ML19345C224
| ML19345C224 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1980 |
| From: | Cosby J, Sheppard W, Waters E WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012040171 | |
| Download: ML19345C224 (49) | |
Text
. . . . .-
'/-f VOLUME IV l
AN l l
INDEP E \ DENT ASS ESS V EN-~ l OF EVACJATION T;WES FOR EN RICO FERMI
.N C _ EAR POW ER ? _A N'-
Prepared for FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
, =
l f?nz 9fillan SPmi/4 and Asacciales JUNE,1980 ,
I 8 012040 j 7f g
e ..
ACKNCWLEDGE. VENT The independent assessment of the evacuation ti.us contained in this repor*: was performed under the technical directicn of John C. Cosby. Mr. William V. Sheppard, Vice President, was the Principal-in-Charge of the Project. The principal centributors to the individual volumes of the report were:
Volume ! - Procram Report - Jchn C. Cosby Volume II - Bailly - James R. Sancro f t Volume III - Beaver Valley -
Richard A. Day volume IV - Enrico Fermi - Elbert L. Waters Volume V - Lime rick - George S . Coulter, Jr.
Volume VI - Maine Yankee - Robert P . Jurasin Volu.e VII - Midland - James R. Bancrof t and Elbert L. Waters Volume VIII - Millstone - Frank LaMagna Volume IX - Shoreham - H. Dean Browner Volume X - Three Mile Island - Welbourne E. Thompson All reports were revised and edited by Jchn C. Cosby and H . De an B rowner. All of the above perscnnel are ' permanent employees of Wilbur Smith and Associates.
l 2
i
? ,*. i l
l 1
I TABLE CF CONTENTS PAGE IN*RCDUC" ION 1 Evacua::icn Time Assessment Versus Evacuation Plan 2 General Assumpticns 3 Major Population Centers d Licensee 9 Type of Plant 3 Emergency Planning Area 8 Support Crgani::atiens 11 Sur-nary of Emergency Planning 12 Av.A CHARACTERISTICS 13 Topography 13 Metecr:1cgy 13 Demcgraphy 14 CCNCEPT OF EVACUATION 20 Notification of Evacuation 20 Public Respense Time 21 Evacuation Link /Nede Network 22 Special Transportation Requirements 34 Sector Evacuation 34 EVACUATION TIME ASSESSMENT 35 Normal
- Workday 35 Nighttime Condit: .1 38 Summertime Recreation Peak 38 Adverse Weather 38 i
e e LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FOLLOWS FIGURE ' TITLE PAGE 1 Study Site Location 7 2 Special Problem Areas, Upper Right Quadrant 18 3 Special Problem Areas, Lower Left Quadrant 18 4 Special Problem Areas, Upper Left Quadrant 18 5 Evacuation Network, Upper Right Quadrant 22 6 Evacuation Network, Lower Left Quadrant 22 7 Evacuation Network, Upper Left Quadrant 22 LIST OF T.ABULATIONS TABLE TITLE PAGE 1 -Schools and Enrollment 15 2 Jails, Parks, other Facilities 18 3 Populations by Jurisdiction Within 10-Mile EP:: 19 4 Network Cescription 23 5 Vehicles on Each Link, Normal Weekday 28 6 Evacuation Route Link Node Description by Centroid 31 7 Evacuation Times by Centroid 36 11
.- i INTRODUC"'ICN An independent assesemnt of evacuation times around nine nuclear pcwer plant site ~, tas made for the Federal Emergency j Management Agency. The results of this three-menth study are cen-tained in ten volumes, as fo11cws :
Volume I - Program Report - Evacuation Time Assessment of Nine Nuclear Pcwer Plant Erargency Planning Icnes (EPI's)
Volume II - Bailly Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume III - Beaver Valley Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume IV - Enrico Fermi Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume V - Limerick Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume VI - Maine Yankee Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuatien Tire Assessment Volume VII - Midland Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuation Time i Assessment Volume VIII - Millstene Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume IX - Shoreham Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuaticn Time
, Assessment l
l
[
Volume X - Three Mile Island Nuclear Pcwer Plant i Evacuation Time Assessment In addition, an Executive Senary is also available.
This volume contains the evacuatien times assessment for Enrico Fermi Nuclear Pcwer Plant. The evaluation of fcur scenarios and the discussi=n of evacuatien of special preblem r
i
, . _ . , , . , . _ , . -.-..,r.. , m. _ . _ . , _. , _ _ _ - , . ..,,_.r.,_.,, -
.y, ,.+. _ ,,y , , - ,. .
areas are included. The scenarios evaluated are those expec*ad when evacuation takes place at night (the optimum time from the standpoint of evacuation time), during a normal workday, during bad weather (the worst case condition), and, where applicable, the evacuation with summertime resident and transient population. ;
Evacuatien Time Assessment Versus Evacuatien Plan The assessment empicys available demographic data and trans-portatien facility information to predict the public response time to an evacuation warning en the assumptien that such a warn-ing is made within 15 minutes of an en-site nuciear incident warranting such emergency actien.
The assessment must provide for estimates of public respense time to these warnings, asse=bly of f=M ly and other groups, preparation for depar* e , travel time en the network including censideration .cf capacity limitatiens en the network possibly forming queues which add to delays, and clearance of the 10-mile ,
radius arcund the site. It must consider the evacuatien of special preblem areas and groups. These would include schools, nursaries, nursing and retirement homes, hospitals, penal f aciliv.ies , beaches and recreational areas, and other activities which may provide !
periodic or seasonal concentrations of pecple. Pcpulation groups witbout access to their own transportatien or unable to previde the special transportation facilities required for evacuation must be included in the evacuation time assessment.
Ivacuation time assessment methodology combines selected techniques of traffic management and planning, land use planning and operatienal analysis. Because some conf.itiens prevailing during an evacuation are not well documented, =odifications to I
em e
- _=. _. . . . - . .-. - .__-- . - _ .
e v some established' principles may be required to meet evacuation requirements. Assumptions may be required in lieu of well formu-lated relationships because of the highly specialized problems being addressed. These assumptions must be founded on best pro-fessional judgement and/or extrapolation from existing knowledge.
The assumptions must be specifically identified. The bases upon
- which the assumptiens are founded should be appropriately dis-1 cused.
Evacuation time assessments contain basic methodology common to evacuation plan development. However, the assessment is not an evacuatien plan. The major distinction between the assessment 4
and a plan is the extent to which the elements have been coordi-
)
nated with all participant agencies and jurisdictions. For example, the assessment may assume that a specific traffic ;
management element is established to cptimize traffic operations at a specific location alcng an evacuation network. The feasi-bility of such an element in the assessment would be based upcn established technical principles. Ecwever, the element would not be coordinated with specific law enforcement agencies to i establish what agency would exercise the element control and management nor identify the type and number of persennel. to be required. The study time allotted makes such coordination im- ,
pcssible. The assessment must identify what is required for j the evacuation time to be realized, and assume that such an element would be implemented.
General Assumptions In the assessment of evacuation times , cartain general assumptions were mandatory. More important of these are summa-rized as follows:
f
- 1. Imergency evacuatica of Cu general public from the IPZ will be performed largely from the home by the family as a united i
. . . - - . , , . , . pg.. ,- - , . . . ... .n._, , .n. . , -
t i III group. This assumption is prefaced by the folicwing quote:
. . . people will not evacuate an area, regardless of the danger, if their family group is separated, unless they know that members of their f amily are safe , accounted for, and that arrangements have been made for them to evacuate." It was felt that this psychological pressure is so prevalent and streng that the above assumptien appears to be justified. In addition, to assure that segments 'of the family are safe and accounted for would have
, required the establishment of shelter locatiens and the develep-ment of a shelter support plan. In view of the next ass u=ption and due to the short time period of the study, this was not done.
- 2. Public. use of shelters in previous mass evacuaticn exper-ience related to natural disasters appears to be a very small percentage of total evacuees. Examples cited i$ literature include : (2) "In a California flood, only 9,260 out of 50,000 perscns evacuated registered in the 38 Red Cross shelters ; during Hurricane Carla, 75 percent of the evacuees went to other than public shelters; and during Hurricane 3etsy, enly 20 percent requested assistance. Generally, shelter centers are used only if nothing else is available or if cne cannot financially care for himself." In this evacuatien time assessment study, it was assumed that the predominant traffic, af ter leaving the 10-: rile IP , went diverse routes rather than to a shelter destination.
Therefore, the evacuation time assessment ended at the EPZ boundary. An analysis of route capacities and service levels ;
1 of highway facilities beyond that boundary was made to assure j that delays or problems were unlikely to occur.
(1) EVACUATION RISKS - AN EVALUATICN, U.S. Environmental Pro-taction Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, EPA-520/6 002, June, 1974, p. 49.
(2) Ibid. , p . 52.
l
- 3. Experience gained in a large range of evacuations indi-cates 2at private vehicles I3I " . . . were the predeminant mode for avacuation (more than 99 percent) . Population density ranged frca approximately 15 persens per square mile to 20,000 persens per square mile. " It was assumed that this was applicable to this time assessment study. It was further assumed that persens without private vehicle transportation would be provided, at
, their telephene request, adequate transportation in high occu-pancy vehicles (EOV's). The additicnal vehicle volumes en the network would therefore be small, could be affected during the general public evacuation time, and would not affect the computed evacuation times of the general population.
- 4. It has been cbserved that not all persons will evacuate the EP . "In many cases, even when presented w$.th a grave threat, pecple refuse to evacuate."I4I This scurce centinues , "Results of this study indicate that approximately six percent of the total pcpulatien refused to evacuate. Other reports indicate this figure can run as high as 50 percent. There is no reasen to believe that because the disaster agent is radiation rather than some other agent . . . will provide sufficient motivation to leave. Rather the opposite viewpcint should be taken--people will hesitate t1 le ave . . ( 5 ) It is believed that a majority of this hesitance is based en fear of exposing their property to looting and vandalism. Notwithstanding this evidence, this time assessment study assumed that all persons evacuate.
- 5. It has been assumed that the traffic network within the EPZ has been isolated so that no through traffic is permitted to enter it within 15 minutes af ter the evacuatien warning has been issued.
(3) Ibid., p. 52.
(4) Ibid., p. 48.
(5). Loc. cit.
- ,-,,--- ,,,--- ----e .w-, - , ,m, - - . ~ - - - - ,-,,-mem
l l e i l
l 6. Traffic management by appropriate law enforcement officers will be performed at selected intersections where evacuation traffic flow is given priority.
- 7. All persons in the EPZ have been provided, in advance, sufficient information regarding the assigned evacuation route from their place of residence (referred to as the " centroid" in the report) .
- 8. It was assumed that the public respcnse to an evacuatien order can be defined as a combinaticn of up to four categories of statistically distributed respenses : receive warnine, leave work, travel home, and evacuate heme. It was assumed that these responses are time-distributed fo11cwing a normal distributien curve. The details and applicatiens of this assu=ptien are more fully discussed later in this report.
Additional assumptiens were made which are summari:ed at the back of the report under this heading.
This secticn presents the general regional characteristics which surround the Enrico Termi Nuclear Pcwer Plant; in particular, the intensity of land use and develcpment, peculaticn and popula-tien centers, majer transportation facilities , planning :enes, parks, beaches and recreational areas.
Major Poculaticn Centers Within the 10-mile radius, there are 10 urbanized areas repre-sentine an estimated resident populatica of approximately 86,999.
The folicwing ec=munities are within 10 miles of the plant:
i :
l l
)
t l
1
, s 1
1 l
1985 Poculatien Stony Point 900-Estral Beach 354 Woodland Beach 800
, Detroit Beach 3,202 Monroe (closest point) 13,011 Scuth Monroe 14,112 Rockwood 3,295 South Reckwood 1,451 Carleton 1,577 Pattersen Gardens (west of Monroe) 2,397 The city of Monroe and the villages of Estral Beach, South i
Rockwood and Carleton are the only incorporated ccm. unities.
Plant T.ccation - The Enrico Fermi Nuclear Pcwer Station is located on the western shore of Lake Erie at Lageona Beach, Frenchtown Township, Monroe County, Michigan. It is approxi-mately 30 miles southwest of downtown Detroit, Michigan, and about 25 miles northeast of downtown Toledo, Ohio. Figure 1 shows the general locatien of the Fermi site and the surrounding areas within 10 miles of the site. The coordinates of the Fermi 2 reactor containment structure are 41 57'48" north latitude end 83 15'31" west longitude.
The political boundaries of the site is located at the eastern edge of Monroe County, in the southeast corner of the State of Michigan. The county extends about 10 miles north, 25 miles west, and 25 miles scuthwest of the site. The communities of Estral Beach, Stony Point, Detroit Beach, Weedland Beach lia along the lakeshore within five miles of the site. These communities are in part summer resorts and in part permanent residential areas. The nearest is Stony Point, one to two miles south of the plant, along the lakeshore. The land within five
e <
~
l
- e - m i . .; s i
, a u' -aox &f 9
).
[ f ig
(
j g
_ = . ... . - - ,
.f "lb ' ld hb0 ]
. , / .,
/ T, ,\~\
l' y N i
] s a
- / (6 .
a s I n
-L/Ag4, x ,
t _-- #
, 4 - / r'
. / .
, .. ... : 1, 1 . a_.
~ .'
[ i .. (.. & '
% f.
/ j ,1-.::,=,-~~
t:
, [\C /n, \,
ls w orw-
- a. .t ,
/
/ \
N5
~
s
( d j .!~. 4
+
l +
+
/N/ ,.
,,, , l / '.
La sA LI pf j N ..
STUDY SITE LOCATION EVACU ATION TIME ASSESSMENT ENRICO FERMI ed / a _- ricypg ,
o a miles of the plant is primarily agricultural. This excludes the aforementioned communities and the small Newport-oldport residential area to the west.
Licensee The Detroit Edisen company of Detroit, Michigan is the licensee which cperates the 1,120-acre site facility. The archi-tects and engineers that designed the facility are Sargent and Lundy, Inc. and Oetroit Edison. Parsens Construction Ccmpany built the first facility from 1969 through 1974. Oaniel Ccnstruc-tien Ccmpany started construction cf the facilities in 1975 en an ongoing basis.
Tyee of Plan:
The system at Enrico Fe=r.i consists of a bciling water reacter with a capacity of 1,023 megawatts of electrical cucput.
Erergency Plannine Area The Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) by definitien is the 10-mile radius around the plant site. Because the 10-mile radius is not recognizable en the ground, the study beundary approxi-
=ates the 10-mile radius by identifiable land = arks such as ri. vers , j urisdictional boundaries , =ajor roadways, and other well known tcpegraphical features. The 10-mile radius sur cunding Enrico Fermi encompasses all or pertiens of Men:ce and Wayne Ccunties. The EPS was established to adhere to a 10-mile radius surrounding the nuclear power plant as practical as pessible. These peripheral bcundaries will assist the local agen-cies implementing the plan and the pecple affected by evacuation to identify the 10-mile radius limit and avoid the pcssibility of evacuating people beyond the '10-mile radius.
l l
.g_
i i ,
l For areas within the 10-mile radius, townships were used as planning :enes. Figure 1 presents the EPZ boundaries, the 10-mile radius, and the townships.
The EPZ boundary along the northwest generally follows Free-land and Ash Roads, bisects the Toledo and Detroit Freeway and parallels Gilbrater Road 3/4 of a mile northeast.
Lake Erie bounds the eastern side of the EP:. The western side generally parallels 1 miles west of Exeter Road and bisects the intersection of Raisinville and Stewart Roads southwesterly.
The southern most boundary parallels Mortar Creek Road near Avalon Seach.
Major Transcortation Facilities - Two =ajor roads serve the area within a 10-mile radius of the plant. Interstate 75 and U.S. 24/25. These roads approach the plant at their clcsest point is 4.1 and 5.8 miles northwest of the plant site. See Figures 2 through 4.
Interstate I-275, a six lane highway, joins the Cetroit -
Toledo Freeway (I-75) approximately 4.5 miles northwest cf the plant site location. It extends northwesterly through Monroe County and connects with Interstate I-94 in Wayne County.
There are four Class I railroads located within the 10-mile EP I. The Cetroit and Toledo Shore Line Railroad, four miles to the northwest, serves the Fermi site through the use of a single spur track. This company operates a freight service only between Detroit and Toledo, Chio. At their closest approach to the plant, the other three lines (the Penn Central Railroad, the Chesapeake, and Chio Railroad, and the Detroit Toledo and Cronton Railroad) are four miles northwest, seven miles west-northeast, and nine Source: Enrioc Fermi, Unit 2, Environmental Report, Cetroit Edison.
Company.
-9
miles northwest, respectively. The rail cad yard in Monroe is the nearest ene to the plant. It is operated by the Penn Central Railroad and has a capacity of 230 cars.
There are four airports within 10 miles of the plant. The ,
ne arest is Marshall Field, two miles west of the plant. This is a small field with two sod runways, the longest being 1962 feet.
Three low level Federal Airways are within five miles of the Fermi site -- V297, V96, and V10-188.
Airway V297 is a 10 mila wide southeast to northwest corridor, which passes over the Fermi site. Airways V96 and V10-188 are 5.5 miles to the southeast and 4.5 miles north of the site, re-spectively. There are no major airports within the 10 mile EP;,
the closest are Cetroit Metropolitan and Willow Run, which are 19 miles north-northwest and 24 miles northwest of the plant, respectively.
The shipping port nearest the plant is the Port of Monroe.
Shipping traffic to this port is by means of an unchstructed channel, approximately 4.5 miles long, east-southeast from the head of navigatien cf the River Raisin to deep water in Lake Erie. The nearest approach of this channel is approximately six miles south of the plant. Shipping traffic to the Port of Monroe is minimal in compari-son to the traffic through the Detroit Rive r. In 1964 there were only six ccmmercial vessel trips inbound to the Port of Monroe as compared to 10,999 northbound and 9,693 southbound through the Detroit River.
The betroit River navigation channel connects to the West Cuter Channel anc the East Guter Channel in Lake Erie at a point approxi-mately seven miles northeast of the Ferni Plant. The majority of Detroit River traffic utilizes the East Cuter Channel. Traffic on the West Guter Channel has a five mile nearest approach to the plant.
Source: Enrico Fermi, Unit 2, Environmental Report, Oetroit Edisen Company
e t There are oil and natural gas pipelines in the envirens of the Fermi site. The natural gas distribution lines of the Michigan Gas Utilities Company are the nearest ' , the plant. Their clcsest approaches are approximately 1.5 miles south and two miles west of the plant. The vapor natural-gas transmission line of the Pan-handle Eastern Pipe Line Company passes ap'reximately 10 miles northwest of the plant. There are current y no other gas pipelines within 10 miles of the plant.
The oil-product lines of the Atlantic Richfield Comoany, five miles to the west, are the, closest oil pipelines to the plant.
Four other cil pipelines pass between six and eight miles north-west of the plant. Three are 6" to 12" cil products pipelines of the Pure Transportation Company, Sun Pipe Line Company, and the Buckeye Pipe Line Company; the fourth is a 6" to 22", crude oil pipeline of the Buckeye Pipe Line Company.
Support C.canizations In case of an e=ergency, close coordination between federal, state, and local agencies is imperative to provide the responsi-bility necessary to ensure implementation of an evacuatien plan.
Support agencies expected to coordinate activities in the Enrico Fermi area are:
- 1. Monroe City - County Office of Civil Preparedness
- 2. Michigan State Police - Emergency Services Jivisien
- 3. Men:ce County Sheriff Department
- 4. Michigan State Police Cepartment
- 5. Monroe County Road Comissien
- 6. Menrce County Health Cepart=ent
- 7. Mcnroe County Chairman of Tha Board of Cc::r.issicners
- 8. Monrce County Firaman's Association (President)
- 9. Nuclear Regulatory Ccemission
- 11. Detroit Edisen u
o e l
In coordination with the aforementioned agencies, the juris-dictional chiefs of all the areas near the site will also parti-cipate. They are as follows:
- 1. President of the Village of Carleton (Ashtcwn Tcwnship)
, 2. Superintendent of Burnett Tcwnship
- 3. President of the Village of South Rockwood
- 4. President of Village of Estral Seach i
- 5. Superintendent of Frencht=wn Tevnship
- 6. Superintendent of Raisinville
- 7. Mayor of the City of Monroe
- 8. Superintendent of Monroe Tcwnship
- 9. Superintendent LaSalle Township
- 10. Superintendent of Brownstewn Tcwnship
- 11. Maycr City of Flatreck
- 12. Mayor City of Rockwced
- 13. President of the Village of Gibraltar In addition 'the individual fire and police departments in these areas will also assist in the emergency evacuation.
Summarv cf Emer:encv Pla.ning An evacuatien =lan is being developed fer the Enrico Fermi site by the Men:ce City / County Office of Civil Preparedness.
Procaration is being made te develop an evacuation plan which will include input frem all agencies it, the area. The scheduled ccm-pletien date is for Cecember, 1980. Detroit Edisen is also pre-paring a plan. To date, this plan has not been completed.
Source: Monroe City / County Civil Preparedness Office, Men:ce, Michigan.
s ;
ARIA CHARACTERISTICS
! This section describes the area characteristics which surround Enrico Fermi, in particular, topegraphy, meteorology, demcgraphy (population by zone; school population; hospital population; prisen pcpulation; recreatien area occupancy) and the acergency planning zenes.
Tepocraphy The terrain in the regien of the Enrico Fermi site is characterized by flat plains, with the relief varying from 0 to 100 feet. More than 80 percent of the area is gently sicping. However, the actual size area is relatively flat and characterized by =arshlands.
Meteo roloey The Fermi site is located in the southeast icwer climatic district of Michigan on the western shcre of Lake Erie. The lake s=ceths out most climatic extremes with the most proncunced lake effect occuring in the coldest part of the winter when there is an excess of cicudiness and very little sunshine. The climate in the area alternates between semi-marine and continental.
Wind Cenditions and Climate - The prevailing winds are from the western sectors in winter. Periods of easterly winds (eff Lake Erie) and local lake breezes modify temperatures during summer months. The predeminate wind in the area is from the southwest, averaging approximately 10 M.P.H. The average afternoon (1:00 P.M.) relative humidity for the Fermi site area is 58 percent, and varies from 52 percent in May to 71 percent in December. The highest temperature recorded in the area was C
105 F and the icwest temperature recorded was -19CF, Source: Enrico Fermi Unit 2, Environr. ental Report, Detroit Edisen Ccmpany.
- s. .
Precipitation - The Fermi site area receives an average of 31.15 inches of precipitation per year, with 56 percent occurring between the months of May and cetober. Minimum amount. of preceipitation generally occur during the winter months (December, January, and February) and average approxi=ately 2.0 inches per month. Maximum amounts of precipitation generally occur during the summer months (June, July, and August) and average approxirately 3.0 inches per month. The mean annual snowfall in the area is 33.7 inches.
Democrachy Demography data was collected for the EPZ by Township and County to identify population and other pertinent factors which affect evaluation. Township and County were used as planning districts; hcwever, in =any instances the planning :enes were subdivided to avoid overloading of the roadway network. When this occurred, the subzones were divided by some easily identi-fiable basis to permit the assign =ent of persons residing in these areas to a logical and definite evacuation route. Table 3 presents the population to be evacuated by county and political jurisdicticn within each county. The total number of schocis and enrollment located within the 10-mile radius is presented in Table 1. The recreation area occupancy and jails are presented in Table 2. Figures 2, 3 and 4 show the location of the areas referenced in the tables.
There are two hospitals located within the 10-mile radius; Mercy and Memorial Hospitals. Mercy Hospital is located en Macomb Street and Memorial Ecspital is located 3 miles nor.hwest 1
on Stewart Road. The total number of patients for both facilities is 180. The staff population is 400. In case of an emergency, the patients would be evacuated by ambulances.
EP Poeulation - The IP: includes municipalities in two i
counties . There are seven townships and seven towns / cities.
These jurisdictions along with their 1985 pcpulatien are shewn in Table 3.
[ !
t
s .'
TABLE 1 SCHCOLS AND ENRCLLMENT ENRICO FERMI Monrce County Scheels Grades Enrollment
- 1. Carleten Elementary K-4 200 (Airport) 12610 Harris St.
- 2. Loren E. Eyler School K-6 401 1535 Carleton-Rockwced Rd.
- 3. Airport Sr. High School 10-12 733 11270 Graften Rd.
Edith M. Waqar Jr. 6-9 752 11270 Graften Rd.
- 4. St. Patrick 1-8 211 2970 W. Labo Rd.
- 5. Holy Ghost Lutheran K-8 92 3563 Heiss
- 6. Raisinville Elementary K-6 636 2300 N. Raisinville Rd.
- 7. Mancr Eler<antary K-6 480 1731 W. Lcrain -
- 8. "cnroe Sr. High Schcol 10-12 2,005 901 Herr
- 9. Waterico K-6 349 1933 S. Custer
- 10. Riverside Elementary K-6 275 77 N. Roessler
- 11. St. Mary Academy 9-12 441 502 W. Elm St.
- 12. St. Michael 1-8' 254 510 W. Front
- 13. Catholic Central High 9-12 369 109 W. Elm
- 14. S t. Mary Parrish Schec' T-8 350 151 N. Monrce
- 15. Zion Lutheran K-8 120 186 Cole Rd.
Table 1 (Continued)
Monroe Co. (cont'd.)
Grade Enrollment
- 16. Hollywced Elementary K-6 344 1135 Riverview
- 17. Cantrick Jr. High 7 627 1008 Riverview
- 18. Christiancy Elem. 1-6 334 306 Linccin Avenue
- 19. St. John's K-8 280 4
521 S. Mon:ce St.
- 20. Monroe Jr. High 8-9 1,412 503 Washingten .
- 21. Trinity Lutheran K-8 271 315 Scott St.
- 22. Linccin Elementary pK-6 430 908 E. Secend "t.
- 23. S. Men:ce Townsite Elem. K-6 329 15489 Eastweed
- 24. Hurd Elementary K-4 600 1960 Hurd Rd.
- 25. St. Anne's K-S 98 2400 N. Oixie Hwy.
- 26. Harcid F. Scd K-4 600 2888 Nadeau
- 27. Jeffersen Middle Scheci 5-8 900 5102 N. Steny Creek
- 28. Jeffersen High Schcol 9-12 850 5710 Williams
- 29. Henry G. Neidermeier Elem K-5 250 8400 S. Newport Rd.
- 30. Joseph C. Sterling Elem. K-6 346 160 Fessner
- 31. Fred W. Ritter Elem. K-6 408 5650 Carleton-Rockwced Rd.
Table 1 (Continued)
Wayne County Grade Inrcilment
- 1. Flat Rock High Scheci 9-12 380 28639 Division St.
- 2. Evergreen Elementary K-5 500 28300 Evergreen
- 3. Simesen Middle Scheci 6-3 350 24900 Meadows
- 4. John M. Barnes Elem. K-5 390 24925 Meadows
- 5. Chapman Elementary K-6 451 31500 Olmstead
- 6. St. Mary's 1-7 198 32477 Church
- 7. Hunter Elementary K-6 758 21320 Roche
- 8. Parsens Elementary K-6 462 14473 Gibralter
- 9. Carlesen Sr. High 9-12 1,168 30550 W. Jeffersen i Shumate Jr. High 7-8 555
- 10. Barrew Elementary K-6 267 33211 McCann 4
17-v -4 + , - - - -
s ,
TABLE 1 JAILS, PARKS, OTEIR FACILITIES ENRICO FERMI Jails Monroe County Jail 56 in=ates Nike Park 208 acres facilities: 4 sof tball diamends 4-wheel drive motocross archery range picnic areas Total development: 1995 w/750 total parking spaces maxi =um 4 cf pecple 9 any one time - 3,500 for a recent anti-nuke ralley.
Heck Park 15 acres Facilities: 2 baseball diamceds Fully developed 1980 w/ maximum parking for 280 vehicles and 750 people.
Flat Rock Speedway Stands seat 2,500 - 3,000 total attendance Asphalt track, 1/4 mile. Races every Saturday night 6:00 p.m. -
10:30 p.m. 20 heats / night. 350-400 people in infield in pits.
Sterline State Park public park 1,200 acres parking spaces 1,500 spring weekday - 800 - 1,000 cars (3,500 people)
=ummer weekend - 2,000 cars (6,000 people) after labor day - 200 cars en weekend 50 cars en weekday i
l -la-
man - - . , , '
$j /gg' .$g li'. P' . ,s.;
Ae l s se .'. t a i 7 ,
\ j ,
'd NE5 0s W ' ' ' b~ .
eq sfr P-v t T ' r
's ,.
l i ,
, .j .
.~
", 8/ >Q .h A -
\
s se /
' 'N.'. \j) (\ ~' ,
i e s-37 s-u
- )
V% -
a
\,
'%lk a ~ . %\
+
! f[o \ ,
'L ! N
\
~1 p
!Q d
%iU
- n '-
Lz , Q 'u T.
N.
5 i- \.
' & 'qgg21g} 9 3 L I N d '# >
'\
T u .
~:l&**
l J \ \
/ '\
a {
E s t r &*3I a c i
- N b I
/
- 2=4Y
/
f v4
/
g 1 ,
i ) !
LEGENO:
s - sCHCCLs NS - NURSEMY SCHCCLS j ..
. . . ..' k _
[p m H - MCSP1TALS _ _ ,
. _,C AN - ADULT NURslNG MCMES cua:mant noas b J - ; AILS 3 '
-2 2 l wt!S SPECIAL PROBLEM ARE AS ENRICO FERMI Eeacuation Time Assessment Stucy l
w4 J A w .4 ,4 8' GUAR 2
l \ /
l h f I' :
l N / , 'f M s 4^
F R E (N / 'C / B' T i
\
/
0 \'mW' N 27 ,
1
/ s-2si,, N
{/ ,
/ >
/[ 4.g s.24 -
k /DE 45 5' woo 4,3 Seac' f
/ //
//
j')', / bF
- %js-s,\.,
t 7
s
\/
b .s Y & a s-25 /
eQ !: i
=. ., i
,-t y ' " * ,
.r. ,.,
%s . ._ , . .
i
/.' s, S J.4 ' %
/
E 5-21 %/
3-23 S.-20 g (s '~
/ '4 7 %
o w i u
% g _~
G H ~-
%-- \
( a %:5'f
% /
' 54( 's /
/ 's j b ism Beach LA SALLE/ 1
/
/
/
l
/
i l
/ ..-
LEGEND: i l f S - SCHCCLS , , _ _ - - - - - -
NS - NURSERY SCHOOLS .U -
H - MCSPITALS _. ". 'i
. \-
AN - AOULT NUR$1NG MCuES '/
cyaonauf mcgx 3 , ,
J - JAILS
, j i
SPECIAL PROBLEM AREAS ENRICO FERMI Evacuation Time Assessmert Study
+,,A./ S s t ricuns a
j # [, I 4 %
i vs qp.m O I l s' ~ M -- _ ;i H U R 0 N ~'l /Ms 33
/h(-/
i , -
i
- (
l,
. ,s 5 s-32R ,
v ^ N. E f'.
n.,n. I I N i s-s<
uonto Ca Co i l
[!,/' ._
I
~
E E s-35 g.36 I
fi =r
' ^
e i /
I I '
i i
_ \j/ /
- y 3-37
'l 4 N 1 s-2 . b!
i
= 1 s-si %,,Aui. -
i m i 7 ./.,.i n l
/ @==
i /s;-' A S H /
l, i
i !
I s-so l 1 a j -
ss '
l a i I
s-4 j e
/
I T' i
! B E R L l' '_.____-____------ ^ .-/
/ ----
i l
ll y =
,5
/ \
~
! L _ __ _ /J-1$_ , ,
3-s ! .
t E. )
') ,
[ I i
N
! t Qn
,/ L _ _ _ _ _ _ q-g"g 5-4 v .=
, l l
' l I
7N
/ F R E N
/
[ b0 Nm'N \
\'/'
LEGENO: - '
x 3 - SCNCCLS g- ;N_n:- " a NS - NURSERY SCNCCLS
- M - MCSPf7ALS T
_ b, AN - 40 ULT NURStNG MCMES Quaomant,moex 3 , ,
J - JAILS 3 SPECIAL FROBLEM AREAS ENRICO FERMI Evacua tict) Time Assessment Study
-%4=< E na sad .due ed.o WrGuRE e
l
)
l Table 3 POPULATION SY JURISDIC'" IONS WITHIN 10-MII.E IP:
ENRICO FERMI Jurisdiction Peculation Monree County Ash TG 4,861 Berlin TWP 5,452 Frenchtown TG 22,449 Men:ce TG 6,290 Raisinville TWP 50 Exter TWP 115 TOTAL 39,217 Men:ce City 21,513 (Includes Scuth Men ce)
Carlaten City 1,577 South Rcckweed City 1,451 Estral Beach City 354 TTAL 24,895 Wayne County Brownstewr. T@ 7,073 Rockwced 3,295 Gibraltar 3,485 Flatrcck 9.024 TCTAL 15,804 GRAND TOTAL 86,989
e e*
CONCEPT OF IVACUATICN The concept of evacuation in this assessment of the Enrico Fermi evacuation times assumes that everyone in the ten-mile 4
radius will be evacuated outside of that ten-mile radius. There is no assessment of the time to evacuate within the two- or the five-mile radius. It is assumed that all people that live within the ten-mile radius will be evtcuated along a specified route kncwn to them. The evacuation time will include the time from notification until the last vehicle c sses the ten-mile radius.
Notification of Evacuatien There are two distinct events which are necessary to initiate the evacuation. One event is the direct notificatien of public agencies, schools, major employees and other locations of large pcpulation concentrations. The second event is the r
dissemination of the evacuation warning to the general population.
Both of these events must include instruction regarding the sectors to be evacuated. The first event is assumed to be accomplished by telephone frem the Emergency Operating Center to the af fected group. Ideally, the second event would be implemented by a public warning system, which would combine an acoustical warning system by sirens or horns, supplemented by instructions over selected radio and television Broadcast stations. In the particular site, no advanced system of this type is in place. Therefore, the predeminant mode of this notification is by use of vehicles and helicopters with mounted-loudspeakers. A specified message frem these vehicles would indicate that an evacuation has been recommended and to turn on their radios for additional information. Radio stations must be provided with complete, accurate and current information.
They should have prior :ene descriptions and repeat recommended routing information. There should be phone numbers available for individuals te call shculd these people recuire special evacuatien assistance er additional information.
F Public Response Time There can be up to four activities preceding the evacuatien from the home wh3 th can be statistically distributed in time:
(1) Receive warning, (2) Leave work, (3) Travel home, and (4)
Ivacuate home. Each cf the response ti=es may have different dis-j tributions, depending upon the particular scenario being assessed.
Receipt of Notification - Receipt of notification is assumed i 1
to approach a normal distribution in time; therefore, the accumu- ;
lated probability app: caches an "S" curve. This distribution !
can be approximated by three straigh lines. Cne line, passing
- through the 50 percent, 16 percent and 84 percent distributions ,
l represents two time increments. One straight line from zero to 16 percent represents one time increment. The third straight
, line frcm 84 to 100 percent represents one ti=e increment. It is assumed that the time increments are five minutes, so the total time for receipt of notification is 20 minutes.
This distributien =eans that 16 percent will have been notified within the first five minutes, 50 percent will have been notified in ten minutes, S4 percent will have been notified I in 15 minutes, and 100 percent will have been notified in 20 minutes. (See Volume I for more detail. )
Departure From Place of Work - Departure frem the place of work is assumed to approach a normal distribution curve in the same manner as 4.ceipt of notification. Distribution is approxi-mately by three straight lines and four five-minute time increments.
The . distribution assumes that 16 percent will depart frcm their place of ' work in five minutes, 50 percent will depart in ten minutes , 84 percent will depart in fif teen ~ minutes, and 100 percent will depart in twenty minutes (see volume I for = ore detail). i i
l l
1 j
i
1 j
i Travel Frcm Work to Home - The time of travel to the hcme approaches no:: mal distribution et time in the same manner as the two previous respenses. Under normal conditions this i distribution assumes that 16 percent will travel to home in five minutes, 50 percent in ten minutes, 84 percent in fifteen minutes, and 100 percent will travel to home in twenty minutes.
This distribution is expanded in certain scenarics, specifically that of the adverse weather scenario.
4 Departure Frem Ecme - Departure frem home also approaches
! a normal distribution in time and the accumulated pr bability approaches an "S" curve. The distributien is approximated by three straight lines in the same manner as the above three respense. The activity is distributed over eight five-minute periods for a total of 40 minutes. The distributica indicates that eight percent will depart frem home in the first five minutes, 16 percent in ten minutes, 33 percent in fifteen minutes, 50 percent in twenty minutes, 67 percent in twenty-five minutes, 84 percent in thirty minutes, 92 percent in 35 minutes, and 100 percent will have departed home within forty minutes. (See Volume I for further details.)
Evacuation Link / Node Network The evacuation routes for each centroid has been manually ,
established and coded for computer evaluation. Figures 5 through 7 indicates the coded network and the evacuaticn route for each centroid.
Table 4 contains the network descriptions. The table contains two node numbers for each and of a given link, the distance between nodes in miles, the assumed speed for that link, its total capacity in vehicles per hour in the direction of evacuation, and the identity of the roadway. For example, l
- amm .- --
- s -.
f ,
'j-k f
k/
B ii.
,a' at? 1
'e i,
- A r .zu/ ,
,27 ios .as ' %~fs4 -
h, ~
' j'r ; Q',
n4 i
l 0)
D L..l$.v d.. .
~
s Q
~
- ' 42. E. :
C' 1.
"=7 iso 4 )) .
ils 'i2ed - , l j i o y, ,
)/y,,,,'F_ , \ .c,., !
' I ss o
ict
% .,/
s, ico ggjeck v
\
W
. y.
. s x.n.d. (.;g -\s sa A' Q o o
- ~'bg,C13 g ,-
\-
~a ios M \
/ -? \
i
/4 #
) \\
/ \.
&t A )
iori v ies:4 i x, i -
%- t
/
l f
i e 2:3 j, LEGEND: , .,
g a.e OENTROIO ANO NUWSER ::: - - %
- ser NCOE ANO NUMBER {
3"*"'" '"U'*
3 . ,
EV ACU ATION ACUTE _
3 o.u s l EVACUATION NETWORK
! ENRICO FERMI l
Evacuation T;me Assessment Study
- at J, A e.d a u t'GUAE S
l 1
156
' w.7, i'*
578 ,,I it' i
'* I 3:2 , .
d3 J 21 3
- 34. -
' ?"" e, "8 hMD$f[
- m. -
g,ws.gc- g..
.. m . s ....n ss
, . . 2
,, g
\ _ % ,g.
s ,,
,uana. ,0, l
,, n w o 3tS'% g.43 j ,
00 is7 99 C 20 7
- f g .
83 4 h
,Q,
^3 317 g
W A ^
N' 3 24! 2c.
y 31s ,f
/ Q'c s
'A' '
'$sion Beacn
/ 's
- r. ,A
/
/
/
/
s) .
r/' s LEGENO: j j O a-, CENTRCIO AND NUMBER --
d re >
- I42 NCOE AND NUMBEM g ;,L, .
EV ACU ATION ACUTT 3 '
? 3 WLIS EVACUATION NETWORK ENRICO FERMI Evacuation Time Assessment Stucy
! x.a 1 .a - m ai eoauaE ,
'& 7,
} l A N q~ . .
304
~
3T. ,
. . . W II )
CA [ 13'l CI'I I, i
g.3 _
~ Zi2 , C 12 4 l
\
'C G- 4 307 t 2]s s? ~~
O l'"
/ g.3 . ,
14 4 33 , ..
i-308 eau '62 ,
19 a
t,o n <
if 68 J l 30 631 M 018 s.3 Q
K -
10 0 l
'8_ ---c t 5 O i43 y
474 ee 2!e 210 ,39
.-G Q
ice -
,I , s I I J.4 'I \ !
, '2] f40 \ .go
(
1_-
1.
109 73 N M 11f L
L. g a
18 *i 2
'67
/.54 [ 'h \
,,.0 m og TS 9
M0 C"~~35 W+1 W -4 o f t_6 g.7,, 14 0
'" A 17s >7
?34 LEGENO: 6---a #
hIN,&..J ! \
CENTRCIO ANO NUMBER m ..
- a C 4*f ,
e 14 2 NCOE 4NO NUM8ER
\'-
QU ADR A NT 'Not X 0 ' ? 3 EV ACU A T!CN ROUTE wits EVACUATION NETWORK ENRICO FERMI l
Evacuation Time Assessment Study 44 1-a wd-a e,aune y
l TABLZ 4 NETWORK DESCRIPTION
--C:( CE 0:37 17:.0~ # Roadway Identity
.00 ;.; ;.40 !!.. ..;) Sig1er Road
- 01 1;2 ).!O *).0 I}a River Road
';2
. ;}3 :.:} 4. ) : 90 River Road
- )3 ;04 ..;) s.3 ;a0 River Road
- 24 ;
- 1.M 0.0 INO River Road
- ';5 I;J 3.40 e. ) IMe River Road
- 0s .$ ).3; H.J 3
- 00 Gibralter Road
- J7
- 08 1.70 I:.J .e00 Port Sunlight Road M9 ::0 :.to 4!.0 ::.;0 N. Dixie Highway
- 09 1;) 0.!0 45.0 J;0 N. Dixie Eighway 110 :11 4.70 45.0 1500 Dixie Highway
.11 112 0.10 4!.J ::co Huron River Drive
- 12
- 13 .40 ;'s. : !?0 Ramp (Det.-To. Frwy) 13 ::4 0.40 !0.J 000 Detroit-Toledo F #f
- 4 115 3.30 !J.0 4430 Detroit-Toledo Fr#f 115 :16 0 30 50 0 6 00 Detroit-Toledo Fr#f 1:4 101 0.10 50.J 400 Detroit-Toledo Fr*#f
- 7 ;11 1.10 40.3 .
- .00 Euron River Drive
- S
- 9 :.40 e.0 :.40. S. Euron River Drive
- 7
- 2 0.M '.) - ;!co Ramp (Dat. -To. Frwy)
,9 :3 3 30 e.0,o 4:-20 Detroit-Toledo F:wy
. .! :1: 0.!3 sa.) ' 00..
. Euron River Drive
- ;3 0.40 35.0
- 10 Gibralter Road J3 ::6 2.40 ;0.0 .!00 Ramp (Det.-To. Frwy)
.;4 ::: :.% !!.; . .v0 Gibralter Road
- 5 .d 2.;0 .
- !;0 Ramp (Det.-To . Frwy)
.:s ;;7 :.:0 ::.0 .... Fort Road
- ' .9
- .!0 !!.. .d0 Fort Road
- S 30
- 0.30 15.9 .w Fort Road 129 130 4.30 : . s
, wc0 Highway 24 130 131 0.70 50.0 49) Highway 24
- n 13
- 0.00 !0.0 s.+1. Hi9hW4Y 24
- 32 204 09) !0.0 4000 Highway 24
- 33 131 J.30 40.0 ;'.90 Huron River Drive
- 34
- n :.30 !O.) ;;10 N. Dixie Highway in 134 :.50 ! .) :!00 N. Dixie Highway
- 36
- 37 :.20 !3.) ;!00 N. Dixie Highway 137 ;;3 :.*0 40.J .000 Swan Creek Road
- 38 ;29 0.30 40.0 .
- 00 Swan Creek Road 139 140 0.44 20.J *!00 Ramp (Det.-To. Frwy)
- 40 tal ].40 !c.) anc; Detroit-Toledo Frwy w _- . -. - . -
Table 4 (Continued) 4a0K W K 0157 $7tI3 CAP Roadway Identity s
141 142 0.30 3.0 120 Ramp (I-275) 142 143 1 30 N.0 4900 I-275 143 144 3.70 10.0 $;00 I-275 144 304 1 10 50.0 3000 I-275 145 144 0.:0 N.0 1500 N. Dixie Highway ide 147 0.M 40.0 1000 N. Stony Creek Road 147 144 0.40 40.0 *000 Newport South Read 148 149 2.00 40.0 INC Newpcrt South Road 149 138 0.70 40.0 !?00 Newport South Rcad 1M 1:1 0.70 40.0 1500 N. Dixie Highway 151 152 2.30 40.0 1000 Nadeau Read 1:2 15303 3.0 1500 Ramp (Det.-To. Frwy) 1:3 !!4 1. M 30.0 4000 Detroit-Tolade Frwy 1:4 142 0.50 l0.0 1M0 Ramp (I-275) 155 I!d 1.40 40 0 1000 Viran Road 14 152 0.M 40.0 1000 Nadeau Road 157 13 1.50 45.0 1000 Carleton-Rockwood Road 158 ',.30 45.0 159 1000 Carleton-Reckwcod Rcad 159 144 0.30 M.0 1500 Ramo (I-275) 160 307 0.30 40.0 1000 Graitcn Road 141 142 0.20 25.0 ?!O Maxwell Road 162 308 0.40 40.0 1000 West Rcad 163 309 0.50 45.0 M00 Scofield-Carleton Rcad 164 165 0. 4 40.0 ING Hurd Rcad 165 144 1.M 45.0 N00 Highway 125 164 147 0 3 50.0 3000 Highway 24 147 lia 1.M 30.0 30C0 Highway 24 148 169 0.M 30 0 1000 Highway 24 149 143 0.M M.0 !!00 Ramp (I-275) 170 171 0.50 3:.0 N00 La Salle Road 171 164 2.00 M.0 ;MC Highway 24 172 167 3.M 40.0 1000 N. Stony Creek Road 173 174 2.00 40.0 1000 S. Stony Creek Read 174 175 1. 3 40.0 1000 S. Stony Creek Rcad 175 176 0.40 40.0 1000 S. Stony Creek Rcad 176 310 0.50 40.0 1000 S. Stony Creek Road 177 175 1.70 35.0 m Lahc Read 171 179 1 40 45.0 1000 Blue Bush Road 179 190 0.40 45.0 1000 Blue Bush Road 180 311 0.60 45.0 1000 31ue Bush Read 191 182 0.40 40.0 1000 Stewart Road 182 183 3.40 40.0 1m Stewart Road 183 312 0.40 40.0 1000 Stewart Rcad i
-24'-
l l
t l
l l
1 Table 4 (Continued)
.wCM G 315T iMD W Readway Identity 184 313 1.J0 40.0 1000 N. Custer Read 135 134 1 70 35.0 1000 Highway 50
!!6 314 1 10 45.0 3000 Highway 50 37 3:5 2.40 40 M Cunbar Road
- 39 ;39
- .00 40.0 EO Highway 24
- 39 I
- 6 0.30 T3.J :M0 Highway 24 170 139 0.70 40.3 IX0 Dunbar Rcad 171 ;f: 1.90 30.3 dC0 3 125
- 92 193 0.80 30.0 !!00 M-125
- f3 317 J.a0 10.3 !!00 M-125
- ?4 19 0.33 40.3
- 000 Cunbar Rcad
- f5 196 0.30 45.J ;M0 Hura Road 17e 197 0.30 45.3 .
- 0 N. Dixie Highway 197 199 3.90 45.0 ;NO N. Dixie Highway 90 199 0.00 20.0 1N0 Ramp (De t. -To . Fr'ef )
- f9 000 1.30 50.0 ;000 cetroit Tclede F '.y 00 ;0g 0.30 50 0 4000 Detroit Toledo Fr'#f
- 01 313
- .70 !0.0 4000 Cetroit Celede F:~a7
- 03 198 0.40 45.0 ;000 N. Dixie Highway 204 30 :.40 35.0 ;;00 Ilm Avenue
- 05 004 0.30 40.0 1500 Highway 50
- 06 20g 0.30 ;0 0 ;GC Ramp (Det.-To . Hwy)
- 07 206 3.00 40.0 1000 La Plaisance Rcad
- 13 n9 0.30 40.J ;)C0 La Plaisance Rcad
- 9 31 0.50 ;! ; ;;00 War Road no n1 1.40 40.0
- MO Newpcrt Read n
- :g 0.40 40.0 1000 Newport Road n: g5 :. 0 4!.2 *;00
. Will Carlaten Rcad 33 134 1.90 40.0 '/.v0 Pointe Aux-Peaux Rcad
, got ;;0 0.00 ;!.J N00 G-3 Centroid Connector go: 103 0.70 !!.1 N00 0-1 Centroid Ccnnector gC3 ::4 0. 0 ;!.J 1;00 C-1 Cen ,rcid Connector 504 107 0.30 :!.0 ;;00 H-1 Centroid Connector gog 109 0.90 ::.0 :000 G-2 Centrcid Connector
!06 118 0.:0 :$.0 S00 T-1 Centroid Ccnnector 507 1:7 0.30 ::.J 0 00 0-2 Centrcid Ccnnector 504 1:1 0 10 ;$.3 .000 G-2 Centroid Connector
- 09 ::: 1.30 ::.0 loco D-3 Centroid Connector no ::4 0.40 ::.0 :co B-2 Centroid Connector n1 126 0.30 !!.0 . %00 E-1 Centroid Connector n 3a: 0.3 1:.0 000 D-4 Centroid Ccnnector n3 1:9 1.00 15.J N00 I-6 Centroid Connector n4 ::, g,30 : ,s :000 I-5 Centroid Connector ng t:0 0.40 !.J 3 00 G-4 Centroid Ccnnector i
t
1 1
l l
1 Table 4 (Continued) anCE W X 3IST iiED W Roadway Identity
$14 133 0. 3 ;to 301 S-3 Centroid Connector 517 132 0.40 !!.0 L00 B-1 Centroid Connector
!!! :;3 0.40 ;!.J 1hN M-9 Centroid Connector
!!7 .35 :.4 .i.; :.:0 M-8 Centroid Ccnnector C0 is! i.30 ;!.0 ; ';0 M-6 Centroid Connector n1 ;48 1 30 ;!.J 1000 M-7 Centroid Ccnnector
'" **0 0.;! !!.0 ;No M-5 Centroid Connector C3 l'! 3.20 ;!.0 tNo N-6 Centroid Connector C4 ;!7 0.40 153 IX0 I-4 Centroid Connector n! ;ia 0.30 d.J ;M I-3 Centroid Connector na 160 0.20 1!.0 M00 I-2 Centroid Connector C7 141 0.30 15 0 0 00 J-10 Centreid Connector C9 162 0.40 ;LO :;00 J-l Centroid Connector C9 163.0.30 !!.0 t000 I-9 Centroid Connector 50 154 0 20 150 0 00 M-3 Centroid Connector 131 170 0 :0 !!.0 000 M-2 Centrcid Connector 532 172 0.20 1L0 1N0 M-10 Centroid Connector 533 173 0. 0 3.0 X0 M-12 Centroid Connector 534 177 0.00 15.0 1000 I-7 Centroid Connector n! 174 0.30 1L3 !M0 I-8 Centroid Connector C4 176 0.20 '!.) ;M K-1 Centroid Connector
!37 ,1 2.!C d.3 ;!00 M-1 Centroid Connecter 53 190 L40 d.) M00 L-1 Centroid Connecter 539 ;31 ).30 M.0 .X0 N-4 Centroid Connecter 540 :i: 3.30 3.0 iWC N-3 Centroid Connector
!41 24 2.!0 20 AM0 M-13 Centroid Connector 4
542 ;35 0.30 15.0 300 N-12 Centroid Connector
!43 ;!6 c.40 d.) .') . N-14 Centroid Connector
!44 ;!? L30 15.0 1%0 0-2 Centroid Connector
!45 ;ia '.10 t!.0 A00 N-1 Centroid Connecter
!4 ;fo 0.4c 3.0 0 00 N-13 Centroid Ccanec*Ar 147 ;at 0.40 d.0 0 00 N-2 Centroid Connector
!as 174 0.33 ;!.J 5 00 N-ll Centroid Connector
!49 195 3.30 t!.0 ;000 M-4 Centroid Connector 20 197 0.!0 3.0 04 N-8 Centroid Connector
!!! 203 0.30 !!.0 ::0c N-7 Centroid Connector n2 205 0.40 15.' ;M N-9 Centroid Connector 53 004 3.30 d.0 ;;00 N-5 Centroid Connector 54 207, 0.40 ;!.0 ;000 N-10 Cent cid Connector
!S 38. 0.20 d.0 ;90 0-6 Centroid Connector 54 173 9 40 t!.) M00 0-4 Centroid Connec*wr 57 ;*3 0.70 t!.0 .30 0-5 Centroid Connecter 28 2:0 0.40 !!.0 ;000 G-1 Centroid Connector 59 209 0.44 M.0 ;.00 M-ll Centroid Connector 560 2:2 0. 0 _. M. 0_. : 21 A-1 Centroid Connector p- - -__ , . m ,,_..
I the first lir.k in Table 4 is from Node 100 to Node 101. The distance is 1.60 miles, the assigned speed is 35 miles per hour, the capacity iJ 1,000 V.P.H., and the roadway segment is on Sigler Road. The values assigned to each link represent the best judgement of these factors considering roadway geo-metry, width, terrain and other factors.
Many of the evacuation zones are rather large and may have several centroids. These centroids are associated with population centers and are located to provide for a logical evacuation of the zone.
The capacities established for each link are not the capacities that could be expected under normal circumstances.
The evacuation of a ten-mile area has all the vehicles headed
' in the same direction, with the possible exception of emergency vehicles coming into the area. Because of the directional flew and controlled routings, lane capacities are generally larger than could be expecte:d under nc mal circumstances. Anc the r important factor that contributes to smoother flew and greater capacities is that all drivers of vehicles on any roadway segment are of one accord and are headed for the same locatien.
Generally, they are probably the most seasoned, experienced of the drivers in a household. All drivers know that they must evacuate the area and cross the ten-mile zone.
Table 5 indicates the vehicles on each link. The nu=her of vehicles is determined by the population to be evacuated and
- based upon the assumption that each vehicle will evacuate 3.0 people. It has been cbserved in other actual evacuations that about 99 percent of the evacuees leave by private automcbile.
Therefore, this is a conservative assumption that all pecple are to be evacuated by autcmobile. The number of vehicles en each link is .i summatien of all the vehicles from the differen:
centroids that use any specific link of roadway.
i TABLE 'S VZHIC.ES CN EACH LINK NORMAL WEEKCAY ANCDE BNCDE VIH ANODE BNCDE VEH ANODE BNCDE VEH 15 30 45 142 143 ;475 , 135 *io ;4a
- 00
- 01 101 *32 143 144 4
- 15 134 I:4 .' -
.;2 242 144 IG !3:1 ;37 I.i ':!
.02 .03 242
- 4 145 144
- 5o 138 ;ii !
- I 117 ;46 ;47 34 ;io I;s ;!!3 M4 .25 917 147 144 W ;90 ;39
- ..
105 100 2068 :48 149 399 191 ;9: ::.
104 105 ,1151 149 138 399 192 ;i3 I!3 107 108 113 ;50 1:1 1047 193 317 .;!
108 110 1:3 ;51 152 1067 104 ::: .!?
109 1:0 465 !2 153 la33 195 ?e III 110 ;11 303 13 154 1A33 tog 147 !
111 112 C&9 154 142 1433 177 199 !!;
- 12 113 1949 155 154 W ;29- ;** :4 113 ;4 2352 !!6 1:2 W 199 ;;0 .I2) 114 ;15 352 157 158 $04 ;00 ;]1 ..;i 115 Ils :S!2 158 159 1104 l01 n! ::'i 116 303 3135 159 144 1104
- o3 log 119 117 111 444 130 IO7 100 ;o4 ;;) ,;;;
118 119 43 161 152 164 ;(.3 'g.:
05 117 100 453 142 308 691 C0 113 206 '31 . !' '-
883 143 309 134 ;97 ,c3 .:,
- 112 200 1a4 15 ;;g 1
- 2 23 I23 40 1 ;;9
- :
145 144 401 ;g9 at , c, 123 14 333 124 125 500 164 167 301 nc :;1 ::.
167 168 1079 n1 ::a .:.
1:5 ::5 '00 168 149 ....,
1740 . ..
.sa . ...
1:a C7 'Y9 :sf ;43 1740 ;p 33 .:
CT CS 493 170 171 400 :01 L0c .:.
CS ICI 499 171 164 400 <0; ;03 ,rr C9 ;3J 49 172 147 277 503 ;;a ,- :,
!!0 !!! 722 173 174 301 504 107 .:
131 132 1773 174 175 421 505 ici 4' 132 304 304 175 174 521 1g 04 4; 33 U1 1 51 176 110 554 507 117 ::o 134 135 244 ;77 175 100 <gg gt j,4 135 134 443 173 179 400 ,c9 .-, ---
134 137 44 3 179 190 400 et0 t;s ;,
137 138 443 ISO lli 416 gn 1:3 4+i 138 139 342 191 182 333 512 20: 500 139 140 342 182 193 779 5t3 29 no 144 141 342 193 312 779 514 1:9 ;9 141 142 342 134 313 433 ets na ;33
-r -r- y e- -, ---- a-
t TABLE 5 (CONTI.WED) f i
ANODE BNCDE- VEH ANCDE BNCDE VEH i;i .33 '. .O ")
. SP ..e
,, ...t., .
.., ...33 e. Q ... .$
.s ..e 3 ..s .
.s
- e. .. .... . .
..a
- s .-
..t we7
. a. )
..t - ... ,00
- e. . g
. r. i
,c.se
- r. .u. .e3
.. u. J.
- v. d 45 1 *i
.53 .s. F. .*. f
'29 ;i3 ;34
!IO - a4 -01 e.t. .g
.. 4sg v
.a... . . . .D
'33 173 !al
!!4 ;77 ;00 a..-,. .4
.. .3
- ?: ;T6 13 t
!!' ;'3 4M
- 3 .:0 e.2. ; ,31
..~ .,
!40 '3 W
!4; .54 4!!
l ,. , ,.
... .c=.. a r.at. .:.
... t. .i, 3 f4J
- 3?
.4 .q.
..f e.gee .ag 8
. 1.3 4 . I'I .
147 191 if4 45 44 .i9 149 ;M !33
- i. 'M .77 44
.43 E..t .t f..f a
.t .* .%t . .E.t ,)
.tr..i 9. 4 e.tg a
.r.r g .7 . 3;$
.r.ee. ..s4.g .*g?..
F e.F.h .- 0dT d.**
E.t*/
. . 4. 3 744
$N 21) A$E i
i i
, _ , . - . . - - - . . - - - .,. - , . - . - - . _ . ,-m. , - . - . . ,--.
1 1
I l
Table 6 describes the evacuation route with a link-nede description by centroid. This table gives the numbers of each node through which each evacuation route passes. Table 4 describes each link in this evacuatien route and Table 3 indicates the number of vehicles on each link.
Directional Flow - All network routings will cperate as two-way facilities. In the case of a two-lane roadway, the outhcund lane is for evacuation with the inbound lane used for emergency vehicles. A three-lane facility assumes two evacuation lanes and one inbound lane. A four lane facility assumes two evacuation lanes and two emergency vehicle lanes.
A six lane facility aasu=es four evacuation lanes and two emergency vehicle lanes.
Travel Sceeds - Speeds were 2ssigned to each link depending on the character of the roadway. Freeway speeds were assigned at 50 M.P.H. with ramp speeds at 20 M.P.H. For two lane read-ways, State Highways were assigned at 25 M.P.H. and 30 M.P.H.
for roadways of lesser quality. Centreid connectors were con-sidered as local streets and assigned a speed of 15 M.P.H.
Capacities - Capacities were assigned to the evacuation network to reflect emergency conditions with traffic flowing in One direction, occasional emergency vehicles opposing the traffic ficw and problem areas centrolled by special traffic features. Under these conditions the folicwing capacities were assigned:
- 1. Freeway - 2,000 vehicles per lane per hour; therefore two evacuation lanes would be 4,000 per hour.
- 2. Two-lane Facilities - A capacity of 1,500 vehicles per lane per hour was assigned to State Highways and other high type roadways and 1,000 vehicles per lane per hour for a readway of lesser quality.
l l
l i
l
TABLE 6 EVACUATICN BCUTE LINK NODE "ESCRIPTICN BY CENTROID
<M :: <X ;3 MM 14
.!4 WMi <X : 30X 3 4M 4 WX ! <M a 'CM 7 WK 3 *CX f *CK 10 42 11
- 3 !01 ;;0 10: ;02 103 ;;4 05 NO
.I' 102 . :-3 .:4 ;05 ICQ
- 1 !03 ;04 ;05 DO
- 28 112 1
- 3 114 1:5 1:4 303 91 !04 .07 110 til
- 9 112 113 114 115 114 303 32 505 110 til F1 !C6 113 119 ;;0 !!3 114 115 114 203 3
- !O7 ;;7
- :1 110 113 1:4 ::: 116 103 E2 502 12 112 113 114 115 ;16 303 33 !;9 12 13 114 303 3: 51) L:4 1; 115 !!6 03
!! !!! ;;i 127 129 101 24 $12 IO:
'. s 5:3 .29 120 131 ;30 204
!3 !14 1:? II0 131 13: 304 J4 515 ;30 ;31 132 304
!3 !!& 133 131 ;32 304 31 !;7 13: 304
- 37 13 139 ;40 ;41 ;42 143 ;44 Ice si !;! 213 134 135 134 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 204 4 519 135 134 137 147 144 149 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 !04
- e 5:0 145 144 138 139 140 141 14: 143 144 304 97 :1 144 149
- 3 2,
4 TABLE 6 (CCNTIN17ED)
. :t .gK 1 W K 2 W K 3 .4 K 4 4K 5 <K 6 W K 7 .1C E 9 M K 9 <M 10 4211 4212 '!313 *13 l'
.5 C2 150 151 152 153 !!4 142 143 144 346
% E3 15 154 I!2 153 154 142 143 144 30 4 I4 C4 157 158 159 144 304 I3 C5 158 159 144 304 26 -160 307
- 10 C7 141 142 30 8 J1 CS 142 308 If C9 143 309 13 SC 144 165 144 167 tia 149 143 144 704
'2 21 170 171 144 167 148 149 143 ;44 Ih
- 10 U2 172 147 Ita 149 143 144 104 at: U3 173 174 175 174 310 17 54 177 175 174 3;0
!3 C5 174 175 17s 310
.* 1 534 174 310 91 37 173 179 ;30 Ill
'1
. 538 150 311 94 39 131 ;32 133 312 93 140 132 ;33 312 413 541 194 313 412 542 135 194 314
TA3LE 6 (CCNTINt:ED) l Lig -
NC E 1 NO K 2 m : 64 65MOX4 M71CE3 69 M 10 G il G 12 G L3 G l'
=14 ' 43 194 314 32 !44 197 315 11 45 138 139 316
- 13 !44 190 139 314 52 547 191 192 193 317 511 !44 194 192 193 317 94 149 195 196 197 199 199 000 201 318 48 SO 197 199 !?9 000 001 318 47 21 l03 199 199 000 001 IIS 49 22 005 :04 201 319 4 S3 204 200 201 318 410 S4 007 l08 319
- A !!5 008 319 04 24 193 317 05 557 193 317 G1 28 210 211 148 149 143 144 304
.111 29 ;09 211 lea 149 143 144 304 41 See 212 305 i
I
- 3. Interchanges and Ramps - 1,500 vehicles per hour.
Soecial Traffic Control Stratecies - In order to attain maximum capacity on the network, control critical intersection movements and provide direction for ccmplex evacuation routings, special trafiic control strategies are imperative.
In some instances major population centers were split to avoid overloads to the network and produce abnormally long delays. These locations will require special handling to insure that motorists utill e their assigned routing for evacuation.
Interchanges and ramps which affect the capacity that can be loaded to the main line will need special centrol strategies.
Scecial Transportation Requirements Transport. tion requirements for special problem groups, such as non-car-owning families, hospitals, schools, jails, etc. were not included in the evacuation time assessment. The assumption was that all families would evacuate as a unit from home. This would preclude the requirement for evacuating school students from school to outside the risk area.
Secter Evacuatien Evacuatien plans are usually set up on a sector or quandrant basis. This assessment has not been concerr.ed with segmenting the 10-mile radius. The assessment icoked at total evacuation from the EPZ. Ecwever, this does not preclude evacuation by quandrants.
Quadrants can be examined f cm the data in this report.
1 1
I
.o - .,
1 l
l EVACUATICN TIME ASSESSMENT As stated earlier, the evacuation ti=a assessment has assumed that all of the family will leave home in one car as a unit.
The assessment time includes mobilization time, delay time and travel time to evacuate the 10-mile radius. Mcbilizatien time includes notification; eave work or school; travel heme; and, svacuate home.
Four conditions were measured in assessing evacuation time.
2.ese conditiens are presented in the following:
- 1. Normal weekday - workers at work, children in schcol;
- 2. Ideal conditiens - night *Ne, mest everyone at home;
- 3. Adverse weather conditions - storms, or fog; and,
- 4. Summertime recreational peak.
The assessment was performed by computer to a process des-cribed in some detail in Volu=e I. Table 6 lists the evacuation times by centroid ~ for the four scenaries shewn above.
Normal Workday The most critical area within the 10-mile radius is the evacuatien of the City of Men ce and a small portion of the southwest portien of Monrce Tcwnship. This planning ene has as estimated pcpulation of 21,513. The evacuation route for Monrce includes three north-south facilities -- U.S. 24 (Tele-graph Road) , SR 125 (Dixie Highway) and Interstate 75. These roads were used in addition to SR 50 (Custer Road). SR 50 (Custer Read) will provide ene evacuation lane westerly. from the intersection of SR 125 (Dixie Highway) to U.S . 24 (Telegraph Road) where it will provide two evacuation lanes through the end of the 10-mile EP2.
i i
I i
1
. .. o- :
I i
TABLE 7 IVACUATICN TI.F6S b BY-CENTROID D D \-
Ok NORMAL ADVERSE WORKDAY WEATHER NIGHTTIME
.i'MC D
'M ;9 90:3 TI.aI e.n.-
. g:,.. -..:
in 3,.- - ..
.J
.33 ..
. 34 s.
- I*-'
,?4 YO .,- v- .jg ,.
.,- ..y
- n io
- r. . og 9, C2 28 5: 127 e, .
,7
.t 2. :.* ...*- .
3, a
-1 .
s -
3 ... . ,3 L., ,
.>3 . a
/ ,-- .y *-
..3 se n.
.a .:. ..
i
.ve ,. 3
- , 31 *5 11,
- s. 3
- s
.t .. :. ... -
~~ , c.
- - .3 .. ...,
.J 0- ivu 2..
- 3., *j 4 *=* :
.)
e r. yb
.r
. .e1 i
4 ; . .
- .;e ..
y; . -
r3 - --
.~
. 3 -
- L .e .,3 ,.
3: -
,9 :: .
- 144- a ;;
a
>< 3 -
4: 4 . ..
1 y ,
1: . ., ..
3 g
! =7 i.:3 .
-i 99 .:
e .[, ..
], "e .34 s -
4 1:3
. 4 ,.-
3 y
[3 109 1?
iG r
5 . ' . --- ,,
- s. 4,,
ei z;n ,
- 3-
'7 d
!!0 ;04
.-n. 3.-
1
- t' *08 J1 :a i ,, j' If ;]3 .,
7 --
3 os* -
13 ;03 . 3 o..,
I
4 .. .-
w h r
Table 7 (Continued)
Q NOR.%L ADVERSE WORKDAY WEATHER NIGHTTIME
.brR0!D 'N ;3 pg:3 r:g ItiR013 ?!T
-2 is 2 129 92 33
-;l 75 *;; .3 i;3 31
'12 32 112 ;14 112 47
!7 31 l7 111 !7 6s il 90 ;i ;-9 3 15 al 77 11 ;;4 11 22 31 31 31 ;11 31 $4 d 78 L1 ;;5 L1 :3 e4 33 u ;15 % sa i3 32 3 .;4 .43 27
- 13 ,
79 *13 ;07 313 34 312 76 *12 ;is 412 34 314 78 #14 ;;6 N14 33 22 '7 2 ;23 22 52 )
.I 32 .I 'l 51 9
+13 74 8 .;] *
- 07 *13
- 4 5 ;14 32 ;;3 *2 29 11 110 , si; ;19 111 34 34 95 .- 4 ;19 M4 4
_ *G 35 I 4 ;19 4 70 57 34 .37 ;;5 *7 :f 19 73 i 1:3 19 75 n! 3 =5 ;19 13 '?
110 :a 10 ;14 510 2a 36 62 :s ;04 04 62
_ 04 12 04 ;15 y c M 73 ;5 113 3 93 31 92 3; 123 31 12 111 31 .tli 121 .411 31 41 43 41 105 At 43 e
e Sim >
4 Evacuatien times are not extensive, but careful routing is required. The maximum evacuation tire is 114 minutes for centroid N2.
Nichttime Condition This condition assu=es that most pecple are at hc=e; there-fore, only notification time and the time to evacuate home prevail under this assessment. Because leaving work or schcol and the travel ti=e to ho=e do not have to be considered, the ti=e to evacuate the EPZ for each zcne centroid is reduced approxi=ately 15 minutes. From Table 6, the maxi =um evacuation time is 99 :-J.nutes .
Straertime Recreatien Peak There are no significant recreatien facilities or increases in su=rertime populaticn for the EP3. There fore , the evacuatien ti=es during the su==er wculd be the sa.=e as other times of the year.
Adverse Weather This assessment assures icing conditions as the = cst pro-bable situation which would have an effecu on evacuation tira.
Se assu=ptions made for these cenditions reduced the travel speed 50 percent and increased the travel time from home to work 100 percent. Travel time f cm work to home was distributed over 40 =inutes instead of 20 minutes.
The maximum evacuation tiras shew a general increase. The maximum time for this scenario is 143 minutes for centroid M9.
Sis is still a very reascnable evacuatien time. ,
1 l
l
- .. . . . . - . . - - . ,