ML20002A885
| ML20002A885 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley, Millstone, Fermi, Limerick, Maine Yankee, Midland, Shoreham, Bailly, Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1980 |
| From: | WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19345C217 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012040088 | |
| Download: ML20002A885 (17) | |
Text
I 0 ;;
y,f
=.
AN
.E V A C J AT O \\
TJV.E AS S ES S V E N OF NINE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONES l
EX2CU-IVE SJiV V ^RY
- gm:~n--
m==uMM3gg;;gn=
Prepared for FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY 9f7//ut Tmi/A ana'doscciales JUNE,1980 E012040037
~
gf 93 INTPOLUCTION An independent assessrent of evacuation times for nine nuclear power plant sites was made for the Federal Emergency Management Agency'.
The results of this three-month study are contained in ten volumes:
Volume I
- Program Report - Evacuation Time Assessment of Nine Nuclear Power Plant Emergency Planning Zones (EP Z 's)
Volume II
- Bailly Nuclear Power Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume III
- Beavrir Valley Nuclear Power Plant Evacuation Time Assessrent Volume IV
- Enrico Fermi Nuclear Power Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume V
- Limerick Nuclear Power Plant Evacuation Tire Assessnent Volume VI
- Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Plant Evacuation Time Assessment i
Volume VII
- Midland Nuclear Power Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume VIII - Millstone Nuclear Pcwer Plant Evacuation Time Assessment Volume IX
- Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant Evacuation Time Asse ssrent Volume X
- Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant Evacuaticn Time Assessment This executive summary contains conclusions of the assess-ment for all of the nuclear power plants reported in detail in Vclumes II through X above.
A brief surrary of the methodology, discussed in Volume I, is also provided.
(
- c Evacuation Tite Assessment Versus Evacuation Plan The assessment employs available demographic data and trans-portation facility information to predict the public response time to an evacuation warning on the assumption that such a warn-2 ing is made within 15 minutes of an on-site nuclear incident warranting such emergency action.
The assessment provides for estimates of public response tine to these warnings, assembly of family and other groups, preparation for departure, travel time on the network including consideration of capacity limitations on the network creating congestion and possibly forming queues which add to delays, and clearance of the 10-mile radius around the site.
It considers the evacuation of special problem areas and groups.
These would l
include schools, nurseries, nursing and. retirement homes, hos-t l
pitals, penal facilities, beaches and recreational areas, and other activities which may provide periodic or seasonal concen-I tra. ions of people.
Population groups without access to their own transportation or unable to provide the special transporta-l l
tion facilities required for evacuation are considered in the i
evacuation time assessment.
Evacuation time assessment methodology combines selected techniques of traffic c:anagement and planning, land use planning and operational analysis.
Because some conditions prevailing during an evacuation are not well documented, modifications to some established principles were required to meet evacuation requirements.
Assumptions were required in lieu of well formu-lated relationships because of the highly specialized proble=s being addressed.
These assumptions were founded on professional judgement and/or extrapolation from existing knowledge.
These assumptions have been specifically identified.
The bases upon which the assumptions are founded are appropriately discussed.,- - -.
-.--.t.
(6 yp Evacuation time assessments contain basic rathodology common to evacuation plan development.
However, the assessment is not an evacuation plan.
The major distinction between the assessment 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 manage-ment element is established to optimize traffic operations at a specific location along an evacuation network.
The feasibility of such an element in the assessment is based upon established technical principles.
Ecwever, the elerants have not been coordinated with specific law enforcement agencies to establish what agency would exercise the element control and managerent nor identify the type and number of personnel to be required.
The study time allotted makes such coordination impossible.
This assessment identifies what is required for the evacuation time to be realized, and assumes that such an element would be impleranted.
4 _ - -
u i
EVACUATION TIFI ASSESSMENT PROGRAM The assessment of evacuation times was performed in the nine Emergency Planning Zones (EPZ's) illustrated in Figures 1 through 9.
The general procedures entailed the development of planning zones within these areas, from local sources, the assembly of demographic data related to these planning zones and the analysis of the existing highway facilities serving those zones.
The popu-l lation to be evacuated in each of these zones was subdivided into population centroids, based upon the highway facilities available to serve as evacuation routes.
An evacuation route was determined by traffic engineering analyses to evacuate the centroid population to a point inter-secting the 10-mile radius of the EPZ.
Network links were iden-tified for each of these routes.
Link characteristics of distance, speed and capacity were identified for each evacuation route.
Centroid population was translated to vehicles leaving each cen-troid by an appropriate car occupancy value.
l These data were analyzed by a computer program which repre-sented the evacuation network.
Public response to an evacuation warning was statistically divided into four basic activities:
(1) receive warning, (2) leave present non-home based location, (3) travel time non-home location to home, and (4) evacuate home.
These responses were tire distributions relating the percent j
I of the population responding to these various reactions as a function of time af ter the warning was issued.
Analysis programs were then used to develop selected combinations of these reactions which fit the conditions of four scenarios-- normal workday, night-time, summer peak and bad weather.
These combinations represented the total distribution of time for vehicles to enter the evacua-tion route from each centroid.
l l l
~
[%-
(;=...-
ra.
=
e i
.e
's g ' 7, W
t
/
\\ ' =,
9
- .=.v-N J
W'l l
,6 =
L
\\
'W'" E 5 7 3,,(S T E 1
'?
A,".
s D' r
_d._x i
i \\G 7
A R
c.
g Qi K*
~& f m a
u.
t F P O T A G E
\\
l i
j
, 5/.N kE S O N
- I k*I f
I L
I B E R T J A l'
/l I
f
}
fp H O 5
A T
- M
(.
g e
!r-
- "L f
==--__
j
..q i,,
l ns )
=
WASHINGT N
0 ____________________
U O
N C
e y,, e ST.
5 l
hT f1 0
STUDY SITE LOCATION EVACU ATION TIME ASSESSMENT BAILLY
cuar t av / u
t
- a.~
T-. E k. - - (
M ! D D L E 7 O N S
O
"#!PPEWA l
O E
A ~ Y E
t e
/,.
J e
t p
i mi
.e DAUCHE TT c'*
e
- 4. N ' 's %
l j '...
.p
\\
'\\
i O
[
6I
..,'N
',.4-'..
..]
\\
)'
N*4
- " ' ~
e
..r
'~~
/,
yi
. ^%\\
OCHESTER
- j J
e
- t.'
1 t
i
..,.... )
g l 5
RJ G
.o
, i e
rm y*
T CL A I R }j
......_,. I O
vi
/,
v
"- 1.,
t
~
i w
v
!,f.,
-- %....I
.. r E N.T E
tNOU0III j
R*1.
P O T 3 '
a'
,/ ~
,_,A
~~
i
')
.y r.,
-~
~'
J.
e....,., % -.. U*
i-'b
[, ,.
~
N l
4' I,
1
{l 6
s f.
~l
)
~
e
"',I L
I" c
.R A
N O-R g
y g
,/
\\
\\
, p 6
y-
'~ 1*"~ ***
a
(
_ _,1 y
~"s a..
~
l
?
...., I g
[/
i
~
d
/
\\
s
\\
/
1 f.N
[ DEN E s
J.
l 5
~
- m. t
,./
~C A
T A
N 0; V,,
E R
j
..e y
v
)
pgg BMGM STUD 7 diTE LOCATION EVACUATION TIME ASSESSMENT BEAVER VALLEY
%%e %'th anddawirtu r,aung g L
Tp E L R
\\
y5
^ $
i o
-+ = :.
l t
5 H
N A9 s,
o d
B E
t L
N J
/
l,,..;
- ss$i F
R E
N C
7 0
W La tone as es se-k e
[..~"'~'
,/
b
+
l
/ 's N
..Q
~.
LA
$A' LEs
N f
l STUDY SITE LOCATION EVACU ATION TIME ASSESSMENT ENRICO FERMI l
- IGURE 3 l,..-
R00R ORMC y'
W j
I f
/ U P P E R e
3 g
/
/
MARL 3OR UGH es 1
/
,r s
A N O R fk Y l' O
L E
i
~.
'/
/
/
E A
L /'N
)-
/
/
/
s'
""/
DOUG ASS /
/
r
.'%_ \\
,o
,f 3
s
\\
= /
f y
f PER
/
/ UPPER
'[
s
[DOUCLA $
f tE OV E R,1
,o g-
, \\'g I
s TREDERICE,'
{
j A
M T
T
/
f i
,/
Y, k
/
l l
' POT ROVE' N
/ LOWE R
f
~'y s' 's s'
i
\\
r FREDER!.
,,e
,/
N e" ~
s
{f g
,e t't O
l LOWER 'N /
\\
N,*
,2 No..
,'(3ALF RD POTTSGROVEi N,'
i i
s O
E L I M hI C E,/
}
f f'
'N
' NORTH
/
'(N
(
i l
u.
,s
- *** 88' 's-
/
l C0VENTRY
/
N
%n
% rs*ss as-A
\\,
EA57
,i
\\
/
\\
f' N
/
'N COVENTRY A
f a
OUTB
/
s e
/
N N
C VENTRY
/
/ EAS T
I;
/
\\
\\,' V 1NCEN
'i A R W E
f f Np
')
N 3
or' N
/
l
\\
i
','s i
f f
s
,,~~'
~
W E
S T
/.. AST e
t m
/
LO W E R'
~~'N
/
,/
f' C
\\
/
'h
/
/
s V
I N
C E
N T,/
N A N T M E A L jf x
r
/
~
,/ % j l
s,
(
s s
e'
/ C A RL E T O
\\.
/
/
W E T
~~
s f
l e
mw
,, " " '/
g
'N,k
- K LA N "J '
I f
'N UW C H L
,N
[
f'
='s**
I STUDY SITE LOCATION EVACU ATION TIME ASSESSMENT UMERICK g A./ 4
/.4 r /
segucE 4_
D
.n,. :
C' l
~
r
, -c:(,
3 owboI N H A l
x(f l
.n x w c A giL
- ' ; //
- /
'Z
- g j
\\
o
[
/
b
/ w I s C A S
7 r
rJ },
n.
N'-
'g
/
I
\\
// /
5
'N, l
lll a%;
~
'/
wNo i
\\
o L
I c s,
7
,k 4
',/
E D \\G E C 0 M A'
- ['ht l
s p.f ('/ I6,, \\
v\\
P' a g i{ s
(
/
f t
i*M
\\
- l
- h #~' "
w
! ?
.,I i kP
- f)pfT;/ga';'lgjQ; l 1
-s N
rq
,atis ot !
[}
(y./
U*,
[
r I
v vi t.
E I
Al
\\
f.'-0 s'N i
fs)0 ' \\v'\\
if'**"s sh Y
\\'J, k
'\\
h h?
3 Q
{$
n
\\y J
d *7-lN' l')
/
Q,,
r*-
e &es.: % ; W( - h'(.-Ta-fh' l: )
N'f 'r
-\\
\\, l.
a o ;HBAY 5
- 44 ~
l.
p
' I
\\
t s ~ 'lon.
{
)
/_f c'1
'n*
%}
h..,s.l-<',.l $
l o
p ,k, /
I lc ~f )Il i
's Y
~
~
y i
I
- k. *'
,5 g/
a T' &I
,i" f
.'f h./f"
' ~f #
1 0~
STUDY SITE LOCATION EVACUATION TIME ASSESSMENT MAINE YANKEE aaynE 5
@,//uo fm,74 asaa' alut. car /as
^
s t
=
nnnt ncinthill
~
u ruun ui
-~
l
\\
- j..-
I
,S S
1 M /E
,e J & SQ'd \\
l G
l it
'\\
I* L !
C 0 L Nl
\\
KAWK47 LIN 1
=
l 3 g a y i; gt l
l Q
a n
s n
/. i L
I
\\,
[
(
l h
/
\\
.A 1
/
\\l l
'A
\\
I pWC,.
' N LN 4 l'g_1.
-"~
-i snm A
/g
(
l
\\ /
n m er u so-f l
] "' "~
(I
-/ ~
i 5
i T4 i
l
! FRANKE 'LL'5F l
i 8
/
j M
0 ft N
T l g
I 1
N C E R S 0 L L H
A 1.
E T
d(ATA 7g7 P 0 R T E P.
l-g i
N l
- KOCHVILLE E --
R I C d L A N D
N.
N l
s o *'* '..-
J O N E S r ! ELD T
H O
M A,
S l
l l
l l
STUDY SITE LOCATION 1
EVACU ATION TIME ASSESSMENT MIDLAND FIGURE e I
L.
PflflR llRlllINAl bA
\\
\\
1.
_ _.,. A
'
- i ~ ~,.~
_.._ /,
s
~
e x..
4 s _-
i s
(;
\\
}
s\\ z
's..
.\\,
. v. ".-
e
(
.3, t
3 t
- i. 1 s
1 y)
\\{r!
3;p p =:=
~} +
Sg\\
j
-r n.n
,\\ 1 y
<........ - s s
t l
1 N
STUDY SITE LOCATION EVACU ATION TIME ASSESSMENT l
MILLSTONE l
neuas 7
..w_w
_ 2
POUR ORIGINAL
- T W x
]3 [)
~6
/'
~S N
\\
m
\\
T\\
4 m
&E5$1 g.
(
L>
/
d
@ =,.
l',i, _ _ -};
'f N
s
/
-=
i N
/
/
A-
\\y
])'
r f
%k 6
\\\\\\ W
'9' STUDY SITE LOCATION l
EVACUATION TIME ASSESSMENT SHOREHAM ha&s hu4 and.aluu.' /**
vacune a a
i
n
(......
Y 69,,
/
\\
\\
i L
0 W
E a
0UTH
}
l
/
"/.
\\*
m "6,
^ " o v,.c..'.
\\
+.
T
- y.. _ -
^
- r s
E'
[
,'s Iy
~ i, s
P 1,,~ ~ ~..
W A
f",
D E'
R R Y 9
-1 :,
j r%
q v.
i e
k v
O j
- St -- --- ------- %
.)
3
\\
~,
- *\\
\\
\\
}
i A (A
^
s Y
y, v'
s N
N D0 DE T
- F A
I E
V i
E W....-
't,
. ~~
\\
7 ym... w.
.e m.sw Ei.,
M O
U.
T J
0 A,5
?.es lt a~
\\
/
f
\\
}
9 6.
--4 R R Y N' )
\\
\\
E 3 I D N E G A L L., \\..
~.
\\
s
(
C N O Ys.',
. j.
- = = = ~ _
e..*
WAR NGTON
-s
~ ~ ' *
...-/
[
A T
,.J 3
.,/
X
-u
\\
i
( '.'
E ST
./
C 0 N W
G s.....
l4' '.*
W G
A L L
= =
(
c%}
I~
's MANCH TER s
V D
0 Y
I E
./
H E
L L
A M
I g
TfR,.~...g...'
,, c' M i
s
.4 y
P00R BRIGIN?L
\\
I STUDY SITE LOCATION EVACU ATION TIME ASSESSMENT THREE MILE ISLAND
%%e %(4 ami a(sucks (**
FIGU A E 9
==~
~w e
1 The program then distributed vehicles leaving the centroid in four basic. time increments as determined by total combined distribution.
Travel time and the delay time resulting from congestion that might occur en any link of the evacuation route due to its limiteil capacity in relation to the assigned volume was computed, and summed with the mobilization time.
The evacuation time for each centroid to the external point where its evacuation route leaves the 10-mile radius of the EPZ was the output of the analysis program providing the basic infor-mation for the evacuation time assessment.
Special problem areas such as beaches, hospitals, s chools,
nursery schools, jails, employment centers and other areas of population concentration were identified.
In seme cases, such as beaches and employment centers, centroids were created in the network and appropriate population statistics were assigned for certain scenario evaluations.
Evccuation of hospitals, schools, nursery schools and jails were analyzed in the assessment.
The assessment study also considered several mechanisms t
for confirming evacuation of the area.
Recommendations for the improvement in evacuation time were also provided.
l l
l l
l l
i l e--
---y,,,
w
,m.-m.
n
-w-e e
(
CONCLUSICNS A summary of the maximum evacuation time by the four sce-narios of normal workday, nighttime, summe r, and bad weather are presented in Table 1, alcng with the identification of the prob-lem area experiencing the time shown.
It must be recognized that evacuation begins within a short time and many areas have com-pletely evacuated by the times indicated.
There fore, these times represent the worst case conditions in the respective plant areas.
The maximum evacuation time relative to the scenard os for all nine areas occurs in the Maine Yankee centroid for the bad weather scenario.
Because of local conditions, this scenario assumed that a fog occurs c'n a su=mer afternoon while large crowds are at the beaches.
In other scenarios, bad weather was defined as an ice storm which disrupted highway operations.
In the same EPZ, the same problem area, Southport Island, could be evacuated in 130 minutes under normal workday conditions.
Beaver Valley had the longest workday evacuation time of 245 minute s, related to the evacuation of an area in Aliquippa.
The evacuation of this area was seriously limited by available highway facilities.
The same area had 230 minutes nighttime evacuation time.
Millstone had the highest summertime evacuation time of t
i 319 minutes.
The problem area was South New London, where increased summertime resident population and beach visitors combined with high density of the area and limited highway f acilities to produce this condition.
Special problem area; were evaluated.
A study of litera-ture indicated that evacuations are more likely to be performed by the family as a group.
School children were to be delivered.
Table 1 MAXIMUM CENTROII) EVACUATION TINE SUMMAltY DY SCENARIO (Minutes)
Nut (MAI. WOlmilAY NI CllTTI MH StlNMMH DAD WMA1til:R SITE M n.o Prob Em Aron Tine Profilem Ar ea Tlpe Pinidem Area YTne [_iToT)em Area lini l ly 180 Po rtage, Ind.
165 Portage, Ind.
294 Ind. Dunes State 190 Portage, Ind.
Park Deaver Valley 245 Aliquippa, Pa.
230 Aliquippa No change
- 250 Aliquippa, Pa.
8 En ri co Fe rmi 115 Mon roe, Mich.
100 Monroe, Mich.
No change
- 125 Ponroe, Mich.
I.i m ri ck 190 East Coventry 175 East Coventry No change
- 190 East Coventry Township Township Township a-s Maine Yankee 130 Sot w art Island 115 Southport Island 299 Southport Island 355 Southport Island Midland 145 N.E.
Ingersoll 130 N.E.
Ingersoll 147 N.E.
Ingersoll 175 N.E.
Ingersoll Township Township Township Township Hillstone 185 So. New London, 170 So. New I.ondon, 319 So. New London, 205 So. New London, Conn.
Conn.
Conn.
Conn.
Shoreham 155 South Beach Area 140 South Deach Area 176 South Beach Area 175 South Beach Area Three Mile Island 180 Steelton, Pr.
165 Steeltor Pa.
No change
- 200 Steelton, Pa.
,N
- Summertime population is the same as normal conditions.
Evacuation time is therefore unaf fected.
.