ML20148T594
| ML20148T594 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Green County  |
| Issue date: | 11/03/1978 |
| From: | Podwal B, Shropshire R PARSONS, BRINCKERHOFF, QUADA & DOUGLAS, INC., POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20148T573 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7812050356 | |
| Download: ML20148T594 (30) | |
Text
-
h PROCEEDI535 IP UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR FIGULATORY CO!iMISSICS BEFOPI THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICESSING BOARD In the Matter of:
)
)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE
)
OF NEW YORK
)
Docket No. 50-549
)
(Greene County Nuclear Power Plant) )
TESTIMONY OF ROSERT SEROPSHIRE AND BRUCE E.
PODWAL ON EMERGENCY PROCEDURES CONTENTIOSS July 22, 1977 (Revised Nove:r.ber 3, 1978) 7812050386
~
4 t
1 4
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS b
1 2
BRUCE E. PODWAL f
ASSISTAST VICE PRESIDENT 3
4 PARSONS, BRINCKE RHOFF, QUADE & DOUGLAS, INC.
t 4
5 6
My name is Bruce E. Podwal.
My business address is
)
7 One Penn Plaza, New York, New York 10001.
I am an assistant 4
vice president with the firm of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade 8
4 1
9
& Douglas, Inc.
j 10 I supervised the evaluation of the effects of site-i j
13 generated traffic-upon highway transportation facilities 12 providing access and egress to the proposed Greene County 13 I
14 Nuclear Power Plant.
In addition, I am also responsible for of alternative improvements to minimize the 15 the development effects of plant traffic and for supervising the preparation l
16 of the environmental analyses dealing with site-generated 17 l
18 traffic.
19 Inc. in I joined parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, 20 i
21 1961 and, for the past 10 years, have been a project manager praticipating in the administration and management of the 1
22 1
\\
1 ne e
r--
,e~
,, m
, ~ - -
4 BRUCE E. PODWAL J
firm's highway planning, design and technical inspection of 1
2 construction for maior construction projects.
I cas a member 3
of the project management staff on the West Side Highwa; 4
project in New York City, a multi-discipline assignment involving engineering management and environmental studies 5
6 for a combined public hearing.
Also, I was the project manage:
for new highways and railroad relocations in Albany, New York 7
8 with construction costs of over $100 million.
For that project l I testified as an expert witness at a public hearing held by 9
10 the New York State Public Service Commission.
11 12 Currently, I am the Deputy Technical Director for Parsons, 13 Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc.'s Civil-Highway efforts, 14 responsible for general supervision of the firm's staff in the I
15 management, planning and design of civil-highway projects.
am also Project Manager for the highway location studies and 16 17 related input for the environmental impact assessment and publ participation process for several major projects including the 18 relocation of 18 miles of Route 31 in New Jersey; 30 miles of 19 proposed Interstate Routes 95 and 695 in New Jersey; and the 20 21 Camden, New Jersey Traffic Operations Program to Increase 22 Capacity and Safety.
2
BRUCE E. PODWAL 1
Prior to joining Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, j'
2 I was employed for two years by Brill Engineering Corp. cf Se*
i
'3 York City and was invloved in all phases of highway planning 4
and design for a variety of state and local government projects 2
5 6
I am the co-author of " Highway Engineering."
Chapter 16 f
j 1
1 7
of the Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, 2nd edition, and I
6 I am the co-author of a paper on the subject of the i
i 9
" Transportation Impacts of Large Power Projects" pre-10 sented at the Joint Power Generation Conference in September, f
11 1977.
12 1
13 I received my degree of Bachelor of Civil Engineering i
14 from the College of the City of New York in 1959.
Subsequently; 15 I obtained the degree of Master of Science, Civil Engineering 2
16 from the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn in 1963.
I am a i
17 member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the 18 Metropolitan Association of Urban Designers and Environmental 19 Planners, and at a registered Professional Engineer in the 20 States of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.
1 21 a
I 22 3
4 e
-n
l PROrESSIONAL oUALIricATIONS 1
i ROBERT SHROPSHIRE 2
SENICR RADIOLOGICAL ENGINEER 3
POWER OPERATIONS DIVISION 4
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE 5
OF NEW YORK i
6 7
8 My name is Robert Shropshire.
My business address is Power i
9 Authority of the State of New York, 10 Columbus Circle, New Yor!
10 New York 10019.
I am employed as the Senior Radiological 11 Engineer by the Power Authority of the State of New York.
1 12 I have worked in various phases of the nuclear fuel cycle 13 14 for approximately fifteen years, to include:
obtaining Nuclear Reactor Operator Licenses on U.S. Navy Reactors, 15 16 AlW and S5W, the Brookhaven National Laboratory Graphite Research Reactor, and the Cornell University TRIGA Ree
'cr; 17 4
decontamination and decommissioning of " Hot Cell" fac,_ities l
18 and the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research Reactor 19 Facility; radiation shielding design; preparation of 20 applicable sections of safety analysis and environmental 21 witness on radiological reports; participating as an expert 22 i :
ROBERT SHROPSHIRE 1
issues before the Atomic Safety & Licensing Board and the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards for pressurized 2
3 water nuclear power plants (Dockets No. 50-434 and 435).
4 5
From 1959 to 1964, I served in the U.S. Navy which included service aboard the nuclear submarine U.S.S. Sam Houston SSB (N) 6 in the capacity of reactor operator / reactor technician.
7 8
9 From December, 1964 to June, 1966, I was employed by Brookhaver 10 National Laboratory as a nuclear reactor operator. I participa:
in the startup, operation, maintenance and shutdown of the_
11 12 Brookhaven Graphite-Moderated Air-Cooled Research Reactor.
13 14 From July,19 66 to July,1969, I was employed by' Columbia 15 University in the City of New Ycrh as assistant reactor 16 supervisor.
In that capacity, I was responsible for 17 designing in-plant systems to comply with the Hazards 18 Survey Report, writing of procedures, technical specifications and corrections and amendments to the Ha:ards Survey Report, 19 and installation and selection of Radiation Monitors for the 20 21 facility, working with the Health Physicist.
22,
~
~
e....
.-m s
t EOBERT SHROPSHIRE 1 I also had the responsibility for establishing a maintensnee i
2 program, and ensuring that all conditions of applicable 3 government licenses and regulations would be fulfilled.
4 5
From December, 1968 to December, 1972, I was employed as a 4
6 consultant to Atcor Inc.
I participated in decontamination 7 efforts at various nuclear installations, including Pratt 8
and Whitney's Middletown Connecticut facilities.
My 9 responsibilities included those of the Health Physicist for thi 10 project as well as supervisor of the decontan.ination of " Hot Cel'.
4 i
11 and packaging and removal of radioactive material to a I
12 licensed burial site.
13
.i 14 I also supervised the decommissioning of Lockheed Georgia's 15 Nuclear Facility at Dawnsonville, Georgia, and assisted in thcj decontamination efforts of Commonwealth Edison's Dresden 16 17 Station.
The latter job involved the decontamination of a i
18 highly radioactive auxiliary system at the Dresden EWR, 19 Plant I.
My responsibility was to ensure that the decontamina tion was carried out safely with minimum exposure to personne1l 20 and that the radioactive waste was packaged and shipped in 21 r
I 22 accordance with both local and AEC regulations.
i
. )
3 e
5
[
ROBERT SHROPSHIRE 1 I was also Field Manager, responsible for the overall 2 operation of the decontamination efforts for the U.S.
Radium I
3 Corporation plant in Danville, Pa.
I was initially 4
l l
4 responsible for bidding the job, and when the contract was i
I 5 awarded, supervised both technicians and laborers until the i
6 licensed area was " released" by AEC authorities.
i 7
l h
From January 1973 to April 1976 I was employed by Stone &
8 i
9 Webster Engineering Corporation.
I was responsible for i'
reviewing licensing material and client and vendor correspondent 10 S
11 for completeness, technical accuracy and conformance with j
i 12 Company policies and Regulatory requirements.
13 14 I was also responsible for the radiation protection effort 1
15 on Virginia Electric and Power Company's (VEPCO) nuclear 3
16 units Surry 3&
4.
As Fadiation Protection Engineer, my 17 duties included: shielding studies, accident analysis, 18 contributing to the writing of the Preliminary Safety 19 Analysis (pSAR) and Environmental Report (ER), responding to 20 NRC staff questions, interpreting the applicability of NRC 21 Regulatory Guides, insuring that the release of radioactive 22 4 0 l
l t
.. ~.
~
ROBERT SHROPSHIRE 1
1 material to the environment met the "as low as reasonably 2 achievable" (ALARA) objectives promulgated by regulatcry 3 agencies, responding to Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board and Radio 1cgical 4
4.
I also Hearings for the Surry Power Station Units 3 &
5 administrated and directed the overall operation of the 6
Radiation Protection Group, assisted in the hiring and the 7
training of personnel to ultimately accept responsibility for 1
8 9 a given nuclear project, maintained and implemented State-of-the-Art knowledge within the Group, interfaced 10 with other offices to make use of the expertise within all 11 12 Radiation Protection Groups, and entertained and supported I
generic studies in the field of radiation protection.
13 directed the radiation protection efforts for the Jamesport 14 Nuclear Power Station, and had final radiation protectio 15 responsibility for the Greene County Nuclear Power Pla:it.
16 17 18 From April, 1976 to the present I have been employed by the Power Authority as the radiological engineer responsible 19 20 for establishing, administering, and maintaining State-of-the-Art knowledge within the disciplines of Radiochemistry, 21 Meteorology, Environmental, Radiation Protection and 22 1 8 i
9
~
'/
ROBERT SHROPSHIRE 1
Nuclear Safety.
I assure that the operation of the nuclear facilities and contractors under the jurisdiction of the 2.
Power Authority of the State of New York conform to the 3
A standards of radiation protection and nuclear 1
4 highest safety within criteria established by applicable regulatory 5
5 6
bodies.
7 I received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Nuclear Engineering 8
from Columbia University i' 1975.
I have also taken advanced 9
courses in nuclear engineering at Columbia University, 10 participated in the Health Physics Certification Course 11 sponsored by the American Health Physics Society in 1974, 12 Cornell the Senior Reactor Operator Training Course, 13 University, 1966, the Nuclear Power Reactor Safety Course 14 15 at M.I.T. Boston, Massachusetts, 1973, and Environmental Surveillance Course, Harvard School of Public Health; 16 17 Boston, Massachusetts, 1974.
I am a member of the American Nuclear Society, the Health Physics Society, and the 18 Standards Committee, ANS 18.1.
19 20
)
21 22 9
j R. SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL 1
CONTESTIONS 2
3 Some intervenors have raised issues concerning the 4
Emergency Procedures that would be associated with the 5
proposed Greene County Nuclear Power Plant.
6 7
Consolidated Intervenors Shirley A. Brand and Mid-Hudson 8
Nuclear Opponents raise the issue of notification to the public 9
in the event of a plant emergency.
Their Contention 1 states:
10 1.
Petitioners contend that the Applicant's PSAR does not 11 contain sufficient information to satisfy the 12 Commission's construction permit requirements regarding 13 measures to be taken in the event of an emergency 14 at the proposed facility requiring evacuation in that:
'15 a.
there is insufficient information regarding 16 the means of notification to the general public:1 17 b.
there is insufficient information whether the 18 highways and public transportation within the 19 vicinity of the plant site are adequate to 20 effect evacuation of persons within the LPZ of 21 the proposed facility; 22 10 l
~. ~ _...
I J
t R. SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL there is insufficient information regarding 1
c.
4 2
the adequacy of medical facilities for energenc; l
3 treatment.
4 Stipulation Contention 2 of Inte-venor Lehigh Portland Cement 5
6 Company states:
7 2.
The Petitioner contends that the Applicant's PSAR does not provide reasonable probability that appropria:cl 8
j 9
measures would be taken to protect the employees of 10 Lehigh in the event of an accident, especially in light of the limited ingress and egress allowed 11 12 by Highway 9W.
13 14 Stipulated Contention I.B. of Intervenor Cementon Civic 15 Association states:
The Petitioner contends that the Applicant's PSAR 16 does not provide reasonable probability that 17 the IS appropriate measures could be taken to protect 19 community of Cementon in the event of an emergency at the proposed facility, especially in view of the 20 limited ingress and egress by Highway 9W.
21 22 11
P R.
SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL 1
In its Memorandum and Order of February 14, 1977, the Atomic 2
Safety and Licensing Board accepted as rewritten Unstipulated 3
Contention B-6 of Intervenors Columbia County Survival 4
Committee and Arthur L.
Rcuter.
That Contention as rewritten 5
states:
6 Applicant has not complied with the requirement of 7
Appendix E, 10 CFR in that sufficient information 8
has not been provided to assure that emergency 9
plans can be developed particularly with respect to 1
10 the surrounding popula'.. ions.
1 11 12
RESPONSE
13 14 It is Applicant's judgment that an accident will not 15 occur at the proposed Greene County Nuclear Power Plant 16 requiring any offsite evacuation.
Applicant has reached this 17 conclusion for the following reason:
the design basis 18 accidents (DBA's), evaluated to ensure the safety of a proposed 19 nuclear station such as Green e County, cover all of the hypothetical accidents that the NRC considers to be credible.
20 21 In NRC terminology, these accidents are n;tmbered in Classes 22 1 to 8.
An event of Class 8 proportion (such as the most l
i 12 l
R.
SHROPSHIRE B.
PODh'AL 1
severe Greene County DBA, a "large break" loss of coolant 2
accident or LOCA) is described by the NRC in 10 CFR 100.11 3
(a) n.1 as a:
4
. major accident, hypothesized for purposes 5
of site analysis or postulated from considerations in 6
of possible accidental events, that would result 7
potential hazards not exceeded by those from any 8
accident considered credible.
9 10 For saf ety analysis purposes highly conservative assump-11 tions are employed in determining radiation doses.
- Thus, 12 unrealistically high doses result from the DBA calculations.
13 For purposes of determining the environmental impacts that 14 would actually result should a DBA occur, realistic doses i
15 are calculated.
The NRC Regulatory Staff's Draft Environmental 16 Statement on Greene County, NURIG-0045, (DES) explains the 17 difference between the conservative estimates of accident 18 doses made for safety purposes, on the one hand, and the 19 realistic calculation of accident doses made for 20 environmental analysis purposes, on the other hand.
The DES 21 states on page 7-1:
22 The probability of the occurrence of accidents and I
13
I R. SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL 1
the spectrum of their consequences to be considered 2
from an environmental effects standpoint have been 3
analyzed using best estimates of probabilities anf 4
realistic fission product release and transport 5
assumptions.
For site evaluation in the Commission's 6
safety review, extremely conservative assumptions are 7
used to compare calculated doses resulting from a 8
hypothetical release of fission products from the fuel 9
with the 10 CFR siting guidelines.
Realistically 10 computed doses that would be received by the populatien 11 and evironment from postulated accidents would be 12 significantly less than those to be presented in the 13 Safety Evaluation.
14 15 Nonetheless, for purposes of emergency planning, the NRC 1
16 requires in 10 CFR 50, App. E that nuclear power plants be l
17 prepared to deal with the hypothetical consequences of the 18 must severe design basis accident.
At the construction permit 19 stage, only sufficient information to assure that emergency 20 plans can be developed is required.
Section 13.3 of 21 Applicant's Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) describes 22 the emergency p'anning Applicant has performed.
As 14
R. SHR0PSHIRI B. PODWAL 1
indicated in that section, emergency plans and procedures will be developed to cover both actions to be taken in case of a 2
Applicant 3
nonradiological as well as a radiological emergency.
4 therein has stated that the plans and procedures will conferr 5
to 10 CFR 50, App.
E.
6 i
New York State oversees any emergency arrangements beyond 7
8 the Greene County Nuclear Power Plant exclusion area.
9 10 In New York State, local authorities are subject to state l
11 direction for purposes of planning for, and dealing with any f
12 radiological emergencies.
The New York State Department of i
13 Health, in turn, is the " lead" state agency for the response 14 to these emergencies.
Thus the Department of Health prepares of the 15 and maintains radiation response plans, which are part 16 state's overall disaster planning effort and support its basic 17
" Emergency Operations Plan."
The State Commissioner of Heal is the official who recommends or orders, depending on the 18 circumstances, protective action to prevent or minimize offsite 19 20 radiation exposure of the public.
21 The state's disaster coordination agency is the Division 22 m
15
I j
R. SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL
)
of Military and Naval Affairs in the Executive Department.
1 the Division To carry out this disaster coordination function, 2
created within its organization 3
of Military and Naval Af f airs has 4
the Office of Disaster Preparedness (CDP).
ODP manages the assistance furnished to the State Department of Health by 5
various federal and state departments and agencies, local 6
and quasi-public and private organizations.
7 government forces, ODP works out of the Emergency Operating Center, which is 8
located in the Public Security Building on the State Of fice 9
10 Building campus in Albany.
At this location, there is a state warning point which is manned 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day.
11 emergency the State Department of Transportation 12 In case of an 13 and the Bureau of Radiological Health, State Department of When Health will be notified for their appraisal of the event.
14 15 they have categorized it, they will take appropriate action 16 according to procedure.
The plant will notify the Greene Ccenty Sheriff's Department to create roadblocks as necessary and the 17 from the river if it 18 U.S. Coast Guard to keep waterborne craft radiatica protection personnel will sample 19 is affected.
Plant area and inform the Coordinator who in turn keeps the 20 the If necessary, the 21 Bureau of Radiological Health up-to-date.
(at Brookhaven Radiological Assistance Team for Region I 22 16
i R.
SHROPSHIRE-B.
PODWAL T
1 National Laboratory) will be asked for assistance.
l 2
The legal basis, notification procedures, public information 3
j duties, and overall functions of the various state agencies 4
i which have radiological emergency responsibilities are set out i
in the State's " Emergency Plan for. Major Radiation Accidents 6
at Fixed Nuclear Facilities," revised January 1977.
7 local j
This plan provides for a coordinated effort by state, 8
and federal agencies to prevent or minimize hazards to the 9
at a nuclear facility.
10 public in the event of an accident While the plan does not. deal directly with an accident confined l
11 I
strictly to a power plant site, the state would be available 12 j
if 4
j 13 for consultation and assistance to the plant operators f
14 such were requested.
l 15 1,
More detailed 16 The plan is purposely general in nature.
4 arrangements are contained in the " Specific Operating Procedures' J
17 a
f.
(SOP) developed for each nuclear power plant before it operates.
10 food and water is l~
19 (The potential contamination of milk, addressed in New York State's " Supplemental Radiation Eniergency 20 Response Plan to Provide for Monitoring, Surveillance, and l
21 Control over Milk, Milk Products, Agricultural Products and 22 1
a 17 i
J s
-t n
v
--y,,,,,-,.-,,7.
R. SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL a Fixed Nuclear Water Sources Following an Accident at 1
issued in September 1975.)
2 Facility,"
3 or during emergency In the unlikely event of an accident, 4
drills, members of the GCNPP operating staff then 5
site will begin immediate protective 6
present at the plant The the emergency plan in motion.
7 measures and otherwise set ranking member of the operating staff actually on site will B
Management personnel will be notified 9
take initial charge.
The of the emergency and summoned to the site as necessary.
10 coordination of emergency efforts will be assumed by the 11 Emergency Director when he arrives at the station.
12 e
l 13 Members of the GCNPP emergency organization will be 14 notified, through the plant intercommunication system for those 15 i
Authority persons onsite, and by means of public telephone, 16 lines between its operating plants and 17 internal telephone headquarters located in the City of New York, or by the 18 Authority emergency radio system for those persons who must 19 20 be summoned from offsite.
21 Identification and characterization of an accident will 22 1
l 18 i
R.
SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL 1 be made by personnel in the control room through interpretation 2 of equipment status and through readouts from temperature, 3 pressure and radiation instrumentation located in plant areas 4 where serious accidents could occur.
Judgments made in this 5 fashion will be supplemented by observation reports from 6 plant personnel and survey teams as necessary.
7 8
Dose projections require two basic inputs, meteorological 9
conditions and radioactivity release data.
In the control 10 room there will be available a continuous readout of temperature 11 dif ferences, wind speed and wind direction, as measured at an Releases will be determined either from 12 onsite met tower.
13 surveys conducted by plant personnel or from fixed radiation 14 instrumentation located about the site. Actual dose estimates 15 will be made either through use of sets of curves that have 16 dose plotted as function of time and distance for different 17 meteorological conditions and radiological releases, or 18 through the use of a computer that takes instrument input 19 directly and calculates doses.
20 21 State and local emergency authorities will be notified 22 by telephone.
Authority personnel would notify state 19
- - - - - ~ +
R. SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL
)
1 and county emergency communication centers, manned around 2
the clock.
These centers would then inform the appropriate 3
state and local authorities.
The names, addresses and 4
telephone nur.bers of these authorities will be set out 5
in preexisting, up-to-date lists.
6 7
The attached map is a composite of portions of United 8
States Geological Survey maps for Columbia, Greene and Ulster 9
Counties.
Concentric rings for mileages from the plant site 10 have been drawn and marked with radii distances.
Roads 11 referred to in the discussion have been highlighted for 12 emphasis as have specific political entity names referenced 13 in the text.
Specific major employment units or units with 14 employees dispersed individually or in small groups over a 15 wide area are shown with a code.
16 17 Major emergencies would mandate that a sector 22.5 18 degrees on either side of the line of wind flow be evacuated.
19 However, for the purpose of general planning and review of 20 conditions, a considerably larger portion of the LpZ is 21 included within our analysis zone than would be defined by a 22 45 degree sector for evacuation.
The evacuation routes 20 l
R.
SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL either relocated anticipated and named below do not include 1
2 Route 9W or the Catskill By-Pass.
3 4 COLUMBIA COUNTY (EAST OF THE HUDSON RIVER) 5 The largest affected residential settlements included 6
within the LPZ in Columbia County are Germantown, North 7
All three communities are within the 8 Germantown and Cheviot.
The year 2000 population for the Town 9 Town of Germantown.
10 of Germantown is projected (by the NYS Economic Development as 3,030, and projecting this growth for an additional 11 Board) 20 years produces an assumed 2020 population of 4,318 12 13 residents.
14 The primary north-south roadway on which evacuation would 15 16 take place is New York Route 9G.
Route 9G south of North 17 Germantown is a heavs-duty road.
North of the heavy-duty 18 section, Route 9G is a medium-duty road.
South of the hamlet of Germantown, Woods Road and Route 9G provide access to areas 19 of the Town of Clermont outside of the 2.5 mile LPZ boundary.
20 medium duty roads from the North Germantown area 21 To the east, and.from the Germantown area allow evacuation beyond the LP2.
22 1
21
,s,--w
I R.
SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL 1
These roads are sufficient to provide evacuation even 2 assuming all 4,318 residents are within the LPZ.
Based on an 3 actual emergency evacuation situation, it can be expected that 1
4 a four persons per car average occupancy would occur and also 5 during this emergency evacuation that normal available road 6 capacities could be greatly exceeded by the evacuation vehicles.
7 The evacuation analysis for the Greene County nuclear power 8 plant conservatively uses three persons per vehicle occupancy 9 average and the normal road capacity.
The available hourly 10 capacity of the roadways leaving the LPZ is 2,500 vehicles.
11 Approximately 1,440 vehicles would be necessary to evacuate 12 4,318 persons, assuming three persons per car.
Thus, the road 13 system is capable of supporting this evacuation within one hour.
14 15 WEST OF THE HUDSON RIVER - ULSTER COUNTY, TOWN OF SAUGERTIES 16 17 A call for evacuation within the LPZ would impact only 18 a small portion of the Town of Saugerties.
The largest 19 affected community is West Camp.
Based on projections by 20 the NYS Economic Development Board the assumed 2020 population 21 for the portion of Ulster County within the LPZ will be 22 5,525.
West Camp is located on Route 9W which provides 1Evacuation Risks - An Evaluation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, June 1974 (EPA - 520/6-74-002), pg. 42 22
n R.
SHROPSHIRE J
B.
PODWAL 1 southerly egress.
West Camp Road provides westward movement 2 to Asbury outside the LPZ.
Alternately, West Camp Road traffic 1
3 could proceed south on Kings Highcay to areas beyond the LPZ.
4 l
4 5
The existing highway network around the hamlet of West 6 Camp has sufficient capacity to accommodate the anticipated 4
l l
7 number of evacuation vehicles.
Using a three persons per q
8 vehicle occupancy, 1,832 vehicles would be used to evacuate l
9 this area of Ulster County.
Assuming use of both West Camp 4
10 Road and Route 9W, the available capacity is over 2,000 1
11 vehicles per hour.
Evacuation of this portion of Ulster i
l 12 County within one hour is feasible with the existing road i
I 13 system.
t; 14 15 WEST OF THE HUDSCS RIVER - GREENE COUNTY, TOWN OF CATSKILL 16 i
17 Based on the 1970 census, there were 5, 115 persons j
18 residing in the Town of Catskill outside the limits of the 19 Village of Catskill.
This non-village area is considerably 20 larger than the portion of the Town within the LPZ.
A 4
21 conservative approach is to assume that 90 percent of the 1
22 non-village Town population resides within the LPZ.
Thus 1
4 i
23 d
R. SHROPSHIRE r
B. PODWAL 4
4,604 persons are assumed to have resided in the zone in 1970.
1 there will 1
Using NYS Economic Development Board projections, 2
3 be 12,417 persons resident in the Tcwn of Catskill porticr cf 4 the LPZ in 2020.
5 available capacity of Route 9W is limited i
6 The present to 800 cars per hour by the one-way operation at the railroad 7
underpasses on either side of the hamlet of Cementon.
8 9
Using the extremely conservative assumption that one 10 11 half the total pcpulation of 12,417 persons are in the 12 Cementon area between the underpasses at the start of evacuation, to then less than three hours would be required to evacuate, 13 14 either the north or south, the approximately 2000 cars 15 (at three persens per car) from the Cementon area.
16 17 It is assumed that the remaining population of the LPZ would be evacuated northward on Route 9W.
This is conservative 18 19 because Kings Highway and Embought Road are also available 20 for evacuation.
If all traffic frem the Cementon area were 21 heading north on 9W, the total northbound 9W traffic would The normal available capacity 22 be approximately 4000 cars.
24
R.
SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL 1 of Route 9W north of the underpasses is in excess of 1000 2 vehicles / hour.
Thus tho existing road system has the capacity 3 to support the evacuaticn of all 4000 cars from the entire 4
LPZ within four hours.
5 6
Personnel working at the nearby cement plants and quarries 7 are included in these calculations.
8 9
WEST OF THE HUDSON RIVER - NEW YORK STATE THRUWAY 10 11 In the event of an emergency evacuation, the portion of i
12 the New York State Thruway between interchanges 20 and 21 12 would have to be closed to traffic.
14 15 RIVER TRAFFIC - HUDSON RIVER 16 17 In the event of an emergency, activity on Hudson River 18 will be controlled, as the situation dictates, by the U.S.
19 Coast Guard.
20 21 22 25
R. SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL 1 AVAILABLE EVACUATION TIME 2
An analysis has been performed to determine how much 3
j time is available to evacuate persons within the LPZ without 4
exceeding recommended Environmental Protection Agency Protective 5
6 (see response to NRC question 422.1 in Action Guidelines GCNPP-PSAR).
Figure Q422.1-34 shows the extent of the area 7
that would require' evacuation within eight hours to meet these 8
9 As indicated on this figure, the great majority guidelines.
The of the LPZ is outside the eight hour evacuation zone.
11 hamlet of Cementon, the Lehigh Portland Cement Company production facilities, and all cement Company quarries f all 12 Therefore, there 13 well outside the eight hour evacuation zone.
i is reasonable probability that the employees of Lehigh 14 Portland Cement Company and the community of Cementon can be 15 l
16 protected in the event of plant emergency.
l 17 18 The above analysis considers evacuation times utilizing Thera will be a need to 19 only the existing road networks.
provide some road improvements in order to facilitate 20 The 21 construction of the Greene County nuclear power plant.
existence _of any road improvements would result in a greater 22 1
i f
26 f
i l
l i
R.
SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL ability of the road network to support an emergency evacuation 1
As discussed above, however, the presently 2 from the LPZ.
3 existing road network is sufficient to evacuate personnel 4
from within the LPZ in a timely manner.
5 6 NEED FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DURING EMERGENCIES 7
is recognized that certain individuals will not have 8
It 9 use of their own private vehicles during LPZ evacuation.
10 However, there is no need to rely on regular public These individuals will 11 transportation for these evacuees.
carpool or will be accommodated by emergency units such as 12 13 police cars and ambulances.
Detailed procedures for 14 evacuation of these persons will be formulated at the Greene 15 County nuclear power plant operating license stage.
16 17 MEDICAL FACILITIES 18 With regard to the adequacy of medical facilities for 19 emergency treatment the Authority has addressed two situations, 20 21 both involving radiation.
One case deals with minor emergencies that could be handled at a local hospital and the 22 27 1
R. SHROPSHIRE B. PODWAL other case deals with major medical emergencies, exceeding 1
he capabilities of the local hospitals, which would be 2 t andled by the Albany Medical Center.
3 h 4
The Authority has established preliminary contact with 5
local hospitals which have pledged their willingness to assist 6
When a more in the event an emergency situation arises.
7 formal agreement is executed, the Authority will provide the 8
designated hospitals with the necessary equipment and 9
supplies to adequately respond to a contaminated-injured 10 These hospitals will be provided with 11 individual.
decontamination supplies, protective clothing, and contaminate 12 Further, the Authority staff will 13 waste disposal equipment.
ensure that hospital personnel and ambulance drivers will 14 receive radiation protection training to the extent necessary 15 to facilitate their handling of injured-contaminated personnel.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 28
f f'
- lg
\\
.,(..
e,,h..,l
/
}
f N
cA T sx I L L 1
' /,.,'
tC l
l j
i '
cru g
,. l
/
x N $* f f f
p'_\\
ll l
~.
I i
3 l
I sauotaTits
{
g
/j fr
- E
- k T C!
- N
\\
]
r:,,e,
E" 1
s mww:s 1
~v
\\
J u
t
- I cat <
)
l v.
t m
4
'~
f j
j
\\
g Qf
/
E' s.J
(
imam
~
an. m ha.
Ih f
4 1
g
'g.3 s,
i G
I
'N%
(
".h
- +4h.
e c..e ~r f
aC" oc l/2 0
1 2
r.
m jr
/
SCALE IN MILES POWER AUTHORIT'Y OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK OREENE COUNTY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT LEGENO CEMENTON SITE TRANSPORTATION ASPECTS OF EMERGENCY PLANNING' k) OI N
emeemaso ear putscNs, emN ouct a DoLGAINC owo e w w N.
-