ML19345C438

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Public Version of Draft Final Rept Assessment of Evacuation Time Around Indian Point Nuclear Power Station, Executive Summary,Prepared for FEMA
ML19345C438
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 08/21/1980
From:
CENTER FOR PLANNING & RESEARCH, INC., CONSAD RESEARCH CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML100540986 List:
References
NUDOCS 8012040704
Download: ML19345C438 (34)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:k /-/ O l (/ b h I Draf t Final Report il y. EXEC"TIVE

SUMMARY

AN ASSESSMENT OF m

EVJ 2 TION TIME AROUND THE INDIAN POINT NVCLEAR POWER STATION Contract Number EMW-C-0257 Prepared for: Federal Emergency Management Agency 18th & F Streets, NW Washington, D.C. 20405 h Prepared eer: CONSAD Research Corporation 121 North Highland Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15206 ~ and Center for Planning And Research MSOU t.L Fli1VACY INF0FJLATIO:7 DM.En.D IN ACCO.UANCE WIDI DIE August 21,1980 FRTCOM 02 JNicuIION AGF M" 801204070

~ z a TABLE OF CONTENTS = PAge! m

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1 2.0 DATA COLLECTION ,2 m 2.1 Evacuation Planning Units 2 2.2 Evacuation Raod Network 2 2.3 Population and Housing Estimates 4 ~ 3.0 SCENARIO DESCRIPTION 131 3.1 Evacuation Planning Zone 13 3.2 Scenario Dimensions 14 3.3 Four Phases of an Evacuation 14 4.0 METHODOLOGY 16 4.1 PCEs Leaving Each EPU 16 4.2 Trip Generation Curves 17 4.3 Network Characteristics 23 4.4 Evacuation Mocal 23 5.0 SCENARIO RESULTS 25 et 9 3$ Ied 2 s '>0g j -.- e I t 4,

l l

1.0 INTRODUCTION

CONSAD Research Corporation with the Center for Planning and Re-search has recently completed an assessment of evacuation time for the l This s population surrounding the Indian Point Nuclear Power Station. I i l assessment was conducted for the Federal Emergency Management Agency to assist it in providing an independent assessment of evacuation times around reactor sites which are in proximity to high population densities. The Indian Point Evacuation Planning Zone (EPZ) has an estimated population and is an area centered on the reactor site whose boundary is of 284,000 approximately ten miles from the power station. This Executive Summary highlights key points of the CONSAD report. There are four sections following this introduction which are: 2.0 DATA COLLECTION 3.0 SCENARIO DESCRIPTION 4.0 METHODOLOGY 5.0 SCENARIO RESULTS Some of the results presented in Section 5 were not provided in the Final Report delivered. to FEMA in. June,1980. They are supplemental 2 data which were gleaned from the computer runs and show not only the ? m total evacuation times, but also the time distribution of the popula-tion evacuated for each EPU. l l s-1 ,-,,,-w r+ ~ w t

q

f; "

l w 9), =1 2.0 ' DATA COLLECT 11N E .= In carrying out this assessment data was assembled on the fo1~oving: i, e A syr en of 39 Evacuation Planning-Units (EPUs); e' The evacuation road network; and m Estimates of 1980 population and household data, e 2.1 Evacuation Planning Units m Thirty nine Evacuation P1.anning Units-(EPUs) make up the EPZ. Figure 1 depicts the 39 EPUs and their relationship to municipal bound-artes. The development of these units was guided by the following consid, erations: The need for disaggregated analysis units; e e A respect for political boundaries; and The need for a readily identifiable system of analysis e units. The above three precepts were constrained by the types and levels of data required to conduct the evacuation time assessment. Each EPU had its size determined by the amount of population and complexity of the transportation network in the vicinity. 2.2 Evacuation Road Network In order to simulate the svacuation a road network had to-be ident-ified. The following steps were taken: e Inventory the roads in the EPZ; o Choose a number of evacuation routes for each zone; and e I h U 2 t

PLANNING ZONE INDIAN POINT EMERGENCY ~ j i / ..\\ - '~ ^. \\;- /N. x,, l COR)(hAtt [ j e o UTN A4's '<*'\\-- I '. so ,/ AL48Y f., 1 / n, f e' ) . ~i PHILLIP5f0WN 's, / ~CAI MEL [/ HIGH& ANDS /. 1 l (\\ ^ ./j i ,t ,1 'l \\ ' 'l,e' ~~ i \\ i,s, *

d. t.. e i.

i ,J / N " x'.p'j, i ,....., ',] x. ...PfQODRURV ,1 W i. l t.: 'c' s( tn I t YOSKJ,0WN ', ? ,I e $ TONY g n / 4 POINT -~$ CORTLAN,t}T ,e, ( ,/ 's, l ... e e ,/,, TUEEDO ,,,,,,a ~ ',, - J CRQTON ON, \\.HUD50$ NEW CASTLE n essee HAVER 5TRAW / ( b"$.$ N.. I_...-...., 055 tHNO \\ " if, </. u--. - .----.. ~. - .\\ l N,,pAggpo g,7, e, BR AR N ~ ~ * ~ ~'~ " ~ *" ~ CIT l gjyg Agog..e / l ' ' " " " " " ~ " " " L_.. __ ,'s.. _ l 1 l L. st---) toep CasHR Att Itset. AttuH Uuneule A ttuet I lesnian riuwe svas esastus lips. AnneneM8Hf i

Identify 'all the. evacuation routes to be used by each e EPU during the simulation. A road network map was initially prepared to include Interstate, The evacuation U.S. and State Highways, Parlasays, and County Roads. routes for each EPU were determined based on the knowledge acquired through a field survey and judgement of the physical characteristics of the links comprising, the network. The chosen evacuation netvork The evacuation routes are described in Table 1, is shown in Figure 2. a and the physical characteristics of the evacuation routes are presented in Table 2. 2.3 Population aac Housing Estimates Estimates of population and households.were developed from the The 1970 census data was chosen because it offered 1970 U.S. Census.* Also, the census tract and the only uniformly comprehensive data set. block. detail allowed flexibility in the development of the EPUs. The steps involved in making the 1980 population estimate were the following: ~ i.e. r. EPUs were categorized by political jurisdiction, town. city, minor civil division; 1977 percent-change in population was recorded for each s political jurisdiction ** ; L. Any increases in population between 1970 and 1977 were assumed to continue at a constant yearly rate to 1980; e i 1970 Census Tract Statistics,

  • Census of Population and Housing:

L Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C. (PHC (1)-145, Parts 1-3) and 1970 Block Statistics _, Bureau of the Census, Washington, Census of Housing: (HC (3)-159, Part 2 and HC (3)-163). D.C. **The sources for the 1977 population estimates was the Current Population Reports,1977 Population Estimates for Counties, Incorporated Places, and Minor Civil Divisions in NY, Bureau of the Census, Washington.. D.C. (Series P-25, #845). w 4

\\ - o *

  • lo
  • lo D'T Y @

o a N o N U&.\\.lF G p Ii 3 i I }r.

  • I l 'i

!.ll i i r i iII8 i !! rig!i, t

8 i

i X. i: p r) i.i t l i i ,L anooo !;i g! s.f,.- \\ {,, - W \\ ~ w ii ':-l' ,/ g l ,s s II ._'T. ~, i q,, 'D ,l 3,- \\, j j ;./.* =.. _ 3 s-l N. t- ,s. \\.... s~. - w .l m u e-- r ,l .s-s, ym f ,1 ., ' / -- i ':.../ \\, .f (....-______.l T.,, ,i.<. / m r, ,...:..~.s.. x

1. ~ =

1,. , l '. - o m. s.x,Y w ~,.2- ~- j ~ \\.tj' 0 ( i* \\,, s - -- g t i,, ,,,, 3 Z t, L, MKy\\,. ;j , -l._;g;ll--{----..J M 'i, ~-- i? % s' h,. l L = s. i >I \\ . l.[ f ~ a. s 1.; zg i , f ---- T y s i l .h.: ' 'N

  • ]

s N. s 2 8.,. ' N.

c

, s. m '.=c.:. ) N. w 1 1 z g a e 8 o- / i; 2 j' .s T e ~ t..N.' a. / .'., ;' / 8 = N ,9, 4 = 3 ' N.,s., E .y- ..y g. t le e 3 8 00 e IEe 0 e C 5

Tzbla 1: Evacuation Rautsc Route Description. Route, Number EPU g 1 l' U.S. 6 N-State 9D. N 2 2 U.S. 9 N 3-1 U.S. 202 E-U.S. 202 E (State 35) 3 3-2 U.S. 202 E-Taconic Pkw. N 3-3 U.S. 202 E-Taconic Pkw. S 4-1, U.S. 202 E-U.S. 202 E (State 35) 4 4-2 U.S. 202 E-Taconia Pkw. N 4-3 Maple Ave. - Taconic Pkw. S 5-1 5 U.S. 9 S-State 9A S 5-2 U.S. 9 N '6-1 6 Peekskill Hollow Road-Taconic Pku. N 7-1 7 U.S. 6 E f' Peekskill Hollow Road-Taconic 7-2 t Pku. N 8-1 U.S. 202 E-U.S.202 E (State 35) 8 8-2 U.S. 202 E-Taconic Pku. N 8-3 U.S. 202 E-Taconic Pku. S 9 9 U.S. 9 S State 9A S 10-1 U.S. 915 State 9A S 10 10-2 U.S. 9 N 11 ) ~11 Maple Ave.-Taconic Pku. S 12 12 U.S. 6 E 13-1 13 U.S.;61E 14-1 14 U.S. 202 E (State 35) 14-2 Granite Springs Road E 15-1 15 U.S. 202 E-U.S. 202 E (State 35) 15-2 U.S. 202 E-Taconic Pkw. N 15-3 U.S. 202 E-Taconic W S I 16 16 U.S. 202 E- (State 35) ~ 17-1 17 U.S. 202 E- (Staee 35) 17-2 o State 129 E 18 ~ 18 State 9A S 19 19 Airy Road E-State 129 E 20 20 Taconic Pku. S g 21 21 Taconic Pku. S 22-1 22 U.S. 95 22-2 State 9A S 23-1 23 U.S. 95 23-3 State 9A 5 24-1 24 State 9D N 24-2 e U.S. 9 N 25-1 ~ 25 State 9D N 25-2 U.S. 9 N 1 s j s ~6 L,

Tabla 1: Evacuation R.ut23 (continued) ROUIE DESCRIPTION _ ROUTE NLMSER. EPU, ~ ~ 26 Peekskill Hollow Road - Taconic 26 Pku. N 27 27 PeeksM11 Hollow Road - Taconic Pku. N 28-1 28 Taconic Pku. N 28-2 Scace 's N 29 Peekskill Ibliou Road - Taconic 29 Pkw.. N ' 29-2 Pennytown Road 30-1 30 U.S. 9W N 30-2 U.S. 6 W 31-1 31 W.S. 6 W 31-2 Seven Iakes Pku. 32-1 32 Interstate 87 N 32-2 U.S. 6 W 33 State 210 W 33 34 34 State 210 W 35-1 35 U.S. 9W S Filors Iane - Palisades Pku. S 35-2 Filors Iane - Palisades Pku. 9 35-3 U.S. 202 W o 36-1 ~ 36 l U.S. 9W S U.S. 202 W-Palisades Pkw. S 36-2 i 36-3 e U.S. 202 W 37-1 37 l U.S. 9W S 37-2 State 303 S 38 Middletown Road and State 304 S 38 39-1 39 Palisades Pka. S 39-2 State 45 D 39-3 U.S. 202 W s 1 e q l ~ Source: CONSAD Research Corporation,1980 M M 7 e

5 . Physical Characteristic of Evacuation Routes Table 2: Capacity ! Travel Soeed (MPN) (Voltme/ Hour) CW Weather Sad Weatherj EPU Trips Orig. Evacuation Route 15 650 20 1. U.S. 65-State 1 24-1, 25-1 610-2,450 9D N 30 40 2. U.S. 9N 2 5-2, 10-2 24-2, 25-2 600-950 30 40 3. U.S. 202 E 3-1, 2. 3. 4-1. 2 8-1. 2. 3.15-1.2.3 820-950 30 40 3-1. 6-1, 8-1, 4. U.S. 202 E 14-1, 15-1, 16 State 118 E 17-1 40 2.070

  • 55 5.

Taconic Pku. N 3-2, 4-2, 8-2. 15-2. 28-1 600-750 20 30 6. Pecksk.111 lloilow

6. 7-2. 26. 27 29-1 Boed 15 530*

20 4-3. 11 7. Maple Avenue 40 2.070

  • 55 8.

Taconic Pier. S 3-3. 4-3, 8-3

11. 15-3. 20 21 2.070-2.450 30 40 22-1. 23-1
  • 240-2.950 9.

U.S. 95 30 40 5-1. 9. 10-1 10. U.S. 9 + State

18. 22-2, 23-2 550-950 9A 5 30 40 7-1. 12. 13-1.

11. U.S. 6E. 15 600* 20

12. dranite Spring 13-2, 14-2 610 20 Road E 30
13. Airy Road E-17-2, 19 State 129 E 30 610 40 28-2 *
14. Stater 6N 15 300 20
15. Denneytown Road 29-2 680-2,370 30 40 30-1, 31-1. 32-2 2.070-2,370 16.

ti.s. oli 30 40 30-2

17. State 9W 20 660 *

'30

18. Seven Iakes Plot 31-2 2.950 40 55
19. Interstate 87N 32-1 620 40 30
20. State 210W
33. 34 30 620-1.150 40 21.

U.S. 202-State 37-4 9W 20 2.400 30

22. State 303 $

37-2 2.370-3.030

  • 40 35-2. 36-2. 39h1 55 1.350-1.420 23.

U.S. 202 W 30 Palisades Plor. 35-3. 36-3, 39-3 40 24. U.S. 202 - 20 660 30

25. State 45 5 39-2

? I I h '!he capacity values are estimated by using the formula developed by t e f New York Department of Transportation. l CGISAD Ramaatch Corporation.1980 Source: i 8 l

_. Areas experiencing a decline between 1970 and 1977 were held e constant at 1977 levels for 1980; and EPUs. Census tracts and blocks were aggregated to The factors used to update population were assumed to hold for all other Some of the data derived using the above process are shown in variables. The co umns indicating automobiles available by household presented Table 3. in this table were used to estimate Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) for Data pertaining to population. and cae general population in each EPU. occupied housing units are displayed by EPU in Figures 3 and 4. [ N

Table 3: 1980 Popul: tion and Housing Data q. Households by Auto Ownership l'- EPU Population Households 0 -1 2 +3 9 1' 2,262 .794 157 380 232 25 d 2 823 223 12 su 130 21 3 5.498' 1,685 259 820 533 73 4 4 6,055 1,949 568 897 436 48 5 6,398 2,042 572 980 368 123 g 6 553 152 8 64 67 ' 14 7 6,710 1,745 74 707 781 183 -8_ 4,651 1.270 139 475 545 111 6 9 1,412 414 75 141 170 29 - 10 8,365 2.044 246 971 724 103 ) 11 1,060 275 50 93 113 19 12 6,071 1,664 100 539 865 150 13 14,807 3,535 88 1,131 2,121 194 14 2,275 605 42

218, 290 54 15 2.898 655 13 197 386 59 16' 4,031 985 0

227 630 128 17-6,309 1,669 67 601 801 200 18 8.465 2,960 335 1,447 1,060 119 19 770 205 37 70 84 14 20 1,829 473 9 142 279 43 21 3,86[ 1,081 'O 238 713 130 22 22,942 6,925 946 3,425 2,247 307 ~ 23 5,141 1,124 88 446 501 89 24 1,866 548 82 274 164 27 P 25 3.574 1,067 160 534 320 53 ~ 26 3,247 -786 118 393 236 39 6 27 1,745 434' 65 217 130 22 28 7,055 1,715 257 858 514 86 29 933 244 37 122 73 12 a 30 9.543 2,602 419 1,336 742 105 31 l',464 353 56 180 102 14 32 4,860 1.395 223 711 405 56 33 23 7 1 4 2 0 34 247 72 12 37 21 3 35 14,153 3,522 303 1,540 1,487 192 36 30,491 7,853 1,126 3,973 2,352 401 37 13,027 3,902 263 1,583 1,683 373. p 38 45,717 11,587 664 3.552 6,391 979 3,368 473 l 39 22.940 5.521 318 1,398 i 284,078 76,082 7.989 31,029 32,039 5.035 Ih Source: Projections using Census data. I 10 l

J P p ** .**-e---., (h 0 $&k d= \\ l s _ s. ce. b g g I.e i mm i 7.' .i: -t' 11 Il l If.!, mi .i 21 " * * -_\\ t 5 I Ii ns '\\f~ ~./. T \\. s L' ltl'- i !} ,r 1, 5..." 7 -- ',, .} u. a. { s. i S *.,.. m.c. ',.s,ed a

e. M s

-e are

  • 4.,.
  • 3

\\ t, e. / i r ~ / ..= . ~,... - -,. ~. = =... c. m. s.n. = .a ~. ,-( a. 3. = s .~. A ,',..u .r ; S..=. / ...r' 4 ' ~ ~ v -..; ~ = t, -s,.....,~. t 5 - n. s ~ ',,,.e o. e e. a. r i, a. ~ i .o

  • g:. :;,

,.,., - -.1./ t ~ -a N., .,. t i. ~' .e,, ., ~, 3 ~ i = .s \\., o. ~ ~',,

r.,. # s y, * ' ~, 's. ',

\\,,}~ j u ~ o s 'l7 C'. - - - - - --- - --.i, m l} u .e ...y.. ~ na G . a z ~ i - n. p, ......~,i>s, .~.,z, a. c. o s-w s,- -,,., - n a ,s ~ e. . n,~ ,.,... "s...., -., a. ,.. ~ .e. .~~.~.t n o 1 ~~

o. m

,s m. e,ng G* % a e 1 n m z . (. 5., n s., n. n ~ ~ z = b',~ ~N,. i. ",, / o s~ .s / \\, / e z - N'- N ___/ i!! 8 .n.. e i

== a. l o E N N "U l o / i t* u I o '-------------T ., 2 N .e.c i e u z =. '3 ~ a B oy W O

  • M s

b O p q y%~ ) ) ts o f '~ .c e ,8 s, 'g 0- - C g = W / ' ,\\, 's s' ~ w e, l:,I '\\. ,/ ,/ ', =,/ .= e. ~ ./- .c .c o r ' NJ r : s c. M

  • Z

.a s* C3 /* a j ,/ i o (*.\\ .,,==*... 5, w i a g e s m.- ,./ S. r -o a.

  • ,s,

's \\ '4., o A. z l fgj' \\ ( =, ' .e ~. f 'r ~~.,s%, ,,,j, ;' * ~u u a ~. 'r, \\.* V" z 'Q \\., U M .Il ( b r s g a. 40 s. lL 11

i W 4 i. ~" '4C EPU Occupicd Hruning Unito cad Percent of Total EPZ Occupied Housing Unito i. Pisuro 41 INDIAN POINT EMERGENCY P l. A N N I N G ZONE j .- / </ I Totel occupied /.%,<-*.,.-7,.,/ ... a Nousing Uittte = 76082 Housin8 ( g

w...

/ a tru U.ii t e i ,I,'. 323 'v/ l ' 244 v\\.,' N

  • 3 323

.2M N 1067 ,e 3 1685 2.21I 1.401 i / \\ i /e/ *.]' 3.g',434 4 1949 2.561 a /. 5 2042 2 681 I,1 , e.' < j' ee 's.*Sig,,, s./ " *',. /N'.N " f 2602 ( ,1 4 152' . 30 1 3.423

  • a,

/ [ " \\ s, J 1~ g,g3 './,, l j 's.: t.tn / 1395,' l j 548 i 786 'j -- 1.035 e' s l .s '""JA "'"I r

  • 723-

\\.

1. 83%, '

s 'I i ,I e,34 8 r e e e i 1 /5335 Y "'<~ --f"/ i / 'i,

  • 4.654 1605 2.29p,

1664 2,,'6., 1745 0 i 2.lu,i .- *. 80s 'i W / ; n4 ~. ~ ~ - 's i \\. A 043,I,. *i ' <,' ' ty' 't : I, f_, a g \\, / x, 4.,,,,/ 985 W 353 g $55 ( 1.291,<,,(s. N.,',-'~'i'1270 y .463 1.673 e f,4 l ' 'j,' O 3,, /' ** s,c.,,..,," * 'j. 861 '~ ,/ \\ s, M .'[ I,,,,, 1669 / 's f '/ 2044 'c 414 'l 275 {s. ' s 2.19I ,'....35I ; l' M / 2.691 's,.541 / ,,,, ' 20 5 I ',e' M .013 ,/s 3522 p y..f -,y., .__,s,4.6u------,_... ,,g a, n, S. .6,2 h 3.891 . p- ,/ e4 l:~s "..... - x,\\. 7081 ,'s s N 7853 ,e ,1.421 10.321 e tseene '\\ N ,d's.~~~---------._. ..,,,q" .' N, l ~ g 'N,Al ( C=3 a 6925 N ~,. \\ l 'N' N l,' \\ '., .,' 103e,;'.,'.Q, g/ 55n 7.u! nSoi

  • =.. -.a.***

15.231 l 'v .N e e 1 j / ! 3902 1124 .g........... .a l 5.131 l% -1.487 ^ / ......-.a -1 l 8 ,,= -9 . -. -. ~

l y..:. 3.0 SCENARIO DESCRIPTION 3.1 Evacuation Planning Zone J The Indian Point Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) is located in a beautiful.and historical area with some communities dating from the 17th ~ More recently, however, part of the area has become a suburb century. of the New York City and Northern New Jersey urban industrial complex, s and includes a number of cities and town (mostly under 20,000 population), A major portion such as Peekskill, Ossining, Haverstraw and New City. of the EPZ on-the west side of the Hudson River consists. of mountainous and vocded area including the Palisades Interstate Park System and o. part of West Point Military Academy. The EPZ is centered on the Indian Point Nuclear Power Station which has two reactors, each of which is operated by a separate utility-Consolidated Edison and Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY). The plant is located on the east bank of the Hudson River at Buchanan, New York,.and in the northwestern corner of Westchester County. CONSAD has chosen to use the EPZ defined in the Parsons Brinckerho C Quade and Douglas. and New York State Office of Disaster Preparedness b Studies completed last winter for the Indian Point Nuclear Power Station. The EPZ as depicted in Figure 1 is in keeping with Nuclear Regulatory [, Commiasion guidelines that specify a perimeter at approximately ten ._.:? In fact, the EPZ goes beyond ten miles U miles from the power station. The EPZ covers an to obviate the need for splitting municipalities. d area of about 415 (approximately 11.5 mile average radius) square miles and includes portions of Westchester, Putnam Orange and Rockland I u 13

> f,\\J 7 I. u ~ pe ,j Counties. m 3.2 Scenario Dimensions In the course of conducting this asse.;sment,eight scenarios were ^ anminedi reflecting all of the combinations contained in the three di-mansions used to define each scenario-The three disencions are: Time of day-day or night; ~ e Rate of response to the alert (loading of traffic onto the e network)-gradual or abrupt; and e Weather Condition-good or bad. The resultant eight scenarios are presented in Figure 5. 3.3 Four Phases of an Evacuation The three dimensions mentioned in Section 3.2 which define the scenarios relate directly to three of four phases of an evacunton. The four pbsses are: e Notification of government officials ; Alerting of the general population; e Movement preparation; and o e Vehicular travel time. The first phase represents the time for a decision to be made to alert the public. It was not a focus of this study. Instead, the evacuation -times reported in this study start from the moment that the alart of the public is initiated and end at the time the last bit of traffic leaves the EPZ. ,i o* 14

\\ 4.0 METHODOLOGY .) To-analyze the movement of traffic out of the EPZ, an evacuation ~ mr del was developed by CONSAD _ staff which has the following two signifi \\ cant attributes: ~It reflects the dynanic aspects of an evacuation; and ~ o It recognizes capacity constraints in the road network "I e Three sets of data are required as input to the model: ~ I PCEs leaving each EPU; e leaving each Trip generatica curves representing the PCEs } e EPU during each time interval; and Network characteristics. e A brief description of sa'ch. Input is presentsd below. 4.1 PCEs Leavin'g Each EPU V for each EPU are based on The Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) L' automobile ownership by households which was obtained from the 1970 In addition, PCEs for special f acilities U.S. Census and updated to 1980. located within each EPU were estimated from data collected during site PCEs is a cancept used to measure visits to the Indian Point area. ~ I~~ vehicular flow on the network. A passenger car obviously counts for In the case of special f acilities, CONSAD hks chosen a value b one PCE. of five for buses because of the hilly terrain in the EPZ. R [J The day / night dimension determines the number of PCEs leaving n During the day, schools are in session and special facilities each EPU. r-b During the night, children are at home and specist have large staffs. F 16 y

oU facilities have reduced staffs. The net effect of the day / night dimension is that during the day, there are a larger number of f

PCEs being generated in the EPZ than there are during the night. Figure 6 shows day-time and night-time PCEs, F u. 4.2 Trip Generation Curves r b As with PCEs leaving each EPU, the trip generation ucrves are also used, to characterize the different scenarios. The curves are based upon two sources: ' f": Previous work done by the Center for P1 arming and Research e which relates to residential population; and L Data gathered from special facilities during site visits. e { Combining departure curves for these two distinct populations yielded ,u total trip generation curves for each EPU. To characterize the traffic loading dimension, different curves were developed for each case. The abrupr loading curves reflected an immediate loading of the network. L The gradual buildup curve called for a slower loading of the network. I'- Figure 7 presents the trip generation curves for both the gradual and u abrupt loading of the network. These curves relate to evacuee ready l. time for the general population. The ready times for gradual and abrupt l l loading for larger special facilities are presented in Table 4. In adC. ton to the large special facilities, there are nearly 100 l l

  • ?

public and private school facilities with a pupil population of 60,000. _I; l There are also approximately 35 nursing homes, geriatric centers, convents, l t etc., with a population of 3,500 located within the EPZ. The following j trip generation assterptions for evacuating schools, nursing homes, and p s 17 mano =-

.,g ~ E

I t i
  • 2 lI fI I

[' E [g* f f '!. .I E. I . m s 3., 1s. --I I: 9j j,

g.ll.1Ii
j

'f,\\[c 4 = . 1 1, ff ,ll L. I ! ,I'~~~......,e'p RE / ', N , I j = 3, !I D. j =

  1. f,.., ::. :....,'

,.N ,g Q .o / ,f 's - Q- /- .o. f i R.o ~, ~. o ~ ~ ~ +..,

g e ar

.~ ( .= i 5, o.%.* .,3, ~ ...s.,....2,-,, .r - e .....,..,t, I.[.~. ~. .N..r a ,5 ,1.. o"[,, ef.. a.o= / , a ,n ~ ,/ \\ ,#,.o.,w ~. ff :,,, ff.e' ga..... :...,.. - / s i> 3 S. s, c i ..,~ , ~ ~', 's. ,',t, - / . ~, L

i.. f.f'y. -

,'v. a = o. f.... - - ~ ~ -- -.' go#, ~ c ,~~,og yg,- -N-l m o~ z 8 c ., e..,.,.,s. .o., o=

n

~~ ,-, - - V 'f.,,i-.s.fk-E 'g g o a e.v,s' /'- \\.

  • z o

i: n.

g.
~, < o.,

L *= w

g.

s fr / a '( ., p

f. f.,

\\~, ) ',, " ~ a m f /.*. ( '; .f* ,e

e. ~1N;; g,

,' --~~.....---? v 5;p**;"' oe ,f eu = ', Nf-- s '- s, = N t .2 J n s.,.,- a2 ~

e

_a ao t, 's 33 a a. - u n M a / 's--......----- 7 y\\ I = n o a. x

g l

g :# w g ;; I .f, f Q l. j ,/ x's o

a a

e

=

./ n g 'N [ i = NN .....,/ ee x = l .a a, . i* m a l <N OK / \\s,/ a i, N.8 x er / v, ~i .f. f N.J r, si. , "a z_ . ?, >/. x u o e: 23

/

'-....e., ,/ h, s l : -... I ,a e a. N l / 5 20 i j ': \\.'\\ n ;..', 'N

    1. \\

l 2 l 1 o a k. \\.v.ff, f N x.','2s,* nl. f. i u *$' 3 ff L% ui x z 25- ,v c.. a l.. f.f 11 .es as I = ,W = b I ql. 18 r. IL

1 I e

a.~--

1 r f%

m f

7 I l v i l l ~' e s m e b 3 l ~.e e r e v4 0 ? w

    • u g

.a.e .e* 3 H Ca 1 2 \\

  • 4e m

.M l i o f e. uo a i N 1 e* a g e I u y i u L-eo we a <.4'.... w ,T Y E ,,Q..**e.._ e U ..**..*...*= ' [. O. we b i-. , * * * ' " =. 7 g .,Pu;7s-t yggg--...,,, lc g o o o o o n ao o w m s=4 t: (s3Jd) s2natrATnb2 sea seSuassed ;= suassed L 19 1 4'~ ~

? C s C D D D (T. D ' C~~3 M (*: O ~s D ( ~1 Q ) D M l. 1 i I I, i 5 Iable 4 Estimated Alerting-Preparing-Hoving Times f ar Hajor Special Facilities Times (sin) under Times (ein) under Evacustdon Distance Flanning from pirat Gradual Innding Abrupt Isading*4 DS Mt. Unit Name (elles) Populatione Activity Day Night 4 8 Feekek111 Community lbopitel 3.5 116 Alert skeetveds 10 60 5 5 Freparations 210 240 120 150 Buse s * *

  • 60 60
  • 30 30 Ambulancesene 120 120 105 105 First to Hove 90 120 45 60 i

Imat to Hovos 240 3G0 125 155 l 10 FDE Veterone Adataistration 21 1.400 Alert Received: 30 60 5 5 g l Preparation 180 210 120 150 Buses: 120 120 60 60 120 120 105 105 Ambulances Farat to Hove: 90 120 45 60 last to tbves 210 270 125 155 22 Maryknoll Complex-Staters 8.8 430 Alert Received: 30 60 5 5 U. Center. Nursing Ibse St. Terees'g Preparation: 120 150 90 90 Buses 60 60 30 30 lbopital Seminary Ambulances: 120 120 105 .105 First to Hove 90 120 45 45 l last to Hove 150 210 110 110 { g 22 Destning Correctional Facility 9.1 1.400 Alert Received: 15 15 5 5 (Shalter option appsere to be Preparations 1800 Rapid evacuation is not feasible most feasible protective action) Shelters 90 60 90 60 30 West Point Military Academy 8.2 10.000 Alert Received: 30 30 5 5 Preparation: 60 90 30 60 g Bi.se s : 240 210 120 120 I First to Mova 90 90 35 35-last to Hove 170 240 125 125 l l l l

I'i l-1 I i O l'~7 N' I i I 1 L t _l El i 1 i ] L ) [ l L _ J' (_ 1 O j Estimated Alerting-Preparing-Hoving Times for Hajor Specail Facilities (continued) l Table 44 { Distance Times (min) 6nder Tisse (mia) under Cradual loadina Abrupt leadina*8 Ryacuatics from plant tinit No. Name (miles) Populatione Activity

Day, Night M

Night 33, Falisades Interstate Fork '5-10 10',000 Alert Received: 15 15 5 5 34 (Evacuation of campers 240 Freparations 120 150 75 100 Buseman* 360 300 180 180 35, free and residential camp ettes) 71 rat Hove 75 75 45 45 36 last to Hove 375 315 - 185 185 36 Helen Hayes Rehab111tatica 4.1 180 Alert Received: 30 60 5 5 Center ~ Freparation: 180 240 150 210 Buses: 60 60 30 30 120 120 105 105 Ambulances *** First to Hove 90 90 45 60 1ast to Hoves 210 300 155 215 9 F* 36 latdsorth Village Devel. 5.0 2,200 Alert Receiveds 30 60 5 5 Center Freparation: 240 360 180 270 Buses: 120 120 60 60 Ambulances: 120 120 105 105 First to Hoves 90 120 45 60 last to Hove 270 420 185 275 39 Rockland coupty llealth ' 9.0 400 Alert Received: 30 60 5 5 I Fact!1ty (Summit Park) Freparation: 180 240 150 210 Buses: 60 60 30 30 Ambulancess. 120 120 105 105 l First to Hove 90 120 45 60 last to Hove 210 300 155 215 i l 8 Number of inantes, patiente, er reefdents at fscility

  • Mesumes adequate planning, equipment installation, public education, etc. will take place for the RPZ.

l

      • Estimated time for all required buses or ambulances to arrive at the facility 9

ll

other such facilities were used: Schools Under gradual loading, the pre-schools and public schools are presumed to receive the alert within one hour; e Under abrupt loading, each school is presumed to have its own special radio receiver for automated telephone for e rapid alert; Schools assume responsibility to transport all pupils to e a safe area outside of EPUs. Not all bus drivers or buses will be parked at school facilities during the middle of the day, and thus they e will have to be assembled; Under gradual loading, are based on an average number of 15 buses per school, it is assumed the first bus can be e loaded and leave within 45 minutes and the last bus will depart the schools 90 minutes after the alert is received. Under abrupt loading when adequate planning has been made, the first bus can be loaded within 3 minutes, sud the last e bus can leave by 45 minutes af ter the alert is received. Nursing Homes, Cariatric Centers, Convents Etc. I Under gradual loading day-time alert is assumed to occur as result of patients or staff learning of the event through e TV or radio, telephone calls, etc., and is estimated to be Night-time alert is assumed to be the same ,'~~ within 45 minutes. as the distributica curve for the general public. Under abrupt loading all such special facilities are assumed to be provided with special receivers or be on an automated e (" - telephone alert system and thus could be alerted within five L. minutes; Preparation time is estimated to be 90 minutes day-time and

c-150 minutes night-time under current conditions; The requirement of an average of three buses needed for each

{' facility is estimated to be met within 60 minutes under current e C-conditions; and C. L 22 t l s }

[;. r

l. )

The first bus can be loaded and enter an evacuation route at e the middle of tha preparation period following receipt of alert and the last at the and of the preparation period. For the above two sets of special facilities. the assumptions are based on estimates obtained from a sampling of suen facilities. .F ~ i 4.3 Network Characteristics C, t. Network characteristics consist of three factors: The evacuation routes defined for each EPU; e f. Travel times associated with each segment; and e Traffic capacities at critical points. o The evacuation routes were discussed earlier in 5ection 2. In specifying the scenarios, we used two different sets of travel times L-

  • {

to reflect the impact of good and bad weather on the evacuation. Estimates of travel times were initially nade for the network under good j conditions. CONSAD chose to simulate bad weather by reducing travel speed across the network by 10 miles per hour which reflected increases travel times. Finally, capacities at critical points were taken from the f' 1978 New York State Sufficiency Ratings or derived using the NYSDOT L espacity methodology. (- 4.4 Evacuation Model 1 U The evacuation model processes the inputs mentioned above by moving {' traffic through en'a networni accoraidg to tn's seihered travel times in L-ten minute intervals, up to the point that the capacity of any point f' [ in the network is exceeded. Once capacity is exceeded, the traffic which exceeds capacity is delayed to the next iteration of the simulation. p .-L 23 e ,s m9

/ 4 l The model keeps track of traffic movements in each EPU and runs until the total EPZ is coupletely evacuated. 4 / i G e .I i .4 J e 4 9 A a e e J I 24 . i

J l.i W 5.0 SCENARIO RESUI.TS The final report identified the Ideal (best) and Adverse (worst) S p The Scenarios. based on 100 percent evacuation time for the entire EPZ. b best scenarias were identified as NGLGW and NGL 3W which both ha The reason for the seemingly L percent avacution times of 7.33 hours. non-existrat difference between good and bad weather (as reflected in Cb identical evacuation times) occurs because the delay caused by bad p f~ veather turns out to be 6significant when compared to the delay created DAL3W is the worst scenario based on its 100 I by capacity constraints. ,L Table 5 su:mnarizes the 100 percent percent evacution time of 8.67 hours. evacuation times by scenario, as well as time estimates for each of the EPUs. c Althought CONSAD f eels that the above approach that identifiss the Ideal and Adverse scenarios based solely on 100 percent evacuation times is basically sound and meets all requirements of the FDfA work plan, for this summary we have taken the initiative to re-identify the best and. worst scenarios based on a slightly different criterion. The criterion f...- used defines the best and worst scenarios based on the highest and lowest a portion of population evacuated at the point of five hours into the evacuation. I Table 6 presents both PCEs and population evacuated at five hours I into the evacuation for each of the scenarios. Contrary to what is ob-f served by looking at the 100% evacuation time, under the five hour criterion At five [~ NALGW And DCLBW are the best and worst scenarios, respectively. L hours into the evacuation the best scenario will have evacuated 90.0 percent of the estimated total (284,078) 1980 population, whereas, the I 25 l ;*

i I k.i 1 L f,, Sunnary of 100 Percent Evacuation Times by Scenario Table 5: { ). EPU DGLGW l DGLBW DALGW DALBW l NGLGW l _ NGLBW NALGW NALBW I -' 1 4.83 4.83 4.67 4.67 6.50 6.67 2.83 3.0 l 2 5.67 5.67 5.50 5.50 5.0 5.0 4.67 4.67 jF 3 7.17 7.33 8.50 8.67 6.50 6.67 7.83 8.0 4 6.33 6.33 7.17 7.17 6.50 6.67 6.50 6.67 l 5 T.83 7.67 7.83 7.67 7.17 7.0 7.0 2.33 4 6 4.33 4.33 4.0 3.67 4.33 4.33 3.83 ,3.50 7 7.0 7.50 7.17 7.67 6.33 6.67 6.17 6.67 6 8 6.33 6.17 6.0 6.17 6.17 6.33 4.83 5.0 I, 9 7.67 7.67 7.50 7.67 7.0 7.0 6.83 6.83 10 7.67 7.67 7.67 7.67 7.0 7.0 6.83 6.83 i 11 4.33 4.33 2.67 2.33 4.33 4.33 2.0 1.83 ilL 12 6.50 6.83 5.83 6.17 6.33 6.50 4.67 5.0 l' 13 5.17 5.33 4.33 4.33 5.0 5.17 4.17 4.17 i jy 14 4.17 4.17 2.33 2.33 4.17 4.17 1.83 1.67 l 15 6.0 6.0 5.67 5.67 4.67 4.67 4.33 4.33 ! c-16 6.17 6.33 5.83 6.0 4.67 4.83 4.33 4.50 ,/ 17 6.33 6.33 5.0 5.0 6.17 6.17 3.67 3.67 l~ 18 7.67 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.0 6.83 6.83 6.67 j 19 4.17 4.17 1.50 1.33 6.0 6.17 1.83 1.83 f 20 4.17 4.17 1.83 2.0 4.17 4.17 1.50 1.33 ! L' 21

4. 17 4.33 2.50 2.50 6.50 6.33 2.0 2.0 l

22 7.67 7.67 7.17 7.30 7.0 7.0 5.67 6.17 i F .23 4.0 4.0 1.67 1.67 6.0 6.0 1.67 1.67 '24 4.0 4.0 4.50 ,4.50 6.0 6.0 2.67 2.67 25 4.17 4.33 3.0 3.17 4.17 4.33 2.33 2.50 l-36 4.0 4.0 3.50 3.50 4.0 4.0 3.33 3.33 i 27 4.0 4.0 2.17 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 1.83 28 4.17 4.33 2.33 2.50 4.17 4.33 2.17 2.50 l. 29 4.0 4.0 0.83 0.67 4.0 4.0 0.83 0.67 I 30 4.50 4.67 2.83 3.0 6.0 6.33 2.17 2.33 31 6.50 6.67 3.33 3.50 5.50 5.67 3.33 3.50 32 4.D 4.33 1.33 1.50 4.17 4.33 1.83 2.0 j L' C 33 6.33 6.33 3.17 3.17 5.33 5.33 3.17 3.17 i i g. 34 3.33 3.33 1.0 1.0 3.33 3.33 0.33 0.33 ) 35 6.50 6.67 6.17 6.33 5.50 5.67 5.17 5.33 36 6.33 6.33 6.17 6.17 7.33 7.33 5.50 5.33 l 37 5.67 5.83 5.17 5.17 5.33 5.33 4.33 6.17 38 7.33 7.33 7.17 7.17 6.50 6.50 6.33 6.33 2 39 6.17 6.17 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 TOTAL 7.83 7.67 8.50 8.67 7.33 7.33 7.83 8.0 { 3 i a t- \\ f L CONSAD Research Corporacion, 1980 Source: 2 L 26 C

~ T ' '. (' I' C 7-(~. (~~ 7 P' F. F, [1 (~y y g g j l i PCEaandPopulari$nF.vacuated4CFivellours { Tchie 6: into the Evacuation Five Hours into Evacuation ^ l . pop,g,,,,,' % of PoPulatico Total me i % of PCEs Evacuated Scenario PCEs Evacuated 86.6 DC10i 96,833 83,664 86.4 2A*,971 DCIAW 96,817 81,423 84.1 238,569 84.0 * / 85.6 85.4 243,067~ IRLGi %,810 82,676 85.0 84.8 241,371 DAIBW 96,815 82,099 NCIIM 81,348 73,376 90.2 256,082 90.1 89.8 254,899 89.7 NCIBW 81,333 73,037 90.9 258,120

90. 9 4 NAIIM 81,364 73,960 NAIDW 81,371 73,641 90.5 257,006 90.5 s
  • Worst Scenario
    • Best Senario CONSAD Research Corporation, 1980 Source:

4 od i.. worst scenario will have evacuated only 84 percent. The following figures highlight the best and worst scenarios as identified by the five hour criterion by looking at both entire A brief description of'each EPZ results and individual EPU result. of them is as follows: Figure 8 is a bar chart displaying population evacuated by two-hour time intervals for the entire EPZ. o Figure 9 presents 50. 90, and 100 percent PCE evacuation time estimates for each EPU under the wrst scenario (DGL3W). o Figure 11 is a graph of the results under Scenario NALGiJ comparing the percentage of PCEs evacuated over time for the r-. o l entire EPZ with the EPUs which had the shortest and longest v evacuation. times. Figure 12 is a graph of the rusults under Scenario DCL3tJ comparing the percentage of PCEs evacuated over time for the o entire EPZ with the EPUs which had the shortest and longest evacuation times. The information presented in those figures was obtained from results d of the computerized analysis; some of this information was not presente in the final report delivered to FEMt.. L f* L 7 w 9 J w 1c l L 28 l l (~ i L-

1 e oco*6 .w a I termt o* e ooo*6I asta i . v c 1 e u u oco'99 8 E imyn = ,u, e N 5 ooo*Z9 u anna a1 u. u n. u ,-a .a a e o .a oco'ss S e . - g awn g U = u. n - am ooo' tot ' i ainee w u N ~ u C3 o ooo*tet a .b d; 4 u a. n 1 S g O o U .O g i. an aggg Ou 3 e b i I .S d. R 2 R (syssonoitz ug) no72 n doi 29 1 mn--

~ ~ [' [~] lp-p- Bact; Scenario $ALCWi-Ev cuatiop Times atl50. 50 end 100% cf EPU Ev:cuation ~ Figu(391 I INDi$N POINT E t4 E p O E N C Y PL ANNINGl ZONE 73-j s tos Timen t Foyt f or Evac \\ q./ u .,\\... " ~' .a - wa t S j 8p .2 2 4 - 1"1 e 3 1 = 1001 time -s ~\\.,, 's , T.'~~i s .1 = 901 tioe in Houre I a 3.1 6.3 43 4.7 3,3 1.0 ! l l$' 2.1.....o.'.,,., 1 t 4.7 F.5 47 7.o 3.3 l / l n.o I,,,, - / -i 1.5 '..'.,. .A-: ;.

t. 2 0

,/' ** '., a,X,", 1.0 i n.s // l ! 1.0 ) // 33 2.0, l 's, 3.x s-3,3 33 J. .So j. ," "~". 1... .7o / / t.3 2.2, 1 l i f \\ .= i 33 / 1.s I "19) '?f I. 1. / -f., 2.,',,, '4. 7s.o. 1, 4.3 / 1..,70 \\, 3y \\ .1 / 's.':...!;,s',Jr'. 4.1\\,..,-\\,63.3... ?. =/ w=s s, / d <' ',.-l 8 ./ ', 3 s, e - '.,/ ,,, -l, . 7 e i [- ', 4 4.2 j 4.2,* \\ 3.3 1 e t. / /S ';A,'.,,, -\\, U .1}}', o ,/ ~ ' ',.,N 'B"e) .':.' ~' ;I l' 1.5 s' !,f 'T,.'

5. 3 e"

@A 2.8 / ~ ,e 2., 3,3 6.7 4.2 , '1. 7 3.7 r- -- _6.3 ., 6. 8 / i W / 2.o a s 1. " ' d _/ w/~"., \\ .. %.2."',,, 1.o,., 1. 2.0 s.", ~~---= ". 3. / ,/

  • V-s

,v.g s s 3.2 '\\ [ e .M 4.5 3,3,g 1.0 .30,/ 5.5 5.5 y ,eb,' g,$ se**== , 2.o s.s, , A s.- - - - - - - - - -.. - - - -, -l s,.,- 30 a e s, 3.0 s N ~~~~~ N 1.3 l _....,5. 3 8 3.0 , ;,j.;;,. ; 5.0 \\.. 3,3 l 1.s l$:$ .., h 3,3 15

    • ~~~-- ~~~

7 I, / ____... _, s.,,. f......' .--.m . ~.--- ' " ~ ~ r'. e e n fe s.n rt a TIOtt 8,80

l~ i i _i f ~~' N F7 i~-) } ~~' O t l i () [~ ] (~ l ("- J I' l Il f ", (... ) 1 W2rct Scenario /DCLBW-Ev:cuation Times at 50, 90, cnd 100% cf EPtl Evicuation Figuro 10s INDIAN POINT EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE i J I Forest for Evace.atto. timeet .3 3.5 4., } E.1 en 501 time .h,.' 4.0 x.s - 1001 stee g' 'g / 1 2 1 1 1 13= 901 time in House 33 S.3 1 3 '4.7 30 j' ' '., {^g ~ ...... 3.7 7.3 3.. / .3 77 43 / I 4.7 7.3 6.3-

  • =

! -t< 1.3 e. '..,.f. n A. l '. 4.0 / n '., 3.s / ",," i 1 l / l

  • /*/

/ ',') 3.3 l 4.3 l 2.3 . l g'y ' , 4.7 1.5 l 3.7 5,.l 3*7 2.0,f s -T. 4."~~- 27 . 40 0*3 / el A.Q - '". 3.7/ .I f .o sm #. 4.1 43; e 2.s

23 j8 3
4.2

~, '3' '~~uE?) -C3,',1'.,'7. 2 , 4.0 i 7.s/.' *.-\\s.2 *. \\' */ l / 4.73.s ..I ;, -t'. I \\'V 'p.:3. 7 g 3.e 's, / >.,. l,' -

4. 7 3.3

/ ,: 3 .i.s \\ ' t;3 g.,, ', 5.1.t., M y' ts 5.7 ,l " - 4 / 6.3,.'t a,7 l. 6.),' u/2,3'i...,'*."'i.7 N-,J. i, I.

4.3 :,,

.:3 i w=3 .:,3, t== / ' 7.7 . I, gg=J) / 3.s , _7 7 / 3.s ) 6 /g, 5.5 %,,,,7', s 1.3 s. [ 6.3 6.7 --.,,,,.1.3 '. 2.7 /,"

  • ~l,,, ~ ~,n 4.2 g.,

l4.2 5, ,,... -f' IM 3. g 2.2 f, \\34.s h.,, ~i'.s 2d / 3,, 20 7.2 l.n,,, 4.3 / s.5

.......,_,,g.,3

,.. ~~'., , 7.5 .' yn \\',,,* 1.5 l ~ ~ ~ - O A.I "i[, N., j

3. 2 lf

,,,,... h.5,.,,. 2.2 l \\,'g ~ ~... 3.7 3.8 - - - - - - ~.. -. - ~ s.s .l ) s.;,.. ~ """" 6.2 s 1.2 / 7.2 l 2.2 2.3 A 1% .~ i.. l l .0 1

- i q,;

'.u.. 5.y l, 7.._.. "a**.*..*: .--a=== D** . D W 8O O$a .o e N GnB w,,,, O

== e u -n H s..D. c. o

s. u

+ N u a ~ e u ~ \\ e S c. N o (. u

l. 0 t

N. - ~ o 3 i + i e I .- e 5 \\ e.o 1 os e\\ u s n ~ U g\\ e .., i \\ E '+ \\ \\ a r1 sS.\\s \\. = - 3 \\ t i.t. *, y a . s.t \\ s. [ !! \\ . e ** . -e-ie G s. e o. % o. 8 y % 'T . %>4

  • o.,.

s .O i ?' 5 Lu g '. g4 o .E \\ \\ t, s } E \\ s g i a

  • Y

\\ __ ~ k +3 D* g \\ aes 's I \\ o\\ \\ r-e4 i., I Y *r / .J g T* i. a e ~ 2 e o 82M IIt*t EC agg \\ 090'y. dod % ~~~~~' w ""***========.=====%.'*"' I i I 1 I I ^.- 4

  • U*S as f

1 s'. g 4 I 6 8 4 o' g R ~- o o O L 2 2 ~ I t., 32 (' e.e _}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19345C438&oldid=4710142"