ML20062K928
| ML20062K928 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1980 |
| From: | STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062K923 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101070536 | |
| Download: ML20062K928 (30) | |
Text
-_- _ _ . _ - _ _
O PRELIMINARY EVACUATION TIME STJDY OF TdE PLUME EX?OSURE DERGENCY P'J.NNING ':ONE ARCUND THE WM.E. ZIMMER NUC: EAR PCWER STATION UNIT 1 Prepared for l Se Cincinnati Gas & Electric Cempany Columbus and Southern Ohio Electric Ccmpany n e Dayton Power and Light Company August 1980 M30KAZ, ZWORLujay W12D It A
'~un ::::;gny, hY ,
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation New York, New York e n nman n s e A 8101070 53C
...: :.-. 0: v.h._-h e . S Section Title Page a F. w..
m RY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a, 2 INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 3 RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 4 METHODS OF ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 5 CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS. . . . . . . . . . 5-1 6 REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 3-1 ESTIMATED ZONE EVACUATION TIMES. . . . . . . . 3-4
. Figure 3-2 SPECIAL FACILITIES MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5 LIST OF TASLES Table Title Pace 3-1 Time Estimates for Evacuation of the General. . . . . 3-6 Population within 10 Miles of the Station 3-2 Comparison of Results with those of Local Flanners. . 3-7 5-1 Designated Evacuation Routes. . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-9 5-2 General Zone Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-12 5-3 Special Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-13 e
l l
l l
SECT:CN 1 SUIO". ark" In response to a December 26, 1979 request frem the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccemission (MRC), an assessment has been prepared of the time required to evacuate the area located within the plume emergency planning :ene around the Wm. E. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station, Moscow, Ohio. At the outset it must be recognized that a comprehensive analysis of the factors involving population evacuation as a result of an assumed hazard at Zimmer cannot be completed until the final NRC/ FEMA position is available and the plans of responsible state and local agencies are developed based on that position. This assessment is based on emergency planning data available at this time and its findings are subject to revision after the state and local emergency plans have been further developed.
The evacuation analysis has been performed in accordance with the sector delineations as defined by the NRC. Sectors have been chosen with boundaries tc correspond as closely as possible to county lines and the Ohio River contour. The existence of a prompt notification system as described in Appendix 3 of NUREC-0654 is assumed. Best estimate evacuation times without such a system are provided sepaiately in the text. Using a total population estimate of 25,500 residents and 1500 employees for 1980, the best estimate total evacuation times by zone are:
Best Estimate Total Evacuation Zone Descriotion Time (Ecurs) 0-2 miles Sector I 0-2 miles, 180' area east of 1.0 the Ohio River in Ohio Sector II O-2 miles, 180' area west of 1.0 the Ohio River in Kentucky 0-5 miles Sectors I & III The area between the two to 1.7 five mile radius within Clermont County (Ohio) north of Route 743 and east of the Ohio river plus Sector I 1-1 9
3es: Estimate Total Ivacuation Zone Descriction Time (Hours)
Sectors ! & IV The area between the two and 1.7 five mile radius within 3racken County (Kentucky) and Clermont County south of Route 743 plus Sector I Sectors II & V The area between the two and 1.7 five mile radius within Pendleton County (Kentucky) plus Sector II Sectors II & VI The area between the two and 1.7 five mile radius within Campbell County (Kentucky) plus Sector II O-10 miles Sectors I, III, The area be:Veen the five and 2.9 and VII ten mile radius within Clernnn County north and west of a line extending from Pt.
Isabel to Bethel plus Sectors I and III Sectors I, IV, The area between the five and 2.6 and VIII ten mile radius within Clermont County south and east of a line extending from Pt.
Isabel to Bethel: and all of Bracken County within the 10 mile radius; plus Sector I and IV Sectors II, V, The area between the five and 2.6 and IX ten mile radius in Pendi'eton County plus Sectors II and V sectors II, VI, The area between the five and 2.6 and X ten mile radius in
, Campbell County plus Sectors l
I II and VI .
i For adverse weather the estimated evacuation times are about 10-l 35% longer than the best estimates. Par:1cul.rly severe winter weather conditions or severe flooding may delay evacuation further; however, a number of alternative evacuation routes are generally available and a part of the affected population may already have been evacuated. In addition, alternative protective 1-2 .
l
actions such as taking shelter may be considered a preferable alternative by the responsible agencies.
Special facility evacuation time estimates are lower than those for the general population in each evacuation ene, except for those employees at Black River Mine Co. in Pendleton County and the W.C. Seckjord Station in New Richmond, Ohio. Some mine workers are estimated to require 12 minutes mere than the general population to complete their evacuation from the 0-2 mile cone.
Of the 150 employees at the W.C. Seckford Station, 12 to 18 are needed to remain at the site to complete a shutdown. These people will require about 20 minutes more than the general population to evacuate.
e a
d i
1-3 i
l l
i l
i
SECTION 2 ,
INTRODUCT:CN Descriotion of the Studv In compliance with the NRC's December 26, 1979 letter (reference
- 1) to all applicants for construction pe rmits and licenses of plants under construction, this report presents an assessment by
=ene of estimated times for evacuating the general population and identified special facilities such as schools, nursing homes, large employers, etc., located within 10 miles of the Wm. H.
Zimmer Nuclear Power Station in Moscow, Ohio. Ses estimates are provided as well as estimates for adverse weather.
This preliminary report is based on available data and emergency planning information.It must be recognized that a comprehensive analysis of the factors involving population evacuation as a result of an assumed hazard at Zimmer cannot be completed until the final NRC/ FEMA position is available and the plans of responsible state and local agencies are developed based on that position. The results of this study have been compared to estimates by state and local emergency planning officials.
Descriotion of the Site The Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station is located on the Ohio River which separates Kentucky from Ohio at the plant site.
Roughly half of the plume exposure emergency planning =ene is in each state.
The assumed 10 mile plume exposure emergency planning zone includes parts of four counties. The plant site is in Clermont County, the only Ohio county containing a portion of the zone.
Each of the three Kentucky counties - 3racken, Pendleton, and Campbell - have a portion of their area within the zone.
Status of Radiological Emergency Planning The emergency plans for both states are not ec=plete at present, although the Ohio state plan is in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) review process. Kentucky expects to submit a plan not later than early 1981.
County plans for radiological emergencies at Zimmer, like state plans, are not complete as of August, 1980.
4
- 2-1 O
SECT:CN 3 RESULTS This section presents the results of this study. Section 4 presents the method used to cbtain these results. Detailed assumptions are presented in Section 5. References are presented in Section 6. These results are subject to revision after the final state and local radiological emergency plans have been developed.
Best Estimate Evacuation Times Sest estimate notification and evacuation times for the general public are presented in Figure 3-1 and in Table 3-1.
Results are presented both with and without consideration of a prompt notification system. With prompt notification, the evacuation time estimates for the two cones in the 0-2 mile radius are approximately one hour. For the four zones in the 0-5 mile radius the estimated times are just under two hours. The four 10-mile radius :ene times are about three hours.
Adverse Weather Evacuation Times .
The estimated evacuation times in adterne weather are presented in Table 3-1. The times are generally 10 to 35 percen higher than the best estimates.
The estimated times for the two 0-2 mile radius zones were just over one hour. In the four 0-5 mile radius enes, total evacuation times were two hours or slightly higher. For the four C-10 mile radius zones, times ranged from about three and one '
half hours to four hours.
Evacuation Time Without a Promet Notification Svstem Without a prompt notification system, the best estimate evacuation times for the 0-2 mile zones are just under two hours.
In the 0-5 mile zones, the times are abou: two and one-half to three and one-half hours. In the 0-10 mile sones the times range from about three and one-half to seven hours.
The estimated times are 5 to 25 percent higher under adverse-weather conditions. -
C:=carison of Results With These of State and Local Planners Evacuation time estimates have been prepared by state and local planning agencies for the 10 mile area. These agencies are the Kentucky Disaster and Emergency Services Agency (KyDES), Ohio Disaster and Services Agency (CDSA), and the Clermont County 3-1 I
i I
i
l Disaster Services Agency (COOSA). Their results and the results of this study are tabulated in Table 3-2.
Fr=m this table it can be seen that for bes: estimate cenditions and for comparable notification system assu=ptions, the results are generally in agreement except for these results of the COOSA.
For the adverse weather estimates under ccmparable notification conditions, the times from this study are lower than those of the state and local planners. These differences are likely due to the severity of the adverse weather conditions assumed by the m studies. This study assumed adverse weather would reduce road capacities and vehicle speeds by 50 percent. The assump : ens of state and local planners were not included with their results.
From inquiry with CCDSA, it was determined that their assumption for adverse weather included a 6 inch snowfall with flooding.
Severe conditions such as these would likely result in greater reductions in road cap,acities and average vehicle speeds than were assumed in this study.
Seecial Facilities The longest evacuation time estimate for special facilities in each zone is presented in Figure 3-1. Special facilities are identified in Figure 3-2.
In Sector II one special facility evacuatien estimated t me is longer than that for the general population. The facility, the Slack River Mine Co., has an evacuation time 12 minutes longer than that of the general public. The mine'is located just under 2.0 miles from the Zimmer site. Some of the up to 80 employees on the maximum-staffed shift would be able to evacuate as soon as the general public.
The W.C. Beckjord Station in Sector VII has an estimated evacuation time of 3.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />, about 20 minutes in excess of that for the general population in the 0-10 mile sone which includes the facility. This fossil-fueled power plant is located 9.8 miles from Zimmer. About 12 to la of the 150 employees are -
needed to remain at the station to ec=plete a shutdown. The remainder can begin to evacuate upon notification and may be able to complete evacuation before the public.
Evacuation Confirmation It is expected that confirmation time should not exceed the notification time without a prcmpt notification system.
Notification times without a prompt notification system are presented in Table 3-1.
i
. 3-2 1
. Alternative Actions Evacuation of the public and special facilities to minimize exposure is feasible for both the normal and adverse conditions.
Under some severely adverse wea-her conditions, such as heavy
! snow or severe flooding, evacuation times could be significantly longer. There .are other protective actions that may be considered if conditions warrant. "'he most likely alternative action is expected to be sheltering people within their own homes or public shelters.
4 d
a 4
I t
a B
4 e
3-3 I
l
, e gy -
- , , , - - , n - - , , - , - - - - - - , - re-- y -,, -
TIG*?RE 3-1 ISTD'.ATED ZC!.*E IVACUATIO!; TIMES W.. H. ZIMMER !;UCI. EAR POWER STATIO!;- N
- at* - .. _- , %e:~.N ._ .. I
~ #f
'\ / 1 ,,[ E kg .. N
/ -
/ d - / . . .... _.._-
9 g .# E Ag s yp/'-
7 g.. . . : .......
/
( -
g 4g 4 3 .
s
- e
/
j
, /
\
\ , " -
\\ ~. %
s \v'/
T.\ % .x., . aM / /
f ( \ *' g I-g \ I
\
! I i Vl S. g. ~.' I' O'i g V ,-
g
%g g.ihSITE I
/ MILES g
- s. _ ..
ll 3N 5 i \W : D \:;h! / g /
y',,,,,,,,l11 d' \ \
/
g 7.
s i -
/
/
,. / g g '
/ 5 MILES /$j
\
\
?
Y% 4 91
!f" 8' _
\! i s
/ *
% /
,, N g / 10 MILES f
) %%.k" 4
M %. A' g)
Zone Evacuation Ti=e Esti=ates l Best Es tira te i Adverse Weather General Special General Special l l
Pooulation Facilities Pooulation Facilities !
I 1.0 -
1.1 -
)
II 1.0 1.2 1.1 1.5 I.III 1.7 -
2.1 -
I.IV 1.7 -
2.1 -
l II.V 1.7 -
2.1 -
l II.VI 1.7 0.7 2.1 0.9 l I,III,VII 2.9 3.2 3.9 3.5 l I . IV. trIII 2.6 0. 9 3.4 1.2
! II.V.IX 2.6 1.1 1.4 1.2 II.VI.X 2.6 2.1 3.4 2.2 l
3~
FIG'JRE 3-2 GPECIAL FACILIT'IS MAP
'JM. H. ZIMMER NUCLIAR PC'JER STATION - N
, - ~ .~ ,
/bI N
/ N
/ l@ N ---
./ %
/ \N *% /
/ \
ll
\
/ gs pp j'
/ / \
I
/
1 /
/ .
ss m N Y
g
.\
l 9 I m .k~{\ /\
) \
! l(h l l
\ (p \ AH ITElI/
2 Muu I l
\
\ /
,h:, g
'R' i =// 5 MILES / l%i N '$ /
\ @ge N4Mt /
h\ xx
/
\
\
\ /
/
% \ /
l
% 1 N
& ~~. a g ' -/ 10 MILES g
KEY:
1 Jolly Elementry School 16 Felicity-Franklin H.S.
2 St. Peter & Paul Elem. Sch. 17 Ries Manufacturing Co., Inc.
3 Crants Lick Elem. Sch. 18 J & H Clasgens Co.
4 Ca=pbell Couety Park 19 U.C. Beckjord Station 5 Northern Elem. Sch. 20 Dobbins Nursing Home 6 Crants Lick Rest Home 21 Head Star: Day care Center 7 Butler Rest Home 8 Kincaid Lake State Park 9 Black River Mining Co.
10 'Jestern Elem. Sch.
l 11 Moscow Ele =, Sch. -
! 12 Monroe Elem. Sch.
13 New Rich =ond Elem. Sch. Note: N . 17 is expected to be cet=inating 14 New Richmond Jr. H.S. F ****i " F #1 * ** Ei "* # ***#t"E*
l 15 New Rich =ond H.S.
3-5
I TABLE 3-1 ZlHIER STATION TlHE ESTItETES FOR EVACLETION OF Tile CENERAL POPUIATION WITilIll 10 Mll.ES OF Tile STATION ZOtlE ESTitlATED ESTDETED ADVERSE WEATi!ER DEST ESTlHATE 1980 NOTIFICATInti EVActETION TIFES EVMUATION TitES EVACLETION TIME Witliout Witle Witlaout Wills
- POPULATION WItliout Witti Prompt Prompt Prompt Proomt Pronipt Prompt Notfctn Notfetn Notfctn Notfctn Notfetn Notfctn System System 0-2 Hiles Sector I 634 1.1 25 1.9 1.1 1.8 1.0 Sector II 439 1.1 25 1.9 1.1 1.8 1.0 0-5 HLles Sectors I, III 1901 1.3 .25 3.1 2.1 2.7 1.7 Sectors I, IV 1442 1.3 25 3.1 2.1 2.7 1.7 Sectors II, V 938 2.0 25 3.8 2.1 3.4 1.7 Sectors II, VI 1326 1.2 .25 3.0 2.1 2.6 1.7 0-10 Miles Sectors I, III, 13263 2.3 .75 5.4 3.9 4.4 2.9 VII ,
Sectors I, IV, VIII 6540 4.6 .75 7.2 3.4 6.4 2.6 Sectors II, V.
IX 2883 5.0 .75 7.6 3.4 6.8 2.6 Sectors II, VI, X 5354 1.8 .75 4.4 3.4 3.6 2.6 3-6
TAnl.E 3-2 EVActlATION TIllE CDHPAltISON OF ltESUI.TS WITil M10SE OF LOCAL PIANNERS (All times in liours)
BEST ESTIMATE ADVDtSE WEATilER Study Prestat Study KvDES ODSA CCDSA Present Study KyD C3 ODSA CCUSA Prongst Notification Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No No Systein Considered Zone 0-2 filles
~
Secb$r I 1.0 1.8 -
2.5 2.5 1.1 1,9 -
6.0 6.0 Sector II 1.0 1.8 1.25 - - 1.1 1.9 3.3 - -
0-5 Hiles Sector I,III 1.7 2.7 - 4.75 9.75 2.1 3.1 -
10.5 15.5 Sector I,IV 1.7 2.7 1.25 4.5 4.5 2.1 3.1 3.5 9.0 9.0 Sector II,V 1.7 3.4 2.0 - - . 2.1 3.8 6.0 - -
Sector II,VI 1.7 2.6 2.0 - -
2.1 3.0 6.25 - -
0-10 Miles Sector I,III,VII 2.9 4.4 -
12.75 48.75 3.9 5.4 -
24.5 77.5 Sector I,IV,VIII 2.6 6.4 2.5 8.0' 39.0 3.4 7.2 8.25 16.0 68.0 Sector II,V,11 2.6 6.8 3.3 - -
3.4 7.6 11.0 - -
Sector II,VI,K 2.6 3.6 7.25 - -
3.4 4.4 11.25 - -
Key: Ky llES - Kentucky Disaster and Einergency Services ODSA - 01:10 Disaster Services Agency CCDSA - Clermont County Disaster Services Agency 3-7
SECTICN 4 METHOOS OF ANALYSIS The method used for calculation of evacuation travel time
- estimates in this study examines the specific highway system, highway. capacities, population distribution, evacuation routes, travel speeds, special facilities, and other site-specific
-factors affecting evacuation. This method is a more detailed study of the type referenced in prepared testimony of James A.
Martin, Jr. on behalf of the NRC in the matter of Puget Sound Power and-Light Company, Skagit Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, Washington.
In estimating the capacity of each evacuation route, vehicles being evacuated are assigned to the evacuation network based upon point of origin and the most direct route of travel to beyond the 10 mile radius. To estimate area evacuation times, the hourly vehicular capacity of each roadway is then compared to the maximum number of vehicles assigned to that roadway. The travel times were conservatively estimated by assuming a travel distance of twice the radial distance to the edge of the evacuation sone.
For the adverse weather estimates it was conservatively assumed that the-vehicle average travel speeds would be halved, resulting in longer evacuation times. Evacuation times esti=ates obtained by, adding the estimated notification, mobilisation, and evacuation travel times.
Notification Times
. Notification times were estimated by using a correlation developed by R. W. Houston in Reference (4) to determine the road miles- per square mile of land area on the basis of population density. In this study, for any given evacuation area the number of miles of roads was estimated using this correlation.. Then assuming use of public address-equipped vehicles for a door-to-door notification, the time was determined.
- Soecial Facilities Mobilisation times for special facilities are based upon direct contacts with the facilities rather than any of the above 1
I methods.
1 Special facilities were identified with the aid of the; Envircnmental Report, state and local emergency planners, local telephone directories, and site area inspection. The list is believed to be reasonably complete, however small facilities may not have been identifiable even with the reasonably comprehensive
! effort given this task. Such small facilities are unlikely to I have significant evacuation times.
4-1 l
I i
I 1
i 1 \
I f
4 ,-r- -- - - - - - -rr- -,, - y
I Ivacuation travel times for special facilities were ::=puted by two methods, with the higher result recorded as the bes esti= ate. The first method examined travel time by dividing the distance from the special facility Oc the edge of the :ene by the average estimated speed (20 mph for all cases). That method only examines travel times with no consideration of read capacity.
The second method used considers road capacities. In this method, the number of vehicles from the general population and the .special facility using the particular roads involved is determined. This nur.ber of vehicles is then divided by a conservative estimate of road capacity from Reference (5).
i 1
4 e
4 J
)
I s
1 1
4-2 1
L h
I' I
,--c y .- - - - , . , ,
SECTION 5 CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSWJTICNS This section describes the considerations and assumptions made in performing the evacuation time study. A detailed descr:ption of results is presented in Section 3. A description of the =ethod used to estimate evacuation times is given in Section 4.
References are listed in Section 6.
Cbjectives of the Analvsis On December 26, 1979, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission sent a request to all applicants for construction permits and licenses of plants under construction for information regarding evacuation of various areas around nuclear reactors. This information is required so that the NRC can identify those areas in which unusual evacuation constraints exist which could require the consideration of special planning measures or facility modifications. In addition, the information will enable the NRC to respond to a recent recommendation from the Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the House Committee on Covernment Operations.
The area for which the evacuation estimate is required includes the entire area within the 10 mile radius around a nuclear power station. The estimates are to be discussed by zones defined as two 180' sectors in the O to 2 mile radius, four 90' sectors in the 2 to 5 mile radius, and four 90' sectors in the 5 to 10 mile radius. The estimated times for the outer 5 and 10 mile sectors are to assume that the inner adjacent sectors are being evacuated simultaneously. ,
The following information responds to the NRC letter:
- 1. Two estimates are requested in each of the areas defined above for a general evacuation of the population (no:
including special facilities). A best estimate is required and an adverse weather estimate is required for movement of the general population. ,
- 2. The total time required to evacuate special facilities (e.g., hospitals) within each area must be specified l (best estimate and adverse weather).
- 3. The time required for confirmation of evacuation should be indicated. Confirmation times may consider special instructions to the public (e.g., tying a handkerchief uo a door or gate to indicate the occupant has left the l premises).
- 4. Where plans and prompt notification systems have not 1
been put in place for areas out to about 10 miles, 5-1 O
estimates of the ::mes required to' evacuate the plume exposure emergency planning cene (EPI) should also be given. No::fication times greater than 15 minutes should be included in the evacuation times and footnoted to indicate the nctification ti=e.
- 5. Where special evacuation problems are identified (e.g.,
in high population density areas), specify alternative protective actions, such as sheltering, which would reduce exposures and the effectiveness of these measures.
- 6. A short background document should be submitted giving the methods used to make the estimates and the assumptions made including the routes and methods of transportation used. The document should also note the agreement or areas of disagreement with principal local officials regarding these estimates.
Plume Exoosure Emergency Planning Zone Soundaries Evacuation planning is required for the plume exposure emergency planning zone per the criteria of NUREG-0654 (reference 2). The b'oundaries of this zone are required to extend only to about 10 miles and should generally -follow road boundaries, naturally-occurring geographic features, jurisdictional boundaries, or other readily identifiable features. Where population centers are intersected by a 10 mile radius, a decision must be made to ccmpletely include or exclude the entire area, to allow uniformity of instructions to the public and reduce confusion.
A 10 mile radius has been selected in accordance with these criteria for studying evacuation routes. Two small urban areas are near the boundary of the 10 mile planning ene (each actually centered outside the 10 mile radius). These are Alexandria, Kentucky and Bethel, Ohio. State and local planners expect to include both in their evacuation considerations. This study does not include these areas.
For Alexandria, Kentucky, (population about 4000) the area has been included in the preparations by state and local planners although (1) the center of the area is located at a radius of 10.5 miles, (2) the majority of the population of Alexand:ia is well outside the 10 mile =ene, (3) the area population is spread out and generally increases in moving further away from the site, thus providing a somewhat unbounded and ill-defined boundary, (4) i evacuation routes for the central =enes use some roads passing through Alexandria, therefore delaying the central sone evacuation, (5) the risk of injury during evacuation is increased, and (6) Kentucky County Judge / Executive authority for ordering evacuation does not include Alexandria, potentially ccmplicating an evacuation and creating public confusion. It is 5-2
recognized that the area mayor and public would very lixely cooperate with a County Judge / Executive crder to evacuate.
In Ohio, the town of Bethel (population about 2200) has been included by local planners since a concentrated population lies just at the boundary of the planning :ene and state and local planning officials and those responsible for ordering evacuations are likely to specify evacuation of the area believing this action to be conservative.
Since, (1) the NRC requect only dealt with the approximate 10-mile radius, (2) exact planning cones have not yet been selected and included in written plans, and, (3) results comparable to those for other facilities are desired, this study has used the lO-mile radius :ene to determine evacuation ~ times and has not included the two surrounding urban areas.
Sector Descriution The sectors identified in Figure 3-1 are in general conformity with the NRC's criteria as set forth in the December 26, 1979 letter. Sector boundaries were chosen to be along =aj or geographic features such as the Ohio River, roads familiar to the local population, or county lines. A total of ten sectors are specified within the 10 mile radius.
The sectors are specified as follows:
3 Sector Radius from Number Zimmer (miles) Descriction of Sector Radial Soundaries I 0-2 180' area east of the Ohio River (Ohio side)
II 0-2 180' area west of the Ohio River (Kentucky side)
III 2-5 Within Clermont ceunty (Ohio) north of Route 743 -
IV 2-5 Within Clermont county south of Route 743 and within Bracken county (Kentucky)
V 2-5 Within Pendleton county (Kentucky)
VI 2-5 Within Campbell county (Kentucky) 5-3 8
i r- ,
Sector Radius from Mumber Zimmer (miles) Descrietion of Sector Radial Boundaries VII 5-10 Within Clermon: county north and west of a line extending from Pt. '
Isabel to Bethel VIII 5-10 within Clermon: county south and east of a line extending from Pt.
Isabel to 3 ethel plus the area within Bracken county (Kentucky).
IX 5-10 Within Pendleton county boundaries X 5-10 Within Campbell county boundaries.
An arsa to be evacuated is labeled a zone in this study. A sone may consist of one or more sectors. For exa=ple, Sectors I or II alone may be an evacuation zone or Sectors I and III together any constitute a :ene. Evacuation zones must include all radially inner sectors in this study. Therefore the ten sectors have been grouped for evacuation time, studies into ten zones identified as follows:
Sectors Forming Radius from A Zone Zimmer (Miles)
I O-2 II O-2 I,III O-5 I,IV O-5 II,V O-5 II,VI O-5 I,III,VII O-10 I,IV,VIII O-10 II,V,IX O-10 II,VI,X O-10 Evacuation of a zone assumes that all sectors within the zone will be evacuated simultaneously. For example, within the 0-5 mile radius, evacuation of Sector III requires the simultaneous evacuation of Sector I. This is consistent with the nature of an emergency at a fixed' site.
Evacuation Routes Evacuation routes have been selected to provide direct egress from the =enes using the existing major highways. Considerations ,'
~
in the selection of routes included:
. 5-4 I \
i u l
(1) the recc=mendations of state and local officials and planners, (2) roadway characteristics such as number of traffic lanes, shoulder availability, road conditions, alinement, grade'; and path length, (3) the / ability to provide reasonably simple public direction prior to and during emergencies when
' describing the route, and (4) normal traffic load.
Generally, roadways that provide the most direct sector egress to beyond the 10 mile radius have been considered as main evacuation routes for this analysis. Vehicles traveling main evacuation routes from any zone generally do not enter another sone within the same radius. Also, once on main evacuation routes vehicles are not directed over any physical boundary (e.g. the Chio River). Routes considered as main evacuation paths are listed in Table 5-1 and include all those presently identified by state and local public officials and planners, i
Sufficient manpower and resources is expected to be available to set up and enforce evacuation routing. At least one lane of each evacuation route .could be designated only for buses and other emergency vehicles. Provision for this level of traffic control appears feasible based on the limited number of people needed and availability of county personnel such as police, fire and road departments.
Public Notification Existing. meens of public notification include (1) a limited number of sirens, (2) EES system or NOAA weather radio reports, (3) radio and television (4) door-to-door contact including use of publin address systems on police cruisers, and (5) telephone.
These rudiments of a public notification system, when augmented, will provide a prompt notification system.
For the 10 mile planning zone, the actual numbers of vehicles for warning the public were obtained from state and local officials or estimated based on a fraction of the population consistent with other capabilities in the area. The average speed of
- vehicles while warning the public was assu=ed to be 6 miles per hour. A vehicle travel time to the local 10 mile planning tone of one hour was estinated based on the known location of vehicles expected to be used in a warning capacity.
Democrachv
! Poculation estimates and the distribution, by radial mile for 22 l 1/2 degree segments were obtained from the Wm. E. Zimmer Nuclear
- l
! 5-5 h
\ N r
f6 .
i
'N f' , %
i
O Power Station Environmental Report. This provides 1980 astimates based en pro;ections from 1974 data. Information was checked for consistency using the 1970 census. With the aid of local officials and state and local planners, special facility information was acquired. School enrollments and transportation availability were determined. In addition, major local employers were contacted to determine the maximum number of empicyees which would have to be evacuated during any given period, and to obtain estimates of the time required to mobill:e the work force and evacuate the site onto local roads. The demography of the 10 f mile evacuation zone is given in Table 5-2.
2 Total popula: ion information, which includes resident population, school children and area employees, results in a high estimate of
\ the total population to be evacuated due to probable " double counting" of some residents who live, as well as work, in the area, and school children who live, as well as attend schools in the planning ene. .
Seecial Facilities Estimates of mobilisation times for special facilities are based
'upon contacts made with state and loca.1 p.anners, public i officials, and special facility personnel. The location of special facilities is shown on Figure 3-2. These facilities include schools, nursing homes, a mine, a commercial fossil-
/ fueled power plant, parks, and day care centers. There are no j' hospitals within the 10-mile planning zone. Identified special facilities are detailed in Appendix B.
If schools are in session, school children will generally be s evacuated directly to pre-designated care centers outside of the area where they will be re-united with their parents. Emergency radio messages will re-affirm to whe:e the specific schools are being evacuated.
I ;i i Vehicle Loading Automobiles will be the predominant means of transportation with the exception of buses for school children, handicapped or otherwise nonambulatory citizens. An average of one vehicle per dwelling unit is assumed for residential evacuation; an average
.s of 0.8 vehicles per person is used for employee evacuation based V upon conversations with local employers, and the general nature
.of work-related travel vehicle occupancy.
Vehicle Numbers An average of 3.23 persons per househcld is assumed to determine the number of dwelling units in the area. This number is from the Invironmental Report, which was based on 1974 data. This ccmpares favorably to the population-weighted average of 3.42 persons per household from the 1970 census data. Individual S-6
1 I
whole county statistics from that census were 3racken-3.06, Campbell-3.23, Pendleton-3.35, and Clermont-3.66. Based on the assumed one vehicles per dwelling uni: notes above, the calculated number of dwelling units determines the number of vehicles to be evacuated.
Mobilization Time Based upon results of similar evacuation studies eg. Reference (6), an average of 20 minutes public preparation time, i.e.,
mobilisation time, is generally allowed for the public to react to the evacuation notification. State and local planners, particularly the Kentucky Disaster and Emergency Services agency, have estimated a 30 minute mobilisation time. Since this is typical of urban areas, and consistent with the general assumption presented above, this was considered a minimum time in this study.
The local IC-mile area is a rural mechanized farming area. Farm
" shutdown" is expected to take somewhat longer than 30 minutes due to the possible initial dispersion of farm animals and the need to leave sufficient feed for several days. To account for this a mobilisation time of 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> is assumed for farming areas.
An examination of the Zimmer Environmental Report and site area knowledge indicated that no significant livestock herds are within 2 miles of the plant. Therefore mcbilization time within 2 miles is expected to be 30 minutes rather than the 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> used in the 2-10 mile area.
Michway Ca=acities and Averace Vehicle Soeeds The directional canacity for a two-lane rural highway is esyimated to be 1,000 vehicles per hour. Only one lane will be used with the other remaining available for emergency end special vehicle use. For four-lane limited access facilities, t lanes in the direction of evacuation will be used. A capacitj 1,500 vehicles per hour accounts for merging vehicles at pc;.4:s of access. Such values are within generally accepted guidelines (References 3 and 5) for highway capacity. An average vehicle speed of 25 miles per hour has been assumed when examining travel times. Most Zimmer area roads are posted for higher speeds or are not posted at all. The relatively low average vehicle speed and highway capacities assumed in this study account for the usua'. deterioration of roads and delays encountered on roadways.
Highway capacities and average vehicle speeds for adverse weather are considered to be reduced by one-half. This is considered to be extremely conservative and accounts for usual adverse weather delays due to rain, light snow, icing, and minor flooding.
l 1
5-7 .
Alternate Protective A:: ions Weather conditions, particularly winter weather conditiens, have the pctential for delaying evacuation. However, the existing practice of snow-plowing early and often in a snow storm, together with the application of sand and salt to icing roads, should allow continued mobility during a snow storm evacuation.
Existing practices dealing with otherand wires severe s:crms, including the clearance of fallen trees and the provision of alternate routing around washouts, should also be adequate to ensure mobility for most residents during severe weather. If evacuation routes cannot be kept cpen adequately to ensure a prompt and safe evacuation, consideration would normally be given
}
to the implementation of alternate protective actions.
Generally, the type of accident which occurs is the first consideration. If the weather and roadway conditions were such as to hamper the evacuation process in terms of time delays or public safety, sheltering people within their own homes or public To shelters could substantially reduce whole body exposures.
maximize the benefits of sheltering, vindows and doors of homes would also be closed and sealed, and ventilation systems curned off to minimise the turnover rate of air within the brilcing.
4 G
5-6 l
I
TABLE 5-1 WM. H. ZIMMER NUCLIAR ?CWER ST5 TION
- DESIGNATED MAJOR IVACL*ATION RO*TES Width Average Evacuation No. of of Capacity 8 Zone Routes
- Lanes Lanes * (veh/hr)
(ft) 0-2 mile radius Sector I Clermont A. US 52 West 2 12 1000 (Ohio) B. US 52 East 2 12 1000 C. CR 743 North 2 10 1000 D. CR 756 North 2 10 1000 Sector II Campbell A. SR 8 East 2 12 1000 (Kentucky)
Pendleton B. SR 8 West
~
2 12 1000 (Kentucky) 0-5 mile radius Sectors I Clermont A. US 52 West 2 12 1000 and III B. US 52 East 2 12 1000 C. CR 743 North to 2 10 1000 SR 222 North 2 10 1000 D. CR 756 North to 2 10 1000 SR 232 North to 2 10 1000 SR 222 North 3 10 1000 Sectors ! Clermont A. US 52 West 2 12 1000 and IV B. US 52 East 2 12 1000 C. CR 743 North to 2 10 1000 CR 756 East 2 10 1000 Bracken D. SR 8 East 2 12 1000 (Kentucky)
Sectors II Pendleton A. SR 8 East 2 12 1000 and V B. SR 8 West 2 12 1000 C. SR 10 South 2 10 1000 Sectors II, Campbell A. SR 8 East 2' 12 1000 VI B. SR S West 2 12 1000 C. SR 10 North 2 10 1000 D. Persimmen Grove 2 10 1000 Rd (CR 1121) North 5-9 k
Width Average Evacuation No. of of Oapacity 8 2cne Routes' Lanes Lanes 8 (veh/hr)
(ft) 0-10 mile ractus Sector I, Clermont A. US 52 West' 2 12 1000 III, S. US 52 East 2 12 1000 VII C. CR 743 North to 2 10 1000 SR 222 North to 2 12 1000 SR 125 North 4 12 1500 D. CR 743 North to 2 10 1000 CR 756 East 2 10 1000 Clermont E. CR 756 North to 2 10 1000 SR 232 North to 2 12 1000 Laurel- 2 8 1000 Nicholsville Rd to SR 222 North to 2 10 1000 SR.,125 North 4 12 1500 Sector I, Clermont A. US 52 East 2 12 1000 IV, VIII B. US 52 West 2 12 1000 C. SR 743 North to 2 10 1000 SR 756 East to 2 10 1000 Felicity, then either (1) SR 756 2 10 1000 East or (2) SR 133 2 10 1000 North to SR 774 2 10 1000 East D. Jones Rd to 2 8 1000 Donald Rd to 2 8 1000 Sodom Rd 2 8 1000 E. CR 755 North to 2 10 1000 SR 232 North 2 12 1000 Bracken F. SR 8 East 2 12 1000 G. CR 1019 South 2 8 1000 SR 10 South 2 10 1000 E. CR 1951 West 2 8 1000 CR 1159 South 2 8 1000 starting at in-tersection with CR 1951 5-10 t
I 1
Width Avs 'sge Evacuation No. of of Cap .1 y 8 Z:ne Routes
- Lanes Lanes: (veh/hr)
(ft)
Sectors II, Pendleton A. SR 8 East 2 12 1000 V, IX B. SR 8 West 2 12 1000 C. SR 10 South to 2 10 1000 SR 159 South 2 10 1000 D. US 27 South 2 12 1000 Sectors II, camebell A. SR 8 West 2 12 1000 VI, X B. SR 8 East 2 12 1000 C. SR 10 North 2 10 1000 D. US 27 North 2 12 1000 E. Persimmon Greve Rd 2 10 1000 (CR 1121) North Notes 1. Evacuation route road numbers are given in the order
- that a vehicle would proceed when evacuating.
- 2. All roads do not have shoulders which can be used as a traffic lane
- 3. Capacities from Reference (3) and Reference (5)
- 4. US 52 West changes to 4 lane highway west of New Richmond, Ohio. Road capacity is 1500 veh/hr along that see:1on. A large number of minor feeder routes to these major routes were considered.
l 5-11 l
l l
l 1
I TABLE 5-2 ZItt1ER STATION CENERAL ZONE DIARACTERISTICS Area Population vehicles Transients / Transient /
_Zog Q . H11es) Resident Employee Total Resident Employee Total
.9-2 ntles Sector I 7.53 609 25 634 185 20 205 Sector II 5.46 359 80 439 109 64 173 0-5 Hiles Sectors I, III 23.95 1876 25 1901 570 20 590 Sectors I, IV 28.96 1417 25 1442 431 20 451 Sectors II, V 19.97 858 80 938 260 64 3 24 Sectors II, VI 19.32 1246 80 1326 379 64 443 '
0-10 titles Sectors I, III, VII 75.84 12788 475 13263 3887 380 4267 Sectors I, IV, VIII 109.08 6515 25 6540 1980 20 2000 Sectors II, V, IX 68.04 2303 580 2883 700 189 889 Sectors II, VI, X 74.45 4774 ,
580 535.4 1451 189 1640 htal 0-10 Miles 314.16 25412 1555 26967 7724 694 8418 5-12 l
TABLE 5-3 SPECI AI. FACII.lTIES WIT 111H 10 H11.ES OF ZIHilER NUCLEAR P(MER STATION OR IHilEDIATE SilHRollNDING AREA HAXIHilH ESTitlATED flap RESIDENTS / Title To ip SulDENTS/ TRANSPORTATIOri ikHill fOCATION EMPLOY. AVAILIBILI*lT (HIN)pZE COLINTY NO. SECTOR NAME OF FACII.ITY CAMPDELL I VI Jolly Elementary Sch. California, KY 370 7 2 VI St. Peter & Paul Elem. Sch. SE of California,KY 73 CAMPBELI.
5 South Middle Sch. Alexandria, KY 550 wurst CAHP,BEI.L '"**
CAMPREl.l. Alexandria Elem. Sch.5 Alexandria, KY 830 ts 35 minutes 5
CAHPREl.I. Campbell City ll.S. Alexandria, KY 1,900 56 fo r f school any CMIPHEl.L 3 X Crants Lick Elem. Sch. Grants Lick. KY 425 buses one St. Hary Elem. Sch.5 Alexandria, KY 475 ""**Ih"'
county
"'I""' I in 10-CAMPRCLI.
mile CAMPilEl.L St. Philip Elem. Sch.5 Holbourne, KY NA znne CMIPBEI.L St. Joseph Elem. Sch. Cold Spring, KY NA CAHPBELL Bishop Brossart II.S. Alexandria, KY 375 CAHPHEl.I. Campbell City Area Vocational Sch.5 Grants Lick, KY s 4 Campbell County Park Alexandria, KY 500 (on 125 (on 30 ,
CAHPREI.L X holiday up holiday up to 2,500), to 800).
5 Northern Elem. Sch. Butler, KY 700 sufficient 45 PENDLETOli IX school buses 6 X Cranta Lick Rest ilome Grants Lick, KY 30-35 1 ambulance & 120 PENDIETON funeral home & ftre department.
Butler Reat ilome Butler, KY 20 60 PENDIETON 7 IX
. 5-13 -
TABI.E 5-3 (cont'd) HAXIHUll ESTillA1EO HAP RESIDEfffS/ TillE lu ID STUDEfffS/ TRAllSPORTATIOf 4 IkHill.IZE COUNTY No. I SECR)R NAHE OF FACILITY LOCATION EllPLOY. AVAll.ABil.lTY (illN)
PENDLETON 8 IX Kincaid Lake State Park NE of Falmouth, KY 500 (on 125 (on 30 (on holiday up holiday up hotIday to 4,000). to 1,200). up t o 50).
PENDLETON 9 II Black River Mining Co. Carntown, KY 160 (80 sufficient 40 per sliift). personel vel:1cles BRACKEN 10 VIII Western Elem. Sch. SSE of Foster, KY 250 2 buses & 30 teachers' cars CLERHONT II I Moscow Elem. Sch. Hoscow, oil 155 CLERHONT 12 VII Honroe Elem. Sch. New Richmond, Q1. 155 570 5 sufficient 25 '
Cl.ERHONT 13 VII New Riclumond Elem. Sch. ,New Richmond, 011 f buses l
Cl.ERHONT 14 VII New Richmond Jr. II.S. New Richmond, Oil 600 Cl.ER110NT 15 .VII New Riclunond li.S. New Riclunond, Oil 750 CLERIIONT 16 VIII Felicity-Franklin, Oil Felicity, Oil 1,100 17 buses 30 Cl.ER110NT 17 I Ries Manufacturing Co., Inc. Ibscow, Oil 25 --
liquidating----
CI.ERHofff 18 VII J & 11 Clasgens Co. New Richmond, 011 25-30 sufficient 20 personal CLERHONT 19 VII W.C. Beckjord Station New Riclunond, op 150 vehicles 180 4 CLERil0NT 20 VII Dobbins Nursing Ilome New Richmond, Oil 22 life squad 10 CLERik)HT 21 IV Ilead Start Day Care Center Felicity, Oil 35 sufficient per-20 sonal & national guard vehicles.
I flap Identification Nimiber identifies the particular facility In Figure 3-1.
2 Iluses in Campbell County, KY are shared by all schools; 56 buses total are available for the entire county.
3 The Hohilization Time represents the time from when the factitty first receives notification froin the DSA, to when all personnel are aboard transportation.
4 At Heckjord Station, a crew of 12-18 sien will be required for 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> to secure plant shutdown. All other non-casential personnel can be mobilized within 30 minutes.
5 Facility is located just outside 10-mile zone; included for information only since local officiais indicate a prefer-ence to evacuate these areas sino.
5-14
SECTION 6 REFERENCES (1) Letter of December 26, 1979 from Brian K. Grimes, Director Emergency Preparedness Task Group, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, United States Nuclear Regulatory Cc=m:ssion, Washington, DC to Applicants for Construction Fermits and Licenses of Plants Under Construction.
(2) NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1: Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, USNRC, FEMA, January 1980. -
(3) Transcortation and Traffic Engineering Handbook, The Institute of Traffic Engineers, 1976.
(4) Ecuston Evacuation Model referenced in the prepared testinony of Mr. R.W. Houston on behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the matter of Northern States Power, Tyrone Energy Park, Unit 1, Eau Claire, Wisconsin, October 7, 1976, Docket No. 50-484.
(5) Michwav Cacacity Manual, Highway Research Board, 1965.
(6) " Evacuation Analysis: Indian Point Site," New York State Office of Disaster Preparedness, New York State Department of Health, May 1978.
4 1
6-1
.