L-22-204, Submittal of Evacuation Time Estimates

Submittal of Evacuation Time Estimates

ML22251A137
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	09/07/2022
From:	Grabnar J Energy Harbor Nuclear Corp
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-22-204
Download: ML22251A137 (481)

Text

IE energy Energy Harbor Nuclear Corp.

Beaver Valley Power Station

~ harbor P. O. Box 4 Shippingport, PA 15077 John J. Grabnar 724-682-5234 Site Vice President, Beaver Valley Nuclear September 7, 2022 L-22-204 10 CFR 50, Appendix E ATTN: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

SUBJECT:

Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-334, 50-412; License Nos. DPR-66, NPF-73 Submittal of Evacuation Time Estimates Pursuant to 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Energy Harbor Nuclear Corp. is submitting the enclosed Evacuation Time Estimates (ETEs) for Beaver Valley Power Station ,

Unit Nos. 1 and 2.

The ETEs were developed using the guidance contained in NUREG/CR-7002, Revision 1, "Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies,"

February 2021 . The estimates use 2020 census data.

There are no regulatory commitments contained in this letter. If there are any questions or if additional information is required, please contact Mr. Phil H. Lashley, Manager -

Fleet Licensing, at (330) 696-7208.

Sincerely, John J Digitally signed by John J Grabnar Grabnar Date: 2022.09.07 11 :12:01 -04'00' John J_ Grabnar

Enclosure:

Beaver Valley Power Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates cc: NRC Region I Administrator NRC Resident Inspector NRR Project Manager Director BRP/DEP Site Representative BRP/DEP Director, Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency

Enclosure L-22-204 Beaver Valley Power Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates (479 Pages Follow)

Beaver Valley Power Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Energy Harbor, by:

KLD Engineering, P.C.

1601 Veterans Memorial Highway, Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 Email: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com August 29, 2022 Final Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1271

Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Beaver Valley Power Station 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 .................................................................................................... 21 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 ............................................................................................................... 25 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Permanent Residents ................................................................................................................. 32 3.1.1 Colleges and Universities ................................................................................................... 32 3.2 Shadow Population .................................................................................................................... 33 3.3 Transient Population .................................................................................................................. 34 3.4 Employees .................................................................................................................................. 35 3.5 Medical Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 35 3.6 Transit Dependent Population ................................................................................................... 35 3.7 School Population Demand........................................................................................................ 38 3.8 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 38 3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................................. 39 3.10 Correctional Facilities ................................................................................................................. 39 3.11 External Traffic ......................................................................................................................... 310 3.12 Background Traffic ................................................................................................................... 310 3.13 Summary of Demand ............................................................................................................... 310 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 BVPS Study Area ........................................................................................... 46 4.3.1 TwoLane Roads ................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2 Multilane Highway ............................................................................................................. 46 4.3.3 Freeways ............................................................................................................................ 47 4.3.4 Intersections ...................................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation .......................................................................................... 48 4.5 Boundary Conditions .................................................................................................................. 49 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME .......................................................................................... 51 5.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 51 5.2 Fundamental Considerations ..................................................................................................... 52 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 ................................................................................... 58 5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas ................................................... 59 Beaver Valley Power Station i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 EVACUATION CASES ........................................................................................................................... 61 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 Estimates (ETE) 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 ETEs for Schools, TransitDependent People, and Special Facilities .......................................... 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ................................................................. 89 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 .................................................................................................................... 101 List of Appendices 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 .............................................................. B1 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. SPECIAL 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.4 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ F5 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Traffic Control Points (TCPs) ..................................................................................................... G1 Beaver Valley Power Station ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

G.2 Access Control Points (ACPs) .................................................................................................... G1 G.3 Analysis of Key TCP and ACP Locations ..................................................................................... G2 H EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES .................................................................................................................... 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 Effect of Changes in Average Household Size .......................................................................... M3 M.5 Enhancements in Evacuation Time .......................................................................................... M3 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped Beaver Valley Power Station iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Figures Figure 11. BVPS Location ........................................................................................................................ 113 Figure 12. BVPS LinkNode Analysis Network ......................................................................................... 114 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ..................................................................................... 210 Figure 31. SubAreas Comprising the BVPS EPZ..................................................................................... 323 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ........................................................................... 324 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 325 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 326 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 327 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 328 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 329 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 330 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 331 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 410 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................ 516 Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities ........................................................................................ 517 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution....................................................... 518 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 519 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region .......................................................................................................................... 520 Figure 61. SubAreas comprising the BVPS EPZ ........................................................................................ 69 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ...................................................................................... 718 Figure 72. Beaver Valley Power Station Shadow Region ........................................................................ 719 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate ............................................ 720 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate .......................................... 721 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate .......................................... 722 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate .......................................... 723 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................ 724 Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................ 725 Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 ...................................................... 726 Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 .................................................... 726 Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 .................................................... 727 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 .................................................... 727 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 .................................................... 728 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 .................................................... 728 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 .................................................... 729 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 .................................................... 729 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 .................................................... 730 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 .................................................. 730 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 .................................................. 731 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 .................................................. 731 Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 .................................................. 732 Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 .................................................. 732 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ...................................................................... 830 Figure 101. Evacuation Route Map ........................................................................................................ 109 Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes in Pennsylvania, North of the Ohio River ........................ 1010 Beaver Valley Power Station iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. TransitDependent Bus Routes in Pennsylvania, South of the Ohio River ........................ 1011 Figure 104. TransitDependent Bus Routes in Ohio and West Virginia ............................................... 1012 Figure 105. General Population Reception Centers and Host Schools/Receiving Schools ................... 1013 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B5 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ......................................................................................... C13 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ......................................................................................................... C14 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ............................................................................ C14 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) .................................................... C15 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools within the EPZ - Overview ........................................................................................ E10 Figure E2. Schools within the PA Portion of the EPZ - North of the Ohio River..................................... E11 Figure E3. Schools within the PA Portion of the EPZ - South of the Ohio River..................................... E12 Figure E4. Schools within the OH and WV Portions of the EPZ .............................................................. E13 Figure E5. Medical Facilities within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E14 Figure E6. Major Employers within the EPZ............................................................................................ E15 Figure E7. Day Camps within the EPZ ..................................................................................................... E16 Figure E8. Golf Courses and Marinas within the EPZ.............................................................................. E17 Figure E9. Campgrounds, Hunting/Fishing Areas, Parks and Other Recreational Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E18 Figure E10. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ .......................................................................................... E19 Figure E11. Correctional Facility within the EPZ ..................................................................................... E20 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ....................................................................................................... F7 Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability ................................................................................................ F7 Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 5 Person Households ...................................................................... F8 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 6 to 9+ Person Households .................................................................... F8 Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference......................................................................................... F9 Figure F6. Commuters in Households in the EPZ ..................................................................................... F9 Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ................................................................................................... F10 Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic ........................................................ F10 Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transpiration Needs ............................................................ F11 Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation ........................................................................... F11 Figure F11. Households Evacuating with Pets ....................................................................................... F12 Figure F12. Types of Pets/Animals ......................................................................................................... F12 Figure F13. Shelter Locations ................................................................................................................. F13 Figure F14. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College ............................................................. F13 Figure F15. Time to Commute Home from Work or College ................................................................. F14 Figure F16. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation................................................................................ F14 Figure F17. Time to Clear Driveway of 6"8" of Snow ........................................................................... F15 Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Points and Barricades for the BVPS EPZ ..................................... G6 Figure H1. Region R01.............................................................................................................................. H4 Figure H2. Region R02.............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H3. Region R03.............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H4. Region R04.............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H5. Region R05.............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H6. Region R06.............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H7. Region R07............................................................................................................................ H10 Figure H8. Region R08............................................................................................................................ H11 Beaver Valley Power Station v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09............................................................................................................................ H12 Figure H10. Region R10.......................................................................................................................... H13 Figure H11. Region R11.......................................................................................................................... H14 Figure H12. Region R12.......................................................................................................................... H15 Figure H13. Region R13.......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H14. Region R14.......................................................................................................................... H17 Figure H15. Region R15.......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H16. Region R16.......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure H17. Region R17.......................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H18. Region R18.......................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H19. Region R19.......................................................................................................................... H22 Figure H20. Region R20.......................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H21. Region R21.......................................................................................................................... H24 Figure H22. Region R22.......................................................................................................................... H25 Figure H23. Region R23.......................................................................................................................... H26 Figure H24. Region R24.......................................................................................................................... H27 Figure H25. Region R25.......................................................................................................................... H28 Figure H26. Region R26.......................................................................................................................... H29 Figure H27. Region R27.......................................................................................................................... H30 Figure H28. Region R28.......................................................................................................................... H31 Figure H29. Region R29.......................................................................................................................... H32 Figure H30. Region R30.......................................................................................................................... H33 Figure H31. Region R31.......................................................................................................................... H34 Figure H32. Region R32.......................................................................................................................... H35 Figure H33. Region R33.......................................................................................................................... H36 Figure H34. Region R34.......................................................................................................................... H37 Figure H35. Region R35.......................................................................................................................... H38 Figure H36. Region R36.......................................................................................................................... H39 Figure H37. Region R37.......................................................................................................................... H40 Figure H38. Region R38.......................................................................................................................... H41 Figure H39. Region R39.......................................................................................................................... H42 Figure H40. Region R40.......................................................................................................................... H43 Figure H41. Region R41.......................................................................................................................... H44 Figure H42. Region R42.......................................................................................................................... H45 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins.......................................................................................................... J6 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) .............. J7 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) ............................... J7 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3).............. J8 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) .............................. J8 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5) ....................................................................................................................... J9 Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) ................ J9 Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7) ............ J10 Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8) ................... J10 Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9) ............ J11 Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10) ........ J11 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11) .............. J12 Beaver Valley Power Station vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12) ................................................................................................................... J12 Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13) ............................................................................................ J13 Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) ...................................................................................... J13 Figure K1. BVPS 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 Beaver Valley Power Station vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ............................................................................... K43 Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 ............................................................................... K44 Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 ............................................................................... K45 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 Figure K60. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 59 ............................................................................... K61 Figure K61. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 60 ............................................................................... K62 Figure K62. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 61 ............................................................................... K63 Figure K63. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 62 ............................................................................... K64 Figure K64. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 63 ............................................................................... K65 Figure K65. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 64 ............................................................................... K66 Figure K66. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 65 ............................................................................... K67 Figure K67. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 66 ............................................................................... K68 Figure K68. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 67 ............................................................................... K69 Figure K69. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 68 ............................................................................... K70 Figure K70. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 69 ............................................................................... K71 Figure K71. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 70 ............................................................................... K72 List of Tables Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction ........................................................................................................... 18 Table 12. Highway Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 18 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons ............................................................................................................ 19 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 28 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 29 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ...................................................................................... 311 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by SubArea ................................................... 312 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ............................................................................ 313 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ...................................................................... 314 Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ........................... 315 Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand ............................................................................................ 316 Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates .............................................................................. 317 Table 38. School Population Demand Estimates ................................................................................... 318 Beaver Valley Power Station viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Estimates .......................................................... 320 Table 310. BVPS EPZ External Traffic ..................................................................................................... 320 Table 311. Summary of Population Demand ......................................................................................... 321 Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand ............................................................................................... 322 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities .............................................................................. 511 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 511 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................. 511 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................ 512 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate ..................................................... 512 Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow ...................................................... 512 Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 513 Table 58. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 513 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation .................... 514 Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ....................... 515 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions........................................................................................... 64 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 66 Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................ 67 Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario.................................................................................................. 68 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 ....................... 712 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region......................... 714 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region....................... 715 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions......................................................................................... 716 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................. 811 Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather ............................................................. 813 Table 83. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow........................................................... 815 Table 84. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow ................................................................. 817 Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather ......................................... 819 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ....................................... 820 Table 87. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow ............................................. 821 Table 88. Medical Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather ............................................ 822 Table 89. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ............................................ 824 Table 810. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow ................................................. 826 Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates ............................ 828 Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 103 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 104 Table 103. Host/Receiving Schools ........................................................................................................ 107 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C9 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ......................................................................... C10 Table C3. Glossary ..................................................................................................................................C11 Table E1. Schools within the EPZ .............................................................................................................. E2 Table E2. Colleges/Universities within the EPZ ........................................................................................ E4 Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ............................................................................................... E5 Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E6 Table E5. Day Camps within the EPZ ........................................................................................................ E6 Table E6. Golf Courses and Marinas within the EPZ ................................................................................. E7 Beaver Valley Power Station ix KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E7. Campgrounds, Hunting/Fishing Areas, Parks and Other Recreational Facilities within the EPZ .............................................................................................. E8 Table E8. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E9 Table E9. Correctional Facility within the EPZ .......................................................................................... E9 Table F1. Beaver Valley Power Station Demographic Survey Sampling Plan .......................................... F6 Table G1. List of Key TCP/ACP/Barricade Locations ................................................................................ G4 Table G2. ETE with No MTC ..................................................................................................................... G5 Table H1. Percent of SubArea Population Evacuating for Each Region ................................................. H2 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. ETE Variation with Population Change ................................................................................. M4 Table M4. ETE Results for Change in Average Household Size .............................................................. M5 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist ................................................................................................. N1 Beaver Valley Power Station x 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 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) located in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. ETE are part of the required planning basis and provide Energy Harbor and 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.

Project Activities This project began in November, 2020 and extended over a period of nearly 2 years. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Attended kickoff meetings with Energy Harbor personnel and emergency management personnel representing state and county governments.

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

Employee data was obtained from the county emergency management agencies and from Energy Harbor.

Studied Geographic Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of the BVPS, 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 entire Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ), plus a Shadow Region covering the region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles radially from the plant.

Designed and conducted an online demographic survey of residents within the study area (EPZ and Shadow Region), 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 county/state emergency management personnel prior to conducting the survey.

A data needs matrix (requesting data) was provided to Energy Harbor and the county/state emergency management agencies at the kickoff meeting. The data for transient and special facilities (schools, medical facilities and correctional facilities) in Beaver Valley Power Station ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

each county was based on the data received from the counties and data from the previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches where data was missing.

The traffic demand and tripgeneration rates of evacuating vehicles were estimated from the gathered data. The trip generation rates reflected 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 study area.

The EPZ is subdivided into 19 Subareas. Following federal guidelines, these Subareas are then grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 42 evacuation regions.

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/Light Snow, Heavy Snow). One special event scenario, the Hookstown Fair, in Hookstown, Pennsylvania, was considered. One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane was closed on Interstate 376 westbound for the duration of the evacuation.

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 accident at the BVPS that quickly assumes the status of a 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 notification.

While an unlikely accident 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.

If the emergency occurs while schools are in session, the ETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to reception centers or host/receiving schools located outside the EPZ. Parents, relatives, and neighbors are advised to not pick up their children at school prior to the arrival of the buses dispatched for that purpose. The ETE for schoolchildren 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 bus, or ambulance, as required. Separate ETE are calculated for the transitdependent evacuees, for access and/or functional needs population, and for those evacuated from special facilities.

Beaver Valley Power Station ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Attended a final meeting with Energy Harbor personnel and county and state representatives to present results from the ETE study.

Computation of ETE A total of 588 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 42 evacuation regions to evacuate from that region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 14 evacuation scenarios (42 x 14 = 588). 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 the 2Mile Region begin to evacuate. As per federal guidance, 20% of people beyond the 2Mile Region 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.

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, of the population within the impacted region, 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 Beaver Valley Power Station ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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. The 100th percentile ETE is when the last vehicle to evacuate crosses the boundary of the area being evacuated.

Traffic Management This study reviewed, modeled and analyzed the existing comprehensive traffic management plans provided in the Beaver County, Columbiana County, and Hancock County Radiological Emergency Response Plans.

Due to the detailed plans already in place and the traffic congestion patterns within the EPZ (discussed in Section 7.3), no additional traffic or access control measures have been identified as a result of this study. See 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 Subarea based on the 2020 Census data.

Table 61 defines each of the 42 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Subareas.

Table 62 lists the 14 Evacuation Scenarios.

Tables 71 and 72 are compilations of ETE for the general population. These data are the times needed to clear the indicated regions of 90% and 100% 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. These tables also include ETE results for staged evacuation of residents beyond the 2Mile Region.

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

Table 82 presents ETE for schools in good weather.

Table 85 presents ETE for the transitdependent population in good weather.

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

Figure 61 displays a map of the BVPS EPZ showing the layout of the 19 Subareas 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. Maps of all regions are provided in Appendix H.

Conclusions General population ETE were computed for 588 unique cases - a combination of 42 Beaver Valley Power Station ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

unique evacuation regions and 14 unique evacuation scenarios. Table 71 and Table 72 document these ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles. These ETE range from 2:10 (hr:min) to 4:45 at the 90th percentile.

Inspection of Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the ETE for the 100th percentile are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile. This is the result of the congestion within the EPZ. 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. See Figures 79 through 722.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicates that a staged evacuation provides no benefit to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region. However, evacuees from 2 to 5 miles are delayed by as much as 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes. Staged evacuation is not beneficial for the BVPS EPZ. See Section 7.6 for additional discussion.

Comparison of scenarios 5 and 13 in Tables 71 and 72 indicates that the special event (Hookstown Fair) does not materially affect the ETE. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure - one lane westbound on I376 - has a significant impact on 90th percentile ETE, with increases of up to 35 minutes for regions wherein the wind is blowing from southsouthwest to west (regions R26 through R30). The 100th percentile ETE increased by up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 5 minutes for regions R03, R04 and R26 through R29.

Separate ETE were computed for schools, medical facilities, transitdependent persons, and access and/or functional needs persons. The average singlewave ETE for these facilities are comparable to or less than the general population ETE at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (region R03). See Section 8.

Table 81 indicates that there are sufficient bus resources to evacuate all schoolchildren and the transit dependent population for all counties in a single wave. However, there are insufficient ambulances to evacuate bedridden patients at medical facilities and access and/or functional needs population in a single wave. Additionally, there are insufficient wheelchair transport vehicles for Beaver and Hancock Counties to evacuate wheelchair bound patients in a single wave.

A 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> reduction in the base trip generation time of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes reduces the general population ETE at the 90th percentile by 10 minutes. An increase in mobilization time of 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 25 minutes. See Section M.1.

The general population ETE is significantly impacted by the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region. Tripling the shadow evacuation percentage increases 90th and 100th percentile ETE by 25 and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes, respectively. See Section M.2.

An increase in permanent resident population (EPZ plus Shadow Region) of 18% or greater results in an increase in the longest 90th percentile ETE of 30 minutes, which Beaver Valley Power Station ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

meets the federal criterion for performing a fully updated ETE study between decennial Censuses. See Section M.3.

An increase in the average household size from 2.40 people per household to 2.89 people per household will result in 17% less evacuating vehicles (higher vehicle occupancy) and minimally impacts ETE with a reduction of at most 15 minutes at the 90th percentile. See Section M.4.

Beaver Valley Power Station ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population SubArea 2010 Population 2020 Population P1 3,680 3,371 P2 1,542 1,479 P3 4,607 5,132 P4 3,042 2,806 P5 1,365 1,356 P6 1,124 1,013 P7 6,182 6,396 P8 15,361 15,448 P9 17,718 17,414 P10 22,494 23,117 P11 2,509 2,262 P12 3,799 3,447 O1 798 762 O2 14,174 12,765 O3 5,428 5,412 O4 156 127 W1 6,173 5,573 W2 2,109 1,995 W3 1,166 1,109 EPZ TOTAL: 113,427 110,984 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 2.15%

Beaver Valley Power Station ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions SubArea Region Description Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 Radial Evacuations R01 2Mile Region X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Site Specific Regions R04 PA X X X X X X X X X X X X R05 OH X X X X R06 WV X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R07 N, NNE 350°34° X X X X R08 NE 35°56° X X X R09 ENE, E 57°101° X X X X X R10 ESE 102°124° X X X X R11 SE, SSE 125°169° X X X X X R12 S 170°191° X X X R13 SSW 192°214° X X X X SW, WSW, R14 215°281° X X X W

R15 WNW 282°304° X X R16 NW, NNW 305°349° X X X Beaver Valley Power Station ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R17 N 350°11° X X X X X X X X R18 NNE 12°34° X X X X X X X X X R19 NE 35°56° X X X X X X X X X R20 ENE 57°79° X X X X X X X X X X X R21 E 80°101° X X X X X X X X X X X X X R22 ESE 102°124° X X X X X X X X X X R23 SE 125°146° X X X X X X X X X X R24 SSE 147°169° X X X X X X X X X X R25 S 170°191° X X X X X X X R26 SSW 192°214° X X X X X X X X R27 SW 215°236° X X X X X X X R28 WSW 237°259° X X X X X X X X R29 W 260°281° X X X X X X X R30 WNW, NW 282°326° X X X X X X X R31 NNW 327°349° X X X X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R32 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R33 N, NNE 350°34° X X X X R34 NE 35°56° X X X R35 ENE, E 57°101° X X X X X R36 ESE 102°124° X X X X R37 SE, SSE 125°169° X X X X X R38 S 170°191° X X X R39 SSW 192°214° X X X X SW, WSW, R40 215°281° X X X W

R41 WNW 282°304° X X R42 NW, NNW 305°349° X X X SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) Evacuate until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station ES9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season1 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 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, Summer Evening Good 5 Weekend None 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain/Light Snow None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain/Light Snow None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, Winter Evening Good 12 Weekend None 13 Summer Weekend Evening Good Hookstown Fair Roadway Impact - Lane Summer Midweek Midday Good Closure on I376 14 Westbound2 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).

2 I-376 will be reduced to a single lane in the westbound direction from the interchange with State Highway 18/Frankfort Rd (Exit 39) to the interchange with State Highway 151/Constitution Blvd (Exit 31).

Beaver Valley Power Station ES10 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R02 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R03 3:25 3:40 3:25 3:45 3:10 3:30 3:45 4:30 3:20 3:35 4:15 3:10 3:10 3:50 Site Specific Regions R04 3:30 3:45 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:50 4:40 3:25 3:45 4:25 3:15 3:15 4:05 R05 2:55 2:55 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:55 2:55 3:35 2:25 2:35 3:15 2:25 2:25 2:55 R06 2:55 3:00 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:55 2:55 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:30 2:35 2:55 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R07 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:20 2:15 2:50 R08 2:45 2:45 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:25 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:45 R09 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:25 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:20 2:15 2:50 R10 2:45 2:50 2:15 2:25 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:45 R11 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R12 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R13 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R14 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R15 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:25 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:50 R16 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:25 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:50 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R17 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:20 3:10 2:20 2:15 2:50 R18 2:55 2:55 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:55 2:55 3:35 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:25 2:25 2:55 R19 2:55 2:55 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:50 2:55 3:35 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:20 2:25 2:55 R20 2:55 2:55 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:55 2:55 3:35 2:25 2:30 3:15 2:25 2:25 2:55 R21 2:50 2:50 2:25 2:35 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:30 2:30 2:50 R22 2:50 2:50 2:25 2:35 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:25 2:35 3:10 2:30 2:30 2:50 Beaver Valley Power Station ES11 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact R23 2:55 3:00 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:55 3:00 3:35 2:40 2:45 3:20 2:40 2:40 2:55 R24 3:05 3:10 2:45 3:00 2:50 3:05 3:10 3:55 2:50 2:55 3:40 2:50 2:50 3:05 R25 3:05 3:15 2:50 3:05 2:55 3:05 3:15 3:55 2:55 3:05 3:45 2:55 2:55 3:05 R26 3:10 3:20 3:00 3:15 2:55 3:10 3:25 4:05 3:00 3:15 3:55 2:55 2:55 3:35 R27 3:30 3:45 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:50 4:40 3:25 3:45 4:20 3:15 3:15 4:05 R28 3:30 3:45 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:50 4:40 3:30 3:50 4:20 3:15 3:15 4:05 R29 3:30 3:45 3:25 3:45 3:15 3:30 3:45 4:35 3:25 3:40 4:20 3:15 3:15 4:05 R30 3:05 3:15 2:55 3:10 2:50 3:05 3:15 3:55 2:50 3:05 3:45 2:55 2:50 3:25 R31 2:50 3:00 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:50 3:00 3:45 2:30 2:40 3:25 2:35 2:30 2:50 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R32 3:20 3:20 3:15 3:20 3:15 3:20 3:20 4:25 3:20 3:20 4:15 3:20 3:15 3:20 R33 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 4:00 3:10 3:10 3:55 3:10 3:10 3:10 R34 3:10 3:10 3:05 3:05 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:05 3:05 3:45 3:05 3:05 3:10 R35 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:55 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:10 3:05 3:10 R36 3:10 3:10 3:05 3:05 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:05 3:05 3:45 3:05 3:05 3:10 R37 3:25 3:30 3:20 3:25 3:20 3:25 3:30 4:40 3:20 3:25 4:35 3:25 3:20 3:25 R38 3:30 3:35 3:25 3:30 3:25 3:30 3:35 4:45 3:25 3:35 4:40 3:30 3:25 3:30 R39 3:25 3:30 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:25 3:30 4:35 3:20 3:25 4:25 3:20 3:20 3:25 R40 3:30 3:35 3:25 3:30 3:25 3:30 3:35 4:40 3:25 3:30 4:35 3:25 3:25 3:30 R41 3:10 3:10 3:05 3:05 3:05 3:10 3:10 4:05 3:05 3:05 3:55 3:05 3:05 3:10 R42 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 4:00 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:10 3:10 3:10 Beaver Valley Power Station ES12 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R02 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R03 4:40 5:20 4:40 5:00 4:40 4:40 5:30 5:50 4:40 4:40 6:15 4:40 4:40 5:45 Site Specific Regions R04 4:40 5:20 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:40 5:30 5:50 4:40 4:40 6:15 4:40 4:40 5:45 R05 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R06 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R07 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R08 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R09 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R10 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R11 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R12 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R13 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R14 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R15 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R16 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R17 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R18 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R19 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:50 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R20 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R21 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R22 4:40 4:50 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 Beaver Valley Power Station 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact R23 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R24 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R25 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R26 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:55 R27 4:40 5:15 4:40 4:50 4:40 4:40 5:10 5:40 4:40 4:40 6:00 4:40 4:40 5:45 R28 4:40 5:20 4:40 4:50 4:40 4:40 5:30 5:50 4:40 4:40 6:15 4:40 4:40 5:45 R29 4:40 5:20 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:25 5:40 4:40 4:40 6:10 4:40 4:40 5:45 R30 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R31 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R32 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R33 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R34 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R36 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R37 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R38 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R39 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R40 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R41 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R42 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 Beaver Valley Power Station ES14 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R02 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R07 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R08 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R09 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R10 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R11 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R12 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R13 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R14 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R15 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R16 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R32 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R33 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R34 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R35 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R36 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R37 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R38 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R39 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R40 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R41 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R42 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 Beaver Valley Power Station ES15 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R02 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R07 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R08 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R09 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R10 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R11 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R12 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R13 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R14 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R15 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R16 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R32 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R33 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R34 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R35 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R36 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R37 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R38 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R39 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R40 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R41 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R42 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 Beaver Valley Power Station ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School 90 15 14.9 15.9 57 2:45 19.2 29 3:15 Midland Neel Elementary/Middle School 90 15 15.2 15.9 58 2:45 19.2 29 3:15 Western Beaver JuniorSenior High School 90 15 13.2 6.6 121 3:50 19.2 29 4:20 Bethel Christian School 90 15 9.8 39.8 15 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 South Side Elementary School 90 15 11.6 39.9 18 2:05 30.2 46 2:55 South Side High School 90 15 11.6 39.9 18 2:05 30.2 46 2:55 South Side Middle School 90 15 11.6 39.9 18 2:05 30.2 46 2:55 Fairview Elementary School 90 15 11.8 10.3 69 2:55 19.2 29 3:25 Highland Middle School 90 15 2.3 24.3 6 1:55 0.3 1 2:00 Blackhawk Intermediate School 90 15 1.5 23.2 4 1:50 0.3 1 1:55 Beaver Area High School 90 15 2.4 11.7 13 2:00 35.7 54 2:55 Beaver Area Middle School 90 15 2.4 11.7 13 2:00 35.7 54 2:55 Dutch Ridge Elementary 90 15 5.2 10.6 30 2:15 39.8 60 3:15 New Horizon School 90 15 5.8 10.6 33 2:20 39.8 60 3:20 College Square Elementary School 90 15 1.5 11.9 8 1:55 35.7 54 2:50 St Peter and Paul School 90 15 0.4 11.9 3 1:50 46.9 71 3:05 Patterson Primary School 90 15 4.1 26.3 10 1:55 0.3 1 2:00 Beaver County Career & Technology Center 90 15 10.0 9.5 63 2:50 30.2 46 3:40 Center Grange Primary School 90 15 9.7 9.5 61 2:50 30.2 46 3:40 Central Valley High School 90 15 10.7 9.4 69 2:55 30.1 46 3:45 Todd Lane Elementary School 90 15 12.1 8.9 82 3:10 30.2 46 4:00 Central Valley Middle School 90 15 13.3 15.0 54 2:40 30.2 46 3:30 Aliquippa Elementary School 90 15 6.5 4.3 91 3:20 24.7 38 4:00 Hopewell Elementary School 90 15 3.9 20.9 12 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Beaver Valley Power Station ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Aliquippa Jr./Sr. High School 90 15 8.3 4.9 102 3:30 24.7 38 4:10 Hopewell Junior High School 90 15 5.0 23.4 13 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Margaret Ross Elementary School 90 15 5.0 23.4 13 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Our Lady of Fatima School 90 15 4.4 22.1 12 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Hope Christian Academy 90 15 8.2 4.9 101 3:30 24.7 38 4:10 Hopewell Senior High School 90 15 5.0 23.4 13 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Independence Elementary School 90 15 5.0 5.9 51 2:40 30.1 46 3:30 Pleasant Hills Wesleyan Academy 90 15 8.6 36.8 15 2:00 30.2 46 2:50 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH East Liverpool Jr. High and High School 90 15 6.3 38.1 10 1:55 10.8 17 2:15 North Elementary School 90 15 6.2 38.1 10 1:55 10.8 17 2:15 Westgate Middle School 90 15 4.7 40.0 8 1:55 10.9 17 2:15 LaCroft Elementary School 90 15 3.0 14.3 13 2:00 10.9 17 2:20 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Allison Elementary School 90 15 9.0 37.3 15 2:00 11.2 17 2:20 Oak Glen Middle School 90 15 2.4 6.7 22 2:10 11.0 17 2:30 Oak Glen High School 90 15 2.4 6.7 22 2:10 11.0 17 2:30 New Manchester Elementary School 90 15 1.4 4.6 19 2:05 11.0 17 2:25 SHADOW REGION East Liverpool Christian School 90 15 Inside the Shadow Region N/A 11.5 18 2:05 John D. Rockefeller Career Center 90 15 Inside the Shadow Region N/A 10.8 17 2:05 Maximum for EPZ: 3:50 Maximum: 4:20 Average for EPZ: 2:25 Average: 3:00 Beaver Valley Power Station ES18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Distance Travel Route Route Travel Pickup to Rec. Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE Ctr Rec. Ctr Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1 120 13.6 18.4 44 30 3:15 25.4 38 5 10 79 30 6:00 2 1 120 15.2 17.5 52 30 3:25 18.9 28 5 10 74 30 5:55 3 2 120 9.7 29.2 20 30 2:50 18.9 28 5 10 61 30 5:05 4 1 120 15.6 40.0 23 30 2:55 30.7 46 5 10 93 30 6:00 5 1 120 13.3 40.0 20 30 2:50 25.4 38 5 10 78 30 5:35 6 2 120 9.9 19.8 30 30 3:00 18.9 28 5 10 58 30 5:15 2 120 9.7 17.1 34 30 3:05 35.4 53 5 10 88 30 6:15 7

2 150 9.7 21.8 27 30 3:30 35.4 53 5 10 88 30 6:40 2 120 12.0 15.8 46 30 3:20 35.4 53 5 10 90 30 6:30 8

2 150 12.0 24.5 29 30 3:30 35.4 53 5 10 90 30 6:40 3 120 8.5 14.5 35 30 3:10 29.3 44 5 10 71 30 5:50 9

3 150 8.5 25.7 20 30 3:20 29.3 44 5 10 71 30 6:00 10 1 120 6.4 7.7 50 30 3:20 30.7 46 5 10 65 30 6:00 11 1 120 10.2 40.0 15 30 2:50 25.4 38 5 10 69 30 5:25 12 1 120 8.5 40.0 13 30 2:45 6.2 9 5 10 35 30 4:15 13 3 120 6.6 40.0 10 30 2:40 6.2 9 5 10 29 30 4:05 14 2 120 2.2 40.0 3 30 2:35 4.7 7 5 10 14 30 3:45 15 2 120 5.5 35.9 9 30 2:40 17.0 26 5 10 43 30 4:35 16 1 120 1.0 4.8 13 30 2:45 11.3 17 5 10 24 30 4:15 3:30 Maximum ETE: 6:40 3:05 Average ETE: 5:30 Beaver Valley Power Station ES19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 88. Medical Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Speed Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA St. Barnabas, Beaver Ambulatory 90 1 37 30 7.9 14.0 34 2:35 Meadows Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 23 75 7.9 11.2 42 3:30 Ambulatory 90 1 30 30 3.4 15.1 14 2:15 Lakeview Personal Care Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 25 75 3.4 9.1 22 3:10 Bedridden 90 15 5 30 3.4 15.1 14 2:15 Ambulatory 90 1 11 11 5.8 17.5 20 2:05 Trinity Oaks Care Center Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 4 20 5.8 15.3 23 2:15 Ambulatory 90 1 110 30 6.1 13.1 28 2:30 Brighton Rehab and Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 105 75 6.1 10.0 37 3:25 Wellness Bedridden 90 15 105 30 6.1 13.1 28 2:30 Ambulatory 90 1 90 30 5.6 13.1 26 2:30 Heritage Valley Beaver Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 40 75 5.6 9.7 35 3:20 Bedridden 90 15 40 30 5.6 13.1 26 2:30 Ambulatory 90 1 69 30 5.1 13.4 23 2:25 Franciscan Manor Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 25 75 5.1 9.7 32 3:20 Bedridden 90 15 6 30 5.1 13.4 23 2:25 Ambulatory 90 1 23 23 2.1 16.0 8 2:05 Cambridge Village Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 2 10 2.1 20.4 6 1:50 Gateway Rehabilitation 2:50 Center Ambulatory 90 1 177 30 7.8 9.8 48 Ambulatory 90 1 35 30 6.3 4.0 95 3:35 Beaver Healthcare &

Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 16 75 6.3 4.9 77 4:05 Rehabilitation Center Bedridden 90 15 2 30 6.3 4.0 95 3:35 Pediatric Specialty Care Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 34 75 5.5 4.8 69 3:55 Ambulatory 90 1 7 7 6.6 3.8 104 3:25 Hunters Personal Care Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 1 5 6.6 3.8 104 3:20 Beaver Valley Power Station ES20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Beaver Valley Nursing & Ambulatory 90 1 60 30 2:00 Inside the Shadow Region Rehabilitation Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 9 45 2:15 Ambulatory 90 1 53 30 2:00 Elmcroft of Chippewa Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 20 75 Inside the Shadow Region 2:45 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 2:00 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH Ambulatory 90 1 20 20 6.1 40.0 9 2:00 Valley Oaks Care Center Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 24 75 6.1 40.0 9 2:55 Bedridden 90 15 11 30 6.1 40.0 9 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 22 22 4.1 40.0 6 2:00 Orchards Of East Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 6 30 4.1 40.0 6 2:10 Liverpool Bedridden 90 15 3 30 4.1 40.0 6 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 3 3 4.1 40.0 6 1:40 The Orchards Rehab Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 4 20 4.1 40.0 6 2:00 Suites Bedridden 90 15 2 30 4.1 40.0 6 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 56 30 4.8 40.0 7 2:10 East Liverpool City Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 6 30 4.8 40.0 7 2:10 Hospital Bedridden 90 15 2 30 4.8 40.0 7 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 41 30 2.9 40.0 4 2:05 Calcutta Health Care Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 27 75 2.9 40.0 4 2:50 Bedridden 90 15 13 30 2.9 40.0 4 2:05 Ambulatory 90 1 8 8 1:40 Senior Link Inside the Shadow Region Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 2 10 1:40 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Ambulatory 90 1 18 18 9.2 15.5 36 2:25 The Orchard at Foxcrest Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 43 75 9.2 20.7 27 3:15 Bedridden 90 15 11 30 9.2 16.7 33 2:35 Maximum ETE: 4:05 Average ETE: 2:35 Beaver Valley Power Station ES21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. SubAreas Comprising the BVPS EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station ES22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Beaver Valley Power Station ES23 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 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS), located in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. ETE provide 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 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.

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 Energy Harbor.

b. Attended meetings with emergency planners from Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, Beaver County, Columbiana County and Hancock County emergency management agencies to discuss methodology, project assumptions and to identify issues to be addressed and resources available.

c. Conducted a detailed field survey of the highway system and of area traffic conditions within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ - circle with an approximate 10mile radius centered at the plant) and the Shadow Region (area between the EPZ boundary and 15 miles radially from the plant).

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

e. Conducted an online demographic survey of the study area residents (See Appendix F).

f. Conducted a data collection effort to identify and describe special facilities (schools, medical facilities and correctional facilities), major employers, access and/or functional needs population, transportation resources available, the Beaver Valley Power Station 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

special event, 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 (mobilize) for the evacuation trip. These estimates are primarily based upon the online demographic survey.

3. Defined Evacuation Scenarios (See Section 6). These scenarios reflect the variation in demand, in trip generation distribution and in highway capacity, 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), Access Control Points (ACP) and barricades located within the EPZ. See Section 9 and Appendix G.

5. Used existing Subareas to define evacuation areas or regions. The EPZ is partitioned into 19 Subareas along jurisdictional and geographic boundaries. Regions are groups of contiguous Subareas 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 as recommended by NUREG/CR7002 Rev. 1.

6. Estimated demand for transit services for persons at schools, medical facilities, correctional facilities, transitdependent persons at home and those with access and/or functional needs.

7. Prepared the input streams for the DYNEV II system.

a. Estimated the evacuation traffic demand, based on the available information derived from census data, and from data provided by local and state agencies, Energy Harbor and from the demographic survey.

b. Applied the procedures specified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 20161) 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 using the field survey and aerial imagery, 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 BVPS.

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

Beaver Valley Power Station 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

10. Calculated the ETE for all transit activities including those for special facilities (schools, medical facilities, etc.), for the transitdependent population and for the access and/or functional needs population.

1.2 The Beaver Valley Power Station Location The BVPS is located on the Ohio River in Shippingport, Beaver County, Pennsylvania. The site is approximately 26 miles northwest of the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and 35 miles southeast of Youngstown, Ohio. The EPZ consists of parts of Beaver County in Pennsylvania, Columbiana County in Ohio and Hancock County in West Virginia. Figure 11 displays the area surrounding the BVPS, identifies the major population centers and roads in the area, and shows the location of the plant relative to the nearest large city - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

Field Surveys of the Highway Network KLD personnel drove the entire highway system within the EPZ and the Shadow Region. 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 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 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 Geographic 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 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 such that it is an exact replica of the physical roadway system.

Demographic Survey An online demographic survey was performed to gather information needed for the evacuation study. Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used, and tabulations of data compiled from the survey responses received.

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 Beaver Valley Power Station 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

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 output by the DYNEV II System such as Level of Service (LOS), vehicles discharged, average speed, and percent of vehicles evacuated. 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 the DYNEV II System 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 BVPS.

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 expedite the movement of vehicles and 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 The 90th percentile ETE for the entire EPZ increased by 25 minutes for a winter midweek midday good weather scenario (Scenario 6) and by 35 minutes for a summer weekend midday good weather scenario (Scenario 3) when compared with the 2012 study. The 100th percentile ETE is unchanged and is dictated by trip mobilization time (plus 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary) for both of these scenarios.

Table 13 presents a comparison of the present ETE study with the previous ETE study (KLD TR 495, dated December 2012). The major factors contributing to the differences between the ETE values obtained in this study and those of the previous study are:

Although the permanent resident population decreased by approximately 2%, the number of evacuating vehicles for the permanent resident population increased by 20%

(approximately 11,500 vehicles). This significant increase in permanent resident evacuating vehicles is caused by the increased number of evacuating vehicles per household as per the demographic survey, resulting in a significant decrease in permanent resident vehicle occupancy.

The number of evacuating vehicles within the Shadow Region increased by 21% (largely the result of the significant decrease in permanent resident vehicle occupancy discussed above), compared to the previous ETE. The significant increase in evacuating vehicles in the Shadow Region prolongs congestion in New Cumberland, Rochester, and near the Pittsburgh International Airport, thereby increasing ETE.

Residents without commuters take an additional 15 minutes to mobilize. This change in trip generation can impact the 90th percentile ETE.

Trip mobilization times decreased by 30 minutes for employees and transients, based on data collected from the demographic survey. The number of employees commuting into the EPZ decreased significantly (38%) due to the updated NRC criteria for major employers from 50 or more employees per shift to 200 or more employees per shift.

This decrease in quickly mobilizing employees can increase the 90th percentile ETE as it will take longer to reach an evacuation of 90% of the population when a larger Beaver Valley Power Station 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

percentage of the evacuating populace is residents who take significantly longer to mobilize than employees.

The combination of these various factors explains why the 90th percentile ETE for the entire EPZ (Region R03) are longer in this study relative to the 2012 ETE study.

Beaver Valley Power Station 17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction Stakeholder Nature of Stakeholder Interaction Attended meetings to define project methodology and data requirements and set up contacts with local government agencies. Reviewed and Energy Harbor emergency planning personnel approved the demographic survey instrument and all project assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and were informed of the study results.

Attended meetings to define project methodology and data requirements. Provided emergency plans and traffic management plans. Provided/

Beaver, Columbiana, and Hancock County confirmed special facility data, transient data and Emergency Management Agencies special event data. Reviewed and approved the demographic survey instrument and all study assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and were informed of the study results.

Attended the project kickoff meeting to define Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia State project methodology and data requirements.

Emergency Management Agencies/Offices Provided state radiological emergency preparedness plans.

Table 12. Highway Characteristics Number of lanes Posted speed Pavement width Actual free speed Shoulder type & width Abutting land use Intersection configuration Control devices Lane channelization Interchange geometries Geometrics: curves, grades Traffic signal type Unusual characteristics: Narrow bridges, sharp curves, poor pavement, flood warning signs, inadequate delineations, etc.

Beaver Valley Power Station 18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

used.

Basis Population = 113,427 Population = 110,984 Vehicles = 58,275 Vehicles = 69,865 2.40 persons per household, 1.23 2.40 persons per household, 1.53 Resident Population evacuating vehicles per household, evacuating vehicles per household, Vehicle Occupancy yielding 1.95 persons per evacuating yielding 1.57 persons per vehicle. evacuating vehicle.

ArcGIS Software using 2020 US ArcGIS Software using 2010 US Census Census blocks; area ratio method blocks; area ratio method used.

Shadow Population used.

20% Population = 27,392 20% Population = 27,403 20% Vehicles = 14,072 20% Vehicles = 16,993 Estimates of employees who reside Employee estimates based on outside the EPZ and commute to information provided about major work within the EPZ are based upon employers in EPZ. the data provided by each county Employee and by Energy Harbor Population 1.04 employees/vehicle based on 1.05 employees/vehicle based on phone survey results. demographic survey results.

Employees = 3,265 Employees = 2,017 Vehicles = 3,154 Vehicles = 1,921 Transient estimates based upon information provided about transient Transient estimates are based on attractions in EPZ, supplemented by the information provided by each observations of the facilities during the Transient Population county.

road survey and from aerial photography.

Transients = 11,431 Transients = 10,963 Vehicles = 5,319 Vehicles = 5,079 Medical facility population based on Medical facility population based on information provided by each county information provided by each and individual facility within the EPZ. county within the EPZ.

Medical Facility Population Current census = 1,724 Current census = 1,488 Buses Required = 47 Buses Required = 37 Wheelchair Buses Required = 39 Wheelchair Buses Required = 38 Ambulances Required = 41 Ambulances Required = 104 Beaver Valley Power Station 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study TransitDependent population TransitDependent population estimated using population estimated using population estimates estimates and results of and results of telephone survey.

demographic survey.

A total of 766 people who do not TransitDependent A total of 2,771 people who do not have access to a personal vehicle, Population have access to a vehicle, requiring 93 requiring 33 buses to evacuate. An buses to evacuate. An additional 36 additional 501 access and/or homebound special needs persons functional needs persons need needed special transportation to special transportation to evacuate evacuate (all 36 require a wheelchair (40 buses, 28 wheelchair buses and accessible vehicle).

29 ambulances needed).

School population based on School population based on information provided by each information provided by each county county within the EPZ, the previous supplemented by facility lists within the ETE study and supplemented by EPZ.

internet searches.

School Population School Enrollment = 24,552 (includes online schools and schools School Enrollment = 19,786 in the Shadow Region that shelter inplace)

Buses Required = 373 Buses Required = 319 Voluntary evacuation from 20% of the population within the EPZ, 20% of the population within the within EPZ in areas but not within the Evacuation Region EPZ, but not within the Evacuation outside region to be (see Figure 21) Region (see Figure 21) evacuated 20% of people outside of the EPZ within 20% of people outside of the EPZ Shadow Evacuation the Shadow Region within the Shadow Region (see Figure 72) (see Figure 72)

Network Size 2,631 Links; 1,957 Nodes. 2,949 Links; 2,203 Nodes.

Field surveys conducted in Field surveys conducted in December November 2020. Major 2010. Major intersections were video intersections were video archived.

archived. GIS shapefiles of signal Roadway Geometric GIS shapefiles of signal locations locations and roadway characteristics Data and roadway characteristics created created during road survey.

during road survey.

Road capacities based on 2016 Road capacities based on 2010 HCM.

HCM.

Beaver Valley Power Station 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Direct evacuation to designated Host Direct evacuation to designated School Evacuation School. Receiving/Host School.

82.5% of transitdependent persons 50% of transitdependent persons will will ride out with a neighbor or Ridesharing ride out with a neighbor or friend based friend based on demographic on federal guidance.

survey results.

External Traffic is loaded on I376 and External Traffic is loaded on I376 US22 . Externaltraffic trips are and US22. Externaltraffic trips are External Traffic stopped within the 2hour ACP stopped within the 2hour ACP establishment time. establishment time.

Vehicles = 8,200 Vehicles = 8,904 Based on residential telephone survey Based on residential demographic of specific pretrip mobilization survey of specific pretrip activities: mobilization activities:

Residents with commuters Residents with commuters returning returning leave between 45 and leave between 30 and 270 minutes.

270 minutes (330 with heavy snow).

Trip Generation for Evacuation Residents without commuters Residents without commuters returning returning leave between 15 and leave between 5 and 210 minutes.

225 minutes (285 with heavy snow).

Employees and transients leave Employees and transients leave between 5 and 120 minutes. between 5 and 90 minutes.

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

Normal, Rain/Light Snow, or Heavy Normal, Rain, or Snow. The capacity Snow. The capacity and free flow and free flow speed of all links in the speed of all links in the network are Weather network are reduced by 10% in the reduced by 10% for Rain/Light Snow event of rain and 20% for snow. and 25% and 15% for Heavy Snow, respectively.

Modeling DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.15.0 DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.21.0 Hookstown Fair, Hookstown, PA Hookstown Fair, Hookstown, PA Special Event Population = 1,650 Special Event Population = 1,500 Special Events additional transients. additional transients.

Special Event Vehicles = 413 Special Event Vehicles = 375 55 Regions (central sector wind 42 Regions (central sector wind direction and two adjacent sectors direction and each adjacent sector Evacuation Cases technique used) and 14 scenarios technique used) and 14 Scenarios producing 770 unique cases. producing 588 unique cases.

Beaver Valley Power Station 111 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, Evacuation Time Good Weather (Scenario 6): 3:05 Good Weather (Scenario 6): 3:30 Estimates for the entire EPZ, 90th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3): 2:50 Good Weather (Scenario 3): 3:25 Winter Weekday Midday, Winter Weekday Midday, Evacuation Time Good Weather (Scenario 6): 4:40 Good Weather (Scenario 6): 4:40 Estimates for the entire EPZ, 100th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3): 4:40 Good Weather (Scenario 3): 4:40 Beaver Valley Power Station 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 11. BVPS Location Beaver Valley Power Station 113 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 12. BVPS LinkNode Analysis Network Beaver Valley Power Station 114 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 ETE.

2.1 Data Estimate Assumptions

1. The permanent resident population is based on the 2020 U.S. Census population from the Census Bureau website1. (See Section 3.1).

2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon data provided by each county and by Energy Harbor. (See Section 3.4).

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based on data received from the counties within the EPZ, the National Center for Education Statistics website2, and the previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches and aerial imagery where updated data was not available.

4. The average household size (2.40 people per household) is based on the 2020 U.S. Census.

5. Evacuating vehicles per household (1.53 evacuating vehicles per household - see Appendix F, subsection F.3.2) are based on the results of the online demographic survey.

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

7. Employee vehicle occupancies are based on the results of the demographic survey; 1.05 employees per vehicle are used in the study. (See Appendix F, subsection F.3.1 and Figure F7). In addition, it is assumed there are two people per carpool, on average.

8. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ is 40 mph based on Pennsylvania state laws for buses and average posted speed limits on major roadways within the EPZ.

9. Roadway capacity estimates are based on field surveys performed in 2020 (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 siren notification.

b. Mobilization of the general population will commence within 15 minutes after 1

www.census.gov 2

https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/index.asp 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

siren notification.

c. ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

2. The centerpoint of the plant is located at the geometric center of the containment building for Units 1 and 2 at 40°37'21.0"N and 80°25'58.0"W.

3. The DYNEV II4 system 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 traffic control devices and traffic guides. All major evacuation routes are used in the analysis.

5. The existing EPZ and SubArea 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 SubAreas 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) are assumed to be the same as that of the permanent resident population within the EPZ.

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

10. This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of the evacuation. Rather, there is an initialization period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the anticipated traffic volumes from the start of the evacuation 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 evacuation depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated. See Section 3.12.

11. To account for boundary conditions (roadway conditions outside the study area that are not specifically modeled due to the limited radius of the study area) beyond the study area, this study assumes a 25% 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 (main street) traffic volume will be more significant than the competing 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(side street) 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.

12. The ETE also includes consideration of through (ExternalExternal traffic that originates its trip outside of the study area and has its destination outside of the study area) trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region.

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.

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, 84%

of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter (see Appendix F, subsection F.3.1 and Figure F6); 59% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip (see Appendix F, subsection F.3.2).

Therefore, 50% (84% x 59% = 50%) 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 are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 82% of the transitdependent population will rideshare (see Appendix F, subsection F.3.1 and Figure F5).

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

a. Schools:

i. If schools are in session, buses will evacuate students directly to the host schools.

ii. For the schools that are evacuated via buses, it is assumed no school children will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

iii. It is assumed that parents will pick up children at day care facilities prior to evacuation and the time needed to perform this activity is included in the responses to the demographic survey.

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

v. Schools located in the Shadow Region are evacuated to host schools if the county public information brochure states that the facilities will be evacuated.

Beaver Valley Power Station 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

b. Medical Facilities

i. Buses, wheelchair buses 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 at each medical facility was provided by the county emergency management agencies.

c. Transitdependent permanent residents:

i. Transitdependent general population are evacuated to reception centers.

ii. 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.

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

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

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

3. Transit vehicle capacities:

a. School buses = 70 students per bus for elementary schools and 50 students per bus for middle/high schools.

b. Ambulatory transitdependent persons and medical facility patients = 30 persons per bus.

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

d. Wheelchair vans = 4 wheelchair bound persons.

e. Wheelchair buses = 15 wheelchair bound persons.

4. Transit vehicles mobilization times:

a. Vehicles will arrive at schools to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

b. Transit dependent buses are mobilized when approximately 90% of residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization at 120 minutes after the ATE (see Figure 54).

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

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. Buses for schools are loaded in 15 minutes.

b. Transit Dependent buses require 1 minute of loading time per passenger.

c. Buses for hospitals and medical 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.

6. Drivers for all transit vehicles are available.

7. The Beaver County Jail will shelterinplace during an emergency.

Beaver Valley Power Station 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions

1. Traffic Control Points (TCP) and Access Control Points (ACP) as defined in the approved county and state emergency plans are considered in the ETE analysis, as per NRC guidance.

See Appendix G.

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

3. All transit vehicles and other responders entering the EPZ to support the evacuation are unhindered by personnel manning TCPs and ACPs.

4. Due to the concerns with reception center capacity, evacuees are not allowed to cross state borders when evacuating. ACPs will be established along the following routes at state borders:

a. Newell Toll Bridge at the Ohio/West Virginia border.

b. Ohio State Route 39 and Pennsylvania State Route 68 at the Ohio/Pennsylvania border.

c. Ohio State Route 154 and Pennsylvania State Route 251 at the Ohio/Pennsylvania border.

d. US Route 30 at the Pennsylvania/West Virginia border.

2.6 Scenarios and Regions

1. A total of 14 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. The Hookstown Fair is considered as the special event (single or multiday event that attracts a significant number of transients into the EPZ; recommended by NRC guidance) for Scenario 13.

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 one lane on I376 westbound from Highway 18/Frankfort Rd (Exit 39) to the interchange with State Highway 51/Constitution Blvd (Exit 31) for the roadway impact scenario - Scenario 14.

2. Two types of adverse weather scenarios are considered. Rain may occur for either winter or summer scenarios; snow occurs in winter scenarios only. It is assumed that the rain or snow begins at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued. Thus, no weather related reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed.

Beaver Valley Power Station 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

It is assumed that roads are passable and that the appropriate agencies are clearing/treating the roads as they would normally with snow and the roads are passable albeit at lower speeds and capacities.

3. Adverse weather scenarios affect roadway capacity and free flow highway speeds. In accordance with Table 31 of Revision 1 to NUREG/CR7002, this study assumes a 10%

reduction in speed and capacity for rain and light snow and a speed and capacity reduction of 15% and 25%, respectively, for heavy snow. The factors are shown in Table 22.

4. Some evacuees will need additional time for heavy snow scenarios to clear their driveways and access the public roadway system. The distribution of time for this activity was gathered through a demographic survey of the public and takes up to 180 minutes (see Figure 52). It is assumed that the time needed by evacuees to remove snow from their driveways is sufficient time for snow removal crews to mobilize and clear/treat the public roadway system.

5. Employment is reduced slightly in the summer for vacations.

6. Mobilization and loading times for transit vehicles are slightly longer in adverse weather.

It is assumed that mobilization times are 10 minutes and 20 minutes longer in rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. It is assumed that loading times are 5 minutes and 10 minutes longer for school buses and 10 minutes and 20 minutes longer for transit buses in rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. Refer to Table 22.

7. Regions are defined by the underlying keyhole or circular configurations and are based on local wind persistence. These Regions, as defined, display irregular boundaries reflecting the geography of the SubAreas included within these underlying configurations.

All 16 cardinal and intercardinal wind direction keyhole configurations are considered, and the keyhole includes the downwind sector and two adjoining sectors on each side (a five sector keyhole). It is assumed that everyone within the group of SubAreas forming a Region that is issued an ATE will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.

8. Due to the irregular shapes of the SubArea, there are instances where a small portion of a SubArea (a sliver) is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (less than 500 people or 10% of the SubArea population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the SubArea is not included in the Region so as to not evacuate large numbers of people outside of the keyhole for a small number of people that are actually in the keyhole, unless otherwise stated in the PAR document.

Beaver Valley Power Station 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

9. Staged evacuation is considered as defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 - those people between 2 and 5 miles will shelterinplace until 90% of the 2mile region has evacuated, then they will evacuate. See Regions R32 through R42 in Table 61.

Beaver Valley Power Station 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season5 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 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/Light Snow None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain/Light Snow None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend 13 Summer Weekend Evening Good Hookstown Fair Roadway Impact - Lane Closure on I376 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Westbound 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).

Beaver Valley Power Station 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Mobilization Time Mobilization Time Loading Time for Loading Time for Highway Free Flow for General for Transit Vehicles School Buses Transit Buses6 Scenario Capacity* Speed* Population Rain/Light 90% 90% No Effect 10minute increase 5minute increase 10minute increase Snow Heavy Snow 75% 85% See Section 5.3 20minute increase 10minute increase 20minute increase

• Adverse weather capacity and speed values are given as a percentage of good weather conditions. Roads are assumed to be passable.

6 Does not apply to medical facilities and those with access and/or functional needs as loading times for these people are already conservative.

Beaver Valley Power Station 29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Beaver Valley Power Station 210 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 (resident, employee, transient).

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 U.S. 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 could tend to overestimate the number of transients and can lead to ETE that are too conservative.

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

Permanent residents - people who are yearround 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 SubArea and by polar coordinate representation (population rose). The BVPS EPZ is subdivided into 19 SubAreas. The SubAreas comprising the EPZ are shown in Figure 31.

Beaver Valley Power Station 31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.1 Permanent Residents The primary source for estimating permanent population is the 2020 U.S. Census data with an availability date of September 16, 2021. The average household size (2.40 persons/household was estimated using the U.S. Census data - See Section 2.1 and Appendix F). The number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.53 vehicles/household - See Appendix F, SubSection F.3.2) was adapted from the demographic survey.

The permanent resident population is estimated by cutting the census block polygons by the SubArea 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. This methodology (referred to as the area ratio method) assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 31 summarizes the permanent resident population within the EPZ, by SubArea, for 2010 and for 2020 (based on the methodology above). As indicated, the permanent resident population within the EPZ has decreased by 2.15% since the 2010 Census.

To estimate the number of vehicles, the 2020 Census permanent resident population is divided by the average household size and then multiplied by the average number of evacuating vehicles per 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 the BVPS. 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, college/university student housing, 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.

3.1.1 Colleges and Universities There are four college/university campuses within the EPZ: Community College of Beaver County, Penn State - Beaver Campus, Kent State University, and New Castle School of Trades -

East Liverpool Campus. The enrollment data was provided by the counties within the EPZ, supplemented by data obtained from the National Application Center1 (NAC) database. The data/information is summarized below:

Community College of Beaver County:

Located in SubArea P9, 7.1 miles eastnortheast of the BVPS.

Data provided by Beaver County indicates this community college has a total enrollment of 2,800 students. Note, not all students attend classes on campus at one time.

Since the college does not provide student housing, all the students are considered commuter students. In the event of an emergency, it is assumed all students have access to their personal vehicles or assistance from their fellow classmates to evacuate.

1 https://www.nationalapplicationcenter.com/

Beaver Valley Power Station 32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The number of personal vehicles (450 vehicles) on campus during peak times was estimated using aerial imagery. It is conservatively assumed that all the students live outside of the EPZ. As such, 450 commuter student vehicles were assigned to this community college.

Penn State - Beaver Campus:

Located in SubArea P9, 8.1 miles eastnortheast of the BVPS.

Penn State has an enrollment of 530 students at Beaver Campus. According to the NAC database (as of December 2019), 23% of the students live on campus. As such, there are 122 (530 x 23%) oncampus students and 408 (530 - 122) offcampus students who commute to school.

The commuter vehicle occupancy rate (1.05 - see Appendix F, SubSection F.3.1) obtained from the demographic survey was used to estimate the number of commuter student vehicles, which is 389 (408 ÷ 1.05). Similar to the Community College of Beaver County, all the commuter students are assumed to live outside the EPZ. Therefore, 389 commuter student vehicles were assigned to Penn State at Beaver Campus.

For students living on campus, it is expected that all 122 students could be evacuated by personal vehicles or by ridesharing. Applying the same commuter vehicle occupancy rate from above, there are 116 (122 ÷ 1.05) evacuating vehicles.

Kent State University - East Liverpool Campus:

Located in SubArea O2, 7.6 miles west of the BVPS.

Based on data provided by Columbiana County, Kent State University has a total of 1,400 students enrolled at the East Liverpool Campus. There is no student housing at East Liverpool Campus. As such, all the students are assumed to be commuter students.

As indicated by aerial imagery, this campus has limited parking space, much less than the total enrollment. Thus, only a portion of the students are on campus at one time.

The number of evacuating vehicles can be estimated based on the parking capacity, which is 175 based on the campus map provided on the university website.

Assuming all the commuter students live outside the EPZ, and that they can be evacuated by personal vehicles or ridesharing with fellow classmates, 175 commuter student vehicles were assigned to this campus.

New Castle School of Trades - East Liverpool Campus:

Located in SubArea O2, 7.6 miles west of the BVPS.

According to Columbiana County, the trade school has 15 commuter students. Applying the commuter vehicle occupancy rate (1.05), 14 (15 ÷ 1.05) commuter student vehicles were assigned to this school.

3.2 Shadow Population A portion of the population living in the Shadow Region outside the EPZ extending to 15 miles radially from the BVPS may elect to evacuate without having been instructed to do so. Based Beaver Valley Power Station 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

upon NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance, it is assumed that 20% of the permanent resident population, based on U.S. Census Bureau data, in this Shadow Region will elect to evacuate.

Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuation 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.

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 (shopping, recreation).

Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at camping facilities, hotels and motels. Data for transient attractions were provided by the counties within the EPZ. When data could not be provided, transient vehicles were estimated based on the parking capacity obtained from aerial imagery or from information on the facility website. It is assumed that transients travel to the recreational areas as a family/household. As such, the average household size (2.40 persons per household - See Section 3.1) was used to estimate the transient population. The transient attractions within the BVPS EPZ are summarized as follows:

Campgrounds - 2,229 transients and 1,304 vehicles; 1.71 transients per vehicle (NOTE:

Recreational Vehicles (RVs) are modeled as 2 vehicles in DYNEV due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.)

Day Camps - 578 transients and 165 vehicles; 3.50 transients per vehicles Golf Courses - 1,091 transients and 474 vehicles; 2.30 transients per vehicle Hunting/Fishing Areas - 1,082 transients and 451 vehicles; 2.40 transients per vehicle Marinas - 163 transients and 89 vehicles; 1.83 transients per vehicle (NOTE: vehicles with boat trailers are modeled as 2 vehicles in DYNEV.)

Parks - 350 transients and 220 vehicles; 1.59 transients per vehicle Other Recreational Facilities - 3,150 transients and 1,463 vehicles; 2.15 transients per vehicle Lodging Facilities - 2,320 transients and 913 vehicles; 2.54 transients per vehicle Appendix E summarizes the transient data that was estimated for the EPZ. Table E5 through Table E7 present the number of transients visiting recreational areas; while Table E8 presents the number of transients at lodging facilities within the EPZ.

In total, there are 10,963 transients in the EPZ at peak times, evacuating in 5,079 vehicles (an average vehicle occupancy of 2.16 transients per vehicle). Table 34 presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by SubArea. Figure 36 and Figure 37 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.

Beaver Valley Power Station 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 counties within the EPZ provided employment data for a list of employers within the EPZ.

This data includes the maximum shift employment and percent of employees living outside of the EPZ for each employer. As per the federal guidance (NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1), employers with 200 or more employees working in a single shift are considered to be major employers. As such, the employers not meeting this criterion are not considered in this study.

In total, there are 2,017 employees commuting into the EPZ on a daily basis. To estimate the number of evacuating employee vehicles, 1.05 employees per vehicle obtained from the demographic survey (see Appendix F, SubSection F.3.1) was used for all the major employers.

The detailed information for each major employer is included in Appendix E, Table E4. Table 35 presents the estimates of employees and vehicles commuting into the EPZ by Sub Area. Figure 38 and Figure 39 present these data by sector.

3.5 Medical Facilities Data were provided by the counties for each of the medical facilities within the EPZ. Table E3 in Appendix E summarizes the data gathered. Table 36 presents the current census of medical facilities in the EPZ along with the breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound, and bedridden patients. As shown in this table, a total of 1,488 people has been identified as living in or being treated in these facilities.

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

36. The number of ambulance runs is determined by assuming that 2 patients can be accommodated per ambulance trip, the number of wheelchair bus runs assumes 15 wheelchairs patients per trip, and the number of bus runs estimated assumes 30 ambulatory patients per trip.

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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 37 presents estimates of transitdependent people. Note:

• 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 will evacuate by ridesharing with neighbors, friends or family. For example, nearly 80% of those who evacuated from Mississauga, Ontario2 who did not use their own cars, shared a ride with neighbors or friends. Other documents report that approximately 70% of transit dependent persons were evacuated via ride sharing.

Based on the results of the demographic survey, 82.5% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

The estimated number of bus trips needed to service transitdependent persons is based on an estimate of 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 x10) = 27. On this basis, the average load factor anticipated is (27/40) x 100 = 68%. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 37 by 50%, the demand for service can still be accommodated by the available bus seating capacity.

2 20 10 40 1.5 1.00 3

Table 37 indicates that transportation must be provided for 766 people. Therefore, a total of 26 buses are required from a capacity standpoint. The transitdependent population by Sub Area was estimated by multiplying the total transitdependent population by the ratio of the SubArea permanent resident population to the EPZ permanent resident population. In order to service all of the transit dependent population and have at least one bus drive through each of the Subareas to pick up transit dependent people, 33 buses are used in the ETE calculations; see Section 10 for further discussion. These buses are represented as two vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

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 BVPS EPZ:

2 Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto, THE MISSISSAUGA EVACUATION FINAL REPORT, June 1981. The report indicates that 6,600 people of a transit-dependent population of 8,600 people shared rides with other residents; a ride share rate of 77% (Page 5-10).

Beaver Valley Power Station 36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Where:

A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 46,243 0.002 1.00 0.145 1.75 1 0.84 0.41 0.523 2.89 2 0.84 0.41 4,378 1 0.825 30 26 These calculations are explained as follows:

• The number of households (HH) is computed by dividing the EPZ population by the average household size (110,984 ÷ 2.40) and is 46,243.

• All members (1.00 avg.) of households (HH) with no vehicles (0.2%) will evacuate by public transit or rideshare. The term 46,243 (number of households) x 0.002 x 1.00, accounts for these people.

• The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (14.5%), who are at home, equal (1.751).

The number of HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (46,243 x 0.145 x 0.75 x 0.84 x 0.41), as 84% of EPZ households have a commuter, 41% of which would not return home in the event of an emergency. The number of persons 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 (52.3%), who are at home, equal (2.89 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 46,243 x 0.89 x (0.84 x 0.41)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 number of buses needed is computed as the product of the number of people requiring public transit and the percentage of people who will not rideshare (100%

minus 82.5%) divided by the bus occupancy (30 passengers - see Section 2.4, Item 3b).

The estimate of transitdependent population in Table 37 far exceeds the number of registered transitdependent persons in the EPZ as provided by the counties (discussed below in Section 3.9). This is consistent with the findings of NUREG/CR6953, Volume 2, in that a large majority Beaver Valley Power Station 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

of the transitdependent population within the EPZs of U.S. nuclear plants do not register with their local emergency response agency.

3.7 School Population Demand Table 38 presents the school population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all schools within the EPZ for the 20202021 school year. This information was provided by the counties supplemented by internet searches where no data was provided. The column in Table 38 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, since the intent of schools is to evacuate all students by bus.

• Bus capacity, expressed in students per bus, is set to 70 for primary schools and 50 for middle and high schools.

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

• Schools in the Shadow Region shelterinplace until they are picked up by their parents unless they are assigned a host school inside the public information brochure or county emergency plans, then it is assumed they are evacuated to the host school by bus.

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

It is recommended that the counties in the EPZ 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. The need for buses would be reduced by any high school students who have evacuated using private automobiles (if permitted by school authorities).

Those buses originally allocated to evacuate schoolchildren that are not needed due to children being picked up by their parents, can be gainfully assigned to service other facilities or those persons who do not have access to private vehicles or to ridesharing.

Table 103 presents a list of the host schools for each school in the EPZ. Students will be transported to these host schools where they will be subsequently retrieved by their respective families or guardians.

3.8 Special Event One special event (scenario 13) is considered for the ETE study - the Hookstown Fair. The Hookstown Fair takes place for seven days during the last full week of August in Hookstown, PA.

Data and information for the event were provided by Beaver County. Peak attendance is on the weekend in the evening (the tractor pull and concerts are the biggest attractions and they occur Beaver Valley Power Station 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

in the evening) when 6,000 people gather in Hookstown for the event. It is estimated that 75%

of these people are residents of the EPZ; thus, there are 1,500 additional transients that enter the EPZ for the Hookstown Fair. It was reported that the vehicle occupancy rate for this event is 4 people, on average, resulting in an additional 375 transient vehicles. Vehicles are parked on the fair property and are distributed over two links within the fairgrounds (Subarea P6). The special event vehicle trips are generated utilizing the same mobilization time distributions as transients. Public transportation is not provided for this event and was not considered in the special event analysis.

A second event, Ceramic City Jazz festival, was mentioned by Columbiana County but it was not considered as it attracts less (1,250) transients into the EPZ.

3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population Based on data provided by the counties, there are an estimated 233 access and/or functional needs people within the Beaver County portion of the EPZ, 55 people within the Columbiana County portion of the EPZ and 233 people within the Hancock County portion of the EPZ who require transportation assistance to evacuate. Table 39 summarizes the data provided. The percent breakdown for ambulatory, wheelchair bound, and bedridden patients was estimated using the averages from medical facilities3 (see Table 36). It was indicated by Hancock County that out of 213 people there are 88 people that need mobility assistance. It is estimated that 70 of these people are wheelchair bound and 18 people are bedridden, using the averages from medical facilities for Hancock County.

The transportation requirements for the access and/or functional needs population are also presented in Table 39. The number of ambulance runs is determined by assuming that 2 patients can be accommodated per ambulance trip; the number of wheelchair bus runs assumes 15 wheelchairs per trip and the number of bus runs estimated assumes 30 ambulatory patients per trip.

3.10 Correctional Facilities As detailed in Table E9, there is one correctional facility within the EPZ - the Beaver County Jail with a total inmate population of 310 people. The Beaver County Emergency Operations Plan indicates the Beaver County Jail would not be evacuated; rather persons would be given potassium iodide (KI) and will shelterinplace.

3 There are 60% ambulatory patients, 26% wheelchair bound patients, and 14% bedridden patients at medical facilities within the Beaver County portion of the EPZ. There are 60% ambulatory patients, 28% wheelchair bound patients, and 12% bedridden patients at medical facilities within the Columbiana County portion of the EPZ. Since Hancock County provided the number of ambulatory people with access and/or functional needs, it was assumed the remaining people with access and/or functional needs are split 80% and 20% for wheelchair bound and bedridden, respectively, using the medical facility data within the Hancock County portion of the EPZ.

Beaver Valley Power Station 39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.11 External Traffic Vehicles will be traveling through the study area (externalexternal trips) at the time of an accident. After the Advisory to Evacuate is announced, these throughtravelers will also evacuate. These through vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes traversing the study area - US 22 and I376. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the study area during the first 120 minutes following the Advisory to Evacuate.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data was obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation website 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 310, 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 at 120 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate) to estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. As indicated, there are 8,904 vehicles entering the EPZ as externalexternal trips prior to the activation of the ACP and the diversion of this traffic. This number is reduced to 40% for evening scenarios (scenarios 5 and 12) as discussed in Section 6.

3.12 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 59, 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 an 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 2,103 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, good weather) conditions.

3.13 Summary of Demand A summary of the population and vehicle demand is provided in Table 311 and Table 312, respectively. This summary includes all population groups described in this section. A total of 184,728 people and 105,239 vehicles are considered in this study.

Beaver Valley Power Station 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population SubArea 2010 Population 2020 Population P1 3,680 3,371 P2 1,542 1,479 P3 4,607 5,132 P4 3,042 2,806 P5 1,365 1,356 P6 1,124 1,013 P7 6,182 6,396 P8 15,361 15,448 P9 17,718 17,414 P10 22,494 23,117 P11 2,509 2,262 P12 3,799 3,447 O1 798 762 O2 14,174 12,765 O3 5,428 5,412 O4 156 127 W1 6,173 5,573 W2 2,109 1,995 W3 1,166 1,109 EPZ TOTAL: 113,427 110,984 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 2.15%

Beaver Valley Power Station 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by SubArea 2020 SubArea 2020 Population Resident Vehicles P1 3,371 2,148 P2 1,479 941 P3 5,132 3,259 P4 2,806 1,778 P5 1,356 861 P6 1,013 644 P7 6,396 3,996 P8 15,448 9,473 P9 17,414 11,088 P10 23,117 14,515 P11 2,262 1,439 P12 3,447 2,201 O1 762 482 O2 12,765 8,061 O3 5,412 3,394 O4 127 81 W1 5,573 3,523 W2 1,995 1,273 W3 1,109 708 EPZ TOTAL: 110,984 69,865 Beaver Valley Power Station 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Evacuating Sector 2020 Population Vehicles N 4,399 2,735 NNE 13,538 8,083 NE 21,479 13,373 ENE 12,978 8,216 E 15,683 9,911 ESE 28,078 17,016 SE 12,069 7,325 SSE 1,601 1,015 S 935 596 SSW 3,662 2,336 SW 8,228 5,246 WSW 1,286 816 W 5,664 3,603 WNW 3,430 2,188 NW 2,287 1,420 NNW 1,696 1,084 TOTAL: 137,013 84,963 Beaver Valley Power Station 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles SubArea Transients Transient Vehicles P1 750 313 P2 778 324 P3 152 68 P4 0 0 P5 0 0 P6 0 0 P7 879 369 P8 622 356 P9 3,883 1,636 P10 60 30 P11 304 127 P12 1,328 723 O1 0 0 O2 186 95 O3 683 230 O4 0 0 W1 907 440 W2 431 368 W3 0 0 EPZ TOTAL: 10,963 5,079 Beaver Valley Power Station 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ SubArea Employees Employee Vehicles P1 360 343 P2 0 0 P3 0 0 P4 0 0 P5 0 0 P6 0 0 P7 0 0 P8 542 516 P9 415 395 P10 0 0 P11 0 0 P12 0 0 O1 0 0 O2 0 0 O3 0 0 O4 0 0 W1 700 667 W2 0 0 W3 0 0 EPZ TOTAL: 2,017 1,921 Beaver Valley Power Station 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand Wheel Wheel Current Ambu chair Bed chair Bus Ambulance SubArea Facility Name Census latory Bound ridden Bus Runs Runs Runs BEAVER COUNTY, PA P7 St. Barnabas, Beaver Meadows 60 37 23 0 2 2 0 P7 Lakeview Personal Care 60 30 25 5 1 2 3 P8 Trinity Oaks Care Center 15 11 4 0 1 1 0 P8 Brighton Rehab and Wellness 320 110 105 105 4 7 53 P8 Heritage Valley Beaver 170 90 40 40 3 3 20 P8 Franciscan Manor 100 69 25 6 3 2 3 P8 Cambridge Village 25 23 2 0 1 1 0 P9 Gateway Rehabilitation Center 177 177 0 0 6 0 0 P10 Beaver Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center 53 35 16 2 2 2 1 P10 Pediatric Specialty Care 34 0 34 0 0 3 0 P10 Hunters Personal Care 8 7 1 0 1 1 0 S.R. Beaver Valley Nursing & Rehabilitation 69 60 9 0 2 1 0 S.R. Elmcroft of Chippewa 75 53 20 2 2 2 1 Beaver County Subtotal: 1,166 702 304 160 28 27 81 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH O2 Valley Oaks Care Center 55 20 24 11 1 2 6 O2 Orchards Of East Liverpool 31 22 6 3 1 1 2 O2 The Orchards Rehab Suites 9 3 4 2 1 1 1 O2 East Liverpool City Hospital 64 56 6 2 2 1 1 O3 Calcutta Health Care 81 41 27 13 2 2 7 S.R. Senior Link 10 8 2 0 1 1 0 Columbiana County Subtotal: 250 150 69 31 8 8 17 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV W1 The Orchard at Foxcrest 72 18 43 11 1 3 6 Hancock County Subtotal: 72 18 43 11 1 3 6 EPZ TOTAL: 1,488 870 416 202 37 38 104 Beaver Valley Power Station 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Average HH Size Survey Percent HH Survey Percent with Indicated No. of with Indicated No. of Survey Percent HH Total People Population Vehicles Estimated Vehicles Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring 2020 EPZ No. of with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 110,984 1.00 1.75 2.89 46,243 0.2% 14.5% 52.3% 84.0% 41.0% 4,378 82.5% 766 0.7%

Beaver Valley Power Station 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 38. School Population Demand Estimates Buses SubArea School Name4 Enrollment Required BEAVER COUNTY, PA P1 Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School 660 14 P1 PA Cyber School P1 Midland Neel Elementary/Middle School 240 4 P3 Western Beaver JuniorSenior High School 346 7 P4 Bethel Christian School 31 1 P5 South Side Elementary School 397 6 P5 South Side High School 310 7 P5 South Side Middle School 217 5 P7 Fairview Elementary School 326 5 P7 Highland Middle School 733 15 P7 Blackhawk Intermediate School 666 14 P8 Beaver Area High School 708 15 P8 Beaver Area Middle School 291 6 P8 Dutch Ridge Elementary 447 7 P8 New Horizon School 163 4 P8 College Square Elementary School 560 8 P8 St Peter and Paul School 124 2 P8 Patterson Primary School 153 3 P9 Beaver County Career & Technology Center5 583 10 P9 Center Grange Primary School 479 7 P9 Central Valley High School 720 15 P9 Todd Lane Elementary School 525 8 P9 Central Valley Middle School 541 11 P10 Aliquippa Elementary School 554 8 P10 Hopewell Elementary School 367 6 P10 Aliquippa Jr./Sr. High School 465 10 P10 Hopewell Junior High School 639 13 P10 Margaret Ross Elementary School 220 4 P10 Our Lady of Fatima School 115 2 P10 Hope Christian Academy 5 1 P10 Hopewell Senior High School 623 13 P11 Independence Elementary School 253 4 P12 Pleasant Hills Wesleyan Academy 10 1 Beaver County Subtotal: 12,471 236 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH O2 East Liverpool Jr. High and High School 891 18 O2 North Elementary School 421 7 4

There are online schools within the EPZ that are not assigned buses. It is assumed these students are at home during school hours and can evacuate with their families in personal vehicles. These students and vehicles are accounted for with EPZ residents.

5 It was estimated (based on aerial imagery) that out of 583 students, 110 students evacuate by personal vehicle. The remaining 473 students require a bus.

Beaver Valley Power Station 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Buses 4

SubArea School Name Enrollment Required O2 Buckeye Online School for Success O2 Quaker Digital Academy O2 Westgate Middle School 350 7 O2 LaCroft Elementary School 386 6 O3 Employment Development Center 35 Columbiana County Subtotal: 2,083 38 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV W1 Allison Elementary School 314 5 W2 Oak Glen Middle School 600 12 W2 Oak Glen High School 530 11 W3 New Manchester Elementary School 250 4 Hancock County Subtotal: 1,694 32 EPZ TOTAL: 16,248 306 SHADOW REGION6 S.R. Blackhawk High School 738 S.R. New Brighton Area Middle School 334 S.R. New Brighton Area Elementary School 607 S.R. New Brighton Area High School 403 S.R. Baden Academy Charter School 573 S.R. Saint Monica Catholic Academy 101 S.R. State Street Elementary School 268 S.R. Beaver Falls Middle School 398 S.R. Central Elementary School 476 S.R. Ambridge Area Sr. High School 724 S.R. Big Beaver Falls Senior High School 478 S.R. Sylvania Hills Christian Academy 20 S.R. The School at McGuire Memorial 73 S.R. Highland Elementary School 289 S.R. Economy Elementary School 414 S.R. Ambridge Area Jr. High School 550 S.R. Beaver County Christian Secondary 96 S.R. Beaver County Christian Elementary School 179 S.R. Big Beaver Falls Elementary School 326 S.R. East Liverpool Christian School 130 3 S.R. Beaver Local Elementary School 667 S.R. John D. Rockefeller Career Center 460 10 Shadow Region Total: 8,304 13 STUDY AREA TOTAL: 24,552 319 6

Schools in the Shadow Region shelter in place until they are picked up by parents unless it is stated otherwise inside the county emergency plans or in the public information brochure.

Beaver Valley Power Station 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Estimates Population Group Transportation Needed Population Vehicles deployed BEAVER COUNTY, PA Ambulatory Bus 140 20 Wheelchair bound Wheelchair Bus 61 15 Bedridden Ambulance 32 16 Beaver County Subtotal: 233 51 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH Ambulatory Bus 33 5 Wheelchair bound Wheelchair Bus 15 3 Bedridden Ambulance 7 4 Columbiana County Subtotal: 55 12 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Ambulatory Bus 125 15 Wheelchair bound Wheelchair Bus 70 10 Bedridden Ambulance 18 9 Hancock County Subtotal: 213 34 TOTAL: 501 97 Table 310. BVPS EPZ External Traffic Upstream Downstream Hourly External Node Node Road Name Direction AADT7 KFactor8 DFactor8 Volume Traffic 8892 892 US22 Eastbound 21,000 0.107 0.5 1,124 2,248 8909 1477 US22 Westbound 21,000 0.107 0.5 1,124 2,248 8105 1063 I376 Northbound 19,000 0.116 0.5 1,102 2,204 8425 1136 I376 Southbound 19,000 0.116 0.5 1,102 2,204 TOTAL 8,904 7

https://www.penndot.pa.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Pages/Traffic-Volume.aspx 8

HCM 2016 Beaver Valley Power Station 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 311. Summary of Population Demand9 Transit Special Universities/ Special Shadow External SubArea Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities10 Colleges Schools Event Population11 Traffic Total P1 3,371 23 750 360 0 0 900 0 0 0 5,404 P2 1,479 10 778 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,267 P3 5,132 35 152 0 0 0 346 0 0 0 5,665 P4 2,806 19 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 2,856 P5 1,356 9 0 0 0 0 924 0 0 0 2,289 P6 1,013 7 0 0 0 0 0 1,500 0 0 2,520 P7 6,396 44 879 0 120 0 1,725 0 0 0 9,164 P8 15,448 107 622 542 630 0 2,446 0 0 0 19,795 P9 17,414 120 3,883 415 177 3,330 2,848 0 0 0 28,187 P10 23,117 160 60 0 40512 0 2,988 0 0 0 26,730 P11 2,262 16 304 0 0 0 253 0 0 0 2,835 P12 3,447 24 1,328 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 4,809 O1 762 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 767 O2 12,765 88 186 0 159 1,415 2,048 0 0 0 16,661 O3 5,412 37 683 0 81 0 35 0 0 0 6,248 O4 127 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 W1 5,573 38 907 700 72 0 314 0 0 0 7,604 W2 1,995 14 431 0 0 0 1,130 0 0 0 3,570 W3 1,109 10 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 1,369 S.R. 0 0 0 0 154 0 8,304 0 27,403 0 35,861 TOTAL: 110,984 766 10,963 2,017 1,798 4,745 24,552 1,500 27,403 0 184,728 9

Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, they are not included in this table.

10 Special Facilities includes both medical facilities and correctional facilities.

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

12 Includes 310 inmates at the Beaver County Jail.

Beaver Valley Power Station 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand13 Transit Medical Universities Special Shadow External SubArea Residents Dependent14 Transients Employees Facilities15 /Colleges Schools Event Population Traffic Total P1 2,148 2 313 343 0 0 36 0 0 0 2,842 P2 941 2 324 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,267 P3 3,259 4 68 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 3,345 P4 1,778 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1,782 P5 861 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 897 P6 644 2 0 0 0 0 0 375 0 0 1,021 P7 3,996 4 369 0 17 0 68 0 0 0 4,454 P8 9,473 8 356 516 128 0 90 0 0 0 10,571 P9 11,088 8 1,636 395 12 955 102 0 0 0 14,196 P10 14,515 12 30 0 19 0 114 0 0 0 14,690 P11 1,439 2 127 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 1,576 P12 2,201 2 723 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2,928 O1 482 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 484 O2 8,061 6 95 0 30 189 76 0 0 0 8,457 O3 3,394 4 230 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 3,643 O4 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 W1 3,523 4 440 667 14 0 10 0 0 0 4,658 W2 1,273 2 368 0 0 0 46 0 0 0 1,689 W3 708 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 716 S.R. 0 0 0 0 19 0 26 0 16,993 8,904 25,942 TOTAL: 69,865 66 5,079 1,921 254 1,144 638 375 16,993 8,904 105,239 13 Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, they are not included in this table.

14 Buses evacuating transit-dependent residents are represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 3.6 and Section 8 for additional information. Buses that serve Sub-areas P-5 and W-3 are loaded in Sub-areas P-6 and W-2, respectively. See Section 10 for additional information.

15 Buses and wheelchair buses are represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 3.5 and Section 8 for additional information. Note that correctional facilities are not included here as they shelter in place. See Section 3.10.

Beaver Valley Power Station 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 31. SubAreas Comprising the BVPS EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station 326 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station 327 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station 328 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station 329 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station 330 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station 331 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, a 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, snow, 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)

Beaver Valley Power Station 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. Capacity is estimated from the procedures of the HCM 2016. For example, HCM Exhibit 71(b) shows the sensitivity of SV at the upper bound of LOS D to grade (capacity is the SV 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 increase vehicletovehicles separation, thus decreasing the amount of traffic flow. Based on limited empirical data, conditions such as rain reduce the values of freeflow speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10%. 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 25% 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%

for rain/light snow. The free speed and highway capacity reductions are 15% and 25%,

respectively, during heavy snow conditions.

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. See Appendix G for more information.

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

Beaver Valley Power Station 42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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, Beaver Valley Power Station 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 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 service volume, 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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 also 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 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.

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 3

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

Beaver Valley Power Station 45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 BVPS 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)

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 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 procedures then estimate 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 is classified as Class I, with "level terrain"; some are rolling terrain.

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

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 2,300 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

traffic with freespeeds 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.

4.3.3 Freeways Ref: HCM 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.

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 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 does not address LOS F explicitly).

Beaver Valley Power Station 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4.3.4 Intersections Ref: HCM 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.

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 provided in Appendix K.

4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation Chapter 6 of the HCM 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 a study area 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 - they 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using the concepts of the HCM, as described earlier.

It is important to note that simulation represents 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 Conditions As illustrated in Figure 12 and in Appendix K, the linknode analysis network used for this study is finite. The analysis network extends 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) if there are 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 (main street) will be more significant than the competing (side street) 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 410 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal Government guidelines (see NUREG CR7002) specify that the planner 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 state and local offsite authorities. As a Planning Basis, we will adopt a conservative posture, in accordance with Section 1.2 of NUREG/CR7002, that a rapidly escalating accident 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. 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 Advisory to Evacuate. 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 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 ATE will be broadcast. 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 report.

Beaver Valley Power Station 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 notification systems available within the EPZ (e.g., sirens, tone alerts, EAS broadcasts, loud speakers).

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

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 330 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 4.1 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from a demographic survey of study area residents. Such a survey was conducted in support of this ETE study. Appendix F presents the survey sampling plan, survey instrument, and raw survey results. 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.

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 Beaver Valley Power Station 52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 (e.g., depart work, arrive home)

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

As such, a completed Activity changes the state of an individual (e.g., 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 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, or removing snow only after the 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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, Part V, Section B.1, item 3 of the 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual states that Notification methods will be established to ensure coverage within 45 minutes of essentially 100% of the population within the entire plume exposure pathway who may not have received the initial notification.

Given the federal regulations and guidance, and the presence of sirens within the EPZ, it is assumed that 100% of the population in the EPZ can be notified within 45 minutes. The notification distribution 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 return 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 2, 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.

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.

Distribution No. 5, Snow Clearance Time Distribution Inclement weather scenarios involving snowfall must address the time lags associated with snow clearance. It is assumed that snow plowing equipment is mobilized and deployed during the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snowplowing Beaver Valley Power Station 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

efforts are generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snow accumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours. (Note - evacuation may not be a prudent protective action under such blizzard conditions).

Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that the highway system will remain passable - albeit at a lower capacity - under the vast majority of snow conditions. Nevertheless, for the vehicles to gain access to the highway system, it may be necessary for driveways and employee parking lots to be cleared to the extent needed to permit vehicles to gain access to the roadways.

These clearance activities take time; this time must be incorporated into the trip generation time distributions. These data are provided by those households which responded to the demographic survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 56.

Note that those respondents (21%) who answered that they would not take time to clear their driveway were assumed to be ready immediately at the start of this activity. Essentially they would drive through the snow on the driveway to access the roadway and begin their evacuation trip.

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 as shown 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 57 presents the summing procedure to arrive at each designated distribution.

Table 58 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 Decline to State 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 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> for a given answer, but 3 say 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 4 say 6 or more hours.

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

Beaver Valley Power Station 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

In assessing outliers, there are three alternates 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 special 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.

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/college, travel home, prepare home, clear snow) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions are created (see Figure 51, Table 57, Table 58)

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

those people with 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 4 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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:

Most of the real data is to the left of the normal curve, indicating that the network loads faster for the first 8085% of the vehicles, potentially causing more (and earlier) congestion than otherwise modeled; 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, no snow or snow in each). In general, these are additive, using weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 54 presents the combined trip generation distributions designated A, C, D, E and F. 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 - preparation for departure follows the return of the commuter; snow clearance follows the preparation for departure, 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 distributions that result are used in their tabular/graphical form as direct inputs to later computations that lead to the ETE.

Figure 54 presents the resultant trip generation distributions for each of the population groups identified. 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, D, E and F, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 59 (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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

2. Subareas 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 to prepare for an evacuation.

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5Mile 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 Subareas beyond 5 miles will shelterinplace, 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 in place.

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 subareas comprising the 2 Mile 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*.

Beaver Valley Power Station 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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. NUREG/CR7002 Rev. 1 uses the statement approximately 90% as the time to end staging and begin evacuating.

The value of TScen* is 2:15 for nonheavy snow scenarios and 3:15 for heavy snow scenarios.

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

a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters

c. Residents with returning commuters and heavy snow conditions

d. Residents without returning commuters and heavy snow conditions Figure 55 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters; the 90th percentile twomile evacuation time is approximately 135 minutes for good weather and approximately 195 minutes for snow scenarios, on average. At the approximate 90th percentile evacuation time, at most 20% of the 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 30 minutes. After TScen*+30, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the unstaged trip generation distribution.

Table 510 provides the trip generation histograms for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas The Beaver County Emergency Operations Plan Radiological Emergency Response Annex, February 2020, states that the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA) determines the need to restrict river traffic and notifies the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission and the Pennsylvania State Police, and, in case of an incident at the BVPS, verifies that the U.S. Coast Guard has been notified by Energy Harbor. The Fish and Boat Commission will establish and operate waterway access control points as required. Furthermore the county plan states that the Beaver County Emergency Management Agency (BCEMA) notifies county, state and federal parks and recreational facilities, designated major industries and public utilities located within or serving the Beaver County portion of the plume exposure pathway EPZ.

Beaver Valley Power Station 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The BVPS Radiological Emergency Response Plan for Columbiana County states that the Ohio Emergency Management Agency (Ohio EMA) has responsibilities to restrict all river and rail traffic.

The Hancock County Radiological Emergency Response Plan states that upon notification of closing recreational waterways, the Chester and Newel Volunteer Fire Departments will send their boats to areas of recreation along or in the river to advise of protective actions.

Furthermore, special populations, such as nursing homes, schools, and recreational areas will be notified by the county.

As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes. Table 59 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 30 minutes. It is assumed that this timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and other transients to return to their vehicles and begin their evacuation trip.

Beaver Valley Power Station 510 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 N/A Snow Clearance 5 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public Elapsed Time Percent of (Minutes) Population Notified 0 0%

5 7%

10 13%

15 27%

20 47%

25 66%

30 87%

35 92%

40 97%

45 100%

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% 35 94%

5 28% 40 94%

10 52% 45 96%

15 74% 50 97%

20 82% 55 98%

25 84% 60 100%

30 91%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Decline to State" 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 Decline to State responders, if the event takes place, would be the same as those responders who provided estimates.

Beaver Valley Power Station 511 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Elapsed Time Percent (Minutes) Returning Home (Minutes) Returning Home 0 0% 35 80%

5 5% 40 86%

10 17% 45 93%

15 30% 50 96%

20 45% 55 96%

25 59% 60 99%

30 70% 75 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the " Decline to State" response Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Ready to Elapsed Time Percent Ready to (Minutes) Evacuate (Minutes) Evacuate 0 0% 105 89%

15 4% 120 94%

30 27% 135 97%

45 49% 150 97%

60 67% 165 98%

75 81% 180 99%

90 88% 195 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the " Decline to State" response Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow Cumulative Percent Cumulative Percent Elapsed Time of Households Elapsed Time of Households (Minutes) Completing Activity (Minutes) Completing Activity 0 21% 105 93%

15 49% 120 97%

30 65% 135 99%

45 75% 150 99%

60 85% 165 99%

75 91% 180 100%

90 92%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the " Decline to State" response Beaver Valley Power Station 512 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 57. 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 Distributions C and 5 Distribution E Event 5 Distributions D and 5 Distribution F Event 5 Table 58. Description of the Distributions Distribution Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also applies A 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).

Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home C

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents without commuters returning home, leaving home D

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home E

to begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents with no commuters returning home, leaving to F

begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).

Beaver Valley Power Station 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Residents Residents With Residents Residents with Without Commuters Without Time Duration Employees Transients Commuters Commuters Snow Commuters Snow Period (Min) (Distribution A) (Distribution A) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) (Distribution E) (Distribution F) 1 15 5% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 30 72% 72% 0% 16% 0% 5%

3 30 20% 20% 11% 41% 4% 23%

4 15 3% 3% 14% 15% 6% 15%

5 15 0% 0% 17% 11% 10% 13%

6 15 0% 0% 16% 5% 12% 11%

7 15 0% 0% 14% 3% 13% 8%

8 60 0% 0% 23% 7% 36% 18%

9 30 0% 0% 3% 2% 9% 4%

10 30 0% 0% 1% 0% 5% 2%

11 15 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% 0%

12 15 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1%

13 15 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

NOTE:

Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 12) using Distributions C and E for good weather and snow, respectively.

Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.

Beaver Valley Power Station 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period*

Residents Residents Residents with Without Residents With Without Time Duration Commuters Commuters Commuters Snow Commuters Snow Period (Min) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) (Distribution E) (Distribution F) 1 15 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 30 0% 3% 0% 1%

3 30 2% 8% 1% 5%

4 15 3% 3% 1% 3%

5 15 3% 3% 2% 2%

6 15 4% 1% 2% 2%

7 15 2% 0% 3% 2%

8 60 81% 80% 7% 4%

9 30 3% 2% 74% 78%

10 30 1% 0% 5% 2%

11 15 1% 0% 2% 0%

12 15 0% 0% 1% 1%

13 15 0% 0% 1% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

• Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 59) is the same for Unstaged and Staged Evacuation.

Beaver Valley Power Station 515 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 2 3 4 5 Residents Households wait for Commuters 1 Residents 1 2 5 Households without 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 2

(b) Accident occurs during weekend or during the evening 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 516 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities Notification Prepare to Leave Work Travel Home Prepare Home Time to Clear Snow 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. Evacuation Mobilization Activities Beaver Valley Power Station 517 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

Cumulative Percentage (%)

70.0%

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 Beaver Valley Power Station 518 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Beaver Valley Power Station 519 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged and Unstaged Evacuation Trip Generation Employees / Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters Res with Comm and Snow Res no Comm with Snow Staged Residents with Commuters Staged Residents with no Commuters Staged Residents with Commuters (Snow)

Staged Residents with no Commuters (Snow) 100 Percent of People Beginning Evacuation Trip 80 60 40 20 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region Beaver Valley Power Station 520 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 subareas 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 42 regions were defined which encompass all the groupings of subareas considered.

These regions are defined in Table 61. The subarea configurations are identified in Figure 61.

Each keyhole sectorbased area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and five adjoining sectors each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. These sectors extend from 2 miles to 5 miles downwind from the plant (Regions R07 through R16) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R17 through R31).

Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R04, R05 and R06 represent evacuations of only the Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia subareas, respectively. Regions R32 through R42 are identical to Region R02 and Regions R07 through R16, respectively; however, those subareas between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2mile region (Region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 14 scenarios were evaluated for all regions. Thus, there are a total of 42 x 14 = 588 evacuation cases. Table 62 is a description of all scenarios. Each combination of region and scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated.

The population and vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 and in 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 for each population group are presented in Table 63, while the Region percentages are provided in Table H1.

Table 64 presents the vehicle counts for each scenario for an evacuation of Region R03 - the entire EPZ, based on the Scenario percentages in Table 63. The percentages presented in Table 63 were determined as follows:

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to 50%, which is the product of 84% (the number of households with at least one commuter) and 59% (the number of households with a commuter who would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating). See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of those households with returning commuters (50%)

Beaver Valley Power Station 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

will have a commuter at work during those times, or approximately 5% (10% x 50% = 5%) of households overall.

It can be argued that the 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% of all households vacation for a period over the summer.

Assume these vacations, in aggregate, are uniformly dispersed over 10 weeks, i.e., 10%

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% 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 assumption 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 assumed that those taking vacation will be uniformly dispersed throughout the summer with approximately 4% of employees vacationing each week. It is further assumed that only 10% of the employees are working in the evening and during the weekend.

As shown in Appendix E, there are a significant number of campgrounds and lodging facilities and one large shopping mall within the EPZ; thus, transient activity during weekends is at its peak - 85% in the summer and 60% in the winter. Due to the overnight accommodations of campgrounds and hotels, transient activity is also high during evening hours - 60% in the summer and 35% in the winter. Transient activity on weekdays during the day is estimated to be 45% and 30% during the summer and winter, respectively.

The shadow percentages are computed using a base of 20% (see assumption 7 in Section 2.2),

as noted in the shadow footnote to Table 63. To include the employees within the Shadow Region who may choose to evacuate, the voluntary evacuation is multiplied by a scenario specific proportion of employees to permanent residents in the Shadow Region. For example, using the values provided in Table 64 for scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows:

1,844 20% 1 21%

34,619 35,246 One special event - the Hookstown Fair - was considered as scenario 13. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for scenario 13, and 0% for all other scenarios.

Schools are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday scenarios. As such, school Beaver Valley Power Station 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

buses and on and off campus students are all present during winter, midweek, midday scenarios. Since on campus students live in campus housing, it is assumed they are also present on weekends and evenings in the winter. It is estimated that summer school enrollment (including colleges) is approximately 10% of enrollment during the regular school year for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. Similar to winter scenarios, on campus students are assumed to be present at the same rate (10%) during summer weekends and evenings. Schools and colleges are not in session during weekends and evenings, as such school buses and off campus students are assumed to be 0% for weekend and evening scenarios.

Transit vehicles for the transitdependent population and medical facility population are set to 100% for all scenarios as it is assumed that these population groups are present in the EPZ at all times.

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

Beaver Valley Power Station 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions SubArea Region Description Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 Radial Evacuations R01 2Mile Region X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Site Specific Regions R04 PA X X X X X X X X X X X X R05 OH X X X X R06 WV X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R07 N, NNE 350°34° X X X X R08 NE 35°56° X X X R09 ENE, E 57°101° X X X X X R10 ESE 102°124° X X X X R11 SE, SSE 125°169° X X X X X R12 S 170°191° X X X R13 SSW 192°214° X X X X SW, WSW, R14 215°281° X X X W

R15 WNW 282°304° X X R16 NW, NNW 305°349° X X X Beaver Valley Power Station 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R17 N 350°11° X X X X X X X X R18 NNE 12°34° X X X X X X X X X R19 NE 35°56° X X X X X X X X X R20 ENE 57°79° X X X X X X X X X X X R21 E 80°101° X X X X X X X X X X X X X R22 ESE 102°124° X X X X X X X X X X R23 SE 125°146° X X X X X X X X X X R24 SSE 147°169° X X X X X X X X X X R25 S 170°191° X X X X X X X R26 SSW 192°214° X X X X X X X X R27 SW 215°236° X X X X X X X R28 WSW 237°259° X X X X X X X X R29 W 260°281° X X X X X X X R30 WNW, NW 282°326° X X X X X X X R31 NNW 327°349° X X X X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R32 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R33 N, NNE 350°34° X X X X R34 NE 35°56° X X X R35 ENE, E 57°101° X X X X X R36 ESE 102°124° X X X X R37 SE, SSE 125°169° X X X X X R38 S 170°191° X X X R39 SSW 192°214° X X X X SW, WSW, R40 215°281° X X X W

R41 WNW 282°304° X X R42 NW, NNW 305°349° X X X SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) Evacuate until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season1 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 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, Summer Evening Good 5 Weekend None 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain/Light Snow None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain/Light Snow None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, Winter Evening Good 12 Weekend None 13 Summer Weekend Evening Good Hookstown Fair Roadway Impact - Lane Summer Midweek Midday Good 14 Closure on I376 WB2 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).

2 I-376 will be reduced to a single lane in the westbound direction from the interchange with State Highway 18/Frankfort Rd (Exit 39) to the interchange with State Highway 151/Constitution Blvd (Exit 31).

Beaver Valley Power Station 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios School Households Households Buses &

With Without On Off External Returning Returning Special Medical Campus Campus Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Facilities Students Students Buses Traffic 1 50% 50% 96% 45% 21% 0% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100%

2 50% 50% 96% 45% 21% 0% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100%

3 5% 95% 10% 85% 20% 0% 100% 10% 0% 100% 100%

4 5% 95% 10% 85% 20% 0% 100% 10% 0% 100% 100%

5 5% 95% 10% 60% 20% 0% 100% 10% 0% 100% 40%

6 50% 50% 100% 30% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

7 50% 50% 100% 30% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

8 50% 50% 100% 30% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

9 5% 95% 10% 60% 20% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100%

10 5% 95% 10% 60% 20% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100%

11 5% 95% 10% 60% 20% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100%

12 5% 95% 10% 35% 20% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 40%

13 5% 95% 10% 60% 20% 100% 100% 10% 0% 100% 40%

14 50% 50% 96% 45% 21% 0% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100%

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

Households without Returning 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.

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

On Campus Students ....................................... Personal vehicles used to evacuate by those college/university students living on campus.

External Through Traffic .................................. Traffic on interstates/freeways and major arterial roads at the start of the evacuation. This traffic is stopped by access control 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario Households Households With Without Off On External Total Returning Returning Special Medical Campus Campus School Transit Through Scenario Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Facilities Students Students Buses Buses Traffic Vehicles 1 34,619 35,246 1,844 2,286 17,842 254 103 12 64 66 8,904 101,240 2 34,619 35,246 1,844 2,286 17,842 254 103 12 64 66 8,904 101,240 3 3,462 66,403 192 4,317 16,993 254 12 66 8,904 100,603 4 3,462 66,403 192 4,317 16,993 254 12 66 8,904 100,603 5 3,462 66,403 192 3,047 16,993 254 12 66 3,562 93,991 6 34,619 35,246 1,921 1,524 17,842 254 1,028 116 638 66 8,904 102,158 7 34,619 35,246 1,921 1,524 17,842 254 1,028 116 638 66 8,904 102,158 8 34,619 35,246 1,921 1,524 17,842 254 1,028 116 638 66 8,904 102,158 9 3,462 66,403 192 3,047 16,993 254 116 66 8,904 99,437 10 3,462 66,403 192 3,047 16,993 254 116 66 8,904 99,437 11 3,462 66,403 192 3,047 16,993 254 116 66 8,904 99,437 12 3,462 66,403 192 1,778 16,993 254 116 66 3,562 92,826 13 3,462 66,403 192 3,047 16,993 375 254 12 66 3,562 94,366 14 34,619 35,246 1,844 2,286 17,842 254 103 12 64 66 8,904 101,240 Note: Vehicle estimates are for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03)

Beaver Valley Power Station 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. SubAreas comprising the BVPS EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station 69 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 the 42 evacuation regions within the BVPS EPZ, and the 14 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 for the 2mile region in both staged and unstaged regions are presented in Table 73 and Table 74. Table 75 defines the evacuation regions considered.

The tabulated values of ETE are obtained from the DYNEV II System outputs which are generated at 5minute intervals.

7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation Voluntary evacuees are permanent residents within the EPZ in Subareas for which an 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 BVPS EPZ addresses the issue of voluntary evacuees in the manner shown in Figure 71. Within the EPZ, 20% of permanent residents located in Subareas outside of the evacuation region who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate. Similarly, it is assumed that 20% of the permanent residents in the Shadow Region will also 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 the permanent residents within the EPZ (see Section 3.1).

As discussed in Section 3.2, it is estimated that a total of 137,013 permanent residents reside in the Shadow Region; 20% of them would evacuate. See Table 64 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

Traffic generated within this Shadow Region, traveling away from the BVPS, 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. Subarea comprising the 2Mile Region are advised to evacuate immediately.

Beaver Valley Power Station 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2. Subarea 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 5Mile Region is advised to begin evacuating when approximately 90% of those originally within the 2Mile Region evacuate crosses the 2 Mile Region boundary.

5. The population between the 5Mile Region boundary to the full EPZ boundary (approximately 10 miles radially from plant) shelters in place.

6. 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 period 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 to describe 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. These 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 and traffic bottlenecks.

Figure 73 displays the developing congestion within the population centers of Monaca (Sub Beaver Valley Power Station 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

area P9), Beaver (Subarea P8), South Heights (Subarea P10) and Hancock County (Subareas W2 and W3) within the EPZ, and in Crescent Township (south of Subarea P10) within the Shadow Region at 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> after the ATE. There is no congestion (LOS F) within 5 miles of the plant at this time. State Route (SR) 168 northbound is operating at capacity (LOS E) in Ohioville (Subarea P2) at this time. Most of the congestion in the EPZ is experienced on the ramps to access I376 in Pennsylvania and at intersections with SR2 in West Virginia.

At 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the ATE, Figure 74 displays fullydeveloped traffic congestion within the study area. Pronounced congestion exists in the population centers of Aliquippa, Beaver, Beaver Falls, Crescent, and Monaca in Pennsylvania; Calcutta and East Liverpool in Ohio; and New Cumberland in West Virginia. There is considerable traffic volume (ranging from LOS B to LOS E, but never degrading to LOS F) in subarea P2 along SR168 northbound until Tuscarawas Road as all evacuees from Midland Borough evacuate northbound on SR 168 and traverse this intersection. The roadways in the 2Mile Region are operating at LOS C at worse. There are never LOS F conditions in the 2Mile Region. Congestion has also developed farther north on SR 168 at the intersection with SR 251. Pronounced traffic congestion also exists in West Virginia as evacuees travel southbound on various routes that intersect SR2 toward the reception center in Weirton. Congestion persists at all the ramps to access I376 in Pennsylvania. I376 and I376 business loop are congested eastbound near the Pittsburgh Airport in the Shadow Region and beyond. All routes leaving Subarea P10 (the most populated Subarea) are operating at LOS F.

At 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> after the ATE, as shown in Figure 75, all roadways within 5miles of the BVPS are operating at LOS A. Roadways are operating at LOS B at worst in Chester and East Liverpool in Ohio. Pronounced congestion persists in Pennsylvania along the entire I376 corridor, eastbound and westbound. The congestion in Subarea P10 is dissipating, though most routes are still operating at LOS F. Pronounced congestion also persists in New Cumberland as most evacuation routes servicing the West Virginia portion of the EPZ end up on SR2 which is a single lane, low speed, and lowcapacity route through New Cumberland. This congestion propagates northbound along SR2 for approximately 51/2 miles but does not penetrate the EPZ boundary. Congestion persists along SR168 northbound through Subarea P7.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> after the ATE, as shown in Figure 76, all roads in the Ohio and West Virginia portion of the EPZ are operating at LOS A and are free flowing. Congestion has cleared in Beaver and Monaca in Pennsylvania. Congestion along SR168 northbound has cleared in the EPZ. I376 is the only major road that is still congested inside the EPZ (Subarea P10). There is significant congestion in the Shadow Region to the northeast in Big Beaver as evacuees use SR51, SR551 and SR168 northbound and eastbound to access I376 and avoid crossing the state line. Traffic congestion is also exhibited in the Shadow Region to the southeast in the vicinity of the Pittsburgh International Airport and to the southwest along SR2 through New Cumberland and along SR2 and Wylie Ridge Rd southbound entering Weirton.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes (the completion of mobilization time) after the ATE (Figure 77), the last of the traffic congestion within the EPZ is exhibited along the I376 onramps from SR151 in Subarea P10, which clears 5 minutes later at 4:35. Congestion still persists in the Shadow Beaver Valley Power Station 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region southeast of the plant along I376 eastbound where it merges with the I376 business loop. SR168 northbound to access I376 is still congested at this time in the Shadow Region northeast of the plant. Congestion is still exhibited in New Cumberland and on the roadways entering Weirton; however, this congestion is in the Shadow Region and does not impact ETE.

Figure 78 shows the last remaining congestion in the study area along I376 eastbound and SR 168 northbound at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE. The last of this congestion clears 10 minutes later at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 40 minutes after the ATE.

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 79 through Figure 722. These figures indicate 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, there is typically a long "tail" to these distributions. 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 evacuees (those with the longest mobilization times) travel freely out of the EPZ.

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 - 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 Estimates (ETE) Results Table 71 through Table 72 present the ETE values for all 42 evacuation regions and all 14 evacuation scenarios. Table 73 through Table 74 present the ETE values for the 2Mile Region for both staged and unstaged evacuation of regions extending to 5 miles. They are organized as follows:

Table Contents ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90% of the population 71 within a region, to evacuate from that region. All scenarios are considered, as well as staged evacuation scenarios.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100% of the population 72 within a region, to evacuate from that region. All scenarios are considered, as well as staged evacuation scenarios.

Beaver Valley Power Station 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90% of the population 73 within the 2Mile Region, to evacuate from that region with both concurrent and staged evacuations.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100% of the population 74 within the 2Mile Region, to evacuate from that region with both concurrent and staged evacuations.

The animation snapshots described above reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (un staged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure 78.

Most of the congestion is located beyond the 5mile region; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R02 are 5 to 10 minutes longer than the ETE for R01.

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R03 are 35 to 80 minutes longer than the ETE for R02 due to the congestion located within the 5 to 10mile region as discussed in Section 7.3.

The 90th percentile Site Specific ETE range from 3:15 to 4:40 for Pennsylvania and 2:25 to 3:40 for Ohio and West Virginia, reflecting the more significant traffic congestion in the Pennsylvania portion of the EPZ, especially beyond 5 miles from the plant.

At the 90th percentile, rain increases the ETE by up to 20 minutes relative to good weather, while heavy snow increases ETE by up to 60 minutes relative to good weather (most of this increase is due to longer mobilization times associated with clearing snow from driveways prior to evacuating). The slower travel speeds and reduced roadway capacity during adverse weather exacerbates the traffic congestion in the study area and prolongs ETE.

The 90th percentile ETE for the keyhole regions downwind to the EPZ boundary that do not include subareas P8, P9 and/or P10 (i.e., Regions R17 through R23) are less (35 minutes on average) across all scenarios than the ETE for other keyholes extending to the EPZ boundary. As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 78, subareas P8, P9 and P 10 are highly congested throughout the evacuation. These are the three most populated Subareas in the EPZ (see Table 32) and evacuees from these Subareas are largely responsible for the pronounced traffic congestion along the I376 corridor throughout the evacuation.

The 100th percentile ETE reflects the mobilization time (plus 10 minutes travel time to the EPZ boundary) of residents with commuters for scenarios and regions except the following cases:

o Regions wherein Subareas P8, P9 and P10 evacuate together (Regions R03, R04, R27, R28, and R29). The 100th percentile ETE increased (relative to mobilization time plus 10 minutes travel time to the EPZ boundary) by at my most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 5 minutes (5:45 minus 4:40 for Scenario 14) when these three Subareas evacuate together.

o Regions wherein Subareas W1, W2 and/or W3 evacuate together (Regions R18 through R22) for rain scenarios (Scenarios 2 and 4) which increase 100th percentile ETE by up to 15 minutes relative to mobilization time plus 10 minutes travel time to the EPZ boundary (4:55 minus 4:40). The decreased capacity of SR Beaver Valley Power Station 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8 during rain exacerbate congestion in New Cumberland and causes queues to propagate into the EPZ and prolong ETE.

Comparison of scenarios 5 and 13 in Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the Special Event -

the Hookstown Fair - has no impact on the 90th and 100th percentile ETE. The additional 375 vehicles present for the special event increase congestion on the local roads in Subarea P6, but do not cause congestion that persists longer congestion along the I376 corridor in Pennsylvania.

Comparison of scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure - one lane westbound on I376 - has a significant impact on 90th percentile ETE, which increase by as much as 35 minutes for regions with wind directions from the southsouthwest to west (regions R26 through R30). Winds from these directions carry the plume over Aliquippa, Beaver and Monaca and include at least two of Subarea P8, P9 and P10. Evacuees from these Subareas primarily use I376 to evacuate. With a lane closed on I376 westbound in the Beaver township area, the capacity is reduced by more than half, increasing congestion and prolonging ETE.

Congestion eastbound on I376 also increases as those evacuees in Subarea P9 that may have evacuated westbound on I376 now evacuate eastbound on I376 to avoid the lane closure.

Regions with winds from the north and east would not be using I376 westbound to evacuate and are not materially impacted by the decreased capacity westbound along I376. The 100th percentile ETE increased by up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 5 minutes for regions R03, R04 and R26 through R29.

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 73 and Table 74 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (un staged) and staged evacuation cases. Note that Regions R32 through R42 are the same geographic areas as Regions R02 and R07 through R16, respectively.

To determine whether the staged evacuation strategy is worthy of consideration, one must determine if the ETE for the 2Mile Region significantly increases (defined in the federal regulations as 30 minutes or 25%, whichever is less) when evacuating Subareas downwind to 5 miles. A significant increase in the 2Mile Region ETE when evacuating Subareas downwind would be indicative of traffic congestion beyond 2 miles delaying the egress of those within the 2Mile Region. In all cases, as shown in these tables, the ETE for the 2Mile Region is unchanged when a staged evacuation is implemented. Thus, the impedance due to the traffic congestion within the 5Mile Region to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region is not sufficient to materially influence the 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region. Therefore, staging the evacuation to sharply reduce congestion within the 5Mile Region provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region.

While failing to provide assistance to evacuees from within 2 miles of the BVPS, staging produces a negative impact on the ETE for those evacuating downwind to 5 miles. A comparison of ETE between Regions R32 through R42 with R02 and R07 through R16, respectively, reveals that staging retards the 90th percentile ETE for those downwind to 5 miles by up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes (see Table 71). This extending of ETE is due to the delay in Beaver Valley Power Station 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

beginning the evacuation trip, experienced by those who shelter, plus the effect of the trip generation spike (significant volume of traffic beginning the evacuation trip at the same time

- see Figure 55) that follows their eventual ATE, in creating congestion within the EPZ area beyond 2 miles. The 100th percentile ETE for those evacuating downwind to 5 miles is unaffected by staging (compare Regions R32 through 42 with R02 and R07 through R16, respectively in Table 72).

In summary, the staged evacuation protective action strategy provides no benefits to evacuees within 2 miles of the BVPS and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the BVPS.

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:

1. Identify the applicable scenario:

• Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

• Day of Week Midweek Weekend

• Time of Day Midday Evening

• Weather Condition Good Weather Rain/Light Snow Heavy Snow

• Special Event Hookstown Fair Road Closure (A lane on I376 westbound is closed)

• 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/light snow are not explicitly identified in the tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (7) and (10) for rain/light snow apply.

Beaver Valley Power Station 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and heavy snow are not explicitly identified in the tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (8) and (11) for heavy snow apply.

• The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes public school is in session, at summer enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Winter (includes Spring and Autumn) considers that public 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.

2. With the desired percentile ETE and scenario identified, now identify the Evacuation Region (Step 2):

• Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of degrees: from 350 11, 12 34, 35 56, and compass orientation: from N, NNE, NE,

• 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, R07 through R16) to EPZ Boundary (regions R03, R17 through R31)

• Enter Table 75 and identify the applicable group of candidate regions based on the distance that the selected region extends from the BVPS. Select the evacuation region identifier in that row, based on the azimuth direction of the plume, from the first column of the table.

3. Determine the ETE table based on the percentile selected. Then, for the scenario identified in Step 1 and the region 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 10th at 4:00 AM.

• It is raining.

• Wind direction is from 35 - 56 degrees.

• Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 2mile radius and downwind to 5 miles.

• The desired ETE is that value needed to evacuate 90% of the population from within the impacted region.

Beaver Valley Power Station 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• 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 75 and locate the region described as Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles for wind direction from 35 - 56 degrees (from Northeast) and read region R08 in the first column of that row.

3. Enter Table 71 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for scenario 4 and region R08. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for region R08; it contains the ETE value of 2:20.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R02 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R03 3:25 3:40 3:25 3:45 3:10 3:30 3:45 4:30 3:20 3:35 4:15 3:10 3:10 3:50 Site Specific Regions R04 3:30 3:45 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:50 4:40 3:25 3:45 4:25 3:15 3:15 4:05 R05 2:55 2:55 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:55 2:55 3:35 2:25 2:35 3:15 2:25 2:25 2:55 R06 2:55 3:00 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:55 2:55 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:30 2:35 2:55 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R07 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:20 2:15 2:50 R08 2:45 2:45 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:25 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:45 R09 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:25 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:20 2:15 2:50 R10 2:45 2:50 2:15 2:25 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:45 R11 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R12 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R13 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R14 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:20 2:20 2:50 R15 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:25 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:50 R16 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:25 2:15 2:20 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:50 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R17 2:50 2:50 2:15 2:20 2:15 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:20 2:20 3:10 2:20 2:15 2:50 R18 2:55 2:55 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:55 2:55 3:35 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:25 2:25 2:55 R19 2:55 2:55 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:50 2:55 3:35 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:20 2:25 2:55 R20 2:55 2:55 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:55 2:55 3:35 2:25 2:30 3:15 2:25 2:25 2:55 R21 2:50 2:50 2:25 2:35 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:30 2:30 2:50 R22 2:50 2:50 2:25 2:35 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:30 2:25 2:35 3:10 2:30 2:30 2:50 Beaver Valley Power Station 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact R23 2:55 3:00 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:55 3:00 3:35 2:40 2:45 3:20 2:40 2:40 2:55 R24 3:05 3:10 2:45 3:00 2:50 3:05 3:10 3:55 2:50 2:55 3:40 2:50 2:50 3:05 R25 3:05 3:15 2:50 3:05 2:55 3:05 3:15 3:55 2:55 3:05 3:45 2:55 2:55 3:05 R26 3:10 3:20 3:00 3:15 2:55 3:10 3:25 4:05 3:00 3:15 3:55 2:55 2:55 3:35 R27 3:30 3:45 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:50 4:40 3:25 3:45 4:20 3:15 3:15 4:05 R28 3:30 3:45 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:50 4:40 3:30 3:50 4:20 3:15 3:15 4:05 R29 3:30 3:45 3:25 3:45 3:15 3:30 3:45 4:35 3:25 3:40 4:20 3:15 3:15 4:05 R30 3:05 3:15 2:55 3:10 2:50 3:05 3:15 3:55 2:50 3:05 3:45 2:55 2:50 3:25 R31 2:50 3:00 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:50 3:00 3:45 2:30 2:40 3:25 2:35 2:30 2:50 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R32 3:20 3:20 3:15 3:20 3:15 3:20 3:20 4:25 3:20 3:20 4:15 3:20 3:15 3:20 R33 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 4:00 3:10 3:10 3:55 3:10 3:10 3:10 R34 3:10 3:10 3:05 3:05 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:05 3:05 3:45 3:05 3:05 3:10 R35 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:55 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:10 3:05 3:10 R36 3:10 3:10 3:05 3:05 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:05 3:05 3:45 3:05 3:05 3:10 R37 3:25 3:30 3:20 3:25 3:20 3:25 3:30 4:40 3:20 3:25 4:35 3:25 3:20 3:25 R38 3:30 3:35 3:25 3:30 3:25 3:30 3:35 4:45 3:25 3:35 4:40 3:30 3:25 3:30 R39 3:25 3:30 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:25 3:30 4:35 3:20 3:25 4:25 3:20 3:20 3:25 R40 3:30 3:35 3:25 3:30 3:25 3:30 3:35 4:40 3:25 3:30 4:35 3:25 3:25 3:30 R41 3:10 3:10 3:05 3:05 3:05 3:10 3:10 4:05 3:05 3:05 3:55 3:05 3:05 3:10 R42 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 4:00 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:10 3:10 3:10 Beaver Valley Power Station 711 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R02 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R03 4:40 5:20 4:40 5:00 4:40 4:40 5:30 5:50 4:40 4:40 6:15 4:40 4:40 5:45 Site Specific Regions R04 4:40 5:20 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:40 5:30 5:50 4:40 4:40 6:15 4:40 4:40 5:45 R05 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R06 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R07 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R08 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R09 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R10 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R11 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R12 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R13 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R14 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R15 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R16 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R17 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R18 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R19 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:50 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R20 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R21 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R22 4:40 4:50 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 Beaver Valley Power Station 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact R23 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R24 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R25 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R26 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:55 R27 4:40 5:15 4:40 4:50 4:40 4:40 5:10 5:40 4:40 4:40 6:00 4:40 4:40 5:45 R28 4:40 5:20 4:40 4:50 4:40 4:40 5:30 5:50 4:40 4:40 6:15 4:40 4:40 5:45 R29 4:40 5:20 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:25 5:40 4:40 4:40 6:10 4:40 4:40 5:45 R30 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 R31 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 5:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R32 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R33 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R34 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R36 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R37 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R38 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R39 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R40 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R41 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 R42 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 5:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 Beaver Valley Power Station 713 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R02 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R07 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R08 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R09 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R10 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R11 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R12 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R13 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R14 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R15 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R16 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R32 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R33 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R34 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R35 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R36 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R37 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R38 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R39 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R40 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R41 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 R42 2:45 2:45 2:10 2:20 2:15 2:45 2:45 3:20 2:15 2:15 3:05 2:15 2:15 2:45 Beaver Valley Power Station 714 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) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R02 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R07 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R08 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R09 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R10 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R11 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R12 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R13 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R14 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R15 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R16 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R32 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R33 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R34 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R35 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R36 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R37 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R38 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R39 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R40 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R41 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 R42 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 5:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 Beaver Valley Power Station 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions SubArea Region Description Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 Radial Evacuations R01 2Mile Region X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Site Specific Regions R04 PA X X X X X X X X X X X X R05 OH X X X X R06 WV X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R07 N, NNE 350°34° X X X X R08 NE 35°56° X X X R09 ENE, E 57°101° X X X X X R10 ESE 102°124° X X X X R11 SE, SSE 125°169° X X X X X R12 S 170°191° X X X R13 SSW 192°214° X X X X SW, WSW, R14 215°281° X X X W

R15 WNW 282°304° X X R16 NW, NNW 305°349° X X X Beaver Valley Power Station 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R17 N 350°11° X X X X X X X X R18 NNE 12°34° X X X X X X X X X R19 NE 35°56° X X X X X X X X X R20 ENE 57°79° X X X X X X X X X X X R21 E 80°101° X X X X X X X X X X X X X R22 ESE 102°124° X X X X X X X X X X R23 SE 125°146° X X X X X X X X X X R24 SSE 147°169° X X X X X X X X X X R25 S 170°191° X X X X X X X R26 SSW 192°214° X X X X X X X X R27 SW 215°236° X X X X X X X R28 WSW 237°259° X X X X X X X X R29 W 260°281° X X X X X X X R30 WNW, NW 282°326° X X X X X X X R31 NNW 327°349° X X X X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R32 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R33 N, NNE 350°34° X X X X R34 NE 35°56° X X X R35 ENE, E 57°101° X X X X X R36 ESE 102°124° X X X X R37 SE, SSE 125°169° X X X X X R38 S 170°191° X X X R39 SSW 192°214° X X X X SW, WSW, R40 215°281° X X X W

R41 WNW 282°304° X X R42 NW, NNW 305°349° X X X SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) Evacuate until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Beaver Valley Power Station 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 72. Beaver Valley Power Station Shadow Region Beaver Valley Power Station 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 1) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 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%

100 90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 60 50 (Thousands) 40 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 Beaver Valley Power Station 726 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

100 90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 60 50 (Thousands) 40 30 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 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%

100 90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 60 50 (Thousands) 40 30 20 10 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 727 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 5) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

100 90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 60 50 (Thousands) 40 30 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 Beaver Valley Power Station 728 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

100 90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 60 50 (Thousands) 40 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

100 90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 60 50 (Thousands) 40 30 20 10 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 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 Beaver Valley Power Station 729 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 9) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 Beaver Valley Power Station 730 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 12) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 Beaver Valley Power Station 731 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Evening, Good, Special Event (Scenario 13) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 60 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 Beaver Valley Power Station 732 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 ETE for transit vehicles (i.e., buses, wheelchair transport, 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 and medical facilities; and 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. 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 distances 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 BVPS EPZ indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to host/receiving schools at emergency classification levels of Alert or higher, and that parents should pick schoolchildren up at host/receiving schools. As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a fastbreaking general emergency. Therefore, schools and special facilities receive initial notification at the same time as the rest of the EPZ and children are evacuated to host/receiving schools. Picking up children at school could add to traffic congestion at the schools, delaying the departure of the buses evacuating schoolchildren, which may have to return in a subsequent wave to the EPZ to evacuate the transitdependent population. This report provides estimates of buses 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

It is assumed that children at daycare centers that do not have a means for transportation are picked up by parents or guardians and that the time to perform this activity is included in the trip generation times discussed in Section 5.

The procedure for computing transit dependent ETE is to:

• Estimate demand for transit service

• Estimate time to perform all transit functions

• Estimate route travel times to the EPZ boundary and to the reception centers ETE 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.

8.1 ETEs for Schools, TransitDependent People, and Special Facilities Table 81 lists the transportation resources and transportation needs to evacuate the transit dependent and special facility population in the EPZ. As shown in the table, there are sufficient bus resources to evacuate all schoolchildren and the transit dependent population for all counties in a single wave. However, there are insufficient ambulances to evacuate bedridden patient at medical facilities and access and/or functional needs population. Additionally, there are insufficient wheelchair transport vehicles for Beaver and Hancock Counties to evacuate wheelchair bound patients.

EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if school is 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 and/or host/receiving schools after completing their first evacuation trip, to complete a second wave of providing transport service to evacuees. For this reason, the ETE for the transitdependent population will be calculated for both a one wave transit evacuation and for two waves if there are insufficient transportation resources. Of course, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R03 (the entire EPZ), 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.

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 at the pickup points.

School Evacuation 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. It is assumed that for a rapidly escalating radiological emergency with no observable indication before the fact, drivers would require 90 minutes to be contacted, to Beaver Valley Power Station 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

travel to the depot, be briefed, and to travel to the schools. Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather - 100 minutes for rain/light snow and 110 minutes for heavy snow.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

Based on discussions with offsite agencies, a loading time of 15 minutes (20 minutes for rain/light snow and 25 minutes for heavy snow) for school buses is used. See Section 2.4, assumption 5 and Table 22.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The buses servicing the schools are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the ATE - 90 minutes mobilization time plus a 15minute loading time - 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 being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate host/receiving school. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes 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., 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 the EPZ is shown in Table 82 through Table 84 for school 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/receiving school was computed assuming an average speed of 40 mph for good weather, 36 mph (10% decrease) for rain/light snow, and 34 mph (15% decrease) for heavy snow. Speeds were reduced in Table 82 through Table 84 to 40 mph, 36 mph, and 34 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively, for those calculated bus speeds which exceed 40 mph.

Table 82 (good weather), Table 83 (rain/light snow) and Table 84 (heavy snow) present the following ETEs (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for schools in the EPZ:

Beaver Valley Power Station 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1. The elapsed time from the ATE until the bus exits the EPZ (ETE); and

2. The elapsed time until the bus reaches the host school/receiving school (ETA to H.S/R.S.).

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 + 15 + 57 = 2:45 for Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School, with good weather rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes; here, 57 minutes is the time to travel 14.9 miles at 15.9 mph). The average singlewave ETE (2:25) for schools is less than the 90th percentile ETE (3:30) for evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and should not impact protective action decision making.

The evacuation time to the host/receiving school is determined by adding the time associated with Activity EF (discussed below), to this EPZ evacua on me.

Activity: Travel to Host School/Receiving School (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the host schools/receiving schools are measured using GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the host school/receiving school. The host schools and receiving schools are mapped in Figure 105. For a onewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 40 mph, 36 mph and 34 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the school 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 DE)

As shown in Table 81, there are sufficient buses for evacuation of children in a single wave, if the entire EPZ is evacuated at once (a highly unlikely event). Therefore, a second wave ETE calculation was not considered for school evacuation.

Evacuation of Transit Dependent People (Residents without Access to a Vehicle)

A detailed computation of transit dependent population was done and is discussed in Section 3.6. The total number of transit dependent people per Subarea was determined using a weighted distribution based on permanent resident population. See Table 311 for the distribution of transit dependent population by Subarea. As discussed in Section 3.6, the number of buses required to evacuate this population was determined using a capacity of 30 people per bus. KLD designed 16 bus routes to service the major evacuation routes and pickup points as discussed in Section 10. The routes are shown graphically in Figure 102 through Figure 104 and the routes used to get average speeds are described in Table 101. Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along these routes, gather people at the pickup points, then proceed out of the EPZ.

Beaver Valley Power Station 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at their designated route. The buses dispatched from the depots to service the transitdependent evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after a majority of their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), approximately 90% of the evacuees will have completed their mobilization when the buses will begin their routes, approximately 120 minutes after the ATE for good weather.

Those routes with multiple buses (more than 3 buses) have been designed such that buses are dispatched using 30minute headways. The use of bus headways ensures that those people who take longer to mobilize will be picked up.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

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/light snow resulting in 10minute delays per bus and 20minute delays in heavy snow.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Bus travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school evacuation.

Beaver Valley Power Station 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85 through Table 87 present the transitdependent population evacuation time estimates for each bus route calculated using the procedures above for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively.

For example, the ETE for the bus route servicing Subarea P1 (Route 1) is computed as 120 + 44

+ 30 = 3:15 for good weather (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 44 minutes is the time to travel 13.6 miles at 18.4 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route starting at 120 minutes.

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.

The average ETE (3:05) for a onewave evacuation of transitdependent people is less than the 90th percentile ETE (3:30) for an evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and should not impact protective action decision making.

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 general population reception centers are mapped in Figure 105. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 40 mph, 36 mph and 34 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent 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 (GCDE)

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 transit dependent people depart 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 secondwave ETE for the bus route servicing subarea P1 (Route 1) is computed as follows for good weather:

• Bus arrives at reception center at 3:53 in good weather (3:15 to exit EPZ + 38minute travel time to reception center).

• Bus discharges passengers (5 minutes) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 15 minutes.

• Bus returns to EPZ and completes second route: 38 minutes (equal to travel time to reception center) + 20.4 minutes (13.6 miles @ 40 mph - assumed speed to start of Beaver Valley Power Station 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

route) + 20.4 minutes (13.6 miles @ 40.0 mph - network wide speed at time bus starts route for the second time) = 79 minutes.

• Bus completes pickups along route: 30 minutes.

• Bus exits EPZ at time 3:53 + 0:15 + 1:19 + 0:30 = 6:00 after the ATE (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes).

The ETE for the completion of the second wave for all transitdependent bus routes are provided in Table 85 through Table 87. The average ETE (5:30) for a twowave evacuation of transitdependent people exceeds the ETE (3:30) for the general population at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather conditions (Scenario 6) and could impact protective action decision making.

The relocation of transitdependent evacuees from the reception centers to mass care centers, if the counties decide to do so, is not considered in this study.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities Activity: Mobilization (ABC)

As discussed in Section 2.4, Assumption 4, and shown in Table 22, it is assumed that the mobilization time for medical facilities averages 90 minutes in good weather, 100 minutes in rain/light snow and 110 minutes in heavy snow. Specially trained medical support staff (working their regular shift) will be on site to assist in the evacuation of patients. It is further assumed that additional staff (if needed) could be mobilized over this same 90minute timeframe.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

Item 5 of Section 2.4 discusses transit vehicle loading times for medical facilities. Loading times are assumed to be 1 minute per ambulatory passenger, 5 minutes per wheelchair bound passenger, and 15 minutes per bedridden passenger. Item 3 of Section 2.4 discusses transit vehicle capacities to cap loading times per vehicle type. Concurrent loading on multiple buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances at capacity is assumed such that the maximum loading times for buses (30 passengers times 1 minute per passenger), wheelchair vans (15 passengers times 5 minutes per passenger) and ambulances (2 passengers times 15 minutes per passenger) are 30, 75 and 30 minutes, respectively.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Transit vehicle travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school evacuation.

Table 88 through Table 810 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. Average speeds output by the model for Scenario 6 (Scenario 7 for rain/light snow and Scenario 8 for heavy snow), Region 3, capped at 40 mph (36 mph for rain/light snow and 34 mph for heavy snow), are used to compute travel time to the EPZ boundary. The travel time to the EPZ boundary is computed by dividing the Beaver Valley Power Station 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

distance to the EPZ boundary by the average travel speed along the route. The ETE is the sum of the mobilization time, total passenger loading time, and travel time out of the EPZ boundary.

All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, the calculation of ETE for the St. Barnabas, Beaver Meadows with 37 ambulatory residents during good weather is:

ETE: 90 + 30 x 1 + 34 (7.9 miles at 14.0 mph) = 154 min or 2:35 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes)

It is assumed that 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 center before arriving at the host facility are not considered in this analysis.

The average single wave ETE (2:35) for medical facilities in the EPZ does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE (3:30) for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03).

Activity: Vehicles Travel to Host Facilities (EF), Passengers Leave (FG), Vehicle Returns to Route for Second Wave Evacuation (GCDE)

As shown in Table 81, there are insufficient ambulances to evacuate the bedridden patients at the medical facilities in the EPZ. Information was provided for Beaver County that all medical facilities will be evacuated to Slippery Rock University, which is approximately 40 miles away from the EPZ boundary1. It is assumed that a host medical facility for Columbiana and Hancock counties is also located approximately 40 miles away.

Due to the large number of medical facilities in the EPZ, second wave ETE for each vehicle type were not computed for each medical facility. Rather, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation for ambulances.

Times and distances are based on facilitywide averages:

• Bedridden patients:

o Ambulances arrive at host medical facilities at 3:23 (2:23 Average ETE for ambulances to exit the EPZ plus 60 minutes to travel 40miles, the approximate distance to Slippery Rock University, at 40 mph).

o Ambulances discharges passengers (30 minutes - maximum loading time for ambulances) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 40 minutes.

o Ambulances return to facilities: 60 minutes to travel back to the EPZ boundary (time needed to travel 40 miles back to the EPZ at 40 mph) + 8 minutes to travel back to the facility (average distance to EPZ = 5.4 miles from Table 88 @ 40 mph) = 68 minutes.

o Remaining patients loaded on ambulance (maximum): 30 minutes.

o Ambulance travels to EPZ boundary: 13 minutes (average distance from medical 1

Distance measured from I-376 westbound departing the EPZ between sub-areas P-7 and P-8.

Beaver Valley Power Station 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

facilities to EPZ boundary (5.4 miles) at 24.4 mph (network wide average speed at 5:45).

o Ambulances exits EPZ at time 3:23 + 0:40 + 1:08 + 0:30 + 0:13 = 5:55 after the ATE, rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

Thus, the second wave evacuation requires an additional 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 32 minutes (5:55 - 2:23 =

3:32) relative to the first wave ETE for ambulances. The average ETE for a twowave evacuation of ambulances does exceed the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) evacuation of the full EPZ (Region R03).

Evacuation of Correctional Facilities As discussed in Section 3.10, there is one correctional facility within the EPZ - the Beaver County Jail with a total inmate population of 310 people. The Beaver County Emergency Operations Plan indicates the Beaver County Jail would not be evacuated; rather persons would be given potassium iodide (KI) and will shelterinplace. As such, an ETE was not calculated for this facility.

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population The registered access and/or functional needs population was provided by the offsite agencies and is further discussed in Section 3.9. Table 39 identifies 501 registered people with access and/or functional needs. Table 811 summarizes the ETE for the access and/or functional needs population. The table is broken down by weather condition and by vehicle type. It is assumed that the access and/or functional needs population will be picked up from their homes.

Furthermore, it is conservatively assumed that households with access and/or functional needs are spaced 3 miles apart. Vehicle speeds approximate 20 mph between households in good weather (10% slower in rain/light snow and 15% slower in heavy snow). Mobilization times of 90 minutes were used (100 minutes for rain/light snow and 110 minutes for heavy snow). The last household is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 40 mph (36 mph for rain/light snow and 34 for heavy snow), after the last pickup is used to compute travel time to the EPZ boundary.

ETE are computed by summing mobilization time, loading time at first household, travel to the subsequent households, loading time at subsequent households, and travel time to the EPZ boundary. All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, assuming no more than one access and/or functional needs person per household implies that 501 households (HH) need to be serviced. It is assumed that 40 buses are needed for ambulatory people, 28 wheelchair buses for wheelchair bound people, and 29 ambulances for bedridden people to evacuate the population with access and/or functional needs in a reasonable amount of time. The following outlines the ETE calculation for ambulances in Beaver County:

1. Assume 16 ambulances are deployed, each with about 2 stops, to service a total of 32 HH in Beaver County.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

Beaver Valley Power Station 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

a. Ambulances arrive at the first pickup location: 90 minutes

b. Load passenger at first pickup: 15 minutes

c. Travel to next pickup location: 9 minutes (assumed 3 miles @ 20 mph)

d. Load passenger at subsequent pickup location: 15 minutes

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 22 minutes (5 miles @ 13.8 mph).

ETE: 90 + 15 + 9 + 15 + 22 = 2:35 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes).

The average ETE (3:15) for a singlewave evacuation of the bedridden access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ is less than the 90th percentile ETE (3:30) for evacuation of the general population in the Full EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions.

The following outlines the ETE calculations for a second wave evacuation using ambulances after the medical facilities have been evacuated assuming host medical facilities are approximately 40 miles away from the EPZ boundary, similar to the second wave calculation for medical facilities:

a. Ambulances arrive at host medical facilities: 3:23 (2:23 Average ETE for ambulances to exit the EPZ plus 60 minutes to travel 40miles, the approximate distance to Slippery Rock University, at 40 mph).

b. Unload patients at host medical facility: 30 minutes.

c. Driver takes 10minute rest: 10 minutes.

d. Travel time back to EPZ: 60 minutes (40 miles at 40 mph).

e. Travel time to first household: 15 minutes (5 miles at 20 mph).

f. Loading time at first household: 15 minutes.

g. Travel to subsequent pickup location: 1 @ 9 minutes = 9 minutes

h. Loading time at subsequent household: 1 stop @ 15 minutes = 15 minutes

i. Travel time to EPZ boundary: 5 miles @ 40 mph (at 5:40) = 8 minutes Bus exits EPZ at time: 3:23 + 30 + 10 + 60 + 15 + 15 + 9 + 15 + 8 = 6:05 after the ATE, rounded to the nearest 5minutes.

The average ETE (6:05) for a secondwave evacuation of the bedridden 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 35 minutes longer than the 90th percentile ETE (3:30) for evacuation of the general population in the Full EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and could impact protective action decision making.

Beaver Valley Power Station 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Transportation Wheelchair Wheelchair Resource Buses Buses Vans Ambulances Resources Available BEAVER COUNTY, PA Medic Rescue 20 20 Economy Ambulance 4 Valley Ambulance 4 7 Cranberry Ambulance 4 Medevac 5 12 Northwest EMS 1 8 RESQRS 2 Northwestern Ambulance 2 Noga Ambulance 8 15 Frye Transportation Group Incorporated 150 McCarter Transit 75 Beaver County Transit Authority 40 South Side Garage 25 RJ Rhodes Transit Incorporated 175 Hopewell Area School District 44 First Student 23 Monark Student Transportation Corp.2 35 Beaver County Subtotal: 567 38 0 74 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH East Palestine Fire/EMS 3 New Waterford Fire/EMS 2 Middleton Twp Fire/EMS (Negley Fire) 2 Columbiana EMS 3 Leetonia Fire/EMS 2 East Liverpool Fire 2 NorthStar Ambulance 6 LifeTeam Ambulance 3 Maple Cotton Ambulance 1 Salem Fire Department 1 EMT (Salem) 2 E. Liverpool School Buses 27 4 2 Community Action Agency 17 29 8 CCDDEDI 10 1 Columbiana County Educational Service Center 5 6 Beaver Local School Buses 25 3 Lisbon Schools 7 Columbiana County Subtotal: 81 52 11 27 2

Buses for these resources have available wheelchair seats.

Beaver Valley Power Station 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Transportation Wheelchair Wheelchair Resource Buses Buses Vans Ambulances HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Hancock County Public Schools2 48 Hancock County Ambulance Service, Inc. 3 Brooke County Ambulance Service 5 Brooke County Public Schools2 42 Hancock County Subtotal: 90 0 0 8 EPZ TOTAL: 738 90 11 109 Resources Needed BEAVER COUNTY, PA School Transportation Needs (Table 38): 236 Medical Facility Transportation Needs (Table 36): 28 27 81 Access and/or Functional Population Transportation Needs (Table 39): 20 15 16 TransitDependent Transportation Needs (Table 312): 24 Beaver County Subtotal: 308 42 0 97 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH School Transportation Needs (Table 38): 41 Medical Facility Transportation Needs (Table 36): 8 8 17 Access and/or Functional Population Transportation Needs (Table 39): 5 3 4 TransitDependent Transportation Needs (Table 312): 6 Columbiana County Subtotal: 60 11 0 21 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV School Transportation Needs (Table 38): 42 Medical Facility Transportation Needs (Table 36): 1 3 6 Access and/or Functional Population Transportation Needs (Table 39): 15 10 9 TransitDependent Transportation Needs (Table 312): 3 Hancock County Subtotal: 61 13 0 15 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 429 66 0 133 Beaver Valley Power Station 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School 90 15 14.9 15.9 57 2:45 19.2 29 3:15 Midland Neel Elementary/Middle School 90 15 15.2 15.9 58 2:45 19.2 29 3:15 Western Beaver JuniorSenior High School 90 15 13.2 6.6 121 3:50 19.2 29 4:20 Bethel Christian School 90 15 9.8 39.8 15 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 South Side Elementary School 90 15 11.6 39.9 18 2:05 30.2 46 2:55 South Side High School 90 15 11.6 39.9 18 2:05 30.2 46 2:55 South Side Middle School 90 15 11.6 39.9 18 2:05 30.2 46 2:55 Fairview Elementary School 90 15 11.8 10.3 69 2:55 19.2 29 3:25 Highland Middle School 90 15 2.3 24.3 6 1:55 0.3 1 2:00 Blackhawk Intermediate School 90 15 1.5 23.2 4 1:50 0.3 1 1:55 Beaver Area High School 90 15 2.4 11.7 13 2:00 35.7 54 2:55 Beaver Area Middle School 90 15 2.4 11.7 13 2:00 35.7 54 2:55 Dutch Ridge Elementary 90 15 5.2 10.6 30 2:15 39.8 60 3:15 New Horizon School 90 15 5.8 10.6 33 2:20 39.8 60 3:20 College Square Elementary School 90 15 1.5 11.9 8 1:55 35.7 54 2:50 St Peter and Paul School 90 15 0.4 11.9 3 1:50 46.9 71 3:05 Patterson Primary School 90 15 4.1 26.3 10 1:55 0.3 1 2:00 Beaver County Career & Technology Center 90 15 10.0 9.5 63 2:50 30.2 46 3:40 Center Grange Primary School 90 15 9.7 9.5 61 2:50 30.2 46 3:40 Central Valley High School 90 15 10.7 9.4 69 2:55 30.1 46 3:45 Todd Lane Elementary School 90 15 12.1 8.9 82 3:10 30.2 46 4:00 Central Valley Middle School 90 15 13.3 15.0 54 2:40 30.2 46 3:30 Aliquippa Elementary School 90 15 6.5 4.3 91 3:20 24.7 38 4:00 Hopewell Elementary School 90 15 3.9 20.9 12 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Beaver Valley Power Station 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Aliquippa Jr./Sr. High School 90 15 8.3 4.9 102 3:30 24.7 38 4:10 Hopewell Junior High School 90 15 5.0 23.4 13 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Margaret Ross Elementary School 90 15 5.0 23.4 13 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Our Lady of Fatima School 90 15 4.4 22.1 12 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Hope Christian Academy 90 15 8.2 4.9 101 3:30 24.7 38 4:10 Hopewell Senior High School 90 15 5.0 23.4 13 2:00 30.1 46 2:50 Independence Elementary School 90 15 5.0 5.9 51 2:40 30.1 46 3:30 Pleasant Hills Wesleyan Academy 90 15 8.6 36.8 15 2:00 30.2 46 2:50 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH East Liverpool Jr. High and High School 90 15 6.3 38.1 10 1:55 10.8 17 2:15 North Elementary School 90 15 6.2 38.1 10 1:55 10.8 17 2:15 Westgate Middle School 90 15 4.7 40.0 8 1:55 10.9 17 2:15 LaCroft Elementary School 90 15 3.0 14.3 13 2:00 10.9 17 2:20 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Allison Elementary School 90 15 9.0 37.3 15 2:00 11.2 17 2:20 Oak Glen Middle School 90 15 2.4 6.7 22 2:10 11.0 17 2:30 Oak Glen High School 90 15 2.4 6.7 22 2:10 11.0 17 2:30 New Manchester Elementary School 90 15 1.4 4.6 19 2:05 11.0 17 2:25 SHADOW REGION East Liverpool Christian School 90 15 Inside the Shadow Region N/A 11.5 18 2:05 John D. Rockefeller Career Center 90 15 Inside the Shadow Region N/A 10.8 17 2:05 Maximum for EPZ: 3:50 Maximum: 4:20 Average for EPZ: 2:25 Average: 3:00 Beaver Valley Power Station 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow Travel Time Travel Dist. EPZ from EPZ Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Bdry to Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE H.S./R.S H.S./R.S H.S./R.S.

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School 100 20 14.9 14.1 64 3:05 19.2 32 3:40 Midland Neel Elementary/Middle School 100 20 15.2 14.1 65 3:05 19.2 32 3:40 Western Beaver JuniorSenior High School 100 20 13.2 5.9 136 4:20 19.2 32 4:55 Bethel Christian School 100 20 9.8 31.3 19 2:20 30.1 51 3:15 South Side Elementary School 100 20 11.6 32.3 22 2:25 30.2 51 3:20 South Side High School 100 20 11.6 32.3 22 2:25 30.2 51 3:20 South Side Middle School 100 20 11.6 32.3 22 2:25 30.2 51 3:20 Fairview Elementary School 100 20 11.8 9.1 78 3:20 19.2 32 3:55 Highland Middle School 100 20 2.3 13.7 11 2:15 0.3 1 2:20 Blackhawk Intermediate School 100 20 1.5 13.2 7 2:10 0.3 1 2:15 Beaver Area High School 100 20 2.4 9.6 15 2:15 35.7 60 3:15 Beaver Area Middle School 100 20 2.4 9.6 15 2:15 35.7 60 3:15 Dutch Ridge Elementary 100 20 5.2 8.7 36 2:40 39.8 67 3:50 New Horizon School 100 20 5.8 8.6 41 2:45 39.8 67 3:55 College Square Elementary School 100 20 1.5 9.9 10 2:10 35.7 60 3:10 St Peter and Paul School 100 20 0.4 10.1 3 2:05 46.9 79 3:25 Patterson Primary School 100 20 4.1 19.7 13 2:15 0.3 1 2:20 Beaver County Career & Technology Center 100 20 10.0 10.0 60 3:00 30.2 51 3:55 Center Grange Primary School 100 20 9.7 10.0 59 3:00 30.2 51 3:55 Central Valley High School 100 20 10.7 10.6 61 3:05 30.1 51 4:00 Todd Lane Elementary School 100 20 12.1 11.1 66 3:10 30.2 51 4:05 Central Valley Middle School 100 20 13.3 17.9 45 2:45 30.2 51 3:40 Aliquippa Elementary School 100 20 6.5 3.6 109 3:50 24.7 42 4:35 Hopewell Elementary School 100 20 3.9 15.5 16 2:20 30.1 51 3:15 Beaver Valley Power Station 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Aliquippa Jr./Sr. High School 100 20 8.3 4.1 122 4:05 24.7 42 4:50 Hopewell Junior High School 100 20 5.0 8.9 34 2:35 30.1 51 3:30 Margaret Ross Elementary School 100 20 5.0 8.9 34 2:35 30.1 51 3:30 Our Lady of Fatima School 100 20 4.4 9.4 28 2:30 30.1 51 3:25 Hope Christian Academy 100 20 8.2 4.1 120 4:00 24.7 42 4:45 Hopewell Senior High School 100 20 5.0 8.9 34 2:35 30.1 51 3:30 Independence Elementary School 100 20 5.0 3.6 83 3:25 30.1 51 4:20 Pleasant Hills Wesleyan Academy 100 20 8.6 26.7 20 2:20 30.2 51 3:15 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH East Liverpool Jr. High and High School 100 20 6.3 35.9 11 2:15 10.8 18 2:35 North Elementary School 100 20 6.2 35.9 11 2:15 10.8 18 2:35 Westgate Middle School 100 20 4.7 36.0 8 2:10 10.9 19 2:30 LaCroft Elementary School 100 20 3.0 13.1 14 2:15 10.9 19 2:35 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Allison Elementary School 100 20 9.0 32.8 17 2:20 11.2 19 2:40 Oak Glen Middle School 100 20 2.4 6.7 22 2:25 11.0 19 2:45 Oak Glen High School 100 20 2.4 6.7 22 2:25 11.0 19 2:45 New Manchester Elementary School 100 20 1.4 4.6 19 2:20 11.0 19 2:40 SHADOW REGION East Liverpool Christian School 100 20 Inside the Shadow Region N/A 11.5 20 2:20 John D. Rockefeller Career Center 100 20 Inside the Shadow Region N/A 10.8 18 2:20 Maximum for EPZ: 4:20 Maximum: 4:55 Average for EPZ: 2:45 Average: 3:25 Beaver Valley Power Station 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow Travel Time from Dist. To Travel Dist. EPZ EPZ Bdry Driver Loading EPZ Average Time to Bdry to to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE H.S./R.S H.S./R.S H.S./R.S.

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School 110 25 14.9 13.6 66 3:25 19.2 34 4:00 Midland Neel Elementary/Middle School 110 25 15.2 13.6 68 3:25 19.2 34 4:00 Western Beaver JuniorSenior High School 110 25 13.2 5.6 143 4:40 19.2 34 5:15 Bethel Christian School 110 25 9.8 29.4 21 2:40 30.1 54 3:35 South Side Elementary School 110 25 11.6 29.4 24 2:40 30.2 54 3:35 South Side High School 110 25 11.6 29.4 24 2:40 30.2 54 3:35 South Side Middle School 110 25 11.6 29.4 24 2:40 30.2 54 3:35 Fairview Elementary School 110 25 11.8 8.4 85 3:40 19.2 34 4:15 Highland Middle School 110 25 2.3 20.9 7 2:25 0.3 1 2:30 Blackhawk Intermediate School 110 25 1.5 21.2 5 2:20 0.3 1 2:25 Beaver Area High School 110 25 2.4 10.5 14 2:30 35.7 63 3:35 Beaver Area Middle School 110 25 2.4 10.5 14 2:30 35.7 63 3:35 Dutch Ridge Elementary 110 25 5.2 9.4 34 2:50 39.8 71 4:05 New Horizon School 110 25 5.8 9.2 38 2:55 39.8 71 4:10 College Square Elementary School 110 25 1.5 10.5 9 2:25 35.7 63 3:30 St Peter and Paul School 110 25 0.4 9.8 3 2:20 46.9 83 3:45 Patterson Primary School 110 25 4.1 16.4 15 2:30 0.3 1 2:35 Beaver County Career & Technology Center 110 25 10.0 6.3 96 3:55 30.2 54 4:50 Center Grange Primary School 110 25 9.7 6.2 94 3:50 30.2 54 4:45 Central Valley High School 110 25 10.7 6.4 101 4:00 30.1 54 4:55 Todd Lane Elementary School 110 25 12.1 6.4 114 4:10 30.2 54 5:05 Central Valley Middle School 110 25 13.3 18.8 43 3:00 30.2 54 3:55 Aliquippa Elementary School 110 25 6.5 3.2 122 4:20 24.7 44 5:05 Beaver Valley Power Station 817 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Hopewell Elementary School 110 25 3.9 18.6 13 2:30 30.1 54 3:25 Aliquippa Jr./Sr. High School 110 25 8.3 3.6 140 4:35 24.7 44 5:20 Hopewell Junior High School 110 25 5.0 14.5 21 2:40 30.1 54 3:35 Margaret Ross Elementary School 110 25 5.0 14.5 21 2:40 30.1 54 3:35 Our Lady of Fatima School 110 25 4.4 14.9 18 2:35 30.1 54 3:30 Hope Christian Academy 110 25 8.2 3.6 139 4:35 24.7 44 5:20 Hopewell Senior High School 110 25 5.0 14.5 21 2:40 30.1 54 3:35 Independence Elementary School 110 25 5.0 5.5 55 3:10 30.1 54 4:05 Pleasant Hills Wesleyan Academy 110 25 8.6 25.1 21 2:40 30.2 54 3:35 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH East Liverpool Jr. High and High School 110 25 6.3 33.1 12 2:30 10.8 20 2:50 North Elementary School 110 25 6.2 33.1 12 2:30 10.8 20 2:50 Westgate Middle School 110 25 4.7 34.0 9 2:25 10.9 20 2:45 LaCroft Elementary School 110 25 3.0 12.2 15 2:30 10.9 20 2:50 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Allison Elementary School 110 25 9.0 31.7 18 2:35 11.2 20 2:55 Oak Glen Middle School 110 25 2.4 6.0 24 2:40 11.0 20 3:00 Oak Glen High School 110 25 2.4 6.0 24 2:40 11.0 20 3:00 New Manchester Elementary School 110 25 1.4 4.5 19 2:35 11.0 20 2:55 SHADOW REGION East Liverpool Christian School 110 25 Inside the Shadow Region N/A 11.5 21 2:40 John D. Rockefeller Career Center 110 25 Inside the Shadow Region N/A 10.8 20 2:35 Maximum for EPZ: 4:40 Maximum: 5:20 Average for EPZ: 3:00 Average: 3:45 Beaver Valley Power Station 818 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Distance Travel Route Route Travel Pickup to Rec. Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE Ctr Rec. Ctr Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number3 of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1 120 13.6 18.4 44 30 3:15 25.4 38 5 10 79 30 6:00 2 1 120 15.2 17.5 52 30 3:25 18.9 28 5 10 74 30 5:55 3 2 120 9.7 29.2 20 30 2:50 18.9 28 5 10 61 30 5:05 4 1 120 15.6 40.0 23 30 2:55 30.7 46 5 10 93 30 6:00 5 1 120 13.3 40.0 20 30 2:50 25.4 38 5 10 78 30 5:35 6 2 120 9.9 19.8 30 30 3:00 18.9 28 5 10 58 30 5:15 2 120 9.7 17.1 34 30 3:05 35.4 53 5 10 88 30 6:15 7

2 150 9.7 21.8 27 30 3:30 35.4 53 5 10 88 30 6:40 2 120 12.0 15.8 46 30 3:20 35.4 53 5 10 90 30 6:30 8

2 150 12.0 24.5 29 30 3:30 35.4 53 5 10 90 30 6:40 3 120 8.5 14.5 35 30 3:10 29.3 44 5 10 71 30 5:50 9

3 150 8.5 25.7 20 30 3:20 29.3 44 5 10 71 30 6:00 10 1 120 6.4 7.7 50 30 3:20 30.7 46 5 10 65 30 6:00 11 1 120 10.2 40.0 15 30 2:50 25.4 38 5 10 69 30 5:25 12 1 120 8.5 40.0 13 30 2:45 6.2 9 5 10 35 30 4:15 13 3 120 6.6 40.0 10 30 2:40 6.2 9 5 10 29 30 4:05 14 2 120 2.2 40.0 3 30 2:35 4.7 7 5 10 14 30 3:45 15 2 120 5.5 35.9 9 30 2:40 17.0 26 5 10 43 30 4:35 16 1 120 1.0 4.8 13 30 2:45 11.3 17 5 10 24 30 4:15 3:30 Maximum ETE: 6:40 3:05 Average ETE: 5:30 3

Refer to Table 10-1 for additional information on the Sub-areas serviced by each route.

Beaver Valley Power Station 819 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow OneWave TwoWave Route Distance Travel Route Route Travel Pickup to Rec. Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE Ctr Rec. Ctr Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number3 of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1 130 13.6 15.9 51 40 3:45 25.4 42 5 10 88 40 6:50 2 1 130 15.2 15.4 59 40 3:50 18.9 32 5 10 82 40 6:40 3 2 130 9.7 30.0 19 40 3:10 18.9 32 5 10 66 40 5:45 4 1 130 15.6 36.0 26 40 3:20 30.7 51 5 10 103 40 6:50 5 1 130 13.3 36.0 22 40 3:15 25.4 42 5 10 87 40 6:20 6 2 130 9.9 15.1 39 40 3:30 18.9 32 5 10 65 40 6:05 2 130 9.7 21.4 27 40 3:20 35.4 59 5 10 98 40 6:55 7

2 160 9.7 21.4 27 40 3:50 35.4 59 5 10 98 40 7:25 2 130 12.0 15.4 47 40 3:40 35.4 59 5 10 100 40 7:15 8

2 160 12.0 28.4 25 40 3:50 35.4 59 5 10 100 40 7:25 3 130 8.5 11.4 45 40 3:35 29.3 49 5 10 79 40 6:40 9

3 160 8.5 21.3 24 40 3:45 29.3 49 5 10 79 40 6:50 10 1 130 6.4 4.8 80 40 4:10 30.7 51 5 10 73 40 7:10 11 1 130 10.2 36.0 17 40 3:10 25.4 42 5 10 76 40 6:05 12 1 130 8.5 36.0 14 40 3:05 6.2 10 5 10 39 40 4:50 13 3 130 6.6 36.0 11 40 3:05 6.2 10 5 10 32 40 4:45 14 2 130 2.2 36.0 4 40 2:55 4.7 8 5 10 15 40 4:15 15 2 130 5.5 31.9 10 40 3:05 17.0 28 5 10 48 40 5:20 16 1 130 1.0 4.7 13 40 3:05 11.3 19 5 10 31 40 4:50 4:10 Maximum ETE: 7:25 3:30 Average ETE: 6:15 Beaver Valley Power Station 820 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow OneWave TwoWave Route Distance Travel Route Route Travel Pickup to Rec. Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE Ctr Rec. Ctr Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number3 of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1 140 13.6 15.0 54 50 4:05 25.4 45 5 10 93 50 7:30 2 1 140 15.2 13.9 66 50 4:20 18.9 33 5 10 87 50 7:30 3 2 140 9.7 28.0 21 50 3:35 18.9 33 5 10 71 50 6:25 4 1 140 15.6 34.0 28 50 3:40 30.7 54 5 10 109 50 7:30 5 1 140 13.3 33.2 24 50 3:35 25.4 45 5 10 92 50 7:00 6 2 140 9.9 17.4 34 50 3:45 18.9 33 5 10 68 50 6:35 2 140 9.7 20.0 29 50 3:40 35.4 62 5 10 104 50 7:35 7

2 170 9.7 14.8 39 50 4:20 35.4 62 5 10 104 50 8:15 2 140 12.0 13.6 53 50 4:05 35.4 62 5 10 106 50 8:00 8

2 170 12.0 19.9 36 50 4:20 35.4 62 5 10 106 50 8:15 3 140 8.5 18.2 28 50 3:40 29.3 52 5 10 83 50 7:05 9

3 170 8.5 17.5 29 50 4:10 29.3 52 5 10 83 50 7:35 10 1 140 6.4 7.1 54 50 4:05 30.7 54 5 10 77 50 7:25 11 1 140 10.2 31.5 19 50 3:30 25.4 45 5 10 81 50 6:45 12 1 140 8.5 34.0 15 50 3:25 6.2 11 5 10 41 50 5:25 13 3 140 6.6 34.0 12 50 3:25 6.2 11 5 10 34 50 5:20 14 2 140 2.2 34.0 4 50 3:15 4.7 8 5 10 16 50 4:45 15 2 140 5.5 30.6 11 50 3:25 17.0 30 5 10 50 50 5:55 16 1 140 1.0 4.5 13 50 3:25 11.3 20 5 10 32 50 5:25 4:20 Maximum ETE: 8:15 3:50 Average ETE: 6:55 Beaver Valley Power Station 821 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 88. Medical Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Speed Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA St. Barnabas, Beaver Ambulatory 90 1 37 30 7.9 14.0 34 2:35 Meadows Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 23 75 7.9 11.2 42 3:30 Ambulatory 90 1 30 30 3.4 15.1 14 2:15 Lakeview Personal Care Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 25 75 3.4 9.1 22 3:10 Bedridden 90 15 5 30 3.4 15.1 14 2:15 Ambulatory 90 1 11 11 5.8 17.5 20 2:05 Trinity Oaks Care Center Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 4 20 5.8 15.3 23 2:15 Ambulatory 90 1 110 30 6.1 13.1 28 2:30 Brighton Rehab and Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 105 75 6.1 10.0 37 3:25 Wellness Bedridden 90 15 105 30 6.1 13.1 28 2:30 Ambulatory 90 1 90 30 5.6 13.1 26 2:30 Heritage Valley Beaver Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 40 75 5.6 9.7 35 3:20 Bedridden 90 15 40 30 5.6 13.1 26 2:30 Ambulatory 90 1 69 30 5.1 13.4 23 2:25 Franciscan Manor Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 25 75 5.1 9.7 32 3:20 Bedridden 90 15 6 30 5.1 13.4 23 2:25 Ambulatory 90 1 23 23 2.1 16.0 8 2:05 Cambridge Village Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 2 10 2.1 20.4 6 1:50 Gateway Rehabilitation 2:50 Center Ambulatory 90 1 177 30 7.8 9.8 48 Ambulatory 90 1 35 30 6.3 4.0 95 3:35 Beaver Healthcare &

Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 16 75 6.3 4.9 77 4:05 Rehabilitation Center Bedridden 90 15 2 30 6.3 4.0 95 3:35 Pediatric Specialty Care Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 34 75 5.5 4.8 69 3:55 Ambulatory 90 1 7 7 6.6 3.8 104 3:25 Hunters Personal Care Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 1 5 6.6 3.8 104 3:20 Beaver Valley Power Station 822 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Beaver Valley Nursing & Ambulatory 90 1 60 30 2:00 Inside the Shadow Region Rehabilitation Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 9 45 2:15 Ambulatory 90 1 53 30 2:00 Elmcroft of Chippewa Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 20 75 Inside the Shadow Region 2:45 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 2:00 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH Ambulatory 90 1 20 20 6.1 40.0 9 2:00 Valley Oaks Care Center Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 24 75 6.1 40.0 9 2:55 Bedridden 90 15 11 30 6.1 40.0 9 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 22 22 4.1 40.0 6 2:00 Orchards Of East Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 6 30 4.1 40.0 6 2:10 Liverpool Bedridden 90 15 3 30 4.1 40.0 6 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 3 3 4.1 40.0 6 1:40 The Orchards Rehab Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 4 20 4.1 40.0 6 2:00 Suites Bedridden 90 15 2 30 4.1 40.0 6 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 56 30 4.8 40.0 7 2:10 East Liverpool City Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 6 30 4.8 40.0 7 2:10 Hospital Bedridden 90 15 2 30 4.8 40.0 7 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 41 30 2.9 40.0 4 2:05 Calcutta Health Care Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 27 75 2.9 40.0 4 2:50 Bedridden 90 15 13 30 2.9 40.0 4 2:05 Ambulatory 90 1 8 8 1:40 Senior Link Inside the Shadow Region Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 2 10 1:40 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Ambulatory 90 1 18 18 9.2 15.5 36 2:25 The Orchard at Foxcrest Wheelchair bound Bus 90 5 43 75 9.2 20.7 27 3:15 Bedridden 90 15 11 30 9.2 16.7 33 2:35 Maximum ETE: 4:05 Average ETE: 2:35 Beaver Valley Power Station 823 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 89. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Speed Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA St. Barnabas, Beaver Ambulatory 100 1 37 30 7.9 11.9 40 2:50 Meadows Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 23 75 7.9 14.6 32 3:30 Ambulatory 100 1 30 30 3.4 13.1 16 2:30 Lakeview Personal Care Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 25 75 3.4 14.4 14 3:10 Bedridden 100 15 5 30 3.4 13.1 16 2:30 Ambulatory 100 1 11 11 5.8 13.5 26 2:20 Trinity Oaks Care Center Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 4 20 5.8 13.0 27 2:30 Ambulatory 100 1 110 30 6.1 10.6 35 2:45 Brighton Rehab and Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 105 75 6.1 13.4 27 3:25 Wellness Bedridden 100 15 105 30 6.1 10.6 35 2:45 Ambulatory 100 1 90 30 5.6 10.6 32 2:45 Heritage Valley Beaver Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 40 75 5.6 13.4 25 3:20 Bedridden 100 15 40 30 5.6 10.6 32 2:45 Ambulatory 100 1 69 30 5.1 11.0 28 2:40 Franciscan Manor Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 25 75 5.1 13.4 23 3:20 Bedridden 100 15 6 30 5.1 11.0 28 2:40 Ambulatory 100 1 23 23 2.1 13.4 9 2:15 Cambridge Village Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 2 10 2.1 15.9 8 2:00 Gateway Rehabilitation 2:45 Center Ambulatory 100 1 177 30 7.8 13.2 35 Ambulatory 100 1 35 30 6.3 2.9 130 4:20 Beaver Healthcare &

Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 16 75 6.3 3.7 102 4:40 Rehabilitation Center Bedridden 100 15 2 30 6.3 2.9 130 4:20 Pediatric Specialty Care Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 34 75 5.5 3.3 100 4:35 Ambulatory 100 1 7 7 6.6 2.8 141 4:10 Hunters Personal Care Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 1 5 6.6 2.8 141 4:10 Beaver Valley Power Station 824 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Beaver Valley Nursing & Ambulatory 100 1 60 30 2:10 Inside the Shadow Region Rehabilitation Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 9 45 2:25 Ambulatory 100 1 53 30 2:10 Elmcroft of Chippewa Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 20 75 Inside the Shadow Region 2:55 Bedridden 100 15 2 30 2:10 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH Ambulatory 100 1 20 20 6.1 36.0 10 2:10 Valley Oaks Care Center Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 24 75 6.1 36.0 10 3:05 Bedridden 100 15 11 30 6.1 36.0 10 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 22 22 4.1 36.0 7 2:10 Orchards Of East Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 6 30 4.1 36.0 7 2:20 Liverpool Bedridden 100 15 3 30 4.1 36.0 7 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 3 3 4.1 36.0 7 1:50 The Orchards Rehab Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 4 20 4.1 36.0 7 2:10 Suites Bedridden 100 15 2 30 4.1 36.0 7 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 56 30 4.8 36.0 8 2:20 East Liverpool City Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 6 30 4.8 36.0 8 2:20 Hospital Bedridden 100 15 2 30 4.8 36.0 8 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 41 30 2.9 36.0 5 2:15 Calcutta Health Care Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 27 75 2.9 36.0 5 3:00 Bedridden 100 15 13 30 2.9 36.0 5 2:15 Ambulatory 100 1 8 8 1:50 Senior Link Inside the Shadow Region Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 2 10 1:50 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Ambulatory 100 1 18 18 9.2 13.0 42 2:40 The Orchard at Foxcrest Wheelchair bound Bus 100 5 43 75 9.2 20.8 27 3:25 Bedridden 100 15 11 30 9.2 13.7 40 2:50 Maximum ETE: 4:40 Average ETE: 2:50 Beaver Valley Power Station 825 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 810. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Speed Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA St. Barnabas, Beaver Ambulatory 110 1 37 30 7.9 9.8 48 3:10 Meadows Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 23 75 7.9 7.5 63 4:10 Ambulatory 110 1 30 30 3.4 10.4 20 2:40 Lakeview Personal Care Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 25 75 3.4 7.6 27 3:35 Bedridden 110 15 5 30 3.4 10.4 20 2:40 Ambulatory 110 1 11 11 5.8 10.4 33 2:35 Trinity Oaks Care Center Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 4 20 5.8 9.8 36 2:50 Ambulatory 110 1 110 30 6.1 9.3 39 3:00 Brighton Rehab and Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 105 75 6.1 6.8 54 4:00 Wellness Bedridden 110 15 105 30 6.1 9.3 39 3:00 Ambulatory 110 1 90 30 5.6 9.3 36 3:00 Heritage Valley Beaver Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 40 75 5.6 6.8 49 3:55 Bedridden 110 15 40 30 5.6 9.3 36 3:00 Ambulatory 110 1 69 30 5.1 9.4 33 2:55 Franciscan Manor Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 25 75 5.1 6.8 45 3:50 Bedridden 110 15 6 30 5.1 9.4 33 2:55 Ambulatory 110 1 23 23 2.1 10.1 12 2:25 Cambridge Village Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 2 10 2.1 13.6 9 2:10 Gateway Rehabilitation 3:30 Center Ambulatory 110 1 177 30 7.8 6.8 69 Ambulatory 110 1 35 30 6.3 3.3 115 4:15 Beaver Healthcare &

Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 16 75 6.3 3.6 105 4:50 Rehabilitation Center Bedridden 110 15 2 30 6.3 3.3 115 4:15 Pediatric Specialty Care Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 34 75 5.5 3.5 94 4:40 Ambulatory 110 1 7 7 6.6 3.3 120 4:00 Hunters Personal Care Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 1 5 6.6 3.3 120 3:55 Beaver Valley Power Station 826 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Beaver Valley Nursing & Ambulatory 110 1 60 30 2:20 Inside the Shadow Region Rehabilitation Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 9 45 2:35 Ambulatory 110 1 53 30 2:20 Elmcroft of Chippewa Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 20 75 Inside the Shadow Region 3:05 Bedridden 110 15 2 30 2:20 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH Ambulatory 110 1 20 20 6.1 34.0 11 2:25 Valley Oaks Care Center Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 24 75 6.1 34.0 11 3:20 Bedridden 110 15 11 30 6.1 34.0 11 2:35 Ambulatory 110 1 22 22 4.1 34.0 7 2:20 Orchards Of East Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 6 30 4.1 34.0 7 2:30 Liverpool Bedridden 110 15 3 30 4.1 34.0 7 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 3 3 4.1 34.0 7 2:00 The Orchards Rehab Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 4 20 4.1 34.0 7 2:20 Suites Bedridden 110 15 2 30 4.1 34.0 7 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 56 30 4.8 34.0 8 2:30 East Liverpool City Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 6 30 4.8 34.0 8 2:30 Hospital Bedridden 110 15 2 30 4.8 34.0 8 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 41 30 2.9 34.0 5 2:25 Calcutta Health Care Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 27 75 2.9 34.0 5 3:10 Bedridden 110 15 13 30 2.9 34.0 5 2:25 Ambulatory 110 1 8 8 2:00 Senior Link Inside the Shadow Region Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 2 10 2:00 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Ambulatory 110 1 18 18 9.2 14.3 39 2:50 The Orchard at Foxcrest Wheelchair bound Bus 110 5 43 75 9.2 16.1 34 3:40 Bedridden 110 15 11 30 9.2 15.3 36 3:00 Maximum ETE: 4:50 Average ETE: 3:00 Beaver Valley Power Station 827 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Total Travel Mobiliza Loading Loading Time to Households tion Time at Travel to Time at EPZ Requiring Vehicles Stops per Weather Time 1st Stop Subsequent Subsequent Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Vehicle Conditions (min) (min) Stops (min) Stops (min) (min) (hr:min)

BEAVER COUNTY, PA Normal 90 54 25 3:00 Rain/Light Buses 140 20 7 100 1 60 6 3:20 Snow 29 Heavy Snow 110 66 29 3:35 Normal 90 36 25 3:00 Rain/Light Wheelchair Buses 61 15 5 100 5 40 20 3:15 Snow 29 Heavy Snow 110 44 29 3:30 Normal 90 9 22 2:35 Rain/Light Ambulances 32 16 2 100 15 10 15 2:50 Snow 27 Heavy Snow 110 11 26 3:00 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, PA Normal 90 54 25 3:00 Rain/Light Buses 33 5 7 100 1 60 6 3:20 Snow 29 Heavy Snow 110 66 29 3:35 Normal 90 36 25 3:00 Rain/Light Wheelchair Buses 15 3 5 100 5 40 20 3:15 Snow 29 Heavy Snow 110 44 29 3:30 Normal 90 9 22 2:35 Rain/Light Ambulances 7 4 2 100 15 10 15 2:50 Snow 27 Heavy Snow 110 11 26 3:00 Beaver Valley Power Station 828 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Total Travel Mobiliza Loading Loading Time to Households tion Time at Travel to Time at EPZ Requiring Vehicles Stops per Weather Time 1st Stop Subsequent Subsequent Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Vehicle Conditions (min) (min) Stops (min) Stops (min) (min) (hr:min)

HANCOCK COUNTY, PA Normal 90 72 24 3:15 Rain/Light Buses 125 15 9 100 1 80 8 3:40 Snow 29 Heavy Snow 110 88 33 4:00 Normal 90 54 24 3:25 Rain/Light Wheelchair Buses 70 10 7 100 5 60 30 3:45 Snow 29 Heavy Snow 110 66 33 4:05 Normal 90 9 22 2:35 Rain/Light Ambulances 18 9 2 100 15 10 15 2:50 Snow 27 Heavy Snow 110 11 26 3:00 Maximum ETE: 4:05 Average ETE: 3:15 Beaver Valley Power Station 829 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(Subsequent Wave)

A B C D E F G Time Event A ATE B Bus Dispatched from Depot C Bus Arrives at Facility/Pickup Point D Bus Departs for Reception Center E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Reception Center G Bus Available for Second Wave Evacuation Service Activity AB Driver Mobilization BC Travel to Facility or to Pickup Point 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 830 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 this 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 existing TCPs and ACPs1 identified by each county agency in their existing emergency plans serve as the basis of the TMP, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

2. The ETE analysis treated all controlled intersections that are existing TCP or ACP locations in the county plans as being controlled by actuated signals. In Appendix K, Table K1 identifies the number of intersections that were modeled as TCPs/ACPs.

3. Evacuation simulations were run using DYNEV II to predict traffic congestion during 1

Including barricades for the State of Ohio.

Beaver Valley Power Station 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 traffic congestion during an 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, which could benefit the ETE, 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 a list of priority TCPs using the process enumerated above.

9.1 Assumptions The following are TMP 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 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.

Traffic will not be permitted to cross state borders during the evacuation.

Study assumptions 1 through 4 in Section 2.5 further discuss the 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 information. 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 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 Beaver Valley Power Station 92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

during the evacuation trip.

These are only several examples of how ITS technologies can benefit the evacuation process.

Consideration should be given that ITS technologies be used to facilitate the evacuation process, and any additional signage placed should consider evacuation needs.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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 Subarea being evacuated to the boundary of the evacuation region and thence out of the EPZ.

• Routing of transitdependent evacuees (schools, medical facilities, or permanent residents who do not own or have access to a private vehicle) from the EPZ boundary to host schools/receiving schools/reception centers.

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 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, wheelchair transport vehicles, or ambulances. Transitdependent evacuees will be routed to reception centers. General population may evacuate to either a reception center or some alternate destination (i.e.,

lodging facilities, relatives home, campgrounds) 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 23 bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102 through Figure 104 were designed by KLD to service the major routes through each Subarea and to service the predefined pickup locations identified in the county public information brochure. The 16 routes listed in Table 101 were used to approximate the bus routes shown in Figure 102 through Figure 104 by Subarea and to compute average speeds along major evacuation routes servicing each Subarea or combination of Subareas. It is assumed that residents will walk to and congregate at these predesignated pickup locations, and that they can arrive at the stops within the 120minute bus mobilization time (good weather).

The specified bus routes for all schools, medical facilities and transit dependent population are documented in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations).

10.2 Reception Centers Figure 105 maps the general population and school reception centers (host/receiving schools) for evacuees and Table 103 presents a list of the host/receiving schools for each school in the EPZ. Students will be transported to these host/receiving schools where they will be subsequently retrieved by their respective families, friends or guardians.

Due to concerns with reception center capacity, evacuees were not routed across state Beaver Valley Power Station 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

borders, including:

Newell Toll Bridge at the Ohio/West Virginia border.

Ohio State Route 39 and Pennsylvania State Route 68 at the Ohio/Pennsylvania border.

Ohio State Route 154 and Pennsylvania State Route 251 at the Ohio/Pennsylvania border.

US Route 30 at the Pennsylvania/West Virginia border.

Transitdependent evacuees are transported to the nearest reception center for each county.

Patients at medical facilities in Beaver County are evacuated to Slippery Rock University. 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes Number of Servicing Sub Route Buses area(s) Length (mi.)

1 1 P1 13.6 2 1 P2 15.2 3 2 P3 9.7 4 1 P4 15.6 5 1 P5 & P6 13.3 6 2 P7 9.9 7 4 P8 9.7 8 4 P9 12.0 9 6 P10 8.5 10 1 P11 6.4 11 1 P12 10.2 12 1 O1 8.5 13 3 O2 6.6 14 2 O3 2.2 15 2 W1 5.5 16 1 W2 & W3 1.0 Total: 33 Beaver Valley Power Station 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 1930, 1925, 1920, 1915, 1900, 1912, 1895, 1910, 1911, 1905, 71, 68, 67, 66, 1457, 65, 60, 58, 259, 59, 75, 1 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P1 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 521, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103 54, 55, 1578, 1579, 1581, 1583, 1584, 1586, 1587, 1588, 1589, 1591, 1592, 80, 521, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 2 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P2 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103 1855, 1850, 1845, 1842, 1840, 1835, 1830, 1825, 1820, 1815, 1805, 1803, 1795, 1786, 1785, 1780, 1778, 3 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P3 1775, 1770, 1765, 1750, 1735, 1430, 1710, 1700, 1690, 1685, 1691, 1670, 1665, 1660 3000, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 3010, 3015, 3020, 3025, 3030, 3035, 3040, 3045, 3050, 3055, 3071, 3060, 4 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P4 3065, 3072, 3070, 1079, 3080, 5125, 5120, 5117, 5115, 5110, 5105, 5100, 5095, 5093, 5090, 5126, 5085, 5080 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subareas P5 198, 194, 193, 192, 5205, 5200, 5210, 944, 178, 179, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 188, 189, 191, 4050, 4045, 5

& P6 4055 6 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P7 513, 941, 942, 943, 91, 92, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103 7 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P8 1810, 1780, 1778, 1775, 1770, 1765, 1750, 1735, 1430, 1710, 1700, 1690, 1685, 1691, 1670, 1665, 1660 1225, 1220, 1217, 1210, 1205, 1190, 1088, 270, 648, 257, 258, 260, 261, 262, 263, 1172, 1170, 1169, 1196, 8 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P9 1167, 1165, 1160, 1195, 1615 1255, 1307, 1260, 1265, 1320, 1426, 1325, 1330, 1427, 1340, 611, 1345, 1350, 1362, 1365, 1370, 1375, 9 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P10 1380 10 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P11 304, 303, 302, 301, 299, 298, 297, 296, 295, 294, 293, 292, 291, 1455, 1456, 1460, 175, 170, 165 11 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea P12 179, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 188, 189, 191, 4050, 4045 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 37, 27, 26, 32, 25, 24, 23, 22, 6015, 6018, 6020, 6025, 6030, 6035, 6040, 6045, 6070, 12 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea O1 6050, 6075, 6080, 6085, 6090, 6095, 6100 25, 24, 23, 22, 6015, 6018, 6020, 6025, 6030, 6035, 6040, 6045, 6070, 6050, 6075, 6080, 6085, 6090, 6095, 13 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea O2 6100 14 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea O3 6640, 6290, 6280, 6275, 6270, 6260, 6265, 6090, 6095, 6100 5275, 5280, 5282, 5285, 5287, 5305, 5320, 5325, 5340, 5347, 5345, 5350, 5355, 5360, 5375, 5380, 5385, 15 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subarea W1 5390 Transit Dependent Route Servicing Subareas W 16 5993, 5825, 5835, 5840, 5730, 5735, 5734 2 & W3 Dutch Ridge Elementary 326, 327, 328, 329, 331, 332, 333, 334, 336, 339, 341, 343, 344, 347, 346, 360, 362, 365, 1573, 370, 1576, 17 New Horizon School 375, 1574, 380, 385, 163 18 Patterson Primary School 168, 167, 166, 162, 161, 156, 154, 141, 147 Beaver Valley Power Station 104 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 19 Our Lady of Fatima School 611, 1345, 1350, 1362, 1365, 1370, 1375, 1380 Hopewell Junior High School 20 Margaret Ross Elementary School 1340, 611, 1345, 1350, 1362, 1365, 1370, 1375, 1380 Hopewell Senior High School 21 Central Valley Middle School 268, 1157, 1155, 1152, 1150, 817 22 Fairview Elementary School 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103 574, 573, 514, 513, 1449, 512, 511, 225, 353, 354, 356, 346, 360, 362, 365, 1573, 370, 1576, 375, 1574, 380, 23 Western Beaver JuniorSenior High School 385, 163 East Liverpool Jr. High and High School 6720, 6715, 6735, 6740, 6785, 6790, 6795, 723, 6780, 6755, 6818, 6760, 6058, 6060, 6045, 6070, 6050, 24 North Elementary School 6075, 6080, 6085, 6090, 6095 Oak Glen High School 25 5993, 5825, 5835, 5840, 5730, 5735 New Manchester Elementary School College Square Elementary School 1710, 1730, 1745, 321, 322, 324, 326, 327, 328, 329, 331, 332, 333, 334, 336, 339, 341, 343, 344, 347, 346, 26 St Peter and Paul School 360, 362, 365, 1573, 370, 1576, 375, 1574, 380, 385, 163, 164, 395 Highland Middle School 27 116, 371, 139, 148, 147 Blackhawk Intermediate School Beaver County Career & Technology Center 40, 1230, 983, 1235, 563, 562, 569, 564, 1084, 568, 567, 305, 1321, 300, 195, 1290, 190, 187, 185, 180, 175, 28 Center Grange Primary School 170, 165 Central Valley High School 1225, 1230, 983, 1235, 563, 562, 569, 564, 1084, 568, 567, 305, 1321, 300, 195, 1290, 190, 187, 185, 180, 29 Todd Lane Elementary School 175, 170, 165 30 Independence Elementary School 299, 298, 297, 296, 295, 294, 293, 292, 291, 1455, 1456, 1460, 175, 170, 165 31 LaCroft Elementary School 702, 701, 699, 1 Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School 63, 65, 60, 58, 259, 59, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 521, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95, 96, 97, 32 Midland Neel Elementary/Middle School 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103 Aliquippa Elementary School 33 Aliquippa Jr./Sr. High School 1400, 1405, 1378, 1410, 1425, 1420, 1115, 1110, 1105, 1100, 1095, 1090, 1087, 1085 Hope Christian Academy Bethel Christian School South Side Elementary School 311, 282, 281, 280, 279, 278, 277, 309, 3055, 3071, 3060, 3065, 3072, 3070, 3090, 3085, 3095, 4000, 4005, 34 South Side High School 4010, 4015, 4020, 4025, 4030, 4035, 4040, 4050, 4045 South Side Middle School Beaver Valley Power Station 105 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 35 Hopewell Elementary School 1435, 1350, 1362, 1365, 1370, 1375, 1380 36 Pleasant Hills Wesleyan Academy 266, 4000, 4005, 4010, 4015, 4020, 4025, 4030, 4035, 4040, 4050, 4045 37 Oak Glen Middle School 5282, 5285, 5287, 5305, 5320, 5325, 5340, 5347, 5345, 5350, 5355, 5360, 5375, 5380, 5385, 5390 38 Westgate Middle School 6065, 1103, 6055, 6058, 6060, 6045, 6070, 6050, 6075, 6080, 6085, 6090, 6095 39 East Liverpool Christian School 527, 528, 529, 523, 6115, 6120, 6125, 6130, 6135, 6140 40 John D. Rockefeller Career Center 5445, 5450, 5455 Beaver Area High School 1745, 321, 322, 324, 326, 327, 328, 329, 331, 332, 333, 334, 336, 339, 341, 343, 344, 347, 346, 360, 362, 41 Beaver Area Middle School 365, 1573, 370, 1576, 375, 1574, 380, 385, 163 42 Allison Elementary School 6645, 6640, 6290, 6280, 6275, 6270, 6260, 6265, 6090, 6095, 6100 43 Gateway Rehabilitation Center 571, 568, 567, 305, 1321, 300, 195, 1290, 190, 187, 185, 180, 175, 170, 165 362, 360, 355, 350, 345, 342, 340, 338, 335, 330, 337, 254, 325, 320, 315, 310, 566, 567, 305, 1321, 300, 44 P7 medical facilities 195, 1290, 190, 187, 185, 180, 175, 170, 165 45 P10 medical facilities 1440, 1445, 1450, 1452, 1456, 1460, 175, 170, 165 350, 345, 342, 340, 338, 335, 330, 337, 254, 325, 320, 315, 310, 566, 567, 305, 1321, 300, 195, 1290, 190, 46 P8 medical facility 187, 185, 180, 175, 170, 165 47 O2 medical facilities 6030, 6035, 6040, 6045, 6070, 6050, 6075, 6080, 6085, 6090, 6095, 6100 48 O3 medical facility 6295, 6290, 6280, 6275, 6270, 6260, 6265, 6090, 6095, 6100 49 The Orchard at Foxcrest 5245, 6010, 6005, 6000, 5995, 5910, 5900, 5895, 5890, 5991, 5992, 5993, 5825, 5835, 5840, 5730, 5735 Beaver Valley Power Station 106 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 103. Host/Receiving Schools School Host/Receiving School BEAVER COUNTY, PA Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School Midland Neel Elementary/Middle School Union Area Middle/High School Western Beaver JuniorSenior High School Fairview Elementary School Bethel Christian School South Side Elementary School South Side High School South Side Middle School Beaver County Career & Technology Center CanonMcMillan High School Center Grange Primary School Central Valley High School Todd Lane Elementary School Central Valley Middle School Pleasant Hills Wesleyan Academy Highland Middle School Blackhawk Intermediate School Blackhawk High School Patterson Primary School Beaver Area High School Beaver Area Middle School Dutch Ridge Elementary Slippery Rock Senior High School New Horizon School College Square Elementary School St Peter and Paul School Aliquippa Elementary School Aliquippa Jr./Sr. High School Independence Middle School Hope Christian Academy Hopewell Elementary School Hopewell Junior High School Margaret Ross Elementary School South Park High School Our Lady of Fatima School Hopewell Senior High School Independence Elementary School COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH East Liverpool Jr. High and High School North Elementary School Columbiana County Career and Technical Westgate Middle School Center/Lisbon David Anderson High School LaCroft Elementary School HANCOCK COUNTY, WV Allison Elementary School Oak Glen Middle School Weir High/Weir Middle Oak Glen High School School Complex New Manchester Elementary School Beaver Valley Power Station 107 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

School Host/Receiving School SHADOW REGION Columbiana County Career and Technical East Liverpool Christian School Center/Lisbon David Anderson High School Weir High/Weir Middle John D. Rockefeller Career Center School Complex Beaver Valley Power Station 108 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 101. Evacuation Route Map Beaver Valley Power Station 109 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes in Pennsylvania, North of the Ohio River Beaver Valley Power Station 1010 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. TransitDependent Bus Routes in Pennsylvania, South of the Ohio River Beaver Valley Power Station 1011 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 104. TransitDependent Bus Routes in Ohio and West Virginia Beaver Valley Power Station 1012 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 105. General Population Reception Centers and Host Schools/Receiving Schools Beaver Valley Power Station 1013 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 vehicles per hour (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 vehicles per hour (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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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 vehicles per hour (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 vehicles per hour (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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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 section 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 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.

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, Beaver Valley Power Station B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

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 ca ta la sa ,

Beaver Valley Power Station B2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

where ca is the generalized cost for link a, 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 traffic assignment 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 d0 = 10 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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 Beaver Valley Power Station B5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

C. 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 percents provided by the 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, EVAN Calculates ETE statistics Beaver Valley Power Station C1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

All traffic simulation models are dataintensive. Table C2 outlines the necessary input data elements.

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 Beaver Valley Power Station C2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

on each link that comprises the evacuation network, and for each TI over the duration of the evacuation.

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 Beaver Valley Power Station C3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 Beaver Valley Power Station C4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

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 Qb vQ shown, Q Cap, with t 0 and a queue of Qe Qe length, Q , formed by that portion of M and E that reaches the stopbar within the TI, but could v not discharge due to inadequate capacity. That is, Mb Q M E . This queue length, Q v Q M E Cap can be extended to Q by L3 traffic entering the approach during the current TI, traveling at speed, v, and reaching the rear of the t1 t3 queue within the TI. A portion of the entering TI 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:

Beaver Valley Power Station C5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

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 Beaver Valley Power Station C6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

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 measures of effectiveness 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 networkwide 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 Beaver Valley Power Station C7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

Beaver Valley Power Station C8 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 Beaver Valley Power Station C9 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 Beaver Valley Power Station C10 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 a LN 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 a O

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.

Beaver Valley Power Station C11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The number of queued vehicles on the link, of a particular turn movement, at the Q ,Q

[beginning, end] of the time interval.

The maximum flow rate that can be serviced by a link for a particular movement Q in the absence of a control device. It is specified by the analyst as an estimate of link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station C12 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 Beaver Valley Power Station C13 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 Beaver Valley Power Station C14 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: Q e , 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)

Beaver Valley Power Station C15 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 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 EPZ boundary information and create a 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 subarea boundaries.

Step 2 2020 Census block information was obtained in GIS format. This information was used to estimate the resident population within the EPZ and Shadow Region and to define the spatial distribution and demographic characteristics of the population within the study area. Estimates of employees who reside outside of the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ was based upon data provided by each county and by Energy Harbor. Transient facility, school and medical facility data were obtained from county emergency management agencies and the National Center for Education Statistics website1.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with major stakeholders (state and local emergency managers and 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 local 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 are present), and to make the necessary observations needed to estimate realistic values of roadway capacity. Roadway characteristics were also verified using aerial imagery.

1 https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/index.asp Beaver Valley Power Station D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 5 An online demographic survey of households within the EPZ was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic information of the EPZ population. 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 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 estimates (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 19 subareas. Based on wind direction and speed, regions (groupings of subareas) 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 Beaver Valley Power Station D2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

measures of effectiveness as well as estimates of evacuation time.

Step 10 The results generated by the prototype evacuation case are critically examined. The examination includes observing the animated graphics (using EVAN software see Section 1.3) produced by DYNEV II 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 minor 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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, and other transit vehicles 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 were available, quality control procedures were used to assure the results were consistent, dynamic routing was reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks were addressed properly. Traffic management plans are analyzed, and traffic control points are prioritized, if applicable.

Additional analysis is conducted to identify the sensitivity of the ETE to change in some base evacuation conditions and model assumptions.

Step 16 Once vehicular evacuation results are accepted, average travel speeds for transit and special facility routes were used to compute evacuation time estimates for transitdependent permanent residents, schools, hospitals, and other special facilities.

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated and graphed. The results were 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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 Demographic Survey and Develop Trip Generation Characteristics B

Step 13 Step 6 Establish Transit and Special Facility Evacuation Create and Calibrate LinkNode Analysis Network Routes and Update DYNEV II Database Step 14 Step 7 Generate DYNEV II Input Streams for All Evacuation Cases Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 15 Step 8 Use DYNEVII to Simulate All Evacuation Cases Create and Debug DYNEV II Input Stream and Compute ETE 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 Beaver Valley Power Station D5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX E Special Facility Data

E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of July 2022, for special facilities, transient attractions, and major employers that are located within the BVPS EPZ. Special facilities are defined as schools, colleges/universities, medical facilities, and correctional facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for transient attractions (campgrounds, day camps, golf courses, hunting/fishing areas, marinas, parks, other recreational facilities) and lodging facilities. Employment data is included in the table for major employers. Each table is grouped by county. The location of each facility is defined by its straightline distance (miles) and direction (magnetic bearing) from the center point of the plant. Maps of each special facility, transient attraction (campground, day camp, golf course, hunting/fishing area, marina, park, other recreational facility), lodging facility, and major employer are also provided.

Beaver Valley Power Station E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools within the EPZ Sub Distance Direc Enroll Area (miles) tion School Name Street Address Municipality ment BEAVER COUNTY, PA P1 1.3 NW Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter School 1 Lincoln Park Midland 660 P1 1.5 NW PA Cyber School1 652 Midland Ave Midland P1 1.6 NW Midland Neel Elementary/Middle School 173 7th St Midland 240 P3 3.2 NNE Western Beaver JuniorSenior High School 216 Engle Rd Industry 346 P4 4.5 SSE Bethel Christian School 4549 PA151 West Aliquippa 31 P5 3.7 S South Side Elementary School 4949 PA151 Hookstown 397 P5 3.7 S South Side High School 4949 PA151 Hookstown 310 P5 3.7 S South Side Middle School 4949 PA151 Hookstown 217 P7 5.3 NNW Fairview Elementary School 343 Ridgemont Dr Midland 326 P7 10.0 NNE Highland Middle School 402 Shenango Rd Beaver Falls 733 P7 10.6 NNE Blackhawk Intermediate School 635 Shenango Rd Beaver Falls 666 P8 7.9 NE Beaver Area High School 1 Gypsy Glen Rd Beaver 708 P8 7.9 NE Beaver Area Middle School Gypsy Glen Rd Beaver 291 P8 8.0 NE Dutch Ridge Elementary 2220 Dutch Ridge Rd Beaver 447 P8 8.2 NE New Horizon School 128 Friendship Cir Beaver 163 P8 8.4 NE College Square Elementary School 375 College Ave Beaver 560 P8 8.9 NE St Peter and Paul School 370 East End Ave Beaver 124 P8 10.1 NNE Patterson Primary School 701 Darlington Rd Beaver Falls 153 P9 6.9 ENE Beaver County Career & Technology Center 145 Poplar Ave Monaca 583 P9 7.2 ENE Center Grange Primary School 225 Center Grange Rd West Aliquippa 479 P9 7.3 ENE Central Valley High School 160 Baker Rd Ext Monaca 720 P9 7.6 ENE Todd Lane Elementary School 113 Todd Ln Monaca 525 P9 9.3 ENE Central Valley Middle School 1500 Allen Ave Monaca Monaca 541 P10 8.2 E Aliquippa Elementary School 800 21st St West Aliquippa 554 P10 8.7 ESE Hopewell Elementary School 3000 Kane Rd West Aliquippa 367 P10 9.2 E Aliquippa Jr./Sr. High School 100 Harding Ave West Aliquippa 465 P10 9.3 ESE Hopewell Junior High School 2354 Brodhead Rd West Aliquippa 639 P10 9.3 ESE Margaret Ross Elementary School 1955 Maratta Rd West Aliquippa 220 1

PA Cyber School, Buckeye Online School for Success and Quaker Digital Academy are online schools identified by county officials. There are no students on site, and therefore, no transportation resources are needed for these schools.

Beaver Valley Power Station E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sub Distance Direc Enroll Area (miles) tion School Name Street Address Municipality ment P10 9.5 ESE Our Lady of Fatima School 3005 Fatima Dr West Aliquippa 115 P10 9.8 E Hope Christian Academy 434 Franklin Ave West Aliquippa 5 P10 9.8 ESE Hopewell Senior High School 1215 Longvue Ave West Aliquippa 623 P11 7.7 SE Independence Elementary School 103 School Rd West Aliquippa 253 P12 5.1 SSW Pleasant Hills Wesleyan Academy 466 Pleasant Hill Rd Hookstown 10 Beaver County Subtotal: 12,471 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH O2 7.1 W East Liverpool Jr. High and High School 100 Maine Blvd East Liverpool 891 O2 7.1 W North Elementary School 90 Maine Blvd East Liverpool 421 O2 7.7 W Buckeye Online School for Success1 119 E 5th St East Liverpool O2 7.7 W Quaker Digital Academy1 108 E 5th St East Liverpool O2 7.8 W Westgate Middle School 810 West 8th St East Liverpool 350 O2 8.7 WNW LaCroft Elementary School 2460 Boring Ln East Liverpool 386 O3 8.4 WNW Employment Development Center 15529 Sprucevale Rd East Liverpool 35 Columbiana County Subtotal: 2,083 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV W1 6.8 W Allison Elementary School 600 Railroad St Chester 314 W2 8.6 SW Oak Glen Middle School 39 Golden Bear Dr New Cumberland 600 W2 8.7 SW Oak Glen High School 195 Golden Bear Dr New Cumberland 530 W3 9.9 SW New Manchester Elementary School 128 Frankfort Rd New Cumberland 250 Hancock County Subtotal: 1,694 EPZ TOTAL: 16,248 SHADOW REGION2 S.R. 10.0 N Blackhawk High School 500 Blackhawk Rd Beaver Falls 738 S.R. 10.3 NE New Brighton Area Middle School 901 Penn Ave New Brighton 334 S.R. 10.4 NE New Brighton Area Elementary School 3200 43rd St New Brighton 607 S.R. 10.5 NE New Brighton Area High School 3200 43rd St # 2 New Brighton 403 S.R. 10.7 E Baden Academy Charter School 1016 W State St Baden 573 S.R. 10.7 NE Saint Monica Catholic Academy 609 10th St Beaver Falls 101 S.R. 11.0 E State Street Elementary School 600 Harmony Rd Baden 268 2

These schools are located in the Shadow Region (S.R.) but they are included in the county emergency plans, the public information brochure, and/or are identified by county officials as potentially having to evacuate. Students at these schools will be evacuated to designated host facilities if there is an emergency at BVPS. Refer to Section 3 for additional information.

Beaver Valley Power Station E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sub Distance Direc Enroll Area (miles) tion School Name Street Address Municipality ment S.R. 11.0 NE Beaver Falls Middle School 1601 8th Ave Beaver Falls 398 S.R. 11.0 NE Central Elementary School 805 15th St Beaver Falls 476 S.R. 11.1 ESE Ambridge Area Sr. High School 909 Duss Ave Ambridge 724 S.R. 11.1 NNE Big Beaver Falls Senior High School 1701 8th Ave Beaver Falls 478 S.R. 11.2 NE Sylvania Hills Christian Academy 567 Pittsburgh Rd Rochester 20 S.R. 11.6 NE The School at McGuire Memorial 2119 Mercer Rd New Brighton 73 S.R. 11.7 ESE Highland Elementary School 1101 Highland Ave Ambridge 289 S.R. 11.9 ENE Economy Elementary School 1000 1st St Freedom 414 S.R. 12.0 ENE Ambridge Area Jr. High School 401 First St Freedom 550 S.R. 12.1 NNE Beaver County Christian Secondary 510 37th St Beaver Falls 96 S.R. 12.2 NNE Beaver County Christian Elementary School 4001 6th Ave Beaver Falls 179 S.R. 13.2 NNE Big Beaver Falls Elementary School 588 Friendship Rd Darlington 326 S.R. 10.2 WNW East Liverpool Christian School 46682 Florence St East Liverpool 130 S.R. 12.0 WNW Beaver Local Elementary School 46088 Bell School Rd Calcutta 667 S.R. 11.6 WSW John D. Rockefeller Career Center 95 Rockyside Rd New Cumberland 460 Shadow Region Total: 8,304 STUDY AREA TOTAL: 24,552 Table E2. Colleges/Universities within the EPZ Sub Distance Direc Enroll Area (miles) tion School Name Street Address Municipality ment BEAVER COUNTY, PA P9 7.1 ENE Community College of Beaver County 1 Campus Drive Monaca 2,800 P9 8.1 ENE Penn State Beaver Campus 100 University Dr Monaca 530 Beaver County Subtotal: 3,330 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH O2 7.6 W Kent State University 400 East 4th St East Liverpool 1,400 O2 7.6 W New Castle School of Trades East Liverpool Campus 129 E 5th St East Liverpool 15 Columbiana County Subtotal: 1,415 EPZ TOTAL: 4,745 Beaver Valley Power Station E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambul Wheel Bed Sub Distance Direc Cap Current atory chair ridden Area (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality acity Census Patients Patients Patients BEAVER COUNTY, PA P7 5.9 NNE St. Barnabas, Beaver Meadows 5130 Tuscarawas Rd Beaver 66 60 37 23 0 P7 8.0 NNW Lakeview Personal Care 498 Lisbon Rd Darlington 92 60 30 25 5 P8 7.1 NNE Trinity Oaks Care Center 160 Chapel Rd Beaver 21 15 11 4 0 P8 8.0 NE Brighton Rehab and Wellness 246 Friendship Cir Beaver 589 320 110 105 105 P8 8.5 NE Heritage Valley Beaver 1000 Dutch Ridge Rd Beaver 300 170 90 40 40 P8 9.5 NE Franciscan Manor 71 Darlington Rd Beaver Falls 117 100 69 25 6 P8 10.6 NNE Cambridge Village 1600 Darlington Rd Beaver Falls 96 25 23 2 0 P9 5.8 E Gateway Rehabilitation Center 100 Moffett Run Rd Aliquippa 177 177 177 0 0 P10 7.4 E Beaver Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center 616 Golf Course Rd West Aliquippa 67 53 35 16 2 P10 7.5 ESE Pediatric Specialty Care 2900 Johnson St Aliquippa 36 34 0 34 0 P10 8.4 E Hunters Personal Care 1916 Main St West Aliquippa 21 8 7 1 0 S.R. 10.0 N Beaver Valley Nursing & Rehabilitation3 257 Georgetown Rd Beaver 120 69 60 9 0 S.R. 11.0 NNE Elmcroft of Chippewa3 104 Pappan Business Dr Beaver Falls 85 75 53 20 2 Beaver County Subtotal: 1,787 1,166 702 304 160 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH O2 6.9 W Valley Oaks Care Center 500 Selfridge St East Liverpool 100 55 20 24 11 O2 7.4 WNW Orchards Of East Liverpool 709 Armstrong Ln East Liverpool 50 31 22 6 3 O2 7.5 WNW The Orchards Rehab Suites 701 Armstrong Ln East Liverpool 9 9 3 4 2 O2 8.1 W East Liverpool City Hospital 425 West 5th St East Liverpool 154 64 56 6 2 O3 8.8 WNW Calcutta Health Care 48444 Bell School Rd East Liverpool 121 81 41 27 13 3

S.R. 10.2 WNW Senior Link 16351 OH267 East Liverpool 10 10 8 2 0 Columbiana County Subtotal: 444 250 150 69 31 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV W1 6.2 W The Orchard at Foxcrest 125 Fox Ln Chester 137 72 18 43 11 Hancock County Subtotal: 137 72 18 43 11 EPZ TOTAL: 2,368 1,488 870 416 202 3

These facilities are located in the Shadow Region (S.R.), but they are included in the county emergency plans and/or are identified by county officials as potentially having to be evacuated. Residents at these facilities will be evacuated if there is an emergency at BVPS.

Beaver Valley Power Station E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ

% Employee Employees Employees Vehicles Sub Distance Direc Employees Commuting Commuting Commuting Area (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ BEAVER COUNTY, PA P1 Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport Rd Shippingport 600 60.0% 360 343 P8 8.2 NE Beaver County Courthouse 810 3rd St Beaver 409 70.0% 286 272 P8 8.5 NE Heritage Valley Beaver 1000 Dutch Ridge Rd Beaver 620 41.3% 256 244 P9 7.2 ENE Beaver Valley Mall 570 Beaver Valley Mall Blvd Monaca 350 41.3% 145 138 P9 7.1 ENE Community College of Beaver County 1 Campus Dr Monaca 300 90.0% 270 257 Beaver County Subtotal: 2,279 1,317 1,254 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH There are no major employers in the Columbiana County portion of the EPZ HANCOCK COUNTY, WV W1 9.2 W The Homer Laughlin China Company 672 Fiesta Dr Newell 887 55.0% 488 465 W1 10.3 W Marsh Bellofram Corporation 8019 Ohio River Blvd Newell 375 56.6% 212 202 Hancock County Subtotal: 1,262 700 667 EPZ TOTAL: 3,541 2,017 1,921 Table E5. Day Camps within the EPZ Sub Distance Direc Area (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles4 BEAVER COUNTY, PA P7 8.9 NNE Camp Baker 371 Winterburn Rd Beaver Falls 150 50 P12 6.7 SSE Promise Camp & Retreat Center 227 Lance Rd Clinton 150 50 Beaver County Subtotal: 300 100 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, PA O2 6.9 W TriState Free Methodist Camp 1027 Anderson Blvd East Liverpool 146 61 O3 7.2 NW Beaver Creek United Presbyterian Church Camp 14757 Beaver Creek Camp Rd East Liverpool 132 4 Columbiana County Subtotal: 278 65 EPZ TOTAL: 578 165 4

Transients at day camps can be evacuated in personal vehicles, except for Beaver Creek United Presbyterian Church Camp where the majority of campers are younger children. It is assumed these children can be evacuated by bus with a capacity of 70 children per bus. As such, 2 (132 ÷ 70, rounded up) buses or 4 vehicles (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles) are needed for this day camp.

Beaver Valley Power Station E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E6. Golf Courses and Marinas within the EPZ Sub Distance Direc Area (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles BEAVER COUNTY, PA P3 3.4 N Deer Trails Country Club 311 Engle Rd Industry Golf Course 92 38 P7 6.0 N Seven Oaks Country Club 132 Lisbon Rd Beaver Golf Course 100 50 P7 8.5 N Rolling Acres Golf Course 350 Achortown Rd Beaver Falls Golf Course 180 75 P7 9.7 N Black Hawk Golf Course 644 Blackhawk Rd Beaver Falls Golf Course 360 150 P8 9.1 ENE Captain's Quarters Marina 101 Wolfe Ln Beaver Marina 44 18 P8 9.2 NE Bridgewater Landings Marina 404 Brkich Way Beaver Marina 39 32 P8 9.3 NE River Harbour 1658 Riverside Dr Beaver Marina 5 4 P8 9.3 NE Taylir Cay Marina 1440 Riverside Dr Beaver Marina 15 10 P8 9.4 NE Beaver Valley Golf Club 725 6th Ave Beaver Falls Golf Course 137 57 P8 9.5 NE Beaver Valley Yacht Club 219 Front St New Brighton Marina 60 25 P9 6.9 E Ironwood Golf Center 3036 Broadhead Rd Aliquippa Golf Course 15 11 P10 7.2 E Club at Shadow Lakes 2000 Beaver Lakes Blvd West Aliquippa Golf Course 60 30 P12 9.8 S Ponderosa Golf Course 2728 Pennsylvania 168 Hookstown Golf Course 128 53 Beaver County Subtotal: 1,235 553 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH O3 8.2 NW Turkana Golf Course 14678 Ohio 170 East Liverpool Golf Course 19 10 Columbiana County Subtotal: 19 10 EPZ TOTAL: 1,254 563 Beaver Valley Power Station E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E7. Campgrounds, Hunting/Fishing Areas, Parks and Other Recreational Facilities within the EPZ Sub Distance Direc Area (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles BEAVER COUNTY, PA P1 1.3 NW Lincoln Park Performing Arts Center 1 Lincoln Park Midland Other, Not Listed 750 313 P2 3.9 NNW State Gamelands No 173 Industry Hunting/Fishing 778 324 P7 5.2 N Orchard Grove Campsites 6138 Tuscarawas Rd Industry Campground 9 4 P7 10.1 NNW White Thorn Lodge 383 State Line Rd Darlington Campground 80 40 P8 8.9 NNE Bradys Run County Park 526 Bradys Run Rd Beaver Falls Park 300 200 P9 7.2 ENE Beaver Valley Mall 570 Beaver Valley Mall Blvd Monaca Other, Not Listed 2,000 1,000 P11 7.6 SSE State Gamelands No 189 189 Allison Rd Clinton Hunting/Fishing 304 127 P12 7.2 S Raccoon State Park 3000 State Route 18 Hookstown Campground 1,000 600 P12 8.2 SSW Linsly Outdoor Center 2425 Pennsylvania Ave Georgetown Park 50 20 Beaver County Subtotal: 5,271 2,628 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, PA O3 6.4 WNW Randy's Raisings 50462 CalcuttaSmith Ferry Rd Calcutta Other, Not Listed 400 150 Columbiana County Subtotal: 400 150 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV W1 6.2 WSW Jasmine Court RV Park 1 Jasmine Ct Chester Campground 20 20 W1 7.4 W Smith's Landing Campground 163 Ferry Rd Chester Campground 25 24 W1 9.9 W Kennedy Marina & Campground 110 Kennedy Marina Park Rd Newell Campground 664 248 W2 7.1 WSW Maple's RV Park 1124 Smith Rd New Cumberland Campground 6 6 W2 7.9 WSW Hartland Campground 493 Asbury Rd Chester Campground 10 8 W2 8.6 SW RED Barn RV Park 4344 Veterans Blvd New Cumberland Campground 15 15 W2 9.3 SW Tomlinson Run State Park 84 Osage Rd Grant Campground 400 339 Hancock County Subtotal: 1,140 660 EPZ TOTAL: 6,811 3,438 Beaver Valley Power Station E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E8. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Sub Distance Direc Area (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles BEAVER COUNTY, PA P3 2.7 NE Willows Inn 1830 Midland Beaver Rd Industry 60 30 P8 7.8 NE Felicity Farms Bed & Breakfast 2075 Dutch Ridge Rd Beaver 8 4 P8 8.7 NE The Todd House 330 3rd St Beaver 14 6 P9 6.9 ENE Hilton Garden Inn 2000 Wagner Rd Ext S Monaca 300 125 P9 6.9 ENE Home2 Suites by Hilton 1000 Wagner Rd Ext S Monaca 518 75 P9 7.1 ENE Hampton Inn 202 Fairview Dr Monaca 86 86 P9 7.1 ENE Fairfield Inn & Suites 1438 Brodhead Rd Monaca 328 70 P9 7.3 ENE Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suites 105 Stone Quarry Rd Monaca 58 46 P9 7.4 ENE My Place Hotel 138 Stone Quarry Rd Monaca 192 64 P9 7.5 ENE The INN Forza 1525 Old Brodhead Rd Monaca 70 40 P9 7.5 ENE Comfort Suites 1523 Old Broadhead Rd Monaca 78 39 P9 7.5 ENE Suburban Extended Stay Hotel 1529 Old Brodhead Rd Monaca 238 80 Beaver County Subtotal: 1,950 665 COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OH O2 7.8 W Sturgis House 122 West 5th St East Liverpool 18 12 O2 8.4 W Vista Motel 721 Edwards St East Liverpool 22 22 O3 8.2 WNW Quality Inn 15860 St Clair Ave East Liverpool 132 66 Columbiana County Subtotal: 172 100 HANCOCK COUNTY, WV W1 7.7 W Andrews Inn Town Motel 12269 Ohio River Blvd Chester 48 48 W1 9.5 W Holiday Inn Express Hotel 1181 Washington St Newell 150 100 Hancock County Subtotal: 198 148 EPZ TOTAL: 2,320 913 Table E9. Correctional Facility within the EPZ Sub Distance Direc Cap Current Area (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality acity Census BEAVER COUNTY, PA P10 10.2 E Beaver County Jail 6000 Woodlawn Rd # 2 West Aliquippa 401 310 Beaver County Subtotal: 401 310 EPZ TOTAL: 401 310 Beaver Valley Power Station E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E1. Schools within the EPZ - Overview Beaver Valley Power Station E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E2. Schools within the PA Portion of the EPZ - North of the Ohio River Beaver Valley Power Station E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E3. Schools within the PA Portion of the EPZ - South of the Ohio River Beaver Valley Power Station E12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E4. Schools within the OH and WV Portions of the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station E13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E5. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station E14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E6. Major Employers within the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station E15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E7. Day Camps within the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station E16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E8. Golf Courses and Marinas within the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station E17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E9. Campgrounds, Hunting/Fishing Areas, Parks and Other Recreational Facilities within the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station E18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E10. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station E19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E11. Correctional Facility within the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station E20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX F Demographic Survey

F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY F.1 Introduction The development of ETE for the Beaver Valley Power Station EPZ requires the identification of travel patterns, car ownership and household size of the population within the EPZ.

Demographic information can be obtained from U.S. Census data. The use of this data has several limitations when applied to emergency planning. First, the U.S. 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, U.S.

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 in this study. 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 2020 and the 2020 Census data had not yet been released, 2010 Census data was used to develop the sampling plan.

A sample size of approximately 470 completed survey forms yields results with a sampling error of +/-4.5% at the 95% confidence level. The sample should be drawn from the EPZ population.

Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using 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 U.S. 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.

A total of 437 completed samples were obtained corresponding to a sampling error of +/-4.67%

at the 95% confidence level based on the 2010 Census data. Table F1 also shows the number of samples obtained within each zip code. 371 out of the 437 completed survey samples were obtained from the EPZ population and the remaining 66 completed surveys were obtained from the Shadow Region. After consulting Energy Harbor, it was deemed that the demographics Beaver Valley Power Station F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

between the EPZ and the Shadow Region were similar. Hence, the Shadow Region was included inside the sampling plan to reduce the sampling error.

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 for a few questions 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. The average household contains 2.89 people. The estimated household size (2.42 persons) used to determine the survey sample (Table F1) was drawn from 2010 U.S. Census data and more recently from the 2020 Census data, the household size was determined to be 2.40 people per household. The difference between the demographic survey results (2.89) and the U.S. Census (2.40) is 17%,

which exceeds the survey sampling error of +/-4.67%. After consulting with Energy Harbor and the county emergency management agencies, it was agreed upon to use the 2020 U.S. Census household size (2.40 people per household) for this study. A sensitivity study was conducted to estimate the impact on ETE of changes in the average household size; see Appendix M, sub section M.4.

Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the EPZ is 2.33. It should be noted that 0.23% of households (1 household out of the 437 completing the survey) do not have access to an automobile. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F2. Figure F3 and Figure F4 present the automobile availability by household size. Note that the one household without access to a car is a single person household. As expected, all households of 2 or more people have access to at least one vehicle.

Ridesharing Approximately 82% of the households surveyed responded that they would share a ride with a Beaver Valley Power Station F2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

neighbor, relative, or friend if a car was not available to them when advised to evacuate in the event of an emergency. Figure F5 presents this response.

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 1.54 commuters in each household in the EPZ, and 84% of households have at least one commuter.

Commuter Travel Modes Figure F7 presents the mode of travel that commuters use on a daily basis. The vast majority of commuters use their private automobiles to travel to work. The data shows an average of 1.05 employees 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. Approximately half (49%) of households indicated someone in their household had a work and/or school commute that was temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic.

Functional or Transportation Needs Figure F9 presents the distribution of the number of individuals with functional or transportation needs. The data shows that approximately 6% of households have functional or transportation needs. Of those with functional or transportation needs, 60% require a bus, 8%

require a medical bus/van, 24% require a wheelchair accessible van, 4% require an ambulance and 4% require other types of transportation.

F.3.2 Evacuation Response Several questions were asked to gauge the populations response to an emergency. These are now discussed:

How many of the vehicles would your household use during an evacuation? The response is shown in Figure F10. On average, evacuating households would use 1.53 vehicles.

Would your family await the return of other family members prior to evacuating the area?

Of the survey participants who responded, 59% said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 41% indicated that they would not await the return of other family members.

If you had a household pet or animals, would you take your pet/animal with you if you were asked to evacuate the area? Based on the responses to the survey, 71% of households have a family pet or animal. Of the households with pets, 87% indicated that they would only take their household pets with them, 11% indicated they would take all pets and animals and only 2% indicated they would leave all pets and animals at home. Of the 98% that would take pets and/or animals with them, 72% would take them somewhere else and only 28% would take Beaver Valley Power Station F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

them to a shelter, as shown in Figure F11. Of the households that would evacuate with their pets, approximately 95% indicated that they have sufficient room in their vehicle to evacuate with their pet(s)/animal(s),approximately 2.5% said they would use a trailer to evacuate with pets and/or animals and approximately 2.5% do not have sufficient room in their vehicles.

What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have? Based on the responses to the survey, 90% of households have a household pet (dog, cat, bird, reptile, rabbit, gerbil, guinea pig or fish) and 10% of households have farm animals (horse, chicken, goat, pig, sheep, or duck), as shown in Figure F12.

Emergency officials advise you to take shelter at home in an emergency. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information regarding compliance with instructions to shelter in place. The results indicate that 87% of households who are advised to shelter in place would do so; the remaining 13% 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. A sensitivity study was conducted to estimate the impact of shadow evacuation noncompliance of shelter advisory on ETE - see Table M2 in Appendix M.

Emergency officials advise you to take shelter at home now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas 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 shelter in place now and then to evacuate after a specified period of time. Results indicate that 68% of households would follow instructions and delay the start of evacuation until so advised, while the balance of 32% would choose to begin evacuating immediately.

Emergency officials advised 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 52% of households indicated that they would evacuate to a friend or relatives home, 4% to a reception center, 17% to a hotel, motel or campground, 7% to a second or seasonal home, 1% of households would not evacuate and the remaining 19% answered other/dont know to this question, as shown in Figure F13.

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 COVID19 pandemic impacted nearly half of the houses surveyed and could have an impact on the commuting patterns of those who live in the BVPS EPZ. To compare the results obtained from the 2012 telephone survey and the 2020 demographic survey, the figures showing distributions involving commuters (time to prepare to leave work/college and time to travel home from work/college) will present both Beaver Valley Power Station F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

distributions.

How long does it take the commuter to complete preparation for leaving work or college?

Figure F14 presents the cumulative distribution for the 2020 and 2012 survey responses. For the 2020 survey, in all cases, the activity is completed within 60 minutes and 91% can leave within 30 minutes. For the 2012 survey, in all cases, the activity is completed within 75 minutes and approximately 86% can leave within 30 minutes. The distributions are very similar for the first 60 minutes but the 2012 survey has a longer tail.

How long would it take the commuter to travel home? Figure F15 presents the time to commute home from work or college for the EPZ population for the 2020 and 2012 survey responses. Approximately 70% of commuters can arrive home within 30 minutes of leaving work; all within 75 minutes, according to the 2020 survey. Approximately 77% of commuters can arrive home within 30 minutes of leaving work; all within 90 minutes, according to the 2012 survey. The 2012 survey has a long tail, but the curves are nearly identical after 35 minutes.

How long would it take the family to pack clothing, secure the house, and load the car?

Figure F16 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 F16 has a long tail. About 70% of households can be ready to leave home within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />; the remaining households require up to an additional two hours and 15 minutes.

How long would it take you to clear 6 to 8 inches of snow from your driveway? During adverse, snowy weather conditions, an additional activity may be performed before residents can depart on the evacuation trip. Although snow scenarios assume that the roads and highways have been plowed and are passable (albeit at lower speeds and capacities), it may be necessary to clear a private driveway prior to leaving the home so that the vehicle can access the street. Figure F17 presents the time distribution for removing 6 to 8 inches of snow from a driveway. The time distribution for clearing the driveway also has a long tail; about 85% of driveways are passable within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. The last driveway is cleared 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> after the start of this activity. Note that those respondents (21%) who answered that they would not take time to clear their driveway were assumed to be ready immediately at the start of this activity.

Essentially they would drive through the snow on the driveway to access the roadway and begin their evacuation trip.

F.4 Conclusions The demographic survey provides valuable, relevant data associated with the EPZ population, which have been used to quantify demographics specific to the EPZ, and mobilization time which can influence ETE.

Beaver Valley Power Station F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table F1. Beaver Valley Power Station Demographic Survey Sampling Plan HH in Zip Pop in Zip HH in Zip Pop in Zip Code Code Code Required Sample Region Zip Code Code (2010 (2010 (2020 (2020 Sample Obtained Census)

Census) Census) Census) 15001 31,951 13,399 32,353 13,932 73 56 15009 15,082 6,342 15,632 6,600 35 149 15010 7,252 3,088 28,694 11,609 61 28 15026 2,538 967 3,103 1,319 7 3 15043 2,453 898 2,180 842 5 6 15050 2,431 912 2,343 896 5 10 15052 3,483 1,409 3,399 1,386 7 14 15059 4,193 1,813 3,872 1,731 9 9 15061 12,799 5,474 12,504 5,480 29 21 15066 246 114 12,030 5,247 28 11 EPZ 15077 198 79 139 66 0 3 15081 475 216 384 193 1 1 15108 1 0 44,486 17,965 94 13 15126 4 1 7,926 3,312 17 9 16115 338 123 3,242 1,309 7 6 26034 4,905 2,136 4,469 1,965 10 5 26047 2,914 1,212 5,892 2,570 13 7 26050 1,564 661 1,377 592 3 1 43920 20,231 8,430 21,817 9,251 48 14 43968 167 94 6,558 2,814 15 4 44441 155 57 1,530 651 3 1 EPZ Total 113,380 47,425 213,930 89,730 470 371 15003 11,861 5,349 11,850 5,295 4 15005 9,450 3,995 9,427 4,110 18 15027 2,201 985 2,201 1,007 1 15042 8,105 3,377 7,835 3,494 12 15046 2,640 1,067 2,488 1,034 2 15056 1,140 528 1,092 516 1 15057 13,930 5,268 17,128 6,349 1 15074 8,874 3,737 8,766 3,829 10 Shadow 15143 19,660 7,968 22,207 8,834 N/A 6 16117 17,185 7,249 16,574 7,115 2 16141 1,806 767 1,653 695 1 26062 21,801 9,672 21,144 9,505 1 43945 3,191 1,261 2,929 1,187 1 43961 294 145 267 131 1 44413 7,261 2,906 7,150 2,915 2 44432 13,693 4,402 12,536 4,172 1 44455 1,890 707 1,651 659 2 Shadow Total 144,982 59,383 146,898 60,847 N/A 66 Grand Total 258,362 106,808 360,828 150,577 470 437 Average 2010 Census HH Size: 2.42 Average 2020 Census HH Size: 2.40 Beaver Valley Power Station F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

BVPS Household Size 40% 37.85%

30%

Percent of Households 20.41% 20.87%

20%

10.55%

10% 6.88%

3.44%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6+

Household Size Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ BVPS Vehicle Availability 60%

52.41%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

23.91%

20%

14.48%

10%

4.14% 4.83%

0.23%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability Beaver Valley Power Station F7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 15 Person Households 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 100%

78%

Percent of Households 80% 65%

49%

60% 55%

47%

38% 37%

40%

22% 22%

12% 16% 2%

1% 1%

20% 4% 4% 3%

2% 10%

2% 7% 2% 3%

11%

7%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 5 Person Households Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 69+ Person Households 6 People 7 People 8 People 9+ People 100%

Percent of Households 80% 67%

60%

44%

33% 33% 33%

33%

40% 33%

20% 11% 11%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 6 to 9+ Person Households Beaver Valley Power Station F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

BVPS Rideshare with Neighbor/Friend 100%

82.45%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

17.55%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference BVPS Commuters 50%

40% 35.94%

Percent of Households 33.87%

30%

20% 15.90%

10% 8.53%

5.76%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F6. Commuters in Households in the EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

BVPS Travel Mode to Work 100%

91.99%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

4.53% 2.27%

1.06% 0.15%

0%

Drive Alone Park & Ride + Carpool (2+) Bus Rail Walk/Bicycle Bus Mode of Travel Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ BVPS Covid19 Pandemic 60%

51.29%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

23.65%

20%

14.05%

10% 6.56%

4.45%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic Beaver Valley Power Station F10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Functional Vehicle Transportation Needs 70%

60.00%

60%

Percent of Households 50%

40%

30%

24.00%

20%

10% 8.00%

4.00% 4.00%

0%

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Ambulance Other Accessible Vehicle Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transpiration Needs Evacuating Vehicles Per Household 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60% 56.22%

35.95%

40%

20%

7.37%

0.46%

0%

0 1 2 3+

Vehicles Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation Beaver Valley Power Station F11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Pets/Animals Evacuation Response 80%

71.82%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

28.18%

20%

0%

Take with me to a Shelter Take with me to Somewhere Else Figure F11. Households Evacuating with Pets Type of Pets/Animals 100%

90.36%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

9.64%

0%

Household Pets Farm Animals Figure F12. Types of Pets/Animals Beaver Valley Power Station F12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Shelter Locations 60%

52.01%

Percent of Households 50%

40%

30%

17.26% 18.68%

20%

10% 7.33%

3.78%

0.94%

0%

Figure F13. Shelter Locations Time to Prepare to Leave Work/College 2020 2012 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F14. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College Beaver Valley Power Station F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Commute Home From Work/College 2020 2012 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Travel Time (min)

Figure F15. Time to Commute Home from Work or College Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F16. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Beaver Valley Power Station F14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Remove Snow from Driveway 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 Time (min)

Figure F17. Time to Clear Driveway of 6"8" of Snow Beaver Valley Power Station F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ATTACHMENT A Demographic Survey Instrument Beaver Valley Power Station F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Beaver Valley Power Station Demographic Survey

• Required Purpose The purpose of this survey is to identify local behavior during emergency situations. The information gathered in this survey will be shared with Beaver, Columbiana, and Hancock County emergency officials to enhance emergency response plans in your area. Your responses will greatly contribute to local emergency preparedness.

. ( ) .

Do not provide your name or any personal information, and the survey will take less than 5 minutes to complete.

1. 1. What is your gender?

Mark only one oval.

Male Female Decline to State Other:

2. 2A. What is your home zip code? *

3. 2B. Which municipality do you live in?

• Mark only one oval.

Aliquippa Skip to question 7 Beaver Skip to question 7 Bridgewater Skip to question 7 Brighton Skip to question 7 Center Skip to question 7 Chippewa Skip to question 4 East Liverpool Fallston Skip to question 7 Frankfort Springs Skip to question 7 Glasgow Skip to question 7 Georgetown Skip to question 7 Greene Skip to question 7 Hanover Skip to question 5 Hookstown Skip to question 7 Hopewell Skip to question 7 Independence Skip to question 7 Industry Skip to question 7 Monaca Skip to question 7 Midland Skip to question 7 Ohioville Skip to question 7 Patterson Heights Skip to question 7 Patterson Skip to question 7 Potter Skip to question 7 Raccoon Skip to question 7 Shippingport Skip to question 7 South Beaver Skip to question 6 South Heights Skip to question 7 Vanport Skip to question 7 Other Skip to question 7 Decline to State

Decline to State Chippewa

4. 2C. Do you live:

Mark only one oval.

South of State Highway 251 (Blackhawk Road) Skip to question 7 North of State Highway 251 (Blackhawk Road)

Decline to State Skip to question 7 Hanover

5. 2C. Which County do you live in?

Mark only one oval.

Beaver County Skip to question 7 Washington County Decline to State Skip to question 7 South Beaver

6. 2C. Do you live:

Mark only one oval.

South of State Highway 251 (Blackhawk Road) Skip to question 7 North of State Highway 251 (Blackhawk Road)

Decline to State Skip to question 7

Household

7. 3A. In total, how many running cars, or other vehicles are usually available to the household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

DECLINE TO STATE

8. 3B. In an emergency, could you get a ride out of the area with a neighbor or friend?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE

9. 4. How many vehicles would your household use during an evacuation?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

I WOULD EVACUATE BY BICYCLE I WOULD EVACUATE BY BUS DECLINE TO STATE

10. 5. How many people usually live in this household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE TEN ELEVEN TWELVE THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN NINETEEN OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE

11. 6. How many people in your household have a work and/or school commute that has been temporarily impacted due to the COVID-19 pandemic?

Mark only one oval.

ZERO ONE TWO THREE FOUR OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE

12. 7. How many people in the household normally (during non-COVID conditions)

• commute to a job, or to college on a daily basis?

Mark only one oval.

ZERO Skip to question 57 ONE Skip to question 13 TWO Skip to question 14 THREE Skip to question 15 FOUR OR MORE Skip to question 16 DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 57 Mode of Travel

13. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Carpool-Park &

Drive 2 or Dont Ride + Bus Rail Walk/Bicycle Alone more know Bus people Commuter 1

Skip to question 17 Mode of Travel

14. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Carpool-Park &

Drive 2 or Dont Ride + Bus Rail Walk/Bicycle Alone more know Bus people Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Skip to question 19 Mode of Travel

15. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Carpool-Park &

Drive 2 or Dont Ride + Bus Rail Walk/Bicycle Alone more know Bus people Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Skip to question 23 Mode of Travel

16. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Carpool-Park &

Drive 2 or Dont Ride + Bus Rail Walk/Bicycle Alone more know Bus people Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Commuter 4

Skip to question 29 Travel Home From Work/College

17. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

18. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 37

Travel Home From Work/College

19. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

20. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

21. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

22. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 39 Travel Home From Work/College

23. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

24. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

25. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

26. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

27. 9-3. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #3 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

28. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 43 Travel Home From Work/College

29. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

30. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

31. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

32. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

33. 9-3. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #3 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

34. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

35. 9-4. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #4 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

36. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-4, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 49 Preparation to leave Work/College

37. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

38. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 57 Preparation to leave Work/College

39. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

40. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

41. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

42. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 57 Preparation to leave Work/College

43. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

44. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

45. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

46. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

47. 10-3. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #3 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

48. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 57 Preparation to leave Work/College

49. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

50. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

51. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

52. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

53. 10-3. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #3 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

54. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

55. 10-4. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #4 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

56. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-4, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 57 Additional Questions

57. 11. If you were advised by local authorities to evacuate, how much time would it take the household to pack clothing, medications, secure the house, load the car, and complete preparations prior to evacuating the area?

Mark only one oval.

LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 15-30 MINUTES 31-45 MINUTES 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 3 HOURS TO 3 HOURS 15 MINUTES 3 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 30 MINUTES 3 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 45 MINUTES 3 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 4 HOURS TO 4 HOURS 15 MINUTES 4 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 30 MINUTES 4 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 45 MINUTES 4 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 5 HOURS TO 5 HOURS 30 MINUTES 5 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 6 HOURS OVER 6 HOURS WILL NOT EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

58. If Over 6 Hours for Question 11, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 11, is under 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

59. 12. If there are 6-8 inches of snow on your driveway or curb, would you need to shovel out to evacuate? If yes, how much time, on average, would it take you to clear the 6-8 inches of snow to move the car from the driveway or curb to begin the evacuation trip? Assume the roads are passable.

Mark only one oval.

LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 15-30 MINUTES 31-45 MINUTES 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS NO, WILL NOT SHOVEL OUT OVER 3 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

60. If Over 3 Hours for Question 12, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 12, is under 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />.

61. 13. Please specify the number of people in your household who require Functional or Transportation needs in an evacuation:

Mark only one oval per row.

More than 0 1 2 3 4 4

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle Ambulance Other

62. Specify "Other" Transportation Need Below

63. 14. Please choose one of the following:

Mark only one oval.

I would await the return of household members to evacuate together.

I would evacuate independently and meet other household members later.

Decline to State

64. 15A. Emergency officials advise you to shelter in place in an emergency because you are not in the area of risk. Would you:

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

65. 15B. Emergency officials advise you to shelter in place now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas are advised to evacuate now.

Would you:

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

66. 15C. Emergency officials advise you to evacuate due to an emergency. Where would you evacuate to?

Mark only one oval.

A RELATIVES OR FRIENDS HOME A RECEPTION CENTER A HOTEL, MOTEL OR CAMPGROUND A SECOND/SEASONAL HOME WOULD NOT EVACUATE DON'T KNOW OTHER (Specify Below)

DECLINE TO STATE

67. Fill in OTHER answers for question 15C Pet Questions

68. 16A. Do you have any household pet(s) and/or animal(s)/livestock?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

69. 16B. What type of household pet(s) and/or animal(s)/livestock do you have?

Check all that apply.

DOG CAT COW/CATTLE BIRD REPTILE HORSE FISH CHICKEN GOAT PIG OTHER SMALL PETS/ANIMALS/LIVESTOCK (Specify Below)

OTHER LARGE PETS/ANIMALS/LIVESTOCK (Specify Below)

Other:

70.

Mark only one oval.

DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

71. 16C. What would you do with your household pet(s) and/or animal(s)/livestock if you had to evacuate?

Mark only one oval.

TAKE ONLY HOUSEHOLD PETS WITH ME TAKE ONLY ANIMALS/LIVESTOCK WITH ME TAKE ALL PETS AND ANIMALS/LIVESTOCK WITH ME LEAVE ALL PETS AND ANIMALS/LIVESTOCK AT HOME DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

72. 16D. What would you do with your household pet(s) and/or animal(s)/livestock if you had to evacuate?

Mark only one oval.

TAKE THEM WITH ME TO A SHELTER TAKE THEM WITH ME SOMEWHERE ELSE DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

73. 16E. Do you have sucient room in your vehicle(s) to evacuate with your household pet(s) and/or animal(s)/livestock?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO WILL USE A TRAILER DECLINE TO STATE Other:

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 EPZ were provided by each county.

These traffic management plans (TMP) were reviewed, and the TCPs and ACPs were modeled accordingly. An analysis of the TCP and ACP locations was performed, and it was determined to model the ETE simulations with existing TCPs and ACPs that were documented in the county emergency plans, with no additional TCP or ACP recommended. Figure G1 maps the existing TCPs and ACPs.

G.1 Traffic Control Points (TCPs)

The TCPs and ACPs are forms of manual traffic control (MTC). As discussed in Section 9, MTC 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 or ACP, 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 and ACPs at existing actuated traffic signalized intersections were essentially left alone except where modifications to green time allocation were deemed necessary.

Table K1 provides the number of nodes with each control type in the analysis network. 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 within the study area are mapped as blue dots in Figure G1. These TCPs are concentrated along major evacuation routes in population centers (Aliquippa, Beaver, Beaver Falls and Monaca in Pennsylvania, and Chester, Newell and New Cumberland in West Virginia) and at access ramps to I376. Theses TCPs would be manned during evacuation by traffic guides who would direct evacuees in the proper direction and facilitate the flow of traffic through the intersections.

G.2 Access Control Points (ACPs)

The existing ACPs within the Pennsylvania and West Virginia portions of the EPZ are mapped as orange squares in Figure G1. The State of Ohio uses the term barricades (rather than ACPs) for points that stop the flow of traffic. These locations are mapped as orange triangles in Figure G1. Some locations are both traffic and access control points. These locations are mapped as red circles in Figure G1 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 ATE to discourage through travelers from using major through routes which traverse the EPZ.

As discussed in Section 3.11, external traffic was only considered on two routes which traverse the study area - Interstate376 and US 22 - in this analysis. The generation of these external trips (8,904 vehicles during daytime conditions and 3,562 vehicles in evening conditions) ceased at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the ATE in the simulation to represent the diversion of traffic at these locations.

Beaver Valley Power Station G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuees are not allowed to cross state borders when evacuating based on discussions with Energy Harbor and county EMA personnel, due to concerns with reception center capacity (see Section 2.5, assumption 4). It is assumed barricades will be placed along state borders to prohibit evacuees from crossing state borders.

G.3 Analysis of Key TCP and ACP Locations As discussed in Section 5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, MTC at intersections could benefit from ETE analysis. The TCP locations contained within the traffic management plan were analyzed to determine key locations where MTC would be most useful and can could 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 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 TMP.

The majority of the TCPs identified in the TMP were located at intersections with existing actuated signals or intersections without control. Table G1 shows a list of the controlled intersections that were identified as TCPs 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 winter, 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. Although localized congestion worsens without MTC1, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE are not impacted significantly (at most a 10minute increase at the 90th percentile ETE) when MTC was not present at these intersections, as shown in Table G2. The remaining TCPs were left as actuated signals in the model and, therefore, had no impact on ETE.

The majority of the TCPs and ACPs in the study area are located along major evacuation routes near major population centers, as shown in Figure G1. As discussed in Section 7.3, the main thoroughfare on SR 168 and I376 is operating at LOS F for several hours, as shown in Figures 7 3 through 78. Positioning police officers at intersections to facilitate access to these roadways would have minimal benefit as the main thoroughfare is already heavily congested.

Additionally, intersections are heavily congested in competing directions (east/west versus north/south) as shown in Figures 73 through 78. MTC has minimal benefit when these conditions exist.

Although ETE are not significantly reduced when MTC is implemented, MTC can be beneficial in the reduction of localized congestion and driver confusion and can be extremely helpful for fixed point surveillance (i.e., seeing a traffic accident or other incident and radioing in to have a tow truck mobilized to remove the incident), amongst other things. Should there be a shortfall of personnel to staff the TCPs, the list of locations provided in Table G1 could be considered as 1

For example, removing TCP PA 31 located at PA-168 and Tuscarawas Rd causes LOS F conditions to persist for 55 minutes longer on PA-168 northbound in Sub-area P-2; however, the 90th percentile ETE for Region R02 (5-Mile Region which includes Sub-area P-2) only increases by 5 minutes.

Beaver Valley Power Station G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

priority locations when implementing the TMP as all other TCPs already have actuated traffic signals which would mimic MTC. The points in Table G1 are listed in state and then ID number order, not in order of priority. As discussed above, none of the points has a significant impact on ETE. However, TCP PA 31 has a noticeable impact on localized congestion and has been bolded in Table G1. This should be considered the top priority TCP if personnel are available to perform MTC.

Beaver Valley Power Station G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G1. List of Key TCP/ACP/Barricade Locations Previous State ID Intersection Node #2 Control OH 4 State Route 7 at E Liverpool Rd. 6195 STOP 3

OH B6 State Route 39/7 and Campground Rd. 6835 STOP PA 5 PA588 at PA18 North 480 STOP PA 13 PA 51 Monaca Blvd & Monaca Rd (Stobo Area PA3001) 1125 STOP PA 19 PA168 & PA18 4050 STOP PA 22 PA168 & PA3037 (Georgetown Road) 194 ALLWAY STOP PA 27 PA168 & Midland Heights Dr (Wood Lane) 77 STOP PA 31 PA168 & Tuscarawas Rd (PA4028) 82 STOP PA 32 Darlington Rd & 4th St 957 STOP PA 36 PA18 & PA151 3055 STOP PA 37 PA18 (Kennedys Corner) & PA3016 (Green Garden Rd) 1980 STOP PA 38 PA168 & PA51 128 STOP PA 40 PA168 & Lisbon Rd (PA4022, Salem Church Area) 91 STOP PA 42 PA168 & PA551 N 1104 ALLWAY STOP PA 43 PA51 & PA151 1085 STOP PA 61 PA251 and PA4021 148 ALLWAY STOP PA 74 PA251 and PA4029 112 STOP PA 184 PA588 & Old Darlington Rd 748 ALLWAY STOP PA 394 PA251 & PA168 Blackhawk Rd 103 & 139 STOP PA BeB1 5th St and Sharon Rd 358 STOP PA BeB3 4th St and Beaver St 1437 ALLWAY STOP PA Fal Beaver Street & Fallston Hill 734 STOP PA Pa1 Darlington Rd & 11th St 756 ALLWAY STOP PA PH1 Darlington Rd & Fourth St 979 STOP PA RA1 PA18 & Holt Rd 226 STOP PA Sh3 YIntersection at Bruce Mansfield Power Company 1935 STOP WV 3 Route 2 (Ohio River Blvd) and Route 208 (Race Track Rd) 5415 STOP WV 5 Route 3 (Washington School Rd) and 3/5 (Flats Cemetery Rd) 5745 STOP WV 6 Route 7 (Hardin Run Rd) and Route 26 (Florence Rd) 5622 STOP WV 7 Route 2 (Ohio River Blvd) and Route 20 (Rolling Acres Rd) 5479 STOP WV 8 Route 2 (Ohio River Blvd) and Route 11 (Kings Creek Rd) 1222 STOP WV 9 Route 2 (Ohio River Blvd) and Route 8 (Veterans Blvd) 5455 STOP 2

Refer to maps in Appendix K for locations of nodes.

3 This point is listed as a Barricade.

4 Points PA 18 and PA 39 are listed as ACP locations.

Beaver Valley Power Station G4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G2. ETE with No MTC Scenario 1 Region 90th Percentile ETE 100th Percentile ETE Base No MTC Difference Base No MTC Difference R01 (2Mile) 2:45 2:45 0:00 4:30 4:30 0:00 R02 (5Mile) 2:50 2:55 0:05 4:35 4:35 0:00 R03 (Entire EPZ) 3:25 3:35 0:10 4:40 4:40 0:00 Beaver Valley Power Station G5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Points and Barricades for the BVPS EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station G6 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) and maps of all Evacuation Regions (Figure H1 through Figure H42). The percentages presented in Table H1 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% households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Beaver Valley Power Station H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of SubArea Population Evacuating for Each Region SubArea Region Description Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 Radial Evacuations R01 2Mile Region 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R02 5Mile Region 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R03 Full EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Site Specific Regions R04 PA 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R05 OH 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R06 WV 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R07 N, NNE 350°34° 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R08 NE 35°56° 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R09 ENE, E 57°101° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R10 ESE 102°124° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R11 SE, SSE 125°169° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R12 S 170°191° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R13 SSW 192°214° 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R14 SW, WSW, W 215°281° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R15 WNW 282°304° 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R16 NW, NNW 305°349° 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Beaver Valley Power Station H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R17 N 350°11° 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R18 NNE 12°34° 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R19 NE 35°56° 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R20 ENE 57°79° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R21 E 80°101° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

R22 ESE 102°124° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

R23 SE 125°146° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R24 SSE 147°169° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R25 S 170°191° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R26 SSW 192°214° 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R27 SW 215°236° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R28 WSW 237°259° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R29 W 260°281° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R30 WNW, NW 282°326° 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R31 NNW 327°349° 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 O1 O2 O3 O4 W1 W2 W3 R32 5Mile Region 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R33 N, NNE 350°34° 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R34 NE 35°56° 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R35 ENE, E 57°101° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R36 ESE 102°124° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R37 SE, SSE 125°169° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R38 S 170°191° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R39 SSW 192°214° 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R40 SW, WSW, W 215°281° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R41 WNW 282°304° 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R42 NW, NNW 305°349° 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) Evacuate until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Beaver Valley Power Station H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H1. Region R01 Beaver Valley Power Station H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H2. Region R02 Beaver Valley Power Station H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H3. Region R03 Beaver Valley Power Station H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H4. Region R04 Beaver Valley Power Station H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H5. Region R05 Beaver Valley Power Station H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 Beaver Valley Power Station H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H7. Region R07 Beaver Valley Power Station H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Beaver Valley Power Station H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09 Beaver Valley Power Station H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H10. Region R10 Beaver Valley Power Station H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 Beaver Valley Power Station H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H12. Region R12 Beaver Valley Power Station H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H13. Region R13 Beaver Valley Power Station H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14 Beaver Valley Power Station H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15 Beaver Valley Power Station H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H16. Region R16 Beaver Valley Power Station H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H17. Region R17 Beaver Valley Power Station H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H18. Region R18 Beaver Valley Power Station H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H19. Region R19 Beaver Valley Power Station H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H20. Region R20 Beaver Valley Power Station H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 Beaver Valley Power Station H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H22. Region R22 Beaver Valley Power Station H25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H23. Region R23 Beaver Valley Power Station H26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H24. Region R24 Beaver Valley Power Station H27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H25. Region R25 Beaver Valley Power Station H28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H26. Region R26 Beaver Valley Power Station H29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H27. Region R27 Beaver Valley Power Station H30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H28. Region R28 Beaver Valley Power Station H31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H29. Region R29 Beaver Valley Power Station H32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H30. Region R30 Beaver Valley Power Station H33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H31. Region R31 Beaver Valley Power Station H34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H32. Region R32 Beaver Valley Power Station H35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H33. Region R33 Beaver Valley Power Station H36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H34. Region R34 Beaver Valley Power Station H37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H35. Region R35 Beaver Valley Power Station H38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H36. Region R36 Beaver Valley Power Station H39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H37. Region R37 Beaver Valley Power Station H40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H38. Region R38 Beaver Valley Power Station H41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H39. Region R39 Beaver Valley Power Station H42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H40. Region R40 Beaver Valley Power Station H43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H41. Region R41 Beaver Valley Power Station H44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H42. Region R42 Beaver Valley Power Station H45 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. There are a total of 559 source links (origins) in the model. The source links are shown as centroid points in Figure J1. Evacuees travel a straight line distance of 5.03 miles, on average, to exit the study area.

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, rain, rain/light snow and heavy snow scenarios (Scenarios 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 and 11) exhibit slower average speeds, higher delays and longer average travel times than good weather scenarios. When comparing scenario 13 (special event) and scenario 5, the additional vehicles the special event introduces has no impact on average travel times or network speeds.

When comparing scenario 14 (roadway closure) and Scenario 1, the single lane closure on I376 westbound lowers the average speeds, causes higher delays and increases the travel times.

Table J3 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes -

Interstate376 and US22 - 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, I376 is congested for most of the evacuation after the first hour. As such, the average speeds are slower (and travel times longer) after the first hour. By the fourth and fifth hour of the evacuation, congestion on I376 is dissipating and average speeds increase. Most of the areas surrounding US22 are sparsely populated explaining why there is minimal congestion along this route and average speed approaches free speed (60 mph) for most of the evacuation.

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. As expected, I376 is the most heavily utilized evacuation route.

Figure J2 through Figure J15 plot the trip generation time versus the ETE for each of the 14 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 J15, the curves are spatially separated as a result of the traffic congestion in the EPZ, which was discussed in detail in Section 7.3. Average travel times are about 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> during peak times.

1 Computed as the difference of the average travel time and the average ideal travel time under free flow conditions.

Beaver Valley Power Station J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Entering Upstream Downstream Network Directional Destination Destination Route Name Node Node on this Link Preference Nodes Capacity 8015 1,700 SR 168 193 192 69 SW 8527 4,500 8425 4,500 Old Blackhawk Rd 41 112 327 N 8854 4,500 8430 1,700 8715 1,275 SR 68 1805 1803 22 NE 8630 1,275 8874 4,500 8105 4,500 SR 51 1087 1085 107 E 8909 1,275 8005 1,275 8133 1,275 Park Way 811 676 126 W 8546 1,275 8145 4,500 SR 8 6010 6005 47 W 8892 4,500 Big Sewickley Creek Rd 429 428 12 E 8423 1,275 Chestnut St 729 717 88 SE 8940 2,850 County Hwy 9 1207 1208 63 SW 8892 4,500 SR 2 5425 5430 6 W 8892 4,500 Beaver Valley Power Station 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 NetworkWide Average 3.3 3.9 3.8 4.4 3.6 3.4 4.0 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 2.0 2.6 2.5 3.1 2.3 2.1 2.7 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 18.1 15.4 15.8 13.6 16.8 17.7 15.1 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 103,511 103,370 103,122 103,128 94,944 104,323 104,451 Exiting Network Scenario 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NetworkWide Average 4.3 3.7 4.3 4.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 3.0 2.4 3.0 3.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 14.1 16.0 14.1 13.0 16.9 16.8 16.7 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 104,536 101,894 101,811 101,806 93,785 95,428 103,667 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 Travel Length Speed Time Travel Travel Travel Travel Route# (miles) (mph) (min) Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time US22 Eastbound 16.8 58.7 17.2 58.7 17.2 57.9 17.4 57.9 17.4 58.7 17.2 US22 Westbound 16.9 58.7 17.3 58.7 17.3 58.7 17.3 58.6 17.3 58.7 17.3 I376 Westbound 29.5 62.6 28.3 24.4 72.5 20.4 87.1 38.8 45.6 68.1 26.0 I376 Eastbound 29.7 63.6 28.0 28.8 61.9 16.5 108.2 28.0 63.5 68.1 26.2 Beaver Valley Power Station 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)

Upstream Downstream 1 2 3 4 5 6 Route Name Node Node Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval 2 29 46 52 54 54 SR 152 8 9 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2,189 6,680 11,149 15,580 19,706 22,433 I376 215 1063 18% 16% 16% 18% 20% 22%

45 597 981 1,101 1,117 1,117 SR 228 419 421 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

Big Sewickley 325 1,505 2,655 3,542 3,603 3,603 424 423 Creek Rd 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3%

2,617 6,667 10,724 14,774 17,158 17,311 I376 425 1136 22% 16% 16% 17% 17% 17%

205 1,090 2,143 3,244 3,948 4,198 SR 18 435 430 2% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4%

149 702 1,142 1,281 1,315 1,315 SR 65 625 630 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1%

468 1,335 2,184 3,005 3,336 3,336 SR 68 786 787 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%

50 334 581 835 954 958 I76 854 1134 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

29 554 1,388 1,847 2,070 2,129 I76 873 874 0% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2%

397 2,320 4,777 6,837 7,151 7,151 SR 65 940 526 3% 6% 7% 8% 7% 7%

86 365 660 939 1,184 1,318 SR 168 1108 1109 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

55 428 656 734 738 738 SR 14 1496 133 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

1,637 4,508 7,031 9,043 10,899 11,361 US22 1504 892 14% 11% 10% 10% 11% 11%

431 855 1,500 1,600 1,637 1,637 SR 576 1526 1527 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

97 741 1,138 1,274 1,281 1,281 SR 7 1531 38 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1%

248 1,089 1,837 2,267 2,598 2,598 SR 588 1536 715 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%

362 847 1,185 1,593 1,695 1,695 SR 51 1559 1005 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

32 581 1,021 1,168 1,183 1,183 SR 7 1562 621 0% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1%

218 1,214 1,891 2,109 2,127 2,127 US 30 1569 20 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2%

Beaver Valley Power Station J4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Elapsed Time (hours)

Upstream Downstream 1 2 3 4 5 6 Route Name Node Node Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval 921 2,060 3,201 4,345 4,705 4,705 US22 1676 1477 8% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%

248 891 1,506 1,670 1,681 1,681 SR 18 5010 5015 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

1,043 5,373 8,306 9,130 9,207 9,207 SR11 6140 6145 9% 13% 12% 10% 9% 9%

12 195 331 375 379 379 SR 39 6940 6945 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Beaver Valley Power Station J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins Beaver Valley Power Station J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (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 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 6:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Beaver Valley Power Station J7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (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 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)

Beaver Valley Power Station J8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (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 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 (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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

Beaver Valley Power Station J9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (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 6:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (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 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8)

Beaver Valley Power Station J10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10)

Beaver Valley Power Station J11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (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 7:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12)

Beaver Valley Power Station J12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Evening, Good, Special Event (Scenario 13)

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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

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 J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Beaver Valley Power Station J13 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 70 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K71) 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 November 2020.

Table K1 summarizes the number of nodes by the type of control (stop sign, yield sign, pre timed signal, actuated signal, Traffic Control Points [TCP]/Access Control Points [ACP]/

Barricades, or uncontrolled).

Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control Number of Control Type Nodes Uncontrolled 1,660 Pretimed 3 Actuated 204 Stop 208 TCP/ACP/Barricades 103 Yield 25 Total: 2,203 Beaver Valley Power Station K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K1. BVPS LinkNode Analysis Network Beaver Valley Power Station K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 Beaver Valley Power Station K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 Beaver Valley Power Station K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 Beaver Valley Power Station K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 Beaver Valley Power Station K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 Beaver Valley Power Station K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 Beaver Valley Power Station K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 Beaver Valley Power Station K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 Beaver Valley Power Station K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 Beaver Valley Power Station K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 Beaver Valley Power Station K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 Beaver Valley Power Station K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 Beaver Valley Power Station K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 Beaver Valley Power Station K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 Beaver Valley Power Station K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 Beaver Valley Power Station K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 Beaver Valley Power Station K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 Beaver Valley Power Station K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 Beaver Valley Power Station K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 Beaver Valley Power Station K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 Beaver Valley Power Station K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 Beaver Valley Power Station K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 Beaver Valley Power Station K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 Beaver Valley Power Station K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 Beaver Valley Power Station K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 Beaver Valley Power Station K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 Beaver Valley Power Station K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 Beaver Valley Power Station K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 Beaver Valley Power Station K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 Beaver Valley Power Station K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 Beaver Valley Power Station K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 Beaver Valley Power Station K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 Beaver Valley Power Station K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 Beaver Valley Power Station K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 Beaver Valley Power Station K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 Beaver Valley Power Station K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 Beaver Valley Power Station K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 Beaver Valley Power Station K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 Beaver Valley Power Station K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 Beaver Valley Power Station K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 Beaver Valley Power Station K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 Beaver Valley Power Station K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 Beaver Valley Power Station K44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 Beaver Valley Power Station K45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 Beaver Valley Power Station K46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 Beaver Valley Power Station K47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 Beaver Valley Power Station K48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 Beaver Valley Power Station K49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 Beaver Valley Power Station K50 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 Beaver Valley Power Station K51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 Beaver Valley Power Station K52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 Beaver Valley Power Station K53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 Beaver Valley Power Station K54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 Beaver Valley Power Station K55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K55. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 54 Beaver Valley Power Station K56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K56. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 55 Beaver Valley Power Station K57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K57. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 56 Beaver Valley Power Station K58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K58. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 57 Beaver Valley Power Station K59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K59. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 58 Beaver Valley Power Station K60 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K60. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 59 Beaver Valley Power Station K61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K61. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 60 Beaver Valley Power Station K62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K62. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 61 Beaver Valley Power Station K63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K63. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 62 Beaver Valley Power Station K64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K64. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 63 Beaver Valley Power Station K65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K65. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 64 Beaver Valley Power Station K66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K66. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 65 Beaver Valley Power Station K67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K67. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 66 Beaver Valley Power Station K68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K68. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 67 Beaver Valley Power Station K69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K69. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 68 Beaver Valley Power Station K70 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K70. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 69 Beaver Valley Power Station K71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K71. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 70 Beaver Valley Power Station K72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX L SubArea Boundaries

L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES Pennsylvania SubArea P1 The central most subarea, includes Midland and Shippingport Boroughs (full);

Industry Borough, Greene and Raccoon Townships (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by Brookwood Drive/Wolf Run Road, on the east by Frankfort Road (State Route 18), on the south by McCleary Road to State Route 168, and on the west by Hill Road due North from Hookstown border to the first bend in the road to the west, at that point continue north (does not follow any geographic boundary) across the Ohio River to the southwestern corner of Midland Borough.

SubArea P2 The north western subarea, includes Glasgow (full); Ohioville Borough (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by Tuscarawas Road, on the east by Engle Road, on the south by the Ohio River, and on the west by the Pennsylvania State Line.

SubArea P3 The north eastern subarea, includes Brighton Township, Industry Borough and Ohioville Borough (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by Tuscarawas Road, on the east by I376, on the south by Brookwood Drive/Wolf Run Road, and on the west by Engle Road.

SubArea P4 The eastern subarea, includes Potter and Raccoon Townships (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by the Ohio River, on the east by Raccoon Creek Road, on the south by the Raccoon Township line, and on the west by the Raccoon Township Line northbound to McCleary Road to Frankfort Road (State Route 18).

SubArea P5 The southern subarea, includes Greene Township (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by McCleary Road, on the east by the Greene Township Line southbound to State Route 18, on the south by the Greene Township Line, and on the west by State Route 168, excluding Hookstown Borough.

SubArea P6 The western most subarea, includes Georgetown and Hookstown Boroughs (full); Greene Township (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by the Ohio River, on the east by State Route 168 to the Hookstown boundary, from Hill Road due north from Hookstown to the first bend in the road to the west, at that point continue north (does not follow any geographic boundary), on the south by the Greene Township Line, and on the west by the Pennsylvania State Line.

Beaver Valley Power Station L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SubArea P7 The northern most subarea, includes South Beaver Township (full); Brighton Township, Chippewa Township, and Ohioville Borough (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by Blackhawk Road (State Route 251), on the east by the Chippewa Township Line southbound to the Brighton Township Line, on the south by Tuscarawas Road, and on the west by the Pennsylvania State Line.

SubArea P8 The north eastern most subarea, includes Beaver, Bridgewater, Fallston Boroughs, Patterson Township, Patterson Heights and Vanport Townships (full); Brighton and Chippewa Townships (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by the Chippewa Township Line eastbound to Steffens Hill Road, on the east by the Patterson Township Line southbound to the Beaver River, on the south by the Ohio River, and on the west by the Vanport Township Line northbound to the Brighton Township Line to the Chippewa Township Line.

SubArea P9 The eastern most subarea, includes Center Township, Monaca Borough (full);

Potter Township (partial). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north and on the east by the Ohio River, on the south by the Center Township Line, and on the west by the Center Township Line northbound to the Potter Township Line to Raccoon Creek.

SubArea P10 The eastern most subarea, includes Aliquippa Borough, Hopewell Township, and South Heights Borough (full). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north by the Center Township Line, on the east by the Ohio River, on the south and on the west by the Hopewell Township Line.

SubArea P11 The south eastern most subarea, includes Independence Township (full). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed within the Independence Township Lines.

SubArea P12 The southernmost subarea, includes Frankfort Springs Borough, and Hanover Township (full). The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the north, east and south by the Hanover Township Line, and to the west by the Hanover Township Line northbound to the Pennsylvania State Line.

Ohio SubArea O1 The portion of East Liverpool and Liverpool Township bounded by:

East of Elizabeth St. and Fisher Rd.

South of St. Clair Township West of Pennsylvania Ohio border North of the Ohio River.

Beaver Valley Power Station L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SubArea O2 The portion of East Liverpool and Liverpool Township bounded by:

East of Campground Rd. intersecting Annesley Rd.

South of St. Clair Township West of Fisher Rd. and Elizabeth St.

North of the Ohio River SubArea O3 The portion of St. Clair Township bounded by:

East of Annesley Rd. intersecting Cannon Mills Rd. intersecting Sprucevale Rd. intersecting the Little Beaver Creek intersecting State Route 170 South of Middleton Township West of Pennsylvania Ohio border North of Liverpool Township SubArea O4 The portion of Middleton Township bounded by:

East of State Route 170 South by PancakeClarkson Rd.

West of Pennsylvania Ohio border North of St. Clair Township West Virginia SubArea W1 The northern most subarea, includes Lawrenceville, Newell and the city of Chester. The subarea is defined as the area enclosed on the east by the Pennsylvania State Line; on the north by the Ohio River, on the west by Arroyo Road (County Road 3/6) and White Oak Run Road (County Road 6) and on the south by Allison Road / Racetrack Road (County Road 208), Veteran Blvd.

(State Route 8), and Stewart Run Road (County Road 3).

SubArea W2 The central subarea, includes New Manchester and Tomlinson Run State Park.

The subarea is defined as the terrain enclosed by the Pennsylvania State Line on the east; on the north by Allison Road / Racetrack Road (County Road 208),

Veterans Blvd (State Route 8), and Stewart Run Road (County Road 38); on the west by White Oak Run Road (County Road 6), to a line parallel to but 1/4 mile east of Ohio River Blvd (State Route 2).[This exclude residences along Ohio River Blvd (State Route 2)], to Ferndale Road (County Road 3/5), to Washington School Road (County Road 3), to Veterans Blvd. (State Route 8);

and on the south by Veterans Blvd. (State Route 8), Gas Valley Road (County Road 18) over to the Pennsylvania state line.

Beaver Valley Power Station L3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SubArea W3 The southernmost subarea includes Grant and Clay Districts. The subarea is defined as area enclosed by the Pennsylvania state line on the east; Gas Valley Road (County Road 180 and Veterans Blvd (State Route 8) on the north; on the west by Archer Street to Mayhew Road to Hardens Run Road (County Road 7);

and on the south by Hardens Run Road (County Road 7), to Wyle Run Road (County Road 9), to Cameron Hollow (County Road 7/6), to Shreeves Road (County Road 7/8), to the Pennsylvania state line.

Beaver Valley Power Station L4 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 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 EPZ. Specifically, if the tail of the mobilization distribution were truncated (i.e., if those who responded most slowly to the ATE could be persuaded to respond much more rapidly), or if the tail were elongated (i.e., spreading out the departure of evacuees to limit the demand during peak times), how would the ETE be affected?

The case considered was Scenario 1, Region R03; a summer, midweek, midday, good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. Table M1 presents the results of this study.

As discussed in Section 7.3, traffic congestion persists 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 ATE. As such, the ETE for the 100th percentile are not decreased by reducing the trip generation time, because they are determined by the time needed to clear the congestion within the EPZ. In fact, when truncating the mobilization time by one hour, the 100th percentile ETE actually increases by 20 minutes. Compressing the mobilization time puts more vehicles on the roadways at peak times which increases traffic congestion and prolongs ETE.

When elongating the mobilization time, the 100th percentile ETE is again dictated by mobilization time as the new mobilization time is longer than the 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes of traffic congestion. The 90th percentile ETE is less sensitive to changes in mobilization time, decreasing by 10 minutes and increasing by 25 minutes when truncating or elongating the tail of the mobilization time distribution, respectively.

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 of changes in the percentage of people who decide to relocate from the Shadow Region. The case considered was scenario 1, region R03; a summer, midweek, midday, good weather evacuation of 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 the ETE is not impacted for at the 90th or 100th percentiles when the shadow evaluation is eliminated (zero percent) or reduced to 13%1.

Tripling the shadow percentage (60%) increases the ETE by 25 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes for the 90th and 100th percentiles, respectively. Full evacuation (100%) in the Shadow Region 1

The demographic survey results presented in Appendix F indicate that 13% of households would elect to evacuate if advised to shelter, which is nearly half the base assumption of 20% non-compliance suggested in the NUREG/CR-7002, Rev. 1.

Beaver Valley Power Station M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

increases the ETE 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 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 20 minutes for the 90th and 100th percentiles, respectively - a significant change.

As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figures 73 through 78, there is pronounced congestion in the Shadow Region, especially in New Cumberland, Rochester, Brighton and near the Pittsburgh International Airport. The additional evacuating shadow vehicles intensifies this congestion and significantly increases ETE. Limiting shadow evacuation could reduce ETE.

M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE of 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) 2013001, 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 19%.

Changes in population were applied to permanent residents only (as per federal guidance), in both the EPZ and 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 highest 90th percentile ETE values for the entire EPZ was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 8 - Winter, Midweek, Midday with Heavy Snow).

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 the 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 />; thus, 25% of these base ETE is always greater than 30 minutes. Therefore, 30 minutes is the lesser and is the criterion for updating.

Beaver Valley Power Station M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 - a 18% or greater increase in the EPZ permanent resident population. Energy Harbor will have to estimate the EPZ population on an annual basis. If the EPZ population increases by 18% or more between decennial censuses, an updated ETE analysis will be needed.

M.4 Effect of Changes in Average Household Size As discussed in Appendix F, the average household size obtained from the demographic survey (2.89 people per household) and the results from the 2020 census (2.40 people per household) differ by 17%, which exceeds the sampling error of +/-4.67%. Upon discussions with Energy Harbor, it was decided that the 2020 Census household size would be used in the study. A sensitivity study was performed to determine how sensitive the ETE is to changes in the average household size. It should be noted that only resident and shadow vehicles were changed for this sensitivity study. The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 3; a summer, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation of the 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and the entire EPZ. Table M4 presents the results of this study.

Increasing the average household size (decreasing the total number of evacuating vehicles as the population is divided by the average household size) to 2.89 people per household has little impact on ETE (decreasing the 90th percentile ETE by 15 minutes at most). The traffic congestion in sub area P10 is the last to clear in the EPZ. The 17% decrease in evacuating vehicles lessens the congestion in this area thereby reducing the 90th percentile ETE slightly. The 100th percentile ETE remains dictated by trip generation time and is not impacted by the change in people per household.

M.5 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 or prolonging the trip generation time by an hour impacts the 90th percentile ETE by 25 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE by up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, since trip generation within the EPZ dictates ETE (Section M.1) after 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes. Public outreach encouraging evacuees to mobilize more quickly or in a timely manner could decrease he 90th percentile ETE.

Increased shadow evacuation can impact the 90th percentile ETE by up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 10 minutes (Section M.2). 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 in more evacuating vehicles, which could increase ETE (Section M.3). 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station 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 Period 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes 3:15 5:00 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes (Base) 3:25 4:40 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes 3:50 5:40 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Percent Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Evacuating Shadow Shadow Vehicles2 90th Percentile 100th Percentile Evacuation 0 0 3:25 4:40 13 11,045 3:25 4:40 20 (Base) 17,842 3:25 4:40 40 34,835 3:35 5:05 60 52,677 3:50 5:55 80 69,670 4:05 7:25 100 87,512 4:35 9:00 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Shadow Population Change Base Permanent Resident 17% 18% 19%

Population 138,387 161,913 163,297 164,681 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 17% 18% 19%

2MILE 3:20 3:25 3:25 3:25 5MILE 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 Full EPZ 4:30 4:55 5:00 5:00 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100th Percentile Population Change Region Base 17% 18% 19%

2MILE 5:30 5:30 5:30 5:30 5MILE 5:35 5:35 5:35 5:35 Full EPZ 5:50 7:20 7:25 7:30 2

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.

Beaver Valley Power Station M4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M4. ETE Results for Change in Average Household Size Base (Average HH Size Average HH Size of 2.89 EPZ and 20% Shadow of 2.40 people per people per household Resident Vehicles household) 87,707 72,833 ETE for 90th Percentile 2MILE 2:45 2:45 5MILE 2:50 2:50 FULL EPZ 3:25 3:10 ETE for 100th Percentile 2MILE 4:30 4:30 5MILE 4:35 4:35 FULL EPZ 4:40 4:40 Beaver Valley Power Station M5 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 ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 1.0 Introduction

a. The emergency planning zone (EPZ) and surrounding area is Yes Section 1 described.

b. A map is included that identifies primary features of the site Yes Figures 11, 31, 61 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 provided Yes Table 13 including information similar to that identified in Table 11, ETE Comparison.

1.1 Approach

a. The general approach is described in the report as outlined Yes Section 1.1, Section 1.3, Appendix D, in Section 1.1, Approach. Table 11 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.

1.3 Scenario Development

a. The scenarios in Table 13, Evacuation Scenarios, are Yes Section 6, Table 62 developed for the ETE analysis. A reason is provided for use of other scenarios or for not evaluating specific scenarios.

Beaver Valley Power Station N1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 1.4 Evacuation Planning Areas

a. A map of the EPZ with emergency response planning areas Yes Figure 31, Figure 61 (ERPAs) is included.

1.4.1 Keyhole Evacuation

a. A table similar to Table 14 Evacuation Areas for a Keyhole Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1 Evacuation, is provided identifying the ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

1.4.2 Staged Evacuation

a. The approach used in development of a staged evacuation is Yes Section 7.2 discussed.

b. A table similar to Table 15, Evacuation Areas for a Staged Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1 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 population Yes Section 3 groups (permanent residents of the EPZ, transients, special facilities, and schools).

2.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. The U.S. Census is the source of the population values, or Yes Section 3.1 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 growth to Yes N/A 2020 used as the base year of the reflect population estimates to the year of the ETE. analysis Beaver Valley Power Station N2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. A sector diagram, similar to Figure 21, Population by Yes Figure 32 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 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 E5 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 E4

c. The average population during the season is used, itemized Yes Table 34, Table 35 and Appendix E and totaled for each scenario. itemize the peak transient population and employee estimates. These estimates are multiplied by the scenario specific percentages provided in Table 63 to estimate average transient population by scenario - see Table 64.

d. The percentage of permanent residents assumed to be at Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 facilities is estimated.

e. The number of people per vehicle is provided. Numbers may Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 vary by scenario, and if so, reasons for the variation are discussed.

Beaver Valley Power Station N3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

f. A sector diagram is included, similar to Figure 21, Yes Figure 36 (transients) and Figure 38 Population by Sector, is included showing the population (employees) distribution for the transient population.

2.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. The methodology (e.g., surveys, registration programs) used Yes Section 3.6 to determine the number of transit dependent residents is discussed.

b. The State and local evacuation plans for transit dependent Yes Section 8.1 residents are used in the analysis.

c. The methodology used to determine the number of people Yes Section 3.9 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.

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 provided. Yes Section 3.6, Table 37, Table 311

f. A summary table showing the total number of buses, Yes Table 312, 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station N4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 2.3 Special Facility Residents

a. Special facilities, including the type of facility, location, and Yes Table E3 lists all medical facilities by average population, are listed. Special facility staff is facility name, location, and average included in the total special facility population. population. Table E8 lists all correctional facilities by facility name, location, and average population.

b. The method of obtaining special facility data is discussed. Yes Section 3.5 and Section 3.9

c. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles assumed Yes Table 36 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 support or security support for prisons, jails, and Medical Facilities and Correctional other correctional facilities) are discussed when appropriate. Facilities.

2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student Yes Table 38, Table E1, Table E2, Section population, and transportation resources required to 3.7 support the evacuation, is provided. The source of this information should be identified.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle schools Yes Section 3.7 are based on 100 percent of the school capacity.

c. The estimate of high school students who will use personal Yes Section 3.7 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 Beaver Valley Power Station N5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 2.5 Other Demand Estimate Considerations 2.5.1 Special Events

a. A complete list of special events is provided including Yes Section 3.8 information on the population, estimated duration, and season of the event.

b. The special event that encompasses the peak transient Yes Section 3.8 population is analyzed in the ETE.

c. The percentage of permanent residents attending the event Yes Section 3.8 is estimated.

2.5.2 Shadow Evacuation

a. A shadow evacuation of 20 percent is included consistent Yes Item 7 of Section 2.2, Figure 21 and with the approach outlined in Section 2.5.2, Shadow Figure 71, Section 3.2 Evacuation.

b. Population estimates for the shadow evacuation in the Yes Section 3.2, Table 33, Figure 34 shadow region beyond the EPZ are provided by sector.

c. The loading of the shadow evacuation onto the roadway Yes Section 5 - Table 59 (footnote) 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 traffic is Yes Section 3.11 and Section 3.12 based on the average daytime traffic. Values may be reduced for nighttime scenarios.

Beaver Valley Power Station N6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. The method of reducing background and passthrough traffic Yes Section 2.2 - Assumptions 10 and 12 is described. Section 2.5 Section 3.11 and Section 3.12 Table 63 - External Through Traffic footnote

c. Passthrough traffic is assumed to have stopped entering the Yes Section 2.5 EPZ about two (2) hours after the initial notification.

2.6 Summary of Demand Estimation

a. A summary table is provided that identifies the total Yes Table 311, Table 312, and Table 64 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 discussed. Yes Section 4 3.1 Roadway Characteristics

a. The process for gathering roadway characteristic data is Yes Section 1.3, Appendix D described including the types of information gathered and how it is used in the analysis.

b. Legible maps are provided that identify nodes and links of Yes Appendix K the modeled roadway network similar to Figure A1, Roadway Network Identifying Nodes and Links, and Figure A2, Grid Map Showing Detailed Nodes and Links.

Beaver Valley Power Station N7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 3.2 Model Approach

a. The approach used to calculate the roadway capacity for the Yes Section 4 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 and Yes Appendix B and Appendix C traffic volumes.

c. A basis is provided for static route choices if used to assign N/A Static route choices are not used to evacuation routes. assign evacuation routes. Dynamic traffic assignment is used.

d. Dynamic traffic assignment models are described including Yes Appendix B and Appendix C 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 for Yes Section 4, Appendix G manned traffic control, is discussed.

3.4 Adverse Weather

a. The adverse weather conditions are identified. Yes Assumptions 2 and 3 of Section 2.6

b. The speed and capacity reduction factors identified in Table Yes Table 22 31, Weather Capacity Factors, are used or a basis is provided for other values, as applicable to the model.

c. The calibration and adjustment of driver behavior models for N/A Driver behavior is not adjusted for adverse weather conditions are described, if applicable. adverse weather conditions.

Beaver Valley Power Station N8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. The effect of adverse weather on mobilization is considered Yes Table 22 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 model used Yes Section 1.3, Table 13, Appendix B, in the analysis is provided. Appendix C

b. If a traffic simulation model is not used to perform the ETE N/A Not applicable since a traffic simulation calculation, sufficient detail is provided to validate the model was used.

analytical approach used.

4.2 Traffic Simulation Model Input

a. Traffic simulation model assumptions and a representative Yes Section 2, Appendix J set of model inputs are provided.

b. The number of origin nodes and method for distributing Yes Appendix J, Appendix C vehicles among the origin nodes are described.

c. A glossary of terms is provided for the key performance Yes Appendix A measures and parameters used in the analysis.

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 of the Yes Appendix F survey, number of participants, and statistical relevance are provided.

c. Data used to develop trip generation times are summarized. Yes Appendix F, Section 5 Beaver Valley Power Station N9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

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 developing Yes Appendix F trip generation times are discussed, if applicable.

4.3.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. Permanent residents are assumed to evacuate from their Yes Section 5 discusses trip generation for homes but are not assumed to be at home at all times. Trip households with and without returning generation time includes the assumption that a percentage commuters. Table 63 presents the of residents will need to return home before evacuating. percentage of households with returning commuters and the percentage of households either without returning commuters or with no commuters. Appendix F presents the percent households who will await the return of commuters. Section 2.3, Assumption 2 and 3

b. The trip generation time accounts for the time and method Yes Section 5 to notify transients at various locations.

c. The trip generation time accounts for transients potentially Yes Section 5, Figure 51 returning to hotels before evacuating.

d. The effect of public transportation resources used during Yes Section 3.8 special events where a large number of transients are Public Transportation is not provided expected is considered. for the special event and was therefore not considered.

Beaver Valley Power Station N10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.3.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. If available, existing and approved plans and bus routes are N/A Established bus routes do not exist.

used in the ETE analysis.

Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit Dependent People

b. The means of evacuating ambulatory and nonambulatory Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit residents are discussed. Dependent People, Section 8.2

c. Logistical details, such as the time to obtain buses, brief Yes Section 8.1, Figure 81 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 Transit prepare and then travel to a bus pickup point, including the Dependent People 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 85 through Table 87 passengers are discussed.

f. A map of bus routes is included. Yes Figure 102 through Figure 104

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 trips, if Yes Section 8.1 and Section 8.2 necessary.

4.3.3 Special Facilities

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 88 provided. through Table 810 Beaver Valley Power Station N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. The logistics of evacuating wheelchair and bed bound Yes Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 8 residents are discussed. 10

c. Time for loading of residents is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 810

d. 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.

e. Discussion is provided on whether special facility residents Yes Section 8.1 are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

f. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1 elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.3.4 Schools

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 provided. through Table 84

b. Time for loading of students is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 84

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 discussion Yes Section 8.1, Table 105 is provided on whether students are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

Beaver Valley Power Station N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

e. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 84 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 average N/A DYNEV does not rely on simulation results is discussed. averages or random seeds for statistical

b. If one run of a single random seed is used to produce each N/A confidence. For DYNEV/DTRAD, it is a ETE result, the report includes a sensitivity study on the 90 mesoscopic simulation and uses percent and 100 percent ETE using 10 different random dynamic traffic assignment model to seeds for evacuation of the full EPZ under Summer, obtain the "average" (stable) network Midweek, Daytime, Normal Weather conditions. work flow distribution. This is different from microscopic simulation, which is montecarlo random sampling by nature relying on different seeds to establish statistical confidence. Refer to Appendix B for more details 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 that Yes Section 4.5 may influence the ETE and that are located beyond the evacuation area or shadow region are identified and included in the model, if needed.

Beaver Valley Power Station N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.6 Traffic Simulation Model Output

a. A discussion of whether the traffic simulation model used Yes Appendix B must be in equilibration prior to calculating the ETE is provided.

b. The minimum following model outputs for evacuation of the Yes 1. Appendix J, Table J2 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%. 100 percent ETE is

3. Number of vehicles arriving at each destination node. based on the time the last

4. Total number and percentage of evacuee vehicles not vehicle exits the evacuation exiting the EPZ. zone

5. A plot that provides both the mobilization curve and 5. Figures J2 through J15 (one evacuation curve identifying the cumulative percentage plot for each scenario of evacuees who have mobilized and exited the EPZ. considered)

6. Average speed for each major evacuation route that exits 6. Table J3 the EPZ.

c. Color coded roadway maps are provided for various times Yes Figure 73 through Figure 78 (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 100 Yes Table 71 and Table 72 percent of the total permanent resident and transient population.

b. Termination criteria for the 100 percent ETE are discussed, if N/A 100 percent ETE is based on the time not based on the time the last vehicle exits the evacuation the last vehicle exits the evacuation zone. zone.

Beaver Valley Power Station N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

c. The ETE for 100 percent of the general public includes all Yes Section 5.4.1 - truncating survey data members of the general public. Any reductions or truncated to eliminate statistical outliers data is explained. Table 72 - 100th percentile ETE for general population

d. Tables are provided for the 90 and 100 percent ETEs similar Yes Table 73 and Table 74 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 special Yes Section 8 facilities, transit dependent, and school populations.

5.0 Other Considerations 5.1 Development of Traffic Control Plans

a. Information that responsible authorities have approved the Yes Section 9, Appendix G traffic control plan used in the analysis are discussed.

b. Adjustments or additions to the traffic control plan that Yes Section 9, Appendix G affect the ETE is provided.

5.2 Enhancements in Evacuation Time

a. The results of assessments for enhancing evacuations are Yes Appendix M provided.

5.3 State and Local Review

a. A list of agencies contacted is provided and the extent of Yes Table 11 interaction with these agencies is discussed.

Beaver Valley Power Station N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. Information is provided on any unresolved issues that may Yes Results of the ETE study were formally affect the ETE. presented to 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

a. The criteria for when an updated ETE analysis is required to Yes Appendix M, Section M.3 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 conditions not adequately reflected in the scenario the availability of US Census Bureau variations. decennial census data.

5.5 Reception Centers and Congregate Care Center

a. A map of congregate care centers and reception centers is Yes Figure 105 provided.

Beaver Valley Power Station N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0