ML19331B931

Forwards Preliminary Rept, Transportation Element for Evacuation in Vicinity of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, in Response to NRC 800702 Request.Rept Available in Central Files Only

ML19331B931
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	08/07/1980
From:	Novarro J LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19276J652	List: ML19331B931
References
SNRC-488, NUDOCS 8008130552
Download: ML19331B931 (13)

Text

-

DM .

3 r LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COM PANY

.'f M O

_hmmw SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION P.O. BOX 618, NORTH COUNTRY ROAD e WADING RIVER N.Y.11792 August 7, 1980 SNRC-488 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation THIS DbCUMENT CONTAINS U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P0OR QUAL.ITY PAGES Washington, D. C. 20555 Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-322

Dear Mr. Denton:

In Mr. L. Eisenhut's letter of July 2, 1980, the Staff requested that we provide evacuation time estimates for the Shoreham site.

In response to that request, LILCO herewith submits a preliminary report entitled, "The Transportation Element for Evacuation in the Vicinity of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station." This document was prepared by the Suffolk County Department of Transportation for the Department of Emergency Preparedness.

The report was prepared using the format set forth in NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants." Since this report was prepared by Suffolic County with only a limited number of copies sent to LILCO, we can only forward one copy of this report for your review at this time. goof 5

In addition to the report, we have enclosed copies of corres- j pondence between the County of Suffolk's Department of N/

Transportation and the State of New York's Division of Ag' Wg Military and Naval Affairs (Enclosures 1 - 3) as well as .

the County of Suffolk's transmittal letter (Enclosure 4). E IA'*.3 I I With respect to Enclosure 1, LILCO takes exception to the SM sPhy f f Department of Transportation's note four (4). To our knowledge, there has been no position taken by the Staff g p .g* I /

on this issuc.

SF.WD t.PDR + P&l

<p. & sud k T.Fs L GR 5%,Su f,eu 80081so55A '

FC 8935 F L A

m Mr. Harold R. Denton August 7, 1980-Re: Evacuation Time Estimates Page 2 We would like to point out that a FEMA consultant has issued a similar report containing their evacuation estimate for the area around Shoreham. This report, entitled "An Evacuation Time Assessment of Nine Nuclear Power Plant Emergency Planning Zones", was issued in June, 1980.

Should you or your Staff have any questions, we would be pleased to discuss them with you at your convenience.

Very truly yours,

'7 J. P. Novarro, Proj ect Manager Shoreham Nuclear Power Station RAll/cc Enclosures cc: Mr. J. Higgins (w/o attachments) e

COUNTYC.W SUFFOLi< ENCLOSURE 1 p.n, -

s.. ~.+ s .*,

Idl ..\

(. y L

.$.:y.

s. :: c.f C.$.I d DEPARTMENT OF TR AfE?CRTATlJfl March 7, 1980 .

Mr. l!illia a F.eg?.n, Director Suffolk County Depart ent of Emergancy Prescreeness Eox 127, Yaphank Ave.

Yaphan't., 3.Y. 11980

' Cear Mr. P.egan:

This is in rescense to your correspendence of February 26, 1980 concerning UUP.EC06H/. G'A-REP-1, Appendix 4.

hs you 'are aware, in August 1979, this Depar trent cc pleted a preiftir.:ry of report entitled The Trer.swt.uitr Eierent fe ~ Evaccaticn in the 'licinits '

the Shore'm "uciear -c..e ' i scicn". ~In assessir.o tna crner E c.'ntu ncc !.

Xppeneb 4, u was c:.nnnert.o mee prudent to satisfy these rezuirenents cy identifying and rafarring to tha applicr.ble sectier.s v;ithin the . :-port.

l!a r.re, therefore, enclosing Appendix 4 (with references) and a ccpy of the report.

The:tabi: cn the succeeding page indicates tha estimated times recuested.

If we can be of any further assictance, please do not hesitate to call.

l < _ -

' Ver' truly ycur:r, c~r ~'

'--~v-GcL> , ! Q Y m w ,

sichard A. Strang PAS:df-Deputy Ces.issicner Enc. - Table of Estimated Times Arpendix 4 Preliminary Evacuaticn Report e

e

($34; 21actt

( " " -- ~vwfW ywe N st?Q7 _e

(

3 1

T/. TIE OF ESTU.!ATED ET*ACUAT105 TLIES .

(refer to Figure 3 in attaclied report)

Adverse Weather Map Zones Est. Time Est. Time ,

Ridi+.1 D1::tance .

2 miles (e.pprox. 19,0o) A,E,C,D,E 2 hrs. 2.-5 h r s .

~ 5 mih* (approx. 900! A,B,F,G 6. 5 hr s. 7.5 hcs.

C , D, E , H, I, .T 4. 5 hr s. 5 hrs. -

5 miles (epprox. 900)

A,3, F, G, K, L, M 10. 5 brs. 12 hrs.

10 miles (appro::. 900) 10 miles (appro::. 900) C, D, E, H, L J. N, O, P 7.5 hrs. 9 brs.

Note s - 1. All e sti nates haced on 1935 peak seasonal population projections.

~

2. Incorporated in zones A through E is a 20 minute interval which reflects an a.sumed lapse time between notification to leave and actual physical movement. This is referred to as mobili-zction time in the repcrt.

3. On page 19 of the attached report is a d'iscussion of high oc-cupancy vehicles for people who may not have access to a private automobile. The pre!!minary evaluation plan procides for the last bus to enter a ;one at a time concomitar.t with the end of the pt ivate vehicle exodus. The trip times for this hus service are not included in the above estimates.

4. Since Appendix 4 does not define " adverse weather conditions" it is defined herein as being heavy rain or light snow. Present thinking with respect to heavy snow is to mandate substamially reduced generating capacity at the plant as suggested in the Rogovin report on TMI (page 133).

e

-a APPE.' 0!X 4 RE00EST FOR EV*C'JAT*'.'; Ti"I EST!ATES (A TOR ::GTIFICATION),

rCP. AriAi :.iAR C.I.AR FC'.;ER ?LA*ii3 Eacker,und ,

Price to recent NRC requests. that means for prempt notification to the public be installed around each nucicar power plant site, a significant compcnent cf evacuation time estic:tes was .the tice required to notify tha public cf a nacd for evacuation. Studies of actual evacuations that have taken place ganerally do not distinguish betwee'n the time requirad for notificatien, the tiaa required to irplement the evacuation, and the time required cc confirm that an evacuatien has taken place. I The requested estimetes for tima required for evacuations relate pricarily to tha time to icplencat sn evacuation as cpposed to the time required for notificatien.

Ti.ase esti,ratts may be based on previcus local axperiences (e.g., chemical spills or ficeds) or may be based en studies related to populatic reue7

" _, , j s No standard method for making such

.0 2 2 's 2 -lect!

_. ge:crachy and

~

/ road cacacities_.

.c7stsa, estit3tes is icentified fer use at this tima, but the basis for the methcd A

- Ny_!d'.Q chosen should be -daceribed in the response. As an independent check on the .44...

evacu.' tion time estimates, the or anication doing the evaluation should obtc'n agreement with cc:ments frca the principal local officials responsible .

for carrying out such evacuations. Such agreement should be documented or the creas of distgreement indicated in the submittal.

- 1/ Hans, _J. M., Jr., and T. C. Sell,1974 Evacuation Risks - An Evalutticn,

- U. S. Environmental Proteccica A7cncy, ::atienai Envircr. mental Research Center, Las Vegas, E?A-520/6-74-002.

4-1

< 'i s

-, , l The format given below is apprcpriate for recorting to the NRC estimate: cf the time requi,ed r tc evacuate areas nect nuclear ;ower .

plcnts. These estimates should be rade in order to give officials who would make evacuation deciciens, knculedge of the time required to complete avacuation for all or a segment of the pcc ulatien. A seccnd purpcse of these esticates is to identify to all concerned those instcnces in which unusual evac;ation constraints exist and where special planning measures should be considered. In some cases of extreme difficulty, where a large populacion is at risk, special facility modifications may also be considered. .

Given a decision to evacuate rather than shelter in an actual event, 7 I

i more or less sectors or distances diffe ent than given in the reporting  !

fonaat might be evacuated shculd this be the chosen protective acticn. , < ppf,_2_

l rmu z;_

For example, three 22-1/20 sectors might be initially evacuated in a  ; _g79,3_

I dcunwind direction (the sector centaining the pl_me and an adjacent sector l

on each side) followed by the evacuation of other sectors as a precauticnary ,

measure.

Format for Recortina Infor ation it.e areas for which evacuation estimates are required must enccmpass the entire area within a circle of about 10 miles radius, and have outcr boundaries corres ending to the piume exposura EPZ. These areas are as fo11cus:

4-2 O

t Distance Area 2 miles two 180' sectors 5 miles four 90* sectors about 10 miles four 90' sectors ,

In .aking m estimates for the outer sectcrs, the plan shcuid assute that the inner adjacent sectors are being evacuated simultaneously.' To the extent practical, the sector boundaries shculd not divide dansely populated areas. 'Jhere a direction correspending to the. edges cf are?s for which .

esticates hava been made is thcucht not to be adequately re' , esented by t're tira esticates for adjacent areas, an additional area should be defined and a separate esticate cade for this case. The fermat for subaitcal shall include bcth a table ar.d figure (overlayed on a cap',, both cf which shal?

provide the information requested in items 1 and 2, below. Additional material may be provided in associated text.

Recuired -In!cr.mation

1. .Two time estimates are requested in each of the areas defined in item 1 for a general evacuation of the pcpulation (not including special facilitics). A best estimate is required and an adverse weather estimate is required for movecent of the population. .

y

2. The total time required to evacuate spetial facilities (e.g. , ,,,7g S* O hospitals) within each area must be spacified (best estimate and and adverse weather).

e i

4-3

~

i

i. ~l N.

3. lhe' ti.oa rauf red fcc ccafirmation of evacuation should be indicated.

Ccnfir:::ation tices =sy consider special instructions .

to the. publ4c (e.g. , tying a handkerchief to a dear er gate to . .

indicate the cccupant has left the premises).

4. Mera plans and precpt nctificatica systems have not been put I

Mawh_.._ _

• in place for areas cut to about 10 miles, estimates of che times I

g aIA # ' ' ?.'

g 9 7, ,e,j..;j j rcquired to evacuate until such ecasures are in place for the

(( e

- - t

. ' #/ ~/ " - 1 exposure e -argency planning zone (E?Z) shi:uld also be given.

• pe.

'e" to

',p e,-- A

,a,,'r. c.

Nctification times greater than 15 minutes should be included in the ctacuatien times and footnoted to indicate the notification tim 5, Where specisi evacuation problems are identified (e.;. , in high populatien density areas), the report shall specify alternative p*otteti te actions, such as sheltering, which n.culd reduce exposures ar.d the effectiveness of these measures.

6. 3 shcrt background document should be submitted giving the cetheds

' # /ihin' used to make the esticates and the asumptices made, including the routes and methods of transpcrtatien used.

Thisdocumentshou![

i

~ . . . Lno.kcue n - . ..

also note the agreement or areas of disagreement utth principal al.twraw local officials regar ding these estimates.

9 e

4-4.

w

l

~

r ENCLOSURE 2. .

[ p .'d' 'u / .

fi. -

.p;F .'

% Qn;p::

. %Cf: s. .'-

STATE OF NCW Yo.1x OtVISION O.* M8 LITANY AND Nr. VAL ArrA45tS Puotic sect mtv Bustmwo Starc campus AttAnv. Ncw YOew #2226 ge.gces t.. C AHl.y Ve T r) J. C A S T C t.a. At:0 m(mQsc . r*a cm(.thaut tsanf r or rvaa r Tr. f at osv*%+= '

l1:!CP 17 l'. arch 1980 Ifr. Richard A'. Strang Daputy Conraissione-Suffolk County Depe +. ment of Transporta tion 65 Jetson Lane s Hauppauge,llY 11787 y- EE: ' Your respon;c to Appendix 4, itUREG-0654/FEFA-REP-1 dated thrch 10, A. 1950.

Daar Com.issioner Strang:

Thank you for submitting the referenced for our revicu. Following are our comments: . .

.With regard to the " Format for Rtporting Information," it appears:

. (1) That some parts of the EPZ area within a circle of about 10-miles radius are not included in the response. Such as parts of Section K, L and 0; . (2); .in makina estimates for the outer sectors, the inner adjacent two-mile sector of 1800 is not fully included in the response, as required by Appendix 4.

. - As per " Required Information" under #2, the total time required to evacuate special facilities within each area must be specified (best l estimate and adverse weather). The response as submitted does not show l the breakdown for evacuation time esticates between general population and speciali facilities as required. -

As per " Required Infor.r.ation"' under !3, the time required for confirmation of an evacuation should be indicated in the response.

-W

\

b . .

. .. . .,... .., . . . . .-. . . . . . . . . . . - . '- . . . . . . . . . . - - . ~ .

g * '

9 y

a , . i .

9

. (.'

- lW DP -

17 P. arch 1980 lh .: Richard A.; Strang -

Page 2

- .tlitir regcrd to the adverse weather time estiestes, it is rot indicatt:d-ho.( these the'es timates have been a: rived at either by using decreased levels of service and ranc capacity or having . local knuciledge of areas

- and .; hat e ffccts bad weather condi tions as tiis speci fied heavy rain or

-light-sno1 will have on road capacities.

If we can bcLof any further assistance, please do not hesitat2 to' call.

. Sincerely,-

k *E' g,C p 4a c.' -

CASE ROTTEVEEL

~

Associate Planner tiuclear Civil Protection *

. . Planning ec:a f

\

cf: R. Hershowitz .

/

. eem 9 O

• t * .

s . . . - . -

4 . . . e =~

• g .. . . . .[* .. . = * +- , . . . .

M g e

. *- .,M 4

. e 9

1. g b 4

0 0

+ W D a * = # "

- e

_ . . . - .E - . _

( C L::N i : v: c :: : v~r, l

. ENCLOSURE 3 -

1. C.m,% .4 .

pW S 7.::e .

e.%@~?f

%.7 #

DEPARTMENT OF TR ANSPORTATION

- - March 27,19E0 '

Mr. Case ?.otteveel, Associate Planner

-Nuclear Civil ?rctection Planning State of ::aw York

• Divisica cf Military and i'aval Affairs Public security Building -

State CE ;us Altiany, i:ea.Ycrk 12225 ,

Dear Mr. Rotteveel:

This rejoinder is in re: pense to the receipt of ycur letter dated March 17, 1920 cutiining your coc ents in icgard to this Department's respcnse to Appendix 4 of NUREG-0554/FEtG-REP-1.

fiith r regard to your initial cbservation that some sections are encocpassed within a ten mile radius of the site ar.d yet are not included in the zcnes comprising cur EPZ, we would like to rake you at;are that this is by no ceans a transgression of the guidelines establish 3d in NUREG-0EE4/FE!!A-REP-1. Specifically, we draw ycur attention tc page 9 of the aforccantioned coctr ent wnica invcives a discussion cf the Dasis for c:ercency planning. This particular section distinctly states that .

the determination of the- size of the EFZ is judgmental and subjact to interpratatien by the planning agency in its effort to assure adequate response. It reiterated this point by asserting that the task force selected a radius ct "about ten miles '.

Therefore, we would like to point out that the initial exclusion

• of these sections adjacent to :enes K,.L and 0 were neicher arbitrary nor an cversight, but rather; it reflected scund reasoning cnd a deter-minatica based cn olan7ing princi;:les and site-scecific characteristics.

However, while the preliminary repert did not indicate thcse secticns as part of the EPZ, they have since been accc=cdatec and will be in-cl~uded in the final report issued by tnis Departr.enz.

1' . i As for -the _ implied exclusien of. the -inner two-nile 120 sector in

~the for:Jiation of the outer sector time estimates, in actuality, nc )

, cc'.issica has been made. The time estima:e of 10.5 hcurs (12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> under adverse conditicas) represents the maximira time necessary to evacu-ate all :enes cc=prising the EPZ.- ,

n i

1 es anon 4)NC e H AurPAUCC, NEW % CN4 91747 e (31 4 0 8*2422 ,

r i - .

1 .

~

,/

In reference to the Appendix 4 requirement of sutaittirg an inde peradent breakdown for evccuation time estimates regarding specialfa An.examinatica of the inventoried data cor.tained within the report

• clearly dcnotes thct all special facilities (cajor ec.cloyers, recreational areas, nursir.g heres, etc.) have teen censidered and included in the time esticates for the zones.in which they are located. It is obvious that ~

devel'oping indi.idual time tables segregating residential and special facilities, which icgically wculd not be evacuated indepencer.tly, is not The only facilities caly unnecessarily time censumir.; but unproductive.

which demand preferential attention, by nature of the scecial circtestances they represent, are the schools. They will be addressed in the final report after ccaferring with the schooi districts involved, f Regarding ccnfirmation tires, these were not included specifically due to the fact tha't the exact cethodology for achieving such confirmation has Consideration has been civen to yet to be determined and/cr agreed upon.the 'use of external indicators identifying t vacated, hc.ever such a cethcd situitanecusly designates these residences as potential targets for icoters and vandals, and increases their suscepti-bility to depredation. While this concept has not been totally abanconed, we are currently pursuing alternate approaches to minimize such disadvantages.

Until such time as the methedolcgy bectmes a certainty, we are reluctent to Particularly, since any uritten statement of estimate ccnfirmation times.

times may be subject to substantial revision at a later date depending cn the approach utiliced, we feel a premature estimateAscculd bewe such, misicading elected toand caitcon-ceivably jeopardize the validity of the plan.

this infcrmaticn until we can make a responsible and professional assessment of confirmation times.

Our las't response addresses the criteria used by this Department in -

g.

• - determining adverse weather time estimates. These evacuatica tices were k derived on the basis of this Capartment's expertise and excerience in trans-portation and its familiarity with the area and road network involved.

Ue sincerely hcpe this clarifies any outstanding issues regarding our response to Appendix 4. 0/

- A

. ery truly your ,,

.. LNIh 1.b.a-

,3 g r Richard A. Strang

~ Deputy Cc missioner \ _

. RAS:df o

F 4

e e .

COUNTY Oi SUFFOLK ENCLOSURE 4

. e .

• s th  !

T"iwOf ikb-PCEP F. COHALAN courew encurwe DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNC35 WILL AH E. REGAf4 crescron March 18, 1990 Mr. Alan !!elson Long Irland-Lighting Ccmpany 175 East G'.d Country Road HickcVille , !!ew York 11801 Dear A~-1 In respons_e to 2:UREG-0654/ FEMA-REP 1, Appendix 4, Suffolk Ccunty Department of Emergency Preparedness submits the attached document.

This document-was prepared utilizing the criteria set forth in ths aforementioned appendix titled: " Request For Evacuation Tirce Estimates (after notification)

For Areas 1: ear !!nclear Power Plants."

Should y

• have any questions, please feel free to contact this department at any time.

.A Yours truly, K L'

'.&)2{\(

Witriam E. Regan Director Department of Emergency Preparednest.

i WER/jen Enc.

e  : V A>+448. C.k Ew YO*M t 19 60 m (S t S 9 24-44M -

- P C. dCt 127 -.