Text

Preliminary Evacuation Time Study of 10-Mile Radius Emergency Planning Zone
	ML19312D224
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden, LaSalle
Issue date:	01/31/1980
From:	; STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORP.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML17192A585	List: ML17192A584; ML19312A333; ML19312D220; ML19312D221; ML19312D224;
References
	NUDOCS 8003210563
	Download: ML19312D224 (48)
	v • d • e

,

e' 9

j

. O.

I1

\\

PRELI!!INARY EVACUATION TI!E STUDY

.OF THE 10-MILE RADIUS E}ERGENCY PLA:!:IING ZONE AT THE LASALLE COUNTY STATIO:I January 1980 4

Prepared for

. Commonwealth Edison Company by i

Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation Boston, Massachusetts v

l c

e 8003210

^

n-,.,,5 6 3

+

o vva o 1 -

wt

g

,s; c

t TABLE OF CONTENTS Section'-

Title g

. l ~

SUMMARY

... -'..... '.................. 1-1 2 DITRODUCTION....................

2-1

~3 RESULTS..................-.......

3-1 4 ACKNOWLEDGD!ENTS.................... 4-1

~ ~ APPENDIX A: - BACKGROUND DOCIMCIT..............

A-1 APPENDIX B SPECIAL FACILITIES...............

5-1 9

m 5

I 1

'4

/

e 3

5 a

- r [ --

LIST OF TABLES

' Table Title Page 3-1 Estimated ' Evacuation Tine of the General 3-2 Population Within 10 Miles of the LaSalle County Station 3-2

- Special Facilities with Estimated Mobilization 3-4

~

Timaa of 60 Minutes or Greater

- A-1 Principal Evacuation Routes -

A-7 A-2

~lLonal Good Weather Evacuation Times for A-12 General Population A-3 Evacuation-Zone General Characteristics A-16 A-4 Special Facilities Evacuation A-21 B-1 Special Facilities Within 10 Miles of the B-1 LaSalle County Station O

e I

' l x.

s.

.,; i6) }i

~

A t

4 LIST OF FIGURES-

~

I.agg 1 FIGURE 2-11. GENERALIZED SECTOR /EVACUATIOli MAP.

-~

2-2

~AND SPECIAL FACILITIES FIGURE 3 ESTIMATED SECTOR EVACUATION TIMES..........

3-2

'f 7 x

E 6

O 9

6.

..e.

i 4

6 C

e l-1 ",

+

c ;. "

o a*.

[ Y '.

f s

4

-b

[

+

- iii

~

., "s

~

4 5 ' h",.

, n F

)

'Y;a _

1 m;..

x 4

.'.h'.

T 7

G

(

.a 4

.r.

rv. - -,,,

.-e.,-

mev r e v. s

- b-e n y%

4e-

.o e

SECTION 1 SUlffARY

~

In response to a request from the U.S. Nucicar Regulatory Commission (NRC),

the connonwealth Edison Company, working with state and local emergency planners, has prepared-an assessment by sector and combination of these

~

. sectors, i.e., by zone, of the time required to evacuate the area located within 10 miles of the LaSalle County Station near Harseilles, Illinois.

This report is based o,n emergency planning data available at this time and its findings are subject to revision af ter the local emergency plan has been developed. The present findings have been reviewed by state and local emergency planners.

Us'ing a current resident population estimate of 16,580 and employee population of 3,130, the best estimate evacuation times by zone are:

Best Estimate Total i

Evacuation Time Zone Description (Hours)

Sector I

. 0-2. miles north of Grand 2

Ridge Road-

' Sector II 0-2 miles south of Grand.

1 Ridge Road

'l-1

f

,e

.e Best Estimate Total Evacuation Time Zone

_ Description

_(Hours)

Sectors I ard III 0-5 mile radial quadrant north 2

of Grand Ridge Road and east of CR39 and extended northward Sectors I and VI 0-5 mile radial quadrant 2

-north of Grand Ridge Road and west of Grand Ridge Read extended northward Sectors II and IV 0-5 mile radial quadrant 2

south of Grand Ridge Road and east of CR39

. Sectors II and V' 0-5 mile radial quadrant 2

south.of Grand Ridge Road and west of CR39 Sectors I, III, 0-10 mile radial quadrant 9

and VII north of CR9 and east of

)

CR39 extended northward Sectors I, VI, 0-10 mile radial quadrant 8

and X north of Grand Ridge Avenue and west of CR39 extended northward Sectors II, IV, 0-10 mile radial quadrant 10 and VIII south of CR9 and east of CR39

' Sectors II, V, 0-10 mile radial quadrant 10

-and'IK south of Grand Ridge Avenue and rest of CR39 L

i-1-2 A

y-

-w

- c;

o

~

In no instance.does.the maximum evacuation' time of a special facility exceed

- the best estimate of general population evacuation for a zone. Weather conditions,:particularly winter weather; have the. potential' for delaying 4

evacuation.

If evacuation routes cannot be kept adequately open to ensure prompt and safe evacuation, consideration will be given to the implementation

~

of alternate protective a'ctions such as a recommendation to remain indoors..

6 e

e e

)

13 D

s y.

e 2-SECTION 2

.INIRODUCTION i

.In compliance with the NRC's avember 29, 1979, letter

to all licensees

authorized to operate a nuclear power reactor, this report presents an assessment of estimated times for evacuating the general population (including employees) and identified special' facilities such as hospitals, schools, nursing' homes,- etc, located within 10 miles of the LaSalle County Station, Marseilles, Illinois. This report is based on emergency planning data available at this time.

Its contents have been reviewed by local emergency l

planning officials.

The geographic sectors used in the analysis are identified in Figure 2-1 and

- are' in general conformity with the intent of NRC's criteria as set forth in

'the November 29,.1979, letter. Evacuation routes and roadway characteristics are also shown.. Thes e _ routes were selected with the assistance of the LaSalle County Sheriff's Department.

!This analysis assesses by sector general evacuability in terms of estimated evacuation' times. The results are considered conservative since total

. residential population as well as allowances for major' employers in the various sectors'were used. Thus,'some " double. counting" of a portion of the

. population has probably _ occurred.

Letter of l November' 29,-1979,- from Brian K. Crimes, Director Emergency Prcparedness Task Group,Loffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, United States -Nuclear-Regulatory Conmission, Washington,'DC, to All Power

-Reactor Licensees.

2-1 4

w

K

/,

g ~ ~-

/

l N N

./

e g

g

/

8 e

N v

f l

s

~

/

\\

l Morseilles'f? l g

's Rivt's [7 5

j

,j g

Seneca,

/

CR 55

-dg p

\\

I

/

~~

\\

l

/

e i

CR6

/

@ l 1

1

\\

i l

/

l

\\

)

/

X

/

N H

g D,'s

\\

E

\\

I

/

32I f, y s

t g

1

'I

\\

I

/

e m

LASALLE) s e

@ STATIOtt l

1 Grand I

=

c., Ridge cR 6 V

4 CR9 I

e

-1 n--

y E

I g

\\

'/

l 1,*

R

/

Verono j g

g

\\

1 E5

,l~

l

\\

/

k

\\

/ Kinsman 9

g

/

=

t CRS i

b U

CR 29 s

s

\\

IX

'j YIII

/

\\

I.g-g

/

Ronsom

/

=

\\

l

/

\\

/

\\

- 17o J-g/

A so'/

l s'

LEGEND:

p

"'"' "'= =l s

1 SECTOR NUMBER

=

- - SECTOR BOUNDARY APPROXIMATE CITY 80t/JOARY

~:::: RIFR

~

STREET 0

1 2

3 4

S t

i f

f I

f KEY:

SCAL E-MILES I RIVERSIDE NURSING HOfE 2-ILLINI STATE PARK 3. NATIONAL GUARD TRAINING CENTER 4 SENECA TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOCt.

FIGURE 2-1 s SEPECA PUBLIC GRADE SCHOCL, LASALLE STATION l

DISTRICT #10 GENERALIZED SECTOR /

6 GRAND RIDGE GRADE SCHOCL l

7 RANSCf1 CONSCLIDATED SCKXX.S EVACUATION MAP AND 8 -KINSMAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SPECIAL FACILITIES

'9 VERONA' GRADE SCHOOL f

i.

e Specifically, thelfollowing three methods of analysis were utilized to develop a

' range _ of estim' ted evacuation times by sector, and to confirm the capacity of a

the 1ocal roadway network available to handle the projected evacuation loads.

1 The results of these methodologies are discussed in more detail in Appendin A -

JBackground. Document.

1.

Calculations of evacuation time utilizing the Houston Evacuat' ion Model referenced in the prepared testinony

. of R.W. Houston on behalf of the NRC in the matter.of Northern States Power, Tyrone Energy Park, Unit 1, Eau Clair, Wisconsin, October 7,1976, Docket No. 50-484.

2.

Estimation of evacuation times utilizing the Population Density versus Evacuation Time curve referenced in

" Evacuation Risk - An Evaluation," USEPA. Office of Radiation Programs, EPA-520/6-74-002; and 3.

Estimation of available highway capacity utilizing a l

refinement of.a method referenced in the prepared testi-money of James A. Martin, Jr., on behalf of the NRC in the matter of _Puget Sound and Light Company, Skagit Nuclear j

Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, Washington.

The. second method was found to-be inappropriate for the evaluation of three zones; i.e., Sector: II,. Sectors 'II and IV, and Sectors ~ II and V, due to their ilow population ' densities. - As a result, :only the -Houston Evacuation Model and refined Martin method were use'd for these sectors.

'2-3

p.

.a I

r

. Estimates of mobilization times for special facilities are based upon contacts made by Commonwealth Edison Company personnel with the identified special facilities c::own in Figure. 2-1 such as hospitals, schools, nursing homes, etc. - Travel time required for personnel from the special facilities

'to leave the eva uated 10 mile area is presented in Table A-4.

Identified special facilities are detailed in Appendix B.

. In analyzing the data.for determination of the time required for evacuation,

the following assumptions have been made

1.

Evacuation of the outer NRC designated sectors assumes that the

' inner adja' cent sectors are being. evacuated simultaneously; i.e.,

within the 5 mile radius, evacuation of Sector III requires the simultaneous evacuation of the 180o Sector I; evacuation of Sector IV requires the evacuation of Sector II, etc. Within the 10 mile radius, evacuation of Sector VII also requires the

' simultaneous ' evacuation of Sector III and the 180o Sector I.

2.

Automobiles will be the predominant means of transportation with the exception of. buses for school children, handicapped, or other-vise nonambulatory. citizens. An average of one vehicle per dwelling unit is assumed for residential evacuation; an average of 1.0 automobile per person is used for employee evacuation

~

based upon conversations with local employers, and the general nature of. work-related travel vehicle occupancy in the LaSalle 1

~ County Station area.:

2-4 i.

c' 3.

EIf schools are in session, school children will generally be evacuated directly out of the area to predesignated schools where - their parents may be reunited with them. Emergency radio messages will re-affirm te where the specific schools are being evacuated.

' 4.. Population estimates for 1980 and its distribution were obtained from Commonwealth Edison Company. A 30 percent factor

was applied to the population within incorporated areas to account for daytime employees. No major concentrations of enployment were ioentified outside of the ' incorporated areas.

5.- An average of 3.0 persons per household is used to estimate the number of dwelling units in the area. These dwelling units correspond co the estimated number of vehicles to be evacuated from residences based on the above assumption.

6.

Designated evacuation routes will remain open to evacuation traffic through measure's such as removal of snow and disabled vehicles, sanding, and traf fic regulation (i.e., stop signs, signals, etc).

7. - Sufficient manpower and resources will be available to set up and enforce evacuation routing. At least one lane of each evacuation route will.be designated.only for buses and other -

smergency vehicles.

L

Based on County Business - Patterns, U.S. Census,1977 and 1977 U.S. -

Estimate of Population.

m: 5 e

m

+

, ~

ToL

.e

~

8.

Some unavoidable time de1ays will be incurred between the time of initial notification and accomplishment of evacuation. However, these delays will be minimized by advance planning which may include periodic mailings to residents identifying by sector

-evacuation routes, evacuation centers, and other general evacuation instructions.

Based upon results of similar evacuation studies, an average of 20 minutes public preparation time, i.e., mobili:-

ation time, is allowed for the public to react to the evacuation notification..

9.

' Weather conditions, particularly winter weather, have the potential for delaying evacuatioc. However, the er.isting practice of plowing early and of ten in a snow storm, together with the application of sand and salt to icing roads, should'

- allow continued mobility during a snow storm evacuation. Existing practices dealing with other severe storms, including the clearance of fallen trees and wires and the provision of alternate routing around washouts, should also be adequate to ensure mobility during severe weather.

If evacuation routes cannot be kept adequately open to ensure a prompt and safe evacuation, considera-tion will_ be given to the implementation of alternate protective

~

actions.

2-6

s

o.

~

10.-

Generally,- only roadways which provide a sector direct egress beyond

- the 10 mile radius have been considered as evacuation routes for

~

purposes of this analysis. Vehicles being evacuated from any zone

' Vill not enter into 'another zone within' the same radi s

~

u.or cross

'any physical boundary (i.e., waterway).- Evacuation routes and plans are discussed in more detail in Appendix A - Background Document.

11.

The directional capacity fcr a two-lane rural highway is estimated to be 1,000 vehicles per. hour.* Only one lane will be used with the other lane remaining available ' for emergency and special vehicle use.

P

Transportation and' Traffic Engineering Handbook,.The Institute

.. of ;Traf fic Enginee rs, 19 76.

2-7 5"

1 y

4 v

~

O o;

SECIION 3 RESULTS Estimated notification and evacuation-time ranges for the general public i

during good. weather conditions are shown by zone on Figure 3-1 and in Table 3-1.

1 l

-These results are subject to revision af ter the final local emergency response

' plan has been developed.

Best weather condition estimate ! range from 1.4-8.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months for evacuation within the 2-mile radius; 1.5-10.0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months for the 5-mile radius; and 2.1-16.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months . for the 10-mile radius.

In the LaSalle area, the three methodologies were used as appropriate to estimate evacuation times. For Sector II, Sectors II and IV, and Sectors II and V, the Population Density versus Evaccation Time curve was found to be inappropriate due to the low population densities. Thus, for these three zones, only the Houston Evacua-

. tion Model and the refinement of the Martin cathod were used. All three methods were utilized in the analysis of the other zones.

With no real criteria upon which to judge the results of these models, for.the less densely populated 0-2 and 0-5 mile zones, area amergency planners have indicated the lower value of the estimates to be more appropriate as the bust estimate for the LaSalle area. For the 0+10 alle zones, the middle value of the three estimates rounded to the l;

nearest hour is shown in Table 3-1 as the best estimate.

l-l No specific.quantification of the impact of adverse weather conditions on the best weather estimates is indicated because current emergency practices should allow sufficient continued mobility on the area's highways during 3-1

o u

/,

r-Q ew i-N A

/

e

/

l h

~

9.

/

l N

~

/

' '4'*% swro,f"Q~ ? l MorS4 tiles

\\

.,, s j

/

ca $s

_t g

3

c?..,

l

\\

= = = g 'l

-f

\\

'4 #

CRs

/

,e g

I s

g s

/

I

/

\\

E g

1

[E P'S E

\\

t

/

I

\\

l i

i LASALLQ l

/

,e Grand I

Q STATIOPg l

l

"" R id_ge fa s_ g ___ ___ _ __ _

reo

_______n y

g i

i 3

s-a 9

I 2)#

/

g y.,,naj

'g

\\

H H?

"I j

\\

4/ "yaa j

h CR 29 h

CR S

%q, s

t 4

m

',ssy

\\

II Im

/

\\

Ronsom a

~

\\

/

\\

/

\\

/

\\

@p

==m,

,, T st '8"'

a BEST ESTIMTE-ESTIMATED MAX.

GEPERAL SPECIAL POPUtATICN FACILITIES 0

I 2

3 4

5 f

i e

f n

EVACUATION TIME C ILIZATION SECTI:A (KtRSI TM tK:URS:

SCAL E-uiLES I

2-II I

-I, III 2

I, VI 2.

II,IV 2

!!, V 2-I,111,vII 9

!,VI,X 8

2 l I, II,IV,vIII 10

-II V.IX 10 FIGURE 3-1

-LASALLE STATION ESTIMATED SECTOR EVACUATION TIMES L

~2 - --

TABLE 3-1

.o IASALLE COUNTY STATION TIME ESTIMATES FOR EVACUATIO!! 0F THE GENERAL POPULATION WITHIN 10 MILES OF Tile STATION ESTIMATED COOD WEATi!ER EVACUATION TIME Range of

' Estimated Range of Estimated Estimated Notification Estimated Total 1980 Time Evacuation Evacuation Best Evacuation In Excess of Mobilization Travel Time.

Time Estimate Zone.

Population 15 Min _(Hin)*

Time (Min)**-

(Ifr)

(llr) * *

__ (llr) * * *

O-2 Miles Sector I 550 80 20 0.6-2.7 2.5-8.8

'2 Sector lI 50 45 20 0.1-0.6 1.4-1.9 1

0-5 litles Sectors I, III 1,025 80 20 0.6-7.0 2.5-9.4 2

Sectors I. III 765 75 20 0.1-6.5 1.9-10.0 2

Y Sectors II, IV.

215 50 20 0.1-3.2 1.5-4.6 2

Sectors.II. V.

195 50 20 0.1-4.2 1.5-5.6 2

0-10 titles Sectors I, III, VII 5,525 120 20 0.8-12.1 3.3-14.7 9

Sectors I, VI, X 9,705 150 20 1.9-13.7 4.9-16.8 8

Sectors II, IV, VIII 1,980 70 20 0.4-7.8 2.1-10.0 10 Sectors II, V, IX 3,100 95 20 0.4-8.5 2.5-10.7 10

The 0-2 mile and 0-5 mile notification times are based on discussions with the Regional ESDA Coordinator.

The 0-10 mile notification times are based on the Houston Model.

- Estimated 20 minutes Mobilization Time based on " Evaluation Analysis: Indian Point Site," N.Y. State Office of Disaster Preparedness, N.Y. State Department of Public Ilealth, May 1978.

- - For Sector II, Sectdra 11 and IV, and Sectors II and V, range determined from the two evacuation time estimates.

For other sectors, range determined from three estimates.

- - - Based on discussions with State and regional ESDA planners, the middle and highest estimates do not appear to be appropriate for the rural LaSalle area in the 0-2 mile and 0-5 mile radii. Thus, the lower value was used rather than the middle value used for the higher average density 0-10 mile radius.

For the 0-10 mile area, the middle value of the three values is used even though this value still appears to be extremely conservative.

o o --

I severe weather conditions to ensure a prompt and safe evacuation.

If evacuation routes cannot be kept adequately oper., however, consideration will be given-to 'the imple=entation of alternate protective actions, such

- as remaining ' indoors.

- In addition, the time required for confirmation of evacuation is not specified because the methods to accomplish the confiraation have not yet

.been determined. Furthermore, the consequences of the use of visible verification methods (i.e., occupants typing readily visible tags to doors as they leave, etc) have not been sufficiently evaluated by local officials.

Thus, a discussion of appropriate verification methods will be contained in the State and local Emergency Response Plans.

' Estimated mobilization times, as well as the names, addresses, and capacities of those special facilities identified on Figure 2-1 which have identified mobilization times of 60 minutes or greater, are shown in Table 3-2.

Evacuation of the special facilities from the 10-mile area can be accomplished within a maximum of 0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months , once the facility is cleared and if sufficient vehicles are available and priority egress is allowed to minimize conflict with other vehicular traffic.

l

)

3-4

\\

o

.o l

TABLE 3-2

LASALLE COUNTY STATIO.'I SPECIAL FACILITIES ti1TH ESTI!!ATED.40EILIZATIO:t

'TDIES OF 60 MUIUTES OR GREATER Total Estimated Facility Map Special Facility Mobilization Identification No.

Capacity Time

Sector Community (See Figure 2-1)

Name/ Address (Persons) plinutes)

X Marseilles 1'

Rivershores 96 60 Nursing Home Route 3 Box 162 X

Marseilles 2

Illini State Avg 1,500; 120 Park Max 4,000 Route 1

Time required to clear the facility and have transportation available, but not to move out of the 10-mile area.

3-5

l To:

, o-t I

SECTIO!!'4 ACICIOWLEDGE:IE:iTS ~

Commonwealth Edison wishes to thank the following Scace an'd local govern-

- mental emergency planners. for their assistance with the preparation and review of this report.

NAMES A'TD AFFILIATI0!!

Mr. :E. Waage,.~ Illinois Emergency Services and Disaster Agency (ESDA)

Mr. D. Smith', Regional ESDA Coordinator 9

e G

1 7

m g

y,.

ywyr.n5y ru w

t t

i 1

1 1

[

APPCTDIX A

}'

BACKCROUND Doct:IENT l

w I

a f.

.5 k-I s

1-h.

[

J.

4

'. ~

t:

V' g.

p' i

w Wra.

~ aa

~

a

o e

APPENDIX A BACKGROUND DOCUMENT Basis 'of Analysis On' November 19, 1979, the. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission sent a request to all power reactor licensees for information regarding estimates for evacua-tion of various areas around nuclear reactors. This information is required sof that the NRC can identify those areas in which unusual evacuation

~

constraints exist which could require the consideration of special planning measures or facility modifications. In addition, the information will enable the NIU: to respond to a-recent recommendation from the Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations.

The area for which the evacuation estimate is required includes the entire

_ area within a 10-mile radius about the LaSalle County Station. The estimates are discussed by zones defined as two generally 180* sectors in the' 0 to 2 ' mile radius, four. sectors-in the O to 5 mile radius, and four sectors in the O to

,10. mile radius...The estimated times for the outer 5'and 10 mile se'etors assume that the inner adjacent sectors are being evacuated simultaneously.

A-1 9'

Le.'.

l o

,o.

The following information is required in response to the NRC letters 1.

Two~ estinates are requested in each of the areas defined above for a general evacuation of the population (not-including special facilities).

Both a best weather estimate sad an adverse weather estimate are required-for movement of the general population.

~2. 'The total time required to evacuate special. facilities (e.g., hospitals)

~

vithin each area must be specified (best weather estimate and adverse weather).

'3.

The time required for confirmation of evacuation should be discussed.

Confirmation methods may consider special instructions to the public s

(e.g., tying a handkerchief to a door or gate to indicate the occupant has left the premises).

4.

Where plans and prompt notification systems have not been put in place for areas out to 10 miles, estimates of the times required to evacuate the plume exposure emergency planning zone (EPZ) until such measures are in. place should also be given. Notification times greater than 15 minutes should be included in the evacuation times and footnoted to,

indicate the notification time.

5. JWhere special evacuation problems are identified (e.g., in high popula-tion density. areas), specify alternative protective-actiona 'such as l

sheltering which would ' reduce exposure,-and the effectiveness of these measures.

~

. A-2.

^

f(

j:

~

-62 I sh' ort' background ' document should be submitted giving the methods used and the ' assumptions made to make the estimates including identi-fications 'of.th'e evacuation routes and methods;of transportation used.

This document should also note the agreement or ' areas of disagreement with principal local officials'regarding'these estimates.

Thus, the ' objectives of this study are to. determine the characteristics of the area's roadway system and its'. impact on evacuability within the 10 mile radius of the LaSalle County Station; to determine limiting factors for evacuating each sector via the: designated evacuation routes; and to estinate

. evacuation times; for. each sector.

This study,~however,'does not address the means to notify persons that they-

-must leave..The State and local Radiological-Emergency Response Plans will designate predetermined evacuation' procedures.and responsibilities, including identification of evacuation centers and means of public notification such o

as the use.of ' irens, '~ door to door notification, bu11 horns, tone activated s

radios, etc.

The plans will also include the basis for notification, the

' responsible agencies, the methods of 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months comunication, and a general description. of the information that would be communicated.- Consideration will' be given at that time to methods 'of verifying 'that the entire public

~

sector haa.been notified. Methods to be considered may include the use-

ofJreadily visible: tag's. previously distributed to a househo' d and.co be i

tied to the door when the household has been evacuated.- :Similarly, the use

- of handkerchiefs tied:to the' doors and confirmation of notification by

- assigned: personnel on-a -street by street basis may also be considered.

w.

A-3 j

's

1 o-

"o-m

~ However, consideration thould also be given to the consequences of visible '

H verification methods, i.e., identification of empty houses available for looting.

_Evneuation'of General Ponulation There is.no single recognized methodology to assess an area's evacuability.

. However, three approaches have been used in certain instances to establish

' a range of evacuation time estimates.

The use of Method 2, relating popula-

-tion density to evacuation time, however, was found to be inappropriate for the area's low density zones; i.e., Sector II, Sectors II and IV, and

' Sectors II and V.~

The1 basic information which must be collected to assess an area's evacuability using these methodologies is:

s.

Population and employment distribution according to identified zones;

'b.

Estimated notification times for the general population (including employees), and mobilization times for special facilities such as j

schools, hospitals, nursing homes,:ete; and l

s c. IThe -1ocation, configuration, and capacity of principal

~

evacuation routes.-

l A-4 M-

-t

~

-a

o.

General population and special facility information was obtained from-Commonwealth Edison Company and -local area representatives.

Based upon contacts with local employers, the number of area employees was estinated to equal 30 per.:ent of the population within. the incorporated areas.

Other Chan the LaSalle County Station, there are no large enplcyers in

~

the unincorporated portions of the 10-mile area.

Since some of' these workers are also residents of the area, there has been some!" double-counting" of the total number of people, but not neces-sarily'an overestimate of the number 'of vehicles to be evacuated.

In

~

~ (ddition,.-no deductions are taken for the residents who leave the area for jobs, schools, or other reasons.. This methodology, however, should provide for the inestimable number of people who will be in the area for other reasons;.i.e.. visitors, shoppers, and the temporary inhabitants.

The. total population to be evacuated, i.e., residents and employees, was distributed within the. designated sectors. The maximum number of persons to be evacuated from special' facilities and the time required to leave

~ ~

t'ase' facilities were also determined.

4

.-Prine'ipal evacuation routes-vere designated with' the assistance of the LaSalle: County Sheriff's. Office. ; These routes were designated to' allow direct egress from the higher population areas within 10 miles of the LaSalle

- County Station.

'In' addition, the evacuation routes were designated to i

V

['-

A-5 l '

't

e o

s

~

minimize che need' for traffic to cross the Illinois River. Taking these

-considerations into account, the street and highway facilities shown in Table A-1 are designated as evacuation routes for the purposes of this analysis.- These roads are two lane facilities and generally rural in character. Directional hourly capacity of these facilities is estimated to be 1,000 vehicles per lane.

The collected data were then evaluated using each of the following methodologies as appropriate:

1.

Dr. R. W. Houston

developed an evacuation model

~ designed to estimate vehicular evacuation times as a function of azimuth and distance about a potential

= source and based, in part, on information contained in " Evacuation Risks - An Evaluation."** The model relates evacuation time in hours (C ) t the popula-E

~ ion initially in the impact area (N,), the area of t

impact in square miles (A), and the number.of roads leaving the area. (L). The formula developed for this model is C = 1.05A.27N IL 0

E O

Houston Evacuation Model referenced _ in ' the prepared testimony of Mr. R. U.

HoustonL on behalf of-the Nuclear Regulatory' Commission (NRC) in the matter-of Northern States Power, Tyrone Energy Park, Unit' 1, Eau Claire, Wisconsin, October 7,1967, Docket-No. 50-484.

** United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs,

~

EPA-520/6-74-002.

1 A-6 4

o, 18 Table A-l' LASALLE COUNTY STATION PRINCIPAL EVACUATION ROITIES Evacuation Highway Number Evacuation One-Way Zone

-Facility **

of Lanes Capacity -(Vehicles /Hr/ Lane)*

I-CR30-N

.2 1,000 CR 6-E -

2 1,000

'CR6-W 2

1,000

.II CR30-S 2

1,000 CR39-S-2 1,000

. CR6-E 2

1,000 CR6-W 2

1,000 I,III CR36-N 2

1,000 CR9-E 2

1,000 I,VI CR55-5 2

1,000 CR6-W 2~

1,000 II,IV CR9-E 2

1,000 SR170-S 2

1,000

'II V CR30-S 2

1,000 CR6-W 2.

1,000 I,III,VII CR9-E 2'

1,000 CR6-E 2

1,000 CR25-N 2

1,000 I,VI,X CRIS-N 2

1,000 CR55-W 2

1,000' CR6-W 2

1,000 II,IV,VIII'

. CR9-E 2

1,0001 CR29-E 2

1,000 CR22-S 2

'1,000 SR170-S 2

.1,000

'II,V IX CR10-S-2 1,000

'CR40-W1 2

1,000 CRS-W-2; 1,000 CR6-W

'2.

1,000

- CR = County Route'

.SR = StateLRoute;

<

Transportation and Traffic Engineerine 11andbook, The Institute of -

Traffic' Engineers. 197b

'** Direction of evacuation indicator follows facility name..

A-7

o -

'e.

Por the p'urposes of the analysis, time is measured from the initial warning

to the. population at large 'since the activities up to this point are subject to a substantial measure ~ of control by-those' responsible for emergency

- preparedness, at d because it is ~ consistent with historical evacuation time informatic n.

Since historical evacuation time information includes warning

, times 'as well as evacuation times, initial warning is defined as the 1beginning of the notification process and by definition. coincides with the

~ implementation of evacuation.-

The results of this analysis include the time to notify the general public as well as the time to evacuate the general-population from the impacted

. area. Parameters are inserted into the model to represent the effect of time delay. factors which act~ to prevent. instantaneous realization of full evacuation route capacities. These parameters reflect delays due to the

. spread Gf warnings, preparation for evacuation, waiting times to get out of parking lots and side streets, distances between vehicles, vehicle speeds,

- variations in speeds and driving habits, etc.

The time delay parameter used in the model is based upon' an analysis which shows e; correlation between road miles per square' mile of land area (r) and population density (p). This analysis resulted in a formula (r = 0.281 p.403) 0 which yields an estimate. of the number.of road miles per square mile of ' land

' area. Then..given 'the area of the evacuation time region, the number of road miles -in'the area can be estimated.

-A-8 r

a

-e-1,,--

ywy e

p

2: ~

sg-

o-

/

1 n

- A second.' formula (Lg= r /2)' can then be used to determine the number of-0 evacuation routes in _ the area if they are not known. This second formula assumes that1the average: length of a' road v'ichin the area A is in the 0

order:of the square root of 'A, s t e averaga num er f r a s within O

"E

* **'##E' ""* *

^

l the area is approximately rAO ^' *"

of : roads.is available for use as evacuation routes.

It should be noted -

.that roads counted as leaving an area do not return to an ' area, and roads'-

internal to an area are not counted for evacuation routes.

cA plot of the results of this analysis for selected historical events *

~

shows that' in high ' pop'ulation density regions of about 15,000 persons -

per square mile or greater, delays appear to be relatively brief land fevacuation times are more nearly controlled by roadway capacities.

For I

areas of lower population density, such as ~ around the LaSalle County Station, evacuation times depend more on parameters other than roadway capacities.

Taking:these considerations into account yields the formula initially 1

identified and' used in this analysis.. (t = 1.05A N

}

E O

r

"I'/acuation Risks - An Evaluation," USEPA,- Office of Radiation Programs,-

' epa-500/6-74-002-a' N

L

~

=A-9 k

N y

-er

.e--e.

-e.

-o;

2. ; Method No. 2 utilizes Figure 12, Population Density versus Evacuation JTime, contained in " Evacuation Risks - An Evaluation,"* as the basis of the calculations.. This graph is based -upon questionnaires completed Lfo11owing actual evacuation incidents.

It shows a correlation betiten population' density and the time required to evacuate the impacted area using - predominantly ~ private vehicles.

-Population densities surveyed by EPA during development of the graph ranged from approximately:15 persons per square mile to 20,000 persons

. per square mile.- Evacuation times ranged from approximately 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months to 18 hours2.083333e-4 days 0.005 hours 2.97619e-5 weeks 6.849e-6 months and include the warning times as well as the time required to

move the ' population ' out.

It is theorized that the' greater evacuation times required to evacuate less densely populated areas were due largely to longer warning times required in the lower density areas

^

because of increasing distances between persons and the need for more j

l

individual contacts, to the longer times required to prepara farms for a " shutdown" than' the times required for residences, and to the limited choice and. direction of roads in less dense' areas.

This second' method requires that the' population' density by square. mile be determined. These datafare then entered in the graph, and the-j

- l

- est'inated time and hours to evacuate the area simply read from the graph.

" Evacuation ' Risks - An Evaluation," USEPA, Office of Radiation Programs, EPA-500/6-74-002.

A-10

~

a

--p

--am.

-- m

ob

}o-

\\'T-?

\\'

4 h

s

The third approach'is a modification of a method

that estinates 13.2 f the ability to evacuate impacted areas based on the capacity of

'~ local evacuation routes.and the number of vehicles to be evacuated.

This method determines whether.the roads can accommodate the

evacuating population..

The de.ignated egress routes in each zone are first determined.

The' approximate capacity for each roadway (one lane or more if available) is then estimated assuming that one lane of each road =is maintained open for Lemergency and other special vehicle traffic. ' The estimated traffic is then assigned to the evacuation network links based upon the origin point of travel and in a L manner designed to minimize the travel distance to beyond the 10-mile' radius. To estimace' area evacuation times, the hourly vehicular ' capacity of each roadway is then compared to the maximum number of vehicles-assigned to that facility.

~

J *" Evacuation Risks - An Evaluation," USEPA, Office of Radiation Programs,' EPA-500/6-74-002.

~ A-11 t

. S-

?

a H-w

+

7 ya--.9-

.-g---

w 5-g-y=.+v-4

io - ~

..o.

m W,

i

-1 Notification times.were estimated by using a ' formula contained in the-Houston model"to determine the road. miles per square mile of land area

~

-on.the basis of population' density. Then, using a conservative average vehicular speed Jof ~ 6 miles per hour for' assigned personnel to notify the 4

population, _the' notification time required for each sector' was estimated.

This tiee-can 'be s'ignificantly' reduced if the number of notification r

For instance, if 20 notification vehicles were vehicles is increased. :

l made available to. notify the I, VI, and X zone, which represents the worst case condition,' the notification time in excess of 15 minutes could be reduced to about an hour. However, the Regional ESDA Coordinator indicated that at least 30 minutes were, required to bring County and State police vehicles into the 0-2 and 0-5 mile areas. Thus, the notification

times were adjusted accordingly for the 0-2 and 0-5 mil. radii.

Table A-2 ' summarizes the zonal evacuation time estimates for the three methods employed.. Estimated total evacuation times include notification,

mobilization,'and travel tim's values. The "best estimate" for the 0-10

~ mile zones' represents the middle value of the three estimates. The lowest

. falue-of the estimates is used for the 0-2 and 0-5 mile zones.

N A-12 f

+.

9 e

-! # J. TABLE A-2,*

o ~

ZuMAL GOOD TEATliER EVACUATION TIMES FOR CENERAL POPULATION Estimated-

. Estimated Range of

. Total Estimated'

-Notification Estima'ted Range'of

~

Population-. Number _ of -

~ Time

!!obilization.

Evacuation:

Evacuation :

Best.

To Be Notification in Excess of Time Travel Time.

Times Estimata~

Zone.

Evacuated *'

-Vehicles.

15 Itin**

(Min)***

' (llr) '

. (llr) * * * * -

(H r) * * * *

0-2 Hiles I

550 2.

80 min 20 0.6-2.7 2.5-8.8-

'2 :

II' 50 l'

45. min 20 0.1-0.6 1.4-1.9 11 0-5 Ilites

- 1,'III 1,025' S

-80 min 20 0.6-7.0 2.5-9.4

.2-765 5

75 min 20 0.1-6.5 1.9-10.0 2

I, VI-II, IV 215 4

50 min 20 0.1-3.2 1.5-4.6 2

II, V 195 4

50 min 20

.0.1-4.2 15.-5.6 2 10 Miles

- I. III..VII -

5,525 10

- 2.0 hr 20 0.8-12.1 3.3-14.7 9

,'4 I, VI, X -

9,705 10 2.5 hr 20

-1.9-13.7 4.9-16.8 8-w II, IV, VIII 1,975 9

1.2 hr 20 0.4-7.8

~ 2.1-10.0 10 II, V, IX 3,100 9

1.6 hr 20 0.4-8.5 2.5-10.7 10 Includes employment estimates for f acorporated areas and for-IaSalle plant when on-line.

' **The 0-2 mile and 0-5 mile notification times are based on discussions with the Regional ESDA Coordinator.

.The 0-10 mile notification times are based on the-llouston Model.

' *** Estimated 20 minutes mobilization time based on " Evacuation Analysis: Indian Point Site," New York Office of Disaster Preparedness, New York. State Department of llealth, May 1978.

- - - For. Sector' II, Sectors 11 and IV, Land Sectors II and V, range detendned from the two evacuation estimates.

For.other. sectors, range determined f rom three estimates.

- - - - Based on discussions with State and Regional ESDA planners,. the middle.and highest estimates do not appear to be appropriate for the rural LaSalle area :in the 0-2 mile and 0-5 mile radii. Thus, the lower value was used rather than the middle value used for the higher average density 0-10 mile radius. For the 0-10 mile area, the. middle,value of the three values is used even though this value still appear to be extrecely conservative.

'98' d6 m elda sum

'w..

o

. a:

+

l'

- Soecia1' Facilities :-

~

The evacuation tites for special facilities are based upon direct contacts with the facilities. rather than any of the above methodologies.* The type of special. facilities identified within 10 miles of the LaSalle County Station are:

Nursing Homes; Schools (including vocational); and

. Recreation Areas i

The following questions vere asked of the identified special facilities.

The information 'is for weekday / daytime occurrence.

Nursing Homes 1.

Number of in-patients

.2.

Peteent of in-patients that would be moved short of l

eminent disaster to facility.

3.

. Percent of in-patients identified in Question' 2 T requiring special transportation (e.g., ambulance, wheelchair)

4. ; Previous experience lor time estimates for in-patient evacuation of building.(e.g., fire drills)

~

Commonwealth Edison made a reasonable elfort to identify. and -contact all' special: facilities in the area. However, we do not imply that we were

' successful in. identifying.all such facilities.

-l

'A-14

,: g '

S

~

.a

.e.

~ * "

~

s t '

5. : Available transportation _(quantified) to'take patients-Eavay from facility (e.g.,, staff autos, ambulances)

Where' patients' wou15 Le * ? Pan 16.

[ Schools 1.

Number of students

' 2.

Number of staff and-student autos and buses available

3. - Special transportation needs of students

4. rAvailability of'special transportation

- 5.1 Previous - evacuations or planning (e.g., fire drills, time to load buses af ter school)

Recreation Areas

, 1.

Number of persons at 'any particular time.

2.-

Estimated time for evacuation (based on estimates or weather-related conditions)

I c)

A-15 x

.u

-eT 9,

w

-m 3g 4;

LIndividual Sector Analysis -

{

1 -

r

~

The'~ evacuation zones! for LaSalle (Fig. 2-1) are in.-accordance with the

< November 29,._1979,' NRCLletter. They are discussed below in terms -of -

lthe 0 to12 mile, the-O'to 5 mile, and 0 to 10 mile radius. concept. The characteristics of each evacuation' zone are contained in Table A-3.

1

~

"0-2 mile radius - ThEre are'two 180 north-south zones within this radius

. ith Grand' Ridge Road separating the. tvo zones. The LaSalle County w

^

' Station, located within Sector:I (north), is the dominant evacuation concern within-the'2 mile' radius. When on-line, the LaSalle facility.is Lexpected 'to have 51S ' personnel on site daily, including construction and maintenance. personnel. Neither Sector I nor Sector II has significant residential population.

For. Sectors. I and II, respectively, 3 and 4 principal evacuation routes are designated., However, the primary evacuation facility to note is Grand Ridge Road which has been assigned all LaSalle County Station traffic..

A westward evacuation;is recommended to minimize interference with the -

potential evacuation 'of communities.such ~as Grand' Ridge and; Ransom, as

. ell.as other populated areas.

w

- =

The evacuation of the.: 550 persons in ' Sector I will require an estimated

' 2.5-to: 8.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months ,; including notification. and mobilization time. The best Lestimate'of time required to evacuate -Sector I is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months . Evacuation of.

..j '

Sector-II will require 1.4 to-1.9 hours1.041667e-4 days 0.0025 hours 1.488095e-5 weeks 3.4245e-6 months . The best estimate of time' L,'

required to evacuate the'50 residents is'1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months .

s

~3"-

[

A '

d

o, TABLE A-3 LASALLE COUNTY. STATION EVACUATION ZONE. GENERAL CllARACTERISTICS

. Area

' Zone.

_(Sq Hi).

Population Evacuation Vehicles

_R_esident -

. Employee To tal Resident Employee

-Total

'O-2 Hiles I

' 8. 5 520 550 10 520

'530 II 14.1 50 50

~ 15 '

'15 -

0-5 Ililes I,III.

22.8

.505-

'520-1,025 170' 520 690 I.VI 25.8

-245 520 765 80 520 600 II. IV 19.7 215 215 70

~

70, 3,'

II, V

,19. 8 '

195 195 65 65 Lh

'8 0-10 Hiles-I,III,VII 87.2 4,250

.1,275 5,525 1.415 1,275-2,690 I,VI,X.

89.5 7,635 2,070

.9,705 2,545 2,070 4,615 II,IV,VIII 73.9-1,905 75 1,980 635 75-710 II,V,IX

.76.3' 2,870 230 3,100 955

~230 1,185 1.

Estimated at.1.0 per household. Households determined.at 3.0 persons per dwelling unit.

2.

Estimated at 1.0 vehicles per employee as a result of lack of concentration -(population and employment) in the area.

1 I

~

so-5 mile radius _- There'are four L 90 zones within the 5 mile radius -of the LaSalle County Station. Each zone includes an inner. 0-2 mile sector and an.

outer 2-5 mile sector. The ' northeast; zone consi;ts of Sectors I-and III;

~

l ithe'uorthwest zone consists of Sectors I and VI; the southeast zone consists l of-Sectors II and IV; and the southwest zone consists of Sectors II and V.

Grand Ridge Road remains as the north-south divide of the evacuation area.. The. east-west separator is' the extension.along the sector lines of a local roadway situated west and. south of the LaSalle County Station.

~

- The evacuation.of ' Sectors I and III will involve the greatest number of residents (505 persons) within the 0-5 mile radius.. The only identified major-employer is the LaSalle Ccunty Station located in Sector I.

Approximately' 690 privately owned vehicles voald be evacuated 'in the

-.approximately.26 square mile Sectors I and III area. Traffic would primarily 1be' evacuated'in _a~ generally westward direction' along Grand Ridge Road.

?_Bowever, traffic will!also be directed along CR36' and CR9. ' The estimated

' time to evacuate 'the' area is 2.5 to 9.4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months , including notification and

! mobilization time. The best estimate of evacuation time is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

e O

h

.A.

J v

4

9

.The.approximately 765 residents and' employees in Sectors I and VI would be

~

. evacuated via CR55 and CR6. About 600 vehicles are available for us2 in the evacuation, which1will take about 1.9 to-10.0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months . The best estimate of

~

. evacuation l time, including notification and mobilization, is 2' hours.

' Sectors'II and IV are to be evacuated along CR9 and SR 170.

Between 1.5 and 4.6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months would be required. to notify, mobilize,.and evacuate the 215 people'in this area. The best escimate of evacuation time, however, is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

The evacuation of Sectors II and V will require'1.5 to 5.6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months along

~

CR30.and CR6. The best estimate of time to move the 65 vehicles is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months , including notification and mobilization time.

0-10 mile radius - Four evacuation -sones have been defined for this maximum

. area of evacuation. The latitudinal and longitudinal divides are the

same as for the 0-5 mile radius.

There are six incorporated areas-between 5 and 10 miles from the Station.

~'

Thus,'. evacuation of' resident population is of more concern in this outer

. evacuation area.than for the inner evacuation zones. Population centers

to the north of the Station include the city. of Marseilles in Sector'X and Seneca in Sector VII.. Evacuation of Sector X in conjunction.with

. Sectors I and. VI and the evacuation of Sector VII-in conjunction with Sectors I and III'will involve.7,635 and 4,250 residents, respectively.

This population-is located moscly north of the. Illinois River.

~

A-19

3

~,

J Based upon; contacts with local employers and officials, employnent. for' the 10 mile zones was estimated by adding.30 percent to the population' estimates i for ' the ' incorpora ted. areas. With this approach, and the existence of the

.- LaSalle County Station employment figures, Sectors I, VI, and -X (which includes

' Marseilles)-'are the primary areas of employment within the O to 10 mile radius

~

with an estimated 2,070 employees. Thus, the total population to be

' evacuated fron-this zone would be 9,705 persons - (residents plus ' employees).

The evacuation would require about 4'.9 to'16.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months . The best estimate of

~

time to evacuate Sectors I, VI, and X is 8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months .

The evacuation of-the 5,525 residents and employees in Sectors I, III, and

'VII would require. 3.3 to 14.7 hours8.101852e-5 days 0.00194 hours 1.157407e-5 weeks 2.6635e-6 months . The best time estimate for the evacuatio:

along CR9, CR6..and'CR25 is-9 hours.

-Sectors south of the LaSalle County Station are less populated and should

.therefore not require as much time to evacuate.

For instance, Sectors II, IV,'and VIII contain about 1,980 residents and employees. The available 710 evacuation vehicles could exit-this zone via either along Routes CR9, CR29, CR22, and CR170 in'2.1 to 10.0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months . The best estimate of evacuation eine is

'10 hours1.157407e-4 days 0.00278 hours 1.653439e-5 weeks 3.805e-6 months .

l Sectors -II, V, : and IX'could be evacuated along CR30, 'CR40, CR5, I

and CR6 in 2.5 to'10.7' hours. The best estinate of time to evacuate the

3,100 residents and employees, however,.Lis 10 hours1.157407e-4 days 0.00278 hours 1.653439e-5 weeks 3.805e-6 months .

A-20 x"

,y-j t

co-The ' critical' evacuation route for the 10 mile radius zones is CRIS north from Marseilles. CR55 west from Marseilles is also important since it will' handle about two-thirds the amount of CR55 traffic.

Evacuation of Special Facilities The special facilities identified within 10 miles of the LaSalle County Station are shown on Fig.'2-1.

An effort was made to identify and contact all special facilities within the 10 mile area; however, some facilities may have been overlooked.

The names, addresses, type, maximum number of residents / students, number of staf f/ student automobiles' available, and estimated mobilization times - (time to ' clear f acility and have transportation available) for each f acility are contaitLJ in Appendix B.

The map identification numbers shown are keyed to Figure 2-1.

Eatimated facility mobilization times range from a low of 5 'to 10 minutes to a' high of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months . Estimated maximum travel time to beyond the 10 mile limit for the special facilities is shown in Table A-4 by facility type (i.e.,

schools, hospitals). Generally, personnel from these facilities would receive priority treatment -during evacuation. The emergency lane provided on each evacuation route would be used by the vehicles transporting special facility personnel. ; Assuming an average travel speed of 20 mph could be maintained, maximum travel _ time in evacuating personnel from special facili -

0 ties beyond the 10' mile area should be about one-half hour.

'A-21

\\

e

V

[:.

4

' TABLE A-4I o

'- LASALLE COL"!TY STATION..

1 SPECIAL FACILITIES EVACUATION Maximum Travel Time

Facility Type Travel Distance (miles)_

(hours)

' School.

6.4 0.32

~

Nursing llome 5.6 0.28-Recreation Facility-5.0

- 0.50 ~

1.* Vehicle speed estimated at 20 mph.

'4 t'

s t

s x-

-A-22 c h

't e

,.i: -

a.{.

t

+

... o.

-e-

' Alt'ernative ' Actions i

i

, Evacuation _ of the population to minimize publ c exposure to a pass ng

-radioactive! material cloud is the protective action most discussed.-

However. there.are other. protective ~'oeasures :available which may at the time;of the accident and in consideration of such factors as weather cond' itions, ' roadway conditions, duration and type of the accident, etc.-

be more: appropriate.

Generally, the type of accident which occurs is the first consideration.*

If' a low probability " melt-through" accident were to occur, the relatively

.long release duration would generally result in. officials recommending evacuation. - Howaver, if the weather and roadway conditions were such as - to

' hamper the evacuation process in terms of time delays or public safety, sheltering people within their own' homes or public shelters could sub-

.sta' tially reduce _ whole body exposures, particularly in residential areas -

n such as around the LaSalle County Station where-most homes have basements. To 4

- maximi:e' the benefits of sheltering, vindows and doors of homes should also be closed and sealed, and ventilation systems turned off to minimize "the turnover race 'of air within the building.--

Calculations have 'shown that sheltering individuals can reduce the dose

~

.from inhaled radionuclides by up ' to 35 percent.** Larger reductions'can

.be achieved by the.emergencyfsealing of openings in the structure such as taping windows, placing wet paper over cracks, etc.

!*" Examination of; 0ffsite Energency Protective Measures. for Core Melt

-Accidents," D.C. Aldrich, P.E. McGrath,- D.M. Ericson,JJr., and R.B. Jones l

of.Sandia Laboratories, Alburquerque, :C4, and N.C. Rasmussen, Department of Nuclear Engineering, II.I.T., : Cambridge,11A,: as presented at.the -

'American-Nuclear-Society Topical Meeting on'Probablistic Analysis of l.

Nuclear Reactor Safetyi May 8-10, 1978.

i

- "Public Protection:. Strategies -in the. Event of a Nuclear Reactor e

J Accident: ' Multicompartment. Ventilation Model for ~ Shelters," D.C. -

Aldreich, D. M.~ Ericson, _.Jr., Sandia Laboratories, January 1978.

i l

A-23' l

s 4

o.

e-LIf there vas an at'ospheric' release of radioactive materials, doses ~to the m

public could occur. by external radiation-as' the cloud passes, by exposure to external radiation from radionuclides deposited on the ground and other surfaces, or' by internal exposure due to the ' inhalation of radionuclides.

Levels in excess of accepted protective action guidelines would generally loccur closer to.th'e ' source so that the protective actions could be recommended -

nt a two-phased approach.. The first phase would be to evacuate those individuals in these closer areas, i.e., within.a 5 mile radius, while the second' phase could be a recommendation to take shelter and institute food,

~

water, and milk control since the results of evacuation versus sheltering

)

in the 5 to 10 mile ar,ea are not as evident. However, beyond 10 miles there is little apparent distinction between the effectiveness of evacuation and sheltering in terns of minimizing projected health ef fects.*

+

Other actions which may be-used include removal of grazing animals from pasture; diversion of raw milk to milk products such as cheese, butter, etc; closing water intake valves from a contaminated water resource to prevent distribution of contaminated water; importation of uncontaminated ufood and water supplies; decontamination of contaminated materials and foodscuffs; and use of potassium iodide as a prophylaxis to reduce the dose to the thyroid.

' " Examination of Offsite Emerg'ency Protective Measures for Core Melt.

' Accidents,"! D. C. Aldrich, P. E. McGrath, D. II. Ericson, Jr., and R. B. Jones of -Sandia Laboratories, Alburquerque, 3:1, and N.

C.' Rasnussen, Department Lof Nuclear Engineering, M.I.T., Cambridge, MA, as presented at the

~ American Nuclear Society Topical Meeting on ~Probablistic Analysis of

~ Nuclear Reactor Safety,alay 8-10, 1978.

i i.,

A-24

~

l

?.i

_.e; t

J

. These represent only, af few of the' alternate courses of ' action which -could-be

+

'taken-in a radiological emergency. ' The particular. actions chosen will, of course, ~ depend ipon the type and : severity of the accident as well as 'such

. other parameters as meteorological conditions, time of day, etc.

4 e

9 a

I J

f a

3 6

1.-

A-25 4m q

k

~_V

.w

<E

$_d;,

g A

J

~

4 g_

-er t rg'..

y _

nyn y -

n~

k-')

1y b<

L t-(-

t t(.

4 t

4 f,.

t h..

?

f APPENDIX 3 l

SPECIAL FACILITIES i

t..

t f.

S

[.-

(

f:

e f

i n

1.

b i, -

d J.

ty-f.

L~

1h.

i

)i

g. -

1 i,

f.s N

} '.

t i,

1 E

1k.

t-h'-

s j"9 '.

ef'.

I.

g.s.

5.

1 4

e{ll g.

Iv t. N*vM. n,64n e '--

A ' rivur".

c rr - w i -

er, w

w m

7 -

a e

- TAllLt. il-1 '

.o SPJLIAL FACILITII.S WITilId-N ild HILES OF.TdE LASAt.li COJ111Y STATION' T"

Itap -

.No. of Staff /

Estimated ID-

'Hax' Residents /

Student Autos' riobiliza ' g Cosasaus.ity

.lu.

Sec tor _ :

ilanie of Facility-Address

' Studesics -

f Available

' tion Ti.aa'a Harseilles"

.1.X.

' Rivershores.harsing Route 3, 96 50 staff ou-aloni dox 162

- autonobiles harsellies' 1-2

.- X '

- Illini State Parl, Route 1 Avg 1,500/ day; 120l Itax 4,000/ day 1 Harseil las 1-3

. V1.

.dational Cuard P.O. Box 96 100 Tratuing Center Seaeca 1-4' VII

. Seneca Township 22o E. Scott 300 2 buses, owned 10-15 iligh School by school; 75 automobiles -

Seaeca 1-S VII Seneca Public 174 Dak St.

$J2 1 bus owned by' 3d Grade Senool

' school; 4 buses District !!o.10 provided by bus service Crand.

1-6 1.i Grand Rid e'Crade 400 u.11ain ST.

372 25-30 automobiles; 5 h

I:1dge Senool Kline's I;us Service Raar.om.

1-7 V111

. Ransom Consolidated 404 Soach 1.ane 120 10-11 staff auto-5 Schools mobiles;.2 owned school busesL 41nsuan 1-ti VIII Kinsman r.lemuutary a0 6 staff automo-5 School biles; 2 buses owned by school Verona 1-9 VIII Verona Grade School

.iorth Division 14$

/ staff autowo-St.

biles; 4 buses

Tue first number of the Map Idantification ihu2bar identifies thu figure in Chapter 2; the second aiumber identifles tha particular. facility on that figure.

Alucludes time to leave tacility ana have vehicles available for departure.

L-1

~

x

ML19312D224

Text

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search