ML20210E670

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack 831230 Response to Concerns Over Emergency Response Plan at Plant,Including FEMA Response from R Vickers.Fema Response Inadequate Re Evacuation Time Considerations & Evacuation Routes
ML20210E670
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon, 05000000
Issue date: 01/09/1984
From: Kranzdorf R
CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIV., SAN LUIS OBISPO
To: Martin J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
Shared Package
ML16341D666 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-84-744 NUDOCS 8603280083
Download: ML20210E670 (6)
v • d • e


Text

~

. t

  • RE0EiVE0

. W.

!!M Jf.N I2 N 12 Y-January 9, 1984 G L. . P John B. Martin Engianal Administrator United States Nuclear

  • Regulatory Commission Region V 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5368

Dear Mr. Martin:

My' appreciation fo'r your December 30, 1983 letter regarding a few of the many concerns of the Concerned Cal Poly Faculty and Staff regarding the Emergency Response Plan for a nuclear accident at Diablo Canyon-is tendered. .I also appreciate your sending.our organization a copy of the response of Robert Vick-ers, Regional Director of FEMA, since he did not see fit to copy us as we had been copying FEMA. We are haartened by your statement th'at you are interested in concerns of the Concerned Cal Poly Faculty and Staff as they relate to the emergency plan, but must inform you that you are in error den you write (in reference to the FEMA response) that, "I trust that this answers your concerns."

In fact, after reading the FEMA response, we are more concerned than ever.

For the sake of brevity, we will respond to the first two of the four headings l in;Mr. Vickers' meno, thus explaining d y we believe his response is singularly inadequate. (We could have forcefully replied to the last two headings as well, but believe such overkill is unnecessary.)

(1) EVACUATION TIME CONSIDERATIONS The FEMA response stresses " standard engineering techniques," a studv done at lancho Seco, and other expert input, but offers no specific replies to our comments, and shows no knowledge of the area surrounding Diablo Canyon.

I trust Mr. Vickers has never crept along either Route 1 or Los Osos Valley ,

Road in heavy fog as have many of us, perhaps averageing 10 or 15 miles an hour. As one t o lived in Reywood Park from 1971 to 1978, I cee attest I that heavy fog and flooding do o: cur along the roads in question, and they are infinitely worse driving conditions than " heavy rain," d atever the '(M

.\ l

" standard engineering techniquas" may claim. Further, to cite a Rancho l #.

Seco study with its far more t= tensive road network, as well as its inland as opposed to coastal weather conditions, is irrelevant. For our area, a 20% add-on time from "best case" to " worst case" weather conditions is ludicrous.

^

l 8603280083 860123 '

PDR FOIA

. DEVDE84-744 PDR f*

t

, . , _ _ .-- ._ . , , , , . - _ _ _ - _ . . . - . - - _ _ _ _ _ - - . . - - . _ . . m.,, _ . . _ _ _ _ , _ _ , _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - . . . _ . -

John B. Martin January 9, 1984 t

. Page Two

- (2) gVACUATION TRANSPORTATION ROUTES As docuented in my December 9,1983, letter to you, any work on Twin Bridges between Baywood Park and Morro Bay is not slated to begin before 1985-86 at

, the earliest. Since no construction projects have been carried out on the problem evacuation transportation routes, the flooding potential for the area is the same this Winter as it was last Winter; there is also no reason to believe the dangers will be any less during the next rainy season should t

Diablo Canyon be in operation by then. To state that, "The County has addressed certain flooding problems and have (sic) budgeted funding for improvements to the impacted areas." is meaningless and a ' subterfuge unless Mr. Vickers can specifically detail what changes have been made or will be made by the time Diablo Canyon is scheduled to go on-line. We submit that absolutely nothing has changed regarding transportation routes, assurances to the contrary.

It does not inspire confidence in FEMA to read that, " People can be evacuated east on Los Osos Valley Road, and it is considered unlikely that. both Morro l Bay and San Luis Obispo would be evacuated concurrently." Who considers it unlikely? Is Mr. Vickers aware that at TMI when_it was suggested that only

, pregnant women and preschool children leave the- area, some 149,000 people chose to do so? In fact, during one of the Diablo Canyon drills, wind

, conditions suddenly changed, and areas not intended to be evacuated suddenly were included in the planning. The fact of the matter is that, as stated in our November 5,1983, letter, the possible need to evacuate the Baywood Park /Los Osos population along only Los Osos Valley Road into the city of San Luis Obispo points up the paucity of evacuation transportation

~

l routes in the Emergency Planning Zone, and has all the makings of a catastrophe.

Table. I.5-2 of the County Emergency Response Plan lists 11,554 people living in Baywood Park /Los Osos (Attachment A). Table I.5-3 lists 371 carless households, and 5,441 " evacuation vehicles" for the area (Attachment B).

Finally, Table I.5-5 shows that Los osos Valley Road can handle 1,000 vehicles per hour, if both lanes are moving in the same direction (and if I

' the weather conditions are not too unfavorable) (Attachment C). We would ask "the engineering and transportation experts" to compute how long it would take to move the Baywood Park /Los Osos population from their homes to a relocation center were Los Osos Valley Road the only means of exiting the area. Before we are again accused of engaging in " worst case" "j scenarios, may we again point *out that Los Osos Valley Road was the oniv '

means out of Baywood Park /Los Osos several timse last Winter' Flooding '

q , Twin Bridges, in fact, shut off the alternate means of evacuation no i l

less in San than Luisthree times Obispo (butinworks'in a singleLos week. It was Osos) that reported when sheby one to drove who lives ;

work f i X along Los Osos Valley Road last Winter during minor flooding, traffic i was backed up the entire nine miles betweerl the two communities,

,~n,-- -, -, - ,,..-,,r , . , , -,,,,n.-,-----,-,-------- , , . - , - . - , - , , , - - , - - , - - , - - - , - - - - - , - - - - , - - , - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

John B. Martin January 9, 1984 Page Three We are sorry if this correspondence is far sharper than either of the other two letters which have been sent to you. The sharpness is not directed at your office. It is, rather, the result of reading a smoothly-worded FEMA response, complete with bland assurances intended to deny that serious problems exist.

If we are to be accused of " worst case" analysis, may we similarly submit.that Mr. Vickers engages in "best case" analysis. Only when Mr. Vickers and others of his persuasion engaged in emergency planning admit there are serious problems with the Diablo Canyon Emergency Response Plan will there be some hope for substantive improvement in the Plan. Until then, we will continue to read about " standard engineering techniques, " appropriate protective measures,"

and "Should you require further assistance...do not hesitate to contact..."

Sincerely. -

] I 0 Dr. Richard Kranzdorf, Spokespet' son Concerned Cal Poly Faculty and Staff 160 Graves Avenue l San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 l

CC: Commissioner Palladino Coenissioner Bernthal Commissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Assaltine.

Commissioner Roberts dongressau.n Leon Panetta Congressman William Thomas Congressman Edward Markey Director Ross A. Scarano, Radiological Safety & Safeguards Programs, NRC l Federal Emergency Management Agency Office of Emergency Services (State of California)

Office of Emergency Services (County of San Luis Obispo)

Attachments: 3 I

l .

l

(ATTACWENT A)

. TABLE !.5-2 PROTECTIVE ACTION ZONE EST! HATED 1980 POPULATION AND DWELLING UNITS (Sheet 1 of 2)

Protective Acticn Zone .

Number and Title Residential Population Dwelling Units, 2-mile 5 3 6-mile 58 27 Avila/ San Luis Bay 949 502 See Canyon /Prefumo Canyon / 57 29 Los Osos Valley Baywood /Los Osos .

11,554 4,691 City of Pismo Beach 5,286 3,315 Squire Canyon 210 79

San Luis Obispo Area 41,803 15,561 Morro Bay /Cayucos 11,830 6,172 .

Five Cities, Southern Portion 25,459 10,555 l Price Canyon, Orcutt Road 1,386 599 l Lopez Drive, Route 227 Nipomo North of Willow Road 2,000 744

. Subtotal, Basic EPZ 100,588 42,277 Nipomo 7.137 2,474 Cuesta Pass / Santa Margarita 1,151 455 l Rcute 41/ Cypress Mountain Dr. 171 66 l Total, Basic and Extended EPZ 109.047 41,17[

l 1

i I.5 (11)

, , n - .,_ -- -

. (ATTACHMENT B)

TABLE 1.5-3 1980 ESTIMATED CARLESS POPULATION AND EVACUATION VEHICLES (Sheet 1 of 2)

Protective Action Zone Carless Evacuation Vehicles -

~

. Number and Title Households Residential Transient Total 2-mile 3 500 503 6-mile . 3 31 370 401 ,

Avila/ San Luis Bay 39 577 700 1,277. 1 l See Canyon /Prefumo Canyon / 2 34 - 34 1 i Los Osos Valley ,

Baywood /Los Osos . 371 5.441 - 5,441  ! .

City of Pismo Beach 193 2,538 2,000 '4,538

  • Squire Canyon 7 343 - 343 -

)

l San Luis Obispo 1,347 17,671 1,000 18,671 i  !

Morro Bay /Cayucos 550 5,687 1,355 7,042 .i  !

l Five Cities, Southern Portion 942 12,390 1,475 13,865 '

l Price Canyon, Orcutt Road, 53 587 - 587 I

Loper Drive, Route 227 '

Nipomo North of Willow Road 62 863 '150 1,013

! Subtotal, Basic EPZ 3,569' 46,165 7,550 53,715  ; )

l ,

Nipomo 214 2,870 375 3,245 ,

Cuesta Pass / Santa Margarita 29 528 - 528 , i Route 41/ Cypress Mountain Dr. 6 77 - 77  !- <

M M M Total, Basic and Extended M EPZ l -

t.

i i l I

. l T

l .

le l

i

{

l e

1 I.5 (13) l l

l

(ATTACHMENT C)

I TABLE I.5-5 )

l CAPACITY OF MAJOR EVACUATION ROUTES t

  • NO. 3 ROUTE SECMENT TYPE LANES
  • CAPACITY 3

US 101 San Luis Obispo - Atascadero F 4 3,600 San Luis Obispo - Santa Maria F 4

  • 3,600 l l

4 State Route 1 San Luis Obispo - Cayucos F 4 3 600  !

Cayucoa-Cambria R 2 1,500 '

Pismo Beach A 2 1,200 l Pismo Beach - Crover City A 2 1,500 Grover City - Niposo A 2 1,200 Niposo - Guadalupe R 2 1,500 State Route 41 Morro Bay - Atascadero R 2 1,200 State Route 166 Niposo (East) R 2 1,200 State Route 227 San Luis Obispo - Arroyo Grandi R 2 1,000 i

Arroyo Grande - Arroyo Grande - Nipomo R 2 1,000 Los Berros Road .

Avila Road Avila Beach - US 101 R 2 1,000

Cypress Mountain Cayucos - Route 46 R 2 800 Drive.

l Los Osos Valley Los Osos - Sta Luis Obispo R 2 1,000 Road Orcutt Road Arroyo Grande - San Luis Obispo R 2 1,000

. South Bay Boulevard Los Osos - Horro Bay R 2 1,200 l

1 F = Freewsy/ Expressway; R = Rural Highway; A = Urban Arterial.

l 2 3

Vehicles per hour (vph), in assumed haage during evacuation (one-way capacity).

Assumes added capacity gained through operation with four lanes up Cuesta Grade 4 for certain Periods of evacuation. (See Attachment II.7.5-1).

6,000 vph in city of San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay.

I.5 (17) i

- - . - - , - - - --- - , , - . , -

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20210E670&oldid=3312677"