ML19347E047

Testimony on Behalf of NRC Re Methodology Used in Evacuation Time Estimate Study.Includes Road Network Capacity & Evacuation Times for Normal Daytime,Nighttime & Adverse Weather Evacuation Scenarios.W/Prof Qualifications

ML19347E047
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	04/10/1981
From:	Urbanik T Battelle Memorial Institute, PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATION, TEXAS A&M UNIV., COLLEGE STATION, TX
To:
Shared Package
ML19347E046	List: ML19347E047
References
NUDOCS 8104150062
Download: ML19347E047 (11)

Text

t[f /O d UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-289

) (Restart)

(Three Mile Island Unit 1) )

TESTIMONY OF THOMAS URBANIX II ON EVACUATIO" TIME ESTIMATE STUDY FOR THREE MILE ISLAND April 10, 1981 810.4150 0 leM

OUTLINE TESTIMONY OF THOMAS URBANIK II ON EVACUATION TIME l ESTIMATE STUDY FOR THREE MILE ISLAND

This testimony addresses the manner in which the Evacuation Time Estimate I

Study prepared for Three Mile Island conforms with Revision 1 to NUREG-0654, Appendix 4. However, the review of the evacuation time estimate study did

.not include an analysis of the planning assumptions of the study or a comparison of the evacuation time estimate study with existing offsite emergency plans.

The testimony addresses the methodology used in the study to determine the

, road network capacity and to compute evacuation times for normal daytime, nighttime, and adverse weather evacuation scenarios. The provisions of the evacuation time estimate study which account for the permanent, transient,

.and special facility population is also discussed. Finally, the testimony indicates that the evacuation time estimate study could bc used to identify to planners and emergency response personnel the need to consider actual roadway conditions in determining the need is traffic control as well as providing a reasonable basis to emergency response decisionmakers on which to make a protective action recommendation involving evacuation.

i l

i i

l l

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD t

In the Matter of METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-289

) (Restart)

(Three Mile Island, Unit 1) )

i TESTIMONY OF THOMAS URBANIK II ON EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE STUDY FOR THREE MILE ISLAND Q.1. State your name and title.

i A. I am Thomas Urbanik II, a transportation engineer and Assistant

! Research Engineer associated with the Texas Transportation Institute of the Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas Q.2. Do you have a statement of your professional qualifications?

A. Yes. A statement of my professional qualifications is attached to j this testimony.

Q.3. In what capacity are you testifying here?

A. I am testifying on behalf of the NRC Staff for which I serve as a l consultant, through the Battelle Pacific Nortnwest Laboratories which is responsible for reviewing evacuation time estimates of nuclear facilities under contract to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

t e~.- . . - . ,, - , - - - - - , , _ _ , , . , - - - - - - . , +-,,,,--.,n ,+, ,- -,i

. .. . . .- = _ . _ _ -_. - ._

2 Q.4. Briefly summarize your experience with evacuation time estimate studies for nuclear- facilities. f A. I was a principal writer of NUREG/CR-1745, " Analysis of Techniques i I

for Estimating Evacuation Times for Emergency Planning Zones", which  ;

i -

war, published in November 1980. That document described the limitations l I of several methodologies and some alternatives for determining evacuation l i

time estimates. Additionally, I provided input to the development of the current guidance for evacuation time estimate studies which appear [

in Appendix 4 to NUREG-0654, Revision 1. Furthermore I have reviewed (

the initial evacuation time estimate study submittals of apVoximately 52 operating and near term nuclear facilities for the NRC against

] guidance of NUREG-0654, Revision 0.

l l

Q.5 What is the purpose of this testimony?

A. The purpose of this testimony is to address the manner in which the

.i Evacuation Time Estimates for the Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ at Three  !

Mile Island Nuclear Generating facilities prepared for General Public  !

Utilities Service Corporation by Parsons, Brinkerhoff, Quade and Douglas, Inc. of March 3, 1981 compares to the guidance of NUREG-0654, Appendix l 4, based on a review which I completed on April 3,1981. '

Q.6. What was the scope of your review of the March 3,1981 Evacuation Time Estimate Study for TMI?

)  :

f f 1

1

, - , , , , _, , _ , - , . - , . - . . _ - - - - - . - - - , _ . .s- - , _ , , - - , - - . _ , . - . . - . . ~ . - - ~ . , , , - - . , .

l A. I conducted this review during the last two weeks of March 1981 at the request of the NRC Staff. The results of the study as well as the methodology used to develop the evacuation time estimates were evaluated and compared with the guidance of Appendix 4 to NUREG-0654. My review did not involve a comparison. of the study with any emergency preparedness plans or procedures of the licensee or State or local response organizations.

i i

Q.7. What were the criteria that you used during your review of the evacuation

study submitted by Metropolitan Edison?

A. I compared the Three Mile Island evacuation time estimate study with i

the guidance of NUREG-0654, Appendix 4. Appendix 4 discusses several elements which the NRC and FEMA believe should be included in evacuation time studies. The considerations include: (a) an accounting for

! permanent, transient, and special facility populations in the plume exposure EPZ; (b) an indication of the traffic analysis method and

! the method of arriving at road capacities; (c) a consideration of a range of evacuation scenarios generally representative of normal through adverse evacuation conditions; (d) consideration of confirmation of evacuation (e) identification of critical links and need for traffic control; and (f) use of methodology and traffic flow modeling techniques for various time estimates consistent with the guidance of NUREG-0654, Appendix 4.

i l

i

, , _ . . . , . - - -- .- - , _ , . , _ , . - . . , , . ~ . , , . - , - . . , - . . - ~ , - - - . . .

O 4

Q.8. Briefly describe the methodology of the study.

A. The methodology used for analyzing evacuation times at TMI is a volume /

capacity analysis on a roadway link basis in order to determine critical roadway segments under various evacuation scenarios. A computer program was used in the analysis to do the counting of vehicles on evacuation routes and to determine the volume to capacity ratios. The method for computing total evacuation time was a sequential method, consistant with one of the two acceptable approaches identified in NUREG-0654, Rev. 1, Appendix 4.

Detailed population e*+.imates were made for permanent residents, transients, and special facility residents as specified in NUREG-0654, Rev. 1. The permanent population estimates were based on preliminary 1980 Census data.

In addition, a variety of data sources were used to estimate transient and special facility popciations.

Populations were converted to the number of evacuating vehicles in several ways. Permanent residents were apportioned to vehicles based on the number of automobiles available for evetuation. This results in an average of less than two persons per vc lcle. Transient populations were converted to evacuating vehicles based on assumed occupancy rates, except for transient employees for which vehicle estimates are based on survey data. The overall approach used to determine evacuating vehicles is reasonable and makes maximum use of available data.

. Non-auto evacuation times are based on utilizing identified buses in close proximity to the EPZ. Multiple trips would be required to evacuate some residents. The time required would be dependent on the effectiveness of the plan to deploy the available resources.

The capacity analysis is based on a capacity range. The lower bound (i.e., lowest time estimate) reflects an upper limit on capacity. The upper bound provides a reasonable estimate of increased time due to a 4

number of variables including state-of-readiness and less than ideal capacity and will provide protective action decisionmakers a useable mechanism for accounting for existing conditions at the time of evacuation.

The evacuation time estimates are based on three scenarios. The scenarios are normal conditions (daytime populations), adverse weather (snow), and nighttime w'nen total populations are lower and family units are together. The evacuation time estimate thus considers a range of evacuation scenarios representative of normal through adverse evacuation conditions generally reflective of the type of conditions that might be expected to exist in an actual evacuation.

The analysis identifies a number of critical locations (potential traffic bottle-necks) and, while it assumes that adequate traffic control personnel are available for those critical locations, it has identified the critical locations so that emergency response officials may assign l needed traffic control or account fo. the lack of traffic control at critical locations in their decision making.

t 4

e

- - . . - , , - - - , - . - . --w. , .-

o Q.9. Based on your' review of the evacuation time estimate study, have you

identified any weaknesses or areas in the study which were not addressed.

A. Yes. An adverse weather scenario considering rain in combination with normal daytime populations might possibly produce evacuation times 1

higher than the normal scenarios studied. My only concern in this regard was that no discussion was included in the evacuation time study which indicated that rain was considered.

Q.10. What is your opinion as to the overall compliance of the study to the criteria of NUREG-0654?

A. The report on evacuation times is responsive to and is in compliance with NUREG-0654, and the estimates provided delineate a reasonable range of times required to evacuate the TMI-1 plume EpZ.

Q.11. How, in your opinion, will emergency response personnel be able to utilize these evacuation time estimates?

i A. These time estimates should provide to emergency response decisionmakers additional information and a basis on which a-decision as to the feasibility of an evacuation could be made. The evacuation study could identify r some necessary modifications to local evacuation plans as a result of bottlenecks or inadequate traffic control and routing.

i i

a

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

i THOMAS URBANIK II APRIL 1980  !

BIOGRAPHICAL DATA t

Education: Ph.D., Civil Engineering (Transportation), Texas A&M University, in progress }

r M.S., Civil Engineering (Transportation), Purdue University, i 1971 B.S., Civil Engineering, Syracuse University,1969  !

B.S., (Forest Engineering), State University of New York, 1968 Professional Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University, Janua ry  ;

Positions: 1977 to Present. Assistant Research Engineer.  !

City of Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1972-1976. Traffic f Engineer.

City of Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1971-1972. '

Transportation Planning Engineer.

Joint Highway Research Project, Purdue University, 1970-1971. ,

Research Assistant.

Experience: Principal Investigator on several studies concerning public transportation planning at the state and local levels. Areas include general transit, elderly and handicapped transporta-tion, and priority treatment of freeways and arterial streets.

Other transportation planning studies include hurrivane evac-uation, nuclear evacuation and truck routino for hazardous i materials. Recent traffic engineering work includes delinea- '

tion of portable barriers in construction zones.

Responsible to Director of Streets, Traffic and Parking, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Responsible supervisory and professional traffic engineering work in directing the traffic engineering function of the department. Work involved responsibility for l the application of professional engineering skill and knowledge to difficult traffic engineering problems in traffic regulation and control, street use, street lighting, geometrics, parking, school safety, curb cuts, and related traffic engineering 1 activities. Was directly responsible for the supervision of the traffic signal and traffic sign maintenance personnel.

Responsible to Director of Traffic Engineering and Transporta-tion, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Reviewed transportation aspects of all plans for development in the city. Staff member to the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority responsible for budget and union negotiations. Staff Coordinator for the planning, design,

implementation, and operation of the Dial-A-Ride demand-responsive demonstration project. '

Under general direction of Dr. Kenneth W. Heathington, Purdue Uni versi ty, designed attitudinal questionnaire concerning public transportation for a home interview survey in Lafayette, Indiana. Also analyzed survey results for inclusion in a  ;

report which was the basis for improving public transportation i

, in Laf ayette.

Affiliations: Institute of Transportation Engineers Transportation Research Board Sigma Xi Chi Epsilon Regi stration: Registered Professional Engineer, Texas and Michigan ,

Publications: Urbanik, T. and Jose' A. Soegaard, Cos t-Ef fectiveness of Accessible Fixed-Route Busses in Texas, Texas Transportation Institute, Technical Report 1061-1F, September 1979.

Urbanik, T. and Jose' A. Soegaard, Transportation of the Elderly and Handicapped in Texas: A Case Study, Texas Trans-portation Institute, Technical Report 1056-2F, September 1979.

l 4

Urbanik, T., bryan-College Station Transit Improvement Plan, Texas Transportation Institute, September 1979.

Urbanik, T., Total Accessibility Versus Equivalent Mobility of the hanoicapped, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Compendium of Technical Papers, 49th Annual Meeting,1979.

Urbanik, T. et al., Survey of Vehicles and Equipment for >

El derly and fiandWapped Transportation, Texas Transportation Institute, Technical Report 1056-1, September 1978.

Urbanik, T. and R.W. holder, Corpus Christi El derly and handicapped Transportation Study, Texas Transportation Institute, September 1978.

Urbanik, T., Texas hurrican Evacuation Study, Texas Transporta-tion Institute, September 1978.

• Urbanik, T. , Priority Treatment of Buses at Traffic Sign'als, Transportation Engineering, November 1977.

Urbanik, T. and R.W. Holder, Priority Treatment of High Occu-pancy Vehicles on Arterial Streets, Texas Transportation Institute, Report 205-5, July 1977.  ;

Urbanik, T. and R.W. Holder, Evaluation of Alternative Concepts for Priority Use of Urban Freeway f

4 I

Urbanik, T., et al., Ann Arbor Dial-A-Ride Project Final Report, Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, April 1973.

Urbanik, T., Ann Arbor Dial-A-Ride Operations, Highway Research Board Special Report 136, 1973.

Urba nik , T. and.K.W. Heathington, Driver. Information Systems '

i for Highway-Railway Grade Crossings, Highway Research Record f4 umber 414,1972.

Urbanik, T., et al., The Greater Lafayett Area Bus Transit 1

Study, Joint HighwTy Research Project, Purdue University, April i 1971. -

i t

4 d

l i

i t

i 1

i

- _ _ _ _ . _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ . _