CP-202200246, Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis

Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis

ML22238A339
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	08/25/2022
From:	Hicks J Luminant, Vistra Operations Company
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CP-202200246, TXX-22050
Download: ML22238A339 (514)

Text

Jack C. Hicks Comanche Peak Manager, Regulatory Affairs Nuclear Power Plant (Vistra Operations Company LLC)

P.O. Box 1002 6322 North FM 56 Glen Rose, TX 76043 T 254.897.6725 CP-202200246 TXX-22050 August 25, 2022 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ref 10 CFR50.4 ATTN: Document Control Desk 10 CFR50 App E Washington, DC 20555-0001

Subject:

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP)

Docket Nos. 50-445, 50-446 and 72-74 Comanche Peak 2022 Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis

Dear Sir or Madam:

In accordance with 10CFR50, Appendix E, section IV.4, Vistra Operations Company LLC (Vistra OpCo) hereby submits the 2022 evacuation time estimates (ETEs) for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP).

The enclosed ETE analysis was developed using the most recent decennial census data from the U. S.

Census Bureau.

This communication contains no new licensing basis commitments regarding Comanche Peak Units 1 and 2.

Should you have any questions, please contact Jim Barnette at (254) 897-5866 or James.Barnette@luminant.com.

Sincerely, Jack C. Hicks

Enclosure:

Comanche Peak 2022 Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis c (email) - Scott Morris, Region IV [Scott.Morris@nrc.gov]

Dennis Galvin, NRR [Dennis.Galvin@nrc.gov]

John Ellegood, Senior Resident Inspector, CPNPP [John.Ellegood@nrc.gov]

Neil Day, Resident Inspector, CPNPP [Neil.Day@nrc.gov]

Sean Hedger, Senior EP Inspector, Region IV [Sean.Hedger@nrc.gov]

Enclosure With TXX-22050 Comanche Peak 2022 Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis (512 pages, not including this cover page)

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Development of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Vistra Operations Company LLC (Vistra OpCo), by:

KLD Engineering, P.C.

1601 Veterans Memorial Highway, Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 Email: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com May 16, 2022 Final Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1230

Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Location .................................................................. 13 1.3 Preliminary Activities ................................................................................................................. 13 1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study .............................................................................................. 16 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS............................................................................................. 21 2.1 Data Estimate Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Methodological Assumptions .................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times .......................................................................................... 23 2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions ................................................................................................ 23 2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions .................................................................................... 25 2.6 Scenarios and Regions ............................................................................................................... 26 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Permanent Residents ................................................................................................................. 32 3.2 Shadow Population .................................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Transient Population .................................................................................................................. 33 3.4 Employees .................................................................................................................................. 35 3.5 Special Facilities ......................................................................................................................... 35 3.5.1 Medical Facilities ................................................................................................................ 36 3.5.2 Correctional Facilities ......................................................................................................... 36 3.6 Transit Dependent Population ................................................................................................... 36 3.7 School, Preschools/Daycares Center and Day Camp Population Demand ................................ 38 3.8 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................................. 39 3.9 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 39 3.10 External Traffic ......................................................................................................................... 310 3.11 Background Traffic ................................................................................................................... 310 3.12 Summary of Demand ............................................................................................................... 311 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY................................................................................................ 41 4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections .............................................................. 42 4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway ........................................................................ 44 4.3 Application to the CPNPP Study Area ........................................................................................ 46 4.3.1 TwoLane Roads ................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2 Multilane Highway ............................................................................................................. 47 4.3.3 Freeways ............................................................................................................................ 47 4.3.4 Intersections ...................................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation .......................................................................................... 48 4.5 Boundary Condition ................................................................................................................... 49 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME .......................................................................................... 51 5.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 51 5.2 Fundamental Considerations ..................................................................................................... 53 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ................................................... 54 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution ...................................................................... 55 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers .............................................................................................................. 55 5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation ................................................................................... 57 5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas ................................................... 59 6 EVACUATION CASES ........................................................................................................................... 61 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) .......................................................... 71 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation ......................................................................... 71 7.2 Staged Evacuation ...................................................................................................................... 71 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation ..................................................................... 72 7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................ 74 7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate Results ............................................................................................. 74 7.6 Staged Evacuation Results ......................................................................................................... 76 7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ................................................................................................... 77 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES ................................. 81 8.1 ETE for Transit Dependent People ............................................................................................. 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................... 810 8.3 ETE for Correctional Facility ..................................................................................................... 811 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ................................................................................................... 91 9.1 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 92 9.2 Additional Considerations .......................................................................................................... 92 10 EVACUATION ROUTES AND RECEPTION CENTERS ........................................................................... 101 10.1 Evacuation Routes.................................................................................................................... 101 10.2 Reception Centers .................................................................................................................... 102 A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS .................................................................................. A1 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL ......................................................... B1 B.1 Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model .................................................... B1 B.2 Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD .............................................................. B2 B.2.1 DTRAD Description ............................................................................................................. B2 B.2.2 Network Equilibrium .......................................................................................................... B4 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL ............................................................................................... C1 C.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. C2 C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram ................................................................................................. C2 C.1.2 The Simulation Model ........................................................................................................ C2 C.1.3 Lane Assignment ................................................................................................................ C6 C.2 Implementation ......................................................................................................................... C6 C.2.1 Computational Procedure .................................................................................................. C6 C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD) ..................................................... C7 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE .............................................................................. D1 E. FACILITY DATA .................................................................................................................................... E1 F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY ..................................................................................................................... F1 F.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... F1 F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan ....................................................................................... F1 F.3 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ F2 F.3.1 Household Demographic Results ....................................................................................... F2 F.3.2 Evacuation Response ......................................................................................................... F3 F.3.3 Time Distribution Results ................................................................................................... F4 F.3.4 Emergency Communications ............................................................................................. F5 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Traffic Control and Access Control Points ................................................................................. G1 G.2 Analysis of Key TCP and ACP Locations ..................................................................................... G1 H EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

L. ZONE BOUNDARIES EVACUATION ROUTES ....................................................................................... L1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ................................................................................................. M1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................ M1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate ................. M1 M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population ......................................................................... M2 M.4 Enhancements in Evacuation Time .......................................................................................... M3 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Figures Figure 11. CPNPP Location ..................................................................................................................... 112 Figure 12. CPNPP LinkNode Analysis Network ...................................................................................... 113 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ....................................................................................... 29 Figure 31. Zones Comprising the CPNPP EPZ .......................................................................................... 324 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................ 325 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 326 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 327 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 328 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 329 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 330 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 331 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 332 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 410 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................ 515 Figure 52. Time Distributions for Evacuation Mobilization Activities.................................................... 516 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution....................................................... 517 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 518 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region .................................................................................................................................... 519 Figure 61. CPNPP EPZ Zones .................................................................................................................. 611 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ..................................................................................... 728 Figure 72. CPNPP Shadow Region .......................................................................................................... 729 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 45 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................................... 730 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 45 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................. 731 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 50 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................ 732 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours and 35 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................ 733 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours and 10 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................ 734 Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................ 735 Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 ...................................................... 736 Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 .................................................... 736 Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 .................................................... 737 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 .................................................... 737 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 .................................................... 738 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 .................................................... 738 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 .................................................... 739 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 .................................................... 739 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 .................................................... 740 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 .................................................. 740 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 .................................................. 741 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 .................................................. 741 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ...................................................................... 827 Figure 101. Evacuation Route Map ........................................................................................................ 107 Figure 102. Transit Dependent Bus Routes ........................................................................................... 108 Figure 103. Transit Dependent Bus Routes ........................................................................................... 109 Figure 104. General Population Reception Centers and Relocation Schools ...................................... 1010 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B5 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ......................................................................................... C12 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ......................................................................................................... C13 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ............................................................................ C13 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) .................................................... C14 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools within the EPZ .......................................................................................................... E10 Figure E2. Preschools and Daycares within the EPZ .............................................................................. E11 Figure E3. Day Camps within the Study Area......................................................................................... E12 Figure E4. Medical Facilities within the EPZ .......................................................................................... E13 Figure E5. Major Employers within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E14 Figure E6. Campgrounds within the EPZ ................................................................................................ E15 Figure E7. Golf Courses, Marinas, Parks and Other Recreational Areas within the Study Area ............ E16 Figure E8. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E17 Figure E9. Major Retail Facilities within the EPZ.................................................................................... E18 Figure E10. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ ................................................................................. E19 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ....................................................................................................... F6 Figure F2. Vehicle Availability .................................................................................................................. F7 Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households ...................................................................... F7 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 5 to 8+ Person Households .................................................................... F8 Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference......................................................................................... F8 Figure F6. Commuters per Households in the EPZ .................................................................................. F9 Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ..................................................................................................... F9 Figure F8. Commuters Impacted by COVID19 ...................................................................................... F10 Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs ......................................................... F10 Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation ........................................................................... F11 Figure F11. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Evacuating ..................... F11 Figure F12. Shelter in Place Characteristics ........................................................................................... F12 Figure F13. Shelter in Place Characteristics - Staged Evacuation ......................................................... F12 Figure F14. Shelter Locations ................................................................................................................. F13 Figure F15. Households with Pets/Animals ........................................................................................... F13 Figure F16. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals ......................................................................... F14 Figure F17. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College ............................................................. F14 Figure F18. Work/College to Home Travel Time.................................................................................... F15 Figure F19. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation................................................................................ F15 Figure F20. Cell Phone Signal Reliability ................................................................................................ F16 Figure F21. Likelihood to Take Action Based off Emergency Management Officials Guidelines .......... F16 Figure F22. Emergency Communication ................................................................................................ F17 Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Points for the CPNPP Site ........................................................... G4 Figure H1. Region R01 ............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H2. Region R02 ............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H3. Region R03 ............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H4. Region R04 ............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H5. Region R05 ............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H6. Region R06 ........................................................................................................................... H10 Figure H7. Region R07 ........................................................................................................................... H11 Figure H8. Region R08 ........................................................................................................................... H12 Figure H9. Region R09 ........................................................................................................................... H13 Figure H10. Region R10 ......................................................................................................................... H14 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 ......................................................................................................................... H15 Figure H12. Region R12 ......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H13. Region R13 ......................................................................................................................... H17 Figure H14. Region R14 ......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H15. Region R15 ......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure H16. Region R16 ......................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H17. Region R17 ......................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H18. Region R18 ......................................................................................................................... H22 Figure H19. Region R19 ......................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H20. Region R20 ......................................................................................................................... H24 Figure H21. Region R21 ......................................................................................................................... H25 Figure H22. Region R22 ......................................................................................................................... H26 Figure H23. Region R23 ......................................................................................................................... H27 Figure H24. Region R24 ......................................................................................................................... H28 Figure H25. Region R25 ......................................................................................................................... H29 Figure H26. Region R26 ......................................................................................................................... H30 Figure H27. Region R27 ......................................................................................................................... H31 Figure H28. Region R28 ......................................................................................................................... H32 Figure H29. Region R29 ......................................................................................................................... H33 Figure H30. Region R30 ......................................................................................................................... H34 Figure H31. Region R31 ......................................................................................................................... H35 Figure H32. Region R32 ......................................................................................................................... H36 Figure H33. Region R33 ......................................................................................................................... H37 Figure H34. Region R34 ......................................................................................................................... H38 Figure H35. Region R35 ......................................................................................................................... H39 Figure H36. Region R36 ......................................................................................................................... H40 Figure H37. Region R37 ......................................................................................................................... H41 Figure H38. Region R38 ......................................................................................................................... H42 Figure H39. Region R39 ......................................................................................................................... H43 Figure H40. Region R40 ......................................................................................................................... H44 Figure H41. Region R41 ......................................................................................................................... H45 Figure H42. Region R42 ......................................................................................................................... H46 Figure H43. Region R43 ......................................................................................................................... H47 Figure H44. Region R44 ......................................................................................................................... H48 Figure H45. Region R45 ......................................................................................................................... H49 Figure H46. Region R46 ......................................................................................................................... H50 Figure H47. Region R47 ......................................................................................................................... H51 Figure H48. Region R48 ......................................................................................................................... H52 Figure H49. Region R49 ......................................................................................................................... H53 Figure H50. Region R50 ......................................................................................................................... H54 Figure H51. Region R51 ......................................................................................................................... H55 Figure H52. Region R52 ......................................................................................................................... H56 Figure H53. Region R53 ......................................................................................................................... H57 Figure H54. Region R54 ......................................................................................................................... H58 Figure H55. Region R55 ......................................................................................................................... H59 Figure H56. Region R56 ......................................................................................................................... H60 Figure H57. Region R57 ......................................................................................................................... H61 Figure H58. Region R58 ......................................................................................................................... H62 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H59. Region R59 ......................................................................................................................... H63 Figure H60. Region R60 ......................................................................................................................... H64 Figure H61. Region R61 ......................................................................................................................... H65 Figure H62. Region R62 ......................................................................................................................... H66 Figure H63. Region R63 ......................................................................................................................... H67 Figure H64. Region R64 ......................................................................................................................... H68 Figure H65. Region R65 ......................................................................................................................... H69 Figure H66. Region R66 ......................................................................................................................... H70 Figure H67. Region R67 ......................................................................................................................... H71 Figure H68. Region R68 ......................................................................................................................... H72 Figure H69. Region R69 ......................................................................................................................... H73 Figure H70. Region R70 ......................................................................................................................... H74 Figure H71. Region R71 ......................................................................................................................... H75 Figure H72. Region R72 ......................................................................................................................... H76 Figure H73. Region R73 ......................................................................................................................... H77 Figure H74. Region R74 ......................................................................................................................... H78 Figure H75. Region R75 ......................................................................................................................... H79 Figure H76. Region R76 ......................................................................................................................... H80 Figure H77. Region R77 ......................................................................................................................... H81 Figure H78. Region R78 ......................................................................................................................... H82 Figure H79. Region R79 ......................................................................................................................... H83 Figure H80. Region R80 ......................................................................................................................... H84 Figure H81. Region R81 ......................................................................................................................... H85 Figure H82. Region R82 ......................................................................................................................... H86 Figure H83. Region R83 ......................................................................................................................... H87 Figure H84. Region R84 ......................................................................................................................... H88 Figure H85. Region R85 ......................................................................................................................... H89 Figure H86. Region R86 ......................................................................................................................... H90 Figure H87. Region R87 ......................................................................................................................... H91 Figure H88. Region R88 ......................................................................................................................... H92 Figure H89. Region R89 ......................................................................................................................... H93 Figure H90. Region R90 ......................................................................................................................... H94 Figure H91. Region R91 ......................................................................................................................... H95 Figure H92. Region R92 ......................................................................................................................... H96 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins ......................................................................................................... J5 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) ............. J6 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) .............................. J6 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3) ............. J7 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4).............................. J7 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5) ....................................................................................................................... J8 Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)................ J8 Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7) ................................ J9 Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 8) ............... J9 Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 9) ............................ J10 Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 10) ................................................................................................................... J10 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 11) ...................................................................................................................... J11 Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12) ................................................................................................................ J11 Figure K1. CPNPP LinkNode Analysis Network ........................................................................................ K2 Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 ...................................................................................... K3 Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 ...................................................................................... K4 Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 ...................................................................................... K5 Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 ...................................................................................... K6 Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 ...................................................................................... K7 Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 ...................................................................................... K8 Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 ...................................................................................... K9 Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 .................................................................................... K10 Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 .................................................................................. K11 Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 ................................................................................ K12 Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 ............................................................................... K13 Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 ................................................................................ K14 Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 ................................................................................ K15 Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 ................................................................................ K16 Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 ................................................................................ K17 Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 ................................................................................ K18 Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 ................................................................................ K19 Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 ................................................................................ K20 Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 ................................................................................ K21 Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 ................................................................................ K22 Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 ................................................................................ K23 Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 ................................................................................ K24 Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 ................................................................................ K25 Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 ................................................................................ K26 Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 ................................................................................ K27 Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 ................................................................................ K28 Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 ................................................................................ K29 Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 ................................................................................ K30 Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 ................................................................................ K31 Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 ................................................................................ K32 Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 ................................................................................ K33 Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 ................................................................................ K34 Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 ................................................................................ K35 Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 ................................................................................ K36 Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 ................................................................................ K37 Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 ................................................................................ K38 Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 ................................................................................ K39 Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 ................................................................................ K40 Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 ................................................................................ K41 Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 ................................................................................ K42 Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ................................................................................ K43 Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 ................................................................................ K44 Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 ................................................................................ K45 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 ................................................................................ K46 Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 ................................................................................ K47 Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 ................................................................................ K48 Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 ................................................................................ K49 Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 ................................................................................ K50 Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 ................................................................................ K51 Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 ................................................................................ K52 Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 ................................................................................ K53 Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 ................................................................................ K54 Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 ................................................................................ K55 Figure K55. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 54 ................................................................................ K56 Figure K56. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 55 ................................................................................ K57 Figure K57. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 56 ................................................................................ K58 Figure K58. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 57 ................................................................................ K59 Figure K59. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 58 ................................................................................ K60 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ix KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Tables Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction ........................................................................................................... 17 Table 12. Highway Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 17 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons ............................................................................................................ 18 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 28 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 28 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ..................................................................................... 312 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone ......................................................... 313 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ........................................................................... 314 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ..................................................................... 315 Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ........................... 316 Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand ............................................................................................ 317 Table 37. Correction Facility Demand .................................................................................................... 318 Table 38. TransitDependent Population Estimates .............................................................................. 318 Table 39. School, Preschools/Daycares and Day Camp Population Demand Estimates ....................... 319 Table 310. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary ........................................................... 320 Table 311. CPNPP EPZ External Traffic................................................................................................... 320 Table 312. Summary of Population Demand ......................................................................................... 321 Table 313. Summary of Vehicle Demand ............................................................................................... 322 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities .............................................................................. 510 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 510 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................. 511 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................ 511 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Leave Home ................................................ 512 Table 56. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 512 Table 57. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 512 Table 58. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation .................... 513 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ......................... 514 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions - Regions R01 through R17 .............................................. 64 Table 62. Description of 3 Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions 18 through R33 .................................. 65 Table 63. Description of 5Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions R34 through R63................................ 66 Table 64. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions - Regions R64 through R92 .................................. 67 Table 65. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 68 Table 66. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................ 69 Table 67. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario................................................................................................ 610 Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ......................... 710 Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ....................... 714 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region ........................ 718 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region ...................... 721 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions - Regions R01 through R17 ............................................ 724 Table 76. Description of 3 Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions R18 through R33 .............................. 725 Table 77. Description of 5Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions R34 through R63.............................. 726 Table 78. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions - Regions R64 through R92 ................................ 727 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources.................................................................................. 812 Table 82. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ....................... 814 Table 83. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ........................................ 816 Table 84. Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather ....................................................... 818 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant x KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates Rain .......................................................................... 818 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather .......................................... 819 Table 87. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ........................................................... 820 Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ............................................... 821 Table 89. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain ............................................................... 823 Table 810. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates ........................... 825 Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Second Wave for the Ambulatory, Wheelchair Bound and Bedridden ......................................................................... 825 Table 812. Correctional Facility Evacuation Time Estimates ................................................................. 826 Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 103 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 104 Table 103. Relocation Schools for Schools, Day Cares and Day Camps ................................................. 106 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C8 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ........................................................................... C9 Table C3. Glossary ..................................................................................................................................C10 Table E1. Schools within the EPZ ............................................................................................................. E2 Table E2. Preschools/Daycares within the EPZ ........................................................................................ E3 Table E3. Day Camps within the Study Area ............................................................................................ E4 Table E4. Medical Facilities within the EPZ .............................................................................................. E4 Table E5. Major Employers within the EPZ .............................................................................................. E5 Table E6. Recreational Areas within the Study Area ............................................................................... E6 Table E7. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ .............................................................................................. E8 Table E8. Major Retail Facilities within the EPZ ....................................................................................... E9 Table E9. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ ....................................................................................... E9 Table F1. CPNPP Demographic Survey Sampling Plan ............................................................................. F6 Table G1 List of Key TCP/ACP Locations .................................................................................................. G3 Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions R01 through R33 .................................. H2 Table H2. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions R34 through R63 .................................. H3 Table H3. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions R64 through R92 .................................. H4 Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input ............................................................................................... J2 Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03) ........................... J3 Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1) ............................................................................................................................ J3 Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 ......................... J4 Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control ............................................................................... K1 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ....................................... M4 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study .................................................... M4 Table M3. Evacuation Time Estimates Variation with Population Change............................................ M4 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist ................................................................................................. N1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant xi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ACRONYM LIST Table 1. Acronym List ACRONYM DEFINITION AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic ACP Access Control Point ANS Alert and Notification System ASLB Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ATE Advisory to Evacuate ATIS Automated Traveler Information Systems BFFS Base Free Flow Speed CPNPP Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant CR County Road COVID19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 D Destination DDHV Directional Design Hourly Volume DHV Design Hour Volume DMS Dynamic Message Sign DTA Dynamic Traffic Assignment DTRAD Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution DYNEV Dynamic Network Evacuation EAS Emergency Alert System EOC Emergency Operations Center EPZ Emergency Planning Zone EPFAQ Emergency Planning Frequently Asked Question ETE Evacuation Time Estimate EVAN Evacuation Animator EMA Emergency Management Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FFS Free Flow Speed FHWA Federal Highway Administration FM Farm to Market GIS Geographical Information System HAR Highway Advisory Radio HCM Highway Capacity Manual HH Household HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems LOS Level of Service MOE Measures of Effectiveness Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant AL1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ACRONYM DEFINITION mph Miles Per Hour MUTCD Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices MTC Manual Traffic Control NB Northbound NOAA The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission O Origin OD OriginDestination ORO Offsite Response Organization PAR Protective Action Recommendation pce Passenger Car Equivalent pcphpl passenger car per hour per lane PSL PathSizeLogit QDF Queue Discharge Flow RC Reception Center RS Relocation School SH State Highway SR State Route SV Service Volume TA Traffic Assignment TCP Traffic Control Point TD Trip Distribution TI Time Interval TMP Traffic Management Plan UNITES Unified Transportation Engineering System USDOT United States Department of Transportation Vistra OpCo Vistra Operations Company LLC vph Vehicles Per Hour vpm Vehicles Per Minute Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant AL2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) located in Glen Rose, Somervell County, Texas. The ETE are part of the required planning basis and provide Vistra Operations Company LLC (Vistra OpCo), state and local governments with sitespecific information needed for protective action decisionmaking.

In the performance of this effort, guidance is provided by documents published by Federal Governmental agencies. Most important of these are:

• Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix E to Part 50 (10CFR50), Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities, NRC, 2011.

• Revision 1 of the Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, February 2021.

• FEMA, Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual (FEMA P1028),

December 2019.

• Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR 6863, January 2005.

Project Activities This project began in, March 2021 and extended over a period of 13 months. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Conducted a virtual kickoff meeting with Vistra OpCo personnel and emergency management personnel representing state and county governments.

Accessed the U.S. Census Bureau data files for the year 2020.

Obtained the estimates of employees who reside outside the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and commute to work within the EPZ from Vistra OpCo and counties within the EPZ.

Studied Geographical Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of the CPNPP, then conducted a detailed field survey of the highway network to observe any roadway changes relative to the previous ETE study done in 2012.

Updated the analysis network representing the highway system topology and capacities within the EPZ, plus a Shadow Region covering the region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles radially from the plant.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Conducted a randomsample online demographic survey of residents within the EPZ, to gather focused data needed for this ETE study that were not contained within the census database. The survey instrument was reviewed and modified by the licensee and offsite response organization (ORO) personnel prior to the survey.

A data needs matrix (requesting data) was provided to Vistra OpCo and the OROs at the kickoff meeting. The data gathered for the 2012 ETE study were reviewed and either confirmed or updated accordingly by the OROs. If updated information was not provided and data could not be obtained from aerial imagery, internet searches or phone calls directly to the facility, the data gathered in the 2012 ETE study was assumed still accurate for this study.

The traffic demand and tripgeneration rates of evacuating vehicles were estimated from the gathered data. The trip generation rates reflect the estimated mobilization time (i.e.,

the time required by evacuees to prepare for the evacuation trip) computed using the results of the demographic survey of the EPZ residents.

Following federal guidelines, the existing 30 Zones, within the EPZ, are grouped within circular areas or keyholes configurations (circles plus radial sectors) and the use of the Protective Action Recommendation Plan, provided by Vistra OpCo, a total of 92 Evacuation Regions (numbered R01 through R92) was defined.

The timevarying external circumstances are represented as Evacuation Scenarios, each described in terms of the following factors: (1) Season (Summer, Winter); (2) Day of Week (Midweek, Weekend); (3) Time of Day (Midday, Evening); and (4) Weather (Good, Rain).

One special event scenario involving the Fourth of July in Granbury was considered. One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane was closed on US 377 NB from TX 144 to just east of FM 167 and a single lane was closed on US 67 NB from FM 205 to CR 1119. These closures were considered for the duration of the evacuation for this scenario.

Staged evacuation was considered for those regions wherein the 2Mile Region and sectors downwind to 5 miles were evacuated.

As per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the Planning Basis for the calculation of ETE is:

A rapidly escalating event at the CPNPP that quickly assumes the status of general emergency wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented such that the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) is virtually coincident with the siren alert.

While an unlikely scenario, this planning basis will yield ETE, measured as the elapsed time from the ATE until the stated percentage of the population exits the impacted Region, that represent upper bound estimates. This conservative Planning Basis is applicable for all initiating events.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

If the emergency occurs while schools, preschools/daycares or day camps are in session, the ETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to relocation schools or reception centers located outside the EPZ. Parents, relatives, and neighbors are advised to not pick up their children at these facilities prior to the arrival of the buses dispatched for that purpose. The ETE for children at these facilities are calculated separately.

Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either rideshare with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided as specified in the county evacuation plans. Those in special facilities will likewise be evacuated with public transit, as needed: bus, wheelchair transport, or ambulance, as required. Separate ETE are calculated for the transitdependent evacuees, for access and/or special needs population, and for those evacuated from special facilities.

Conducted a final meeting with Vistra OpCo personnel and the OROs to present results from the study.

Computation of ETE A total of 1,104 ETE were computed for the evacuation of the general public. Each ETE quantifies the aggregate evacuation time estimated for the population within one of the 92 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 12 Evacuation Scenarios (92 x 12 = 1,104). Separate ETE are calculated for transitdependent evacuees, including schoolchildren for applicable scenarios.

Except for Region R03, which is the evacuation of the entire EPZ, only a portion of the people within the EPZ would be advised to evacuate. That is, the ATE applies only to those people occupying the specified impacted region. It is assumed that 100% of the people within the impacted region will evacuate in response to this ATE. The people occupying the remainder of the EPZ outside the impacted region may be advised to take shelter.

The computation of ETE assumes that 20% of the population within the EPZ but outside the impacted region, will elect to voluntarily evacuate. In addition, 20% of the population in the Shadow Region will also elect to evacuate. These voluntary evacuees could impede those who are evacuating from within the impacted region. The impedance that could be caused by voluntary evacuees is considered in the computation of ETE for the impacted region.

Staged evacuation is considered wherein those people within the 2Mile Region evacuate immediately, while those beyond 2 miles, but within the EPZ, shelterinplace. Once 90% of the 2Mile Region is evacuated, those people beyond 2 miles begin to evacuate. As per federal guidance, 20% of people beyond 2 miles will evacuate (noncompliance) even though they are advised to shelterinplace, during a staged evacuation.

The computational procedure is outlined as follows:

A linknode representation of the highway network is coded. Each link represents a unidirectional length of highway; each node usually represents an intersection or merge point. The capacity of each link is estimated based on the field survey observations and on established traffic engineering procedures.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The evacuation trips are generated at locations called zonal centroids located within the EPZ and Shadow Region. The trip generation rates vary over time reflecting the mobilization process, and from one location (centroid) to another depending on population density and on whether a centroid is within, or outside, the impacted area.

The evacuation model computes the routing patterns for evacuating vehicles that are compliant with federal guidelines (outbound relative to the location of the plant), then simulate the traffic flow movements over space and time. This simulation process estimates the rate that traffic flow exits the impacted region.

The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90% and 100%, respectively, to evacuate from within the impacted region. These statistics are presented in tabular and graphical formats. The 90th percentile ETE have been identified as the values that should be considered when making protective action decisions because the 100th percentile ETE are prolonged by those relatively few people who take longer to mobilize. This is referred to as the evacuation tail in Section 4.0 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev 1.

Traffic Management This study reviewed, used and analyzed the comprehensive traffic management plans provided by Hood and Somervell Counties. The existing traffic management plans are adequate and no additional traffic or access control measures have been identified as a result of this study. Refer to Section 9 and Appendix G.

Selected Results A compilation of selected information is presented on the following pages in the form of Figures and Tables extracted from the body of the report; these are described below.

Table 31 presents the estimates of permanent resident population in each Zone based on the 2020 Census data.

Table 61 through Table 64 define each of the 92 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Zones.

Table 65 defines the 12 Evacuation Scenarios.

Tables 71 and 72 are compilations of the ETE. These data are the times needed to clear the indicated regions of 90 and 100 percent of the population occupying these regions, respectively. These computed ETE include consideration of mobilization time and of estimated voluntary evacuations from other regions within the EPZ and from the Shadow Region.

Tables 73 and 74 present the ETE for the 2Mile Region, when evacuating additional Zones downwind to 5 miles for unstaged and staged evacuations for the 90th and 100th percentile ETEs, respectively.

Table 82 presents the ETE for the children at schools and preschools/daycares in good weather.

Table 86 presents the ETE for the transitdependent population in good weather.

Table 88 presents the ETE for the medical facility population in good weather.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61 displays a map of the CPNPP EPZ showing the layout of the 30 Zones that comprise, in aggregate, the EPZ.

Figure H8 presents an example of an Evacuation Region (Region R08) to be evacuated under the circumstances defined in Table 61 through Table 66. Maps of all regions are provided in Appendix H.

Conclusions General population ETE were computed for 1,104 unique cases - a combination of 92 unique Evacuation Regions and 12 unique Evacuation Scenarios. Table 71 and Table 72 document these ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles. The 90th percentile ETE range from 2:00 (hr:min) to 4:50. The 100th percentile ETE are dictated by trip mobilization of residents (i.e., the time it takes to prepare to evacuate) for nonspecial scenarios and special scenario Regions that do not contain Zones 1C, 1D and 4E. These ETE range from 5:00 to 5:10 at the 100th percentile. For the Special Event and Roadway Impact scenarios, where Regions do contain Zones 1C, 1D and 4E, which is dictated by congestion, the 100th percentile ETE are at most 5:55 and 6:20, respectively.

The comparison of Table 71 and Table 72 indicate that the 100th percentile ETE are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile ETE. This is the result of the long trip generation tail and some congestion. As these stragglers mobilize, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand. See Figures 79 through 720.

The population centers of Granbury and Tolar display the most congestion during the evacuation for Scenario 1 for the full EPZ. US 377 northbound, going towards Fort Worth/Dallas, exhibits the last of the traffic congestion within the EPZ. All congestion within the EPZ clears by 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE. See Section 7.3 and Figures 73 through 78.

The comparison of Scenarios 3 (summer, weekend, midday with good weather) and 11 (summer, weekend, midday, special event) in Table 71 indicates that the special event -

Fourth of July in Granbury - does have a material impact on the 90th percentile, with up to 40minute increases in ETE, in regions that include Zones 1C, 1D and/or 4E. The additional 3,699 vehicles intensify traffic congestion in Granbury and prolongs ETE. The 100th percentile is increased by 45 minutes due to the additional vehicles evacuating from the special event as indicated in Table 72. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

The comparison of Scenarios 1 and 12 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure -

US 377 NB from TX 144 to just east of FM 167 and a single lane was closed on US 67 NB from FM 205 to TX 144 and Somervell CR 316 to CR 1119 - increase ETE at the 90th percentile by at most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes. The lane closure on US 67 does not impact ETE; however, the lane closure along US 377 compounds congestion in Granbury and in the Shadow Region to the northeast, prolonging ETE. The 100th percentile is increased by at most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 10 minutes as indicated in Table 72 when comparing Scenarios 1 and 12, for Regions that include 1C, 1D and/or 4E. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74, indicates that a staged evacuation provides no Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region (compare Regions R64 through R78 with Regions R02 and R04 through R17, respectively, for three sectors; compare Regions R79 through R92 with Regions R34 through R47, respectively, for five sectors). See Section 7.6 for additional discussion.

Separate ETE were computed for special facilities (schools, preschools/daycares, day camps, medical facilities, and correctional facility), transitdependent persons, and the access and/or functional needs persons. The average singlewave ETE for all special facilities and the transitdependent persons are less or comparable to the 90th percentile ETE for the general population; whereas the average singlewave ETE for the access and/or functional needs persons are greater than the 90th percentile ETE for the general population. See Section 8.

Table 81 indicates that there are not enough transportation resources available, except for minibuses and wheelchair buses, to evacuate the schoolchildren, ambulatory patients and bedridden patients at medical facilities, transitdependent persons, or access and/or functional needs persons. Multiple waves are needed to evacuate these populations. The secondwave ETE for this population exceeds the general population ETE at the 90th percentile except for buses being used for schoolchildren. See Sections 8.1 and 8.2.

A reduction in the base trip generation time by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> has no impact to the 90th percentile ETE for the general population but decreases the 100th percentile ETE by 35 minutes. An increase in mobilization time by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> increases the 90th percentile ETE by 10 minutes and increases the 100th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. Congestion within the EPZ persists for 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE for an evacuation of the entire EPZ during the summer, midweek, midday with good weather conditions, after this point, the ETE is dictated by the mobilization time. As such, changes to the trip generation impacts the 100th percentile ETE. See Appendix M.1 and Table M1.

The general population ETE is minimally impacted when reducing the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region. The 90th and 100th percentile ETE are sensitive to increases in shadow evacuation. For example, the 90th percentile and 100th percentile ETE increases by 30 minutes and 15 minutes respectively, during an evacuation of the entire Shadow Region. See Appendix M and Table M2.

An increase in permanent resident population (EPZ plus Shadow Region) of 18% or greater result in an increase in the longest 90th percentile ETE by 30 minutes for the full EPZ (Regions R03), which meets the federal criterion for performing a fully updated ETE study between decennial Censuses. See Appendix M.3 and Section M.3.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2010 Population1 2020 Population 1A 672 656 1B 337 351 1C 6,871 8,105 1D 11,793 14,713 2A 736 548 2B 364 251 2C 466 717 2D 695 567 2E 70 127 2F 115 153 2G 16 21 2H 431 507 2J 1,202 1,557 3A 134 149 3B 83 122 3C 546 592 3D 363 366 3E 111 129 3F 309 320 4A 59 58 4B 104 108 4C 123 189 4D 181 182 4E 4,261 4,856 4F 1,543 1,509 4G 523 491 4H 73 70 CP 66 283 GL 2,291 2,369 TO 661 803 EPZ TOTAL 35,199 40,869 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 16.11%

1 The 2010 population shown in the table for Zones 1D, 4Eand 4F reflect the new zone boundaries and will therefore not align with the previous ETE study.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions - Regions R01 through R17 Site PAR Zone Region Central Description GLEN CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R01 N/A 2Mile Region X X R02 N/A 5Mile Region X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R03 N/A Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R04 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X R05 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X R06 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X R07 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X R08 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X R09 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X R10 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X R11 H, J 326.25 - 11.24 X X X X X R12 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X R13 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X R14 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X R15 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X R16 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X R17 Q, R 123.75 - 168.74 X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Description of 3Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions 18 through R33 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R18 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X X X X R19 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R20 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R21 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X X X R22 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R23 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X X X R24 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X X R25 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X X X X R26 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X X X X R27 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X X X X R28 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X X R29 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X X X X X R30 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X X X X X R31 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X X X R32 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X X X X R33 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Description of 5Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions R34 through R63 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R34 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X R35 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R36 C, D 213.75 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X R37 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R38 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X R39 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X R40 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X R41 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X R42 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X R43 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X R44 M, N 56.25 - 101.24 X X X X X X R45 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X R46 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X R47 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R48 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X R49 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R50 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R51 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R52 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R53 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R54 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R55 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R56 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R57 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X R58 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R59 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R60 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R61 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R62 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X X X X X X X R63 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions - Regions R64 through R92 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R64 N/A 5Mile Region X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R65 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X R66 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X R67 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X R68 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X R69 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X R70 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X R71 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X R72 H, J 326.25 - 11.24 X X X X X R73 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X R74 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X R75 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X R76 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X R77 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X R78 Q, R 123.75 - 168.74 X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zones(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE N/A N/A 5Mile Region Refer to Region R64 R79 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X R80 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R81 C, D 213.75 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X R82 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R83 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X R84 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X R85 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X R86 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X R87 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X R88 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X R89 M, N 56.25 - 101.24 X X X X X X R90 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X R91 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X R92 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zones(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 65. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Time of Scenario Season2 Weather Special Week Day 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Special Event: Fourth of 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good July in Granbury Roadway Impact: Single 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good Lane Closure on US 377 NB and on US 67 NB 2

Winter means that school is in session, at normal enrollment levels (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer means that school is in session at summer school enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R02 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:25 R03 3:25 3:45 3:35 3:45 3:15 3:20 3:40 3:30 3:45 3:15 4:10 4:35 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R04 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 R05 2:40 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 R06 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:30 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 R07 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 R08 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:15 R09 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:20 R10 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:20 R11 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:10 2:20 R12 2:15 2:20 2:05 2:10 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:05 2:05 2:15 R13 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:35 R14 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:35 2:40 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:35 R15 2:50 2:50 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:50 2:50 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:50 R16 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 R17 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups)

R18 3:30 3:50 3:40 4:00 3:20 3:20 3:40 3:35 3:50 3:20 4:20 4:40 R19 3:25 3:40 3:35 3:50 3:15 3:20 3:35 3:25 3:45 3:15 3:55 4:45 R20 3:15 3:20 3:10 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:05 3:20 2:55 3:20 4:10 R21 3:05 3:10 2:45 2:50 2:50 3:05 3:10 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 3:05 R22 2:55 3:00 2:40 2:45 2:45 3:00 3:05 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:55 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R23 2:25 2:25 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:20 2:20 2:25 R24 2:25 2:25 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:20 2:25 R25 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:10 2:10 2:25 R26 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:25 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:25 R27 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 2:25 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:20 R28 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:20 R29 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:25 R30 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:10 2:20 R31 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:30 R32 2:35 2:35 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:40 R33 3:05 3:25 3:10 3:30 2:55 3:00 3:15 3:10 3:25 2:55 3:45 4:25 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R34 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 R35 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 R36 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 R37 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:25 R38 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:20 R39 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:20 R40 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:20 R41 2:15 2:15 2:05 2:10 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:05 2:05 2:15 R42 2:15 2:20 2:05 2:10 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:05 2:05 2:15 R43 2:15 2:15 2:05 2:10 2:00 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:05 2:05 2:15 R44 2:30 2:30 2:00 2:00 2:05 2:35 2:35 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:00 2:30 R45 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 R46 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:45 2:45 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:45 R47 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary (5 Sector Groups)

R48 3:35 3:55 3:40 4:05 3:25 3:35 3:50 3:40 3:55 3:25 4:20 4:45 R49 3:30 3:45 3:40 4:00 3:20 3:25 3:45 3:35 3:50 3:20 4:10 4:50 R50 3:20 3:35 3:30 3:45 3:15 3:20 3:30 3:25 3:45 3:15 3:50 4:50 R51 3:15 3:25 3:15 3:30 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:05 3:25 3:00 3:25 4:00 R52 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:45 2:30 2:30 2:50 R53 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:45 2:30 2:35 2:50 R54 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:15 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:20 2:20 2:30 R55 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:20 2:20 2:30 R56 2:25 2:25 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:20 2:20 2:25 R57 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:25 R58 2:25 2:30 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:25 R59 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:10 2:20 R60 2:20 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:25 R61 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:40 R62 3:10 3:25 3:10 3:30 2:55 3:05 3:20 3:10 3:25 2:55 3:45 4:25 R63 3:35 3:50 3:40 4:00 3:15 3:25 3:45 3:35 3:55 3:20 4:15 4:50 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R64 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 R65 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 R66 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 R67 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 R68 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 R69 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:35 2:40 R70 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 R71 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R72 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 R73 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 R74 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 R75 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 R76 2:55 2:55 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:55 2:55 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:55 R77 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:50 R78 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R79 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:50 R80 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 R81 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 R82 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 R83 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 R84 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 R85 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 R86 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 R87 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 R88 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 R89 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 R90 2:50 2:55 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:55 2:55 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 R91 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 R92 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R02 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R03 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:55 6:20 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R04 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R06 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R07 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R08 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R09 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R10 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R11 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R12 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R13 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R14 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R15 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R16 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R17 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups)

R18 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:45 6:00 R19 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:05 R20 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:40 R21 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R22 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R23 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R24 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R25 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R26 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R27 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R28 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R29 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R30 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R31 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R32 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R33 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:45 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R34 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R35 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R36 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R37 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R38 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R39 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R40 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R41 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R42 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R43 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R44 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R45 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R46 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R47 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary (5 Sector Groups)

R48 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:55 6:10 R49 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:35 6:20 R50 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 6:20 R51 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:40 R52 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R53 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R54 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R55 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R56 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R57 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R58 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R59 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R60 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R61 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R62 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:40 R63 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:50 6:00 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R64 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R65 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R66 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R67 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R68 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R69 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R70 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R71 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R72 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R73 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R74 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R75 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R76 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R77 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R78 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R79 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R80 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R81 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R82 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R83 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R84 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R85 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R86 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R87 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R88 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R89 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R90 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R91 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R92 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R02 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 UnStaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R04 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R05 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R06 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R07 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R08 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R09 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R10 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R11 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R12 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R13 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R14 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R15 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R16 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R17 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 UnStaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R34 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R35 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R36 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R37 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R38 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R39 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R40 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R41 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R42 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R43 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R44 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R45 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R46 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R47 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Staged Evacuation 5Mile Region R64 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R65 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R66 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R67 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R68 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R69 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R70 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R71 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R72 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R73 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R74 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R75 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R76 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R77 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R78 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R79 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R80 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R81 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R82 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R83 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R84 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R85 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R86 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R87 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R88 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R89 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R90 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R91 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R92 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R02 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 UnStaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R04 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R06 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R07 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R08 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R09 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R10 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R11 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R12 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R13 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R14 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R15 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R16 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R17 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 UnStaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R34 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R35 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R36 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R37 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R38 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R39 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R40 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R41 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R42 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R43 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R44 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R45 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R46 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R47 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Staged Evacuation 5Mile Region R64 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R65 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R66 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R67 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R68 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R69 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R70 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R71 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R72 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R73 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R74 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R75 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R76 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R77 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R78 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R79 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R80 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R81 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R82 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R83 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R84 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R85 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R86 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R87 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R88 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R89 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R90 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R91 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R92 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Travel Time Travel Dist. from Dist. Time EPZ EPZ Driver Loading To EPZ Average to EPZ Bdry Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE to R.S. R.S. R.S.

School/Day Care Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

HOOD COUNTY Mambrino Elementary School 10 10 5.1 43.3 7 0:30 29.2 35 1:05 Premier High School 90 15 0.7 4.3 10 1:55 27.6 33 2:30 Lakeside Baptist Academy 90 15 4.2 5.2 49 2:35 27.6 33 3:10 Brawner Intermediate School 10 10 2.9 34.6 5 0:25 27.6 33 1:00 Emma Roberson Elementary School 90 15 8.8 5.3 99 3:25 27.6 33 4:00 Granbury High School 10 10 7.7 50.0 9 0:30 21.2 25 0:55 Tolar High School 90 15 0.2 39.7 0 1:45 20.8 25 2:10 Tolar Elementary School 90 15 0.9 8.1 7 1:55 20.8 25 2:20 Tolar Jr. High School 90 15 0.9 8.1 7 1:55 20.8 25 2:20 Rainbow's Promise 90 15 10.3 7.4 83 3:10 27.6 33 3:45 Lakeside WEEschool 90 15 4.7 5.2 55 2:40 27.6 33 3:15 Lil Pirates Daycare 90 15 0.2 3.5 3 1:50 27.6 33 2:25 Cross Town Preschool 90 15 2.7 4.5 36 2:25 27.6 33 3:00 Miss Dee Little Angels 90 15 2.9 4.5 39 2:25 27.6 33 3:00 Tolar Small Steps Childcare & Early Learning Center, 90 15 0.6 26.1 1 1:50 20.8 25 2:15 LLC Little Rattlers Preschool & Childcare 90 15 0.4 26.1 1 1:50 20.8 25 2:15 SOMERVELL COUNTY North Central Texas Academy 90 15 9.9 50.0 12 2:00 13.8 17 2:20 Brazos River Charter School 90 15 3.2 50.0 4 1:50 13.8 17 2:10 Glen Rose Junior High School 10 10 10.1 48.9 12 0:35 23.3 28 1:05 Glen Rose High School 10 10 8.7 49.2 11 0:35 23.3 28 1:05 Glen Rose Elementary School 10 10 9.1 48.2 11 0:35 23.3 28 1:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Time Travel Dist. from Dist. Time EPZ EPZ Driver Loading To EPZ Average to EPZ Bdry Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE to R.S. R.S. R.S.

School/Day Care Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Glen Rose Intermediate School 10 10 9.1 48.2 11 0:35 23.3 28 1:05 Grace Preschool 90 15 10.4 49.5 13 2:00 13.0 16 2:20 Glen Rose Early Head Start 90 15 9.6 49.5 12 2:00 13.0 16 2:20 Little Tigers Learning Center 90 15 10.4 49.5 13 2:00 13.0 16 2:20 Endless Discoveries Child Development Center 90 15 8.0 49.3 10 1:55 13.0 16 2:15 First United Methodist Preschool 90 15 9.1 49.5 11 2:00 13.0 16 2:20 Rockin' D Day Care 90 15 8.3 49.5 10 1:55 13.0 16 2:15 Maximum for EPZ: 3:25 Maximum: 4:00 Average for EPZ: 1:45 Average: 2:15 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather SingleWave SecondWave Route Travel Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Bus Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1 135 7.9 50.0 9 30 2:55 23.3 28 5 10 47 30 4:55 2 1 135 8.9 50.0 11 30 3:00 13.0 16 5 10 37 30 4:40 3 1 135 2.3 50.0 3 30 2:50 13.0 16 5 10 22 30 4:15 4 1 135 13.2 50.0 16 30 3:05 23.3 28 5 10 60 30 5:20 5 1 135 14.1 10.9 78 30 4:05 20.8 25 5 10 59 30 6:15 6 1 135 6.7 4.7 86 30 4:15 20.8 25 5 10 41 30 6:10 7 2 135 4.3 6.0 43 30 3:30 23.7 28 5 10 40 30 5:25 8 1 135 10.7 50.0 13 30 3:00 13.0 16 5 10 42 30 4:45 9 1 135 7.1 7.9 54 30 3:40 23.7 28 5 10 45 30 5:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SingleWave SecondWave Route Travel Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Bus Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 10 1 135 3.7 3.5 64 30 3:50 20.8 25 5 10 35 30 5:35 11 1 135 5.9 41.5 9 30 2:55 23.3 28 5 10 43 30 4:55 12 1 135 1.0 33.2 2 30 2:50 18.4 22 5 10 25 30 4:25 Maximum ETE: 4:15 Maximum ETE: 6:15 Average ETE: 3:20 Average ETE: 5:15 Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Loading Total Time to Rate Loading Dist. To EPZ EPZ Mobilization (min per Time Bdry Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People (min) (mi) (min) (hr:min)

HOOD COUNTY Southern Concepts South Town Ambulatory 90 1 6 6 1.0 14 1:50 Southern Concepts Meadowlark Ambulatory 90 1 4 4 1.0 17 1:55 Ambulatory 90 1 20 20 1.3 2 1:55 Harbor Lakes Nursing & Rehab Wheelchair bound 90 5 30 75 1.3 2 2:50 Bedridden 90 15 25 30 1.3 2 2:05 Ambulatory 90 1 78 30 1.4 2 2:05 Lakestone Terrace Senior Living Wheelchair bound 90 5 11 55 1.4 2 2:30 Bedridden 90 15 1 15 1.4 2 1:50 Ambulatory 90 1 44 30 0.5 5 2:05 Courtyards at Lake Granbury Wheelchair bound 90 5 30 75 0.5 4 2:50 Southern Concepts Torrey House Ambulatory 90 1 6 6 1.3 2 1:40 Ambulatory 90 1 186 30 11.9 17 2:20 Waterview The Point Independent Living Wheelchair bound 90 5 24 75 11.9 18 3:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Loading Total Time to Rate Loading Dist. To EPZ EPZ Mobilization (min per Time Bdry Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People (min) (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 90 1 24 24 11.9 18 2:15 Waterview The Cove Assisted Living &

Wheelchair bound 90 5 12 60 11.9 17 2:50 Memory Care Bedridden 90 15 2 30 11.9 18 2:20 Ambulatory 90 1 22 22 1.4 25 2:20 Bridgewater Memory Care Wheelchair bound 90 5 23 75 1.4 15 3:00 Ambulatory 90 1 59 2 2.9 42 2:15 Granbury Care Center Wheelchair bound 90 5 84 10 2.9 39 2:20 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 2.9 30 2:30 Ambulatory 90 1 17 2 4.3 42 2:15 Magnolia Court Wheelchair bound 90 5 1 5 4.3 42 2:20 Bedridden 90 15 13 30 4.3 31 2:35 Ambulatory 90 1 21 2 2.5 11 1:45 Granbury Villa Nursing Center Wheelchair bound 90 5 38 10 2.5 9 1:50 Bedridden 90 15 3 30 2.5 11 2:15 SOMERVELL COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 37 2 16.5 20 1:55 Cherokee Rose Manor Wheelchair bound 90 5 19 10 16.5 20 2:00 Bedridden 90 15 4 30 16.5 20 2:20 Ambulatory 90 1 50 2 6.4 8 1:40 Glen Rose Nursing and Rehab Center Wheelchair bound 90 5 25 10 6.4 8 1:50 Bedridden 90 15 5 30 6.4 8 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 52 2 8.2 12 1:45 Glen Rose Medical CenterHospital Wheelchair bound 90 5 27 10 8.2 10 1:50 Bedridden 90 15 5 30 8.2 10 2:10 Maximum ETE: 3:05 Average ETE: 2:15 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. CPNPP EPZ Zones Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant ES32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 INTRODUCTION This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP), located in Somervell County, Texas. This ETE provide Vistra Operations Company LLC (Vistra OpCo), state and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decision making.

In the performance of this effort, guidance is provided by documents published by Federal Government agencies. Most important of these are:

• Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix E to Part 50 (10CFR50), Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities, NRC, 2011.

• Revision 1 of the Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, February 2021.

• FEMA, Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual (FEMA P1028),

December 2019.

• Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR 6863, January 2005.

The work effort reported herein was supported and guided by local stakeholders who contributed suggestions, critiques, and the local knowledge base required. Table 11 presents a summary of stakeholders and interactions.

1.1 Overview of the ETE Process The following outline presents a brief description of the work effort in chronological sequence:

1. Information Gathering:

a. Defined the scope of work in discussions with representatives from Vistra OpCo.

b. Attended a project kickoff meeting with emergency planners from Hood and Somervell Counties and the Texas Department of State Health Services to discuss methodology, project assumptions and to identify resources available.

c. Conducted a detailed field survey of the highway system and of the area traffic conditions within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and Shadow Region.

d. Obtained demographic data from the 2020 Census (See Section 3.1)

e. Conducted a random sample demographic survey of EPZ residents.

f. Conducted a data collection effort to identify and describe schools, special facilities, transient attractions, major employers, transportation providers, and other important information.

2. Estimated distributions of trip generation times representing the time required by various population groups (permanent residents, employees, and transients) to prepare Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(mobilize) for the evacuation trip. These estimates are primarily based upon the random sample demographic survey.

3. Defined Evacuation Scenarios. These scenarios reflect the variation in demand, in trip generation distribution and in highway capacities, associated with different seasons, day of week, time of day and weather conditions.

4. Reviewed the existing traffic management plan to be implemented by local and state police in the event of an incident at the plant. Traffic control is applied at specified Traffic Control Points (TCP) and Access Control Points (ACP) located within the study area.

5. Used existing Zones to define Evacuation Regions as well as the Vistra OpCo Protective Action Recommendation (PAR) plan. The EPZ is partitioned into 30 Zones along jurisdictional and geographic boundaries. Regions are groups of contiguous Zones for which ETE are calculated. The configurations of these regions reflect wind direction and the radial extent of the impacted area. Each region, other than those that approximate circular areas, approximates a keyhole section within the EPZ and three or five adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees, as recommended by NUREG/CR7002, Rev 1 and defined in CPNPP Protective Action Recommendations Procedure No. EPP304.

6. Estimated demand for transit services for persons at special facilities and for transit dependent persons at home.

7. Prepared the input streams for DYNEV II.

a. Estimated the evacuation traffic demand, based on the available information derived from Census data, and from data provided by local and state agencies, Vistra OpCo and from the demographic survey.

b. Applied the procedures specified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM1 2016) to the data acquired during the field survey, to estimate the capacity of all highway segments comprising the evacuation routes.

c. Updated the linknode representation of the evacuation network, which is used as the basis for the computer analysis that calculates the ETE.

d. Calculated the evacuating traffic demand for each Region and for each Scenario.

e. Specified selected candidate destinations for each origin (location of each source where evacuation trips are generated over the mobilization time) to support evacuation travel consistent with outbound movement relative to the location of the plant.

8. Executed the DYNEV II system to determine optimal evacuation routing and compute ETE for all residents, transients and employees (general population) with access to private vehicles. Generated a complete set of ETE for all specified Regions and Scenarios.

9. Documented ETE in formats in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev 1.

1 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016), Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2016.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

10. Calculated the ETE for all transit activities including those for special facilities (schools, preschools/daycares, day camps, medical facilities and correctional facility), for the transitdependent population and for access and/or functional needs population.

1.2 The Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Location The CPNPP is located in Glen Rose, Somervell County, Texas, along the shores of the Squaw Creek Reservoir. The site is approximately 40 miles southwest of Fort Worth, Texas. The EPZ consists of parts of Somervell and Hood Counties in Texas. Figure 11 shows the location of the plant relative to Fort Worth. This map also identifies the communities in the area and the major roads.

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

Field Surveys of the Highway Network In 2020, KLD personnel drove the entire highway system within the EPZ and the Shadow Region which consists of the area between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles radially from the plant. The characteristics of each section of highway were recorded. These characteristics are shown in Table 12.

Video and audio recording equipment were used to capture a permanent record of the highway infrastructure. No attempt was made to meticulously measure such attributes as lane width and shoulder width; estimates of these measures based on visual observation and recorded images were considered appropriate for the purpose of estimating the capacity of highway sections. For example, Exhibit 157 in the HCM 2016 indicates that a reduction in lane width from 12 feet (the base value) to 10 feet can reduce free flow speed (FFS) by 1.1 mph - not a material difference

- for twolane highways. Exhibit 1546 in the HCM 2016 shows little sensitivity for the estimates of Service Volumes at Level of Service (LOS) E (near capacity), with respect to FFS, for twolane highways.

The data from the audio and video recordings were used to create detailed geographical information systems (GIS) shapefiles and databases of the roadway characteristics and of the traffic control devices observed during the road survey; this information was referenced while preparing the input stream for the DYNEV II System.

Roadway types were assigned based on the following criteria:

Freeway: limited access highway, 2 or more lanes in each direction, high free flow speeds Freeway Ramp: ramp on to or off of a limited access highway Major Arterial: 3 or more lanes in each direction Minor Arterial: 2 lanes in each direction Collector: single lane in each direction Local Roadway: single lane in each direction, local road with low free flow speeds Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

As documented on page 156 of the HCM 2016, the capacity of a twolane highway is 1,700 passenger cars per hour in one direction. For freeway sections, a value of 2,250 vehicles per hour per lane is assigned, as per Exhibit 1237 of the HCM 2016. The road survey has identified several segments which are characterized by adverse geometrics on twolane highways which are reflected in reduced values for both capacity and speed. These estimates are consistent with the service volumes for LOS E presented in HCM 2016 Exhibit 1546. Link capacity is an input to DYNEV II which computes the ETE. Further discussion of roadway capacity is provided in Section 4 of this report.

Traffic signals are either pretimed (signal timings are fixed over time and do not change with the traffic volume on competing approaches), or are actuated (signal timings vary over time based on the changing traffic volumes on competing approaches). Actuated signals require detectors to provide the traffic data used by the signal controller to adjust the signal timings. These detectors are typically magnetic loops in the roadway, or video cameras mounted on the signal masts and pointed toward the intersection approaches. If detectors were observed on the approaches to a signalized intersection during the road survey, detailed signal timings were not collected as the timings vary with traffic volume. TCPs and ACPs at locations which have control devices are represented as actuated signals in the DYNEV II system.

If no detectors were observed, the signal control at the intersection was considered pretimed, and detailed signal timings were gathered for several signal cycles. These signal timings were input to the DYNEV II system used to compute ETE, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance.

Figure 12 presents the linknode analysis network that was constructed to model the evacuation roadway network in the EPZ and Shadow Region. The directional arrows on the links and the node numbers have been removed from Figure 12 to clarify the figure. The detailed figures provided in Appendix K depict the analysis network with directional arrows shown and node numbers provided. The observations made during the field survey were used to calibrate the analysis network.

Demographic Survey An online demographic survey was performed in March 2022, to gather information needed for the ETE study. Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used, and tabulations of data compiled from the survey returns.

These data were utilized to develop estimates of vehicle occupancy to estimate the number of evacuating vehicles during an evacuation and to estimate elements of the mobilization process.

This database was also referenced to estimate the number of transitdependent residents.

Computing the Evacuation Time Estimates The overall study procedure is outlined in Appendix D. Demographic data were obtained from several sources, as detailed later in this report. These data were analyzed and converted into vehicle demand data. The vehicle demand was loaded onto appropriate source links of the analysis network using GIS mapping software. The DYNEV II system was then used to compute ETE for all Regions and Scenarios.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Analytical Tools The DYNEV II System that was employed for this study is comprised of several integrated computer models. One of these is the DYNEV (DYnamic Network EVacuation) macroscopic simulation model, a new version of the IDYNEV model that was developed by KLD under contract with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

DYNEV II consists of four submodels:

A macroscopic traffic simulation model (for details, see Appendix C).

A Trip Distribution (TD), model that assigns a set of candidate destination (D) nodes for each origin (O) located within the analysis network, where evacuation trips are generated over time. This establishes a set of OD tables.

A Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA), model which assigns trips to paths of travel (routes) which satisfy the OD tables, over time. The TD and DTA models are integrated to form the DTRAD (Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution) model, as described in Appendix B.

A Myopic Traffic Diversion model which diverts traffic to avoid intense, local congestion, if possible.

Another software product developed by KLD, named UNITES (UNIfied Transportation Engineering System) was used to expedite data entry and to automate the production of output tables.

The dynamics of traffic flow over the network are graphically animated using the software product, EVAN (EVacuation ANimator), developed by KLD. EVAN is GIS based, and displays statistics such as LOS, vehicles discharged, average speed, and percent of vehicles evacuated, output by the DYNEV II System. The use of a GIS framework enables the user to zoom in on areas of congestion and query road name, town name and other geographical information.

The procedure for applying DYNEV II within the framework of developing ETE is outlined in Appendix D. Appendix A is a glossary of terms.

For the reader interested in an evaluation of the original model, IDYNEV, the following references are suggested:

NUREG/CR4873 - Benchmark Study of the IDYNEV Evacuation Time Estimate Computer Code NUREG/CR4874 - The Sensitivity of Evacuation Time Estimates to Changes in Input Parameters for the IDYNEV Computer Code The evacuation analysis procedures are based upon the need to:

Route traffic along paths of travel that will expedite their travel from their respective points of origin to points outside the EPZ.

Restrict movement toward the plant to the extent practicable and disperse traffic demand so as to avoid focusing demand on a limited number of highways.

Move traffic in directions that are generally outbound, relative to the location of the plant.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

DYNEV II provides a detailed description of traffic operations on the evacuation network. This description enables the analyst to identify bottlenecks and to develop countermeasures that are designed to represent the behavioral responses of evacuees. The effects of these countermeasures may then be tested with the model.

1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study Table 13 presents a comparison of the present ETE study with the 2012 ETE study (KLD TR589, Rev. 1, dated December 2012). The 90th percentile ETE for the entire EPZ (Region R03) increased by at most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 10 minutes for all nonscenarios except for special scenarios (Special Event

& Roadway Impact), which increased at most by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 55 minutes. The 100th percentile ETE for the full EPZ increased by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> for all scenarios except for Scenario 11 (Special Event) and Scenario 12 (Roadway Impact). The 100th percentile ETE for Scenario 11 and Scenario 12 has increased by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> 55 minutes, respectively.

The factors contributing to the differences between the ETE values obtained in this study and those of the previous study are:

The permanent resident population in the EPZ has increased by approximately 16%,

resulting in additional vehicles, which can increase the ETE.

The Shadow Region permanent resident population has increased by approximately 21%,

resulting in additional vehicles evacuating in the Shadow Region, which decreases the available roadway capacity for EPZ evacuees and can increase the ETE.

Tripgeneration time increased by at most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> for the permanent residents based on data collected from the demographic survey. As a result, vehicles are generated over a longer period of time which can decrease local congestion decreasing the 90th percentile ETE. This trip generation increase is directly correlated with the increase of the 100th percentile ETE for nonspecial scenarios. During nonspecial scenarios, for this site, since all congestion clears prior to the end of the trip generation time, the 100th percentile ETE is dictated by the time needed to mobilize (plus a 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary).

The various factors, discussed above, that can increase ETE outweigh those that can decrease the ETE, thereby explaining why the 90th percentile and the 100th percentile ETEs for the full EPZ increased for all scenarios in this study, relative to the 2012 ETE Study.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction Stakeholder Nature of Stakeholder Interaction Attended kickoff meetings to define methodology and data requirements. Set up contacts with local government agencies.

Vistra Operations Company LLC (Vistra OpCo) Provided recent CPNPP employee data. Reviewed and approved all project assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and was informed of the study results.

Attended kickoff meeting to discuss the project methodology, key project assumptions and to define data needs. Provided emergency plans, Hood and Somervell County Emergency and existing traffic management plans.

Management Offices Provided/confirmed special facility and special event data. Reviewed and approved all project assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and were informed of the study results.

Attended kickoff meetings to define methodology and data requirements. Provided Texas Department of State Health Services recent emergency plans. Reviewed and approved all project assumptions and was informed of the study results.

Obtain traffic data from TXDOT GIS website for the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) external traffic.

Table 12. Highway Characteristics Number of lanes Posted speed Lane width Actual free speed Shoulder type & width Abutting land use Interchange geometries Control devices Lane channelization & queuing Intersection configuration (including capacity (including turn bays/lanes) roundabouts where applicable)

Geometrics: curves, grades (>4%) Traffic signal type Unusual characteristics: Narrow bridges, sharp curves, poor pavement, flood warning signs, inadequate delineations, toll booths, etc.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study ArcView GIS Software using 2010 US ArcGIS Software using 2020 US Census blocks and area ratio Census blocks; area ratio method Resident Population method. used.

Basis Population = 35,199 Population = 40,869 2.21 persons/household, 1.29 2.57 persons/household, 1.44 Resident Population evacuating vehicles/household evacuating vehicles/household Vehicle Occupancy yielding: 1.71 persons/ vehicle. yielding: 1.78 persons/ vehicle.

Employee and transient estimates Employee estimates based on based on information provided by information provided about major the counties. 1.02 employers in EPZ. 1.08 employees employees/vehicle based on phone per vehicle based on demographic Employee Population survey results. survey results.

Employees = 1,382 Employees = 534 Estimates based upon 2020 U.S.

Estimates based upon 2010 U.S.

Census data and the results of the Census data and the results of the demographic survey. A total of 120 telephone survey. A total of 627 people who do not have access to a people who do not have access to a vehicle, requiring 13 buses to vehicle, requiring 21 buses to TransitDependent evacuate. An additional 66 access evacuate. An additional 80 access Population and/or functional needs population and/or functional needs population needed special transportation to needed special transportation to evacuate (32 require a bus, 23 evacuate (44 require a bus, 36 require a wheelchair accessible require a wheelchair accessible vehicle and 11 require vehicle).

ambulances).

Transient estimates based upon Transient estimates based upon information provided about information provided about Transient Population transient attractions in EPZ. transient attractions in EPZ.

Transients = 17,787 Transients = 20,568 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Special facility population based on Special facility population based on information provided by each information provided by each county county within the EPZ, the previous within the EPZ. ETE study and supplemented by internet searches.

Medical Facilities: Medical Facilities:

Special Facilities Current census = 875 Current census = 1,026 Population Buses Required = 15 Buses Required = 15 Minibuses = 61 Minibuses = 30 Wheelchair Bus/Vans Required = 5 Wheelchair Bus/Van Required = 17 Ambulances Required = 5 Ambulances Required = 39 Correctional Facilities: Correctional Facilities:

Total Population: 32 Total Population: 32 Buses Required: 2 Buses Required: 2 School, Preschool/Daycare, and Day School, Preschool/Daycare, and Camp population based on Day Camp population based on information provided by each county information provided by each within the EPZ. county within the EPZ.

Schools: Schools:

School, Preschool/Daycare, School enrollment = 4,171 School enrollment = 6,436 and Day Camp Buses required = 79 Buses required = 125 Population Preschool/Daycares: Preschool/Daycares:

Daycare enrollment = 217 Daycare enrollment = 635 Buses required = 5 Buses required = 15 Day Camps: Day Camps:

Day Camp enrollment = 2,121 Day Camp enrollment = 2,221 Day Camp Buses = 42 Day Camp Buses = 44 Voluntary evacuation 20% of the population within the 20% of the population within the from within EPZ in EPZ, but not within the Evacuation EPZ, but not within the Evacuation areas outside region Region Region (see Figure 21) to be evacuated 20% of people outside of the EPZ 20% of people outside of the EPZ within the Shadow Region (see Shadow within the Shadow Region Figure 72)

Population/Evacuation Population = 22,924 Population = 27,644 Network Size 1,308 links; 876 nodes 1,680 links; 1,170 nodes Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Field surveys conducted in April Field surveys conducted in March 2012. Roads and intersections were 2022. Roads and intersections were video archived. video archived.

Roadway Geometric Aerial imagery used for additional Data roadways which were not included in the field surveys.

Road capacities based on the HCM Road capacities based on HCM 2010.

2016.

Reception Center first for Direct evacuation to relocation School Evacuation monitoring, then to a Host School. schools 77% of transitdependent persons 50% of transitdependent persons will evacuate with a neighbor or Ridesharing will evacuate with a neighbor or friend based on the results of the friend.

demographic survey Based on residential telephone Based on demographic survey of survey of specific pretrip specific pretrip mobilization mobilization activities: activities:

Residents with commuters Residents with commuters returning returning leave between 30 and leave between 30 and 240 minutes.

300 minutes.

Trip Generation for Residents without commuters Residents without commuters Evacuation returning leave between 15 and 180 returning leave between 15 and minutes. 225 minutes.

Employees and transients leave Employees and transients leave between 15 and 105 minutes. between 15 and 105 minutes.

All times measured from the All times measured from the Advisory to Evacuate. Advisory to Evacuate.

Normal or Rain. The capacity and Normal or Rain. The capacity and free flow speed of all links in the free flow speed of all links in the Weather network are reduced by 10% in the network are reduced by 10% in the event of rain. event of rain.

Modeling DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.0.0 DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.21.0 4th of July in Granbury 4th of July in Granbury Special Events Special Event Population = 11,303 Special Event Population = 11,097 additional transients additional transients 92 Regions (central sector wind 92 Regions (central sector wind direction and each adjacent sector direction and each adjacent sector Evacuation Cases technique used) and 12 Scenarios technique used) and 12 Scenarios producing 1,104 unique cases. producing 1,104 unique cases.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study ETE reported for 90th and 100th ETE reported for 90th and 100th Evacuation Time percentile population. Results percentile population. Results Estimates Reporting presented by Region and Scenario. presented by Region and Scenario.

Winter Midweek Midday, Winter Midweek Midday, Good Weather: 2:25 Good Weather: 3:20 Evacuation Time Rain: 2:40 Rain:3:40 Estimates for the entire EPZ, 90th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 2:25 Good Weather: 3:35 Rain: 2:35 Rain: 3:45 Winter Midweek Midday, Winter Midweek Midday, Good Weather: 4:10 Good Weather: 5:10 Evacuation Time Rain: 4:10 Rain: 5:10 Estimates for the entire EPZ, 100th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 4:10 Good Weather: 5:10 Rain: 4:10 Rain: 5:10 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 11. CPNPP Location Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 12. CPNPP LinkNode Analysis Network Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 113 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS This section presents the estimates and assumptions utilized in the development of the evacuation time estimates (ETE).

2.1 Data Estimate Assumptions

1. The permanent resident population are based on the 2020 U.S. Census population from the Census Bureau website1. A methodology, referred to as the area ratio method, is employed to estimate the population within portions of census blocks that are divided by Zone boundaries. It is assumed that the population is evenly distributed across a census block in order to employ the area ratio method. (See Section 3.1.)

2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon data provided by Vistra OpCo, each county and the data from the previous ETE study (confirmed by Hood and Somervell Counties). (See Section 3.4.)

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based on the data received from the counties within the EPZ and the previous ETE study (confirmed by the counties),

supplemented by phone calls and internet searches where data was missing.

4. The relationship between permanent resident population and evacuating vehicles are based on the results of the demographic survey (see Appendix F). Values of 2.57 persons per household (Figure F1) and 1.44 evacuating vehicles per household (Section F.3.1) are used for the permanent resident population.

5. Employee vehicle occupancies are based on the results of the demographic survey. For this study, 1.08 employees per vehicle is used. In addition, it is assumed there are two people per carpool, on average (See Figure F7).

6. The relationship between persons and vehicles for transients (see Section 3.3) and the special event (see Section 3.9) are as follows:

a. Transients on average have an occupancy of 2.17 persons per vehicle (occupancy varies depending on the type of facility. See Section 3.3 and Appendix E.)

b. Special Event (see Section 3.9): Transients attending the 4th of July in Granbury has an occupancy of 3 people per vehicle.

c. Where data was not provided, the average household size is assumed to be the vehicle occupancy rate for transient facilities and the special event.

7. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ is 50 mph (based on Texas Transportation Code2) for school buses and average posted speed limits on roadways within the EPZ.

1 www.census.gov 2

https://texas.public.law/statutes/tex._transp._code_section_545.352 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8. Roadway capacity estimates are based on field surveys performed in 2021 (verified by aerial imagery) and the application of the Highway Capacity Manual 2016.

2.2 Methodological Assumptions

1. The Planning Basis Assumption for the calculation of ETE is a rapidly escalating accident that requires evacuation, and includes the following3 (as per NRC guidance):

a. Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) is announced coincident with the Alert and Notification system.

b. Mobilization of the general population will commence within 15 minutes after the notification.

c. The ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

2. The centerpoint of the plant is located at 32°17'53.2"N, 97°47'08.4"W.

3. The DYNEV II4 (Dynamic Network Evacuation) macroscopic simulation model is used to compute ETE in this study.

4. Evacuees will drive safely, travel radially away from the plant to the extent practicable given the highway network, and obey all control devices and traffic guides. All major evacuation routes are used in the analysis.

5. The existing EPZ and Zone boundaries are used. See Figure 31.

6. The Shadow Region extends to 15 miles radially from the plant or approximately 5 miles radially from the EPZ boundary, as per NRC guidance. See Figure 72.

7. One hundred percent (100%) of the people within the impacted keyhole will evacuate.

Twenty percent (20%) of the population within the Shadow Region and within Zones of the EPZ not advised to evacuate will voluntarily evacuate, as shown in Figure 21 as per NRC guidance. Sensitivity studies explore the effect on ETE of increasing the percentage of voluntary evacuees in the Shadow Region (see Appendix M).

8. Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuating vehicles per household, and mobilization time) is assumed to be the same as that of the permanent resident population within the EPZ.

9. The ETE are presented at the 90th and 100th percentiles, as well as in graphical and tabular format, as per NRC guidance. The percentile ETE is defined as the elapsed time from the ATE issued to a specific Region of the EPZ, to the time that Region is clear of the indicated 3

We emphasize that the adoption of this planning basis is not a representation that these events will occur within the indicated time frame. Rather, these assumptions are necessary in order to:

1. Establish a temporal framework for estimating the Trip Generation distribution in the format recommended in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR-6863.

2. Identify temporal points of reference that uniquely define "Clear Time" and ETE.

It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various stages of an emergency. See Section 5.1 for more detail.

4 The models of the I-DYNEV System were recognized as state of the art by the Atomic Safety & Licensing Board (ASLB) in past hearings. (Sources: Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Hearings on Seabrook and Shoreham; Urbanik). The models have continuously been refined and extended since those hearings and were independently validated by a consultant retained by the NRC. The DYNEV II model incorporates the latest technology in traffic simulation and in dynamic traffic assignment.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

percentile of evacuees.

10. The ETE also includes consideration of through (ExternalExternal) trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region. See Section 3.10.

11. This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of the first time period.

Rather, there is a 50minute initialization period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from the first time period are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of the first time period depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated. See Section 3.11.

12. To account for boundary conditions beyond the study area, this study assumed a 25 percent (%) reduction in capacity on twolane roads and multilane highways for roadways that have traffic signals downstream. The 25% reduction in capacity is based on the prevalence of actuated traffic signals in the study area and the fact that the evacuating traffic volume will be more significant than the competing traffic volume at any downstream signalized intersections, thereby warranting a more significant percentage (75% in this case) of the signal green time. There is no reduction in capacity for freeways due to boundary conditions.

2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times

1. Trip generation time (also known as mobilization time, or the time required by evacuees to prepare for the evacuation) are based upon the results of the demographic survey (see Section 5 and Appendix F). It is assumed that stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur.

2. One hundred percent (100%) of the EPZ population can be notified within 45 minutes, in accordance with the 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual.

3. Commuter percentages (and percentage of residents awaiting the return of a commuter) are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 56% of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter (see Section F.3.1); 57.7% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip (see Section F.3.2.). Therefore, 32.3% (56% x 57.7%

= 32.3%) of EPZ households will await the return of a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.

2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions

1. The percentage of transitdependent people who will rideshare with a neighbor or friend will be based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 77% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2. Transit vehicles are used to transport those without access to private vehicles:

a. Schools, Preschools/Day Cares and Day Camps

i. If schools, Preschools/Day Cares are in session, transport (buses) will evacuate students directly to the designated relocation schools.

ii. If day camps are in session, transport (buses) will evacuate children to the nearest reception center.

iii. For the schools, preschools/day cares, and day camp children are evacuated via buses, it is assumed no children will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

iv. Schoolchildren, if school is in session, are given priority in assigning transit vehicles.

b. Medical Facilities

i. Buses, minibuses, vans, passenger cars, wheelchair buses, wheelchair vans and ambulances will evacuate patients at medical facilities and at any senior facilities within the EPZ, as needed.

ii. The percent breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound, and bedridden patients for most medical facilities were determined using medical facilities with similar capacities to determine the number of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at the medical facilities.

c. Transitdependent permanent residents:

i. The transitdependent permanent resident population are evacuated to reception centers.

ii. The access and/or functional needs population may require county assistance (ambulance, bus or wheelchair transport) to evacuate. This is considered separately from the general population ETE, as per NRC guidance (see Section 8).

iii. Households with 3 or more vehicles were assumed to have no need for transit vehicles.

d. Somervell County Jail (Correctional Facility):

i. Inmates at Somervell County Jail are transported to a comparable facility (i.e., Johnson County Correctional Facility).

e. Analysis of the number of required roundtrips (waves) of evacuating transit vehicles is presented.

f. Transport of transitdependent evacuees from reception centers to congregate care centers is not considered in this study.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3. Transit vehicle capacities:

a. School buses = 65 students per bus for primary schools/preschools/day cares/Stevens Ranch Day Camp and 50 students per bus for middle/high schools/day camps.

b. Transitdependent persons, inmates, and ambulatory medical facility patients =

30 persons per bus

c. Ambulances = 2 bedridden persons (includes advanced and basic life support)

d. Minibuses = 25 Ambulatory and 4 wheelchair bound persons

e. Wheelchair vans = 4 wheelchair bound persons

f. Wheelchair buses = 15 wheelchair bound persons

4. Transit vehicles mobilization times, which are considered in ETE calculations:

a. Tolar Independent School District (ISD), North Central Texas Academy, Brazos River Charter School, preschools/day cares, and day camps arrive at facilities to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE. Glen Rose ISD and Granbury ISD buses are mobilized within 10 minutes of the ATE.

b. Transitdependent buses are mobilized when approximately 87% of residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization at 135 minutes.

c. Vehicles will arrive at hospitals, medical facilities, and senior living facilities to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

d. Buses arrive at Somervell County Jail within 90 minutes of the ATE.

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. School/Day Care/Day Camp buses are loaded in 15 minutes (10 minutes for Glen Rose ISD and Granbury ISD).

b. Transitdependent and Somervell County Jail buses require 1 minute of loading time per passenger.

c. Buses for hospitals and medical/senior facilities require 1 minute of loading time per ambulatory passenger.

d. Wheelchair transport vehicles require 5 minutes of loading time per passenger.

e. Ambulances are loaded in 15 minutes per bedridden passenger.

f. Concurrent loading on multiple buses/transit vehicles is assumed.

6. It is assumed that drivers for all transit vehicles identified in Table 81 are available.

2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions

1. Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Access Control Points (ACPs) as defined in the approved county and state emergency plans are considered in the ETE analysis, as per NRC guidance. See Appendix G.

2. The TCPs and ACPs are assumed to be staffed approximately 120 minutes after the ATE, as per NRC guidance. Earlier activation of ACPs could delay returning commuters. It is assumed that no through traffic will enter the EPZ after this 120minute time period.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3. It is assumed that all transit vehicles and other responders entering the EPZ to support the evacuation are unhindered by personnel manning TCPs.

2.6 Scenarios and Regions

1. A total of 12 Scenarios representing different temporal variations (season, time of day, day of week) and weather conditions are considered. Scenarios to be considered are defined in Table 21:

a. Fourth of July at Granbury, located in Zones 1D, 4E, and portions within the Shadow Region, is considered as the special event (single or multiday event that attracts a significant population into the EPZ; recommended by NRC guidance) for Scenario 11.

b. As per NRC guidance, one of the top 5 highest volume roadways must be closed or one lane outbound on a freeway must be closed for a roadway impact scenario.

This study considers the closure of a single lane on US 377 Northbound (NB) from TX 144 to slightly east of Farm to Market (FM) 167 and a single lane on US 67 NB from FM 205 to TX 144 and CR 316 to CR 1119 for the roadway impact scenario -

Scenario 12.

2. One type of adverse weather scenario is considered. Rain may occur for either winter or summer scenarios. It is assumed that the rain begins earlier or at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued. No weatherrelated reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed. It is assumed that roads are passable.

3. Adverse weather scenarios affect roadway capacity and the free flow highway speeds.

Transportation research indicates capacity and speed reductions of about 10% for rain.

For this study, the capacity and free flow speed are reduced by 10% for rain, in accordance with Table 31 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. The factors are shown in Table 22.

4. It is assumed that employment is reduced slightly (4% reduction) in the summer for vacations.

5. It is also assumed that mobilization and loading times for transit vehicles are slightly longer in adverse weather. It is assumed that mobilization times are 10 minutes longer in rain. It is assumed that loading times are 5 minutes (for schools, preschools/day cares, day camps) and 10 minutes (for transitdependent buses) longer in rain. Refer to Table 22.

6. Regions are defined by the underlying keyhole or circular configurations as specified in Section 1.4 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 and the PAR provided by Vistra OpCo. These Regions, as defined, display irregular boundaries reflecting the geography of the Zones included within these underlying configurations. All 16 cardinal and intercardinal wind direction keyhole configurations are considered. Three adjoining sectors (as per guidance) and five adjoining sectors (as per PAR) are considered. Three adjoining sector Regions to be considered are defined in Table 61 and Table 62. Five adjoining sector Regions to be Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

considered are defined in Table 63 and Table 64. It is assumed that everyone within the group of Zones forming a Region that is issued an ATE will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes

7. Staged evacuation is considered as defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 and PAR - those people between 2 and 5 miles will shelterinplace until 90% of the 2Mile Region has evacuated, then they will evacuate. See Regions R64 through R92 in Table 64.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Time of Scenario Season5 Weather Special Week Day 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Special Event: Fourth of 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good July in Granbury Roadway Impact: Single 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good lane closure on US 377 NB and on US 7 NB Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Mobilization Mobilization Loading Time for Free Time for Time for all School/Pre Loading Time Highway Flow General Transit school/Daycare/Day for Other Scenario Capacity* Speed* Population Vehicles Camp Buses Transit Vehicles 10minute 5minute 10minute Rain 90% 90% No Effect increase increase increase

• Adverse weather capacity and speed values are given as a percentage of good weather conditions.

Roads are assumed to be passable.

5 Winter means that school is in session, at normal enrollment levels (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer means that school is in session at summer school enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3 DEMAND ESTIMATION The estimates of demand, expressed in terms of people and vehicles, constitute a critical element in developing an evacuation plan. These estimates consist of three components:

1. An estimate of population within the EPZ, stratified into groups (e.g., resident, employee, transient, special facilities, etc.).

2. An estimate, for each population group, of mean occupancy per evacuating vehicle. This estimate is used to determine the number of evacuating vehicles.

3. An estimate of potential doublecounting of vehicles.

Appendix E presents much of the source material for the population estimates. Our primary source of population data, the 2020 Census, is not adequate for directly estimating some transient groups.

Throughout the year, vacationers and tourists enter the EPZ. These nonresidents may dwell within the EPZ for a short period (e.g., a few days or one or two weeks), or may enter and leave within one day. Estimates of the size of these population components must be obtained, so that the associated number of evacuating vehicles can be ascertained.

The potential for doublecounting people and vehicles must be addressed. For example:

A resident who works and shops within the EPZ could be counted as a resident, again as an employee and once again as a shopper.

A visitor who stays at a hotel and spends time at a park, then goes shopping could be counted three times.

Furthermore, the number of vehicles at a location depends on time of day. For example, motel parking lots may be full at dawn and empty at noon. Similarly, parking lots at area parks, which are full at noon, may be almost empty at dawn. Estimating counts of vehicles by simply adding up the capacities of different types of parking facilities will tend to overestimate the number of transients and can lead to ETE that are too conservative.

Analysis of the population characteristics of the CPNPP EPZ indicates the need to identify three distinct groups:

Permanent residents people who are year round residents of the EPZ.

Transients people who reside outside of the EPZ who enter the area for a specific purpose (shopping, recreation) and then leave the area.

Employees people who reside outside of the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ on a daily basis.

Estimates of the population and number of evacuating vehicles for each of the population groups are presented for each Zone and by polar coordinate representation (population rose).

The CPNPP EPZ is subdivided into 30 Zones. The Zones comprising the EPZ is shown in Figure 31.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.1 Permanent Residents The primary source for estimating permanent population is the latest U.S. Census data. with an availability date of September 16, 2021. The average household size (2.57 persons/household -

was estimated based on the 2021 demographic survey see Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1). The number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.44 vehicles/household - See Appendix F, Sub section F.3.2) was adapted from the demographic survey.

The permanent resident population is estimated by cutting the census block polygons by the Zone and EPZ boundaries using GIS software. A ratio of the original area of each census block and the updated area (after cutting) is multiplied by the total block population to estimate the population within the EPZ. The methodology (referred to as the area ratio method) assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 31 provides permanent resident population within the EPZ, by Zone, for 2010 and for 2020 (based on the methodology above). As indicated, the permanent resident population within the EPZ has increased by 16.11% since the 2010 Census.

To estimate the number of vehicles, the 2020 Census permanent resident population is divided by the average household size (2.57 persons/household) and multiplied by the average number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.44 vehicles/household). Permanent resident population and vehicle estimates are presented in Table 32. Figure 32 and Figure 33 present the permanent resident population and permanent resident vehicle estimates by sector and distance from CPNPP. This population rose was constructed using GIS software. Note, the 2020 Census includes residents living in group quarters, such as skilled nursing facilities, group homes, prisons, etc. These people are transit dependent (will not evacuate in personal vehicles) and are included in the special facility evacuation demand estimates. To avoid double counting vehicles, the vehicle estimates for these people have been removed. The resident vehicles in Table 32 and Figure 33 have been adjusted accordingly.

3.2 Shadow Population A portion of the population living outside the evacuation area extending to 15 miles radially from the CPNPP may elect to evacuate without having been instructed to do so. This area is called the Shadow Region. Based upon NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance, it is assumed that 20 percent of the permanent resident population, based on U.S. Census Bureau data, in the Shadow Region will elect to evacuate.

Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuating vehicles per household, mobilization time) are assumed to be the same as those for the EPZ permanent resident population. Table 33, Figure 34, and Figure 35 present estimates of the shadow population and vehicles, by sector. Similar to the EPZ resident vehicle estimates, resident vehicles at group quarters have been removed from the shadow population vehicle demand in Table 33 and Figure 35.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.3 Transient Population Transient population groups are defined as those people (who are not permanent residents, nor commuting employees) who enter the EPZ for a specific purpose (e.g., shopping, recreation). Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at camping facilities, hotels and motels. Data for transient facilities was reviewed and updated by the counties within the EPZ, supplemented by the previous ETE study and internet searches where data was missing. The average transient vehicle occupancy rates vary by facility from 1 person per vehicle to 5 persons per vehicle. Note, recreational vehicles (RVs) at campgrounds are treated as 2 vehicles due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics. The transient facilities within the CPNPP EPZ are as follows:

Campgrounds Parks Golf Courses Marinas Other Recreational Facilities Lodging Facilities Major Retail Facilities There are a number of campgrounds and RV parks within the study area. Data from the previous study was reviewed and updated by the counties within the EPZ. Several new campgrounds and RV parks were identified within the study area. The estimates of transients and transient vehicles for each new facility were provided by the counties. A total of 2,090 transients and 1,252 vehicles are assigned to campgrounds and RV parks within the study area

- an average of 1.67 transients per vehicle.

Some of the camping facilities have 1 to 2 week long summer day camps. Individuals attending these camps are either dropped off by parents or bussed to the facility. The ETE for day camps is computed separately in Section 8 and discussed in Section 3.7, since the children at these day camps are considered transit dependents.

There are a couple of parks within the EPZ. Data from the previous study was reviewed by the counties within the EPZ and confirmed the data was still accurate. Four new parks were identified within the EPZ and the estimates of transients and transient vehicles for each new park were provided by the counties. A total of 1,984 transients and 867 vehicles are assigned to parks within the EPZ - an average of 2.29 transients per vehicle.

There are four golf courses within the EPZ. Data of the preexisting golf course in Somervell County was reviewed by the county and confirmed the data was still accurate. Hood County identified three new golf courses within the EPZ and provided the estimates of transients and transient vehicles for each new golf course. A total of 900 transients and 900 vehicles are assigned to the golf courses within the EPZ - an average of 1.00 transient per vehicle.

There are four marinas within the EPZ. Data of the preexisting marina in Hood County was reviewed by the county and confirmed the data was still accurate. An additional three new Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

marinas were identified in Hood County portion of the EPZ. The estimates of transients and transient vehicles for each new marina were provided by Hood County. A total of 298 transients and 274 vehicles are assigned to the marinas within the EPZ - an average of 1.09 transients per vehicle.

There are four other recreational facilities as well within the EPZ. There is one museum in the Somervell County portion of the EPZ. Data from the previous study was reviewed by the county and confirmed the data was still accurate. A drivein movie theater was identified in the Hood County portion of the EPZ. The parking capacity was obtained from the facility website. It is assumed that transients would drive to the theater as a family/household. As such, the average household size of 2.57 persons per household (see Section 3.1) was used to estimate the number of transients. In addition, there are two event centers that attract the largest number of transients into the EPZ - Somervell County Expo Center and Texas Amphitheatre:

• The Somervell County Expo Center is located in Zone Glen Rose and is a multipurpose event center which hosts a variety of events, such as horse shows, exhibits, concerts, dances, and stage shows. It has a large indoor arena, a show barn, equestrian fields, two outdoor arenas, and a pavilion (multipurpose area in which portable stalls, cattle pens or an arena can be constructed). It has an exposition hall which may be used for banquets, wedding receptions, and meetings. The Expo Center is used yearround on weekends and weekdays.

• The Texas Amphitheatre is located in Zone 2C is used for special events and is only considered during the winter weekend scenarios, which include spring and fall months, since the facility is only open on weekends in April and between September and November.

• The data from the previous study confirmed by the county, included the capacity, percent of transients traveling from outside of the EPZ, and the average vehicle occupancy rate for each event center. This data was used to estimate the number of transients and evacuating vehicles at these two facilities.

In total, an estimate of 9,321 transients and 3,130 transient vehicles are assigned to the museum, drivein theater and the two event centers - an average of 2.98 transients per vehicle.

There are numerous lodging facilities in Hood County and Somervell County. Data from the previous study was reviewed and updated by the counties. A couple of new lodging facilities were identified within the EPZ. The estimates of transients and transient vehicles for new lodging facilities were provided by the counties and supplemented by internet searches. A total of 4,100 transients and 1,933 vehicles are assigned to lodging facilities - an average of 2.12 transients per vehicle.

Finally, there are a few major retail facilities within the Hood County portion of the EPZ. Data from previous study was reviewed by Hood County and confirmed the data was still applicable for this study. Hood County has identified an additional major retail facility within the EPZ and provided the estimates of transients and transient vehicles for this new facility. A total of 1,916 transients and 1,143 transient vehicles are assigned to major retail facilities - an average of 1.68 transients per vehicle.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Appendix E summarizes the transient data that was estimated for the study area. Table E6 presents the number of transients visiting recreational areas within the study area; Table E7 presents the number of transients at lodging facilities within the EPZ; Table E8 presents the number of transients at major retail facilities within the EPZ. In total, there are 20,609 transients in the EPZ at peak times, evacuating in 9,499 vehicles (an average vehicle occupancy of 2.17 transients per vehicle). Table 34 presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by Zone. Figure 36 and Figure 37 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.

3.4 Employees Employees who work within the EPZ fall into two categories:

Those who live and work in the EPZ Those who live outside of the EPZ and commute to jobs within the EPZ.

Those of the first category are already counted as part of the permanent resident population.

To avoid double counting, we focus only on those employees commuting from outside the EPZ who will evacuate along with the permanent resident population.

The estimate of employees commuting into the EPZ is based on the data provided by Vistra OpCo and the data from the previous study. Data from the previous study included the maximum shift employment and percent of employees commuting into the EPZ for each facility. This was reviewed by the counties within the EPZ, indicating the data was still applicable. Note, the employment data of CPNPP was updated by Vistra OpCo.

As per the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance, employers with 200 or more employees working in a single shift are considered as major employers. As such, the employers with less than 200 employees (during the maximum shift) are not considered in this study. There is only one major employer in Hood County and Somervell County, respectively. The information of these two facilities is shown in Table E5 of Appendix E.

To estimate the evacuating employee vehicles, a vehicle occupancy rate of 1.08 employees per vehicle obtained from the demographic survey (see Appendix F, subsection F.3.1) was used for the major employers. Table 35 presents the employee and vehicle estimates commuting into the EPZ by Zone. Figure 38 and Figure 39 present these data by sector.

3.5 Special Facilities In the CPNPP EPZ, there are two additional types of special facilities that will require transit vehicles:

Medical Facilities Correctional Facility - Somervell County Jail A total of 1,058 patients and inmates require transit vehicles. A total 103 transport vehicles are needed. Section 3.5.1 (Medical Facilities) and Section 3.5.2 (Correctional Facilities) below discuss the data in detail at each facility.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.5.1 Medical Facilities The data from the preexisting medical facilities was reviewed by the county and confirmed the data was still accurate. Additional new medical facilities were identified and data was provided by the county and internet searches where data was missing. Table E4 in Appendix E summarizes the data gathered. Table 36 presents the census of medical facilities in the EPZ. A total of 1,026 persons have been identified as living in, or being treated in, these facilities. Since the average number of patients as these facilities fluctuates often, the capacity, current census and breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients for each facility were provided by the county emergency management agencies.

The transportation requirements for the medical facility population are also presented in Table

36. The number and type of evacuating vehicles that need to be provided depend on the patients' state of health. It is estimated that buses can transport up to 30 people; wheelchair accessible minibuses can transport up to 25 ambulatory patients and 4 wheelchairbound persons wheelchair vans up to 4 people; wheelchair buses up to 15 wheelchairbound people; and ambulances up to 2 people. Based on discussions with Hood County Emergency Management Agency, it was assumed no vehicles are needed for patients located in Lake Granbury Medical Center, as they shelterinplace.

3.5.2 Correctional Facilities As detailed in Table E9, there is one correctional facility within the EPZ - Somervell County Jail.

The total inmate population was provided by the county. As summarized in Table 37, the current capacity of the facility is 54. Similar to medical facilities, where population within the jail may fluctuate. The current census is 32 inmates, which requires two (2) buses to evacuate, based on a capacity of 30 inmates per bus.

3.6 Transit Dependent Population The demographic survey (see Appendix F) results were used to estimate the portion of the population requiring transit service:

• Those persons in households that do not have a vehicle available.

• Those persons in households that do have vehicle(s) that would not be available at the time the evacuation is advised.

In the latter group, the vehicle(s) may be used by a commuter(s) who does not return (or is not expected to return) home to evacuate the household.

Table 38 presents estimates of the transitdependent people. Note the following:

• Estimates of persons requiring transit vehicles include schoolchildren. For those evacuation scenarios where children are at school when an evacuation is ordered, separate transportation is provided for the schoolchildren. The actual need for transit vehicles by residents is thereby less than the given estimates. However, estimates of transit vehicles are not reduced when schools are in session.

• It is reasonable and appropriate to consider that many transitdependent persons Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

will evacuate by ridesharing with neighbors, friends or family. For example, nearly 80 percent of those who evacuated from Mississauga, Ontario who did not use their own cars, shared a ride with neighbors or friends. Other documents report that approximately 70 percent of transit dependent persons were evacuated via ride sharing. Based on the results of the demographic survey, approximately 77% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

The estimated number of bus trips needed to service transitdependent persons is based on an estimated average bus occupancy of 30 persons at the conclusion of the bus run. Transit vehicle seating capacities typically equal or exceed 60 children (roughly equivalent to 40 adults). If transit vehicle evacuees are two thirds adults and one third children, then the number of adult seats taken by 30 persons is 20 + (2/3 x 10) = 27. On this basis, the average load factor anticipated is (27/40) x 100 = 68 percent. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 38 by 50 percent, the demand for service can still be accommodated by the available bus seating capacity.

2 20 10 40 1.5 1.00 3

Table 38 indicates that transportation must be provided for 120 people. Therefore, a total of 4 bus runs are required from a capacity standpoint. In order to service all of the transit dependent population and have at least one bus drive through each of the Zones to pick up transit dependent people, 13 bus runs are used in the ETE calculations, see Section 10 for further discussion.

To illustrate this estimation procedure, we calculate the number of persons, P, requiring public transit or rideshare, and the number of buses, B, required for the CPNPP EPZ:

Where, A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 15,902 0.00 0.126 1.66 1 0.562 0.4225 0.537 2.45 2 0.562 0.4225 531 1 0.77 531 30 0.23 531 30 4 These calculations, based on the 2020 demographic survey results, are explained as follows:

• There were no households (HH) with no vehicles, so the term 0.00 represent those who do not have access to a vehicle.

• The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (12.6%), who are at home, equal (1.661).

The number of HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (15,902 x 0.126 x 0.93 x 0.55 x 0.43), as 56.2% of EPZ households have a commuter, 42.25% of which would not return home in the event of an emergency. The number of persons Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms.

• The members of HH with 2 vehicles that are away (53.7%), who are at home, equal (2.45 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 15,902 x 0.537 x 0.45 x (0.562 x 0.4225)2. The number of persons who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms (the last term is squared to represent the probability that neither commuter will return).

• Households with 3 or more vehicles are assumed to have no need for transit vehicles.

• The total number of persons requiring public transit is the sum of such people in HH with no vehicles, or with 1 or 2 vehicles that are away from home.

The estimate of transitdependent population in Table 38 far exceeds the number of registered transitdependent persons in the EPZ as provided by the counties (discussed below in Section3.8). This is consistent with the findings of NUREG/CR6953, Volume 2, in that a large majority of the transitdependent population within the EPZs of U.S. nuclear plants does not register with their local emergency response agency.

3.7 School, Preschools/Daycares Center and Day Camp Population Demand Table 39 presents the school population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all schools, preschools/daycares and, day camps within the EPZ for the 2020 to 2021 school year. The previous ETE data for schools in Hood County were confirmed still accurate for this study. Data for schools within Somervell County was obtained from the county emergency plan. Data for preschools/daycares were provided by Hood County and the Somervell County emergency plans. The previous ETE data for day camps in Somervell County were confirmed still accurate for this study. Data for Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro was provided by Hood County. This was supplemented with The National Center for Education Statistics1 and Texas Health and Human Services2 where data was missing.

The column in Table 39 entitled Buses Required specifies the number of buses required for each school under the following set of assumptions and estimates:

• No students will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

• While many high school students commute to school using private automobiles (as discussed in Section 2.4 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev.1), the estimate of buses required for school evacuation does not consider the use of these private vehicles.

• Bus capacity, expressed in students per bus, is set to 65 for primary schools and preschools/daycares and 50 for middle and high schools.

• Those staff members who do not accompany the students will evacuate in their private vehicles.

• No allowance is made for student absenteeism, typically 3 percent daily.

1 https://nces.ed.gov/

2 https://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Child_Care Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The counties in the EPZ could introduce procedures whereby the schools are contacted prior to the dispatch of buses from the depot to ascertain the current estimate of students to be evacuated. In this way, the number of buses dispatched to the schools will reflect the actual number needed. Those buses originally allocated to evacuate schoolchildren that are not needed due to children being picked up by their parents (although they are not advised to do so), can be gainfully assigned to service other facilities or those persons who do not have access to private vehicles or to ridesharing.

3.8 Access and/or Functional Needs Population Based on data provided by the counties, there are an estimated 17 access and/or functional needs people (10 ambulatory, 4 wheelchairbound and 3 bedridden) within the Hood County portion of the EPZ; 49 access and/or functional needs people (22 ambulatory, 19 wheelchair bound and 8 bedridden) within the Somervell County portion of the EPZ; This results in 32 ambulatory persons, 23 wheelchairbound persons and 12 bedridden persons for a total access and/or functional needs population of 66 people. Table 310 shows the total number of people registered as access and/or functional needs by type of need. The table also estimates the number of transportation resources needed to evacuate these people in a timely manner.

3.9 Special Event Based on discussions with Vistra OpCo and the OROs, a 4th of July celebration in Granbury was chosen as the special event (Scenario 11) in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, because it is a single event that attracts the largest number of transients entering the EPZ.

A 4th of July celebration in Granbury is a multiday event held in conjunction with the 4th of July weekend. This summer, weekend, midday event is held at various locations in Granbury, including Historical Square and the surrounding area. Data from the previous ETE study was reviewed and confirmed by the county. It was used to estimate the number of transient and transient vehicles present during the event. The peak number of transients for the multiday event is 50,000 people with an average daily population that ranges between 20,000 and 30,000 people. This study assumes a peak daily population of 25,000. It was assumed that (based on the previous ETE Study) 50% of event attendees are traveling from outside of the EPZ. Transients stay in local hotels in Granbury while others have weekend homes or rental properties on Lake Granbury. Transients already included at lodging facilities within Hood County (excluding the Granbury Convention Center) are subtracted out as to avoid double counting. These factors result in a total additional transient population of 11,097 people. data based on the previous ETE, a vehicle occupancy of 3 people per vehicle was assumed, resulting in an additional 3,699 vehicles.

Vehicles were assumed to be parked along various streets and parking lots within Granbury.

Therefore, the vehicle trips were distributed over several links within the Town of Granbury.

The special event vehicle trips were generated utilizing the same mobilization distributions for transients. Public transportation is not provided for this event and was not considered in the analysis.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.10 External Traffic Vehicles will be traveling through the EPZ (externalexternal trips) at the time of an emergency accident. After the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) is announced, these throughtravelers will also evacuate. These through vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes traversing the EPZ

- US377 and US67. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the EPZ during the first 120 minutes following the ATE.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data from 2019 was obtained from the North Central Texas Council of Governments Traffic Count Information Systems3 to estimate the number of vehicles per hour on the aforementioned routes. The AADT was multiplied by the KFactor, which is the proportion of the AADT on a roadway segment or link during the design hour, resulting in the design hour volume (DHV). The design hour is usually the 30th highest hourly traffic volume of the year, measured in vehicles per hour (vph). The DHV is then multiplied by the DFactor, which is the proportion of the DHV occurring in the peak direction of travel (also known as the directional split). The resulting values are the directional design hourly volumes (DDHV) and are presented in Table 311 for each of the routes considered. The DDHV is then multiplied by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> (access control points - ACP - are assumed to be activated within 120 minutes of the ATE) to estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. As indicated, there are 4,256 vehicles entering the EPZ as externalexternal trips prior to the activation of the ACP and the diversion of this traffic. This number is reduced by 60% for evening scenarios (Scenarios 5 and 10) as discussed in Section 6.

3.11 Background Traffic Section 5 discusses the time needed for the people in the EPZ to mobilize and begin their evacuation trips. As shown in Table 58, there are 14 time periods during which traffic is loaded on to roadways in the study area to model the mobilization time of people in the EPZ. Note, there is no traffic generated during the 15th time period, as this time period is intended to allow traffic that has already begun evacuating to clear the study area boundaries.

This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of Time Period 1. Rather, there is a 50minute initialization time period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from Time Period 1 are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of Time Period 1 depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated (see Section 6). There are 1,533 vehicles on the roadways in the study area at the end of fill time for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 (summer, midweek, midday, with good weather) conditions.

3 http://www.dot.state.tx.us/apps/statewide_mapping/StatewidePlanningMap.html Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.12 Summary of Demand A summary of population and vehicle demand is provided in Table 312 and Table 313, respectively. This summary includes all population groups described in this section. A total of 89,112 people and 44,034 vehicles are considered in this study.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2010 Population4 2020 Population 1A 672 656 1B 337 351 1C 6,871 8,105 1D 11,793 14,713 2A 736 548 2B 364 251 2C 466 717 2D 695 567 2E 70 127 2F 115 153 2G 16 21 2H 431 507 2J 1,202 1,557 3A 134 149 3B 83 122 3C 546 592 3D 363 366 3E 111 129 3F 309 320 4A 59 58 4B 104 108 4C 123 189 4D 181 182 4E 4,261 4,856 4F 1,543 1,509 4G 523 491 4H 73 70 CP 66 283 GL 2,291 2,369 TO 661 803 EPZ TOTAL 35,199 40,869 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 16.11%

4 The 2010 population shown in the table for Zones 1D, 4Eand 4F reflect the new zone boundaries and will therefore not align with the previous ETE study.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone 2020 2020 Population Zone Resident Vehicles 1A 656 368 1B 351 197 1C 8,105 4,541 1D 14,713 8,018 2A 548 306 2B 251 139 2C 717 400 2D 567 318 2E 127 71 2F 153 86 2G 21 13 2H 507 285 2J 1,557 874 3A 149 85 3B 122 69 3C 592 331 3D 366 204 3E 129 73 3F 320 178 4A 58 33 4B 108 61 4C 189 107 4D 182 102 4E 4,856 2,647 4F 1,509 807 4G 491 274 4H 70 38 CP 283 161 GL 2,369 1,246 TO 803 426 EPZ TOTAL 40,869 22,458 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Sector 2020 Population Evacuating Vehicles N 9,577 5,222 NNE 9,905 5,549 NE 1,508 843 ENE 116 65 E 511 287 ESE 195 109 SE 163 90 SSE 175 97 S 148 83 SSW 119 67 SW 178 98 WSW 140 77 W 697 389 WNW 606 342 NW 437 244 NNW 3,189 1,787 TOTAL 27,664 15,349 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles Zone Transients Transient Vehicles 1A 0 0 1B 20 20 1C 999 891 1D 5,585 3,267 2A 0 0 2B 50 50 2C 4,207 1,354 2D 248 230 2E 150 50 2F 50 36 2G 0 0 2H 0 0 2J 894 438 3A 0 0 3B 966 389 3C 10 4 3D 119 52 3E 0 0 3F 345 98 4A 282 150 4B 0 0 4C 0 0 4D 0 0 4E 475 194 4F 60 60 4G 0 0 4H 0 0 CP 0 0 GL 6,108 2,175 TO 0 0 EPZ TOTAL 20,568 9,458 Shadow Region5 41 41 STUDY AREA TOTAL 20,609 9,499 5

A transient facility in Hood County is located in the Shadow Region. As per the countys request, this facility is included in the study due to the close proximity to the EPZ boundary. Figure 3-6 and Figure 3-7 display the transients and transient vehicles within the EPZ only, therefore, the total numbers shown in these two figures do not align with the study area total numbers in Table 3-4.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ Zone Employees Employee Vehicles 1A 0 0 1B 0 0 1C 0 0 1D 293 271 2A 0 0 2B 0 0 2C 0 0 2D 0 0 2E 0 0 2F 0 0 2G 0 0 2H 0 0 2J 0 0 3A 0 0 3B 0 0 3C 0 0 3D 0 0 3E 0 0 3F 0 0 4A 0 0 4B 0 0 4C 0 0 4D 0 0 4E 0 0 4F 0 0 4G 0 0 4H 0 0 CP 241 223 GL 0 0 TO 0 0 EPZ TOTAL 534 494 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand Wheel Wheel Wheel Mini chair chair Current Ambu chair Bed Bus Bus Bus Van Ambulance Zone Facility Name Municipality Capacity Census latory Bound ridden Runs Runs Runs Runs Runs HOOD COUNTY 1D Southern Concepts South Town Granbury 6 6 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1D Southern Concepts Meadowlark Granbury 4 4 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1D Harbor Lakes Nursing & Rehab Granbury 147 75 20 30 25 0 8 0 0 13 1D Lakestone Terrace Senior Living Granbury 208 90 78 11 1 0 4 0 0 1 1D Courtyards at Lake Granbury Granbury 82 74 44 30 0 0 8 0 0 0 1D Southern Concepts Torrey House Granbury 6 6 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Waterview The Point Independent 1D Living Granbury 210 210 186 24 0 2 6 0 0 0 Waterview The Cove Assisted Living 1D

& Memory Care Granbury 55 38 24 12 2 0 3 0 0 1 4E Bridgewater Memory Care Granbury 52 45 22 23 0 1 0 2 0 0 4E Lake Granbury Medical Center6 Granbury 83 16 12 1 3 ShelterinPlace 4E Granbury Care Center Granbury 181 145 59 84 2 2 0 6 0 0 4F Magnolia Court Granbury 22 18 17 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 4F Quail Park of Granbury Granbury 20 13 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 13 4F Granbury Villa Nursing Center Granbury 95 62 21 38 3 1 0 0 3 3 Hood County Subtotal: 1171 802 499 254 49 9 30 8 3 31 SOMERVELL COUNTY GL Cherokee Rose Manor Glen Rose 102 60 37 19 4 2 0 2 0 2 GL Glen Rose Nursing and Rehab Center Glen Rose 120 80 50 25 5 2 0 2 0 3 GL Glen Rose Medical CenterHospital Glen Rose 123 84 52 27 5 2 0 2 0 3 Somervell County Subtotal: 345 224 139 71 14 6 0 6 0 8 TOTAL: 1,516 1,026 638 325 63 15 30 14 3 39 6

Based on discussions with Hood County, Lake Granbury Medical Center shelters-in-place, so no vehicles are required.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 37. Correction Facility Demand Current Buses Zone Facility Name Municipality Capacity Census Required SOMERVELL COUNTY GL Somervell County Jail Glen Rose 54 32 2 Somervell County Subtotal: 54 32 2 EPZ TOTAL: 54 32 2 Table 38. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Average Survey Percent HH Size Survey Percent HH Survey Percent HH Total People Population with Indicated with Indicated No. of Estimated Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring No. of Vehicles Vehicles 2020 EPZ No. of with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 40,869 0.00 1.66 2.45 15,902 0.00% 12.60% 53.70% 56.20% 42.25% 531 77% 120 0.3%

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 39. School, Preschools/Daycares and Day Camp Population Demand Estimates Zone Schools Enrollment Buses Required HOOD COUNTY 1C Mambrino Elementary School 604 10 1D Premier High School 150 3 4E Lakeside Baptist Academy 100 2 4E Brawner Intermediate School 400 8 4E Emma Roberson Elementary School 501 8 4E Granbury High School 2,029 41 4G Tolar High School 225 5 TO Tolar Elementary School 265 5 TO Tolar Jr. High School 132 3 Hood County School Subtotal: 4,406 85 SOMERVELL COUNTY 2D North Central Texas Academy 70 2 2H Brazos River Charter School 135 3 GL Glen Rose Junior High School 425 9 GL Glen Rose High School 500 10 GL Glen Rose Elementary School 500 8 GL Glen Rose Intermediate School 400 8 Somervell County School Subtotal: 2,030 40 EPZ SCHOOL TOTAL: 6,436 125 Zone Preschools/Daycares Enrollment Buses Required HOOD COUNTY 1C Rainbow's Promise 55 1 1D Lakeside WEEschool 59 1 1D Lil Pirates Daycare 70 2 4E Cross Town Preschool 18 1 4E Miss Dee Little Angels 4 1 Tolar Small Steps Childcare & Early Learning Center, TO LLC 80 2 TO Little Rattlers Preschool & Childcare 57 1 Hood County Subtotal: 343 9 SOMERVELL COUNTY 2C Grace Preshool 60 1 2C Glen Rose Early Head Start 40 1 3D Little Tigers Learning Center 60 1 GL Endless Discoveries Child Development Center 60 1 GL First United Methodist Preschool 60 1 GL Rockin' D Preschools/daycares 12 1 Somervell County Subtotal: 292 6 EPZ PRESCHOOLS/DAYCARES TOTAL: 635 15 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Zone Day Camps Enrollment Buses Required HOOD COUNTY 7

S.R. Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro 100 2 Hood County Subtotal: 100 2 SOMERVELL COUNTY 2E Arrowhead Camp & Retreat Center 450 9 2H Stevens Ranch 171 3 2J Riverbend Retreat Center 900 18 GL Glen Lake Camp & Retreat Center 600 12 Somervell County Subtotal: 2,121 42 EPZ DAY CAMPS TOTAL: 2,221 44 SCHOOLS, PRESCHOOLS/DAYCARES, & DAY CAMPS TOTAL: 9,292 184 Table 310. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary Population Group Population Vehicles deployed Buses 32 1 Wheelchair Vans 23 6 Ambulances 11 6 TOTAL: 66 13 Table 311. CPNPP EPZ External Traffic Upstream Downstream Road HPMS Hourly External Direction KFactor9 DFactor5 Node Node Name AADT8 Volume Traffic 8607 1108 US 67 WB 6,221 0.118 0.5 367 734 8285 285 US 67 EB 6,221 0.118 0.5 367 734 8103 903 US 377 WB 12,013 0.116 0.5 697 1,394 8261 1007 US 377 EB 12,013 0.116 0.5 697 1,394 TOTAL: 4,256 7

Based on discussions with Hood County, Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro evacuates even though located within the Shadow Region.

8 North Central Texas Council of Governments - Traffic Count Information Systems (2019 AADT was used) 9 HCM 2016 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Population Demand10 Schools, Transit Special Preschools/Daycares, Special Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities11 Day Camps12 Event Population13 Traffic Total 1A 656 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 658 1B 351 1 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 372 1C 8,105 24 999 0 0 659 0 0 0 9,787 1D 14,713 43 5,585 293 503 279 4,167 0 0 25,583 2A 548 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 2B 251 1 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 302 2C 717 2 4,207 0 0 100 0 0 0 5,026 2D 567 2 248 0 0 70 0 0 0 887 2E 127 1 150 0 0 450 0 0 0 728 2F 153 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 203 2G 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2H 507 1 0 0 0 306 0 0 0 814 2J 1,557 5 894 0 0 900 0 0 0 3,356 3A 149 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 149 3B 122 0 966 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,088 3C 592 2 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 604 3D 366 1 119 0 0 60 0 0 0 546 3E 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 129 3F 320 1 345 0 0 0 0 0 0 666 4A 58 0 282 0 0 0 0 0 0 340 4B 108 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 4C 189 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 190 4D 182 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 183 4E 4,856 14 475 0 190 3,052 4,158 0 0 12,745 4F 1,509 4 60 0 93 0 0 0 0 1,666 4G 491 1 0 0 0 225 0 0 0 717 4H 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 CP 283 1 0 241 0 0 0 0 0 525 10 In addition, since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, they are not included in this table.

11 Special facilities include medical facilities (not including Lake Granbury Medical Center which shelters-in-place) and Somervell County Jail.

12 As per discussions with Hood County, Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro evacuates even if within the Shadow Region.

13 Shadow Population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 2-1 for additional information.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Schools, Transit Special Preschools/Daycares, Special Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities11 Day Camps12 Event Population13 Traffic Total GL 2,369 7 6,108 0 256 2,557 0 0 0 11,297 TO 803 2 0 0 0 534 0 0 0 1,339 Shadow Region 0 0 41 0 0 100 2,772 5,533 0 8,446 Total 40,869 120 20,609 534 1,042 9,292 11,097 5,533 0 89,112 Table 313. Summary of Vehicle Demand14 Transit Schools, Dependent Special Preschools/Daycares, Special Shadow External Zone Residents Buses15 Transients16 Employees Facilities17 Day Camp Buses18 Event Population19 Traffic Total 1A 368 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 368 1B 197 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 217 1C 4,541 2 891 0 0 22 0 0 0 5,456 1D 8,018 0 3,267 271 83 12 1,389 0 0 13,040 2A 306 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 308 2B 139 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 189 2C 400 0 1,354 0 0 4 0 0 0 1,758 2D 318 0 230 0 0 4 0 0 0 552 2E 71 0 50 0 0 18 0 0 0 139 2F 86 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 2G 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 2H 285 2 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 299 2J 874 0 438 0 0 36 0 0 0 1,348 3A 85 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 3B 69 0 389 0 0 0 0 0 0 458 3C 331 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 335 3D 204 2 52 0 0 2 0 0 0 260 14 Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, they are not included in this table.

15 Transit-Dependent Buses represented as two passenger vehicles.

16 The transient population at Sunnyside RV Park is located within the Shadow Region but will evacuate based on discussions with Hood County.

17 Special facilities include medical facilities (not including Lake Granbury Medical Center which shelters-in-place) and Somervell County Jail.

18 Schools, Preschools/daycares, and Day Camp Buses represented as two passenger vehicles and include buses for Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro, even though located within Shadow Region.

19 Shadow Population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 2-1 for additional information.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Transit Schools, Dependent Special Preschools/Daycares, Special Shadow External Zone Residents Buses15 Transients16 Employees Facilities17 Day Camp Buses18 Event Population19 Traffic Total 3E 73 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 3F 178 0 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 276 4A 33 2 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 185 4B 61 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 4C 107 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 4D 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 4E 2,647 4 194 0 22 122 1,386 0 0 4,375 4F 807 2 60 0 23 0 0 0 0 892 4G 274 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 284 4H 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 CP 161 0 0 223 0 0 0 0 0 384 GL 1,246 2 2,175 0 36 100 0 0 0 3,559 TO 426 2 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 450 Shadow Region 0 0 41 0 0 4 924 3,070 4,256 8,295 Total 22,458 26 9,499 494 164 368 3,699 3,070 4,256 44,034 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 31. Zones Comprising the CPNPP EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 326 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 327 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 328 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 329 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 330 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 331 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 332 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY The ability of the road network to service vehicle demand is a major factor in determining how rapidly an evacuation can be completed. The capacity of a road is defined as the maximum hourly rate at which persons or vehicles can reasonably be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a lane of roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic and control conditions, as stated in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016). This section discusses how the capacity of the roadway network was estimated.

In discussing capacity, different operating conditions have been assigned alphabetical designations, A through F, to reflect the range of traffic operational characteristics. These designations have been termed "Levels of Service" (LOS). For example, LOS A connotes freeflow and highspeed operating conditions; LOS F represents a forced flow condition. LOS E describes traffic operating at or near capacity.

Another concept, closely associated with capacity, is Service Volume . Service volume (SV) is defined as The maximum hourly rate at which vehicles, bicycles or persons reasonably can be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a roadway during an hour under specific assumed conditions while maintaining a designated level of service. This definition is similar to that for capacity. The major distinction is that values of SV vary from one LOS to another, while capacity is the SV at the upper bound of LOS E, only.

Thus, in simple terms, SV is the maximum traffic that can travel on a road and still maintain a certain perceived level of quality to a driver based on the A, B, C, rating system (LOS). Any additional vehicles above the SV would drop the rating to a lower letter grade.

This distinction is illustrated in Exhibit 1237 of the HCM 2016. As indicated there, the SV varies with Free Flow Speed (FFS), and LOS. The SV is calculated by the DYNEV II simulation model, based on the specified link attributes, FFS, capacity, control device and traffic demand.

Other factors also influence capacity. These include, but are not limited to:

Lane width Shoulder width Pavement condition Horizontal and vertical alignment (curvature and grade)

Percent truck traffic Control device (and timing, if it is a signal)

Weather conditions (rain, fog, wind speed, ice)

These factors are considered during the road survey and in the capacity estimation process; some factors have greater influence on capacity than others. For example, lane and shoulder width have only a limited influence on Base Free Flow Speed (BFFS1) according to Exhibit 157 of the HCM. Consequently, lane and shoulder widths at the narrowest points were observed during the road survey and these observations were recorded, but no detailed measurements 1

A very rough estimate of BFFS might be taken as the posted speed limit plus 10 mph (HCM 2016 Page 15-15).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

of lane or shoulder width were taken. Horizontal and vertical alignment can influence both FFS and capacity. The estimated FFS were measured using the survey vehicles speedometer and observing local traffic, under free flow conditions. Free flow speeds ranged from 15 to 75 mph in the study area. Capacity is estimated from the procedures of the 2016 HCM. For example, HCM 2016 Exhibit 71(b) shows the sensitivity of SV at the upper bound of LOS D to grade (capacity is the Service Volume at the upper bound of LOS E).

The amount of traffic that can flow on a roadway is effectively governed by vehicle speed and spacing. The faster that vehicles can travel when closely spaced, the higher the amount of flow.

As discussed in Section 2.6, it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent the prevailing conditions. Adverse conditions like inclement weather, construction, and other incidents tend to slow traffic down and often, also increases vehicletovehicle separation, thus decreasing the amount of traffic flow. Based on limited empirical data, weather conditions such as rain reduce the values of freeflow speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10 percent. Over the last decade new studies have been made on the effects of rain on traffic capacity. These studies indicate a range of effects between 5 and 20 percent depending on wind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.6, we employ a reduction in free speed and in highway capacity of 10 percent for rain.

Since congestion arising from evacuation may be significant, estimates of roadway capacity must be determined with great care. Because of its importance, a brief discussion of the major factors that influence highway capacity is presented in this section.

Rural highways generally consist of: (1) one or more uniform sections with limited access (driveways, parking areas) characterized by uninterrupted flow; and (2) approaches to at grade intersections where flow can be interrupted by a control device or by turning or crossing traffic at the intersection. Due to these differences, separate estimates of capacity must be made for each section. Often, the approach to the intersection is widened by the addition of one or more lanes (turn pockets or turn bays), to compensate for the lower capacity of the approach due to the factors there that can interrupt the flow of traffic. These additional lanes are recorded during the field survey and later entered as input to the DYNEV II system.

4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections Atgrade intersections are apt to become the first bottleneck locations under local heavy traffic volume conditions. This characteristic reflects the need to allocate access time to the respective competing traffic streams by exerting some form of control. During evacuation, control at critical intersections will often be provided by traffic control personnel assigned for that purpose, whose directions may supersede traffic control devices. The existing traffic management plans documented in the county emergency plans are extensive and were adopted without change. See Appendix G for more information.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The perlane capacity of an approach to a signalized intersection can be expressed (simplistically) in the following form:

3600 3600 where:

Qcap,m = Capacity of a single lane of traffic on an approach, which executes movement, m, upon entering the intersection; vehicles per hour (vph) hm = Mean queue discharge headway of vehicles on this lane that are executing movement, m; seconds per vehicle G = Mean duration of GREEN time servicing vehicles that are executing movement, m, for each signal cycle; seconds L = Mean "lost time" for each signal phase servicing movement, m; seconds C = Duration of each signal cycle; seconds Pm = Proportion of GREEN time allocated for vehicles executing movement, m, from this lane. This value is specified as part of the control treatment.

m = The movement executed by vehicles after they enter the intersection: through, leftturn, rightturn, and diagonal.

The turnmovementspecific mean discharge headway hm, depends in a complex way upon many factors: roadway geometrics, turn percentages, the extent of conflicting traffic streams, the control treatment, and others. A primary factor is the value of "saturation queue discharge headway", hsat, which applies to through vehicles that are not impeded by other conflicting traffic streams. This value, itself, depends upon many factors including motorist behavior.

Formally, we can write, where:

hsat = Saturation discharge headway for through vehicles; seconds per vehicle F1,F2 = The various known factors influencing hm fm( ) = Complex function relating hm to the known (or estimated) values of hsat, F1, F2, Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The estimation of hm for specified values of hsat, F1, F2, ... is undertaken within the DYNEV II simulation model by a mathematical model2. The resulting values for hm always satisfy the condition:

That is, the turnmovementspecific discharge headways are always greater than, or equal to the saturation discharge headway for through vehicles. These headways (or its inverse equivalent, saturation flow rate), may be determined by observation or using the procedures of the HCM 2016.

The above discussion is necessarily brief given the scope of this evacuation time estimate (ETE) report and the complexity of the subject of intersection capacity. In fact, Chapters 19, 20 and 21 in the HCM 2016 address this topic. The factors, F1, F2,, influencing saturation flow rate are identified in equation (198) of the HCM 2016.

The traffic signals within the EPZ and Shadow Region are modeled using representative phasing plans and phase durations obtained as part of the field data collection. Traffic responsive signal installations allow the proportion of green time allocated (Pm) for each approach to each intersection to be determined by the expected traffic volumes on each approach during evacuation circumstances. The amount of green time (G) allocated is subject to maximum and minimum phase duration constraints; 2 seconds of yellow time are indicated for each signal phase and 1 second of allred time is assigned between signal phases, typically. If a signal is pre timed, the yellow and allred times observed during the road survey are used. A lost time (L) of 2.0 seconds is used for each signal phase in the analysis.

4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway The capacity of highway sections as distinct from approaches to intersections is a function of roadway geometrics, traffic composition (e.g. percent heavy trucks and buses in the traffic stream) and, of course, motorist behavior. There is a fundamental relationship which relates SV (i.e., the number of vehicles serviced within a uniform highway section in a given time period) to traffic density. The top curve in Figure 41 illustrates this relationship.

As indicated, there are two flow regimes: (1) Free Flow (left side of curve); and (2) Forced Flow (right side). In the Free Flow regime, the traffic demand is fully serviced; the SV increases as demand volume and density increase, until the SV attains its maximum value, which is the capacity of the highway section. As traffic demand and the resulting highway density increase beyond this "critical" value, the rate at which traffic can be serviced (i.e., the SV) can actually decline below capacity (capacity drop). Therefore, in order to realistically represent traffic performance during congested conditions (i.e., when demand exceeds capacity), it is necessary to estimate the SV, VF, under congested conditions.

2 Lieberman, E., "Determining Lateral Deployment of Traffic on an Approach to an Intersection", McShane, W. & Lieberman, E.,

"Service Rates of Mixed Traffic on the far-Left Lane of an Approach". Both papers appear in Transportation Research Record 772, 1980. Lieberman, E., Xin, W., Macroscopic Traffic Modeling for Large-Scale Evacuation Planning, presented at the TRB 2012 Annual Meeting, January 22-26, 2012.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The value of VF can be expressed as:

where:

R = Reduction factor which is less than unity We have employed a value of R=0.90. The advisability of such a capacity reduction factor is based upon empirical studies that identified a falloff in the service flow rate when congestion occurs at bottlenecks or choke points on a freeway system. Zhang and Levinson3 describe a research program that collected data from a computerbased surveillance system (loop detectors) installed on the Interstate Highway System, at 27 active bottlenecks in the twin cities metro area in Minnesota over a 7week period. When flow breakdown occurs, queues are formed which discharge at lower flow rates than the maximum capacity prior to observed breakdown. These queue discharge flow (QDF) rates vary from one location to the next and vary by day of week and time of day based upon local circumstances. The cited reference presents a mean QDF of 2,016 passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl). This figure compares with the nominal capacity estimate of 2,250 pcphpl estimated for the ETE and indicated in Appendix K for freeway links. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 which translates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.

Since the principal objective of ETE analyses is to develop a realistic estimate of evacuation times, use of the representative value for this capacity reduction factor (R=0.90) is justified. This factor is applied only when flow breaks down, as determined by the simulation model.

Rural roads, like freeways, are classified as uninterrupted flow facilities. (This is in contrast with urban street systems which have closely spaced signalized intersections and are classified as interrupted flow facilities.) As such, traffic flow along rural roads is subject to the same effects as freeways in the event traffic demand exceeds the nominal capacity, resulting in queuing and lower QDF rates. As a practical matter, rural roads rarely break down at locations away from intersections. Any breakdowns on rural roads are generally experienced at intersections where other model logic applies, or at lane drops which reduce capacity there.

Therefore, the application of a factor of 0.90 is appropriate on rural roads, but rarely, if ever, activated.

The estimated value of capacity is based primarily upon the type of facility and on roadway geometrics. Sections of roadway with adverse geometrics are characterized by lower freeflow speeds and lane capacity. Exhibit 1546 in the HCM 2016 was referenced to estimate saturation flow rates. The impact of narrow lanes and shoulders on freeflow speed and on capacity is not material, particularly when flow is predominantly in one direction as is the case during an evacuation.

3 Lei Zhang and David Levinson, Some Properties of Flows at Freeway Bottlenecks, Transportation Research Record 1883, 2004.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The procedure used here was to estimate "section" capacity, VE, based on observations made traveling over each section of the evacuation network, based on the posted speed limits and travel behavior of other motorists and by reference to the HCM 2016. The DYNEV II simulation model determines for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether its capacity would be limited by the "sectionspecific" service volume, VE, or by the intersectionspecific capacity. For each link, the model selects the lower value of capacity.

4.3 Application to the CPNPP Study Area As part of the development of the linknode analysis network for the study area, an estimate of roadway capacity is required. The source material for the capacity estimates presented herein is contained in:

2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016)

Transportation Research Board National Research Council Washington, D.C.

The highway system in the study area consists primarily of three categories of roads and, of course, intersections:

TwoLane roads: Local, State Multilane Highways (atgrade)

Freeways Each of these classifications will be discussed.

4.3.1 TwoLane Roads Ref: HCM 2016 Chapter 15 Two lane roads comprise the majority of highways within the study area. The perlane capacity of a twolane highway is estimated at 1,700 passenger cars per hour (pc/h). This estimate is essentially independent of the directional distribution of traffic volume except that, for extended distances, the twoway capacity will not exceed 3,200 pc/h. The HCM 2016 procedures then estimate Level of Service (LOS) and Average Travel Speed. The DYNEV II simulation model accepts the specified value of capacity as input and computes average speed based on the timevarying demand: capacity relations.

Based on the field survey and on expected traffic operations associated with evacuation scenarios:

Most sections of twolane roads within the study area are classified as Class I, with level terrain; some are rolling terrain.

Class II highways are mostly those within urban and suburban centers.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4.3.2 Multilane Highway Ref: HCM Chapter 12 Exhibit 128 of the HCM 2016 presents a set of curves that indicate a perlane capacity ranging from approximately 1,900 to 2,200 pc/h, for freespeeds of 45 to 70 mph, respectively. Based on observation, the multilane highways outside of urban areas within the study area service traffic with free speeds in this range. The actual timevarying speeds computed by the simulation model reflect the demand and capacity relationship and the impact of control at intersections. A conservative estimate of perlane capacity of 1,900 pc/h is adopted for this study for multilane highways outside of urban areas, as shown in Appendix K.

4.3.3 Freeways Ref: HCM 2016 Chapters 10, 12, 13, 14 Chapter 10 of the HCM 2016 describes a procedure for integrating the results obtained in Chapters 12, 13 and 14, which compute capacity and LOS for freeway components. Chapter 10 also presents a discussion of simulation models. The DYNEV II simulation model automatically performs this integration process.

Chapter 12 of the HCM 2016 presents procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for Basic Freeway Segments". Exhibit 1237 of the HCM 2016 presents capacity vs. free speed estimates, which are provided below.

Free Speed (mph): 55 60 65 70+

PerLane Capacity (pc/h): 2,250 2,300 2,350 2,400 The inputs to the simulation model are highway geometrics, freespeeds and capacity based on field observations. The simulation logic calculates actual timevarying speeds based on demand:

capacity relationships. A conservative estimate of perlane capacity of 2,250 pc/h is adopted for this study for freeways, as shown in Appendix K.

Chapter 13 of the HCM 2016 presents procedures for estimating capacity, speed, density and LOS for freeway weaving sections. The simulation model contains logic that relates speed to demand volume: capacity ratio. The value of capacity obtained from the computational procedures detailed in Chapter 13 depends on the "Type" and geometrics of the weaving segment and on the "Volume Ratio" (ratio of weaving volume to total volume).

Chapter 14 of the HCM 2016 presents procedures for estimating capacities of ramps and of "merge" areas. There are three significant factors to the determination of capacity of a ramp freeway junction: The capacity of the freeway immediately downstream of an onramp or immediately upstream of an offramp; the capacity of the ramp roadway; and the maximum flow rate entering the ramp influence area. In most cases, the freeway capacity is the controlling factor. Values of this merge area capacity are presented in Exhibit 1410 of the HCM Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2016 and depend on the number of freeway lanes and on the freeway free speed. Ramp capacity is presented in Exhibit 1412 and is a function of the ramp FFS. The DYNEV II simulation model logic simulates the merging operations of the ramp and freeway traffic in accord with the procedures in Chapter 14 of the HCM 2016. If congestion results from an excess of demand relative to capacity, then the model allocates service appropriately to the two entering traffic streams and produces LOS F conditions (The HCM 2016 does not address LOS F explicitly).

4.3.4 Intersections Ref: HCM 2016 Chapters 19, 20, 21, 22 Procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for approaches to intersections are presented in Chapter 19 (signalized intersections), Chapters 20, 21 (unsignalized intersections) and Chapter 22 (roundabouts). The complexity of these computations is indicated by the aggregate length of these chapters. The DYNEV II simulation logic is likewise complex.

The simulation model explicitly models intersections: Stop/yield controlled intersections (both 2way and allway) and traffic signal controlled intersections. Where intersections are controlled by fixed time controllers, traffic signal timings are set to reflect average (non evacuation) traffic conditions. Actuated traffic signal settings respond to the timevarying demands of evacuation traffic to adjust the relative capacities of the competing intersection approaches. All traffic signals within the CPNPP study area (EPZ and Shadow Region) are actuated. Default cycle length of 75 seconds was used for each of these signals.

The model is also capable of modeling the presence of manned traffic control. At specific locations where it is advisable or where existing plans call for overriding existing traffic control to implement manned control, the model will use actuated signal timings that reflect the presence of traffic guides. At locations where a special traffic control strategy (continuous left turns, contraflow lanes) is used, the strategy is modeled explicitly. A list that includes the total number of intersections modeled that are unsignalized, signalized, or manned by response personnel is noted in Appendix K.

4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation Chapter 6 of the HCM 2016 is entitled, HCM and Alternative Analysis Tools. The chapter discusses the use of alternative tools such as simulation modeling to evaluate the operational performance of highway networks. Among the reasons cited in Chapter 6 to consider using simulation as an alternative analysis tool is:

The system under study involves a group of different facilities or travel modes with mutual interactions involving several HCM chapters. Alternative tools are able to analyze these facilities as a single system.

This statement succinctly describes the analyses required to determine traffic operations across an area encompassing an EPZ operating under evacuation conditions. The model utilized for this study, DYNEV II, is further described in Appendix C. It is essential to recognize that simulation models do not replicate the methodology and procedures of the HCM 2016 - they Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

replace these procedures by describing the complex interactions of traffic flow and computing Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) detailing the operational performance of traffic over time and by location. The DYNEV II simulation model includes some HCM 2016 procedures only for the purpose of estimating capacity.

All simulation models must be calibrated properly with field observations that quantify the performance parameters applicable to the analysis network. Two of the most important of these are: (1) FFS; and (2) saturation headway, hsat. The first of these is estimated by direct observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using the concepts of the HCM 2016, as described earlier. These parameters are listed in Appendix K, for each network link.

It is important to note that simulation is a mathematical representation of an assumed set of conditions using the best available knowledge and understanding of traffic flow and available inputs. Simulation should not be assumed to be a prediction of what will happen under any event because a real evacuation can be impacted by an infinite number of things - many of which will differ from these test cases - and many others cannot be taken into account with the tools available.

4.5 Boundary Condition As illustrated in Figure 12 and in Appendix K, the linknode analysis network used for this study is finite. The analysis network does extend well beyond the 15mile radial study area in some locations in order to model intersections with other major evacuation routes beyond the study area. However, the network does have an end at the destination (exit) nodes as discussed in Appendix C. Beyond these destination nodes, there may be signalized intersections or merge points that impact the capacity of the evacuation routes leaving the study area. Rather than neglect these boundary conditions, this study assumes a 25% reduction in capacity on two lane roads (Section 4.3.1 above) and multilane highways (Section 4.3.2 above). There is no reduction in capacity for freeways due to boundary conditions. The 25% reduction in capacity is based on the prevalence of actuated traffic signals in the study area and the fact that the evacuating traffic volume will be more significant than the competing traffic volume at any downstream signalized intersections, thereby warranting a more significant percentage (75% in this case) of the signal green time.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kopt kj ks Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 410 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal guidance (see NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1) recommends that the Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) study estimate the distributions of elapsed times associated with mobilization activities undertaken by the public to prepare for the evacuation trip. The elapsed time associated with each activity is represented as a statistical distribution reflecting differences between members of the public. The quantification of these activitybased distributions relies largely on the results of the demographic survey. We define the sum of these distributions of elapsed times as the Trip Generation Time Distribution.

5.1 Background

In general, an accident at a nuclear power plant is characterized by the following Emergency Classification Levels (see Section C of Part IV of Appendix E of 10 CFR 50 for details):

1. Unusual Event

2. Alert

3. Site Area Emergency

4. General Emergency At each level, the Federal guidelines specify a set of Actions to be undertaken by the licensee and by the state and local offsite agencies. As a Planning Basis, we will adopt a conservative posture, in accordance with Section 1.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1., that a rapidly escalating accident at the plant wherein evacuation is ordered promptly and no early protective actions have been implemented will be considered in calculating the Trip Generation time. We will assume:

1. The Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) will be announced coincident with the siren notification.

2. Mobilization of the general population will commence within 15 minutes after the siren notification.

3. The ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

We emphasize that the adoption of this planning basis is not a representation that these events will occur within the indicated time frame. Rather, these assumptions are necessary in order to:

1. Establish a temporal framework for estimating the Trip Generation distribution in the format recommended in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR6863.

2. Identify temporal points of reference that uniquely define "Clear Time" and ETE.

It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various classes of an emergency. For example, suppose one hour elapses from the siren alert to the ATE. In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public during this onehour period. As a result, the population within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) will be lower when the ATE is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an Advisory will be broadcasted. Thus, the time needed to complete the mobilization activities and the number of people remaining to evacuate the EPZ after the ATE, will both be somewhat less than the estimates presented in this Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

report. Consequently, the ETE presented in this report are higher than the actual evacuation time, if this hypothetical situation were to take place.

The notification process consists of two events:

1. Transmitting information using the alert and notification systems (ANS) available within the EPZ (announcements and alarms broadcast over the plant pageparty system, sirens, and EAS broadcasts).

2. Receiving and correctly interpreting the information that is transmitted.

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 316 square miles and is engaged in a wide variety of activities. It must be anticipated that some time will elapse between the transmission and receipt of the information advising the public of an accident.

The amount of elapsed time will vary from one individual to the next depending on where that person is, what that person is doing, and related factors. Furthermore, some persons who will be directly involved with the evacuation process may be outside the EPZ at the time the emergency is declared. These people may be commuters, shoppers and other travelers who reside within the EPZ and who will return to join the other household members upon receiving notification of an emergency.

As indicated in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR6863, the estimated elapsed times for the receipt of notification can be expressed as a distribution reflecting the different notification times for different people within, and outside, the EPZ. By using time distributions, it is also possible to distinguish between different population groups and different dayofweek and timeofday scenarios, so that accurate ETE may be computed.

For example, people at home or at work within the EPZ will be notified by siren, and/or tone alert and/or radio (if available). Those well outside the EPZ will be notified by telephone, radio, TV and wordofmouth, with potentially longer time lags. Furthermore, the spatial distribution of the EPZ population will differ with time of day - families will be united in the evenings but dispersed during the day. In this respect, weekends will differ from weekdays.

As indicated in Section 4.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from surveys of the EPZ residents. Such a demographic survey was conducted in 2021 in support of this ETE study for this site. Appendix F discusses the survey sampling plan, documents the survey instrument utilized, and provides the survey results. It is important to note that the shape and duration of the evacuation trip mobilization distribution is important at sites where traffic congestion is not expected to cause the ETE to extend beyond the trip generation time period. The remaining discussion will focus on the application of the trip generation data obtained from the demographic survey to the development of the ETE documented in this report.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5.2 Fundamental Considerations The environment leading up to the time that people begin their evacuation trips consists of a sequence of events and activities. Each event (other than the first) occurs at an instant in time and is the outcome of an activity.

Activities are undertaken over a period of time. Activities may be in series (i.e., to undertake an activity implies the completion of all preceding events) or may be in parallel (two or more activities may take place over the same period of time). Activities conducted in series are functionally dependent on the completion of prior activities; activities conducted in parallel are functionally independent of one another. The relevant events associated with the public's preparation for evacuation are:

Event Number Event Description 1 Notification 2 Awareness of Situation 3 Depart Work 4 Arrive Home 5 Depart on Evacuation Trip Associated with each sequence of events are one or more activities, as outlined in Table 51.

These relationships are shown graphically in Figure 51.

An Event is a state that exists at a point in time (i.e., depart work, arrive home)

An Activity is a process that takes place over some elapsed time (i.e., prepare to leave work, travel home)

As such, a completed Activity changes the state of an individual (i.e., the activity, travel home changes the state from depart work to arrive home). Therefore, an Activity can be described as an Event Sequence; the elapsed times to perform an event sequence vary from one person to the next and are described as statistical distributions on the following pages.

An employee who lives outside the EPZ will follow sequence (c) of Figure 51. A household within the EPZ that has one or more commuters at work, and will await their return before beginning the evacuation trip will follow the first sequence of Figure 51(a). A household within the EPZ that has no commuters at work, or that will not await the return of any commuters, will follow the second sequence of Figure 51(a), regardless of day of week or time of day.

Households with no commuters on weekends or in the evening/nighttime will follow the applicable sequence in Figure 51(b). Transients will always follow one of the sequences of Figure 51(b). Some transients away from their residence could elect to evacuate immediately without returning to the residence, as indicated in the second sequence.

It is seen from Figure 51, that the Trip Generation time (i.e., the total elapsed time from Event 1 to Event 5) depends on the scenario and will vary from one household to the next.

Furthermore, Event 5 depends, in a complicated way, on the time distributions of all activities preceding that event. That is, to estimate the time distribution of Event 5, we must obtain Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

estimates of the time distributions of all preceding events. For this study, we adopt the conservative posture that all activities will occur in sequence.

In some cases, assuming certain events occur strictly sequential (for instance, commuter returning home before beginning preparation to leave) can result in rather conservative (that is, longer) estimates of mobilization times. It is reasonable to expect that at least some parts of these events will overlap for many households, but that assumption is not made in this study.

5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 The time distribution of an event is obtained by summing the time distributions of all prior contributing activities. (This summing process is quite different than an algebraic sum since it is performed on distributions - not scalar numbers).

Time Distribution No. 1, Notification Process: Activity 1 2 Federal regulations (10CFR50 Appendix E, Item IV.D.3) stipulate, [t]he design objective of the prompt public alert and notification system shall be to have the capability to essentially complete the initial alerting and initiate notification of the public within the plume exposure pathway EPZ within about 15 minutes. Furthermore, 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) Program Manual Part V Section B.1 Bullet 3 states, Notification methods will be established to ensure coverage within 45 minutes of essentially 100% of the population within the entire plume exposure pathway EPZ who may not have received the initial notification.

Given the federal regulations and guidance, and the assumed presence of sirens within the EPZ, it is assumed that 100 percent of the population in the EPZ can be notified within 45 minutes. The assumed distribution for notifying the EPZ population is provided in Table 52. The distribution is plotted in Figure 52.

Distribution No. 2, Prepare to Leave Work: Activity 2 3 It is reasonable to expect that the vast majority of business enterprises within the EPZ will elect to shut down following notification and most employees would leave work quickly. Commuters, who work outside the EPZ could, in all probability, also leave quickly since facilities outside the EPZ would remain open and other personnel would remain. Personnel or farmers responsible for equipment/livestock would require additional time to secure their facility. The distribution of Activity 2 3 shown in Table 53 reflects data obtained by the demographic survey for employees working inside or outside of the EPZ who returns home prior to evacuating. This distribution is also applicable for residents to leave stores, restaurants, parks, and other locations within the EPZ. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52.

Distribution No. 3, Travel Home: Activity 3 4 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the demographic survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 54.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution No. 4, Prepare to Leave Home: Activity 2, 4 5 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the demographic survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 55.

5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution The time distributions for each of the mobilization activities presented herein must be combined to form the appropriate Trip Generation Distributions. As discussed above, this study assumes that the stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur. For example, if a household awaits the return of a commuter, the worktohome trip (Activity 3 4) must precede Activity 4 5.

To calculate the time distribution of an event that is dependent on two sequential activities, it is necessary to sum the distributions associated with these prior activities. The distribution summing algorithm is applied repeatedly to form the required distribution. As an outcome of this procedure, new time distributions are formed; we assign letter designations to these intermediate distributions to describe the procedure. Table 56 presents the summing procedure to arrive at each designated distribution.

Table 57 presents a description of each of the final trip generation distributions achieved after the summing process is completed.

5.4.1 Statistical Outliers As already mentioned, some portion of the survey respondents answer dont know to some questions or choose to not respond to a question. The mobilization activity distributions are based upon actual responses. But, it is the nature of surveys that a few numeric responses are inconsistent with the overall pattern of results. An example would be a case in which for 500 responses, almost all of them estimate less than two hours for a given answer, but 3 say four hours and 4 say six or more hours.

These outliers must be considered: are they valid responses, or so atypical that they should be dropped from the sample?

In assessing outliers, there are three alternatives to consider:

1) Some responses with very long times may be valid, but reflect the reality that the respondent really needs to be classified in a different population subgroup, based upon access and/or functional needs;

2) Other responses may be unrealistic (6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> to return home from commuting distance, or 2 days to prepare the home for departure);

3) Some high values are representative and plausible, and one must not cut them as part of the consideration of outliers.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The issue of course is how to make the decision that a given response or set of responses are to be considered outliers for the component mobilization activities, using a method that objectively quantifies the process.

There is considerable statistical literature on the identification and treatment of outliers singly or in groups, much of which assumes the data is normally distributed and some of which uses non parametric methods to avoid that assumption. The literature cites that limited work has been done directly on outliers in sample survey responses.

In establishing the overall mobilization time/trip generation distributions, the following principles are used:

1) It is recognized that the overall trip generation distributions are conservative estimates, because they assume a household will do the mobilization activities sequentially, with no overlap of activities;

2) The individual mobilization activities (prepare to leave work, travel home, prepare home) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions are created (see Figure 51, Table 56, Table 57);

3) Outliers can be eliminated either because the response reflects a special population (e.g.,

access and/or functional needs, transit dependent) or lack of realism, because the purpose is to estimate trip generation patterns for personal vehicles;

4) To eliminate outliers, a) the mean and standard deviation of the specific activity are estimated from the responses, b) the median of the same data is estimated, with its position relative to the mean noted, c) the histogram of the data is inspected, and d) all values greater than 3.5 standard deviations are flagged for attention, taking special note of whether there are gaps (categories with zero entries) in the histogram display.

In general, only flagged values more than 3.5 standard deviations from the mean are allowed to be considered outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected.

When flagged values are classified as outliers and dropped, steps a to d are repeated.

5) As a practical matter, even with outliers eliminated by the above, the resultant histogram, viewed as a cumulative distribution, is not a normal distribution. A typical situation that results is shown below in Figure 53.

6) In particular, the cumulative distribution differs from the normal distribution in two key aspects, both very important in loading a network to estimate evacuation times:

a) Most of the real data is to the left of the normal curve above, indicating that the network loads faster for the first 8085% of the vehicles, potentially causing more (and earlier) congestion than otherwise modeled; Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

b) The last 1015% of the real data tails off slower than the comparable normal curve, indicating that there is significant traffic still loading at later times.

Because these two features are important to preserve, it is the histogram of the data that is used to describe the mobilization activities, not a normal curve fit to the data. One could consider other distributions, but using the shape of the actual data curve is unambiguous and preserves these important features;

7) With the mobilization activities each modeled according to Steps 16, including preserving the features cited in Step 6, the overall (or total) mobilization times are constructed.

This is done by using the data sets and distributions under different scenarios (e.g., commuter returning, no commuter returning). In general, these are additive, using weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 54 presents the combined trip generation distributions for each population group considered. These distributions are presented on the same time scale. (As discussed earlier, the use of strictly additive activities is a conservative approach, because it makes all activities sequential - travel home from work follows preparation to leave work, preparation for departure follows the return of the commuter, and so forth. In practice, it is reasonable that some of these activities are done in parallel, at least to some extent - for instance, preparation to depart begins by a household member at home while the commuter is still on the road.)

The mobilization distribution results are used in their tabular/graphical form as direct inputs to later computations that lead to the ETE.

The DYNEV II simulation model is designed to accept varying rates of vehicle trip generation for each origin centroid, expressed in the form of histograms. These histograms, which represent Distributions A, C and D, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 58 (Distribution B, Arrive Home, omitted for clarity).

The final time period (15) is 600 minutes long. This time period is added to allow the analysis network to clear, in the event congestion persists beyond the trip generation period. Note that there are no trips generated during this final time period.

5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation As defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Zones comprising the 2Mile Region are advised to evacuate immediately.

2. Zones comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the 2Mile Region is cleared.

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2Mile Region, sheltered people from 2 to 5 miles downwind continue preparation for evacuation.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5 Mile Region are advised to begin evacuating when approximately 90% of those originally within the 2Mile Region evacuate across the 2Mile Region boundary.

5. Noncompliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadow evacuation percentage of 20%.

Assumptions

1. The EPZ population in Zones beyond 5 miles will react as does the population in the 2 to 5Mile Region; that is, they will first shelter, then evacuate after the 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region, with the exception of the 20% noncompliance.

2. The population in the Shadow Region beyond the EPZ boundary, extending to approximately 15 miles radially from the plant, will react as they do for all nonstaged evacuation scenarios. That is 20% of these households will elect to evacuate with no shelter delay.

3. The transient population will not be expected to stage their evacuation because of the limited sheltering options available to people who may be at parks, on a beach, or at other venues. Also, notifying the transient population of a staged evacuation would prove difficult.

4. Employees will also be assumed to evacuate without first sheltering.

Procedure

1. Trip generation for population groups in the 2Mile Region will be as computed based upon the results of the demographic survey and analysis.

2. Trip generation for the population subject to staged evacuation will be formulated as follows:

a. Identify the 90th percentile evacuation time for the Zones comprising the 2Mile Region. This value, TScen*, is obtained from simulation results. It will become the time at which the region being sheltered will be told to evacuate for each scenario.

b. The resultant trip generation curves for staging are then formed as follows:

i. The nonshelter trip generation curve is followed until a maximum of 20%

of the total trips are generated (to account for shelter noncompliance).

ii. No additional trips are generated until time TScen*

iii. Following time TScen*, the balance of trips are generated:

1. by stepping up and then following the nonshelter trip generation curve (if TScen* is < max trip generation time) or

2. by stepping up to 100% (if TScen* is > max trip generation time)

c. Note: This procedure implies that there may be different staged trip generation distributions for different scenarios, however, that was not the case for this site.

NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 uses the statement approximately 90th percent as the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

time to end staging and begin evacuating. The value of TScen* is about 2:30 for all scenarios (see Region R01 in Table 71).

3. Staged trip generation distributions are created for the following population groups:

a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters Figure 55 and Table 59 present the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters and employees/transients.; the 90th percentile 2Mile Region evacuation time is 150 minutes for all scenarios, on average. At TScen*, approximately 20% of the permanent resident population (who normally would have completed their mobilization activities for an unstaged evacuation) advised to shelter has nevertheless departed the area.

These people do not comply with the shelter advisory. Also included on the plot are the trip generation distributions for these groups as applied to the regions advised to evacuate immediately.

Since the 90th percentile evacuation time occurs before the end of the trip generation time, after the sheltered region is advised to evacuate, the shelter trip generation distribution rises to meet the balance of the nonstaged trip generation distribution. Following time TScen*, the balance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 15 minutes. After TScen*+15, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the unstaged trip generation distribution.

Figure 55 and Table 59 provides the trip generation for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas Section 8.2 of Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Emergency Plan Manual states that Squaw Creek Park shall be evacuated using instruction in the Squaw Creek Park Emergency Plan, which states that park personnel would notify anyone that is in the park.

As discussed in Section 2.3, this study assumes a rapidly escalating general emergency. As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes which is consistent with the FEMA REP Manual. Table 58 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 45 minutes. It is assumed that this timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and other transients to return to their vehicles or lodging facilities, pack their belongings and begin their evacuation trip.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities Event Sequence Activity Distribution 12 Receive Notification 1 23 Prepare to Leave Work 2 2,3 4 Travel Home 3 2,4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public Elapsed Time Percent of (Minutes) Population Notified 0 0.0%

5 7.1%

10 13.3%

15 26.5%

20 46.9%

25 66.3%

30 86.7%

35 91.8%

40 96.9%

45 100.0%

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 510 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work Cumulative Percent Cumulative Percent Elapsed Time Employees Leaving Elapsed Time Employees Leaving (Minutes) Work (Minutes) Work 0 0.0% 50 91.8%

5 28.3% 55 92.3%

10 45.2% 60 98.8%

15 60.0% 65 99.1%

20 65.1% 70 99.5%

25 68.1% 75 99.8%

30 82.2% 80 99.8%

35 86.7% 85 99.9%

40 88.8% 90 100.0%

45 90.9%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response. That is, the sample was reduced in size to include only those households who responded to this question. The underlying assumption is that the distribution of this activity for the Dont know responders, if the event takes place, would be the same as those responders who provided estimates.

Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Elapsed Time Cumulative Percent Elapsed Time Cumulative Percent (Minutes) Returning Home (Minutes) Returning Home 0 0.0% 55 87.9%

5 4.5% 60 92.9%

10 14.7% 65 94.0%

15 27.0% 70 95.1%

20 37.7% 75 96.2%

25 45.5% 80 97.2%

30 61.1% 85 98.1%

35 69.9% 90 99.1%

40 74.6% 95 99.4%

45 82.2% 100 99.7%

50 86.0% 105 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 511 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Leave Home Cumulative Percent Ready Elapsed Time (Minutes) to Evacuate 0 0.0%

15 2.5%

30 19.1%

45 36.6%

60 61.1%

75 76.3%

90 80.4%

105 83.6%

120 91.5%

135 96.3%

150 97.2%

165 97.7%

180 98.2%

195 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response.

Table 56. Mapping Distributions to Events Apply Summing Algorithm To: Distribution Obtained Event Defined Distributions 1 and 2 Distribution A Event 3 Distributions A and 3 Distribution B Event 4 Distributions B and 4 Distribution C Event 5 Distributions 1 and 4 Distribution D Event 5 Table 57. Description of the Distributions Distribution Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also A applies to employees who work within the EPZ who live outside, and to Transients within the EPZ.

B Time distribution of commuters arriving home (Event 4).

C Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

D Time distribution of residents without commuters returning home, leaving home to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 512 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 58. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Residents Residents with Without Time Duration Employees Transients Commuters Commuters Period (Min) (Distribution A) (Distribution A) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) 1 15 5% 5% 0% 0%

2 15 27% 27% 0% 2%

3 15 33% 33% 0% 9%

4 30 28% 28% 6% 37%

5 15 5% 5% 8% 18%

6 15 2% 2% 13% 11%

7 15 0% 0% 14% 5%

8 15 0% 0% 14% 5%

9 30 0% 0% 21% 9%

10 30 0% 0% 13% 2%

11 30 0% 0% 6% 2%

12 15 0% 0% 2% 0%

13 30 0% 0% 2% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

NOTE:

Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 12) using Distribution C for good weather.

Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period1 Residents Residents with Without Time Duration Commuters Commuters Period (Min) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) 1 15 0% 0%

2 15 0% 0%

3 15 0% 2%

4 30 1% 8%

5 15 2% 3%

6 15 2% 2%

7 15 3% 1%

8 15 3% 1%

9 30 65% 79%

10 30 13% 2%

11 30 6% 2%

12 15 2% 0%

13 30 2% 0%

14 30 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0%

1 Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 5-8) is the same for Un-staged and Staged Evacuation.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 2 3 4 5 Residents Households wait 1

for Commuters Households without Residents 1 2 5 Commuters and households who do not wait for Commuters (a) Accident occurs during midweek, at midday; year round Residents, Transients 1 2 4 5 Return to residence, away from then evacuate Residence Residents, 1 2 5 Residents at home; Transients at transients evacuate directly Residence (b) Accident occurs during weekend or during the evening2 1 2 3, 5 (c) Employees who live outside the EPZ ACTIVITIES EVENTS 1 2 Receive Notification 1. Notification 2 3 Prepare to Leave Work 2. Aware of situation 2, 3 4 Travel Home 3. Depart work 2, 4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4. Arrive home

5. Depart on evacuation trip Activities Consume Time 1

Applies for evening and weekends also if commuters are at work.

2 Applies throughout the year for transients.

Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 515 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities Notification Prepare to Leave Work Travel Home Prepare Home 100%

Percent of Population Completing Mobilization Activity 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Activity (min)

Figure 52. Time Distributions for Evacuation Mobilization Activities Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 516 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

Cumulative Percentage (%)

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

112.5 2.5 7.5 12.5 17.5 22.5 27.5 32.5 37.5 42.5 47.5 52.5 57.5 67.5 82.5 97.5 Center of Interval (minutes)

Cumulative Data Cumulative Normal Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 517 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Trip Generation Distributions Employees/Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters 100 80 Percent of Population Beginning Evacuation Trip 60 40 20 0

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 518 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged and Unstaged Evacuation Trip Generation Employees / Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters Staged Residents with Commuters Staged Residents with no Commuters 100 80 Percent of Population Evacuating 60 40 20 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 519 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 EVACUATION CASES An evacuation case defines a combination of Evacuation Region and Evacuation Scenario. The definitions of Region and Scenario are as follows:

Region A grouping of contiguous evacuating Zones that forms either a keyhole sectorbased area, or a circular area within the EPZ, that must be evacuated in response to a radiological emergency.

Scenario A combination of circumstances, including time of day, day of week, season, and weather conditions. Scenarios define the number of people in each of the affected population groups and their respective mobilization time distributions.

A total of 92 Regions were defined which encompass all the groupings of Zones considered. These Regions are defined in Table 61 through Table 64. The Zone configurations are identified in Figure 61. Each keyhole sectorbased area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and three or five adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees, as per NUREG/CR7002 guidance, Rev. 1 and the CPNPP Protective Action Recommendations Procedure No. EPP304. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. These sectors extend to 5 miles from the plant (Regions R04 through R17 and Regions R34 through R47) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R18 through R33 and Regions R48 through R63).

Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R64, and R65 through R78 are identical to Regions R02, and R04 through R17, respectively for a threesector keyhole; Regions R79 through R92 are identical to Regions R34 through R47, respectively for a five sector keyhole; however, those Zones between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2Mile Region (Region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 12 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 92 x 12 = 1,104 evacuation cases. Table 65 provides a description of all Scenarios.

Each combination of region and scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated. The population group and the vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 and Appendix E are peak values. These peak values are adjusted depending on the Scenario and Region being considered, using Scenario and Region specific percentages; such that the average population is considered for each evacuation case. The Scenario percentages are presented in Table 66, while the regional percentages are provided in Table H1 through Table H3. Table 67 presents the vehicle counts for each scenario for an evacuation of Region R03 - the entire EPZ, based on the scenario percentages in Table 66. The percentages presented in Table 66 were determined as follows:

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to 32%, the product of 56.2% (the number of households with at least one commuter - see Figure F6) and 57.7% (the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating - see Figure F11). See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of households with returning commuters (32%) will have a commuter at work during those times or approximately 3% (10% x 32% = 3.2%, rounds to 3%) of households.

It can be argued that this estimate of permanent residents overstates, somewhat, the number of evacuating vehicles, especially during the summer. It is certainly reasonable to assert that some portion of the population would be on vacation during the summer and would travel elsewhere.

A rough estimate of this reduction can be obtained as follows:

Assume 50 percent of all households vacation for a period over the summer.

Assume these vacations, in aggregate, are uniformly dispersed over 10 weeks, i.e., 10 percent of the population is on vacation during each twoweek interval.

Assume half of these vacationers leave the area.

On this basis, the permanent resident population would be reduced by 5 percent in the summer and by a lesser amount in the offseason. Given the uncertainty in this estimate, we elected to apply no reductions in permanent resident population for the summer scenarios to account for residents who may be out of the area.

Employment is assumed to be at its peak (100%) during the winter, midweek, midday scenarios.

Employment is reduced slightly (96%) for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. This is based on the estimation that 50% of the employees commuting into the EPZ will be on vacation for a week during the approximate 12 weeks of summer. It is further estimated that those taking vacation will be uniformly dispersed throughout the summer with approximately 4% of employees vacationing each week. It is assumed that only 10% of the employees are working in the evenings and during the weekends.

Transient activity is estimated to be at its peak (100%) during summer weekends and is less (75%)

during the week. As shown in Appendix E, there is a significant amount of lodging and campgrounds offering overnight accommodations in the EPZ; offset by any other transient facilities in which evening use is minimal (parks, beaches, golf courses, and other recreational areas) thus, transient activity is estimated to be high during evening hours - 85% for summer and winter. Transient activity on winter weekends is estimated to be 85% and less (55%) during the winter weekday.

As noted in the shadow footnote to Table 66, the shadow percentages are computed using a base of 20% (see assumption 7 in Section 2.2); to include the employees within the Shadow Region who may choose to evacuate, the voluntary evacuation is multiplied by a scenariospecific proportion of employees to permanent residents in the Shadow Region. For example, using the values provided in Table 67 for Scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows:

474 20% 1 21%

7,282 15,176 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

One special event - Fourth of July in Granbury - was considered as Scenario 11 during the summer, weekend, midday, with good weather. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for Scenario 11, and 0% for all other scenarios.

Schools and preschools/day cares are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday scenarios. It is estimated that summer school enrollment is approximately 10% of enrollment during the regular school year for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. School is not in session during weekends and evenings, thus no buses for school children are needed under those circumstances.

Day camps are set to 100% during the summer, midday, midweek scenarios and is 0% for all other scenarios.

Buses for the transitdependent population and special facility population (medical facilities and Somervell County Jail) are set to 100% for all scenarios as it is assumed that the transitdependent and the special facility population are present in the EPZ for all scenarios.

External traffic is estimated to be reduced by 60% during evening scenarios and is 100% for all other scenarios.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions - Regions R01 through R17 Site PAR Zone Region Central Description GLEN CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R01 N/A 2Mile Region X X R02 N/A 5Mile Region X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R03 N/A Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R04 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X R05 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X R06 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X R07 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X R08 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X R09 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X R10 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X R11 H, J 326.25 - 11.24 X X X X X R12 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X R13 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X R14 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X R15 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X R16 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X R17 Q, R 123.75 - 168.74 X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Description of 3 Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions 18 through R33 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R18 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X X X X R19 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R20 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R21 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X X X R22 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R23 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X X X R24 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X X R25 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X X X X R26 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X X X X R27 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X X X X R28 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X X R29 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X X X X X R30 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X X X X X R31 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X X X R32 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X X X X R33 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Description of 5Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions R34 through R63 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R34 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X R35 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R36 C, D 213.75 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X R37 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R38 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X R39 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X R40 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X R41 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X R42 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X R43 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X R44 M, N 56.25 - 101.24 X X X X X X R45 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X R46 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X R47 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R48 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X R49 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R50 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R51 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R52 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R53 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R54 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R55 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R56 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R57 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X R58 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R59 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R60 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R61 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R62 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X X X X X X X R63 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions - Regions R64 through R92 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R64 N/A 5Mile Region X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R65 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X R66 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X R67 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X R68 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X R69 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X R70 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X R71 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X R72 H, J 326.25 - 11.24 X X X X X R73 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X R74 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X R75 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X R76 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X R77 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X R78 Q, R 123.75 - 168.74 X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zones(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE N/A N/A 5Mile Region Refer to Region R64 R79 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X R80 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R81 C, D 213.75 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X R82 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R83 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X R84 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X R85 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X R86 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X R87 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X R88 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X R89 M, N 56.25 - 101.24 X X X X X X R90 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X R91 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X R92 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zones(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 65. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Time of Scenario Season1 Weather Special Week Day 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Special Event: Fourth of 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good July in Granbury Roadway Impact: Single 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good Lane Closure on US 377 NB and on US 67 NB 1

Winter means that school is in session, at normal enrollment levels (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer means that school is in session at summer school enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 66. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Households Households With Without Texas External Returning Returning Employee Shado Special Special Amphi Day School Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters s Transients w Event Facilities theatre Camps Buses Buses Traffic 1 32% 68% 96% 75% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

2 32% 68% 96% 75% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

3 3% 97% 10% 100% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

4 3% 97% 10% 100% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

5 3% 97% 10% 85% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 40%

6 32% 68% 100% 55% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 100% 100%

7 32% 68% 100% 55% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 100% 100%

8 3% 97% 10% 85% 20% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 100%

9 3% 97% 10% 85% 20% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 100%

10 3% 97% 10% 85% 20% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 40%

11 3% 97% 10% 100% 20% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

12 32% 68% 96% 75% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

Resident Households with Commuters......... Households of EPZ residents who await the return of commuters prior to beginning the evacuation trip.

Resident Households with No Commuters ... Households of EPZ residents who do not have commuters or will not await the return of commuters prior to beginning the evacuation trip.

Employees ................................................... EPZ employees who live outside the EPZ Transients ................................................... People who are in the EPZ at the time of an accident for recreational or other (nonemployment) purposes.

Shadow ....................................................... Residents and employees in the shadow region (outside of the EPZ) who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis for the values shown is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees.

Special Event ............................................... Additional vehicles in the EPZ due to the identified special event.

Special Facilities ........Vehiclesequivalents present on the road during the evacuation servicing medical facilities and Somervell County jail (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles)

Texas Amphitheatre. Facility is open on weekends during the months of April and September through November, therefore it was only considered on winter weekends.

Day Camps Day camps are open only on weekdays during the summer. Vehicleequivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing day camps (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

School and Transit Buses ............................. Vehicleequivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing schools and transitdependent people (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

External Through Traffic ............................ .Traffic passing through the EPZ on major arterial roads at the start of the evacuation. This traffic is stopped by access control approximately 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the evacuation begins.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 67. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario2 Households Households With Without Texas External Total Returning Returning Special Special Amphi Day School Transit Through Scenario Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Facilities3 theatre Camps Buses Buses Traffic Vehicles 1 7,282 15,176 474 6,187 3,135 0 164 0 88 28 26 4,256 36,816 2 7,282 15,176 474 6,187 3,135 0 164 0 88 28 26 4,256 36,816 3 728 21,730 49 8,249 3,076 0 164 0 0 0 26 4,256 38,278 4 728 21,730 49 8,249 3,076 0 164 0 0 0 26 4,256 38,278 5 728 21,730 49 7,012 3,076 0 164 0 0 0 26 1,702 34,487 6 7,282 15,176 494 4,537 3,137 0 164 0 0 280 26 4,256 35,352 7 7,282 15,176 494 4,537 3,137 0 164 0 0 280 26 4,256 35,352 8 728 21,730 49 7,012 3,076 0 164 1,250 0 0 26 4,256 38,291 9 728 21,730 49 7,012 3,076 0 164 1,250 0 0 26 4,256 38,291 10 728 21,730 49 7,012 3,076 0 164 1,250 0 0 26 1,702 35,737 11 728 21,730 49 8,249 3,076 3,699 164 0 0 0 26 4,256 41,977 12 7,282 15,176 474 6,187 3,135 0 164 0 88 28 26 4,256 36,816 2

Vehicle estimates are for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) 3 This includes medical facilities and the Somervell County Jail.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 610 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. CPNPP EPZ Zones Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 611 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE)

This section presents the ETE results of the computer analyses using the DYNEV II System described in Appendices B, C and D. These results cover 92 Evacuation Regions within the CPNPP EPZ, and the 12 Evacuation Scenarios discussed in Section 6.

The ETE for all Evacuation Cases are presented in Table 71 and Table 72. These tables present the estimated times to clear the indicated population percentages from the Evacuation Regions for all Evacuation Scenarios. The ETE of the 2Mile Region in both staged and unstaged regions are presented in Table 73 and Table 74. Table 75 through Table 78 defines the Evacuation Regions considered. The tabulated values of ETE are obtained from the DYNEV II model outputs which are generated at 5minute intervals.

7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation Voluntary evacuees are permanent residents within the EPZ in Zones for which an Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) has not been issued, yet who elect to evacuate. Shadow evacuation is the voluntary outward movement of some permanent residents from the Shadow Region (outside the EPZ) for whom no protective action recommendation has been issued. Both voluntary and shadow evacuations are assumed to take place over the same time frame as the evacuation from within the impacted Evacuation Region.

The ETE for the CPNPP EPZ addresses the issue of voluntary evacuees in the manner shown in Figure 71. Within the EPZ, 20% of permanent residents located in Zones outside of the Evacuation Region, who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate. Similarly, it is assumed that 20% of those permanent residents in the Shadow Region will choose to leave the area.

Figure 72 presents the area identified as the Shadow Region. This region extends radially from the plant to cover a region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles. The population and number of evacuating vehicles in the Shadow Region were estimated using the same methodology that was used for permanent residents within the EPZ (see Section 3.1). As discussed in Section 3.2, it is estimated that a total of 27,664 permanent residents reside in the Shadow Region; 20% of them would evacuate. See Table 68 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

Traffic generated within this Shadow Region, including externalexternal traffic (See Section 3.10), traveling away from the plant location, has the potential for impeding evacuating vehicles from within the Evacuation Region. All ETE calculations include this shadow traffic movement.

7.2 Staged Evacuation As defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Zones comprising the 2Mile Region are advised to evacuate immediately.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2. Zones comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the 2Mile Region is cleared.

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2Mile Region, people from 2 to 5 miles downwind continue preparation for evacuation while they shelter.

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5 miles is advised to begin evacuating when approximately 90% of those originally within the 2Mile Region evacuate across the 2Mile Region boundary.

5. Noncompliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadow evacuation percentage of 20%.

See Section 5.4.2 for additional information on staged evacuation.

7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation Figure 73 through Figure 78 illustrate the patterns of traffic congestion that arise for the case when the entire EPZ (Region R03) is advised to evacuate during the summer, midweek, midday scenario under good weather conditions (Scenario 1).

Traffic congestion, as the term is used here, is defined as Level of Service (LOS) F. LOS F is defined as follows (HCM 2016, page 55):

The HCM uses LOS F to define operations that have either broken down (i.e., demand exceeds capacity) or have reached a point that most users would consider unsatisfactory, as described by a specified service measure value (or combination of service measure values). However, analysts may be interested in knowing just how bad the LOS F condition is, particularly for planning applications where different alternatives may be compared. Several measures are available for describing individually, or in combination, the severity of a LOS F condition:

• Demandtocapacity ratios describe the extent to which demand exceeds capacity during the analysis period (e.g., by 1%, 15%).

• Duration of LOS F describes how long the condition persists (e.g., 15 min, 1 h, 3 h).

• Spatial extent measures describe the areas affected by LOS F conditions. They include measures such as the back of queue, and the identification of the specific intersection approaches or system elements experiencing LOS F conditions.

All highway links which experience LOS F are delineated in these figures by a thick red line; all others are lightly indicated. Congestion develops rapidly around concentrations of population centers and traffic bottlenecks.

At 45 minutes after the ATE, Figure 73 displays significant traffic congestion (LOS F) within the population center of Granbury and Pecan Plantation. Tolar is starting to display some congestion along US 377. Significant congestion on TX 144 and Water Edge Road approaching US 377. US 377 northbound is also significantly congested (LOS F) as it is the major evacuation route towards Fort Worth/Dallas. The roads within Pecan Plantation exhibit congestion, especially on Monticello Drive northbound as evacuees approach a roundabout (reducing roadway capacity Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

and speed) to evacuate from Pecan Plantation. Note that there is no traffic congestion exhibited within the 2Mile Region and remains free of congestion throughout the entire evacuation.

At 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 45 minutes after the ATE, Figure 74 displays traffic congestion within the EPZ, north of the plant, has intensified. At this time, Farm to Market (FM) 56 in Tolar is exhibiting significant congestion when approaching US 377. Additional roadways within Granbury are now showing significant congestion. The congestion on TX 144 northbound has worsened and expanded. This causes additional roads like Contrary Creek Road and Knob Hill Drive accessing TX 144 to exhibit congestion as well. Areas north and east of Granbury, outside of the study area (EPZ and Shadow Region) is also experiencing traffic congestion, especially along FM 51 northbound, US 377 northbound (near Cresson) and FM 167 with the intersection of FM 51. In the Shadow Region, within the population center of Bluff Dale, significant congestion exists on US 377 southbound. Minor congestion exists along US 67, east and west of Glen Rose, as the external traffic has not diverted (see discussion in Section 3.10) at this time. At this point, all of the employees and transients have mobilized and 50% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE, Figure 75 displays significant congestion continuing within Granbury, Tolar, Bluff Dale and Pecan Plantation. At this point, no delays on US 67 exists.

US 377 westbound is congested within Tolar due to the stop control with FM 56. TX 144 continues to be congested along with roads near Canyon Creek (Contrary Creek Road, Knob Hill Drive and FM 310) trying to access TX 144. FM 167 northbound from the population center of DeCordova, within the Shadow Region is operating at LOS F trying to access US 377 northbound. Congestion and delays within the 5Mile Region has now cleared. At this point, 92% of evacuees have mobilized and 79% have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 35 minutes after the ATE, Figure 76 displays significant congestion continues in Tolar (along US 377), Granbury (along TX 144), Contrary Creek Road and Knob Hill Drive as evacuees are trying to access TX 144. Congestion continues in Cresson along US 377 and CR 171 and on FM 51 and FM 167. Congestion with Pecan Planation has now cleared. At this point, 93%

of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 10 minutes after the ATE, Figure 77 displays that within Tolar, DeCordova, Canyon Creek the congestion has cleared. Congestion still exists along TX 144 northbound as evacuees try to access US 377 and continue north of US 377. Significant congestion (LOS F) continues outside of the study area within Cresson on FM 171 southbound, FM 51, FM 167 and in Bluff Dale. At this point, 98% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, Figure 78 displays that the EPZ and Shadow Region is now clear of traffic congestion. All roadways in the EPZ are now operating at LOS A. Therefore, any evacuee who departs after this time encounters no traffic congestion or delays within the EPZ or Shadow Region. At this time, approximately 99% of the evacuees have mobilized and 99%

of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ. This indicates that the trip generation plus the time to travel to the EPZ boundary (5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 10 minutes) is dictating the 100th percentile ETE.

The only congestion that is still visible outside of the study area, along FM 167, d FM 51 and near Cresson, which clears 20 minutes later at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 79 through Figure 720. These figures display the rate at which traffic flows out of the indicated areas for the case of an evacuation of the full EPZ (Region R03) under the indicated conditions. One figure is presented for each scenario considered.

As indicated in Figure 79 through Figure 720, there is typically a long "tail" to these distributions due to congestion until approximately 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes and then parallels the trip generation time (plus 10 minutes travel time to EPZ boundary) for all scenarios and regions except for the special event (Scenario 11) and roadway impact (Scenario 12) scenarios for Regions that include Zones 1C, 1D and 4E, where congestion exists within the EPZ. Vehicles begin to evacuate an area slowly at first, as people respond to the ATE at different rates. Then traffic demand builds rapidly (slopes of curves increase). When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand.

This decline in aggregate flow rate, towards the end of the process, is characterized by these curves flattening and gradually becoming horizontal. Ideally, it would be desirable to fully saturate all evacuation routes equally so that all will service traffic near capacity levels and all will clear at the same time. For this ideal situation, all curves would retain the same slope until the end of mobilization time - thus minimizing evacuation time. In reality, this ideal is generally unattainable reflecting the spatial variation in population density, mobilization rates and in highway capacity over the EPZ.

7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate Results Table 71 and Table 72 present the ETE values for all 92 Evacuation Regions and all 12 Evacuation Scenarios. Table 73 and Table 74 present the ETE values for the 2Mile Region for both staged and unstaged keyhole regions downwind to 5 miles. The tables are organized as follows:

Table Contents The ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90% of the population within a Region, to 71 evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

The ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100% of the population within a Region, to 72 evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

The ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90% of the population within the 2Mile 73 Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations of additional Zones downwind in the keyhole Region.

The ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100% of the population within the 2Mile 74 Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations of additional Sectors downwind in the keyhole Region.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The animation snapshots described in Section 7.3 reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (un staged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure 78.

Majority of the congestion, located in the EPZ, are within population centers which are beyond the 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

The 2Mile Region (Region R01) consists of equal number of plant employees and permanent residents, approximately. Even though employees mobilize quickly (within 105 minutes), the permanent residents with commuters take much longer to mobilize (300 minutes), as shown in Figure 54. As such, the 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region (R01) ranges between 2:25 (hours:minutes) and 2:40 for all scenarios, which mimics the combination of the quick mobilizing employees and the slow mobilizing permanent residents with commuters.

The 5Mile Region (Region R02) ETE range between 2:10 and 2:30. The 5Mile Region consists of more evacuating vehicles when compared to Region R02, and some of these vehicles are from the number of transients and special facilities which mobilize quicker than permanent residents with commuters. As such, the 90th percentile ETE is at most 15 minutes shorter than Region R01. In addition, a lot of the additional evacuating vehicles are within Glen Rose, where congestion is minimal and does not delay vehicles evacuating out of Glen Rose, allowing the 90th percentile ETE to be reached sooner.

The 90th percentile ETE for the full EPZ (Regions R03) ranges between 3:15 and 4:35. This is at most 1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 25 minutes longer than Region R02 in all nonspecial scenarios (1:55 and 2:10 for special event and roadway impact scenario, respectively). This is due to the additional population and heavy congestion located in Tolar, Granbury and Pecan Plantation, delaying evacuees and prolonging ETE.

The 100th percentile ETE for all nonspecial Scenarios in all Regions parallel mobilization time, as the congestion within the EPZ dissipates, speed and capacity reductions no longer exist, as displayed in Figure 78 and discussed in Section 7.3. The 100th percentile ETE ranges from 5:00 to 5:10 (mobilization time plus 10 minutes to travel out of the EPZ) for all nonspecial scenarios and special scenario regions that do not contain Zones 1C, 1D and/or 4E. For Scenarios 11 (Special Event) and 12 (Roadway Impact), some regions are not dictated by the mobilization time but the congestion within the EPZ, in particularly in Granbury and on US 377, as discussed below. As such, the 100th percentile ETE ranges for these cases range from 5:35 to 6:20.

Comparison of Scenarios 3 and 11 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicate that the Special Event -

Fourth of July in Granbury - the 90th percentile ETE remains the same or increases at most by 40 minutes. The 100th percentile ETE remains the same or increases as much as 45 minutes. As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figure 77 through Figure 78, significant congestion exists within Granbury, which includes Zone 1C, 1D and/or 4E. The additional 3,699 vehicles present for the Fourth of July holiday increases local congestion in Granbury, so for regions that include either Zones 1C, 1D and/or 4E the 90th and 100th percentile ETE increases, while Regions that do not include these Zones are dictated by the trip generation (plus 10minute travel time to EPZ boundary).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 12 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicate that the roadway impact

- a single lane on US 377 Northbound (NB) from TX 144 to slightly east of FM 167 and a single lane on US 67 NB from FM 205 to TX 144 and Somervell CR 316 to CR 1119 - remains the same for all Regions, except those that include Zones 1C, 1D and/or 4E. For Regions that include Zones 1C, 1D, and/or 4E, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE increases by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 10 minutes and 55 minutes, respectively. As discussed in Section 7.3, the area of Granbury and US 377 are significantly congested until about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, as such, a closure on US 377 northbound significantly reduces the capacity of US 377, prolonging the traffic congestion, delaying vehicles and prolonging ETE. Regions that include Zones only near US 67, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE remain the same, as the congestion on US 67 is limited so there is excess capacity to handle the single lane closure.

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 73 and Table 74 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (unstaged) and staged evacuation studies. Note that Regions R64 and R65 through R78 are the same geographic areas as Regions R02 and R04 through R17, respectively. Also, Regions R79 through R92 are identical to Regions R34 through R47, respectively. The times shown in Table 73 and Table 74 are when the 2Mile Region is 90% clear and 100% clear, respectively.

The objective of a staged evacuation is to show that the ETE for the 2Mile Region can be significantly reduced (30 minutes of 25%, whichever is less) without significantly impacting people beyond the 2 Mile Region. In all cases, as shown in Table 73 and Table 74, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region is unchanged when a staged evacuation is implemented. As discussed in Section 7.3, there is no congestion within the 2Mile Region and minimal congestion within the 5Mile Region (on US 67 and FM 2425) until 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE. In addition, the congestion beyond 5 miles does not extend upstream to the extent that it penetrates within 2 miles of the plant, so evacuees from within the 2Mile Region are not impeded. Therefore, staging provides no benefits to these evacuees from within the 2Mile Region.

To determine the effect of staged evacuation on residents beyond the 2Mile Region, the ETE are compared for Regions R64 and Region R65 through R78 with Regions R02 and R04 through R17, respectively, and R79 through R92 with Regions R34 through R47, respectively in Table 71 and Table 72. A comparison of ETE between these similar regions reveals that staging increases the ETE for those in the 2 to 5mile area by at most 40 minutes in the 90th percentile ETE and has no impact on the 100th percentile. The increase in the 90th percentile ETE is due to the evacuating vehicles, beyond the 2Mile Region, sheltering and delaying the start of their evacuation. As shown in Figure 55, staging the evacuation causes a significant spike (sharp increase) in mobilization (tripgeneration rate) of evacuating vehicles. This spike oversaturates evacuation routes, which increases traffic congestion and prolongs ETE.

Therefore, staging the evacuation provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region and adversely impacts evacuees located beyond the 2 miles radially from the plant.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables The user first determines the percentile of population for which the ETE is sought (The NRC guidance calls for the 90th percentile). The applicable value of ETE within the chosen table may then be identified using the following procedure:

• Identify the applicable Scenario (Step 1):

• Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

• Day of Week Midweek Weekend

• Time of Day Midday Evening

• Weather Condition Good Weather Rain

• Special Event Fourth of July in Granbury

• Roadway Impact A single lane closure on US 377 northbound and on US 67 northbound.

• Evacuation Staging No, Staged Evacuation is not considered Yes, Staged Evacuation is considered While these Scenarios are designed, in aggregate, to represent conditions throughout the year, some further clarification is warranted:

• The conditions of a summer evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (2) and (4) apply.

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (7) and (9) apply.

• The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes schools are in session at summer school enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Winter (includes Spring and Autumn) considers that schools are in session at normal enrollment levels.

• Time of Day: Midday implies the time over which most commuters are at work or are travelling to/from work.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• With the desired percentile ETE and Scenario identified, now identify the Evacuation Region and the Number of Sectors (3 or 5) used to define a keyhole Region (Step 2):

• Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of Site PAR Central Sector and degrees:

from A/168.75° 191.24°, B/191.25° 213.74°,

• Determine the distance that the Evacuation Region will extend from the nuclear power plant. The applicable distances and their associated candidate Regions are given below:

2 Miles (Region R01)

To 5 Miles (Regions R02, R04 - R17, R34 - R47 or R64 - R78 and R79 - R92)

To EPZ Boundary (Regions R03, R18 - R33 or R48 - R63)

• Enter Table 75 through Table 78 and identify the applicable group of candidate Regions based on the distance that the selected Region extends from the plant. Select the Evacuation Region identifier in that row, based on the azimuth direction of the plume, from the first column of the Table.

• Determine the ETE Table based on the percentile selected. Then, for the Scenario identified in Step 1 and the Evacuation Region and Number of Sectors identified in Step 2, proceed as follows:

• The columns of Table 71 are labeled with the Scenario numbers. Identify the proper column in the selected Table using the Scenario number defined in Step 1.

• Identify the row in this table that provides ETE values for the Region identified in Step 2.

• The unique data cell defined by the column and row so determined contains the desired value of ETE expressed in Hours: Minutes.

Example It is desired to identify the ETE for the following conditions:

• Sunday, August 14th at 4:00 AM.

• It is raining.

• Wind direction is from the 33.75° - 56.24° (Site PAR Central Sector L).

• Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 2Mile Region and keyhole to the EPZ boundary with a width of 3 sectors.

• The desired ETE is that value needed to evacuate 90 percent of the population from within the impacted Region.

• A staged evacuation is not desired.

Table 71 is applicable because the 90th percentile ETE is desired. Proceed as follows:

1. Identify the Scenario as summer, weekend, evening and raining. Entering Table 71, it is seen that there is no match for these descriptors. However, the clarification given above assigns this combination of circumstances to Scenario 4.

2. Enter Table 76 and locate the Region described as Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups) for wind direction from the 33.75° -

56.24°. Read Region R28 in the first column of that row.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3. Enter Table 71 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for Scenario 4 and Region R28. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R28; it contains the ETE value of 2:10.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R02 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:25 R03 3:25 3:45 3:35 3:45 3:15 3:20 3:40 3:30 3:45 3:15 4:10 4:35 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R04 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 R05 2:40 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 R06 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:30 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 R07 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 R08 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:15 R09 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:20 R10 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:20 R11 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:10 2:20 R12 2:15 2:20 2:05 2:10 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:05 2:05 2:15 R13 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:35 R14 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:35 2:40 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:35 R15 2:50 2:50 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:50 2:50 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:50 R16 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 R17 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups)

R18 3:30 3:50 3:40 4:00 3:20 3:20 3:40 3:35 3:50 3:20 4:20 4:40 R19 3:25 3:40 3:35 3:50 3:15 3:20 3:35 3:25 3:45 3:15 3:55 4:45 R20 3:15 3:20 3:10 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:05 3:20 2:55 3:20 4:10 R21 3:05 3:10 2:45 2:50 2:50 3:05 3:10 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 3:05 R22 2:55 3:00 2:40 2:45 2:45 3:00 3:05 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:55 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 710 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R23 2:25 2:25 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:20 2:20 2:25 R24 2:25 2:25 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:20 2:25 R25 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:10 2:10 2:25 R26 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:25 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:25 R27 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 2:25 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:20 R28 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:20 R29 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:25 R30 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:10 2:20 R31 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:30 R32 2:35 2:35 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:40 R33 3:05 3:25 3:10 3:30 2:55 3:00 3:15 3:10 3:25 2:55 3:45 4:25 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R34 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 R35 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 R36 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 R37 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:25 R38 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:10 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:20 R39 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:20 R40 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:20 R41 2:15 2:15 2:05 2:10 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:05 2:05 2:15 R42 2:15 2:20 2:05 2:10 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:05 2:05 2:15 R43 2:15 2:15 2:05 2:10 2:00 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:05 2:05 2:15 R44 2:30 2:30 2:00 2:00 2:05 2:35 2:35 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:00 2:30 R45 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:45 R46 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:45 2:45 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:45 R47 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 711 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary (5 Sector Groups)

R48 3:35 3:55 3:40 4:05 3:25 3:35 3:50 3:40 3:55 3:25 4:20 4:45 R49 3:30 3:45 3:40 4:00 3:20 3:25 3:45 3:35 3:50 3:20 4:10 4:50 R50 3:20 3:35 3:30 3:45 3:15 3:20 3:30 3:25 3:45 3:15 3:50 4:50 R51 3:15 3:25 3:15 3:30 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:05 3:25 3:00 3:25 4:00 R52 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:45 2:30 2:30 2:50 R53 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:45 2:30 2:35 2:50 R54 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:15 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:20 2:20 2:30 R55 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:20 2:20 2:30 R56 2:25 2:25 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:20 2:20 2:25 R57 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:25 R58 2:25 2:30 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:25 R59 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:10 2:20 R60 2:20 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:25 R61 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:40 R62 3:10 3:25 3:10 3:30 2:55 3:05 3:20 3:10 3:25 2:55 3:45 4:25 R63 3:35 3:50 3:40 4:00 3:15 3:25 3:45 3:35 3:55 3:20 4:15 4:50 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R64 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 R65 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 R66 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 R67 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 R68 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 R69 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:35 2:40 R70 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 R71 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 712 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R72 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 R73 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 R74 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 R75 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 R76 2:55 2:55 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:55 2:55 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:55 R77 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:50 R78 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R79 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:50 R80 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 R81 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 R82 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 R83 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 R84 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 R85 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:45 R86 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:40 R87 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 R88 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 R89 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 R90 2:50 2:55 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:55 2:55 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 R91 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 R92 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 713 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R02 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R03 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:55 6:20 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R04 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R06 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R07 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R08 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R09 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R10 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R11 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R12 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R13 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R14 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R15 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R16 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R17 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups)

R18 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:45 6:00 R19 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:05 R20 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:40 R21 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 714 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R22 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R23 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R24 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R25 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R26 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R27 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R28 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R29 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R30 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R31 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R32 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R33 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:45 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R34 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R35 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R36 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R37 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R38 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R39 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R40 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R41 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R42 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R43 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R44 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R45 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R46 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R47 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary (5 Sector Groups)

R48 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:55 6:10 R49 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:35 6:20 R50 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 6:20 R51 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:40 R52 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R53 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R54 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R55 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R56 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R57 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R58 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R59 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R60 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R61 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 R62 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:40 R63 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:50 6:00 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R64 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R65 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R66 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R67 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R68 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R69 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R70 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R71 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R72 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R73 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R74 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R75 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R76 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R77 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R78 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R79 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R80 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R81 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R82 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R83 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R84 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R85 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R86 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R87 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R88 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R89 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R90 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R91 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 R92 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R02 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 UnStaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R04 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R05 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R06 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R07 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R08 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R09 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R10 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R11 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R12 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R13 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R14 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R15 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R16 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R17 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 UnStaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R34 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R35 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R36 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R37 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R38 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R39 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R40 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R41 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R42 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R43 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R44 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R45 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R46 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R47 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Staged Evacuation 5Mile Region R64 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R65 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R66 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R67 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R68 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R69 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R70 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R71 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R72 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R73 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R74 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R75 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R76 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R77 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R78 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R79 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R80 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R81 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R82 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R83 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R84 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R85 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R86 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R87 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R88 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R89 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R90 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R91 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 R92 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R02 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 UnStaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R04 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R06 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R07 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R08 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R09 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R10 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R11 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R12 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R13 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R14 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R15 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R16 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R17 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 UnStaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R34 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R35 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R36 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R37 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R38 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R39 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R40 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R41 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R42 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R43 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R44 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R45 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R46 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R47 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Staged Evacuation 5Mile Region R64 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

R65 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R66 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R67 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R68 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R69 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R70 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R71 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R72 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R73 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R74 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R75 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R76 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R77 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R78 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

R79 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R80 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R81 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R82 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R83 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R84 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R85 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R86 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R87 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R88 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R89 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R90 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R91 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 R92 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions - Regions R01 through R17 Radial Regions Site PAR Zone Region Central Description GLEN CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R01 N/A 2Mile Region X X R02 N/A 5Mile Region X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R03 N/A Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R04 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X R05 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X R06 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X R07 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X R08 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X R09 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X R10 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X R11 H, J 326.25 - 11.24 X X X X X R12 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X R13 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X R14 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X R15 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X R16 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X R17 Q, R 123.75 - 168.74 X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 76. Description of 3 Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions R18 through R33 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R18 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X X X X R19 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R20 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R21 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X X X R22 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R23 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X X X R24 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X X R25 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X X X X R26 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X X X X R27 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X X X X R28 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X X R29 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X X X X X R30 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X X X X X R31 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X X X R32 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X X X X R33 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 77. Description of 5Sector Evacuation Regions - Regions R34 through R63 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R34 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X R35 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R36 C, D 213.75 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X R37 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R38 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X R39 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X R40 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X R41 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X R42 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X R43 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X R44 M, N 56.25 - 101.24 X X X X X X R45 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X R46 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X R47 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R48 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X R49 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R50 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R51 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R52 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R53 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R54 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R55 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R56 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R57 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X X R58 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R59 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R60 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X X X X X X X X R61 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X R62 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X X X X X X X R63 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 726 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 78. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions - Regions R64 through R92 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE R64 N/A 5Mile Region X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R65 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X R66 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X R67 C 213.75 - 236.24 X X X X X X X X X R68 D 236.25 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X R69 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X R70 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X R71 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X R72 H, J 326.25 - 11.24 X X X X X R73 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X R74 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X R75 M 56.25 - 78.74 X X X X X X R76 N 78.75 - 101.24 X X X X X R77 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X R78 Q, R 123.75 - 168.74 X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zones(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central GLEN (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H TOLAR Sector ROSE N/A N/A 5Mile Region Refer to Region R64 R79 A 168.75 - 191.24 X X X X X X X R80 B 191.25 - 213.74 X X X X X X X X X X R81 C, D 213.75 - 258.74 X X X X X X X X X R82 E 258.75 - 281.24 X X X X X X X X X X R83 F 281.25 - 303.74 X X X X X X X X R84 G 303.75 - 326.24 X X X X X X X X R85 H 326.25 - 348.74 X X X X X X X R86 J 348.75 - 11.24 X X X X X X R87 K 11.25 - 33.74 X X X X X X X R88 L 33.75 - 56.24 X X X X X X X X R89 M, N 56.25 - 101.24 X X X X X X R90 P 101.25 - 123.74 X X X X X X R91 Q 123.75 - 146.24 X X X X X R92 R 146.25 - 168.74 X X X X X X Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zones(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 727 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 728 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 72. CPNPP Shadow Region Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 729 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 45 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 730 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 45 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 731 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 50 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 732 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours and 35 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 733 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours and 10 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 734 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 735 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 736 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 737 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 738 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 8) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 739 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 9) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 10) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 740 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 11) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

45 40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 30 Vehicles Evacuating 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 741 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES This section details the analyses applied and the results obtained in the form of evacuation time estimates (ETE) for transit vehicles (buses, wheelchair buses and ambulances). The demand for transit service reflects the needs of three population groups:

• residents with no vehicles available,

• residents of special facilities such as schools, preschool/daycares, day camps, medical facilities, correctional facilities; and

• the access and/or functional needs population.

These transit vehicles mix with the general evacuation traffic that is comprised mostly of passenger cars (pcs). The presence of each transit vehicle in the evacuating traffic stream is represented within the modeling paradigm described in Appendix D as equivalent to two pcs.

This equivalence factor represents the longer size and more sluggish operating characteristics of a transit vehicle, relative to those of a pc.

Transit vehicles must be mobilized in preparation for their respective evacuation missions.

Specifically:

• Bus drivers must be alerted

• They must travel to the bus depot

• They must be briefed there and assigned to a route or facility These activities consume time. As discussed in Item 4 of Section 2.4, it is estimated that bus mobilization time will be evacuated within 90 minutes (except for Glen Rose ISD and Granbury ISD, which will be within 10 minutes) extending from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), to the time when buses first arrive at the facility to be evacuated, which was provided by the counties within the EPZ. The location of bus depots impacts the time to travel from the bus depots to the facilities being evacuated. Locations of bus depots were not identified in this study. Rather, the offsite agencies were asked to factor the location of the depots and the distance to the EPZ into the estimate of mobilization time.

During this mobilization period, other mobilization activities are taking place. One of these is the action taken by parents, neighbors, relatives and friends to pick up children from school prior to the arrival of buses, so that they may join their families. Virtually all studies of evacuations have concluded that this bonding process of uniting families is universally prevalent during emergencies and should be anticipated in the planning process. The current public information disseminated to residents of the CPNPP EPZ indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to a relocation school at emergency action classifications of Site Area Emergency or higher, and that parents should pick schoolchildren up at relocation schools.

As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a rapidly escalating event at the plant, wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented.

Therefore, children are evacuated directly to the relocation schools. Picking up children at school could add to traffic congestion at the schools, delaying the departure of the buses evacuating Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

schoolchildren. These buses may have to return in a subsequent wave to the EPZ to evacuate the transitdependent population. This report provides estimates of the number of buses required, under the assumption that no children will be picked up by their parents (in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1), to present an upper bound estimate of buses required.

The procedure for computing transitdependent ETE is to:

• Estimate demand for transit service (discussed in Section 3).

• Estimate time to perform all transit functions.

• Estimate route travel times to the EPZ boundary and to the reception centers or relocation schools.

8.1 ETE for Transit Dependent People The EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if schools, preschools/daycares and day camps are in session at the time of the ATE) as the first priority in the event of an emergency. In the event that the allocation of buses dispatched from the depots to the various facilities and to the bus routes is somewhat inefficient, or if there is a shortfall of available drivers, then there may be a need for some buses to return to the EPZ from the reception center after completing their first evacuation trip, to complete a second wave providing transportation service to evacuees. For this reason, the ETE for the transitdependent population will be calculated for both a single wave transit evacuation and for two waves. Of course, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R03 (the entire EPZ), or if schools are not in session, then there will likely be ample transit resources relative to demand in the impacted Region and this discussion of a second wave would likely not apply. A list of available transportation resources was from the previous study, from the counties and located within the emergency plans and is shown in Table 81. It is assumed that there are enough drivers available to man all resources listed in Table 81.

When school evacuation needs are satisfied, subsequent assignments of buses to service the transitdependent population should be sensitive to their mobilization time. Clearly, the buses should be dispatched after people have completed their mobilization activities and are in a position to board the buses when they arrive.

The ETEs for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. Figure 81 presents the chronology of events relevant to transit operations. The elapsed time for each activity will now be discussed with reference to Figure 81.

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at the facility to be evacuated or to their designated route. Based on discussions with the offsite agencies, for a rapidly escalating radiological emergency with no observable indication before the fact, school bus drivers would require 90 minutes to be contacted, to travel to the depot, be briefed, and to travel to the transitdependent facilities (10 minutes for Glen Rose ISD and Granbury ISD).

Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather - 100 minutes when raining (20 minutes for Glen Rose ISD and Granbury ISD).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The buses dispatched from the depots to service the transitdependent evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), 87.3 percent of the evacuees will complete their mobilization when the buses begin their routes, approximately 135 minutes after the ATE for good weather. Mobilization time is longer in adverse weather 145 minutes in rain to account for slower travel speeds and reduced roadway capacity.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

As discussed in Section 2.4, a loading time of 15 minutes (20 minutes for rain) for school buses is used. A loading time of 10 minutes (15 minutes for rain) was used for Glen Rose ISD and Granbury ISD buses.

For multiple stops along a pickup route (transitdependent bus routes) estimation of travel time must allow for the delay associated with stopping and starting at each pickup point. The time, t, required for a bus to decelerate at a rate, a, expressed in ft/sec/sec, from a speed, v, expressed in ft/sec, to a stop, is t = v/a. Assuming the same acceleration rate and final speed following the stop yields a total time, T, to service boarding passengers:

2 ,

Where B = Dwell time to service passengers. The total distance, s in feet, travelled during the deceleration and acceleration activities is: s = v2/a. If the bus had not stopped to service passengers, but had continued to travel at speed, v, then its travel time over the distance, s, would be: s/v = v/a. Then the total delay (i.e., pickup time, P) to service passengers is:

Assigning reasonable estimates:

• B = 50 seconds: a generous value for a single passenger, carrying personal items, to board per stop

• v = 25 mph = 37 ft/sec

• a = 4 ft/sec/sec, a moderate average rate Then, P 1 minute per stop. Allowing 30 minutes pickup time per bus run implies 30 stops per run, for good weather. It is assumed that bus acceleration and speed will be less in rain (40 minutes per bus).

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

Transportation resources available were provided by the EPZ county emergency management agencies. Table 81 summarizes the available capacity of transportation resources. Also included in the table is the transportation resource capacity needed to evacuate schools, preschools/daycares, day camps, medical facilities, transitdependent population, access and/or functional needs population (discussed below in Section 8.2) and correctional facilities (discussed below in Section 8.3). The capacity for buses and wheelchair accessible vehicles varied between the different transportation providers, therefore the total number of ambulatory and wheelchairbound individuals that can be serviced by each entity is also provided in Table 81.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

These numbers indicate there are not enough resources available to evacuate all population groups in a single wave, except for those requiring wheelchair buses and mini buses.

Evacuation of Schools The buses servicing the schools are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes (20 minutes for Glen Rose ISD and Granbury ISD) after the ATE - 90 minutes mobilization time plus 15 minutes loading time (10 minutes mobilization time plus 10 minutes loading time for Glen Rose ISD and Granbury ISD) - in good weather. The UNITES software discussed in Section 1.3 was used to define bus routes along the most likely path from a school or preschool/daycare being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate relocation school or reception center.

This is done in UNITES interactively selecting the series of from the school to the EPZ boundary.

Each bus route is given an identification number and is written to the DYNEV II input stream.

DYNEV computes the route length and outputs the average speed for each 5minute interval, for each bus route. The specified bus routes are documented in Section 10 in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). Data provided by DYNEV during the appropriate timeframe depending on the mobilization and loading times (i.e.,

100 to 105 minutes after the ATE for good weather) were used to compute the average speed for each route, as follows:

60 .

1 .

. 60 .

. . 1 .

The average speed computed (using this methodology) for the buses servicing each of the schools and preschools/daycares in the EPZ is shown in Table 82 and Table 83 for school and preschool/daycare evacuation. The travel time to the EPZ boundary was computed for each bus using the computed average speed and the distance to the EPZ boundary along the most likely route out of the EPZ. The travel time from the EPZ boundary to the host school was computed assuming an average speed of 50 mph and 45 mph for good weather and rain respectively.

Speeds were reduced in Table 82 and Table 83 to 50 mph (45 mph for rain- 10% decrease ).

Section 548.201 of the Texas Transportation Code indicates that 50 mph is the maximum speed that school buses without a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) inspection can travel on a highway numbered by the United States or State of Texas, including Farm to Market (FM) roadways.

Table 82 (good weather) and Table 83 (rain) present the following ETEs (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for schools and preschools/daycares in the EPZ:

1. The elapsed time from the ATE until the bus exits the EPZ; and Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2. The elapsed time until the bus reaches the host school.

The evacuation time out of the EPZ can be computed as the sum of times associated with Activities ABC, CD, and DE (For example: 10 min. + 10 + 7 = 0:30 for Mambrino Elementary School, with good weather, rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes).

The average singlewave ETE, for schools and preschool/daycares, is significantly less than the 90th percentile ETE for evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and will not impact protective action decision making.

The evacuation time to the Relocation School (R.S) is determined by adding the time associated with Activity EF (discussed below), to this EPZ evacuation time. For example: 0:30 + 0:35 = 1:05 for Mambrino Elementary School, rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes).

As shown in Table 81, there is a shortfall of school buses for evacuation of children in a single wave, if the entire EPZ is evacuated at once (a highly unlikely event). As such, a secondwave evacuation may be needed for some schools and preschools/daycares. Due to the large number of schools/preschools/daycares in the EPZ, secondwave ETEs were not computed for each school/preschools/daycare. Rather, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation of schools. The travel time from the R.S.

back to the EPZ boundary and then back to the school was computed assuming an average speed of 50 mph (good weather) and 45 mph (rain) as buses will be traveling counter to evacuating traffic. Times and distances are based on averages for all schools in the EPZ for good weather:

• School buses arrive at the R.S. at 1:45 (see average value in Table 82)

• Bus discharges passengers (5 minutes) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 15 minutes

• Bus returns to facility: 33 minutes (average distance to R.S. (21.5 miles) + average distance to EPZ boundary (5.7 miles at 50 mph))

• Loading Time: 30 minutes

• Bus completes second wave of service along route: 23 minutes (average distance to EPZ boundary (5.7 miles) at network wide average speed at 3:05 (15.1 mph))

• Bus exits EPZ at time 1:45 + 0:15 + 0:33 + 0:30 + 0:23 = 3:30 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Given the average singlewave ETE for schools is 1:45 (see Table 82); a second wave evacuation would require an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 45 minutes on average. The average secondwave ETE of schools is 5 minutes longer than the 90th percentile ETE of the full EPZ during a winter, midweek, midday scenario (Scenario 6). This is an insignificant difference and is not likely to impact protective action decision making.

Day Camp Evacuation The peak season for day camps is when schools are in session at summer enrollment, thus school buses will be available to evacuate the day camps in a single wave. Table 84 and Table 85 present the single wave ETE for day camps. The bus mobilization time is estimated as 90 minutes, similar to schools and preschool/daycares within the EPZ. The buses are assumed to travel to the nearest reception center, which is the Cleburne Senior Center. Table 84 (good weather) and Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85 (rain) present the following ETE (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for day camps in the EPZ:

1. The elapsed time from the ATE until the bus exits the EPZ; and

2. The elapsed time until the bus reaches the reception center.

The evacuation time out of the EPZ can be computed as the sum of times associated with Activities ABC, CD, and DE (For example: 90 min. + 15 + 8 = 1:55 for Arrowhead Camp &

Retreat Center, with good weather). The evacuation time to the reception center is determined by adding the time associated with Activity EF (discussed below), to this EPZ evacua on me.

For example: 1:55 + 0:16 = 2:15 rounded to the nearest 5 minutes.

The average singlewave ETE, for day camps, is significantly less (1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes) than the 90th percentile ETE for evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R03) under summer, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 1) conditions and will not impact protective action decision making.

Evacuation of TransitDependent Population A detailed computation of transit dependent people was done and is discussed in Section 3.6.

The total number of transit dependent people per Zone was determined using a weighted distribution based on population. See Table 39 for the distribution used. The number of buses required to evacuate this population was determined by the capacity of 30 people per bus. The county emergency plans do not identify predefined bus routes or pickup points to service the transitdependent population in the EPZ. There is 12 routes designed by KLD (as discussed in Section 10) and shown graphically in Figure 102 and described in Table 101, to service the major routes through each Zone. Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along their pickup routes, then proceed out of the EPZ. It is assumed that residents will walk to the nearest major roadway and flag down a passing bus, and that they can arrive at the roadway within the 135minute bus mobilization time (good weather). Mobilization time is 10 minutes longer in rain to account for slower travel speeds and reduced roadway capacity.

As previously discussed, a pickup time of 30 minutes (good weather) is estimated for 30 individual stops to pick up passengers, with an average of one minute of delay associated with each stop.

Longer pickup times of 40 minutes are used for rain.

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Bus travel times within the EPZ uses average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school evacuation.

For example, the ETE for one (1) bus servicing Route 32 Zone 3D, 3F and 3C - is computed as 135 + 9 + 30 = 2:55 for good weather (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 9 minutes is the time to travel 7.9 miles at 50.0 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route starting at 135 minutes.

The average singlewave ETE (3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 20 minutes) for the transit dependent people is equal to the general population 90th percentile ETE for the evacuation of the entire EPZ under winter, Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions. Hence, ETE is not likely to impact protective action decision making.

The ETE for a second wave (discussed below) is presented in the event there is a shortfall of available buses or bus drivers, as previously discussed and shown in Table 81.

Activity: Travel to Reception Centers (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the reception centers are measured using GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the reception center. The reception centers are mapped in Figure 104. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 50 mph and 45 mph for good weather and rain, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population.

For a secondwave evacuation, the ETE for buses must be considered separately, since it could exceed the ETE for the general population.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

A bus can empty within 5 minutes. The driver takes a 10minute break.

Activity: Bus Returns to Route for Second Wave Evacuation (GC)

The buses assigned to return to the EPZ to perform a second wave evacuation of transit dependent evacuees will be those that have already evacuated transitdependent people who mobilized more quickly. The first wave of transitdependent people departs the bus, and the bus then returns to the EPZ, travels to its route and proceeds to pick up more transitdependent evacuees along the route. The travel time back to the EPZ is equal to the travel time to the reception center.

The second wave ETE for the bus route servicing Route 32 - 3D, 3F and 3C - is computed as follows for good weather:

• Bus arrives at reception center at 3:23 in good weather (2:55 to exit EPZ + 28minute travel time to reception center).

• Bus discharges passengers (5 minutes) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 15 minutes.

• Bus returns to EPZ, drives to the start of the route and completes second route: 28 minutes (equal to travel time to reception center) + 9.5 minutes (equal to travel time to start of route, i.e., 7.9 miles @ 50 mph) + 9 minutes (equal to travel time complete second route) = 47 minutes

• Bus completes pickups along route: 30 minutes.

• Bus exits EPZ at time 2:55 + 0:28 + 0:15 + 0:46+ 0:30 = 4:55 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

The ETE for the completion of the second wave for all transitdependent bus routes are provided in Table 86 and Table 87.

The average ETE (5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 15 minutes) for a secondwave evacuation of transitdependent people is 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> 55 minutes longer than the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather conditions (Scenario 6) and could impact the protective action decision making.

The relocation of transitdependent evacuees from the reception centers to congregate care centers, if the counties decide to do so, is not considered in this study.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities The evacuations of the medical facilities are similar to a school evacuation except:

• Buses are assigned on the basis of 30 persons to allow for staff to accompany the patients.

• Minibuses are assigned on the basis of 25 ambulatory and 4 wheelchairbound per vehicle.

• Wheelchair buses can accommodate 15 patients.

• Wheelchair vans can accommodate 4 patients.

• Ambulances can accommodate 2 patients.

• The passenger loading times will be approximately one (1) minute per ambulatory person to account for the time to move a person from inside the facility to the vehicles. Loading times of 5 minutes and 15 minutes per patient are assumed for wheelchair bound patients, and bedridden patients, respectively.

Table 38, in Section 3, and Table 81 indicate that 15 bus runs, 30 minibus runs, 14 wheelchair bus runs, 3 wheelchair van run and 39 ambulance runs are needed to service all of the medical facilities in the EPZ.

According to Table 81, the counties can collectively provide 118 buses, 33 minibuses, 30 wheelchair accessible buses, 3 wheelchair accessible vans and 11 ambulances. There is a sufficient number of minibuses and wheelchair accessible buses available for some wheelchair bound and ambulatory patients. Even though Table 81 indicates that there are enough buses for ambulatory patients at the medical facilities, the total number of buses available is shared among other population groups (children at schools/childcare facilities and access and/or functional needs population) resulting in a shortfall of buses. In addition, there is a shortfall in wheelchair vans and ambulances for to evacuate the wheelchair bound and bedridden patients in a single wave. Thus, a second wave evacuation was computed.

It is estimated that mobilization time for medical facilities averages 90 minutes in good weather (100 minutes in rain). Specially trained medical support staff (working their regular shift) will be onsite to assist in the evacuation of patients. Additional staff (if needed) could be mobilized over this same 90minute timeframe.

Table 88 and Table 89 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather and rain. Average speeds output by the model for Scenario 6 (Scenario 7 for rain) Region 3, capped at 50 mph (45 mph for rain), are used to compute travel time to EPZ boundary. The travel time to the EPZ boundary is computed by dividing the distance to the EPZ boundary by the average travel speed. The ETE is the sum of the mobilization time, total passenger loading time, and travel time out of the EPZ boundary. Concurrent loading on multiple buses/minibuses, wheelchair buses/vans, and ambulances at capacity is assumed such that the maximum loading Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

times for buses/minibuses is 30 minutes, wheelchair buses/vans is 75 minutes and ambulances are 30 minutes. All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, the calculation of ETE for the Courtyards at Lake Granbury with 44 ambulatory and 30 wheelchairbound residents (assuming concurrent loading of multiple vehicles) during good weather is:

ETE: 90 + (30 x 1) + 5 = 125 min. or 2:05 rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

It is assumed that the medical facility population is directly evacuated to appropriate host medical facilities outside of the EPZ. Relocation of this population to permanent facilities and/or passing through the reception/care center before arriving at the host facility are not considered in this analysis.

The average single wave ETE (2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes) for all medical facilities in good weather is 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 5 minutes shorter than the 90th percentile ETE for the evacuation of the general population from Region R03 during Scenario 6 (3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 20 minutes) conditions and will not impact protective action decision making.

In the event there is a shortfall of transport vehicles at the medial facilities within the EPZ, a secondwave ETE is computed. Due to the large number of medical facilities in the EPZ, second wave ETE was not computed for each medical facility and transport vehicle. Rather, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave using ambulatory buses. Times and distances are based on medical facilitywide averages. A second wave ETE is computed as follows for good weather:

• Buses arrive at Reception Center (R.C.) at 2:40 (2:15 average ETE from Table 88 plus 24 minute average travel time to R.C. calculated from Table 86 )

• Bus discharges passengers: 5 minutes

• Bus Driver Takes a Rest: 10 minutes

• Bus returns to EPZ and travels back to the facility to complete second route: 31 minutes (average distance to R.C. (19.8 miles) from Table 86 plus average distance to EPZ boundary (5.5 miles) from Table 88) @ 50 mph)

• Remaining patients loaded on bus (maximum): 30 minutes

• Bus travels to EPZ boundary: 15 minutes (average distance from medical facilities to EPZ boundary (5.5 miles) at network wide speed at 22.5 mph (taken at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />; congestion has not cleared in the EPZ)

• Bus exits EPZ at time 2:40 + 0:05 + 0:10 + 0:31 + 0:30 + 0:15 = 4:15 (rounded to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

The average ETE (4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 15 minutes) for a second wave evacuation of patients within the EPZ is 55 minutes longer than the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and will impact the protective action decision making.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population The access and/or functional needs population registered within the EPZ was provided by the offsite agencies. Table 810 summarizes the ETE for access and/or functional needs population, also discussed in Section 3.9. The table is categorized by type of vehicle required and then broken down by weather conditions (good weather and rain). The table takes into consideration the deployment of multiple vehicles (not filled to capacity) to reduce the number of stops per vehicle.

Due to the limitations on driving for access and/or functional needs persons, it assumed they will be picked up from their homes. Furthermore, it is conservatively assumed that ambulatory and wheelchair bound access and/or functional needs households are spaced 3 miles apart and bedridden households are spaced 5 miles apart. Van and bus speeds approximate 20 mph between households and ambulance speeds approximate 30 mph in good weather (10% slower in rain). Mobilization times of 135 minutes were used (145 minutes for rain). Loading times of 1 minute per person are assumed for ambulatory people, 5 minutes for wheelchair bound people and 15 minutes per person are assumed for bedridden people. The last household is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 50 mph (45 mph for rain), after the last pickup is used to compute travel time.

The ETE is computed by summing mobilization time, loading time at first household, travel to subsequent households, loading time at subsequent households, and travel time to the EPZ boundary. All ETE are rounded to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, assuming no more than one access and/or functional needs person per household implies that 32 ambulatory households need to be serviced. While only 2 buses are needed from a capacity perspective, if 4 buses are deployed to service these households, then each would require at most 8 stops. The following outlines the ETE calculations for a bus:

1. Assume 4 buses are deployed, each with at most 8 stops, to service a total of 32 households.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the first pickup location: 135 minutes

b. Load household members at first pickup: 1 minute

c. Travel to subsequent pickup locations: 7 @ 9 minutes (3 miles @ 20 mph) = 63 minutes

d. Load household members at subsequent pickup locations: 7 @ 1 minute = 7 minutes

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 16 minutes (5 miles @ 19.1 mph - network wide average speed at this time).

ETE: 135 + 1 + 63 + 7 + 16 = 3:45 rounded to the nearest 5 minutes The average ETE for a single wave evacuation of the access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ is 30 minutes longer than the general population ETE at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03), during Scenario 6 conditions. Therefore, the evacuation of the access and/or functional needs population could impact the protective action decisionmaking.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

As the number of buses, wheelchair vans and ambulances are not enough a second wave ETE was computed, see Table 811. The following outlines the ETE calculations for a second wave of the ambulatory access and/or functional needs population in good weather using school buses after the schools have been evacuated (see Table 82):

a. School buses arrive at reception center: 2:15 on average (Table 82)

b. Unload patients: 5 minutes

c. Driver takes 10minute rest: 10 minutes.

d. Travel time back to EPZ: 30 minutes (average time of Travel Time from EPZ Bdry to R.S.

From Table 82 rounded to nearest 5 minutes).

e. Travel to All Stops: 72 minutes (3 miles @ 20 mph)

f. Total Loading time at all stops: 8 minutes

g. Travel time to EPZ boundary = 17 minutes ( 5 miles @ 17.4 mph - network wide average speed at this time)

ETE: 2:15 + 0:05 + 0:10 +0: 30 + 1:12 + 0:08 + 0:17 = 4:40 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes)

The average ETE for a secondwave evacuation of the access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 20 minutes longer than the general population ETE at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03), during Scenario 6 conditions.

Therefore, the evacuation of the access and/or functional needs population could impact the protective action decisionmaking.

8.3 ETE for Correctional Facility As detailed in Table 37 and Table E9, there is one correctional facility within the EPZ - Somervell County Jail. The total inmate population at this facility is 32 persons. A total of two (2) buses are needed to evacuate the this facility, based on a capacity of 30 inmates per bus. Mobilization time is assumed to be 90 minutes (100 minutes in rain). It is estimated that it takes 30 minutes to load the inmates (1min per inmate) onto a bus and the two (2) buses can be loaded in parallel. Thus, the total loading time is estimated at approximately 30 minutes for good weather (35 minutes in rain). Using GIS software, the shortest route from the facility to the EPZ boundary, traveling away from the plant, is 8 miles. As shown in Table 812, the travel time to traverse 8 miles is 10 minutes (8 miles @ 50 mph [network wide average speed at this time]) in good weather, 11 minutes in rain. All ETE are rounded to the nearest 5 minutes.

Good Weather ETE: 90 + 30 + 10 = 2:10 after the ATE Rain ETE: 100 + 35 + 11 = 2:30 after the ATE Table 812 summarizes the ETE for Somervell County Jail. The average single wave ETE (2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 20 minutes) for Somervell County Jail is less than the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03), during Scenario 6 conditions. As such, there is no impact to the protective action decision making.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Total Fleet Capacity Wheel Mini chair Wheel Ambu Ambu Wheelchair Bed Transportation Resources Buses buses Buses chair Van Vans Cars lances latory Bound ridden Resources Available Granbury ISD 64 17 17 0 0 12 0 4,934 60 0 Tolar ISD 12 1 1 0 0 0 0 843 4 0 Lipan ISD 7 1 1 0 2 0 0 538 4 0 North Central Texas Academy 2 2 0 0 10 0 0 380 0 0 Rainbow's Promise 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 45 0 0 Transit System Hood County 0 6 6 2 1 0 0 120 40 0 Southern Concepts South Town 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 Southern Concepts Torrey House 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 Courtyards at Lake Granbury 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 18 0 0 Granbury Villa Nursing Center 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 10 10 0 Waterview Assisted Living 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 22 4 0 Quail Park Assisted Living 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 15 2 0 Lakestone Terrace 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 15 2 0 Pecan Plantation EMS 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 3 Texas EMS 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 6 North Central Texas Trauma Regional 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 42 Advisory Council (NCTTRAC)

Glen Rose ISD 30 0 0 0 4 0 0 160 0 0 Somervell Co. SO 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 10 0 0 Transit System Somervell County 0 2 0 0 4 5 0 82 0 0 1

Brazos River Charter School 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 1

Cherokee Rose Manor 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 16 0 0 1

Cherokee Rose Manor Granbury 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 1

Transportation resources available at this facility is from the previous ETE study, updated data was not provided.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Total Fleet Capacity Wheel Mini chair Wheel Ambu Ambu Wheelchair Bed Transportation Resources Buses buses Buses chair Van Vans Cars lances latory Bound ridden Cherokee Rose Manor Stephenville2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 12 0 0 Glen Rose Medical Center Nursing Home2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 Expo Center 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 15 0 0 TOTAL: 118 33 30 3 31 20 11 7,305 139 51 Resources Needed School, Preschool/Daycare, and Day Camp 184 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,292 0 0 Transportation Needs (see Table 3.9):

Medical Facility Transportation Needs 15 30 14 3 0 0 39 638 325 63 (see Table 36):

Access and/or Functional Needs Population 1 0 0 6 0 0 6 32 23 11 Transportation Needs (see Table 310):

Correctional Facility Transportation Needs 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 0 (see Table 37) :

TransitDependent Transportation Needs 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 0 (see Table 38, Section 3.6):

TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 215 30 14 9 0 0 45 10,114 348 74 2

Transportation resources available at this facility is from the previous ETE study, updated data was not provided.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Travel Dist. Time Driver Dist. To Time EPZ from EPZ Mobilization Loading EPZ Average to EPZ Bdry Bdry to ETA to Time Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE to R.S. R.S. R.S.

School/Preschool/Daycare (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

HOOD COUNTY Mambrino Elementary School 10 10 5.1 43.3 7 0:30 29.2 35 1:05 Premier High School 90 15 0.7 4.3 10 1:55 27.6 33 2:30 Lakeside Baptist Academy 90 15 4.2 5.2 49 2:35 27.6 33 3:10 Brawner Intermediate School 10 10 2.9 34.6 5 0:25 27.6 33 1:00 Emma Roberson Elementary School 90 15 8.8 5.3 99 3:25 27.6 33 4:00 Granbury High School 10 10 7.7 50.0 9 0:30 21.2 25 0:55 Tolar High School 90 15 0.2 39.7 0 1:45 20.8 25 2:10 Tolar Elementary School 90 15 0.9 8.1 7 1:55 20.8 25 2:20 Tolar Jr. High School 90 15 0.9 8.1 7 1:55 20.8 25 2:20 Rainbow's Promise 90 15 10.3 7.4 83 3:10 27.6 33 3:45 Lakeside WEEschool 90 15 4.7 5.2 55 2:40 27.6 33 3:15 Lil Pirates Daycare 90 15 0.2 3.5 3 1:50 27.6 33 2:25 Cross Town Preschool 90 15 2.7 4.5 36 2:25 27.6 33 3:00 Miss Dee Little Angels 90 15 2.9 4.5 39 2:25 27.6 33 3:00 Tolar Small Steps Childcare & Early Learning 90 15 0.6 26.1 1 1:50 20.8 25 2:15 Center, LLC Little Rattlers Preschool & Childcare 90 15 0.4 26.1 1 1:50 20.8 25 2:15 SOMERVELL COUNTY North Central Texas Academy 90 15 9.9 50.0 12 2:00 13.8 17 2:20 Brazos River Charter School 90 15 3.2 50.0 4 1:50 13.8 17 2:10 Glen Rose Junior High School 10 10 10.1 48.9 12 0:35 23.3 28 1:05 Glen Rose High School 10 10 8.7 49.2 11 0:35 23.3 28 1:05 Glen Rose Elementary School 10 10 9.1 48.2 11 0:35 23.3 28 1:05 Glen Rose Intermediate School 10 10 9.1 48.2 11 0:35 23.3 28 1:05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Dist. Time Driver Dist. To Time EPZ from EPZ Mobilization Loading EPZ Average to EPZ Bdry Bdry to ETA to Time Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE to R.S. R.S. R.S.

School/Preschool/Daycare (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Grace Preschool 90 15 10.4 49.5 13 2:00 13.0 16 2:20 Glen Rose Early Head Start 90 15 9.6 49.5 12 2:00 13.0 16 2:20 Little Tigers Learning Center 90 15 10.4 49.5 13 2:00 13.0 16 2:20 Endless Discoveries Child Development Center 90 15 8.0 49.3 10 1:55 13.0 16 2:15 First United Methodist Preschool 90 15 9.1 49.5 11 2:00 13.0 16 2:20 Rockin' D Day Care 90 15 8.3 49.5 10 1:55 13.0 16 2:15 Maximum for EPZ: 3:25 Maximum: 4:00 Average for EPZ: 1:45 Average: 2:15 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates Rain Travel Dist. Time Travel EPZ from Driver Dist. To Time Bdry EPZ Mobilization Loading EPZ Average to EPZ to Bdry to ETA to Time Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE R.S. R.S. R.S.

School/Preschool/Daycare (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

HOOD COUNTY Mambrino Elementary School 20 15 5.1 38.9 8 0:45 29.2 39 1:25 Premier High School 100 20 0.7 3.9 11 2:15 27.6 37 2:55 Lakeside Baptist Academy 100 20 4.2 3.3 76 3:20 27.6 37 4:00 Brawner Intermediate School 20 15 2.9 24.5 7 0:45 27.6 37 1:25 Emma Roberson Elementary School 100 20 8.8 4.5 117 4:00 27.6 37 4:40 Granbury High School 20 15 7.7 45.0 10 0:45 21.2 28 1:15 Tolar High School 100 20 0.2 35.7 0 2:00 20.8 28 2:30 Tolar Elementary School 100 20 0.9 8.0 7 2:10 20.8 28 2:40 Tolar Jr. High School 100 20 0.9 8.0 7 2:10 20.8 28 2:40 Rainbow's Promise 100 20 10.3 5.7 109 3:50 27.6 37 4:30 Lakeside WEEschool 100 20 4.7 3.3 84 3:25 27.6 37 4:05 Lil Pirates Daycare 100 20 0.2 2.5 5 2:05 27.6 37 2:45 Cross Town Preschool 100 20 2.7 3.3 49 2:50 27.6 37 3:30 Miss Dee Little Angels 100 20 2.9 3.0 58 3:00 27.6 37 3:40 Tolar Small Steps Childcare & Early Learning 100 20 0.6 29.6 1 2:05 20.8 28 2:35 Center, LLC Little Rattlers Preschool & Childcare 100 20 0.4 29.6 1 2:05 20.8 28 2:35 SOMERVELL COUNTY North Central Texas Academy 100 20 9.9 45.0 13 2:15 13.8 18 2:35 Brazos River Charter School 100 20 3.2 45.0 4 2:05 13.8 18 2:25 Glen Rose Junior High School 20 15 10.1 29.1 21 1:00 23.3 31 1:35 Glen Rose High School 20 15 8.7 31.5 17 0:55 23.3 31 1:30 Glen Rose Elementary School 20 15 9.1 43.0 13 0:50 23.3 31 1:25 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Dist. Time Travel EPZ from Driver Dist. To Time Bdry EPZ Mobilization Loading EPZ Average to EPZ to Bdry to ETA to Time Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE R.S. R.S. R.S.

School/Preschool/Daycare (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Glen Rose Intermediate School 20 15 9.1 43.0 13 0:50 23.3 31 1:25 Grace Preschool 100 20 10.4 45.0 14 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 Glen Rose Early Head Start 100 20 9.6 45.0 13 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 Little Tigers Learning Center 100 20 10.4 45.0 14 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 Endless Discoveries Child Development Center 100 20 8.0 45.0 11 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 First United Methodist Preschool 100 20 9.1 45.0 12 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 Rockin' D Day Care 100 20 8.3 45.0 11 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 Maximum for EPZ: 4:00 Maximum: 4:40 Average for EPZ: 2:10 Average: 2:40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 817 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Dist. To Travel Travel Time Driver Loading EPZ Average Time to Dist. EPZ from EPZ ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to Bdry to R.C. R.C.

Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

HOOD COUNTY Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro3 90 15 0.0 0.0 0 1:45 20.6 25 2:10 SOMERVELL COUNTY Arrowhead Camp & Retreat Center 90 15 6.5 50.0 8 1:55 13.0 16 2:15 Stevens Ranch 90 15 4.2 50.0 5 1:50 13.0 16 2:10 Riverbend Retreat Center 90 15 2.9 50.0 3 1:50 23.4 28 2:20 Glen Lake Camp & Retreat Center 90 15 8.6 49.9 10 1:55 13.0 16 2:15 Maximum for EPZ: 1:55 Maximum: 2:20 Average for EPZ: 1:55 Average: 2:15 Table 85. Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates Rain Travel Travel Time from Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ EPZ Bdry ETA to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to to R.C. R.C.

Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

HOOD COUNTY Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro3 100 20 0.0 0.0 0 2:00 20.6 27 2:30 SOMERVELL COUNTY Arrowhead Camp & Retreat Center 100 20 6.5 45.0 9 2:10 13.0 17 2:30 Stevens Ranch 100 20 4.2 45.0 6 2:10 13.0 17 2:30 Riverbend Retreat Center 100 20 2.9 45.0 4 2:05 23.4 31 2:40 Glen Lake Camp & Retreat Center 100 20 8.6 45.0 11 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 Maximum for EPZ: 2:15 Maximum: 2:40 Average for EPZ: 2:10 Average: 2:35 3

Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro is located in the Shadow Region. Hood County personnel indicated this day camp would evacuate in the event of an emergency at the CPNPP.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 818 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather SingleWave SecondWave Route Travel Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Bus Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 32 1 135 7.9 50.0 9 30 2:55 23.3 28 5 10 47 30 4:55 33 1 135 8.9 50.0 11 30 3:00 13.0 16 5 10 37 30 4:40 34 1 135 2.3 50.0 3 30 2:50 13.0 16 5 10 22 30 4:15 35 1 135 13.2 50.0 16 30 3:05 23.3 28 5 10 60 30 5:20 36 1 135 14.1 10.9 78 30 4:05 20.8 25 5 10 59 30 6:15 37 1 135 6.7 4.7 86 30 4:15 20.8 25 5 10 41 30 6:10 38 2 135 4.3 6.0 43 30 3:30 23.7 28 5 10 40 30 5:25 40 1 135 10.7 50.0 13 30 3:00 13.0 16 5 10 42 30 4:45 43 1 135 7.1 7.9 54 30 3:40 23.7 28 5 10 45 30 5:40 44 1 135 3.7 3.5 64 30 3:50 20.8 25 5 10 35 30 5:35 45 1 135 5.9 41.5 9 30 2:55 23.3 28 5 10 43 30 4:55 46 1 135 1.0 33.2 2 30 2:50 18.4 22 5 10 25 30 4:25 Maximum ETE: 4:15 Maximum ETE: 6:15 Average ETE: 3:20 Average ETE: 5:15 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 819 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Rain SingleWave SecondWave Route Travel Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Bus Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 32 1 145 7.9 45.0 11 40 3:20 23.3 31 5 10 51 40 5:40 33 1 145 8.9 45.0 12 40 3:20 13.0 17 5 10 40 40 5:15 34 1 145 2.3 45.0 3 40 3:10 13.0 17 5 10 23 40 4:45 35 1 145 13.2 45.0 18 40 3:25 23.3 31 5 10 64 40 5:55 36 1 145 14.1 13.1 65 40 4:10 20.8 28 5 10 64 40 6:40 37 1 145 6.7 5.9 69 40 4:15 20.8 28 5 10 45 40 6:25 38 2 145 4.3 4.0 65 40 4:10 23.7 32 5 10 43 40 6:20 40 1 145 10.7 45.0 14 40 3:20 13.0 17 5 10 44 40 5:20 43 1 145 7.1 5.2 82 40 4:30 23.7 32 5 10 50 40 6:50 44 1 145 3.7 7.0 32 40 3:40 20.8 28 5 10 38 40 5:45 45 1 145 5.9 37.6 9 40 3:15 23.3 31 5 10 47 40 5:30 46 1 145 1.0 30.8 2 40 3:10 18.4 25 5 10 28 40 5:00 Maximum ETE: 4:30 Maximum ETE: 6:50 Average ETE: 3:40 Average ETE: 5:50 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 820 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Loading Total Time to Rate Loading Dist. To EPZ EPZ Mobilization (min per Time Bdry Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People (min) (mi) (min) (hr:min)

HOOD COUNTY Southern Concepts South Town Ambulatory 90 1 6 6 1.0 14 1:50 Southern Concepts Meadowlark Ambulatory 90 1 4 4 1.0 17 1:55 Ambulatory 90 1 20 20 1.3 2 1:55 Harbor Lakes Nursing & Rehab Wheelchair bound 90 5 30 75 1.3 2 2:50 Bedridden 90 15 25 30 1.3 2 2:05 Ambulatory 90 1 78 30 1.4 2 2:05 Lakestone Terrace Senior Living Wheelchair bound 90 5 11 55 1.4 2 2:30 Bedridden 90 15 1 15 1.4 2 1:50 Ambulatory 90 1 44 30 0.5 5 2:05 Courtyards at Lake Granbury Wheelchair bound 90 5 30 75 0.5 4 2:50 Southern Concepts Torrey House Ambulatory 90 1 6 6 1.3 2 1:40 Waterview The Point Independent Ambulatory 90 1 186 30 11.9 17 2:20 Living Wheelchair bound 90 5 24 75 11.9 18 3:05 Ambulatory 90 1 24 24 11.9 18 2:15 Waterview The Cove Assisted Living &

Wheelchair bound 90 5 12 60 11.9 17 2:50 Memory Care Bedridden 90 15 2 30 11.9 18 2:20 Ambulatory 90 1 22 22 1.4 25 2:20 Bridgewater Memory Care Wheelchair bound 90 5 23 75 1.4 15 3:00 Ambulatory 90 1 59 2 2.9 42 2:15 Granbury Care Center Wheelchair bound 90 5 84 10 2.9 39 2:20 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 2.9 30 2:30 Ambulatory 90 1 17 2 4.3 42 2:15 Magnolia Court Wheelchair bound 90 5 1 5 4.3 42 2:20 Bedridden 90 15 13 30 4.3 31 2:35 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 821 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Loading Total Time to Rate Loading Dist. To EPZ EPZ Mobilization (min per Time Bdry Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People (min) (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 90 1 21 2 2.5 11 1:45 Granbury Villa Nursing Center Wheelchair bound 90 5 38 10 2.5 9 1:50 Bedridden 90 15 3 30 2.5 11 2:15 SOMERVELL COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 37 2 16.5 20 1:55 Cherokee Rose Manor Wheelchair bound 90 5 19 10 16.5 20 2:00 Bedridden 90 15 4 30 16.5 20 2:20 Ambulatory 90 1 50 2 6.4 8 1:40 Glen Rose Nursing and Rehab Center Wheelchair bound 90 5 25 10 6.4 8 1:50 Bedridden 90 15 5 30 6.4 8 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 52 2 8.2 12 1:45 Glen Rose Medical CenterHospital Wheelchair bound 90 5 27 10 8.2 10 1:50 Bedridden 90 15 5 30 8.2 10 2:10 Maximum ETE: 3:05 Average ETE: 2:15 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 822 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 89. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain Travel Loading Total Time to Rate Loading Dist. To EPZ EPZ Mobilization (min per Time Bdry Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People (min) (mi) (min) (hr:min)

HOOD COUNTY Southern Concepts South Town Ambulatory 100 1 6 6 1.0 17 2:05 Southern Concepts Meadowlark Ambulatory 100 1 4 4 1.0 20 2:05 Ambulatory 100 1 20 20 1.3 2 2:05 Harbor Lakes Nursing & Rehab Wheelchair bound 100 5 30 75 1.3 2 3:00 Bedridden 100 15 25 30 1.3 2 2:15 Ambulatory 100 1 78 30 1.4 2 2:15 Lakestone Terrace Senior Living Wheelchair bound 100 5 11 55 1.4 2 2:40 Bedridden 100 15 1 15 1.4 2 2:00 Ambulatory 100 1 44 30 0.5 3 2:15 Courtyards at Lake Granbury Wheelchair bound 100 5 30 75 0.5 5 3:00 Southern Concepts Torrey House Ambulatory 100 1 6 6 1.3 2 1:50 Waterview The Point Independent Ambulatory 100 1 186 30 11.9 20 2:30 Living Wheelchair bound 100 5 24 75 11.9 18 3:15 Ambulatory 100 1 24 24 11.9 20 2:25 Waterview The Cove Assisted Living &

Wheelchair bound 100 5 12 60 11.9 19 3:00 Memory Care Bedridden 100 15 2 30 11.9 20 2:30 Ambulatory 100 1 22 22 1.4 25 2:30 Bridgewater Memory Care Wheelchair bound 100 5 23 75 1.4 25 3:20 Ambulatory 100 1 59 2 2.9 45 2:30 Granbury Care Center Wheelchair bound 100 5 84 10 2.9 45 2:35 Bedridden 100 15 2 30 2.9 34 2:45 Ambulatory 100 1 17 2 4.3 45 2:30 Magnolia Court Wheelchair bound 100 5 1 5 4.3 45 2:30 Bedridden 100 15 13 30 4.3 34 2:45 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 823 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Loading Total Time to Rate Loading Dist. To EPZ EPZ Mobilization (min per Time Bdry Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People (min) (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 100 1 21 2 2.5 11 1:55 Granbury Villa Nursing Center Wheelchair bound 100 5 38 10 2.5 10 2:00 Bedridden 100 15 3 30 2.5 8 2:20 SOMERVELL COUNTY Ambulatory 100 1 37 2 16.5 22 2:05 Cherokee Rose Manor Wheelchair bound 100 5 19 10 16.5 22 2:15 Bedridden 100 15 4 30 16.5 22 2:35 Ambulatory 100 1 50 2 6.4 9 1:55 Glen Rose Nursing and Rehab Center Wheelchair bound 100 5 25 10 6.4 9 2:00 Bedridden 100 15 5 30 6.4 9 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 52 2 8.2 12 1:55 Glen Rose Medical CenterHospital Wheelchair bound 100 5 27 10 8.2 11 2:05 Bedridden 100 15 5 30 8.2 11 2:25 Maximum ETE: 3:20 Average ETE: 2:25 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 824 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 810. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Total Travel Mobiliza Loading Loading Time to People tion Time at Travel to Time at EPZ Requiring Vehicles Weather Time 1st Stop Subsequent Subsequent Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Stops Conditions (min) (min) Stops (min) Stops (min) (min) (hr:min)

Good 135 63 16 3:45 Buses 32 4 8 1 7 Rain 145 70 20 4:05 Wheelchair Good 135 27 18 3:20 23 6 4 5 15 Vans Rain 145 30 25 3:40 Good 135 10 20 3:15 Ambulances 11 6 2 15 15 Rain 145 11 25 3:35 Maximum ETE: 4:05 Average ETE: 3:40 Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Second Wave for the Ambulatory, Wheelchair Bound and Bedridden Travel Time Total Travel Back Loading Time to People One Wave Unload Driver to Travel to Time at EPZ Vehicle Requiring Vehicles Weather ETE1 Passengers Rest EPZ5 All Stops All Stops Boundary ETE 4

Type Vehicle deployed Stops Conditions (hr:min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Good 2:15 5 10 30 72 17 4:40 Buses 32 4 8 8 Rain 2:40 5 10 30 80 21 5:15 Wheelchair Good 2:15 5 10 30 72 17 4:50 23 6 4 20 Vans Rain 2:40 5 10 30 80 21 5:30 Good 2:15 5 10 30 80 17 5:10 Ambulances 11 6 2 30 Rain 2:40 5 10 30 88 21 5:45 Maximum ETE: 5:45 Average ETE: 5:15 4

Average ETA to Relocation School from Table 8-2 through Table 8-3, respectively 5

Average of travel time from EPZ boundary to Reception Center for good and rain weather conditions. from Table 8-2 and Table 8-3, respectively, rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 825 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 812. Correctional Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Travel Total Time to Loading Dist. To EPZ EPZ Weather Mobilization Number of Number of Time Bdry Boundary ETE Correctional Facility Conditions (min) Inmates Buses (min) (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Good 90 30 10 2:10 Somervell County Jail 32 2 8.0 Rain 100 35 11 2:30 Maximum ETE: 2:30 Average ETE: 2:20 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 826 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(Subsequent Wave)

A B C D E F G Time Event A Advisory to Evacuate B Bus Dispatched from Depot C Bus Arrives at Facility/Pickup Route D Bus Departs for Reception Center E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Reception Center/Host Facility G Bus Available for Second Wave Evacuation Service Activity AB Driver Mobilization BC Travel to Facility or to Pickup Route CD Passengers Board the Bus DE Bus Travels Towards Region Boundary EF Bus Travels Towards Reception Center Outside the EPZ FG Passengers Leave Bus; Driver Takes a Break Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 827 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY This section discusses the suggested Traffic Management Plan (TMP) that is designed to expedite the movement of evacuating traffic. The resources required to implement the TMP include:

• Personnel with the capabilities of performing the planned control functions of traffic guides (preferably, not necessarily, law enforcement officers).

• The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) of the U.S.D.O.T. provides guidance for Traffic Control Devices to assist these personnel in the performance of their tasks. All state and most county transportation agencies have access to the MUTCD, which is available online:

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov which provides access to the official PDF version.

• A written plan that defines all Traffic Control Point (TCP) and Access Control Point (ACP locations, provides necessary details and is documented in a format that is readily understood by those assigned to perform traffic control.

The functions to be performed in the field are:

1. Facilitate evacuating traffic movements that safely expedite travel out of the EPZ.

2. Discourage traffic movements that move evacuating vehicles in a direction which takes them significantly closer to the power plant, or which interferes with the efficient flow of other evacuees.

The terms "facilitate" and "discourage" are employed rather than "enforce" and "prohibit" to indicate the need for flexibility in performing the traffic control function. There are always legitimate reasons for a driver to prefer a direction other than that indicated.

For example:

• A driver may be traveling home from work or from another location, to join other family members prior to evacuating.

• An evacuating driver may be travelling to pick up a relative, or other evacuees.

• The driver may be an emergency worker entering the area being evacuated to perform an important emergency service.

The implementation of a TMP must also be flexible enough for the application of sound judgment by the traffic guide.

The TMP is the outcome of the following process:

1. The detailed traffic and access control tactics discussed in the Somervell County Emergency Evacuation Traffic Management Plan, dated April 2013 and the shapefiles provided directly by Hood County, serve as the basis of the TMP, as per NUREG/CR 7002, Rev 1.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2. The ETE analysis treated all controlled intersections that are existing TCP or ACP locations in the offsite agency plans as being controlled by actuated signals. Appendix K identifies the number of intersections that were modeled as TCPs.

3. Evacuation simulations were run using DYNEV II to predict traffic congestion during evacuation (see Section 7.3 and Figure 73 through Figure 78). These simulations help to identify the best routing and critical intersections that experience pronounced congestion during evacuation. Any critical intersections that would benefit from traffic or access control which are not already identified in the existing offsite agency plans are examined. No additional TCPs or ACPs were identified as part of this study.

4. Prioritization of TCPs and ACPs.

a. Application of traffic and access control at some TCPs and ACPs will have a more pronounced influence on expediting traffic movements than at other TCPs and ACPs. For example, TCPs controlling traffic originating from areas in close proximity to the power plant could have a more beneficial effect on minimizing potential exposure to radioactivity than those TCPs located farther from the power plant. Key locations for manual traffic control (MTC) were analyzed and their impact to ETE was quantified, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. See Appendix G for more detail.

Appendix G documents the existing TMP and list of priority TCPs using the process enumerated above.

9.1 Assumptions The following are assumptions made for this study:

The ETE calculations documented in Sections 7 and 8 assume that the TMP is implemented during evacuation.

The ETE calculations reflect the assumptions that all externalexternal trips are interdicted and diverted after 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> have elapsed from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE).

All transit vehicles and other responders entering the EPZ to support the evacuation are assumed to be unhindered by personnel manning TCPs and ACPs.

Study Assumptions 1 and 2 in Section 2.5 discuss TCP and ACP operations.

9.2 Additional Considerations The use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies can reduce the manpower and equipment needs, while still facilitating the evacuation process. Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) can also be placed within the EPZ to provide information to travelers regarding traffic conditions, route selection, and reception center or relocation school information. As stated earlier, DMS placed outside of the EPZ will warn motorists to avoid using routes that may conflict with the flow of evacuees away from the power plant. Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) can be used to broadcast information to evacuees during egress through their vehicles stereo Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

systems. Automated Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) can also be used to provide evacuees with information. Internet websites can provide traffic and evacuation route information before the evacuee begins their trip, while the onboard navigation systems (GPS units) and smartphones can be used to provide information during the evacuation trip.

These are only several examples of how ITS technologies can benefit the evacuation process.

Considerations should be given that ITS technologies can be used to facilitate the evacuation process, and any additional signage placed should consider evacuation needs.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 93 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

10 EVACUATION ROUTES AND RECEPTION CENTERS 10.1 Evacuation Routes Evacuation routes are comprised of two distinct components:

• Routing from a Zone being evacuated to the boundary of the Evacuation Region and thence out of the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ).

• Routing of transitdependent evacuees (schools, day care centers, day camps, medical facilities, correctional facilities, employees, transients or residents who do not own or have access to a private vehicles) from the EPZ boundary to reception centers or relocation schools.

Evacuees will select routes within the EPZ in such a way as to minimize their exposure to risk.

This expectation is met by the DYNEV II model routing traffic away from the location of the plant to the extent practicable. The DTRAD model satisfies this behavior by routing traffic so as to balance traffic demand relative to the available highway capacity to the extent possible. See Appendices B through D for further discussion. The major evacuation routes for the EPZ are presented in Figure 101. These routes will be used by the general population evacuating in private vehicles, and by the transitdependent population evacuating in buses. Transit dependent evacuees will be routed to reception centers or relocation school. General population may evacuate to either a general reception center or some alternate destination (e.g., lodging facility, relatives home, campground) outside the EPZ.

The routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception centers is designed to minimize the amount of travel outside the EPZ, from the points where these routes cross the EPZ boundary. The 12 bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102, Figure 103 and described in Table 101 were designed by KLD, as no preestablished transitdependent bus routes exist within the county emergency plans. The routes were designed to service the transitdependent population within each Zone. This does not imply that these exact routes would be used in an emergency. It is assumed that residents will walk along to the nearest major roadway routes to flag down a passing bus, and that they can arrive at the roadway within the 135minute bus mobilization time (good weather). These routes are only used in this study for the purpose of computing ETE.

Schools, day care centers, day camps, medical facilities and correctional facilities were routed along the most likely path from the facility being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the nearest reception center or relocation school.

The specified bus routes for all the transitdependent population are documented in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). This study does not consider the transport of evacuees from reception centers to congregate care centers, if the counties do make the decision to relocate evacuees.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

10.2 Reception Centers According to the current public information to EPZ residents, evacuees will be directed to reception centers. Figure 104 presents a map showing the reception centers and relocation school for evacuees. Transitdependent evacuees are transported to the nearest reception center for each county.

Table 103 presents a list of the relocation schools for each evacuating school, day care center and day camp in the EPZ. It is assumed that the children at these facilities will be taken to the appropriate relocation schools and will be subsequently picked up by parents or guardians. No children at these facilities will be picked up by parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes No. of Length Route Buses Route Description (mi.)

Service Zones 3D, 3F and 3C: Along U.S. 67 West from FM 205 to U.S 377 and to 32 1 Henderson Jr. High School 31.2 Service Zones GL, 2J, 2D: Along U.S. 67 East from Bo Gibbs Blvd to Cleburne High 33 1 School 21.8 34 1 Service Zones 2E, 2H, 2F: Along U.S. 67 East from FM 199 to Cleburne High School 15.3 Service Zones 3B, 2C, 3A, 2A: Along FM 56 South from FM 1007 to U.S 67 and along U.S 35 1 67 West to U.S 377 and to Henderson Jr. High School 36.5 Service Zones 4C, 4D, CP: Along FM 56 North from FM 1018 to U.S 377 and along U.S 36 1 377 West to Henderson Jr. High School 34.9 Service Zones 4G, 4F: Along FM 56 North from Rainbow Hill Rd to U.S 377 and along 37 1 U.S 377 West to Henderson Jr. High School 27.5 Service Zones 4E, 1D: Along FM 144 North from Contrary Creek Rd to U.S 377 and 38 2 along U.S 377 East to Benbrook YMCA 28.0 Service Zones 4A, 1A, 2B: Along FM 144 South from FM 302 to U.S 67 and along U.S 67 40 1 East to Cleburne High School 23.7 Service Zones 4B, 1B: Along FM 144 North from Neri Rd to U.S 377 and along U.S 377 43 1 30.8 East to Benbrook YMCA 44 1 Service Zone TO: Along U.S 377 West from FM 216 to Henderson Jr. High School 24.5 Service Zone 3E: Along FM 51 South from FM 205 to U.S 377 and along U.S 377 West 45 1 29.2 to Henderson Jr. High School Service Zone 1C: Along FM 309 East to FM 306 and along FM 306 East to FM 1131 to 46 1 19.4 FM 4 East to Cleburne High School Total: 13 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 103 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 1 Premier High School 181, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 357, 356, 978, 960, 340, 1076, 341, 1275, 1273, 1002, 378, 2 Glen Rose High School 1000, 379, 380, 403, 381, 404, 384, 971, 969, 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 3 Brazos River Charter School 595, 594, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 991, 990, 399, 392, 393, 383, 382, 402, 381, 404, 384, 971, 4 North Central Texas Academy 969, 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 145, 149, 963, 160, 159, 153, 165, 166, 1145, 506, 170, 5 Granbury Care Center 171, 173, 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 Rainbow's Promise 432, 431, 419, 1147, 997, 418, 998, 784, 420, 452, 421, 6 Lakeside WEEschool 422, 509, 514, 513, 508, 507, 1277, 505, 1127, 1145, 506, Lakeside Baptist Academy 170, 171, 173, 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 Little Rattlers Preschool & Childcare 7 Tolar Small Steps Childcare & Early 245, 244, 255 Learning Center, LLC Cross Town Preschool 150, 512, 511, 510, 507, 1277, 505, 1127, 166, 1145, 506, 8 Miss Dee Little Angels 170, 171, 173, 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 Lil Pirates Daycare 9 Harbor Lakes Nursing & Rehab 181, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 10 Lakestone Terrace Senior Living 178, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 11 Waterview The Point Independent Living 130, 1070, 129, 1071 12 Mambrino Elementary School 436, 437, 457, 458, 477, 478, 479, 480, 487, 449, 450 13 Stevens Ranch 595, 594, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 376, 1003, 377, 409, 1001, 378, 1000, 379, 380, 403, 381, 14 Glen Lake Camp & Retreat Center 404, 384, 971, 969, 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 15 Arrowhead Camp & Retreat Center 726, 725, 724, 723, 722, 721, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 16 Riverbend Retreat Center 582, 583, 633, 634 Waterview The Cove Assisted Living &

17 130, 1070, 129 Memory Care 1051, 505, 1127, 1145, 506, 170, 171, 173, 174, 176, 175, 18 Bridgewater Memory Care 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 553, 552, 549, 548, 912, 512, 150, 962, 963, 160, 159, 153, 19 Magnolia Court 165, 166, 1145, 506, 170, 171, 173, 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 553, 552, 549, 548, 912, 512, 150, 962, 963, 160, 159, 153, 20 Quail Park of Granbury 165, 166, 1145, 506, 170, 171, 173, 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 511, 510, 507, 1277, 505, 1127, 1145, 506, 170, 171, 173, 21 Brawner Intermediate School 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 233, 223, 225, 227, 226, 231, 229, 230, 232, 238, 1078, 22 Granbury High School 237, 1079, 236, 235, 1019, 234, 247, 244 23 Southern Concepts South Town 181, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 24 Courtyards at Lake Granbury 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 104 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 25 Granbury Villa Nursing Center 553, 552, 549, 548, 912, 512, 150, 962, 149, 145, 143, 144 26 Southern Concepts Torrey House 149, 145, 143, 148, 132, 131, 1073, 130, 1070 409, 1001, 1000, 379, 380, 403, 381, 404, 384, 971, 969, 27 Glen Rose Medical CenterHospital 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 375, 374, 373, 1004, 333, 334, 335, 336, 576, 1141, 1142, 28 Glen Rose Nursing and Rehab Center 338, 587, 934, 588 29 Southern Concepts Meadowlark 185, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 519, 511, 510, 507, 1277, 505, 1127, 1145, 506, 170, 171, 30 Emma Roberson Elementary School 173, 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 765, 379, 1000, 378, 1002, 1273, 1275, 341, 1076, 340, 960, 978, 356, 339, 323, 974, 322, 321, 320, 319, 1059, 31 Cherokee Rose Manor 318, 958, 1100, 302, 301, 300, 299, 1098, 1099, 298, 297, 292, 914 322, 321, 320, 319, 1059, 318, 958, 1100, 302, 301, 300, 32 Transit Dependent Zones 3D, 3F, 3C 299, 1098, 1099, 298, 297, 292, 914 341, 1275, 1273, 1002, 378, 1000, 379, 380, 403, 381, 404, Transit Dependent Zones GL (Glen Rose),

33 384, 971, 969, 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 2J, 2D 1066, 1101 34 Transit Dependent Zones 2E, 2H, 2F 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 365, 364, 363, 362, 361, 342, 959, 960, 978, 356, 339, 323, 35 Transit Dependent Zones 3B, 2C, 3A, 2A 974, 322, 321, 320, 319, 1059, 318, 958, 1100, 302, 301, 300, 299, 1098, 1099, 298, 297, 292, 914 368, 571, 369, 1171, 569, 568, 567, 961, 566, 565, 561, 36 Transit Dependent Zones 4C, 4D, CP 563, 564, 562, 243, 242, 241, 240, 239, 1049, 234, 247, 244 37 Transit Dependent Zones 4G, 4F 562, 243, 242, 241, 240, 239, 1049, 234, 247, 244 422, 509, 514, 513, 508, 507, 1277, 505, 1127, 1145, 506, 38 Transit Dependent Zones 4E, 1D 170, 171, 173, 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 39 Tolar High School 1032, 262, 255, 1014 770, 410, 993, 411, 412, 400, 990, 399, 392, 393, 383, 382, 40 Transit Dependent Zones 4A, 1A, 2B 402, 381, 404, 384, 971, 969, 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 Tolar Elementary School 41 708, 244, 255, 1014 Tolar Jr. High School 1046, 771, 765, 379, 380, 403, 381, 404, 384, 971, 969, 42 Somervell County Jail 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 413, 999, 1067, 418, 998, 784, 420, 452, 421, 422, 509, 43 Transit Dependent Zones 4B, 1B 514, 513, 508, 507, 1277, 505, 1127, 166, 1145, 506, 170, 171, 173, 174, 176, 175, 127, 188, 121, 772, 125, 112 44 Transit Dependent Zone TO (Tolar) 708, 244, 255 652, 1033, 653, 654, 1034, 655, 656, 1035, 657, 658, 659, 45 Transit Dependent Zone 3E 660, 661, 662, 296, 295, 294, 292, 914 46 Transit Dependent Zone 1C 487, 449, 448 1276, 1275, 1273, 1002, 378, 1000, 379, 380, 403, 381, 47 Glen Rose Junior High School 404, 384, 971, 969, 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 105 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary Glen Rose Elementary School 358, 359, 976, 977, 360, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 576, 48 Glen Rose Intermediate School 1141, 1142, 338, 587, 934, 588 Grace Preschool Glen Rose Early Head Start Little Tigers Learning Center 322, 974, 323, 339, 356, 978, 960, 340, 1076, 341, 1275, 49 Endless Discoveries Child Development 1273, 1002, 378, 1000, 379, 380, 403, 381, 404, 384, 971, Center 969, 385, 968, 386, 591, 592, 593, 603, 1091, 1066, 1101 First United Methodist Preschool Rockin' D Day Care Table 103. Relocation Schools for Schools, Day Cares and Day Camps School, Day Care, Day Camp Relocation School Mambrino Elementary School Premier High School Lakeside Baptist Academy Brawner Intermediate School Emma Roberson Elementary School Western Hills High School Rainbow's Promise Lakeside WEEschool Lil Pirates Daycare Cross Town Preschool Miss Dee Little Angels Granbury High School Tolar High School Tolar Elementary School Tolar Jr. High School Glen Rose Junior High School Henderson Junior High School Glen Rose High School Glen Rose Elementary School Glen Rose Intermediate School Tolar Small Steps Childcare & Early Learning Center, LLC Little Rattlers Preschool & Childcare North Central Texas Academy Brazos River Charter School Grace Preschool Glen Rose Early Head Start Little Tigers Learning Center Endless Discoveries Child Development Center First United Methodist Preschool Cleburne High School Rockin' D Day Care Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro Arrowhead Camp & Retreat Center Stevens Ranch Riverbend Retreat Center Glen Lake Camp & Retreat Center Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 106 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 101. Evacuation Route Map Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 107 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 102. Transit Dependent Bus Routes Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 108 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. Transit Dependent Bus Routes Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 109 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 104. General Population Reception Centers and Relocation Schools Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant 1010 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX A Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms

A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms Term Definition Analysis Network A graphical representation of the geometric topology of a physical roadway system, which is comprised of directional links and nodes.

Link A network link represents a specific, onedirectional section of roadway. A link has both physical (length, number of lanes, topology, etc.) and operational (turn movement percentages, service rate, freeflow speed) characteristics.

Measures of Effectiveness Statistics describing traffic operations on a roadway network.

Node A network node generally represents an intersection of network links. A node has control characteristics, i.e., the allocation of service time to each approach link.

Origin A location attached to a network link, within the EPZ or Shadow Region, where trips are generated at a specified rate in vehicles per hour (vph). These trips enter the roadway system to travel to their respective destinations.

Prevailing Roadway and Relates to the physical features of the roadway, the nature (e.g.,

Traffic Conditions composition) of traffic on the roadway and the ambient conditions (weather, visibility, pavement conditions, etc.).

Service Rate Maximum rate at which vehicles, executing a specific turn maneuver, can be discharged from a section of roadway at the prevailing conditions, expressed in vehicles per second (vps) or vph.

Service Volume Maximum number of vehicles which can pass over a section of roadway in one direction during a specified time period with operating conditions at a specified Level of Service (The Service Volume at the upper bound of Level of Service, E, equals Capacity).

Service Volume is usually expressed as vph.

Signal Cycle Length The total elapsed time to display all signal indications, in sequence.

The cycle length is expressed in seconds.

Signal Interval A single combination of signal indications. The interval duration is expressed in seconds. A signal phase is comprised of a sequence of signal intervals, usually green, yellow, red.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant A1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Term Definition Signal Phase A set of signal indications (and intervals) which services a particular combination of traffic movements on selected approaches to the intersection. The phase duration is expressed in seconds.

Traffic (Trip) Assignment A process of assigning traffic to paths of travel in such a way as to satisfy all trip objectives (i.e., the desire of each vehicle to travel from a specified origin in the network to a specified destination) and to optimize some stated objective or combination of objectives. In general, the objective is stated in terms of minimizing a generalized "cost". For example, "cost" may be expressed in terms of travel time.

Traffic Density The number of vehicles that occupy one lane of a roadway section of specified length at a point in time, expressed as vehicles per mile (vpm).

Traffic (Trip) Distribution A process for determining the destinations of all traffic generated at the origins. The result often takes the form of a Trip Table, which is a matrix of origindestination traffic volumes.

Traffic Simulation A computer model designed to replicate the realworld operation of vehicles on a roadway network, so as to provide statistics describing traffic performance. These statistics are called Measures of Effectiveness.

Traffic Volume The number of vehicles that pass over a section of roadway in one direction, expressed in vph. Where applicable, traffic volume may be stratified by turn movement.

Travel Mode Distinguishes between private auto, bus, rail, pedestrian and air travel modes.

Trip Table or Origin A rectangular matrix or table, whose entries contain the number Destination Matrix of trips generated at each specified origin, during a specified time period, that are attracted to (and travel toward) each of its specified destinations. These values are expressed in vph or in vehicles.

Turning Capacity The capacity associated with that component of the traffic stream which executes a specified turn maneuver from an approach at an intersection.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant A2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX B DTRAD: Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution Model

B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL This appendix describes the integrated dynamic trip assignment and distribution model named DTRAD (Dynamic TRaffic Assignment and Distribution) that is expressly designed for use in analyzing evacuation scenarios. DTRAD employs logitbased pathchoice principles and is one of the models of the DYNEV II System. The DTRAD module implements pathbased Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) so that time dependent OriginDestination (OD) trips are assigned to routes over the network based on prevailing traffic conditions.

To apply the DYNEV II System, the analyst must specify the highway network, link capacity information, the timevarying volume of traffic generated at all origin centroids and, optionally, a set of accessible candidate destination nodes on the periphery of the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) for selected origins. DTRAD calculates the optimal dynamic trip distribution (i.e., trip destinations) and the optimal dynamic trip assignment (i.e., trip routing) of the traffic generated at each origin node traveling to its set of candidate destination nodes, so as to minimize evacuee travel cost.

B.1 Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model The underlying premise is that the selection of destinations and routes is intrinsically coupled in an evacuation scenario. That is, people in vehicles seek to travel out of an area of potential risk as rapidly as possible by selecting the best routes. The model is designed to identify these best routes in a manner that realistically distributes vehicles from origins to destinations and routes them over the highway network, in a consistent and optimal manner, reflecting evacuee behavior.

For each origin, a set of candidate destination nodes is selected by the software logic and by the analyst to reflect the desire by evacuees to travel away from the power plant and to access major highways. The specific destination nodes within this set that are selected by travelers and the selection of the connecting paths of travel, are both determined by DTRAD. This determination is made by a logitbased path choice model in DTRAD, so as to minimize the trip cost, as discussed later.

The traffic loading on the network and the consequent operational traffic environment of the network (density, speed, throughput on each link) vary over time as the evacuation takes place.

The DTRAD model, which is interfaced with the DYNEV simulation model, executes a succession of sessions wherein it computes the optimal routing and selection of destination nodes for the conditions that exist at that time.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

B.2 Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. An algorithm was developed to support the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (OD matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next. Another algorithm executes a mapping from the specified geometric network (linknode analysis network) that represents the physical highway system, to a path network that represents the vehicle [turn] movements. DTRAD computations are performed on the path network: DYNEV simulation model, on the geometric network.

B.2.1 DTRAD Description DTRAD is the DTA module for the DYNEV II System.

When the road network under study is large, multiple routing options are usually available between trip origins and destinations. The problem of loading traffic demands and propagating them over the network links is called Network Loading and is addressed by DYNEV II using macroscopic traffic simulation modeling. Traffic assignment deals with computing the distribution of the traffic over the road network for given OD demands and is a model of the route choice of the drivers. Travel demand changes significantly over time, and the road network may have time dependent characteristics, e.g., timevarying signal timing or reduced road capacity because of lane closure, or traffic congestion. To consider these time dependencies, DTA procedures are required.

The DTRAD DTA module represents the dynamic route choice behavior of drivers, using the specification of dynamic origindestination matrices as flow input. Drivers choose their routes through the network based on the travel cost they experience (as determined by the simulation model). This allows traffic to be distributed over the network according to the timedependent conditions. The modeling principles of DTRAD include:

It is assumed that drivers not only select the best route (i.e., lowest cost path) but some also select less attractive routes. The algorithm implemented by DTRAD archives several efficient routes for each OD pair from which the drivers choose.

The choice of one route out of a set of possible routes is an outcome of discrete choice modeling. Given a set of routes and their generalized costs, the percentages of drivers that choose each route is computed. The most prevalent model for discrete choice modeling is the logit model. DTRAD uses a variant of PathSizeLogit model (PSL). PSL overcomes the drawback of the traditional multinomial logit model by incorporating an additional deterministic path size correction term to address path overlapping in the random utility expression.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant B2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

DTRAD executes the traffic assignment (TA) algorithm on an abstract network representation called "the path network" which is built from the actual physical link node analysis network. This execution continues until a stable situation is reached: the volumes and travel times on the edges of the path network do not change significantly from one iteration to the next. The criteria for this convergence are defined by the user.

Travel cost plays a crucial role in route choice. In DTRAD, path cost is a linear summation of the generalized cost of each link that comprises the path. The generalized cost for a link, a, is expressed as where is the generalized cost for link and , , and are cost coefficients for link travel time, distance, and supplemental cost, respectively. Distance and supplemental costs are defined as invariant properties of the network model, while travel time is a dynamic property dictated by prevailing traffic conditions. The DYNEV simulation model computes travel times on all edges in the network and DTRAD uses that information to constantly update the costs of paths. The route choice decision model in the next simulation iteration uses these updated values to adjust the route choice behavior. This way, traffic demands are dynamically reassigned based on time dependent conditions.

The interaction between the DTRAD TA and DYNEV II simulation models is depicted in Figure B1. Each round of interaction is called a Traffic Assignment Session (TA session).

A TA session is composed of multiple iterations, marked as loop B in the figure.

The supplemental cost is based on the survival distribution (a variation of the exponential distribution).The Inverse Survival Function is a cost term in DTRAD to represent the potential risk of travel toward the plant:

sa = ln (p), 0 p l ; 0 p=

dn = Distance of node, n, from the plant d0 =Distance from the plant where there is zero risk

= Scaling factor The value of do = 11.3 miles, the outer distance of the EPZ. Note that the supplemental cost, sa, of link, a, is (high, low), if its downstream node, n, is (near, far from) the power plant.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant B3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

B.2.2 Network Equilibrium In 1952, John Wardrop wrote:

Under equilibrium conditions traffic arranges itself in congested networks in such a way that no individual tripmaker can reduce his path costs by switching routes.

The above statement describes the User Equilibrium definition, also called the Selfish Driver Equilibrium. It is a hypothesis that represents a [hopeful] condition that evolves over time as drivers search out alternative routes to identify those routes that minimize their respective costs. It has been found that this equilibrium objective to minimize costs is largely realized by most drivers who routinely take the same trip over the same network at the same time (i.e.,

commuters). Effectively, such drivers learn which routes are best for them over time. Thus, the traffic environment settles down to a nearequilibrium state.

Clearly, since an emergency evacuation is a sudden, unique event, it does not constitute a long term learning experience which can achieve an equilibrium state. Consequently, DTRAD was not designed as an equilibrium solution, but to represent drivers in a new and unfamiliar situation, who respond in a flexible manner to realtime information (either broadcast or observed) in such a way as to minimize their respective costs of travel.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant B4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Start of next DTRAD Session A

Set T0 Clock time.

Archive System State at T0 Define latest Link Turn Percentages Execute Simulation Model from B time, T0 to T1 (burn time)

Provide DTRAD with link MOE at time, T1 Execute DTRAD iteration; Get new Turn Percentages Retrieve System State at T0 ;

Apply new Link Turn Percents DTRAD iteration converges?

No Yes Next iteration Simulate from T0 to T2 (DTA session duration)

Set Clock to T2 B A Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant B5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL This appendix describes the DYNEV traffic simulation model. The DYNEV traffic simulation model is a macroscopic model that describes the operations of traffic flow in terms of aggregate variables: vehicles, flow rate, mean speed, volume, density, queue length, on each link, for each turn movement, during each Time Interval (simulation time step). The model generates trips from sources and from Entry Links and introduces them onto the analysis network at rates specified by the analyst based on the mobilization time distributions. The model simulates the movements of all vehicles on all network links over time until the network is empty. At intervals, the model outputs Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) such as those listed in Table C1.

Model Features Include:

Explicit consideration is taken of the variation in density over the time step; an iterative procedure is employed to calculate an average density over the simulation time step for the purpose of computing a mean speed for moving vehicles.

Multiple turn movements can be serviced on one link; a separate algorithm is used to estimate the number of (fractional) lanes assigned to the vehicles performing each turn movement, based, in part, on the turn percentages provided by the Dynamic TRaffic Assignment and Distribution (DTRAD) model.

At any point in time, traffic flow on a link is subdivided into two classifications: queued and moving vehicles. The number of vehicles in each classification is computed. Vehicle spillback, stratified by turn movement for each network link, is explicitly considered and quantified. The propagation of stopping waves from link to link is computed within each time step of the simulation. There is no vertical stacking of queues on a link.

Any link can accommodate source flow from zones via side streets and parking facilities that are not explicitly represented. This flow represents the evacuating trips that are generated at the source.

The relation between the number of vehicles occupying the link and its storage capacity is monitored every time step for every link and for every turn movement. If the available storage capacity on a link is exceeded by the demand for service, then the simulator applies a metering rate to the entering traffic from both the upstream feeders and source node to ensure that the available storage capacity is not exceeded.

A path network that represents the specified traffic movements from each network link is constructed by the model; this path network is utilized by the DTRAD model.

A twoway interface with DTRAD: (1) provides link travel times; (2) receives data that translates into link turn percentages.

Provides MOE to animation software, Evacuation Animator (EVAN).

Calculates Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) statistics.

All traffic simulation models are dataintensive. Table C2 outlines the necessary input data elements.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

To provide an efficient framework for defining these specifications, the physical highway environment is represented as a network. The unidirectional links of the network represent roadway sections: rural, multilane, urban streets or freeways. The nodes of the network generally represent intersections or points along a section where a geometric property changes (e.g., a lane drop, change in grade or free flow speed).

Figure C1 is an example of a small network representation. The freeway is defined by the sequence of links, (20,21), (21,22), and (22,23). Links (8001, 19) and (3, 8011) are Entry and Exit links, respectively. An arterial extends from node 3 to node 19 and is partially subsumed within a grid network. Note that links (21,22) and (17,19) are gradeseparated.

C.1 Methodology C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram It is necessary to define the fundamental diagram describing flowdensity and speeddensity relationships. Rather than settling for a triangular representation, a more realistic representation that includes a capacity drop, (IR)Qmax, at the critical density when flow conditions enter the forced flow regime, is developed and calibrated for each link. This representation, shown in Figure C2, asserts a constant free speed up to a density, k , and then a linear reduction in speed in the range, k k k 45 vpm, the density at capacity. In the flowdensity plane, a quadratic relationship is prescribed in the range, k k 95 vpm which roughly represents the stopandgo condition of severe congestion. The value of flow rate, Q , corresponding to k , is approximated at 0.7 RQ . A linear relationship between k and k completes the diagram shown in Figure C2. Table C3 is a glossary of terms.

The fundamental diagram is applied to moving traffic on every link. The specified calibration values for each link are: (1) Free speed, v ; (2) Capacity, Q  ; (3) Critical density, k 45 vpm ; (4) Capacity Drop Factor, R = 0.9 ; (5) Jam density, k . Then, v , k k

. Setting k k k , then Q RQ k for 0 k k 50 . It can be shown that Q 0.98 0.0056 k RQ for k k k , where k 50 and k 175.

C.1.2 The Simulation Model The simulation model solves a sequence of unit problems. Each unit problem computes the movement of traffic on a link, for each specified turn movement, over a specified time interval (TI) which serves as the simulation time step for all links. Figure C3 is a representation of the unit problem in the timedistance plane. Table C3 is a glossary of terms that are referenced in the following description of the unit problem procedure.

The formulation and the associated logic presented below are designed to solve the unit problem for each sweep over the network (discussed below), for each turn movement serviced on each link that comprises the evacuation network, and for each TI over the duration of the evacuation.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Given Q , M , L , TI , E , LN , G C , h , L , R , L , E , M Compute O , Q , M Define O O O O ; E E E

1. For the first sweep, s = 1, of this TI, get initial estimates of mean density, k , the R - factor, R and entering traffic, E , using the values computed for the final sweep of the prior TI.

For each subsequent sweep, s 1 , calculate E P O S where P , O are the relevant turn percentages from feeder link, i , and its total outflow (possibly metered) over this TI; S is the total source flow (possibly metered) during the current TI.

Set iteration counter, n = 0, k k , and E E .

2. Calculate v k such that k 130 using the analytical representations of the fundamental diagram.

Q TI G Calculate Cap C LN , in vehicles, this value may be reduced 3600 due to metering Set R 1.0 if G C 1 or if k k ; Set R 0.9 only if G C 1 and k k L

Calculate queue length, L Q LN

3. Calculate t TI . If t 0 , set t E O 0 ; Else, E E .

4. Then E E E ; t TI t

5. If Q Cap , then O Cap , O O 0 If t 0 , then Q Q M E Cap Else Q Q Cap End if Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A below

6. Else Q Cap O Q , RCap Cap O

7. If M RCap , then t Cap

8. If t 0, O M ,O min RCap M , 0 TI Q E O If Q 0 , then Calculate Q , M with Algorithm A Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Else Q 0, M E End if Else t 0 O M and O 0 M M O E; Q 0 End if

9. Else M O 0 If t 0 , then O RCap , Q M O E Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A

10. Else t 0 M M If M ,

O RCap Q M O Apply Algorithm A to calculate Q and M Else O M M M O E and Q 0 End if End if End if End if

11. Calculate a new estimate of average density, k k 2k k ,

where k = density at the beginning of the TI k = density at the end of the TI k = density at the midpoint of the TI All values of density apply only to the moving vehicles.

If k k and n N where N max number of iterations, and is a convergence criterion, then

12. set n n 1 , and return to step 2 to perform iteration, n, using k k .

End if Computation of unit problem is now complete. Check for excessive inflow causing spillback.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

13. If Q M , then The number of excess vehicles that cause spillback is: SB Q M ,

where W is the width of the upstream intersection. To prevent spillback, meter the outflow from the feeder approaches and from the source flow, S, during this TI by the amount, SB. That is, set SB M 1 0 , where M is the metering factor over all movements .

E S This metering factor is assigned appropriately to all feeder links and to the source flow, to be applied during the next network sweep, discussed later.

Algorithm A This analysis addresses the flow environment over a TI during which moving vehicles can join a standing or discharging queue. For the case shown, Qb vQ Q Cap, with t 0 and a queue of length, Q ,

Q Qe formed by that portion of M and E that reaches the stopbar within the TI, but could not discharge due to v inadequate capacity. That is, Q M E .

Mb This queue length, Q Q M E Cap can be v L3 extended to Q by traffic entering the approach during the current TI, traveling at speed, v, and t1 t3 reaching the rear of the queue within the TI. A portion T of the entering vehicles, E E , will likely join the queue. This analysis calculates t , Q and M for the input values of L, TI, v, E, t, L , LN, Q .

When t 0 and Q Cap:

L L Define: L Q . From the sketch, L v TI t t L Q E .

LN LN Substituting E E yields: vt E L v TI t L . Recognizing that the first two terms on the right hand side cancel, solve for t to obtain:

L t such that 0 t TI t E L v

TI LN If the denominator, v 0, set t TI t .

t t t Then, Q Q E , M E 1 TI TI The complete Algorithm A considers all flow scenarios; space limitation precludes its inclusion, here.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

C.1.3 Lane Assignment The unit problem is solved for each turn movement on each link. Therefore it is necessary to calculate a value, LN , of allocated lanes for each movement, x. If in fact all lanes are specified by, say, arrows painted on the pavement, either as full lanes or as lanes within a turn bay, then the problem is fully defined. If however there remain unchannelized lanes on a link, then an analysis is undertaken to subdivide the number of these physical lanes into turn movement specific virtual lanes, LNx.

C.2 Implementation C.2.1 Computational Procedure The computational procedure for this model is shown in the form of a flow diagram as Figure C4.

As discussed earlier, the simulation model processes traffic flow for each link independently over TI that the analyst specifies; it is usually 60 seconds or longer. The first step is to execute an algorithm to define the sequence in which the network links are processed so that as many links as possible are processed after their feeder links are processed, within the same network sweep.

Since a general network will have many closed loops, it is not possible to guarantee that every link processed will have all of its feeder links processed earlier.

The processing then continues as a succession of time steps of duration, TI, until the simulation is completed. Within each time step, the processing performs a series of sweeps over all network links; this is necessary to ensure that the traffic flow is synchronous over the entire network. Specifically, the sweep ensures continuity of flow among all the network links; in the context of this model, this means that the values of E, M, and S are all defined for each link such that they represent the synchronous movement of traffic from each link to all of its outbound links. These sweeps also serve to compute the metering rates that control spillback.

Within each sweep, processing solves the unit problem for each turn movement on each link.

With the turn movement percentages for each link provided by the DTRAD model, an algorithm allocates the number of lanes to each movement serviced on each link. The timing at a signal, if any, applied at the downstream end of the link, is expressed as a G/C ratio, the signal timing needed to define this ratio is an input requirement for the model. The model also has the capability of representing, with macroscopic fidelity, the actions of actuated signals responding to the timevarying competing demands on the approaches to the intersection.

The solution of the unit problem yields the values of the number of vehicles, O, that discharge from the link over the time interval and the number of vehicles that remain on the link at the end of the time interval as stratified by queued and moving vehicles: Q and M . The procedure considers each movement separately (multipiping). After all network links are processed for a given network sweep, the updated consistent values of entering flows, E; metering rates, M; and source flows, S are defined so as to satisfy the no spillback condition. The procedure then performs the unit problem solutions for all network links during the following sweep.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Experience has shown that the system converges (i.e., the values of E, M and S settle down for all network links) in just two sweeps if the network is entirely undersaturated or in four sweeps in the presence of extensive congestion with link spillback. (The initial sweep over each link uses the final values of E and M, of the prior TI). At the completion of the final sweep for a TI, the procedure computes and stores all MOEs for each link and turn movement for output purposes.

It then prepares for the following time interval by defining the values of Q and M for the start of the next TI as being those values of Q and M at the end of the prior TI. In this manner, the simulation model processes the traffic flow over time until the end of the run. Note that there is no spacediscretization other than the specification of network links.

C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD)

The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. Thus, an algorithm was developed to identify an appropriate set of destination nodes for each origin based on its location and on the expected direction of travel. This algorithm also supports the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (OD matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next.

Figure B1 depicts the interaction of the simulation model with the DTRAD model in the DYNEV II system. As indicated, DYNEV II performs a succession of DTRAD sessions; each such session computes the turn link percentages for each link that remain constant for the session duration, T , T , specified by the analyst. The end product is the assignment of traffic volumes from each origin to paths connecting it with its destinations in such a way as to minimize the network wide cost function. The output of the DTRAD model is a set of updated link turn percentages which represent this assignment of traffic.

As indicated in Figure B1, the simulation model supports the DTRAD session by providing it with operational link MOE that are needed by the path choice model and included in the DTRAD cost function. These MOE represent the operational state of the network at a time, T T , which lies within the session duration, T , T . This burn time, T T , is selected by the analyst.

For each DTRAD iteration, the simulation model computes the change in network operations over this burn time using the latest set of link turn percentages computed by the DTRAD model. Upon convergence of the DTRAD iterative procedure, the simulation model accepts the latest turn percentages provided by the Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) model, returns to the origin time, T , and executes until it arrives at the end of the DTRAD session duration at time, T . At this time the next DTA session is launched and the whole process repeats until the end of the DYNEV II run.

Additional details are presented in Appendix B.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II Measure Units Applies To Vehicles Discharged Vehicles Link, Network, Exit Link Speed Miles/Hours (mph) Link, Network Density Vehicles/Mile/Lane Link Level of Service LOS Link Content Vehicles Network Travel Time Vehiclehours Network Evacuated Vehicles Vehicles Network, Exit Link Trip Travel Time Vehicleminutes/trip Network Capacity Utilization Percent Exit Link Attraction Percent of total evacuating vehicles Exit Link Max Queue Vehicles Node, Approach Time of Max Queue Hours:minutes Node, Approach Length (mi); Mean Speed (mph); Travel Route Statistics Route Time (min)

Mean Travel Time Minutes Evacuation Trips; Network Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model HIGHWAY NETWORK Links defined by upstream and downstream node numbers Link lengths Number of lanes (up to 9) and channelization Turn bays (1 to 3 lanes)

Destination (exit) nodes Network topology defined in terms of downstream nodes for each receiving link Node Coordinates (X,Y)

Nuclear Power Plant Coordinates (X,Y)

GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES On all entry links and source nodes (origins), by Time Period TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS Traffic signals: linkspecific, turn movement specific Signal control treated as fixed time or actuated Location of traffic control points (these are represented as actuated signals)

Stop and Yield signs Rightturnonred (RTOR)

Route diversion specifications Turn restrictions Lane control (e.g., lane closure, movementspecific)

DRIVERS AND OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS Drivers (vehiclespecific) response mechanisms: freeflow speed, discharge headway Bus route designation.

DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Candidate destination nodes for each origin (optional)

Duration of DTA sessions Duration of simulation burn time Desired number of destination nodes per origin INCIDENTS Identify and Schedule of closed lanes Identify and Schedule of closed links Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table C3. Glossary The maximum number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that can discharge Cap from a link within a time interval.

The number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that enter the link over the E

time interval. The portion, ETI, can reach the stopbar within the TI.

The green time: cycle time ratio that services the vehicles of a particular turn G/C movement on a link.

h The mean queue discharge headway, seconds.

k Density in vehicles per lane per mile.

The average density of moving vehicles of a particular movement over a TI, on a k

link.

L The length of the link in feet.

The queue length in feet of a particular movement, at the [beginning, end] of a L ,L time interval.

The number of lanes, expressed as a floating point number, allocated to service LN a particular movement on a link.

L The mean effective length of a queued vehicle including the vehicle spacing, feet.

M Metering factor (Multiplier): 1.

The number of moving vehicles on the link, of a particular movement, that are M ,M moving at the [beginning, end] of the time interval. These vehicles are assumed to be of equal spacing, over the length of link upstream of the queue.

The total number of vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from O

a link over a time interval.

The components of the vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a link within a time interval: vehicles that were Queued at the beginning of O ,O ,O the TI; vehicles that were Moving within the link at the beginning of the TI; vehicles that Entered the link during the TI.

The percentage, expressed as a fraction, of the total flow on the link that P

executes a particular turn movement, x.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The number of queued vehicles on the link, of a particular turn movement, at Q ,Q the [beginning, end] of the time interval.

The maximum flow rate that can be serviced by a link for a particular movement in the absence of a control device. It is specified by the analyst as an estimate of Q

link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2016.

R The factor that is applied to the capacity of a link to represent the capacity drop when the flow condition moves into the forced flow regime. The lower capacity at that point is equal to RQ .

RCap The remaining capacity available to service vehicles of a particular movement after that queue has been completely serviced, within a time interval, expressed as vehicles.

S Service rate for movement x, vehicles per hour (vph).

t Vehicles of a particular turn movement that enter a link over the first t seconds of a time interval, can reach the stopbar (in the absence of a queue down stream) within the same time interval.

TI The time interval, in seconds, which is used as the simulation time step.

v The mean speed of travel, in feet per second (fps) or miles per hour (mph), of moving vehicles on the link.

v The mean speed of the last vehicle in a queue that discharges from the link within the TI. This speed differs from the mean speed of moving vehicles, v.

W The width of the intersection in feet. This is the difference between the link length which extends from stopbar to stopbar and the block length.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8011 8009 2 3 8104 8107 6 5 8008 8010 8 9 10 8007 8012 12 11 8006 8005 13 14 8014 15 25 8004 16 24 8024 17 8003 23 22 21 20 8002 Entry, Exit Nodes are 19 numbered 8xxx 8001 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kc kj ks Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams Distance OQ OM OE Down Qb vQ Qe v

v L

Mb Me Up t1 t2 Time E1 E2 TI Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sequence Network Links Next Timestep, of duration, TI A

Next sweep; Define E, M, S for all B

Links C Next Link D Next Turn Movement, x Get lanes, LNx Service Rate, Sx ; G/Cx Get inputs to Unit Problem:

Q b , Mb , E Solve Unit Problem: Qe , Me , O No D Last Movement ?

Yes No Last Link ? C Yes No B Last Sweep ?

Yes Calc., store all Link MOE Set up next TI :

No A Last Time - step ?

Yes DONE Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3)

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant C14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX D Detailed Description of Study Procedure

D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE This appendix describes the activities that were performed to compute Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE). The individual steps of this effort are represented as a flow diagram in Figure D1. Each numbered step in the description that follows corresponds to the numbered element in the flow diagram.

Step 1 The first activity was to obtain Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) boundary information and create a geographical information system (GIS) base map. The base map extends beyond the Shadow Region which extends approximately 15 miles (radially) from the power plant location.

The base map incorporates the local roadway topology, a suitable topographic background and the EPZ and Zone boundaries.

Step 2 The 2020 Census block population information was obtained in GIS format. This information was used to determine the permanent resident population within the EPZ and Shadow Region and to define the spatial distribution and demographic characteristics of the population within the study area. Employee and transient data were obtained from local/state emergency management agencies. Information concerning schools, daycares, day camps, access and/or functional needs population, medical and correctional facilities within the EPZ was obtained from county emergency management agencies. In addition, transportation resources available during the emergency were also provided by the counties. Wherever the data is unavailable, internet searches and phone calls were done to gather the data. If still unresolved, data from the 2012 ETE study was used.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with major stakeholders (state and county emergency managers, onsite and offsite utility emergency managers). The purpose of the kickoff meeting was to present an overview of the work effort, identify key agency personnel, and indicate the data requirements for the study. Specific requests for information were presented to county emergency managers. Unique features of the study area were discussed to identify the local concerns that should be addressed by the ETE study.

Step 4 Next, a physical survey of the roadway system in the study area was conducted to determine the geometric properties of the highway sections, the channelization of lanes on each section of roadway, whether there are any turn restrictions or special treatment of traffic at intersections, the type and functioning of traffic control devices, gathering signal timings for pretimed traffic signals (if any exist within the study area), and to make the necessary observations needed to estimate realistic values of roadway capacity. Roadway characteristics were also verified using aerial imagery.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 5 A demographic survey of households within the EPZ was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic information of the EPZ population, for this study. This information was used to determine important study factors including the average number of evacuating vehicles used by each household, and the time required to perform preevacuation mobilization activities.

Step 6 A computerized representation of the physical roadway system, called a linknode analysis network, was developed using the most recent UNITES software (see Section 1.3) developed by KLD. Once the geometry of the network was completed, the network was calibrated using the information gathered during the road survey (Step 4) and information obtained from aerial imagery. Estimates of highway capacity for each link and other linkspecific characteristics were introduced to the network description. Traffic signal timings were input accordingly. The link node analysis network was imported into a GIS map. The 2020 permanent resident population (Step 2) were overlaid in the map, and origin centroids where trips would be generated during the evacuation process were assigned to appropriate links.

Step 7 The EPZ is subdivided into 30 Zones. Based on wind direction and speed, Regions (groupings of Zones) that may be advised to evacuate, were developed.

The need for evacuation can occur over a range of timeofday, dayofweek, seasonal and weatherrelated conditions. Scenarios were developed to capture the variation in evacuation demand, highway capacity and mobilization time, for different time of day, day of the week, time of year, and weather conditions.

Step 8 The input stream for the DYNEV II model, which integrates the dynamic traffic assignment and distribution model, DTRAD, with the evacuation simulation model, was created for a prototype evacuation case - the evacuation of the entire EPZ for a representative scenario.

Step 9 After creating this input stream, the DYNEV II System was executed on the prototype evacuation case to compute evacuating traffic routing patterns consistent with the appropriate NRC guidelines. DYNEV II contains an extensive suite of data diagnostics which check the completeness and consistency of the input data specified. The analyst reviews all warning and error messages produced by the model and then corrects the database to create an input stream that properly executes to completion.

The model assigns destinations to all origin centroids consistent with a (general) radial evacuation of the EPZ and Shadow Region. The analyst may optionally supplement and/or replace these modelassigned destinations, based on professional judgment, after studying the topology of the analysis highway network. The model produces link and networkwide measures of effectiveness as well as estimates of evacuation time.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant D2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 10 The results generated by the prototype evacuation case are critically examined. The examination includes observing the animated graphics (using the EVAN software - see Section 1.3) and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a laborintensive activity, requiring the direct participation of skilled engineers who possess the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any problems reflected in the results.

Essentially, the approach is to identify those bottlenecks in the network that represent locations where congested conditions are pronounced and to identify the cause of this congestion. This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to high rates of trip generation, improper routing, a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative flaw in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream. This examination leads to one of two conclusions:

The results are satisfactory; or The input stream must be modified accordingly.

This decision requires, of course, the application of the user's judgment and experience based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the model and a comparison of the results of the latest prototype evacuation case iteration with the previous ones. If the results are satisfactory in the opinion of the user, then the process continues with Step 13. Otherwise, proceed to Step 11.

Step 11 There are many "treatments" available to the user in resolving apparent problems. These treatments range from decisions to reroute the traffic by assigning additional evacuation destinations for one or more sources, imposing turn restrictions where they can produce significant improvements in capacity, changing the control treatment at critical intersections so as to provide improved service for one or more movements, adding routes (which are paved and traversable) that were not previously modelled but may assist in an evacuation and increase the available roadway network capacity, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems.

Such "treatments" take the form of modifications to the original prototype evacuation case input stream. All treatments are designed to improve the representation of evacuation behavior.

Step 12 As noted above, the changes to the input stream must be implemented to reflect the modifications undertaken in Step 11. At the completion of this activity, the process returns to Step 9 where the DYNEV II System is again executed.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant D3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 13 Evacuation of transitdependent evacuees and special facilities are included in the evacuation analysis. Fixed routing for transit buses and for school buses, ambulances, minibuses, wheelchair buses and wheelchair vans are introduced into the final prototype evacuation case data set. DYNEV II generates routespecific speeds over time for use in the estimation of evacuation times for the transit dependent and special facility population groups.

Step 14 The prototype evacuation case was used as the basis for generating all region and scenario specific evacuation cases to be simulated. This process was automated through the UNITES user interface. For each specific case, the population to be evacuated, the trip generation distributions, the highway capacity and speeds, and other factors are adjusted to produce a customized casespecific data set.

Step 15 All evacuation cases are executed using the DYNEV II System to compute ETE. Once results are available, quality control procedures are used to assure the results were consistent, dynamic routing is reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks are addressed properly.

Step 16 Once vehicular evacuation results are accepted, average travel speeds for transit and special facility routes are used to compute ETEs for transitdependent permanent residents, schools, hospitals, and other special facilities.

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated and graphed. The results are then documented, as required by NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Step 18 Following the completion of documentation activities, the ETE criteria checklist (see Appendix N) is completed. An appropriate report reference is provided for each criterion provided in the checklist.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant D4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

A Step 1 Step 10 Create GIS Base Map Examine Prototype Evacuation Case using EVAN and DYNEV II Output Step 2 Gather Census Block and Demographic Data for Results Satisfactory Study Area Step 11 Step 3 Modify Evacuation Destinations and/or Develop Conduct Kickoff Meeting with Stakeholders Traffic Control Treatments Step 4 Step 12 Field Survey of Roadways within Study Area Modify Database to Reflect Changes to Prototype Evacuation Case Step 5 Conduct and Analyze Demographic Survey and Develop Trip Generation Characteristics B

Step 13 Step 6 Establish Transit and Special Facility Evacuation Routes and Update DYNEV II Database Update and Calibrate LinkNode Analysis Network Step 14 Step 7 Generate DYNEV II Input Streams for All Evacuation Cases Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 15 Step 8 Execute DYNEV II to Compute ETE for All Create and Debug DYNEV II Input Stream Evacuation Cases Step 16 Step 9 Use DYNEV II Average Speed Output to Compute ETE for Transit and Special Facility Routes B Execute DYNEV II for Prototype Evacuation Case Step 17 Documentation A Step 18 Complete ETE Criteria Checklist Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant D5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX E Facility Data

E. FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of November 2021, for special facilities, transient attractions and major employers that are located within the CPNPP EPZ. Special facilities are defined as schools, preschools/daycares, day camps, medical facilities, and correctional facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for campgrounds, golf courses, marinas, parks, other recreational areas, lodging facilities and major retail facilities.

Employment data is included in the table for major employers.

Each table is grouped by county. The location of the facility is defined by its straightline distance (miles) and direction (magnetic bearing) from the center point of the plant. Maps of each school, preschool/daycare, day camp, medical facility, major employer, campground, golf course, marina, park, other recreational area, lodging facility, major retail facility and correctional facility are also provided.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools within the EPZ Distance Dire Enroll Zone (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment HOOD COUNTY 1C 6.9 NE Mambrino Elementary School 3835 Mambrino Hwy Granbury 604 1D 9.5 N Premier High School 883 Harbor Lakes Dr Granbury 150 4E 7.4 N Lakeside Baptist Academy 3410 Glen Rose Hwy Granbury 100 4E 8.8 N Brawner Intermediate School 1520 S Meadow Dr Granbury 400 4E 8.8 N Emma Roberson Elementary School 1500 Misty Meadow Dr Granbury 501 4E 9.8 N Granbury High School 2000 W Pearl St Granbury 2,029 4G 10.3 WNW Tolar High School 301 Rock Church Rd Tolar 225 TO 9.7 NW Tolar Elementary School 401 E 7th St Tolar 265 TO 9.8 NW Tolar Jr. High School 401 E 7th St Tolar 132 Hood County Subtotal: 4,406 SOMERVELL COUNTY 2D 3.1 E North Central Texas Academy 3846 N Hwy 144 Granbury 70 2H 8.5 ESE Brazos River Charter School 1964 S FM 199 Nemo 135 GL 4.5 SSE Glen Rose Junior High School 805 College St Glen Rose 425 GL 4.8 SSE Glen Rose High School 900 Stadium Dr Glen Rose 500 GL 4.9 SSE Glen Rose Elementary School 601 Stadium Dr Glen Rose 500 GL 4.9 SSE Glen Rose Intermediate School 201 Allen Dr Glen Rose 400 Somervell County Subtotal: 2,030 EPZ TOTAL: 6,436 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E2. Preschools/Daycares within the EPZ Distance Dire Enroll Zone (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment HOOD COUNTY 1C 6.7 NNE Rainbow's Promise 2727 Mambrino Hwy Granbury 55 1D 7.2 N Lakeside WEEschool 500 W Bluebonnet Dr Granbury 59 1D 9.9 N Lil Pirates Daycare 309 Western Hills Trail Granbury 70 4E 8.9 N Cross Town Preschool 1400 N Meadows Dr Granbury 18 4E 9.8 N Miss Dee Little Angels 301 S Ables St Granbury 4 TO 10.2 NW Tolar Small Steps Childcare & Early Learning Center, LLC 9010 W US377 Tolar 80 TO 10.2 NW Little Rattlers Preschool & Childcare 9015 US377 Tolar 57 Hood County Subtotal: 343 SOMERVELL COUNTY 2C 3.7 SSE Grace Preschool 2008 N FM 56 Glen Rose 60 2C 4.2 SSE Glen Rose Early Head Start 1190 N FM 56 Glen Rose 40 3D 4.9 S Little Tigers Learning Center 1073 Co Rd 1001 Glen Rose 60 GL 4.3 SE Endless Discoveries Child Development Center 200 Commerce St Glen Rose 60 GL 4.6 SSE First United Methodist Preschool 405 NE Barnard St Glen Rose 60 GL 4.6 SSE Rockin' D Day Care 1111 Robin St Glen Rose 12 Somervell County Subtotal: 292 EPZ TOTAL: 635 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E3. Day Camps within the Study Area1 Distance Dire Enroll Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality ment HOOD COUNTY S.R.2 10.3 NE Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro 7710 Fall Creek Hwy Granbury 100 Hood County Subtotal: 100 SOMERVELL COUNTY 2E 4.5 E Arrowhead Camp & Retreat Center 5236 FM 199 Cleburne 450 2H 8.4 ESE Stevens Ranch 4602 FM 200 Nemo 171 2J 8.4 SE Riverbend Retreat Center 1232 CR 411B Glen Rose 900 GL 4.7 SSE Glen Lake Camp & Retreat Center 1102 NE Barnard St Glen Rose 600 Somervell County Subtotal: 2,121 EPZ TOTAL: 2,221 Table E4. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambul Wheel Bed Distance Dire Capa Current atory chair ridden Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality city Census Patients Patients Patients HOOD COUNTY 1D 9.4 N Southern Concepts South Town 1400 Fifth St Granbury 6 6 6 0 0 1D 9.4 N Southern Concepts Meadowlark 900 Meadowlark Ln Granbury 4 4 4 0 0 1D 9.4 N Harbor Lakes Nursing & Rehab 1300 2nd St Granbury 147 75 20 30 25 1D 9.5 N Lakestone Terrace Senior Living 916 E Hwy 377 Granbury 208 90 78 11 1 1D 9.6 N Courtyards at Lake Granbury 801 Calinco Dr Granbury 82 74 44 30 0 1D 9.8 N Southern Concepts Torrey House 400 Torrey St Granbury 6 6 6 0 0 Waterview The Point Independent 210 210 186 24 0 1D 9.9 N Living 100 Watermark Blvd Granbury Waterview The Cove Assisted Living 55 38 24 12 2 1D 10.0 N & Memory Care 101 Watermark Blvd Granbury 4E 9.3 N Bridgewater Memory Care 900 Autumn Ridge Dr Granbury 52 45 22 23 0 4E 9.3 N Lake Granbury Medical Center3 1310 Paluxy Hwy Granbury 83 16 12 1 3 1

Day camps typically last 1-2 weeks during the summer. Refer to Section 8 for the ETE calculation for these transit dependents.

2 Camp Fire Camp El Tesoro is located in S.R. (Shadow Region). As per the discussion with Hood County, this day camp will evacuate due to the close proximity to the EPZ boundary.

3 As per Hood County EMA, Lake Granbury Medical Center will shelter in place.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Ambul Wheel Bed Distance Dire Capa Current atory chair ridden Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality city Census Patients Patients Patients 4E 9.8 N Granbury Care Center 301 S Park St Granbury 181 145 59 84 2 4F 8.5 NNW Magnolia Court 2310 Paluxy Hwy Granbury 22 18 17 1 0 4F 8.5 NNW Quail Park of Granbury 2300 Paluxy Hwy Granbury 20 13 0 0 13 4F 8.6 NNW Granbury Villa Nursing Center 2124 Paluxy Hwy Granbury 95 62 21 38 3 Hood County Subtotal: 1,171 802 499 254 49 SOMERVELL COUNTY GL 4.3 SE Cherokee Rose Manor 203 Bo Gibbs Blvd Glen Rose 102 60 37 19 4 GL 4.5 SSE Glen Rose Nursing and Rehab Center 1021 Holden St Glen Rose 120 80 50 25 5 GL 4.5 SSE Glen Rose Medical CenterHospital 1021 Holden St Glen Rose 123 84 52 27 5 Somervell County Subtotal: 345 224 139 71 14 EPZ TOTAL: 1,516 1,026 638 325 63 Table E5. Major Employers within the EPZ

% Employee Employees Employees Vehicles Distance Dire Employees Commuting Commuting Commuting Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ HOOD COUNTY 1D 9.2 N WalMart Supercenter 735 Hwy 377 Granbury 325 90% 293 271 Hood County Subtotal: 325 293 271 SOMERVELL COUNTY CP Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant4 Hill City Hwy Glen Rose 750 32% 241 223 Somervell County Subtotal: 750 241 223 EPZ TOTAL: 1,075 534 494 4

As per Vistra Operations Company LLC (Vistra OpCo), staffing at the plant consists of 3 employers: Vistra OpCo, DZ, and Allied Universal.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E6. Recreational Areas within the Study Area Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles HOOD COUNTY 1B 3.1 NE Lone Star RV Ranch 8905 Glen Rose Hwy Granbury Campground 20 20 1C 7.2 NE Pecan Planation Golf Course 8650 Westover Ct Granbury Golf Course 300 300 1C 7.2 NE Pecan Plantation Marina 4600 W Wedgefield Rd Granbury Marina 100 100 1C 7.8 NE De Cordova Dam Park 7608 Rollins Rd Granbury Park 198 90 1C 8.0 NE Nutcracker Golf Club 9500 Orchard Dr Granbury Golf Course 300 300 1C 8.5 NE Lake Granbury RV Ranch 7001 Deer Hollow Ct Granbury Campground 75 75 1C 9.4 ENE Pecan Plantation RV Park 10000 Ravenswood Rd Granbury Campground 26 26 1D 6.0 NNE Granbury RV Resort 1800 Mambrino Hwy Granbury Campground 87 87 1D 6.9 NNE Rustic Ranch RV Camp 2515 Williamson Rd Granbury Campground 5 5 1D 7.6 NNE Indian Harbor Marina 1413 Blackhawk Cir Granbury Marina 50 50 1D 8.1 N Indian Harbour RV Park 3819 Gila Cir Granbury Campground 150 150 1D 8.2 N Lake Granbury Marina (Stumpy's) 2323 S Morgan St Granbury Marina 100 100 1D 8.4 N Rough Creek Park Rough Creek Estates Granbury Park 175 79 1D 8.9 N Harbor Lakes Golf Club 2100 Clubhouse Dr Granbury Golf Course 150 150 1D 9.4 N The Dock on Lake Granbury 1003 White Cliff Granbury Marina 48 24 4A 2.2 N Squaw Creek Park 2300 CR 213 Granbury Park 250 120 4A 2.8 NE Midway Pines RV Park 9322 Glen Rose Hwy Granbury Campground 32 30 4E 9.9 N Brazos Drive In 1800 W Pearl St Glen Rose Theater 321 125 4E 10.1 N Granbury City Park 116 W Bridge St Granbury Park 140 63 4F 9.3 NW Jacks Trailer Park 6514 W US Hwy 377 Tolar Campground 20 20 4F 9.3 NW Park Place RV Ranch 6300 US377 Tolar Campground 40 40 S.R.5 9.7 NNW Sunnyside RV Park 2600 W US Hwy 377 Granbury Campground 41 41 Hood County Subtotal: 2,628 1,995 SOMERVELL COUNTY 2B 2.8 E Jurassic RV Park 4621 Glen Rose Hwy Glen Rose Campground 50 50 2C 3.1 SSE Wheeler Branch Park Reservoir 2099 Co Rd 301 Glen Rose Park 200 100 2C 3.1 SE Texas Amphitheatre 5000 Texas Dr Glen Rose Other 4,000 1,250 2D 4.6 SE Squaw Valley Golf Course 2439 Hwy 67 Glen Rose Golf Course 150 150 5

Sunnyside RV Park is located in the Shadow Region but within the 10-mile radius. As per the discussion with Hood County, this facility is included in the study due to the close proximity to the EPZ boundary.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles 2D 5.0 ESE Rainbow Village RV Park 1018 Co Rd 303 Rainbow Campground 54 54 2E 4.5 E Arrowhead Camp & Retreat Center 5236 FM 199 Cleburne Campground 150 50 2F 9.8 E Cedar Break RV Park 8895 Hwy 67 Cleburne Campground 50 36 2J 5.0 SE Tres Rios RV Resort 2322 CR 312 Glen Rose Campground 200 100 2J 8.4 SE Riverbend Retreat Center 1232 CR 411B Glen Rose Campground 600 306 3B 3.7 SSW Dinosaur Valley State Park 1629 Park Rd 59 Glen Rose Park 421 191 3B 4.1 SSW Dinosaur Valley RV Park 1099 Park Rd 59 Glen Rose Campground 320 80 3B 4.2 SSE Flint Canyon RV Park 1321 N FM 56 Glen Rose Campground 25 18 3B 4.2 SSW Dinosaur World 1058 Park Rd 59 Glen Rose Museum 200 100 3D 7.0 S Cedar Ridge RV Park 4475 W Hwy 67 Glen Rose Campground 95 44 3F 8.2 S Earth Promise DBA Fossil Rim Wildlife Center 2299 CR 2008 Glen Rose Park 300 83 GL 4.1 SE Soccer Complex 1501 Texas Dr Glen Rose Park Local visitors only GL 4.3 SE Somervell County Expo Center 202 Bo Gibbs Blvd Glen Rose Other, Not Listed 4,800 1,655 GL 4.7 SSE Oakdale Park 1019 NE Barnard St Glen Rose Park 200 91 GL 4.7 S Barnard Street RV Park 1900 SW Barnard St Glen Rose Campground 50 20 GL 4.7 SSE Big Rocks Park 1014 NE Barnard St Glen Rose Park 100 50 GL 4.8 SSE Paluxy Heritage Park 100 Matthews St Glen Rose Park Local visitors only Somervell County Subtotal: 11,965 4,428 EPZ TOTAL: 14,593 6,423 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E7. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles HOOD COUNTY 1D 7.9 N Lake House at Cedar Cove 1303 Comanche Cove Ct Granbury 12 6 1D 8.1 NNE Bakers Bunk House 3313 Midway Ct Granbury 8 4 1D 9.5 N Days Inn Granbury 1201 N Plaza Dr Granbury 108 50 1D 9.5 N La Quinta Inn and Suites 880 Harbor Lakes Dr Granbury 171 57 1D 9.5 N Classic Inn 1209 N Plaza Dr Granbury 44 22 1D 9.5 N Comfort Suites 903 Harbor Lakes Dr Granbury 208 69 1D 9.5 N Quality Inn & Suites 800 Harbor Lakes Dr Granbury 171 57 1D 9.5 N Granbury Inn and Suites 1339 N Plaza Dr Granbury 80 40 1D 9.6 N Blue Heron B&B 511 S Baker St Granbury 6 3 1D 9.8 N Holiday Inn Express & Suites Granbury 1515 N Plaza Dr Granbury 211 96 1D 9.8 N Inn on Lake Granbury 205 W Doyle St Granbury 33 16 1D 9.8 N Best Western 1517 N Plaza Dr Granbury 165 55 1D 9.8 N Captains House 123 W Doyle St Granbury 4 2 1D 9.8 N Granbury Gardens Bed & Breakfast 321 W Doyle St Granbury 8 4 1D 9.9 N Lake View Inn 1451 E Pearl St Granbury 74 37 1D 9.9 N Granbury Convention Center 621 E Pearl St Granbury 1,500 885 1D 9.9 N Hilton Garden Inn 635 E Pearl St Granbury 93 74 1D 9.9 N The Granbury on West Pearl 103 W Pearl St Granbury 8 2 4E 9.5 N Historic Sheriffs Carriage House 703 Spring St Granbury 4 2 4E 10.0 N Pomegranate House and Cottages Bed and Breakfast 1002 W Pearl St Granbury 10 4 Hood County Subtotal: 2,918 1,485 SOMERVELL COUNTY 2C 2.9 SSE Popejoy Haus Cabins 1943 CR 321 Glen Rose 7 4 2D 5.2 ESE Glen Rose Cottage 3279 E Hwy 67 Rainbow 4 2 2D 7.2 ESE Riverside Cottages on the Brazos 1140 CR 315 Glen Rose 40 24 2J 6.0 SE Cedars on the Brazos 2920 CR 413 Glen Rose 30 6 2J 7.8 SSE CJ's Country Cabins & RV Park 3454 FM 56 S Glen Rose 64 26 3C 5.3 S Anderson Creek Cabins 1442 Moody Ln Glen Rose 10 4 3D 4.4 S Paluxy Riverbed Cabins 1319 FM 205 Glen Rose 8 4 3D 4.9 S Kozy Cabins 1443 US 67 Glen Rose 16 4 3F 9.1 SSW The Lodge at Fossil Rim 3022 CR 2010 Glen Rose 25 8 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles 3F 9.3 S Fossil Rim Safari Campground 3022 CR 2010 Glen Rose 20 7 GL 4.4 SE Best Western Dinosaur Valley Inn & Suites 1311 NE Big Bend Trail Glen rose 200 60 GL 4.4 SSE La Quinta Inn & Suites Glen Rose 101 West Bo Gibbs Blvd Glen Rose 242 58 GL 4.4 SE Comfort Inn & Suites 1615 NE Big Bend Trail Glen Rose 200 80 GL 4.5 SE Quality Inn & Suites 1614 N Big Bend Trail Glen Rose 100 53 GL 4.5 SSE Live Oak Bed and Breakfast 200 Live Oak St Glen Rose 10 4 GL 4.6 SSE Glen Rose Inn & Suites 300 SW Big Bend Trail Glen Rose 95 60 GL 4.8 SSE Country Woods Inn 420 Grand Ave Glen Rose 45 12 GL 4.8 SSE Inn On The River 205 SW Barnard St Glen Rose 60 30 GL 4.8 SSE PriceHouse Inn 304 SW Barnard St Glen Rose 6 2 Somervell County Subtotal: 1,182 448 EPZ TOTAL: 4,100 1,933 Table E8. Major Retail Facilities within the EPZ

% Transients Distance Dire Commuting Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality into the EPZ Transients Vehicles HOOD COUNTY 1D 9.1 N Brookshires Brothers 1301 S Morgan St Granbury 10% 23 15 1D 9.3 N Cinergy Cinemas 1201 Waters Edge Dr Granbury 30% 20 13 1D 9.3 N Lowe's 1021 E US Hwy 377 Granbury 5% 500 200 1D 9.3 N Home Depot #6571 415 E Hwy 377 Granbury 5% 302 201 1D 9.3 N WalMart Supercenter 735 E Hwy 377 Granbury 75% 1,011 674 1D 9.7 N HomeGoods 1420 E Hwy 377 Granbury 20% 60 40 Hood County Subtotal: 1,916 1,143 EPZ TOTAL: 1,916 1,143 Table E9. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Cap Current Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality acity Census SOMERVELL COUNTY GL 4.0 SSE Somervell County Jail 750 Gibbs Blvd Glen Rose 54 32 Somervell County Subtotal: 54 32 EPZ TOTAL: 54 32 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E1. Schools within the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E2. Preschools and Daycares within the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E3. Day Camps within the Study Area Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E4. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E5. Major Employers within the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E6. Campgrounds within the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E7. Golf Courses, Marinas, Parks and Other Recreational Areas within the Study Area Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E8. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E9. Major Retail Facilities within the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E10. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant E19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX F Demographic Survey

F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY F.1 Introduction The development of evacuation time estimates (ETE) for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) requires the identification of travel patterns, car ownership, and household size of the population within the EPZ. Demographic information can be obtained from Census data. The use of this data has several limitations when applied to emergency planning. First, the Census data do not encompass the range of information needed to identify the time required for preliminary activities (mobilization) that must be undertaken prior to evacuating the area. Secondly, Census data do not contain attitudinal responses needed from the population of the EPZ and consequently may not accurately represent the anticipated behavioral characteristics of the evacuating populace.

These concerns are addressed by conducting a demographic survey of a representative sample of the EPZ population. The survey is designed to elicit information from the public concerning family demographics and estimates of response times to well defined events. The design of the survey includes a limited number of questions of the form What would you do if ? and other questions regarding activities with which the respondent is familiar (How long does it take you to ?).

F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan Attachment A presents the final survey instrument used for the demographic survey. A draft of the instrument was submitted to stakeholders for comment. Comments were received and the survey instrument was modified accordingly, prior to conducting the survey.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. Since the demographic survey discussed herein was performed in March 2021 and the 2020 Census data had not been released, 2010 Census data was used to develop the sampling plan.

A sample size of approximately 459 completed survey forms yield results with a sampling error of +/-4.5% at the 95% confidence level. The sample must be drawn from the EPZ population.

Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using geographic information system (GIS) software. This list is shown in Table F1. Along with each zip code, an estimate of the population and number of households in each area was determined by overlaying 2010 Census data and the EPZ boundary, again using GIS software. The proportional number of desired completed survey interviews for each area was identified, as shown in Table F1. Note that the average household size computed in Table F1 was an estimate for sampling purposes and was not used in the ETE study.

The results of the survey slightly exceeded the sampling plan. A total of 460 completed samples were obtained corresponding to a sampling error of +/-4.5% at the 95% confidence level based on the 2010 Census data. The number of samples obtained within each zip code is also shown in Table F1.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.3 Survey Results The results of the survey fall into two categories. First, the household demographics of the area can be identified. Demographic information includes such factors as household size, automobile ownership, and automobile availability. The distributions of the time to perform certain pre evacuation activities are the second category of survey results. These data are processed to develop the trip generation distributions used in the evacuation modeling effort, as discussed in Section 5.

A review of the survey instrument reveals that several questions have a Decline to State entry for a response. It is accepted practice in conducting surveys of this type to accept the answers of a respondent who offers a Decline to State response or who refuses to answer a few questions. To address the issue of occasional Decline to State responses from a large sample, the practice is to assume that the distribution of these responses is the same as the underlying distribution of the positive responses. In effect, the Decline to State responses are ignored, and the distributions are based upon the positive data that is acquired.

F.3.1 Household Demographic Results Household Size Figure F1 presents the distribution of household size within the EPZ, based on the responses to the demographic survey. According to the responses, the average household contains 2.57 people. The estimated average household size from the 2020 Census data is 2.46 people, which is in good agreement with the results of the demographic survey. The percent difference between the 2020 Census data and survey data is 4.47%, which is consistent with the sampling error of 4.5%, as discussed in Section F.2.

Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the EPZ is 2.32. It should be noted that all households within the EPZ have access to an automobile according to the demographic survey. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F2.

Figure F3 and Figure F4 present the automobile availability by household size.

Ridesharing Approximately 77% of the households surveyed responded that they would share a ride with a neighbor, relative, or friend if a car was not available to them when advised to evacuate in the event of an emergency, as shown in Figure F5.

Commuters Figure F6 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household.

Commuters are defined as household members who travel to work or college on a daily basis.

The data shows an average of 0.96 commuters per household in the EPZ, and 56% of households have at least one commuter.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Commuter Travel Modes Figure F7 presents the mode of travel that commuters use on a daily basis. The vast majority (91%) of commuters use their private automobiles to travel to work or college. The data shows an average of 1.08 commuters per vehicle, assuming 2 people per vehicle - on average - for carpools.

Impact of COVID19 on Commuters Figure F8 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household that were temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic. The data shows an average of 0.59 commuters per household were affected by the COVID19 pandemic. Approximately 66% of households indicated that no commuter in their household had a work and/or school commute that was temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic; 20% indicated one commuter was impacted; 7% indicated two commuters were impacted; 2% indicated three commuters were impacted and 4% indicated four or more commuters were impacted.

Functional or Transportation Needs Figure F9 presents the distribution of the number of individuals with functional or transportation need. The survey result shows that approximately 11.5% of households have functional or transportation needs. Of those with functional or transportation needs, 30%

require a bus, 55% require a wheelchair accessible van, 2% require an ambulance and 13%

indicated that they would require other accommodations.

F.3.2 Evacuation Response Questions were asked to gauge the populations response to an emergency. These are now discussed:

How many vehicles would your household use during an evacuation? The response is shown in Figure F10. On average, evacuating households would use 1.44 vehicles.

Would your family await the return of other family members prior to evacuating the area?

Of the survey participants who responded, 57.7% said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 42.3% indicated that they would not await the return of other family members, as shown in Figure F11.

Emergency officials advise you to shelterinplace in an emergency because you are not in the area of risk. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information regarding compliance with instructions to shelterinplace. The results, as shown in Figure F12, indicate that 88.6% of households who are advised to shelterinplace would do so; the remaining 11.4%

would choose to evacuate the area.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20% of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. Thus, the data obtained above is significantly lower than the federal guidance recommendation. A sensitivity study was conducted to estimate the impact of shadow evacuation noncompliance to a shelter advisory on ETE - see Appendix M.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Emergency officials advise you to shelterinplace now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas of are advised to evacuate now. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information specifically related to the possibility of a staged evacuation. That is, asking a population to shelterinplace now and then to evacuate after a specified period of time. As shown in Figure F13, results indicate that 74.8% of households would follow instructions and delay the start of evacuation until advised, while the balance of 25.2% would choose to begin evacuating immediately.

Emergency officials advise you to evacuate due to an emergency. Where would you evacuate to? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the destination of evacuees in case of an evacuation. Approximately 49% of households indicated that they would evacuate to a friend or relatives home, 5% to a reception center, 17% to a hotel, motel, or campground, 5%

to a second or seasonal home, 2% to another city/state and the remaining 22% indicated other location/dont know to this question, as shown in Figure F14. It should be noted that no households indicated they would not evacuate, according to the survey.

If you had a pet and/or animal, what would you do with your pet and/or animal if you had to evacuate? Based on responses from the survey, 72.5% of households have a family pet, as shown in Figure F15. Of the households with pets, 31% indicated that they would take their pets with them to a shelter, 66% indicated that they would take their pets somewhere else and only 3% would leave their pet at home, as shown in Figure F16. Of the households that would evacuate with their pets, 95% indicated that they have sufficient room in their vehicle to evacuate with their pet(s)/animal(s).

What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have? Based on responses from the survey, 86% of households have a household pet (dog, cat, bird, reptile, or fish), 13% of households have farm animals (horse, chicken, goat, pig, etc.), and 1% have other small pets/animals.

F.3.3 Time Distribution Results The survey asked several questions about the amount of time it takes to perform certain pre evacuation activities. These activities involve actions taken by residents during the course of their daytoday lives. Thus, the answers fall within the realm of the responders experience.

The mobilization distributions provided below are the result of having applied the analysis described in Section 5.4.1 on the component activities of the mobilization.

As discussed in Section F.3.1 and shown in Figure F8, the majority of respondents indicated no commuters were impacted by the COVID19 pandemic; therefore the results for the time distribution of commuters (time to prepare to leave work/college and time to travel home from work/college) were used as is in this study.

How long does it take the commuter to complete preparation for leaving work? Figure F17 presents the cumulative distribution; in all cases, the activity is completed by 90 minutes.

Approximately 82% can leave within 30 minutes.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

How long would it take the commuter to travel home? Figure F18 presents the work to home travel time for the EPZ. About 82 % of commuters can arrive home within 45 minutes of leaving work; all within 105 minutes (1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 45 minutes).

How long would it take the family to pack clothing, secure the house, and load the car?

Figure F19 presents the time required to prepare for leaving on an evacuation trip. In many ways this activity mimics a familys preparation for a short holiday or weekend away from home. Hence, the responses represent the experience of the responder in performing similar activities.

The distribution shown in Figure F19 has a long tail. About 91% of households can be ready to leave home within 120 minutes; the remaining households require up to an additional hour and 15 minutes.

F.3.4 Emergency Communications At your place of residence, how reliable is your cell phone signal? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the ability to be notified in case of an evacuation.

Approximately 82% of households indicated that they have very reliable signal to receive texts and phone calls, 5.4% indicated that their signal is reliable for text messages only, 9.6%

indicated that they do not always receive cell communications at their residence, and 3%

indicated that they do not have cell service at their residence, as shown in Figure F20.

Emergency management officials in your state may send text messages, similar to AMBER Alerts, with emergency directions for the public during a radiological emergency at the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant. How likely would you be to take action on these directions, if you received the message? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the likelihood of an individual to take action based on emergency management officials guidelines.

Approximately 76% of households indicated that they are highly likely to take action on these directions, about 21.5% indicated likely, 2% indicated neither likely nor unlikely, 0.4% indicated unlikely or highly unlikely for them to take action on emergency management officials directions, as shown in Figure F21.

Which of the following emergency communication methods do you think is most likely to alert you at your residence? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the most efficient way to alert residents within the EPZ.

Approximately 74% of households indicated that a text message from emergency officials would be most likely to alert them at their residence, 15% indicated that a siren sounding near their home would likely to alter them, 6% indicated an alert broadcast on the TV, 3% and information on Twitter or Facebook or other method would be the most likely to alert those at their residence, and 2% indicated that a phone call/text message from a family member, friend or neighbor would be the most likely way to alert them at their residence, as shown in Figure F22.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table F1. CPNPP Demographic Survey Sampling Plan Current EPZ Households EPZ Population Expected Demographic Zip Code within Zip Code (2010) Sample Survey Samples (2010)

Obtained 76033 15 7 0 4 76043 6685 2394 77 26 76044 14892 6301 203 156 76048 10151 4256 137 251 76049 653 254 8 6 76070 590 206 7 4 76077 142 61 2 2 76476 2071 772 25 11 Total 35,199 14,251 459 460 Average Household Size: 2.47 Household Size 70%

58.5%

60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20%

13.9%

8.7% 8.0% 8.7%

10%

2.2%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6+

People Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Vehicle Availability 60%

53.7%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

26.3%

20%

12.6%

10%

4.4% 3.0%

0.0%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F2. Vehicle Availability Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 14 Person Households 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 58+ Person Households 5 People 6 People 7 People 8+ People 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 5 to 8+ Person Households Rideshare with Neighbor/Friend 100%

80% 77.4%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

22.6%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Commuters Per Household 50%

43.8%

40%

Percent of Households 30%

26.8%

21.8%

20%

10%

5.0%

2.6%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F6. Commuters per Households in the EPZ Travel Mode to Work 100%

91.1%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

7.7%

0.7% 0.5%

0%

Bus Walk/Bike Drive Alone Carpool (2+)

Mode of Travel Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

COVID19 Impact to Commuters 70%

66.2%

60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20.1%

20%

10% 7.1%

4.4%

2.2%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F8. Commuters Impacted by COVID19 Functional or Transportation Needs 60%

55%

Percent of Households with Functional or 50%

40%

30%

30%

Transportation Needs 20%

13%

10%

2%

0%

0%

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Ambulance Other Accessible Vehicle Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuating Vehicles Per Household 100%

80%

Percent of Households 62.4%

60%

40%

32.6%

20%

5.0%

0.0%

0%

0 1 2 3+

Vehicles Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation Await Returning Commuter Before Evacuating 100%

80%

Percent of Households 57.7%

60%

42.3%

40%

20%

0%

Yes, would await return No, would evacuate Figure F11. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Evacuating Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Shelter in Place Characteristics 100%

88.6%

Percent of Households 80%

60%

40%

20%

11.4%

0%

Shelter Evacuate Figure F12. Shelter in Place Characteristics Shelter then Evacuate Characteristics 100%

80% 74.8%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

25.2%

20%

0%

Shelter, then Evacuate Evacuate Immediately Figure F13. Shelter in Place Characteristics - Staged Evacuation Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Shelter Locations 49%

50%

40%

Percent of Households 30%

22%

17%

20%

10%

5% 5%

2%

0%

Figure F14. Shelter Locations Households with Pets/Animals 100%

80%

72.5%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

27.5%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F15. Households with Pets/Animals Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals 80%

66%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

31%

20%

3%

0%

Take with me to a Shelter Take with me to Somewhere Leave Pet at Home Else Figure F16. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals Time to Prepare to Leave Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F17. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Commute Home From Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Travel Time (min)

Figure F18. Work/College to Home Travel Time Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F19. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Cell Phone Signal Reliability 100%

82.0%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

9.6%

5.4% 3.0%

0%

VERY RELIABLE TO RELIABLE FOR TEXT I DO NOT ALWAYS I DO NOT HAVE CELL RECEIVE TEXTS AND MESSAGES ONLY RECEIVE CELL SERVICE AT MY PHONE CALLS COMMUNICATIONS RESIDENCE AT MY RESIDENCE Figure F20. Cell Phone Signal Reliability Likelihood to Take Action Based Off 100%

Guidelines 80% 76.1%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

21.5%

20%

2.0% 0.4%

0%

HIGHLY LIKELY LIKELY NEITHER LIKELY NOR UNLIKELY/HIGHLY UNLIKELY UNLIKELY Figure F21. Likelihood to Take Action Based off Emergency Management Officials Guidelines Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Emergency Communication Method 100%

74%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

15%

20%

6%

3% 2%

0%

A SIREN SOUNDING A TEXT MESSAGE ALERT BROADCAST INFORMATION ON PHONE CALL/TEXT NEAR YOUR HOME FROM EMERGENCY ON TV TWITTER OR MESSAGE FROM OFFICIALS FACEBOOK/OTHER FAMILY, FRIEND, OR NEIGHBOR Figure F22. Emergency Communication Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ATTACHMENT A Demographic Survey Instrument Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant F18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

s89t9:u 9 t9 t89 8 9

vÿcMwxWNMy 0123456 789 98 9998  9997898998 9989889 9 99999  99

989999 9 9  9! 9 99 9999 9 99"#$%&$'(#)*'+,#$-$'($&./0$),$/1'.&$1'#2"#$%&$1%0$-1$1$%2'3-1$1'.&$1'#2 456)$%/&'/'#2$/7*'+,#$-$-1$&./0$)8 9 9  9989 9:998; 9 99

<= z{8 99l

>?@AÿCDEFÿCDGÿCH?EI PQRM SMTQRM UMVRWXMÿKZÿ[KQKM JKLMNO

\= }{8 89~ 9l?

]= 98 9 89 9899 9898 98l

>?@AÿCDEFÿCDGÿCH?EI J^_

`aJ

`bc__

SJdc Sef_

[eg

[_f_^

_ehb`

^e^_ÿJcÿPJc_

i_cJÿj^J^_k U_lme^_ÿJÿ[`n`_

o= 9999  9 9 899898  9l

>?@AÿCDEFÿCDGÿCH?EI p_[

^J U_lme^_ÿJÿ[`n`_

q= 989  8 98 9 9 l

>?@AÿCDEFÿCDGÿCH?EI J^_

`aJ

`bc__

SJdc Sef_

[eg

[_f_^

_ehb`

^e^_ÿJcÿPJc_

i_cJÿj^J^_k eÿaJdmUÿ_fnldn`_ÿrpÿrelplm_

eÿaJdmUÿ_fnldn`_ÿrpÿrd[

U_lme^_ÿJÿ[`n`_

01 NOFP6QF7IRSFT:6TK:F8<8IKKSFKUJ:FURF9VU<FV68<:V6KEW 2345ÿ789ÿ78ÿ739





































ÿÿ

 ÿÿ!

"5#$ÿ%7ÿ&' (%#78ÿ)

• +,-./01 21 XOFP6QF7IRSFT:6TK:FURFS68;FV68<:V6KEFVIJ:FIFQ6;YFIREZ6;F<[V66KF[67789:F9VI9FVI<F\::RF9:7T6;I;UKSFU7TI[9:EFE8:F96F9V:F*+,-./01FTIRE:7U[W 2345ÿ789ÿ78ÿ739 3ÿ45







ÿÿ

 ÿÿ!

• 67789:;<

=1 ]OFP6QF7IRSFT:6TK:FURF9V:FV68<:V6KEFR6;7IKKSF^E8;UR_FR6R/*+,-.F[6REU9U6R<`F[67789:F96FIFa6\bF6;F96F[6KK:_:F6RFIFEIUKSF\I<U<WFc 2345ÿ789ÿ78ÿ739 3ÿ45 "5#$ÿ%7ÿ&' (%#78ÿ>?

 "5#$ÿ%7ÿ&' (%#78ÿ@

 "5#$ÿ%7ÿ&' (%#78ÿAB

 "5#$ÿ%7ÿ&' (%#78ÿAA

ÿÿ "5#$ÿ%7ÿ&' (%#78ÿAC

 ÿÿ! "5#$ÿ%7ÿ&' (%#78ÿ>?

D6E:F6GFH;IJ:K L1 dOFHVURYUR_FI\689F:I[VF[67789:;bFV6QFE6:<F:I[VFT:;<6RF8<8IKKSF9;IJ:KF96FQ6;YF6;F[6KK:_:W 2345ÿ789ÿ78 ÿ739ÿ$ 4ÿ47M efg hijkelmnmio plqoÿ!irso hptrriuvÿrpÿwrpoÿtortio rsxyÿjsrz rwwfyopÿ{

"5#$ÿ%7ÿ&' (%#78ÿA?

D6E:F6GFH;IJ:K

012 GHIJK+JK.!LMN!OIO((MNPIQR!OISRKMRM!##TN!"#NQ+O##.U 3456ÿ89 ÿ89 ÿ84ÿ 5ÿ58

BVW DXYZ[B\]^]Y_ E`\a_ÿCYbc_ FX`dbbY=%ÿb`ÿeb`_ÿd_bdY_ EbcfgÿZcbh FbeeVg_`ÿ0 FbeeVg_`ÿ%

6ÿ8ÿ 89ÿ

!"#

002 GHIJK+JK.!LMN!OIO((MNPIQR!OISRKMRM!##TN!"#NQ+O##.U 3456ÿ89 ÿ89 ÿ84ÿ 5ÿ58

BVW DXYZ[B\]^]Y_ E`\a_ÿCYbc_ FX`dbbY=%ÿb`ÿeb`_ÿd_bdY_ EbcfgÿZcbh FbeeVg_`ÿ0 FbeeVg_`ÿ%

FbeeVg_`ÿ/

6ÿ8ÿ 89ÿ$

!"#

0%2 GHIJK+JK.!LMN!OIO((MNPIQR!OISRKMRM!##TN!"#NQ+O##.U 3456ÿ89 ÿ89 ÿ84ÿ 5ÿ58

BVW DXYZ[B\]^]Y_ E`\a_ÿCYbc_ FX`dbbY=%ÿb`ÿeb`_ÿd_bdY_ EbcfgÿZcbh FbeeVg_`ÿ0 FbeeVg_`ÿ%

FbeeVg_`ÿ/

FbeeVg_`ÿ>

6ÿ8ÿ 89ÿ&

!"#'()(*+,-##.

0/2 ijkH'Q(MOINJ(K!"!.PQM#JNN!+-((MNlkNN!"#I((Q+O##.U 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

0ÿ2345678ÿ9:ÿ;788

<=01ÿ2345678 00=00ÿ2345678 0<=%1ÿ2345678

%0=%0ÿ2345678

%<=/1ÿ2345678

/0=/0ÿ2345678

/<=>1ÿ2345678

>0=>0ÿ2345678

><=01ÿ2345678 00=00ÿ2345678 0<ÿ=ÿ0ÿ?95:

9@7:ÿ0ÿ?95:AÿB56ÿ;788ÿ6?C4ÿ0ÿ?95:ÿ00ÿ2345678 B76D774ÿ0ÿ?95:ÿ0<ÿ2345678ÿC4Eÿ0ÿ?95:ÿ/1ÿ2345678 B76D774ÿ0ÿ?95:ÿ/0ÿ2345678ÿC4Eÿ0ÿ?95:ÿ>0ÿ2345678 B76D774ÿ0ÿ?95:ÿ><ÿ2345678ÿC4Eÿ%ÿ?95:8 9@7:ÿ%ÿ?95:8 E7F;347ÿ69ÿ86C67

012 CDEFGHDIGHJKLMNOPQRSKDT

UVWXVÿYUWZ[ÿ\]ÿ^_`aÿWZbcVaÿ]_aÿd`Vbe\_Zÿf40:ÿ\bÿZgVaÿ6ÿh_`ab2 3456ÿ89ÿ 859ÿ



0 2 MNOijGSkJKLPjGlKJJGJmOJJkDjSn

!"#4ÿ9$%ÿ9ÿ9&"$'

ÿ)*+,-./ÿ01ÿ2.//

3405ÿ)*+,-./

0040 ÿ)*+,-./

03465ÿ)*+,-./

6046 ÿ)*+,-./

63475ÿ)*+,-./

7047 ÿ)*+,-./

73415ÿ)*+,-./

1041 ÿ)*+,-./

1345ÿ)*+,-./

04 ÿ)*+,-./

3ÿ4ÿ0ÿ80,1 09.1ÿ0ÿ80,1:ÿ;,-ÿ2.//ÿ-8<+ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ0 ÿ)*+,-./

.-=..+ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ03ÿ)*+,-./ÿ<+>ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ75ÿ)*+,-./

.-=..+ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ70ÿ)*+,-./ÿ<+>ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ1 ÿ)*+,-./

.-=..+ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ13ÿ)*+,-./ÿ<+>ÿ6ÿ80,1/

09.1ÿ6ÿ80,1/

>.?2*+.ÿ-0ÿ/-<-.

032 CDEFGHDIGHJKLMNOPQRSKDT

UVWXVÿYUWZ[ÿ\]ÿ^_`aÿWZbcVaÿ]_aÿd`Vbe\_Zÿf40:ÿ\bÿZgVaÿ6ÿh_`ab2 0@2 MNFijGSkJKLPjGlKJJGJmFJJkDjSn

!"#4ÿ9$%ÿ9ÿ9&"$'

ÿ)*+,-./ÿ01ÿ2.//

3405ÿ)*+,-./

0040 ÿ)*+,-./

03465ÿ)*+,-./

6046 ÿ)*+,-./

63475ÿ)*+,-./

7047 ÿ)*+,-./

73415ÿ)*+,-./

1041 ÿ)*+,-./

1345ÿ)*+,-./

04 ÿ)*+,-./

3ÿ4ÿ0ÿ80,1 09.1ÿ0ÿ80,1:ÿ;,-ÿ2.//ÿ-8<+ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ0 ÿ)*+,-./

.-=..+ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ03ÿ)*+,-./ÿ<+>ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ75ÿ)*+,-./

.-=..+ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ70ÿ)*+,-./ÿ<+>ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ1 ÿ)*+,-./

.-=..+ÿ0ÿ80,1ÿ13ÿ)*+,-./ÿ<+>ÿ6ÿ80,1/

09.1ÿ6ÿ80,1/

>.?2*+.ÿ-0ÿ/-<-.

0A2 CDEFGHDIGHJKLMNFPQRSKDT

UVWXVÿYUWZ[ÿ\]ÿ^_`aÿWZbcVaÿ]_aÿd`Vbe\_Zÿf46:ÿ\bÿZgVaÿ6ÿh_`ab2 3456ÿ89ÿ 859ÿB

0123456789461896 81 85544

 9:;<678=69>?@6AB9468C6234124D6=8>5E6BA6A246899>A416F;6A86A123456@8946G1896=816816?85544H

ÿÿÿ

ÿ!"#$%&'ÿ()ÿ*&

+,-ÿ!"#$%&'

,ÿ!"#$%&'

+,.-ÿ!"#$%&'

.,.ÿ!"#$%&'

.+,/-ÿ!"#$%&'

/,/ÿ!"#$%&'

/+,0-ÿ!"#$%&'

0,0ÿ!"#$%&'

0+,-ÿ!"#$%&'

,ÿ!"#$%&'

+ÿ,ÿÿ1($)

(2&)ÿÿ1($)3ÿ4$%ÿ*&ÿ%15#ÿÿ1($)ÿÿ!"#$%&'

4&%6&&#ÿÿ1($)ÿ+ÿ!"#$%&'ÿ5#7ÿÿ1($)ÿ/-ÿ!"#$%&'

4&%6&&#ÿÿ1($)ÿ/ÿ!"#$%&'ÿ5#7ÿÿ1($)ÿ0ÿ!"#$%&'

4&%6&&#ÿÿ1($)ÿ0+ÿ!"#$%&'ÿ5#7ÿ.ÿ1($)'

(2&)ÿ.ÿ1($)'

7&8*"#&ÿ%(ÿ'%5%&

.- IG6J3416K678>1L6G816M>4LAB8C69:;D6NO4?BGP67414 QRSTRÿUQSVWÿXYÿZ[\]ÿSV^_R]ÿY[]ÿ\R^aX[Vÿ,3ÿX^ÿ\VbR]ÿ.ÿc[\]^

. 9:K<678=69>?@6AB9468C6234124D6=8>5E6BA6A246899>A416FK6A86A123456@8946G1896=816816?85544H

ÿÿÿ

ÿ!"#$%&'ÿ()ÿ*&

+,-ÿ!"#$%&'

,ÿ!"#$%&'

+,.-ÿ!"#$%&'

.,.ÿ!"#$%&'

.+,/-ÿ!"#$%&'

/,/ÿ!"#$%&'

/+,0-ÿ!"#$%&'

0,0ÿ!"#$%&'

0+,-ÿ!"#$%&'

,ÿ!"#$%&'

+ÿ,ÿÿ1($)

(2&)ÿÿ1($)3ÿ4$%ÿ*&ÿ%15#ÿÿ1($)ÿÿ!"#$%&'

4&%6&&#ÿÿ1($)ÿ+ÿ!"#$%&'ÿ5#7ÿÿ1($)ÿ/-ÿ!"#$%&'

4&%6&&#ÿÿ1($)ÿ/ÿ!"#$%&'ÿ5#7ÿÿ1($)ÿ0ÿ!"#$%&'

4&%6&&#ÿÿ1($)ÿ0+ÿ!"#$%&'ÿ5#7ÿ.ÿ1($)'

(2&)ÿ.ÿ1($)'

7&8*"#&ÿ%(ÿ'%5%&

.. IG6J3416K678>1L6G816M>4LAB8C69:KD6NO4?BGP67414 QRSTRÿUQSVWÿXYÿZ[\]ÿSV^_R]ÿY[]ÿ\R^aX[Vÿ,.3ÿX^ÿ\VbR]ÿ.ÿc[\]^

012 ABCD789E7:FGH7IJ:579K734523@5L7E9F6M7JI7I3=57?9::FI527NC7I97I234567H9:57O29:7E92=7927G9665@5P 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

0ÿ

00ÿ

01ÿ

11ÿ

1ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ

!ÿÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿÿÿÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿ1ÿÿ$&ÿÿÿÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿ0ÿ

!ÿ0ÿ

&'ÿÿ$

02 QO7R4527S789F2T7O927UF5TIJ9K7ABCL7VW5GJOX78525 YZ[\Zÿ]Y[^_ÿaÿbcdeÿ[^fgZeÿaceÿhdZfic^ÿj1"ÿfÿd^kZeÿ0ÿlcdef2 (6)*ÿ+8ÿ,- .+)89ÿ/0 123456789:57;29:7<92=>?9665@5 02 ABmD789E7:FGH7IJ:579K734523@5L7E9F6M7JI7I3=57?9::FI527Nm7I97I234567H9:57O29:7E92=7927G9665@5P 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

0ÿ

00ÿ

01ÿ

11ÿ

1ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ

!ÿÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿÿÿÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿ1ÿÿ$&ÿÿÿÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿ0ÿ

!ÿ0ÿ

&'ÿÿ$

02 QO7R4527S789F2T7O927UF5TIJ9K7ABmL7VW5GJOX78525 YZ[\Zÿ]Y[^_ÿaÿbcdeÿ[^fgZeÿaceÿhdZfic^ÿj"ÿfÿd^kZeÿ0ÿlcdef2

012 +,-./012/3456/7839/1:/;<9=;>9?/214@A/87/7;B9/C133479=/D-/71/7=;<9@/6139/E=13/21=B/1=/51@@9>9F 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

0ÿ

00ÿ

0ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!#ÿ$ÿÿ!%ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿ0ÿ!

"ÿ0ÿ!

'(ÿÿ%

0)2 GE/H<9=/-/014=I/E1=/J49I781:/+,-?/KL958EM/09=9 NOPQOÿRNPSTÿUVÿWXYZÿPS[\OZÿVXZÿ]YO[^UXSÿ*0#ÿU[ÿYS_OZÿ0ÿXYZ[2 0*2 +,a./012/3456/7839/1:/;<9=;>9?/214@A/87/7;B9/C133479=/Da/71/7=;<9@/6139/E=13/21=B/1=/51@@9>9F 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

0ÿ

00ÿ

0ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!#ÿ$ÿÿ!%ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿ0ÿ!

"ÿ0ÿ!

'(ÿÿ%

2 GE/H<9=/-/014=I/E1=/J49I781:/+,a?/KL958EM/09=9 NOPQOÿRNPSTÿUVÿWXYZÿPS[\OZÿVXZÿ]YO[^UXSÿ*#ÿU[ÿYS_OZÿ0ÿXYZ[2

012 CDEF:G8H:IJKL:67I3:89:5<325A3M:H8J;N:76:65>3:@8IIJ632:OE:68:625<3;:L8I3:P28I:H82>:82:K8;;3A3Q 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

1ÿ

111ÿ

1ÿ

1ÿ

0ÿ

010ÿ

0ÿ

1ÿ

ÿ

1ÿ

ÿÿ1ÿ

!ÿ1ÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿ1ÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿ1ÿÿ$&ÿ1ÿÿ0ÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿ01ÿÿ$&ÿ1ÿÿÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿ

!ÿÿ

&'ÿÿ$

02 RP:S<32:T:G8J2U:P82:VJ3U6789:CDEM:W43K7PX:G323 YZ[\Zÿ]Y[^_ÿaÿbcdeÿ[^fgZeÿaceÿhdZfic^ÿj"ÿfÿd^kZeÿÿlcdef2 (6)*ÿ+8ÿ,- .+)89ÿ/0 12345256789:68:;35<3:=82>?@8;;3A3 002 mnDmF:o4428p7I563;X:L8H:IJKL:67I3:H8J;N:76:65>3:@8IIJ632:Om:68:K8I4;363:42345256789:P82:;35<79A:H82>:82:K8;;3A3:42782:68:U652679A:6L3:6274:L8I3Q 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

1ÿ

111ÿ

1ÿ

1ÿ

0ÿ

010ÿ

0ÿ

1ÿ

ÿ

1ÿ

ÿÿ1ÿ

!ÿ1ÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿ1ÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿ1ÿÿ$&ÿ1ÿÿ0ÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿ01ÿÿ$&ÿ1ÿÿÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿ

!ÿÿ

&'ÿÿ$

02 RP:S<32:T:G8J2U:P82:VJ3U6789:mnDmM:W43K7PX:G323 YZ[\Zÿ]Y[^_ÿaÿbcdeÿ[^fgZeÿaceÿhdZfic^ÿ11"ÿfÿd^kZeÿÿlcdef2 (6)*ÿ+8ÿ,- .+)89ÿ0B 12345256789:68:;35<3:=82>?@8;;3A3

012 DEFDG<H664:I9J785=K<L:M<JNOL<89J5<M:N=P<98<87@5<B:JJN854<QD<8:<O:J6=585<645674789:;<R:4<=57>9;C<M:4@<:4<O:==5C5<649:4<8:<S87489;C<8L5<8496<L:J5T 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

1ÿÿÿ

ÿ

1ÿ

ÿ

1ÿ

0ÿ

001ÿ

0ÿ

1ÿ

1ÿ

111ÿ

1ÿÿÿ

!ÿÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ0ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿ0ÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿ

!ÿÿ

&'ÿÿ$

02 UR<V>54<W<X:N4S<R:4<YN5S89:;<DEFDZ<[65O9RK<X545

\]^_]ÿ\^abÿcdÿefghÿ^aij]hÿdfhÿkg]ilcfaÿ"ÿciÿgam]hÿÿnfghi2 0(2 DEFWG<H664:I9J785=K<L:M<JNOL<89J5<M:N=P<98<87@5<B:JJN854<QW<8:<O:J6=585<645674789:;<R:4<=57>9;C<M:4@<:4<O:==5C5<649:4<8:<S87489;C<8L5<8496<L:J5T 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

1ÿÿÿ

ÿ

1ÿ

ÿ

1ÿ

0ÿ

001ÿ

0ÿ

1ÿ

1ÿ

111ÿ

1ÿÿÿ

!ÿÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ0ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿ0ÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿ

!ÿÿ

&'ÿÿ$

0)2 UR<V>54<W<X:N4S<R:4<YN5S89:;<DEFWZ<[65O9RK<X545

\]^_]ÿ\^abÿcdÿefghÿ^aij]hÿdfhÿkg]ilcfaÿ"ÿciÿgam]hÿÿnfghi2

• 6+,ÿ-8ÿ./ 0-+89ÿ12 345674789:;<8:<=57>5<?:4@AB:==5C5

012 )*+),-.//0123456789-:1;-4<=:-6347-;1<8>-36-65?7-@144<670-A)-61-=14/8767-/07/505631B-C10-875D3BE-;10?-10-=1887E7-/0310-61-F65063BE-6:7-603/-:147G 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

0ÿ

00ÿ

0ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!#ÿ$ÿÿ!%ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿ0ÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿ0ÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!

'(ÿÿ%

2 HC-ID70-J-K1<0F-C10-L<7F631B-)*+)M-N/7=3C9-K707 OPQRPÿSOQTUÿVWÿXYZ[ÿQT\]P[ÿWY[ÿ^ZP\_VYTÿ#ÿV\ÿZT`P[ÿÿaYZ[\2

2 )*+J,-.//0123456789-:1;-4<=:-6347-;1<8>-36-65?7-@144<670-AJ-61-=14/8767-/07/505631B-C10-875D3BE-;10?-10-=1887E7-/0310-61-F65063BE-6:7-603/-:147G 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

0ÿ

00ÿ

0ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!#ÿ$ÿÿ!%ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿ0ÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿ0ÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!

'(ÿÿ%

2 HC-ID70-J-K1<0F-C10-L<7F631B-)*+JM-N/7=3C9-K707 OPQRPÿSOQTUÿVWÿXYZ[ÿQT\]P[ÿWY[ÿ^ZP\_VYTÿ#ÿV\ÿZT`P[ÿÿaYZ[\2

012 BCDEF:G4428H7I563;J:K8L:IMNK:67I3:L8M;O:76:65>3:@8IIM632:PE:68:N8I4;363:42345256789:Q82:;35<79A:L82>:82:N8;;3A3:42782:68:R652679A:6K3:6274:K8I3S 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

1ÿ

11ÿ

10ÿ

00ÿ

0ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ

!ÿÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿÿÿÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿ1ÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ0ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿ0ÿÿ$&ÿÿ

!ÿÿ

&'ÿÿ$

002 TQ:U<32:V:W8M2R:Q82:XM3R6789:BCDEY:Z43N7QJ:W323

[\]^\ÿ_[]`aÿbcÿdefgÿ]`hi\gÿcegÿjf\hkbe`ÿ1"ÿbhÿf`l\gÿÿmefgh2 (6)*ÿ+8ÿ,- .+)89ÿ/0 12345256789:68:;35<3:=82>?@8;;3A3 02 BCDBF:G4428H7I563;J:K8L:IMNK:67I3:L8M;O:76:65>3:@8IIM632:PB:68:N8I4;363:42345256789:Q82:;35<79A:L82>:82:N8;;3A3:42782:68:R652679A:6K3:6274:K8I3S 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

1ÿ

11ÿ

10ÿ

00ÿ

0ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ

!ÿÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿÿÿÿ

1. %ÿÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿ1ÿÿ$&ÿÿÿ0ÿ

1. %ÿÿÿ0ÿÿ$&ÿÿ

!ÿÿ

&'ÿÿ$

02 TQ:U<32:V:W8M2R:Q82:XM3R6789:BCDBY:Z43N7QJ:W323

[\]^\ÿ_[]`aÿbcÿdefgÿ]`hi\gÿcegÿjf\hkbe`ÿ"ÿbhÿf`l\gÿÿmefgh2

012 +,-./01223456789:;<0=4>07?@=0967:0>4?;A069098B:0C477?9:30D.0940@472;:9:023:2838964E0F430;:8G6EH0>43B0430@4;;:H:0236430940I98396EH09=:093620=47:J 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

0ÿ

00ÿ

0ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!#ÿ$ÿÿ!%ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿ0ÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿ0ÿÿ%'ÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!

'(ÿÿ%

0)2 KF0LG:30.0M4?3I0F430N?:I964E0+,-.O0P2:@6F<0M:3:

QRSTRÿUQSVWÿXYÿZ[\]ÿSV^_R]ÿY[]ÿ\R^aX[Vÿ#ÿX^ÿ\VbR]ÿÿc[\]^2 0*2 +,-d/01223456789:;<0=4>07?@=0967:0>4?;A069098B:0C477?9:30Dd0940@472;:9:023:2838964E0F430;:8G6EH0>43B0430@4;;:H:0236430940I98396EH09=:093620=47:J 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

ÿ

0ÿ

00ÿ

0ÿ

ÿ

ÿÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!#ÿ$ÿÿ!%ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿÿÿ%'ÿÿ!ÿ0ÿ

$&ÿÿ!ÿ0ÿÿ%'ÿÿ!

"ÿÿ!

'(ÿÿ%

2 KF0LG:30.0M4?3I0F430N?:I964E0+,-dO0P2:@6F<0M:3:

QRSTRÿUQSVWÿXYÿZ[\]ÿSV^_R]ÿY[]ÿ\R^aX[Vÿ#ÿX^ÿ\VbR]ÿÿc[\]^2

012 >?@AB91CCD5E3F74<8G9H5I9F;JH943F<9I5;82934947K<9L5FF;4<D9MA9459J5FC8<4<9CD<C7D743569N5D98<7O36P9I5DK95D9J588<P<9CD35D9459=47D436P94H<94D3C9H5F<Q 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

0ÿÿÿ

1ÿ

1110ÿ

1ÿ

10ÿ

ÿ

10ÿ

ÿ

10ÿ

0ÿ

0100ÿ

0ÿÿ1ÿ

!ÿ1ÿ"ÿ#ÿÿ $ÿ1ÿÿ10ÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿ1ÿÿ$&ÿ1ÿÿÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿ1ÿÿ$&ÿ1ÿÿ0ÿ

1. %ÿ1ÿÿÿÿ$&ÿÿ

!ÿÿ

&'ÿÿ$

02 RN9SO<D9T9U5;D=9N5D9:;<=43569>?@AV9WC<J3NG9U<D<

XYZ[Yÿ\XZ]^ÿ_`ÿabcdÿZ]efYdÿbdÿgcYeh_b]ÿ1"ÿ_eÿc]iYdÿÿjbcde2 (6)*ÿ+8ÿ,- .+)89ÿ/0 12234356789:;<=4356=

02 >>B9RN9G5;9I<D<972O3=<29kG985J7897;4H5D343<=9459<O7J;74<V9H5I9F;JH943F<9I5;82934947K<94H<9H5;=<H5829459C7JK9J854H36PV9F<23J74356=V9=<J;D<94H<9H5;=<V9857294H<9J7DV 7629J5FC8<4<9CD<C7D74356=9CD35D9459<O7J;7436P94H<97D<7Q 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿ $ÿ10ÿ

10ÿ

10ÿ

ÿÿÿ1ÿ

1ÿÿÿ1ÿÿ10ÿ

1ÿÿ1ÿÿÿ1ÿÿÿ

1ÿÿ1ÿÿÿ1ÿÿ0ÿ

1ÿÿÿÿÿÿ

ÿÿÿÿÿ10ÿ

ÿÿ1ÿÿÿÿÿÿ

ÿÿ1ÿÿÿÿÿ0ÿ

ÿÿÿÿÿÿ

ÿÿÿÿÿ10ÿ

ÿÿ1ÿÿÿÿÿÿ

ÿÿ1ÿÿÿÿÿ0ÿ

ÿÿÿÿÿÿ

ÿÿÿÿÿ10ÿ

ÿÿ1ÿÿÿÿÿÿ

ÿÿ1ÿÿÿÿÿ0ÿ

ÿÿÿÿÿ0ÿ

0ÿÿÿ0ÿÿÿ

0ÿÿ1ÿÿÿÿ

!ÿÿ

%ÿÿ!$'$

&'ÿÿ$

012 STLUVJWLXLYQNWOLTQWLMNJOKPQRLZZ[L\]J^PT_LYJWJ

%ÿ$ `ÿ!ÿ)ÿ "ÿ!ÿa" ÿHH?ÿ"ÿ ÿÿ"2 002 ZbcLIdJeOJLO]J^PT_LKfJLRNghJWLQTL]JQ]dJLPRL_QNWLfQNOJfQdiLjfQLWJkNPWJLlNR^KPQRedLQWLmWeRO]QWKeKPQRLRJJiOLPRLeRLJVe^NeKPQRn 3456ÿ89 ÿ89 ÿ84ÿ 5ÿ58

H o p 1 >ÿ ÿ1 F"

>&ÿF"A7

B&ÿ5&&""$ÿ7&

5#$ &

9

02 \]J^PT_LqUKfJWqLmWeRO]QWKeKPQRLrJJiLsJdQj 02 ZtcLIdJeOJL^fQQOJLQRJLQTLKfJLTQddQjPRun 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿÿÿ!ÿ"ÿ##$"ÿÿ%&ÿ'2

ÿÿ%&ÿ(  )ÿ ÿ#ÿÿ"ÿ##$"ÿ2

• &ÿÿ+

0,2 ZvwcLxgJWuJR^_LQTTP^PedOLeiVPOJL_QNLKQLOfJdKJWyPRy]de^JLPRLeRLJgJWuJR^_LhJ^eNOJL_QNLeWJLRQKLPRLKfJLeWJeLQTLWPOzcL{QNdiL_QNn 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

+-./0.12324/56.

.756850.

• .6/3.ÿ09ÿ+050.

0:2 ZvscLxgJWuJR^_LQTTP^PedOLeiVPOJL_QNLKQLOfJdKJWyPRy]de^JLRQjLPRLeRLJgJWuJR^_LeRiL]QOOPhd_LJVe^NeKJLdeKJWLjfPdJL]JQ]dJLPRLQKfJWLeWJeOLeWJLeiVPOJiLKQLJVe^NeKJLRQjc

{QNdiL_QNn 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

+-./0.12324/56.

.756850.

• .6/3.ÿ09ÿ+050.

;2 ZvlcLxgJWuJR^_LQTTP^PedOLeiVPOJL_QNLKQLJVe^NeKJLiNJLKQLeRLJgJWuJR^_cL{fJWJLjQNdiL_QNLJVe^NeKJLKQ}

3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

5ÿ1./507.<+ÿ91ÿ=1.3*<+ÿ-9>.

5ÿ1.6.4093ÿ6.30.1 5ÿ-90./?ÿ>90./ÿ91ÿ65>4@1983*

5ÿ+.693*A+.5+935/ÿ-9>.

B98/*ÿ390ÿ.756850.

• 93C0ÿD39B 90-.1ÿE+(&!)ÿFG

• .6/3.ÿ09ÿ+050.

H2 lPddLPRLUmYx~LeROjJWOLTQWLkNJOKPQRLZvl IJKLMNJOKPQRO

012 WXYZ&[+&S+(&\U]$&U,S&^$%_)`&U,ab+P&U,*OUc_)`d 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84



 6ÿ8ÿ 89ÿ

ÿ!ÿ!"! 6ÿ8ÿ 89ÿ

1. $%&'($)%*+,)

0-2 WXeZ&f\U%&%S^$&+g&^$%_)`&U,ab+P&U,*OUc_)`&a+&S+(&\U]$d 34 56ÿ4ÿ44ÿ4 

6

"!

78

89!

8



:<

6"!

96

!:8ÿ="ÿ9!>"="ÿ?@0ABCDÿ70EFGH

!:8ÿ"86ÿ9!>"="ÿ?@0ABCDÿ70EFGH

ÿ!ÿ!"!

./012

1. $%&'($)%*+,)

0I2 WXTZ&f\U%&h+(ca&S+(&a+&h*%\&S+(P&^$%_)`&U,ab+P&U,*OUc_)`&*g&S+(&\Ua&%+&$]UR(U%$d 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

!"<ÿ9!ÿJ!:ÿ=ÿ!ÿ"ÿ:!8

!"<ÿ9!ÿJ!:ÿ=ÿ=J:8ÿ

"Kÿ9!ÿ"!ÿ:= 6ÿ8ÿ 89ÿ

ÿ!ÿ!"! 6ÿ8ÿ 89ÿ

1. $%&'($)%*+,)

0L2 WX[Z&[+&S+(&\U]$&)(gg*R*$,%&P++O&*,&S+(P&]$\*Rc$_)`&%+&$]UR(U%$&h*%\&S+(P&^$%_)`&U,ab+P&U,*OUc_)`d 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84





JÿMÿ"ÿ!8"8

ÿ!ÿ!"!

./012 NO$PQ$,RS&T+OO(,*RU%*+,)

002 WiYZ&Y%&S+(P&^cUR$&+g&P$)*a$,R$j&\+h&P$c*Ukc$&*)&S+(P&R$cc&^\+,$&)*Q,Ucd 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

K8ÿ8"7ÿ!ÿ8Kÿ!V!ÿ"ÿ9:ÿ"

8"7ÿ;8ÿ!V!ÿ="6ÿ

ÿÿ!ÿ"J"ÿ8Kÿÿ==M"!ÿ"!ÿ=ÿ8

ÿÿ!ÿ:"Kÿÿ8Kÿ"!ÿ=ÿ8

012 +,-./012342567/1858421259/:;;<6<8=>/<5/7:?3/>9892/187/>25@/92A9/12>>842>B/><1<=83/9:/CD-0E/C=239>B/F<9G/212342567/@<3269<:5>/;:3/9G2/H?I=<6/<;/8/38@<:=:4<68=

212342567/F232/9:/:66?3/89/J:1856G2/K28L/M?6=283/K:F23/K=859./N:F/=<L2=7/F:?=@/7:?/I2/9:/98L2/869<:5/:5/9G2>2/@<3269<:5>B/<;/7:?/3262<O2@/9G2/12>>842P 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿ



ÿÿÿ



ÿ

02 +,J./QG<6G/:;/9G2/;:==:F<54/212342567/6:11?5<689<:5/129G:@>/@:/7:?/9G<5L/<>/1:>9/=<L2=7/9:/8=239/7:?/89/7:?3/32><@2562P 3456ÿ89 ÿ89ÿ84

ÿÿÿÿÿ 

ÿ!ÿ ÿ" ÿ #ÿ""#

ÿ$#ÿÿ

ÿ$#ÿÿ%

" ÿÿ&ÿÿ"#$

'ÿ#(!ÿ ÿ" ÿ" )ÿ")ÿÿ$



0*2 R<==/<5/STN0E/85>F23>/;:3/U?2>9<:5/+,J

APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 indicates that the existing Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Access Control Points (ACPs) identified by the offsite agencies should be used in the evacuation simulation modeling. The traffic and access control plans for the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) are described in the Somervell County Emergency Evacuation Traffic management Plan, dated April 2013 and the shapefiles (of TCP/ACP locations) provided directly by Hood County.

These plans were reviewed and the TCPs and ACPs were modeled accordingly.

G.1 Traffic Control and Access Control Points As discussed in Section 9, TCPs at intersections (which are controlled) are modeled as actuated signals. If an intersection has a pretimed signal, stop, or yield control, and the intersection is identified as a TCP, the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system, in accordance with Section 3.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. TCPs at existing actuated traffic signalized intersections were essentially left alone except where modifications to green time allocation were deemed necessary.

It is assumed that ACPs will be established within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) to discourage through travelers from using major through routes which traverse the EPZ.

According to the counties emergency plans, the law enforcement coordinators will coordinate ACP activation.

As discussed in Section 3.10, external traffic was considered on the major routes that traverse the study area - US 377 and US 67 - in this analysis. It can be seen, in Figure G1, that the majority of the TCPs/ACPs are along US 67 and there are two are located on US 377. The generation of these external trips (4,256 vehicles during day conditions, 1,702 vehicles in evening conditions) ceased at 120 minutes after the ATE in the simulation to represent the diversion of traffic at these TCP locations.

This study did not identify any additional intersections that should be designated as TCP or ACP, as there is limited congestion along US 67 and significant congestion on US 377. Any additional TCP/ACP would not be beneficial. The existing county traffic management plans are adequate.

Table K1 provides the number of nodes with each control type. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a TCP or ACP, the control type is indicated as a TCP/ACP in Table K1. The TCPs and ACPs within the study area are mapped as green dots in Figure G1.

G.2 Analysis of Key TCP and ACP Locations As discussed in Section 5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, manual traffic control (MTC) at intersections could benefit from ETE analysis. The TCP and ACP locations contained within the TMP were analyzed to determine key locations where MTC would be most useful and can be readily implemented. As previously mentioned, signalized intersections that were actuated based on field data collection were essentially left as actuated traffic signals in the model, with Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

modifications to green time allocation as needed. Other controlled intersections (pretimed signals, stop signs and yield signs) were changed to actuated traffic signals to represent the MTC that would be implemented according to the traffic management plan.

Table G1 shows a list of the intersections that were identified as TCPs or ACPs in the TMP that were not previously actuated signals, including the type of control that currently exists at each location. To determine the impact of MTC at these locations, a summer, midweek, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 1) evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) was simulated wherein these intersections were left as is (without MTC). The results were compared to the results presented in Section 7. There was no difference in the 90th and 100th percentile ETEs, when MTC was not present at these intersections. The remaining TCPs and ACPs were left as actuated signals in the model and, therefore, had no impact to ETE.

As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 78, the southern portion of the EPZ experiences little traffic congestion. As such, the TCPs and ACPs in the southern portion of the EPZ do very little to help the ETE. The Hood County TMP does not have many TCP/ACPs designated in the northern portion of the EPZ, most are located within the Shadow Region north of the plant, so removing them do very little to help the ETE. In addition, the northeastern and northwestern portion of the EPZ experiences significant traffic congestion. Heavy traffic flows exist in both the east and west directions as vehicles evacuate the area. When heavy traffic persists in competing directions, MTC provides little to no benefit since both approaches need equal amounts of green time. As a result, the TCPs and ACPs in the northeastern and northwestern portion of the EPZ do very little to help the ETE as well.

In addition, traffic congestion clears prior to the completion of trip generation. The 100th percentile ETE is dictated by mobilization (plus 10 minutes to travel to EPZ boundary). As such, the impact of MTC at TCPs and ACPs will have no impact on the 100th percentile ETE.

While TCPs and ACPs are not necessary to evacuate the EPZ expediently, staffing these locations does still provide value during an evacuation such as guiding those evacuees who are not familiar with the area and serving as fixed point surveillance (if there is an incident on one of the major evacuation routes).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G1 List of Key TCP/ACP Locations TCP/ACP UNITES Node # Previous Control Hood County 01 255 Stop Control Hood County 02/Somervell County 01 592 No Control Hood County 03/Somervell County 02 292 Stop Control Hood County 05 287 No Control Hood County 06 207 No Control Hood County 10 689 No Control Hood County 11 1146 No Control Hood County 12/Somervell County 03 595 No Control Hood County 13 580 No Control Hood County 14/ Somervell County 04 587 No Control Hood County 15/Somervell County 05 300 No Control Hood County 16 20 Stop Control Somervell County 06 736 No Control Somervell County 07 744 No Control Somervell County 08 768 No Control Somervell County 09 323 Stop Control Somervell County 10 342 No Control Somervell County 11 364 No Control Somervell County 12 367 No Control Somervell County 13 723 No Control Somervell County 14 365 No Control Somervell County 15 392 No Control Somervell County 16 336 No Control Somervell County 17 385 Stop Control Somervell County 18 338 Stop Control Somervell County 19 588 No Control Somervell County 20 333 Stop Control Somervell County 21 1066 No Control Somervell County 22 591 No Control Somervell County 23 958 No Control Somervell County 24 379 Stop Control Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Points for the CPNPP Site Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant G4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX H Evacuation Regions

H EVACUATION REGIONS This appendix presents the evacuation percentages for each Evacuation Region (Table H1 through Table H3) and maps of all Evacuation Regions (Figure H1 through Figure H92). The percentages presented in these tables are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 7 of Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 21.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions R01 through R33 Radial Regions Site PAR Zone Region Central Description CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H GL TO Sector R01 N/A 2Mile Region 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R02 N/A 5Mile Region 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R03 N/A Full EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H GL TO Sector R04 A 168.75 - 191.24 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R05 B 191.25 - 213.74 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R06 C 213.75 - 236.24 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R07 D 236.25 - 258.74 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R08 E 258.75 - 281.24 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R09 F 281.25 - 303.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R10 G 303.75 - 326.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R11 H, J 326.25 - 11.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R12 K 11.25 - 33.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R13 L 33.75 - 56.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R14 M 56.25 - 78.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R15 N 78.75 - 101.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R16 P 101.25 - 123.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R17 Q, R 123.75 - 168.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H GL TO Sector R18 A 168.75 - 191.24 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R19 B 191.25 - 213.74 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R20 C 213.75 - 236.24 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R21 D 236.25 - 258.74 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R22 E 258.75 - 281.24 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R23 F 281.25 - 303.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R24 G 303.75 - 326.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R25 H 326.25 - 348.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R26 J 348.75 - 11.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R27 K 11.25 - 33.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R28 L 33.75 - 56.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20%

R29 M 56.25 - 78.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R30 N 78.75 - 101.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R31 P 101.25 - 123.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100%

R32 Q 123.75 - 146.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100%

R33 R 146.25 - 168.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100%

Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H2. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions R34 through R63 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H GL TO Sector R34 A 168.75 - 191.24 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R35 B 191.25 - 213.74 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R36 C, D 213.75 - 258.74 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R37 E 258.75 - 281.24 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R38 F 281.25 - 303.74 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R39 G 303.75 - 326.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R40 H 326.25 - 348.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R41 J 348.75 - 11.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R42 K 11.25 - 33.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R43 L 33.75 - 56.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R44 M, N 56.25 - 101.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R45 P 101.25 - 123.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R46 Q 123.75 - 146.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R47 R 146.25 - 168.74 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H GL TO Sector R48 A 168.75 - 191.24 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100%

R49 B 191.25 - 213.74 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R50 C 213.75 - 236.24 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R51 D 236.25 - 258.74 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R52 E 258.75 - 281.24 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R53 F 281.25 - 303.74 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R54 G 303.75 - 326.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R55 H 326.25 - 348.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R56 J 348.75 - 11.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R57 K 11.25 - 33.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R58 L 33.75 - 56.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20%

R59 M 56.25 - 78.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R60 N 78.75 - 101.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100%

R61 P 101.25 - 123.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100%

R62 Q 123.75 - 146.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100%

R63 R 146.25 - 168.74 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100%

Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H3. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions R64 through R92 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles (3 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H GL TO Sector R64 N/A 5Mile Region 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R65 A 168.75 - 191.24 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R66 B 191.25 - 213.74 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R67 C 213.75 - 236.24 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R68 D 236.25 - 258.74 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R69 E 258.75 - 281.24 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R70 F 281.25 - 303.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R71 G 303.75 - 326.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R72 H, J 326.25 - 11.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R73 K 11.25 - 33.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R74 L 33.75 - 56.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R75 M 56.25 - 78.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R76 N 78.75 - 101.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R77 P 101.25 - 123.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R78 Q, R 123.75 - 168.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zones(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles (5 Sector Groups)

Site PAR Zone Wind Direction From Region Central (Degrees) CP 1A 1B 1C 1D 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2J 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H GL TO Sector N/A N/A 5Mile Region Refer to Region R64 R79 A 168.75 - 191.24 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R80 B 191.25 - 213.74 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R81 C, D 213.75 - 258.74 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R82 E 258.75 - 281.24 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R83 F 281.25 - 303.74 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R84 G 303.75 - 326.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R85 H 326.25 - 348.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R86 J 348.75 - 11.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R87 K 11.25 - 33.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R88 L 33.75 - 56.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R89 M, N 56.25 - 101.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R90 P 101.25 - 123.74 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R91 Q 123.75 - 146.24 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R92 R 146.25 - 168.74 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zones(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate1

1. Twenty percent (20%) of population in these Zones will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR-7002, Rev. 1. Once 90% of the 2-Mile Region has evacuated, the remaining population in these Zones will evacuate.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H1. Region R01 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H2. Region R02 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H3. Region R03 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H4. Region R04 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H5. Region R05 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H7. Region R07 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H10. Region R10 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H12. Region R12 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H13. Region R13 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H16. Region R16 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H17. Region R17 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H18. Region R18 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H19. Region R19 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H20. Region R20 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H22. Region R22 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H23. Region R23 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H24. Region R24 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H25. Region R25 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H26. Region R26 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H27. Region R27 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H28. Region R28 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H29. Region R29 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H30. Region R30 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H31. Region R31 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H32. Region R32 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H33. Region R33 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H34. Region R34 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H35. Region R35 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H36. Region R36 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H37. Region R37 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H38. Region R38 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H39. Region R39 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H40. Region R40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H41. Region R41 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H42. Region R42 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H43. Region R43 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H44. Region R44 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H45. Region R45 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H46. Region R46 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H50 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H47. Region R47 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H48. Region R48 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H49. Region R49 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H50. Region R50 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H51. Region R51 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H52. Region R52 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H53. Region R53 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H54. Region R54 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H55. Region R55 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H56. Region R56 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H60 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H57. Region R57 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H58. Region R58 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H59. Region R59 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H60. Region R60 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H61. Region R61 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H62. Region R62 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H63. Region R63 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H64. Region R64 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H65. Region R65 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H66. Region R66 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H70 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H67. Region R67 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H68. Region R68 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H69. Region R69 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H70. Region R70 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H71. Region R71 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H72. Region R72 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H73. Region R73 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H74. Region R74 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H75. Region R75 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H76. Region R76 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H80 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H77. Region R77 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H78. Region R78 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H79. Region R79 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H80. Region R80 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H81. Region R81 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H82. Region R82 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H83. Region R83 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H84. Region R84 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H85. Region R85 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H86. Region R86 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H90 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H87. Region R87 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H88. Region R88 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H89. Region R89 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H93 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H90. Region R90 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H94 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H91. Region R91 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H95 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H92. Region R92 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant H96 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX J Representative Inputs to and Outputs from the DYNEV II System

J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM This appendix presents data input to and output from the DYNEV II System.

Table J1 provides source (vehicle loading) and destination information for several roadway segments (links) in the analysis network. In total, there are a total of 312 source links (origins) in the model. The source links are shown as centroid points in Figure J1. On average, evacuees travel a straightline distance of 7.26 miles to exit the network.

Table J2 provides network-wide statistics (average travel time, average delay time1, average speed and number of vehicles) for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) for each scenario. As expected, Scenarios 2, 4, 7 and 9, which are rain scenarios, exhibit the slowest average speed and longest average travel times. Scenario 11 (special event) has a lower networkwide average speed and higher networkwide average travel time when compared with Scenario 3 (summer, weekend, midday, good weather). Scenario 12 (roadway impact) has a lower networkwide average speed and higher networkwide average travel time when compared with Scenario 1 (summer, weekday, midday, good weather).

Table J3 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes -

US 377, US 67, TX 144, FM 4, FM 56, FM 51 and FM 205 - for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figures 73 through 78, congestion persists on US 377 Northbound (NB) within the EPZ for about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE). As such, this route has the slowest average speeds of all routes.

Table J4 provides the number of vehicles discharged and the cumulative percent of total vehicles discharged for each link exiting the analysis network, for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. Refer to the figures in Appendix K for a map showing the geographic location of each link.

Figure J2 through Figure J13 plot the trip generation time versus the ETE for each of the 12 Scenarios considered. The distance between the trip generation and ETE curves is the travel time. Plots of trip generation versus ETE are indicative of the level of traffic congestion during evacuation. For low population density sites, the curves are close together, indicating short travel times and minimal traffic congestion. For higher population density sites, the curves are farther apart indicating longer travel times and the presence of traffic congestion.

As seen in Figure J2 through Figure J13, the curves are spatially separated as a result of the traffic congestion in the EPZ which continues until 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes following the ATE, For Scenarios 1 through Scenario 10 (nonspecial scenarios, Figure J2 through Figure J11, the curves are spatially separated for about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes and then become close together as a result of the reduced traffic congestion in the EPZ after this time (discussed in detail in Section 7.3). For Scenarios 11 (Special Event) and 12 (Roadway Impact), the curves do not come together as congestion with the EPZ dictates the 100th percentile ETE and not the mobilization time, as discussed in Section 75.

1 Computed as the difference of the average travel time and the average ideal travel time under free flow condition.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Link Entering Directional Destination Destination Up node Down node Number Network Preference Nodes Capacity on this Link 8285 1,275 373 322 321 84 S 8293 1,700 8933 1,275 8637 1,700 401 334 333 145 SE 8630 1,275 8607 1,700 8706 1,275 604 442 443 142 NE 8359 1,700 8103 2,850 790 583 633 180 SE 8637 1,700 936 703 704 14 NE 8706 1,275 1080 922 311 28 S 8933 1,275 8285 1,275 1260 1035 657 28 SW 8293 1,700 8637 1,700 1451 1189 334 187 SE 8630 1,275 8607 1,700 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03)

Scenario 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NetworkWide Average 2.8 3.3 3.3 3.9 3.1 2.7 3.3 3.2 3.7 3.1 4.0 3.6 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 1.7 2.2 2.2 2.8 1.9 1.5 2.1 2.1 2.6 1.9 2.9 2.5 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 21.6 18.1 18.0 15.5 19.7 22.7 18.4 18.5 16.1 19.6 15.0 16.7 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 38,635 38,731 40,192 40,295 35,451 37,085 37,195 40,246 40,387 36,711 43,414 38,648 Exiting Network Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1)

Elapsed Time (hours) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Travel Evacuation Length Speed Time Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Route (miles) (mph) (min) Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time US 377 NB 8.6 28.8 18.0 12.3 42.2 12.9 40.2 24.2 21.5 57.9 9.0 46.8 11.1 US 377 SB 15.2 54.7 16.7 41.7 21.8 25.8 35.3 41.2 22.1 61.4 14.8 61.5 14.8 US 67 NB 16.9 34.2 29.7 47.8 21.2 60.4 16.8 60.3 16.8 66.8 15.2 66.8 15.2 US 67 SB 10.4 57.8 10.8 58.5 10.7 58.8 10.6 60.2 10.4 62.3 10.0 62.3 10.0 TX 144 SB 9.3 62.4 9.0 60.1 9.3 61.6 9.1 61.8 9.0 64.9 8.6 64.9 8.6 FM 56 NB 8.7 63.1 8.3 65.3 8.0 66.1 7.9 66.9 7.8 68.2 7.6 68.2 7.6 FM 51 SB 7.9 67.2 7.1 67.2 7.1 69.5 6.8 69.5 6.8 69.5 6.8 69.5 6.8 FM 4 SB 7.5 60.5 7.5 59.9 7.5 61.1 7.4 62.0 7.3 63.5 7.1 63.5 7.1 FM 205 WB 7.3 53.5 8.1 54.2 8.0 54.2 8.0 55.4 7.8 55.4 7.8 55.4 7.8 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 Elapsed Time (hours) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Up Down Network Exit Link Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Node Node Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time 315 1,009 1,575 1,960 2,124 2,125 202 213 214 5% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5%

803 2,067 3,539 4,988 5,407 5,407 286 264 1007 12% 11% 13% 14% 14% 12%

185 470 626 714 764 764 294 268 276 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 3%

44 215 334 393 417 417 314 282 283 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

396 1,040 1,421 1,504 1,512 1,513 315 284 285 6% 6% 5% 4% 4% 6%

122 356 447 458 461 461 853 629 630 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2%

381 1,192 1,482 1,541 1,550 1,550 860 637 638 6% 7% 5% 4% 4% 6%

1 15 34 41 42 42 898 673 674 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

288 959 1,269 1,357 1,372 1,372 1090 932 933 4% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4%

186 622 909 1,028 1,060 1,060 1236 1016 253 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%

129 403 493 504 507 507 1344 1093 293 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2%

983 2,587 3,535 3,698 3,718 3,718 1369 1111 1108 15% 14% 13% 11% 10% 15%

508 1,315 2,079 2,843 3,443 3,445 1385 1126 1140 8% 7% 7% 8% 9% 8%

199 848 1,458 1,864 1,907 1,908 1554 1279 1280 3% 5% 5% 5% 5% 3%

1,161 2,937 4,781 6,704 7,744 7,749 1646 1352 1356 18% 16% 17% 19% 20% 18%

0 0 0 188 485 485 1649 1353 1359 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0%

757 2,309 3,843 5,261 6,107 6,113 1653 1357 1358 12% 13% 14% 15% 16% 12%

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 8)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 8)

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 9)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 9)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 10)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 10)

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 11)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 11)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12)

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant J11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX K Evacuation Roadway Network

K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK As discussed in Section 1.3, a linknode analysis network was constructed to model the roadway network within the study area. Figure K1 provides an overview of the linknode analysis network. The figure has been divided up into 58 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K59) which show each of the links and nodes in the network.

The analysis network was calibrated using the observations made during the field surveys conducted in March 2021.

Table K1 summarizes the number of nodes by the type of control (stop sign, yield sign, pre timed signal, actuated signal, traffic and access control point [TCP/ACP], uncontrolled).

Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control Number of Control Type Nodes Uncontrolled 922 Pretimed 0 Actuated 25 Stop 148 TCP/ACP 38 Yield 37 Total: 1,170 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K1. CPNPP LinkNode Analysis Network Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K50 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K55. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 54 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K56. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 55 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K57. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 56 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K58. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 57 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K59. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 58 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant K60 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX L Zone Boundaries

L. ZONE BOUNDARIES EVACUATION ROUTES Zone CPNPP Counties: Hood and Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary: Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) Boundary Zone 1A Counties: Hood and Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Hayworth Highway (Farm to Market (FM) 2425) and River Country Lane East: Brazos River South: Brazos River and Mitchell Bend to River West: Glen Rose Highway (Highway 144)

Zone 1B County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Mambrino Highway (FM 2425)

East: Hayworth Highway (FM 2425)

South: Mitchell Bend Highway (FM 2425)

West: Glen Rose Highway (Highway 144)

Zone 1C County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Mambrino Highway (FM 3210), Power Plant Court, and Lake Granbury East: Brazos River and Fall Creek Highway (FM 167)

South: River Country Lane and Brazos River West: Mambrino Highway (FM 2425) and Brazos River Zone 1D County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Pearl Street East: FM 167, 10mile limit South: Mambrino Highway (FM 2425/ FM 3210), Power Plant Court and Lake Granbury West: Glen Rose Highway (Highway 144), Morgan Street Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Zone 2A County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: CPNPP boundary East: County Road 302 South: County Road 318 and 313 West: FM 56 Zone 2B County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Somervell/Hood County Line East: Highway 144 South: County Road 302 West: County Road 302 and CPNPP boundary Zone 2C County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: County Road 318 and 313 East: County Road 302 and Highway 144 South: Glen Rose north city limits West: FM 56 Zone 2D County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Somervell /Hood County Line East: Brazos River South: Brazos River and Highway 67 West: Highway 144 Zone 2E County: Hood and Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Brazos River East: FM 199 South: Highway 67 West: Brazos River Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Zone 2F County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Somervell/Hood County Line East: Johnson County Line South: Highway 67 West: FM 199 Zone 2G County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Brazos River East: Johnson County Line, 10mile limit South: Hood County Line West: Brazos River Zone 2H County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Highway 67 and Brazos River East: 10mile limit South: Brazos River and 10mile limit West: Brazos River Zone 2J County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Glen Rose south city limits and Highway 67 East: Brazos River South: 10mile limit West: Highway 144 Zone 3A County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Somervell/Hood County Line East: FM 56 South: County Road 1007 West: County Road 1008 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant L3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Zone 3B County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: County Road 1007 East: FM 56 South: FM 205 West: County Road 1007 Zone 3C County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Glen Rose south city limits East: Highway 144 South: 10mile limit West: County Road 2008 and Highway 67 Zone 3D County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: FM 205 East: Highway 67 South: Highway 67 West: County Road 1004 Zone 3E County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Somervell/Hood County Line and County Road 1008 East: County Road 1004 and FM 51 South: County Road 1004 and 10mile limit West: Somervell/Hood County Line and 10mile limit Zone 3F County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Highway 67 East: County Road 2008 South: 10mile limit West: Highway 67 and 10mile limit Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant L4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Zone 4A County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Coates Road East: Glen Rose Highway (Highway 144)

South: CPNPP boundary and Hood/Somervell County Line West: CPNPP boundary Zone 4B County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Cripple Creek Court, Neri Road and Pear Orchard Road East: Glen Rose Highway (Highway 144)

South: Coates Road West: CPNPP boundary and Cripple Creek Court Highway 67 Zone 4C County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Paluxy Highway (FM 51) and Neri Road East: Cripple Creek Court, Pear Orchard Rd, Neri Road and CPNPP boundary South: Hood/Somervell County Line West: Hill City Highway (FM 56) and Paluxy Highway (FM 51)

Zone 4D County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Paluxy Highway (FM 51)

East: Hill City Highway (FM 56)

South: Hood/Somervell County Line West: Paluxy Highway (FM 51) and Edwards Road Zone 4E County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Pearl Street East: Glen Rose Highway (Highway 144)

South: Neri Road West: Paluxy Highway (FM 51), Holmes Drive Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant L5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Zone 4F County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: 10mile limit, W. US Highway 377 and Loop 567 East: Paluxy Highway (FM 51)

South: Paluxy Highway (FM 51)

West: Hill City Highway (FM 56)

Zone 4G County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Tolar south city limits, W. US Highway 377 East: Hill City Highway (FM 56)

South: Paluxy Highway (FM 51), Bakers Crossing Road West: 10mile limit and Rock Church Highway Zone 4H County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary:

North: Bakers Crossing Road East: Edwards Road South: Hood/Somervell County Line West: 10mile limit, FM 51 Glen Rose County: Somervell Defined as the area within the following boundary: City Limits Highway 67 Tolar County: Hood Defined as the area within the following boundary: City Limits Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant L6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX M Evacuation Sensitivity Studies

M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES This appendix presents the results of a series of sensitivity analyses. These analyses are designed to identify the sensitivity of the Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) to changes in some base evacuation conditions.

M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times A sensitivity study was performed to determine whether changes in the estimated trip generation time have an effect on the ETE for the entire Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). Specifically, if the tail of the mobilization distribution were truncated (i.e., if those who responded most slowly to the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), could be persuaded to respond much more rapidly or if the tail were elongated (i.e., spreading out the departure of evacuated to limit the demand during peak times), how would the ETE be affected? The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 3; a summer, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. Table M1 presents the results of this study.

If evacuees mobilize in one hour quicker, the 90th percentile ETE remains the same and the 100th percentile ETE is reduced by 35 minutes - a significant change. An increase in mobilization time by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> increases the 90th percentile ETE by 10 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />

- a significant change.

As discussed in Section 7.3, traffic congestion within the EPZ clears at about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE. As such, congestion dictates the 100th percentile ETE until 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE. After this time, trip generation (plus a 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary) dictates the 100th percentile ETE. Therefore, shortening the trip generation below 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes, the 100th percentile ETE is dictated by the congestion, while elongating the trip generation above 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes, the 100th percentile ETE is dictated by the trip generation time (plus a 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary). The 90th percentile ETE, however, are relatively insensitive to truncating or elongating the tail of the mobilization time distribution.

M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the percentage of people who decide to relocate from the Shadow Region. The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 3; a summer, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation for the entire EPZ. The movement of people in the Shadow Region has the potential to impede vehicles evacuating from an Evacuation Region within the EPZ. Refer to Sections 3.2 and 7.1 for additional information on population within the Shadow Region.

Table M2 presents the ETE for each of the cases considered. The results show that eliminating the shadow evacuation (0%) decreases the 90th percentile ETE by 5 minutes - not a significant change -

and does not impact the 100th percentile ETE. Tripling (60%) the shadow evacuation increases the 90th percentile ETE by 15 minutes and has no impact to the 100th percentile ETE. A full evacuation Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(100%) of the Shadow Region increases the 90th and 100th percentile ETE by 30 minutes (significant impact) and 15 minutes (minimal impact) respectively.

Note that the demographic survey results presented in Appendix F, indicate that approximately 11%

of households would elect to evacuate if advised to shelter, which differs from the assumption of 20% noncompliance as suggested in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. A sensitivity study was considered using a 11% shadow evacuation and the 90th and 100th percentile ETEs were not affected.

The Shadow Region for CPNPP is sparsely populated except for near population centers of Granbury, Bluff Dale, Brazos Bend, and DeCordova. As shown in Figure 73 through 78, congestion exists within the Shadow Region, such that the EPZ evacuees would be delayed. Therefore, any additional shadow residents that decide to voluntarily evacuate increase this congestion, delay the egress of EPZ evacuees and prolong ETE.

M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the permanent resident population within the study area (EPZ plus Shadow Region). As population in the study area changes over time, the time required to evacuate the public may increase, decrease, or remain the same. Since the ETE is related to the demand to capacity ratio present within the study area, changes in population will cause the demand side of the equation to change and could impact ETE.

As per the NRCs response to the Emergency Planning Frequently Asked Question (EPFAQ) 2013 001, the ETE population sensitivity study must be conducted to determine what percentage increase in permanent resident population causes an increase in the 90th percentile ETE of 25%

or 30 minutes, whichever is less. The sensitivity study must use the scenario with the longest 90th percentile ETE (excluding the roadway impact scenario and the special event scenario if it is a one day per year special event)

Thus, the sensitivity study was conducted using the following planning assumptions:

1. The percent change in population within the study area was increased by up to 18%.

Changes in population were applied to the permanent resident population only (as per federal guidance), in both the EPZ area and in the Shadow Region.

2. The transportation infrastructure remained fixed (as presented in Appendix K); the presence of future proposed roadway changes and/or highway capacity improvements were not considered.

3. The study was performed for the 2Mile Region (R01), the 5Mile Region (R02) and the entire EPZ (R03).

4. The scenario (excluding roadway impact and special event) which yielded the longest 90th percentile ETE values was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 9 Winter, Weekend, Midday, with Rain).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M3 presents the results of the sensitivity study.Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, Section 5.4, require licensees to provide an updated ETE analysis to the NRC when a population increase within the EPZ causes the longest 90th percentile ETE values (for the 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region or entire EPZ) to increase by 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. All base ETE values are greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; 25% of these base ETE is always equal or greater than 30 minutes. Therefore, 30 minutes is the lesser and is the criterion for updating the ETE.

Those percent population changes which result in the longest 90th percentile ETE change greater than or equal to 30 minutes are highlighted in red in Table M3 - an 18% or greater increase in the full EPZ permanent resident population. Vistra OpCo will have to estimate the full EPZ population on an annual basis. If the full EPZ population increases by 18% or more, an updated ETE analysis will be needed.

M.4 Enhancements in Evacuation Time This appendix documents sensitivity studies on critical variables that could potentially impact ETE. Possible improvements to ETE are further discussed below:

Reducing the trip generation time an hour does not impact the 90th percentile ETE whereas the 100th percentile ETE is reduced by 35 minutes. Prolonging the trip generation time an hour increases the 90th percentile ETE by 10 minutes and 100th percentile ETE increases by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> respectively, since trip generation within the EPZ dictates ETE (Section M.1).

Increasing the percent shadow evacuation has material impact on ETE (Section M.2). As such, public outreach could be considered to inform those people within the EPZ (and potentially beyond the EPZ) that if they are not advised to evacuate, they should not.

Population growth results (Section M.3) in more evacuating vehicles, which could significantly increase ETE. Public outreach to inform people within the EPZ to evacuate as a family in a single vehicle would reduce the number of evacuating vehicles and could reduce ETE or offset the impact of population growth.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant M3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Trip Generation Time 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 4 Hours 3:25 4:35 5 Hours (Base) 3:25 5:10 6 Hours 3:35 6:10 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Evacuating Percent Shadow Shadow Evacuation 90th Percentile 100th Percentile Vehicles1 0 0 3:20 5:10 11 1,724 3:20 5:10 20 (Base) 3,135 3:25 5:10 40 6,270 3:30 5:10 60 9,405 3:40 5:10 80 12,540 3:50 5:10 100 15,675 3:55 5:25 Table M3. Evacuation Time Estimates Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Shadow Population Change Base Permanent Resident 16% 17% 18%

Population 46,402 53,826 54,290 54,754 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 16% 17% 18%

2MILE 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 5MILE 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:35 FULL EPZ 3:45 4:10 4:10 4:20 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100th Percentile Population Change Region Base 16% 17% 18%

2MILE 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5MILE 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 FULL EPZ 5:10 5:35 5:35 5:55 1

The Evacuating Shadow Vehicles, in Table M-2, represent the residents and employees who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis, for the base values shown, is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees. See Section 6 for further discussion.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant M4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX N ETE Criteria Checklist

N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 1.0 Introduction

a. The emergency planning zone (EPZ) and surrounding Yes Section 1.2 area is described.

b. A map is included that identifies primary features of Yes Figures 11, 31, 61 the site including major roadways, significant topographical features, boundaries of counties, and population centers within the EPZ.

c. A comparison of the current and previous ETE is Yes Table 13 provided including information similar to that identified in Table 11, ETE Comparison.

1.1 Approach

a. The general approach is described in the report as Yes Section 1.1, Section 1.3, Appendix D, Table 11 outlined in Section 1.1, Approach.

1.2 Assumptions

a. Assumptions consistent with Table 12, General Yes Section 2 Assumptions, of NUREG/CR7002 are provided and include the basis to support use.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 1.3 Scenario Development

a. The scenarios in Table 13, Evacuation Scenarios, Yes Table 21, Section 6, Table 65 are developed for the ETE analysis. A reason is provided for use of other scenarios or for not evaluating specific scenarios.

1.4 Evacuation Planning Areas

a. A map of the EPZ with emergency response planning Yes Figure 31, Figure 61 areas (ERPAs) is included.

1.4.1 Keyhole Evacuation

a. A table similar to Table 14 Evacuation Areas for a Yes Table 61 through Table 63, Table 75 through Table Keyhole Evacuation, is provided identifying the 77, Table H1 and Table H2 ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

1.4.2 Staged Evacuation

a. The approach used in development of a staged Yes Section 7.2 evacuation is discussed.

b. A table similar to Table 15, Evacuation Areas for a Yes Table 64, Table 78, Table H3 Staged Evacuation, is provided for staged evacuations identifying the ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

2.0 Demand Estimation

a. Demand estimation is developed for the four Yes Section 3 population groups (permanent residents of the EPZ, transients, special facilities, and schools).

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 2.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. The U.S. Census is the source of the population Yes Section 3.1 values, or another credible source is provided.

b. The availability date of the census data is provided. Yes Section 3.1

c. Population values are adjusted as necessary for N/A 2020 Census data used as the base year of the growth to reflect population estimates to the year of analysis the ETE.

d. A sector diagram, similar to Figure 21, Population Yes Figure 32 by Sector, is included showing the population distribution for permanent residents.

2.1.1 Permanent Residents with Vehicles

a. The persons per vehicle value is between 1 and 3 or Yes Section 3.1, Appendix F justification is provided for other values.

2.1.2 Transient Population

a. A list of facilities that attract transient populations is Yes Section 3.3, Table E6 through Table E8 included, and peak and average attendance for these facilities is listed. The source of information used to develop attendance values is provided.

b. Major employers are listed. Yes Section 3.4, Table E5 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. The average population during the season is used, Yes Table 34, Table 35 and Appendix E itemize the peak itemized and totaled for each scenario. transient population and employee estimates. These estimates are multiplied by the scenario specific percentages provided in Table 66 to estimate average transient vehicle by scenario - see Table 67.

d. The percentage of permanent residents assumed to Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 be at facilities is estimated.

e. The number of people per vehicle is provided. Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 Numbers may vary by scenario, and if so, reasons for the variation are discussed.

f. A sector diagram is included, similar to Figure 21, Yes Figure 36 (transients) and Figure 38 (employees)

Population by Sector, is included showing the population distribution for the transient population.

2.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. The methodology (e.g., surveys, registration Yes Section 3.6 programs) used to determine the number of transit dependent residents is discussed.

b. The State and local evacuation plans for transit Yes Section 3.6, Section 3.7 dependent residents are used in the analysis.

c. The methodology used to determine the number of Yes Section 3.8 people with disabilities and those with access and functional needs who may need assistance and do not reside in special facilities is provided. Data from local/county registration programs are used in the estimate.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

d. Capacities are provided for all types of transportation Yes Item 3 of Section 2.4 resources. Bus seating capacity of 50 percent is used or justification is provided for higher values.

e. An estimate of the transit dependent population is Yes Section 3.6, Table 38, Table 310 provided.

f. A summary table showing the total number of buses, Yes Table 313, Table 81 ambulances, or other transport assumed available to support evacuation is provided. The quantification of resources is detailed enough to ensure that double counting has not occurred.

2.3 Special Facility Residents

a. Special facilities, including the type of facility, Yes Table E4 and Table E9 lists all medical facilities and location, and average population, are listed. Special correctional facilities, respectively, by facility name, facility staff is included in the total special facility location, and average population. Staff estimates population. were not provided.

b. The method of obtaining special facility data is Yes Section 3.5 discussed.

c. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles Yes Table 36 assumed available to support the evacuation of the facility is provided.

d. The logistics for mobilizing specially trained staff (e.g., Yes Section 8.1 - under Evacuation of Medical Facilities medical support or security support for prisons, jails, and Section 8.3 and other correctional facilities) are discussed when appropriate.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student Yes Table 39, Table E1 and Table E2, Section 3.7 population, and transportation resources required to support the evacuation, is provided. The source of this information should be identified.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle Yes Section 3.7 schools are based on 100 percent of the school capacity.

c. The estimate of high school students who will use Yes Section 3.7 personal vehicle to evacuate is provided and a basis for the values used is given.

d. The need for return trips is identified. Yes Section 8.1 2.5 Other Demand Estimate Considerations 2.5.1 Special Events

a. A complete list of special events is provided including Yes Section 3.9 information on the population, estimated duration, and season of the event.

b. The special event that encompasses the peak Yes Section 3.9 transient population is analyzed in the ETE.

c. The percentage of permanent residents attending the Yes Section 3.9 event is estimated.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 2.5.2 Shadow Evacuation

a. A shadow evacuation of 20 percent is included Yes Item 7 of Section 2.2, Figure 21 and Figure 71, consistent with the approach outlined in Section Section 3.2 2.5.2, Shadow Evacuation.

b. Population estimates for the shadow evacuation in Yes Section 3.2, Table 33, Figure 34 the shadow region beyond the EPZ are provided by sector.

c. The loading of the shadow evacuation onto the Yes Section 5 - Table 58 (footnote) roadway network is consistent with the trip generation time generated for the permanent resident population.

2.5.3 Background and Pass Through Traffic

a. The volume of background traffic and passthrough Yes Section 3.10 and Section 3.11 traffic is based on the average daytime traffic. Values may be reduced for nighttime scenarios.

b. The method of reducing background and pass Yes Section 2.2 - Assumptions 10 and 11 through traffic is described. Section 2.5 Section 3.10 and Section 3.11 Table 66 - External Through Traffic footnote

c. Passthrough traffic is assumed to have stopped Yes Section 2.5 entering the EPZ about two (2) hours after the initial notification.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 2.6 Summary of Demand Estimation

a. A summary table is provided that identifies the total Yes Table 312, Table 313, and Table 67 populations and total vehicles used in the analysis for permanent residents, transients, transit dependent residents, special facilities, schools, shadow population, and passthrough demand in each scenario.

3.0 Roadway Capacity

a. The method(s) used to assess roadway capacity is Yes Section 4 discussed.

3.1 Roadway Characteristics

a. The process for gathering roadway characteristic data Yes Section 1.3, Appendix D (Step 4) is described including the types of information gathered and how it is used in the analysis.

b. Legible maps are provided that identify nodes and Yes Appendix K links of the modeled roadway network similar to Figure A1, Roadway Network Identifying Nodes and Links, and Figure A2, Grid Map Showing Detailed Nodes and Links.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 3.2 Model Approach

a. The approach used to calculate the roadway capacity Yes Section 4 for the transportation network is described in detail, and the description identifies factors that are expressly used in the modeling.

b. Route assignment follows expected evacuation routes Yes Appendix B and Appendix C and traffic volumes.

c. A basis is provided for static route choices if used to N/A Static route choices are not used to assign evacuation assign evacuation routes. routes. Dynamic traffic assignment is used.

d. Dynamic traffic assignment models are described Yes Appendix B and Appendix C including calibration of the route assignment.

3.3 Intersection Control

a. A list that includes the total numbers of intersections Yes Table K1 modeled that are unsignalized, signalized, or manned by response personnel is provided.

b. The use of signal cycle timing, including adjustments Yes Section 4, Appendix G for manned traffic control, is discussed.

3.4 Adverse Weather

a. The adverse weather conditions are identified. Yes Assumption 2 and 3 of Section 2.6

b. The speed and capacity reduction factors identified in Yes Table 22 Table 31, Weather Capacity Factors, are used or a basis is provided for other values, as applicable to the model.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. The calibration and adjustment of driver behavior N/A Driver behavior is not adjusted for adverse weather models for adverse weather conditions are described, conditions.

if applicable.

d. The effect of adverse weather on mobilization is Yes Table 22; snow is not considered for this site.

considered and assumptions for snow removal on streets and driveways are identified, when applicable.

4.0 Development of Evacuation Times 4.1 Traffic Simulation Models

a. General information about the traffic simulation Yes Section 1.3, Table 13, Appendix B, Appendix C model used in the analysis is provided.

b. If a traffic simulation model is not used to perform N/A Not applicable since a traffic simulation model was the ETE calculation, sufficient detail is provided to used.

validate the analytical approach used.

4.2 Traffic Simulation Model Input

a. Traffic simulation model assumptions and a Yes Section 2, Appendix J representative set of model inputs are provided.

b. The number of origin nodes and method for Yes Appendix J, Appendix C distributing vehicles among the origin nodes are described.

c. A glossary of terms is provided for the key Yes Appendix A, Table C1 and Table C3 performance measures and parameters used in the analysis.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 4.3 Trip Generation Time

a. The process used to develop trip generation times is Yes Section 5 identified.

b. When surveys are used, the scope of the survey, area Yes Appendix F of the survey, number of participants, and statistical relevance are provided.

c. Data used to develop trip generation times are Yes Appendix F, Section 5 summarized.

d. The trip generation time for each population group is Yes Section 5 developed from sitespecific information.

e. The methods used to reduce uncertainty when N/A No uncertainty existed when developing trip developing trip generation times are discussed, if generation times.

applicable.

4.3.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. Permanent residents are assumed to evacuate from Yes Section 5 discusses trip generation for households their homes but are not assumed to be at home at all with and without returning commuters. Table 66 times. Trip generation time includes the assumption presents the percentage of households with returning that a percentage of residents will need to return commuters and the percentage of households either home before evacuating. without returning commuters or with no commuters.

Appendix F presents the percent households who will await the return of commuters. Section 2.3, Assumption 3

b. The trip generation time accounts for the time and Yes Section 5 method to notify transients at various locations.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. The trip generation time accounts for transients Yes Section 5, Figure 51 potentially returning to hotels before evacuating.

d. The effect of public transportation resources used Yes Section 3.9 during special events where a large number of transients are expected is considered.

4.3.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. If available, existing and approved plans and bus N/A Established bus routes do not exist. Basic bus routes routes are used in the ETE analysis. were develop for the ETE analysis.

Section 8.1 under Evacuation of TransitDependent Population

b. The means of evacuating ambulatory and non Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of TransitDependent ambulatory residents are discussed. Population, Section 8.2

c. Logistical details, such as the time to obtain buses, Yes Section 8.1, Figure 81 brief drivers and initiate the bus route are used in the analysis.

d. The estimated time for transit dependent residents to Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of TransitDependent prepare and then travel to a bus pickup point, Population including the expected means of travel to the pickup point, is described.

e. The number of bus stops and time needed to load Yes Section 8.1, Table 86 and Table 87 passengers are discussed.

f. A map of bus routes is included. Yes Figure 102, 103 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

g. The trip generation time for nonambulatory persons Yes Section 8.2 including the time to mobilize ambulances or special vehicles, time to drive to the home of residents, time to load, and time to drive out of the EPZ, is provided.

h. Information is provided to support analysis of return Yes Section 8.1 and 8.2 trips, if necessary.

4.3.3 Special Facilities

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Section 8.3, Table 88, Table times is provided. 89, and Table 8.12

b. The logistics of evacuating wheelchair and bed bound Yes Section 8.1, Table 88 and Table 89 residents are discussed.

c. Time for loading of residents is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Section 8.3, Table 88, Table 89, and Table 812

d. Information is provided that indicates whether the Yes Section 8.1 and Section 8.3 evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

e. Discussion is provided on whether special facility Yes Section 8.1 and Section 8.3 residents are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

f. Supporting information is provided to quantify the Yes Section 8.1 and Section 8.3 time elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 4.3.4 Schools

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 85 times is provided.

b. Time for loading of students is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 85

c. Information is provided that indicates whether the Yes Section 8.1 evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

d. If used, reception centers should be identified. A Yes Section 8.1, Section 10.1, Table 104 discussion is provided on whether students are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

e. Supporting information is provided to quantify the Yes Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 85 time elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.4 Stochastic Model Runs

a. The number of simulation runs needed to produce N/A DYNEV does not rely on simulation averages or average results is discussed. random seeds for statistical confidence. For

b. If one run of a single random seed is used to produce N/A DYNEV/DTRAD, it is a mesoscopic simulation and each ETE result, the report includes a sensitivity study uses dynamic traffic assignment model to obtain the on the 90 percent and 100 percent ETE using 10 "average" (stable) network work flow distribution.

different random seeds for evacuation of the full EPZ This is different from microscopic simulation, which is under Summer, Midweek, Daytime, Normal Weather montecarlo random sampling by nature relying on conditions. different seeds to establish statistical confidence.

Refer to Appendix B for more details Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 4.5 Model Boundaries

a. The method used to establish the simulation model Yes Section 4.5 boundaries is discussed.

b. Significant capacity reductions or population centers Yes Section 4.5 that may influence the ETE and that are located beyond the evacuation area or shadow region are identified and included in the model, if needed.

4.6 Traffic Simulation Model Output

a. A discussion of whether the traffic simulation model Yes Appendix B used must be in equilibration prior to calculating the ETE is provided.

b. The minimum following model outputs for evacuation Yes 1. Appendix J, Table J2 of the entire EPZ are provided to support review: 2. Table J2

1. Evacuee average travel distance and time. 3. Table J4

2. Evacuee average delay time. 4. None and 0%. The 100% ETE is based on the

3. Number of vehicles arriving at each destination time the last vehicle exits the evacuation zone node. 5. Figures J2 through J13 (one plot for each

4. Total number and percentage of evacuee vehicles scenario considered) not exiting the EPZ. 6. Table J3

5. A plot that provides both the mobilization curve and evacuation curve identifying the cumulative percentage of evacuees who have mobilized and exited the EPZ.

6. Average speed for each major evacuation route that exits the EPZ.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. Color coded roadway maps are provided for various Yes Figure 73 through Figure 78 times (e.g., at 2, 4, 6 hrs.) during a full EPZ evacuation scenario, identifying areas where congestion exists.

4.7 Evacuation Time Estimates for the General Public

a. The ETE includes the time to evacuate 90 percent and Yes Table 71 and Table 72 100 percent of the total permanent resident and transient population.

b. Termination criteria for the 100 percent ETE are N/A The 100% ETE is based on the time the last vehicle discussed, if not based on the time the last vehicle exits the evacuation zone.

exits the evacuation zone.

c. The ETE for 100 percent of the general public includes Yes Section 5.4.1 - truncating survey data to eliminate all members of the general public. Any reductions or statistical outliers truncated data is explained. Table 72 - 100th percentile ETE for general population

d. Tables are provided for the 90 and 100 percent ETEs Yes Table 73 and Table 74 similar to Table 43, ETEs for a Staged Evacuation, and Table 44, ETEs for a Keyhole Evacuation.

e. ETEs are provided for the 100 percent evacuation of Yes Section 8 special facilities, transit dependent, and school populations.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 5.0 Other Considerations 5.1 Development of Traffic Control Plans

a. Information that responsible authorities have Yes Section 9, Appendix G approved the traffic control plan used in the analysis are discussed.

b. Adjustments or additions to the traffic control plan Yes Section 9, Appendix G that affect the ETE is provided.

5.2 Enhancements in Evacuation Time

a. The results of assessments for enhancing evacuations Yes Appendix M are provided.

5.3 State and Local Review

a. A list of agencies contacted is provided and the Yes Table 11 extent of interaction with these agencies is discussed.

b. Information is provided on any unresolved issues that Yes Results of the ETE study were formally presented to may affect the ETE. state and local agencies at the final project meeting.

Comments on the draft report were provided and were addressed in the final report. There are no unresolved issues.

5.4 Reviews and Updates Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in NRC Review Criteria ETE Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

a. The criteria for when an updated ETE analysis is Yes Appendix M, Section M.3 required to be performed and submitted to the NRC is discussed.

5.4.1 Extreme Conditions

a. The updated ETE analysis reflects the impact of EPZ N/A This ETE is being updated as a result of the availability conditions not adequately reflected in the scenario of US Census Bureau decennial census data.

variations.

5.5 Reception Centers and Congregate Care Center

a. A map of congregate care centers and reception Yes Figure 104 centers is provided.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant N18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0