ML14043A164

Kld TR-617, Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Final Report, Rev. 0. Page 4-1 Through Page 7-36

ML14043A164
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	01/31/2014
From:	KLD Engineering, PC
To:	Exelon Generation Co, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TR-617, Rev 0
Download: ML14043A164 (78)

Text

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 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010).

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 free-flow and high-speed 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" (SV). Service volume 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 service volume at the upper bound of LOS E, only.

This distinction is illustrated in Exhibit 11-17 of the HCM 2010. 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 (BFFS 1) according to Exhibit 15-7 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 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 vehicle's speedometer and observing local traffic, under free flow conditions. Capacity is estimated from the procedures of 1 A very rough estimate of BFFS might be taken as the posted speed limit plus 10 mph (HCM 2010 Page 15-15)

Limerick Generating Station 4-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

the 2010 HCM. For example, HCM Exhibit 7-1(b) shows the sensitivity of Service Volume at the upper bound of LOS D to grade (capacity is the Service Volume at the upper bound of LOS E).

As discussed in Section 2.3, it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent the prevailing conditions during inclement weather. Based on limited empirical data, weather conditions such as rain reduce the values of free speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10 percent. Over the last decade new studies have been made on the effects of rain on traffic capacity. These studies indicate a range of effects between 5 and 20 percent depending on wind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.3, we employ a reduction in free speed and in highway capacity of 10 percent and 20 percent for rain and snow, respectively.

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

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

Qcap,m 3600

('-" X( G -C- L (3600) hrn X 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)

Limerick Generating Station 4-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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, left-turn, right-turn, and diagonal.

The turn-movement-specific 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, hm = fm(hsat, F, F2 ,...)

where:

hsat = Saturation discharge headway for through vehicles; seconds per vehicle F=,F2 The various known factors influencing hm fM() = Complex function relating hm to the known (or estimated) values of hsat, F1 , F2 ,...

The estimation of hm for specified values of hsat, F1, F2 , ... is undertaken within the DYNEV II simulation model by a mathematical model 2 . The resulting values for hm always satisfy the condition:

hm >- hsat 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 Limerick Generating Station 4-3 KLD Engineering. P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

That is, the turn-movement-specific 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 2010.

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 18, 19 and 20 in the HCM 2010 address this topic. The factors, F1, F2,..., influencing saturation flow rate are identified in equation (18-5) of the HCM 2010.

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 all-red time is assigned between signal phases, typically. If a signal is pre-timed, the yellow and all-red 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 service volume (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 4-1 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 service volume increases as demand volume and density increase, until the service volume 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 service volume) 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.

The value of VF can be expressed as:

VF = R x Capacity where:

R Reduction factor which is less than unity Limerick Generating Station 4-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 fall-off in the service flow rate when congestion occurs at "bottlenecks" or "choke points" on a freeway system. Zhang and Levinson 3 describe a research program that collected data from a computer-based surveillance system (loop detectors) installed on the Interstate Highway System, at 27 active bottlenecks in the twin cities metro area in Minnesota over a 7-week 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 and indicated in Appendix K for freeway links. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 which translates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.

Since the principal objective of evacuation time estimate 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 QODF 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 free-flow speeds and lane capacity. Exhibit 15-30 in the Highway Capacity Manual was referenced to estimate saturation flow rates. The impact of narrow lanes and shoulders on free-flow 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 2010 HCM. The DYNEV II simulation model determines for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether its capacity would be limited by the "section-specific" service volume, VE, or by the intersection-specific capacity. For each link, the model selects the lower value of capacity.

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

Limerick Generating Station 4-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4.3 Application to the LGS Study Area As part of the development of the link-node 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:

2010 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:

" Two-Lane roads: Local, State

" Multi-Lane Highways (at-grade)

" Freeways Each of these classifications will be discussed.

4.3.1 Two-Lane Roads Ref: HCM Chapter 15 Two lane roads comprise the majority of highways within the EPZ. The per-lane capacity of a two-lane highway is estimated at 1700 passenger cars per hour (pc/h). This estimate is essentially independent of the directional distribution of traffic volume except that, for extended distances, the two-way capacity will not exceed 3200 pc/h. The HCM procedures then estimate Level of Service (LOS) and Average Travel Speed. The DYNEV II simulation model accepts the specified value of capacity as input and computes average speed based on the time-varying demand: capacity relations.

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

• Most sections of two-lane roads within the EPZ are classified as "Class I", with "level terrain"; some are "rolling terrain".

" "Class 1I" highways are mostly those within urban and suburban centers.

4.3.2 Multi-Lane Highway Ref: HCM Chapter 14 Exhibit 14-2 of the HCM 2010 presents a set of curves that indicate a per-lane capacity ranging from approximately 1900 to 2200 pc/h, for free-speeds of 45 to 60 mph, respectively. Based on observation, the multi-lane highways outside of urban areas within the EPZ service traffic with free-speeds in this range. The actual time-varying speeds computed by the simulation model reflect the demand: capacity relationship and the impact of control at intersections. A Limerick Generating Station 4-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

conservative estimate of per-lane capacity of 1900 pc/h is adopted for this study for multi-lane highways outside of urban areas, as shown in Appendix K.

4.3.3 Freeways Ref: HCM Chapters 10, 11, 12, 13 Chapter 10 of the HCM 2010 describes a procedure for integrating the results obtained in Chapters 11, 12 and 13, 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 11 of the HCM 2010 presents procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for "Basic Freeway Segments". Exhibit 11-17 of the HCM 2010 presents capacity vs. free speed estimates, which are provided below.

Free Speed (mph): 55 60 65 70+

Per-Lane Capacity (pc/h): 2250 2300 2350 2400 The inputs to the simulation model are highway geometrics, free-speeds and capacity based on field observations. The simulation logic calculates actual time-varying speeds based on demand:

capacity relationships. A conservative estimate of per-lane capacity of 2250 pc/h is adopted for this study for freeways, as shown in Appendix K.

Chapter 12 of the HCM 2010 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 12 depends on the "Type" and geometrics of the weaving segment and on the "Volume Ratio" (ratio of weaving volume to total volume).

Chapter 13 of the HCM 2010 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 on-ramp or immediately upstream of an off-ramp; 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 13-8 of the HCM 2010, and depend on the number of freeway lanes and on the freeway free speed. Ramp capacity is presented in Exhibit 13-10 and is a function of the ramp free flow speed. The DYNEV II simulation model logic simulates the merging operations of the ramp and freeway traffic in accord with the procedures in Chapter 13 of the HCM 2010. 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).

Limerick Generating Station 4-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

w 4.3.4 Intersections Ref: HCM Chapters 18, 19, 20, 21 Procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for approaches to intersections are presented in Chapter 18 (signalized intersections), Chapters 19, 20 (un-signalized intersections) and Chapter 21 (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 2-way and all-way) 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 time-varying 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, contra-flow lanes) is used, the strategy is modeled explicitly. Where applicable, the location and type of traffic control for nodes in the evacuation network are noted in Appendix K. The characteristics of the ten highest volume signalized intersections are detailed in Appendix J.

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 interactionsinvoking several procedural chapters of the HCM. Alternative tools are able to analyze these facilities as a single system."

This statement succinctly describes the analyses required to determine traffic operations across an area encompassing an EPZ operating under evacuation conditions. The model utilized for this study, DYNEV II, is further described in Appendix C. It is essential to recognize that simulation models do not replicate the methodology and procedures of the HCM - 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 2010 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 Limerick Generating Station 4-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

these are: (1) Free flow speed (FFS); and (2) saturation headway, hsat. The first of these is estimated by direct observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using the concepts of the HCM 2010, as described earlier. These parameters are listed in Appendix K,for each network link.

Volume, vph

-- Qs Density, vpm AL Vf R vc poDensity, vpm I I kopt ks Figure 4-1. Fundamental Diagrams Limerick Generating Station 4-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal Government guidelines (see NUREG CR-7002) 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 activity-based distributions relies largely on the results of the telephone 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 Appendix 1 of NUREG 0654 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/CR-7002, that a rapidly escalating accident will be considered in calculating the Trip Generation Time. We will assume:

1. The Advisory to Evacuate 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 Advisory to Evacuate.

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 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 one-hour period. As a result, the population within the EPZ will be lower when the Advisory to Evacuate is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an Advisory will be broadcast.

Thus, the time needed to complete the mobilization activities and the number of people remaining to evacuate the EPZ after the Advisory to Evacuate, will both be somewhat less than Limerick Generating Station 5-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

The notification process consists of two events:

1. Transmitting information using the alert 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 360 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/CR-6863, 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 day-of-week and time-of-day 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 word-of-mouth, 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/CR-7002, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from a telephone survey of EPZ residents. Such a survey was conducted in support of this ETE study. Appendix F discusses the survey sampling plan and documents the survey instrument and survey results. The remaining discussion will focus on the application of the trip generation data obtained from the telephone survey to the development of the ETE documented in this report.

Limerick Generating Station 5-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

Table 5-1. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities These relationships are shown graphically in Figure 5-1.

• 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 5-1. A household Limerick Generating Station 5-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 5-1(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 5-1(a), regardless of day of week or time of day.

Households with no commuters on weekends or in the evening/night-time, will follow the applicable sequence in Figure 5-1(b). Transients will always follow one of the sequences of Figure 5-1(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 5-1, 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 households, but that assumption is not made in this study.

Limerick Generating Station 5-4 5-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 2 3 4 5 A& -Am -Af Residents Households wait w rw for Commuters' Households without An 1 2 5 Ail Commuters and Residents households who do not

- - . I wait for Commuters W MW *w Residents, Transients 1 2 4 5 Ah A .Ah -Af Return to residence, away from Residence W _MW MW _W then evacuate Residents, 1 2 5 Transients at As Residents at home;

- - p= transients evacuate directly Residence W 'W W 1 2 3,5 ACTIVITIES EVENTS 1 -1. 2 Receive Notification 1. Notification 2 -p. 3 Prepare to Leave Work 2. Aware of situation 2, 3 , 4 Travel Home 3. Depart work 2, 4 __0 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 5-1. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip Limerick Generating Station 5-5 KID Engineering, P.C.

KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 In accordance with the 2012 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual, 100% of the population is notified within 45 minutes. It is assumed (based on the presence of sirens within the EPZ) that 87 percent of those within the EPZ will be aware of the accident within 30 minutes with the remainder notified within the following 15 minutes. The notification distribution is given below:

Table 5-2. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public Elped Tim Pecnto (Mnues Pouato Notifie 0 0%

5 7%

10 13%

15 27%

20 47%

25 66%

30 87%

35 92%

40 97%

45 100%

5-6 5-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Limerick Generating Station KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 4 3 shown in Table 5-3 reflects data obtained by the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2.

Table 5-3. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work

- U.laiv 0 0%

15 73%

30 92%

45 96%

60 98%

75 100%

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

Limerick Generating Station 5-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution No. 3, Travel Home: Activity 3 -> 4 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2 and listed in Table 5-4.

Table 5-4. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Cuuatv

.Percent Elapsd Tie Retrnin 0 0%

15 44%

30 74%

45 87%

60 93%

75 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Distribution No. 4, Prepare to Leave Home: Activity 2, 4 -+ 5 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2 and listed in Table 5-5.

Table 5-5. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate 0.Cumulative 0 0%

20 32%

40 74%

60 89%

90 97%

120 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Limerick Generating Station 5-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 equipment is mobilized and deployed during the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snow-plowing 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.

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. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2 and listed in Table 5-6.

The data in Table 5-6 are adapted from a survey conducted of households in the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES) telephone survey conducted in 2008. SSES is also in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, only 65 miles north-northwest of LGS. It is assumed that snowfall and snow removal times are similar in both EPZs.

Table 5-6. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"-8" of Snow Cuuatv 0 0%

15 40%

30 73%

45 82%

60 90%

75 94%

90 95%

105 97%

120 99%

135 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Limerick Generating Station KLD Engineering, P.c.

5-9 5-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities 100%

• 80%

4..

01 CL 0

60% lit

• m *

.2

-Notification

-Prepare to Leave Work (U

0. 40% If - Travel Home

-Prepare to Leave Home

-Clear Snow 20%

'fl/I 0% 1 0 90 105 120 135 15 30 45 60 75 Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Activity (min)

Figure 5-2. Evacuation Mobilization Activities Limerick Generating Station 5-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 work-to-home 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 5-7 presents the summing procedure to arrive at each designated distribution.

Table 5-7. Mapping Distributions to Events Distribummiong" Al h T Distribution a EventD 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 Dand 5 Distribution F Event 5 Table 5-8 presents a description of each of the final trip generation distributions achieved after the summing process is completed.

Limerick Generating Station 5-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 5-8. Description of the Distributions Disrbto Descriptio 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 to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

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

E Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home to begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents with no commuters returning home, leaving to begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).

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

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

In assessing outliers, there are three 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-Limerick Generating Station 5-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

parametric methods to avoid that assumption. The literature cites that limited work has been done directly on outliers in sample survey responses.

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

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

2) The individual mobilization activities (prepare to leave work, travel home, prepare home, clear snow) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions are created (see Figure 5-1, Table 5-7, Table 5-8);

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

special 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.

Limerick Generating Station 5-13 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 5-3.

100.0% -

90.0%

80.0% -

70.0%

60.0%

150.0%

2 40.0%

4.

= 30.0%

E u 20.0%

10.0%

Lq LAq LA LA LQ Lq LA LQ LA LA LA LA LA IlA LA LA

- N-r4 ( m cn 4 LA LA ZD 66 a)( ,-

Center of Interval (minutes)

- Cumulative Data - - Cumulative Normal Figure 5-3. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution

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 above, indicating that the network loads faster for the first 80-85% of the vehicles, potentially causing more (and earlier) congestion than otherwise modeled;

> The last 10-15% 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 1-6, including preserving the features cited in Step 6, the overall (or total) mobilization times are constructed.

5-14 KID Engineering, P.C.

Limerick Generating Station KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 5-4 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.

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 5-9 (Distribution B, Arrive Home, omitted for clarity).

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

5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation As defined in NUREG/CR-7002, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Sub-areas comprising the 2 mile region are advised to evacuate immediately

2. Sub-areas comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised to shelter in-place while the 2 mile region is cleared

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

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

5. Non-compliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadow evacuation percentage of 20%

Assumptions

1. The EPZ population in Sub-areas beyond 5 miles will react as does the population in the 2 to 5 mile region; that is they will first shelter, then evacuate after the 90th percentile ETE for the 2 mile region

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 non-staged Limerick Generating Station 5-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

evacuation scenarios. That is 20% of these households will elect to evacuate with no shelter delay.

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

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

Procedure

1. Trip generation for population groups in the 2 mile region will be as computed based upon the results of the telephone 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 sub-areas comprising the two 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 non-shelter trip generation curve is followed until a maximum of 20%

of the total trips are generated (to account for shelter non-compliance).

ii. No additional trips are generated until time Tscen*

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

1. by stepping up and then following the non-shelter 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/CR-7002 uses the statement "approximately 9 0 th percentile" as the time to end staging and begin evacuating.

The value of Tscen* is 1:45 for non-snow scenarios and 2:30 for snow scenarios.

3. Stajged 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 snow conditions

d. Residents without returning commuters and snow conditions Figure 5-5 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters; the 9 0 th percentile two-mile evacuation time is 105 minutes for good weather and 150 minutes for snow scenarios. At the 90th percentile evacuation time, 20% of the population (who normally would have completed their mobilization activities for an un-staged 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.

Limerick Generating Station 5-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Since the 9 0 th 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 non-staged trip generation distribution. Following time Tscen*, the balance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 15 minutes. After Tscen*+15, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the un-staged trip generation distribution.

Table 5-10 provides the trip generation histograms for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas Section B, Item 9 of Annex J-3-6 of the Berks County Emergency Plan states that PEMA will determine the necessity of closing the Schuylkill River and notify the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission and the Pennsylvania State Police to set up access control.

Page 33 of Attachment F to Appendix 5 of the Chester County Radiological Emergency Annex states that LGS River Access Control Points will be located in Berks County (up river) and Chester County (down river) outside of the EPZ.

As indicated in Table 5-2, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes. Table 5-9 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 75 minutes. It is assumed that this 75 minute timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and other transients to return to their vehicles and begin their evacuation trip.

Limerick Generating Station 5-17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 5-9. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Un-staged Evacuation 1 15 73% 73% 2% 24% 0% 5%

2 15 19% 19% 2% 29% 0% 5%

3 15 4% 4% 9% 25% 2% 19%

4 15 2% 2% 16% 11% 4% 22%

5 15 2% 2% 18% 4% 10% 17%

6 15 0% 0% 17% 4% 14% 11%

7 15 0% 0% 13% 2% 15% 7%

8 15 0% 0% 9% 1% 14% 5%

9 15 0% 0% 7% 0% 12% 4%

10 15 0% 0% 4% 0% 9% 3%

11 15 0% 0% 2% 0% 7% 1%

12 30 0% 0% 1% 0% 8% 1%

13 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0%

14 60 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0%

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

NOTE:

• Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 1-2) using Distributions C and E for good weather and snow, respectively.

• Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.

Limerick Generating Station 5-18 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 and Snow 100%

0. 80%

M.

I-to 60%

CL 0

40%

CU CL 20%

0%

0 2<> 30 60 90 120

,ii 150 180 210 240 270 300 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 5-4. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Limerick Generating Station 5-19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 5-10. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation IL lb W'O 5bI UYOI Y 2 15 1% 6% 0% 1%

3 15 2% 5% 0% 4%

4 15 3% 2% 1% 5%

5 15 4% 1% 2% 4%

6 15 3% 1% 3% 2%

7 15 3% 0% 3% 1%

8 15 71% 80% 3% 1%

9 15 6% 0% 2% 1%

10 15 4% 0% 2% 0%

11 15 2% 0% 71% 79%

12 30 1% 0% 8% 1%

13 30 0% 0% 3% 0%

14 60 0% 0% 2% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

• Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 5-9) is the same for Un-staged and Staged Evacuation.

Limerick Generating Station 5-20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions

-Employees/Transients - Residents with Commuters -- Residents with no Commuters

- Res with Comm and Snow - Res no Comm and Snow -Staged Residents with Commuters

- Staged Residents with no Commuters- Staged Res with Comm and Snow -Staged Res no Comm and Snow 1UU7o

ýý111111111111111

ýýý;;;ý 0o10:;

.2 80% A0000.

4-M M

to 60%

CL 40%

4-0 CL 20%

0%

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

Figure 5-5. Comparison of Staged and Un-staged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region Limerick Generating Station 5-21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS 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 Sub-areas that forms either a "keyhole" sector-based 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 46 Regions were defined which encompass all the groupings of Sub-areas considered.

These Regions are defined in Table 6-1 through Table 6-3. The Sub-area configurations are identified in Figure 6-1. Each keyhole sector-based area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and three adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees, as per NUREG/CR-7002 guidance. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. These sectors extend to 5 miles from the plant (Regions R04 through R16) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R17 through R32). Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R33 through R46 are identical to Regions R02, R04 through R16, respectively; however, those Sub-areas between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2-mile region (Region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 14 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 46 x 14 = 644 evacuation cases. Table 6-4 is a description of all Scenarios.

Each combination of region and scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated. Table 6-5 presents the percentage of each population group estimated to evacuate for each scenario.

Table 6-6 presents the vehicle counts for each scenario for an evacuation of Region R03 - the entire EPZ.

The vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 are peak values. These peak values are adjusted depending on the scenario and region being considered, using scenario and region specific percentages, such that the average population is considered for each evacuation case. The scenario percentages are presented in Table 6-5, while the regional percentages are provided in Table H-1. The percentages presented in Table 6-5 were determined as follows:

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is the product of 60% (the number of households with at least one commuter - see Figure F-3) and 43% (the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating - see Figure F-5) which equals 26%. See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of households with returning commuters will have a commuter at work during those times.

Limerick Generating Station 6-1 KID Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

Transient activity is estimated to be at its peak (100%) during summer weekends and less (80%)

during the week. As shown in Appendix E, there are a significant number of lodging and campgrounds offering overnight accommodations in the EPZ; thus, transient activity is estimated to be high during evening hours - 80% for summer and 45% for winter. Transient activity is less in the winter - 60% during the week and 75% on weekends.

As noted in the shadow footnote to Table 6-5, the shadow percentages are computed using a base of 20% (see assumption 5 in Section 2.2); 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 6-6 for Scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows:

20%x +/-+ 13,227 22%

2 35,708 + 102,646) =

One special event - Phoenixville Firebird Festival - was considered as Scenario 13. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for Scenario 13, and 0% for all other scenarios.

It is estimated that summer school enrollment is approximately 10% of enrollment during the regular school year for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. School is not in session during weekends and evenings, thus no buses for school children are needed under those circumstances. As discussed in Section 7, schools are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday and 100% of buses will be needed under those circumstances. Transit buses for the transit-dependent population are set to 100% for all scenarios as it is assumed that the transit-dependent population is present in the EPZ for all scenarios.

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

Limerick Generating Station 6-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 6-1. Description of Evacuation Regions (Regions RO1-R16) 2-Mile 5-Mile Full Region

Description:

Ring Ring EPZ Evacuate 2-Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R01 R02 R03 R04 R05 N/A I R06 R07 I ROB I R09 I R10 I R11 R12 R13 I R14 R15 I R16 IuL A II /uA &I /A RI I &MhIC Ric I cre I C ICCC  ! - i CCIAI I CIAI I 1AICUIA I %AI I WAIMIA1 I MtfAI I UNIM Wind Direction From:

SUB-AREA Amity + + 4 4 + * + 4 4 I Bovertown

+ Charlestown ______ -4. .4- 4 + 4 4 4 4 4. 4.

Colebrookdale + + ___ + + I I 4 4 4 1 Collegeville Douglass (Berks) ___ + + 4 4 4 4 4 4 4. 4.

Douglass (MontRomery)

Earl East Coventry -mmmmI East Nantmeal East Pikeland + 4 4 4. 4.

East Vincent U, Green Lane 0o Limerick 0* iN-Lower Frederick Lower Pottsgrove Lower Providence Lower Salford ______ .4- .4- 4 -4 4 4. 4 4 4. 4.

Marlborough

_____ .4- 4 4 4 4 4 1 4.

New Hanover m North Coventry + + 4 4 Perkiomen Phoenixville Pottstown mm _ _ mnmm Royersford Schuylkill Schwenksville Limerick Generating Station 6-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2-Mile 5-Mile Full Region

Description:

Ring Ring EPZ Evacuate 2-Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: I R01 I R02 I R03 IR04I R05 I N/A I R06 R07 R08 R09 R10 Rl R12 R13 R15 R16 Wind Direction From: N/A I SIN/A! N INNE.NEI ENE! E I ESE ISE. SSEI S SSW SW IWSW W I NW NNW SUB-AREA Skippack South Coventry Spring Ct mmm Trappe Union Upper Frederick Upper Pottsgrove I I Upper Providence Upper Salford _ _I I 1 I_ I I_ _ 11 _ _1 IJ_

Upper Uwchlan Uwchlan Warwick Washington

+ 4 + + 4 + + 4 4 West Pikeland West Pottsgrove West Vincent Limerick Generating Station 6-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 6-2. Description of Evacuation Regions (Regions R17-R32)

Region

Description:

Evacuate 5-Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Region Number: R18 R19 R20 R21 R22 R23 R24 I R26 R27 R28 R29 R30 R31 R32 Wind Direction From: NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW SUB-AREA Amity Boyertown Charlestown Colebrookdale I

Collegeville Douglass (Berks) ___m m Douglass (Montgomery)

Earl East Coventry East Nantmeal East Pikeland East Vincent Green Lane Limerick Lower Frederick Lower Pottsgrove Lower Providence Lower Salford Marlborough New Hanover North Coventry Perkiomen Phoenixville Pottstown Royersford Schuylkill Schwenksville Skippack Limerick Generating Station 6-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Evacuate 5-Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Region Number: R17 R18 R19 R20 R21 R22 R23 R24 R25 R26 R27 R28 R29 R30 R31 R32 Wind Direction From: N NNE NE ENE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW SUB-AREA South Coventry Spring City Trappe Union Upper Frederick Upper Pottsgrove Upper Providence Upper Salford Upper Uwchlan m__

Uwchlan Warwick Washington -

West Pikeland West Pottsgrove x _ _X West Vincent it I I_ I_ I_ I_= = I Sub-area not within Plume, but Evacuates because it is surrounded by other Sub-areas which are Evacuating Limerick Generating Station 6-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 6-3. Description of Evacuation Regions (Regions R33-R46)

Region

Description:

I Staged Evacuation Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R33 R34 R35 I N/A R36 R37 [ R38 I R39I R40 R41 R42 R43 I R44 R45 R46 5-Mile N NNE, NE ENE E ESE SE, SSE S I SSW I SW WSW I W I WNW W WNW Wind Direction From: Ring SUB-AREA Amity iiimiim Boyertown 4 4 +

_____ 4- 4 + 4 4 Charlestown

+ f 4 Colebrookdale Collegeville 4- 4 4 + 4 I + 4 4 '4 4 4- I Douglass (Berks)

Douglass (Montgomery) _____ 4- 4 4- 4 4 4 4 +

Earl East Coventry East Nantmeal 4- 4 East Pikeland East Vincent (D

Green Lane CLQ Limerick 0

Lower Frederick C0 Lower Pottsgrove P".

Lower Providence Lower Salford Marlborough I New Hanover North Coventr Perkiomen Phoenixville Pottstown I

Royersford Schuylkill IJ _ I I_ Ii _ II __ II II _

Schwenksville L 2. 1 4 L a _____ a ______ +/- a a a a. u Limerick Generating Station 6-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Staged Evacuation Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R33 R34 R35 N/A R36 R37 R38 R39 R40 R41 R42 R43 R44 R45 R46 N NNE, NE ENE E ESE SE, SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW W Wind Direction From: Ring WNW SUB-AREA BB B Skippack South Coventry Spring City ** **

Trappe

. Union

-Upper Frederick 7

Upper Pottsgrove Upper Providence No r_

Upper Salford Upper Uwchlan Uwchlan Warwick Washington West Pikeland West Pottsgrove West Vincent Limerick Generating Station 6-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 6-1. LGS EPZ Sub-areas Limerick Generating Station 6-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 6-4. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scnai Sesn WekDyW atepca 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None 5 Summer Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None 12 Winter Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 13 Winter Midweek, Evening Good Phoenixville Firebird Weekend Festival 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Single Lane Closure US 422 Eastbound 1 Winter means that school is in session (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer means that school is not in session.

Limerick Generating Station 6-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 6-5. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios 1 26% 74% 96% 80% 22% 0% 10% 100% 100%

2 26% 74% 96% 80% 22% 0% 10% 100% 100%

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

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

5 3% 97% 10% 80% 20% 0% 0% 100% 40%

6 26% 74% 100% 60% 22% 0% 100% 100% 100%

7 26% 74% 100% 60% 22% 0% 100% 100% 100%

8 26% 74% 100% 60% 22% 0% 100% 100% 100%

9 3% 97% 10% 75% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%

10 3% 97% 10% 75% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%

11 3% 97% 10% 75% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%

12 3% 97% 10% 45% 20% 0% 0% 100% 40%

13 3% 97% 10% 45% 20% 100% 0% 100% 40%

14 26% 74% 96% 80% 22% 0% 10% 100% 100%

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

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

Employees .................................................. EPZ employees who live outside the EPZ Transients .................................................. People who are in the EPZ at the time of an accident for recreational or other (non-employment) 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 Events ............................................ Additional vehicles in the EPZ due to the identified special event.

School and Transit Buses ............................ Vehicle-equivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing schools and transit-dependent people (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

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.

Limerick Generating Station 6-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 6-6. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario 1 35,708 102,646 13,200 5,451 29,105 - 226 236 41,386 227,958 2 35,708 102,646 13,200 5,451 29,105 - 226 236 41,386 227,958 3 3,571 134,783 1,375 6,814 26,834 - - 236 41,386 214,999 4 3,571 134,783 1,375 6,814 26,834 - 236 41,386 214,999 5 3,571 134,783 1,375 5,451 26,834 - - 236 16,554 188,804 6 35,708 102,646 13,750 4,088 29,211 - 2,262 236 41,386 229,287 7 35,708 102,646 13,750 4,088 29,211 - 2,262 236 41,386 229,287 8 35,708 102,646 13,750 4,088 29,211 - 2,262 236 41,386 229,287 9 3,571 134,783 1,375 5,111 26,834 - - 236 41,386 213,296 10 3,571 134,783 1,375 5,111 26,834 - - 236 41,386 213,296 11 3,571 134,783 1,375 5,111 26,834 - - 236 41,386 213,296 12 3,571 134,783 1,375 3,066 26,834 - - 236 16,554 186,419 13 3,571 134,783 1,375 3,066 26,834 3,000 - 236 16,554 189,419 14 35,708 102,646 13,200 5,451 29,105 226 236 41,386 227,958 Note: Vehicle estimates are for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03)

Limerick Generating Station 6-12 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 46 regions within the LGS EPZ and the 14 Evacuation Scenarios discussed in Section 6.

The ETE for all Evacuation Cases are presented in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2. These tables present the estimated times to clear the indicated population percentages from the Evacuation Regions for all Evacuation Scenarios. The ETE of the 2-mile region in both staged and un-staged regions are presented in Table 7-3 and Table 7-4. Table 7-5 through Table 7-7 defines the Evacuation Regions considered. The tabulated values of ETE are obtained from the DYNEV II System outputs which are generated at 5-minute intervals.

7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation "Voluntary evacuees" are people within the EPZ in Sub-areas for which an Advisory to Evacuate has not been issued, yet who elect to evacuate. "Shadow evacuation" is the voluntary outward movement of some people 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 LGS EPZ addresses the issue of voluntary evacuees in the manner shown in Figure 7-1. Within the EPZ, 20 percent of people located in Sub-areas outside of the evacuation region who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate. Similarly, it is assumed that 20 percent of those people in the Shadow Region will choose to leave the area.

Figure 7-2 presents the area identified as the Shadow Region. This region extends radially from the plant to cover a region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles. The population and number of evacuating vehicles in the Shadow Region were estimated using the same methodology that was used for permanent residents within the EPZ (see Section 3.1). As discussed in Section 3.2, it is estimated that a total of 279,016 people reside in the Shadow Region; 20 percent of them would evacuate. See Table 6-6 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

Traffic generated within this Shadow Region, traveling away from the LGS location, has the potential for impeding evacuating vehicles from within the Evacuation Region. All ETE calculations include this shadow traffic movement.

7.2 Staged Evacuation As defined in NUREG/CR-7002, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Sub-areas comprising the 2 mile region are advised to evacuate immediately.

2. Sub-areas comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised to shelter in-place while the two mile region is cleared.

Limerick Generating Station 7-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5 mile region is advised to evacuate when approximately 90% of the 2 mile region evacuating traffic crosses the 2 mile region boundary.

5. Non-compliance 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 7-3 through Figure 7-9 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 2010, page 5-5):

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

• Demand-to-capacityratios describe the extent to which capacity is exceeded during the analysis period (e.g., by 1%, 15%, etc.);

a Durationof LOS F describes how long the condition persists (e.g., 15 min, 1 h, 3 h); and e 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 7-3 displays the developing congestion within the population centers just 30 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE). At this time, the majority of transients and employees have begun their evacuation trips, as well as many residents.

Congestions exists within two miles of the plant as the evacuating vehicles of Limerick residents and LGS employees gain access to US 422 in both directions. Outside of two miles, LOS F roadways can be seen in every major township. Freeways other than US 422 are not experiencing significant congestion (LOS F).

Limerick Generating Station 7-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

At one hour after the ATE, Figure 7-4 displays fully-developed congestion throughout the study area with LOS F along every major evacuation route. At this time, over three-quarters of vehicles have begun their evacuation trips and 21% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. Vehicles in Pottstown attempt to access US 422 westbound or evacuate on Route 100 and Route 663 among other arterials. Vehicles in Limerick, Royersford and Upper Providence attempt to access US 422 eastbound or travel north and west on arterials such as Route 113, Route 363, Route 29 and Route 73. Vehicles in Spring City and Phoenixville evacuate on Route 23, Route 29, Route 113, Route 401, and Route 100 among other roadways.

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, as shown in Figure 7-5, congestion persists throughout the EPZ. At this time, over 95% of vehicles have begun their evacuation trips, external traffic has been stopped by access control, and 40% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. Congestion is completely clear within the 2-mile radius. Beyond 2-miles, US 422 is amongst the most heavily used evacuation routes in the EPZ, with pronounced congestion west of LGS in Amity once it is no longer a limited access road and has many traffic signals. In the southeast, traffic queues emanate from where US 422 splits into US 202 and 1-76. The severe congestion along US 422 results in many vehicles evacuating on other state routes and arterials throughout the EPZ.

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, Figure 7-6 shows congestion migrating away from LGS. At this time, over 99% of vehicles have begun their evacuation trips and 59% have successfully evacuated the EPZ. Congestion along US 422, state routes, and other arterials slowly moves radially from the plant as bottlenecks slowly flush out. The major population centers - Pottstown and Phoenixville - are still heavily congested.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, as shown in Figure 7-7, congestion continues to migrate away from the plant. At this time, 82% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

The 2-mile region is completely clear of congestion. Major congestion remains on US 422 outside of the 5-mile radius.

At 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> after the ATE (Figure 7-8) the EPZ is predominantly clear of traffic congestion. At this time, 97% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. Congestion persists in the northwest on arterials leaving Boyertown - Route 73, Route 100, and Route 562. The congestion to the northwest is largely the result of pronounced congestion along US 422 westbound (due to bottleneck in Amity) and vehicles rerouting to the north to leave the EPZ. In the southeast, congestion persists in Lower Providence as vehicles attempt to access US 422 Eastbound, 1-276, 1-476, and other limited access highways.

At 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE (Figure 7-10) the EPZ is clear of congestion. Only LOS B and C are exhibited on Route 663 northbound to access 1-476. At 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 25 minutes after the ATE, 100% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. Congestion completely clears the study area at 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 40 minutes after the ATE.

Limerick Generating Station 7-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 7-10 through Figure 7-23. 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 7-10, 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 evacuation routes service the remaining demand.

The rate of egress for the 5-Mile Region and the Entire EPZ, however, remains relatively constant throughout the course of the evacuation. This is due to the limited roadway capacity servicing the high vehicle demand, and the fact that the EPZ beyond 2 miles remains heavily congested for most of the evacuation, as discussed in Section 7.3.

Conversely, the rate of egress for the 2-Mile Region has a long "tail" as congestion in this region begins to dissipate hours earlier than in the 5-Mile Region and the Entire EPZ, as depicted in Figure 7-5. This decline in aggregate flow rate, towards the end of the process, is characterized by this curve 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 Estimate (ETE) Results Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 present the ETE values for all 46 Evacuation Regions and all 14 Evacuation Scenarios. Table 7-3 and Table 7-4 present the ETE values for the 2-Mile region for both staged and un-staged keyhole regions downwind to 5 miles. The tables are organized as follows:

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90 percent of the 7-1 population 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 percent of the 7-2 population within a Region, to evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

Limerick Generating Station 7-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Tabl Cotet ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90 percent of the 7-3 population within the 2-mile Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100 percent of the 7-4 population within the 2-mile 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 7-3 through Figure 7-9.

Congestion exists throughout the EPZ, but migrates away from the plant during the course of the evacuation; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

" The 90th percentile ETE for Region R01 (2-mile region) are approximately 60 to 90 minutes shorter than Region R02 (5-mile region) and generally range between 1:30 (hr:min) and 1:50 (higher for snow).

• The 90th percentile ETE for Region R02 (5-mile region) is approximately 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> shorter than Region R03 (full EPZ) due to the prevalence of traffic congestion beyond the 5-mile radius, and generally range between 2:45 and 3:30.

• The 9 0 th percentile ETE for Region R03 (full EPZ) generally range between 4:35 and 5:35.

Comparison of Scenarios 12 and 13 in Table 7-1 indicates that the Special Event - Phoenixville Firebird Festival - has little impact on the ETE for the 9 0 th percentile. As discussed in Section 6, the external traffic is reduced by 60% for these scenarios as they are evening scenarios. The additional 3,000 vehicles present for the special event increase congestion on the local roads in Phoenixville and exiting arterials. However, the fast mobilizing transients are able to evacuate before significant congestion develops. As a result, the entire EPZ (Region R03) ETE increases by only 5 minutes.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 7-1 indicates that the roadway closure - one lane eastbound on US 422 from the interchange with Evergreen Rd to the interchange with US 202 -

does have a material impact on 90th percentile ETE for keyhole regions with wind towards the southeast (Regions R06 through R08 and R21 through R24), with up to 45 minute increases in ETE. Wind towards the southeast carries the plume over Upper Providence and surrounding areas, which rely heavily on US 422 eastbound. With a lane closed on US 422 eastbound, the capacity is reduced to half, increasing congestion and prolonging ETE.

The results of the roadway impact scenario indicate that events such as adverse weather or traffic accidents which close a lane on US 422, could impact ETE. State and local police could consider traffic management tactics such as using the shoulder of the roadway as a travel lane or re-routing of traffic along other evacuation routes to avoid overwhelming US 422. All efforts should be made to remove the blockage on US 422, particularly within the first 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> of the evacuation.

Limerick Generating Station 7-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 7-3 and Table 7-4 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (un-staged) and staged evacuation studies. Note that Regions R33 through R46 are the same geographic areas as Regions R02 and R04 through R16, respectively. The times shown in Table 7-3 and Table 7-4 are when the 2-mile region is 90% clear and 100% clear, respectively.

To determine whether the staged evacuation strategy is worthy of consideration, it must be shown that the ETE for the 2-mile region can be reduced without significantly affecting the exposure of those in the region between 2 miles and 5 miles. When evacuating the 5-mile Region (Region R02) for non-special scenarios (all scenarios except scenarios 13 and 14), the ETE for the 2-mile region is as much as 40 minutes higher than when evacuating just the 2-mile region (R01); compare R01 and R02 in Table 7-3.

In addition, when evacuating the 2-mile radius and downwind to 5 miles with wind toward Pottstown (R13 through R16 and R43 through R46), the ETE for the 2-mile region increases by up to 40 minutes. The evacuation of Pottstown causes significant traffic congestion along State Route 663 northbound, State Route 100 northbound and US Route 422 westbound. These routes are also used by evacuees from Lower Pottsgrove, which is in the 2-mile region. Those vehicles evacuating from Pottstown slow the egress of vehicles from Lower Pottsgrove, resulting in longer ETE for the 2-mile region. Thus, staging the evacuation to allow the evacuees from the 2-mile region to clear prior to evacuating Pottstown would benefit evacuees from Lower Pottsgrove.

To determine the effect of staged evacuation on residents outside the 2-mile Region, Regions R02 and R04 through R16 are compared to Regions R33 through R46, respectively, in Table 7-1.

Again, Scenarios 1 through 12 are considered. The ETE for most keyholes increases when staging evacuation with some regions increasing up to 55 minutes. As shown in Figure 5-5, staging the evacuation causes a significant "spike" (sharp increase) in mobilization (trip-generation rate) of evacuating vehicles: nearly 80 percent of the evacuating vehicles between 2 and 5 miles who have sheltered in place while residents within 2 miles evacuated, begin their evacuation trip over a 15 minute timeframe. This spike oversaturates evacuation routes, causing significant traffic congestion, rerouting and prolonged ETE.

In summary, a staged evacuation protective action strategy could benefit those people evacuating from within the 2-mile region when wind is blowing over Pottstown, or when evacuating the full 5-mile region (R02). Although staged evacuation can be disadvantageous to those beyond 2 miles, it does expedite the evacuation of those evacuees from within the 2-mile region under certain circumstances.

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 9 0 th percentile). The applicable value of ETE within the chosen Table may then be identified using the following procedure:

Limerick Generating Station 7-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

" Snow

• Special Event

" Phoenixville Firebird Festival

" Road Closure (One lane on US 422 eastbound 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 are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (7) and (10) for rain apply.

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

0 The seasons are defined as follows:

" Summer assumes that public schools are not in session.

" Winter (includes Spring and Autumn) considers that public schools are in session.

• 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:

• Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of compass orientation: towards 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 Limerick Generating Station 7-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

given below:

• 2 Miles (Region R01)

• To 5 Miles (Region R02, and R04 through R16)

• To EPZ Boundary (Regions R03, R17 through R32)

• Enter Table 7-5 through Table 7-7 and identify the applicable group of candidate Regions based on the distance that the selected Region extends from the LGS.

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 7-1 through Table 7-4 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 the 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 toward the northeast (NE).

• Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 5-mile radius and downwind to 10 miles (to EPZ boundary).

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

• A staged evacuation is not desired.

Table 7-1 is applicable because the 9 0 th percentile ETE is desired. Proceed as follows:

1. Identify the Scenario as summer, weekend, evening and raining. Entering Table 7-1, 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 7-6 and locate the Region described as "Evacuate 5-Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary" for wind direction toward the NE and read Region R19.

3. Enter Table 7-1 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for Scenario 4 and Region R19. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R19; it contains the ETE value of 3:30.

Limerick Generating Station 7-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 7-1. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter Summer Midweek Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) "7 (l (9) (10 (,1) (2 )4 Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Rain Good Rain Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Snow Good Special Roadway Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2-Mile Region, 5-Mile Region, and EPZ ROl 1:45 1:50 1:35 1:40 1:35 1:4011:4512:25 1:30 1:40 2:10 1:3511:3511:50 R02 3:10 3:30 2:55 3:15 2:50 3:10 3:25 3:30 2:50 3:00 3:05 2:45 j 2:50 3:25 R03 5:10 5:30 4:45 5:05 4:35 5:05 5:30 5:35 4:35 4:50 4:50 4:35 4:40 5:30 2-Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R04 2:15 2:25 2:10 2:35 2:25 2:25 2:35 3:00 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 2:30 ROS 2:25 2:25 2:05 2:15 2:25 2:20 2:45 3:00 2:20 2:25 2:35 2:25 2:25 2:25 R06 2:30 2:40 2:10 2:10 2:05 2:45 2:45 3:00 2:10 2:15 2:30 2:00 2:05 3:00 R07 2:40 2:40 2:10 2:25 2:10 2:35 2:40 3:00 2:10 2:15 2:30 2:00 2:05 3:00 R08 2:55 3:00 2:20 2:35 2:20 2:50 3:15 3:20 2:20 2:30 2:30 2:15 2:20 3:20 R09 1:45 1:50 1:35 1:40 1:35 1:40 1:50 2:25 1:35 1:40 2:15 1:35 1:40 1:50 RiO 1:45 1:50 1:35 1:40 1:35 1:45 1:45 2:25 1:30 1:40 2:10 1:35 1:35 1:50 R11 1:50 2:00 1:45 1:55 1:40 1:45 2:00/ 2:30 1:40 1:50 2:20 1:40 1:40 1:55 R12 1:50 2:00 1:45 1:55 1:40 1:50 2:00 2:30 1:45 2:00 2:20 1:45 1:45 1:55 R13 2:20 2:40 2:15 2:40 2:10 2:20 2:35 2:40 2:10 2:30 2:40 2:15 2:15 2:25 R14 2:50 3:10 2:40 2:55 2:35 2:45 3:10 3:15 2:40 2:45 2:50 2:35 2:35 2:55 RIS 2:2-5 2:45 2:15 2:35 2:20 2:30 2:40 2:55 2:25 2:25 2:40 2:15 2:15 2:25 R16 2:55 3:10 2:55 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:10 3:15 3:05 3:05 3:05 2:50 2:55 2:55 5-Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R17 4:20 4:35 4:10 4:25 4:05 4:20 4:40 4:40 4:10 4:15 4:20 4:05 4:05 4:25 R18 3:40 3:50 3:30 3:35 3:30 3:35 3:50 3:50 3:25 3:35 3:35 3:25 3:25 3:50 R19 3:30 3:40 3:05 3:30 3:05 3:25 3:40 3:45 3:10 3:15 3:15 305 3:05 3:45 R20 3:30 3:45 3:15 3:25 3:05 3:30 3:45 3:50 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:50 R2 4:30 4:50, 3:55 4:10 3:45 4:35 4:50 5:05 3:50 4:10 4:20 3:45 3:45 5:15 R22 4:25 4:45 4:00 4:15 4:00 4:35 4:50 5:00 4:00 4:15 4:20 3:50 4:00 5:10 4:25 4.45 4:00 4:20 3:55 4:25 4:45 4:55 4:00 4:10 4:10 3:50 4:00 5:10 R24 4:15 4:35 3:55 4:10 3:50 4:20 4:30 4:45 3:50 4:00 4:00 3:50 3:55 4:50 R25 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:40 3:10 3:30 3:50 3:50 3:10 3:15 3:15 3:10 3:15 3:45 R26 3:10 3:30 2:55 3:15 2:55 3:10 3:25 3:30 2:55 3:05 3:05 2:50 2:50 3:25 R27 3:10 3:30 2:55 3:15 2:50 3:10 3:30 3:30 2:50 3:05 3:05 2:45 2:50 3:25 Limerick Generating Station 7-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Rain Good Rain Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Snow Good Special Roadway Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact R28 3:15 3:30 3:00 3:15 2:55 3:10 3:25 3:30 2:55 3:05 3:05 2:50 2:55 3:25 R29 3:40 4:05 3:35 3:55 3:35 3:40 3:55 4:00 3:25 3:45 3:45 3:25 3:25 4:05 R30 3:40 4:00 3:35 3:55 3:30 3:45 4:00 4:05 3:25 3:40 3:40 3:25 3:25 4:00 R31 4:45 5:00 4:30 4:55 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:20 4:30 4:35 4:35 43 4:35 4:50 R32 4:35 5:00 4:30 4:50 4:30 4:45 4:55 4:55 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:25 4:30 4:50 Staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R33 3:05 3:20 2:55 3:05 2:50 3:05 3:15 3:55 2:50 3:00 3:45 2:55 2:55 3:25 R34 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:35 2:25 2:40 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:40 3:15 2:30 2:35 2:40 R35 2:40 2:50 2:30 2:50 2:25 2:45 2:45 3:35 2:35 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:35 2:40 R36 2:30 2:40 2:15 2:25 2:15 2:30 2:40 3:15 2:20 2:25 3:10 2:15 2:20 3:00 R37 2:30 2:45 2:25 2:30 2:20 2:40 2:50 3:15 2:20 2:30 3:15 2:20 2:20 3:05 R38 2:45 2:55 2:30 2:35 2:25 2:45 3:00 3:30 2:30 2:35 3:25 2:30 2:30 3:15 R39 2:05 2:05 2:00 2:00 2:00 2:05 2:05 2:50 2:00 2:00 2:50 2:00 2:00 2:05 R40 2:00 2:05 2:00 2:00 1:55 2:00 2:05 2:50 2:00 2:00 2:50 2:00 2:00 2:00 R41 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:10 2:05 2:10 2:15 3:00 2:05 2:10 3:00 2:05 2:05 2:10 R42 2:05 2:10 2:00 2:05 2:00 2:05 2:10 2:55 2:00 2:05 2:50 2:05 2:05 2:10 R43 2:25 2:30 2:20 2:30 2:25 2:25 2:30 3:15 2:25 2:30 3:15 2:25 2:25 2:25 R44 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 3:30 2:35 2:50 3:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 R45 2:35 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:45 3:20 2:35 2:40 3:30 2:35 2:35 2:40 R46 2:55 3:0S 2:55 3:10 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:45 3:00 3:10 3:45 3:00 3:00 2:55 Limerick Generating Station 7-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 7-2. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter Summer Midweek Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend

/ ( 4 Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Rain Good Rain Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Snow Good Special Roadway Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2-Mile Region, S-Mile Region, and EPZ R101 3:25 3:35 3:15 3:20 3:15 1 3:30 3:40 4:45 3:15 3:20 4:45 3:15 3:15 4:10 R02 4:25 4:50 4:15 4:40 4:10 4:25 4:50 5:05 4:10 4:15 5:00 4:05 4:10 5:15 R03 7:25 7:40 6:40 7:05 6:35 6:50 7:35 . 7:40 6:30 6:35 ,, 6:45 6:30

.. 6:35 8:10 2-Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R04 3:45 3:50 3:35 4:00 3:40 3:45 3:50 4:55 3:40 3:40 4:50 3:30 3:30 4:20 RDS 3:50 3:50 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:40 4:00 4:55 3:25 3:40 4:45 3:25 3:25 4:20 R06 4:15 4:35 3:50 3:50 3:50 4:15 4:20 4:50 3:50 3:50 4:55 3:50 3:50 4:55 R07 4:20 4:20 3:55 4:00 3:50 4:10 4:25 4:55 3:50 3:55 4:50 3:50 3:50 4:35 R08 4:25 4:35 3:55 4:00 3:50 4:10 4:50 5:00 3:50 4:00 4:50 3:50 3:55 4:40 R09 3:45 3:45 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:45 3:55 4:50 3:25 3:30 4:45 3:30 3:35 4:30 R10 3:45 3:45 3:15 3:25 3:30 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:20 3:35 4:45 3:25 3:30 4:15 R11 3:45 3:45 3:25 3:35 3:35 3:50 3:50 4:50 3:25 3:35 4:45 3:30 3:40 4:15 R12 3:45 3:45 3:25 3:35 3:15 3:40 3:50 4:50 3:25 3:30 4:45 3:25 3:40 4:10 R13 3:50 4:00 3:35 4:00 3:40 3:45 3:55 4:50 3:35 3:50 4:45 3:25 3:40 4:25 R14 3:50 4:10 3:35 4:00 3:35 3:55 4:20 4:50 3:40 3:50 4:45 3:35 3:40 4:15 R15 3:50 4:10 3:35 4:00 3:35 3:55 3:55 4:50 3:40 3:50 4:45 3:35 3:40 4:15 R16 4:15 4:30 4:05 4:30 4:00 4:10 4:30 4:55 4:10 4:10 4:50 3:50 4:10 4:20 5-Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R17 6:45 7:05 6:10 6:25 6:30 6:35 7:10 7:10 6:05 6:05 6:10 6:15 6:30 6:45 R18 5:50 6:15 5:50 5:50 5:55 6:00 6:15 6:15 5:55 6:00 6:00 5:45 5:55 5:55 R19 5:35 5:35 5:00 5:00 4:50 4:45 5:00 5:20 4:55 4:55 5:00 4:50 4:55 5:40 R20 5:35 5:35 5:00 5:00 4:50 5:15 5:20 5:20 5:00 5:00 5:00 4:55 5:00 6:20 R21 6:40 7:05 5:55 6:20 5:40 6:50 7:20 7:35 5:50 6:15 6:30 5:35 5:40 8:00 R22 6:40 7:00 6:05 6:25 5:45 6:50 7:25 7:30 5:55 6:15 6:30 5:55 5:55 8:05 R23 6:30 7:00 5:55 6:20 5:40 6:25 7:05 7:35 5:45 6:20 6:20 5:40 5:40 7:55 R24 6:00 6:30 5:25 5:55 5:20 6:10 6:25 7:00 5:20 6:00 6:05 5:20 5:35 7:35 R25 5:10 6:00 5:10 5:45 5:10 5:05 505 5:05 5:15 5:20 5:25 5:10 5:35 5:55 R26 4:25 4:55 4:15 4:40 4:25 4:25 4:50 5:05 4:15 4:25 5:00 4:05 4:25 S:1S R27 4:25 4:50 4:15 4:40 4:10 4:25 5:05 5:05 4:10 4:20 5:00 4:05 4:15 5:15 Limerick Generating Station 7-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Weekend Weekend Midweek Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Rain Good Rain Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Snow Good Special Roadway Weather -Weather Weather Weather Weather a Weather Event Impact 4:35 4:5U 4:15 4:5U 4:20 4:-U 4:-U 5:U5 4:2U 4:55 S-00 4:15 4:20 5: 15 R29 5:35 5:55 5:25 5:50 5:20 5:30 5:55 6:25 5: 10 5:50 6:00 5:20 6:00 5:40 5:100 5:00 :0 55 R30 5:20 5:40 5:10 5:45 5:20 5:55 5:55 6:15 5:10 5:35 5:40 5:20 5:55 R31 6:55 7:05 6:40 6:55 6:35 6:50 7:20 7:30 6:30 6:30 6:35 6:30 6:35 6:55 R32 6:50 6:50 6:25 6:55 6:35 6:45 6:55 6:55 6:30 6:30 6:35 6:25 6:35 6:50 Staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R33 4:10 4:55 4:00 4:40 4:15 4:30 4:35 5:20 4:00 4:05 5:05 4:10 4:10 4:55 R34 3:50 4:00 3:35 3:55 3:40 3:55 3:55 4:55 3:30 3:55 4:45 3:30 3:45 3:50 R35 3:40 3:50 3:25 3:50 3:20 3:45 3:45 4:55 3:35 3:45 4:45 3:25 3:50 4:00 R36 3:55 4:00 3:50 3:50 3:50 3:50 3:50 4:55 3:50 3:50 4:55 3:45 3:50 4:25 R37 3:55 4:15 3:50 3:50 3:45 3:55 4:20 4:55 3:50 3:55 4:50 3:45 3:50 4:50 R38 4:10 4:30 3:50 3:55 3:50 4:05 4:25 5:10 3:50 3:55 4:55 3:50 3:50 5:10 R39 3:40 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:30 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:40 3:40 4:49 3:40 3:40 4:00 R40 3:40 3:50 3:35 3:40 3:30 3:40 3:50 4:50 3:25 3:40 4:45 3:15 3:25 3:55 R41 3:50 3:50 3:35 3:50 3:30 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:25 3:40 4:50 3:30 3:35 4:00 R42 3:40 3:50 3:35 3:40 3:10 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:20 3:40 4:50 3:30 3:30 3:55 R43 3:45 3:50 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:35 3:35 4:00 R44 3:50 3:55 3:35 3:55 3:45 3:55 4:00 4:50 3:40 3:50 4:45 3:35 3:35 3:50 R45 3:50 4:05 3:35 4:05 3:45 3:55 4:05 4:50 3:40 3:50 4:45 3:35 3:35 3:55 R46 4:05 4:25 4:10 4:30 4:05 4:15 4:35 5:10 4:10 4:25 5:00 4:05 4:05 4:05 Limerick Generating Station 7-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 7-3. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2-Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter Summer Midweek Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scnaio (1) (2 (3) (4) (5) (6 (8)) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Rain Good Rain Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Snow Good Special Roadway Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Un-staged Evacuation Mile Region ROl 1:45 1:50 1:35 1:40 1:35 [ 1:40 1 1:45 1 2:25 1 1:30 1:40 2:10 1:35 1:30 1:50 Un-staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to S-Miles R02 2:10 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:00 2:10 2:15 2:35 2:00 2:15 2:25 2:00 2:00 2:40 R04 1:45 1:50 1:40 1:50 1:40 1:40 1:55 2:20 1:35 1:50 2:10 1:40 1:40 1:50 ROS 1:45 1:50 1:30 1:40 1:30 1:40 1:50 2:20 1:30 1:45 2:10 1:30 1:35 1:50 R06 1:45 1:50 1:35 1:40 1:30 1:50 1:50 2:20 1:30 1:35 2:20 1:35 1:30 2:00 R07 1:45 1:50 1:30 1:40 1:30 1:50 1:50 2:25 1:35 1:35 2:15 1:35 1:35 2:10 ROS 1:50 1:50 1:30 1:40 1:30 1:45 2:15 2:25 1:30 1:40 2:20 1:40 1:35 2:05 R09 1:45 1:50 1:35 1:40 1:35 1:40 1:50 2:25 1:35 1:40 2:15 1:35 1:35 1:50 RIO 1:45 1:50 1:35 1:40 1:35 1:45 1:45 2:25 1:30 1:40 2:10 1:35 1:35 1:50 R11 1:40 1:50 1:30 1:45 1:30 1:40 1:50 2:25 1:30 1:40 2:10 1:30 1:35 1:50 R12 1:40 1:50 1:30 1:40 1:30 1:45 1:50 2:20 1:30 1:45 2:15 1:35 1:35 1:45 R13 1:55 2:10 1:45 2:05 1:50 2:00 2:05 2:30 1:55 2:05 2:25 2:00 2:00 2:00 R14 2:00 2:10 1:50 2:05 1:50 2:05 2:20 2:35 1:55 2:00 2:25 1:55 1:50 2:10 RIS 2:05 2:05 1:50 1:55 1:50 2:10 2:10 2:35 1:55 1:55 2:20 1:50 1:55 2:05 R16 2:10 2:20 2:05 2:10 2:00 2:15 2:15 2:35 2:00 2:05 2:25 2:00 2:00 2:15 Staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R33 2:05 2:10 2:05 2:05 2:00 2:05 2:10 2:55 2:00 2:05 2:50 2:00 2:00 2:15 R34 1:50 1:55 1:35 1:45 1:35 1:45 1:55 2:30 1:35 1:45 2:20 1:35 1:35 1:55 R35 1:50 1:50 1:30 1:35 1:30 1:50 1:55 2:30 1:30 1:40 2:15 1:35 1:35 1:50 R36 1:55 1:55 1:40 1:45 1:40 1:55 2:00 2:35 1:40 1:50 2:30 1:50 1:40 2:05 R37 1:55 2:00 1:55 1:55 1:50 1:55 2:00 2:45 1:50 1:55 2:35 1:50 1:50 2:05 R38 1:55 2:00 1:50 1:55 1:50 2:00 2:05 2:45 1:50 1:55 2:40 1:55 1:50 2:15 R39 1:45 1:55 1:40 1:40 1:35 1:50 1:55 2:30 1:35 1:40 2:25 1:35 1:35 1:50 R40 1:45 1:55 1:40 1:45 1:35 1:50 1:55 2:30 1:30 1:40 2:25 1:35 1:35 1:50 R41 1:45 1:50 1:40 1:40 1:35 1:50 1:55 2:30 1:40 1:40 2:30 1:40 1:35 1:55 R42 1:50 1:50 1:30 1:35 1:30 1:45 1:50 2:30 1:30 1:40 2:20 1:35 1:40 1:55 R43 2:00 2:00 1:55 2:00 2:00 2:00 2:00 2:50 2:00 2:00 2:45 1:55 2:00 2:00 R44 2:05 2:05 1:55 2:00 2:05 2:00 2:05 2:45 1:55 2:00 2:45 1:55 1:55 2:05 R45 2:05 2:05 2:00 2:00 2:00 2:05 2:05 2:45 2:00 2:00 2:45 2:00 2:00 2:05 R46 2:00 2:00 1:55 1:55 1:55 2:00 2:05 2:45 1:55 2:00 2:45 1:55 1:55 2:00 Limerick Generating Station 7-13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 7-4. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2-Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter Summer Midweek Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good [Rain Good Rain Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Un-staged Evacuation Mile Region _

RO1 3:25 [ 3:35f 3:15 '3:20 3:15 1 3:30 3:40 14:45 1 3:15 3:20 4:45 3:15 3:15 4:15 Un-staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to S-Miles_

R02 3:55 4:00 3:50 4:05 3:50 3:50 3:55 5:05 3:45 4:00 5:00 3:50 3:50 4:10 R04 3:45 3:50 3:35 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 4:50 3:30 3:30 4:49 3:25 3:25 4:20 ROS 3:50 3:50 3:30 3:30 3:10 3:50 3:50 4:50 3:30 3:40 4:45 3:25 3:25 4:20 R06 4:00 4:00 3:50 3:50 3:50 4:00 4:00 4:50 3:50 3:50 4:55 3:50 3:50 4:05 R07 3:55 3:55 3:55 4:00 3:55 4:00 4:00 4:55 3:50 3:55 5:00 3:50 3:50 4:00 R*8 3:55 3:55 3;55 3:55 3:40 3:55 5:00 5:00 3:50 4:00 4:50 3:50 3:55 4:05 R09 3:45 3:45 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:45 3:55 4:50 3:25 3:30 4:45 3:30 3:35 4:30 R10 3:45 3:50 3:15 3:25 3:30 3:40 3:50 4:50 3:20 3:45 4:45 3;30 3:30 4:15 R11 3:50 3:50 3:25 3:25 3:35 3:50 3:50 4:50 3:10 3:30 4:35 3:30 3:30 4:15 R12 3:50 3:50 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:40 3:40 4:45 3:30 3:40 4:20 R13 3:50 3:50 3:20 3:30 3:50 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:30 3:30 4:45 3:15 3:40 4:20 R14 3:50 3:50 3:15 3:30 3:25 3:45 4:00 4:50 3:35 3:35 4:50 3:20 3:25 4:05 R15 3:45 3:55 3:25 3:45 3:25 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:25 3:35 4:45 3:25 3:30 4:20 R16 3:45 4:10 3:35 3:40 3:30 3:40 4:00 4:50 3:35 4:00 4:45 3:35 3:35 4:00 Staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R33 3:55 3:55 3:45 3:55 3:50 3:50 4:05 5:05 3:50 3:55 4:55 3:50 3:50 4:05 R34 3:50 3:50 3:30 3:30 3:40 3:40 3:45 4:50 3:20 3:30 4:40 3:30 3:30 3:50 R35 3:45 3:50 3:15 3:20 3:20 3:40 3:40 4:50 3:25 3:35 4:40 3:20 3:50 4:00 R36 3:50 3:50 3:50 3:50 3:50 3:50 3:50 4:55 3:50 3:50 4:55 3:45 3:50 4:20 R37 3:55 4:00 3:50 3:50 3:45 3:55 4:00 4:55 3:55 3:55 4:50 3:45 3:50 4:10 R38 3:50 4:00 3:50 3:55 3:50 3:55 4:05 5:10 3:50 3:50 4:55 3:50 3:50 3:50 R39 3:35 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:30 3:40 3:50 4:50 3:40 3:40 4:49 3:30 3:30 4:00 R40 3:40 3:50 3:35 3:40 3:30 3:40 3:45 4:50 3:25 3:45 4:45 3:15 3:25 3:55 R41 3:45 3:45 3:35 3:35 3:30 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:25 3:35 4:49 3:20 3:25 4:00 R42 3:45 3:50 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:40 3:45 4:40 3:20 3:30 3:55 R43 3:45 3:50 3:25 3:25 3:25 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:30 3:30 4:35 3:10 3:10 3:55 R44 3:40 3:50 3:25 3:35 3:35 3:45 3:50 4:50 3:20 3:35 4:50 3:20 3:30 4:00 R45 3:50 3:50 3:20 3:45 3:25 3:50 3:55 4:50 3:20 3:40 4:45 3:25 3:25 3:55 R46 3:45 3:55 3:30 3:35 3:20 3:45 3:45 4:50 3:30 3:45 4:40 3:30 3:30 3:55 Limerick Generating Station 7-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 7-5. Description of Evacuation Regions (Regions RO1-R16) 2-Mile 5-Mile Full Region

Description:

Region Region EPZ Evacuate 2-Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R01 R02 R03 R04 R05 N/A I R06 R07 I ROB I R09 I RIO 11R1 1 R12 I R13 I R14 Ri5 R16 Wind Direction Toward: N/A R I IA RI /IA Ok&iI hifte ft I rac I C I CCC ICC CCC I C I CCIAI I CIAI I IAICIAI I WA I IAIftIIAI I MAIII I SUB-AREA Amity ____ 4 + 4 4 4 4 + + +

Boyertown

+ I*

Charlestown Colebrookdale Collegeville Douglass (Berks)

Douglass (Montgomery)

Earl NEast Coventry mmmm-mm-mm-East Nantmeal East Pikeland East Vincent Green Lane

-Limerick m LA M

-Lower Frederick M

Lower Pottsgroveo Lower Providence Lower Salford

_ mmmm

-Marlborough New Hanoverm

-North Coventry I

Perkiomen Phoenixville I

-Pottstown

-Royersford

] E Schuylkill Schwenksville Skippack South Coventry Spring City Trappe Limerick Generating Station 7-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2-Mile 5-Mile Full Region

Description:

Region Region EPZ Evacuate 2-Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R01 R02 I R03 IR04I ROS N/A R06 R07 R08 R09 I RIO R11 R12 R13 R14 R15 R16 Wind Direction Toward: N/A NA I N I NNE, NE ENE E ESE I SE, SSE S SSW 1 SW I WSW I W WNW NW NNW Union

____ _____ ~ + 4 + + 4 Upper Frederick Upper Pottsgrove Upper Providence Upper Salford Upper Uwchlan Uwchlan Warwick Washington West Pikeland West Pottsgrove Wp-,t Vinrpnt Sub-area(s) Shelter-in-Place Limerick Generating Station 7-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 7-6. Description of Evacuation Regions (Regions R17-R32)

Region

Description:

Evacuate S-Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Region Number: R7R8R9R0R1R2R3R4 25 26 27 R28 R9 R30 R1 R32 Wind Direction Toward: N NE N N S E SE S SW S WSW W IWWNW NNW SUB-AREA 11 Amity Boyertown Charlestown Colebrookdale Collegeville (Berks)

Douglass (Montgomry Earl1 1

East Nantmeal East Pikeland East Vincent Green Lane Limerick Lower Frederick Lower Pottsgrove Lower Providence Lower Salford Marlborough New Hanover111 North Coventry Perkiomen Phoenixville RoyetrsfordI11 Schuylkill Schwenksville Sout CoventryB Skippack Spring City B

Trappe Union Upper Frederick Upper PottsgroveEE41 i i Limerick Generating Station 7-17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Evacuate 5-Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Region Number:

Wind Direction Toward:

Upper Providencem Upper Salford R17 N

R8 NE R19 NE m--

R20 IR21 ENE IE R22 ESE R23 SE R24 SSE R5 S

26 S

27 W

R28 WSW R29 W

R30 WNW R1 R32 NNW Upper Uwchlan _ ..

Uwchlan Warwick ... __mm . .

Washington mm_ .. . .

West Pikeland VVeSL tULL:I UVe

- 4-~-'~-4 + +

West Vincent I Sub-area(s) Shelter in Place Limerick Generating Station 7-18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 7-7. Description of Evacuation Regions (Regions R33-R46)

Region

Description:

Staged Evacuation Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R33 R34 R35 R36 R37 R38 R39 R40 R41 R42 R43 R44 R45 R46 Wind Direction Toward: 5-Mile Ring N NNE, NE E ESE SE, SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW SUB-AREA Amity Boyertown Charlestown Colebrookdale Collegeville Douglass (Berks)

Douglass (Montgomery)

Earl East Coventry East Nantmeal East Pikeland East Vincent Green Lane Limerick Lower Frederick Lower Pottsgrove **** * *

• Lower Providence Lower Salford Marlborough New Hanover

• North Coventry _ __ _

Perkiomen Phoenixville Pottstown ***

Royersford

• Schuylkill Schwenksville Skippack South Coventry Spring City Trappe Union Upper Frederick Upper Pottsgrove Limerick Generating Station 7-19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Staged Evacuation Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R33 R34 R35 R36 R37 R38 R39 R40 R41 R42 R43 R44 R45 R46 Wind Direction Toward: 5-Mile Ring N NNE, NE E ESE SE, SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW SUB-AREA Upper Providence Upper Salford Upper Uwchlan Uwchlan Warwick Washington West Pikeland West Pottsgrove West Vincent Sub-areas Shelter-in-Place Limerick Generating Station 7-20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

~le~ion ~eRegion ~EPZ Keyhole: 2-Mile Region &5 Miles Downwind Keyhole: 5-Mile Region & 10 Miles Downwind m

IStaged Evacuation: 2-Mile Region &5 Miles Downwind I

• Plant Location E Region to be Evacuated: 100% Evacuation [_20% Shadow Evacuation

• Shelter, then Evacuate Figure 7-1. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Limerick Generating Station 7-21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 7-2. LGS Shadow Region KLD Engineering, P.C.

Limerick Generating Station 7-22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Rev. 0 Evacuation Time Estimate

Figure 7-3. Congestion Patterns at 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 7-23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 7-4. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 7-24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 7-5. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 7-25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 7-6. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate KLD Engineering, P.C.

Limerick Generating Station 7-26 7-26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 7-7. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 7-27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 7-8. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 7-28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 7-9. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours and 30 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 7-29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 1)

- 2-Mile Region - 5-Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300 250

-~200 U r

,,, 150 do =-i0 50 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-10. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 1 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

- 2-Mile Region Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300 250 4-.

200 2_

r-5 LU3150

• -100 50 A

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-11. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 2 for Region R03 KID Engineering, P.C.

Limerick Generating Station 7-30 7-30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3)

Mile Region - 5-Mile Region - Entire EPZ

• 90% 0 100%

300 250 C

4.

M 200 50 50 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-12. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 3 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

- 2-Mile Region - 5-Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300 250

- 200 Ui 150 0

V,  : 100 50 0' m 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-13. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 4 for Region R03 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Limerick Generating Station 7-31 7-31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 5)

- 2-Mile Region Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300 250 bInk M 200 w 150

'-- 100 50 00 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-14. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 5 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6)

- 2-Mile Region - 5-Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300 250 200 (U C M

150 0

LU 100

E so 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-15. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 6 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 7-32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

- 2-Mile Region Mile Region - Entire EPZ

• 90% 0 100%

300 250 q 200 U r 150

-**100 50 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-16. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 7 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario 8)

- 2-Mile Region Mile Region - Entire EPZ

• 90%

• 100%

300 ,

250 C

m 200 150 100 50 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-17. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 8 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 7-33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 9)

- 2-Mile Region - 5-Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300 250

" 7200 U5=150

- 100 50 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-18. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 9 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10)

- 2-Mile Region - 5-Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300 250 (U 200 U C 150 na 100 50 0'

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-19. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 10 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 7-34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario 11)

- 2-Mile Region - 5-Mile Region - Entire EPZ

• 90% 0 100%

300 250

• 200 2

(Ur 150 VIo0

. J100 50 00-0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-20. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 11 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 12)

- 2-Mile Region Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90%

• 100%

300 250 b"l 4-'

m 200 LU 150 IE 100 50 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-21. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 12 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 7-35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Evening, Good, Special Event (Scenario 13)

- 2-Mile Region Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300 250 C

" 200 U r 50 50 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-22. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 13 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

- 2-Mile Region - 5-Mile Region - Entire EPZ 0 90% 0 100%

300

[

to C

250 m 1 200 M

U r is IA 150 ANk

.~I-100

> 50-0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 7-23. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 14 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 7-36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0