ML20199B572
| ML20199B572 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 06/02/1986 |
| From: | KLD ASSOCIATES, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199B559 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8606170173 | |
| Download: ML20199B572 (529) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:, O PREFACE This. Draft Final Report of the Seabrook Station Evacuation Time Estimates and Traffic Management Plan Update is comprised primarily of the seven Progress Reports which have been published over a period of time extending from November 1985 . to April 1986. Any differences between this report and these l progress reports reflect the.following: e Editorial changes needed to transform seven progress reports into a single coherent Final Report e Extensions which are responsive to comments and requests by:. The Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts The Staff of Region 1 of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) In publishing and distributing this draft report, we-solicit comments and questions from all readers. All responses will be reviewed by KLD staff members. It is expected that such responses will enable us to incorporate any needed improvements into this draft prior to its. publication as a Final' Report. ? ' i i i (- June 2, 1986 [ l( ) E a 8606170173 860613 , PDR ADOCK 05000443 t F PDR
. . _ _ _ . . . . _ . . - ~ . . _ , _ _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ , __
EREFACE
)
1 This Craft Final Report of the Seabrook Station Evacuation Time Estimates and Traffic Management Plan Update is comprised primarily of the seven Progress Reports which have been published over a period of time extending from November 1985 to April 1986. Any differences between this report and these progress reports reflect the following: e Editorial changes needed to transform seven progress reports into a single coherent Final Report e Extensions which are responsive to comments and requests by: The Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts The Staff of Region 1 of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) l In publishing and distributing this draft report, we solicit l comments and questions from all readers. All responses will be l reviewed by KLD staff members. It is expected that such responses will enable us to incorporate any needed improvements into this draft prior to its publication as a Final Report. l June 2, 1986
L TABLE OF CONTENTS () Sectio.n Title Eage
- 1. INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Overview of the Plan Update Process 1-1 1.2 Description of the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) 1-4 1.3 Preliminary Activities 1-8
- 2. DEMAND ESTIMATION 2-1 Trip Generation; Permanent Residents; Beach Population; Seasonal Housing Residents; Overnight Accommodations; Campgrounds; Seabrook Greyhound Park; Parking at Retail Establishments; Seabrook Station; Medical-Related Facilities; Total Demand in Addition to Permanent Population; Uncertainties
- 3. ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY 3-1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections; Capacity Estimation Along Sections of Highway; General Considerations; Application to Seabrook EPZ; Two-Lane Roads; Freeway Capacity; Freeway Ramps; Ocean Fog; Link Capacities; Recommended Highway System Improvements
- 4. ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME 4-1 Background; Fundamental Considerations; Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5; Time Distribution of the Notification Process; Time Distribution to Prepare to Leave Work; Time Distribution to Travel Home; Time Distribution to Prepare to Leave Home; Time Distribution for Residents & Tourists off the Beach Time Distribution for Tourists on the Beach; Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution (Algorithm) ; Computed Time distribution of event k+1; Trip Generation Distributions for Week-end Scenarios; Trip Generation Distributions for Week-day Scenarios; Snow Clearance Time Distribution
- 5. ESTIMATION OF EMPLOYEE POPULATION 5-1
- 6. DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR OFF-SEASON AND MID-WEEK IN-SEASON SCENARIOS 6-1 Evacuating Volumes for the Summer Mid-week, Mid-day Scenarios O
i ________________j
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) . Section Title Pace
- 7. TRAFFIC CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT TACTICS 7-1
- 8. TRAFFIC ROUTING, CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT PLANS 8-1 Evacuation Signing
- 9. ACCESS CONTROL WITHIN, AND AT THE PERIPHERY OF, THE EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE (EPZ) ;
DIVERSION ROUTES 9-1 Identification and Installation of Control Devices
- 10. EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) FOR GENERAL POPULATION 10-1 Discussion of ETE; Example 1; Example 2; Example 3; Sensitivity Tests; Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation (Region 1, Scenarios 1 and 5); Evacuation Rates; Distribution of Population and vehicles; Summary of Evacuation Time Anclysis
- 11. EVACUAT9N TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) FOR TRANSIT OPERAT1 .S 11-1 ;<
Estimates of Demand for Transit Service; Calculation of Transit Route Travel Times; Procedure; Assignment of Buses to Service Specific Requirements; Evacuation Time Estimates for Transit-Dependent Persons; Mobilization Time; Inbound Travel Time; Time to Load Passengers; Outbound Travel Time; Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Vehicles; Summary of ETE
- 12. SURVEILLANCE OF EVACUATION OPERATIONS 12-1 Tow Vehicles
- 13. CONFIRMATION TIME 13-1 APPENDIX A - Glossary of Terms A-1 APPENDIX B - Traffic Assignment Model B-1 APPENDIX C - Traffic Simulation Model: I-DYNEV C-1 APPENDIX D - Detailed Description of Study Procedure D-1 APPENDIX E - Literature Review and Data Compiled to Date E-1 0
11 I i
TABLE OF CONTENTS (conc.) , Section Title Pace , APPENDIX F - Telephone Survey Instrument F-1 APPENDIX G - Tabulations of Telephone Survey Data G-1 APPENDIX H - 1980 Census Data H-1 APPENDIX I (Rev. 2) - Traffic Management and Control I-1 APPENDIX J - Description of Evacuation Routes J-l APPENDIX K - Evacuation Routes K-1 APPENDIX L - Detailed Sketches of all Access Control Posts (ACP) on the Periphery of the EPZ L-1 APPENDIX M - Estimated Traffic Demands at all Origin Centroids, Loading Rates and Origin-Destination Patterns M-1 APPENDIX N - Network Link Attributes N-1 0 l O l l 111 l l ..
LIST OF FIGURES No. Title Pace 9 1-1 General Highway Map 1-6 1-2 Geographic Location of Seabrook Station 1-7 1-3 Link-Node Representation of the Evacuation Network for Seabrook Station 1-12 2-1 Distributions of Elapsed Time for Various Pre-evacuation Activities 2-4 2-2 Household Size Within Seabrook Station EPZ 2-6 2-3 Auto ownership of Households Within Seabrook Station EPZ 2-7 2-4 Weekend Vehicle Demand 2-13 2-5 Weekend Vehicle Demand - Inland 2-14 2-6 Rooms in Yearly and Seasonal Overnight Accommodations 2-16 2-7 Vehicles Associated with Yearly and Seasonal Overnight Accommodations 2-17 (Estimates Exclude Vehicles at the Beach) 2-8 Vehicles at Campgrounds 2-18 2-9 Vehicles at Campgrounds 2-20 (Estimates Exclude Vehicles at the Beach) 2-10 Parking Lot Capacity (Vehicles) Along U.S. Highway 1 2-21 2-11 Parking Lot Capacity (Vehicle Demand) on U.S. Highway 1 2-22 (Estimates Based on 40 Percent Occupancy) 2-12 Capacity of Medical-Related Facilities 2-24 3-1 Fundamental Relationship Between Volume and Density 3-5 4-1 Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation 4-5 4-2 Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions 4-18 O iv
r LIST OF FIGURES (cont.) . i Ho z Title Pace 9-1 Diversion Route and Access Control Cordon for Seabrook Station Emergency Planning Zone 9-2 9-2 Access Control Posts in Massachusetts 9-6 9-3 Access Control Posts in New Hampshire on Western Boundary of the EPZ 9-7 9-4 Access Control Posts in New Hampshire on Northern Boundary of the EPZ 9-8 9-5 Access Control Posts in New Hampshire in Dover and Durham Towns 9-9 9-6 Access Control Posts in Maine 9-10 10-1 Map of EPZ Delineating all Emergency Response Planning Areas (ERPA) 10-4 10-2a Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 1, at time 0:10 after Order to Evacuate 10-18 10-2b Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 1, at time 0:40 after Order to Evacuate 10-19 l l 10-2c Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 1, at time 1:40 after Order to Evacuate 10-20 10-2d Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 1, at time 2:40 after Order to Evacuate 10-21 10-2e Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 1, at time 3:40 after Order to Evacuate 10-22 10-2f Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 1, at time 4:40 after Order to Evacuate 10-23 . 10-2g Traffic Congestion Patterns for Reg' ion 1, I Scenario 1, at time 5:40 after Order to Evacuate 10-24 O v
LIST OF FIGURES (cont.) No. Title Page 10-3a Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 5, at time 0:30 after Order to Evacuate 10-26 10-3b Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 5, at time 1:00 after Order to Evacuate 10-27 10-3c Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 5, at time 2:00 after Order to Evacuate 10-28 10-3d Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 5, at time 3:00 after Order to Evacuate 10-29 10-3e Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 5, at time 4:00 after Order to Evacuate 10-30 10-3f Traffic Congestion Patterns for Region 1, Scenario 5, at time 5:00 after Order to Evacuate 10-31 10-4a Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 1 10-32 10-4b Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 2 10-33 10-4c Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 3 10-34 10-4d Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 4 10-35 10-4e Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 5 10-36 l 10-4f Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 6 10-37 10-4g Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 7 10-38 ! 10-4h Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 8 10-39 O vi
LIST OF FIGURES (cont.) ., No. Title Pace 10-41 Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 9 10-40 10-4j Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station Region 1, Scenario 10 10-41 10-5 Permanent Residents 10-43 10-6a Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Inland Population of Employees Who Liva Outside of EPZ 10-44 10-6b Scene.rios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Transient Population (includes beach area employees) 10-45 10-6c Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Total Population 10-46 10-7a Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Inland Population of Employees Who Live Outside of EPZ 10-47 10-7b Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Transient Population (includes beach area employees) 10-48 10-7c Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Total Population 10-49 10-8a Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Midweek, Midday Employees Who Live Outside EPZ 10-50 10-8b Scenarios 5-10: Winter Transient Population 10-51 10-8c Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Midweek, Midday Total Population 10-52 l 10-9a Scenarios 8, 9 and 10: Winter Evening and Weekend Employees Who Live Outside of EPZ 10-53 10-9b Scenarios 8, 9 and 10: Winter Evening and Weekend Total Population 10-54 10-10 Permanent Residents 10-55 O vii
LIST OF FIGURES (conc.) , No. Title Pace 10-11a Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Inland Population of Employees Who Live Outside of EPZ 10-56 10-11b Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Transient Population (includes beach area employees) 10-57 10-11c Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Total Population 10-58 10-12a Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Inland Population of Employees Who Live Outside of EPZ 10-59 10-12b Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Transient Population (includes beach area employees) 10-60 10-12c Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Total Population 10-61 10-13a Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Midweek, Midday Employees Who Live Outside EPZ 10-62 10-13b Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Transient Population 10-63 10-13c Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Midweek, Midday Total Population 10-64 10-14a Scenarios 8, 9 and 10: Winter Evening and Weekend Employees Who Live Outside of EPZ 10-65 10-14b Scenarios 8, 9'and 10: Winter Evening and Weekend Total Population 10-66 11-1 Time Distribution of Arrival Home 11-14 12-1 Surveillance Patrol Routes 12-2 O viii
LIST OF TABLES H2 Title Pace 1-1 Climatic Conditions in Durham, N.H.: 1951-1980 1-9 2-1 Estimated Vehicle Population - Permanent Residents 2-9
- 2-2 Comparisons of Beach Area Vehicle Capacities and Counts 2-11 i 4-1 Number of Sampled Vehicles 4-7 4-2 Computed Trip Generation Cumulative Distributions (percent) 4-16 4-3 Trip Generation Time Histograms for the Week-end Scenarios 4-19 4-4 Computed Trip Generation Time Distribution for the Mid-week, Mid-day Scenario
.(Distribution F) 4-20 4-5 Trip Generation Time Histograms for the Week-day Scenarios (Dist. F) 4-21 4-6 Trip Generation Time Histograms for the Inclement Weather, Snow, Scenarios (Distributions G, H, I) 4-24 5-1 Year-round Employment Population Estimates by Community 5-2 l
5-2 Employment Population Estimates by Community for the Months of July and October 5-3 5-3 Estimates of Evacuating Employees 5-7
- 5-4 Evacuating Employees for Various
! Scenarios, Expressed in Vehicles 5-9 8-1 Assignment of Host Communities to Communities Within the EPZ 8-2 l 8-2 Letter to Police Chiefs 8-4 ! 8-3 Recipients of Plans 8-7 l 8-4 Follow-up Letter to Police Chiefs 8-9 ix i s
LIST OF TABLES (cont.) Ho. Title Pace 8-5 Form to Specify TCP Priorities 8-10 8-6 Traffic Control Post Summary by Community 8-11 8-7 Evacuation Route Marker 8-13 9-1 Access Control Posts in Massachusetts 9-3 9-2 Access Control Posts in New Hampshire 9-4 9-3 Access Control Posts in Maine 9-5 9-4 Personnel and Equipment Required at Access Control Posts 9-11 9-5 Identification of Those TCP Which Take on the Added Role of ACP When the Indicated Regions are Evacuated 9-15 10-1 Description of Evacuation Scenarios 1-10 10-2 10-2 Identification of the Seabrook Station Emergency Planning Areas (ERPA) 10-3 10-3 Towns Included Within ERPA 10-5 10-4 Estimated Times to Evacuate from within 2 Miles of Seabrook Station after the Order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios 10-6 10-5 Estimated Times to Evacuate from within 5 Miles of Seabrook Station after the Order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation l Scenarios 10-7 10-6 Estimated Times to Evacuate from within 10 Miles of Seabrook Station after the Order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios 10-8 O X
LIST OF TABLES (cont.) . H2 Title Pace 10-7 Estimated Times to Evacuate from within the Seabrook Station EPZ after the Order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios 10-9 10-8 Estimated Time to Evacuate from within the Indicated Region of the Seabrook Station EPZ after the Order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios 10-10 10-9 Estimated Times (Hrs.: Min.) to Evacuate the Beach Areas in the Indicated Towns, after the Order to Evacuate for Scenario 1 (Summer Weekend) 10-11 10-10a Summary of Results of Evacuation Time Analysis: Scenarios 1 & 2 10-68 10-10b Summary of Results of Evacuation Time Analysis: Scenarios 3 &4 10-69 10-10c Summary of Results of Evacuation Time Analysis: Scenarios 5 & 6 10-70 10-10d Summary of Results of Evacuation Time Analysis: Scenarios 8 & 9 10-71 11-1 Number of Non-Returners for Households with 1 Car and 1 Commuter Who Drives 11-3 11-2 Number of Non-Returners for Households with 2 Cars and 2 Commuters Who Drive 11-4 11-3 Number of Non-Returners for Households with 3 Cars and 3 Commuters Who Drive 11-5 11-4 Number of Non-Returners for Households with 4 Cars and 4 Commuters Who Drive 11-6 11-5 Estimates of Ambulatory Persons , Requiring Transit Who Do Not Reside in Special Facilities 11-7 11-6 Estimated Transit Requirements 11-9 O Xi l l l
LIST OF TABLES (conc.) ILq. Title Pace 11 -7A Results of Analysis to Obtain ETE for Transit-Dependent Perscns Within the EPZ (Massachusetts Communities) 11-21 11-7B Results of Analysis to Obtain ETE for Transit-Dependent Persons Within the EPZ (New Hampshire Communities) 11-22 12-1 Recommended Tow Truck Locations 12-5 3 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit Title Pace 2-1 Estimation of Persons per Vehicle for the Evacuation of Permanent Residents 2-5 9-1 General Provisions of the MUTCD 9-17 9-2 Excerpts from MUTCD Section G: Signing for Civil Defense 9-18 9-3 Excerpts from the MUTCD on Barricades 9-19 9-4 Excerpts from the MUTCD on Cone Design and Application 9-20 13-1 Estimated Number of Telephone Calls Required for Confirmation of Evacuation 1.3 -2 i O e xii
- 1. INTRODUCTION
() This report describes the analyses undertaken, and the results obtained, in a study to update the existing Evacuation Plan for Seabrook Station, located in Seabrook, New Hampshire. This plan is designed to protect the health and safety of the public in the event that an emergency evacuation is ordered as a protective action in response to an accident at Seabrcok Station. This effort was performed over the period extending from i mid-August 1985 to the date of this publication. During this time, seven (7) Progress Reports were prepared. The first of these was published on November 11, 1985 and the final one on ' April 7, 1986. This draft report is comprised of those Progress Reports, suitably edited in the form of a single comprehensive document, with a limited number of additional refinements. In the performance of this effort, all available prior documentation relevant to Evacuation Planning was reviewed. In addition, work products developed by other consultants to the State Civil Defense Agencies were incorporated, where appropriate. Finally, local and State public officials, as well as private citizens, were interviewed. In particular, we wish to express our appreciation to all the Police Chiefs of the communities within the Seabrook Station Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) who provided valued guidance in the development of this plan. Other guidance is provided by documents published by Federal Government agencies. Most important of these are: Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG 0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, November 1980. Analysis of Techniques for Estimating Evacuation Times for Emergency Planning Zones, NUREG/CR-1745, November 1980. 1.1 overview of the Plan Uodate Process The following outline presents a brief description of the work effort in chronological sequence:
- 1. The initial effort consisted of gathering information:
e Initial meeting with the Massachusetts civil Defense j Agency (MCDA) to define the scope of work. I e Review of existing reports describing past evacuation I studies. i l-1 4 y- , - - , - _ . - , . - , . . . , -. ,__,. ,._. .-
e Conducted a field survey of the EPZ highway system and of beach-area traffic conditions during the last two weeks in August and over the Labor Day Weekend. e Retained a subcontractor to acquire data describing beach traffic in the Salisbury-Seabrook-Hampton area on the weekends of August 24th and 31st (Labor Day weekend) and the mid-week period between these, weekends. e Developed a survey instrument to solicit data describing the travel patterns, car ownership and household size of the population within the Seabrook EPZ. This survey also obtained data on the public's projected responses to an emergency at Seabrook Station. e Retained a subcontractor to conduct a stratified random-sample survey of the populace within the Seabrook EPZ. e Conducted on-site interviews with emergency planning personnel (Fire Depts., Police Depts., State Troopers, Planning personnel, Public Works Dept., Town Managers) ; Town elected officials; Regional Planning agencies; Chambers of Commerce; State Parks Dept., Highway and Planning officials; and Citizen Emergency Planning Committees. e Attended a meeting with FEMA personnel at Region 1 Headquarters. e obtained demographic data from State Planning offices. e Received, and analyzed, aerial photographs of the coastal areas within the Seabrook EPZ. These photographs were taken on weekends during August, 1985.
- 2. After reviewing and analyzing this information, it was decided to proceed with the task of preparing the preliminary input stream for the IDYNEV model.
e Estimated the traffic demand based on the available information derived from Census data, from prior studies undertaken by the NRC, data provided by local and State agencies and from the telephone survey. e Employed the procedures specified in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) and the data acquired during the field survey, to estimate the capacity of all highway segments comprising the evacuation routes. O 1-2
l e Developed ths link-node representation of the evacuation network, which is used as the basis for O computer analysis which calculates the Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE). The I-DYNEV System, developed by KLD for FEMA, will be used to perform these calculations. e Prepared the input stream for the IDYNEV System. e Executed IDYNEV.to provide the initial estimates of evacuation routing and Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for a single scenario.
- 3. Based primarily on the survey results, the distributions of Trip Generation times were estimated for the various population segments: permanent residents and transients (i.e. tourists and employees).
- 4. Evacuation scenarios were defined. These scenarios reflect the variation in demand, trip generation distribution and in highway capacity, associated with different seasons, day of week, time of day and weather conditions.
- 5. Updated the demand estimation of employees who work within the EPZ, based on more recent information obtained from State Labor agencies.
l O 6. Defined a preliminary set of traffic management tactics to be applied at specified Traffic Control Posts (TCP), for subsequent review by local and State police personnel.
- 7. Updated and expanded the preliminary ETE results to reflect the recent information quantifying the current employment estimates.
- 8. Partitioned the EPZ into Emergency Response Planning l
Areas (ERPA), then defined " Regions", where each region l consists of a grouping of contiguous ERPA. Each region, other than those which approximate circular areas, approximates a quadrant within the EPZ as required by NUREG 0654. Each ERPA is an aggregation of two or more communities.
- 9. Conducted sensitivity tests with the IDYNEV model to quantify the change in ETE associated with different l beach-area populations.
- 10. Assigned Host Communities to each community within the EPZ and developed traffic routing patterns for evacuating vehicles. ;
O 1-3
- 11. Conducted a survey of police chiefs within the EPZ to solicit their opinions and recommendations on traffic ,
routing, control and management. The preliminary design (items 6 and 10, above) were used as the basis for discussion. All but 3 of the 23 local law enforcement officers contributed valuable recommendations, all of which were integrated into the plan.
- 12. Using the traffic management policies derived in step 11, a complete set of ETE was computed. This set consists of over 90 distinct cases; each case corresponds to the evacuation of a specified recion for a specified evacuation scenario. A total of 9 regions and 10 scenarios were considered, together with several additional sensitivity runs.
- 13. Documented the results of these studies in formats responsive to NUREG 0654.
- 14. Identified Access Control Posts (ACP) at locations along the periphery of the EPZ and developed traffic management control to be applied there. Discussed the need for highway signing at these locations.
- 15. Identified a diversion route circumventing the EPZ.
- 16. Estimated demand for transit services for persons at home. Determined the number of bus trips and buses required for each route within each community. These estimates were based on the survey data base and on an analysis of route travel times.
- 17. Determined the ETE for all transit activities.
- 18. Designed a procedure to confirm the evacuation process and estimated person resources for its implementation.
- 19. Developed a route structure for police patrols during the evacuation. Discussed the advisability of aerial l su2Veillance and the stationing of tow trucks at j strategic locations inside the EPZ and along its periphery.
1.2 DescriDtion of the Emercency Plannina Zone (EPZ) The Seabrook Station site is located near the northern l boundary of the town of Seabrook in Rockingham County, New Hampshire, approximately 2 miles west of the Hampton Harbor Inlet. l The Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) for the plume exposure pathway includes 6 communities in Essex County, Massachusetts and 17 communities in Rockingham County, New Hampshire: l l-4
Massachusetts New Hameshire Amesbury Brentwood
- Merrimac East Kingston 1 Newbury Exeter Newburyport Greenland Salisbury Hampton West Newbury Hampton Falls Kensington Kingston New Castle Newfields Newton North Hampton Portsmouth 1 Rye Seabrook South Hampton Stratham
- Portsmouth and Newburyport are cities; the other communities are l towns.
Figure 1-1 displays the general site area including the location of Seabrook Station (6) , the EPZ boundary, all l communities within the EPZ, the major highways in the area and the Host Communities (*) where the relocation centers are O located. Figure 1-2 indicates the geographical area around Seabrook Station. The coastal area extending from Plum Island, Massachusetts, in the town of Newbury, northward to Portsmouth, New Hampshire is l a popular summer tourist attraction. To a large extent, the most popular beach areas are separated from the mainland by marshlands. The topography east of Interstate Route 95 is mostly
- flat. To the west of I-95, the country-side is rolling with some i hills exceeding 300 feet in elevation.
There are many lakes, rivers and streams within the EPZ. The mest prominant of these are the Merrimac River which is about 5 miles south of Seabrook Station, the Squamscott River about 8 miles to the northwest, Lake Attitash about 7 miles to the southwest and several large ponds in Kingston about 10 miles to the west. The highway system is comprised primarily of two-lane two-way l . highways. The major routes include the Interstate Routes 95 and 495. The former is 4 lanes wide in each direction throughout most of its length within the EPZ although it narrows to 3 lanes where it crosses the Piscataqua River into Maine, on the north, and the Merrimac River toward the south. Interstate 495 is 2 lanes in width in each direction where it joins I-95 but widens to 3 lanes about two miles south of that point. O 1-5
g s 6 is. \ seg 4 t' b nocne s tt a, . NEW HAMPSHIRE , s ', _ s t
'42 s n #
\
% 'a s i
'251 novte f
9 - p t'J $ l s .. # 8
'~
i tt g
'% 2 ' 'g fj .s }I , 0;*M&M . \s
- 2 a,i *
,~%
' IC k e 0 /
\
w s2m
~
( t,d k
,J - - EPZ
,, '9 Si, eGREENQNO
' '0 ',) t ws J LDS ,n] ,
*C W'< '"j
.- s .a
'2 9 9 ^ J #q -
l E st fER * 'g aggggy l9 t 1 -
,a s#ENfw000 ' TCI' "- "'I 1 '
12 %.e , ,Q, ,gg, g, l ,2 i
'103 ) o
. c-. s 'i a -
,,, s.,,,'de d.,,,,,0.,
54 -,
,{',' EASI /,go "1
' I.8 - -D UNGSTON N waMPfqN ,,,,,gg 2'A a GSf0N m ENSINGf 6N 8 AL = ,
l 33-
\
12' ( 1 ' ,i c -
& (Ta
\
( . wapprON.N'SCU f d.
,_. SEASA r
E
'2ei \ htWTON . #
s
%2 S'/ ,
j i r -' ( _y o2;.D .0 /,' " L,,saua. s.ifst., 4 1+1 "' ( _ 2, ; 2-g y 7,%,an,uac < .b3 _ 3/ j %- l$ . ,/ ).gd f e . .a u - mon _f
.' ) I
- NEh6uay N' ', '
i
/ , j i
-- J' 21 N s.
News a. ' a i ' EPZ i
~
* ( ~2s)
,-- . 3D' V
/ i ,, :
us a ,/ ,, Q' /L'? _ _________ .-__________i '.w'A. ', 12 5#- y'33 ' f; , @ s
=
_s
,3 s $UE
'd agoo.ga I'A'
- -~-
19 4 ,
~
r, f m - M ASS ACH U S ETTS j esa800v l l 5 VtLES i Figure 1-1. General Highway Map 1-6 l
ROCHES R e 2e 4 CONCORD l OVE
/ so utLE 7 95
/ is '
DURHAM i ' 7 20 MILE 3 7-' ios PORTSMOUTH r
)
8 ia , MANCHESTER [ '
"' EXETER 7 %
/ HAMPTON I * \
I
,3 to SEABROOK
)
NUCLEAR t ios ' e POWER F PLANT
\ ALEM # ' **
\ ,,, y, x,3 4 r.-
NASHUA HUDSON , EW HAMPSHIR l i M SSACHU ETT METHUEN p LOgELL ANDOVER
* . ) .
PEABODY ' O 95 ,
/0 93
\b
(
\{ '
- e BOSTON
/
O rieere - l-7
I j Other controlled access highways include the Spaulding l Turnpike, two lanes in each direction, at the northern extremity of the EPZ and Route 51/101, which is the major east-west route l in the area, and offers one lane in each direction within the EPZ. Major routes which are not access controlled include the north-south U.S. Routes 1 and 1A. Route 1 is parallel to the coast and about 3-4 miles inland. Access to Route 1 is controlled in the Newburyport area but is uncontrolled elsewhere; Route 1 is 3 lanes wide throughout most of its length in New Hampshire, 4 lanes wide in Newburyport, and mostly 2 lanes (one in each direction) elsewhere. Route 1A is the coastal route and provides 2 lanes in each direction for a portion of its length and 1 lane elsewhere. Other important routes, with 1 lane in each direction, are State Routes 84, 85, 87, 88, 101, 107, 107A, 108, 110, 111, 113, 125, 151 and 286; see Figure 1-1 for locations. This area enjoys a variable climate with temperature ranging from well below zero (F) in the winter to as high as 100 degrees (F) in the summer. Average annual rainfall is about 43 inches while snowfall averages about 63 inches. The monthly variations in temperature and precipitation in Durham, New Hampshire over 3 decades is given in Table 1-1. 1.3 Preliminarv Activities Since this plan constitutes an update of prior work, it O was necessary to familiarize ourselves with the existing plan. These activities are described below. Initial Meetina: Definina the ScoDe of Work The initial activity was a meeting with Mr. Robert Boulay, Director of the Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency (MCDA). At that meeting, Mr. Boulay outlined the scope of our activities: e To update the current evacuation plan and to compute revised Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE). e To acquire whatever current information is needed for this activity. e To meet with the six EPZ Planning Committees to solicit information, to describe the activities which are being undertaken and to address any concerns which are expressed. e To cooperate with all other emergency planning groups and public officials and emergency personnel, both in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. O 1-8
t i Table 1-1. Climatic Conditions in Durham, NH: 1951-1980 O , Durham 1951-1980 Temnerature (dea.F) Rainfall (inches) Snow (inches)
- Month Law Hich Hann Max. Etan Max.
Jan.- -30 61 3.51 9.68 16.5 38.5 Feb. -22 69 3.12 5.88 14.3 48.5 March -18 82 3.66 10.82 12.0 43.6 April 9 90 3.80 13.35 2.1 9.3 May 22 94 3.57 12.00 0 0.2 June 30 98 3.00 6.88 0 0 July 35 99 3.00 6.69 0 0 Aug. 28 102 3.31 6.97 0 0 Sept. 24 99 3.37 8.40 0 0 Oct. 14 87 3.91 10.50 0.3 3.0 Nov. 3 76 4.70 10.31 3.0 14.5 Dec. -22 68 4.28 9.72 15.2 36.5
. O 4
1 i i l j 1-9 ) i
e To report all progress to, and accept direction from, Mr. Buzz Hausner, MCDA consultant. h A subsequent meeting was held in Concord, New Hampshire at the office of the New Hampshire Civil Defense Agency (NHCDA) . That meeting, with Mr. Richard Strome, Director of NHCDA, served to extend the scope of our effort to include that portion of the EPZ which is in New Hampshire. Literature Review KLD Associates was provided with copies of documents describing past studies and analyses leading to the development of evacuation plans and of ETE. We also obtained supporting documents from a variety of sources, which contained information needed to form the data base used for conducting evacuation analyses. Appendix E is a listing of the major sources of information and includes brief descriptions and summaries of the data contained therein. Field Surveys KLD professional personnel drove the entire highway system within the EPZ and for some distance outside. Each driver recorded the characteristics of each section of highway on audio tape. These characteristics include: Number of lanes Posted speed Pavement width Actual free speed Shoulder type & width Abutting land use Intersection configuration Control devices Lane channelization Interchange geometries Unusual characteristics: Geometries: curves, grades Narrow bridges, sharp curves, poor pavement, flood warning signs, inadequate delineations, etc. The audio cassettes were then transcribed; this information was referenced while preparing the input stream for the IDYNEV model. Field surveys were performed both during weekdays and on weekends. Much of the time on the August 1985 weekends was spent at the beach areas. Unfortunately, congested conditions were limited along the beach access roads for these weekends due to mild -- but not hot -- weather, plus occasional rain. One Saturday night, however, the weather was pleasant and the beach areas were crowded. Telechone Survey A telephone survey was undertaken in order to gather information needed for the evacuation budy. Appendix F exhibits lh 1-10
the survey instrument. Appendix G contains tabulations of some of the data compiled from the survey returns. . This data was utilized to develop estimates of vehicle occupancy during an evacuation and to estimate elapsed times 4 between the issuance of an evacuation order and the start of evacuation trips. This data base was also referenced to estimate the number of transit-dependent residents. 4 On-Site Interviews KLD personnel visited the EPZ area on a bi-weekly basis j during the first 2 1/2 months of this project. Each visit l consisted of from 2 to 4 days; each day included several interviews with different groups of people.
- These interviews consisted primarily of KLD personnel
, acquiring information which could prove useful for developing an ! evacuation plan. Participants in these interviews included town police and fire chiefs, emergency planners, public work
! supervisors, town managers, elected officials, chamber of commerce personnel, State planning and highway personnel, regional planning commission personnel, state parks personnel, and State emergency planning personnel. In addition, KLD was invited to address two citizen emergency planning committees in Massachusetts. At these meetings, the KLD representative described the work effort and responded to all questions. Visits were also made to the Seabrook Station to gather information.
l() Develonina the Evacuation Plan i
- The overall study procedure is outlined in Appendix D.
Particular attention was focused on estimating tourist traffic, especially that which is concentrated in the beach areas. Aerial photographs were obtained which were used to estimate parking capacity at the beach areas and to obtain counts of vehicles parked at the beach areas. Other photographs enabled us to
- estimate maximum people density on the beach itself.
Demographic data was obtained from several sources, as detailed later in this report. This data was analyzed and converted into vehicle demand data. Highway capacity was estimated for each highway segment based on the field surveys and on the principles specified in the 1985 Highway capacity Manual (HCM). The link-node representation of < the physical highway network was developed using large-scale maps and the observations obtained from the field survey. This network is shown in Figure 1-3, with the general directions of i evacuating traffic indicated thereon. The input stream for the IDYNEV system was then created, j checked, and debugged. i 1-11 l 4 i
O O O I I
_e
-- n.
Og . D ! [., , -
)
1, -. s i l
\
l 4420 e ne. ** '
- 8 8 eo ,e esie g
ass e zor j 0 3,, rose j see
g
* '"e neo ..e aos 3 3e g e 3,,
y
*, i.o e ee %/, -
e,,,, ==1 e,
*'* y aeiro e
%eysee 4 e s. are soit aree,gs,ge:F8
- NEW CA LE O eu e ,~'~...n M -
,, "* g" Q
- sos *** ',/
- .t.
g ,* ,, , e l,
** ee3 Anna a its '*' s ' se %
FIcuRE 1-3: i b )
'se s i sgeJ4: # pl g 28 NE wM ARKET sko g' F4 e i
3o3, g LINK-NODE RE PRE SENT A TION \ i e ,/ er OF THE E V ACU A TION NETWORK e sota anF J'g PORTSMOUTH a c a s ,, g ,, g e e' e - % e sii, 2osa
",,,,"*~~'*'*\,-
FOR SEABROOK ST A TION ,
\s%' is.
e
.y,g , s a\,' "e l
*,/ , 'e
',?,
e s'.le
,es en s ,e,.
4 so.
- e t,soes se o
e ,<e oss ( % e **'t e ,
/
I' e e eu ~ soie sois gas noss to NEwFIELOS e e ssa e ssa [(%- ,-- d se g iso e 4 ins e '
't 8
-J g (4 RVE g
g l u
'j u aos e
assi soon e e **8' :::: # aia sne e sso j .n*
, ,sr ,
n O E PPIN G
~~%(ef e
****e STRATHAM 8 see N.HAMPTCN
, tee
. o e e g ." 1 6 , "o -. se g sino D
- e mos et h no g g e , ion
*eg zoai ses e /
en
** e '
, ga'
, ,E ,,,, e , ,,, ,, g ,,,,
in ,,'e\ tu ... , e e a n. ' nos. I- , e \ e k w as e *oso e
,e suo 2002 g to *
- O eni e **e e e e s
%e noti / ses zou _. g . ,o 'o ga, ,e .
EXETER g#g ' n g sRENTwooo '.s "'"O , D , ,,, , sin s c'* " ""' 4
= in e indg e'"==,= e- ni, _1 - g
,g,,, , > >e-b - .... N
~
nas4%,3 f ,,, ,, *- 3 zooie
*F \,arsina e "g, , " ,, 3 .,e,o.
s, *
,o,,
,,s e noos e ,un - n ;;,,6 e
, 3 , s e n. f. e y i
w k~ .*
,.,.-r
..E o M?
o i o ., 9
- 2 - :
i * *
- o :
> s i EE g
g T \, e, e . 8
\ \
\ . \ '
? =
' .=
, ,s: e . :
; . : s e i*
e e ';P
,- g.is %
* ,e.\e-e
*: \ _.- : -: *=\ s
- ce :
e
, *8 : '
)
e e;- ,,j. ; e- g
~
e: " .. / , a
.-o ?:*
.e ,4 o: . *: s , ' ,, < e: q
%, - i,
, s .
a N
;* 4 .;yo e .e.:e .- ,, i s a a e.: .*B. :. a 8
c .1 - ' / l,/ -;,'I g*\ !1 ~
! ?* d'de s . =
,,** ., 95 .c l
-s~" ,-
", 8:q : 'e %
%' IA= . ,= % "a==
, ,, v
'd*##:
<}' 4 1 :E; ,= 3 *: :o 4
88a e p --w J ,~ev o 4r :
. e:
e - o s g e.- .
-e ** e . W.\ m s,
.e.e e8
- i e e s .
- e-a i' '
e Gi\ l ei eit e y / = e . *<*i~*?! e:e:-e. a -
- e:*. 4
, 2* 1, 4 s
' *I g
\,!e -- 2 e:
s
. *2 : 2 /
; < 'o .a . : -- - e. t
. . # t.e--:. -Ase i e:.-- s e.o... aa e6 .
- e. ,
e r <*' e - -
.a . s. w ,: .. .
l
. - e. e: -- ge e e: .
\. 4 : vg, - .
,,- ow---
i
- = ,N.*
- o -
.,, 1.:e -- =
.o ::.
4 e:: ,,. ose:
.e e
e-
**.ej N -. *N\,
y ',) fE$
~
*',! *.. ~ . . fe., I ' '
1,
. ,- - - . ,7 . ,
e e r / ooe :.. .J e-e'
- o *s : e.%.*. , - -
1 t
' e e *::
~.*
!*\.
# 2 .e e,e
=
= t
~
'Sx e t r E
- ) l< *= * *3 ;* s g s, 4,, ,
s i } .** i
- x. . .*.
. \ .-.-
= ., ,,
% 3 , . .
-- :e, - m s
g
. \x: 3
- , e e5 o e, g :. g ,,,
- eo .. sei, e r de s ~ g as
= :* -
e . :.. o
=
g *. - - !*i ' s e: - -
- :i s e
- 1
- e . *:, .a-A,x -
e e,, le . a .e n *g- *I , - r, u e TI
'b *
! APERTURE fi.,$ -kIN g
!,.) ,,...
\-
,. ei
- =
s g* .! (%nRD t O e.o I
, 1.~,
-! ,*. ..- l i ,
i s t E - 8 l 1, N, r \ g
~
a s % ,,. - g
. Also Available On
,,-....s..-
. . t i.
*5 --*:.~-e:- ,.
Aperture Card
.sg -* - s me .
9
. e e: , i is
, ... ;. e- *:
l s i . = O l A e 's 2 O
*\ * > E 1
4 / $$= $ ,l J S a * ". < d
~0
.5* \\ $ ' ... :A l h'
' l g m..-\ .e -
1
\., '
'g e e s-
, 48* 4; t 4
,., 5I
' . s W"
r' Analvtical Tools N A variety of analytical tools was employed for this study. s,) The most prominant of these is the IDYNEV (Interactive Dynamic Network Evacuation) computer system which was developed by KLD under contract with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). I + IDYNEV consists of three submodels: I
- e An equilibrium traffic assignment model (for details, see Appendix B) f e A macroscopic traffic simulation model (for details, see Appendix C) e An intersection capacity model (for details, see Highway Research Record No. 772, Transportation Research Board, 1980, papers by Lieberman and McShane & Lieberman).
The procedure for applying IDYNEV within the framework of developing an update to the Seabrook Evacuation Plan is outlined in Appendix D. Appendix A is a glossary of terms used in Traffic 4 Engineering. The evacuation analysis procedures are based upon the need e Route traffic along paths of travel that will expedite their travel from their respective points of origin to points outside the EPZ restrict movement toward Seabrook Station to the extent practicable disperse traffic demand so as to avoid focusing demand on a limited number of highways e Satisfy, to the extent possible under emergency conditions, perceived "best" paths out of the EPZ e Move traffic in directions which are generally radial, relative to the location of Seabrook Station. A Trip Table
- is specified which satisfies to the specified linkage between communities within the EPZ and host communities outside the EPZ. The IDYNEV Traffic Assignment model is executed to produce output which identifies the "best" traffic routing, subject to the design conditions outlined above. In addition to
*A matrix of origin-destination demand volumes.
1-13 i
,-,----,.,,-.,.----94%- ,7 -..,r-,._,.w.,,-., , + - ,# ..-, w. - -. ,w-, ,-w-
this information, (very] rough estimates of travel time are provided, together with turn-movement data required by the IDYNEV simulation model. The simulation model is then executed to provide a detailed description of traffic operations on the evacuation network. This description enables the analyst to identify bottlenecks and to develop countermeasures which are designed to expedite the movement of vehicles. As outlined in Appendix D, this procedure consists of an iterative design-analysis-redesign sequence of activities. If properly done, this procedure converges to yield an Evacuation Plan which best services the evacuating public. O l l O 1-14
- 2. DEMAND ESTIMATION The estimates of demand constitute a critical element in developing an evacuation plan. This estimate consists of three components:
- 1. An estimate of population, stratified into groups, in communities within the EPZ.
- 2. An estimate, for each population grouping, of mean occupancy per evacuating vehicle. This estimate is used to determine the number of evacuating vehicles.
- 3. An estimate of potential double-counting of vehicles.
A variation of this approach was applied in order to estimate beach area traffic. This was necessary since the majority of beach traffic consists of transients, most of whom enter the EPZ from locations outside. As a result, we relied on empirical observation of the number of vehicles which can physically be accommodated within the beach area. This is a valid approach since discussions with public officials confirmed that, with few exceptions, people at the beach have access to a vehicle.* Thus, the evacuation of people from the beach area will be primarily reflected in the number of evacuating private vehicles. By accurately estimating the number of vehicles on the beach area, we have satisfied the inpuu requirements for an evacuation plan. Estimates of population can be based on accurate estimates of per-vehicle person occupancy. Thus, for the beach area, more reliable estimates are forthcoming if we reverse the sequence of steps 1 and 2, above, by first estimating the number of evacuating vehicles, then using the vehicle-occupancy figure to estimate population. During the summer season, vacationers and tourists enter the EPZ in large numbers. These non-residents may dwell within the EPZ for the entire season, for a short period (e.g. one or two weeks), for a weekend, overnight, or may enter and leave within
*The NRC report authored by Kaltman estimated the number of persons who may have arrived at the beach by hitch-hiking, via transit vehicles, or being " dropped off". Relative to the total, these exceptions constitute about two percent of the total population at the beach area. These relatively few exceptions can have access to cars driven by others (i.e. ride-sharing). In addition, the evacuation plan will provide transit vehicles for those who are not able to ride-share.
2-1 _ - _ __ a
r-one day. Estimates of the size of these population components must be obtained, so that the associated number of vehicles can . be ascertained. The spectre of double-counting of people and vehicles must be addressed: a vehicle and its occupants cannot occupy two disparate locations at the same time. Consider a vacationing family that registers at a motel, travels to the beach in the morning, then does some shopping, away from the beach, in the evening before returning to the motel. If we consider a scenario where the accident occurs at about 2:00 PM when the beaches are most crowded, then this family, and its vehicle, would most likely be at the beach. If an evening scenario is being studied, , then the vehicle would be at a retail parking lot, or perhaps, l back at the motel. Clearly, since this vehicle cannot be at all 3 locations simultaneously, its location at the instant an order to evacuate is announced, depends on the scenario being studied. It is seen that the number of vehicles at each location depends on time of day. It is clearly wrona to estimate counts of vehicles by simply adding up the capacities of different types t of parking facilities, without considering the whereabouts of the ) vehicles. For example, motel parking lots which are full at dawn, may be almost empty at noon. Similarly, beach parking lots . which are full at noon, may be almost empty at dawn. j l Another element that must be considered in an evacuation plan I is the need to provide for transit-dependent people. These people may be youngsters in school, persons in institutions l without access to private vehicles or who cannot provide for themselves, as well as residents and tourists who do not have access to a private vehicle. Trio Generation l Evacuation trips do not "just happen". These trips are
" generated" at the time the vehicle leaves its " origin" (i.e. !
driveway of a residence, motel lot, public parking lot, etc.) to ! begin the evacuation trip. 1 Between the time the evacuation is ordered, and the time that the evacuation trip begins, the evacuees may be performing a sequence of preliminary activities, depending on time-of-day and other scenario considerations: l e Commuters will prepare to leave work and secure their places of business, if necessary. e Commuters will travel home from work. e Families will pack clothes and other provisions, and 1 secure their homes (or farms). l l 2-2 i
Another time lag is notification time -- the elapsed time .. i 'O between the issuance of the order to evacuate, and the receipt of this notice by members of the public. These elapsed times will vary from one population group to the next, from one scenario to the next and, of course, from one household to the next. Thus, the trip generation time (i.e. the elapsed time between the issuance of the order to evacuate and the beginning of the evacuation trip) will vary from one group of people in a vehicle, to another. We can state that the time lag associated with each preliminary activity can be represented by a statistical distribution which describes the range of elapsed times for the evacuating public. The survey (see Appendix F) obtained information which quantified 3 of these distributions; Figure 2-1 displays these distributions. For each scenario, we must perform a series of calculations, using the distributions of Figure 2-1, plus a reasonable estimate of the distribution of notification time, to obtain the distribution of Trip Generation time. , Experience -- and theory -- indicate that ETE is generally l insensitive to this distribution of Trip Generation time, I whenever the temporal extent of the trip generation process is O significantly less than the evacuation time (ETE). This is generally the case when evacuating traffic experiences extensive congestion. On the other hand, when congestion is absent, or limited in
- spatial and/or temporal extent, then travel time can be small l relative to trip generation time. In these cases, the ETE will directly reflect the trip generation time (i.e. ETE = Trip Generation time + [small] travel time).
Permanent Residents The estimates of permanent population within the EPZ are given in Appendix E, Item 15. The two major sources of these data -- State projections and Town Clerk estimates -- are in general overall agreement, but with some important differences at the town level. We have decided to accept the Town Clerks' estimates since they represent data acquired in early 1985 and may therefore be more accurate. The second step of the estimation process is presented in Exhibit 2-1. As detailed there, we employ data obtained from the telephone survey to estimate the average person occupancy of vehicles evacuating from the EPZ. Supporting data are presented O in Figures 2-2 and 2-3 and in Appendix G. 2-3 l ~ - _ .
/ l Cumulative Percentage 100 ;to - -
- u ' ~~X ,, , ,,.. p .-g. = p . 9 p ,W"f , ,.,,.
90 .P .M'
...x'
/
,c:s '
,.x' a .x-80- ,- ,'
o , I o
- x 10 I
I
- o
- o. ,.
I ,x 60
- f ,
. r I M 50 g ,
p a I s g i e s
*
- 0 y
40 l / l
.i I' l, ; ; : Commuter Travel Time l x- Packing to Leave llome 30 l - -x - - -x j
I 0-*-D*-A Preparing to Leave Work 20 -! ! l l l
*i I. .
10 - .i,l O Il 0.5 l '. 0 l'. 5 2 '. 0 2.5 3 '. 0 3.5 4.0 Elapsed Time, Hours Figure 2-1. Distributions of Elapsed Time for Various Pre-evacuation Activities O O O
i EXHIBIT 2-1 ( Estimation of Persons ner Vehicle for the Evacuation of Permanent Residents
- 1. Assume:
(a) All households with 4 or fewer persons will ride in one car, if they have a car available.
- (b) All households with 5 or more persons and with 2 or more cars, will ride in 2 cars. The remainder will ride in one car, if available.
H.H. Size No. of H.H. No. of Cars Used Persons / Car 1 187 0.87 x 187 = 163 1 2 450 0.98 x 450 = 441 2 3 246 246 3 4 247 247 4 5 106 (2x0.86+0.14)106 = 190 2.79 6+ 64 (2x0.78+0.22)64 = 114 4.04* ) TOTALS: 1300 1401 2.68 avg.
- 2. Assume:
- (a) All households with 3 or fewer persons will ride in one car if available.
(b) Half of all households with 4 persons and two or more cars will take two cars; the others will take 1 car. (c) All households with 5 or more persons with 2 or more cars will take 2 cars. The remainder will take one car. H.H. Size No. of H.H. No. of Cars Used Persons / Car 1 187 0.87 x 187 = 163 1 2 450 0.98 x 450 = 441 2 3 246 246 3 4 247 (1/2x0.81x2+0.595)247 = 347 2.95 5 106 (2x0.86+0.14)l06 = 190 2.79 6+ 64 (2x0.78+0.22)64 = 114 4.04* TOTALS: 1300 1501 2.51 avg. Conclusions For estimating the vehicle population, we will employ the value of 211 persons per vehicle, as an average. () *... based on an avg. H.H. size of 7.2 persons. 2-5
f O I ! (35) l l m D
-4 o .c 0
m
- s o
* (19) (19) c a
o (14) E* t u l 0 l a (8) c e O (5) o c. 1 2 3 4 5 6+ Number of Persons per Household l i Average Household size: 2.87 1 Figure 2-2. Household Size Within ! Seabrook Station EPZ 9 2-6 k
Figura 2-3 Auto Ownership of Households O Within Seabrook Station EPZ - O Percents in ( ) (79) (55) a
@ (35) 0 2
(13) (6) (7) (1) (2) (2)
. I .
0 1 2 3 4+ 0 1 2 3 4+ Cars Available Cars Available One-Person Households 'Two-Person Households () V (54) (52) E 8 u o S (19) (19) (19) (17) (12) (8) 0 1 2 3 4+ 0 1 2 3 4+ Cars Available Cars Available l Three-Person Households Four-Person Households 4 l (51) l u ! 5 0 (25) (28) (23) o (22) (14) { (10) I 0 1 2 3 4+ 0 1 2 3 4+
- Cars Available Cars Available l Pive-Person Households six Plus-Person Households
, 2-7
Using an average vehicle occupancy of 2.6, the number of evacuating vehicles servicing the permanent residents may be g calculated. Table 2-1 presents these results. W It can be argued that accepting this estimate of permanent residents serves to overstate, somewhat, the number of evacuating vehicles, especially during the summer. It is certainly reasonable to assert that some portion of the population would be on vacation during the summer and would travel elsewhere. A rough estimate of this reduction can be obtained as follows:
- 1. Assume 60 percent of the households vacation over the summer, for a two-week period.
- 2. Assume these vacations, in aggregate, are uniformly dispersed over 10 weeks, i.e. 12 percent of the population is on vacation during each two-week interval.
- 3. Assume half of these vacationers leave the area.
On this basis, the resident population would be reduced by 6 percent in the summer and by a lesser amount in the off-season. The same rationale will lead to the conclusion that the number of employees who work within the EPZ on a full-time (i.e. non-seasonal) basis would also be reduced by that percentage over the summer. This six percent reduction translates into about 5,000 vehicles, or about 5 percent of the total vehicle population, including tourists. lll Since we do not have any "hard" data at this time, we have decided to make no downward adjustment in our demand estimates for the summer scenarios which are studied. We do recommend that surveys be taken to quantify this effect in any future update of the evacuation plan. In conclusion, it does appear that the resident and employee populations are somewhat overstated during the summer. By i neglecting this effect, the ETE computed for the summer scenarios could be high by up to five percent. Beach Poculation In general, the beach area population is comprised of: o Permanent residents e Seasonal residents e Overnight residents e Transients (i.e. day-trippers). To estimate the number of people and vehicles during ceak conditions, such partitioning is largely academic. In a practical sense, beach traffic is generally limited by parking capacity, according to discussions we have held with public officials. , 2-8
l Table 2-1. Estimated Vehicle Population - Permanent Residents Proj. Est. Est. Population Growth Pop. Vehicles Massachusetts Town Clerks:1985 Rate (Dct) (1986) (1986) i Amesbury 14,056 1.44 14,258 5,484 Merrimac 4,364 1.28 4,420 1,700 Newbury 5,423 1.04 5,479 2,107 Newburyport 16,300 0.70 16,414 6,313 Salisbury 6,645 1.23 6,726 2,587 West Newbury 3,260 1.10 3,296 1,268 New HamDshire . Brentwood 2,000 1.94 2,039 784 i E. Kingston 1,250 0.96 1,252 485 Exeter 11,600 1.50 11,744 4,517 Greenland 2,200 1.15 2,225 856 Hampton 13,000 1.80 13,234 5,090 Hampton Falls 1,450 1.65 1,474 567 Kensington 1,350 2.57 1,385 533 Kingston 4,890 3.93 5,085 1,956 ) New Castle 625 -0.62 621 239 Newfields 850 2.11 868 334 Newton 3,625 3.27 3,744 1,440 North Hampton 3,600 1.05 3,638 1,399 Portsmouth 26,300 2.21 26,881 10,339 Rye 5,000 1.98 5,099 1,961 Seabrook 8,000 1.97 8,158 3,138
; South Hampton 700 -0.19 699 269
- Stratham 3.300 1211 3.445 1.325 l Totals: 139,788 (Avg.) 1.72 142,194 54,691 1
Note: Compounded annual rates were calculated using State data for the years 1980 and 1985. l l 2-9
The available parking in the beach areas take several forms: o Parking lots, both public and private e Parking areas reserved for guests, e.g. hotels, motels, cottages, condominiums e curb parking e Driveways, backyards, front yards, other accessible, unattended areas. On several beaches, curb parking is available only to those who exhibit permits. Nevertheless, we assumed that all curb space, except where they block driveways, could be fully utilized. Appendix E, Item 7, presents a list of estimated parking capacity at the beach areas, and a list of vehicle counts on the most crowded weekend day that was recorded on aerial photographs in our possession. The capacity totaled 25,470 spaces while the number of vehicles counted totaled 18,220 or about 72 percent of estimated capacity. Our studies indicate that beach population can vary widely, from day to day, depending most strongly on weather conditions. Beach population also varies with time of day. On a sunny day it generally peaks at about 2 PM; another, lower, peak occurs at night. It therefore appears sensible to conduct a series of sensitivity studies to determine the " elasticity" of ETE with respect to beach population. h j It is instructive to compare the estimates of beach area l vehicle population presented by other investigators, with those obtained by KLD using the aerial photographs. Table 2-2 lists these comparisons. As is indicated, the KLD estimates of capacity exceed other estimates of vehicle counts and of capacity, by a reasonable margin. l Seasonal Housina Residents l l The vehicle population on the beach areas, which represents ! weekend occupancy of seasonal housing there, has already been I included in our count of beach parking. However, we must ! consider the vehicle population which is gif the beach areas, and which services seasonal residents. A primary source of double-counting must be considered. If the beaches are packed to capacity, it follows that at least a portion of the vehicles servicing seasonal vacationers located off the beach, will have been driven to the beach and parked , there. Of ccurse, some of the seasonal dwellings are close enough to the beach for people to leave their cars and walk to the beach. To the extent that vehicles are driven to the beach, it would be improper to count these vehicles at the seasonal dwelling mld at the beach. 2-10
Table 2-2. Comparisons of Beach Area Vehicle . Capacities and Counts (Refer to Appendix E for details)
- 1. Dufresne-Henry Report (Item 3, App. E):
o Capacity of all parking areas in Hampton Beach, including on-street: 4,034 cars compared with e KLD estimate of parking capacity, including driveways, backyards, etc.: 7,770 cars
- 2. The SNHRPC Report (Item 6, App. E):
o Count of parked cars on a crowded weekend, on N.H. beaches: 12,650 cars e KLD estimate of parking capacity in N.H.: 14,580 cars
- 3. The HMM Report (Item 13, App. E):
O e Daily transient (i.e. seasonal, overnight, daily) vehicles on weekend: 17,147 cars e KLD estimated capacity: 25,470 cars
- 4. The NRC Reports (Item 14, App. E):
e Estimates of beach area parking during i peak conditions, within the EPZ: 19,700 cars e KLD estimated capacity: 25,470 cars l
- 5. The Costello, et al., Report (Item 16, App. E):
This report does not break out the estimate of beach area traffic, explicitly, so no comparison is possible. 4 O < 2-11
In order to estimate tourist population, D21 included in the beach area vehicle count, we seek an estimate of the number of those vehicles which remain in the EPZ at the time the beach is most crowded, but are n21 at the beach. We will, therefore, accept the figures provided by the NRC*, as shown in Figure 2-4, with the following exceptions:
- 1. We will exclude from consideration those vehicles at seasonal housing which are located on the beaches, since these vehicles have already been counted. Excluding the vehicles in the seaward sectors of Figure 2-4 from 2 miles, outward, will avoid double-counting of the beach vehicles.
- 2. Based on discussions with managers of tourist facilities, they estimate that 74 percent of visitors at off-beach facilities will travel to the beach and park their vehicles there, during mid-day peak weekend conditions.
We will adopt a conservative factor of 50 percent (i.e. one-half of tourists lodging at inland facilities will drive to the beach on a sunny day). Note that the NRC estimates assume 2.5 vehicles per dwelling, l a figure which we confirmed with an on-site survey. The results are shown in Figure 2-5. Overnicht Accommodations Again, the vehicles associated with those hotels, motels and guest houses located on the beach area have already been counted. We must also consider vehicles associated with such accommodations which are located off the beach.
- The need to avoid double-counting for these vehicles leads to consideration of the following
e Many patrons of overnight accommodations do not arrive at the facility until late afternoon or early evening, after the beach population has dropped from its peak content. e Many patrons also leave the area in the early morning before peak conditions occur on the beaches. e other patrons stay for several days. of these: Some depart the facility to go to the beach or some other attraction. l l i
*See the NRC report prepared by M. Kaltman and referenced in Item l 14, Appendix Et also see related text of Item 14.
2-12 L __
I hi i i
" d.
n-t o j 5
)
- 0 -
l lp-! O r\ g C M i b o o o ! C s o 0 O c O O \ Q l O o \ l O e O
~
- o ( o / ;Q
' o o \ /o GI 0 O ? 9 S / O o o O
" 7 m c^ - o o 7 c, .2 o P M m
- pC o O N
m o GmC 2 o to O 4 4 gmp M ' c h o n Mbd U t, T t-
/
& O ~ 4/2* ny - 4 J- 7 t C3 o :[, L ce d Ges l
. es C C C m 1
o ca ciani'hg'4
-~
an in e o 0* m' n
*1
~
m A m n
,a e) r
[ Ce C3 C3 c - c5 ra len c ,,-e c_ o 9 O C .% en 9 e 8 n m e,
~
S n p o - a n n 2 n
= no o
- O
") O O o 3 o. c4 ,o C'
O g,! 2
~
N !7 c; o
*
- n
" \
^e, 0 L cs <, . $ m
<5 o -'
S- c6 m
- n c 2
.k en co A
j Q cn
#' C (e"~1 p ") y a a B l
sL.J - _ g f co C T 4 C. $ $ i u
,d
$ 3 u
Figure 2-4. Weekend Vehicle Demand NRC Estimate (Kaltman) 2-13
P ' -- O q
- O' O
w o j - . ,
\ O O o I p O W o e\ a I
o O d
.d C
' O o O Q . O c O o
/
O l O Q O Q J Q p
,Z ~
O C
- O / O o C
> O " d ' %
- c lj O o M 0~
O O p 2y D g O
' ~ % 4 g
$, R $- 0 I g Y f J o r Y
~
~ y n ~ b5 %
d s ${s 4 3 Cr- p f -
'9 , p. d d
# T p e d *
- 4 >
, t e -
~
~
* ~
Ct~ di \D h o l N y - N/m e -- lw lE7 m
\/) d 1 ~
b b o K o t a m o - Q D j d ~
/ ' c
- f. t a
T. & M J m .. d lC _ _ e4 d n d N Id Ni 'd
'l -- .
-- U
;C Figure 2-5. Weekend Vehicle Demand, Inland O
NRC Estimate Excluding Vehicles at the Beach 2-14
P
- The remainder stay at the facility to swim in the pool or walk in the area. .
i e The number of cars per unit for off-beach motel / hotel accommodations may be less than one because:
- A family, or friends, travelling in one car may occupy
< two units.
- Travelers on one charter bus will occupy many units.
In any event, we seek an estimate of the number of these vehicles which are within the EPZ at the time the beach is most i crowded, but n21 at the beach. I We will accept, as a basis, the NRC count of overnight accommodation units, as shown in Figure 2-6. Based on discussions with managers of tourist facilities, we estimate that about 50 percent of the vehicles servicing these units remain l within the EPZ, but not at the beach when peak conditions prevail ! there. These disussions also revealed that several of the largest hotels set aside blocks of rooms on the weekend for guests who arrive by tour bus, at the rate of about 20 units for one tour bus. Estimates of guests who utilize more than one unit per car, range from 5 percent to 40 percent. On the basis of this information, we estimate that approximately 0.85 vehicle per l O unit, is a reasonable expectation. The results of an analysis to estimate off-beach vehicles at i mid-day who remain within the EPZ are shown in Figure 2-7. Cammarounds The estimate of the number of vehicles at campgrounds within the EPZ is developed in a manner which is similar to that for seasonal residents. The primary difference is that 2.5 vehicles are assumed for each seasonal dwelling while campground capacity is expressed in terms of sites, where one vehicle per site is standard. We again accept the NRC data, as shown in Figure 2-8, excluding, as before, the vehicle spaces which were already included in our beach area count. In addressing the issue of double-counting, the considerations are essentially the same as noted earlier for the overnight accommodations. I Based on discussions, campground operators estimate that approximately 75 percent of campground sites are unoccupied by a vehicle during the day when the beach exhibits peak occupancy. Most of these vehicles are driven to the beach areas, with the remainder leaving the area. As a result, the number of O 2-15
C l'Oi
'm U -
5 0
/
0 0 0 _ o G O O o O u O / N I o O
.) 0 R O !O o O
2
- O o O 1
4 O O O o [ O & W g!O O a C gb M - W+* ko
- 7 o o o O & n m O
I O u o$$0 0 O l
*n A O y 0 o o
^N 10 0 I O O O E
- Qd I C
o a m 0 0 - 0 3 0 o 8/[Dh<2 " m O O Co$7 o O O O _
~
0 O O O O O c 0 O O 0 O h. 9 0 0 O o o 9 O o 3 O 0 i O
- w O \
O O O f I C O G O O p- m e / O O [ O
] O o O
l P O ] b 5 a Figure 2-6. Rooms in Yearly,and Seasonal Overnight e Accommodations - NRC Estimate (Kaltman) 2-16
O' -- P _ _ . i i g 01 M O " J \ / O O O j _ O o o o - 0
/ C' O O O
~,
q \ O g o \ _ -l o O O / o O I O - ;~ O C Y O O O !O O o O O CO g o OfC o c o N O O O q g O o g O o o o j ,
-- G O O O l
O \ k' o f o o g\g,a t o,o
'I o . g :! OO'm' . ,
oo d M ~ O [
~ \ O y Y k O O
(j o o O Q'o ' O O g 0 o 0 0 a c 0
' ,s .,
O 0 O 0
\/O
'O o
\ O O
O o f5 w y O u _O O o - o T- O o d' O j O O Q C O
/ o d k o O
O o O . p C ,
'C.
t u .~N
~
b b Estimates Exclude Vehicles at the Beach Figure 2-7. Vehicles Associated with Yearly and Seasonal Overnight Accommodations i 2-17 s
~
0 - 6, O Q l
\
' c
" C O o C O C ./ o o C
C O C o o g, O
' C '\ o\O / o o ir-
;c c O O O lc p O O O
' C O O c O C O O
- O m l 1 a
' O Q C O O'O G~C O ~ c. C C ks C -
%lG ~
- e O e a O i O Oo O o O o o
- O O
o O O a\C O O / O (l o l o g ga c m 0 O
, a O O o
u c o F / a o
\c8 o
C o O gOl g C O . 0 U 8 , c
/
Q A \ o l}a -. g Cl 6
~
G Figure 2-8. Vehicles at Campgrounds NRC Estimate (Kaltman) 2-18
additional vehicles, not at the beach, but remaining in the area and must be considered, is shown in Figure 2-9. . Note that the Local Plans call for all persons who have no access to shelter, such as those in campgrounds, to evacuate from the EPZ even when shelter is the recommended protective action. Seabrook Greyhound Park This park, which is located a little over 2 miles west of the Station, has a parking lot with capacity for about 3,100 vehicles, according to the NRC report. We seek an estimate of the maximum number of parked vehicles during the weekend mid-day, when the beach is experiencing peak attendance. Those vehicles belonging to permanent residents must be excluded since they are counted elsewhere. Based on the information available, we have estimated a figure of 1,500 vehicles at mid-day. Note that this estimate of 1,500 vehicles fxcludes those that have already been counted. That is, we assume that these visitors are all day-trippers. Night-time attendance can be double this figure, but would include many tourists and residents who have already been counted. Parkina at Retail Establishments The NRC report presents an estimate of vehicles parked in lots servicing retail establishments, e.g. shopping centers, restaurants, large stores, municipal lots, etc. This estimate, O shown in Figure 2-10, is premised on the assumption of 100 percent occupancy. The applicant indicated that some 40 percent of the spaces are filled at maximum periods during the summer. Several factors should be considered: e Do the " maximum periods" occur concurrently with the peak periods of beach attendance? l e What percentage of parked vehicles belong to permanent t residents? We have not been able to acquire data to respond to these questions; therefore, we will make no deductions to account for the possibility that there are different peak periods for shopping and for beach traffic. On the other hand, it is not reasonable to ( assume that all lots servicing retail establishments are filled to capacity on a day when the weather attracts people to the beach area. Adoption of the estimate of 40 percent occupancy appears to ! be prudent, in the absence of other empirical evidence. This estimate is shown in Figure 2-11. l Emolovment 1 i This subject is treated in greater detail in Section 5. l 2-19 I i 1
.__ 3 -
~
.,,. Q O
\
C O O C C O O O C C O
;2 O 0 _!O O u .- O y O O O C O
fG O O o O Q > c c 0 o 0 0 0 g G O c O G ,$., O I ! t o O ( O O O O O
!G O C C g o [ hT C O c4 f ~ o '
O o C O O g oe O o o o O O O O O O O l Q g i". 0 0 E pO U, O o Q o g" u O O o
% / c O o g o .
l C x o O O 6 q: 0 \ t a O LJ u -/ c O y G O \ 'h G',0! - M U Oi L_. Estimates Exclude Vehicles at the Beach Figure 2-9. Vehicles at Campgrounds 2-20
O G "
\ ,
o o b o d_ \ c _/ IO o o e O O O l ,O' r C G O /( C
/
O O o g
!O
- g O C O o
! J O
=
~ to 0fo O O
m i O nn o O O ,~G
~ % ~ %,Ql[ ,
./
- 7 ^
O c, G G
\ G y w w o Sf/ '
* .; O g O - O C q
, o O O -
m O [Y! O C o !C! O
$~ k lob o o
. .. O O
! C O m o a 5
2 f*\ e c - o O l 0 \ li w Ee b O Figure 2-10. Parking Lot Capacity (Vehicles) Al.ona U.S. !!ichway 1 2-21
~
u
- 7 .
G - u
- \ ,
O
* /\ \ c .j f i, o
f lc. w
- 'O\
Q j O 2 \- O O w L _ s g j O C o
)c
'- / C _/
\
A.
/ v C
= -
o C o O 9 O y!
~
\ \ O lh o O
C O O C\ /O 0 w o o
! " E o O O 0
f G d 0 O e N O . l/..,\0
- O e
% ~%Q! %L- O- . M/g;
\n d le G n~ m 2; E O O O [.
' b; M 0 ' h b~. .k',p ,4, O ' -
hO ; O %[ o
'. ' O o d G y 0 N* C
\ O O G CfC '
O O O
-/ O O O I v
C, [tQ/O O k. u
" C \ O e
/ O ji I u O 0 0 l 3 0 L 0 C 0 -
_ 0 _ e o l \- O L
~ ! O \ ,
y L i w & m w Estimates Based on 40 Percent Occupancy Figure 2-11. Parking Lot Capacity (Vehicle Demand) on U.S. Highway 1 2-22
4 Seabrook Station ; Employment at Seabrook Station will probably stabilize in the f() area of 300-400 after construction is completed. On this basis, we estimate 500 vehicles there, to account for any contractor and visitor vehicles, in addition to commuter vehicles. . Medical-Related Facilities I The NRC report presents estimates of the population of
! facilities such as hospitals, nursing and retirement homes and i other health-related facilities; see Figure 2-12. The number of l vehicles associated with this estimate depends on the patients'
! state of health. Buses can transport up to 40 people; vans, up to 12 people; ambulances, up to 2 people (patients). ) once again, the prospect of double-counting is present. The i population of nursing and retirement homes is included in the resident population. Thus, the vehicle estimates for this group ! have already been determined on the basis of 2.6 persons per vehicle. Since many residents can be transported in buses (up to
- 40 persons) while others in ambulances (1 or 2 persons), it is reasonable to state that these people are already accounted for, in terms of the resident vehicle count.
Igtal Demand in Addition to Permanent Poculation )
- The total number of vehicles servicing tourists, which are off the beach and are in addition to those servicing permanent l
residents, is obtained by summing the entries in Figures 2-5,
- 2-7, 2-9, and 2-11, then adding those at Seabrook Park. These i totals are shown in Appendix M.
i Uncertainties I Every plan which forecasts events which can take place, definitionally involves some uncertainties. Such uncertainties, ! do not compromise the effectiveness of a plan if they are l accounted for in a reasonable manner. l The statistics derived by the NRC and cited in the prior subsections are the outcome of a painstaking effort by HMM Associates. These results were then reviewed and refined by the NRC. Finally, additional data obtained by KLD addressed the issue of double-counting which did not receive attention . previously. The NRC data did not extend beyond the 10-mile radius to the EPZ boundary. KLD has contacted the Chamber of Commerce in Portsmouth. They have kindly offered to send a list of tourist facilities in that area since they have no data on tourist capacity. We have called the larger facilities and estimate 1,000 additional tourist vehicles may be stored there outside the O 10-mile boundary, but within the EPZ. 2-23
o _ g o[ m
~
; X+
\ -
w
~
I o e.
\ '
G O
/ (; - C C, , _,
!
- O C C \ l c O g g
/\ g, N U- \G l'.,
O h v O O O O
- O C O o O Q'fG o O - .\ ^ / c
' ' -- , h ic) m ~ s.
b' . C o M
~ .#
% M //I# ',M !
O j ,0;G o O QlO Q G G w G,Gg q ,1 0i C g5 3, 5. ' , C ; O - G
\ \ s '\ n G C ;lJ.\G V
~
c- O Q
- G cI O
- .~,
V a\C n= Q c 2 .& Q' ' l ~ s\ G _.
' \ ';l co G
/ Q [
\ L = l ,, a 3 *o
- a -
a p t % . l -
\
I - l \ g v I 3 s\ , Q _ 1 u i
'Q Figure 2-12. Capacity of Medical-Related Facilities O
2-24
1 The towns of Brentwood, Greenland, Kingston and Newfields also have large areas within the EPZ but outside the 10-mile l () boundary. The first 3 have campgrounds but no hotels; we obtained the necessary information from the respective town governments.
! There will be vehicles travelling through the EPZ (external-external trips) at the time of the accident. It is reasonable to expect that, at the time evacuation gets under way, i these through travellers will also be evacuating since they are ; already in their cars. We estimate about 3,000 of these additional vehicles.
V l l l l O 2-25
d 1 I
- 3. ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY
() The ability of the road network to accommodate demand is a major factor in determining how rapidly an evacuation can be
~
completed. It is, therefore, necessary to know the capacity of the available roadways. In general, the capacity of a facility is defined as the maximum hourly rate at which persons or vehicles can reasonably be expected to traverse a poin~t or uniform section of a lane or
, roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic and control conditions. (From the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual.)
In discussing capacity, different operating conditions have been assigned alphabetical designations, A through F, to generally reflect varying traffic operational characteristics. These designations have been termed " Levels of Service". For example, Level A connotes free-flow and high-speed operating conditions; Level F represents a forced flow condition. Level E describes traffic operating at capacity. Because of the effect of weather on the capacity of a roadway, it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent. estimated road conditions during inclement weather. Based on j limited empirical data, weather conditions such as heavy rain reduce the values of capacity for highways by approximately 20 i percent. For inclement weather conditions during the winter months, we have estimated capacity. reductions of approximately 25 percent relative to normal weather conditions. We also reduce free flow speeds for inclement weather conditions: 20 percent for rain, 25 percent for snow. In the congested traffic environment which is often characteristic of an evacuation scenario, travel time on a roadway section is, to a large extent, determined by the capacity of that section. For that reason, estimates of roadway capacity l must be determined with great care. Because of its importance, a i brief discussion of the major factors which influence capacity, l is presented in this section. The major factors which control capacity include: e On the-approach to intersections
- Saturation queue discharge headways
- Turning movements
- competing traffic streams
- control pclicy.
e Along sections of roadway
- Roadway geometrics 3-1 .- ,a-__ - _ _ - - - - _ . - - - . . _ . . - _ _ . - - - - -. . - _.
1 l l l Traffic composition e General considerations h' Weather conditions Pavement conditions Lighting Cacacity Estimations on Acoroaches to Intersections At-grade intersections are apt to become the first bottleneck locations under heavy traffic volume conditions. This characteristic reflects the need to allocate access time to the ! respective competing traffic streams by exerting some form of control. During evacuation, however, control at critical intersections, will often be provided by traffic control personnel assigned for that purpose, whose directions may supercede traffic control devices. The per-lane capacity of an approach to an intersection can be expressed in the following form:
~
3600 ( G- L) ' " 3600 Qcap,m " h P III C h m m -
-m m where Qcap,m = capacity of traffic on an approach, which execute G movement, m, upon entering the intersection; vehicles per hour (vph) hm = Mean queue discharge headway of vehicles on an approach, which are executing movement, m; seconds per vehicle Gm = The mean duration of GREEN time servicing vehicles on an approach, which are executing movement, m, for each control cycle; seconds L = The mean " lost time" for each control cycle; seconds C = The mean duration of each control cycle; seconds Pm = The proportion of time allocated for vehicles executing movement, m, from an approach. This l
value is specified as part of the control treatment.
- m = The movement executed by vehicles after they enter l the intersection
- through, left-turn, right-turn, l diagonal.
The turn-movement-specific mean discharge headway hm, depends in a complex way upon many factors: roadway geometrics, turn l l 3-2
percentages, the extent of conflicting traffic streams, the control treatment, and others. A primary factor is the value of , _) " saturation queue discharge headway", hsat, which applies to through vehicles which are not impeded by other conflicting traffic streams. This value, itself, depends upon many factors < including motorist behavior, but is relatively straightforward to determine empirically in the field. Formally, we can write, hm " fm (hsat, F, 1 Fr 2 **) where hsat = Saturation discharge headway for through vehicles; seconds per vehicle F, 1 F2 = The various known factors influencing hm fm (* ) = Complex function relating h m to the known (or estimated) values of hsat, F, 1 F2 The estimation of hm for specified values of hsat, F, 1 F, 2 ... is undertaken by a mathematical model* which has been programmed into the Traffic Assignment and Traffic Simulation software of the IDYNEV System. The resulting values for hm always satisfy the condition: hm 2 hsat That is, the turn-movement-specific discharge headways are always more than, or equal to, the saturation discharge headway for through vehicles. It is seen that, given the ability to determine hm from hsati the determination of capacity of the approaches to intersections depends upon obtaining estimates of hsat. Such estimates were obtained empirically at representative intersections throughout the EPZ. In all cases, the values of hsat used in developing the evacuation plan represent conservative estimates ** based on this empirical data. Specifically, observed values for hsat ranged
*Lieberman, E., " Determining Lateral Deployment of Traffic on an Approach to an Intersection", McShane, W. & Lieberman, E.,
" Service Rates of Mixed Traffic on the far Left Lane of an Approach". Both papers appear in Transportation Research Record 772, 1980.
** Interestingly, studies have shown that hsat decreases (i.e.
capacity increases) during periods of congestion, relative to that during off-peak traffic conditions. This behavior reflects the fact that motorists are more attentive and are highly motivated to reduce their travel time, during congested conditions. Our estimates do not include this beneficial effect. O 3-3
from 2.1 to 2.4 sec/veh; the highsr (more conservative) figure was adopted to account for any uncertainty in driver-responses at - intersections. To summarize the foregoing discussion: e The saturation queue discharge headways, hsat, for through vehicles can be quantified by empirical observation e The turn-movement-specific headways, hm, are then calculated, taking into account the effects of turn movement percentages, link geometry and other factors e With the control treatment prescribed as part of the evacuation plan, the value of Pm may be defined e The per-lane capacity for each turn movement is then formed from equation (1) . Cacacity Estimation Alona Sections of Hiahway The capacity of highway sections -- as distinct from approaches to intersections -- is a function of roadway geometrics, traffic composition (e.g. percent heavy trucks and buses in the traffic stream) and, of course, motorist behavior. There is a fundamental relationship which relates service volume (i.e. the number of vehicles which can pass a point in a given time period) to traffic density. Figure 3-1 describes this relationship. l As indicated there, the service volume increases as density increases, until the service volume attains its maximum value, VE, which is the capacity of the highway section. Note that as density increases beyond this " critical" value, the rate at which traffic can be serviced (i.e. the service volume) declines below capacity. Therefore, in order to realistically represent traffic performance during congested conditions (i.e. when density exceeds the " critical" value), it is necessary to estimate the service volume, Vy, under congested conditions. This value, Vy, ( which is less than capacity, V E, should be used for developing the evacuation plan and for estimating evacuation times, whenever ( congested conditions prevail. The value of Vy can be expressed as: i Vy = R VE 1 l where R = Reduction factor which is less than unity. Based on empirical data collected on freeways, we have employed a value of R = 0.85. O 3-4
O O O service Volume (ve / houri < Free-flowing Ir. creased Inter-vehicle inter- Stop-and- Higher densities traffic little interactions actions produce Go opera- possible but observed interaction among reduce speeds - disturbances and in- tions with- very infrequently vehicles stable flow crease speed variance. in a queue Some stoppages and state _ mmue formations a capacity r Service Volume
/ under congested U, Conditions Y
w
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
F
\
Traffic Density (veh/ mile) Figure 3-1. Fundamental Relationship between Volume and Density
The estimated value of capacity, VE , is based primarily upon the type of facility (e.g. controlled access such as I-95, uncontrolled access such as Route 101D) and on roadway geometrics. Clearly, a winding narrow road has significantly lower service volume than does the Exeter-Hampton Expressway. Sections of roadway with poor geometrics are characterized by: e Lower free-flow speeds than on highways with good geometrics. e Longer headways separating moving vehicles. The first factor increases travel time when conditions are undersaturated. The latter factor produces lower service volumes, thereby reducing capacity. The procedure used here was to estimate "section" capacity, V, E based on our observations travelling over each section of the evacuation network and by reference to the Highway Capacity Manual. We then determined for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether its capacity would be limited by the "section-specific" service volume, VE or by the intersection-specific capacity, Qcap,m. For.each link, we selected the lower value of capacity. General Considerations Inclement weather conditions (rain, fog, snow) and poor or wet pavement conditions reduce capacity by virtue of: lh e Lower free-flow speeds reflecting greater caution on the part of motorists in an environment of decreased visibility. l e Longer vehicle headways reflecting lower traction and/or more cautious driver behavior. The decrease in service volume due to these factors can be estimated based on either direct observation or by referencing other studies in the literature. Aeolication to Seabrook EPZ As part of the development of the Seabrock EPZ traffic network, an estimate of roadway capacity is required. The source l material for the capacity estimates presented herein is contained i in: 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Special Report 209 Transportation Research Board National Research Council Washington, D.C. 1985 1 3-6
l l The highway system in the Seabrook EPZ consists primarily of three categories of roads: - e Two-lane roads: local, State, National e Multi-lane Expressways e Freeway ramps Each of these classifications will be discussed. Two-Lane Roads Ref: HCM Chapter 8 As a further aid to the estimate of roadway capacity, we have adopted the following four general types of rural roads:
- 1. " Low" design roads - 10 ft. lanes, 1 ft. shoulders (e.g.
Breakfast Hill Road)
- 2. " Medium" design roads - 11 ft. lanes, 2 ft. shoulders (e.g. Routes 286, lA N/S)
- 3. "High" design roads - 12 ft. lanes, 4 ft. shoulders (e.g.
Route 1)
- 4. Limited access roads - 12 ft. lanes, 6 ft. shoulders (e.g. Exeter - Hampton Expressway)
The relationship describing traffic operations on general terrain segments is as follows: SFi = 2,800 x (v/c)1 x fd X fw X fEV where: SFi = prevailing total service flow rate in both directions for roadway and traffic conditions, for level of service i, in vph (v/c)1 = ratio of flow rate to ideal capacity for level of service i, obtained from HCM Table 8-1 fd = adjustment factor for directional distribution of traffic, obtained from HCM Table 8-4 fy = adjustment factor for narrow lanes and restricted i shoulder width, obtained from HCM Table 8-5 fgy = adjustment factor for the presence of heavy vehicles in the traffic stream, which can be computed as outlined in the HCM 3-7
We have applied these procedures of the 1985 HCM to obtain estimates of the "section" capacities of two-lane roads within . the EPZ. An outline of these procedures is presented below. l Note that capacity is defined as the service flow of Level of ) Service, LOS E. Based on the field survey and on expected traffic operations associated with evacuation scenarios: e The two-lane roads within the EPZ are classified as
" rolling terrain".
e Percent no passing zones is approximately 60. e Directionality of traffic moving over two-lane roads during evacuation will approximata a " split" of 90 percent moving outbound; 10 percent moving inbound, averaged over l the duration of the evacuation. e Traffic mix is: 1% trucks, 1% buses, 4% recreational vehicles during the summer. On this basis, the value of v/c of LOS E is 0.91 taken from l Table 8-1 of the HCM. The directional split factor, fd is 0.75 l from Table 8-4 of the HCM. These factors apply to all four rural l road types. The road width factors, fw, are obtained from Table 8-5 of the HCM: e " Low" design roads - 0.78 (by interpolation) l e " Medium" design roads - 0.88 e "High" design roads - 0.97 e Limited access roads - 1.00 The vehicle mix factor is based both on the percentages of i heavy vehicles and on the Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) value of l each vehicle type. Since PCE is related to vehicle performance, the PCE is lower on higher speed roads. For example, due to sluggish acceleration, a truck moving in local street traffic exhibits a higher PCE than the same truck does when it is on a freeway. On this basis, the following values were obtained: fgy = 0.87 for roads of high, medium and low designs; j fEV = 0.91 for limited-access roads l O l 1 1 3-8
The following table represents the two-way and one-way (directional) capacity estimates for the four road types O identified: 2-way 1-way Equivalent VE VE Headway Road Type (V/C) fd fw fMV (Vph) (vph) (sec) Low design 0.91 0.75 0.78 0.87 1297 1167 3.1 Medium design 0.91 0.75 0.88 0.87 1463 1317 2.7 High design 0.91 0.75 0.97 0.87 1613 1452 2.5 Limited access 0.91 0.75 1.00 0.91 1739 1565 2.3 Notes: 1. The one-way capacities of roads for evacuating vehicles are calculated by multiplying the two-way values obtained from the HCM procedures, by the directional split, 0.9.
- 2. These directional (i.e. one-way) estimates will be multiplied by the factor, R = 0.85, when the traffic is moving under congested conditions.
We have obtained hourly traffic counts along several roads from the NH DOT. Included is Route 51 in Hampton. The maximum recorded daily volumes on this road in the summer of 1985 were O'. well above the estimate of 1739, calculated above. Thus, these estimates of capacity appear to be reasonable. Freeway CaDacity There are two freeways in the Seabrook EPZ; I-95 and I-495. A general relationship is used to compute the one-way freeway service flow at different Levels of Service: i SFi = c3 x (v/c)1 x N x fw xfMV X f p where: SFi = service flow rate for LOS i under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions for N lanes in one direction, in vph (v/c)1 = maximum volume-to-capacity ratio associated with LOS i ( c3 = capacity under ideal conditions for freeway element of design speed j ; 2,000 pcphpl for 60 mph and 70 mph freeway elements, 1,900 pcphpl for 50 mph freeway elements; the value of c is synonymous with the maximum service flow rate fo LOS E [) 3-9
N = number of lanes in one direction of the freeway fw = factor to adjust for the effects of restricted lane O widths and/or lateral clearances fHV = factor to adjust for the effect of heavy vehicles (trucks, buses and recreational vehicles) in the traffic stream i fp = factor to adjust for the effect of driver population Based on the field survey, the Interstate Highways exhibit: i e Essentially level terrain e Six or Eight lanes e A traffic mix approximating: 1% trucks, 1% buses, 4% l recreational vehicles during the summer The (v/c) ratio at capacity flow is 1.0 from Table 3-1 of the j HCM. The lane width factor, fw, taken from HCM Table 3-12 = 1, l for a facility with 12 ft. lanes, 6 ft, shoulder, and a 6 or 8 lane facility. The vehicle mix factor, fgy, is computed in a manner similar to that for the rural road segments. The value obtained is fHV " 0.96. l The final factor, f is designed to adjust the service flow toaccountfordifferinh,drivercharacteristics. The suggested values (HCM, Table 3-10] range from 0.75 to 1.0 for weekday or l commuter traffic. It is expected that during an evacuation, the l most experienced person in the group will drive. Further, it is l assumed that virtually all drivers are familiar with the major 1 roads in the Seabrook EPZ. Therefore, a factor fp = 0.90 was l selected. l On the basis of these factors, a freeway capacity VE = 1728 vphl was selected.* Some indication of this value may be obtained from an analysis of Sunday traffic data on I-95, provided by NH DOT. The highest one-way daily volume in 1985 was recorded on Sunday, July 7th: 79,119 vehicles. Unfortunately, we do not have hourly volumes. We can, however, compute the peak hourly flow based on the value of V E' l Peak Hour Volume = 1,728 vphi x 4 lanes = 6,912 vph
*VE is synonymous with SFE , as used in the HCM.
3-10
l This value is only 8.74 percent of the recorded ADT. (Usually, peak hour volumes exceed 10 percent of the ADT.) Thus, even in O' the absence of hourly data, the estimate of VE appears to be realistic. This estimate translates into a mean vehicle headway of 2.1 seconds. Freeway Ramos Capacity of freeway ramps was assumed to be 1170 vphl. This is a conservative estimate (see HCM, Table 5-5], and corresponds to a queue discharge headway of 3.1 seconds per vehicle. Note that the actual capacity for a portion of the traffic stream on link, i, could be less if its movement-specific headway, hm 2 hsat as discussed earlier. The estimated values of capacity during congested conditions for highway sections (nqt at intersections) are reduced below their respective VE values by the R = 0.85 factor as discussed earlier. Ocean Foa The issue of ocean fog must be addressed. Discussions with public officials in communities along the coast indicate that ocean fog is an unusual occurrence during the summer months. All agree that such fog, when it does appear, occurs primarily in the O early morning and generally dissipates by 9 A.M., and no later than 10 A.M., in any event. It is generally acknowledged that beach area population is significantly below capacity in early morning. Thus, Scenarios 1 and 2 are certainly more severe than an early morning scenario which includes the presence of fog. Fog qualifies as inclement weather, regardless of its l location. The 1985 Highway Capacity Manual indicates "that 10 to 20 percent reductions (in capacity] are typical and higher i percentages are quite possible". Our capacity reductions of 20 percent for rain and 25 percent for snow are responsive to these guidelines. l l Link Capacities l for the Appendix evacuation N presents network shown in the link capacities, Figure Vg,ks 1-3. All lin are identified by name and location (community). l l l l 3-11 i l
Recommended Hichway System Imorovements These recommendations address those highway improvements which would be most beneficial in expediting the movement of evacuating vehicles, thus reducing the ETE. Since many of these improvements are associated with beach area traffic, they would also greatly benefit travelers under normal circumstances, particularly during the tourist season.
- 1. Route 286 in Seabrook, N.H. and Salisbury, Mass. and its interchange with I-95.
We recommend that this route, extending between I-95 in Salisbury and Route 1A in Seabrook Beach, be widened to a four-lane undivided highway. Such widening would not be fully utilized unless additional access can be provided to amd from, I-95. We therefore recommend that the existing ramp servicing southbound I-95 from Route 286 be widened to accommodate two lanes of traffic and that an additional ramp be constructed to permit traffic on I-95 to access this widened Route 286. These changes, if implemented, would provide two-lane service from Seabrook Beach to I-95, virtually halving the ETE for trips originating in Seabrook town (including the beach) south of Seabrook Station. In recognition of the fact that Seabrook town is within two miles of the Station, these recommendations are of high priority.
- 2. Route 51/101 in Hampton, N.H. and to the west.
1 We recommend that this route be widened to a four-lane divided highway from Hampton Beach to the present four-lane ! section of Route 101. It is our understanding that the State has approved plans for this improvement. We further recommend that the bridge over I-95 be widened to five lanes -- three lanes westbound and two lanes eastbound. The i third eastbound lane is needed to service the weaving traffic movement on this overpass associated with westbound traffic from Route 101C merging with Route 51 traffic at the eastern end of the bridge and the subsequent diverging of traffic either entering I-95 from Route 51 or continuing west on Route 51, at the western end of the bridge. We also recommend a two-lane ramp onto I-95 from Route 51, and a careful design of speed control and channelization to maintain safe operations. Finally, we recommend that the interface between Route 51 and l the local street system in Hampton Beach be redesigned. l Specifically, there is either a need for a direct connection between Ashworth Avenue and Route 51 or some other configuration which will permit traffic to exploit the full capacity of Route 1 51 in both directions. 3-12 l l
N We estimate that these improvements could reduce the ETE for Hampton Beach by approximately 30 percent. In recognition of the . 0" fact that Hampton Beach is about two miles from the Station, these recommendations are of high priority.
- 3. Beach Road (Route 1A) and Route 110 in Salisbury, Mass.
We recommend that Beach Road either be channelized for three lanes and widened if necessary, or be widened to four lanes. The current plan calls for traffic to form two-lanes outbound (i.e. westbound) from Salisbury Beach to the interchange of Route 110 with I-95. Implementing this recommendation will ease that i process somewhat by virtue of the road being permanently
- delineated (i.e. striped) to guide two outbound lanes of traffic.
As discussed earlier, the intersection of Routes LA and 110 with U.S. Route 1 must be upgraded to provide safe access for two lanes of westbound traffic. .l If Beach Road is widened to four lanes, then the opportunity exists for establishing an additional left-turn bay on the approach to Route 1 to service a third lane of traffic which will movo south on Route 1. Traffic moving south on Route 1, however, could exacerbate congested conditions in Newburyport and in Newbury unless other adjustments are implemented there (see below). Thus, this option must be studied carefully before implemented. Finally, we recommend that the present railroad overpass on Route 110 be replaced with a modern structure which will service four lanes of traffic. Also, Route 110 should be channelized for three lanes for the entire distance between Route 1 and the interchange with I-95, and widened, as necessary. , Reductions in ETE will depend on the extent that the ! left-turn bay on Beach Road proves to be beneficial. These benefits, in turn, depend on the amount of traffic in Newburyport that can be diverted from U.S. Route 1, onto Scotland Road and thence to I-95; such diversion would provide additional capacity on Route 1 for servicing traffic from Salisbury Beach. We believe that a 10-20 percent reduction in ETE for Salisbury is possible, if all potential benefits are realized.
- 4. Access to Scotland Road from Newburyport, Mass.
Presently, there is no direct access to Scotland Road from the built-up central area of Newburyport City. Access is now possible from Low Street via Graf Road. Low Street is not easily accessible from the downtown area. Access to Scotland Road is also possible from Parker Street (in fact, Parker Street is renamed Scotland Road at the Newbury-Newburyport town boundary), but the Parker Street approach is from the east across Route 1, which would limit its utility during an evacuation. 3-13
We recommend that consideration be given by the City of . Newburyport to extending Graf Road north and into the downtown area. Of course, any such decision should be consistent with the city's long-term plan and land-use zoning. Given that such a connector is feasible and attractive, it would provide another direct evacuation route from downtown Newburyport. This additional route would lessen the demand for service on Route 1 and on Route 113 (toward I-95) and expedite the evacuation of the city. We estimate a reduction in ETE of approximately 20 percent for Newburyport if the capacity of Scotland Road is fully utilized.
- 5. We recommend that consideration be given to constructing an interchange at the junction of Route 151 and I-95 in North Hampton, to permit access from Route 151 onto I-95, northbound.
This would expedite the movement of evacuating vehicles from within the towns of Hampton and North Hampton and relieve the demand on U.S. Route 1 northbound, thereby expediting the traffic movement from the coastal areas and the towns of Rye, North Hampton and Portsmouth. l It is difficult to quantify the benefits in terms of reduced ETE without a detailed study, since several towns are impacted. A reduction of 10 percent appears attainable, and possibly more. We have not conducted detailed studies to quantify the benefits in reduced ETE that could accrue as a result of implementing these recommendations, nor have we estimated their costs, at this time. Such studies are contemplated in the near future. O 3-14
I
- 4. ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME
'( Federal Government Guidelines (see NUREG 0654, Appendix 4) specify that the planner estimate the distributions of elapsed times associated with activities undertaken by the public in preparation for evacuation. We define the num of thesa distributions of elapsed times, to be defined later, as the Trip Generation Time Distribution. Backaround In general, an accident at a nuclear power station attains one or more " classes" of Emergency Action Levels (see Appendix 1 of NUREG 0654 for details):
- 1. Unusual Event
- 2. Alert j 3. Site Area Lmergency
- 4. General Emergency At each level, the Federal Guidelines specify a set of Actions to be undertaken by the Licensee, and by State and Local offsite authorities. If we limit this discussion to the evacuation decision action, then the first off-site public notification and response can occur at the time of the Site Area Emergency.
O There is an exception to this rule in the Emergency Plan for the Seabrook Station. It is now contemplated that the public will be notified to clear the beaches at the Alert Level as a precautionary action. The loudspeakers will be used to announce this action but the sirens will not be activated at this time. As a Plannina Basis, we will adopt a conservative posture, in accord with Federal Regulations, that a rapidly escalating accident will be considered in calculating the Trip Generation Time. We will assume: e The accident escalates almost immediately to a Site Area Emergency. e That further escalation to a General Emergency occurs 15 minutes later. e That the order to evacuate is transmitted to the public 10 minutes after the General Emergency is declared. We emphasize that the adoption of this planning basis is D9t a representation that these events can occur at the Seabrook Station within the indicated time frame. Rather, these assumptions are only necessary in order to: O 4-1
e Establish a temporal framework for estimating the Trip Generation distribution in the format recommended in . Appendix 4 of NUREG 0654. e Identify temporal points of reference for the purpose of uniquely defining " clear Time" and Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE). It is more likely that a longer time will elapse between the various classes of an emergency at Seabrook. For example, suppose two hours elapse from the declaration of a General Emergency to the Order to Evacuate. In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation during this two-hour period. As a result, the population within the EPZ will be lower when the Order to Evacuate is announced, than at the time of the General Emergency. Thus, the time needed to evacuate the EPZ, after the Order to Evacuate will be significantly less than the estimates presented in this report.
- on the other hand, there is a low probability that an "immediate" General Emergency can arise, with the Order to Evacuate given almost simultaneously. In this case, the evacuation time estimates (ETE) will be somewhat longer than the j figures presented herein.
The planning basis adopted here approximates the " worst case" conditions, and is within 25 minutes of the most extreme condition. Sensitivity tests provide quantitative indications of the effects of accident scenarios which depart from this planning basis. The notification process consists of two events: e Transmittina information (e.g. using sirens, tone alerts, EBS broadcasts, loudspeakers). e Receivina and correctly interDretina the information that is transmitted. l The population within the EPZ exceeds 140,000 persons who are I deployed over an area of approximately 200 square miles, and engaged in a wide variety of activities. It must be anticipated that some time will elapse between the transmission and receipt of the information advising the public of an accident. The amount of elapsed time will vary from one individual to the next depending where that person is, what that person is doing, and related factors. Furthermore, persons who will be directly involved with the evacuation process may be outside the EPZ at the time that the emergency is declared. These people may be commuters, shoppers and other travelers who reside within the EPZ and who will return to join the other members in the household upon receiving notification of an emergency. 4-2
)
As indicated in NUREG 0654, the estimated elapsed times for the receipt of notification can be expressed as a distribution . , reflecting the different notification times for different people within, and outside, the EPZ. By using time distributions, it is l also possible to distinguish between different population groups and different day-of-week and time-of-day scenarios, so that more accurate assessments may be obtained. For example, persons on the beach areas will be alerted with loudspeakers; there will be little time lost between transmission and receipt of information. Other persons, located inland within
- the EPZ will be notified by siren, tone alert and radio. Those well outside the EPZ will be notified by telephone, radio, TV and word-of-mouth, with potentially longer time lags.
Furthermore, the spatial distribution of the EPZ population will differ with time of day -- families will be united in the evenings and at night, but dispersed during the day. In this respect, weekends will differ from weekdays. Fundamental Considerations The environment leading up to the time that people begin their evacuation trips, consists of a sequence of events and activities. Each event (other than the first) occurs at an instant in time and is the outcome of an activity. ' O Activities are undertaken over a period of time. Activities may be in " series" (i.e. to undertake an activity implies the completion of all preceding events) or may be in parallel (two or more activities may take place over the same period of time). Activities conducted in series are functionally denendent on the completion of prior activities; activities conducted in parallel are functionally indenendent of one-another. The , relevant events associated with the public's preparation for evacuation are: i
, Event Number Event Descrintion r
! 1 No-accident condition 2 Awareness of accident situation 3 Depart place of work 4 Arrive home 5 Leave home to evacuate the area i Associated with each sequence of events are one or more ! activities, as outlined below: Event Secuence Activity ! 1 --> 2 Public receives notification information 2 --> 3 Prepare to leave work 2,3 --> 4 Travel home 2,4 --> 5 Prepare to leave for evacuation trip 4-3
1 l These relationships may be depicted graphically as shown in Figure 4-1. - Note that event 5, " Leave to evacuate the area" is conditional either on event 2 or event 4. That is, activities 2
--> 5 can be undertaken in parallel with activities 2 --> 3, 3 --> 4 and 4 --> 5, as shown in Figure 4-1 (a) and (c).
Specifically, it is possible that one adult member of a household can prepare to leave home (i.e. secure the home, pack clothing, etc.), while others are travelling home from work. In this instance, the household members would be able to evacuate sooner than if such preparation had to be deferred until all household members had returned home. However, we will adopt the conservative posture that all activities will occur in sequence. It is seen from Figure 4-1, that the Trip Generation time (i.e. the total elapsed time from Event 1 to Event 5) depends on I the scenario and will vary from one household to the next. Furthermore, Event 5 depends, in a complicated way, on the time distributions of all activities leading to that event. Specifically, in order to estimate the time distribution of Event 5, we must somehow obtain estimates of the time distributions of all preceding events. Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Precedine Event 5 l The time distribution of an event is obtained by " summing" the time distributions of all prior, contributing activities. (This " summing" process is quite different than an algebraic sum since we are operating on distributions -- not numbers). Time distribution of the Notification Process: Activity 1 --> 2) We know of no survey which has accumulated empirical information describing the rate at which notification information is received. Nevertheless, there is sufficient data to obtain a reasonable estimate of a notification time frame, based largely on the information obtained from the telephone survey. (See Appendices F and G). The following information is relevant: Estimated Population: 142,194 Average Household (HH) Size: 2.87 Estimate Number of HH: 142,194/2.87 = 49,545 Avg. Number of Commuters per HH: 1661/1300 = 1.28 Percentage of Residents who will be within the EPZ if accident occurs at mid-week, mid-day: 0.582 (1,2g3 + (g 8,_1.28) x 100 = 81.4 2.87 9 4-4
1 2 3 4 5 . ze .e Inland and Residents Os o- -: . '
~_____
1 2 5 Beach area vacationers (a) Accident occurs during mid-week, at mid-day; summer season 1 2 5
- :: &c Inland and Residents 1 2 5 e :e w Beach area vacationers (b) Accident occurs during week-end, at mid-day; summer season 1 2 3 4 5
- =- =c == 3:
~ -
__ ___ ~ O (c) Accident occurs during mid-week, at mid-day; non-summer season 1 2 5 e---ze >c . (d) Accident occurs in the evening, non-summer season 1 2 3 (e) Employees who live outside of the EPZ Time Increasing e Event
- *- Activity l
Figure 4-1. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation (see text for definition) O 4-5 i t
c l 4 since 58.2 percent of all commuters work within the EPZ, according to the survey results. l The population within the EPZ includes 81.4 percent of all l residents, as computed above, and 100 percent of all tourists and employees, by definition. The tourist population may be estimated by estimating the i average value of persons per vehicle. The subject of vehicle occupancy has received much attention in past studies (see Appendix E, items 6, 10, 13; also the Costello Report referenced l in item 16). For this purpose, we reason that during the summer, the vehicles on the access roads to the beach areas, at points close to the beaches, are predominately tourists. In August 1985, a count of vehicle occupancy was conducted for KLD, as reported in item 18 of Appendix E. The results of this field count are presented in Table 4-1. These results for the major beach access roads may be summarized as follows: Averace Vehicle OccuDancy on Beach Access Roads Route Wednesday Sunday Overall l 1A 2.18 2.21 2.20 286 1.91 2.12 2.07 51 2.18 2.23 2.21 As is indicated, these data reveal a much lower vehicle occupancy than the values obtained in other surveys which yielded values generally ranging from 2.7 to 3.5 persons per vehicle. The factors which could contribute to these disparate results are: e Secular reduction in family size over the past decade. e Increase in vehicle ownership per household, leading to fewer persons per car, over the past decade. 1 e The vehicle fleet in 1986 is composed of smaller cars than those in the early 1970's, with less seating capacity. e A change in the demographics of those attracted to the beach area, relative to prior years. Discussions with officials revealed that fewer families and a larger number of younger people were attracted to the beach in 1985. 1 e These data, collected over the last week and weekend of the season, may not be representative of the entire season. l 4-6
Table 4-1. Number of Sampled Vehicles - Major
- Occupied by the indicated Mean Beach Location Day Time number of nersons occun. Access.
l2 1 A E k 1t Rt. 1 WED 10:00AM 33 30 17 8 0 0 2 2.13 Rt. 286 " 10:35AM 63 85 20 10 1 O 1 1.92 X Rt. 51 " 11:35AM 29 35 15 10 10 2 0 2.44 X Rt. 101C " 12:00PM 38 22 7 3 3 0 0 1.69 Rt. lA " 12:35PM 35 47 13 6 1 1 1 2.02 X Rt. 101E " 1:08PM 38 24 10 5 0 1 0 1.82 Rt. lA " 1:50PM 50 61 27 14 5 1 0 2.15 X Rt. 286 " 2:25PM 20 32 8 1 1 0 0 1.88 X Rt. 51 " 2:56PM 41 42 19 10 5 0 0 2.11 X Rt. 101E " 3:25PM 25 34 17 7 2 0 0 2.14 Rt. 101C " 3:45PM 31 37 7 2 0 1 0 1.79 Rt. lA " 4:10PM 14 52 15 9 6 0 0 2.39 X Rt. 101C " 4:40PM 45 30 9 4 3 0 0 1.79 Rt. 101E " 5:05PM 68 54 12 6 2 0 0 1.79 Rt. 51 " 5:35PM 29 42 11 8 0 0 0 1.98 X Rt. lA SUN 9:30AM 34 53 19 8 7 0 0 2.18 X Rt. 286 " 10:10AM 46 42 7 8 1 0 0 1.81 X
" 6 0 0 2.18 X
() Rt. 51 10:55AM 30 84 14 12 Rt. 101E " 11:35AM 18 36 17 11 1 0 0 2.28 Rt. 101C " 12:00PM 22 29 13 6 1 0 0 2.08 Rt. lA " 12:25PM 14 40 14 10 1 2 0 2.37 X Rt. 101C " 12:50PM 25 27 15 11 3 0 0 2.25 Rt. 101E " 1:15PM 29 48 14 10 4 0 0 2.16 Rt. 51 " 1:40PM 9 42 8 10 0 2 0 2.38 X Rt. 286 " 2:30PM 36 65 13 16 3 2 1 2.23 X Rt. lA " 3:05PM 28 66 20 9 4 0 0 2.17 X Rt. 286 " 3:45PM 27 88 20 13 8 1 0 2.30 X Rt. 51 " 4:30PM 17 74 11 12 2 0 0 2.21 X Rt. 101E " 5:00PM 36 57 9 7 0 2 0 1.95 Rt. 101C " 5:30PM 35 56 13 16 5 1 0 2.23 Wednesday data is August 28, 1985 l Sunday data is September 1, 1985 l l
*X indicates that route directly services the beach area l
O 4-7
l In the absence of other definitive data compiled earlier in the 1985 season, we will adopt a " compromise" estimate of 2.8 . persons per vehicle in the beach area. Any reasonable inaccuracy l in this estimate will not meaningfully impact the calculations of I the notification time distribution. It is planned to take additional data in early summer of 1986. It is reasonable to expect that 90 percent of those within the EPZ will be aware of the accident within 15 minutes with the remainder notified within the following 15 minutes. The commuters outside the EPZ will be notified somewhat later, say uniformly between 10 and 40 minutes, while the entire beach area population will be notified within'15 minutes. The resulting distributions for this notification activity are given below: l Distribution No. 1. Notification Time: Activity 1 --> 2 i l Persons off the Beach: Distribution lA Elapsed Cum. Pct. Time (min.) Notified 5 15 10 46 i 15 79 20 85 25 90 30 95 35 98 l 40 100 Persons on the Beach: Distribution 1B Elapsed Cum. Pct. l Time (min.) Notified 5 20 10 60 l 15 100 It is reasonable to expect that the vast majority of business enterprises within the EPZ will elect to shut down following notification. Most employees would take action to leave work quickly. Commuters who work outside the EPZ could, in all probability, also leave quickly since facilities outside the EPZ would remain open and other personnel would remain. Personnel responsible for equipment would require additional time to secure the facility. The distribution of Activity 2 --> 3 reflects data obtained by the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 2-1 and listed below as Distribution 2. O l 4-8
Distribution No. 2. Time to Prenare to Leave Work: Activity 2 --> 3 - Elapsed Cum. Pct. Time (min.) Leavina Work 5 66 10 77 15 84 20 86 25 87 30 93 35 95 40 95 45 95 50 96 55 96 60 97 65 97 70 98 75 98 80 98 85 98 90 99 95 99 100 99 105 99 110 100 NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the
" Don't know" response Distribution No. 3. Time to Travel Home: Activity 3 --> 4 This data is provided directly by the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 2-1 and listed below:
i Elapsed Cum. Pct. l Time (min.) Returnina Home 5 16 10 33 15 49 20 60 25 66 30 75 35 78 40 81 45 87 50 89 55 89 60 95 65 95 O 4-9
Elapsed Cum. Pct. Time (min.1 Returnina Home . 70 96 75 97 80 97 85 98 90 98 95 98 100 98 105 99 110 99 115 100 NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the
" Don't know" response Distribution No. 4. Time to PreDare to Leave Home:
Activity 2.4 --> 5 This data is provided directly by the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 2-1 and listed below: Distribution 4A: Residents & Tourists off the Beach E13Dsed Time (min) Cum. Pct. Ready to Evacuate 5 8 10 16 15 24 20 34 25 44 30 53 35 56 40 58 45 61 50 65 55 70 60 74 65 78 70 81 i 75 85 80 86 ( 85 86 90 87 95 87 100 87 105 87 l 110 88 115 90 120 91 125 92 130 94 135 95 4-10
Elansed Time (min) Cum. Pct. Ready to Evacuate 140 95 145 96 150 96 155 96 160 96 165 96 170 97 175 97 180 98 185 98 190 98 195 99 200 99 205 99 210 100 NOTE: The original data was obtained in 15-minute increments. The above figures were calculated by interpolation and normalized as before. Distribution 4B: Tourists on the Beach Distribution 4B describes the estimated preparation time to leave the beach area. While we have no empirical data to support this distribution, we do know the physical domain of the beach () area and the activities involved. People on the beach or out walking would merely gather their belongings and walk to their respective cars. Others who are lodged in overnight accommodations and in tourist facilities would return to pack their belongings and leave. Business people and permanent residents must secure their properites and then pack, before leaving. Since we know that congestion will occur on the beach areas during the summer and that evacuation time will exceed Trip Generation time, any inaccuracies in the distribution will not influence the ETE. Thus, an approximate, reasonable distribution will satisfy our needs. On a weekend, about half of all visitors are day-trippers. These people should be able to access their respective cars within 30 minutes of the receipt of the notification information and be ready to depart. About 80 percent of the remaining visitors (i.e. 40 percent of the total) should be able to access their respective cars within 1.5 hours. The remaining people are those who must take longer, say, from one hour, up to two hours. The resulting distribution follows: ( 4-11
. . - . . . _ - _ - - . - - - - _ - . , . . , _ _- . _ _ . . - _ ~ - _ , . _ . , _ . _ . . - - . - - . . _ - , _ . , _ - . , . _ - . . . - , , , _ . , _ _ _ -- _
_--._m.
Elaosed Time (min) Cum. Pct. Ready to Evacuate 5 12 O 10 23 15 35 20 46 25 57 30 68 35 70 40 72 45 74 50 76 55 79 60 81 65 84 70 86 75 89 80 91 85 94 90 97 95 97 100 98 105 98 110 99 115 99 120 100 Calculation of Trio Generation Time Distribution Associated with each event is a time distribution reflecting the range of time for the population to complete the preceding activity, and the time distribution of the preceding event. When an event, k+1, deoends upon a prior event, k, then the time distribution of this event, k+1, can be calculated if: e The time distribution of event, k, is known, and
, e The time distribution of the activity k->k+1, is known or can be estimated.
l We now present the analytical treatment to compute the distribution of event, k+1, given the distribution of the prior l event and of the connecting activity. Alcorithm No. 1 (Decendent Events) Computationally, all distributions are represented as l histograms composed of elements (i.e. each element represents a l percentage of the population). The following definitions apply: Let Ti(k) = Time at which the ith element of the histogram has completed event, k; i=1,2...,I 4-12 1
tj = Time required for jth element of the histogram to i (~s perform the activity, k->k+1; j=1,2,...,J - P i (k) = Percent of population represented by the ith element of the histogram for event, k. That is, Pi(k) percent of the population has completed the event, k, at time, Ti(k), over the interval, AT=Ti (k)-Ti-1(k) . Pj = Percent of population which requires tj minutes to complete activity, k ->k+1. Tm(k+1) = Time at which mth element of the histogram has completed event, k+1; m=1,2,...,1+j-1,...I+J-1 Pm(k+1) = Percent of population represented by the mth element of the histogram for event, k+1. That is, Pm(k+1) percent of the population has completed the event, k+1; at time, Tm(k+1) , over the time interval, oT=Tm(k+1) - T m-1(k+1) Then, Pm(k+1) = E Pi (k)pj /100 1,j -> i+j-l=m () Tm(k+1) = Ti(k)+tj where i+j-1=m I+J-l Note: E Pm(k+1) =1 m=1 Examnle: Dependent Events--Application of Algorithm No. 1 Time Distribution Time Distribution of of event, k activity, k->k+1 i Pi (k) Ti(k) j Pj tj 1 30 10 1 50 20 2 50 20 2 30 30 3 10 30 3 20 40 4 10 40 l Let m = 1. Then i = j = 1 l i P1(k+1) = (30) (50)/100 = 15 ;Ti(k+1) = 10+20=30
- O f
4-13
- _ . - _ - - _ - - . . _ _ - - . ~ _ - - - = - . _ . . . . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _
Let m = 2. Then i=1, j=2 ; i=2, j=1 P2 (k+1) = ((30) (30) + (50) (50)]/100=34 T2 (k+1) = 10 + 30 = 40 Let m = 3. Then i = 1, j = 3 ; i = 2, j =2 ;i=3, j =1 P3(k+1) = [(30) (20) + (50) (30) + (10) (50) ]/100 = 26 T3(k+1) = 10 + 40 = 50 Let m = 4. Then i = 2, j=3 ; i=3, j=2 ; i = 4, j =1 P4 (k+1) = 18 , T4(k+1) = 60 Let m = 5. Then i = 3, j =3 ; i = 4, j =2 P5(k+1) = 5, T5 (k+1) = 70 Let m = 6. Then i = 4, j =3 ;Pi(k+1) = 2, Ti(k+1) = 80 ComDuted Time distribution of event k+1 m Pm(k+1) Tm(k+1) 1 15 30 2 34 40 3 26 50 4 18 60 5 5 70 6 2 80 Definitionally, the distribution for Event No 2 is identical to Distribution LA (or 1B), since Event No. 1 (the normal condition) is a continuum. To obtain the needed distributions we apply algorithm No. 1 repeatedly, as indicated below: in order to which is Acolv Alcorithm No. 1 to Obtain Dist, for named Distribution Distributions lA and 2 Event No. 3 A Distributions A and 3 Event No. 4 B Distributions B and 4A Event No. 5 C Distributions lA and 4A Event No. 5 D Distributions 1B and 4B Event No. 5 E 4-14 l
Table 4-2 lists the calcuated distributions, which are p explained below: - V Distribution Exclanation A Time distribution of commuters leaving work. Also applies to employees who work within the , EPZ who live outside the EPZ. l B Time distribution of commuters arriving home. ! C Time distribution of residents with commuters i l leaving home to begin the evacuation trip. D Time distribution of residents and tourists with no commuters in the household, leaving home to begin the evacuation trip. E Time distribution of beach area tourists leaving the area to begin the evacuation trip. Trin Generation Distributions for Week-end Scenarios For those scenarios it is assumed that the notification process for the beach populace begins at the Alert level, while that for the rest of the EPZ begins 15 minutes later at the General Emergeccy level. There is, at present, limited shelter capacity on the beach areas, relative to the number of people who could visit there on a week-end day. It is therefore reasonable to expect that the evacuation process will begin on the beach areas immediately following the notification that the beaches are closed. The sirens will not be activated, in general, until the General Emergency level is reached. This level is assumed to be reached 15 minutes after the Site Area Emergency level. We also postulate that the evac 1ation order is given 10 minutes after the General Emergency 17 deolared. Thus, for the " planning-basis" accident scenarict > 0 pc stulate two evacuation stages (beach area and inland) whic) gg .gnporaly displaced with respect to one-another: 4
- 1. The Trip Generation time distribution for the beach areas has its origin point (i.e. time, zero) at the time of the announcement of the Site Area Emergency (assumed to be concurrent with the Alert level).
- 2. The Trip Generation time distribution for the remainder of the EPZ has its origin point (i.e. time zero) at the time of the issuance of the order to evacuate, which is l assumed to take place 10 minutes after the General l
Emergency is declared, or 25 minutes after the Site Alert I and Site Area Emergency. l l l 4-15 l l
Table 4-2. Computed Trip Generation Cumulative Distributions (percent) Elansed Time (Hr: Min) A B C D E 0:05 0 0 0 0 0 0:10 10 0 0 1 2 0:15 31 2 0 5 9 0:20 57 7 0 11 21 0:25 67 16 1 18 32 0:30 74 26 3 26 44 0:35 81 35 5 35 55 0:40 87 44 8 43 64 0:45 92 52 11 49 70 0:50 93 60 16 53 72 0:55 94 66 21 57 74 1:00 95 71 26 62 76 l 1:05 96 76 30 66 78 l 1:10 96 79 35 70 80 l 1:15 97 83 40 74 83 1:20 97 86 44 78 85 1:25 98 88 49 81 88 1:30 98 89 53 83 90 1:35 98 91 57 85 93 1:40 98 92 61 86 95 1:45 99 93 65 86 97 1:50 99 94 68 87 97 1:55 99 94 71 87 98 2:00 99 95 73 88 98 2:05 100 96 75 89 99 2:10 97 77 90 99 2:15 97 79 91 100 2:20 98 81 92 2:25 99 82 94 2:30 100 84 94 2:35 86 95 2:40 87 96 2:45 88 96 2:50 90 96 2:55 91 96 3:00 92 96 3:05 93 97 3:10 93 97 3:15 94 98 3:20 95 98 3:25 95 98 3:30 96 99 3:35 96 99 3:40 97 100 3:45 97 3:50 98 3:55 98 4:00 99 4:05 99 4:10 100 4-16
l l ! On this basis, reference to Dist. E of Table 4-2 indicates I that an estimated 9 percent of the population in the beach area - has been mobilized at the time the General Emergency is announced. Also, about 32 percent of the beach area population is ready to evacuate -- and has started to evacuate -- at the time the order to evacuate is given. On the other hand, only one percent of the inland resident and tourist population, and 10 percent of the employee population will be prepared to evacuate when the order to evacuate is issued. Figure 4-2 displays these distributions (A, D and E) on the same time scale, showing their relative temporal displacement. The I-DYNEV model is designed to accept varying rates of trip generation for each origin centroid, expressed in the form of ! histograms. We partition these centroids into three sets -- i those for beach area traffic, for inland residents and inland i employees. These histograms, which represent Distributions A, D and E, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 4-3. l These tabulations present the trips generated And the rates of trip-making within each indicated time period, both expressed as a percentage of the total number of trips to be generated at each centroid. The rate of trip making is found by: Rate = Trins cenerated in Time Period (Dercent) ( Duration of Time Period (hours) Trin Generation Distribution for Week-day Scenarios The mid-day scenario produces a Trip Generation distribution which is a linear combination of Distributions C and D. Distribution C applies to those households with at least one commuter, while Distribution D applies to those households with no commuters. This linear combination results in Distribution F, reflecting the fact that about 25 percent of the households within the EPZ has no commuters, according to the telephone survey (see Appendix G). Distribution F is listed in Table 4-4 and is also presented in Table 4-5 in a format suitable for input to the IDYNEV system. Snow Clearance Time Distribution Inclement weather scenarios involving snowfall must address the time lags associated with snow clearance. Discussions with local officials indicate that snow plowing equipment is mobilized and deployed during the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that their efforts are generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snow accumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours. 4-17
100 -- 1 f e -- --- N l A f u'
/
& V c > E h
l 80 -- X f m C l m o 1 '- r-i a O M
- m r 3 r:
QJ U
>m >
60 -- o tu u E o i U C W g a M C m e C A0 + on c2 m t. - 4 20- -- 9. I
-: 30 0 : 30 1: 00 1: 30 2: 00 2: 30 3:00 3: 30 4:00 Time (Hr .: Min .)
Figure 4-2. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions O O O
Table 4-3. Trip Generation Time Histograms - for the Week-end Scenarios Time Period Percent of Total Trips and Rates which are Relative to Generated During the Indicated Time Periods Time of Order to Evacuate Beach Areas Inland Residents Inland Empl. (Hrs.: Min.) (from Dist. E) (from Dist. D) (from Dist. A) Trips Rate Trips Rate Trips Rate
-0:20 to -0:10 9 54 0 0 0 0
-0:10 to -0:00 23 138 0 0 0 0 0:00 to 0:15 32 128 18 72 31 124 0:15 to 0:30 10 40 25 100 43 172 0:30 to 0:45 6 24 14 56 18 72 0:45 to 1:15 15 30 24 48 5 10 1:15 to 1:45 5 10 6 12 3 6 1:45 to 2:30 0 0 9 12 0 0 2:30 to 3:30 0 0 4 4 0 0 3:30 onward 0 0 0 0 0 0 i
Units: Trips, percent of total trips which are generated at the origin centroids during indicated Time Period
< Rate, percent of total trips per hour during indicated Time Period Note: Time zero for Distribution E occurs 25 minutes prior to the Order to Evacuate, i.e. at the Site Emergency level. No one is ready to evacuate over the first 5 minutes, thus we show the time from -0:20 instead of
-0:25.
I l 4-19 l
Table 4-4. Computed Trip Generation Time Distribution for the Mid-week, Mid-day Scenario j (Distribution F) 1 Elapsed Time Cum. Pct. of Elapsed Time Cum. Pct of (Hrs: Min) Trios Generated (Hrs: Mini Trios Generated 0:05 0 2:05 79 0:10 0 2:10 80 0:15 1 2:15 82 0:20 3 2:20 84 0:25 5 2:25 85 0:30 9 2:30 87 0:35 23 2:35 88 0:40 17 2:40 89 0:45 21 2:45 90 0:50 25 2:50 91 0:55 30 2:55 92, 1:00 35 3:00 93 1:05 39 3:05 94 1:10 44 3:10 94 1:15 49 3:15 95 1:20 53 3:20 96 1:25 57 3:25 96 1:30 61 3:30 97 1:35 64 3:35 97 1:40 67 3:40 98 1:45 70 3:45 98 1:50 73 3:50 99 1:55 75 3:55 99 2:00 77 4:00 100 4-20
, Table 4-5. Trip Generation Time Histograms for the - Week-day Scenarios (Dist. F) Percent of Total Trips and Rates Time Period Relative to which are Generated During the Time of Order to Evacuate Indicated Time Periods (Hrs.: Mini Trins Rate 0:00 to 0:15 5 20 0:15 to 0:30 12 48 0:30 to 0:45 13 52 0:45 to 1:15 27 54 1:15 to 1:45 18 36 1:45 to 2:30 14 18.7 2:30 to 3:30 9 9 3:30 to 3:50 2 6 3:50 to 13:50 0 0 Units: Trips, percent of total trips at centroid Rate, percent of total trips, per hour Note: Time zero for Distribution F occurs 10 minutes prior to the Order to Evacuate, i.e. at the General Emergency level. i l 4-21
Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that the highway system will remain passable -- albeit at a lower capacity -- ' under the vast majority of snow conditions. Nevertheless, for the vehicles to gain access to the highway system, it is necessary for driveways and employee parking lots to be cleared to the extent needed. These clearance activities take time, and this time lag must be incorporated into the trip generation time distributions. Thus, we must postulate a separate distribution for the driveway snow clearance activity and then introduce this distribution into the procedure used to calculate the trip generation time distribution. The time needed to clear a driveway depends on the depth of snow, the available equipment and the number of able-bodied personnel to perform the task. Since this area is accustomed to heavy recurring snowfalls (see Table 1-1), it is reasonable to l expect that virtually all households have made provision for snow clearance by either owning some form of equipment or by contracting for such service to be performed by others. The i following distribution is postulated based on discussions with people in the area, for a heavy snowfall. Elapsed Time Cum. Percent of (min.) Cleared Driveways 15 5 30 10 45 25 60 40 90 70 l 120 90 150 100 It is recognized that the snow clearing activity can take " place in parallel with other activities, e.g. preparing for evacuation. Nevertheless, we will adopt the conservative point of view that this activity follows the preparation activity, rather than proceeding in parallel with it. This posture will lengthen the temporal extent of the trip generation process. l The above distribution will be identified as Distribution 5. The event " Driveways cleared of snow" will be identified as Event No. 5 and the event " Leave to Evacuate" is Event No. 6 for scenarios involving snow conditions. We must then perform the following additional operations to compute the trip generation distributions for the inclement weather, snow scenarios: 1 0 4-22
in order to which is Apolv Alacrithm No. 1 to Obtain Dist. for named Distribution - Distributions A and 5 Event No. 6 G Distributions F and 5 Event No. 6 H Distributions D and 5 Event No. 6 I i The results of these calculations are shown in Table 4-6 in a format consistent with the others. Note: e Distribution G applies to employees e Distribution H applies to residents and transients during mid-day e Distribution I applies to residents and transients during the evening / weekend. Appendix M presents the loading rates at each origin centroid shown in Figure 1-3. Note that these are the estimated rates at which vehicles leave their respective points of origin (i.e. home, beach area, motel, place of business) to begin the evacuation trip. The rates at which these vehicles enter the evacuation network, as shown on Figure 1-3, via their respective Access Links, depends on traffic conditions, and may be lower than the rates shown in Appendix M. The IDYNEV simulation submodel computes these " access" loading rates internally, in () order to realistically represent the evacuation environment. 4 I i 4-23
I Table 4-6. Trip Generation Time Histograms for the - Inclement Weather, Snow, Scenarios (Distributions G, H, I) l Time Period Relative Percent of Trips and Rates which are to Time of Order Generated During the Indicated to Evacuate Time Periods (Hrs.: Min.) Dist. G Dist. H Dist. I Trips Rate Trips Rate Trips Rate 0:00 to 0:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0:15 to 0:30 2 8 0 0 0 0 0:30 to 0:45 5 20 0 0 2 8 0:45 to 1:15 23 46 5 10 11 22 1:15 to 1:45 29 58 13 26 19 38 1:45 to 2:30 32 43 30 40 32 43 2:30 to 3:30 9 9 33 33 24 24 3:30 to 4:30 0 0 14 14 12 12 4:30 to 5:00 0 0 5 10 0 0 5:00 to 15:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Units: Trips, percent of total trips at centroid Rate, percent of total trips per hour Note: Time zero for Distributions G, H, I occurs at the General Emergency (sounding of sirens) which is assumed to be 10 minutes prior to the Order to Evacuate. O 4-24
- 5. ESTIMATION OF EMPLOYEE POPULATION Table 5-1 lists the annual average employment figures for the years of 1980* and 1984, in the towns located within the Seabrook Station EPZ. We also obtained employment figures for the months of July (in-season) and October (off-season). These figures, shown in Table 5-2, indicate that summer employment is 1 significant in the Towns of Hampton and Rye, but not elsewhere.
As indicated in Table 5-1, the area within the EPZ has enjoyed a significant growth in employment over a period of four years: about 20 percent increase in New Hampshire and more than doubling in Massachusetts. It is very tenuous to project employment figures for 1986 since employment is usually sensitive to the general health of the nation's economy and, of course, the regional economy. Nevertheless, we have projected these figures forward to 1986, using the tabulated growth rates in the 1984-1985 time frame for Massachusetts towns and the mean annual growth rate over 4 years, for the New Hampshire towns. These projections are also given in Table 5-1. i A careful analysis of the results of the survey taken of the i population within the EPZ (see item 17, App. E and App. G) indicates that about 58.2 percent of commuters who live within the EPZ, also work within the EPZ. Specifically, the survey also revealed that: O 1300 3730 1658 Households were interviewed, representing persons (i.e. 2.87 persons per household) and commuters (i.e. 0.445 commuters per resident) of whom 965 worked within the EPZ. On this basis, the projected population (see Table 2-1) of 142,194 residents within the EPZ corresponds to 63,206 commuters. Of these, 36,788 (58.2 percent) work within the EPZ. The
- remainder (68,084 - 36,660 = 31,424) who work within the EPZ, l reside outside the EPZ. Thus, during a mid-week, mid-day I scenario, these employees will be evacuating along with the other people within the EPZ.
For purposes of estimating evacuation traffic demand, we focus on those employees who work within the EPZ and who live outside the EPZ. (Those who live within the EPZ have already been counted as part of the permanent population). It is therefore necessary to estimate the number of employees -- and their vehicles -- who work within each town. We proceed as follows:
*The 1980 figures are taken from the Costello Report which cited the Census Bureau as the source. See item 16, Appendix E.
O 5-1
Table 5-1. Year-round Employment Population Estimates by Community Annual Community Total Emolovment Rate 1980 1984 1986(Proi) (oct) New Hampshire Brentwood 82 133 170 12.9 East Kingston 47 72 89 11.3 Exeter 5,309 5,387 5,430 0.4 Greenland 279 524 718 17.1 Hampton 2,845 3,636 4,109 6.3 Hampton Falls 173 296 387 14.4 Kensington 43 77 103 15.7 Kingston 384 670 885 14.9 New Castle 203 43 43 -67.8 Newfields 678 824 908 5.0 Newton 88 123 145 8.7 North Hampton 599 962 1,218 12.5 Portsmouth 11,825 14,803 16,570 5.8 Rye 505 644 728 6.3 Seabrook 7,234 7,459 7,579 0.8 South Hampton 158 282 377 15.6 Stratham 510 947 1.290 16.7 New Hampshire Subtotals 30,962 36,882 40,749 4.7 l Massachusetts l Amesbury 3,954 7,483 7,880 2.6 Merrimac 496 2,414 2,543 2.6 Newbury 466 2,451 2,580 2.6 Newburyport 5,413 8,999 9,477 2.6 Salisbury 1,254 3,089 3,252 2.6 West Newbury 411 1.522 1.603 2.6 Massachusetts Subtotals 11,994 25,958 27,335 14.7 TOTAL in EPZ 42,956 62,840 - 68,084 8.0 SOURCE: New Hampshire and Massachusetts Labor Services and Employment Bureaus for the 1984 ) data. ' I 1 0 1 5-2
)
Table 5-2. Employment Population Estimates by Community . O. for the Months of July and October July Oct. Community 1984 1984 New Hamushire Brentwood 152 127 East Kingston 78 75 Exeter 5,634 5,508 Greenland 544 554 Hampton 5,213 3,232 Hampton Falls 318 371 Kensington 79 70 Kingston 719 707 New Castle 54 55 Newfields 848 878 Newton 133 150 North Hampton 980 1,075 Portsmouth 15,233 15,103 Rye 862 643 seabrook 5,116 6,005 South Hampton 361 367 Stratham 934 1.015 i New Hampshire Subtotals 37,258 35,935 July Oct. 1985 1985 Massachusetts Amesbury 7,707 7,715 Merrimac 2,486 2,489 Newbury 2,524 2,526 Newburyport 9,268 9,278 i Salisbury 3,181 3,184 l West Newbury 1,567 1,569 Massachusetts Subtotals 26,733 26,761 TOTAL in EPZ 63,991 62,696 SOURCE: New Hampshire and Massachusetts - Labor Services and Employment Bureaus. O 5-3
Let: Ei = Total number of employees within Town, i ci = Total number of residents within Town, i, who commute to work Ni = Total number of residents within Town, i, who commute to work in Town, i NIi = Total number of employees in Town i who commute there from another town Inside the EPZ NEi = Total number of employees in Town, i, who commute there from outside the EPZ. Ri = Population of Town, i (i.e. Residents) Pc = Percentage of residents in EPZ who commute = 44.5 Pii = Percent of commuters in Town, i, who work in Town, i Pei = Percentage of commuters who originate their trips within the EPZ and also work within the EPZ = 58.2 By definition: Ci=PRci; C =E Ci O i i l l E=EEii
;R= IRi i
Ni = Pi iCi = Pii PR ci NI.E (Ni+NIi) =PcI C i N EN Ei = E - NI E=i Ei=Ni+ Nyi + NEi where i E = Total number of employees within the EPZ NI = Total number of employees within the EPZ who also live within the EPZ. NE = Total number of employees within the EPZ who live outside the EPZ h 5-4
h, R = Total number of residents within the EPZ C = Total number of residents within the EPZ who commute to work Given
- 1. El
- 2. PcI and Pc j 3. Ri
- 4. Ci = P Rci t
Immediately, we get 1 C, E, R, NI , NE using the expressions above. The values of P'1 for each town
- may be found from the 1980 census data (Append:.x H). The values, Ni , can than be calculated. Then, NEi + NIi = Ei-Ni where the right-hand side is known at this point. Summing both l sides over i:
1 N E+iENIi = E-ENi i . or NE = E.- PcIC from the definition of N I, above and E Nyi = PcIC-ENi l 1 i In the absence of any more definite data, it is reasonable to
- assume that the proportion of NEi to Nyt is the same for all towns, i. Specifically, define r=NIi/NEi which is equivalent to r = I Nyi/NE -
i i
*The data for eight towns are not available, we will estimate 4 these values, based on their respective population densities,
, employment, and locations. 1 5-5 l
Then, for every town, i, the number of employees from outside the EPZ is estimated as: NEi = (Ei -Ni)/ (1+r) O Table 5-3 presents the results. First, we must guard against double-counting those employees who work at the beach since their vehicles have already been accounted for. Conservatively, it is reasonable to estimate that 25 percent of the employees in the Towns of Hampton and Rye work at the beach areas and that 10 percent of employees in the Towns of Seabrook, Salisbury and Newbury work at the beach areas. Second, the employment for Seabrook includes those working on Seabrook Station construction, based on 1984 figures. These figures reflect work on both units, i.e. before the second unit was cancelled. We will estimate that some 4,000 employees at Seabrook Station are included in the employment in Seabrook Town, who will not be present after the Station goes on-line. Of these, it is estimated that 4000 x (4,222/7579) = 2228 live external to the EPZ. Third, employment over the week-end is some fraction of employment during mid-week. This fraction will vary depending on the season and by location within the EPZ. Since we do not have data for this fraction, we will make some reasonable assumptions: e For the tourist-oriented Towns of Hampton, Hampton Falls, New Castle, North Hampton, Rye, Seabrook, South Hampton, Salisbury and Newbury, we estimate that 70 percent of all employees work on the weekend, during the season. e For the remaining towns, we will estimate that 40 percent of all employees work on the weekend, during the season. e off-season, we will estimate this fraction of weekend employment at 25 percent for all towns. e During mid-week, all employees will be considered to be at work. Fourth, it is necessary to recognize that the Trip Generation time distribution for employees differs markedly from that which is applicable for residents. The sequence of activities for employees is shown in Figure 4-1(e). We must therefore apply Distribution A (see Table 4-2) to the employee trips. O 5-6
o Table 5-3. Estimates of Evacuating Employees 7- , b 1986 Pii 1986 Employees External Evac. Population (pct) Empl. from Town Empl. Empl. Community Ri Ei Ni NEi Vehicles New Hamoshire . Brentwood 2,039 10* 170 91 56 48 East Kingston 1,262 10* 89 56 23 20 Exeter 11,744 51.1 5,430 2,671 1,956 1,686 Greenland 2,225 40 718 396 228 197 Hampton 13,234 32.4 4,109 1,908 1,560 1,345 Hampton Falls 1,474 25* 387 164 158 136 Kensington 1,385 10* 103 62 29 25 Kingston 5,085 24.7 885 559 231 199 New Castle 621 10* 43 28 11 9 Newfields 868 40* 908 155 534 460 Newton 3,744 8.3 145 138 5 4 North Hampton 3,638 16.5 1,218 267 674 581 Portsmouth 26,881 61.2 16,570 7,321 6,556 5,652 Rye 5,099 19.1 728 433 209 180 Seabrook 8,158 44.7 7,579 1,623 4,221 3,640 South Hampton 699 25* 377 78 212 183 Stratham 3,445 22.1 1,290 339 674 581 Massachusetts Amesbury 14,258 38.3 7,880 2,430 3,863 3,330 Merrimac 4,420 22.4 2,543 441 1,490 1,284 Newbury 5,479 16.6 2,580 405 1,542 1,329 Newburyport 16,414 48.5 9,477 3,543 4,206 3,626 Salisbury 6,726 21.4 3,252 641 1,850 1,595 West Newbury 3,296 12.2 1,603 179 1,009 870 TOTAL in EPZ 142,194 68,084 23,928 31,298 26,980 INIi = 0.582 x 63,206 - 23,928 = 12,858 i Ng= 68,084 - 0.582 x 63,206 = 31,298 r = 12,858/31,298 = 0.411 i
- Estimated. These estimates are based on the need to obtain a reasonable relationship between the resulting values of Ni and
() EL l 5-7
Table 5-4 presents the estimates of evacuating vehicles containing employees, for various scenarios, taking into account - the comments made above. Table 4-3 presents the Trip Generation distribution for these employees. O 1 1 0 5-8
l Table 5-4. Evacuating Employees for Various scenarios, . O Expressed in Vehicles
- community Summer Off-Season Off-Season Season Week-end Week-end Midweek Midweek (off-beach) (Total) (off-beach)
New Hamnshire I Brentwood 19 12 48 48 East Kingston 7 5 20 20
- Exeter 674 422 1,686 1,686 i Greenland 79 49 197 197
- Hampton 706 336 1,345 1,009 Hampton Falls 95 34 136 136
] Kensington 10 6 25 25 Kingston 80 50 199 199 t New Castle 4 2 9 9 4 Newfields 184 115 460 460 < Newton 2 1 4 4 North Hampton 407 145 581 581 Portsmouth 2,261 1,413 5,652 5,652 Rye 95 45 180 135 4 Seabrook 1,083 430 1,719 1,547 t South Hampton ,128 46 183 183 232 145 581 581 Stratham Massachusetts Amesbury 1,332 833 3,330 3,330 Merrimac 514 321 1,284 1,284 Newbury 837 332 1,329 1,196 , Newburyport 1,450 907 3'626 , 3,626 Salisbury 1,005 399 1,595 1,436 l West Newbury 348 218 870 870 i TOTAL in EPZ 11,553 6,266 25,059 24,214 l O 5-9
! 6. DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR OFF-SEASON AND MID-WEEK IN-SEASON l SCENARIOS - For off-season scenarios, it is necessary to estimate transient population. The number of units available for overnight accommodations during the off-season is significantly less than during the season. Furthermore, the occupancy rates of these rooms are also significantly lower during the off-season. The NRC report (by Kaltman) presents the number of units available on a yearly basis and assigns one vehicle per unit. We believe this approach overstates the number of such l vehicles which can reasonably be expected to be within the EPZ in l the off season. Telephone inquiries with hotel / motel managers j indicates an occupancy rate of about 50 percent; we use this
- percentage.
We will retain the NRC estimates for the vehicles parked in lots along Route 1 within the EPZ servicing persons who reside outside the EPZ. The permanent residents are the same as for the in-season scenarios. However, the number of vehicles used to evacuate the permanent residents may differ for a mid-day scenario since the school children will be transported separately. Thus, many l households with multiple-car ownership who have children in school at the time of the accident, may use one vehicle to i O evacuate, rather than the two vehicles they would otherwise use to transport the school children who would be at home. , The rationale supporting the estimate of the number of l vehicles used to evacuate the permanent residents, is given in Exhibit 2-1. The survey (see Appendix G) yields the number of i school children in households of different size. We can then l calculate the household sizes when the children in school are evacuated separately. Refer to Exhibit 2-1 for the data used below: l t i
- 6-1
H.H. Size w/o No. of H.H. in No. of cars Used children Survey Samole* Assumo. 1 Assumo. 2 h 1 216 192 192 (Note 1) 2 739 730 730 (Note 2) 3 242 242 242 4 92 92 129 5 18 32 32 6+ 13 23 23 1,311 1,348 Note 1: 163 + (216 - 187) Note 2: 450 x 0.958 + (739 - 450 x 0.958) The adoption of the estimate of 2.6 persons per vehicle for households containing school children, determined in Exhibit 2-1, results in a total of 1435 vehicles servicing the sampled 3,730 residents. If we apply Assumption 2 of Exhibit 2-1 to these households which are reduced in size due to the children being in school, then the number of vehicles used for evacuation is 1348, as shown above. The children, which number 786 for this sample of households, would be transported in approximately 20 buses. A bus is
" equivalent" to two passenger cars, approximately. Thus, the total number of vehicles for the mid-day, mid-week scenario is 1388 vehicles, (i.e. 1348 + 2 x 20) compared with 1,435 vehicles for the weekend. This represents a net reduction of about 3 percent in the number of evacuating vehicles, even after accounting for the school buses.
We will adopt the conservative posture that some households whose size is reduced to 4 or fewer persons when the children are in school, and who have access to more than one vehicle, will l take two vehicles in anticipation of the eventual need to accommodate the children. In addition, we anticipate that many parents will pick up their children -- and, perhaps, those of neighbors -- at school, prior to their own evacuation. Thus, we will not apply the indicated 3 percent reduction in vehicle demand, for the purpose of estimating evacuation travel times. Instead, the evacuating vehicle population for residents used for the off-season scenarios will be the same as used for the in-season scenarios. l 1 l *187 + 450 x 0.042 + 246 x 0.041 + 247 x 0.004 = 216 450 x 0.958 + 246 x 0.429 + 247 x 0.498 + 206 x 0.358 + 64 x 0.333
= 730 246 x 0.53 + 247 x 0.255 + 106 x 0.321 + 64 x 0.231 = 242 247 x 0.247 +106 x 0.198 + 64 x 0.154 = 92 106 x 0.123 + 64 x 0.077 = 18 64 x 0.205 = 13 (Percents taken from page G-2) 1 6-2
Evacuatina Volumes for the Summer Mid-week, Mid-day Scenario For this scenario, it is assumed that: ( '
- 1. Beach area population is 75 percent of capacity
- 2. Employment within the EPZ is at usual mid-week levels. That is, no allowance is made for the fact that some workers will be on vacation.
- 3. Commuters who live within the EPZ will return home, then evacuate with the other members of the household.
- 4. The Trip Generation distributions are:
e Distribution E for beach area e Distribution A for inland employees e Distribution F for inland residents and tourists The estimate of mid-week beach area population is based on an extensive data base compiled by EKM Associates in a report entitled " Beach Area Traffic Count Program - Seabrook Station EPZ", in 1983. O 1 l l f 1 6-3 i
- 7. TRAFFIC CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT TACTICS This section presents the current set of traffic control and management tactics which are designed to expedite the movement of
, evacuating traffic. The resources required to implement these tactics include:
o Personnel with the capabilities of successfully performing the planned control functions of traffic guides. e Equipment to assist these personnel in the performance of their tasks: Traffic Barriers Traffic Cones Signs e A plan which defines all necessary details and is documented in a format which is easy to understand. The functions to be performed in the field are:
- 1. Facilitate evacuating traffic movements which serve to expedite travel out of the EPZ along routes, which the analysis has found to be most effective.
- 2. Discourace traffic movements which permit evacuating O
vehicles to travel in a direction which takes them significantly closer to the power station, or which interferes with the productive flow of other evacuees. We employ the terms " facilitate" and " discourage" rather than
" enforce" and " prohibit" to indicate the need for flexibility in performing the traffic control function. There are always legitimate reasons for a driver to prefer a direction other than
- that indicated. For example:
e He/she may be traveling home from work or from another location, to join other family members preliminary to evacuating. e An evacuating driver may be taking a detour from the evacuation route in order to pick up a relative. e The driver may be an emergency worker en route to perform an important activity. The implementation of a plan must provide room for the application of sound judgment. 1 This set of control tactics is the outcome of the following process: 1 i 7-1
---*,we- --
w ..,wwy.--., -,,-.-.-.e------my g --- - - ,--- -ng wy--*g--,,---me--em-my wm
- 1. A field survey of these critical locations.
The sketches of Appendix I are based on the data collected during field surveys and upon large-scale maps. We have found these maps to be less than accurate in some respects. The previous surveys did not focus at great length on any particular set of locations, since we did not know which would be included in the set of Traffic Control Posts (TCP).
- 2. Consultation with the officials of the towns who will be implementing them: police department personnel, specifically.
Clearly, any control tactics should be reviewed by trained personnel who are experienced in controlling traffic and who are familiar with the likely traffic patterns. Also these personnel know which intersections are probable bottlenecks under heavy traffic demand conditions.
- 3. Prioritization of these TCP. Application of traffic control at some TCP will have a more pronounced influence on expediting traffic movements, than applying control at other TCP. Thus, during the mobilization of personnel to respond to the emergency situation, those TCP which are assigned a higher priority, will be manned earlier than the others.
This setting of priorities should be undertaken with the concurrence of town police. These priorities should be compatible with the availability of local manpower resources. In each sketch which appears in Appendix I, the control policy at each TCP is presented in a manner which is self-explanatory. l O 7-2
t
- 8. TRAFFIC ROUTING, CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT PLANS
() Evacuation routes are composed of two distinct components: e Routing from a community being evacuated to the boundary of the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) l I e Routing of evacuees from the EPZ boundary to Host communities and reception centers. Evacuees should be routed within the EPZ in'such a way as to minimize their exposure to risk. This requirement is met by routing traffic so as to move away from the location of Seabrook Station to the extent practicable and by delineating evacuation routes which expedite the movement of evacuating vehicles. The routing of evacuees from the EPZ boundary to the host
- communities must also be responsive to several considerations
i o Minimizing the amount of travel outside the EPZ, from the ~ points where these routes cross the EPZ boundary to the reception centers. e Relating the anticipated volume of traffic destined to each reception center, to the capacity of the reception center facilities. ( e Assigning the residents of those towns which are members of a regional educational system, to the same reception center, to the extent possible. This would expedite the reunion of school children with other members of the household, should the evacuation take place during a
- school day.
1 Consequently, there is a linkage between the routing plans , and the choice of host communities. In light of this linkage, a i review of the allocation of host communities to communities l within the EPZ was performed. Table 8-1 presents the current l assignment of host communities to communities within the EPZ. l A total of seven Emergency Response Planning Areas (ERPA) are defined: ERPA Community A Hampton Falls, Hampton Beach, Seabrook B Amesbury, Salisbury C Kensington, South Hampton D Hampton, North Hampton O 8-1
Table 8-1. Assignment of Host Communities to Communities - Within the EPZ New Hamoshire Dover Manchester Rochester Greenland Brentwood Portsmouth Hampton East Kingston Hampton Falls Exeter New Castle Hampton Beach Transients North Hampton Kensington Rye Stratham Newfields Salem Kingston Nashua will serve as a backup Newton facility for Manchester and Salem. Seabrook Durham will serve as a backup South Hampton facility for Dover and Rochester. Massachusetts h Andover Peabody Amesbury Newbury Merrimac Newburyport West Newbury Salisbury 9 8-2 l
t EEEA community j E Merrimac, Newbury, Newburyport, West Newbury i F Brentwood, East Kingston, Exeter, Kingston, . Newfields, Newton G Greenland, New Castle, Portsmouth, Rye, Stratham These ERPA are delineated in Figure 10-1. The routing plans for each of these ERPA are presented in Appendix J. Appendix K presents maps -- one for each ERPA -- { delineating the evacuation routes from each community within the l EPZ. . These evacuation routes were submitted to the Police Chiefs i of all communities within the EPZ, for their review. Shortly I thereafter, KLD personnel interviewed all police chiefs who were l permitted to contribute to the plan. Table 8-2 is a copy of the letters sent to these personnel; Table 8-3 is a listing of all j recipients of the routing and traffic management plans for their respective communities. In addition, State Police received a i copy of these plans. 1 Subsequent to these interviews, a second mailing was made to 1 all police chiefs who were interviewed. A typical letter is , shown as Table 8-4. A form used to indicate the priority of each TCP was also included; this form is shown as Table 8-5. Subsequent to this second survey, the contents of earlier versions of Appendix I were revised and extended. This "Rev. 2" ! of Appendix I contains a complete set of traffic control posts.
- Each post is identified by town or city and by ERPA.
I l The resources needed to implement the traffic control and
- management plan are summarized in Table 8-6. Summaries are
- presented by communities and indicate the numbers of traffic i guides, traffic cones and traffic barricades required to i
implement the plan. These requirements will be reviewed with each community. l Evacuation Sicnina The identification of emergency evacuation routes is, in our view, a desirable element of an evacuation plan. Such signing l has long been used in areas subject to natural disasters (e.g. l hurricanes) and, occasionally, within the EPZ of nuclear power l stations. Table 8-7, which is extracted from the 1978 edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), describes a standard Evacuation Route Marker. (While the marker shown includes the Civil Defense logo, this logo is small and is not a requirement.) 1 i 8-3
,.-m_--.. . , , - - - . - . ,.. --r y.-,,_,,-,%, _ _ - - ~ . - - - , . - - -. .,..-m-. -
Table 8-2. Letter to Police Chiefs KLD ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED . 300 Broadway Huntington Staten, NY 11746 (516) 549-9803 January 17, 1986 Police Chief Richard Henderson Town of New Castle Town Hall New Castle, NH 03854
Dear Chief Henderson:
Our firm has been retained by the Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency (MCDA) to upgrade the Evacuation Plan for the Seabrook Station. Through a letter agreement between MCDA and the New Hampshire Civil Defense Agency (NHCDA), we are servicing both agencies. This Evacuation Plan includes: e Design of evacuation routing from each community within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) to its Host Community. e Application of traffic management and control at key locations along these evacuation routes. This control is designed to assure safe and efficient traffic operations at these locations so as to Expedite the movement of evacuating vehicles in directions away from the power station. Discourage the inadvertent movement of traffic in directions toward the power station.
- Resolve potential conflicts between traffic streams at intersections, by assigning right-of-way so as to promote safe operations and to keep traffic moving.
These recommended routes and controls have been designed to be responsive to guidelines specified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Furthermore, these routes, and the supportive controls, reflect months of computer analysis, extensive field surveys of the highway system within the EPZ and discussions with police personnel. i 8-4 1
)
l
Tabic 8-2. Letter to Police Chiefs (cont.) Chief Richard nanderson 2 January 17, 1986 -
)
d Nevertheless, we are sensitive to the fact that local police are far more familiar with the highway system and with traffic conditions in their, respective communities than any outside consultant. Furthermore, your depth of experience in controlling traffic and in responding to emergency conditions, would be invaluable in refining and improving these elements of the Evacuation Plan. For these reasons'we are requasting your assistance in the following respects: .
- 1. Please review the recommended evacuation routes for your community. . These are shown on the enclosed map and are also expressed as routing instructions.
- 2. Please review the recommended traffic management and control. These are shown as diagrams,' indicating the location of all traffic guides, traffic cones and ,
barricadec.' O 3. Opinions that additional traffic controls are necessary in your community (some communities have no controls assigned) or that those recommended. controls should be ! relocated or changed in any way, would be valuable contributions to the plan. i l 4. We recognize that there are personnel limitations in all communities. Please indicate how such limitations affect your ability to implement traffic controls.
- 5. Please crioritize these control locations, indicating which are most important and those which are less important. _
We would greatly appreciate all opinions, whether supportive or critical. These inputs of police chiefs of all communities within the EPZ will be integrated within the plan so as to increase its effectiveness in protacting the public in the event l of an accident at Seabrook Station. To expedite matters, I plan to visit the communities within the EPZ next week to discuss these topics with you, if your schedule permits. You will be contacted by phone to arrange a meeting at your convenience. 4 8-5
- . _ - -_ - . _ ~ - _ - - - - - - -. _ _ _ _ - _
Table 8-2. Letter to Police Chiefs (conc.) Chief Richard Henderson 3 January 17, 1986 Thank you in advance for your valuable assistance in these matters. Yours truly, 4-r d <t.c Edward Lieberman, P.E. Vice President EL:ld Enc. O O 8-6
Tablo 8-3. Racipients of Plans NEN HAMPSHIRE o Ch'ief Robert Mark Chief David Gilbert 136 Winnacunet Road Box 115 Hampton, NH 03842 Stratham, NH 03885 Chief Karl Gilbert Acting Chief Glover Town Office P.O. Box 476 Greenland, NH 03840 Seabrook, NH 03874 Chief Frank Caracciolo Chief Michael Daley 10 Front Street P.O. Box 55 Exeter, NH 03833 Newfields, NH 03856 Chief William vahey Chief Henry I;euwandowski, Jr. RFD #1 Haverhill Road Dalton Rd. E. Kingston, NH 03827 Brentwood, NH 03833 Lt. Sheldon Sullivan Chief Andrew Christie, Jr. New Hampshire State Police Holice Dept. Troop A Hampton Falls, NH 03844 Route 125 Epping, N.H. 03042 O Chief Wayne Theriault Town Hall Chief flichael Acquilina RFD #2 Town Office
- South Hampton, NH 03827 vo 2, Route 150 '
Exeter, NH 03833 Chief Neil Parker (Kensington) Box 201 Kingston, NH 03848 Chief LaBrie no lice Deoartment Chief David Barrett , 28 Ten Hollow Street Box 61 Portsmouth, NH Newton, NH 03858 Chief Richard Henderson Town Hall New Castle, NH 03854 Chief Bruce Golden Town Office North Hampton, NH 03862 Chief Walter Dockham O Washington Road Rye, NH 03870 8-7
Table 8-3. Recipients of Plans (conc.) MASSACHUSETTS . Chief James Flynn E. Main Street Merrimack, MA 01860 Chief Richard Berkenbush 381 Main St. W. Newbury, MA 01985 Chief Edward Olivera Railroad Avenue Salisbury Beach Salisbury, MA 01950 Marshall Joseph Garand Green St. Newburyport, MA 01950 Chief George Riel High Road Newbury, MA 01950 Chief Michael Cronin 0 19 School St. Apesbury, MA 01913 Mass. Police l 8-8
Table 8-4 Follow-up Letter to Police Chiefs KLD ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED . 20 BROADWAY HUNDNGToN STADoN, NY 1174 (516) 540-9003 February 4, 1986 Chief Richard Berkenbush 381 Main Street
.; W. Newbury, MA 01985
Dear Chief Berkenbush:
I would like to thank you for your courtesy and the assistance you provided at our recent meeting. Enclosed is an updated set of schematic drawings identifying i the Traffic Control Posts (TCP) in your community. These sketches include the changes, if any, that you suggested during our recent meeting. The changes in traffic control will result in some changes to the evacuation routes, within the Seabrook Station Emergency O Planning Zone (EPZ). The new configuration of evacuation routes will be defined after the final computer analysis is completed. With some exceptions, we expect the existing evacuation routing l to remain essentially intact. A drawing of the updated l evacuation routes will be sent to you in a few weeks. Please review the updated documentation (i.e. sketches) of the TCP in your community. If you wish to revise or delete any of these TCP, please indicate the changes on the sketches and return them to me in the enclosed envelope. If you wish to add TCP, please sketch the location on the blank sheet provided for that purpose and return it with the others. Indicate the sequence in which you would order the TCP to be manned. This sequence reflects your judgment of the relative "importance" of each TCP. I would greatly appreciate your completing this review and returning any revisions to me as soon as possible. At that time, we will complete the final computer analysis to quantify the Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE), and evacuation routes, based on the final sets of TCP. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, N %f a -n. . ~ l Edward Lieberman, P.E. ( Vice-President l l 8-9 i __ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ __-_ _
r-Table 8-5. Form to Specify TCP Priorities Please fill in the Relative Importance of each TCP, together with any comments, and return in the envelope provided. . Sequence in which the TCP will be manned ICE (Relative Importance) Comments l i llI NOTES: l Examnle ICE Relative Importance Comments Z-XX-01 2 Z-XX-02 1 Most important Z-XX-03 4 Least important Z-XX-04 3 l We recognize that a group of several TCP may be judged to be equally " essential". Nevertheless, we ask that separate values be assigned to each TCP to indicate the sequence in which they would be manned. 8-10
Table 8-6. Traffic Control Post Summary by Community O Number of Number of Number of ! , TCP Traffic Guides Traffic Cones Barricades Local Inter- Local Inter- Local Inter-Community ERPA Numbers state state state i Massachusetts Amesbury B AM AM-09 14 2 78 0 9 10 Merrimac E ME ME-02 4 1 14 3 5 3 Newbury E NB NB-03 6 0 46 0 0 0 Newburyport E NP NP-07 16 2 79 6 8 2 Salisbury B SA SA-10 18 0 129 0 9 0
. West Newbury E WN WN-06 9 1 27 0 22 5 New Hampshire i
Brentwood F B R B R-0 3 3 0 15 0 0 0 E. Kingston F EK EK-03 3 0 21 0 0 0
- Exeter F EX EX-06 10 0 26 0 17 0 Greenland G GR GR-0 3 3 0 18 0 0 0 l Hampton Beach A HB HB-06 13 0 27 0 8 0 i Hampton D H A I~D HA-05 15 1 60 0 28 4 U
l l 8-11
Table 8-6. Traffic Control Post Summary by Community Number of Number of Number of 9 TCP Traffic Guides Traffic Cones Barricades Local Inter- Local Inter- Local Inter-Community ERPA Numbers state state state New Hampshire (cont.) Hampton Falls A HF-01 1 0 3 0 0 0 Kensington C KE KE-03 3 0 19 0 0 0 Portsmouth G PO PO-13 24 1 80 3 10 7 Kingston F KI KI-04 5 0 27 0 4 0 New Castle G NC NC-02 2 0 0 0 6 0 Newfields F NF NF-02 4 0 24 0 0 0 Newton F NT NT-02 2 0 18 0 0 0 North Hampton D NH NH-04 6 0 24 0 5 0 Rye G RY RY-03 3 0 12 0 3 0 i Seabrook A SE SE-06 11 2 54 0 15 4 South Hampton C SH SH-02 2 0 15 0 0 0 Stratham G ST ST-02 4 0 16 0 2 0 NOTE: Every third cone and every portable barricade have an attached " flasher" to enhance its conspicuity. 8-12 l l
Table 8-7. Evacuation Route Marker (Source: MUTCD, 1978 ed.) , 2G-3 Evacuation Route Marker (CD-1) The Evacuation Route Marker shall be circular,having a minimum outside diameter of 18/ inches,. carrying a directional arrow and the legend EVACUATION ROUTE.The standard Civil Defense Symbol, CD inscribed in a triangle within a ring, shall appear near the bottom of the sign, with a diam'eter of 3% inches. The legend, arrow, symbol, and border shall be in white on a blue background. At least the arrow and border shall be reflectorized.The arrow designs shallinclude a straight, vertical arrow pointing upward, a straight horizontal arrow pointing to left or right, and a bent arrow pointing to left or right for. advance ; warning of a turn.The arrow may be a separate unit attached to the face i of the sign. The marker format may also be used on a nonreflectorized, ) white, square plate. The Evacuation Route Marker, with the appropriate arrow, shall be
. erected 150 to 300 feet in advance of, and at, any turn in an approved evacuation route, and elsewhere for straight. ahead confirmation where needed. In urban areas it shall be mounted at the right of the roadway, not less than 7 feet above the top of the curb, and at least 1 foot back from the face of the curb. In rural areas it shall be not less than 5 feet above the crown of the roadway and 6 to 10 feet to the right of the roadway edge.
Evacuation Route Markers shall not be placed where they will con. flict with normal signs. Where conflict in placement would occur be. i tween the Evacusion Ro'ute Marker and a standard regulatory sign, the latter shall take precedence. In case of conflict with a standard informa-tional sign the civil defense sign may take precedence. Placement of Evacuation Route Markers should be made under the supervision of the offleials having jurisdiction over the placement of normal traffic signs, but coordination with Civil Defense authorities and agreement between contiguous political entities will be necessary to assure continuity of routes.
.I CD-1 18" diametee (bluel O
8-13 1 l
We recommend the installation of evacuation signing to assist the public to identify the evacuation routes at the time of the - accident. Such signs also act as public information training guides since they are visible to travelers as they move over the highway system. It is recognized that such signs may be viewed with much reservation by some members of the public, particularly since the area's economy is strongly dependent on tourist activity. It may be argued that tourists would be dismayed by the appearance of such signs and be reluctant to enter the area. It may also be argued that tourists are well aware of the presence of Seabrook Station and would be reassured by the knowledge that an evacuation plan is in place. In either event, our recommendation to utilize such signs is based exclusively on pragmatic grounds: information which guides the motorist has always been found to be beneficial in moving vehicles -- and people -- safely and efficiently on the nation's highways. It may therefore be preferable to permanently install the necessary mounting appurtenances, but not to display the evacuation signs during normal times. If an emergency should occur, then these signs, properly placed, can be mounted quickly i I as temporary installations prior to the Order to Evacuate. For example, an evacuation sign can be clipped onto a NO PARKING sign, hung on a metal post supporting another sign or simply nailed to a utility pole, as required. It would be necessary, of course, to prepare these signs in advance, noting the location of each sign and the method of mounting it. This approach also obviates any concern that permanently installed signs may be misleading for other types of emergencies requiring the evacuation of the public. In summary, while such signing is not specified in NUREG 0654 and is generally not included in emergency plans for other nuclear power stations, their deployment is recommended. Appendix M presents a tabulation.of the destinations assigned to each origin node (refer to Figure 1-3). These assignments are consistent with the assignments of Host Communities shown in Table 8-1. O 8-14
l
- 9. ACCESS CONTROL WITHIN, AND AT THE PERIPHERY OF, THE EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE (EPZ) AND DIVERSION ROUTES -
a The purpose of peripheral access control is to restrict entry to the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and to expedite the traffic movement of evacuating vehicles. Entry should be permitted for the following groups: o Commuters returning to the EPZ, to gather members of their household for the purpose of evacuation. e Transit vehicles (buses, vans, ambulances) dispatched to the EPZ to participate in any evacuation. e All vehicles transporting emergency response personnel. All other travelers seeking to gain entry to the EPZ should be denied access and provided with local diversion routes. These local diversion routes will enable those denied entry to reverse their paths and seek other routes outside the EPZ. 4 Figure 9-1 indicates the major diversion route and the cordon line around the EPZ. The intersections of this cordon with highways demark the locations of Access Control Posts (ACP). These ACP are identified in Tables 9-1, 9-2 and 9-3. Figures 9-2 through 9-6 locate these ACP on County maps. Appendix L details the control tactics and the personnel and equipment needed at
- each ACP. Table 9-4 presents a summary of personnel and equipment needs.
The diversion route was developed to satisfy the following objectives:
- 1. The route should be sufficiently removed from the EPZ so as to minimize the extent that diverted traffic will mingle with, and thereby impede, the evacuating vehicles travelling toward their respective host relocation centers. Any such mingling, and consequent impedance should take place well outside the EPZ.
- 2. To the extent possible, the diversion route should consist of high-capacity highways.
A comparison of the diversion route in Figure 9-1, with the evacuation routes shown in Appendix K and described in Appendix J, will indicate that the first objective is satisfied. l Specifically, evacuating traffic from North Exeter, Newfields and Stratham will mingle with diverting traffic on U.S. Route 4 in New Hampshire. The closest point where such merging takes place is the intersection of U.S. 4 and U.S. 202 in Northwood, N.H., a distance of over 15 miles from the EPZ boundary. Traffic to Manchester will, to an extent, utilize I-93; the closest point on I-93 to the EPZ boundary is about 10 miles. l l 9-1
I
\
8***** Bidd.f.'
,U J ,* r. k -'" .,s. :..a',e Diversion Route h --
' '- u .
',,( iv( 9 Access Control Cordon - - " ""
t "I S*"'"
'7 q
I Uf. 1 8 4,,,, .s Qj # N'[I
, , E.ntwbuch
" J*
,,.I . %
g i, *.a ' t
~ t, s .
. g)'~<'
e3 . ,
, . , , N s. p - -.: A rs . ,
7 * *
* . itt.fe.ed ,, i A ch ',3 i
. i.
,. .A 8 7 'O t..
;r.
m A.. r- ,
.. .,.r. s
. . e,_ .
.ss..- ., .
~,
y fM.,._,m.3.- \ g.Q.,, - _ , -.=ep, . .g - -
.- s.. - .
q3 .. ._ ,_
. e ..... .-, . ,
t.,s1 ..t..~(< ,_ :.y .
-- t LA, . , d -> , .. >.\ : ,. .y; N.~'. "~
l 4. . e- .
t ' M s -
.~ .. .
w,
.,,.:~,~,>. .n .
**.. u .. ** - . . . , , ,-
. Mark.t , -
P0ftsm0Uth Gt '
's.
.P o- tm.: . 4 : ., ux u ,Ra,m\A.7 -
4.. .- ;,.y -
- p. , x s -
- g. -
g,o-i .
.,..s .,.i
.d, ,,,,,
3 s . , , ,
- s. _
B.dt.t * (,3 n h<.. g n.m . g,,,, D. awe
,K7 ,g
- g f
* - io, . W B.ach i v A su 50 .- a "8' R.eas F.ery .
' g $i , Ha ' ad *F *~*
k,, brook 3 'q' . ' -
,., /
/
.a..st ,,
1w./a=n
= ,
. y .
y4 #. F,.I t' ^ > g M, , , t , ",. {O , '*: Y . s~ - -- -
- s. , -
Mh t..d., . (.k'2 'd T 58'**v hd*'ygy, ' anm, .b. & d.,) 0. A ,
. ~ ~ -'
2 p.:=f-. . .
~ .
c -
-.k_ ,,.U.
)O ../ 4.-
U' -
"^
y 'k is.rm Andow *l,, p,p,, g,,
,,,,,.4 s. Drs .g , ,
Ip.s.ch .
. ,P.op.r.Il se C As _ ,,,
Chem, i d.v.' P
- o.
'3d 9k, s
, (.a e. I.PLf'.ld ' (sus *
'ner fj Gr.t.a
.' ' h s Ta .-
b'T , e'Glgucggtgg
~
. Ha.m.d i
, ( *, ,,,, .
l n ,. %. \ . . u.da' .
,.J
, . s ' " ' , \s.n..c. .
e,- 'u.no.u, p' 's
.to tea .im.open f,
.uJ Q /, = . " " ..', h ,,,/p' -
1"" ?/ ,, g,i,, C
-"""
- 2' P w '- '
. ,y 70' ..' i
. n*. %wo
. w .M c k. g, ~ .
g\.. .a;u/Marti.h d
,, s. -
-i ,
S... v.a .he me M Sa-a*=*' C'*'" Figure 29. Diversion Route and Access Control Cordon for Seabrook Station Emergency Plannino Zone .,
* 'e n 2 r.= ,L
.~. .-
g
]' -
,9.
I I Table 9-1. Access Control Posts in Massachusetts O ACP No. Location RO-1 On Main Street at entrance to Kittery Crossing Housing Development. RO-2 At intersection of Central Street and U.S. Route 1. RO-3 At intersection of Hillside Street and Glen Street. GT-1 At intersection of Jackman and Warren Streets. GT-2 At I-95 interchange with Route 133. GT-3 At intersection of Thurlow and North Streets. GR-1 At intersection of Pond Street, Thurlow Street, Seven Star Road, and Little Road. GR-2 At intersection of Seven Star Road and Center Street. GR-3 At intersection of Seven Star Road and Main Street (Route 113). HA-1 At intersection of Amesbury Line Road and Merrimac Road. HA-2 At intersection of Amesbury Line Rd. and Route 110. HA-3 At intersection of Amesbury Line Rd. and Heath Road. HA-4 At I-495 interchange with Route 110. HA-5 At intersection of Routes 108 and 110. l Note: RO - Rowley; GT - Georgetown; GR - Groveland; I HA - Haverhill ( l O 9-3
Table 9-2. Access Control Posts in New Hampshire ACP No. Location O PL-1 At intersection of Route 108 and Sweet Hill Road. PL-2 At intersection of Sweet Hill Road, Smiths Corner Road, Hole Spring Avenue and Sweet Hill Avenue. PL-3 At intersection of Old County Road and Kingston Road. PL-4 At intersection of Old County Road and Route 125. DA-1 At intersection of Routes 111A and 111. DA-2 At intersection of Cheney Mill Road and Danville Road in West Kingston. DA-3 At intersection of Happy Hollow Road and Beach Plain Road. . FR-1 At intersection of Route 107 Red Block Road. EP-1 At interchange of Routes 101 and 125. EP-2 On Route 27 at the entrance to the Winston Drag Racing Grounds. EP-3 At intersection of Route 87 and Jacob's Well Road. NM-1 At intersection of Grapevine Hill Road and Bald Hill Road. NM-2 On Route 108 north of bridge over the Railroad at Rockingham Country Club. NW-1 At intersection of Woodbury Avenue and Gosling Road (Portsmouth City boundary). NW-2 At intersection of Spaulding Turnpike and Gosling Road (Portsmouth City boundary) NW-3 On southbound Spaulding Turnpike at Exit 4N.
- DU-l At intersection of Routes 108 and 4.
DO-1 On Route 4 at Exit 6. Note: PL - Plaistow; DA - Danville; FR - Fremont; 1 l EP - Epping; NM - Newmarket; NW - Newington; DU - Durham; DO - Dover. l 9-4
Table 9-3. Access Control Posts in Maine . ACP No. Location KI-l Intersection of Route 1 and Route 103. KI-2 Intersection of Route 1 Bypass and first intersection north of N.H. - Me. Bridge. KI-3 Interchange of I-95 with Donnet Road. KI-4 Interchange at Remick Corners: Routes 1, 1 Bypass and 236. KI-5 Interchange of I-95 with Route 236. Note: KI - Kittery O l ( l 9-5
-----,.._._____.:________..______.. _ _ . _ _ _ ____. , ____ _ _ . _ _ _ . ____J
~% N C. W I U N w 4#d & Y y
g , ,yo ** i
. -?- L N
- y 'g'[ ;,+.kj %;j[
, (E 5 B U RY u_.<
af R
- N r.:,&E R a,,l -
u
. ..s
+;e C*
gd* - 4 , - ( _ s-_ f,
' t0 AISTOW . , *
*s -, e.... u,
/ y - ,,..r MI- _
^g
- s.% %, ~
t i 1 gy lg;).>k
- 6. 's. e
- Mp5 ..,, .
e
,,, o., =N-V /g +#'T
*/:
', r * ,
i , 'p
+
,,,4
#e
,1
; tE% +5
<9
;4 g\ 0/ gg > o.e,.;-.
o a q l y e s C
,a ' N /, ** I s "%
?
g 'v,,, %
, s' s %l ' '
3 U ,,,
+'/ l o,s - /
r ' i j , c.,,' *~ \t, +
, w- . y, ~..,
g s*
* /
4 %, A > M ) n; "~ 4 s* +.% -
,'6,+, se n l .,
... n a ,
x .-
, a s
W
^
W %. . E'
~
. 5 e -
s
,I . .,,,,f, ; %' a si
- - w. -
.g a -
, a
+ -
Xs, 7j S ;r W~g y/
~-"
yG R L A N, D - y, f, o - x 1 j !j g' .
,{C l t
's- c*
p , 3 . d sq
/. g'$5 -
%J / ,
.! ( .f ..
.' 'k,, [ -
) ~
! s /
g Figure 9-2. Access Control Posts in Massachusetts dE
- v 7 9 1 h
'I d!R .x [..! #
1 y fygr c,3 e s%w. eg qD e q- $\ s % s y , m p4ry,% , cao 7 - i 3 ,8 . e s u ,. Q {
,,,, . 1m.
Aperture Card Q g ,
's \ .
s
, h
\9
,, ok g'%,
y J
.N
- n. p
- c. A-e , i
- s. - ,
Id$ ' . .. 3 eo "
'Sx 8
3 . s. hi */ $t 5 > t o ,
* ,+
v* Ca' 4,
~
i 5,,.,..,
+
t 1 , fd i
\' E. , B U* ,. w.a Riy Y t d /
- e i
' .[ ,
,.< ./ w* ..
)
e , . J N. -
s e
k . l a y Pgi m' Yf ,I lg pA s - l
/k i
v' 1 y 9 _L az - x , e
" fd ' y
~
i y'
~~ ,
e jg t s s n25 .
<- a 1, 1 # 3 1x c.... .
(kf) .e
^
s X 3
,~
)})
- ,pg$,
u*q u][\ g-(' .
\
-x_
V '
.I v, t- .~ .
. .t@-ub \
~~~~~
N... . *
==== I , ..
s -' .. Ogl .,jtn .r....* . %*
?
J- ... .{ l 8
- s
, q \
m :, o, o. a,s z . , i . 1 i
. i . , ,
o .
- r. -
- i. k .,*;'. y
%' g 31 .; 7 X.1 .
y . - se io s - f
, c1: 3 . . S V, . 5..i t.
p e p
=
g .. o - as u e y; ia
,tg,- ..ga.w ;: .Qag..
.' : iig .::. . .
S ga. 1 s. . ar
,y..<
' 3
*i
; (( .
bi. E *II' b
- y. p . s. 3. L,
. =
'#N g" IMP %d ..
i I. r '.T dk e *. (. -:.3-- f. p, ,, re s ;____- l l p _ 7, % . iyun ., , . g .. wf/. i i .
-L. _ __ - ---_,
2 l : .s.,
.c ,
=n :
T . l ! 3! #
,l,'R:. . . .
0 .. . . .: .- ..
'{
w
. . . gs f .
' M ' 's ,...'3 4 .'y .
3 MSd / . -
* ~*b l t i to,,p ! .3 y n.
aK! . . i _ . s .. : . . .. . - - . .
.w rigure 9-3. Access Control Posts in New Hampshire - '
on Western Boundary of the EPZ - 9-7 l 1
. e.u r.s t . _ . . .
s, .,\ u..,,.
,e
),, ,5
.f,$"'-fy ;
;e*, . .
et/ . (p - ~* V8
/< + % \ s' n. -. 1 i < . . s3 , =
- qkz '
': le f:hi!':'. "sk
~~
9; g. g ( ,; l .$.. .T 4 d s -
... g f(_
e L.s . , i
,i ,
~
.g E
y e ,. j-
,~
y
- . .s.
(,,!i.! -
.,%g};*....
& * . c \ g, ln!
- ~
4 -
,f R
3',
p
%,. s e
.JglOJ y,. q- . . .
r4 f .
~
dil'gN 5 I
~
~
' I' D *' .
-fi T
(' L r~ . + s
,'g/* 9i4Mj!I
/
.. "8 b TI
- . -g: . ..
./
/ f
.O h, 3' APERTU M
.y ,
CARD h , v:qf 4 .-
--- '...,--- /],\ -
$l Aperture 2o AvauMe O 4 '. ' -
g gAF
.<. p4
! Card q ,e ,,
l1 . *'q ?' TT ' - .- . m. v 2 b.; v.r
. ..-gy 4
- ' N, t, ,
..- % . N -
~a , Zi~7 .-.
;... . 1
< ,'s *,
v ., ' . .l
- q,' -
th ,Et -j- ;, _e ,,-c ~~. f, ' . ,/. .
. 1 4
I y ., , . . - s" .' <l,~ .;,
,y g=~: .-
f g'
- n !; '
o :.gf- ,. _ 96Dhl?Ol73 OS-
% j
%, 's
,, .S,
... -- s 4 t'
1: h.i .) cIJ < l.
'A' 1
Y- \, '{ t J[#. (R ,, I '
~-% %
$ 1 .J.s. = r = Q f ,, Q, .,;;;M-}:
3,.. - .
. ,.. ~'- -
~.
40)i? t .
- lg.
\.~
,.a y
- f. j '
i f g' w'* : ' k'LTR$ . , y J' '
-nt, ., .**
- \ ~-
==**
L.> ,
%*f,\
* .~ R)hf._ ,___;* h% l i, a** ** *
?!%. .
S..p
" " ~~
lI-4l s-I .}. .
?l::::.%
*!. ~ %
E r W 'I D . S' x,,,'* ;. . ':o~. ..
.I #*
m- . . ' 4 Ibs P- ".
*9 **;*,,l, IE^s en g -
,/,a:-
- n. ->,r...',.+.., *4
*. . s * .. ..*;
..,,,, *... . n e.m *<
i .
, %, , y
.. l(=;
~1--{
d, M"*
)
, i g h* * **
- Figure 9-4. Access Control Posts in Nek on Northern Boundary of ths Q.
9-8 s
v k -
- s s 1,k g h.- + .. '?!
-3 , ~
s '. .h. .. A.
# . '.b
) ~~
~*~
1 -
)ht,4- .
e
;' , f E / \ ep's \ .m N !/ lN' .. (*-);'4 ' e '* $ y^ g, *^88 - - -y,z '
- r,.;.,. ;
7 , _ q:. .(. . L ;- 1 1.X, .w . . m '. p, L 't.y.vieyQ"$. M .?iPORT$aAOUT < J 1.*= I l i m,_~px. . , R >. ,_% ~ - . n,.. l '*': ,~ ,, ' y ;a, v ~ * * *w=v ' Yt, ,. ;. G .k , 'y a ~ y$ Y'y T1 f)$U *- C'. \. ' - M Lx*- -- "' ' - ",, . \\A APERTURN . . L, ' ,s, _ _ ., ';.V. ' 'a CARD %g -, s%r%e','w %. j : f %, ._\ : . bo#- *
- 3. EM'!
^ # ; D.d. Also Available On ' Aperture Card ?,,,,,,,, / ,i4 / ' u , a - s ,. s
- 1. - ae -.
a
- v. t .
,,. ,/ ,n 8 a. p.E .. . n y 4,4 n !< /' II//#i '"~ h.$,,D' . . ,' r ,, ) V .l fi, r . .i.=:: tx. . %e . ~ Hampshire EPZ 8&ohl70)73- M J 3 7 ,. , w- , N,s ' b ~~.s r i o ' Q '*'I \ 1- , f } /h 7 y I 'y . fij .t /.s., ... %~ . ' ll'(_ : . i l e-p , <:. f' . :.: Q... . ?- \. g g, .. 9 ___;, q x. . .. L . r . */ '?h I' ' .~ g. /; L.. . *'; Q. y 7.- , J ~ R ,i 'y;ik$ Wy. . ? _ f-_ , ~" ; h :[.~I f, f. } ../9, 1. .- J .,.~ j .., '\j;;.. . Q,- Q;.; t-
- c -
.. '!' y 4 . .
- n. ,,
v' .N , l .- m , N frg N, n \t .. . /. -eo ~ .y,7 - l\ Q- - ' ',... / . ,, ' t. A 'l y ,. W ; !, . b(?)ry.. 8 .
- s. r.
.r . s .2% .. .w .y t * . . 4 1 ) s
- 4 , .
g , - s \ xN t ,,,, ; ) -l g a &. '} , - s ' '; \', (. t 'q v '~ . ' ~~s , &\ 'r ,% . ( *6, f..; .- y s\ ) ~. . - x k. ) l 'P ~ i . i. 1 \o N ,,, lFL, N, s. W~ ' .\ i ,,I. h l, ss .; - t t e ' ,, - f ,'\ ', ' J\ \ . _ +3 . b. f)<\ .,\ . s & 'c ~ - , ' L;C~.=,4. r' _. e\ p R. . H ,, ,k Figure 9-5. Access Control Posts in New Hampshire O in Dover and Durham Towns 9-9 .dm.M -4.m *eera-- i / [ i o .i t * * .--c- - 4 t,. hje .s 9 . a.C. :- ,. s .; ug#as -> < y14 n.. }p'Y q 3 :- , , g;gg-,e.,, m j! - * / ;[ pf , s 2- 1 &. z , , ' -{ we1 r , . ., z e y n .. . .. , ,. e 1.. **,,, 9 - . ~ 5. %
- T ~A!M (
- m. !, ~
, %A \ ~.;W - , a P c ~,.. . .. m, - ., .,w - I E Q , +T4
- f m:- ,
t . . .. .. .m c: s , .ss7s ,*..** ~ , , ,j wi .. / < - / ' * ', i : i m j gl e. 3 . .. , - i 1
- e. *
., p.: 0q : ! t; . m 1 - o ; . ./ ., l. s- . 4 s.p i ' *s. .,
- d
- 1 f cMhI' 8 "
.h E I
- E
/ &! . m, ; s , .: v ! . l i * .,/'*"' k "f ". ,} l . n; 4'. ,.:< - p O . .e.-$.*[, ! h a ~ 5 ,s." .S .-
- 9 :
/i e / .:Q. . g ;\ '1 d N ,. . / f '4g7 . , e y a e , x* <,% * . , s ..g,-
- k; ' ,'
~ ) m w < x j.* s . . *. . . . ~ ~ - S \ +... . . ,, s. g [ N - l4/o*
- r. y - ./ .f, e (n'
.a F , ,Vt .; e.:w _ ~ , .. . i 1 .. ' ,1 e , s3 . , . ' . *.. : ' ' N.5 ' . . . . .. ' Q. :) --- 4 4 \ ?* f *#: M- .s*
- s .
?* fi9 , y/ I .ef:y':w U .: ! 4 D N
- 1 9)g
- gg; -
9 ggs -y,y'ig? . ~.- ' ggr g . 8:y:. . . .n le)6 , )t
- g. t :
q/5*. ' ' '- \ 1 J1 .,l * . . 4*. .... /(4'f } !.:,/, . ., l! . c..' . 9-10 1 *J- a *? ;. <. i .~a < 7h4 h/ o' .o i r .- .-:-.------ ---a---- - .----- - . - - - - - - . ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - O Table 9-4. Personnel and Equipment Required at Access Control Posts Eauinment Reauired Traffic ACP Desianation Priority Cones Barricades Guides Massachusetts RO-1 1 7 0 1 i RO-2 1 9 0 3 I RO-3 3 3 0 1 GT-1 , 3 3 0 J GT-2 1 7 9 3 GT-3 3 3 0 1 GR-1 4 6 0 1 GR-2 3 3 0 1 GR-3 2 6 0 1 HA-1 3 10 0 1 HA-2 2 19 0 2 HA-3 4 3 0 1 HA-4 1 9 6 4 HA-5 2 3 0 1 TOTALS 91 15 22 O i l { l-O 9-11 Table 9-4. Personnel and Equipment Required at Access Control Posts (conc.) Eculoment Recuired Traffic ACP Desianation Priority Cones Barricades Guides New Hamoshire PL-1 2 3 0 1 PL-2 3 3 0 1 PL-3 3 3 0 1 PL-4 , 2 4 0 1 DA-1 2 3 0 1 DA-2 3' 6 0 1 l DA-3 4 3 0 1
- FR-1 2 3 0 1 EP-1 1 13 3 3 l
t EP-2 2 20 0 1 l EP-3 2 4 0 1 NM-1 4 6 0 1 NM-2 2 23 0 2 NW-1 3 10 2 2 NW-2 1 14 6 3 NW-3 1 0 4 1 DU-l 1 9 3 3 DO-1 2 3 0 1 TOTALS 133 18 27 Maine KI-l 1 6 0 2 KI-2 2 9 0 1 KI-3 2 3 0 1 KI-4 1 12 5 3 KI-4 (cont.) 1 9 0 2 l KI-5 1 3 0 1 l KI-5 (cont.) 1 3 0 1 TOTALS 45 5 11 l O 9-12 l l ( To satisfy the second objective, the available Interstate Highways are utilized (I-93, I-193) as well as sections of other O' access-controlled highways (U.S. 3, Mass. 128). We have also specified the best available routes north of the EPZ: U.S. Routes 4 and 202 and Me. 111. The northern and of the diversion route connects with I-95 at Biddeford, Me. while the southern ends connect with I-495, Mass. 128 and the Boston Metropolitan area. The cordon line and the ACP locations were developed to satisfy the following objectives:
- 1. Control all paved roads crossing the EPZ boundary.
- 2. Select ACP locations as close to the EPZ boundary as possible so as to minimize the number of people who could originate a trip into the EPZ from points between the ACP and the EPZ boundary.
so as to minimize the number of personnel needed to secure the EPZ bcundary. which will enable those vehicles, which are denied entry to the EPZ, to safely change direction with a () 3. minimum of delay and turbulence. Prioritize all ACP - Priority 1 is assigned to all primary " Numbered" routes which service substantive volumes of traffic. Priority 2 is assigned to all other numbered routes. Priority 3 is assigned to all local " collector" roads. Priority 4 is assigned to all local roads which service low volumes of traffic. Based on a careful study of available, large-scale county maps, the selected ACP locations satisfy objectives 1 and 2. The need for prioritization arises because well-defined criteria are needed to identify: e The sequence in which the ACP will be manned. e Those ACP where a barrier, with a sign, will suffice for purposes of control, thus obviating the need for police personnel. Depending on circumstances, all Priority 4 ACP may be selected for unmanned (i.e. barrier + sign, only) control and, possibly, Priority 3 ACP as well. O 9-13 These ACP are specified at the same level of detail in Appendix L, as are the Traffic Control Posts (TCP) in Appendix I. The procedure employed for developing these specifications are: o Perform a field survey e Sketch all ACP e Distribute to State police for review The field survey was completed and the detailed sketches, presented in Appendix L. This report has been distributed to Massachusetts and New Hampshire State police for review. Some of the TCP within the EPZ also serve as " internal" ACP. That is, if a specific region is to be evacuated, then those TCP on the periphery of that region must also serve as ACP restricting entry to the region. Fortunately, since all the TCP controls restrict movements toward the Station, there is little or no need to alter these controls when they are assigned the dual role of ACP. The assignment of ACP by region depends on the geographical properties of each region. Table 9-5 identifies this assignment of region-specific ACP. Note that all TCP within the EPZ should be activated even when the Order to Evacuate affects a portion of the EPZ (e.g. Regions 2-9). Those TCP which are located outside the Region which is evacuated will be needed to expedite the movement of evacuees outside that Region who elect to evacuate spontaneously. At the completion of the evacuation process only the appropriate ACP will continue to be manned. Identification and Installation of Control Devices All Access Control Posts (ACP) are designed to restrict access into the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) or into the Region ordered to evacuate, to those vehicles where occupants will provide some form of emergency-related service. The remaining traffic will be denied entry and will be provided an alternative route which directs them away from the EPZ. Whenever traffic operations at a location are restricted, it is sound practice to inform drivers in a timely and unambiguous manner, and to assert guidance control. Both needs are fulfilled, in part, by installing suitable traffic control devices. These devices include: e Regulatory Signs e Barricades e Cones e Trail Blazer Signs e Illumination It is essential that these control devices, installed singly or in combination, satisfy the specifications of the Manual on 9 9-14 l x : .=:.- .=.. .. . .=. : . . . - . . . ... .: 1. a : : :. . . :. O Table 9-5. Identification of Those TCP Which Take on the Added Role of ACP When the Indicated Regions are Evacuated Access Control Posts in addition Region Evacuated to those in Appendix L 1 None 2 NF-1,2; EX-3,4,6; ST-2; KE-2,3; , SA-1,2,3,9; SE-1; AM-6 3 HB-2,4; HA-2,5; EX-4,6; ST-1,2; SA-1,2,3,9; AM-6,9 4 SH-1; KE-2,3; EX-4,6; HA-2,5; HB-2,4 l i 5 RE-1,3; GR-1; NH-1,2; EX-4,6; KE-1; FK-1,3; NT-2; ME-1,2; NP-2,5; SA-8 6 RY-1,3; GR-1; NH-1,2; EX-4,6; KE-2,3; SA-1,2,3,9; AM-6 7 HB-2,4; HA-2,5; EX-4,6; KE-1; EK-1,3; NT-2; AM-9; SA-1,2,3,9; AM-6 8 HB-2,4; HA-2,5; EX-4,6; KE-2,3; SH-1; NP-2,5; SA-8 9 HB-2,4; HA-2,5; EX-4,6; KE-2,3; SA-1,2,3,9; AM-6 O 9-15 i l l- - . . . . . - . - ~ . ~ . . . . - . . . .- .. . 1 Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The need for uniform standards is best explained by reference to the MUTCD; see . Exhibit 9-1. In the following discussion, we refer to relevant sections of the MUTCD as they apply to the Seabrook Evacuation Plan. Exhibit 9-2 consists of excerpts from Section G, Part II, of the MUTCD which is entitled, " Signing for Civil Defense". (We
- have previously discussed the advisability of Evacuation Route Markers (Section 8), so we did not include that section in Exhibit 9-2). These provisions of Exhibit 9-2 apply directly to the Seabrook Evacuation Plan.
At'ACP which are' located at interchanges with Interstate Highways, and at some other Priority 1 locations, it will be' necessary to install barricades which physically block the lanes on roads providing access to the EPZ. These barricades should be portable (alther " wing" type, which folds, or with detachable footings) 'so that they .may easily be transported to the' ACP locations and installed. For Priority 4 ACP, and possibly for (some] Priority 3 ACP, barricade installations will replace the cones indicated on the sketches of Appendix L, when the ACP is unmanned.' - l Exhibit 9-3 presents excerpts from the MUTCD specifications for barricades. Nota that signs may be attached to barricades: for example, the AREA CLOSED sign
- shown on Exhibit 9-2 should be mounted on all such barricades. Barricade Type III is h recommended by the MUTCD for road closure. We recommend that lighting devices -- flashing and steady yellow lights -- be attached tc-all barricades and clamped onto every third cone used at every? ACP and TCP. Arrow Panels and advance warning signs should be used on approachas to all ACP and TCP located on Expressways so as to inform drivers that traffic will be chanr;elized onto an exi.t ramp. See Section E, Part 6 of the MUTCD for details on lighting devices and Section B, Part 6 of the MUTCD for channelization treatments on expressways.
Exhibit 9-4 consists of excerpts f! rom Section C, Part 6 of the MUTCD, which describe the design and application of cones as channelizing devices. We prefer 'the use of cones, ' rather than drums, because: l = They are more portable *It is also permissable to indicate the cause for a restricted movement. For example, the sign AREA CLOSED - RADIATION may be used if it is believad that improved' compliance will result. One or more arrows indicating'the direction of the diversion routes are also advisable. O 9-16 th3 Umform vsmen s.,oue et one nauve.m.,wmm. . . . . . . . fic Lawnnd Ordinances, which is th) nationally recognize ard in \ Q this area. ( Five basic considerations are employed to insure that these require-ments are met. They are: design, placement, operation, maintenance, and uniformity. Part1. GENERAL PROVISIONS p,,ign of the device should assure that such features as size, contrast, colors, shape, composition, and lighting or reflectorization are combined to draw attention to the device; that shape, size, colors, and simplicity of 1A-1 Purpose of Traffic Control Devices message combine to produce a clear meaning; that legibility and size The purpose of traffic control devices and warrants for their use is to * * ** with placement to permit adequate time for response; and that h:1p insure highway safety by providing for the orderly and predictable un nnny,5 , EMty and reasonableness of the regulation combine movement of all traffic, motorized and non-motorized, throughout the t c mmand respect. In the des,gn i of a device, minor modifications of national highway transportation system, and to provide such guidance the specified design elements may be necessary, provided that the es-and warnings as are needed to insure the safe and informed operation of senti *I 2Ppearance charactenstics are met. individual elements of the traffic stream. Placement of the device should assure that it is within the cone of Traffic control devices are used to direct and assist vehicle operators vialon of the viewer so that it will command attention; that it is posi-in the guidance and navigation tasks required to traverse safely any tioned with respect to the point, object, or situation to which it applies facility open to public travel, to aid in conveying the Proper meaning; and that its location, combined Guide and information signs are solely for the purpose of traffic con. with suitable legibility, is such that a driver traveling at normal speed trol and are not an advertising medium. has adequate time to make the proper response. Operadon or application should assure that appropriate devices and lA-2 Itequirements of Traffic Control Devices related equipment are installed to meet the traffic requirements at a This hianual sets forth the basic principles that govern the design and given location. Furthermore, the device must be placed and operated in a uniform and consistent manner to assure, to the extent possible, that gusage of traffic control devices.These principles appear throughoht the vehicle operators can be expected to properly respond to the device, y tsxt in discussions of the devices to which they apply, and it is important 4 thst they be given primary consideration in the selection and application based on their previous exposure to similar traffic control situations. , of each device. Afaintenance of devices should be to high standards to assure that e The blanual presents traffic control device standards for all streets legibility is retained, that the device is visible, and that it is removed if and highways open to public travel regardless of type or class or the no longer needed. Clean, legible, properly mounted devices in good governmental agency having jurisdiction. Where a device is intended working condition command the respect of vehicle operators and pedes-for limited application only, or for a specific system, the text specifies trians. In addition to physical maintenance, functional maintenance is the restrictions on its use. required to adjust needed traffic control devices to current conditions To be effective, a traffic control device should meet five basic require- and to remove unnecessary traffic control devices. The fact that a de-m:nts. They are: Vice is in good physical condition should not be a basis for ' deferring
- 1. Fulfill a need. needed replacement or change. Furthermore, carelessly executed main-
- 2. Command attention. tenance can destroy the value of a group of devices by throwing them
- 3. Convey a clear, simple meaning.
out of balance. For example, replacement of a sign in a group or series
- 4. Command respect of road users. by one that is disproportionately large may tend to deprecate others in
- 5. Give adequate time for proper response. the vi6ity.
In the case of regulatory devices, the actions required of vehicle Uniformity of traffic control devices simplifies the task of the road user because it aids in recognition and understanding. It aids road users, operators and pedestrians should be specified by State statute, or by police officers, and traffic courts by giving everyone the same interpre-local ordinance or resolution which are consistent with national stan-dards. Uniformity of meaning is vital to effective traffic control devices. tation. It aids public highway and traffic officials through economy in hieanings ascribed to devices in this hianual are in general accord with manufacture, installation, maintenance and administration. Exhibit 9-1. General Provisions of the MU'"CD (1978 Edition) 1n the event of disastzr there will be o closing of highwrys that cc.nnot be used, a controlled operation cf certain d:signated highwcys, the es. In tha svnt of cmergency, St:te and local crthorities will establish tablishing of regulation posts for the expediting of essential traffic, and various centers for civilian relief, communication, medical service, and similar purposes.To guide the public to such centers a series of diree-the provision of emergency centers for civilian aid. tional signs willbe needed.These signs shall carry the designation of the To guide and control highway traffic in an emergency, special high. center and an arrow indicating the direction to the center.They shall be way signs will be needed.The signs here specified have been approved erected as needed, at intersections and elsewhere, on the right-hand ' rnd are here presciibed as standard for use when and where applicable side of the roadway, at a height in urban areas of at least 7 feet, and not in the civil defense program. less than 1 foot back from the face of the curb, and in rural areas at a These emergency signs will not permanently displace any of the stan. he,ght i of 5 feet,6 to 10 feet from the roadway edge, dard signs that are normally applicable, and as conditions permit they ; '; These signs shall carry one of the followinglegends, as appropriate, or thould be replaced or augmented by standard signs. ' others designating similar emergency facilities: For economy in stockpiling and in emergency fabrication, all the spe- DECONTAMINATION CENTER cial civil defense signs, with the exception of the Evacuation Route REGISTRATION CENTER 51arker, are designed for a sidgle size of plate measuring 24 by 3 WELFARE CENTER inches, and have a black legend and border on a white background.The MEDICAL CENTER ' bickground should be reflectorized. In an emergency these signs may be needed in large numbers and are , for essentially temporary use. Consideration should accordingly be giv-sn to their fabrication from any light and economical material that can serve through the emergency period. Any of these signs may be accompanied by a standard triangular DECONTAMINATION y marker for marking areas contaminated by biological and chemical war- CENTER g fare agents and radioactive fallout. The ARE A CLOSED sign shall be used to close a roadway entering h c.n area from which all traffic is excluded because of dangerous radio-logical or biological contamination. It shall be erected on the shoulder as C*}',,, near as practicable to the right-hand edge of the roadway, or preferably on a portable mounting or barricade partly or wholly in the roadway. For best visibility, particularly at night,its height should not normally exceed 4 feet from the pavement to the bottom of the sign. Unless adequate advance warning signs are used,it should not be so placed as to create a complete and unavoidable blockade.Where feasible, the sign thould be located at an intersection that provides a detour route. AREA Exhibit 9-2. Excerpts from MUTCD Section G: Q Signing for Civil Defense i r Co-2 > 3o"x24" c-D ,- - ( t). 1} Barricades shall be one cf three types: Type I, Type II.or Type III. (" LNG BARRICADES The characteristics of these types are shown in Figur2 *i-14 ara Trble \* I - l .
- g' ,
( Barricades with stripes which begin at the upper right side a-A slope s , " downward to the lower left side are to be designated as right* (R) g 's . , , , h^$'4u mot roa barricades. Barricades with stripes which begin at the upper : sit side g s N ,*t q.., o g fotoa..Av m i [ .h { and slope downward to the lower right side are to be desig .a:ed as 'left' % :-I N s'N "' (L) barricades. 51arkings for barricades rails shall be alternate orar.ge ara white e.N .M 7 N N 'N W' . stripes (sloping downward at an angle of 45 degrees in the direction
- N. I traffic is to pass).
Where a barricade extends entirely across a roadway,i is desirable y % N ' N.s that the stripes slope downward in the direction toward which traffic \ must turn in detouring. Where both right and left turns are p-ovided Ih # k~, for, the chevron striping may slope downward in both direc:io:.s from the center of the barricade. , Barricade rails should be supported in a manner that wC allow them - to be seen by the motorist and provide a stable support no: easily blown over by the wind or traffic. For Type I barricades, the suppcrt may include other unstriped horizontal panels necessary to provide s. ability. , The name of the agency, contractor, or supplier shall no- be shown on
- the face parts of any barricade. Identification markings may be shown y only on the back side of barricade rails. ,
The entire area of orange and white shall be reflec:crized with a g material that has a smooth, sealed outer surface which wi'.i display the same approximate size, shape and color day and night.The predominant color for other barricade components shall be white, except that un-painted galvanized metal or aluminum components may t-e used. Barricades are located adjacent to traffic and therefen su': Ject to impact by errant vehicles. Because of their vulnerable posi: ion and the possible hazard they could create, they should be construe:ed of light-weight materials and have no rigid stay bracing for "A" frame designs. l Table VI-l Barricade Characteristics Type * !! fit I Wi.ith of Rail 8" min-12" max 8" min-12" mas 6" .J .-12 ' sax Length of Rad 2 ft. min 2 ft. min 4 f:. =i: s ia s in. si- Exhibit 9-3. Excerpts from the MUTCD on wwth of stripes a .I ight 3 ft, min 3 ft. min 5 f:. =i- Barricades > Number of 2 (one each 4 (two each 3if fae ::raffic ' i . e,e dhetion Reflectorized direction) direction) Rail Faces 4 if faf~i:~8'fic L- :wo rhtions For mooden barricades nominal lumber dimensions uill be sati$f : : .- " For raita less than 3 feet long. 4 inch wide stripes shall be und li J Exhibit 9-4. Excerpts from the MUTCD on Cone Design and Application Traffic cones and tubular markers of various configurations are avail. able. These shall be a minimum of IM inches in height with a broadened base and may be made of various materials to withstand impact without damage to themselves or to vehicles. Larger size cones should be used on freeways ami other roadways where speeds are relatively high or wherever more conspicuous guidance is needed. Orange shall be the ( predominant color on cones. They should be kept clean and bright for maximum target value. For nighttime use they shall be reflectorized or equipped with lighting devices for maximum visibility. Reflectorized material shall have a smooth, sealed outer surface which will display the same approximate color day and night. Riflyetorization of tubular markers shall be a minimum of two three. pM inchAands placed a maximum of 2" from the top with a maximum of 6" between th ands. Reflectorization of cones shall be provided by a minimum 6' band placed a maximum of 3" from the top. ! 6C-4 Cone Application Included under this heading are a group of devices whose primary l I function is the channelization of traffic. They may be conical in shape, but there are also tubular shaped devices available capable of perform- ' ing the same function. They may be set on the surface of the roadway or rigidly attached for continued use. Traffic cones may be easily stacked on a truck and one workman can } carry and distribute several cones with ease. This mobility and flexibil-ity (which cannot be equalled by Type I barricades) increases the useful-ness of these devices. When cones are used, precautions are necessary to assure they wil! [ ' not be blown over or displaced. This may be particularly critical adja-cent to lanes of moving traffic where there may be a wind created by l passing vehicle . Some cones are constructed with bases that may be l filled with ballast. With others it may be necessary to double the cones ) or use heavier weighted cones, special weighted bases, or weights such as sand bag rings that can be dropped over the cones and onto the base to provide increased stability.These added weights should not be suffi-cient to present a hazard if the devices are inadvertently struck. In general, traffic cones have a greater target value than do the tubular shaped devices. However, the target value of either device may be enhanced during the day time by the insertion of an orange flag in the top and at night, by reflectorization or the use of lighting devices. O 9-20 1
- z. a._ . . 2.-. . . . ..; .. ..--- .. .~ , . . . . , . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . - . . . .
e They will be needed only for a relatively short period of time (hours) while drums are generally used at a site over .O a period of days or weeks e They are less costly and consume less storage space o They take up less room on the highway, allowing the vehicles more room to maneuver. i w i j O ~ O 9-21 ..1 : :a - u=:....w=. . . w. =- -
- 10. EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) FOR GENERAL POPULATION This section presents the current results of the computer analyses using the IDYNEV System. These results cover:
e Ten evacuation scenarios as described in Table 10-1. e Nine regions within the Seabrook Station EPZ, as defined in Table 10-2. Each region consists of one or more Emergency Response Planning Areas (ERPA). These ERPA are shown on Figure 10-1; the communities comprising each ERPA are listed in Table 10-3. These ETE for each Region-Scenario combination, are presented in Tables 10-4 through 10-8. e Table 10-4 presents the ETE for the area within a circle , with a radius of two miles centered at Seabrook Station. e Table 10-5 presents the ETE for the area within a circle with a radius of five miles centered at Seabrook Station. i e Table 10-6 presents the ETE for the area within a circle with a radius of ten miles centered at Seabrook Station. e Table 10-7 presents the ETE for the entire Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) of Seabrook Station. i e Table 10-8 presents the ETE for the regions ordered to evacuate. For example, if it is determined that everyone l within 5 miles of the Station should evacuate, then all communities within Region 5 (ERPA A, B, C, D) will be ordered to evacuate. The ETE of interest, then, are those which apply to evacuees who begin their trips from within 5 miles of the Station. Additional travel time from the regional boundary to the EPZ boundary is somewhat of academic interest since the evacuees are then outside the specified area of potential risk. Thus Table 10-8 presents the ETE which are of primary importance within the context of emergency planning. These Tables also present the results of sensitivity tests to determine the influence of varying beach area traffic volumes on ETE. Scenarios lA and 1B represent beach populations of 80 and 60 percent of capacity, respectively. Table 10-9 presents the evacuation time estimates from the beach areas, only, for Scenario 1 conditions. The values of ETE are obtained by interpolating from IDYNEV output, which are generated at 30-minute intervals, then rounding to the nearest 5 minutes. Thus, the numerical precision of these values is within 10 minutes. O 10-1 -_ - . = . _ _ _ _ . . , _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - Table 10- 1. Distribution of Evacuation Scenarios 1-10 Scenario Season Day Time Weather Comments 1 Summer Weekend Mid-day Good Beach area population at capacity. Employees are at 70 pct. of mid-week in towns with beach areas, 40 pct. in remaining towns. Tourists fill available seasonal and overnight facilities, with half of them at the beach areas. 2 Summer Weekend Mid-day Rain As above. Sudden rain occurs with beach population at capacity concurrent with accident at Seabrook Station. 3 Summer Mid-week Mid-day Good Beach area and tourist population at 75 pct. of capacity. Employees are at 100 pct. of mid-week work force. 4 Summer Mid-week Mid-day Rain As above. Sudden rain occurs. 5 Of f-Season Mid-week Mid-day Good Tourist population at 50 pct. of yearly capacity (i.e. " facilities which remain open the entire year) . No beach area transients. Employees at 100 pct. 6 O f f-Season Mid-week Mid-day Rain As above, but for inclement (rain) weather. 7 Off-Season Mid-week Mid-day Snow Conditions the same as for Scenario 5 except that there is inclement weather (snow). Evacuees must clear driveways. 8 Off-Season Mid-week Evening Good Tourist population at 50 pct. of yearly capacity. No Weekend All day beach area transients. Employees at 25 pct. of mid-week, mid-day. 9 Off-Season Mid-week Evening Rain As above, but for inclement (rain) weather. Weekend All day 10 Off-Season Mid-week Evening Snow As above, but for inclement (snow) wea ther. Evacuees j Weekend All day must clear driveways. i i O O O u :.- , .. u a- -.w.. a _ ua : : - - - . u.. . =....: . . :. . [ Table 10-2. Identification of the Seabrook Station Emergency Planning Areas (ERPA) Recion Scatial Extent ERPA Desianation 1 To EPZ bdry. A-G Entire EPZ 2 To EPZ bdry. A, D, G Fntire North Region 3 To EPZ bdry. A, C, F Entire West Region 4 To EPZ bdry. A, B, E Entire South Region 5 To Five Miles A, B, C, D Entire Five-Mile Region 6 To Five Miles A, D Inner North Region 7 To Five Miles A, C Inner West Region 8 To Five Miles A, B Inner South Region 9 To Two Miles A Entire Two-Mile j Region 10 Beach Areas Portions of Beach Areas A,B,D,E,G NOTES: 1. All beach areas are always completely evacuated in Scenarios 1-4, including those outside the Region ordered to evacuate. It is assumed that beaches are closed at the Alert stage of the Emergency and that evacuation of the beach areas begins 20 minutes before the order to evacuate a specified region.
- 2. It is assumed that 25 percent of the population within the EPZ, but outside the Region ordered to evacuate, will spontaneusly evacuate, contrary to
, instructions.
- 3. The outer boundaries of Regions 5-9 are generally town boundaries which extend, somewhat, beyond the indicated distances from Seabrook Station. Thus, for each of these regions, the indicated radius is an accroximation and should not be interpreted literally.
O 10-3 ! 108 4 l .-f',- O152 18 ASTLE ' ELDS ORTSMoury gyJ ' 01- ,- ' Y 1 '~~,,,_ # ) -I 1A . K EXET STRATHAM / 9S I ## r BRENTWOOf' 9 RYE , 125 I4 1010- NORT 101C 0 ' . A M PTO N l 88 101C y \ j',eEAST , g; gyp}S Klb GSTONh I KINGSTON KENSIN 51 HAMPTQh LLS l ! I s 1 ) T 107 ~ 84 f l g/ ~~~ s ~~ S0UTii 2t B'R / TO I W., , .H. ' j NE On , M MESBUR I , ' I RY 125 108\ ERRIMA ff0 y 5
- j \ -
'N NEW80 \ ' #E EST NE URY, 1A 11 3 V l NEWBURY g /0 \ 125 69d i I 125 O Figure 10-1. Map of EPZ Dolineating all Emergency Response Planning Arcas (ERPA) 10-4 ...:. ._ .. _ . . . _ __ .. . . _ . 2 ;.u._.:.a a;., ..___u.. Table 10-3. Communities Included Within Each ERPA ERPA Communities Comorisina Indicated ERPA A Hampton Falls, Seabrook, Hampton Beach B Amesbury, Salisbury C Kensington, South Hampton ', D . Hampton, North Hampton E Merrimac, Newbury, Newburyport, West Newbury F Brentwood, East Kingston, Exeter, Kingston, Newfields, Newton G Greenland, New Castle, Portsmouth, Rye, Stratham O 4 l
- O
,10-5 Table 10-4. Estimated Times (Hrs.: Min.) to Evacuate from within 2 Miles of Seabrook Station after the Order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios Reaion Scenario 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 5:50 5:05 4:50 5:50 5:50 4:50 4:50 5:50 4:50 2 7:35 6:10 6:15 7:35 7:35 6:15 6:15 7:35 6:15 3 5:40 4:35 4:35 5:40 5:40 4:35 4:35 5:40 4:35 4 7:25 6:05 6:05 7:25 7:25 6:05 6:05 7:25 6:05 5 4:30 3:35 3:35 4:30 4:30 3:35 3:35 4:30 3:35 6 5:50 4:15 4:15 5:50 5:50 4:15 4:15 5:50 4:15 7 6:40 5:15 5:15 6:40 6:40 5:15 5:15 6:40 5:15 8 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 9 4:20 3:30 3:30 4:20 4:10 3:30 3:30 4:20 3:30 h 10 5:15 4:30 4:30 5:15 5:15 4:30 4:30 5:15 4:30 Reaion Scenario 1 la 1 5:50 3:30 1A 5:25 3:30 1B 4:50 3:30 l l l 10-6
- . - . : .: . - - =;~ : x .u_..-......= n - . =
2 Table 10-5. Estimated Times (Hrs.: Min.) to Evacuate from within 5 Miles of Seabrook Station after the Order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios i Reaion Scenario 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 6:10 5:25 5:10 6:10 6:10 5:10 5:10 6:10 5:10 1 2 7:50 6:40 .6:30 7:50 7:50 6:30 6:30 7:50 6:30 , 3 5:55 4:45 4:45 5:55 5:55 4:45 4:45 5:55 4:45 4 7:40 6:20 6:20 7:40 7:40 6:20 6:20 7:40 6:20 5 4:40 4:00 4:00 4:40 4:40 4:00 4:00 4:40 4:00 6 6:05 4:40 4:35 6:05 6:05 4:35 4:35 6:05 4:35 i 7 7:00 5:35 5:35 7:00 7:00 5:35 .5:35 7:00 5:35 8 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 () 9 4:30 4:30 3:40 4:30 4:30 3:40 3:40 4:30 3:40 10 5:30 4:40 4:40 5:30 5:30 4:35 4:35 5:3C 4:35 l . Reaion Scenario 1 12 1 6:10 4:15 1A 5:40 3:40 IB 5:10 3:30 0 10-7 l._. - , . - Table 10-6. Estimated Times (Hrs.: Min.) to Evacuate from within 10 Miles of Seabrook Station after the order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios Recion Scenario 1 1 1 A i 1 2 a 2 1 6:15 5:50 5:10 6:10 6:10 5:10 5:10 6:10 5:10 2 8:55 8:55 .6:40 7:55 7:55 6:40 6:40 7:55 6:40 3 6:05 5:55 4:50 6:00 6:05 4:50 4:50 6:05 4:50 4 9:35 9:30 6:25 7:45 7:45 6:25 6:25 7:45 6:25 5 5:10 5:05 4:00 5:10 4:45 4:00 4:00 4:45 4:00 6 7:00 6:10 4:40 7:00 6:45 4:35 4:40 6:15 4:35 7 7:05 7:00 5:35 7:05 7:05 5:35 5:35 7:05 5:35 8 4:10 4:10 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 9 5:20 5:20 3:40 5:10 4:35 4:00 3:40 4:35 3:40 10 6:00 6:00 4:40 5:35 6:00 6:00 4:40 5:35 4:40 Reaion Scenario 1 1Q l 6:15 4:15 1A 5:40 3:40 1B 5:15 3:40 l 9 10-8 .-......a .-.....:-.-.....a.. -. - . . - . - . . . Table 10-7. Estimated Times (Hrs.: Min.) to Evacuate from O- within the Seabrook Station EPZ after the Order to Evacuate from the Indicated Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios Reaion Scenario 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 6:40 6:10 5:15 6:15 6:15 5:15 5:15 6:10 5:15 2 9:10 9:10 6:40 7:55 7:55 6:40 6:40 7:55 6:40 , 3 7:10 7:10 4:50 6:10 6:10 5:15 4:50 6:10 4:50 4 9:45 9:40 6:25 7:45 7:45 7:40 6:25 7:45 6:25 5 6:00 6:00 4:05 5:30 4:45 4:05 4:05 4:45 4:05 i 6 7:30 7:10 4:40 7:00 6:15 4:40 4:40 6:15 4:40 7 8:00 8:00 5:35 7:05 7:05 5:35 5:35 7:05 5:35 8 4:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:00 4:00 3:40 3:40 3:40 () 1 9 6:00 6:00 4:00 5:10 4:35 4:00 4:00 4:35 4:00 l 10 6:30 6:30 5:00 5:35 6:00 6:00 5:00 5:35 5:00 Recion i Scenario _1__ _12_ 1 6:40 4:20 1A 6:10 3:40 l 1B 5:40 3:40 1 l O 10-9 Table 10-8. Estimated Times (Hrs.: Min.) to Evacuate from within the Indicated Region of the Seabrook Station EPZ after the Order to Evacuate from these Regions, for the Individual Evacuation Scenarios Recion Scenario 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 a 1 1 6:40 6:10 5:15 6:15 6:10 5:10 5:10 6:10 4:50 2 9:10 9:10 '6:40 7:55 7:50 6:30 6:30 7:50 6:15 3 7:10 7:10 4:50 6:10 5:55 4:45 4:45 5:55 4:35 4 9:45 9:40 6:25 7:45 7:40 6:20 6:20 7:40 6:05 5 6:00 6:00 4:05 5:30 4:40 4:00 4:00 4:40 3:35 6 7:30 7:10 4:40 7:00 6:05 4:35 4:35 6:05 4:15 7 8:00 8:00 5:35 7:05 7:00 5:35 5:35 7:00 5:15 8 4:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:30 9 6:00 6:00 4:00 5:10 4:30 3:40 3:40 4:30 3:35 10 6:30 6:30 5:00 5:35 5:30 4:35 4:35 5:30 4:30 1A 6:10 1B 5:40 I O I 10-10 l .- . . ~ - . . . . - ..-.i..,....~...-.-........-.... . . . . . . . . . O Table 10-9. Estimated Times (Hrs.: Min.) to Evacuate the Beach Areas in the Indicated Towns, after the Order to Evacuate the Individual Region, for Scenario 1 (Summer Weekend) Recion Beach Area 1 1 1 lQ Plum Island (MA) 3:05 2:20 2:20 2:10 Salisbury (MA) , 4:45 4:45 3:45 3:45 Seabrook (NH) 5:40 5:40 4:35 2:45 Hampton (NH) 5:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 0 I O 10-11 Discussion of ETE A total of 95 cases have been analyzed -- each case represents a possible evacuation protective action: e If the emergency occurs during the tourist season, then all beaches will be ordered closed at the Alert stage. Unless instructions are given for the beach area populace to take shelter, it is reasonable to expect that many, if not most, day-trippers will start to travel from beach areas shortly after leaving the beach. e If the accident then escalates beyond the Alert stage, and it is determined that evacuation is advisable, the protective actinn will specify the region to be evacuated. There are a total of 10 regions. Associated with each region are one or more ERPA (See Table 10-2); the communities within each ERPA are listed in Table 10-3. e The protective action could occur within the context of any one of ten evacuation scenarios; these are defined in Table 10-1. The population of the beach areas ranges widely depending on the weather. Since ETE are sensitive to this variation, we have added subsets of scenario 1 in order to quantify this effect. These data are presented in a concise tabular format in Tables 10-4 through 10-9. Each entry in these tables is the value of ETE for the indicated circumstances (i.e. Scenario), lh protective action (i.e. Region ordered to evacuate), and radius of the circular area centered at Scabrook Station. For example, it is estimated that the entire population within 5 miles of Seabrook Station can evacuate that circular area (of 5-mile radius centered at the Station] within 6 hours and 10 minutes, under Scenario 1 conditions, when the entire populace within the EPZ (Region 1) is ordered to evacuate (see Table 10-5). The use of these tables is best illustrated through the medium of illustrative examples. 1 Examole 1 Consider an accident situation on a Summer Sunday (Scenario
- 1) . Based on meteriological and on-site data, a release is projected while wind direction is due east. The protective action is to evacuate Region 9 (see Table 10-2).
l In arriving at this decision, the ETE for evacuating the two-mile area, for Region 9 and Scenario 1, is referenced in Table 10-4 and is found to be 4:50. (Table 10-8 yields the same value). This ETE is referenced to the issuance of the general order to evacuate which, in turn, is assumed to follow the Alert stage by 25 minutes. It is also assumed that all beaches are l 10-12 l l . _ _ .. . _ . _ ._ _. _ _. . r . . -- - . _ _ . . - - _ . . . . . _ _ _ - . - . _ . . . .-. -3 closed at the Alert stage, at which time the day trippers begin O their trips from the beach areas. Thus, if the general order to evacuate Region 9 is given 25 minutes following the Alert stage, as is postulated in the planning basis, then it will take 4:50 to evacuate the two-mile area after the order is given. Reference to Table 10-9 yields the further information that under these conditions, the beach areas of Seabrook and Hampton, which are within Region 9, will be evacuated within 4:35 and 3:40, respectively. For this case, Table 10-5 yields an ETE of 5:10 for evacuating the populace from within 5 miles of Seabrook Station. Thus, it takes about.20 minutes longer to clear the 5-mile area, than it takes to clear the 2-mile area. Since only the area within 2 miles of Seabrook Station has been judged to be subject to potential exposure to radiation under the conditions of this example (i.e. only Region 9 is ordered to evacuate) the additional time to clear the 5-mile area is somewhat of academic interest. That is, travelers who are outside the 2-mile areas are not subject to potential exposure to radiation. Note that the population clearing the five-mile area , is assumed to include _25 percent of the population in the area outside Region 9, but inside the 5-mile area. This 25 percent represents those who are assumed to spontaneously evacuate contrary to EBS messages. Now consider a situation in which the order to evacuate is not expected to be given for, say, 4 hours after the Alert stage. In this situation, the ETE of Region 10 applies, rather than those of Region 9. The rationale for this change lies in the fact that for 4 hours, only the beach area population would be evacuating (plus the estimated 25 percent of the remaining population who are assumed to spontaneously evacuate contrary to broadcast instructions). Under these circumstances (Region 10, Scenario 1) , the ETE from the two-mile area, as listed in Table 10-4, is 3:30 -- significantly less than the 4:50 of Region 9. Concommitantly, the ETE for the beach areas of Seabrook and Hampton towns for Region 10, Scenario 1, are 2:45 and 3:40, respectively (Table 10-9). It is seen that a " head-start" of 4 hours (rather than 25 minutes) yields an important reduction in ETE (to 2:45) for , Seabrook people at the. beach, relative to the time of 4:35 for Region 9, with the beach area having a 25 minute head-start. For Hampton Beach, the additional " head-start" does not influence the evacuation time of 3:40. Note that if the order to evacuate Region 9 is given 4 hours after the Alert stage (and after the beach areas have been cleared), the ETE for the inland populace of Region 9, relative to the time this order is given, will be far less than the 4:50 O estimated for the combined evacuation of Region 9 and the beach 10-13 areas. We have not calculated this reduced value of ETE since the plannine basis that we have adopted, of a 25-minute head start for the beach area population assumes a rapidly escalating h accident. Examole 2 consider an accident situation on a rainy, mid-week day in late Autumn (Scenario 6) in early afternoon. A release is projected which will travel southward. The protective action is to evacuate Region 4 (see Table 10-2). In arriving at this decision, the ETE for evacuating Region 4 in Scenario 6 is referenced in Table 10-7 (or Table 10-8) and is found to be 7:00. The ETE for areas closer to the Station are (from Tables 10-4 through 10-7): Distance (miles) from Seabrook Station EIE 2 5:50 5 6:05 10 7:00 EPZ Boundary 7:00 It would appear that it takes zero time to travel from the 10-mile distance to the EPZ boundary, a distance of about a mile. This apparent anomoly reflects the interpolation procedures used to obtain these ETE, and the subsequent rounding to the nearest 5 minutes. As a result, our tabulation of ETE does not distinguish small differences of a few minutes needed to travel the distance of a mile. Examole 3 consider an accident situation on a summer midweek day with clear weather (Scenario 3). A release is projected which will travel to the north on the basis of current wind direction. Based on analysis of the situation, it is decided to evacuate an area out to a 5-mile distance from the power station: Region 6. In arriving at this decision, the ETE, 4:45, for evacuating this region under the stated conditions is found in Table 10-5 or in Table 10-8. As described in Example 1, this ETE assumes a 25-minute head-start for beach area evacuees. As for Example 1, we must consider the expected elapsed time from the Alert stage, to the order to evacuate. For Region 10, Scenario 1A (Scen. lA applies, since this is a weekday), the ETE is 3:40. Thus, if at least 3:40 elapses from the Alert stage to the order to evacuate, then the beach areas will have been cleared at the time (75 percent of] the inland population in Region 6, is ordered to evacuate. Thus, the ETE for Region 6 at the time of the order to evacuate should be significantly less than 4:45. 10-14 . _ _ ._. . - _ _ _ . _ . . _ ~ . , _ . _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . . _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ < . . _ . . 3 The ETE for evacuees from Region 6 to clear the EPZ is 5:15, O as found from Table 10-7. Thus, an additional 30 minutes is required for the traffic from Region 6 to move out of the EPZ, compared to the time required to clear this traffic out of the 5-mile area around Seabrook Station. Sensitivity Tests As discussed earlier, a Planning Basis was adopted for calculating the ETE. It is important to explore the effects, on ETE, of variations about this basis. This section presents the results of several sensitivity studies. The population of permanent residents and permanent employees within the Seabrook Station Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) remain reasonably stable over the year. In contrast, the tourist population increases greatly during the summer months of July and August, relative to the level that prevails over the other months of the year. . The beach area population is even more volatile than the seasonal tourist population. Roughly half of the beach traffic on a crowded day is comprised of day-trippers. Thus, the beach area population is " weather-driven" as expressed by a member of a local Chamber of Commerce. If the weather is unappealing, the beach area traffic could be less than half of what it would otherwise be on a hot, sunny day. Day-of-week is another factor i O which influences beach population. The ETE results presented earlier represent mostly " worst-case" beach area population conditions, based on the ! assumption that all real estate available for parking vehicles is fully utilized for that purpose. Such conditions are rarely, if l ever, attained since there is a continuing turnover of parked cars which makes it almost impossible to fully match demand for parking with available supply. { As presented in Appendix E, Item 7, the most crowded parking ! condition in August, 1985 was tabulated for each beach area and compared with our estimates of parking capacity. On that day, the largest beaches exhibited parking occupancy rates, relative i to capacity, of 72, 86 and 74 percent for Salisbury, Seabrook and Hampton Beaches, respectively. l Of course, these occupancy rates may reflect our rather l conservative (i.e. high) estimates of capacity, rather than any l shortfall in demand. On that day, virtually all the parking lots ' and curb space were full, with space available only on some unpaved areas and on some front lawns, backyards and driveways. l Thus it is reasonable to expect that actual parking i attendance will likely be somewhat less than the estimated l capacity, on most days of the season. It is therefore prudent to l l quantify the " elasticity" of Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) with l l l l 10-15 - . . - .- . . . . - a.- . - respect to beach areas population, particularly in view of the high volatility of this population as noted above. Scenarios lA and 1B were developed for this purpose. As is indicated in Tables 10-4 through 10-7, a reduction in beach area population from 100 percent of capacity to 80 percent of capacity (i.e. scenario 1A vs. 1) reduces the ETE of Region 1 by approximately one-half hour, for all areas considered (2-mile, 5-mile, 10-mile and EPZ). A further reduction in beach area population from 80 percent to 60 percent of capacity (i.e. Scenario 1B vs. lA) results in a further reduction of about one-half hour in all areas of Region 1. We have explored,the extreme case of an "immediate General Emergency" wherein the Order to Evacuate immediately follows the activation of all sirens. The results of these sensitivity tests are compared with the results obtained using the Planning Basis: ETE to Evacuate the EPZ Recion 1 Recion 5 Recion 9 Scenarios: 1 1 1 1 1 1 Planning Basis 6:40 7:10 6:15 6:10 5:15 4:50 Immediate General 6:40 7:30 6:40 6:40 5:30 5:15 Emergency ETE to Evacuate the Two-Mile Area Recion 1 Recion 5 Recion 9 Scenarios: 1 1 1 1 1 1 Planning Basis 5:50 5:40 5:50 5:40 4:50 4:35 Immediate General 6:10 6:00 6:20 5:50 5:10 4:55 Emergency As indicated above, the effect of an Immediate General Emergency is to extend the Ei'E up to 20-30 minutes, relative to the ETE calculated for the stated Planning Basis. l These results are consistent with our understanding of the traffic environment for Scenarios 1 and 3. Congestion occurs almost immediately in the beach areas after evacuation begins, either at the Alert Level or at the Order to Evacuate. Thus, any delay at the outset (i.e. loss of the " head-start" postulated by the Planning Basis) will translate into a commensurate increase in ETE, particularly within the two-mile area. Of course, the reverse is also true, as discussed in the three examples presented earlier. Any increase in the head-start afforded beach-area evacuees due to a lenghtening of the period between the Alert Level and the Order to Evacuate, will decrease ETE accordingly. O 10-16 Patterns of Traffic Conaestion durina Evacuation (Reaion 1, () Scenarios 1 and 5) Figures 10-2 a) through 10-2 g) illustrate the patterns of traffic congestion which arise for the case when the entire EPZ is ordered to evacuate (Region 1) on a summer weekend day at the time when the beach area population is at capacity (Scenario 1). Traffic congestion, as the term is used here, is defined as Levels of service E and F. These terms are defined in the 1985 Highway capacity Manual, as follows: e Level-of-service E represents operating conditions at or near the capagity level. All speeds are reduced to a low, but relatively uniform value. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is extremely difficult, and it is generally accomplished by forcing a vehicle or pedestrian to "give way" to accommodate such maneuvers. Comfort and convenience levels are extremely poor, and driver or pedestrian frustration is generally high. operations at this level are usually unstable, because small increases in flow or minor perturbations within the traffic stream will cause breakdowns,. e Level-of-service F is used to define forced or breakdown flow. This condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which can O traverse the point. Queues form behind such locations. Operations within the queue are characterized by stop-and-go waves, and they are extremely unstable. Vehicles may progress at reasonable speeds for several hundred feet or more, then be required to stop in a cyclic r fashion. Level-of-service F is used to describe the operating conditions within the queue, as well as the point of the breakdown. It should be noted, however, that in many cases operating conditions of vehicles or l pedestrians discharged from the queue may be quite good. ! Nevertheless, it is the point at which arrival flow l exceeds discharge flow which causes the queue to form, and level-of-service F is an appropriate designation for such points. These definitions are general and conceptual in nature, and they apply primarily to uninterrupted flow. Levels of service for interrupted flow facilities vary widely in terms of both the user's perception of service quality and the operational variables used to describe them. O 10-17 my 4 " ,
- e. ,,
i , ' , ' ' 9.u. N , , , . , ,s,p.. > " 9 "'*;{, --' J*, a . .,* ..\. a.,: , \ ,. / "e'Y.\ u = = 'g,9s ,e \ O A = " 'N, aC' . e ew ' ... I muse 6.e T / ,p*d , ~ * , , ,* , , , ' ' ' em, ;, _ = e f . s, . .!. . v - ,.- .g. ,t. , a aa *'*aaa '#~ Th .2. s ' I'" "b"'"- I
- f. N
,o . .? - . .s. 't . .... i T "v ,g' " - .a t , / '-3, %m,m .? %.. ' T - . . g. u / {.) ,, G,y. T .s.!. ... rv- t a ,. r. .i .-r-~ / -~ ,' ,.' 3 .4 e. -3, : ,,,* ~S/ ,,,. -A',t , .t. - - -- 2 - ' " _,, ( N ('y & ",a " A 'h ,g, , ..,s 8 w ..- A " 7[ __ N, s.- , 'ja . '"j a-,, ' ,; ( v ,, ,. .~- j , ~~.- ,,,g "K . .a. ... / b' ;i. "f'-3-% k yv3 . G N . .. Y . .3- , **,,*./ i ._ \A( E=', , .# I) * %. I A i: ' ,3 . *, s I "sA ',A.e. . * / * .( ,, _,,,, ' 3 ' "g y - * .- i $..s9' ** s Ag / , A * . . , ,g, '""**' . . , g,p /' '"b ,[ 3,, \j , ,,,'p -" .T * ,,g, .- .A. 5 -- T .- EA . .. gw.d. = g W "M,% ' '; =' 2"" % .y ",** , .?. . .' ,=j = ~ '3s . .., ., g , j
- e.
z .. - . . ~ .. , ,N, ) , ,I j > ., .. ; ,, . ?... ,/ -------- . , / - "" K / ,, , ' 1. ,,, /. / ,2 Figure 10-2a. f. . ., ;8 g . a=6 Traf fic Conoestion Patterns , 8 for peqion 1, Scenario 1, . at tim 0:10 after "'*, * = Order to Fvacuate ~ ~ * ' ' 10-18 ~ n #..F .t.f- ,,", .. h." ,, f O == ===s t .3, ,. A/ *-.. ..., mr ,,[y ~ o .a.
- ~
)a'N , , y **reta. ,,, ,,, d e- or, / i a,e ,3, , , ,- y
- p*== .g.s m _
F ~ .2. , , w** '"" . r , a. I 3 * ,g , . E, , , , ,,s i 3.. - T D y/ . .a 7 - r ' m. / u.= y ". f y . ... ,.h ..=.g,,,, J, m..; .ae=r coe . / .""*,"i"') , = 2, " . a '* */ - ~'g, _g "" A .2. ,,s ,f '[=\ {i , ,,, . .g. ,,' .f. ' sA p - 'I i ,, aamatedraus. " ) ,. = * .j '~k " .2. . '[
- I y, .
. ,. / , /j, '" i - \ ., '/ s, ==== ' =='"* 3,i , t ======= g 'E' A .1 . g -+ . ..'I A g') r % Y .R. , ,., - ' .! N ' s g,, . , .T ' " S.,," a .= A n;' i .n. 7..e G ,.,p _ ,3, .. '/' "" \. , - .- - ,2. _! .. .i . . \ , A u~g. ,,,,.0,,,,,,, mamm es , j" "j, ' g . ,.g ... =, .g. s . " /,,- - e,. [ ., 'E } s ,. [8> r .L m i s. . ! ' s ... ... s j Sb' N-/ g /, . - . - - . . - i j
- w. ===.av
~ ,/ ,, Figure 10-2b. [ uu Traffic Congestion Patterns for Recion 1, Scenario 1, .'.,4 at time 1:40 after t. "" Order to Fvacuate / .~ e , 10-19 5 m x. gg, 4. a. o u ~,,.. g- -.c j .- , ,5 t c .a. , . .. ..a.j . P' l % / / ~.' " ~3 = 7[~. ' ,3. = 'E../ - - ~. u& l,
- f,, Q, .
I g ~, .g.s - - -- == , .. ,3,, s L g , m
- aa'='= I i 4
- A h8
, T = =
- 1 . T
i i - .t. .. .' - I ,, , ) ..,,,, le. e A T ?.I ... T * ' T* *""" ' =,= . .t. 3 8 " ~' ~ _...( 'a ' .. ,- 3 - ,, * */ """ i , . 8. 2. 's - .. 1. ._ -~~m.s.-:: - ,,, % ' .2. .;. ! 1 "' i g,, . - '. e i e .1 s ...I, /j ,, a - . m ,fM
- a. ===,o=,3,. : ===== g 7 a N '- W
,,,,\, 7 [f'- e u- ' 3' ,;, 'y' '* ,, s ). - > - y N _ \ g, c.= , . - i) % 3 1' . ."/ J. _ _'s / s ,A _g,, ~ ,,,..- N ' 1 , i a,y i
- s. osaasPtese .
j g,, i . ~ * ;T " p."" A, a .S. r* y- .at * \ , . E;'U -- = 6 & .z._,. .. % , &/' ,/ 2 3 , "',. - - .s. f , .. * =#, #' \ .g. .. e ====as r ... . . . . . , ,,e . -" 'g' / g 8 M. = / .y, ,,, g ,= . 'f' - - / ... a r, ,g,, ==, .\ .;.- _ \ ; I de j / .o e- ? .' a 69 ' ?. . .e. 3 / , /-~ ~ ~--- -~ w * ' ' ,/ f p i J, Figure 10-2c. '/6' ,,, .. . .. t ' 8 l ,/ y, Traffic Congestion Patterns / a for Region 1, Fcenario 1, t. at time 1:40 af ter ai", A Order to I'vacuate 10-20 f'- , - - - - - - - - ------- ~ ^~ ~ ~ - - ~ j" . ..?. e.i ,,ar-8 ' O '~ .,. - - - . . a., ~~" , 1 .' ,. ... ~. i. . = -- v:. - .a. - - A. d _. s. , ... .A .s \ . . o< - ._. yy ,,, r. _-./ /r - .s 2fj -= g. v Jr j.. i. g? 'y. .g.,. -, .s. .- .. - s . -* ..'. 3,/ ~ . .,1, .-3 . - N ___ ,,, g ,g, ,3. s.. . ,,,,,4,, ,, {. A N ,.- '"s v J, .s. . , ,.u. = . - y %- s. . .:g. '.~( ^ -' . o ~ , A) """'" A' ' ~, ,t. /p !.' . --eh .. .. a . .[ e.= m.g (g 1, '/'# .g. , ss gA y l , as. w~._.2,. g ...t.. a c mi d' h - ., m ,, g . 3 .),. e \ i , " 2 \.R. ,a / ,,.../- ,) a. g \ ', ,g, ,,,, ,3 J ' ' ~ ,A 1 l -= 's = l .1 ,: SoA jg* s AN -. , ,3, s e u, . === ""t* E r;/ f._ d' % ),,. 3 \. "" a===< , w - .a. i ./ . .% . -- . gl \ y e'*/ ,. '3A .. ,,,, - ~ %~ .c . ..e,j'y *=g= .. .. "h s. .,r . , -, A l J. - ~. / . ,, T ,, ,,, , e .," ..A "PPr ,f"~ g' 'e,,.. = = , . . // ,,,, \ = riE' k y ), M', .~ ,s. / ' *... ,. .. .. .\ ? ? ; s, .,... / f--- ~ ~ . ,_ ' ' w.m w.v., ""'N / - /, / / , 's , , , , , , la O -I .3, Figure 10-2d. ./ ""~ Traffic Conaestion Patterns ,,,, ,. ! for Region 1, Ecenario 1, * .,,, I at time 2:40 efter .* Order to Evocuate l .- . - -. - - . -_ . _ _ - _ - . - _ _ _ _ - _ ~ . - - - . . - : .N 'e '
- k. n i.. .~ . . , - ~
t, . J %~ "i ,l,e , me annat ,& y, , , * ....'-,,3.> . _-5 \ " .,, j~ . ,. - y- ' ~ ~ .2.. ._ 'Ye.~*l # ,g, , , .s . - .. , e=" g :~ - w, . .. /t, e4 4 g *,' \/ ; 1\** 4 j .g. .i. . .,, Ts ,,,,,,,,,, l 'm~a=~}l ..d ','lf ~ ., i,,, ..-- .2. T # ' , ,,,,- ;g l '"' = 7 _, ,,,, j . ,,,, .. T ?.,I ... T' I '3' ' I ~ a ,.oo. / BAS,.s =ao , - * *C.,,, "8 '". . . _. ,1 .' ,, .f, ,'_"- _3 ,r N ~ AA {! "'/ " ""A .g A ..,,.,- .g. 8A x *3' . . ,, .f. ' sJA .,# ' sT N 81 - , , , , ,?. #- aaw,oa **ue = g ib Ma.p,05 e.$, . .. ,, ."'; , , , , . i .~. ',# , "t ."~.. ff- /'e / ,,.4 . _ . .N ., s , ' s,s A e ,l .L % ,' $ ~ ,l, ..[y - \ .. "' [ ~ ' *. 1 . {- .. g-k* y\ # .d " ' ?' ,, \ j "=*v .R.W'a sTs' ' p g ,,,, , , A'e , . , .L s' ' ,2 x* i N ' ! s. aarte s . % " " f ,; $..L'e(" . / ',, , \ 5 - . "- a .2.,. , ( / g. , . . ~ 3 \., - $".,P. tr;9.~A d,3;-'"~[~ s . j ,*/'-51P gh . ... == x s' q [' ,, .... x.. .s$ g\ T' .a ,,, .[ o / .. i ... ..wA ,,.# ,, .s. .... n,, ,. i ,~ .' .s ~~ x \l) i ; ,. s.. / ..._..~~ - ,A 4 -// - .. .... p - ,g, Figure 10-2e. .- Traffic Congesticn Patterns . "*"*"" for Reqion 1, Scenario 1, p at time 3:40 af ter ,,,a Order to Evacuate ,'~ ,, . , 10-22 , y 1 A. - e, - z... . ~* .+ ' . $ Ny * , ,, O ! ' e ..., r n, .2. <. ) t menns * ' ,? j'-J ' t \ . 'a7 "d' \ " 7- ,4 - ~ .. ., T ,.*'I , , % .a. - 1 .g. e ,,,, A *"" .f. , . ,g, e4 J, ~ ,j "" Ay \Q . ... s ~ ,' y m l..... ..~[ s a-. ban' ~~. am E_- - ' 8~ ~*;- .2. b""*" g j = mas,t .""'t 4 e s .R. 8A .. ; 8 ' T . v. , g .' -t = '" ' ,1 . .g ' * ,,, , ] .z , * =a,, .'. ,.r. . .c . ,. ., / 's t / A '"' . 2 ,3,- 1 ; e.a 2 * '"o.e . ,-g ... '- ' L,,f_ '%~ ' {; */ * " ,,, . ,gk, ' ,g, A ' .., - g, ,3,- ' A ,, .g. ps. -S' 3 .. .'" g . N 'jA g i' A.
- 2. r.' ' T'/**"
- \ f +. ,/ ..,. ~; . . ;*. ,,, , '3. y. / A ~~ ' .f.. ' ,O . , P o ""*g . ,1 ,- .... .e- . Il g
- N.
_ s - .. _3 , T ,. g * $. ~ ". s - s\ o e ,' x s* o N- , == .a.. 3 c o'. ' , \ 7,q g) '% \ A L eo -. t x *, A i: g N, 't / ! -'", nrD., ~. 8 A ".. ,ef' ~. . Tg, . J.' JL A "e;- g,, a .,m I;~ ' *** s . ,-
- m. s
__ ;;e ... j.- A y",,. m .i . s . *. ,././~Y "" g .g. . .. $ j nW . Y ..sp s. .3 1[',,, ~4' \,.. %g's"* '#' b .R. .1% ' '# ' " * ' ' 'i f', . * *** "I, .g Imm m * ~. t , ny , 't ae / {' ' ,, ' , ' l 'N e t. 3 ,. . .2 , "y ,'. 5- g j ,&~-~.._ .' , f y, e . =w.un T I, , j 8, , , /, O ,g, Figure 10-2f. Traffic Congestion Patterns b,/,, "a =" ;,. ' for Region 1, Scena'rio 1, at time 4:49 after ',* j .,[ p M, i Order to Fvacuate 5 b "" 10-23 * *' ,,.o ,, , *a A cs p , Ap . ' ,, *, . P %>;,,,... / -. .n,/,,. , .a. .. %. ,,,, -, A. g ,, ) -~
- 2.. .t. j/ e
~ . _ ~ , # ,..*' f' \ ,, 7 "'e. , ". ~ . ~ y. .-e" , = / *=" N.; , *** , '., p*' , - $g"' ' \. E,' / .r. , . ; e4 of, \ ,e,, N)/ s' = g .g. j .T.. s e- - m e, ,g, *= f g 'g 5 '=a='= I i e s 8 ".- %. .? . 't s 8A ;g y . s. ,q' ( ,,,, N = '" - ,! -,f. ~ . y _, $ . A y ?,I T N' er'.,*._... " ~.I T*/ s ; / .- -'.: / .f., " . 2.. - * ,a =... . . .1 ' - .... ., \_,, f N - {: -* */ " " 3 .g A .2. g i' ., . t .. ,,.; .g. .s. . {3? I- [ ' a, . tj. ' \ ~ a s y { ,,., s . ., 4 ._ . . .t. .t . .F ; . . . ~ e,, . / ,e ,- ~* =,3,. s I1 "."*g, *" N. .. a ,1 .? < a,- ,,,,}, -- w ,,, . . 3'2'\ l, . pl ;, - \ == r_ . . - . A . " ~e* .7 g .. * \ a. / i ' .= s , \" 3,e" == ,a* / p.'". 5 x3. g') , .8. ' .N S H .$. E1 ' $ 'N' i ) \ m, a I / I - sea.P,s. j g,, * ~ ' ~ _.= 'i 'I , J S'8'$ s A's../' ph,vg ,~ y, , .A.K _,. g ** - i."/ ** , M ,3, g,/*8 [ . \ ' , ,,,p s a . = A ! i g*[ g ... ,, - . . .. s' <, . '="'""* ..?s N_. A sf',T =, .'% t'f"8 = g * ; 3' '"$'\ .a. - s ~ . ,/v f * '.= y.3 , .. i .taa.,oe .- g e,,, .g, _ , , ,.
- m. -
#it N . l to g g( i . lf gr 4 'q ..m .. ,= =a g / I ,, , / ' ----------- J 7.' / , ,/ l [a < = '" ag,,, ,,,,,,, ; , .? Figure 10-2g. ' Traffic Concestion Patterns ,,, f , for iegion r 1, Scenario 1,
- at time 5:<!0 after n' * ,,e,,
Order to rvacuate = i r _ . _ . _ _ _ . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . _ . . . . . .. _ .. All highway " links" which experience either Level of Service O E or F are delineated in the Figures by a thick dark line; all others are lightly indicated. As expected, traffic congestion develops rapidly within the beach areas and along the major beach egress routes. (Note: Time 0:10 after the time to Evacuate is 0:35 after the Alert stage when beaches are closed). Congestion spreads shortly afterwards to the major population centers (Amesbury, Exeter, Hampton, Merrimac, Newburyport, Portsmouth and Seabrook) , and along the major agress routes (Rts. 51, 110, 107, 108, 1, 151, 101 and 1A). At 2:40, Amesbury, Exeter and Merrimac have mostly cleared while - the beach areas and the other population centers remain congested. Hampton and Newburyport clear by 4:40. Gradually, the congestion attenuates. At 4:40, all of Massachusetts is clear with the exception of Salisbury Beach and its egress road (Routes lA/110). The evacuation of Seabrook Beach is delayed by the joining of beach area traffic with inland , traffic at points where Route 286 meets Route 1 and Main Street. ' Hampton Beach traffic moves west (along Route 51) and north (along Route 1A). Both beach areas are clear by 5:40, although Route 286 remains to be cleared at this time. , The Portsmouth Central Business District (CBD) remains congested throughout the evacuation process. Fortunately, this CBD is at least 12 miles from the Seabro'ok Station. O Figures 10-3 a) through 10-3 f) illustrate the patterns of traffic congestion which arise for the case when the entire EPZ is ordered to evacuate (Region 1) on a midweek day outside the l tourist season, at a time when employment is at a peak (Scenario j 5). The pattern for this case differs from the previous one, in i that congestion develops rapidly within population (and l employment) centers, rather than in the beach areas. With the ! exception of Exeter (which clears within 3 hours due to the many l egress routes available), congestion prevails in these centers for over 3 hours. Amesbury, Exeter, Hampton and Merrimac are l clear within 4 hours; Seabrook clears shortly thereafter. i Newburyport is almost clear by 5 hours while the Portsmouth CBD remains congested until the end of the evacuation process, as before. i Evacuation Rates Traffic flow is a continuous process, as implied by Figures 10-2 and 10-3. Another format for displaying the dynamics of the evacuation procedure is depicted in Figures 10-4 a) through 10-4 j). These plots indicate the rate at which traffic flows out of the indicated areas for each Scenario associated with the , evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region 1). 10-25 1 - __---. - -- i , ' .i ,,, c ====., .on .a. "...f,',h. g ,. . - . . .2./ e 7- ~~~"., j (" ,x y'"e J ,g, __ b *' , A *~~ .2., ==,a 'E. .= =~ -.r eh I ;/ are r; ,7, \ ,3, . 41 .o. ,3 ' / .Ta g ,,.,,, . g = g .L MA.ertes l . x .._%-. * .'t . . . . ,, .2. ;g T ,8 ' -3. = y ' ,3. '# ' 4 3 .
- n. ' ..
y ' ~ ,,,., .g. g .. f .g,. . ; ,,,, -a,f a, ._.2,g** g ones,wooo / "'t .f "*. ** ' 2 # . * $ "e. .. . _..3 4 ..a ' / , [. . N # ~* */ " "",3, .g A .2. 's - ' p s .g. ['A ,, .t< gA '"./",3,-t.,s.(hT'j'- ; b / "" n nos e.tte , . .,, , {" 'y . . a. % - - - ~~, 9,, p 2/ . . l ""* , ./ ' N.. . e, , s. ==**vong usammeron g "* . A \ "" W. " ,,, ,,,, T ,. . . ,,= . A s A i g) %s .R. , g. ,, , g -,A e. n 2 g x N ,..- = j ", . _y* / - t I. ; g,, 7 , A'g / ' / y- .a. _,. g . ' ,,,, ~ \w, j - 8.-~ea tr;g'p ., . . .. A ; ,3, 4<f ',' g .. 8f',',[< .s _. v g' . . n-= s .. -y - \o . =a N, , , , , * - ,. *s /, V . , , , , , 'l '* \" . ' ' ==. o.,.= / ..- s a s / .' ' , , \! i . ipif ?. m .e.. N f . -~ ~~M 2. i w. = wear , 5 ' /;- ~ Figure 10-3a. as w'*' ;* - Traffic Concestion Patterns .. .=6 for Region 1, Scenario 5, at time 0:30 after ) j* i Order to Evacuate ,,, == 10-26 1 l l l . . . . _a l um . ~ th) o r-1 s "* , ,i ,3 . O ., .a. . . *... ..., + a - / -" ! *. . 2./ *# / -- [ [e. .. \ a .#.- ' N. . ". ~~ s. *, s~ 1. um, a_' monase . = ~*=.= ; m .~ s ,, a , .g. j ... 3,, e ' '",, ., f" , r g , q . -n e .9 - .... 8 ; y D !' .?.. j . . , s. ,.1, y _, # A == ,' 7'4. y - ,*,1 ,,. > J T i ,,,, .-* i .g.
- l l -
r_ m ,,, : / *"'" %, 3 1 ~. ~ - > SM '7'" ,, N 2 / ? = -4,,/ {! "' ""3 g AA's - y - t 4- ' .g. l,t. ..t. . ,a ^ '"s *. "' ie '. 'N "j ~ s' ~"
- f -9*
.=' - - +. , .. c A'i **.',- 4 sN e , ,t. .. P .. ,- .". , ~ .. .re. ?' . ron g, g y' y
- A \*
i i.** e,,,, ,fs ?,. a . == . . . (.- r t a $' f' k* f,* 'e= \ 'g q ,,, A een oos 3 p.*O ! - g} ,$a e ,,, ./ A ' 1 N ,, 'f, / - a.n ,re. .. . s - . ~. i .. A "j g* .* . .'T '"" % . s f* W T' +>" .2 en ,,,# e *., 3 "\"' . a==== .e . = A l ,g, Q,, / / ,,.,. . A ' ,. ...h.p. .... """"* ..? , s . =4 \ A A . ,,, T ,8 ' ' " ' ,,, . f ?*; ,, n ,.. / . . r.W p ', r *... g, e .. . i , t... l / i W. "" N lf 1 ro ,f,, 2 tgre,s.V , ' ' "./, .?.s ' = , j8
- O a
& Figure 10-3b. Traffic Congestion Patterns r l for Region 1, Scenario 5, ~ x" t at time 1:00 after .=
- Order to Evacuate I 10-27 N~ *
l t 1 .ns t pn j.. . f, #.P% ,, f
- 3. M h ,
=.===.' s' , .a. .. .Af .g, .. ( +#" , - a\ ,, M. , ".8 ..., ,,. 4 _ -.y .se et "d / .A J, -,,.* I ; m..! .. t . p , ... ,,,,,,, y ,,,,,,'- , , c .g s "1 sg : ' . = 7., -.t. g, - %,, . . 8 y - i s .==. , .3. , -ae M & '"; .. r . _: -" -- , . v.I? . r.oo. ..,,. _ 3 .? m _q-..._- . - 3.. 1 ,, N / j -* ,/ a= ' ,g, <. .,- ,,, 3 . ., . .g,,, , ,, 9 pg, ,,' ,f.- 34 '8' '" ) ** , ' ( T' \ J/ - . . , - y .; .. 8. . a. % -~ .s. .- -e . t % .f.. F / . ' !/ ,- #..s,*E{.. / .= voeg g \, /- .. . . .to. . ,,, y A g n. ,I 8" aw% , -f - " ~ ~ '" .. Y. y ,W' f' * j- N#,, N ,,,,3. ,g, 'i~ g h. . , y '= N, i t s ...* .s [ .; a- , , , , , , '3 ",% i b yT a \ 7.. " #- - .a. ,),,, m T \,. =au== =# * ?...% "\"'** . . / .= S>" -- __ 9,. ,3, M., / 3., . a===v p ' = .R. l / y ,~' - tK ' l R. ,, , ..?. -d . R" / \ .3, ' ,R, y ' ". ee. .g .~ = =.vo. '; 'e s. _. . y , .~ s,/y ' , ,,.a t }s , ~\ / .o e ,'s, e' ' q O,,, 'y'"*b,,,;'/ , _ _ _ l ,. , = / *,, , ~ ~~---- J / ., . z ,I(8 ,3, Figure 10-3c. - Traffic Corgestion Patterns , .. j . u. for Region 1, Scenario 5, .,y,, at tinn 2:00 af ter .*. Order to Wamat 10-28 \. / m .=.., . o p j* ~. . . s ' ..".J .. s = " "'I h /.y O - - . , *-a .g, =r , , 3,j' f "" i.. 1 . N,, \- .. "" ' N. . ,s a .2- . - .. ,,- s, q , ; ,- .... j" l se mL T.,/ m . ~ *[, 3. ' I e_ , = g/ ,. av. & .g. q, , , . . , , p seem. .g's um. ._ > .2. " '= = ' r N E 5 l . f is . g,' 'I' o ' -< r .. (A ""f. t ';/ , ..g. .!'N. . ,,s 't , - ~ m ') .. 4" ?.! 'g' - P. . * .g"L i .-r / / ,,,,,, ' -.,,..-......,..,.J.. ,g... *t e s s. .1 L A .7 s- - s _ ,s ..,,,j .,. A.t -,, ,, ,1 , * '".; * "'fyy;p.,N, p . m1 _,a _. -.c - . , e,, __. , . ~ . . . .. n . . . , s. . . . , .,1 . s.. O _ . . _ . - . __ _ . . _ _ .t\s .:, h %. 3g ' Q E~ 1 , _ ,. ,m . A ,s .s.s A. . ... ' 5 ! %. l' - ,. s j(. 1 m =e Jy _m ~ . s a==== . - A a ",43. e 3 ,. ..A,,s"- ., ~S ' . . ,s n *4,\ A 's,q,,O'-
- a- t . ... -
. _ .. \ v".s _. A. y) .c3. . sk. e. 5 I ,I / s. . .< . . -. ./, ... ,f '------------ --Q . - , . "" ) s/ - ~ 1:. O - . . . _ , . . ' *~ Figure 10-3d. "a"*** Traffic Congestion Patterns -/ 2' - for Region 1, Scenario 5, ., at time 3:00 after "'" Order to Evacuate \'9 % / .= w i i 10-29 1 ,;.q,,1 * \ p * 'l.,,. ,,," Af- ne, * / ~ w. , = ==aaa r ' ,,, A , . m, r .t. f ,, ",. ) -- *..--
- a A j' . 3 .
s ,,, - o .2,' '- 4 , ,Dd .g. A / e .= / ,espu6ae u. ,,,3,p ~ 1, ed 3f, \, y avam ,' g .e . s A s., s ~ a .f, y / aa ~5. f .8., *=""" a- 'I .f* is .. *A 8**' .s.. -S 'G ' 4 y ". f -- \,, . 5 g ,g ; T l ,,,, k ,R. A * .g- s s. .*- _ * ;.. y .j j / : =ren , A. f " ". < \_,, /'. - N '= .r.co. i ,.*'S, ,,,"S. '=... . .. A . g w-... . -y t> Ab 3 s - ~ . . ~- - .s.- y n,..' m. ,,' ..t. - g4 Tj. '= \ l s' . - . - , -~a_ . .;- ,=, .. , f -+-- s ,,, , ,', .O e g %s T r' A. y S. , ., .1 *-~,,( ,1 . ./. -fI ,' . .s a oro. -
- l' F 8 a"es'**g! t n
s m esseren ~ g a ~,.. my JA( , .,,,\, Y .-/y~ Nq.~ .- .1 __ r -r , -. ".p. , - .i k wr\y,a*,e - a . . ( ? ..- g) % N \ s 1, \ A1 sA == ~' s h,, _ ! (,," ~ ' A A,/ M r ' #gMn .i g. . 7 ,, , 4 . ,. - "" \. m ====, ,.,pme sa ,, , - A ! / r a% .g. c/'~ ,,'y/"* = 'f .- tl . p=g a *-s, v# .y , o- : .. . . amen.o g ,i , . .g ', - "(~L 7 ' e ,q - ,_ .' . "P$- = / ,,., esuesow / em t -, ,. '= }s / .7ind , '".",.'( ,- = . ! '?- ~~'- - ' ) p ro lA f ,3, Figure 10-3e. >'" usoeunt gl i Traffic Congestion Patterns ,,, . / I for Region 1, Scenario 5, I at time 4:00 after ,',,a Order to Evacuate ,k "" [., rw-r , 10-30 %. qu' s , .2. tt ~. * +.J %; ...~ } p - .l / . ... y O =='==" .g. -r A
- n. .2. / . . ' g ..
~ ,3, 'f \ ,. ~ ~r. . \ ~., e , . .g*. I. 3 . -t. ~~ s, ., . v,.- . ,,,\ .a. i p %, j: . .. cs *& b \ * ,\Q sj l"" m .. j T. b s.. ? & in, .g. og' .s g% '\ ' 'm='m \ .t
- f. .g. \ n . .* - * -a a*a 5 ,3,
" "" ,, -N -.T. = ' 'I * ,,, eg. .E - T - i ,I ' , / '-{7*** / ~*' ' I' ' .2. '
- Y .#.l .
T' V,,,- -f.".*
- == r-o=
./- . .e ~1 . , , - 3, 3.. .., . 2 . _.- .A , , - - . - ,, r , N , {i -* '"/ -. "",,. 3 ,g, ,3, ,3, s - - ... y .. ,J ..t. - ^ " $~',"'; rj .'.g,= N . sj +- ==n4 raus ,], \. ,, , ,' *" . 3 ,. . , ,,, w ==.t .. . - . - - . - t * ',gf ~. ..l9, e. ====,g,n A . \. , . 7 l ,. s, == arom ' " * ' 7 , \, ?., Ok % ,,,k,g *. '" ~ *= A -. T_ { . ..] x v ..{
- r. .i~ s \ a # .a ,g* -
* ... / ' * '?. m \ "'"'T ,t Au NBA 's. g=. =* / p1 ..- ,,, .. r A r ,3 s T , g .' 3 '
- s. ==ra.
p.- _~-! q*[3,O"g ' e',,,/ A . .~ ' .y _'*'. , V ~~*$TJ v- - .a. N . _, . ..*- . 2 \ ,,3 - i a==== . W ,;~' /4, ,=== J' ',~,3,. A s ~ . A l ,g, y)/.. / s _. T 4.- $' - ' Sk . ..=., A """** ..? . , ; ..%'t".R g A T . O "' ; .g , d'%,g C 's = ,/...\_ / ' 4 o,, ,., ,,],.g - .r , .s. <... N ,. E [',,, , 88 u . e. .t .,g-L- , '" y /(j ,,, ; '/---------- ~ .t. , " "' " "*' ,' - /,/ .., /,3 4 Figure 10-3f. "" l "" I ' ' - Traffic Congestion Patterns f 3, , , , _ j for Region 1, Scenario 5, ,, at time 5:00 after , Order to Evacuate 10-31 Ws A - t - 2-MILE REGION a _ 5-MILE REGION p 10-MILE REGION ___.g.._ ENTIRE EPZ 100 - - -I g e 90 - /, [.V. -w 80 Q ( / y'y' . 2 . 70 - / //,/ g * ~ d ,- 5I h 50 - '/ u _a 6 40 - l', j / 30 - 20 I / g - ,? / m j LO - f - 2 .. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ELAPSED TIME (HOURS) FROM ORDER TO EVACUATE Figure 10-4a. Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 1 O O O O O O i x 2-MILE AREA a _ HILE AMA _g-_10-44ILE AMA _3.._ ENTIRE EPZ 200 - ~~ 1 ? E o e 90 - - Y.W' 80 - /. . ~ ~ . < ~V__y g 70 ~ /,/ , ' I y* 60 - /, / W'~ g < , j w y 50 - '/ ~ - . . 7 - .lf U 40 - ,- r , so - g ,- 20 - X l 8 , - XX X Ei 10 . r- X X U >4
- . & ' , _1 # # f 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
! ELAPSED TIE (HOLES) FROM OfEIER TO EVACUATE-l l l l I Figure 10-4b. Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 2 1 / x 2-MILE AREA a 5-MILE AREA w.- 10-MILE AREA I._ ENTIRE EPZ . --4 100 - Y,, .V. So H e ./ ---a
- 80 -
,/, V#. , i 5 _ 70 - - 60 b ' I m 50 - / / ^ 40 - a y r~ - E 30 F f '/ f 5 20 - - I = *
- Y 10 -
i i e i i i e i i i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ELAPSED TIME (HOURS) FROM ORDER TO EVACUATE Figure 10-4c. Evacuation Time Estimates for Scabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 3 O O O O O . O x 2-MILE AREA a __ 5-MILE AREA g_ 10-MILE AREA j !. _ ENTIRE EPZ -I 100 - ,y._. . -. g 90 - i e ,. 7 - " ~, 80 - .( y ' < 70 - . / , f e Q 60 - -/'/ / . 1 o - e E s 50 - e / ~ ?, u 5 et 40 - /'/! / s, e- - - 30 - B - - ' N 20 - ./ s' / B so - / , , g ;. s ' 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ELAPSED TIE (HOURS) FROM ORDER TO EV[CUATE Figure 10-4d. Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 4 L x 2-MILE AREA a __ 5-MILE AREA w__ 10-MILE AREA I.__ ENTIRE EPZ 100 - 3 90 - 8 / t go _ .f " < 70 - - 8 - g ~ @ 50 - - //,/ 5 40 - * // 3 - g g 20 - .g;/ V * / g .I. d , , , , , , i w g i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ELAPSED TIME (HOURS) FROM ORDER TO EVACUATE Figure 10-4e. Evacuation Time Estimates for Leabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 5 O O O O O O x 2-MILE AREA a 5-MILE AREA -w__ 10-MILE AREA I ._ ENTIFE EPZ , 100 - 3 90 - O 2 . I , 80 ./.#.#' 4 70 - * --M l @ __ - 60 lf./,y - - t Q , 8 ~ g 50 - . a H L 4 E 40 - /,o a-L 30 [' .l-g H , xV ! @ 20 - l I /' j / su 10 - // , , _, sn } - X ~ ~ } f _' W.X i i i e i i- e e i s $ i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 , ELAPSED TIME (HOURS) FROM ORDER TO EVACUATE l l Figure 10-4f. Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station l REGION 1 SCENARIO 6 . I x 2-MILE AREA a 5-MILE AREA ,_ 10-MILE AFEA __.3.._ ENTIRE EPZ 100 - 8 90 - E ~ - --I 80 - , f.V' 70 - g H 60 - [-l #r,,,r __ - a e O b 9 H 50 - . l./# ,o $ 5 i 40 - E g I" 30 - /,/ /./ / y e -- - $ 20 - f 7 10 - x s, 7 - x x til # u x I I I I I I I m i H g i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ELAPSED TIME (HOURS) FROM ORDER TO EVACUATE Figure 10-4g. Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 7 O O O O O O x 2-MILE AREA a 5-MILE AREA ,___ 10-MILE AREA I.. ENTIRE EPZ 100 - l g 90 - 80 - 5 ' 5 70 - o . - -I u 9 50 - y" 5
- l,Y
& 5 40 - / '
- k '
/ 30 !g 20 - / po < W D 10 - - # I h a
- . - -W i .. ._ i i , , ,
5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ELAPSED TIME (HOURS) FROM ORDEM TO EVACUATE A Figure 10-4h. Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 8 --- x 2-MILE AREA o _ 5-MILE AREA g_ _ 10-MILE AREA I.__ ENTIRE EPZ 100 - BO 90 - I S 80 e h , < 70 - ---I g f, 60 - ~ s~ so - / -- - --* ? 8 8 40 - / ,/ / F_. 30 - g 20 - / f' -e -- F < .-Y D 10 .! # x x = j' . - _ x y K X. "i i e n. e e : i / 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 $ i 10 ELAPSED TIME (HOURS) FROM ORDER TO EVACUATE Figure 10-4i. Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 9 1 O O O . O O O x 2-MILE AMA a 54 TILE AM A w __10-MILE AMA _.__3.. ENTIE EPZ 100 <- 8 90 - o S 4 80 - 70 - -I g . 6 3 . ~ -" U 1 ~ 5 g 50 '- 40 - / /[// .* E ' , / g 30 - , 5 20 ,- ,- # S # E 10 - - # , = : x x j , - f_ _ i i i } i r a i e , i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 i ELAPSED TIME (HOURS) FROM ORDER TO EVACUATE
- i Figure 10-4j. Evacuation Time Estimates for Seabrook Station REGION 1 SCENARIO 10
. . . . - a. . As indicated in these Figures, there is typically a long " tail" to these distributions. Vehicles evacuate an area slowly at the beginning, as people respond to the order to evacuate at different rates, then builds rapidly (slopes of curves increase). When the system becomes congested, traffic flow remains at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, the one or two remaining evacuation routes service the remaining demand. This decline in aggregate flow rate, with tir e, is characterized by these curves gradually becoming horizontal. Ideally, it would be desirable to fully saturate all evacuation routea so that all will service traffic near capacity levels and all will clear at the same time. For this ideal situation, all curves would remain steep until the end -- thus minimizing evacuation time. In the real world, this ideal is generally unattainable. Proper planning, however, can make an important difference in the utilization of existing highway capacity and in reducing evacuation time to a practical minimum. Distribution of Poculation and Vehicles The NRC/ FEMA guidelines in NUREG 0654 recommend that the distribution of population and of vehicles within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) be presented in the format of Polar Sectors. Figures 10-5 through 10-14 present this information for the four (4) basic set of scenarios considered, stratified by: o Permanent Residents e Employees who Live outside the EPZ e Transients e Total Population The Figures are identified below: Descriotion Poculation Vehicles Permanent Residents 10-5 10-10 Scenarios 1 and 2 10-6 a,b,c 10-11 a,b,c Scenarios 3 and 4 10-7 a,b,c 10-12 a,b,c Scenarios 5,6,7 10-8 a,b,c 10-13 a,b,c Scenarios 8,9,10 10-8b, 10-9a,b 10-13b, 10-14a,b It must be emphasized that this format is for presentation purposes, only. To define the spatial distribution of traffic demand, a total of 147 Origin Nodes (i.e. centroids) were created. Each represents an area (or " Zone") within a community. The traffic demands at all such centroids are presented in ' Appendix M. The locations of these centroids are shown in Figure 1-3. O 10-42 l O I 7540_l 1479A l N 2028 1388441 NNW NNE 780 3432' 25974 112506l 2912 6214 g NW NE 10 mites 1274 10608 , 780 56 884 6656 ENE [74881 3250 5 I 8321 o 312 3120 3380 624 7 0 2 52 4 , W 2574 364 ' '60 0 0 E I4550l 8 l 2601 3874 SS O h 5538 7280 390 0 WSW 2288 884 ESE [12272 l 2210 [ 780] ! 1430 8216 0 SW SE Il7784l 260 ' 19764 1352 8840 l SSW SSE 1160161 g l 22881 l l0 to 10 Mi e 111570] POPULATION TOTALS-RING. MILES PCd$flON TOTAL MILES $NT! O2 9464 0-2 'J4 04 25 30940 05 40404 S 10 64480 0 10 104884 10-8 17110 0-8 142194 O Figure 10-5. Permanent Residents 10-43 f O l 905 l l498 l N 441 127s41 -NNW 278 NNE 162 0 394 I 788 1 46 I 34' I NW HE 10 witEs 696 70 186 WNW 104 232 ENE l 1621 24 5~ 0 l 69 l 81 23 23 # # 23 23 ,? 2 58 I 46 35 d 0 0 [ [162 l gt oF l 46 1 418 Yb , 0 0 638 . 0 0 835 - 162 476 ESE 186 I1184 l 12 255 y 951 0 35 SW SE l 2169l 1090 128 l 1621 SSW " SSE 139 11740 1 3 R I I o*'i,' ,s, gi, mi>.i.ii.. ,1 gag , POPULATION TOTALS - C ' RING. MILES POPU ION TOTAL MILES ,[yTI O.2 1252 02 1434 25 3202 o.5 4454 5 10 5891 0 10 10345 10 - 8 ' 3056 0-8 13401 Figure 10-6a. Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Inland Popu1ation of Emoloyees who Live Outside of EPZ 10-44 O [1820 ] l 504 l N mm:n 333 NNW 420 NNE 84 224 4816 [1008 l $872 l NW NE 868 10 Mai.as 47 84 98 WNW 40 1484 ENE I 672l 252 28 0 4200 112 o, 9 o 2 840 JA I 420 4424 if 4 0 0 [ [ 4928I % l 43121 20 h%# 0 j 616 672- 2464 0 I 364 18564 ESE ! 11344l 2 476 % > 952 0 SW SE l2100 l 84 1428 7420 I ! ' ll 6 SSW 56 SSE I22961 g M ! ! Total Segment Population l1792 l O to 10 Miles POPULATION TOTAL.S - RLMG MILES PON[ ION 2bu4u TOTAI. MILES k$TI zuvev 0-2 o.2 25 35168 0-5 61208 5 10 19068 0 1o R0276 10-8 4508 c.s 64764 Figure 10-6b. Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Transient Population (includes beach area employees) 10-45 . .. .. . ~ . - - O [10265l l 5760 l N 2805 M -NNW 413o NNE 1026 3356 11424 114303 19407 l NW NE 1376 10 uuS 12172 252 1326 3403 1128 8372 ENE I 8322l 5 l163011 3583 363 7564 0 759 0 ,2 915 I o h 0 ( 3040 4823 1 0 E %W N618 j 712 To 0 j0 6792 8787 3016 0 WSW 2838 19924 ESE 2941 l61131 0119 0 SW SE l22053] 379 13282 8900 l3202 l SSW 94 0 SSE 1200521 0 128904l 3 l 1 o*',*,' 47,0 """** l14962 l POPULATION TOTALS-RING. MILES TWAT. MILES C Ta POPU ION , i O.2 36756 o-2 36/56 2-5 69310 05 106066 5 10 89439 0 10 195505 10 - 8 44874 06 240379 Figure 10-6c. Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Total Population 10-46 =-. ./ .. o .. . : ~ u . e - - - - O l1937 l N 1102 M NNW 568, NNE ~ 406 5284 557 696 [1949 l l372 1 NW NE MRES i 116 1740 93 ( 12 WNW 220 406 ENE [ 3241 244 l 69 I 35 0 46 197 35 /2 4 0 2 23 bs (, 81 46 g 0 ,1 W , 0 E l W 11 1 46 1 1009 8 0 j 485 1995- 220 0 g3g 325 487 ESE A 35 441 l 209 l 2366 0 SW SE 93 l 49881 2598 151 l 220] 261 SSW 22 SSE S R ! ! Total Segment Populatloa l3121 l O to 10 Miles POPULATION TOTALS-RING. MILES POPU ION TOTAL. MILES MQ[T! o2 1/40 o-2 1728 25 5753 05 7481 5 to 13142 o .to 20623 80-8 7465 0-8 28088 Figure 10-7a. Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday O Inland Population of Employees Who Live Outside of EPZ 10-47 1 O 11116 l l 392 l N 252 A NNW 308 NNE 56 2900 168 3640 l756 l l 3640l NW NE 28 10 uiLEs 644 364 - 6 1 728 WNW 140 1120 ENE l504 l 196 28 1115641 136 0 84 o 644 zo W 308 4368 ow 0 0 E l L4.22.2j #o " b220 1 308 h,,7 0 j 476 504- 1848 0 WSW 280 364 13916 ESE 28 l3836 l l 700 0 SW . SE l1540 l 56 1064 5600 h904 l 896 SSW s6 SSE M g l19544l Total Segment Population Q to to Mlles l1372 l l POPULATION TOTALS-RING. MILES C Tl POPU ION TOTAL MILES . 02 19488 o.2 19488 l 25 27468 os 46956 5 10 1a164 0 10 61320 #0-8 1132 0-8 64652 Figure 10-7b. Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Transinnt Dopulation (includes beach area emoloyees) 10-48 l l O l10793l l6345 l N 3382 M NNW 4308 NNE 1242 34058 3637 10550 115211l l 8198 l ) NW NE 10 MILES 1418 12992 , 1237 224 WNW " 1244 a182 ENE [lTJTT2] 3643 5' g 3426 375 6500 0 743 w 0 2 719 1425 k \a 2963 4778 0 0 W l 41 , E l3526 l 5191 0 1493 7499 9779 0 45 WSW 2893 15287 ESE 3015 M 0 11282 SW SE l24312l 14426 7103 F644 1 12346 SSW SSE N $ l224701 8 '**'" l l o 'g*,' 3oTi$. l16063l POPULATION TOTALS. C RING MILES POPU ION TOTAL MILES .Mj[gy 8 02 JU66U o.2 JUUGU 25 64161 0-5 94841 5 -10 ' 91986 o -10 1 186827 #0-8 48107 o-S 234934 Figure 10-7c. Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Total Population 10-49 - - - - - . . - - . A O wn l1242 l N 1124 16611 l NNW NNE 51 0 . 5324 406 1 1926l 557 742 NE W NW 10 uitas 116 1740 , 94 12 , + 348 ENE 267 545 l 3241 197 5 l 93l 35 0 46 325 35 a002 35 % d 0 W 81 46 L23 M I O E l 301] i y % l 58 l 151 1009 t/ O O 2018 232 1485 0 l IbI 545 i l27261 360 534 l 209 l 35 2366 o SW SE l 5069 l 95 2656 151 2691 SSW SSE I3826l 230 l 696 l l l to 10 M e l3306l POPULATION TOTALS. C RlHQ, MILES POP ON TOTAL MILES , pi,T4 0-2 1926 0-2 1926^ 25 6334 05 8260 5 - to 13270 0 10 l 21530 #0-8 7539 0-8 29069 Figure 10-8a. Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Midweek, Midday O Employees Who Live Outside EPZ 10-50 k . : . . - : : - u. ,- .- = =. - .a . \ s O I 5601 I oi N 28 Md NNW . 14NE ".68 ' ' 420 O. 168 1 [ 168l @ l NW NE l 10 MsLas 168 - 0 \, . ( WNW . o 3'64 , ENE I se l 56 see 5 . I 56 1 9 \ 0 112 0 0 n o \ r w.. ( - W 0 4452 1 56 s 0 0 0 E [4508] O Ty 1 0l O o o $4 \~ O *% 112 112 . , 0 ' . O. N ' 112 168 ESE 3 . -. 1 84 1 140 o SW SE [ 252{ l 84 l 112 SSW SSE I 112l g 1 33d T ! ! otal Segment Pocastellee 1 224l O to 10 Miles POPULATION TOTALS. C TI RING MILES PM$flON TOTAL MILES ,g o2 420 0-2 420 2-5 }_ 6020 o5 6440 5-to 1008 0 10 1 7_448 10 - s 448 o-S 7.896 O Figure 10-6b. Scenarios 5-10: Winter Transient Population 10-51 [10082] 16000I N 31go pes 31l NNW NNE 4 1186 31718 1146001 3469 7124 l 4820 l NW NE 10 m.as 1390 12516 874 168 WNW 2714 1149 7789 ENE [ 7866l 5 l 9811 3503 347 0 3426 3557 659 3 0 2 87 s /4 W 2655 4862 l y' 7 &? l O O E [ 9359 l 18 D l 318l 1425 4883 ^de 0 7135 410- 622 0 WSW [15110l 2760 2856 1597 ESE h 1465 10722 0 SW SE l23107 l 35 836l 13420 1587 11643 SSW SSE M g l 3320] g g Total Segment Population l15100l 0 to 10 Miles POPULATION TOTALS. RING. MILES TOTAL MILES C ' POP L ION P[PU TI o.2 11810 02 11810 2*5 43294 05 55104 s .10 78758 0 10 133862 (0-8 45297 0-5 179159 Figure 10-8c. Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Midweck, Midday Total Population 10-52 O l 510l I 2781 N 278 W -NNW 131 M . 104 1306 1 174 l 163] 1 488l NW NE " E8 47 417 35 . WNW 81 ENE 57 46 104 'O [ 921 5~ i as i 12 116 12 0 4 0 0o 2 12 f 3 M I 22 35 i M A3 0 0 E I 104] 244 D O / W 35 \ g j 499 0 0 360 WSW 70 197 ESE l 6621 104 I 81] 12 580 0 SW SE 1 l1241l l 70l SSW 58 SSE I894 l g g T ! ! ots1 Segment Populattoa ! 777I O to 10 Miles POPULATION TOTALS. RING MILES TOTAL MILES C POP ION , T,1 02 510 0-2 510 25 1590 05 2100 ) 5 10 3294 0-10 5394 ~ #0-8 , 1875 0-5 7269 O Figure 10-9a. Scenarios 8, 9 and 10: Winter Evening and Weekend Employees Who Live Outside of EPZ 10-53 l_8610 l 15036l NHW N 2334 91604l h NNE 884 3751 27700 113164l 3040 6556 g NW NE 10 MiLas 11195 1321 815 156 WNW 2447 930 7348 ENE I7635l 3362 0 l 9231 3392 3348 624 64 % Sg 7f od,2 q 3 W 2596 4851 i y 283 0 [ [ 9162] \d DS I 283l 1 4118 '8 0 f 7891 460 6008 - 0 WSW 2470 1249 ESE l13044] 2426 1442 I 945l 8936 0 SW SE 119277l 283 11414 1509 SSW 96 SSE 812 [17022 l l2894l g g Total Segment Populettom O to 10 MIIes L12569] POPULATION TOTALS - C u RING. MILES POPU ION TOTAL MILES ,[Pu T,1 0-2 10394 02 AUJV4 25 38550 0-5 48946 5 10 68782 0 10 117728 10-8 39633 0-5 157359 s Figure 10-9b. Scenarios 8, 9 and 10: Winter Evening and Weekend Total Population 10-54 l 1 ~ _ O l 2900 l M 780 M NNW-3 1320 NNE 9990 l48101 49 d ' NW HE 10 uiLES 4080' 300 1300 , WNW . 34g 2560 ENE I 28801 1250 1 1201 120 1200 - 240 7000 2 20 490 # #o 5 990 W 140 1 00 0 0 E g 5 0 [ 100) 4 1490 $ 0 o '550 2130 15 WSW - ESE 850 34 I47201 l 3001 l 3160 g 100 SW SE l 4140 521 SSW 340 SSE 290 M g l 881l I I o*i*.' 'o"uiij "** I 44Soi VEHICLES TOTALS C LA E RING ulLES VEHIC ES TOTAL MILES ( 0-2 M40 *02 3640 25 11900 0-S 15540 5 10 24801 0 10 40341 10 - 8 14350 0-8 1 54691 Figure 10-10. Permanent Residents 10-55 l l I 7901 l 430l N l2373I 380 NNW HNE 140 240 1833 l 680l l 30d NE NW 10 uiLES 40 600 60 10 16 WNW 90 200 ENE I 1401 7 0 1 60l 20 210 20 20 2 000 2 20 50 2 30 4 W 40 30 1 2 40 1 0 0 E 10 8 l 40,) [ 140l 360 0 0 1 WSW 550 720 140 0 ESE h 160 410 _ 220 1 180] l10201 820 0 t SW SE l 1870l l 140 l 110 112 SSW SSE I 1500l g l 520l ! ! Total Segment Vehicles O to 10 Miles - l 1380l , VEHICLES TOTALS l N C L^ RING MILES vg"g' C ES TOTAL MILES CL 02 1080 '0-2 1080 ! 2-5 2760 05 3840 5 10 5080 0 10 8920 to - 8 2633 1 ,' o-8 l 11553 I l Figure 10-lla. Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weckend ! Inland Population of Employees who l Live Outside of EPZ 10-56 ,a . . .. O l 650 l l 1801 N 120 136001 NNW 13o NNE 30 1350 80 1720 NW HE \' 10 uiLEs 20 310- 170 30 35 WNW 50- 530 ENE I 2401 5 0 1 5s001 90 10 1500 40 0 00 2 300 0 0 1 W 150 1580 ' 3 540 '- 0 0 E g O. I 1540] 4 150 50 0 4 220 0 WSW 130 es30 ESE I 4a01 10 170 M 340 0 SW SE I 7501 30 l 900l l 510 2650 42 SSW 20 SSE l 820l l9290l l I 'i s I a*'i. , 7 ; i w .i , g4o, i VEHICLES TOTALS RING MILES yg"g;C ES 3M 7gygg y,Lgg C E c o-2 9300
- o* 2 9300 25 12560 05 21860 5 -10 6810 0 10 28670 to- 5 l 1610 1 0-8 '
30280 O Figure 10-11b. Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer Weekend Transient Population (includes beach area employees) 10-57 , 3, - g- - . - - - . . , , , - - - .w- .y-.-------------.--,p---, ,. l 4330l l 2440l N 1280 W 470 13173 l 58501 1390 4450 g HE NW 10 Mites 550 4990- 530 100 128 WNW 4gg . 3290 ENE l 3260l 1410 5 a 1 Sasci 150 2910 1320 300 340 o 00 W 175 118 68 ' O E us0 l16801 M SD S 540 0 2000 $ k 30 3760 1170 2900 WSW 1170 7380 ESE 1240 1 2310l I6220l 570 j 4320 0 SW SE l 9460l l'60 l 1240 l SSW 4940 SSE l 84801 g l10691] I g Total Segment Vehletes O to 10 Miles !6470I VEHICLES TOTALS j RING MILES VEHtC ES TOTAL mites Cge i E 02 14020 'O2 14020 25 ,799n 05 41240 5 10 36691 0-10 77931 10 - 8 18593 0-8 1 96524 l l Figure 10-11c. Scenarios 1 and 2: Summer weekend l Total Population l i l 10-58 = . . - . . O l 1670l g N 950 I ss041 NNW MNE 350 4554 480 600 l 3201 l16801 NW NE 10 uiLEs 10 1500 80 10 WNW 23 - 19o . 350 ENE l 2801 5 0 1 60 l 17o 30 210 40 30 0 02 20 4 4 g 70 40 2 40 ' O E @ go l 40_) i 1X A g 0 870 0 *6 0 1720 190 12e WSW ESE , [ 23301 380 1 1801 30 040 SW SE l l 4300l 80 l 19d
- 2240 130 2250 SSW SSE 190 I 31301 I 5501 I I o*'i,' d*L"*."' **'** I 269oI VEHICLES TOTALS N
RING Ml'LES yg"g'ICYES TonL MILES Y,'CLES 02 1490 '02 1490 25 4960 0S 6450 5-10 11330 0 10 17780 10 - 5 6434 l 0-8 1 24214 O Figure 10-12a. Scenarios 3 and 4: Summer Weekday Inland Population of Employees who Live Outside of EPZ 10-59 1 1 1 4701 14Cl H 127001 l go NNW 11g HNE 20 1000 1 27d 60 1300 g NW NE 10 uius 10 230 130 g l UNW 50 400 0 ENE I 18Cl 70 l 4130l l 30 230 0 0 1C 0 2 3 80 ,o t N 1560 1 2 0 0 E . 80 , L w p_I ! LE2d 0 110 0 40 0 WSW 170 180 seo g ESE g 100 130 497 l 37Cl 10 250 0 _SW SE I 5501 20 , I 6801 80 32 SSw SSE I 6201 20 g l 6980l I" I I o to 10 M l "s l 490l VEHICLES TOTALS R C L filNG Mil.ES ygHic ES TOTAL Mit "3 , C o-2 6960 o- r o960 2-5 9810 oS 16770 5 -10 5130 0-10 21900 Jo - S 1190 0-8 23090 Figure 10-12b. Scenarios 3 and 4 : Summer Weekday Transient Population (includes beach area employees) 10-60 , .. . ~ . . _ . . ..: ,_ _. _ _ . O l 50401 13000l N 1231441 1820 NNW HNE 19 15544 67 l 6760 l l 32301 NW NE 10 uitEs 5810 510 90 WNW 126 ENE 580 3310 I 33401 5 i45101 49 134 2530 0 o 2 300 g 270 24 W 1170 1740 i i ?.9C 0 E L1722] 7 *3 11290] 620 2470 0 o m l 4700 1000 3580 0 ,1260 5730 WSW ESE g 1360 11850) 590 5450 0 sW SE 1690l 6760 200 2651 5'7 ssw sst l 9910] g l8411l s g l l o*'t io u 7t vm . l 7630I VEHICLES TOTALS RING MI'LES TOTAL MILES C ^ VEHIC ES C 0-2 12090 '02 12090 2-5 26670 0*S 38760 l 5 10 41261 0 10 80021 10 - 5 21974 0-8 101995 Figure 10-12c. Scenarios 3 and 4 : Summer Wookday Total Population 10-61 l1709l l 1070 l N 969 I5700i NNW 44g HNE 35 4590 480 640 l 4001 l 16601 NW HE 100 10 witEs 1500' 80 10 3 WNW 230- 470 ENE I 2801 5 i 801 10 0 40 30 0 00 02 30 3 4 o W 70 40 2 0 ' 0 0 [ l,,,,,,21Qj l 50] 130 870 @cm 0 0 o 1740 200 0 28 WSW 310 460 470 ESE l 23501 1 180 l 30 2040 SW SE I43701 80 130 l M 2320 SSW 200 SSE l 3300l g l 600l , l l Total segment Vehicles 0 to 10 Miles - l 2854 VEHICLES TOTALS E RING MILES 8 VEH1C ES TOTAL. MILES CgLA eL o-2 1660 ' o- 2 1660 25 5460 o5 7120 5 10 11440 0 10 18560 10-8 6499 0-8 ' 25059 Figure 10-13a. Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Midweek, Midday Cmployees who Live Outside EPZ 10-62 1 2001 l 01 N 10 1 4201 NNW go M 150 0 60 1 601 l 60l NW HE 10 uitas 60 , O WNW 13 .o - 210 ENE I 201 5 l 2et 20 o 0 40 0 2 0 oo 0 W o ^ 1590 20 0 , O o [ 0 0 1 0) ~~ 3 0 003 0 40 40 0 WSW 40 go N I 4 01 40 I 301 l 50 0 l l SW SE I 9 01 1 3d 9 30 4 SSW SSE l 4 04 g W ! !T etel Segment yeenselee I R0l O to 10 Mllee . VEHICLES TOTALS IttNG MILES VEMIC ES TOTAL MILES Cgc gt T o-2 150
- o- 2 150 25 2150 0S 2300 s io 360 o to 2660 10 - 8 160 0-8 '
2820 i Figure 10-13b. Scenarios 5-10: Winter O Transient Population 10-63 1 14809l l 29001 H 1759 1210601 HNW HNE i 1 14730 I 650 1600 3090 1 20701 I 65301 HE NW 10 uitEs 590 5640 380 70 - 1200 570' 3240 ENE I 3180 l 1440 -5 0 i 420i 150 1520 1340 ! 270 00 50 0 23 2 7 W 1060 1770 ' l 150 0 0 E M 1 8 l 155] 620 ,Q 5 0 2360 4580 350 0 345 WSW 1230 870 ESE l71101 1350 1 510] ! 580 0 5250 SW SE l11300l 18 l 430l 681 6430 " M SSW 490 l 9500l g g i i!, 'a',W,:"."a' - i mn i VEHICLES TOTALS C E RING MILES yg"g';Ng3 TOTAL mites o2 5450 o2 5450 25 19510 oS 24960 5 10 36601 o 10 61561 to - 6 21009 0-8 l 82570 l l 1 Piqure 10-13c. Scenarios 5, 6 and 7: Winter Midweek, Midday Total Population l l 10-64 a M- a- w A - - -, e"- w C 1 4401 1 2401 N 24o LussJ NNW90 NNE 13o N 40 O 2So l 140 l NW HE 10 Mus 360 30 WNW 40 - 70 9g m I 801 5 o i 30 I 50 to lo go o o o 32 so 2 l W 20 3o I o 20 ' e o E R Po 1 20"] 3 p 4 20 o O WSW se o' " go 0 ESE 90 7 07 o t I 70 l @* 0 , SW SE l 1070l 20 S60 l 60 l 60 4 560 SSW so SSE W I 770I $ ! !O r.i.s w v.w S. Mil.a l 670 l to 10 VEHICLES TOTALS lN C A E RING Mit.ES y,"giC ES JOTAL MILES eL l 0*2 440 *O*2 440 2*5 1370 0*5 1810 s to 2840 0 10 4650 Jo - 8 1616 0-8 6266 Figure 10-14a. Scenarios 8,9 and 10: Winter Evening and Weekend l O Employcos who Live Outside of EPZ. 10-65 i f__.____.._.._____.._____._____ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _, 1 1 35401 120701 H ,g y NNW 131o HNE 390 11266 1 30 2600 [ ,g3g[ 15290l HE NW 10 uitas 530 330 4500 97 WHW GE 380 2860 I2980l 1320 5 0 i 370i 130 1340 1310 240 00 2 30 0 20 10 8, O W 1010 1760 1 16 20 ' O O E M @ 4 8 l 126l 520 1700 o@p 0 o 3270 210 0 248 980 570 WSW ESE l5330_j 980 l 400l 3710 .0 SW SE l 8000l 120 611 4700 40 SSE SSW 340 I6970l 3 l 1231] g g Total Segment VeWetee 0 to 10 Miles I5200I VEHICLES TOTALS ' C t.A T E RING Mll.ES VEHIC ES TOTAL. MILES ( o.2 4230 *o2 4230 25 15420 o*5 19650 5 10 28001 0 10 47651 10 - 5 16126 0-8 1 63777 l Figure 10-14b. Scenarios 8, 9 and 10: Winter Evening and Weekend Total Population 10-66 O Su - ry of Evacuation Time Analysis A summary of evacuation times is presented in Tables 10-10, which are presented in the format recommended in Appendix 4 of NUREG 0654. The analyses of Confirmation Time and of the ETE for Special Population segments are presented in Sections 11 and 12, respectively. The estimates of Permanent Resident and Vehicle Population are those of Table 1-1. These town estimates were aggregated to i form ERPA estimates and then Region estimates. The transient population includes ill transients -- tourists, beach area day-trippers and employees who live outside the EPZ. These estimates were presented in Sections 2 and 5. Evacuation capacity from each region was ascertained by aggregating the highway capacities of all outward-bound roads which pierce the region's outer boundary. Here, we have employed the capacity estimates associated with Level of Service F conditions, which is estimated at 85 percent of the LOS E values obtained from the 1985 Highway capacity Manual for all access-controlled sections. i The capacities given represent clear weather conditions. These capacities are reduced by 20 percent for rain and 25 percent for snow. It is assumed that all roads are passable and that the recommended traffic control tactics are in effect (see Appendix I). t It is important to stress that these estimates of available capacity may overstate the actual accessible capacity. Specifically, the high capacities offered by the Interstate l Highways (I-95, I-495) cannot be fully utilized due to the i limited number of entry ramps within the EPZ and to the limited capacities of these ramps. Reference to Figures 10-2a through 10-3f indicate that these Interstate Highways are never congested, while many entry ramps to these highways are congested over a period of many hours. The estimated notification, preparation and response (i.e. trip-generation) times which are listed correspond to the 100th percentile of the indicated population. That is, these are the times associated with the comoletion of the indicated process. The process itself (i.e. notification, preparation to evacuate, l and departing on the evacuation trip) is best represented as a l continuous distribution (see Figure 4-2). This representation graphically depicted the continuous nature of the process. l The Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) are those presented in Table 10-8. O 10-67 _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ Table 10-10a. Sumary of Result) of Evacuation Times Analysis: scenarios 1 & 2 Relative to c' Relative to Siren Alert > Nac. Ordef *
- E 3 : E E E D
t g g." 8. 28
- 8. 8.
28 28 s. .8 E. .8 - g Ed .8 E. .8 . . - E ~ a8 % aa & & ~ p. 33 ED ED 3D MB MB MB ME En " 53 "O dY 8 e .E .s .E .G 35 as 8 as a6 m W c .* Ea %D #2 Es %D *2 eE S s. B 3 3 # E"d" 2 *3 88 "f "f & .f B g 8" 8 .8 2- " "- - < :: ge sa" :: :: c -- !E = Eb" tE
- t"sg E %gg -
'e %E :;;h a o e a L g 3eE Ev 0 EE E4 *
- I E m. ge [3 EE Eg =<
- e e = 3 a a< m m - - 3 m m WITHIN TWO MILES i j 37567 14166 11936 3:30- 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 4:50 6:15 0:40 4:50 6:15 Region 9 11354 4367 0:40 l H o - 1 m I WITHIN FIVE MILES 49574 19067 7071'4 28049 29819 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 6:10 7:50 1:15 6:10 7:50 Recion 5 Region 6 26504 10194 43343 16822 17959 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 5:10 6:30 0:40 5:10 6:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 5:10 6:30 0:4n 5:10 g.an Recion 7 13439 5169 38528 14591 15316 0:40 3:30 Region 8 32339 12438 63979 24968 22785 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 6s10 7:50 0:40 6:10 7:50 WITHIN TEN HILES~ 98186 41835 36389 3:30- 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 6:40 9:10 1:15 6:40 9:10 Reuion 1 142194 54701 0:40 Reaion 2 64776 24914 54940 22529 24344 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 6:10 9:10 1:15 6:10 9:10 Resion 3 38207 14695 41078 16067 15466 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 5315 '6:40 1:15 5:20 6:40 ^ I i3:55 i 2 }01 2:10 6:15 7:55 1:15 6:15 ^ ; Reci 61948 23826* 77303'31571?23885' 0:40 3:3 :55 - -..-i- l } Table 10-10b. Sunnary of Sesults of Evacuation Tises Analysis: scenarios 3 & 4 ~ i Relative g ' : Relative to Siren Alert nvac. Order ' 3 3 3 : E E E E b g 8. 8. g. 8. pg P. g EJ s. . t - I Re 95 .8 28 .. 8 - ~ .8 .8 & x ~
- s. En ED ED RB En MB 2; MD a8 & ac
.E .U .E 3E OE dE 3E is " 53 "3 OY 8 e .E .j t 8 .8 ! E W E.a et EI ;4 is it "I 3 ca 3 3 3 4 "&O" "J R "&J "&j 3 8"- g g &" &" i < :: ge :: == c - t- v: - vg s - -s 4 A.*& - e a 3 EE Eg SE *g %E %g e %E %b l 4 ~ a .h ga g3 sa s a e e ta a n, e a ma 24 x x< 1 . a. > > ,G e m m a. j WITHIN TWO HILES 42412 16192 11936 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 4:35 6:05 0:40 4:40 6:05 Facion 9 11354 4367 e o \ m 1, w l 1 WITil!N FIVE MILES 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 5:55 7:40 1:15 5:55 7:40 Reaien 5 49574 19067 717Il0 30454 29819 0:40 26504 10194 47592 18914 17959 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 4:45 6:20 0:40 4:45 6:20 Recion 6 Feaica 7 13439 5169 43257 16618 15316 0:40 3:30 3:55' 3:55 2:10 2:10 4:45 6:20 0:40 4:45 6:20 4 Re; ion 8 32339 12438 65715 27306 22785 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 5:55 7:40 0:40 5:55 7:40 j \ - WITHIN TEN HILES 3:55 2:10 2:10 7:10 9:45 1:15 7:10 9:45 Eccicm 1 142194 54701 104958 51666 36389 0:40 3:30 3:55 ] 6159C 27764 24344 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 7:10 9:40 1:15 7:10 9:40 Feaion 2 64776 24914 Facino 3 38707 14695 47120 19414 15466 0:40 3-30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2e10 (-50 L25 1:15 5:20 6-25 Fe: ton 4 6194E 21826 8106J 36874 23885 0:40 , 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 6:10 7:45 1:15 6:10 7-45 l j . t i 1 1 ; i Table 10-10c. Sumary Of Results of Evacuation Tines Analysis: Scenarios 5 & 6 l Relative g
- Relative to Siren Alert fvac. Order E E E E b . 8. 8. 8. 8. it . p. Da E.
. . E S E 8" 28 28 28 .8 .8 .! ~ .8 .8 a8 & ua & 2 ~ c. en aD ED eB MB MD MB MB -8s 'O 83 't a h' 8 e .E .3 .E .E SE SE* 8 3E 3E E tt ut is ce 3- S 9 &8 28 .8 0 L 8 .8 W E"a .2 82 85 *2 Su 3 % '3 '& "O '" '" y* '9 - l &* &" l < : ge e == a c n g sE vg E. :E us !! g %E %[ t %E ;s t
- EE kE km De D5 I
8 = e a. f.e l4< . e E e3 a = 8< 8 a x< m a w w o m m WITHIN TWO Mll.ES . Fegion 9 11354 4367 2840 2160 11936 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 3:55 4: 15 0:40 4:40 4:40 e o I J o WITit!N FIVE MILES Fecion 5 49574 19067 12888 9828 29819 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 4:40 6:05 1:15 4:40 6:05 c rien 6 26504 10194 6312 4470 17959 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 4:00 4:35 0:40 4:40 4:40 Reaion 7 13439 5169 3131 2388 15316 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 4:00 4:35 0:40 4:40 4:40 Eegion 8 32339 12438 9126 7290 22785 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 4:40 4:35 0:40 4:40 4:40 WITHIN TEN FlILES Re:1cr. I 142194 54701 32191 26148 36389 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 6:00 7:30 1:15 6:00 7:30 cenion 2 64776 24914 14047 11080 24344 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 6:00 7:10 1:15 6:00 7:10 Facion 3 38207 14695 6087 4857 15466 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 4 *:.05 4:40 1:15 5:20 5 20 Fe, ion 4 61948 21826 17730 14531 23885 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 5:30 7:00 1:15 5:30 7_:00 l J = _ f l l I ; Table 10-10d. Suniiary of Results of Evacuation Times Analysis: Scenarios 8& 9 . . Relative to l 0 Relative to Siren Alert : fvac. Orde? ! % 5 3 5 E E E E l b 8. [. [. 8. E. E. g sa s. . s .! 8 Re .8 .8 28 .5 8 - .8 .8 as " 3D 2B * %; MB a8 & u. & K p. Es &B MD
- s s sa -s av 8 . 5 .s .s .s as as 8 as as 1
i e -: vs 2: vs .a s. s "g a "g e "g a g3 p3 p 3 . s 5 .s ) E $a ze EE g: 55 se 32 R s.
- c 3 ' -- --
vg g [ -- E" E" s !l gia !. . e a s si .! E s, s, ; si se e a .i ga g3 =a e =, e 8 m3 a ma 24 a x< . > 5 m m . a. a. r WITHIN TWO MILES Recica 9 11354 4367 1152 705 11936 0:40 3:30. 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 3:55 3:35 0:40 4:40 4:40 j e o 8 l -a
- P
\ i WITHIN FIVE MILES 1 Reaion 5 49574 19067 55i7 3474 29819 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 3:35 4:30 1:15 4:40 4:40 l Recion 6 26504 10194 3034 1644 17959 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 3:35 3:40 0:40 4:40 4:40 i Fenion 7 13439 5169 1633 1097 15316 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 3:35 3:40 0:40 4:40 4:40 Feaion 8 32339 12438 3155 2143 22785 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 3:55 4:30 0:40 4:40 4:40 l l - l ' f WITHIN TEN MILES 4:40 ~ Fenion 1 142194 54701 10831 7734 36389 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 6:00 1:15 5:20 6:00 Fecinn 2 6477( 24914 5065 3337 24344 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 '4:40 6:00' 1:15 4:40 6:00 rm i n, 1 1820T 14695 2491 1757 15466 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 3:55 ~4:00 1:15 5:20 5:20 ! i Reaion 4 61940 23826 5580 405C 23885 0:40 3:30 3:55 3:55 2:10 2:10 3:55 5:10 1:15 4:40 5:10 l e e
- 11. EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) FOR TRANSIT OPERATIONS This section details the analyses applied and the results obtained, which provide evacuation time estimates for transit vehicles. The procedure is:
e Estimate demand for transit service e Estimate time to perform all transit functions e Estima?.e route travel time o Determine how buses should be allocated to routes e Develop ETE Estimates of Demand for Transit Service Demand f)r transit service reflects the needs of different "special population" groups:
- 1. Residents and transients with no vehicles available
- 2. Special facilities: schools, health-support, child-care, other
- 3. Private citizens (i.e. those not in health-support facilities) who have special medical needs.
The demand estimates for the groups identified in items 2 and 3 have been developed by the State Civil Defense Agencies and O thereby lie outside the scope of this report. The demand associated with item 1 does fall within the scope of this report. The survey conducted in Autumn of 1985 (see Appendixes F and G, and Figures 2 and 3) acquired a data base which enabled us to estimate the population group of item 1. This group is divided into two subgroups: e Those persons who belong to households which do not have a vehicle available e Those persons who belong to households which normally do have at least one vehicle available, but would not have a vehicle available at the time the evacuation is ordered. The persons belonging to the latter subgroup are in l households where the vehicle (s) have been driven away from home for commuting purposes and are therefore not immediately available when the order to evauate is given and, in addition, the driver (s) of the vehicle (s) refuse to return home to gather the household members. Question 10 of the survey addressed this issue. Other, less important factors, include the possibilities that the vehicle is non-functioning or that the commuter is willing, but unable, to return home. 11-1 Tables 11-1 through 11-4 are typical print-outs of the software developed to analyze the survey data base and to provide the empirical basis for quantifying those two subgroups. These data were then multiplied by the sample factor (i.e. ratio of total households within the EPZ, to the number of randomly selected households sampled) to obtain the data for each community within the EPZ. Table 11-5 presents the summary of this data. There are teveral factors which influence the accuracy of these estimates in Table 11-5:
- 1. These figures include school children. On school days, separate transportation is provided for the children in school and the actual need for this transit is thereby less than the given estimates.
- 2. These figures do not take into account the effects of ride-sharing with family, friends and' neighbors who do have vehicles available. To the extent that ride-sharing is undertaken, the actual need for this transit is less than the given estimates.
- 3. These figures do not take into account the prospect that vehicles may not be available due to malfunction. To that extent, the actual need for this transit is slightly greater than the given estimates.
- 4. Since .the number of surveyed persons who require transit is small relative to the total sample, and to the population (roughly 3.0 percent) , we are contending with a problem of small sample size when the data is considered at the community level. That is, the confidence interval associated with these estimates is apt to be large. There is thus a statistical uncertainty associated with these estimates (as there is with aDY estimates obtained using statistical procedures) which should be prudently considered.
We have not included those buses which are located within the EPZ. It is estimated that some buses are included in this group. To this extent we have estimated transit needs. It is seen that some of the factors which cannot be readily quantified would tend to reduce these estimates, while others would tend to increase them. Despite these uncertainities, an up-to-date informational survey (as opposed to an opinion survey) remains the best means of quantifying such facts. In consideration of the potential health-threatening effects of a radiological accident, we consider it proper and prudent to increase these estimates by 50 percent to ensure that an adequate supply of transit vehicles is provided. Also, all communities will be provided with buses to transport at least 60 persons, even though their estimated needs may be less. 11-2 k TABLE 11-1: AbMBER CF NOA-RETURNERS FCR HCUSEHCLDS WITH.1 CAR ANC 1 COPPUTER WHO ORIVES AMESBURY, MA HOUSEHOLOS WITH ONE CAR SIZE OF SUCH HOUSEHOLOS E 1 CCMMUTER WHO ORIVES t 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ UNKNCwN TOTAL i _______ _____ e H 5 W NO. OF SUCH 1100SEHOLDS: 4 3 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 1 1 j "1 C . CF NCN RETURNER S : 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 i t j NO. CF RETURNLRS : 1 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 i i j '
- 10. CF UNSURE : 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 I i
i i NOH RETURNERS PCT. : 50.0 33.3 0. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. 1 13.2 TAL NC. OF PERSONS REOUIRING TRANSIT : 3 j TAL NC. OF PERSONS AT HOME RECUIRIAC TRANSIT: 2 4 1 ! I 4 TABLE 11-2: AUMBER OF A0h-RETURNERS FOR HCUSEHOLOS WITH 2 CARS AND AT LEAST 2 CCMPUTERS WHO ORIVE AMESBURY, MA 2 CARS SIZE OF SUCH HOUSEHOLOS HOUSEHOLCS WIT 9 __________-_______-____ l ____-______--_-___-_-_- L AT LEAST 2 COMPUTERS l 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNKNOWN TOTAL w H I 43 ^ 15 13 10 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 NG. OF SUCH HOUSE HOLDS : 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 NO. OF NEITHER RETURNED: 0 2 0 0 0 1 13 8 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 NO. OF E ITHER RETURNED : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 NO. OF UNSURE : 0 0 4 1 1 O. 13.3 0. O. O. 100.0 0. O. O. O. O. 8.3 NON RETURNERS PCT. 'AL flC . GF PERSONS REQUIRING TRANSIT : 9 3 at NC. OF PER3ONS AT HOME RECUIRINE TRANSIT: O O O \ t TABLE 11-3: NUMBER OF h0A-RETURNERS FRCP HOUSEHOLDS WITH 3 CARS ANC AT LEAST 3 CCMPUTERS WH3 ORIVE AMESBURY, PA , HCUSEHOL DS JITH 3 CARS SIZE OF SUCH HCUSEHOLOS %ND AT LEAST 3 COMMUTERS , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UAKNCWN TOTAL w H I ui NO. OF SUCH HOUSEHOLDS : 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 NO. OF f40NE RETURNED : C 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 NC. OF AT LEAST 1 RTRND: C 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 NO. OF UNSURE : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NON RETU4NERS PCT. : O. C. 50 0. O. O. O. O. O. C. O. O. 33.3 l l . NO. OF PERSCNS REQUIRING TRANSIT : 0 * . MO. OF PERSGNS AT HOME RECUIRING TRANSIT: 0 TA3LE 11-4: AUM3ER OF ADA-RETURNERS FOR HCUSEHOLOS WITH 4 CARS AND AT LEAST 4 CCPPUTERS WHO DRIVE AMESBURY, MA SIZE OF SUCH HOUSEHOLDS HCUSEHOLD5 WITH 4 CARS ----------------------- AND AT LEAST 4 COMMUTER 5 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNKNCWN TOTAL 1 2 ___ -______ ___ - w 0 1 0 0 0 3 NL. OF SUCH HOUSEHOLDS : C 0 C 1 C 1 T' m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 NO. OF NCNE RETURNED : C 0 C 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 C 1 4C. OF AT LEAST 1 RTRND: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
- 0 0 0 0 0
.N O . OF UNSURE
- 0. O. O. O. O. O. O. 33.3 NON RETURNEAS PCT. : O. O. O. 100.0
- 0 AL NO. OF PERSONS REQUIRING TRANSIT 0
*AL 5! U . OF PERSGNS AT HCHE RECUIRING TRANSIT: 0 0 0 O Table 11-5. Estimates of Ambulatory Persons Requiring Transit Who Do Not Reside in Special Facilities Persons in H.H. with X Vehicles None of Which Will be Available Community X: 0 _1_ _2_ 3 4 Total Amesbury 299 112 336 0 0 747
- Merrimac 75 0 75 0 0 150 Newbury 112 0 112 0 0 224 Newburyport 336 75 112 0 0 523 Salisbury '75 112 0 0 0 187 West Newbury 37 0 0 0 0 37 Brentwood 0 0 37 0 0 37 j East Kingston 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exeter 112 37 75 149 0 373 Greenland 0 75 149 0 0 224 Hampton 75 37 149 0 0 261 Hampton Falls- 37 0 0 0 0 37 Kensington 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kingston 0 0 0 37 0 37 South Hampton 0 0 37 0 0 37 i New Castle 0 0 37 0 0 37
! /~T ' Newfields 0 0 0 0 0 0 j Newton 37 0 112 0 0 149 i North Hampton 37 0 0 0 0 37 i Portsmouth 448 187 261 37 0 933 i Rye 0 0 37 0 0 37 187 187 Seabrook 0 0 0 0 Stratham 0 0 37 0 0 37 Total: 4291 i NOTES: 1. Of those who responded "NOT SURE" to the question: "Would you return home in an emergency at Seabrook?"
- j. we assume 50 percent would return home.
i 2. The sample factor is 37.33,
- 3. H.H. = Household.
i lO i 11-7 i i Table 11-6 presents the transit requirements for all communities, based on the 50 percent. factor added to the estimates of Table 11-5, and on the number of bus routes identified by State Civil Defense personnel. A factor of 1.2 is applied to estimate passengers per route, to take into account any imbalances in domand among routes in a given community. That is, the figures in column 3 of Table 11-6 are found by dividing the figures of column 1, by those of column 2 and multiplying by 1.2. The number of bus trips needed por route is based on the conservative premise that the average bus occupancy at the conclusion of the bus run wi31 not exceed 30 persons. This figure compares with an actual seated capacity of 40 adults or 60 children. For example, if the passengers are two-thirds adults and one-third children, then the bus capacity is (2/3) 40 + (1/3) 60 = 47 persons. On this basis, we have assumed that bus trips, at most, will be running at an average load factor of (30/47) 100 = 64 percent. Thus, even if the actual demand for service on a bus route exceeds the estimates in column 3 of Table 11-6 by 57 percent, that demand can still be accommodated by the available seating capacity. Any additional demand can be accommodated by standing passengers or by rerouting buses from more lightly loaded routes within the community. It is recommended that all buses return to the local transportation center at the completion of each run. There, partly-filled buses can consolidate their respective occupants, so that only full (or nearly-full) buses leave the community and the EPZ for the relocation center. In this way, some buses can make two or more trips along a route. The total number of buses required is determined by the number of buses leaving the EPZ carrying a full passenger manifest (assumed to be 36 persons). Calculation of Transit Route Travel Times The calculation of transit route travel times depends intrinsically on how.the buses are allocated to the specified routes in each community. The allocation of buses to bus routes within a community will be based on the objective of minimizing evacuation time. This is equilvalent to stating the following: Allocate buses to routes so that the total time needed to evacuate transit-dependent persons is approximately the same for all routes. The analysis formulation and procedure are presented below: Let N = Total number of buses needed in a community based on an average occupancy of 36 persons. See column 6 of Table 11-6. O 11-8 (} Table 11-6. Estimated Transit Requirements 1 1 1 1 1 i Bus People No. of Pass. Trips Total Buses Requiring Bus Per Per Bus Re-Community Transit Routes Route Route Trins cuired Amesbury 1121 7 193 7 49 32 Merrimac 224 2 135 5 10 7 Newbury 336 4 101 4 16 10 Newburyport 728 5 175 6 30 21 Salisbury 281 5 68 3 15 8 West Newbury 56 3 23 1 3 2 Brentwood 56 2 34 2 4 2 East Kingston 50 2 30 1 2 1 Exeter 555 4 167 6 24 16 Greenland 336 3 135 5 13 10 Hampton 392 8 59 2 16 11 Hampton Falls 56 3 23 1 3 2 Kensington 50 3 20 1 3 2 Kingston 56 5 14 1 5 2 South Hampton 56 2 34 2 4 2 (/) ~- New Castle Newfields 56 50 1 2 68 30 3 1 3 2 2 2 Newton 224 3 90 3 9 7 North Hampton 56 3 23 1 3 2 Portsmouth 1400 7 240 8 56 39 Rye 56 5 14 1 5 2 Seabrook 281 3 113 4 12 8 Stratham 56 3 23 1 3 2 Column Exclanation Column Exclanation 1 50 pct. additional factor 4 Col. 3/30 2 Given by State CDA's 5 Col. 2 x Col. 4 3 1.2 x Col. 1/ Col. 3 6 Col. 1/36 ~ O 11-9 l n = Number of bus trips along each route, r, within the community; r = 1,2,...,R. See column 4 of Table 11-6. Xr = Number of buses allocated to route, r. tr = Bus travel time, hours, on route, r. This value is determined from the IDYNEV simulation output. For those segments of the bus route which are not on evacuation routes (e.g. local streets or counterflow streets), a mean speed of 10 mph is assumed which takes into account time spent stopping to load passengers. Tr(X r) = Total elapsed time to service transit-dependent evacuees along route, r, using X r buses to complete an aggregate of n trips. Hr = Bus headways on route, r. Definitionally, Tr(Xr) " Pr tr + (n - (pr-1) Xr - 1) Hr for (pr-1)Xr < n S Pr Xr i Pr = 1, 2, ... NOTE: pr = Maximum number of trips made by a bus on Route, r. O where pr = n/X r. If not an integer, then pr = Int f-+1 .r - Clearly, Xr $ n. That is, it makes no sense to assign more buses to a route than the number of trips to be completed. Also, by definition, Hr = tr/Xr when Xr < D* When Xr = n, we will adopt the following condition in order to provide reasonable spacing of buses: Hr = min (t r/n, 0.2] The objective is to select the Xr such that max [Tr(Xr )] is minimized r subject to the condition, EXr=N O 11-10 Procedure The procedure is trial-and-error which converges rapidly if the proper care is taken.
- 1. Select the longest route, r = r n. Assign Xr = n for this route. L
- 2. Calculate pr, Hr and Tr (Xr n " D)
Set Nrea = N - X L =N-n
- 3. Select the longest remaining route. Estimate X r for this Route, r, as follows: J t
. r Xr"t # Xr L
- 4. Calculate pr, Hr and Tr(Xr)*
5. Compare comparable, Tr(Xr) accept with TrL(Xrt) the solut ion.If thace figures are Else, adjust the estimate of Xr, accordingly, and repeat steps 4 and 5. When completed, set Nrea = N h - X r O 6. If more routes remain to be analyzed, return to step 3. If finished, examine Nrem-If Nrem < 0, either request more buses for this community to keep the objective function low, or reduce the number of buses allocated to those routes which exhibit low values of Tr(Xr ) relative to other routes and redo the procedure of steps 4, 5 and 6 until Nrea = 0. If Nrem > 0, which is a desirable condition, there is a choice: Add buses to those routes with the longest values of Tr (Xr) , subject to Xr < n, and/or store these excess buses at the local transportation center for use only to accept people from the route buses and to transport them out of the EPZ. If Nrem = 0, procedure is complete. Examole: Exeter, N = 16, n=6 r= 1 2 3 4 tr= 1.1 0.9 0.5 0.4 Step 1. Select r = rn = 1, the longest route. Assign X1=n=6. O 11-11 Step 2. p1 = 6/6 = 1; H1 = min [1.1/6, 0.2] = 0.18 Ti(X1) = 1(1.1) + (6 - (1-1) 6 - 1) 0.18 = 2. 0 Step 3. Select r = 2, next longest route. X2 = 0.9/1.l(6) = 4.9. Choose X2 = 5. Step 4. H2 = 0.9/5 = 0.18 ; p2 = Int [6/5 + 1] = 2 T 2(X2 ) = 2(0.9) + (6 - 1(5) - 1)0.18 = 1.8 Step 5. T2(X 2 ) is comparable with T i(X 1). Accept result for now. Nrem = 10 - 5 = 5 Step 3. Select r = 3, next largest route. X3 = 0. 5/1. l ( 6 ) = 2.7. Choose X3 = 3. Step 4. H3 = 0.5/3 = 0.17 ; p3 = Int [6/3] =2 T3(X3 ) = 2(0.5) + (6 - 1(3) - 1) 0.17 = 1. 3 Step 5. T3(X3 ) is somewhat lower than Ti(X1 ) which is O.K. Later, if necessary, we could reduce X3 to 2. Nrem " 5-3=2 Step 3. Select r = 4, the remaining route. X4 = 0.4/1.1(6) = 2.1. Choose X4 = 2. Note that X4=Nrem which is a good indication. Step 4. H4 = 0.4/2 = 0.20 ; p4 = Int [6/2] = 3. T4(X4 ) = 3(0.4) + (6 - 2(2) - 1) 0. 2 0 = 1. 3 Step 5. Looks good: Nrem = 2 - 2 = 0. Step 6. Nrem = 0; we are finished. The results are: I }C3 ; Tr(Xr) 1 6 2.5 = Maximum travel time 2 5 2.4 3 3 1.9 4 2 1.8 Assianment of Buses to Service Specific Recuirements Each community Transportation Coordinator has the responsibility for assigning available transport to service the needs of transit-dependent persons, according to some system of prioritization. It is reasonable to expect that the first arriving buses will be sent to the schools. O 11-12 . . . . -. . ~. .. .u-.~,...-.-....- .. 1 1 ! It is essential that the local Transportation Coordinator O I determine the number of buses needed at each school at the time of their (i.e. the buses) arrival -- not the number based on school 1 enrollment. The need for such distinction arises because- I l s Actual attendance may be somewhat below enrollment due to i absences. , e Many children may have been picked up at school by their , parents and by neighbors / friends of the parents before the buses arrive at the local transportation center. l The latter point deserves further discussion. Distribution B listed in Table 4-2 represents the event, " Arrive Home". This distribution is plotted in Figure 11-1. It is seen that within an hour of the order to Evacuate, over 70 percent of all commuters have returned home from work; this figure I expands to 83 percent at 1:15. In addition, households with two commuters, or with one adult at home with a vehicle available, could be in a position to pick up their child (ren) at school even earlier. Thus, the vast majority of parents will be in a position to pick up their child (ren) at school before the arrival of the buses. (While the EBS messages will notify the public that transportation is being made available to the schools and that there is no need to pick up children, we have to recognize, as a practical matter, that O many parents who can do so, will drive to school for that purpose.) Since many -- if not, most -- children will have been picked up by their parents by the time the buses arrive at the local EOC, the actual number of buses needed will be significantly less than the number mobilized. Under this expected scenario, it appears that there will be an ample number of buses available for servicing the at-home transit-dependent. Other scenarios: School early dismissal procedures will be put into effect at the Alert Level so that parents will not need to go to school. This would relieve or eliminate the need for transit vehicles to transport kids. Based on the information provided to us by the State Civil Defense Agencies, the number of buses available is based on the premise that the entire EPZ would be ordered to evacuate. However, the more probable emergency scenario would call for the evacuation of a portion of the EPZ, i.e. one of Regions 2 through 9. Hence, , those buses which arrive at the Staging Area early in the emergency ' j would be dispatched to those communities which comprise the Region ordered to evacuate. l Evacuation Time Estimates for Transit-Denendent Persons () The Evacuation Time Estimates for transit-dependent persons must be developed for several categories of "special population": e 'Residents and tourists with no cars available 11-13 l I 100 - 90 - 80 - 70 - E 3 60 - E n j 50 - - b b n 40 - E E g 30 - - 20 - - 10 - I I I l - 1 I 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Elepsed Time from Order to Evacuate (Hours) Figure 11-1. Time Distribution of Arrival llome O . O - O O e Special facilities Schools Health-support facilities Child-care centers Other i e Special medical needs. In Massachusetts and in New Hampshire, buses will travel from their respective originating locations to one or more staging areas. From there, they will be sent, as needed, to a central transportation center within each community. At that time, the buses will be assigned to specific routes or facilities by the local Transportation Coordinator. In either case, the time elements involved for all vehicles responding to the emergency are outlined below:
- 1. Mobilization Time Elapsed time from the moment that the transit agency is notified of the need for vehicles until the time the vehicles leave their respective points of origin.
- 2. Inbound Travel Time Elapsed time to travel to the local transportation center. (In Massachusetts, this includes the travel time to the dispatch area.]
- 3. Time to Load Passengers a) For vehicles servicing special facilities, this time includes the travel from the local transportation center to the facility and the time to load passengers.
b) For vehicles servicing transit-dependent persons, this includes the travel times along the assigned routes. t l 4. Outbound Travel Time Elapsed time from the facility or transportation center to the EPZ boundary. l O 11-15 . . . ~ . . . . . . 1 Mobilization Time A telephone survey of organizations which own and operate buses was undertaken to obtain estimates of mobilization time. There was a fairly wide variance of estimates among the different organizations. Many indicated that all bus drivers and buses could be mobilized within one hour. Others indicate that anywhere from 20-50 percent could be mobilized in one hour, with the remainder within the second hour. A few indicated that more than 2 hours were needed; in these cases the last 20-30 percent could be mobilized within the third hour after notification. Another factor is time of year. During the summer and on weekends during the off-season, fewer bus drivers are available in many cases and mobilization time is somewhat longer. Fortunately, school is not in session during these periods so the need for buses is reduced accordingly. Based on our survey, it is conservatively estimated that overall, 50 percent of the available buses can be mobilized within one hour of notification, another 30 percent within the second hour and the remainder within the third hour. The statistics of primary interest, however, are the mobilization times of recuired vehicles. For example, suppose the available number of transit vehicles exceeds the required number by 25 percent. On this basis, 50 percent of available buses translates into 62.5 percent of required buses mobilized in one hour; 30 percent of available buses translates into 37.5 percent of required buses mobilized during the second hour. In this example, then, all required buses would be mobilized within 2 hours (62.5 + 37.5 = 100 percent); those buses mobilized in the third hour constitute the excess of supply relative to the need. Based upon the information provided, the example given above r represents current expectations. Therefore, we will assume that ! 62 percent of all required buses will be mobilized in one hour following notification, with the remainder available during the second hour. Inbound Travel Time The elapsed time from the time that buses leave their 1 I respective points of origin to the time they arrive at the local transportation center. This travel time may be expressed as: TI = D/v + P where TI = Inbound travel time, hours O 11-16 D = Distance to be travelled, miles [/ \_ v = Mean speed, mph P = Any preparation time, en route. For example, time spent at a staging area, as is currently contemplated in the Massachusetts plan, would fall in this category. The travel distance will vary, depending on the point of origin. Some bus depots that are outside the EPZ are located in neighboring communities; others are as far as 30+ miles from the EPZ. It is reasonable to expect that there should be little impedance to incoming emergency vehicles for the following reasons:
- 1. In general, the first few buses won't start leaving their respective points of origin until 30 minutes after the order to evacuate. Bus volumes travelling toward the EPZ will increase toward the one-hour mark.
- 2. At one hour after the order to evacuate, some 70+ percent of returning commuters will already have reached home within the EPZ, and will therefore be off the highways.
l l 3. Other traffic which would normally travel towards the EPZ would be discouraged by EBS and other media messages and O' by people's concern over the potential risk to their health and safety. On this basis, it is reasonable to expect that incoming buses would be able to average about 40 mph along at-grade primary highways (e.g. Route 1) and 50 mph along access-controlled highways. The preparation time depends on how well operations at the staging area are organized, and on the relation between the demand for buses from local EOC within the EPZ and the supply of buses arriving at the staging area. Assuming a reasonable degree of efficiency at the staging area and a high demand for buses within the EPZ, a total preparation time, P, of 15 minutes (0.25 l hr.) is a realistic estimate. l As a planning basis, we will estimate maximum inbound travel time for the ensemble of buses as follows: TI = 30/40 + 0.25 = 1.0 hour ! Thus, buses should start arriving at local EOC from close-by j points of origin (outside the EPZ) after about one hour has 11-17 elapsed
- from the Order to Evacuate. Buses will continue to arrive, as needed, over the following hour, at which point, a sufficient number of buses necessary to evacuate the schools and the transit-dependent will be on-hand and will have started evacuation activities. (of course, buses which service the communities within the EPZ and are stored there, will arrive i earlier.) l Any additional buses needed for special facilities (other than schools) which are not available 2 hours after the Order to Evacuate, will arrive during the following (i.e. third) hour. If l only a portion of the EPZ is evacuated and if fewer buses are needed for schools than have been allocated (based on earlier discussion), then it is likely that all required buses will have arrived at the local' transportation center within 2 hours after the Order to Evacuate.
Time to Load Passenaers A. Special Facilities This includes the time to travel from the local , transportation center to the special facilities and then to load the passengers. Studies have shown that passengers can board a bus at headways of 2-4 seconds (see 1985 Highway Capacity Manual). Thus, if we double these headways to account for elderly or disabled passengers, a bus can be fully loaded in about 5 minutes. The time to travel to the facility depends on the distance travelled and on whether the bus will be travelling with, or counterflow, the evacuating public. If we assume the former, and apply the mean speed of 5.8 mph obtained for Scenario 1, Region 1, as computed by the IDYNEV simulation, then for a distance of say, 3 miles within the community, the travel time will be about 35 minutes. Thus the total time to load passengers at special facilities is approximately 40 minutes. B. Transit-Dependent Persons at Home The time to load transit-dependent passengers is dependent on the time required to service the longest (in time) bus route. The analysis procedure ha's already been presented. Results are presented shortly. *That is, buses located close to the EPZ which are mobilized within 1/2 hour and which travel for 1/2 hour. O 11-18 . . ~. . I ) Outbound Travel Time The time to travel out of the EPZ depends on several factors: o The location where this trip originates e The traffic environment at the time this trip begins. The discussion above has identified that a reasonable estimate of the elapsed time from the Order To Evacuate to the time that a bus servicing a special facility is loaded, should t not exceed 2:40. Reference to Table 4-5, which details the mid-week trip-generation distribution, indicates that approximately 10 percent of the evacuation trips which use private vehicles, have not as yet started at that time. Thus it is seen that the buses and vans used to evacuate special facilities will be embedded within the overall traffic streams evacuating the EPZ. It follows that the ETE for these transit vehicles will not exceed those estimates already developed for evacuees using private vehicles, regardless of the evacuation scenario (Table 10-1). The outbound travel time for transit-dependent persons who are transported by buses (i.e. do not ride-share) depends on the time required to completely execute all bus trips on all routes. This time depends on the number of buses per route and on the route travel time, as detailed earlier. O When the bus runs mingle with other evacuating traffic, then the route times are impacted by the impedance associated with the level of congestion encountered. If all bus runs have not been completed at the time the other evacuating vehicles have left the area covered by the route, then the remaining trips can be completed quickly since there would be no other -- or relatively few -- vehicles on the highway. Thus, this analysis for buses servicing transit-dependent persons is more complex than for those servicing special facilities. These transit ETE depend on: e The evacuation scenario e The location of the routes e The details of bus operations, specifically, whether all runs are completed before, or after, the other evacuees have cleared the area. Our analysis has identified that those communities in greater need of transit will, not surprisingly, take longer to evacuate. Specifically, the criterion which controls ETE is " Bus Trips per Route", column 4 of Table 11-6. On this basis, we present the results of the analysis for all communities which require 3 or O more bus trips per route. 11-19 l l -_ . . . . . . . . . ~ . . - . .- . . . .- These results, shown in Tables 11-7A and ll-7B are based on the assumption that evacuees in private vehicles have not cleared the indicated communities prior to the completion of all bus runs. Thus, the estimated travel times are somewhat high for those communities which clear at an earlier time. Emercency Medical Service (EMS) Vehicles The previous discussion focused on transit operations for ambulatory persons within the EPZ. It is also necessary to provide transit services to non-ambulatory persons who do not -- or cannot -- have access to private vehicles. These EMS vehicids are vans equipped for transporting non-ambulatory persons (i.e. those confined to wheel chairs), ambulettes and ambulances. They are generally available on an emergency basis; consequently it is reasonable to expect that their mobilization time would be much less than for bus vehicles. In fact, drivers for EMS are always either "on-station" or can be reached via a telecom pager. It is therefore reasonable to expect that mobilization time for EMS vehicles can be completed within 20 minutes. On the other hand, many EMS vehicles would have to travel much longer distances to the EPZ, than would buses. For example, EMS vehicles from the North Conway area would travel a total of about 90 miles to a community within the EPZ and thence to a h facility to pick-up passengers. A mean travel speed of 40 mph is assumed. Thus the total elapsed time, at worst, from notification to the arrival of an EMS vehicle at its destination within the EPZ, ' is estimated at: Mobilization Time: 0.33 hours Inbound Travel: 90/40 + 0.25 2.50 Loading Passengers: 02 62 3 'O hours outbound travel would be controlled by the speed of other evacuating vehicles, if the area is not yet cleared at 3:30, or would take less than 15 minutes, if the area is cleared at that time. O 11-20 ,___.....____,._._..._...........-__._-..._n-__a.u. -- () Table 11-7A. Results of Analysis to obtain ETE for Transit-Dependent Persons Within the EPZ (Massachusetts Communities) Total Travel Buses Route Route Time per Time Community Route Length (riles) tr (hours) Route Tr(Xr) Xg (hours) Amesbury 1 8.3 1.3 7 2.4 2 , 7.1 0.9 5 2.0 3 6.3 0.7 4 1.8 4 7.5 0.6 3 1.8 5 4.5 0.6 3 1.8 6 5.1 0.5 3 1.5 7 5.5 0.5 3 1.5 At Center _A 32 Merrimac 1 17.5 2.4 5 3.2 2 8.5 0.9 _1 2.7 7 Newbury 1 23.7 3.1 4 3.7 O- 2 3 14.1 20.9 2.1 1.4 4 3 2.7 2.8 4 11.7 1.1 _1 2.8 13 Newburyport 1 7.1 1.4 6 2.4 2 4.6 1.4 6 2.4 3 6.9 0.7 3 2.4 4 5.2 0.7 3 2.4 5 4.4 0.6 _1 1.6 21 Salisbury 1 7.8 0.8 2 1.6 2 8.8 1.4 2 2.8 3 10.2 1.9 3 2.3 4 4.6 0.5 1 1.5 5 6.0 0.8 _1 1.6 10 0 11-21 Table 11-7B. Results of Analysis to Obtain ETE for h Transit-Dependent Persons Within the EPZ (New Hampshire Communities) Total Travel Buses Route Route Time per Time Community Length tr Route Tr(Xr) Route (miles) (hours) Xg (hours) Exeter 1 9.4 1.1 6 2.0 2 . 12.3 0.9 5 1.8 3 6.3 0.5 3 1.3 4 4.6 0.4 _1 1.3 16 Greenland 1 7.6 1.0 5 1.8 2 5.8 1.0 4 2.0 3 4.9 0.8 _2 2.4 11 Newton 1 17.7 1.8 3 2.2 2 6.9 1.4 3 1.8 3 9.3 1.2 _1 2.0 Portsmouth 1 4.3 1.2 8 2.3 O 2 4.5 1.0 7 2.1 3 5.7 1.0 7 2.1 4 4.2 0.6 4 1.8 5 6.0 0.6 4 1.8 6 4.9 0.5 3 1.7 7 4.0 0.3 3 1.7 At Center _1 39 Seabrook 1 13.1 2.5 4 3.1 2 5.2 0.9 2 2.3 3 5.5 0.9 _2 2.3 8 9 11-22 In calculating the ETE for transit-dependent people, it is /~, 1 necessary to add the maximum values of Tr(Xr) in a Region, to the estimated time for mobilization and for inbound travel. Based on the previous discussion, it is reasonable to expect that the first buses will arrive at a local transportation center at 1.5 hours after the Order to Evacuate. These first buses would be dispatched on those routes with the longest value of Tr(Xr)- The ETE for Special Population is based on the analysis described earlier. When transit trips are completed before the l time that private vehicles can clear the region, then the transit j vehicles will mingle with the other evacuating vehicles. In these cases, transit vehicles are subject to the same highway capacity constraints and congested conditions as are the private vehicles. Thus, the ETE for the transit-dependent "special population" are set equal to the ETE for the general population. For the other scenarios, where some transit vehicles clear the region after the private vehicles, the special population ETE are based on computed values using the procedures described in this section. For the inclement weather scenarios, separate calculations were done wherever the ETE for special population (i.e. transit-dependent) exceeded the ETE for the general population. The controlling transit times are those in the towns of Seabrook and Newbury. In Seabrook the transit ETE is estimated as O the sum of sequential activities mobilization and inbound travel time for the first arriving buses (which is 1:30) plus the maximum value of Tr(X r) (which is 3:05) + Time to clear the Region Boundary at free speed (which is 0:05). This sum, which is equal to 4:40, control all Regions except 1 and 3, where the transit time for Newbury controls. For Regions 1 and 3, the sum of (1:30 + 3:40 + 0:10 = 5:20) controls. These results are included in Tables 10-10a through 10-10d. O 11-23
- 12. SURVEILLANCE OF EVACUATION OPERATIONS There is a need for surveillance of traffic operations during the evacuation. There is also a concommitant need for tow-truck equipment to clear any blockage of roadways arising from accidents or vehicle disablement.
Surveillance can take several forms.
- 1. Aerial patrol
- 2. Ground patrol
- 3. Fixed-point This plan calls for all forms of surveillance to be applied:
- 1. Arrangements should be made with the Civil Air Patrol to provide aerial surveillance, using fixed-wing aircraft.
Such surveillance is effective both day and night, weather permitting. The aircraft must have a communication link to the EOC and the pilot must be trained to utiliza dosimetry equipment and be informed so that he can avoid the plume, if any.
- 2. Ground patrol can be undertaken by State police along well-defined paths to ensure coverage of those highways which serve as major evacuation routes. Such patrols are not essential since we will have air surveillance and
/~ multiple TCP; however, they should be undertaken if (_3/ personnel resources permit. Figure 12-1 depicts 11 patrol routes, identified as PR-1 through PR-11. Each such closed path is delineated on Figure 12-1 by cross-hatching the enclosed area.
- 3. Fixed-point surveillance is provided by all traffic guides located at the Traffic Control Posts (TCP -- See Appendix I) and at the Access Control Posts (ACP -- See Appendix L) .
These concurrent surveillance procedures are designed to provide coverage of the entire EPZ as well as the area around its periphery. With this coverage, any blockage caused by a disabled vehicle should be quickly identified within a matter of minutes: l e From the air, a blockage is identified by a marked l discontinuity in traffic density. Upstream of the blockage, evacuating vehicles will exhibit a dense queuing pattern while the highway downstream will exhibit a very low density. Such a discontinuity is easily detected at night, by observing the pattern of head-lights and tail-lights, and by day, directly. e The patrol cars, manned by experienced police personnel, should be able to travel faster than the general public 12-1 f n t I I so"an . **" N ... .**'* %, q- [ ..e x. ,,, 2 ,, 3. 4 308 -b . 2, .. to. ga. ' *** 5" i an g, k.asas 3,r ,. s,s ' ' 'J., re g * '" i.a u . '~- .-.,-~..~.-c. N .,r,, , s su n. ).,Pg.4" ,, - l,,, \ .,, ......T v-0 *g* ' \. \ .a. o 3 n 8. ponTSMOUTH aga, 3. e,[ ,. ,- c===. , , O 3 ,., a j s.,e ",'N% , 3.sea / ,, to,O ,es to ' ' ga s sse / y, ss / . g . ,se ~7 _ **" N ,f . "',g, , (....'k,a.,' G'\,3, o, , / .. 3* go
- N.WFIELOS N
\ '"' ---- 8 ,g as 2.a,< e' - - 4 ~/ Vj / 4,,
- x. - '
.N (7x - / -.C ' i ' f ,,F R - J j , s ,, . 5. -,> STRATHAg . L -
- s. . - .,., ... .
.....,7 .s - . .. s, s . - .. = - .o. . . - s, ... .,- . . ., t x, ~. ... s> . . A, ,, - . . .. s ,. .... t., 8,... ...: g ~. . e me,, . .. . s. .. g .s . ., . \,, 3, m =.. .. , i. ,, y
- j g ,,., . _
/,. .., ... .... ..... . . s "U ,2, , 'V' ,,,..e s i
- fg-) FR.g--.J~S,,,, , . . \.
,~~' - , L, . p,,, aa=,To . .u .s .n , O *c y,, y e s /- ,R. , ,ss \ ~ g ,,,,,,- - O " ,$,, j /p p f 8 ainoston ( / 8- "'"0870" ., s a.. , , g* u s ' , ' n ensino ga A 's ,j s i ,, . , . , \ PR-7s..., \ - y \ s, i l' Ay\--h ...* ~g* 4 c.,a. , -a . p -N g f. A - A* s g-J' T', . ,=[ ,, - , i ,. ,, ~. ~ \ ..r , , ~~~, ,n \ "* ' ,* sEAsmoox g \ i! x " ' ' , g. . .fa/a in, a - ,., \: _, ,o * ', s .,
- ... . '\ '
.2 ,,, ' ... ,, .o...- -N .,i. j' ~
- s. HA row -
g* , ,, ,e,... ,, n.b .o.. .... ,/ , ,/ . . ., d. g., 8- ,f .... , R. , . ,. .x. .J . \ sat .uar ,, - , .. \g ."g'"'" / ,,. " ' , d at n'\ ,.,, i - , Aa:E uny . .. *P .., g*,/,, /* g,, / ~~ pg_9 .- ~ - - "s e \ * - e. ~ ,' / .- ,/ .... .... '"'~~ ' g '" .,;*, M , "!,4 1 , .r, , ,. , "..,,j,3 .. ) / g- -, , y v o y 1;' gy .__ , 88 " PLAlsTOW / "' e 8.' . 8 PR-ION, \ \ s \y.o .. af,,,/ .- / ,/ y,.i ,----.----......a ,. ,e l/ f'"' e g . i, y" "' NEWSUnv .c- % ' , '*' N ' # /.- . . . . , ( / ,,, b*'""""'""" Figure 12-1. Surveillance ._ Patro1 Routes .. [ I* P"ma",s"o", m0.t. >hg > ., ai GnoVELANo (>i., e-ptl i i =g > a 12-2 ..$. - A=G 3 -A >d W n E' Cd ]. 'I nn uowom-os \ 1 along those portions of their routes which are in the I"') (/ outbound direction. These patrol routes are designed so that the patrols travel counter-flow, relative to the evacuees, on these roads which are most heavily congested. For example, Patrol Route 11 (PR-ll) travels inbound along Route 1 and outbound (i.e. with the evacuating traffic) along the lesser congested Route 1A. Most patrol routes are approximately 15 miles in length. This length, in combination with skillful driving by experienced police personnel, should permit one cycle over the route to be completed well within one hour. A blockage would be identified visually using the same criteria of density discontinuity described above, or directly. While such patrols are somewhat redundant, if aerial surveillance is available, we recommend its implementation if resources permit. Certain3y, as traffic volumes decrease with time, some personnel at lightly-loaded TCP could assume this role of patrollihg the indicated routes. e Personnel at the TCP and ACP would recognize that a blockage (beyond visible range) has occurred, when a pronounced and extended decrease in evacuating traffic volume is observed along an evacuation route. While short-term fluctuations in demand are common, any sharp O decrease in demand which prevails for more than three minutes should be viewed as a symptom of a blockage somewhere on an approach to the TCP location. It is also probable that a passing motorist will inform the traffic guide that a blockage has taken place. l The traffic guide would immediately report to the EOC that I an apparent blockage is taking place. If more than one guide is stationed at the TCP, then one officer can leave the post to investigate the cause. If a police car is patrolling the route, then that car can be assigned to investigate. Tow Vehicles In a low-speed traffic environment, any vehicle disablement is likely to arise due to mechanical failure or exhausting the fuel supply. In either case, the disabled vehicle can be pushed onto the shoulder, thereby restoring access for the following vehicles. Most accidents involving vehicles travelling at low speeds
- will not result in a vehicle disablement; most of those that are
*For example, the average vehicle speed for the case of Scenario l O 1 and Region 1, is under 6 miles an hour. l 12-3 l - . - - - . - _ - . __ disabled can be pushed onto the shoulder. Experience in past - emergencies indicate that such activities (i.e. pushing a disabled vehicle to the side of the road) is often undertaken by other evacuees who are anxious to continue their trips. While the need for tow vehicles is expected to be low under the circumstances described above, it is still prudent to be prepared for such a need. We therefore recommend that tow trucks be deployed at strategic locations within, or just outside, the EPZ. These locations should be selected so that: e They permit access to key, heavily loaded, evacuation routes, e Tow trucks responding to a need would most likely travel counter-flow relative to evacuating traffic. Table 12-1 lists recommended locations for stationary tow trucks during an evacuation. All such equipment should be located off the major roads (e.g. in a parking area) so as not to impede traffic movement. The function of such equipment is to clear the roads of any obstruction and to return to their original locations to await any subsequent call for assistance. I These tow trucks should all have communication equipment linked, either directly or indirectly, with the EOC. O O 12-4 I [ Table 12-1. Recommended Tow Truck Locations - C H2x Location General Descrintion Outside EPZ
- l. Newington In a parking area east of Gosling Road, with across to both Spaulding Turnpike and Woodbury Avenue.
- 2. Kittery In a parking area at Remick Corners with access to Route 1, Route 1 Bypass and to I-95.
- 3. Newmarket In a parking area with access to Route 108 and thence to Routes 87, 85 and 101.
- 4. Epping In a parking area with access to Routes 125 and 101.
- 5. Plaistow In a parking area with access to Route 125.
- 6. Haverhill In a parking area with aceas to Routes O 108, 110 and I-495.
- 7. Groveland In a parking area with access to Route 113.
- 8. Georgetown In a parking area with access to I-95.
! 9. Romney In a parking area with access to Routes 1 and 1A. 1 Within EPZ, Outside 10-Mile Radius
- 10. Portsmouth In a parking area near Elwyn Road with access to Route 1 and Route 1A.
] Within EPZ, Outside 5-Mile Radius
- 11. Amesbury In a parking area off Route 110 near interchange with I-495, with access to Routes 110, I-495 and I-95.
- 12. North Hampton In a parking area off the intersection of Routes 101D and 1, with access to Routes 101D, 1 and 151.
- O ,
12-5 l l
- 13. CONFIRMATION TIME ;
It is necessary to confirm that the evacuation process is effective, in the sense that the public is complying with the order to evacuate. Since it is not feasible to confirm the compliance of every household within the EPZ in a timely manner, a procedure which employs a stratified random sample is recommended. The size of the sample is dependent on the expected number of households which do not comply with the order to evacuate. We believe it is reasonable to assume, for the purpose of estimating sample size, that at least 80 percent of the population within the EPZ will comply with the order to evacuate. On this basis, an analysis was undertaken (see Exhibit 13-1) which yielded an estimated sample size of approximately 300. The confirmation process should start at about 3 hours after the order to evacuate is announced or 1 1/2 hours prior to the ETE value, whichever is later. For example, if the ETE, referenced to the order to evacuate, is 6:30, then the confirmation process should begin 5 hours after the order. If i the ETE is 3:30, then the confirmation process should begin 3 i hours after the order to evacuate. At these times, for either case, virtually all evacuees will have departed on their respective trips and the local telephone system will be largely free of traffic. As indicated in Exhibit 13-1, almost 8 1/2 person hours are needed to complete the telephone survey. If 7 people are assigned . to this task, each dialing a different set of telephone exchanges ! (e.g. each person can be assigned a different ERPA), then the l confirmation process will extend over a time frame of about 75 minutes. Thus, the confirmation should be completed about 15 I minutes before.the evacuated area is cleared (for those cases where the ETE exceeds 4:30) or up to 45 minutes after the area is I cleared, for situations with shorter ETE. Of course, fewer people l would be needed for this survey if only a portion of the EPZ is j ordered to evacuate. i Should the number of telephone responses (i.e. people still
- at home) exceed 20 percent, then the telephone survey should be i repeated after and hour's interval until the confirmation process l is completed.
I
- Summarv of ETE Confirmation times, as tabulated in Tables 10-10a through 1 10-10d are calculated on the basis that two persons are involved l in the telephone survey if Region 9 is evacuated, four persons if Regions 5-8 are evacuated, and one person per ERPA for Regions 1-4.
13-1 Exhibit 13-1. Estimated Number of Telephone Calls Required - for Confirmation of Evacuation Problem Definition Estimate number of phone calls, n, needed to ascertain the proportion, p, of households that have not evacuated
Reference:
Burstein, H., Attribute Samulina, McGraw Hill, 1971 Given: No. of households plus other facilities, N, within the EPZ (est.) = 55,000 Est. proportion, F, of households that will not evacuate = D.20 Allowable error margin, e: 0.05 Confidence level, a: 0.95 (implies A = 1.96) Applying Table 10 of cited reference, p = p + 5 = 0.25 ; q = 1 - p = 0.75 n= = 308 e2 nN Finite population correction: ny = = 306 n+N-1 Thus, some 300 telephone calls will confirm that approximately 20 percent of the population has not evacuated. If only 10 percent of the population does not comply with the order to evacuate, then the required sample size, ny = 215. Est. Person Hours to complete 300 telechone calls Assume: Time to dial using touch-tone (random selection of listed numbers): 30 seconds ! Time for 8 rings (no answer) : 48 seconds ! Time for 4 rings plus short conversation: 60 sec. Interval between calls: 20 sec. Person Hours: 300[30+20+0.8(48)+0.2(60)]/3600 = 8.4 I l 9 13-2
. . _ _ . -A.
I I, 9 APPENDIX A Glossary of Terms i I i i 4 I f 4
,n.. .- - - - . , , ,- - - - - ----, - - - , .-n- .----, - - - - - . ,-,- , , , , , ,---... --. - - - - - . , ,,, - - - , - - - - . . -
l O Appendix A: Glossary of Terms Term Definition capacity Maximum number of vehicles which has a reasonable expectation of passing a given section of road-way in one direction during a given time period under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions. These are estimates which are ex-pressed as vehicles per hour (vph) Centroid An origin or destination located in the interior of the network. Content Number of vehicles' occupying a section of roadway at a particular point in time.
# Destination A location in the network, either within the interior or on the periphery, to which trips are attracted.
Entry Node A network node, usually located on the periphery of a network, which serves only as an origin. That is, vehicles are generated and move" into the network to travel toward their respective destinations. Exit Node A network node, usually located on the periphery of a network, which serves only as a destination. That is, vehicles which arrive at an exit node are discharged from the network. A-1 e _ \
O Term Definition Green-Time to Cycle Time The ratio of the duration of a green Ratio (G/C Ratio) interval to the cycle length. This ratio denotes the proportion of time available to service a specified traffic movement on a specific approach to an intersection. Internal Node All nodes which are not Entry or Exit nodes. Vehicles travel through these nodes from one link to the next along their respective paths toward their respective destinations. Level of Service An index (A, B, ..., E) which is a qualitative descriptor of the oper-ational performance of traffic on l a section of roadway, usually ex- ! pressed in terms of speedf travel l ' time or density. In practice, each Level of Service index is often associated with a range of service volumes. This relation de-pends on the type of facility l (freeway, rural road, urban street) . Link A network link represents a specific, one-directional section of roadway. A link has both physical (length,- number of lanes, topology, etc.) and operational (turn movement per-centages, service rate, free-flow speed) characteristics. Measures of Effectiveness Statistics describing traffic opera-tions on a roadway network. Node A network node generally represents a specific intersection of network links. A node has control charac-teristics, i.e. the allocation of service time to each approach link. l s e A-2
I'w;) Term ' ir3 f in i tion Origin A locatzin in the network, either within the interior, or on the periphery, where trips are generated at a specified rate expressed in vehicles per hour (vph). These trips enter the roadway system to travel to their respective destina-tions. Network A graphical representation of the geometric topology of a physical roadway system, which is comprised of directional links and nodes. Prevailing riadway and Relate to the physical features traffic conditions of the roadway, the nature (e.a. composition) of traffic on the roadway and the ambient conditions ()
's /
(weather, visibility, pavement conditions, etc.) Service Rate Maximum rate at which vehicles, executing a specific turn maneuver, can be discharged from a section of roadway at the prevailing con-ditions, expressed in vehicles per second (vps). Service Volume Maximum number of vehicles which can pass over a section of roadway in one direction during a specified time period with operating conditions at a specified Level of Service. (The service volume at Level of Service, E, is equal to Capacity) Service Volume is usually expressed as vehicles per hour (vph). Signal Cycle, The total clapsed time to display Cycle Time or all signal indications, in sequence. Cycle Length The cycle length is expressed in sCConds. A-3
Term Defi.nition O Signal Interval A single combination of signal indications. The interval duration is expressed in seconds. In gen-eral, several intervals, in sequence, comprise a phase. Signal Phase A set of signal indications (and
. intervals) which services a parti-cular combination of traffic move-ments on the approaches to the intersection. The phase duration is expressed in seconds.
Traffic Assignment A process of assigning traffic to paths of travel in such a way as to satisfy all trip objectives (i.e. the desire of each vehicle to travel from a specified origin in the network to a specified de-stination) and to optimize some h stated objective or combination of objectives. In general, the ob-jective is stated in terms of mini-mizing a generalized " cost". For example, " cost" may be ex-pressed in terms of travel time. Traffic Density The number of vehicles which occupy one lane of a roadway section of specified length at a point of time, expressed as vehicles per lane-mile (vp1m or vpm) Traffic Simulation A computer model designed to repli-cate the real-world operation of vehicles on a roadway network, so as to provide statistics describing traffic performance. These sta-tistics are called Measures of Effectiveness. 8 A-4
O' Term Definition Traffic Volume The number of vehicles which pass over a section of roadway in one direction, expressed in vehicles per hour (vph). Where applicable, traffic volume may be stratified by turn movement. 1 Travel Mode Distinguishes between private auto, i ~ bus, rail and air travel modes. Trip Table A rectangular matrix or table, whose or entries contain the number of trips Origin-Destination which are generated at each specified Matrix origin, during a specified time period, which are attracted to (and travel toward) one of the specified destinations. These values are ex-pressed in vehicles per hour (vph) or in vehicles. I) Turning Capacity The capacity associated with that component of the traffic stream which executes a specified turn maneuver from an approach at an intersection.
\
3 A-5
APPENDIX B Traffic Assignment Model (s 9
h~') Appendix D: Tra t fic Assignment Model V The traffic assignment program which is employed in this study is an elaboration of an existing model developed by Dr. Sang Nguyen.* This model is an equilibrium assignment model which employs mathem.2tical programming methodology to scarch for, and attain, a global optimum solution. The term," optimum" , implies that the solution is unique and that it minimizes a specified cost function. This cost funqtion, in our application, is expressed directly in terms of aggregate travel time. That is, the model formulation relates travel time to the assigned volumes on each network link according to the following formulation: fV. T. =T 1+a d ' 2 (C) i where , T. :r Travel Time en link, i,sec 1 (-) ( ,/ T g = Specified free-flow (zero delay) travel time on link,i,sec
- v. = volume of traffic on a link,i, vph 1
C. = Capacity of link,i, vph 1 a,b = Specified calibration parameters The cost function, then, is formulated in terms of travel time along each path fron each origin to each respect' ve i destina-tion. Minimizing this path-specific travel time (i.e. the so-called User Optimization) , all vehicles are assured of being routed along the shortest (in travel time) possible path to their respective destinations. The computational algorithm assigns traffic over the network in such a way as to minimize this aggregate cost. That is, the
.ille, cation of volumes, V, to the network links, i=1,2..., N is accomplished in such a way as to:
*Nguyen. S. an U ames, L., "TPAFFIC - An E<otilibrium Traf fic Ansignment P roij ram , Ptibli e:a t ion No. 17, Contre de Reserche sur
. les Transpotts, March l ') l S .
k % E B-1
f e Sattsfy all specified origin-destination demands, h e Satisfy the minimum-cost (travel time) objective, e Satisfy any specified control treatment and turn re-strictions designed to:
- Expedite the evacuation process
- Minimize radiation exposure of the vehicle occupants.
Most applications of traffic assignment employ constant, estimated, values of link capacity, C i. It is well known, how-ever, that link capacity is a function of many factors including the (unknown) turn volumes on all links serviced by a common intersection. Consequently, the assumption of constant link capacity compromises the efficacy of the assignment results. To resolve this problem, KLD has expanded the eEisting TRAFFIC model to incorporate a model, named the'TRAFLO CAPACITY model. This model computes accurate estimates of capacity, Ci,that are always consistent with the assigned volumes, Vi, on each l link. This capacity model consists of three integrated component
- e A formulation which calculates the service rates for through and left-turning vehicles in a lane, given, among other data, the proportion of left-turners in the lane, l
l e Another formulation for through and right-turner I service rates, o A formulation which calculates the lateral deployment of traffic on an approach, yielding the proportion of through and turning vehicles in each lane. These three components are exercised in an iterative manner to produce accurate and self-consistent estimates of service rates for approaches of general configuration and for all types of control devices. Many tests have confirmed that this solution procedure is rapid, accurate and unconditionally con,- vergent. In summary, the Traffic Assignment Model used in this project l repconents the latest state-of-tho-art and provides accurate esti-B-2
mates of link volumes, stratified by turn movement at the down-stream mode (intersection) . These turn volumes on each link arc [. subsequently input i nto the Traffic Simulation Program. Another output provided by the Traffic Assignment model is the estimated travel times on each link. These estimates are not particularly accurate--they are usually optimistic--but they do identify the " hot spots" in the network: those links which are seve rely congested. This permits the analyst to identify candi-date solutions to relieve the congestions and to expedite the flow of traffic. - 9 e O 1 4 I e n-3 y- -ar, T wry
- w ,- rw-w 9 ww w- ---wr .y. cq,e , a yv se-w,-, v ---w-- ---.--% ,y - ,gaw wWrwmww,wyw---y-we*- . , _ . _ - --- - -- --
- _ _ - . . . ~- . .
i I l l i 1 9 APPENDIX C Traffic Simulation Model: I-DYNEV l l i 4 5 l i l l c--- -- - - - _ - - . , __ __ ,_
Appendix C: Tra f f ic S imu1aL ion Mociel: I -nY::CV {b A model, named T-DYMEV, is an adautatLun of the TRAFLo Level II simulation model, developed by KLD for the Federal Highway Administration (FliWA) , with extensions in scope to ac-commodate all types of facilities. This model produces an extensive set of output MOE as shown in Table C-1. The traffic stream is described in terms of a set of link-specific statistical flow histograms. These histograms (Figure C-1) describe the platoon structure of the traffic scream on each net-work link. The simulation logic identifies five types of histo-grams: e The ENTRY histogram which describes the platoon flow at the upstream end of the subject link. This histo-gram is simply an aggregation of the appropriate OUTPUT turn-movement-specific histograms of all feeder links. e The INPUT histograms which describe the platoon flow , pattern arriving at the stop line. These are obtained by first disaggregating the ENTRY histogram into turn-movement-specific component ENTRY histograms. Each such component is modified to account for the platoon
~)
s ,) dispersion which results as traf fic traverses the link. The resulting INPUT histograms reflect the specified turn percentages for the subject link. e The SERVICE histogram which describe the service 1.tes for each turn movement. These service rctes reflvet the type of control device servicing traffic on tnis approach; if it is a signal, then this histogram re-flects the specified movement-specific signal phasing. A separate model was developed to estimate service rates for each turn movement, given that the control is GO. e The QUEUE histograms which describe the time-varying ebb and growth of the queue formation at_the stop line. These histograms are derived f rom the interaction of the respective IN histograms with the SERVICE histograms. e The OUT histograms which describe the pattern of traf-fic discharging from the subject link. Each or the IN histograms is transformed into an OUT histogram by the control appl ied to t he subject link. Each of these OUT his t og rams is added into the (a jy rega te) ENT3Y hictogram
'# of its receiving l ink .
C-1
Table C-1: Measures of Effcctiveness output by I-DYNEV Measurc Units Travel Vehicles-Miles and Vehicle-Trips Moving time - Vehicle-Minutes Delay time vehicle-Minutes Total travel time vehicle-Minutes Efficiency: moving time / total travel time Percent Mean travel time per vehicle Seconds Mean delay per vehicle Seconds Mean delay per vehicle-mile Seconds / Mile Mean speed Miles /Mour Mean occupancy Vehicles Mean saturation Percent i Vehicle stops Percent These data are provided for each network link and are also aggregated over the entire network. l 1 s C-2
d d - E R - 1* - I ~ o 1 2 n A - . . l _ i e O 10 20 30 40 Time, Sec. Note: IDYNEV operates upon the areas enclosed within these histograms. These areas represent the product of Flow Rate and Time (veh/sec x sec) to yield the i ' number of vehicles entering a link, traveling on the j link and discharging from the link. Figure C-1: Statistical representation c f the traffic stream platoon str.icture. 9 8 C-3
Note that this approach provides the I-DYNEV wool w t th the ability to identify the characteristics of each turn-movement-specific component of the traffic stream. Each component is serviced at a different saturation flow rate as is the case in the real world. Furthermore, the I-DYNEV logic will be able to recognize when one component of the traffic flow is encoun-tering saturation conditions even if the others are not. Algorithms provide estimates of delay and stops reflecting the interaction of the IN histograms with the SERVICE histograms. The I-DYNEV logic also orovides for properly treating spillback conditions reflecting queues extending from one link into its upstream feeder links. A valuable feature of I-DYNEV is its ability to internally generate functions which relate mean speed to density on each ! link, given user-specified estimates of free-flow speed and l saturation service rates for each link. Such relationships are essential in order to simulate traffic operations on freeways and rural roads, where the signal control does not exist or where its effect is not the dominant factor in impeding traffic flow. All traffic simulation models are data-intensive. Table C-2 outlines the input requirements of the I-DYNEV Model. In order to apply the I-DYNEV Model, the physical traffic environment must be specified by the user. This input data describes: e Topology of the roadway system - e Geometries of each roadway component e Channelization of traffic on each roadway component e Motorist behavior which, in aggregate, determines the operational performance of vehicles in the system e Specification of the traffic control devices and their operational characteristics e Traffic volumes entering and leaving the roadway system e Traffic composition To provide an efficient f ramework for defining these spe-cifications, the physical environment is represented as a net-work. The unidirectional links of t[he network generally represent roadway components: either urban streets or freeway segments. The nodes of the network generally represent urban intersections of points along the freeway where a geometric property changes (e.g., a lane drop, change in grade or ramp.) lh
\
C-4
; Figure C-2 is an example of a network representation. The '"' freeway is defined by the sequence of links, (1,2), (2,3), ...,
(5,6). Links (8000,1) and (7,8002) are Entry and Exit links, respectively. An arterial extends f rom node 7 to node 15 and is partially subsumed within a grid network. The development of the IlDYNEV nodel followed directly after DYNEV was comoleted. The perceived need for I-DYNEV was based upon the requirement for a model having all the demonstrated capabilities of DYNEV, but one which consumed less computer time and storage. The major distinction between DYNEV and I-DYNEV is that the latter model directly calculates the intecral of the histograms described earlier (see Fiqure C-1) , instead of comouting the amoli-tudes of each histocram slice, as does DYNEV. One other difference is that in I-DYNEV, vehicles which cannot travel along their assigned evacuation route due to excessive congestion will divert to another, alternative evacuation route if the latter is not congested. In all other respects, the two models are either identical (e.g., the input and output software) or are very similar, with any differences reflecting the major distinction described above. [) This major distinction results in software code which consumes significantly less storage for I-DYNEV than for DYNEV, reflecting the elimination of large arrays containing the amplitude values of each histogram slice. The reduced computational burden is reflected in almost a three-fold reduction in computing time. A thorough comparison was made between the ETE results generated oy the two models. It was found that all pairs of results, DYNEV and I-DYNEV, were virtually identical for a wide variety of network configurations and traffic demand levels. Note that the two models require the same basic input stream and produce similar output formats. On the basis of these results, I-DYNEV is used exclusively for the EESF system, to calculate evacuation time estimates, and was used to calculate the Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for Seabrook Station. C-5
Table C-2: Input requirements for the I-DYNEV Model - O GEOMETRICS Links defined by upstream downstream node numbers. Links lengths. Number of lanes (up to 6). Turn pockets. . Grade. Network topology defined in terms of target nodes for each receiving link. l TRAFFIC VOLUMES on all entry links and sink / source nodes stratified by vehicle types auto, car pcol, bus, truck. Link-specific turn movements og 0-D matrix (Trip Table) TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS Traffic signals: link-specific, turn movement specific. Control may be fixed-time or traffic-actuated. Stop and Yield signs. Right-turn-on-red (RTOR) . Rou.te diversion specifications. Turn restrictions. Lane control (i.e. , lane closure) . DRIVER'S AND OPERATICNS CHARACTERISTICS Driver's (vehicle-specific) response mechanisms: free-flow speed, aggressiveness, discharge headway. Link-specific mean speed for free-flowing (unimpeded) traffic, vehiclo-type operational characteristics: acceleration, deceleration. Such factors as bus route designation, bus station location, dwell time, headway, etc. C-6
Entry, Exit nodes are nuctbered
^
in the form, 8XXX
, v n
& @ r e % V
$0'e y
a . n t'
,,t f ~, e
~
2@ m & e@ 2 m
- 2 n
l RN E6 , o w "'ts e m d, e rigure C-2: Representative analysis "" # C-7
I APPENDIX D I Detailed Description Of Study Procedure - O i
r~x Appendix D: Detailed Description of Study Procedure This appendix describes the activities to be performed
, in order to produce accurate estimates of evacuation times on the Evacuation Planning Zone (EPZ) for a nuclear power plant. The individual steps of this ef fort are represented as a flow diagram in Figure D-1. Each numbered step in the description which follows corresponds to the numbered ele-ment in this flow diagram.
Step 1 The first activity is to obtain census data defining the spatial distribution of population within the EPZ. Specifically, obtain the population in each of 160 cells of a polar grid which is centered at the nuclear station, and consists of 22.5* sections and rings spaced one mile apart. Transient population characteristics must also be estimated on the same basis. Step 2 The next activity is to examine a large-scale map of the EPZ. This map enables one to identify the access (N N-roads from each residential development to the adjoining elements of the analysis roadway network. This information is necesssary in order to assign generated trips to the correct links of the network. This map also enables one to represent the geometrics of complex intersections properly in terms of their network configuration. Step 3 With this information absorbed, the next step is to conduct a physical survey of the roadway system withln the EPZ. The purpose of this survey is to determine the necessary measurements of roadway length and of the number of lanes on each link, the channelization of these lanes, whether or not there were any turn restrictions or special l treatment of traffic at intersections and to gain the nec-essary insight required for estimating realistic values of roadway capacity. At each major intersection, take note of the traffic control device which was installed. In addition, , determine whether or not, under emergency evacuation condi-tions, it would be possible to employ paved shoulders as an additional lane in the event such additional capacity was required. . t3 L) x s D-1
\
Cet n.coiraphie nata O II 2 Study Large-Scale Map of ED" II 3 Survey the Roadway System within the EPZ
~
'I 4 Develop Network Representation II 5 O
Estimate Link Cacacities and Locate Centroids If 6 Create the Input Stream for the Traffic Assignment Model if 7 Debug the Innut Strean I F ig u r e D-1. Flow Diagram of Activities D-2
A II 8 Execute the
= Traffic Assignnent
.Stodel U 9 Examine Traffic Assignnent Output (Iterate) JL Results are B
/ Satisfactory Changes Needed t U 10 Develop control Treatments
{' ' and/or Modify Trip Table to Improve Results II 11 Modify the Input Stream to Reflect the Changes of Step 10 l I i ,. Figure D-1. Flow Diagram of Activitics (cont.) D-3
c0 12 Complete Inp,ut Stream for the Traffic Simulation Model by Incoroporating Traffic Assignment Outpists If 13 Execute the
-*- Simulation Model II 14 Examine Traffic Simulation Output IIo Changes to 17 (rterate)a esgits are the Traffic ,
Docurent Satisfactory \ Assignment Results Changes Outouts Needed
. I 15
[ Develop Control Treatments and/or Modifv Trin Tabl i to Improve Results hw 9ehs Reflect Ch'anges
!4ade in Step 15
" 16 t-tod i f y t he Input Stream to Reflect the A Changes'of Step 15 "## "'
F iqure D-1. P loti Dimiram of Act ivi ties (conc l . ) D-4
\
C)
\_j Step 4. With this information, develon the evacuation network representation of the physical roadway system.
Steo 5. With the network drawn, proceed to estimate the capacities of each link and to locate the controids where trips would be generated during the evacuation process and then enter the analysis network. Step 6. With all the information at hand, it is time to perform the ef fort of creating the input stream for the Traffic Assignmene Model. This model was designed to be compatible with the Traffic Simulation Model used later in the project, in the sense that the input format required for one model was entirely compatible with the aput format re-quired by the other, thus avoiding duplication of effort. This step in the procedure is labor-intensive. Fortunately, this input stream need only be developed once; any changes made can be implemented quickly and at small cost. Thus, it is possible to execute these models on different scenarios with very little effort needed to modify the basic input stream to represent the specific' attributes of each scenario. [h l\ /
Step 7.
~
After c'reating the input stream by using PREDYN,
~
execute the Traffic Assignment Model. This computer pro' gram contains upwards of 1,000 diagnostic inconsistencies and any other improper input. This diagnostic software produces messages which assist the user in identifying the source of the problem and guide the user in preparing the necessary corrections. Step 8 With the input stream free of error, execute the Traffic Assignment Model. The Traffic Assignment program is a very ef ficient sof tware code. Step 9. The next activity is to examine critically the statistics produced by the Traffic Assignment program. This is a labor-intensive activity, requiring the direct partici-pation of skilled engineers who possess the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any prob'lems reflected in the result. 1O) y n-c
Essentially, the approach in to identify those " hot spots" in the network which represent loca tions where con-gested conditions are extreme. It is then necessary to identify the cause of this congestion. This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to improper routing, as a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative error in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream. The examination of the Traffic Assignment output leads to one of two conclusions: e The re . :12s are as satisf actory as could be expected at this stage of the analysis process, or e Treatments must be introduced in order to improve the flow of traffic. This decision recuires, of course, the application of the user's judgment based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the Traffic Assignment Model and a comparison of the results of this last case with the previous ones. In the event the results are satisfactory, in the opinion of the user then the process continues ~with the exercise of the simu-lation model in Step 12. Otherwise, proceed to Step 10. Step 10. There are many " treatments" available to the user in resolving such problems. These treatments range from decisions to reroute the traffic by imposing turn restrictions where they can produce significant improvements in capacity, changing the control treatment at critical intersections so as to provide improved service for one or more movements, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems or changing the trip table. Such " treatments" take the form of modifications to the original input stream. We then perform the modifications to the input stream, reflecting the control treatments described above. As indicated previously, such modifications are implemented quickly to the extent that more than one execution of the computer program is possible in a single day. Step 11. As noted above, the physical changes to the input stream must be implemented in order'to reflect the changes in the control treatments underrahen in Steo l0. At the com-pletion of thin activity, the process returrn to Step 8 where the Traffic A si;nment Model :s once anain executed. n-6
Step 12. The output of the Traffic Assignment Model (~ , includes the computed turn movements for each link. If the m-
/ user is executing the Traffic Assignment and the Traffic Simu-lation models in a single run, then this data is automatically accessed by the latter model. If the simulation model is executed separately, the user must modify the input stream for the Traffic Assignment model by beginning in the turn-movement data, using PREDYN.
Step 13. After the input stream has been debugged, the simulation model is executed to provide the user with detailed estimates, expressed as statistical measures of effectiveness (MOE), which describe the detailed performance of traffic operations on each link of the network. Step 14. In this step,.the detailed output of the Traffic Simulation Model is examined in order to identify once again the problems which exist on the network. The results of the simulation model are extremely detailed and are far more accurate in their ability to describe traffic operations than those provided by the Traffic Assignment Model. Thus, it is possible to identify the cause of the problems by carefully studying the output. 1 Again, one can implement corrective treatments designed to expedite the flow of traffic on the network in the event that the results are considered to be less efficient than is possible to achieve. In the event that changes are needed, the analysis process proceeds to Step 15. On the other hand, if the results were satisfactory, then one can decide whether it is necessary to return to Step 8 to execute the Traffic Assignment Model once again and repeat the whole process, or to accept the final results as being the "best" that can be achieved within the reasonable constraints of budget and time allotments. Generally, if there are no changes indicated by the activities of Step 14, then we can conclude that all results were satisfactory, and we can then proceed to document them in Step 17. Otherwise, we have to return to Step 8 in order to determine the effects of the changes implemented in Step 14 on the optimal routing patterns over the network. This determination can only be ascertained by executing the Traffic Assignment Model. Step 15. This activity implements the changes in control treatments or in the assignment of destinations associated with one or more origins in order to improve the flow of traffic over the network. These treatments can also include the consideration f of additional roadway segments to the existing analysis network D-7 l
in order to disperse the traffic demand and thus avoid the focusing of traffic demand which can produce high levels of congestion. h Step 16. Once the treatments have been identified, it is necessary to modify the input stream accordingly. At the completion of this effort, the procedure returns to Step 13 to execute the simulation model on,ce more. Step 17. The simulation results are then analyzed, tabulated and graphed. The results are then documented, as required. O D-3 9
O APPENDIX E Literature Review and Data compiled to Date O
APPENDIX E: Literature Review and Data Compiled to Date
- 1. State of New Hampshire, Dept. of Resources and Economic Development, Division of Parks and Recreation.
Records are k' apt of the number of parked vehicles at all State Parks. Park attendance is imputed from this data by
, assuming an average value of vehicle occupancy:
Park Attendance Based on 3.5 Persons ner Vehicle Summer, 1983 Summer, 1984 Seacoast Recion , (13 weeks) (13 weeks) Ft. Constitution 2,000 2,000 Hampton Bathhouse 204,200 170,700 Odiorne 18,200 19,500 Rye Picnic Area 15,900 15,100 Wallis Sands 99,300 70,000 Wentworth-Coolidge 1.500 1.300 341,100 278,600
- 2. Town of Hampton, Department of Public Works one way of estimating chances in population, is to measure the flow of sewage. As indicated below, the highest daily flow occurs over the July 4th Weekend.
Average Flow per Day (millions of gallons) 1984 1985 July 4th Weekend: 3 61 2.77 (four days) All of July: 3.21 2.63 Excess on July 4th Weekend Relative to Month of July: 12.5 5.3 (percent) ( 3. Hampton Beach Traffic Study: Report compiled by l Dufresne-Henry, Consulting Engineers, for the Town of Hampton, N.H.; date August 1, 1984
- The following statistics have been culled from this report:
a) Approximately 3400 people use the State Park beach (adjoining the bath house) on a peak day. i b) Off-street parking area for this facility is l approximately 1200 spaces, t E-1
c) Other off-street parking lots included: Church St.: 400 cars Ashworth: 580 Island Path: 315 Casino: 530 Playground: 230 Median: 453 Ocean Blvd. N.: 139 on-street: 187 TOTAL: 2834 d) Cites a N.H. State Planning study which estimates that the beach (other than that near the bath-house) can accommodate 15,600 people at high tide and 31,300 people at low tide. Including the State Park would raise these estimates to about 19,000 and 34,700, respectively.
- 4. Regionwide Systems Performance Study Update: Working Paper proposed by Merrimack Valley Planning Commission, dated July 1985.
This report presents the results of capacity analyses . conducted on the heavily travelled roads within the MVPC region. The Level of Service (LOS) describing traffic flow conditions is presented for all surveyed roads in each town: Percent of Roads with Level of Service Town & H g D E E Newburyport 84.7 3.8 11.5 0 0 0 Newbury 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 Merrimac 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 Amesbury 82.7 8.7 4.3 4.3 0 0 Salisbury 86.5 8.1 0 0 5.4 0 West Newbury 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 The term, " Level of Service" (LOS) is defined as follows: LOS Definition A Free flow. Users virtually unaffected by others in the traffic stream. B Stable flow. Presence of other users in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively unaffected. C Stable flow. Users significantly affected by interactions with others in traffic stream. Selection of speed affected by presence of others. O E-2
D High density, but stable. Speed selection and freedom ; p()s to maneuver are severely restricted. 1 E Usually unstable. Operating conditions at or near capacity. Speeds are low, but relatively uniform. Small increases in flow or minor perturbations can cause breakdowns in traffic flow. F Forced or " breakdown" flow. Traffic demand exceeds capacity; queues are formed and stop-and-go operations result. These definitions are adapted from the 1985 Highway capacity Manual. - According to this study, drivers in the indicated towns generally enjoy traffic conditions which are free flow or stable. This condition implies that there is substantial reserve capacity available, relative to normal peak-period traffic demand. The lone exceptions are in Salisbury where Route 1 intersects Routes 286 and 1A/110, respectively. A subsequent study (see below) indicated a LOS of F for the latter intersection during peak hours.
- 5. Salisbury Center Traffic Study: Draft Report prepared by MVPC, dated March 1985.
() This study focused on traffic conditions on the approaches to Salisbury Center -- the intersection of Routes 1, lA and 110. Traffic counts were taken during the summer of 1984; peak hour traffic volume data is given below: East or West or Road North-Bound South-Bound Rt. lA: Beach Road, E-W 1473 910 Rt. 1: Lafayette Road, N-S 576 693 Rts. 1, lA: Bridge Road, N-S 1647 1173 Rt. 110: Elm Street, E-W 842 900 Three alternative designs were submitted to the Town of Hampton; one of the these was found to be acceptable, with some modification. This choice involved, among other factors, channelizing Beach Road as a four-lane road in the vicinity of the intersection and installing a signal there.
- 6. Economic Impact of Certain Shoreline Users on the New Hampshire Coastal Zone, prepared by the Southeastern New Hampshire Regional Planning Commission, dated October 1975.
This study acquired data using observers stationed along the access roads to the beaches. observers also conducted surveys on (~} the beach and along ocean Blvd. Aerial photographs were taken (/ and the vehicle population was estimated from these photos. E-3
The data was stratified by four coastal areas:
- 1. Not Sandy: Hilton Park, Great Island Common, Odiorne's Point, Rye Harbor State Park
- 2. South Sandy: Seabrook, Hampton State Beach, Cottage Beach, Hampton Beach
- 3. Mid Sandy: Noth Beach, Plaice Cove, Little Boar's Head
- 4. North Sandy: Rye Beach, Jenness Beach, North Beach, Wallis Sands Car occupancies and number of parked cars were recorded on days which represented " good beach weather":
Location: Not South Mid North Sandy Egndy Sandy Sandy Avg. Car Occupancy (persons): 3.2 3.5 3.0 3.1 TOTALS Cars Counted Weekday: 103 7,496 1,005 897 9,501 Weekend (max..of Sat. & Sun.): 639 8,269 2,053 1,689 12,650 Est. Pecole on Coast Weekday: 300 25,900 3,000 2,900 32,100 Max. Weekend day: 2,100 28,600 6,200 5,400 42,300 Percentaces Overall 3.5 73.8 12.3 10.4 100.0 Day-Tripper 83 44 51 55 45 Vacationer 17 56 49 45 55
- 7. Parking Analysis using Aerial Photographs KLD was provided with 9 sets of color-slides containing aerial views of the entire coastal area within the Seabrook EPZ, from southern Plum Island on the south to the Portsmouth area on the north. Each set consists of approximately 55 slides, representing one sortie along the coast.
Each set vas analyzed by employing a slide projector and a screen. For each set, the number of vehicles parked within the EPZ along the beach areas was determined, together with an estimate of parking capacity. All vehicles sighted on the film were counted, including those in designated parking lots, in unmarked (and unpaved) lots used by parked vehicles, along the curbs, in driveways and in backyards and on front lawns. Capacity was estimated by: e counting the parking stalls in all marked parking lots E-4
e Measuring the length of unoccupied curb space and expressing this distance in terms of cars
- e Assuming that all open, accessible lots could be occupied to their full extent e Assuming that private driveways, front yards and backyards would be utilized for parked cars Many of these unpaved lots are at significant distances from the beach (1/2 to 1 mile) and are thus relatively unattractive, other locations (e.g. on Plum Island) are attractive only to those who seek relative solitude; in a pratical sense, such capacities are overstated We believe that these capacity estimates represent a reasonable upper bound to the number of possible parked vehicles in the indicated areas
, The statistics describing actual parked vehicles presented below for each section of the coastal region, are derived from aerial films taken on Sunday, August 11, 1985 in the early afternoon. These estimates represent the highest vehicle counts of any of the available sets of photographs. The weather on that day was described as clear, with temperature i approximately 90 degrees -- ideal conditions for attracting i day-trippers to the beaches. Estimate of Parking Vehicle Count Coastal Section Capacity (cars) (all vehicles tvoes*) O k-s/ Plum Island (MA) 2830 1440 (51) Salisbury Beach (MA) 8060 5800 (72) Seabrook Beach (NH) 2650 2280 (86) Hampton Beach (NH) 7770 5720 (74) North of NH 51, incl. North Beach (NH) 1300 990 (76) Plaice Cove, Little
- l. Boar's Head, Bass J Beach (NH) 600 500 (83) 1 Rye & Jenness Beaches
& Straw Point (NH) 1440 950 (66)
Wallis Sands, odiornes Point (NH) 820 540 (66) Totals: 25,470 18,220 (71.5)
*Few buses were observed; RV's constituted less than 2 percent of the total count. Values in parenthesis are vehicle count as percent of j capacity.
1 E-5 i
l l l l
- 8. Beach Population Analysis using Aerial Photographs Separately, KLD obtained 3 aerial photographs of Hampton Beach which were 11" x 17" in size. These photographs were taken on July 4, 1983. It was agreed by all officials interviewed that 1983 was the peak year for beach attendance and that the Fourth of July weekend appeared to attract just about the heaviest crowds of the season. Both assessments were supported by data describing traffic counts at permanent State counters (ATR's) and by examining sewage flows (see item 2, above).
On this basis, we concluded that by counting individual people on the beach for that day, we would have an empirical basis for an independent estimate of beach population. Review of these photos revealed that: e The most crowded portion of the beach was opposite the Casino, which was also closest to the sanitary facilities maintained by the State. e Few people, relatively speaking, were observed off the beach at that time of day. Traffic flow was extremely light and only a handful gf people were visible inland of the beach. Both observations were confirmed by N.H. Parks Dept. personnel as consistent with their experience. A large-scale photo of this beach area was examined and, with the help of a magnifying glass, a count of people was undertaken. A check confirmed that a total of about 1160 persons were on the beach and on the abutting sidewalk near the State facilities. A subsequent measurement of this beach area using a measuring wheel indicated a total area above the high-tide line of approximately 75,500 sq. ft. The photos also revealed that few, if any, blankets were spread on the seaward side of the high-tide line: the sand was wet throughout the low tide period. (At other locations, the sand drained and people did spread their towels on the seaward side of the high-tide line.) We thus computed the practical upper bound of people density on dry beach area to be approximately 65 sq. ft. per person. We are not suggesting that a higher density is not attainable. There were, in fact, small clusters of higher density groups of people. Rather, this data indicates that a substantially higher density at Hampton Beach is not likely to be realized, when large areas of beach are considered, given the current limitation on available parking capacity. These photographs also indicated that the density of population on the beach, outside of the area in front of the casino, was somewhat lower than the figure given above. We E-6
l therefore believe that use of the 65 sq. ft. per person, applied to the entire beach area in Hampton Beach, will overstate the actual population, somewhat.
)
- 9. 1983 Beach Area Traffic Count Program: Seabrook Station EPZ, report prepared by HMM Associates, dated February 1984 This report describes the results of a comprehensive traffic count program undertaken during the summer of 1983. Hourly, directional traffic counts are provided at each of six locations extending from just north of NH 51 on Route 1A, to just west of the amusement area in Salisbury, on Beach Road (Rt. lA). This area includes Hampton, Seabrook and Salisbury beaches.
The report acknowledges that the data cannot be used to estimate the number of vehicles within the beach area at a given .! time (p. 3-4). Yet data is presented which indicates that on the peak day (July 16th), the maximum accumulation relative to 4:30 A.M., was about 9,000 cars at 2 P.M. (On a 24-hour basis, the maximum accumulation was about 6,200 cars.) The maximum rate of accumulation over one hour was less than 2,000 vehicles.
. The estimate of peak accumulation of transient vehicles used in the EMM evacuation study was 12,900, some 43 percent higher than the peak value of 9,000 measured. KKM also estimated some 10,400 vehicles belonging to permanent, seasonal and overnight persons, for a total of 23,300 vehicles. In 1982, the peak accumulation was about 7,400 vehicles.
Peak, two-direction traffic volumes (veh/hr) were (approx.): l Route 1A, Hampton: 1700 Route 51, Hampton: 1700 Route 1A, Seabrook: 2100 l NH 286, Seabrook: 1600 Route 1A, Salisbury: 1500 Bridge Street, Salisbury: 1800 A total of 19,400 vehicles exited these beaches over a 6 1/2 hour period. The peak hour volume was just under 3,900 vehicles. Of course, this figure is probably below the aggregate roadway capacities and should not be interpreted as an upper bound. Weekday traffic was about 75 percent of weekend traffic.
- 10. Beach Capacity Analysis for Shoreline Areas Around Seabrook, New Hampshire, prepared by EMM Associates, dated June 1982 This study investigated beach usage and capacity characteristics. The coastal area considered lies between the Parker River National Wildlife refuge on Plum Island, Mass.,
north to Concord Point, north of Rye Beach. However, data was presented for both Wallis Sands State Park and odiorne Point State Park, both of which are north of Concord Point. E-7 l-_ - _ , _ - . _ _ _ _
Total annual attendance at the four coastal State Parks generally ranged between 250,000 and 300,000, with a long-term trend that was essentially flat between 1970 and 1981. The annual attendance at Hampton Beach State Park ranged from about 150,000 to 180,000, in general. Vehicle parking capacity was estimated at 19,212 vehicles. This capacity included parking lots and on-street curb parking, but may not have included driveways and backyards. Studies of population on the sandy beach areas yielded observations consistent with ours (see item 8). Specifically, careful analysis indicated that a perfunctory assessment of beach population would' yield overestimates of beach density since, at any time, many beach towels are unoccupied. It was also determined that the casino area of Hampton Beach was of particular interest. The study conducted a " peak day - peak area" analysis of beach density. Specifically, sampling areas, upwards of 3,500 sq. ft were selected which represented "the most crowded section within the [ beach] segment", thus providing an upper bound of
- beach density. The report cautions the reader not to assume that such peak values are applicable to the entire beach segment (p.
3-13, 14). For example, while the peak density for the major Hampton Beach segment is 44 sq. ft. per person, an average density calculated using six sampling " plots" was 62 sq. ft. per person. (This figure compares with 65 sq. ft. per person measured by KLD -- see item 8.) The observation is made that even on peak days over a 3-year study period, "several parking lots ... are not filled to capacity". The total parking capacity was estimated at about 19,200 vehicles. On this basis, assuming 3.3 person per vehicle, a " realistic" capacity estimate of 63,400 persons is offered.
- 11. Roadway Network and Evacuation Study (for) Seabrook, New Hampshire, prepared by Wilbur Smith and Associates, dated December 1974 This report describes the assumptions used, the highway capacities estimated, the traffic management techniques to be applied and the evacuation time estimates (ETE). Several evacuation scenarios are considered.
The analysis methodology is not described in any detail. It appears to be based on an assumed speed of travel for each roadway, the estimated roadway capacities and estimated traffic demands. In the " controlled sector evacuation" it is assumed that people in some of the designated sectors will wait patiently for other sectors to be evacuated, before beginning to evacuate (Fig. E-8
following p. 36). On this basis, an ETE of slightly over 3 hours For simultaneous evacuation of the entire EPZ, an O is predicted. ETE of just under 7 hours is predicted.
- 12. Estimate of Evacuation Times, prepared by Alan M. Voorhees &
Associates, dated June 1980 (Final Report, August 1980) This report describes the estimation of ETE from the Seabrook EPZ. Several scenarios are considered: Summer Sunday, Winter weekday, normal and severe weather. Estimates of ETE are presented (hrs: min): l { e Summer Sunday - 6:10 ! e Winter weekday - 3:40 normal weather; 4:30 severe e Selective evacuation - 5:10 to 6:10 { I The population estimates are: 111,000 permanent residents i and 78,000 seasonal and transient. These estimates are i projections to 1978 from the 1970 census. Highway capacities are i set to 1200 veh. per hour for all but the interstate routes; j capacities for I95 and I495 are not given. i
- 13. Evacuation Clear Time Estimates for Areas' Near Seabrook l Station, prepared by EMM Associates, Inc., revised July 1983 This report provides ETE for the Seabrook EPZ, corresponding to five conditions. The ETE (hrs: min) for an evacuation of the entire EPZ are:
[ l Summer Weekend - 6:05 i Summer Weekday - 4:10 i Off-Season Weekday - 3:10, fair weather i Off-Season Weekday - 4:10, adverse weather ! Highway capacities are calculated internally by the NETVAC i model, based on the procedures of the 1965 Highway Capacity ! Manual. These capacities may be modified, over time, as traffic j patterns change. NETVAC is a macroscopic traffic simulation model developed for analyzing traffic operations during an ! evacuation and for calculating ETE. The traffic demand volumes used for this study excluded the towns of Portsmouth, Kingston and Newfields. Thus, the total i permanent population in 1983 was estimated to be about 122,300. l An average venicle occupancy of 3.0 persons was assumed; this would yield a demand of about 40,800 vehicles. Total seasonal demand was estimated at 39,500 vehicles for weekends (Figure 6). j Daily seasonal transient vehicle counts were estimated at 17,150
- for the weekend and 6,870 for weekdays. Manufacturing employment l within the EPZ was estimated at 7,500 vehicles. No allowance was made for double-counting; i.e. people who worked within the EPZ or went to the beach, and who also resided within the EPZ. Also, seasonal demand included 2,000 utility employee vehicles at the Station.
E-9
It was assumed that all evacuating vehicles enter the highway system at the constant rate of 20 vehicles per minute, throughout the EPZ. This rate was doubled at major employment locations for the weekday scenarios (e.g. at Seabrook Station and at the Greyhound Park) .
- 14. An Independent Assessment of Evacuation Time Estimates for a Peak Population Scenario in the Emergency Planning Zone of the Seabrook Nuclear Power Station, prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory, dated October 1982 This report presents the results of an ETE analysis of the entire EPZ under the single scenario of a peak population condition. This report was "not intended for use by decisionmakers during emergencies", but rather as an independent evaluation of other ETE's.
A total of 95,800 evacuating vehicles is estimated for this scenario, including 44,000 for permanent residents and 51,800 for seasonal and transient population. These estimates were derived from an NRC report:
. Demographic and Vehicular Demand Estimates for an Evacuation Analysis of the Seabrook Station, prepared by M. Kaltman of the Siting Analysis Branch, dated February 1981 The estimate of seasonal population was approximately 43,000 on the weekend, compared with 30,500 on a typical weekday. These estimates assumed 7.6 persons per dwelling on a weekend and 5.4 on a typical weekday. (The imputed number of seasonal dwellings is about 5,700.)
The PSNH study assumed 2.0 vehicles per dwelling; the NRC argued for a figure of 2.5. (KLD's on-foot survey recorded an average value of 2.6 vehicles per dwelling.) In addition, overnight accommodations were surveyed to obtain an estimate of about 4,600 rooms within the EPZ. Each occupied room was assumed to generate one vehicle. Campgrounds contained space for about 3,150 vehicles. Beach area parking -- both lots and on-street -- are estimated at about 17,500 spaces. Weekend bus activity is low -- on the order of 10 trips. (This was confirmed in KLD interviews with local officials.) It was also assumed that some 2,200 vehicles park during the weekend at non-seasonal housing units. About 3,100 vehicles are estimated for the Greyhound Park and another 5,100 vehicle spaces in parking lots along Route 1. Manufacturing and industrial employment within the EPZ is estimated at about 12,200 persons. (of course, many of these persons also live within the EPZ.) An assumption of one vehicle per worker was applied. E-10
A very thorough inventory was undertaken of hotels, () campgrounds, schools and special facilities. The ETE were calculated using the CLEAR model which simulates the movement of vehicles along specified " free" networks. Trip generation time was assumed to be one hour for the beach traffic and 1.5 hours elsewhere. No basis was presented to support this approach. The ETE obtained for this study was 11:40 (hrs: min). The conclusions included the following comment: The data presented in this report suggests that an evacuation time of 6 to-7 hours is possible under peak conditions if a high level of effectiveness and traffic optimization are achieved. An evacuation time estimate in the range of 10 to 12 hours represents the time estimate for an evacuation under peak conditions if a relatively umimproved level of traffic control exists.
- 15. Population Estimates for Towns within the Seabrook EPZ We have obtained the most recent population projections for the towns within the Seabrook EPZ:
e 1985 Population Estimates for towns in Massachusetts were provided by the Division of Health Statistics and i Research, Department of Public Health of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts e 1984 Population Estimates of New Hampshire Towns were provided by the New Hampshire Office of State Planning. Both sets of data were provided to us in September 1985. All estimates were projected forward to 1986 using the most recent annual growth rates for each town. We also contacted the Town Clark's offices to obtain independent estimates based on local census activities. These estimates are also shown.below: 1986 Town Clerks Town Proiected Poculation Early 1985 Massachusetts Amesbury 14,982 14,056 Merrimac 4,760 4,364 Newbury 4,759 5,423 Newburyport 16,615 16,300 Salisbury 6,276 6,645 West Newbury 3,023 3,260 O e E-11
1986 Town Clerks Town Proiected Population Early 1985 New Hamoshire Brentwood 1,939 2,000 E. Kingston 1,202 1,250 Exeter 11,828 11,600 Greenland 2,281 2,200 Hampton 11,656 13,000 Hampton Falls 1,514 1,450 Kensington 1,539 1,350 Kingston 5,180 4,890 New Castle 798 625 Newfields - 926 850 Newton 3,722 3,625 North Hampton 3,632 3,600 Portsmouth 28,404 26,300 Rye 5,059 5,000 Seabrook 6,649 8,000 South Hampton 653 700 Stratham 3,232 3,300 EPZ TOTAL: . 140,629 139,788
- 16. Emergency Planning Zone Evacuation Time Study - Seabrook Nuclear Power Station, Seabrook, N.H., prepared by Costello, Lomasney and deNapoli, Inc. in association with C.E. Maguire, Inc., dated March 1984 This report presents the results of an evacuation study for the Seabrook EPZ. These results included projections to the years 2000 and 2030, in addition to 1985.
The permanent resident population within the EPZ in 1985 is estimated at about 127,700 persons. Summer weekend transient population for 1985 was projected at about 173,100 persons. Institutional population approximated 2,200 patients and 1,300 support staff. School population is estimated at about 29,600 students and 3,300 support staff. Non-car-owning population was estimated using 1970 census data rates. The ETE estimates for the entire EPZ are presented below: Scenario ETE (hrs: min) Winter Day 3:00 Summer Weekday 4:30 Summer Weekend 5:50 Winter Day with snow 5:30 Summer Weekend, rain & fog 7:40 (Add 15 minutes to account for notification time) G E-12
- 17. Telephone Survey of Residents of Seabrook EPZ, conducted by First Market Research using a survey instrument developed by
() KLD Associates, dated October 1985 On October 3-7, 1985, telephone interviews were conducted among heads of households within the Seabrook EPZ. A total of 10,567 calls were made. Of these, 1,382 interviews were completed. The survey instrument was designed to obtain up-to-date data on demographic and travel information which is needed to satisfy the input requirements for evacuation study. This information, which should also be of value for other planning agencies, is presented elsewhere in this report.
- 18. Survey of Traffic Movements o'n the Beach Access Roads Merrimac Engineering Services, Inc. was retained to acquire vehicle counts during the last week in August 1985 and over the Labor Day weekend. These counts include vehicle counts, observations of vehicle occupancy (i.e. persons per vehicle), and license plate numbers and State of origin.
The weather over this period of time was not particularly appealing to beach-goers, so the data will not reflect peak conditions. Nevertheless, the counts of vehicle occupancy which were taken are probably representative of beach traffic, albeit there is some uncertainty on this point. Also, the license plate O data provides an indication of the points of origin of visitors. This data will be presented in the next Progress Report.
- 19. 1980 Census Data Most of the early studies employed population statistics which were projections based on the 1970 census data. KLD reviewed available 1980 census data for the towns within the EPZ, which are relevant to the evacuation study. These data are presented in Appendix H.
9 " E-13
i i k
- i i i 3
i , i I l t t i
~ ,
l ' APPENDIX F Telephone Survey Instrument j l r b i l I I I r l l l I 1 l i I I l
s % A$AY Hellu. my n.ae+ t e. , ,_
..nd I 'm wo ra. ini. .m , , ult. . . l .* i 4 i di 1 8s 's H J survey be ing sude f or First ifJrket Hen.t r h . .(1H.,
t:04. . .* IJ l 4 i* 8. i 88 's is Corporat tun us Bouton degimnni t ie (d.nl48v t [ J ) t. e W. J 4 'e to loc.at t ravel patterns in your .arcJ. 11..- , t.e al . . 4 1 J A ?. $ f. # * 'e se informetton uhtaincJ will tic . J in a t ot . i i !s4 1 #-. / 9 . er traf fic ena&lnevring Stu.8v ase.1 in t;oituve t s...e with prep.artdness pl.ans f or ifn Nraterook S e,a l'a el , A, Station. t nil. he. l . INit.kvin ER: ASK TO $ PEAK TO THE !!LSD OF HOUSLHOL.D OR THE SPOUSE OF T1tF. HIMD OF HOUSEM0LD.,
- 1. In what town or comunanity do you live? (00 NOT READ.)
COL. 9 SK!F TO COL. 10 $KtP TO 1 Amesbury, t". 1 Newbury. MA 2 Brentwood. Nil 2 howburyport. MA - Plue taland 3 East Kingsten. NH 3 New Castle. NH 4 Emeter. NH 4 Newftelds. NH 3 Creenland, NN $ Newton, NH 6 Hampton, Nil . HJapton Beach g 6 North Hampton, Nil 7 Hampton Falle, NH T Portsmouth, NH 2 5 Kensington NH $ Ryen NH - Rye Beach 9 King,eton, Nil 9 $41tsbury. MA Salinhurs Itc i. 6. O tierrimac. NH 0 Seabrook Nil . Seabroo. Ilsach X Don' t Know -- _ g ,, g gg, X Stratham. *H V Other- Y West Newbury. HA t \ 2. In total. how a.any . ars, or other velisc les COL.J t, , are usually available tn t'.e h.n.whold? I sine (D0 Nt)T ltEAD ANSWI:R5.) 2 l k. ' 3 Three
!. r..u r i Fiva 6 $lx
? 5sven 8 Fight 9 Nitic or > tars 0 Zero (Nor.w)
X licIunwJ
. - - - - - ..- .~.. .
- 3. How many peuple usually Itve in this Ctat. 12 CuL. 13 househoLJF (D0 NOT READ ANSWERS.) 1 One 0 Tun 2 Two 1 I;teven i Three 2 Tw lve 4 Four 3 Thirte e n 4 Fivt 4 Fourt..a 6 Nis $ Fit tnn 1 St-ven 6 tilmtsen A Elthe T Ssvantisn V Nine 8 F i rl.t erit
, 9 Ninetivn or Nr.
X E s t is .rit
* - . - . =
.. Ibew many children living in tht. r:0'. .M h.savhold gv to toe,al punite. Private. O Zero
'?
PJenchial whools? (D0 No! (LA3 I One Vi% Fil$ . ) .! IwJ
) Thret
' & Four
( f
$ Ytve \/ 6 sin 1 Seven '
4 E16ht 9 *i t ne ai r Mo rn 1 erfuorg F-1
). 6 tow m. int wusk rnd d; syn it.o r a ny. the t i 't. . ,3 ) II.I . . I ,
aurmer Jo . yous f.nity L r.sw l in . ny 0 26 re. laay f6 l's.n li.sv pite ut t he ine l I..w ing hv.i. hr* : 4v ftr.a. h . I t.:,c Day l Il . ! *: . avw al.ar ept en livat h , heabroek lis.n is. I'l um t a l in.1 2 Two .% y , 2 le . 10 1 .y Beach, nr Sall bury Beach? 3 *hre. Day- 3 21 . Ilspayn
. t o.a r U.sy s . 4 *ve r 50 te. yt.
5 F6vi h .. } 1:sfie J 6 Six De>m
/ Seven Day, 8 Eight Day, 9 sine Days 1 Dois't Know
- 6. How many peopic in the laouseholJ Col..E SKIP To connute to a job, or to collsge. O Zerc 11 at least 4 times a week? 1 One he 1 4 Four or Ptore 5 Don't Know/kcfused 11 txTLitVit w.R: For each persian Ident if eril to Quc* tion 6. .v.h yuc*tions 1. M. 9. & 10.
- 1. Thinking about enemuter 81. Biow does triat pernon unnat t e t ravel en work nr college? (REPEAT QUESTION NR EACH COMMllTER.)
, Comunit e r # 1 Cune. uter 62 cor ocer vi (*on.utur 84 c COL.14 COL. A COL. 20_ COL.,2j, Rat! ! 1 1 1 Bun 2 2 2 2 Walk /81 cycle 3 3 3 3 Driver Car / Van 4 4 4 4 Passenpur Car / Van 3 5 ) $
Driver Carpool.3 or more people 6 6 6 6 Passvnger Carpool.3 or more 7 1 1 T people Tant 8 8 8 8 Refused 9 9 9 9
- 8. What is the name of the city, town, or censunity in which Cormiter #1 worbe ut attends school? (nEPF.AT QUESTION FOR F.AGil COMMUTER.) (FILI. I i /45'4E R . )
Cu cVTLR #1 CO'C:IrtCR #2 Co *L7ER 83 C0KWTF.R 84 City / Town State City / Town State City / fawn State City /Tn.m State COL.JJ C01..g COL.h Col.. g COL. 3 COL. D C01, 13 Cnk.21 Col.jg COL.}j, Col..jl Col..jj 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 S 5 5 5 3 $ 5 5 $ $ $ 5 6 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 5 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
. . .. _ ....-. . . .... - .a . . . . - . . . . . . \
(C.m m ..in m . inas i toe m uniocs it .w ui.vi., F-2
% Apprisstrately how 10 nit does et LJu* Cesa.a.tvr el tu t ravel li..et tro.1 w. ara or solteu? (RFPEAT slut.STION FOR t%CH tWl?fuTih.) tin NnT 6:IA0 \?NWip%.)
.CtMtt*TER 81 DiMML-TI:R e;;
Cul. 3. Cot 3 t 01..Jf,. 4.0L . j l,
! $ Minutes or Les4 1 .6 - $U Minute l ','tInutse or 1 f.8 * *. r# Min..t i s J 4 10 Minutes 2 St . M Minute = lcw, 2 *l . 1$ Minut.%
e J ll - l$ itinutes 3 $6 4 Hour 2 t, . In . Minutes i St. . I II..u r 4 16 - Ju Minuts:s 4 over i 41our. Imt 1 il . 15 Minutes 4 over i lineer.
$ J1. .') Minutus Ivan titan 1 4 16 - 20 Minutes tou t 1s sa s i. . .
u J6 30 Minutes llour l$ Minutum i 21 25 Hinutos I lleur 13
? 31 3) Minutes $ Between 1 Hour 6 26 30 Minutes Minuten 6 36 40 Minutes 13 Minutes and 7 31 - 33 Minutes $ Between 1 Hour 9 41 = 45 Minutes 1 Hout 30 Minutes 8 36 - 40 Minutes 1$ Minutes 6 Between 1 Hour il 9 41 - 45 Minutes and 1 Hour 30 Minutes and 1 Minutes Hour 45 Minutes 6 Setween 1 Hour 7 Between 1 !!our 46 . 31 Minutes Minutes and J and 1 Hour 4$
llours Minutes 8 Over 2 llouts 7 Rutween 1 Hour 9 46 Minutes 0 and 2 Hours X Don' t Know/ltelnn.il 8 Ovur 2 Hours 9 0 X unn't Know/ P.efused fuMTTER O
- COMMLffER #_4 CUL.38 Cut.. 39 COL.40 COL.41 ~
! $ Minutes or Less 1 46 . $0 Minutes 1 $ Minutse or 1 46 - 10 Minute $
2 6 - 10 Minutes 2 $1 - $$ Minutro f.e s s 2 51 . $$ rttruta , % 3 11 13 Minutes 3 $6 - 1 Hour 2 6 - 10 Minutes . 3 '.8, 1 II.wr
. 16 20 Minutes 4 over ! Itaur. Sut 3 11 1$ 'ttnutes 4 iner ! Hour.
$ J1 - 2$ Minutvg less tisan 1 4 1(, . 20 *tinutes Im t lves th en 6 26 30 Minutes Hour 1) Minutes $ 21 2$ Minutes ! I! cut 11 7 31 15 Minutes 3 Detween I ilour 15 6 26 3rl Minuten Minute, d 36 = 40 Minuten Minuten and i 7 31 45 Minutes 3 Petween 1 Itour 9 41 45 Minutes llour 30 Minutt-s G 36 40 Minutes la Min 4tv, 6 Butween i llour 9 41 41 Minutes .and 1 Hour 31 Minutes and 10 t*tni. ten I liour 4$ $'inute e 6 .;etween i Heus I $stween 1 lleur 6 Il Mitiutes
!!! nuts n aaJ 2 .bsd i II+e r Hourg 4 5 .u i ns. t s ,
8 Uvtr 2 liceurs 7 Ins ts wit I h..u r 9 44 Minutra 0 and 2 Hourn X Don't knew /itef u% ! 8 over 2 lluuta
?
U x pon't Know/ Is..f osv J I '. . If Co.wiuter 81 were nottfied of an sevegeno at tlw Svabrook Station
=litiv at work or cutlege, would that person t turn fine d thlPIAT getsito!. h'n rALH COMML!rtt . )
roettnEn e( coteatnra et u w ?n ~) toTtiiA . u 6. . *
'! 3tP N LUL . 41 ~ E P fu i.al. 44 u t P 10 l 7 . d ~ ~ 10' ::'
i fen ILA 1 Yes - LGA 1 Ye - LGA i V s .2 l J !.o - 108 2 Nc 105 2 L 108 2 ?.o !"a 8 . t %.re==luA J Not hute. =10A Not sure (
.I 10A 1 '.a t
%.r. 10A F-3
IM. le. w l n ,' wou l i i t t .iig foramit s t l t. .niilet* p repa ra t it :s I ..r t r..V i n. w. .e . O
. s t' .. ! s s .a preur to %tJeten, s, t i n i. l 4 e .' 1 RI PIAT yt't::.a liiN nin t .u ti co r't 1618. )
IlFB es t N1' All A*.Y-l.la . ) L'US'.U rl.it 81 D or!! TFjt e .' Los . .. e o. . '. 7 f.ol . /.r. t 01. . . 'e I . Minutum or t- '. 6 - % ::e nu t. = I S Minuts4 4 44 - ".'s :li nn e .
- l.
- 2 el - % Minutr4 O r 1.r s 4 it - . . 't i nu t.
.' e. - lo '9tnutes i ". - 1 ilou r J 6- 10 Minuten J %- I flou r
) II - 1) Minutes 4 inver t G ur. J 11 - !$ Minutem 4 Over i Hour.
. 16 - 20 Minuts. ten t tv- t h.in 4 If, 20 flinutts but l e = = ti. .n i 21 - 23 Minutve i Hour 15 5 21 - 25 Minutts 1 Ilaur 15 6 2h - 30 Minutwa Minutw4 fa 26 - 10 Minutus Minutes 7 11 - 35 Minutus 5 avasewn I Hour 7 31 - 35 Manueva 5 8etween 1 Hout 4 36 .0 Minutes 15 Minutes 8 36 - 40 Minuten 15 Minutes 9 41 - 4) Minutes and 1 4 tour 9 41 - 45 Minutes and 1 Hour 30 Minuten 30 Minutes 6 Detween 1 Hour .
6 Ectween 1 Hour 31.Ninutes 31 Minutes and 1 Hour .ind 1 Hour 45 Minutes 45 Minutes
? Berwcun 1 Ilour I 8vtworn i Ifour
.6 Minutes sh Minutes and 2 flourk 1nd 2 Houra S Over J Llour- e over 2 Hours 4 9 0 e n
1 Os.n ' t an sJ .( Nn ' t neaw/ licf aavit kofused C050!!T1 f.It di t'aw"tTfrR #4 Cet . N ~ ~ 'LOL. 51 1 01. 52 O T .1 ) I .*finute Or 1 6 - W .'la.*uten 1 5 flinuts. 1 6- *M Minutt'. Lv*a 2 31 - % '96ftutie Or f.< s w 2 i l - $ *# *inutse 2 * , - tu Minutew 3 '. 0 - ! hete r J 6 10 *ttnt.tes *) 9 - I flour 3 14 - 13 'finutos . Over I flaur. I 11 15 Minutws 4 over 1 Heat.
. In - 20 Minutes but l e i t h.i i 4 16 - 20 Minutos hut less thvi
) 21 - 25!Itnutes ! Ilour 13 ) 21 - 23 Minutos I Hour 15 h 46 - 30 Minutes Minutc= 6 26 - 30 Minuten Min ts u
? 11 - 3) Minutus $ Cetween i Hwur ? 31 - 35 Minutes $ be twvs 1 1 Hour 8 Je> ;0 Minutvs 15 Minuten $ 16 - 40 "inutes 15 .'tt nu t es 9 .I - 45 Minutos and I ilour 9 41 - 44 .utnutes and 1 Hour 30 Minutes 30 Minutes 4 Octween i Hour h Detween 1 Hout 31 Minuten 31 Minutes and 1 Hour .ind 1 Hour 45 Minutes si Minutes 1 8etween 1 Hour 1 totmevn i Hour 46 Minutes 46 Minutes and 2 Hours .tnJ 2 Houre 8 Over 2 Houre 8 Over JIdaure 1 9 0 0 4 Don't K n. .w / X Don't Wnow/
Rvfu*ed Rifused it N f thv!F'..r 4 r at!P To etli:5tl0*3 11.) LOM. Dues the f astly have ennther vrhiele COL.3 av.allable f or av ecu.it ion' I Yen 2 No i Don ' e i:n-w , n e i u . T:A3 d;1 uJUJIs:L? P ; h 3 L.N S '# d 4 h F3ER OF C J:' FU T E R 3 Pak HCU32 HOLO w .'Ji ! HC LL 0 1 2 3 4 T ;T 1L 1 T O T *. L : 13 103 0 0 0 186 7 -4 CE:.T : 44. 55.4 v.] 00 00 100.J TOTAL: 157 113 163 0 0 443
#;4 CENT: 37.3 25.2 37.5 0.0 0.C 110 0 3 TOTAL: 30 31 97 37 0 2'5 P 7. CENT: 12.2 33 1 39.o 15.1 0.0 100.0 4 (0T3La 23 15 83 23 13 267 41 CENT: 42 29.5 35.6 1.3 7.3 100.C TETAL: 2 45 36 13 4 tc-
';'CEst: 7.5 4;.5 34 0 12 3 '.3 l' 6 TCTAL: 2 5 20 e 5 3C P l R ;i.N T : 51 1*.4 51 3 15 4 12.S 100 0 TOTAL: 0 1 2 C 1 4 3ERCENT: C.C 25.0 50 0 00 25 0 100 0 3 TOTat C 0 1 2 1 -
P d P C h '. T C.C 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 loc.C o TOTAL: 0 '. 1 1 2 0 P2. C 2 '. T 25.0 C.0 25.0 *0.C 0.0 100.0 1J !;TAL: 3 2 1 1 4 13
* : 3 C P. *
- 33 2 1'.6 7.7 7.7 30.3 100 0 G-4
;,%
- t. T L 1 T: S v ~; L T ! ? C ', ; T '
- t. ; : .'. '!"1 v. ( 2 0 8 . ?. ) t.*..' 5 8 ' 'd
- i Tl'*. 3ME
( I ri v i .it; T 3 ) CJv2.. C t: C r'w w' T- R S 'PCNT ;' F "$dvJi~e: 1 -
> 29~ 15.4
.i . -
- c. 1., ., 's . , ,
11 - 13 . 27C 16 3 i$ - 20 114 10.'s
- 2. -
25 26 5.3
;6 -
30 154 o.; 31 - 35 42 23 36 - 4C 57 44 41 - 45 34 5.2
'9 SC 31 1.4 31 -
55 9 0.5 56 - SC 40 f.4 51 - 75 32 1.1 7 'a - 10 29 17 di - 105 i 0.5 l 1h - !?C 4 w.. I 1..+ 4 . .,, 3
.- 11.,:a 7 0.4 U 'M *, C W A , ,
.7 .. .
p 4 i l l
\
l G-5 i
,------. _ -- . . - - , - - - . . , , . . . , - - - - - . - . .-,_._,__ -._-.._.--_-- - -.-- --- ,-~. ..
; J I P J T '. n ; . .",'/ c L TIvl3 '..*r.;.\ w.tx (0;eC;L)
- t. : -;'.. ~7"
. r!.1;4.L's! . !*'-
O
.s . r.
7 1 '. . \ f. 3. ( I f, rihul ll hur;ER OF 00FFUTCR3 ' d R O *. . . ! Oc ;;vygt;o, 1 5 52 !?.a t - 10 65 17.5 11 - 13 51 13.3 It -
?O 3C #. 0 21 -
25 25 7.5 26 - 30 37 11.1 31 - 30 12 35 35 - 40 9 2.7 41 - 43 15 45 4$ - SC 4 1.2 51 - 55 1 J.3 SS - 30 17 51 61 - 75 3 J.7 76 - 90 5 1.5 91 - 103 C 0.G 106 - 120 1 0.3 121+ 1 3.3
, n JN X N C.4 A 5 L * '.
I I l l I G-6
. m_-.-. - _ ____ ..- - __. _ _ = - _ _ _ _ . - - _ . _ . . - . _ _ _ _ . = . - _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - __.
I i i e f l ; i. t
. ..'..< . ...s
. . T..v L T1v , s . L..Iel%
4 t
. 3LT4 . ... l. h ! a. .. .... . , ) t..... I ,. . .. r ....y. re .,-. , _ ;-t L s,s. .I.".
c 1 ! TI"2 A.43. l
- t. I lis M I W T .% U F. 2 2 '. . :F 00.vPui; 2 5 P'i3C M T ' f- C0v % f.:.' i i
1 1 - 5 141 1 2. c , 10 132 13.$ ! ! 11 - 13 . 135 15 9 ; a 1$ - 20 43 11.*3 - 21 - 23 39 4.6 . . 25 - 30 70 32 J 31 - 33 21 2.5 j 35 - 40 ?? 32 41 - 45 53 6.3 t 45 - 50 14 1.7
, 51 - 55 7 33 i 55 -
$C 4- 5.7 01 -
75 15 19 l 75 -
'90 16 19 l
- 31- -
105 6 J.7 i 104 - 120 ( 4 1 31 l i 121+ 3 04 j - '< A A I ~ 4 2 0.4 j UNKNCWA 24 2.S i 4 i l l l l t 9 d i i t f n i l l I I l l l+ I' I l 1 i 1 i. J' \ l l E p t I i
?
9 O,* g Is T b
- t G-7 t.
8
-,w,,,.r,-, ,.n.-mw-,er-r-c-.-- ....,om.,e., ,- . m-
. , , . .s. ,. . . . . . . . ,. .
O a.... .
.w . . . .. . .; ._ .. : . . .. . i. .
(2....L) .\ H... r.s H . L
., ., . ...< ; .e .
(.)
.. . .a..
(IA d i ' U T '. ) ) fs'J w .) "f C "X F t; T E 3 S ' 2 '* C .~ ':7 "F O C " v ) T - R ,' 1 -
- 39 13.7 10 r. 7 1t.-
l '. - 1- 47 1$.5 1, - - 10
,' C
!?.E
.. . 1.a 5.s
_ . .s . 3 e. 27 1 ,. . ,, 31 - 31 7 25
.5 -
*C 11 3.7 41 -
- 4. 13 4.o 43 -
2" 3 1.1 s1 -
"3 1 0.4 56 -
SC 16 3.6 s - p, 3 J . c. 7 's - 74 4 1.4
?! -
10: 2 0.7 11s - 12C 2 3.7 121+ 3 1.1
.,.c.c
- 4-
& w. #
t.% .~>A 2 0.7 i l 9 G-8 I 1 l l
....r w..e .-..)
....,,L, s , . g .
. 7 -. ,., ./. , , I ., .;
- - .e ...
- s. . .
M .. .,...,,t... .., .c. .g.y TI": '1 v.: , ( ! *. 6 t i. J 1 E 3 ) AJPCCi CF CCFP*oriA; PdRC:\T 0- 00M/UTI:3
. s -
. - 63 . 2.
L - 10 25 13.?
.1 -
1* 37 11.5 16 - 2' . 71 1 1. '. 41 - 2! 14 7.4 25 - 3C 17 i.1 31 - 3d 2 1.L 35 - 40 10 5.3 41 - 45 5 2.5 4$ - 50 1C 5.3 a1 . ce
- s. e
. r..,
55 - SC i 4.7 al - 75 5 2.5
,. -n le -
- e. ,
1.s 56 - i,a.n, C .s.- 135 - 12C 0 0.0 12A+ 1 1.3
...s
, . , I r.. a, ,
<. 1.1 UMN C.d A i 3.2 1
G-9
*:'le,' *s
. " t. v. I w t v 0;eryT 4 flav'L . Tiv;i -Ce -4;L;_n:L;; ,, ! T . I ;; s * . v ; t . )
O
---- v ! N I .v u r T I .w E 4 4 N .. 5 --- ---- v a x ! :4 e v T1v- ? a. A r, - .
* : 't. ; A '. 3 5 bJ/:4 C~ ' i C C E 's T OF NUu?Ct CF p r 7 0 e,- Of
( I t. 1 .\ UTIS) CO*vsTERJ CCvFUT:15 C0wvtTC15 cC'4FUT-~" 1 - 5 $3 15.2 $3 1!.2 s - I t' 57 1?.2 57 12.3 11 - 10 - 33 11.4 53 11.7 15 -
/ *J 55 12 3 55 12.3 21 -
25 34 7.$ 34 7. 3 2t - 30 43 1.6 43 i.G 31 - 35 9 2.C 7 2.C 36 - 40 11 43 19 4.3
*1 -
45 27 61 27 $.1 46 - 30 $ 1.3 3 13 31 - 33 4 09 4 0.9 56 -
$3 34 7.6 34 7.6
$1 -
75 to ?.2 10 22 7t - 9 12 2.7 I? 27
'41 -
Ici 1 0.2 1 J.2 106 - 120 0 0.C 0 00 121+ 2 0.4 2 2 V4 RIES 2 94 ? ': U N K '* CN .N 10 2.2 l ') . 2 t s O. G-10
4 i i 4-i
?,1.\ 1 V L ' f *. MAXI' icd 0 4.v .v L T I .s T ?. J. V - L T I v ; $ c ' '. .i;L3 F:L *. a!TH ? O 2 *' .# L I :2. ( ! )
+
----vlh!PU7 TIPS TAN'I--- ; ----vaXivU'l T!vi i t. \ F - - -
' b)?;il
'!Mc i.t. f.0 i ;F 352CIAT OF A').13 2R CC PE40:47 CF tth / ! !C I:. S l CC 'NTt 25 ;;wr'JT3R3 CCvL75'S < ; 0 4 vu T;4.!
e 1 - i 171 20.7 76 11.5 o - 10 169 10.7 115 14 3 11 - 15 I4$ 17.6 127 15.3
- 16 -
20 15 10 3 84 10.1 1 21 - 23 39
- 7 43 33
, 26 - 20 a6 3.0 33 10.0 31 - 3 .4 le 22 21 31 36 - 40 23 ?.9 30 3.s 41 - 4i 39 4.7 *
.? 7.1 46 -
39 10 12 17 2.1 51 - 55 3 3.4 2 0.2 St - SO 31 3.7 60 7.2 51 - 75 10 1.2 25 3.3 i 76 - 13 3 0.4 15 1.J ! 91 - 105 3 04 5 0.7
! 10e - 120 9 0.0 1 0.1 I 121+ 0 0.0
^ 3 0.4 VARIES 2 0.2 4 0.3 , UNKNCWN 14 1.7 26 . 31 ] l l 4 i 4 5 *- N i . s G-ll f
---x - . - , - , . - - - - - ~ - - , - - , - - . . , _ . , , , - . . - - - - ,,,,,,,,r, ,. -. ,.,,,----,,,.yc, .w,-,,,.r..,,-n_.e
O
- g .N ; :4" *NO Ft.x:"L" CC*FUT - T ?. .t y ; L T I ' t. 5 'T tCw3 n LO3 W IT'i 3 C;vvut it_:
- . -- F I .s ! P U F TIPI IANCE--- ----
- a x ! U v T;dE 'A'.GC---
?!?L <1N0d hL.<;;s cc PEtti.\r CF AUM:2 24 C5 M4 CENT ~7
( I ts 4 ! '.U T~. 31 CCrvJ T b CCWPUTCAS CCMwuTCRS C 0 4.v u ! r.i i 1 - 5 il 21.1 15 .. 6 - 10 ' 47 19.i 27 17. .? 11 - 15 :1 23.3 20 0.; IS - 20 27 10 9 35 13.) 21 - 25 10 4.C 23 12 2$ - 30 13 5.2 19 7. $ 31 - 35 2 3.2 16 5.4 35 - 40 9 3.2 11 4.4 41 -
'$ 5 2.4 16 s.4 46 -
50 3 3.2 14 5., 51 - 55 0 0.0 1 0.' 56 - SC 7 29 15 $.0 61 - 75 2 0.3 10 4.0 74 - 90 1 0.4 3 1,i 31 - 105 1 C.4 3 1.2 10$ - 120 1 0.4 4 1.s 121+ 1 0.4 5 i' VARIES 1 0.4 3 1 UNKNCWN 4 1.6 11 . 4.4 s O G-12
. i i. .
d i .\ 1 'u i t. s ; et.xi .s : :a .w J T :.: T3 J.v i. t. T !u;3 :;- 40UL.rJLC h !!84 4 CCYuuT~A(,) l J l
----:'Ih!PUF ' t .v c 9ANO --- --- .vax!4U4 TIv: l'.N0f---
T;',C AA .0t N ,e H 0: 064Cet.T OF AUM331 Oc PitCr;T OF ( ! .\ M t r.U T7 0 ) C C ' V U T .- P S 00 7' P U T s o.O OCPFUTCP3
............ .......... .......... __________ ; C'_'_F U 7 510 5 !3 25.0 11 1.3 a -
IJ 43 30.3 10 7.; 11 - 13 ' 31 23.5 33 23.0 16 - 2G 1 2.3 17 12 1 21 - 23 10 7.6 5 2.J 2$ - 30 3 $.1 , 17 12 0 i 31 - 35 2 1.5 3 5.1 l 35 - 40 0 3.3 3 23 41 - 45 1 3.5 5 35 1 45 - S 's 0 3.C 0 0.0 l e. -
- s. .
2 s= s 0.n. ,
. n. . )
36 -
$C 1 0.3 3 a.1 1
ol - 75 3 0.0 ; :.0 76 - 90 1 0.9 6 '
.3 il -
105 3 C.C U 0.0 1 106 - 130 1 0.9 4 3.J i 121+ 1 0.0 4 3.) VADIcS 0 00 2 C .) . O C'4 d CtJ te 7 03 1 , 0.5 1 1 J 4 1 J I a i i 4
- w r
I I f , i k l, ' I a G-13 4 b f y- - , , , ., .-.,em--y__.-----v-y w--n----er-------r-w----^-*-'*'N"-"'""**d* * " * ' ' " " " " * ' " ' ' " ' " " ' " ' ' ^ #'"^ ' ' ' ~
l I l
.. . :e w.f_,
4 .. ........N
. . . . T,.,.,.
. ., . L :.. ... .. .. , . 1 ;( ,. .. ,* L)
I I ?.. . 4 :: (;h 4;.40 7 5 ) h)P;E*. CF C'FFJT.p
; 2 ' 2 : 0 ". N T OF C. ; '". i;CL 1 -
770 37.9 a i - , ,.., e. ,
.w ..
11 - L1 79 5.7 15 - 2; ,
.$ 20 21 -
25 d 0.6 2e - 30 72 5. 4 31 - 35 19 1.4 36 -
'. 0 1 0.1 41 -
*5 4 '3 46 -
50 3 0.? rs . J . ,,. 3s - d0 24 1." oi - 73 3 '.> 76 - 42 3 0.2 91 - 105 2 0 . ;. 1 9 ., - 1 , ., , s
..T 121+ 5 u . '.
VA'!di 1 ;.1
'J t. f. t. C'4 N 152 12.'
I I l I G-14 9
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ , _ _ . = . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ - . - . _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ , _
l 3 .. 4 1 r.. >:.'A v.C Ttv;1 *i.':
. ?. .p s- r< . ~, .' < ' ; o .
4 1
. y .* ..t * * * *,
1 (IN A I '.a ! .; ) M. w . 9 t. : 4CL 3 ::t :t. n p e a c :*; 7 or 9:;; , i.*- 1 J, s 1 1 -
'13 202 21.7 15 -
30 333 23., 31 - 43 , 22 1.1 i '6 -
-0 1:3 gg,g
- j. $1 -
75 12; q.; i ?$ - M 75 1.- 71 - 135 5 3.. 10$ - 120 46 35
- 121 - 133 46 3.5 13$ - 15J 13 1.C i 131 - 165 & 0.3 I '
los - 150 15 t.2 } 131 - IM 2 0 . :. t . >-,
. . 3.,., o
- . n. . ..
- 211 - 22! C ') . O 1, ..,.a.
.. - , ,. C
.4 241 - 255 1 :.1
, 25A - 2FC 1 3.1 [ 271 - 219 C -) . 0 - i , ,
... . .3, . s
,] . ,
331 - 313 1 -) . ; 316 - 330 0 00 J 331 - 355 0 0.J j 346 - JSC 5 ;.$ i 0 Ws0;l'; 140 10.$ l-i 4 G-15 r
-mmm ----u----em.-- -nnm...____v.-w ._,,_a_ , _ _. m. w w ww m _ -.mm,-p,y- . - - . _ . . . y m,-~
i r I i i i. i i i e 1 ] l 1 i APPENDIX H l i 1980 Census Data i l t 4 I
O b
~
Number of Ilouseholds with School Indicated Number of Enrollment Vehicles Available riurse ry Other 0 1 2 23 N!! Rockingham Cty. 2603 41758 3657 24439 26858 10997 i Ilrentwood E. Kingston Exeter 306 2183 360 2002 1327 500 Greenland
- llampton 200 1960 305 1760 1593 428 Ilampton Falls l Kensington i
Kingston 87 912 53 448 563 351 New Castle Newfields x Newtown 97 672 71- 281 415 240
- d. North llampton 57 793 24 428 494 261 Portsmouth (city) 444 4993 1261 4561 2860 742 Rye 59 852 25 612 817 268 i
Seabrook 18 944. 86 1106 834 368 South flampton Stratham 39 626 13 223 398 171 MA Amesbury 303 2800 663 2248 1627 528 Merrimac 65 1069 86 642 537 260 Newbury 58 1000 54 444 752 338 Newburyport 410 3151 875 2642 1796 579 Salisbury 81 1394 158 880 754 265 , West Newbury 39 761 32 221 430 181 i
1 Worked Avg. Outside % Occupancy Mean Area of % in % Using Public Driving Journey to Travel Residence Carpools Transportation Alone Work Time
'. l Rockingham Cty. 43.9 23.8 1.4 66.6 1.17 22.7 Brentwood C. Kingston ,
D.e t e r 49.9 22.0 1.7 61.7 1.18 20.2 Greenland llampton 67.6 24.2 2.3 65.0 1.18 22.5 llampton Falls Kensington Kingston 75.3 22.8 0.7 70.0 1.16 24.5 y New Castle ' N Ne'w f ie ld s Newtown 91.7 29.7 0.6 63.2 1.24 26.0 North flampton 83.5 10.5 1.4 77.3 1.07 23.9 Portsmouth (city) 38.8 25.0 2.8 57.1 1.20 14.5 Rye 80.9 12.6 1.4 77.2 1.08 21.0 seabrook 55.3 23.1 1.1 70.0 1.16 21.3 South llampton Stratham 77.9 23.5 1.3 67.8 1.17 19.4 MA Amesbury 61.7 26.1 1.0 63.7 1.21 20.6 Merrimac 77.6 27.6 1.4 62.3 1.22 22.5 Newbury 83.4 19.0 4.0 72.2 1.13 25.6 t:'wburyport 51.5 24.3 2.2 58.6 1.21 22.4 Salisbury 78.6 20.9 1.0 67.4 1.16 20.7 West Newbury 87.8 21.5 0.8 71.3 1.16 26.8 9 9 S'
pm rh (~ U v U t i 1 Year % With % With one Round 5 or Occupied or More % of Families Single llousing More liousing Vehicles With Children Unit Units Units Units Available Under 6 Years Structure Nil Rockingham Cty. 69375 14.8 65951 94.5 23.6 51162 ] Brentwood 582 543 482 E. Kingston 370 363 , 315 j Exeter 4406 13.7 4189 91.4 21.1 3092 ! G reen land 73} 705 640 llampton 4437 24.1 4086 92.5 18.1 2711 ! llampton Falls 483' 462 429 Kensington 450 434 407 ' Kingston 1518 7.2 1415 96.3 20.0 1320 I m New Castle 352 335 310 i Newfields 280 274 235 , Newtown 1073 14.2 1007 92.9 28.6 897 , North llampton 1255 4.9 1207 98.0 17.6 1123 Portsmouth (city) 9877 23.5 9424 86.6 28.2 6610 Rye 1812 8.2 1722 98.5 17.3 1570 Seabrook 2523 30.1 2394 96.4 17.1 1601
; South 11ampton 221 216 205 Stratham 844 1.1 805 98.4 20.4 735 l 1
j MA d Amesbuty 5429 29.0 5066 86.9 25.2 2678 Merrimac 1572 7.3 1525 94.4 26.7 1210 l ~ Newbury 1666 5.2 1588 96.6 15.5 1449
! Newburyport 6259 17.7 5892 85.1 19.9 3524 ; Salisbury 2156 7.1 2057 92.3 21.9 1619 l West Newbury 882 0.6 864 96.3 20.3 832
O House t.ald Persons in Size Grouc Quarters NH 2.84 2779 Brentwood 3.14 298 E. Y.ingston 3.13 - Exeter 2.59 208 Greenland 3.02 - Hampton , 2.54 109 Hampton Falls 2.97 - Kensington 3.05 - Kingston 2.90 2 New Castle Newfields Newtown 3.05 - North Hampton 2.83 14 Portsmouth (city) 2.63 1431 Rye 2.61 12 Seabrook 2.47 3 South Hampton Stratnam 3.10 11 O MA Amesbury 2.70 380 Merrimac 2.92 1 Newbury 2.85 2 Newburyport 2.63 425 Salisbury 2.82 58 West Newbury 3.31 1 l i H-4 [
l 0 APPENDIX I (Rev. 2) TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL (Subject to Second Review by Police Chiefs) iO i O
Traffic Control Post No. A-HB-01 ERPA: A TOWN: Hampton (Hampton Beach) 1 LOCATION: !!ampton Beach State Park NODE: 7 i Light Marina N > X 0: j @ l Bridge K ' "O-X X [ Route lA Hampton Beach State Park Parking i g: O Movement facilitated
=; Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Encourage all traffic to move north along j Route lA.
i MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT i 2 traffic guides 3 traffic cones t 5 barricades I-l _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . _ _ . . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . , _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - _ _ _ - _ . _ _ . _ . _ _
Traffic Control Post No. A-HB-02 ERPA: A TOWN: Hampton (Hampton Beach) LOCATION: Ocean Blvd. (Route 1A) & Church St. NODE: 12 A Stores I I
- l l I
Lic ht N lMoteld I l l I Church St. i
-. ,/ @ @
y A ecccco , l N: I
- I g Route 1A I
l I I I I I s I I $N' t Parking g:
- Movement facilitated
=rl Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone )( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic turning onto Church St.
- 2. Divert southbound traffic onto Church St.
- 3. Facilitate traffic moving north on Route 1A.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT O 2 traffic guides 6 traffic cones I-2
Traffic Control Post No. A-HB-03 ERPA: A TOWN: Hampton (Hampton Beach) LOCATION: Highland' Ave., Church St., Brown Ave. NODE: 311 jl N Church St.
= c N
N@ / Route 51 I r A A \ XXX Highland Ave. C ght
- d O
[goO Brown Ave. M: '
> Movement facilitated Ol Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. All castbound traffic makes U-turn.
- 2. Westbound traffic on Highland Ave merges with westbound traffic on Church St., then onto Route 51.
^ MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 2 traffic guides 3 traffic cones 3 traffic barricades I-3
Traffic Control Post No. A-HB-04 ERPA: A TOWN: Hampton (Hampton Beach) LOCATION: Ocean Blvd. (Route lA) & Highland Ave. NODE: 10 Parking i ; A I I . l l l l Lig'htl l N I l 1 i Highland Ave. be i 0 __--___-__ g g COOCCO g 1 ' Ashworth l l Route 1A Motel I s I I I I I I I I
, s I
I kb P rking M:
= Movement facilitated =l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Highland Ave, will be converted to a one-way westbound street. Eastbound traffic will be diverted to Brown Ave.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT O 2 traffic guides 9 traffic cones I-4
Troffic Control Post No. A-HB-05 ERPA: A TOWN: Hampton (Hampton Beach) LOCATION: Route lA & Ashworth Ave. NODE: 7
! /
N = 0 p @ @ U
=
Route lA g: ! = Movement facilitated r ; Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
- )( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION
- 1. Allocate service to vehicles turning north onto Route lA.
- 2. Discourage southbound traffic.
O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 3 traffic guides 3 traffic cones I-5
Traffic Control Post No. A-HB-06 ERPA: A TOWN: Hampton (Hampton Beach) LOCATION: Route 51 & Landing Rd. O NODE: H
~
N Light Landing Rd. Route 51 JY f [
]OO6e eC O
Light \O 0l a O W l O
)
Light O O O M: Ba. Movement facilitated ! >=1 Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound traffic along Route 51. l
- 2. Discourage eastbound traffic along Route 51.
i MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 2 traffic guides 10 traffic cones I-6
_ -. . . - . - - = _ _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ - - Traffic Control Post No. A-HF-01 ERPA: A TOWN: Hampton Falls LOCATION: Route 1 & Route 88 NODE: 80 N Lafayette Rd. Route 1 Route 88 y Shopping
-g
- N Area 1
000 O
; Ky:
I j = Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate northbound traffic on Route 1.
- 2. Discourage southbound traffic on Route 1.
O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 3 traffic cones I-7
Traffic Control Pont No. A-SE-01 E'?A: A TOWN: Seabrook LOCATION: Route 1 & Main St. NODE: 83
\ \ Main Street To Route 286 w
Light . N _ _ - - - - - - ~ l~ s o
, \
s Tom ' Church Hall Light >
=
r A;-;o O Northbound' Route 1 d g:
>- Movement facilitated
>l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate southbound traffic along Main St.
- 2. Discourage southbound and northbound traffic along Route 1.
O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 2 traffic guides 10 traffic cones I-8
y Traffic Control Post No. A-SE-02 ERPA: A TOWN: Seabrook O V LOCATION: Route 286 & Washington Street NODE: 85 I l Washington St. N OOOX
=
8
. e O
O I O Route 286 l Light l D:
> Movement facilitated
>l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone t
X Traffic barricade
- DESCRIPTION
- 1. Facilitate Westbound traffic on Route 286.
- 2. Discourage all eastbound traffic.
.R1 POWER / EQUIPMENT
]. 2 traffic guides 6 traffic cones i 2 traffic barricades I-9
.1 Traffic Control Post No. A-SE-03 ERPA: A TOWN: Seabrook LOCATION: New Zealand Rd. (Route 107) & Lafayette Rd. (Route 1)
O NODE: 82 i I A l
~
Route 1 l
) { N
'l Route 107 g O
O O O Seabrook ' O 8 s O Station Very O Entrance Light O O g 9 lO_O id l II Route 1 l g:
> Movement facilitated >l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone 1
l X Traffic barricade i i DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic turning westbound onto Route 107,
- 2. Discourage through traffic on Route 1.
MANPOWCR/CQUIPMBNT 2 traffic guides 19 traffic cones I-10 l 1
Traffic Control Poct No. A-SE-04 ERPA: A T wN: Seabrook (-)) LOCATION: New Zealand Rd. (Route 107) & I-95 Very NODE: 202 Light
/ 0 I I-95 x
/ :; 1 a
N
/
/
/ /
/
/
/
% i A
%,=,
O'
=
- _,X N- O Route 107 7x O 4 <
(
/
r x
/ '
/
/
/
/
/
/
e K_eZ: / A
/ m X
> Movement facilitated G IX Z l Movement discouraged '
i O Traffic guide f O Traffic cone very X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage traffic from getting off I-95. l 2. Discourage eastbound traffic on Route 107.
- 3. Facilitate movement from Westbound Route 107 onto I-95.
l l MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT l 4 traffic guides l 8 traffic barricades
- 3 traffic cones r_11 I
Traffic Control Post No. A-SE-05 ERPA: A TOWN: Seabrook LOCATION: Route 1A - Hampton Town Line 9 NODE: 4 Bridge to Hampton Beach N .
\ N f Qa%ton Sea gro
%_. /
XXX XXX Route 1A q) ( - - s e
/ \
If N M:
>- Movement facilitated =l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Route all traffic south along Route lA.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic barricades I-12
Traffic Control Poot No. A-SE-06 ERPA: A TOWN: Seabrook
)
LOCATION: Ocean Blvd. (Route lA) & Route 286 NODE: 6
. R If 0;b N
Route 286 XXX
@ r Seabrook Town Guide i
~
o .. j@ c Salisbury Town Guide Very Light I IIf O Ocean Blvd. O O O Route lA O O g:
> Movement facilitated
?l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic trrm nnt frcri southbound ~bute 1A onto westhound teute 286. If westbound traffic on Foute 286 mcx:nes congested, tmn send traffic southbound on 1bute 1A. tien "oute 286 traffic noves away frcm intersection, revert to guiding traffic onto Ibute 286. Thus, the preferential novement is onto MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT Ibute 286; however, keep traffic noving out of Seabrcxak 2
Beach even if Ibute 286 is concested. traffic guides
- 2. Northbound traffic on Emite 1A is to be turned 16 traffic cones back to travel southbou.M on Ibute 1A.
3 traffic barricades I-13
Traffic Control Post No. B-AM-01 ERPA: B TOWN: Amesbury LOCATION: Amesbuky Center: Route 150, Water St. & Elm St. NODE: 40
. JL l \ Route 150 i .
t N i o[o 9,9 gqY
~@ '
l ,95 f
-( .
1 l t ieb' y
/
gt. Water St. p9 D JI Light i l Route 150 Ky:
= Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged l @ Traffic guide l O Traffic cone 1
X Traffic barricade i
-DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage northbound traffic along Route 150.
- 2. Facilitate movement around traffic circle <
/ toward evacuation routes.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 2 traffic guides 4 traffic cones I-14 l l
Traffic Control Post No. B-AM-02 ERPA: B TOWN: Amesbury LOCATION: Macy St. & Hillside Ave. (Route 110 & Route 150) NODE: 104 Hillside Ave. (Route 150) gg o o o - g i=, Light
- To I-495
\
o - -N
- e O/
l
~
Macy St. (Route 110) Kg: j r Movement facilitated
&; Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone i
X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage eastbound movement along Macy St. and northbound movement along Hillside Ave.
- 2. Facilitate southbound movement on Hillside Ave.
toward entry ramp onto I-495 westbound. O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 2 traffic guides 12 traffic cones I-15
Traffic Control Post No. B-AM-03 ERPA: B TOWrJ : Amesbury LOCATIOti: I-495 & Ilillside Ave. NODE: 249 & 250 h Hillside Ave, yi000
~@ \ N IN N o*
I-495
/
/' I-495 s e 5'
Light X nl*X A s k Hu_nt Rd.
~wg l4 Ligh
/ *
\
@ l O
O O x M: Ag
/ > Movement facilitated , Hillside Ave. >l Movement discouraged Light
! O Traffic guide l O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage movements along Hillside Ave. l 2. Facilitate traffic movement onto westbound I-495.
- 3. Discourage eastbound movement on I-495.
l MANPOWER /EOUIPMENT 3 traffic guides 7 barricades 9 traffic cones I-16
l Traffic Control Post No. B-AM-04 ERPA: B TOWN: Amesbury O LOCATION: Macy St. & Main St. NODE: 44 A Main i St. N l / 000 Macy St. 4 f 4( Route 110 o A o O COO l Light d l M: \ - l
> Movement facilitated l . >l Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone l X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound movement along Macy St.'(Route 110) .
l 2. Discourage eastbound movement on Route 110. l l MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT l i 1 traffic guide 9 traffic cones ! I-17 l
Traffic Control Post No. B-AM-05 ERPA: B TOWN: Amesbury 1.OCATION: Market St. & Main St. NODE: 38 A Main St. N 000 Market St. O y e Light M: Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound movement along Market St.
- 2. Discourage northbound movements on Main St. and eastbound movements on Market St.
f4ANDOWER/EOUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-18
Trcffic Control Post No. B-AM-06 ERPA: B TOWN: Amesbury [ ' V) LOCATION: I-95 & Route 110 NODE: 253, 255 0 I-95
\
X X X, ^ Macy Street \ If l' l' Route 110 kok ' g ' To I-495 - d1 *
= oooo@0o' o m m 1 From
-= r --
< c 2 Salisbury Light -N f 'E T l4 7 N
l , I l 1f N Kgny,: yp p
/
> Movement facilitated 'Very l >l Movement discouraged Light O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage eastbound movement along Route 110 and northbound movement along I-95.
- 2. Facilitate movement of traffic from Route 110 onto southbound I-95.
p 3. Permit eastbound movement along Route 110 if Macy Street (, MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT approach to I-495 is not congested. 4 traffic guides l 10 traffic cones 12 traffic barricades I-19
Traffic Control Post No. B-AM-07 ERPA: B TOWN: Amesbury LOCATION: Route 110 & Elm St. O NODE: 45 Elm St.
\ n
\\
Route 110 (Macy St.) ' 000
- < Light Qoon -
ooo ( h e msmaant Light 9 Clark St. g:
> Movement facilitated >l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1., Facilitate eastbound movement along Route 110 to I-95 ramp. ~
- 2. Discourage northbound movement along Elm Street. ,
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 9 traffic cones I-20
Traffic Control Pont No. B-AM-08. ERPA: B
+ TOWN: Amesbury 1
LOCATION: Interchange of Route 110 with I-495 NODE: 103, 248 l . i I-495
\ -
Macy Street Route 110 T. .
/ .
t O - Ji l N i g: i >- Movement facilitated l -' Movement discouraged l
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: , 1. Facilitate traffic movements onto the entry ramo to I-495 southbound, from Route 110.
- 2. Discourage through traffic movements along Route 110.
O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT . 1 traffic guide 10 traffic cones I-21
Traffic Control Post No. B-AM-09 ERPA: B TOWN: Amesbury LOCATION: Intersection of South Hampton Rd. & Market St. (Route 150)O: NODE: 41 N
- 4I Light N
#4 e Ag N ,\
OOO O O O O OOO O i l I l Key:
;; Movement facilitated -
- = l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic movements onto South Hampton l Road northbound.
- 2. Discourage all movements onto Route 150.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT. 1 traffic guide 9 traffic cones I-22
Traffic Control Post No. B-SA-01 ERPA: B TOWN: Salisbury LOCATION: Forest St. (Route 286) & Lafayette Rd. (Route 1) NODE: 87
~ ! A l
Route 1 N Liquor - Store 4 000 OOOO Route 286
- Y [k
@ o O O;
,O O
Route 1 i M:
> Movement facilitated M Movement discouraged O Traffic guide l O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound movement along Route 286.
- 2. Discourage northbound and eastbound movements.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT j 1 traffic guide 10 traffic cones I-23
Traffic Control Post No. B-SA-02 ERPA: B TOWN: Salisbury LOCATION: Forest St. (Route 286) , High St. & Main St. NODE: 90 Connector to Northbound I-95 ) Locust St. N on oao Main St.
+
h [ R) NO O ._ s O 47 'N O
#de \ O Forest St.
N Route 286 High St. o
@ og g:
l >- Movement facilitated
= 1 Movement discouraged \ 's @ Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic moving along Route 286 from High St. to Main St. westbound.
- 2. Discourage eastbound traffic on Route 286 and l Main St.
MANPOWER /EOUIPMENT 3 traffic guides 15 traffic cones I-24
i 1 , Traffic Control Post No. B-SA-03 l ERPA: B l i , TOWN: Salisbury j +
.O LOCATION: Congress St., Locust St. & Main St.
NODE: 35 I l
'st- I-95 Lo c0* _
Congress St. W,.s' Main St. o ute 286 7 #F 4 1 g: l l
> Movement facilitated
>l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic entering I-95 southbound ramp.
- 2. Discourage eastbound traffic on Main St.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-25
._--.___,_--...,--...---.-----~_.__--_,.~.~,-.._.,--.__,..,_.e-- . , , . .. - .,, - - ,,-m-- - - -
Traffic Control Port No. B-SA-04 ERPA: B TOWN: Salisbury LOCATION: Route lA & North End Blvd. NODE: 5 A Central Avenue North End Blvd. Route lA OOO _ coe ____ , ___= ~. Very Light OOO 000 . Town i Police Railroad Avenue Parking Cable Station Lot Avenue g:
> Movement facilitated >l Movement discouraged 1
O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
>< Traffic barricade l DESCRIPTION: 1. Accommodate all westbound flow on Route lA.
- 2. Discourage eastbound and northbound movements.
i l MANPOWER /COI1IPMENT O 2 traffic guides 12 traffic cones I-26 l
Traffic Control Pont No. B-SA-05 ERPA: B TOWN: Salisbury 4 LOCATION: Route lA & State Beach Rd. NODE: 3 h Route 1A . 4 9 *
- *,0 0 4
- go O O O O o O h State Beach Rd.
O\) O O g:
> Movement facilitated
>l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide -
O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate vehicles turning west from State Beach Rd. and merging with through traffic on Route lA. I 2. Discourage movement eastbound along Route lA. MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 18 traffic cones I-27
--..,v , -----,-,--,--..,,---e ,,n--w . . . , . -
~---.--------,.,,_,e-- - - - - , - - -- ---,-n---a-..-- .~.- ..- - - - - we
TrOffic Control Poct No. B-SA-06 ERPA: B TOWN: Salisbury LOCATION: Elm St. (Route 110), Bridge Rd., Pleasant St., Beach Rd. (Route lA) , Lafayette Rd. (Route 1) & School St. NODE: 93 7 Route 110 to I-95 f O
, N
/
Mudnock O Road O
% Route 1 N N N e\_ o o School St. 3 -
O O Neo n a. N o O G o\ O g Route 1 - K,ey: @ Pleasant St. O g l
> Movement facilitated Route 1A --> l Movement discouraged X 0 Traffic guide \
O Traffic cone \ , X Traffic barricade l DESCRIPTION: Split the traffic moving west on Route lA onto two j lanes approaching the intersection. The two lanes will move continuously onto Route 110. All traffic moving south on Route 1 will be diverted westbound to Route 110. Northbound traffic on Route 1 will be routed to Route 110 via School Street. MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 5 traffic guides 32 traffic cones 3 traffic barricades I-28
Traffic Control Post No. B-SA-07 ERPA: B TOWN: Salisbury LOCATION: Elm Street (Route 110) & Mudnock Road near Crossroads Plaza NODE: _ __
! c i .
)I N ,
Cushing Street OOC Route 110 J c _F c c c - O D W Light =l l{
=
To I-95 H Mudnock Road
\
) s_) . g:
>- Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged I
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage eastbound movement along Route 110.
- 2. Facilitate Westbound movement along Route 110.
IO MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 3 traffic cones I 3 traffic barricades I 29
TrOffic Control Pont No. B-SA-08 ERPA: B TOWN: Salisburf LOCATION: North of Bridge Crossing on Route 1 at March Street NODE:
]\
N ooc March Street If
@ n o U O O
Route 1 9 To Bridge - south N to Newburyport g:
>- Movement facilitated >-1 Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone )( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate southbound movements on Route 1.
- 2. Discourage northbound movement on Route 1.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT O 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-30
Traffic Control Poct No. B-SA-09 ERPA: B TOWN: Salisbury LOCATION: Ocean Blvd. (Route 1A) & Route 286 NODE: 6
}\
l If 0;b N Route 286 j gyy 0 . O O .
@ f c Salisbury 'Ibwn Guide Very Light If O Ocean Blvd. -
o O l O Route lA O O g:
> Movement facilitated '
=l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic trrarnnt frtn southbound "bute 1A onto westhourd acute 286. If westbound traffic on 1bute 266 beoones congested, tnen send traffic southbound on Ibute 1A. When Peute 286 traffic noves away frcm intersection, revert to guiding traffic cnto O
V MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT Ibute 286. Thus, the preferential movment is onto acute 286; however, keeo traffic moving out of Seabrook Beach even if acute 286 is congested. 2 traffic guides 2. Northbound traffic on Route 1A is to be turnal 16 traffic cones back to travel southbound on acute IA. 3 traffic barricades 7,31
Traffic Control Post No. B-SA-10 ERPA: B TOWN: LOCATION: Elm St. (Route 110) at Intersection with Merrill St. & Rabbit Rd. at Cross Roads Plaza NODE: - Al N Rabbit Road Route 110 Elm St. Q oo 7 _ _ _ . _ _ _ C 3 O F(
' )
X'l O - jl s.
$ o L'--__ e U
Merrill Street g . Key: \ /
~ s l
l >- Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged ,
l 0 Traffic guide l O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound movement along Route 110.
- 2. Discourage eastbound movement along Route 110 and northbound movement into Rabbit Road.
- MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT .
1 traffic guide i 11 traffic cones l I-32
Traffic Control Post No. C-KE-01 ERPA: C O TOWN: Kensington V LOCATION: Route 108 & Route 150 NODE: 131 To Exeter j 0 N Store 4 O
@ 'O i
O Route 150 V .l Light 4 Route 108 K__ey_:
= Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone i
i
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate southbound traf fic along Route 108.
- 2. Discourage southbound movement along Route 150.
I i I MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT i i traffic guide 3 traffic cones i I-33
Trcffic Control Poct No. C-KE-02 ERPA: C TOWN: Kensington LOCATION: Intersection of Route 84 and Route 150 NODE: 43 JL N j J I Wild Pasture Road
~
Lig t b9 0 N 9he O
""9'"I
- Route 150 / --
o O
\ Route 84 Amesbury Road oute 150 K.,gy:
3=- Movement facilitated Or ; Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: , 1. Facilitate northbound traffic along Route 150.
- 2. Discourage all other movements. Permit south-bound traffic on Route 150 to continue south to avoid turbulence at this location.
MANPOWER /EQUIPMEttr 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-34
Traffic Control Poot No. C-KE-03 ERPA: C
~
TOWN: Kensington (' LOCATION: Intersection of Route 150 and Route 107 NODE: 42
}\
4 1 I i Route 150 J f a h y , p \0 Y0 00
++
oute 107 A Route 150 E*XS j
>- Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: , 1. Facilitate the movements of traffic onto westbound Route 107.
- 2. Discourage all other movements. Permit traffic travelling eastbound on Route 107 to move onto Route 150 northbound to avoid turbulence at the j v MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT intersection. ,
- f. . 1 traffic guide j- 10 traffic cones I-35
TrOffic Control Poot No. C-SH-01 ERPA: C TOWN: South Hampton LOCATION: Town Center at Route 107A and Hilldale Avenue NODE: 122 h 1 Route 107A o Light \oo y [o J M [# m d g W Light f - J - 2 Soo M ale Avenue j I Litsht F.D. Town School Whitehall [ Road
!!all pey:
>- Movement facilitated
?-; Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound traffic novements along Route 107A and Ililldale Avenue.
- 2. Discourage eastbound traffic along Route 107A and southbound traffic.
l MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 9 traffic cones I-36 [
Traffic Control Poet No. C-SH-02 ERPA: C
~
TOWN: South Hampton O LOCATION: Intersection of Route 107A and Chase Road 123 N NODE: N South Road O o, Route 107A e - 0 Light I f Light Clase Road K818
= Movement facilitated = l Movement discouraged @ Traffic guide O Traffic cone )( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: ,1. Facilitate traffic movement.s westbound on Route 107A and southbound onto Chase Road. .
- 2. Discourage traffic movements eastbound on Route 107A and northbound onto South Road.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-37
Traffic Control Poat No. D-HA-01 ERPA: D TOWN: !!ampton LOCATION: !!igh St. (Route 101C) & Lafayette Rd. (Route 1) O NODE: 73 JL Light N ( Lafayette Rd. (Route 1) 5 j l Route 101C y
~
w ll Light - ); e 10 O Exeter Rd. O liigh St. O ($ E.GX3
> Movement facilitated >l Movement discouraged l @ Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traf fic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Allocate service to traffic moving west onto E.<eter Rd. from Route 1 northbound and Iligh St.
wastbound.
- 2. D:.scourage southbound or eastbound traf fic.
MAN!' OWE R/EOU I t' MENT 1 2 traffic guides 6 traf fic cone:1 I-38
Traffic Control Poct No. D-HA-02 ERPA: D A TOWN: Hampton LOCATION: Interchange of Route 51, Route 101C & I-95 NODE: s 230,233,235,236,/ 237,238 N I-95 d
~
N
. I h
- -- h/ )
f /
} .1.} M 'p.
" ./
Route { j af'
~
. . ' '%y.~ e %
gg k OOo h s o 0, N ,
, -c....... ,,_;
;y; ,g . _ _ _
m .pv 8_
~- .
r Movement facilitated
= ; Movement discouraged I-95
/
%) ,
4 O Traffic guide + O Traffic cone g
,g
)( Traffic barricade Route 51 DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate movements from Route 101C to Route 51 west.
- 2. Facilitate traf fic moving from Route 51 to I-95 north.
- 3. Facilitate traffic westbound on Route 51.
- 4. Discourage traffic from exiting Route 51 onto
/ Route 101C and from northbound I-95 onto Route 51. C MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 5 traffic guidos , 16 traffic barricades 40 traffic cones r_39
Traffic Control Pcat No. D-HA-03 ERPA: D TOWN: llampton LOCATION: Ocean Blvd. (Route lA) & Iligh St. (Route 101C) t I ( NODE: 14 Kings Highway
\
Route 101C N > iLig t l Restaurant l 19th St 4 96 ffff a lc - ight 18th St. 0 77.7Z -
, jgf
, Route 1A Uurking 58
> Movement facilitated
>l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate movements from Route 1A to westbound Route 101C and northbound 1A.
- 2. Discourage southbound movement along Route 1A.
MAN POWi:!UEQU IPMENT 2 traffic guide 3 traffic cones 2 traffic barricad I-40
Traffic Control Poct No. D-HA-04 ERPA: D TOWN: Hampton 1 LOCATION: Ocean Blvd. (Route lA) & Winnacunnet Rd. (Route 101E) NODE: 13 Winnacunnet Rd. N = (Route 101E) Condos Stores
} g4 nan HiG ""Y o
so, 6 \ Route 1A p Parking Light g
, L @ *)
~
> ] a Ocean Blvd. (Route 1A) 5
>- Movement facilitated
>4 Movement discouraged
.. O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate northbound traffic along Route 1A.
- 2. Discourage southbound traffic; divert it west on Route 101E.
3 MANPOWER /EOUIPMENT 2 traffic guidos 12 traffic cones I-41
Traffic Control Poct No. D-HA-05 ERPA: D TOWN: _ !!amptoh LOCATION: Routes l'& 51 NODE: 205,206,207 Light b 1( i) N > xxx
/
/
Route 1 South - - e x 0 . X l< - '
= Light X
f f ,
' b s
' N
(
-?
~
' 'T X XI 1
> - / >
b , , Route 1 North G -j l D , Route 51
> Movement facilitated r I Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone -
i )( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: ,1 Facilitate northbound traffic on Route 1.
- 2. Facilitate westbound traffic on Route 51.
- 2. Discourage southbound traffic on Route 1.
- 4. Discourage eastbound traffic on Route 51.
j $. Discourage merging of traffic streams. MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 5 traffic guides 14 barricades I-42 l l
l Traffic Control Post No. D-NH-01 ERPA: D TOWN: North Hampton LOCATION: Intersection of Route 1 and North Road NODE: 61 U.S. Route 1 North Road North Road 8 s s, j_
$o Ligh O
O s_/ o N U.S. Route 1 g:
- Movement-facilitated
=; Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate northbound traffic movement on Route 1.
- 2. Discourage southbound traffic movement on Route 1 and eastbound movement on North Road.
O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-43
Traffic Control Post No. D-NH-02 ERPA: D TOWN: North Hampton LOCATION: Route 151 and Route 101r- / O a NODE: 49 _. N ,N Route 151 s = :: : r O .T [ p-Light
\
p \/ - a1 1 f s** Route 101D g g: I 1
= Movement facilitated l
>; Movement discouraged \
@ Traffic guide Route 151 O Traffic cone -
X Traffic barricade l DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage southbound movement along Route 151 l and all movements along Route 101D.
- 2. Facilitate northbound movement along Route 151.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT l 3 traffic guides 5 barricades 9 traffic cones y_44 i l -
i Traffic Control Post No. D-NH-03 I ERPA: D TOWN: North Hampton (~ k LOCATION: Lafayette Rd. (Route 1) & Route 101D NODE: 62 A
. N Light 1
Route 1 Route 101D U i Y . Light J ll gO P V T/C . O O O g: .
>- Movement facilitated 1 Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate northbound and westbound through movements through the intersection.
- 2. Discourage movements south and east.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-45
, .,, . .-.. .~ ,. . . -
Traffic Control Poet No. D-NH-04 ERPA: D
~
TOWN: North Hampton LOCATION: Intersection of Route 151 with Route 1 O NODE: 71 AL N Ji - Lig: t H k te Route l 600 0 Route 1 g:
> Movement facilitated =l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone )< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound traffic movement onto Route 151 and northbound movement on U.S. Route 1.
- 2. Discourage southbound traffic movement on Route 1.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 3 traffic cones I-46
Traffic Control PoOt No. E-ME-01 ERPA: E TOWN: Merrimac (,) LOCATION: I-695 & Broad St. NODE: 268 & 269
\' road St.
A o O
'O '\.
- A \/ N ON
/ \ \
'x N sx \
I-495 _
\ _ N ,,_y I-495
\
c Q .. Li I _ _ _
\ ,
' ' ,,l x x,
/
o / N .. .f O 4 Y
\'~%j t e
K_ey:
x
-> Movement facilitated Broad St.
=! Movement discouraged \ \\
Light O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
>< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage eastbound movement along I-495 and northbound movement along Broad St.
- 2. Facilitate movement from Broad St. onto westbound I-495.
m' (G' MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 3 traffic guides 8 barricades 11 traffic cones I-47
Traffic Control Post No. E-ME-02 ERPA: E TOWN: Merrimac LOCATION: Church St. & Main St. NODE: 107 Jl Church St. N Main St.
'n0o bk -
@ e. Route 110 o
y i G Broad St. M:
>= Movement facilitated >=1 Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone )< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate all traffic movements onto southbound j Broad St. toward entry ramp to I-4 95 westbound.
- 2. Discourage eastbound movement along Main St. and northbound movement along Church St.
MANPOWER /EOUIPMENT , 2 traffic guides 6 traffic cones I-48
Traffic Control Post No. E-NB-01 ERPA: E TOWN: Newbury LOCATION: Plum Island Tpke & Old Point Rd./ Sunset Dr. NODE: 1 A N Old Point Rd. Plum Island Tpke. c 0 O Sunset Dr. g:
>= Movement facilitated
- 1 Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION:
- 1. Allocate service time to the three movements s to provide a smooth continuous flow.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide I-49
Traffic Control Post No. E-NB-02 ERPA: E
~
TOWN: Newbury LOCATION: Route lA, Parker St., Green St., Rolfe Lane & Hanover St. O NODE: 99, 86, 68 From Plum Island
- Rdfe he Route 1A
+
< N Y o .
Town O g g Light Route lA - 0 Green Street From Newburyport
/
Hanover St. Parker Street
\
To Route 1 Kg:
> Movement facilitated
>l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage northbound movement along Route lA and Rolfe Lane.
- 2. Facilitate southbound movement along Route lA.
- 3. Facilitate southbound movement along Green St.
and Hanover St. MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 3 traffic guides 15 traffic cones I-50
Traffic Control Post No. E-NB-03 ERPA: E
~
TOWN: Newbury O LOCATION: Hanover Street, Middle Road, U.S. Route 1 NODE: 69 ! O N U.S. Route 1 O O
>] O vf O*O O \
y O Middle Hanover Road O { }O O O O Street O O O 3 0 O O.. O on Oy oj UO o n oO M:
= Movement facilitated
?-l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1._ Discourage northbound movement along Route 1.
- 2. Facilitate southbound movement from Hanover St.
onto Route 1. Maintain two lanes of traffic moving south on Route 1; these will merge O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT downstream. 2 traffic guides 31 traffic cones I-51 s - . .s
Traffic Control Post No. E-NP-01 ERPA: E TOWN: Newburyport LOCATION: Intersection of Route 1, Parker St. & State St. O NODE: 97 N N Route 1 State Street Parker Street
/
o o o\ a gYl 'E Light s O g S ooo
} O o
l o@
\
h O
@O 1 0 <
K_ey: Light
>- Movement facilitated >l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone U.S. Route 1 )< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage northbound movement along Route 1 and State Street.
- 2. Facilitate southbound movements from Route 1, Parker St. and State St. onto Route 1.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 5 traffic guides 19 traffic cones I-52 o
Traffic Control Post No. E-NP-02 ERPA: E TOWN: Newburyport LOCATION: I-95 & Storey Ave. Intercha.nge NODE: 258,259 ! y r l Z~95 X k g N
~
l i O 30c X Storey Ave. Route 113 OP - Light _ , T . Y
\
,, i t
I O i r J g
- t M: I 11 i
> Movement facilitated Very >l Movement discouraged Light O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate all movements from Storey Ave. onto southbound I-95 and southbound movement along I-95.
- 2. Discourage all other movements.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 4 traffic guides 18 traffic conos 4 barricades I-53
Traffic Control Post No. E-NP-03 ERPA: E TOWN: Newburyport LOCATION: Intersection of Route 113 with Moseley Ave., Ferry Rd., O Noble St. & Low St. NODE: 79, 101 Ferry Moseley Ave. Road Noble - Stree E oo % I igh St. g Route 113 t Low Street N I-95 g:
>- Movement facilitated = ; Movement discouraged O Traffic guide 1
O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate all movements to_ travel westbound on l Route 113.
- 2. Discourage all eastbound and northbound movements.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 3 traffic guides 21 traffic cones I-54
Traffic Control Post No. E-NP-04 ERPA: E TOWN: .Newburyport LOCATION: liigh St. & Broad St. NODE: 167 Ji N Broad St. / + High St. O Toppans Route 113 Lane High School g:
>- Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound movement along High St.
s MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide I-55
Traffic Control Post No. E-NP-05 ERPA: E TOWN: Newburyport LOCATION: Route 1 & Merrimac St. NODE: 96 U.S. A j Route 1 Y A o/
~,
Merrimac St.
. J e XXXX f
l
- g. Light '
> Movement facilitated >l Movement discouraged @ Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage northbound movement along Route 1 and traffic along Merrimac St.
- 2. Facilitate southbound movement along Route 1.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 2 traffic guides 9 traffic cones 6 barricades I-56
Traffic Control Post No. E-NP-06 ERPA: E TOWN: Newburyport f3 LOCATION: Parker St., Graf Rd., Low St. & Mulligan Way 77,91 Low Street NODE: m 1 N Graf Road Mulligan Way a
@b Parker Street Parker Street Newburypprt
% , M ewbury
/
To I4 5 ,'
/ Scotland Road g: f'
>- Movement facilitated
?; Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage northbound movement along Parker St.
' and Graf Rd. and eastbound inovement along Parker St. and Low St.
- 2. Facilitate southbound movements onto Parker St.
, toward Scotland Ave. and I-95. \ MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT -
2 traffic guides 12 traffic cones I-57
Traffic Control Post No. E-NP-07 ERPA: E TOWN: Newburyport LOCATION: Water St., Plum Island Turnpike & Ocean Ave. O NODE: 100 0 N . Water St. /
/
Oo
,/ o Plum Island "E * *
- Ocean Ave.
N Newburyport Rolfe Newbury e g: Da- Movement facilitated
- l Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Discourage westbound movement along Water St. and eastbound movement along th6 P.I.T.
- 2. Facilitate movements onto Ocean Ave. southbound.
1 MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-58
TRAFFIC CONIROL POST ID. E-W-01
'IOWN: WEST NEWBURY IDCATION: Route 113 at Newbut,jport Town Line NODE:
- i. '
Artichoke River Route 113 M h lc : : Light Light E s
- i{
l
- 1. : !!I West Newburg ! ! Newburyport h . :
O l! *.. Legend
- Movement f acilitated
;' Movement discouraged
@ Traf fic guide O Traffic cone x Traf fic barricades DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic movement in the directions indicated.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT: 1 - traffic guide l 6 - traffic barricades s l O I-59 1 l 1
l ( l [ j TRAFFIC CONTROL POST NO.E-WN-02 TOWN: WEST NEWBURY LOCATION: Rouet 113 and Pentuckett School near Groveland Town Lir.e NODE: 151 Pentucket School i 1
% :/* x
- e
- E :
Route 113 O Legend l 0 Movement facilitated 4 Novement discouraged -
@ Traf fic guide O Traf fic cone x Traf fic barricades ._
DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate movements into/out of access road to the Pentuckett School and southbound along Route 113.
- 2. Discourage northbound movements along Route 113.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT: 2 - traffic guides 3 - traffic cones 3 - traffic barricades 0 I-60 L ..
Traffic Control Post No. E-WN-03 ERPA: E TOWN: West Newbury (n LOCATION: South Street & I-95 Interchange & Scotland Road NODE: 262, 263 s' I-95 N
$ /
Y p+ 4/
/ Mass.
State Police South St. O
' </ gAxx Scotland Rd.
OM /
,s -
2
@o O
N
=lO / O QV
/
/
s/9 6
& -f-g: 6 h
Movement facilitated rl Movement discouraged O Traffic guide Light O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate vehicles moving from South St. to I-95 southbound. -s
- 2. Discourage northbound movement on I-95 and eastbound movement on South St.
O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT d 3 traffic guides 9 traffic cones 9 traffic barricades I-61
TRAFFIC CONIBOL POST NO. E-WN-04
- E TOWN: WEST NEWBURY IDCATION: Georgetown Road and Crane Neck Road NODE:
Georgetown Road Light - Y u. *o N gs Crane Neck Road s , x, x,, 8 b r Light l Legend Movement f acilitated
- ' Movement discouraged
@ Traf fic guide O Traf fic cone x Traf fic barricades DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate movements onto Crane Neck Road, westbound
- 2. Discourage northbound and eastbound traffic movements.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT: 1 - traffic guide 6 - traffic cones 6 - traffic barricades - l I-62
l TRAFFIC CONIROL POST NO. E-WN-05 ERPA: E O '1%N : WEST NEWBURY IDCATION: Bridge Street at Rock Village Bridge NODE: p: :1 Haverhill ;.:: . , 1 West Newbury
&. . Y.\
... :s p :..(
^
% \
Cr w/ A
! -+ ;
=
j:f Bridge Street Merrimac River Legend
- Movement f acilitated
- l Movement discouraged g Traffic guide O Traffic cone x Traf fic barricades DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic to West Newbury for Merrimac parents traveling to pick up. children.
- 2. Discourage all other through trovements.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT: 1 - traffic guide ' 3 - traffic cones 3 - traffic barricades O I-63
Traffic Control Poct No. E-WN-06 ERPA: E TOWN: West Newbury LOCATION: West Newbury Square NODE: 152 x Ch NW YI
$#Ch S,
t I f N l ! Main Street OO l @ ** 2e ( et l Get If Whetstone St. Route 113 g: O Movement facilitated l
?l Movement discouraged @ Traffic guide ,
O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: _
1 1 MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 2 traffic guides , 6 traffic cones j I-64
l Traffic Control Post No. F-BR-01 . ERPA: F TOWN: Brentwood LOCATION: Route 125 & Route lllA NODE: 193 0 Route 125 N Light Route lllA Route 4 - 107 g Light -. j O g: O Movement facilitated
, =l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone l )( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate movement along Route 125 northbound ,
and Route lllA westbound.
- 2. Discourage movement onto Route lllA eastbound.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 3 traffic cones I-65
Traffic Control Post No. F-BR-02 ERDA: F
~
TOWN: Drentwood LOCATION: Intersection of South Road and Route 125 G NODE: 183 h N a To Route 107 L South Road b A, Light J@ Ql f0 0 000 f
\
Route 125 g:
> Movement facilitated
> I Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade
~ DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate traffic moving westbound on South Road or northbound on Route 125
- 2. Discourage eastbound traffic movement on South Road )
or southbound on Route 125. MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT O' 1 traffic guide - 6 traffic cones I-66 s
Traffic Control Post No. F-BR-03 ERPA: F TOWN: Brentwood LOCATION: Intersection of Route 125 and North Road NODE: 300 jl N Ligh l, / 8- 1 North Road
/ O
\0 O
4 O Route 125 g:
>- Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone X Traffic barricade
~~
DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate northbound traffic movement along Route 125.
- 2. Discourage all other traffic movements.
O MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-67 c
Trcffic Control Poet No. F-EK-01 ERPA: F TOWN: East Kingston LOCATION: Intersection of Route 108 & Route 107 at Monahan Corner O NODE: 128 d Route 108 N Route 107/108 000 Route 107
@ ~
V
-- O JO ooo fO Light South Rd.
Ky: D> Movement facilitated
- =l Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone )( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound traffic on Route 107 and traffic turning west onto Route 107/108.
- 2. Discourage movements eastbound on Route 107 and along Route 108.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 9- traffic cones I-68 _<m=, .. - - --
Traffic Control Pest No. F-EK-02 ERDA: F
~
TOWN: East Kingston LOCATION: Intersection of Routes 107, 107/108 and 108 (west) l NODE: 165 j Route 107
% , Route 107/108
^
Light e h
'gh Route 108 N i
M: I = Movement facilitated
=l Movement discouraged
@ Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)< Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate westbound traffic movement on Route 107.
- 2. Discourage eastbound traffic movement on Routes 107/108 and southbound on Route 108.
I MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-69
=.. - _. _ _ _ . . _ _
Traffic Control Post No. F-EK-03 ERPA: F
~
' ~ TOWN: East Kingston Intersection of Route 107A and Route 108 O
LOCATION _: NODE: 164 h Route 108 N Light 000
\
_ Route 107A y N O L Ligh l - t l Key:
>- Movement facilitated M Movement discouraged O Traffic guide O Traffic cone
)( Traffic barricade DESCRIPTION: 1. Facilitate through movcrents of traffic estbound on Ponte 107A and southbound on Boute 108.
- 2. Discourage eastbound and northbound traffic noveFents.
~
- 3. Discourage turning movemnts from westbound Boute 107A and
- . - southbound Ibute 108.
MANPOWER / EQUIPMENT 1 traffic guide 6 traffic cones I-70
, Traffic Control Post No. F-EX-01 ERPA: F TOWN: Exeter LOCATION: Interchange of Routes 111, 108, 101C}}