ML20212D894
| ML20212D894 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/27/1987 |
| From: | Lieberman E, Weismantle J, Wilm W KLD ASSOCIATES, INC., LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212D309 | List: |
| References | |
| OL-5, NUDOCS 8703040226 | |
| Download: ML20212D894 (122) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:O O UNITED STATES OF AMERICA O NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board O In the Matter of )
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-5
) (EP Exercise)
O (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, ) Unit 1) ) LILCO'S TESTIMONY ON CONTENTION EX 41 0 0-Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 O Richmond, Virginia 23212 February 27,1987 ,O
- O G703040226 870227 i PDR ADOCK 05000322 G PDR O
!O
.O O UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Befom the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
'O In the Matter of )
)
LONG ISLAND LIClITING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-5 O ) (EP Exerchie) (Shoreham Nucl' ear Power Station,
~ )
Unit 1) ... ) O LILCO'S TESTIMONY ON CONTENTION EX 41
.O Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Strmt lO .. P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 l
February 27,1987
- O
- O
'O
h LILCO, February 27,1987 ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ) Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )
)
) LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-5
) (EP Exercise)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, ) Unit 1) ) ) LILCO'S TESTIMONY ON CONTENTION EX 41
- 1. Q. Please state your name and business address.
A. (Lieberman) My name is Edward B. Lieberman. My business address is ) KLD Associates, Incorporated, 300 Broadway, Huntington Station, New York 11746. ) [Weismantle] My name is John A. Weismantle. My business address is Long Island Lighting Company,175 Old Country Road, Hicksville, New York 11801. 2 - [Wilm) My name is Walter F. Wilm. My business address is Long Island Lighting Company,175 Old Country Road, Hicksville, New York 11801. ) 2. Q. Please summarize your professional qualifications and your roles in emer-gency planning for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station and in the February 13,1986 Exercise of the Shoreham Emergency Plan. A. (Lieberman) I am Vice President of KLD Associates, Incorporated. My ) professional qualifications are included in the " Professional Qualifications of LILCO Witnesses on Exercise Contentions." My familiarity with the )
) issues raised in Contention EX 41 results from my experience as a traffic engineer, from work KLD Associates has performed for LILCO on evacuation time estimates for the Shoreham EPZ, and from telephone calls I received from LERO members during the February 13 Exercise asking my advice about certain issues relating to the two simulated roadway impedi-ments. Following the Exercise, members of KLD Associates, including my-self, have served in the position of Traffic Engineer in the Local Emergency Response Organization ("LERO"). One of the primary duties of the Traffic Engineer is to assist in LERO's response to roadway impedi-ments. D (Weismantle] I am Vice President, Engineering for LILCO. My professional qualifications are included in the " Professional Qualifications D of LILCO Witnesses on Exercise Contentions." My familiarity with the is-sues raised in Contention EX 41 stems from my prior position as the Manag-er of the Local Emergency Response Implementing Organization ("LERIO") h for LILCO, which was responsible for the development and implementation of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Local Offsite Radiological Emer-l gency Response Plan ("LILCO Plan") - a position which I held from the in-O - ception of LERO in 1983 until af ter the February 13, 1986 Exercise. In ad-dition, I participated in the February 13 Exercise as the Manager of Local Response - a position which provided me with direct factual knowledge h about LERO's response to the two simulated roadway impediments. 1 [Wilm) I am Vice President, Customer Relations for LILCO. My profes-sional qualifications are included in the " Professional Qualifications of LILCO Witnesses on Exercise Contentions." My familiarity with the issues O
O presented in Contention EX 41 stems from having served as the Evacuation O Coordinator of LERO during the February 13 Exercise. In that position, I had direct responsibility for implementing the traffic portions of the evac-u ti n rec mmendati n that was made that day. LERO's response to the O two simulated roadway impediments was the result of actions taken either by LERO workers who reported to me or by me. O 3. Q. Would you please summarize the issues raised in Contention EX 41? A. (Lieberman, Weismantle, Wilm] Contention EX 41 essentially alleges that LERO failed to demonstrate that it had the ability to remove impediments
.O from roadways in a timely manner and that as a result, the LILCO Plan is fundamentally flawed. Intervenors also allege that the addition of a Traffic Engineer in the EOC would not eliminate the problems exhibited during the O February 13 Exercise. Finally, as the result of the consolidation of various contention subparts into Contention EX 41, Intervenors contend that FEMA introduced an insufficient number of accidents into the February 13 Exer-O cise.
The specific language of Contention EX 41 and consolidated subparts is contained in Attachment A.
- o -
- 4. Q. Could your briefly describe the scope of this testimony?
A. [Lieberman, Weismantle, Wilm) This testimony will address all admitted subparts of Contention EX 41, as well as Contentions EX 22.I. 25 and 29 O. which have been subsumed in that contention. This testimony will begin by descricing briefly the provisions in the LILCO Plan and Procedures for the
- g removal of roadway impediments. It will then explain how FEMA input
/
simulated roadway impediments inte the February 13 Exercise and describe 'O
the steps taken by LERO to respond to those impediments. The testimony will conclude with an analysis of LERO's performance regarding those im-pediments and with responses to Intervenors' specific allegations. ) 5. Q. C( ild your summarize your testimony on Contention EX 41? A. [Lieberman, Weismantle, Wilm] In Contention EX 41 and subsumed con-tentions, Intervenors have presented an assortment of factual allegations ) which they claim demonstrate that the LILCO Plan is fundam(.ntally flawed. Close examination of Intervenors' claims reveals that Intervenors have attempted to extract factual snippets in order to support their ) general thesis. A review of all Exercise documents discredits Intervenors' thesis. The Exercise documents demonstrate that LERO consistently took ) appropriate actions to respond to the two roadway impediments. Delays in LERO's response can be directly traced to two primary causes: first, the Evacuation Route Coordinator did not communicate both necessary infor- ) mation from the free play messages to field personnel and the potential existence of the impediments to his superiors in the EOC; and second, inherent difficulties in effectively injecting severe, readily-observable im- ) - pediments into an exercise. Neither of these causes indicates a deficiency in the LILCO Plan. As will be discussed below, in an actual emergency the Evacuation Route Coordinator's actions would not have had a detrimental effect on LERO's l response, since information about the accidents would have reached the EOC in a timely manner by other paths. Indeed, following the Exercise
) steps have been taken to improve further both the Plan and Procedures and LILCO's training program as they relate to dealing with roadway impediments. Thus, the concerns raised in Contention EX 41 are baseless.
P L
- _ _ ~ _ . . . . . . . _ . _
O
- 6. Q. Could your briefly describe the LILCO Plan provisions for the removal of O roadway impediments?
A. [Weismantle] The LILCO Plan specifies that a maximum of twelve road crews will be assigned to remove roadway obstructions during an evacua-O tion. These road crews are dispatched to different locations throughout the EPZ, principally at the intersections of major east-west and north-south evacuation routes. OPIP 3.6.3, Att. 8, p. 4 of 5. The total number of road O crews that will actually be assigned in a given emergency depends on the size of the area to be evacuated. During the February 13 Exercise, all 12 road crews were dispatched. In its Partial Initial Decision ("PID"), the O Board found these provisions for the removal of roadway impediments to be
- . " reasonable." Long Island Lighting Company (Shoreham Nuclear Power Sta-tion, Unit 1), LBP-85-12, 21 NRC 644, 811 (1985) ("PID"), aff'd, Long Island l
- O Lighting Company (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1), ALAB-832,23 NRC 135 (1986).
The specific procedures for responding to roadway impediments are O contained in OPIP 3.6.3. In Revision 6 of the Plan (which was the revision in effect on the day of the Exercise), OPIP 3.6.3 provided that the Traffic Control Coordinator was initially to instruct the Road Logistics Coordi-O - nator to implement road crew operations. OPIP 3.6.3, Att. 4. Af ter an order to evacuate, the Road Logistics Coordinator then identified the road crew posts to be manned given the evacuation recommendation and O notified the Lead Traffic Guides in the three staging areas of the manning decision. OPIP 3.6.3, S 5.5. The Lead Traffic Guides, in turn, briefed and dispatched the appropriate Road Crews. OPIP 3.6.3, S 5.4.9. Upon arriving O at their vehicles, Road Crews were required to check in on their radios with the Evacuation Support Communicator in the EOC and then to O
maintain periodic contact with that communicator following their arrival J at their assigned posts. OPIP 3.6.3, Att. 2. The Revision 6 procedures also provided general instructions with regard to responding to roadway impediments. When an accident report J was received in the EOC, response personnel were given two options. If the source of the information required verification, the Evacuation Route Coordinator could dispatch a Route Spotter to the accident location to ver-J, \ ify the impediment. Once verified, the accident information was to be relayed to the Road Logistics Coordinator who would then dispatch the I appropriate equipment. Alternatively, if the source of the report was suf-ficiently trustworthy, LERO's initial action could have been the dispatch of a Road Crew. Both the Evacuation Route Coordinator and the Road Logistics Coordinator were instructed by procedure to report problems affecting evacuation to the Traffic Control Coordinator who, in turn, was to provide periodic updates to the Evacuation Coordinator. Revision 6 of OPIP 3.6.3 did not contain specific instructions about traffic rerouting as the result of roadway impediments or about broad-casting an EBS message as a result of such rerouting. It did not prohibit O - l these actions, but was silent on them. The procedure was draf ted this way since LILCO assumed that any accidents that would occur during an evacu-ation would be of relatively minor severity since evacuation traffic would be moving at low rates of speed, s_ee PID at 810, and hence would not I entirely obstruct a roadway making rerouting a necessary action. In response to FEMA concerns articulated in the Post-Exercise Report, OPIP 3.6.3 has been revised to provide more specific instructions O
O regarding responses to roadway impediments. In addition, the position of Traffic Engineer has been added to the EOC staff. These changes will be discussed in more detail below. O 7. Q. Could you describe how hypothetical roadway impediments were introduced by FEMA into the February 13 Exercise?
.A. [Weismantle, Wilm] During the February 13 Exercise, FEMA controllers handed two free play impediment messages to the Evacuation Route Coordinator in the EOC. The first message was given to the him at 10:39 -
approximately 15 minutes af ter the initial order to evacuate was given. The message read: .O A loaded gravel. truck with a broken driveshaf t, which is up-right, but turned sideways in the road is blocking the north and south bound lanes and both shoulders of Yaphank-Middle Island Road approximately (50) yards north of the caution light at the "Y" intersection of Yaphank-Middle Island Road,
- O Main Street and Mill Road (in the vicinity of TCP #124). This is a multiple vehicle cccident also involving three passenger cars that are blocking both the north and south bound shoul-ders of the road. There are n_o injuries of any individuals.
The LERO responder to the site of this impediment should O locate the FEMA evrluator who will be wearing a colored armband. Attachment B.1 (emphasis in original). A second message was given to the Evacuation Route Coordinator at O - 11:04. The message read: On Route 25A, approximately 75 yards east of the inter-section with Miller Place-Yaphank Road, (in the vicinity of Traffic Control Post #41), a fuel tank-truck has jackknifed O and turned over on its side blocking both eastbound and westbound traffic lanes, as well as both shoulders of the road. In the course of the accident, the fuel tank was ruptured and is leaking fuel. There is a possibility that the fuel could ignite causing fire. There is no fire at present and n_o injuries to any individuals. O The LERO responder to the site of this impediment should locate the FEMA evaluator who will be wearing a colored arm band. O
D Attachment C.1 (emphasis in original). Neither message was supplied by FEMA evaluators / controllers in the field to any field personnel. ] 8. Q. Could you please describe LERO's response to the gravel truck impediment? A. [Wilm] Describing LERO's response to either impediment free play mes-sage is not a straightforward proposition. A reasonable picture of LERO's D response can be constructed from LERO message forms, player logs and observer generated documents. However, this process does not answer all possible questions. For example, the time reported for any given action is D only an approximate time since clocks and watches were not all synchro-nized at.the start of the Exercise. In addition, the process is definitionally limited to actions that were written down. In some cases, knowledge of D oral communications between various LERO players or between players and FEM A controllers would have helped to clarify events. Unfortunately, given the passage of time since the Exercise, these communications cannot now D be reconstructed accurately. The following is a chronological description of the actions that were recorded during the Exercise. Where appropriate, I have supplemented this D - compendium of messages, log entries and notes of observers with my own personal recollections from the Exercise. Af ter receiving the free play message for the gravel truck impedi-e' ment at 10:39, the Evacuation Route Coordinator checked the traffic con-trol point and route spotter maps, Attachment B.2, and gave the EOC Com-municator the following message six minutes later: S Have Route Spotter 1004 verify a gravel truck is blocking the north and south bound lanes of Yaphank-Middle Island Road, approximately 50 yards north of the caution at the "Y" inter-section of Yaphank-Middle Island Road, Main Street and Mill Road. O
). Attachment B.3. In response, the EOC Communicator reported back to the ) Evacuation Route Coordinator that the " Route Spotter reported no one at location - returned to route at 10:56." I_d. Since the Route Spotter failed to find any FEMA evaluator in the ) field, a FEMA controller in the EOC gave the EOC Communicator a hand-written note at 11:04 that indicated that the FEMA evaluator was located at Everett Drive and Main Street - a location 50 yards east of ) Yaphank-Middle Island Road. Attachment B.4. Route Spotter #1004 was again dispatched to meet the FEMA evaluator. At 11:35, the Transportation Support Coordinator in the EOC ) notified the Bus Dispatcher at the Riverhead Staging Area of the gravel truck impediment. Attachment E.5. Upon receipt of that message, the Bus Dispatcher determined that Zones L and M could be affected by the irapedi- ) ment and notified the Transfer Point Coordinators at the Brookhaven Mul-tiplex and at the Shirley Mall of the possible impediment. Attachment B.6. At approximately 11:50, Route Spotter #1004, having met with the ) FEMA evalutor, reported to the EOC that the gravel truck impediment was 50 yards east of the "Y" intersection, not north of that intersection. At-tachment B.7. At about the same time this report was received in the ) ' EOC, the Road Logistics Coordinator instructed the Evacuation Support Communicator to: Dispatch Road Crew #2006 to Yaphank-Middle Island Road ) east of the caution light (approximately 50 yards) at the "Y" intersection of Yaphank-Middle Island Road, Main Street and Mill Road. Remove gravel truck blocking the north and south bound lanes. l Attachment B.8. Road Crew #2006 lef t its field post to respond to the ac- ) cident at 12:00. Id. )
D At 12:13 or 12:14, a controller in the EOC informed me that there was a " blocked road" in the EPZ. Attachment B.9. I immediately went to the traffic control area where I met with the Traffic Control Coordinator, Evacuation Route Coordinator, Road Logistics Coordinator and Traffic Control Point Coordinator. I was informed that a gravel truck accident had occurred east of the intersection of Yaphank-Middle Island Road and that a road crew had been dispatched to the scene. After consulting a map of evacuation routes, I concluded that evacuation flow would not be affected since the accident was on a route that carried little or no evacuation traf-fic. Af ter I had informed the FEMA controllers of this conclusion, the FEMA controllers huddled and then informed me that we should treat the gravel truck impediment as though it were north of intersection rather than east. Attachment B.9. Thereaf ter, I met with the Traffic Control Point Coordinator to discuss possible rerouting schemes around the impedi-ment. At 12:20, the Traffic Control Point Coordinator sent the following message to the Lead Traffic Guide at the Patchogue Staging Area: Contact the Traffic Guide at Post 35, inform him to route all 3 ' traffic westbound. Do not let traffic proceed south on Middle Island Road due to a traffic problem on south bound Middle Is-land Road. Contact traffic guides at Posts 53 and 54, instruct them to route all traffic to Bartlett Road west bound. Do not let traffic use south bound (oute on Middle Island Road. O Attachment B.10. At 12:31 the Lead Traffic Guide in the Patchogue Staging Area reported to the Traffic Control Point Coordinator that the appropriate traffic guides had been informed of the rerouting message. Id. S We next turned our attention to the fuel truck impediment and made decisions on the rerouting of evacuation traffic and on the steps necessary O
/ ~
for remov'ing the overtuined tanker. At 12:55, I asked my staff to inform ) the Coordinator of Public Information in the EOC that an EBS message needed to be prepared on both the gravel and fuel truck impediments. At-tachment B.11. ) ' At 12:55, the Bus Coordinator in the EOC asked the Bus Dispatcher at the Riverhead Staging Area: . Are any traffic problems being encountered on-Route #M-1 specifically at the "Y" type intersection of Yaphank-Middle ) _- Island Rd., Main St. and Mill Rd. due to gravel truck blocking north and south bound lanes of Yaphank-Middle Island Rd? Attachment B.12. At 13:05, the Bus Dispatcher responded that the appro-priate transfer points had been informed on the gravel truck problem but that no problems were being reported on bus routes. Attachment B.13. At approximately 13:20, the Manager of Local Response telephoned Mr. Lieberman to ask him, in part, whether he concurred with the , rerouting decision for the gravel truck impediment. Attachment B.14. Shortly after I explained the facts of the gravel truck impediment to Mr. Lieberman, he noted his concurrence with the rerouting scheme and estimated that the evacuation time for evacuees using Yaphank-Middle Island Road would be increased by approximately one hour. Id. However, l he also noted that the increase would not have a like impact on the total ) ' evacuation times, since Yaphank-Middle Island Road was not a critical l l evacuation route. i While these activities were taking place in the EOC, Road Crew )
#2006 was trying to find the FEMA evaluator at the site of the gravel truck l impediment. The Road Crew's initial attempt was unsuccessful, leading
+ them at about 12:40 to report to the EOC that they were returning to their ) assigned field location. In order to allow FEMA to judge the Road Crew's
)
k performance, the Crew was again dispatched to meet the FEMA evaluator. [ At 12:45, the Road Crew met with the FEMA evaluator on Main Street, east of Yaphank-Middle Island Road. Attachment B.2. At 13:30, Road Crew-
#2006 reported to the Road Logistics Coordinator in the EOC that the
) gravel truck was cleared from the roadway and that traffic had resumed in both directions. Attachment B.15. At 13:45, the Evacuation Route Coordinator asked the EOC Commu- )- nicator to transmit the following message: Have Route Spotters 1002-1004 check the flow of traffic on Yaphank-Middle (Island) Road. If open, have Route Spotter tell Traffic Guide at Control Point 53 to open flow of traffic ) in south direction. Respond by radio when completed. Attachment B.16. Also, at 13:45, EBS message #8, which advised the pub-lic of the gravel and fuel truck impediments, was approved by the Director ) of Local Response. Attachment B.17. At 14:05, Route Spotter 1002 reported that traffic was flowing south bound on Yaphank-Middle Island Road with no delays. Attachment B.16. ) (Welsmantle] I concur with Mr. Wilm's summary of LERO's response. I l would add that I became aware of the gravel truck impediment at 12:18 af ter observing a good deal of activity in the traffic area. I walked over to see what the problem may have been and af ter learning of the steps being taken to respond to the impediment I was satisfied and returned to other duties. Attachment B.18. At 12:39, Mr. Wilm reviewed the rerouting deci-sion with me and I approved the scheme. Id. I decided to call Mr. Lieberman at about 13:20 to confirm my judg-ments about the effects of the two traffic reroutings on total evacuation
) times. Id. Mr. Lieberman's estimates of at most a one hour delay for evacuees confirmed my judgment. )
r, , 3 fj 'A x ' 4
' I' t.,.
I
.f 4
~
s ..
\ 't At 13:37, I discussed the impediments and their effect on evncuation
' ~
times with the Director of Local Response. Id. The basic concitsion was that the impediments would not affect the protective action recommen-datiors. Id. - )- [Lieberman) At about 13:20 on February 13,19N, I received a telephone call from Mr. Weismantle who informed me that ;his was a drill. Mr. ) Weismantle described the situatbn as an impediment blocking Yaphank- - Middle Island Road. I asked him to tell me the extent of the blockage and he responded that it extended from shoulder to shoulder completely ) blocking the road. Mr. Weismantle and Mr. Wilm then described the rerouting instructions given to the traffic guides and asked my ment of those instructions and of the impact of the impediment on the evacua- ) tion time. U I referred to my copy of Appendix A and to (large-scale map to for-mulate my answer. Pased on my knowledge of evacuation travel patterns, I ) concurred with the rerouting scheme which had been recommended. I then estimated that the effect on evacuation time,for those vehicles which were delayed by tito blockage, would be about one hour. I noted that this:dHay - ) ' would not apply to the entire EPZ but just to those involved with J.he impedance. Since Yaphank-Middle Island Road is not a critical path, I did not believe that the total evacuation time would exceed the calculated es- )' timates. l i
.g l
m
,,~ , ,
/
) _14 I'
- 9. Q. Could you please described LERO's response to the fuel truck impediment? ,
k A'. [Wilm] Bearing in mind the documentary limitations I noted in the previ-ous answer, LERO responded to the fuel truck impediment as follows: Af ter receiving the free play message at 11:04, the Evacuation Route Coordinaer took action to have a Route Spotter confirm the pres-l ,,. .5
'ence of the fuel truck accident. At 11:06, he instructed the EOC Commu-7 nicator to:
). ' ' Have Route Spotter #1005 proceed to 25A, 75 yards east of
'( f the intersection with Miller Place-Yaphank Road. Fuel truck
+
turned over on side, blocking both east and west bound lanes. l , Attachment C.2. Af ter trying and falling to raise the Route Spotter on his ),e s , radio, the EOC Communicator sent a message to the Port Jefferson Staging
, f
% q a S Area at 11:15, inquiring simply whether Route Spotter 1005 had been dis-(' ,t
,t
[ patched. Attachment C.3. The Port Jefferson Etaging Area responded )) promptly that he had not been. Id. At 11:40, the Transportation Support Coordinator in the EOC in-formed the Port Jefferson Bus Dispatcher that "at 11:06, a fuel truck was ) repot'ted to be turned over on side blocking the east and west bound lancs % of Route 25A. On 25A, 75 yards east of Miller Place-Yaphank Road, Port
, Jefferson." Attachment C.4. At 12:05, the Bus Dispatcher at the Port
- .i .
i Jefferson Staging Area reported to the Transportation Support Coordinator l s in the EOC that a " visual check of fuel truck problem on 25A and Miller i :2 ' l
'q Place and Yaphank Roads indicates no problem to traffic control or evacu-
) (
; ation completion." Attachment C.5. This message was relayed by a mem-U ber of the Transportation Support Group to the Evacuation . Route Coordinator.
l
) At 11:49, the Port Jefferson Staging Area informed the EOC Com- ) municator that all route spotters had been dispatched. Attachment C.6. At 12:02, Route Spotter 1005 was instructed by the EOC Communicator to proceed to the scene of the fuel truck impediment. Attachment C.2. As previously noted, at 12:13, I was informed by a controller about the existence of roadway problems. My discussions with the Traffic Con-trol Coordinator, Evacuation Route Coordinator, Road Logistics Coordi-nator and Traffic Control Point Coordinator initially focused on responding to the gravel truck impediment. We did not begin to discuss the fuel truck impediment until a rerouting scheme had been determined for the gravel
. truck accident and actions were underway to implement that decision.
Route Spotter 1005 found and met with the FEMA evaluator just east of the intersection of Miller Place-Yaphank Road. He was released by the FEMA evaluator at 12:23. Attachments C.2 and C.7. Discussions about the fuel truck impediment in the EOC quickly con-cluded that there was no rapid way to remove the impediment from the D roadway. As a resua, we initiated two different actions. First, we began to work on a rerouting strategy for the fuel truck impediment. At 12:47, the Traffic Control Point Coordinator sent the following message to the Ler1 *raffic Guide at the Port Jefferson Staging Area: Instruct Traffic Guide at Point 40 to stop all west bound traffic on Route 25A. Reroute all traffic to North Country Road to Echo Avenue proceed westbound. Reason for detour, gas truck spill on 25A. } Attachment C.8. At 12:57, the Lead Traffic Guide in the Port Jefferson Staging Area informed the Traffic Control Point Coordinator that Traffic j Guides were rerouting traffic. Id. J
L i Second, efforts were undertaken to contact the Miller Place Fire Department and to request them to respond to the fuel truck impediment. In addition, it was decided that a LERO worker should be dispatched to the l scene of the accident with dosimetry equipment to monitor any exposure to , the responding firemen. See Attachment C.9. At 12:37, the Evacuation Route Coordinator instructed the Lead Traffic Guide at the Port Jefferson Staging Area to dispatch a Route Alert Driver with dosimetry to the scene ) of the accident. Attachment C.10. The Route Alert Driver was dispatched at 12:50. Id. At 12:55, I instructed a member of my staff to ask the Coordinator )
- .of Public Information in the EOC to prepare an EBS message on the two impediments. Attachment C.11.
At 12:56, the Bus Coordinator in the EOC again asked the Bus Dis-patcher at the Port Jefferson Staging Area about any traffic problems that bus drivers may be encountering, especially on Route 25A and Miller Place /Yaphank Road. Attachment C.12. The response, received 15 l minutes later in the EOC, was that " routes associated with Miller Place transfer point are not being affected by fuel truck problem." Attachment
- C.13.
) ' After receiving the rerouting order, the Traffic Guide at TCP #40 assessed the roadway geometry and at 13:10, radioed the Lead Traffic Guide at the Port Jefferson Staging Area that an additional Traffic Guide and six ) l i additional traffic cones were needed to effectuate the rerouting. Attach-l l ment C.14. An additional Traffic Guide with the necessary equipment was dispatched from the Port Jefferson Staging Area at 13:32. Attachment C.15. l 1
) As previously noted, at 13:20, the Manager of Local Response con-tacted Mr. Lieberman to ask him about the effects of both traffic impedi-ments on evacuation times. Attachment C.9. With respect to the fuel. truck impediment, Mr. Lieberman concurred with the rerouting strategy ) and estimated that the impediment would increase evacuation times by approximately one hour for evacuees affected by the impediment. At approximately 13:30, the Route Alert Driver carrying dosimetry ) for the Miller Place Fire Department met with the FEMA evaluator at the scene of the fuel truck impediment. His response was delayed by the fact - that he had initially passed by the evaluator's location without seeing him. ) The Route Alert Driver was released by the FEMA evaluator at 13:54. t
. Attachment C.16.
At 13:45, EBS message #8 was approved instructing the public about ) both roadway impediments. Attachment C.17. At approximately the same time,- the Road Logistics Coordinator, either at my request or at the request of the Lead Traffic Guide at the Port ) . Jefferson Staging Area (Attachment C.18), dispatched a Road Crew to the fuel truck impediment to provide assistance to the responding firemen as needed. At 13:50, the Evacuation Support Communicator was instructed by ) ' the Road Logistics Coordinator to: Dispatch Road Crew #2011 to Route 25A, 75 yards east of Miller Place Road. Fuel truck is overturned and fuel spilling on roadway. Miller Place Fire Department at scene. Truck ) owned by Hess. Standby at location until further notified. Attachment C.19. ) Y b
}
g At 14:00, the Traffic Control Coordinator instructed the Logistics Support Coordinator to: Please contact the Hess Gas Company inform them that one of their gasoline tanker trucks has overturned on Route 25A approximately 75 yards east of the intersection with Miller ] Place-Yaphank Road. The truck was carrying a full load and the tank has ruptured. Have Hess send an empty tanker to the location for off-loading. Note the Miller Place Fire Department is on the scene. Attachment C.20. At 14:15, the Logistics Support Coordinator informed D the Traffic Control Coordinator that Hess had made arrangements with a local environmental contractor to transfer the load and that all appropriate agencies were being notified in accordance with Hess's procedures. A t-D tachment C.21. At 14:45, the Evacuation Support Communicator informed the Road Logistics Coordinator that Road Crew #2011 had reported that the fuel D spill had been cleared, that the truck was off the roadway and that the roadway was clear. Attachment C.22. At 14:57, I instructed the Traffic Control Coordinator to reroute traffic back onto the normal evacuation routes. Attachment C.9. [Weismantle] My response to the fuel truck impediment was the same as I g - described with regard to the gravel truck impediment. [ Lieberman) As I did for the gravel truck impediment, I reviewed the rerouting tactics recommended by LERO and concurred with them. I esti-D' mated that the evacuation time for evacuees along this path could be extended by about one hour. I also concluded that this delay could extend the total evacuation time beyond the calculated values, but by an amount O which would be less than one hour. O
) 10. Q. Do you agree with the allegation contained in Contention EX 41 that LERO failed to demonstrate an ability to remove impediments from roadways? )
A. [Weismantle, Wilm) No. If one looks at the details of LERO's response to the two roadway impediments, it is apparent that in large measure LERO ) demonstrated its ability to respond to roadway impediments during an evacuation of the Shoreham EPZ. This is true even though the LERO orga-nization had never practiced responding to such extremely severe acci-dents that blocked entire roadways and thus required not only actions to ) remove the impediment but also actions to ensure that evacuating traffic was not unnecessarily impeded. Specifically, the Evacuation Route } Coordinator immediately acted to verify each accident report. Once the gravel truck' accident was verified a tow truck was promptly dispatched to the impediment. In the case of the fuel truck accident, where removal was not a straightforward proposition, steps were taken to have fire personnel ) respond to the impediment and to have the truck's owner unload the vehi-cle. Once the Evacuation Coordinator became involved in the process, de-cisions were promptly made to reroute traffic around both impediments; ) the rerouting schemes that were chosen were reasonable; they were rapidly and effectively implemented in the field; and the rerouting schemes were removed once the impediments were cleared. In addition, the decision was ) made to inform the public of the impediments by an EBS message and such a message was prepared and broadcast. Finally, the Transportation Support ) Group recognized the potential impact of the impediments on bus operations and promptly informed the appropriate field personnel of the possible problems. The delays in LERO's response can be traced primarily to two causes. In the first place, the Evacuation Route Coordinator did not I
)
perform his assignment as effectively as he could have. By falling to trans-mit all of the information contained on the original free play messages to staging area and field personnel, unnecessary delays and confusion resulted in the field because field personnel were unaware of the need to meet with k the FEMA evaluators. This led to reports either that no impediment existed or that the impediment had been cleared. In addition, the Evacua-tion Route Coordinator's failure to inform his co-workers and superiors in
)'
the EOC of the roadway impediments also led to delays in LERO's response. In this respect, the Evacuation Route Coordinator is not totally to blame. The FEMA free messages indicated that they were from "G. Connolly, EOC
)
Team Leader." Not knowing Mr. Connolly, the Evacuation Route Coordi-nator chose to verify the reports of each accident using LERO personnel rather than to inform the Road Logistics Coordinator of the impedi'nents
)
so that a Road Crew could have been immediately dispatched to each loca-tion. Until this verification process was complete, the Evacuation Route Coordinator undoubtedly assumed that he need not report the accidents to ) his co-workers or superiors. While the Evacuation Route Coordinator's actions were not inconsistent with his procedures,' his failure to appreciate the potential severity of each accident certainly played a role in the delay ) in LERO's response. A second major cause of the delays in LERO's response can be traced to tne manner in which FEMA introduced the impediment free play mes-sages into the Exercise and to confusion that resulted from FEMA's field evaluation of LERO's response. The two impediments imposed were of such severity that had they really occurred, the validation of each would have
)
occurred almost immediately. Numerous LERO field workers, all capable 7
0-of communicating with the EOC, would have driven by, or been within view O of, the impediments on the way to their field locations. For the gravel truck impediment, two route spotters, two traffic guides and the Middle Island Transfer Point Coordinator would have passed the scene of the acci-O dent. See Attachments D.1, 2 and 3. In fact, the Middle Island Transfer Point Coordinator reported his arrival at his transfer point at 10:50 - eleven minutes af ter the gravel truck impediment was hypothesized to O have occurred. Attachment D.3. Thus, in the real world, he would have come upon the accident minutes af ter it had occurred and could have im-mediately used his radio to inform the EOC of the accident. For the fuel O truck. impediment,14 traffic. guides and as many as 49 bus drivers would have seen the accident. See Attachments D.4 and 5. In addition, the Miller Place Transfer Point is located a little more than 100 yards from the scene O of the accident. The four transfer point coordinators who arrived at that location at 10:15, Attachment D.6, would undoubtedly have heard and im-mediately reported the fuel truck accident which occurred at 11:04. O In addition, attempts by the Transportation Support Group to verify each impediment resulted in responses of "no problems." Had FEMA con-trollers injected appropriate replies in this chain of LERO workers, each ,O - j- Impediment would have been confirmed at an ear!.!er time. I Finally, delays in responding to the gravel truck impediment can be traced directly to the FEMA evaluator not having been where the free play (O message indicated he would be -- the FEMA evaluator was east rather than north of the intersection. Had he been readily observable, then the sequence of events on the day of the Exercise suggests that LERO would O have been able to demonstrate a timely response to that impediment. O
)
Thus, at most, the impediments imposed by FEMA indicate that steps can be taken to improve LERO's response to impediments. They do not, as the contention suggests, demonstrate that the LILCO Plan falls to provide the necessary personnel or resources to respond to impediments or that the organizational structure presented in the LILCO Plan is inherently incapable of removing roadway impediments. ) 11. Q. Subpart A of Contention EX 41 contains a variety of factual assertions about the mobilization of LERO road crews and concludes that "at the time of [the evacuation] order the LERO personnel essential to the imple-mentation of the recommendation according to the LILCO Plan were not even fully mobilized." Do you agree with the factual assertions contained in this subpart or its conclusion? A. [Lieberman, Weismantle] No. Factually, Subpart A contains a number of inaccuracies. The reporting information presented there systematically understates reporting levels. The reporting information as of 9:00 is cor-rect. However, by 9:40, five road crew members had reported to the Riverhead Staging Area, none to Port Jefferson and four to Patchogue. Attachments E.1, 2 and 3. As of 10:00, eleven road crew members had reported to Riverhead, four to Port Jefferson and nine to Patchogue. Ld. As of 10:20, thirteen road crew members had reported to Riverhead, nine to Port Jefferson and thirteen to Patchogue. Id. More importantly, the real problem with the assertions in Subpart A is that they misperceive the provisions in the LILCO Plan for the removal of roadway impediments. As was stated earlier and was discussed at length in the earlier Plan litigation, s_ee PID at 809-11, the LILCO Plan provides for the dispatching of 12 road crews to respond to roadway impediments. This number of road crews is far in excess of the number of crews needed to respond to the four minor accidents (not all of which would have
)
i 3-re9uired a t W truck response) that have been predicted to occur during an O evacuation of the entire Shoreham EPZ. Thus, it is not essential that all road crews be mobilized and dispatched at the moment an order to evacu-ate is given in order to realize the evacuation time estimates contained in g the LILCO Plan. Rather, it is important that some road crews be dis-patched shortly af ter the order to evacuate. During the Exercise, LERO clearly met this requirement. At 10:39, when the order to evacuate was first given, nine two-man Road Crews were ready to be dispatched into the EPZ. Attachments E.1,2 and 3. Four R ad Crews lef t the staging area for the field locations at 11:00; four more O lef t at 11:28; and two more lef t at 11:58. Attachments E.4,5 and 6. Thus, more than enough road crews were always in place to respond to expected impediments.
- 12. Q. Subpart B of Contention EX 41 and subsumed Contentions EX 25 and 29 list a series of factual assertions that Intervenors claim demonstrate that LERO was incapable of responding to either free play message. Do you agree with the f actual assertions contained in Subpart B and in Contentions
,O
- EX 25 and 29?
1 A. [Lieberman, Weismantle, Wilm] No. In the first place, we disagree with Intervenors' attempt to select isolated facts to draw sweeping conclusions 0 - about LERO's response to the two roadway impediments. Only by consid-I ering all aspects of LERO's response and by identifying the root causes of the delays in that response can meaningful conclusions be drawn about O' LERO's response to the two roadway imptviiments and about the sufficiency of the Plan itself. In Subpart B, Intervenors have made no attempt to con-duct such a studied analysis. M Let us take the specific assertions in order. In Subpart B(1), Interve-nors allege that the Evacuation Route Coordinator failed to advise the !O
;O vacuati n sur<. art Coordinator about ' pertinent facts involving each O
impediment. While we agree that the Evaraation Route Coordinator did , not specifically include, in his messages to the Evacuation Support Commu- .g nicator, the facts that the gravel truck accident was a multiple vehicle ac-cident, or that the fuel truck impediment involved the possibility of fire or. was blocking both shoulders of the road (see Attachments B.3 and C.2), we g do not agree that the omissions were important or that their consequence . was to delay substantially LERO's response. The fact that the gravel truck impediment was a multiple vehicle accident would have easily been dis-ernM by the route spotter when he anived at the scene of the impedi-
- O ment or by other LERO field workers who came upon the accident. If more than one tow . truck.had been needed to remove the vehicles, either the Route Spotter or the responding Road Crew could have requested additional assistance. Similarly, information about the possibility of fire was not an important omission since once at the scene of the accident, the Route
=,3 Spotter could have accurately described the situation to the EOC. It is N
common sense that if fuel had been leaking from a gasoline tanker, the ob-server would have known that there was a possibility of fire. Finally, the fact that the fuel truck was blocking both shoulders of the road could again
.O -
- have been readily observed by field personnel responding to the impediment or by the large number of LERO field workers within visual range of the accident. Information about the blockage of both shoulders was more im-O portant to EOC decisionmaking (la the need to reroute) than it was to the field response.
in Subpart B(ii), Intervenors begin by stating that the Evacuation O Coordinator was not informed of the roadway impediments until 12:13, and
;O
~ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ , . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . _ _ . _ _ -.
O then only because of a prompt by a controller. The subpart then goes on to O list three items which allegedly demonstrate LERO's failure to respond to the two impediments. While we agree that the Evacuation Coordinator was prompted about the impediments at 12:13, we disagree that the three listed o items demonstrate LERO's inability to respond to impediments following that prompt. First, Intervenors contend that the Transportation Support Coordi-O nator was not informed about the impediments and their potential effect on bus routes until 12:40. Exercise documents flatly contradict this asser-tion. At 11:35, the Transportation Support Coordinator informed the Bus O Dispatcher at the Riverhead Staging Area about the gravel truck impedi-ment (Attachment B.5); the Bus Dispatcher at the Port Jefferson Staging Area was notified of a possible fuel truck accident by the Transportation O Support Group at 11:40 (Attachment C.4). Thus, the Transportation Sup-port Coordinator was aware of both impediments at least an hour before 12:40. O Second, Intervenors allege that as of 13:48, the Road Logistics Coordinator did not know that equipment needed to be sent to the fuel truck impediment. In fact, the Road Logistics Coordinator was a partici-O - pant in discussions about the two impediments that took place shortly af ter the Evacuation Coordinator became aware of the impediments at 12:13. During those discussions, it was decided that two steps had to be completed O before a tow truck needed to be dispatched to the fuel truck impediment: (1) that a fire department take the necessary actions to eliminate fire potential and (2) that the tanker be unloaded into another tanker. O Accordingly, LERO acted first to contact the Miller Place Fire Department O
} and then to call the tanker owner to get assistance in unloading the vehl-cle. A road crew was dispatched at around 13:48 to stand by at the scene of the accident and to provide assistance in any way it could. Third, Intervenors contend that there was no EBS broadcast, "or J other public dissemination of information about the impediments" until 13:45. While it is true that an EBS message about the impediments was not broadcast until 13:45, we do not agree that the population impacted by the impediments were unaware of them. At both impediments, rerouting schemes were in place that involved traffic guides and traffic cones to indicate the appropriate detour. In addition, some portion of people stuck D in a. queue that is not moving would be expected to seek an alternative path. Therefore, an EBS message, while helpful, was not necessary to in-form the public affected by the impediments. In Subpart B(ill), Intervenors contend that even af ter LERO re-sponded, its response was inadequate. Intervenors' factual offerings do not l l Support this allegation. Ir.tervenors first complain that inadequate equip-O ment and personnel were sent to remove the gravel truck impediment. (An l Identical factual claim is presented in Contention EX 29). In support, In-tervenors cite the FEMA Report. In this case, we strongly disagree with 3 - FEMA's evaluation. One tow truck was all that was initially needed to re-spond to the accident. The multiple vehicle accident posed by FEMA blocked all lanes and both shoulders of Yaphank-Middle Island Road. The ! critical goal in responding to this impediment was to open a path to allow evacuating traffic to proceed southbound on Yaphank-Middle Island Road. This could probably have been accompushed by removing a single car from 0 the roadway - a task that could easily have been accomplished by the O
responding vehicle. Also, the 30-minute removal time cited by Intervenors is of little moment since that is the time estimated to remove all four vehi-cles from the roadway, not the briefer interval needed to open a path to start the flow of evacuating vehicles. Finally, the need for a scraper truck ] was an invention of the FEMA evaluator in the field. The free play mes-sage did not mention gravel on the roadway. See Attachment B.I. Indeed, the message noted that the truck was upright suggesting that little or no gravel would have been spilled. Furthermore, the FEMA evaluator in the field who envisioned that a scraper truck was needed did not inform the responding Road Crew that there was a substantial amount of gravel on the ] roadway nor did he ask the responding Road Crew if they could call for a scraper truck had one been needed. If such a request had been made, LILCO has numarous scraper trucks that could have responded. J Intervenors also complain in Subpart B(iii) that the responses of the Road Crew and Route Spotter to the fuel truck impediment were both untimely. (An identical factual concern about the delay in dispatching the O Route Spotter is contained in Contention EX 25). With regard to the Road Crew, Intervenors fall to state that the Road Crew was instructed to report to the scene of the fuel truck impediment at 13:50. See Attachment C.19. O - Its response time of 10 minutes was hardly untimely. With regard to the Route Spotter, it is true that his dispatch could have been more expedited. The delay, though, was not the result of a flaw O in the LERO organizational structure as the contention suggests, but rather of the cryptic nature of the EOC Communicator's message to the Port Jefferson Staging Area. At the time the fuel truck impediment occurred, J the Port Jefferson Staging Area was in the process of dispatching all its O
O Bus Drivers, Traffic Guides, Road Crews and Route Spotters. Given the O time constraints imposed by the Exercise scenario, the Lead Traffic Guides correctly chose to brief and dispatch Traffic Guides before briefing Route Spotters. When the EOC Communicator contacted the Port Jefferson n" Staging Area, he inquired if Route Spotter 1005 had been dispatched. See Attachment C.3. He did not explain why he wanted to know about this par-ticular Route Spotter nor did he state that a fuel truck accident may have
- O occurred in the EPZ. Had he done so, the Port Jefferson Staging Area could immediately have dispatched a field worker to verify the accident.
Subsequent training has stressed that if a field worker needs to be dis-
- O patched immediately, the request be made clearly to the staging area.
- 13. Q. In Subpart E of Contention EX 41, Intervenors contend that the addition of a Traffic Engineer to. the EOC staff "would have no impact on the basic
.O structural flaws in the Plan and demonstrated incapacities of LERO person-- nel described in this contention." Do you agree with this assertion? A. [Weismantle] No. To start with, Subpart E grossly understates the revi-sions to the Plan and to LERO's training program that have been made to O improve LERO's response to roadway impediments. As stated in Subpart E, the position of Traffic Engineer has been added to the EOC staff. Plan S 2.2; OPIP 3.6.3, S 2.2. This person should enhance LERO's ability to re-
- O -
spond to roadway impediments and also provide a useful source of informa-l tion about the various traffic assumptions that underlie the LILCO Plan and I ( in particular, Appendix A and the evacuation time estimates. In addition, .O~ OPIP 3.6.3 has been extensively revised to provide more detailed instruc-tions regarding responses to impediments. At all levels of LERO, job descriptions have been expanded to stress the importance of reporting in- ,0 formation about unusual traffic occurrences up the chain of command.
- O i
Specifle rerouting ~ instructions have been added to the Evacuation Coordinator's procedures. These include consulting with the Traffic Engi-neer, getting detailed reports from field personnel, informing the Transpor-tation Support Group should bus rerouting be necessary, and informing the Public Information Group of the need to prepare an EBS message. OPIP 3.6.3, S 5.1.4. OPIP 3.6.4 has also been revised to ensure that impediment information is properly factored into bus operations. OPIP 3.6.4, SS 5.2.3 L and 5.2.4. These Plan and Procedure revisions have been reinforced through training program changes. A new tabletop exercise for traffic personnel
.has been created which involves both removable and non-removable imped-iments and which stresses accurate communication and the need to report information up the appropriate chain of command. In addition, all field workers are reminded in training sessions of the need to report any unusual occurrence in the field to their superiors. Finally, drill scenarios now include a variety of roadway impediments of varying severity that are designed to test LERO's ability to respond to roadway impediments.
Viewed in their entirety, these Plan and training revisions should eliminate the response delays observed during the February 13 Exercise. (Lieberman] Having served as the Traffic Engineer in drills following the Exercise, I believe this addition to the EOC staff has improved the LILCO ) Plan. A trained traffic engineer can bring new insights to the deci-sionmaking process. In particular, members of KLD Associates have better understandings, than other members of the EOC staff, of traffic flows and
) potential sources of congestion during an evacuation. They are also famil-lar with the computer projections of evacuation traffic flow. As a result.
)
J the Traffic Engineer should help LERO respond more quickly and with more ./ confidence to any roadway impediment or unexpected traffic problem.
- 14. Q. Do you agree with the statements in Contention EX 22.I, which has been
, subsumed in Contention EX 41? J A. [Lieberman] No. In Contention EX 22.I, Intervenors have once again sought to argue about the number of accidents that will be ' expected to occur during an evacuation of the Shoreham EPZ. Contrary to the sugges-tions in the Contention, the "new" accident statistics presented by Interve-nors only confirm LILCO's earlier testimony as well as the sufficiency of FEMA's choice of using two impediments. The accident statistics presented in Contention EX 22.I are fron' the Sixth Precinct during the period from February 6-20,1986. The Sixth Pre-cinct covers an area roughly the same size as the Shoreham EPZ. However, the population of the Sixth Precinct is about 1.5 times the population of the Shoreham EPZ. Thus, to make the accident statistics presented in Conten-tion EX 22.I. meaningful for the Shoreham EPZ, we need to divide the prof-fered accident figures by 1.5. If we take the reported accident rate of 22 accidents per day and , divide it by 1.5, then 14.3 accidents would be predicted to occur in the EPZ J - per day or 0.61 accidents per hour. If evacuation takes place over five hours, then 3.05 accidents would be predicted to occur - a number below the four accidents earlier predicted by LILCO (although, it must be noted that this prediction of four accidents does not mean that a tow truck would be required to respond to each). , Interestingly, the Suffolk County statistics reveal that only 65 of the J total 335 reported accidents (or 1 in 5) required tow truck assistance. Thus, O
7 I l L
.. during a five hour evacuation only 3.05/5 or 0.61 accidents would be pre-dicted to need tow truck assistance. If this value is used, then FEMA could be accused of overtesting LERO's ability to respond to impediments.
In addition, the Sixth Precinct statistics for the day of the Exercise reveal that 17 accidents were reported that day, but that only one of them required a tow truck response. Thus, Intervenors' own statistics refute the premise of Contention EX 22.I. Finally, I believe that normal accident rates, if anything, overstate the number of accidents that would require tow truck assistance during an evacuation. Many accidents typically occur during periods of very low vol-ume. These accidents tend to be more severe than those that occur during high volume because of higher traveling speeds. During an evacuation where mean traffic speeds are on the order of six miles per hour, less severe accidents would be expected, and hence the need for tow truck response would be lower. For example, statistics reveal that the fatality rate (deaths per one hundred million vehicle miles) in urban communities characterized by low speeds and high congestion, was 1.72 during 1984, compared with 3.98 for rural areas which are characterized by low volume, high speed traffic. Accident Facts,1985 Edition, published by the National Safety Council. [Weismantle] The insertion of additional accidents into the Exercise
) would not have revealed any additionalinformation about LERO's capability to respond to roadway impediments. First, the two freeplay messages im-posed by FEMA were designed to place the maximum demand on LERO's ) resources. Both accidents were of much greater severity than would ever be anticipated during an actual emergency. FEMA constructed each )
O Impediment to obstruct totally all paths of movement, thus, requiring O LERO not only to respond to each impediment but also to reroute traffic and broadcast an appropriate EBS message. Second, the injection of addi-tional impediments in the field would not have provided any greater in-O sights into LERO's field resources, since the LILCO Plan provides a large excess of capacity to respond to potential roadway impediments. Third, in the EOC, FEMA imposed the two free play messages in a manner which O required EOC personnel to respond simultaneously to both impediments. Thus, FEMA was able to evaluate the ability of LERO to respond to such simultaneous events. The insertion of additional free play impediments at O other times in the evacuation would not have provided FEMA with any new information. O O o . o O O
) )
) ) ATTACHMENT A ) 3 3 3 'J J
) Attachment A ) Contention EX 41. [ Basis I of EX 22 and EX 42 to be dealt with under EX 41]. The exercise demonstrated a fundamental flaw in the LILCO Plan and in LILCO's ability to control and manage an orderly evacuation of the EPZ pursuant to that Plan in that the Plan fails to provide - and LILCO failed to demonstrate - an ability to remove impediments from the roadways until long af ter evacuation had begun. There are likely to be accidents and other events creating blockages on evacuation routes during a Shoreham emergency. LILCO's inability to deal with such impediments will cause delay ) in the implementation of protective actions and preclude LILCO from managing an orderly evacuation of the EPZ. Under the LILCO Plan and the evacuation time estimates used by the LILCO players during the exercise, it is assumed that evacuees will be able to, and will, follow the LILCO prescribed evacuation routes, and that Road Crews will remove impediments efficiently so that the prescribed routes remain open and available for use at full capacity during the entire evacuation process. See, e.g., )- App. A at IV-19, -23, V-1 thru -5, Table XII, and Fig. 8; OPIP 3.6.3. Not only did the exercise reveal that LILCO's proposal for the removal of impediments to evacuation is inherently unworkable, but it also demonstrated that the LERO players were incapable of properly responding to, much less " removing," the " impediments" created by FEMA's free play messages. For the reasons set forth in more detail below, the exercise results g demcnstrated fundamental flaws in LILCO's Plan, noncompliance with 10 CFR S 50.47(b)(10) and NUREG 0654 S ILJ.10.k, and failure to satisfy exercise objectives, including EOC 5, 7, 8,11,16,17, SA 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9,10, and FIELD 9,10. Thus, the exercise results preclude a finding that the protective action of evacuation can and will be implemented in the event of a Shoreham accident. I EX 41.A. During the exercise and according to the LILCO Plan (Plan, Fig. 3.3.4; OPIP 3.3.2; OPIP 3.3.3; OPIP 3.6.3), the LERO Road Crews were not notified of the emergency or required to report to the staging areas until af ter the declaration of a Site Area Emergency. Such declaration was made at approximately 8:19. Even on February 13, when the LERO personnel were on notice that they would be called to report for duty, most Road Crew personnel did not arrive at the staging areas until well ) af ter 10:00. Thus, at 9:00, only one Road Crew member had reported to the Riverhead Staging Area (10 are required under the Plan), none had reported to Port Jefferson (14 are required under the Plan), and none had reported to Patchogue (14 are required under the Plan). At 9:40, after a General Emergency had been declared, only two had reported to Riverhead, none to Port Jefferson, and two to Patchogue. By 10:00, eight had reported to Riverhead, one to Port Jefferson, and five to Patchogue. And at 10:20 ) - about the time of LILCO's EBS announcement advising evacuation - still only 8 had reported to Riverhead, seven to Port Jefferson, and 10 to Patchogue. Thus, at the time a General Emergency was declared - 9:39 - only 10.5 percent of the Road Crew personnel essential to the implementation of the LILCO Plan were mobiliz% even though the circumstances - a pre-announced exercise - were designed to maximize g the likelihood of good LILCO performance. Thus, even assuming that no member of the public attempted to evacuate prior to the evacuation order, at the time of that order the LERO personnel essential to the implementation of the recommendation according to the LILCO Plan were not even fully mobilized.1/ g 1/ Pursuant to OPIP 3.6.3, during the exercise the Road Crew personnel were not dispatched from the three staging areas until af ter the evacuation recommendation had (footnote continued) G
)~ EX 41.B. [EX 25 and 29 to be dealt with under this subpart). LILCO was ) incapable of responding as required to either of the two free play messages indicating existence of major road impediments, one involving a gravel truck and three cars, and the other involving a fuel truck. See FEMA Report at 30, 36-38, 57-58, 65. For example, although FEMA's free play messages were injected at about 10:40 for the gravel truck accident and 11:00 for the fuel truck accident (FEMA Report at 36): } (1) The Evacuation Route Coordinator failed to advise the Evacuation Support Communicator for Route Spotters / Road Crews of pertinent facts, including that the gravel truck impediment was a multiple vehicle accident, that the fuel truck impediment involved the possibility of fire since fuel was leaking, and that both shoulders of the road were blocked by the fuel truck. Such facts were required to be communicated under LILCO's Plan (see OPIP 3.6.3), and the consequence of not doing so } during the exercise was to delay substantially lit.CO's response to the impediments (by approximately three hours for the fuel truck impediment). See FEMA Report at 30, 36-37, 57. (ii) The LERO Evacuation Coordinator, who is to be kept informed of any problems with implementing an evncuation of the EPZ, including impediments or 3 suspected impediments (see OPIP 3.6.3), was not informed or either the gravel truck or the fuel truck impediment until af ter about 12:13, and even then it was FEMA, not any LERO personnel, which brought information regarding the impediments to the Evacuation Coordinator's attention. FEMA Report at 36. Only thereaf ter did the Evacuation Coordinator discuss LILCO's response to the impediments with his staff. Notwithstanding the FEMA-prompted discussion, however, ) (a) As late as 12:40, the Transportation Support Coordinator had not been informed that a bus evacuation route was potentially blocked by the gravel truck; (b) As late as 1:48, the Road Logistics Coordinator had not been ) informed that equipment needed to be sent to the site of the fuel truck accident (despite the fact that the Evacuation Coordinator had discussed the situation with respect to road logistics with members of his staff as early as 12:16). As a result, the Road Crew assigned to the fuel truck impediment did not arrive at the scene of the simulated impediment until approximately 2:10 - over three hours af ter the impediment had first been made known to LILCO by FEMA. FEMA Report at 36,57. ) (continued from previous page) been made to the public by simulated EBS message. The dispatch of Road Crew person-nel began at Riverhead at about 10:47 and was completed at about 11:00; it began at ] about 10:46 at Port Jefferson and was completed at about 12:40 (with two Road Crews having to travel to Brentwood to pick up their tow trucks); it began at about 10:45 at Patchogue, and was completed at about 11:28. Subsequent to their being dispatched, it took substantial time before crews were in a position to drive to an identified impedi-ment in the field and attempt to remove it. Thus, for example, as noted in subpart B of } this contention, a Road Crew to deal with the simulated fuel truck impediment did not arrive at the impediment scene until about 2:10, three hours af ter it had been dis-patched. FEMA Report at 37, 57-58. J
1 ) (c) There was no EBS broadcast, or other public dissemination of information about the impediments, until 1:45. (iii) LILCO's response, once it had finally begun, was inadequate with respect to both simulated impediments. (a) Only one tow truck was dispatched to the scene of the gravel truck impediment and no scraper was sent to remove spilled gravel from the ). road. As a result, there was inadequate equipment available to remove the impediment, which would have required 30 minutes or more to clear even with the proper equipment. See FEMA Report at 37,65.~ (b) Although Road Crews from the Port Jefferson Staging Area were dispatched by 11:50, the Road Crew assigned to respond to the fuel truck ) impediment (within Port Jefferson's area of responsibility) did not arrive at the impediment scene until about 2:10, by which time the FEMA evaluator had lef t. FEMA Report at 57-58. At about 11:15, the Route Spotter / Road Crew Communicator at the EOC had requested the Port Jefferson Evacuation Support Coordinator to dispatch the Route Spotter on whose route the fuel truck impediment was located. This Route Spotter, however, was not dispatched until about 12:02, a delay of over 45 minutes ) which interfered with verification of the impediment. FEMA Report at 37. EX 25. [Not separately admitted but to be dealt with under subpart B of EX 41]. EOC ARCA 8 refers to a delay of 45 minutes between an attempt to have field workers verify a fuel truck impediment and the dispatch of a Route Spotter from the Port ) Jefferson Staging Area. FEMA Report at 41. According to the LILCO Plan, all coordination of and decisionmaking concerning evacuation, including the direction of Traffic Guides, rerouting of traffic, and identification and responding to traffic impediments, is performed by personnel at the EOC. See OPIP 3.1.1; OPIP 3.6.3. In order to be able to make necessary decisions, achieve a coordinated response, and implement an evacuation, the coordinators and decisionmakers in the EOC must have ) accurate and timely information from the field. Without such information, an evacuation cannot be accomplished according to the LILCO Plan. Thus, this deficiency precludes a finding that an evacuation can and will be implemented as required by 10 CFR S 50.47(b)(10), and precludes a finding of reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a Shoreham accident. D EX 29.[Not separately admitted but will be dealt with under subpart B of EX 4J ]. Patchogue SA ARCA 2 refers to the fact that appropriate personnel and equipment were not dispatched to remove the simulated multiple vehicle accident road impediment. FEMA Report at 67. The LILCO Plan and the evacuation time estimates in the Plan and used during the exercise assume that prescribed evacuation routes are ) clear of impediments and available for use by evacuees. App. A at V-2. Under the Plan, Road Crew personnel are assumed to be available, appropriately equipped, and capable of quickly removing any impediments that appear during an evacuation. OPIP 3.6.3. Thus, this deficiency precludes a finding that the protective action of evacuation can and will be implemented as required by 10 CFR S 50.47(b)(10) as well as a finding that adequate emergency equipment to support the emergency response is available as ) required by 10 CFR S 50.4Hb)(8). It also precludes a finding of reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a Shoreham accident. )
y EX 41.C and D. Not admitted. )- EX 41.E. The proposal to add a Traffic Engineer to the LERO personnel at the EOC (see letter dated June 20, 1986, from John D. Leonard to Harold R. Denton (SNRC-1269), Encl. I at 1) would not eliminate the flaws in the Plan which were demonstrated by the exercise, since that person's assigned task would be "to assist in evaluating road impediments and developing alternate routing." Even assuming such a ) person could provide such " assistance," it would have no impact on the basic structural flaws in the Plan and demonstrated incapacities of LERO personnel described in this contention. EX 22.I. [Not separately admitted but will be dealt with under EX 41]. During ) the exercise, two impediments to evacuation were postulated in " free play" messages. FEMA's conclusions on objectives EOC 16, FIELD 9 for the Port Jefferson Staging Area, and FIELD 10 for the Patchogue Staging Area, were all based upon the exercise assumption that in order to implement its Plan including the' protective action of evacuation, LILCO needs to be capable of removing only two road impediments. That assumption has no basis. Even if road impediments were assumed to include only > traffic accidents (contrary to the NUREG 0654 provision which clearly includes impediments caused by inclement weather), LILCO itself has estimated tnat four accidents / breakdowns would occur during an evacuation of the EPZ (see Cordaro et al., ff. Tr. 6685, at 8). In fact, during the two-week period from February 6-20,1986 (IA, the weeks immediately before and af ter the February 13 exercise, and including the day of the exercise), there were a total of 335 reported traffic accidents in the Sixt9 ) Precinct of the Suffolk County Police Department, which includes the 10-mile EPZ.2 Of these 335 reported accidents, 62 involved personal injuries, 38 required ambulance response, and 65 required the assistance of one or more tow trucks. Thus, on average, there were over 22 reported accidents per day during this two-week period, with more than four, on average, involving personal injuries and the assistance of one or more tow trucks, and approximately two-and-one-half, on average, requiring ambulance response. Because the exercise was premised on the false assumption that the capability of removing two roadway impediments was sufficient to assure that an evacuation could be implemented, the results of the exercise, even assuming arguendo that LILCO could have demonstrated such capability, preclude a finding of reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a Shoreham ) emergency. Accordingly, the LILCO Plan is fundamentally flawed. } } 2/ Under New York law, an accident is required to be reported if the property dam-age exceeds $400, or if the accident results in personal injury. Of course, a substantial number of accidents that fall within these criteria are not reported. )
A lO 1 f i .lO
- O
-O O ATTACHMENT B O lO
- O 10 1
1,0 4 4 L 1 d JO 4
- . . , , -____ ,_,._.-..---___,e,_- . . . . - - . - . . _ . - , - . . . - - , , _ - , - - . . . _ _ _ _ , _ - - - . . _ . _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _
AttachmSnt B.1 0 THIS IS AN EXERCISE SHOREHAM EXERCISE IMPEDIMENT TO EVACUTION ROUTE MESSAGE O Suffolk County, New York Date: February 13, 1986 M:ssage: Impediment - Patchogue From: G. Connolly, EOC Team Leader O To: Evacuation Route Coordinator at LERO EOC via Exercise Controller Initiating Event: After EBS message to evacuate has been issued to the public and FEMA field evaluator (C. Sarricks)
'O has notified EOC Team Leader that he/she is in position to evaluate field response.
M:ssage: A LOADED CRAVEL TRUCK WITH A BROKEN DRIVESHAFT, WHICH IS UPRICHT, BUT TURNED SIDEWAYS IN THE ROAD IS BLOCKING
. THE NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND LANES AND BOTH SHOULDERS OF 0 YAPHANK - MIDDLE ISLAND ROAD, APPROXIMATELY FIFTY (50)
YARDS NORTH OF THE CAUTION LIGHT AT THE "Y" INTERSECTION OF YAPHANK - MIDDLE ISLAND ROAD, MAIN STREET AND MILL ROAD (IN THE VICINITY OF TCP #124). THIS IS A MULTIPLE VEHICLE ACCIDENT ALSO INVOLVING THREE PASSENGER CARS
.g THAT ARE BLOCKING BOTH THE NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND SHOULDERS OF THE ROAD. THERE ARE g INJURIES TO ANY INDIVIDUALS.
THE LERO RESPONDER TO THE SITE OF THIS IMPEDIMENT S30ULD LOCATE THE FEMA EVALUATOR WHO WILL BE WEARING A COLORED ARM BAND. - O THIS IS AN EXERCISE
- c.
l l 0 , l lo
w-.u c . ,.- e . A v - r.W w_ en " 'ww-~ ~_a-o f ..* - Attachment B.2 gh0M. " S.iN, 5 ~d , . '- : THID IS AN EXERCISE r c .. ? *tf
=~ .-
c,:: ~i.,..
. .~.. p *
,.e- w. .. $sontaAn EEERCIsE l
/- y'?
.~. DtFEDIMENT TO EVACUTICN ROUTE MESSACE c' 0I I,i.pfI "I,
. ,1 Q
<9-;. ;
- 't - f
; Suffolk County, New York Date: February 13, 1986
.' .._.;i Messaget Impedineer - Fatshogue ,,
From: C. Cocoolly, EOC Taan Leader ) 7 , To: Evacuation Raete Caerdinator at LERG EOC
, vis Esarcise Concre11er Initiating Events After E38 message to evacuate has bees issued to
,9 the public and FEMA field evaluator (C. Sarricks) has actified ROC Tame Leader that he/she is in position to evaluate field response.
Message: A fnwn CRATEL TRUCK WITE A BROKEN DRIVESIAT2, WEICE
/ '
IS UFRIGIT, SOT TURNED 5,IDEWAYS U THE ROAD IS BIDCEDC THE NORTI AND SCOTEBOUND 1/JES AND BOTE SHOULDERS OF YAPHANE = MIDDLE 131AND ECAD AFFROEIMATELY TIFTT (30) TAADS NORTE OF THE CAUTION LICIT AT TRE "T" INTE18ECTION OF YAPEANK = MIDDIA ISLAND ROAD, MAIN STREET AND MILL ROAD (IN THE VICINITT OF TCP #124). THIS IS A MULTIPLE VEHICLE ACCIDENT ALSO INYCLVDC THREE FA55ENCE1 CARS TIAT ARE SIDCEUC 80TH THE NotTR AND SOUIBBOUND 5300LDERS OF THE ROAD. TRERE ARE g DJURIES TO ANY INDITIDUALS. TEE LERO RESPONDER TD TRE SITE OF THIS IMPEDDtENT SHOULD ICCATE TEE FEMA EVALUATot WHO WILL BE WEARDC A COLORED ARM SAND. Evaluator Sinnoff Tlae Caammen t s d 1. Message given to b controller by tese
+
leader et LERO EOC (Ibas Leaded [O W at LERO EOC)
- 2. Message dispatched to M UN lN W W M'*j.4 4caXa %
the road crew / fuel mW h EC /UN ! 4 Evac.' ops. , Evaluator at LERO EOC)
- 3. Verification of Message O E M-t t
to road crew responder recetved at EOC [
//[
IC S WS -
/MMMEN l tComadascattons d
(,M na44/9 l
# evatustor at LERO rs. MWM l
ECC) (k44. I- 4. Road crew unit %. evaluated at tne Eield location (Field Evaluator) . 5-0 i"'
. ,,* Ml
- v. 's..
. . .:c.cr ., w e
.. .y .m THIS IS AN EXERCISE
'\ N+5%p&3 ib3
- r.u ,
'lM@/
.4 nw
.'- y.
4.2.
- i. -
L .#
E p- g.I. M wx.T n e ~ :.~ Yuiff ia is exencisa G". .
. f j 't f "J. N e Ss0REIAM EEERCISE
'T a .~ die IMPEDIMENT TO ETACUTION ROOTE MESSM;E
'-$ ' "; I Suffolk County, New York Date: February 13, 1986 Messaget Impediment - Facchosse d
[ , From: C. Connolly, IOC Team Leader To: Evacuation Route Coordinator at LERO EOC via Exercise poetroller Initiating Evest: After ERS message to evacuate has been issued to the public and TEMA field evaluator (C. Sarricks) t f has notified EOC Team Leader that he/she la is b I I position to evaluate field resposse. l I Message: A IDADED GRAVEL TRDCE WITR A BROKEN DRIVESEAFT, WEICE g IS UFRICIT, SUT TURNED SIDEWAYS Di THE ROAD IS ELOCKINC g ME NORTE AND SotTT330tBID 1. ANES AND BOTI SHOULMRS OF YAFMANK - MIDDIZ ISIMD ROAD. AFFRCEIMATTLT FIFTT (50) YARDS NORTH OF THE CAUTION LICHT AT THE "T" INTTRSECTICN g ' OF YAFEANK = MIDDLE. ISIMD ROAD, MAIN STREET AND MILL , ROAD (IN THE VICINITT OF TCP #124). THIS IS A MULTIFLE l .' VEHICLE ACCIDENT ALSO INVOLVING THREE PASSENCER CARS THAT I i ARE 314CKING 80TR THE NORTH AND SOUTHBotlND SROULMRS OF THE ROAD. THERE ARE E INJURIES TQ ANT INDIVIDUALS. I j THE LERO RESPONDER TO THE SITE OF THIS DtPEDIMENT s SHOULD IDCATE THE TEMA EVALUATOR WHO WILL BE VEARING $ , . A COLORED ARM BAND. Evaluator signoff Time Counme a r s { 1 i 1. Messate given to Q;- j controller by taan leader at LERO EOC
, y (Team Leader t.q 4t LIRO EOC) al m . 2. Mas sage dispatched to the road crew / fuel
( truck responder from h (Evac. Ops, f1 j. Evaluator at g ' LERO ECC) d
, 3. Verificatton of Message to road crew responder received at ECC
@ (Consuntcattons y evaluator at LERO 9 EOC) i l 4 Road crew unit evaluated at the i field location C. fd r,'r _12 < M*4f , ppd (Field Evaluator)
.. . .:b7.:4ws..
y p.W,y... .
~ -
. y:"hg l- .-
, n
. g,s-
~~
~
s 3. ..!S IS AN EXERCISE ..".. d,?p e ? 1 c
.' '- 5 .'.N . .
>\h,
. * * ~ -
- e =* i N;t,5(w n .: '
M 1}' W m
= .,:
- q.iY s h T5'
. - . '.Rn..
t$ h 5
~ ' -~* M * -- - 9$1 6 -
WhTWmumM e meGe Int _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. 1 Attachment B.3 ..q O OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7
'l Attachment 1 .
Page 1 of 1 2.,1.t
..n, ,;:
c: ;, .=
- o ,- .
s
- w3.q
. %u;. .Wg 4
.. 2.
s... . 5 :, :.
... LERO MESSAGE FORM
= , . ..
.,. . -ci "uI
. . ... s
. ;.s s
.- '.y. , ;;; -.i: .
.e,-
,.3 , .
;e -
,;3.~gg;g
, < cce
. .r~*
y;Q o um.nu u.cle Locacs.on name 4?g
,,, 1 1 . : e:. '
(r
/ .* r i % % 7 from: /~u? ? u ,, # ' .: D To: i i 1 J'i.'. .
a ?' - [ r -
- O Data / Time: 4' et 2. .....w Measageh 'Y//@c- '
f s W /)4,'/ L ' N'
-; .. . :wp . . .
. .. . wa. . b
,. p -
.f
-r..ts.. .
O MIM . 6o 7~E S A ?$ cat /dd V e x i F>- *: StM+f L btuL A is A d d c h iis c TEE ~ l l/ T 7 W d' . h /> W / b. ins.D / 4!) 2 % A7 v*A/A4uA.S=W&, s. . 'O ,.
._ l'S/j$g ^ 7 Q %y l'hQ,_,i *y1. $;r^)/2g 9; y), ygt y ,,, .y,n ym)5& ,t &
i;.~. ' g 7 p ,, y :p l l y; ,, ,, ,_,,y ;r- 3 ,. 7,y , gj ,.Q;Qff
/' As. a- ..
0$ YY/4 /l4 ?'l'. hsEYb~- /.5*/ 4Asb ' kroa 'k /.f l>// T rh '^ !1'$n.:,-t o . sdf,1 tL / - 1.) is 12-
- E'-~EQ-(JR:
y..: .c.;::: . :;. .. N17F '<Ao nt-4 . FAATrP. N o 6.y E A f/kA Tek. \ o K ,;,2Ag w,4 aM% . . ,s f , n , g Q... r -
,. s
. . . . w~ . -. . . . :. : .~m..c,.. .. .~. t.A s..
...e.,. ,.s.
- T.
. , , , - - ..=', . ...r,..,. a j~!,Information
~
O.'* Routing for:: 1 ~ 2, 'A. 'h e.c .w
.- .. % . Action
[ \
. T., t. . . . ..
e
. ;e
.+-j* f ::p=
,a. a Response Required:
l~-l - { c In Response to Message No.. e 3 0 - t W (Signature) .
'~
. ' T%
White copy Addressee ,. .3,gg":~...#S Fi~ Yellow copy:--Originator. -T a Y '; 'l, n. Red -
;;,- ~ ,.
r O
- Pinkcopy-(LeadCommunicator.7..; *.,e
;&. . ,.. 'G: ~. .g.gf
. , ~ c
-%r - .m t !2: ?. .l...
. .nm . Uw,. ;-:2.?.p..,,,
4 v .iL C,'z.<Vt'::li:; ,&.WX .+..W:.a ;- ^::c.:* .. .y. . .:a.%: , a . ?. ho; &i.y *Ju% *f-s;U'Q; g% c . v ;. ;, s.v - 0: - R , [. " y . N y. 1-@ fig..;- M: . f . p?) %g g. & g.h.. Q, w % .@{f? OOQ.~4_f _) _ hyg
Attachment B.4 g i 9
, /cr 1
O j 4P-N de hzW J_ D s - O k t$ qP,h j
\
71 C 3 -
\
w.< 2 - 1
\
1 ' ;( J_ fjA i n% .
?
Q u 't.( ' _) o" - \, l 4 I
)
s . rB 4
' e
~
\ '
. ..j .c., -
Attcchment B.5 ) % . OPIP 4.1.2 i , ty.f/[{ h Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1
"_ Page 1 of 1 r-y Q
f -
)
LERO MES RM - No. ) br.nu utie Location l Name From: TA Sumaf k ' E c<_ To: $ tA S i sAO ib [',d . ) Date/ Time: M[l /% (l 11 ( Message: r'ki IC 4( h 64LM\/-f_ d t'2. U C % LO G $ ) Q 670 (if C( ' i- v . l -E ,Cv('d kLl)b M C( 3 Y ^\u,'F \n"&\l=fchisvn af
^
Ki~ !he ' e b, n oha ris ; D'.:j J n - t wi . F<! -llla : o .. ') + - llli ll k.,c' e ) p), U a p h a n k. So uuds E/o o Aumcn um Bloc dne NdS god nd \ a'nes v-G l Da ph'C' (M ' , ]~<:, c. 2d. ! ) I* ) 4 ) Routing for: l[lAction Information Response Required: l[l In Response to Message No. D White copy - Addressee Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Communicator 3
// '/{- V [
Attachm7nt B.6 p , OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 Page 1 o,f 1 3 LERO MESSAGE FORM No. O br.au title i Location i Name From: TkA SuWf Cavia $ O L-To: Eu5 ht.sl'A fcHGrL 22 t v Cttt-/MO 3 Oste / Time: -> /t F l34 //3g Messaga: A ~i e Wf A- f a,s a G-c. - ,,2 u c k. zaps e2evoa ge.o t'o DG o 1Ga -f a teJ4b AT -fit s Y - 7ps W r c-ucs-rsa 8 O DP YA/HMK - M t DDG G o c ut a n 12 h - Mel a s c # M i t t - ,7 b IN Y4-f JA Jk' [0 YMLM <=-As4 oF- CAvr-rIo a L./Gsl~T. ScoLKtNG- Nott.(H > sodH Roa up u-MGs 6c:. 7/fG O VA-f M Nif. ~ M tb OLG I S LA ND La fVI A- Eoa Pt'o (l) & I TO
. Id\'
p vn Ate hkt) Wk.s.ufoW--- binbbw - dud $ia h,A Y Y f- Af.4. W o ' 3 Routing for: l[l Action Information Response Required: lZl In Response to-Message No. 4 White copy - Addressee Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Communicator O
- -~ :
p g Attachment B.7 { 8{
- 6 :
i EVAC. WE.
~
Cooms. . l i
- t 2
O w 4
?
/
4 m"^*.,$ ^ 7 O
- Mm- , Z g$fg K
44
? -
g s. W n we R
.., s 8', p' .$ /
4 i _, D
-y
>. *' 4. 7.."
~
a , . . . me em.e a ..m.d --M==4e%.. L
.:-=.w'. , '- * : y a -
E.: _=_ J_ '. gg c
-5: -.. ~
) 4.. fhi7 >Q/,fL'1~ /Ateg AADoMs! l.nGLs Cee:n briey Q. u w s ca.</ y r ' T
= = = =
.p
"'l 5 2 Sierws %o nr u n . EE.s n.-sm - w :' c. % fy__G.:;9 <~L
?$ e' a f 'f
~
. w .
= n Sin C CC A c-fi.ya TEp -
_ y rio _S,7e de .+ u.-,v;ac i
/; 9:J? {e r 'D /%
- D/ i: 7*3 A7 [7A de A/De
- M T.i- j$hg.cs:.i:~,
S* l.' $ ? /'Fif 5** Y
$ $.'3 S llf m~s *F L e E r%2/; F.t)c ~ s 5's-EU);)F3
., M'd fniL s?? six Anms re s7Aer A7dc auc, buys $S__
sb'TcNo6_gg~ /'o s_L' s e s~ l .' / C s'4:) - b $ 'I~IG_F+=
/
' ) e6 /. / O 8 3 - / 4 8 [ ~ /CC A. - iW W Eet) /d'd7-/C.ft:(-jft*C 9 O / E'LQs).5.e_- kC Q.qt_5C.h ^ /k'fEAhggx- Dis./Mt.sfch /Sh : *)
/r : .n'"
'. A+n Aou 72- Vo277=l2- /ooa cks" ini.e-u.~-i,.19 I >'a 90s/Anr- /9ihhLf A.rLrsao A's, P/A'a__ 5 n d_-.ry,2.e_ /2aA n . -
^
.f Y M h r EnA l'>iS $ e! a-b
$>Lstpr/ Ny_c}: L 8 A- u p lc ;--t_ e456__
/ *
\ lr)
- t) %
f) ff_' C/t D L & rO b ?)J $ JOA-Tt* A$ C D ' A6 0 IG Jk WE/ % T />
.s //: b/
i
! MA D l'u oh Sh &A Psh ~_ Ats -h h LF i) - X >r? A DS EA
.=::.
*C is>'7 c t s n k s to ;17s t/' . //E <- lL VAP#rsuf O-
/J W L YL12 f_ $ fl!$$TH DJ C
- k. p.//
- Vf l/?cm cs M -
EtaTF foTIG L To w 'sT'Yu y . ODO/ O U " _L Ob Y $ _ /!' if i A$bu% SiD offEA.- /re J thDut'rs D O*u2;' L ~72 u eX-- e c fo oLD 2% 7" s " Y' InTgd Se 7?o z./ - //s7 /%MN' D__SD he(( y i C/ T _M :/f ds N'-7c /f.?D '7t' 'Y A ')'?
-L w,' h e'n : 7 s,e lis7. c:cc,e a /9',/ /e_g /
s't-)f_EA+3.'Le e t
- 7n r m 'T M;" Ea- /Y Eic~ 207-
'.= 2' . ! * bud P t et T Dn t OL-A SEfe r'S 15 A - A T ' _5 ~~& lr !'l a A'A-
~ fh n f & 5* 4's~f' -
06 EE M .* L_.,dn D a ^ * ' E
~
W' Ot}f [$r'I td E ** "" = " '! D 'A ) i~h )
- LI C D '
5 ., ~.= S ,h -' u _ _ t l Ei) = iL 1 .3
- pf~ H_c. c- it :.'.u. ._5: '.%y2 Q..] '/ ' ? .
2 i L f5EiLe_y 4 '1 n >{liLo_t /0?!- _ D-t g [' N -- . w_ __
.t I
Attachment B.8
/
)-
.- 0FIF 4.1.1 i
}g7 (( Page 6 of 7-
[y gf / Attachaene 1 Page 1 of 1 1 ) i Lano MESSAGE PORM
~. l
/01 C Y No.
w.au uca.e weauon l name from: f e J J a .- Moni fd 0 -. To: Se fa$. / t,' , . fed C =-N Data / Time: 0A// ? Ff //fo / mar Massage: r/ - /S 4 Der // Qisn/e4 pa, J eml.2.a s /
< !/brbs /c M , / ) // & h/an1 pJ
. M W /c= 'rle os,,A.s La u ks-ir < res w Y A v'- YWF V /nbn che /ou N ' N p 1/Ai,b -
thi</}// /c 4~J'l PA 6 . nxin SV + />>i // I PN hfmsetb kirstvll //u e A' 0/o e Nrn e f A)08A Y u ll Su4N A A N PJ >\ .1h Y tf f1 A b/tr ff lY l1) il
,nf N /
con y at W/rs f*ffC _.-
' $0m l ira l' c 'o s ir n't or loi.
) nao 44,,u - u.t. m ara.L.x % loa. Routing for: l l Action l[! Information ) - Response Required: l[I In Response to Message No. I
,/b. ) (Signature)
White copy - Addressee Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Coc:municator . ) 10003524
37e( ,
< .- 31 l
~'
P ~ Attachment B.9 l APPENDIX D CONTROLLER LOG 3 ' Assignment: LE2,0-Ec6 Message # Input Point Tirse , D j Mg PML, 08/L - (f.Mmkw) 6 & aa 5eJed b . to^4
' (Sida)
.g s,a se uso w + te+ osy 3
9 -{ Y nov
, u~.s u Ml&)
0 $ b M. y y Q *-q cd. W% a . Bae.Goak.' VM-AAkof ~ia2S _ pudwr a.ao . (w. wd.M m *)D gy Qp i&3D aaaLwro(W.iAdm) J - n /
/
/.5l$/o
. .f -
5.. ( x Vdd2NGII22 ' 3ONL.H01T2[110D C ' ytp}Bumsu2: isugO - H.0 0 gssse3e y Iudn2 do}n2 1]sa ar< o J
??"T tnih c 6 gg- .
)se( wt
~
c - k*r*T
'9fNgac 5 ^ ^
q . r ( G. - M gnp, -
. PNM _
/SYJ X"V y h '
( ^^rryr-
^
C C r c ..
,, pg3 g . i. Attachmnnt B.10 )
OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 A Page 1 of 1 Nd
&sE/
LERO MESSAGE FOR 1 V ./ so.
)
1 r nu 12.cz.e Locats.on name From: . ( / b.+- b , 6.C To: $ </ J$d; at.u/ i'Y.Ek,s n Date/ Time: _.# .2 - / ?- /[ [ /)'2c Message: IIM e. .[v .O ! ! $
)s ef 'Tb!-s s.! 0 / b w A A- V ed 3f l^
W A ~ L-n A A L i,] J L Ai h r = ' An d 4% ), ' h o J f$& wd
-~ a 3. ..h W % S/dA M 1m.,$ t.-s-,. I, n.< $
fd nk n Co-eAA 2 d ~77il d d A /1 A / d _.Y $2.4.1 a21.i ed.ro Wxoon 't .f 3 4 S4 C/
-)
-,o.
. >. v e .t. , e/ Futp%-
-s ,
/s. . < , .. c., - ..c,.-
"' .e ; e
.. ... r_ .1 r.. / s . > . L .
)
f-5 n JhD' ./.n-. 6' w. a i 5.eu.~.i ,$w.- ~i boy r$ Hyde u-~ >
. - - -or -. bw. n l ,..s-el?c C4- ^121,Ne$/L?
r/ _
~ 0-16$, A. / i (h / 2.f 7/ #4A6 c 'A M M YdD .. <
. ,_ u
) Routing for: Information l~-l Action fl Response Required: l[l In Response to Message No.
)
I White copy - Addressee (Signature) l Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 I
) Pink copy - Lead Communicator
--5;',.'."* Attachmnnt B.11 0 .:
O
\, RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY .O ,
PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE
- CBSERVATIONS AND EVALUATIONS EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC)
PUBLIC INFORMATION MODULE O . . O . OBSERVER DATA Facility: EiOC ![/ / 2.lg3lh(o O gate: I l . Specific Assignment: 0.blic d 1nforvraHm - Eoc. 1 Team Leader: O _ Name: , j Organization: bil CO IO bM1 ERG. PL A A) A) ER Titie: l Business Address: Business Phone: _ !O O 4
- O
l
....s
., l
$ ** ' ) FC lTS SS PC...__.. Pr.CPAnCD CT_.. - - _
* ' O. NC. _ _
DATE LONG ISLAND LICi!TINO COMPANY ACO NO. -.
) SUbJk CT il .
~ l2'l5 . Wh.d m . h mahm bao f*n. P*
3
; a pas akw/es5 nws y yL.
t. 12 :Is
% tJeath oA p% im ws dra MM D&se/w 3 keue k k H Rad Heah bru h op+ tess WA owsc-wo m /nen t w ow ) -
(W-Kd W hao intbruk9eyob aawuw liaaaM4 bse.// d aa: 3I to Ik puu2nw... b'>s.s nun w . Y to hwadwd ogaa-0lrq9 res nun g E7 wLdu e a w wce k k pua . sw p5s Pauc la &&gwsta av&3a k tra y$c pub /m_ Ees wxgt 3
. vio % kdl.dw edkg h plwe h h/k w/ IKaabck.
t:I3 law kk k k&~ ak 7Mk Bubbm
- ms nuaOy. .
g o m wxay ngapeo pac / w& /c fue . il Ill'iS (zs k -tak Io u)Fu)<% & -Iluct h'M. (Mm D ij tv disp x w% fl%cy. I!,
} ll% Y.dh. k . c-d l).l. Shas f<Ast, Crusnll) tap h chi m a. M . a n ic ln b cea.
o i i
l Attachment B.12
)- .
1 0P17 4.1.2 ,) Page 6 of 7 I Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1
) ,
LIBO MESSAGE FORM
. No. .
1
- u-a i 2.no t.ocac s.on name 00 0
~ ) From: M. b -
io]. SL & b h % dx.se-2 v
/c2.' s }// F naite/ Time:
F
> Mass.s: / & a ,, 7k//. /kdi /um -
$$ E0AL/ MU hislk N N #l W&er&i e s g ,
.ed. . .-- %-- . . Y k v1,iec A .i t s z e. b ,3 ,. VAfanac M A7.2t A/
~
) kQ$bblif T*t7 14hjo KD, MA>& Ji
+ aa n a '//w J
~
L
'7 S Ac/ec44 AJA&/. v f u u MI /$ c e -/ s7.' )
k
..- .g - . ..
& s .< y b )
e
. .y .
A.bkg b/ $1/ - ..
) )
Routing for: ((IAction l~ Information
) Response Required: ll-In Response to Message No.
(Signature)
) White copy - Addressee ;
Yellow copy - Originator Rev.- 5 ;* Pink copy - Lead Communicator . ;
Attachment B.13 ) P ' 5 ;. OPIP 4.1.2' ' ) Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 [.S. L
,Page 1 of 1 I;'.
O h j 7ERO MESSAGE FORM @ R No. %. 2 grau ( i 2.c to t.ocacton name -j From: - Eu b To: }Yh . 0 '
- DateNEas: / 'of / 2// 3 3 Message: /f/d M .' T/bfalo. MS -
- h bf6effl-&.4*/J $4. u.An.mw
&Q
/' .
f
'A<xe LvM ., k b
W Ards J x) a 2a.ed L ~
- O / .
h e J J o b--JL J _ e (h LA.W fMMt-h CI / 2 l# W 1//3 j' ih 4 I '3 . 0 -- Routing for: l~l Action i formation h b y Response Required: l~l In Response to Message No.
'i '
( (Signature) White copy - Addressee
# Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Communicator
kttechmentB.14 3, ,. f J-RADIOLOGICAL EIERGENCY ) PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE
'0BSERVATIONS AND EVALUATIONS s
ENERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) M EVACUATION OPERATIONS 3 J . OBSERVER DATA _ E o C. Facility: Essawmo ) Date: 2//3/M . EvAcuanon Conrruu.e4 __ Specific Assignment: 3 M8 Team Leader: E il Name: frese, dESSTEL. Organization: L ed.7 7 64'd4M.
Title:
FP 7~ecutedt-L e L co W!r./'LL4 Business Address: s ) Business Phone: __ ) ) . ......... .. .. . .
2 , ^ ~m -- _ - O? ~_~~ ~~ .'.6 3,,, . . - . - - F & fdC.~~S* Y 5%.* **:.5 **.MMM^--*$b%%i;*ME\
-t.'lnL*-T'"=WGMiG%C&43WW. - -D""$2*y&"l%d.M' ::%... .;has.tr,.
.- s - . -h- -=.**W-M$W p
- A'"r
- a8 PM'Ut .
6 . r. ? ; 0 aasse,u. oon lacen Its st*~ss Attstans . 7 ., y IL nondMdA= lesJe s 1Ase P% e os M 3 *TT*'* **j* d'G S46d 4 *J , It&*wontotst.. g8 0:sess:ron- e oc tec.ns. mepsse m 4a,, 7 t.4 e/Ac ceoso AtA. ads $ -' Sn.a s s no ~ srArGr ynn+T s'u ffe s.n Co. h ! At d'ttal y 1,8 e. Ass A6ttt. Gstif ~t.*s s c.. r=<.v.o o. ..r ra < vi.ar r9 m ,, ,, r. c ,s. uo ,,. ,,, 7,, ,, , O 734 * * **44- cesvir a4.is set.s o. . .a pyr gm a g , a *d **' ^- 6 "38 3 '^* #* G -- E sf
?73 f % >r=**rr41.
i 747. our c- a>> ca w .,c. eu, c. . , ro ear,c, ,,,, # o, aoses ,w,t, n E 75'4 Evac. caens ca u.s e e G.,4,s.o r.,ro4 +.s o, ,a,c,ty-74S'" 4 eid coo 40 ,gs n.s > ost*%*to d*'!L t.o.*4 e s,Y o,yArsa foot,per, 860 Distac.v=s .a tut, gas,, ,* QE. Dhr sac A c.viv a r-ss , 883 C4A c- Cmo - carasws.so um.arup r= A, , . c. r. r. vita coAsr somu av EA raw s e, 8 I di A M. 58 '*"* '8 P sJ euc.
- pintart paeum Fsse g % t '.7 SFdd% % ft.sc.stvE5 i' Ant.ad Settre s' co.srae.ysa f Aaq, cias sg .
ry.assAdr. g cj ,4f- g3 , s75 s ne_ escuitse
- Ba s coono s e *~srAc:r edG 90s Car I"- O ** * *
- L G- W^
- asu,,s. Arm A r gca. gooesoveter To W nasArts Sx 's o' TfS.
Aa* G coo As s' c ats S A g o t, A.se g. (o's Fo4 A #at.Alf8L ' '# bN' 3 J 97o T AE oussia vt> L JfA-j P " ~ ~ "'- 834 a s ss Aw- rao ', .* eafarc.w i n.re. at.aas- barf ere <.o Son., s, ,t. ,. p g' n.v 'y.FF
& 3 $~ '#' ca**.6 'es a.s VAA g,45" g.a r crasa.or p swe" Aar. fro.sEf A u*cA7*4 '*" " [ A*TEctrEp W.A/ HoLK (tr.g nejr .1:P paa rr46E. od@E s. e5 66 ds*8) 6 5't **'***"- r3fus.*' t coc =* s'.s s"'" R stsAft, srru. ps c.
3 S s'a t smo A.ts AL.s4=- Bargerr=*ses e ats o yo rir : FAA t "**8 6. 4k s 3 AS 2 a# C*'taE*T . Co a'7"** 'E8-- ggA g. c ease.O TP) SAKE. DeJ L&. 98 4 . Af se ssta/Ittg f MrO dt:0J
$"T- "I 3aa 574a crt0 Au. c.o== s a a.Avoa.I ve o g,s E. Eos pstca o#r g ap4 Als **EKtA8#7
) To ng Nr E.so ee b Af . 9 y4 Scp0 * *d'd's* A trisra JcC. ,arr t"c-f C" g33 g.4 pec, caotto uns Tn W'C ca.rrres.L caern Tu CErtL'% * * *- factres.r Lbc A rs o*'e ruar s.ssa s.,o.,w aese A coin e.r **- f*c' Mhf-CJac esen.o es se ac..s s .3, rn rsessF oe Gno*f sars4AL pou st casus 96 C W A S' ' ' 'W t 344 P^*sraol.- o* Bus s: ,4 - o. (s s: aE4AL- ' Cfe c A'- p F^ cit e r8 e 5 t .
- Fatto * w s a r ra s r'us c.rc o To .T,4 Ges7- kI, O49 ~~
os39 cs aAAL E. . Oc ci, A Aso , sa M M ( 4, stag I reer To Eo C .
) 349 - g w tA. ao esi.s f, s s.0 rw
- r- 9mm p ' ^ 5* # '
- N 70 I'# 6# f 7" k' p f(* -
gA64Af so ##'8" [ca. 05 )
a:, . . ..n;me ** m r_'?? :M'W%'. ">L*~eS+-s -{-}'${,&&& e _ x I t { p
' AiF, v r
C.wfnc. rad d(Ae.- Cod'O y ot.o g /3 80 ALL T4 3 f fossmo*ss. sina.r rttsj cv syypenr, S*-fC f o^" twt *'t , to 2.tGEr b gg,' EACH gtg ALSo -r1EuS MA $ VEasftES No C Hor.st.& N y W. f e og CM W c.o*vne r! < e G IOG3 5/AC Eo&GS W~ 9*% QA / l0 to eAM M. , , e3 gJAcso . c v,os e s k r. Uss Gaovp E4wl Asn...=, gpe. ,o.<st ,<> /s. cous.s 7efs gr A e m terrQ. 77swie ca.<rnoe. pr- coaan izes,p To Io I4 > 2,3Fo Gi d 4,4 To OvencA/)/ f 7 ," @Amq j e 10 14 U us Disgnyc.u E. orts. h.so 9 scan pfvussto~s o stno s. It-n ta so n Q 'S SJM- ATt' Coo *0 G*JGK f to IG n' 5 Y '
** o rs %rro .a at.nort Arro. ~} pcapst poucAru J4o^t60 4o
*0ers*4 is rues.re IJosforms cunee ry
^~~ m ear roar ~ peu es nas cor.toans~s e nasptw car
,o 3 p v.asose.-
r**'* 83- SAAF Gerd mAnc AvAttAtL4 C* **D-r rranoeso r. cJ ^ c R.r p to .39 e a* wpome,ar sessass "
~
C'c *o & v"C b"O C^'" W'/** 1.e sus n c r to 4/ 1 cno 2 j!in WS i d*P p *
- Tic.f art .
A ,seescer vaar SCfD
,,, , .,ca n,,
f o 4; pg A rg se,s ,s.g,, yrs ,, D caoso c,es3 bey 9a m 7,ne,97,,.3 to 52. ,5'F GJo*C
~f"T***""' , fee ~osae., CJEstin w - Dt f N Ass sr ya pc aa s, puso w*T* T- 'A -
st f 1NoA.n .ro' t'd!"/"! *~f4 AI (d 1" *^ CE) 't'~ ( cons <,4 v. w M*c. * * *Ca=4 *'O p , )'r
- f D
cenc ai- cce^o d <rs.r ,4ssace ro co+i.v.<.mros(=~rowr)
// s/
.re w a.
n.rs w e ,. a. ,. c. u. a. tooro Goes rn gg ,, naag, ,q y, Ro s, EM R.rt. Il 31 *' l.sicam GE. sperrsa, m de so Gac % WCs,sespe Pitt . pe,astoo J E yo *** n T* M'" 0 L ku. A -- S l ~r. *d' s p o s.a citert44 e. ss a aoiseo, a ggc e,s.of e p o rsso ge, egg, ye cz.,,g y gy
, p3 64Ac coosp pao-,yrio : w g 2, 1.3 re&'*6 en ,"
E '*; **o O!Ieu'S rwe u,w y; k (t. J Z fCOCb TNC Kj r g .) fC, be Q ((f g opf( W * \ L C L f% A LZ,. 5t hdr. DGg1T'* f lgstjy. t> nt44 ro Scs,4s Fo~ N #'
- C
,1L;o g(s o (2. -t. Aw
,..., L ., en ca .
.~ c ..
- o. .
W:t. . race = cv. ws.co ns.4 .,< fugavn,4 f.sris,wy . rases se. so no % u,, evea G u ** 8- **""*/ % "W g .e u ..,
,tr csq CSX mErr and. - ,u,44 ,y:a s ryt.., cad # , C.p i tta Gw(4AFE '**8 reA( f .
s' Ci44M'"G TAA Woc ons ltE z.; y y,4 GJAs L**no A Ossnusses Q $Harcts (eAsraeuo}
\c - ..
j .g,o mMAGEA. ChiL3' l.,tfJf'tA'0 ~~
$ H M] If /20 .it Clocgen M @W
- r. J6 O z 31 of a 'rs k TAff coyserse M T'T.'/* C 7xwysc ca.rreta c coasw r, se,.<rt., /I/sa_
<**de .rvsns ., c.ry a 5"' P E/* ..
Tr'oMic. ye Motoss g g2sa m 2"^f e 'W f gAcg N "' C co rwos. c . % ,,,4 g t,,.MJ TwWGM t O Aot.o.r.lD rnt, R g g,,, .z' nf e t **t 6d' 7" M; Gefeartd4 TnAffoL Eyes.,ses 1'o vo *** odt.no eg 7, n, s Asad OL OFSY /feco.<, she dArra .I . _. D ELAyI o'r /Er z S A. e.s or Eugec.rto
. pME . c o ai% w t.Av rue. QoE RAssodeatS EMT op a J Kstene fr est,, 04, 2 rAu EscAura OTestt% &J ht. W SoJT"H -
O f6c gAAt,,, O 15 $ GAJtd.,,,, U d TILL A pfgA,,,,,
^Y'f ,,5"O f'l ,,9 ) To GE Mdlt) c o.4v *cr5 . rte s.m i
a A cats.ss Rrt .rfrom A oc a. ease lO fiel1 M t AU l"!Ilb pot'L. 405" fC#L NCE[F (* *"o t Sc90 o Ff6st3 AJP f YA** #4 l At& . l g'4 A c, cMg 5 TTL **'ft C Cor!M*S. Codote
- Wmc Ca.dtn.aL f ?"~ Cc W
' r lO t
Dose au. yaa y. yp,sen ,4c,cm ca,,rnag - g.oe,7,y yty :r.rrosacti~* s Es Feso 70 5890 D et.n,1. YC4**dATCO \ 4-7 d l O l l , o. ' s ,
Attachmsnt B.15 " 3 OPIP 4.1.2
/ Page 6 of 7
/
Attachment 1 3-j pg/4/ Lamo unssaas roax i no. - ) 4.EJLU ELCle
)
LocaClon Name reon: f5lw/ Cna.- Yacl& _ ?oe d To: NU-. ' . /1.. 6C Date/ Time: b.2/B /#4 /3 V> d-h' /., c ! MessageA:/
/ 4.A <Dd/ sA3 LM s-s i 2d LA ^ 1 0 ,) )
% aJA
, A 3 )
'. ; 2 '.' a.
O ) t/ Routing for: l[l Action KlInformation - Response Required: l[l ) In Response to Message No. (Signature)
~
White copy - Addressee , Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 '!- ) Pink copy - Lead Conununicator -j,
~
,__ , .,,,m,-.-
_ ---, e-= *-- i-______- -- *
~ ~ '
Attachm' int B.16
' ~
.~
OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 Page 1 of ~ 1.;. 7 ;-$a. . r ,.. . . -. ;w ) . ,
,., i.,5 ..;; V. ,s.
.x , .y
. b .
. . . . . .. ;Le urssaan ronx' . .
. . g;@ggg no. , 2 . c.;,e e e.y,
,g
..e
) unau u.ca.e Locac1.on name - a 1 .'d..
.s from: E &, kouf && FD C. i.
To: 0 -r v U r w d u d 7'3 2. E D c. f Date/TLae; & /(3,lt & /)!e.A' ~ ; +(h s I nessaga: f< e,i - ~ /) ? / / C
- c.
m.c.. ,.,g r.
/ bus ~douTs TA ~h% R soo 2 - /ood C e c k Do n) J % M L ox
~
% Pfak - Mi bzyc-
~
0 m i/A v /h TC ode u New - Ao & SA7mk5k8+ rn i 4%c.ch - m:%:- Jr n,,,7m A%i . is%$ n a N ;f a 9 7 m ,; a h r s u :- G $W M.,
! ,f f h ** ff k/ .,..,
. m#m .. :2+;
':i,.
/ es 90 n'b 8v- a Dio
~
01 H w r w p L e-7 7 h -
/4/.*ioC- A0li7c T,%vre ab /s o t- A a so n n u E E's A n ? 5
$lh n } $/MiMk~, S&1 ~7N n V7~4 Nn SE/rJ4 . .. k. ..e
. . e-
.<.w
. .,rg;ig,h a.
. .,s..
s g"q, a ',;
^ '
. ., - ;:.~y..r.:c u '
p Routing.for: ..l $ Action .'.l[l Information ,
, ...K..W{.
. .^"'- lyl' j
. MO$il in Response Required: l5l_J p
In Response to Message No. 47p*. (Signature) .- g.. White copy - Addressee . . f, :. - 3 Yellow copy .~ Originator- <
. ? ; c Ran- a P. ink copy . ,,..*..,.s
- L,ead C.ommunicator * * - ... <- . -
- . .i.-
, .. .,, ; 4.
. . . ,..f.. 0 '.'/ ..2. ..%:f.M..?"
.h -
. .... i . 's . .
febh.Y.I[ .D (E,k, ,.
-[ '#
6 .f ' .? if p. .,,*,e.i 'n***'a + 5, k
.,..g** t).. .y'.'. Q3 F.y'* f.... *. . ,yp3. ,. k' ' ]y,'.
- .. *v e. ,1
', g.<j, A *.*
. J.' ", w.r ;q 7a ,. *p.;j'g,y'.
, .,,Q:[ ; g.{ y.f Q p ; , -
c ',:.
- p 'Q 's
.l *. :.,;,;y;
. . . > *7.
\ ,.
( .9 4- .
. .9,,,o_.
Attachment B.17 3 APPROVED OY: W I 3! i CATE b9Fs?)do n4f TIMC 1 J 0 Date 2/13/86 r'4 EdS # 8 Time 1333 3 TH IS IS A D RILL 3 A General Emergency was declared at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station at 9:39 A.M. today. O A major release of radiation occurred at 12:00 P.M. today, g Earlier today residen6 of all zones were recommended to evacuate. The Director of LERO, Jay er, recommends that all residents of g zcnes A, B, F, C, K, and Q shoul oort to the Nassau Coliseum before going anywhere else. At the Coliseum the public will be monitored for poDsible radioactive contamination. O The Nassau Coliseum is in Uniondale. It can be reached from l' e;
m ) ()h) I ) H0apatead Turnpike er the Headowbrook Parkway. ) People who are evacuating along the NY Route 25A corrider should try to use an alternate route and avoid the intersection of Route 25A ) cnd Miller Place-Yaphank Road. Also people utilizing Middle Country Road should not try using Yaphank-Middle Island Road, due to a multiple-vohicle accident at the intersection of Yaphank - Middle Island Road and ) Main Street in the West Yaphank area. YHIS IS A DR ILL )
- END OF MESSAGE -
) ) - )
I u - 1; Attachment B.18 I
~
'r" s.
y N *\. ,
%_QY -' .
y., { 3 77 [ f.
,y:y
~ -. ,
up
- i. I l i-acw= Pe**Jb I j me n ,.
&T s.i 4J
- W~ __&_6
_2 M AAJA 6 E h oP SMAT . de_ N
~ ##
dllll g C_ 9 r _y m =4_ _
,- --e 5" ' Q_-="
,, y-Y g -
n M. .A $? '
- a. - * .:- ,,n
" $.S. E *
- W5 a,.
x
<]
m gg i y , . 4a4[ n
~=
y e] [ f - si) si
~
0
.7 g_;
e
- T- ,%'
'thl,1 4) g v2 -
. w- 9 . ..
. .r: n;, C1e"st" p #
r - - 9e
, _2 3
..wh+;;;ig -
~~
.G;;
r a ,sf
,,., .~
- my.+: '.,,
..~ ,
. . any
, . ,.g an -
In
~.
.e .. . N-
. - - . . ...........;,~ ._,,;,_.,,,,
1 g3 %
$k:
/ Z // M Jf%Y.
- t
,,/fM 41
- 6. . s:n / 7 d6M>r / J f h' /0 >ss'$o . .
/Z/L 0/x-ne-es., h 4,'W D/ C
- n spu Td & x .-f5ld J'dd /
// 1 dec d.2/ . .
'E o&7retAc~~,' e .er rec. 2,.
f . p s e G ~ . /r 3 .- M A ~ .
/724 We$<, e-w k p-y %' .p'az?a.-
a . ~ X '/=D cwlh N
/
a & (*,.
+a aw/
;aK s$tW f #b h wsrae .
p g %; XL.,DeOf>,<,'-. a# 9 o~ 3- C) 9C't .
/ z rf E Ad* # d #<r//d/ .
fc.W -y2$ ti., . tr.p h eren a- m M <!c c ? on, s~.c ~ ie w .~~ z *
- A
;&M . / <; ~G - .
ii;c c h a a ,.c.<. w.c : , 6-4
. ->x.-x, wW wn .
l
?,
- 3. e,w-~r e2 u{'an d.w - L j, ,
/m,um -a-~,m ;/2* r d s/i [e/X
<.- (
Y # W'1 l.;Pfp Y e 4~- , 1 - f.
j . O ~ u,.c .. .. 4- ---- - m fy n. 3, _.~m. ,
- 0 ,
ejip 1a 2 re.a
~ - ~ ~
- _ w Au ah .
np 9a (. 4
. G .~ w1 $d nWi6kt
* .-. n . :/2 N
- em ._
.Yf .. .. . _. . . .
.TtP+ . . _ 4a $ . . _ _ .
J* . . . -
'Q '
I305lQGw Gauut ..h.tu}&q - Q - ] t l I AhN & p.wLa & M m .l -n b% r 10 . . I '2u % ago, _D ~~ u aPo kg. __ !
' O2). 3 pep-QA j I
% .h. a
%.fM - "e+
&c 'w i n uy
%L M :
1 o Et-u m_ M rW I 4 - e2fitho.+ ~~v . . 1
% ~s ,
- TC aw g"C27 '
f - i : eng,L w m_ %-utcauuu O k MLMw u v d % bn.,
.) bzo W' A ktb 4-i m eb Lu U dila>uk.W .
- shb ()[ Q,M y u,g,s, L O , ~ l
. . . . .: . =. ..-.; !,. : . ' . ..:: * -.' . . . .o "']
10
- O '.
19%) Tau 2e.A Ao % k l. w - j on m Pe N'waaar_ AA4 o of r u jj a N - ats A%I k kun y cu<.L~d~ . i
-g W v14d. k-M 1-e .Lmt . .
f$d ,ji-nw% - Y.58 '3.Il tw uj hmunn. S Cut. IbLu
-rue .LJ y lo ca g9pch .
/
whm. a ,_ ~ %
"~"
O m TM uu M
.) % .- i c~ a ~.E ='= , km.;d . of -
a b t ~ tt. I d~t- . Om M hu g om gcgk n
, Q %- % - -
nm nm 6 W n . 3,a.c + Y v>m mJ . k LT) . M.- .b- y;A ut. .
. gw% 4% .
,O
% L-\ h .
f . nafa \O ^ h40 _ A' %u Ko. %c du m.g,k;e.dhu.um, l U
- 6 % g ^as. asp. #
o , N yiE (f. n7}j As@Ns Fi . i) -l s. .
,;i y ..gga qtp ..c;,' pc
- .e : i -3,: '
, . r. ,
"(, > l},
,.h. .,'- 7.b,y .+
,,g.
, f. **, . . ' , ' , --
.' l(3 -
- s. r, V
I. t'r ?- Q.
. d.{ ., a WCf qvikMg t.n..i h'..
~
O ft -U! b I '
's " 7bi Y"
, .s.
. .n .
- p;Ag"g,I
- - - - 4 __ & 'O -O !
- O 0
!O ATTACHMENT C O !O O O , O O
~
THIO 10 AN EXERCISE O'~ Attachment C.1
$80RERAM EEERCISE l
IMPEDIMENT TO EVACUTION ROUTE MESSACE i O Suffolk County, New York Date: February 13, 1986 i Message: Impediment - Port Jefferson From: G. Connolly, EOC Team Leader 4 O To: Evacuation monte Coordinator at LERO a0C i via Esercise Controller i j Initiating Event: After EBS message to evacuate has been issued to i the public and FEMA field evaluator (K. Bertras) I has notified EOC Team Leader that he/she is in O position to evaluate field response. i Message: ON ROUTE 25A, APPROEIMATELY 75 TARDS EAST OF THE INTER-i SECTION WITH MILLER PLACE - YAPEANK ROAD, (IN THE VICINITY OF TRAFFIC CONTROL POST #41), A FUEL TANK-TRUCK HAS JACK-I ENIFED AND TURNED OVER ON ITS SIDE BLOCKING BOTH EASTBOUND C AND WESTBOUND TRAFFIC LANES, AS WELL AS BOTH SHOULIERS OF THE ROAD. IN THE COURSE OF THE ACCIDENT, THE FUEL TANK WAS RUPTURED AND IS LEAKING FUEL. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE FUEL COULD IGNITE CAUSING A FIRE. THERE IS NO FIRE AT PRESENT AND THERE ARE NO INJURIES TO ANY INDIVIDUALS.
~
THE LERO RESPONDER TO THE SITE OF THIS IMPEDIMENT SHOULD I4CATE THE FEMA EVALUATOR WHO WILL BE WEARING A COLORED ARN BAND. O THIS IS AN EXERCISE o O . O O
) ,- Attachraent C.2 OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 ) Page 1 of 1 l l LERO MESSAGE FORN ; ) No.
- t.t a u a u i e i.ocacton name from: EtJ4t AMGALD ED C. bA.serkseI)
) To: Cs W4u ari-%e Date/ Time: ?>* kb3 f& //!e 6 n $ ?", Message: 7 /e ys # JM d, U ) O dur /1>7r .SM 77F A ' bam-d 73 hCA 75 VfD s E"4 a T e F TA
- bVWA 3dct.7N2A/
3 uJMt /4//Et b' o- VA) A '
$3 e L Ao et Tu / u eD doEAL b o .S/De~-
ALntk 10 t Aa 7A' CASYd WE s *7 Ash u > Mjf 3
,a NoT 9)SD A 7tHCo M of # ~~~ b l y ,b 3 i 7 6( !
r .r Re0emseL sk / *2 U - k <%<t,4e$hn! ..s Y i g ) l N Action Routing for: l[l Information . Response Required: ((l In Response'to Message No. ) e White copy - Addressee I Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Consnunicator ) .
---'*---m_ . - m.--,-.-,,- - - - - . ue-,. . . - - - - . - , - - . - - - - , . - , - . ---ve---..,----,r----,,w---- --
,O Attachment C.3 t 4 OPIP 4.1.2 Pge 6 of 7
** Attachment 1
! Page 1 of 1 ,0 %
.g. . ,
,f LERO MESSAGE PORM No.
. O usau utAs Locacion name From: -- 7
-4 [ 0C l To: psi,. 7e .e. O l .s j
Date/ Time: Y [/./
- Message
! . Iha Ic%t YoA4 )oo e P fn ekum ? 1. r . . i i !O i
- J M N No t % .A i t? b $ f N O] ]
jo ' ( / 1O i j
$$ M.
v
- a. ,
O Routin'g" ri l M1Gition l[l Information , j Response Required: l[l t
! In Response to Message No.
Di 1 i White copy - Addressee (Signature)
- Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Communicator jO i
a m y s y m =r-. W : w i e - i- s
- w ** 7 ' * = - . ~ ~ ~ , - " -
(
~ ~
, OPIP 4.1.2 g 'I i Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 gp Page 1 of 1
__ NC-\d ' no. L&Ku ILCle LocaClon , Name _ Prom: 'IE.An'h/Jfec/ EOC ' To: bdi D!9- I c' f'Y' s \e h k o.te/ Time: 2/I1/5 (, 1
/
II Vo
/ -
Message: _T { k I O bi d -h(AR. (2.1'C k' LO& 5 ff06tf E I- -
'O I)8 i-e- E tul rdi_ !
i'd Lllic.d OVfBo%u.no }ic.$E !1LcE Lo. n e s Ch ShteW 2T4 / A 2TA 7s vards E/o '
%il/JA ?IlUQtharklA ker MCth
~
/ J" o
..yi ' -.
T,% - 3 Routing for: l(( Action 14 Information Response Required: l(( In Response to Message No. White copy - Addressee 3 Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 i Pink copy - Lead Communicator .(
t 1
, Attachment C.5 l J , ...- !
OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 , Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 -) l LERO MESSAGE FORM No. 3 3 Lt.nu ut te Location l Name From: 11 i1 P%xt.AA.- bT' dhW To: TRAut 8ug Cooes 6. 6 . C. l Date/ Time: 2.f13 76 120[ ' Message: t.50 A C@cX. e C. EtEL ra.u er )Q. eat,e% o tJ ~2. s A- ( hist..a 8eacce [ Vaiht AA.b lp(C.Mei, uo fQ 3 m 4o h C.C t c. Cn@t 6 (L.
' QJ AC.o &hev Co w f sC tmo d 3
, Y, h / f 0 /.Y.
S
]
C O' lllInformationM '-- fk !=" Routing for: l[l Action _ /p/f Response Required: l[l , In Response to Message No. White copy : Addressee Yellow copy : Originator (Signatur6) Pink copy : Lead Communicator Rev. 5 O
Attachment C.6 OPIP 4.1.2 ) Page 6 of 7 i-Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 ) LERO MESSAGE FORM d no. J Z
'-su ricAs cocacion name
) From: M /7[ ,
. I M. -
To: Date/ Time: 7l/8hb , //,' k Message: / 'M ~[M E ' , _2 'O j , W $$$ & AAYJA 51 fm 014_e% k A,+ sew- /d cs n ? b L2 Ja r m c. m /v % 2 3 - - is 9 4 - r y
+A
)h gp, y. &
W
- 2 J
Routing for: l_~~l Action l -~ oformation Response Required: l~l ') In Response to Message No. Wite copy - Addressee 13"**"*8) Yellow copy - Originator Rev* 5 3 Pink copy - Lead Conmuunicator
.,Ad,4*i-g'~g ,g -G * .- ' ' ~ - - ' ' - " '
-~~"4' F14 o ~4 a ~s4 s1I'~ E^ En w e a s
~~"" '
W , y:N..a/ . ; pST f ' O, . h.r;ru. .
=EuAN nE=In Attachment C 7
..'*q*
^
- DEFEDMINT TO ETMUTION MUTE MESSACI'
, a . 4 .Ma,b - .
.. ( ' . . ei Suffolk Ceesty. Mes York Date February 13. 1984
", , Meseege: . Impediment - Fort Jefferese O Fres ,C. Casse11y, IDC Tase I,ander To Evessaties toute caerdisator at LERO BOC via Esareise Castroller Initiatiet Event After Ess meessee to evassate has bees seemed to the publie and FEMA field evaluator (E. Bertree) has estified EOC Tese I.eader that he/ete is in O , , posities to evaleate field roepease.
Meessee ON 300TE 15A, AFFEDEIMATELT 75 YAaDs IAst OF M INTIE-
' SECTION WITE NI"** F'" - hP*= 30AD (3 M TICINI3T 0F TRAFFIC CDWTEOL FOST del). A FWI. TAR-TRUCE EAR Jam.
ENIJED AND TURNED OTEE CBI ITS SIM BLOCEIN BOTE EAST 300ND i AND WEST 300ND MAFFIC LANES 6 AS VELL AS BOTE $500LDERS Or O THE ROAD. 3 M COURSE OF DE ACCIMNT. THE FML TAE WAS aUFTUnto ANo is tEAEuc rutt. TEtag is A ros:IsrLITY TiiAT ME FUEL 03OLD 10 NITE CAUSDC & FIRE. TEESE IS NO FIRE AT PRESEalf AND MERE AEK g INJURIES TO ANT MDIVIDUALS. f , THE 1230 RESPONDEI 10 TIE SITE OF MIS DEFEDDfENT SMOULD LOCATE TM FEMA ETALCATOE WBO WILL M VEARMC A CDLORID ARN SAND. O . i Evateater S tano f f Time Coengets e
! 1. Message given to f controller by taas d [ N'0 8 O . leader et LE10 EOC (
; (Iies te .
3 - at tem 0 /e. C) u -
} !
' 2. Message dispatched to f the road crew / fuel b '
go 1 /fdh f. ('1vas . dpa . ,on. ~;' ' 1e". goCSC',k .
- lsed' 3 Evaluator at ,,,
r LEAD ECC) y g g,1_Lg*'>1_ArL J
- 3. Verification of Message /, 6 to road crew responder a j received at EOC 3 ,
4 /i m " J (comeum a'cas sone 6 g
- evaluator at LE10
. / ECC)
- . 4 Reed crew unit I
. evaluated at the field locaties (Field Evaluater) . , . , . .. . .y .
am .. o ' qg. y l '
. ,7 .
l * *
. ,.. .a.o. ;. . ..
* %? . 8 . ((
- e.
THIS
. IS AN EXERCISE "4.
. . u .. ...b ...
.".,4 *(
O y .
..r... y ;:n-9
* . . '.?4..,
*? ma *
% ,[',y t . , (
I. am , - - --- -- - - - - A O . . .
. w. .. . . . . .- .
1 - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ ____ _---- ____-_ __ _ _ .- _ -__ - _. _ _ _ - - -
. r. g. .:. -= = - --
--_-_ u .
u a. _,L5;,
), .; *Q* - .6' 2 . ,.w : *Z..
.' - **'f;w ,
f .
. THIS IS AN EXERCISE l, e 350eram gEgICISE
,Q.[,p,... h.g;x.. , , . , e: .
mrEDrxENT to Evacm05 som MESsact t e-l .-. .
- . ;l Suffolk Cesary, New York Dates February 13, 1984
! . - - (
~'w Message Impediment - Port Jeffersos
( ' From C. Comme 11F. E0C Teen Leader
'. Tos. Evesuation teete Caerdinator at LE30 EOC via Emeraise Contra 11er Initiating Evest: After EBS message to evacuate has bees issued to
) e t
, the publie and FEMA field evaluator (E. Bertree) has estified ECC Tese Leader that be/abe la is
. j j peetties to evolmate field respeese.
. ; Message: CW 30m 13A. AFF30EIMATELY 73 YARDS EAST OF ME INTER-SECTION WITE MILLIE PLACE - TAP 1tANE ROAD. (M ME VICu!TY OF TRAFFIC CONTROL FOST #41), A FUEL TANE-3UCK EAS JACE-
) '
ENIFED AND TURNED OVER Olt ITS SIDE BIDCEDC 30TE EAST 300tD AllD WEST 300ND MAFFIC LANES, AS WELL AS BOTE $500LDERS OF THE ROAD. IN THE CDURSE OF NE ACCIDENT. THE FUEL *ANE VAS EDFTURED AllD IS LEASING FUEL. TIERE IS A POSSIBILITT TEAT THE FUEL COULD ICal1TE CAUSUC & FIRE. THERE 13 NO FIRE AT FRESENT A110 NESS ARE g INJURIES TO Ally INDIVIDUALS. THE LIRO RESPONDER TO THE SITE OF THIS DIFEDDLENT SHOULD 14CATE THE FEMA EVALUATOR WHO VILL BK WEARIllC A Q3LORED ARM 8AND. l Evaluator g Stanoff flee Commeste
- 1. Messate given to 7 controller bF tese a leader at LE10 ECC (Team Lesser I , at LE10 ECC)
. 2. Message dispatched to
} the road crew / fuel truck respeeder free l 1 the ECC (Eves. Ope.
. 4 Evaluator et
. LE10 EOC3
< 3. Verification of Message to toad crew responder
) received at ECC I.
. (Casewucat toes
* # evaluator at LERO E0C) 4 Reed crew unit g,g- -y.-==_
Move CMk/ Deb Me /* evaluated at the SAtm.l . (*NL r A field toestion b8MM A'a u rs' A t a sC7tist-.
$ (Fiste Evaluater) W. . #gL.d .
WAT7f 3 }c;. , THIS IS AN EXERCISE m l 1
....i.<
**q'
.- e Dl . 4;... ..Iyd,T%>743 .
I
, x ..' .p. ..,..r,. ; .g.y
- s. s
' f* .l .h*
I D , i j
- e , *
- n
.. e it. ..~
;f="7 '.; ." i
' ~
Attachmant C.8 - lO
- ~ ~ '
h'] OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 Attacheent 1 Page 1 of 1 LERO MESSAGE FORM No. 10
--v acts t.ocacion ., name ,,
tro : TC,1 2 Ce-c.u/ $ [.U'C . To: Y A? l.4 4 L ' wA ) 'N' L4 A Date/ Time: Yl I ~ E' IL f } .2 ' 'l '7 ' Hessage: l Y L*s- c Ylh I. O
% D A d/is.S_LL N2$. -<,zYu. ,0.A / !! ! f $bls x ,) lI_ d h & & Y n/cNJ4sh i
93, O A . :Q:. L a...e/ Zl.2A- b '.:' l 9 L AL r A IL J A A L e&n 1 >Y e 'Ar- ,
&.L' A-- n . : --~ . /+
1 W &~L et a 4 )Lo" m b % h r . ! 9 ' o d >, m , u .1 f12>.r7 . bso //'l_e L Jt.l. e.. ., fx., e > n x_YY JLN Ahh da $5fPk = 0 Ks AA> c,2LLJ unp w r/ - g.g.. ; * . g Routing f&r: -l[l' Action , Information Response Required: l[l In Response to Message No. e O White copy - Addressee ($igniature) Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 ' Pink copy - Lead Communicator O* , b-
D -
. . . Attachment C.9 J
RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY '3 PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE
'0BSERVATIONS AND EVALUATIONS s
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) MODULE EVACUATION OPERATIONS .) 3 OBSERVER DATA _ Facility: guammo E o c.
]
Date: 2//3/M Specific Assign: cent: EVAcoanea Gamt4 Team Leader: MN O Name: 4 Organization: dreNE,fhEBSM4-. T1 tie: ( M 7'ee wiedt- Lyear E4wur. L i l co NFL A W Business Address:
/
8' Business Phone: , O O . . . . . . . .
1
- . *~ .
_P~ _ -, . L , _- = = 7.25i h'= h - c-:i~-- . ~~:.- % .=L:* 2 % :i*= O t ~ hiL Y *.a.
",G_ .Qw. 4 m--r~~w uq;;g g g .%.:nt'- .
).' .- 7, --
-3 . v ~~-2.:.c.
m _.M_a.n..'.W _ .__ .c ' w ':. =2.. ..e.-.= =-= x:+ H;:n At* der " Nd - g . g, 1 y.p a.,4r 44. .a t, .m. It4rf se Anneas , ) , o c. - *ua. sisa . s..a . ,,,, s .,,, . ., c. a. ; ,, a , ,,, a, ,,,,,,_ e yst 0,488.r*4 ** (**a8- 'fd y**8(. As** t8 3
?rA e/Ac canne Atat#5 '.
y .c g -4 46 tit. G.<#t "r a4
- S ' ,aa sr.s rst ra*T s'u!!a Lu C* NA' d"
c..a ,u.rso .' viedt eeasy 0e der seta r* P8"8
'*"'Ad8 ,' '* r44 s. .
734 - e*44. e,ie s t sa.a s s*#.# r, e.s pyr swivos. 773 =^d**- 'd# ' ' ' " ~ " " D 74 t. Usr ce= ass ca ua'c, Fos Ca. *st 73 ocrre.,.,6 # op earcs ,want4 ate 75'4 EVa*. caens ea u.s c aer o 4,to z, san s ., ect,sy- ) Ms~ Ae a c=*ro oens **
- s saeup
/
A'tL 8,o =*4 e ecT DoyA RAM f*Aluf, 8o Disse.ws es wi stasp. ear. Dec.Lansr so c. A<riverss, Sn3 64A *- *me - tsrs erusero enurup et a,,,, e .,. 7, <.,- ,,, s,.s ceAsr Gu ars or EA r*" 2 **c ar. 8 i de au- 58 '"'8 eosus f p.tivar* **%sa Fass ca.srasved ) 'F. t 7 '5 F4 d ag. c.e.o raar_swCJ F^atad $#sts4 Y f Aac, e.nes so , ty. a ss Aer , g g; gg- g3 , 81ES S Af. becLAasa gag geon,o g ee=rvac.v 44 tog des M Od*'tA ELE. DJ8% mu y,.essrus A t pea. g 6,.4 pts agg.s fo e'o csous.&C
- A** O ***Asa enu s *#
, 7"fl.
A ., g g s ,,, ,, co's pro g. AvaesArst.s y APSF . ) gge sAs owaa v. ft Jfr j P a m'** *'- S 34 a.ser aw. raa *-i . p+ru i n.v an.s4s- bisp eru.<o to,s s. ,s. ,. p ,4 ,.*
- feavr 7t.99 83S* * #'- ***A4 'm ws F'AA
$ 45 g.o a c e s.e f H poet AM., Esu t! Au*chY*0 *
- f **.16a.itp %^)M*LI (n.a s*r 2 9 pas tr*t.L annss es G ****)
) 85'f "* A saa,6s a. cape,v g g,,e , ggg gny- g ,gg4fg g7, gj,, ,gg g, 9 J' ft.svensdag 8.vt AL.dar Bergertmaase t 3ts e pae TW : prA A p ***de. er s.s A s r asemenager . Co.erneu.sa T8"3 avAs seeae To use. Daau. av. ateur , 42o d**J
.9 tar. T. 2 4 sMo s%0 Aw ta=.a wd e e.Amt ve o ise. mocy prias e# g ap 4 A.'s *'E8td8#8 '
) To of Mr a.40 oF b Af , , 9 24 seto * * * * * *
- A trosre 6st Mr 'tt-ft~
g33 EJ%. CaeAS legg 'rn mF#6' c.o.sraea g. c a.4.o 7B Darte.'*. s e d. pacI# dos' L **
- F' 88'er war L,saa .se.oup aese t cos tI *=' '*- /** '
3 H*a f * ) coac co.a.o eise.use. 4 .s. rw r a '*4 '8 od**/ *seeaE peust cand et es ^ 5" "# r 9 *I4 pans rso i- os tsus es o%- cr (, casa s. . cpe <s A'. p Fressenes t
- #icto .a.....t ru s mucre o To T,4 6*s t-It.I.
849 ) os3$ c asa^d t- E. . o sc u ,ts. / .= 4,a A 64-4
<* ^t
<tsiI r., em, To ro c .
r., e,s a r x '
.$ 4 9 - asA,ansta a.c s v,. . r. r,, e.i.o p s a.s.as a to p yg, -
p44*s s. *** /oa. GC )
- 3.I '.~~~MIUN E..hhAh*.7 g,h- ;._ ,, ,.;-pdfgg~ .j ,,,,.,,,,,;,,
'f, .y ,,.6.- ,'%;
sa , _ ,'gyy ,
- v. ., . _ q * *- W + m 24% g-gy g ,, 7. m --r D ...
. V e MM Cod *4 reLO 4de .#7" T4 3 C earrync. rad
/0 oo %
fa.esna.ess. enses y cy s q p or-r, St fo f err'serkrt* I , s EACl4 g4 ,, r.tCas 'r- gt' AL5o Tutts No C Hor.cs4 .T" f N'( gg,se t**A0 ce,nvasrs MA e VEstsh E S y j,4 e.a.rM As. G o06J EVAC Eo*'G S 0N 4 A= / IQ lo f./AC.8 0 , Uossf . Fen g re3 U .81 Gaovp T46.e81 Au.e =Av e.vC.
,o fy* aouss re,os L'a edi'tal f'Y" W IleLAf.5 U# n gg. pyrrQ, l0 l4 *17t effte.
2,* FO G
- d44 78 b ***d'48 b I
- EAT'**f- /
go g4 gas 13i,f are.u / s s Wit (15. Asa speca46 pfvu tt***f
/Lrt. 2so A0 79 f b '.,
Io /6 dsrA4- )LTL Ceare G esrss f artse L. re MV P * *'* . P*** sa" o ~
- merr. .s .x.,orrarno. -p paq,a paawru A00esee *16 THes.res.
Has,**mLs coeotresso rs nelpsgs ga r- constererjs r*** r"* ,oeu es Ang in .p y .esa.rsess- A*usserter e8* E 868a4. Gerd ma n t. AqAss, Art 4 c.r Ae. ftr coenn, 5 10 39 c.ase .zssysemeer Mstass .z;* rsan.osed r. r"o Loa.avr ed $ Cao'o Cesv42 20^ O CA&M CifL*y *=.4.tY jo 4/ / ton 0 f.oossnGJ
;$ A'S aar war seto d s.<- eaa.m.f are .
w . ..r
, , 4, reortt*te&no.J Artten es.hgr2 to $'s t 10 57.
MO Gau62 b6.N ff"Esh*C n',,1enAsrs- tA l ss,r.o sr
,y o,ap ,gga,,sa se.yuso **1~ ~f' T** **' , h m."oc.as, tCr* 7. JN ,
'l l e fe e oL L tA.
d p LACE) l1 yp4oxg ,g us,,rtetn/se f e c a,ae, ,, n e.Y**e.Y0 , 0e-, 0 Q a40 , )*T*C,F corss massen g c..s. ,.o,m (.r~,eismo or) ll Il C./Ac. otr- caosto mr. ., ,, . yu. o. y . <, 1 C. o . m. u ,y 1 r.aeos. m E.ise. are c==< o cons n sa n usaa. A arc. Taerren, j no de to doc. fon. Wueny, pe,t, 70 M'80C g p c. ,, Arred E nf A .**84 Au. Af 8 % 7,sar e.c c.a f eya es jriosa c'4W8 8. es 4Aeoisaa, yz jj (JAC* W f M *f!W'5 "Yhd C ele C g 6 r) (QAL lt.TG j , rw** *.mc ccM 01 s < .sr.r
, , 1.3 ea ,* ,.w , ,,,,7.,
g 3.t. J & f#4Ina TA*d* U* (A f* ~ssis fssLL fr ^4. O*ff* o *J $' i C y gg
,nL;e g(so G et, hierf 0 ^'#84- T* I' N n .... , L ., e ~ . - c ~ > .
e
-a... _.... - . _ . _ . . _ . ___. ._. ._ _ ,_ ,
) . .- Nat., - Thais g ceay ; tr4a sn,.c,. (a. m., san. a f srie,6,7 ., . a . c.s ny 84 es i r>. v raa m u s. m . g t ,,ri ) ** U * .* str1sg 18X m Efr a*& - ,no44 ya s mucrd' , c. p e' tta G Aa 44.A rt waremoe, C1'44AT'% m me o *4 f.s L rp 7pg u,4 Gras C-** % A bnssusses ) $Hencrs (e^srausso) \, . j .g.a m,%dMKA CAUS LtdJf4 ***N
~~
f k MY !! /td '* 2' Clazgra
=t.:56 see w 5 z 34 one g ps Bar ray.r cosyserep
) M
# .irr. /Iws. T't.t/c c
.rssm w e.7f Mc. ca.e7vu c. coests y, gg p i E /N. * **^s -
d ineMrc. ancg po not *** L /Coare, J^f e'M
^^ # c ca svans c. .% , ,, , ,,4 s sAJ
) M; fla$narrer. snAfros Are.ow.sv m mer. rn.wsa- z eptes =* row'1* M Grsr tW ne,sentre J ro ** odo neo eg 71a.s ud f' */. nee to ._ . Dunyf oon zgg esor Gyre.rure f&9 . C o m m. us.nveue. Qal (f.y (Zaseo***rs EM7- op i.a s s yced tM 4. OdL e 74xt BreAata ) o Trifeb dJA4 M fodT'M
- U*/71LL AFTEst ftot A O tf Std
Y'"f f0 f*'t jj ~/"O GE s%ft 0
- c. edt hv3 rw Cm (t.t sArst A C'L' S * 'f orttM
} 4 oo fos ~ ttet Au Fielo PML. Scp0 = FftJt 3 ^ " * " " "'- M" 0""* L. Az6 [4Ag, c.aeAg $ r%^*!'l C*rlM*L Coaste
- y *tAppr e. Ca.orneg. py- CW 9 y T.97t$$8LTI**N 5 IIC 6#If M '/* ff^e6C4 Al.C/.ty C ons TA4 4,, -
Tot./Tey NI/ s resa m sc.go, bevu. Tha-amo 9 4Gd ) ) ) . l
+:
. 19 n Attachment C.10 1
3 .. . .
. a
.s.g4 OPIP 4.1.2 '
Page 6 of 7 i gO Attachment 1 . Gs.:
.. .y Pag e 1 o f . l. . '-/ "( .
D . . w-..-
; a. '
.. < . ..;3.Q.
. r.o~ war.,+
?
. . < , . ~~, ,. . p . 1,n. . e m .
- , .? p.
. . c. . r .,
as3 ., -
, . Qgs, ,,
- (h
.h; 5.; MM
. . .}. ;> f.u. , y. N. , .~..c.e
. . . ,:a.g. . . . .. w.; .., .
... .e E...,Q
. ...;+.i. - .- r: .*
... ;p... ..+. . .
.%r f. .')d;' : .;*;':,0. *: ,~,. . . qc. -... w ..:Qm, . ."9. ..5-
. ... G.:.,7. . .'... .
); .... f.y 'j~.;'.h. .. .. . . Yo o
,"' \.,' , 4
'""U LlEle 1.oCAClon Name '1N From: t*t/Mt MauI 6o '
CO C, - To: / E*42) 7h FFk Gu tbs hop 7 JgSX .j
.T, Dete/ Time: '/2 '. 3 7 2 //3 l84 .~- .i
$Yi&
~
. 5); Message:'
. -.. . ':-^X 7 5 ~- A / n ,t Y ' D i? i ). # L.,1. b55 .,
;h['.'Y}} & .f.% })yjj Q f. g W.:. Q y..l g ,.g. .
- g :. & j' _
H V,9 A D s E2 s-Y a4~ t#72 p Se:~.7?oM . / b e W k.. YdPEANk Ali - Sb 2 f 7 A~ u c. A OUEA %/Nb *.', ( O7% kbh. hEHW *C/M.l a A- ThA
- n FM.M /MFUNbh,
...::{ . .f.,,;y;h. ...b-'iw ;g' .n* .sgggtsw.y'?q;%,9.%::V,t.y. - -
'"4. - .- - --
.g.fi .: 0'-:.. ? .
, , , m;"%LQ
"-e-
- a. '.".,c....
.(.W ll,ig-f , g. ;g: ...,; g., g 7.. j
.g
. g .g v......
i..u.ug
-) '
". /-) l Q.?) % 7 } Q,, h y e ,1) & '
. y .. ...
. 3.=W:%gg
.- :- .c:.q;y
. v . .g.a.
, . .w. .- .. i n
) . ..y;,-
. .. . ,:. . . .. .s. -. .
. u. . . ..
.. . .ma9 .
v. n j,;g:y?@.l:Qf[.,;,-[. '- , ,.
. ,y';Q?[ '
" ,' . . I '
4
- 8-
? .. . , ,- ..* -
* ( .'
2' .
- 01. ', g;; Action'.il l.Information
' ~ '
- . M.' h*W,-.t, for:
. . .e . d 3,., as., t . . . . ., .,. , s.
- x. * . .Ol' .:. .).,4? $.r'..' r%.fW
':. ..... .w .,* q.. ,.,*V....
- c. ...
.e,. n. . . tm-, S#,%s - ' ~. ~~. .,, . . . .' ~~ *.m
'W, ,: . . .
, *..-+.. .,.
;~,
s
. ,. wV. w .
. . R e s p o n.s.se u Req. ired:;;n
- i - - ,
J. .i
, . u.
. r. . . . . ,
'...1
. ., j In Response'to Message No.
,, l
,- White copy - Addressee Signature -
J.j
.. Tellow copy .. Originator. ,
. . ,:f. .
. . .,c ..: c . .. . . . L. .
,s
.// .
y % )...?., Pink y .copy
' l'.-
3 ,.. , ..
. Lead. Communicator
..- . -. . ..nq.g . . . x .. y. .
w... %' .u. t
, @yfq,i.T.;,'Q " .;,e,p :,ga.Q:
Pf: ? ,,1 # ' .,$y
. ;' ASl;F., .'<;)/ ' "
! I d'
g_ .. , Attachmnnt C.ll D B
, RADIOLOGICAL EP'.RGENCY PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE CBSERVATIONS AND EVALUATIONS EMERGENCY CPERATIONS CENTER (EOC)
B PUBLIC INFORMATION MODULE I
~
OBSERVER DATA Facility: EEOC !b / Date: 2/13/Ifo . Specific Assignment: tibIiG InfCrvrah/M - EOc_ E Team Leader: _ Name: , Organization: bil- CO T1 tie: BM16RG. PL A AJ A) Ew Business Address: . g Business Phone: _ I
6
) .
FC 170 SS TC.. _ .. Pr.CPAr.CD r.i .. LONG ISLAND LICi! TING C05tPANY W O. NC. _ __ DATF.
) ht'bl6.CT
- CC NO-I!
) i2;l5 Wii M . h a sa /4 W P? . 7 ia p a a B k w / 6?3s o w n y p 4. o
)S I$ h'dlhallN 4 fwf 4. I m c)fa f% $.Ch>
k4lb W & w'W DirtC/n 61ss H Aad Heaar Wh 94 nwml2m Rdwu ou nA dov-D (W.
,/2 : 31 h Ae* ab Wlla.//u.d4:e irt(cifn%Em.%dy tuv Gahd N to Me puminv> . t'sr mm& W.
- " \ to hwaa'esn' agsua.
')l1.49 res nu.*g '7 u eL cb <. J i bum.dce fo iW. pu.k>h..
ja:s sn
- Pake Etss lamda'.ugwsu an % a Tin h Jmy$c pul.kn '
e i:to. % kn cahd k plw< h it w/ ttwan. I:13 la w Fnk k % a k roc Bubkn s . ess -y. p pc/ 4 5 .w/- f . cv waay n I,l'IS lxto k 1alk. Ic Wfiduk & hso' 6M. (A4k n w ditc w h w% MavGy. ll:% Vdh.k & P,l. &as wp 4 okk%s u,% azik}Ms, h Cnsd)ctd. e
Attachm*,nt C.12 D
' OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7
, Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 3
LERO MESSAGE FORM No. ! ) Lt.nu u t te Location l Name From: h.5 M To: Br.s hn/ar fJ ) Date/ Time: ! k/3 Message: M/ Ot/[43 //-/ [/-1, F>-a F > - 9. F.3 - c ' n & " - O
&v fM/ ff0A!? A e--rpr4 84/AVH E e Ere/& (We W by fu d2f$ k///&f ~
WW a fta / ' 3 3 3 Rnuting for: l[l Action l Information Response Required: In Response to Message No. White copy : Addressee Yellow copy : Originator . (Signature) Pink copy : Lead Communicator Rev. 5 3
i 0 . Attachment C.13
/ OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1
,0 Page 1 of 1 LERO MESSAGE FORM r.o . /,7 ! -O Ltnu utta Location name From: Mu.m hPAerc468.- h7. r-. To:
% bo AD E O. C.
Date/ Time: ~2./l3fSS I3Io Message: i EowftrA hu o un te% 14 etw b t t. d how T(hW L T+ Ooi 6 OAE met ~T3 E i ># 4 6 WEc_%h TV
-ttti T-oGL tr2.u tA bMLe*
tO
- O 1
- O
'O Routing for: l[l Action ll_lInformation/7/2.fs'M &"'
Response Required: l[l In Response to Message No. White copy : Addressee Yellow copy : Originator Pink copy : Lead Communicator (Signat'ure) Rev. 5 0
Attachment C.14 ) OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7
, - Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1
) LERO MESSAGE FORM no. 49 ) cr.nu ucie Location i name From: $5 sei n b beso hr d d f-To: I.-% "fE.4.< Cvies ; hi DOT- ) Date/ Time: UlO E8 13 Message: TG AT Tc_9 4o A s k.1 N G Tb 9-IN 3-6 AM AT> o d )
't2Mut/Lu A onL 'C 1 [CAc)6f
) ) D15 94TC9% IW l[l Action Routing for: l[l Information Response Required: In Response to Message No. ) White copy : Addressee Yellow copy : Ori inator - Pink copy : Lea Communicator (Sibature) Rev. 5 )
l, Attachment C.15 OPIP 4.1.2 h Page 6 of 7 I(
) , Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 3 y h mf(99 f
LERO MESSAGE FORM No. }} ') Lt.nu Ticle m Location i Name From: 44%0IAF Cdc0f. d
-3 ro: JAc/rcP
/
sin' (iI ' Date/ Time: Message:
~
([Afed) kDoc TG s'[6]/IA T tfPAeh$ & 6--TC.f O YO & 133 % - O f
, , , .0Y Yn .n l f \' (
4~ Routing for: l[l Action l Information Response Required: l[l In Response to Message No. e White copy : Addressee Yellow copy : Originator ' ~ V / (Signature) Pink copy : Lead Communicator Rev. 5 9
Attachment C.16
'O ,/ (Og
'O
[O C. y RECEIPT FOR FIELD EVALUATIONS O . , SHOREHAM EXERCISE FEBRUARY. 13, 1986 O This receipt verifies that , (name of LERO participanc) ' has been notified by
- b'
. (nime of FEMA evaluator) that evaluation of his/her perfo ace at (location):
?
fIL L6 f~MCG~ Q3 } p1fQfjv3 gM'y
- O To CVAr @-171CAN
~
lf /1 h } b lCiv i % J: I h C-- h ff CA Ll hs 3 been completed. C OVL6 CAn L' f* oR .QEQ uES Te D Eg tO W/3l5'l (data) 'O l ,' $ '/ f 'l l ) (time)
$l- Nd (signature of FsMA evaluator) i j
l .- -
- O e
'O O -
), APPiiOVED BY: Attachmnnt C.17 h r!."' ..
/346
) 'l3 ffB
~
DATE flo TIME ) 0 Date 2/13/86 ) EdS #8 Tsae 1333 ) THIS IS A DRILL ) A General Emergency was declared at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station at 9:39 A.M. today. ) A major release of radiation ecourred at 12:00 P.M. today. Earlier today residen6 of all zones were recommended to evacuate. ) The Director of LERO, Jay er, receemends that all residents of z0nes A, B, F G, R, and Q shoul oort to the Nassau Coliseus before ) going anywhere else. At the Coliseus the public will be monitored for possible radioactive contamination. ) The Nassau Coliseum is in Uniondale. It can be reached from
~
i
l 0 . O ! i Heapstead Turnpike er the Meadowbrook Parkway. O People who are evacuating along the !!Y Route 25A corrider should try to use an alternate route and avoid the intersection of Route 25A O cnd Mt:1er pleo.-Yaphank Road. Also people utilizins Middle country Rocd should not try using Yaphank-Middle Island Road, due to a multiple-vchicle sooident at the intersection of Yaphank - Middle Island Road and O McIn Street in the west Yaphank area. YNIS IS A DR ILL O ---
- END OF MESSAGE -
0 4 0
.s O
O O
.O . Attachment C.18 OFIF 4.1.1 Pge 6 of 7 6 Attachment i O P'8* L f1 < LERO MESSAGE PORN ^o No. *
- e u.s te weassoa ,
3-Trom: Sh $A f[kn, gu {._ ~N N w hdbblw) ' To: W0C# ' ,,' ' L,. , O Date/Tian: QJ//J/fd /3W~ //ss (Y h)/ Nessage: '*fk ~ s - g JP . / O, ,W
%AWm nA ws 7%A (O k f 4/ % g Q)' , ,p) f n}-ra,A L L .s a 1 4 /
! A' .7L. n . l lo ik/A,I s ,_ ps,,$ l i,+L a s AA lO
- O W
- w 0
Routing for: l[l Action l((Information m - 4 Response Required: l[l .- i In Response to Message No. . T' (Signature) White copy - Addressee / Yellow copy - Originator 10002195 - j Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Consuunicator O l
.. * $?' 7 .:
.. ..- gy OPIP 4.1.2 -
fi Page 6 of 7 3
- q' qq,.-2p"%p si; 4 oN[ p Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 -
r-
."7,f.~..._if Q ;
..s.
LERO MESSAGE FORM D No.' [ I I Y t.r.,m u u .c l e Locacion l name _From: ks /Iez, d. / [dd 8M 3 To: r% '[ .C 6.o [d C ( Date/ Time: $3Y/3/f6 /3 f0 h .$ Message: 'C/ a n f-[ -
) , so h a f .^M.a .h ht on - $ 1dll A.A l Br4'inio./ 4J /dzE RL; Ku .f u.
-r J +~ f AW'M2W{
/)W.";
9 AL - n n e di_ /~ - L A YL[.- t w w . .. i .. __ -- = k ,- & _ __ & . k , / / Ys/ 1 b & "c & .d n h -- A_ 3 t/u As w n I $ (kY2 Wo b { AW W ep & ll . , a / / 44, s e AL.8 . g S$hIM4k.hh
~
~"'l
-$f-N:k!h&$$$ , : '0 5f; Routing for:'l l Action l[l Information . ' ']fj
>d es Response Required: l[l .j In Response to Message No. j
)
(Signature) : White copy - Addressee
. ;;l Yellow copy - Originator Rev..5' i
Pink copy - Lead Consnunicator , . f,g D - ;; .,j
. i&.;
n:w
.. . . . . - _ . - _ - . . _ m 'T r
, Attachmant .
f,1~< OPIP 4,1.2 "**- Page 6 of 7 ~ E Attachment 1:'?, (; ? ,. . , t . [ _ . pg Page 1 of 1 "' u,., _ l : f,y , wm .. ii.
.e
. g uno NassAGE PoaN a..
)
no.' / *
'-_-u u. cts t.o c a c s.o n name Prom: EMnc Aur &A AM
- l 2-To: Ae's . & CL m.
fue
).Ebc Date/ Time: A2/n/SL /W'o o ~
'}.
Nessaget, '.'
- I~A d-f>
*s , ' /La'd.:e Osw rwe r- 7Ne, ' //ess~ 657 f ' ~ ~ ' '
~
s'Rfobiel "Mity Tis eNE ef 7Prid W . A f h' ff $fff ' J/9N //r W.97FC/ .Tb! .fM7~ M 72'r w 7?W3f M )/ - .,N'
) k.TM
/N.4/FM JN../n f - N/AE W r/M M kJ. / Md' 5t/fW 4 G! /tjs>d s vis t, M fritt .6v/} .n sis vzjf iWNK h'HT Sii.'s9tarb Vlt)Vr //cs: Tr//d *' F)M/7V YMMk'a? 77-b
/Hf //vemios M &W L e d A ' '/d .
**'f .,
- s. .
. u.M.:g
') n.
..m-we . .-
. _ . :9 gb'W .
? !'- ~~
gtL,, g,,,_p2C ! Fir' i eFRE'3r Y !N5A
. c , ,
@ . ' %. 2
. ,Mik,,
)
Routing or: Action l~l Information
, f,C. .$.; jp .is.
-c...
. a r; Response Required: l- s ',
In Response to Message No. e
) :qJ White copy - Addressee (Signature) .'
Yellow copy - Originator
. Pink copy - Lead Cormnunicator ;
Rew).h. ...) -
) .
~ *
.., .. . .s vz *
/.g.v g . v-G.c s . .. .- mu
^:n ~.
1
.ttachm:nt C.
)
, ' , 3..;,;.3.;
. 4 , ..-
.g i
,., p' OPIP 4.1.2 , 9l J' ..Wfhe ..
. Page 6 of 7 -l*
,L -
Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 .3
- @)c'.y .. ._5J.4y,.jN'
. i.
l
.- LERO MESSAGE $ '!
> No.'LSc.c; *
"-u n. cts wcat s.on name Frosh ha 6, , ,
To: i [. 4 c/ . G.
$.kg/p/
Dete/TimeY i41. if*- .?f
., -.a
)k L {~' $
} ' Heasege: 0, $1,I /! . .) $/ r!!
. - dio/_ ){0-(, g cg p $Y. \ /))/L A I 'S h ~ . ,,,/ 4 NAN.N,x.pkf w> 1!h&.!& JJijl c.L4 6BL, i L ,_%%%&litiy; J M A h'124 2 &x d Min p .. lld/H b l& 4 4fd,% a / sir,:-) ~
ddsm$ > j$ wh)w ,,Yh hs>L Afmf_,,), [ ~ (/ D p -
... :a.. m <.::asu
. ' . . .~
'1W hk -:
5'%Y$'&hi;'hi . . .. L D Routing for: l[l Action [ l Information 1 Response Required: l[l In Response to Message'No. / - White copy - Addressee Yellow copy - Originator - Rev. 5 .s Pink copy - Lead Consnunicator l~ p .
- v. A .
.3:.-
, . . . 3.
~
Attachment C 22
,'. .b *'
(('b Page 6 of 7 M ., g$$+%-fq.6j m:"P:n'
'w." lef2 ' *.'
. 1 LERO MESSAGE FORM
, No.
lJ l '4"U LLCle L,oCaClon 1 Name From: /swe b x / k [dC To: /dd [1, . [O C_. Date/ Time: O 3 kJ/cf h /JVV f - Message: - A- d ] W 20// /?)hnY Y($ _0 E- &A
/
J' w #' ,wL' e 49%Kh
" ! r
.f*. .,,e x * $2
, J?. ;'*;.
3 Y, - - 2:.; cr e bb ~ 3 3 . 2 Y .
=::,t3 3 Rout . Action- l Information
;,j w
".]
Response Required: ' l(( ' 1 In Response to Message No. O .] White. copy - Addressee
,9 ' -(Signature)
Yellow copy.- Originator
/
Rev. 5
]
Pink copy - Lead Communicator 3 - __s__ _ y.J
> i ) ' ) ) ATTACHMENT D ) ) ) ) ) )
Attachment D.1 ) . OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 LERO MESSAGE FORM n ., No. ) Lt.KU 11Cle Location Name From: fVd C b% D Wl 0 ( Yh/Uk To: < YTAA ' bl Date/ Time:
# $7//) /O #7 Message:
4 Oc b b 0 Y Lc AtLWts 0 $ h dcu W d- . 1002 -
/00 4
)
/O/O (0 WY - ~ b ~Cbd %c} $
V ) (nhw uk EnduGJ o u ) ) Routing for: Action l[l Infor: nation Response Required: l In Response to Message No. ) White copy : Addressee Yellow copy : Originator (Signature) Pink copy : Lead Communicator Rev. 5 ) '
7 R 1' ( ( , Attachment D.2 _ / 3 - ff G OPIP 3.6.3 O Fage 69 of 77 Accaciment 17
- Page 5 of 11 TRAFFIC CONTROL POINT COMMUNICATION LIST (concinued)
D I I FAILt10Gu t, 5IAGidu A* M (^ l E[ POINT cn$F DISPATCHED CHECK Li TIMES / MESSAGES O 24 t/ II '. L S I i 30 l LI;tS O 31. /, /noo - 32 / ,
/llZ5 35 W /t lc o 3 .
-l 53 V j l(3c 54 l 0
63 V l- ll:5 It '.0 I $ 64 l i
/ l II:Sa f
O , 65 / , l ( ,' t o 66 / ' Il ; 2 6 i O 67 / l l '. 7 I i 68 . t/ st :1C j. 69 / ' li .lg e 1
;. I
.~ 2 - :
O
) -
OPIP 3.6.3 ) Page 70 of 77 Attachment 17 Page 6 of 11 TEAFFIC CONTROL POL 9T COMMUNICATION LIST (concinued) ) l FATGriOGUE 5TAGLiG AHLA (continued) l l TIULFFIC CHECK ( M ' CHECK IN TIMES / MESSAGES CONTROL IF l l POINT 'DISPATCHEDl ) 70 (/ lI .' 2S 1 71 ] 1 M:36 1 ) 75 / //:/6 16 j // 30 . 77 /- ll '. 2.5 I ) ! j I l 78 V 1 [l'.kO 79 , c/' I
/l l Z $
)
\ so / \ it:W
\
l l 84 t/ II: 30 1 101 / ;g3cy 113 / )I 14 i
) -r 116 : J ; it3a 1
126 / , f/,* / o
, 130 V /g '. 2c i
) I , v, . s
-e
OA. ) < . ' G- * ~ c m e u =, yib-8G _ Ev A c 6, io : ec.)
= qr
)
$74H 069e- Sur,we jeen Gem %. Atta n t o.3
~=
ho w_ w es to-ns 01 m> s- sse.* n to:$c h Ta. 5 zoz.s ) ) x -. - ~ - ,- nn OW hlkLA lO='$O hYA6SCu)4 %$ KALA / C a'$Q 2.049 Z06? ) 2ot8 . E0 4 I ) i )
Attachment D.4
! /.3 b l Qu) Y ~ TCP Q /ggg dm p G /fe9 'b d 0 hty Ls,3 -
) /}'h & (vis j . :-) - RP Q /edd (kbd<'.
,p G*'U.n M'/ ' )$$l$c en Page 7 of 11 l TRAFFIC CONTROL POINT COMMUNICATION LIST (continued) kt!)M /wsiterc7sb rcp n & c- m yo f m y w m h I
) l YORT JEttLK50N 5TAGING AREA TRAFFIC CHECK (V) CHECK IN TIMES / MESSAGES CONTROL IF POINT DISPATCHED wg srs. Mtf W Vf ' ) l3}E / foe V
) 5 lll } . ll N /hStd pawn
[ / J:4 IITO /S/ Aed
\ #5
' V( ,, - isoE
.n -a he q .C '& *
? .- ;y; jfo c) lin ,:bi.? -
a
<lMewd o b* A $s 5' E'-
/
///S y //fr llo IO Y ;: cis Ida 1 / ,rt .4
'f
0 *
. /// /, // ': /6 o *)
4
. , t (3
$ hid jtt4 fld S~
s ) t' .44'. 4 a /LII /2Z9 /Gd) I-gp flIlY .,/b0S ) 'kk ' I:gY l bel , W Tio6 Ttw ' GT Tune ou-GT&W4 oft 'T Rev. 5 d
D -
$d Zll3 OPIP 3.6.3 1 l
Page 72 of 77 3 Attachment 17 Page 8 of 11 l TRAFFIC CONTROL POINT COMMUNICATION LIST (continued) D FORT JEttt.,K50N STAGING AREA (continued) y CHECK IN TIMES / MESSAGES t POINT DISPATCHED D 4 Srs " Abvi trHi'
/2/6 /zos' /66'7 s
40 'O' W e-, Dl.xf p!4 y ll: G iaJ /6a.5 M .A 50.. ,,,, y4 ,$,g , _ , ,/ j._ . 3 , X p {r,/ , le:z) l$0$ Os- 'A '- *A 6 W " "" fot9
-' > za' /62b D -s R nio riso llo) -
),, y y ,_- 14'o u ,.u , -5. ./~ lh*A $ Q, k' ~P "
i;oo .W IzzA ay's lblb l' or Ill ,
- 3.
;241 .i ca }&ol -
01 f.
, 1223 p, s I ,
wWlkh wr og' mmi ARRyg mme LpT Rev. 3 D. .
O OPIP 3.6.3 2 /3 [d Page 73 of 77 Attachment 17 0 Page 9 of 11
'!RAFFIC CONTROL POINT COMMUNICATION LIST (continued) roar Ja.FFt.K50N STAGING AREA (continued) [
O - TRAFFIC CHECK (V)
' CONTROL IF CHECK IN TIMES / MESSAGES /fd* ,
POINT DISPATCHED LASr6 JitWf LEAVE i
~
.n.udu/ /'t7/'. 2 MA
- f. sV ba% &x5 < %~
" essV j// sn.,t ocin a e n ~sisot .
O u I6/ 5 P C N II I '> g //J$ ha fs.Ger -
\ llS$ ll @ /600 $ .,s" (, bJ J M. u-m
//Z(o /!?: lb0 N
///I l//JJ 73dr o 1/ 3 fluf l(.o f SCP 'E.
, ;/G]
//J(o d SO 'cE lYl l60 89
' e '
. /19 9 90 9
/3% >
O gp
% 112% I&olo x //d /2/2 /6d l ..
N 96 CV
=
/> d3 l'%d ,
o nmc eqT AKk qE k ~ TV #T % A9a T1 T s%GWE TOp E D Rev. 5 t O
.-- .. - . _ , . - - _ - - - = .
!o _ . OPIP 3.6.3 g /3 (( Page 74 of 77
- O Attachment 17 p ,, to og it l
! TRAFFIC CONTROL POINT COMMUNICATION LIST ! (continued) ' runt JErr uSON STAGING AREA (continued) TRAFFIC CHECK (V) CONTROL IF . CHECK IN TIMES / MESSAGES POINT DISPATCHED ,o ass ' nx w' iyS9 Ilb lS0 $ -
- 12]1 13 II'0
'O 100
~
i ii:) ,:,7 /t., rj . ,. 6
*ild! /3f7 10 ;
's& !;o t !:y, //, o d N /13 f. /404 l R .i: ; i c.,9 ilas 7
' 'N
. Maws by ACP 6*$; ,
\ % i, is l iia 1611 : s< R qif 1z13 II* *
- 3E !f*
_"k ., o 9 azG '/40% l ,
///2 /. ;<J
. /60.5 i N it u is,9 160 J l '"'s a f- b ; L " 0- 2 P h " "
o R ,,l ign\ h SCP , e lado ,
\
[ kh ,, O l
l OPIP 3.6.3 Page 75 of 77 ) [//d Attachment 17 Page 11 of 11 l TRAFFIC CONTROL POINT COMMUNICATION LIST (continued) ) l runt JstrL= SON STAGING AREA (continued) TRAFFIC CHECK (y*) IF CHECK IN TIMES /M?.SSAGES CONTROL POINT DISPA1 M i ) ' w.95 1 Atuf Lined , .
/idG I;oz jf,o p I t!5d ,Yv / hey -j$s.bb h y
$' 015 ll'o b f lSt ais- lGO fam#
//3[ </ :l/ /f4 /
) l /sirar# '
/220 11SL /SN '
120 2 /(pli 3 3 i ] f J k l Timr Timt ou TlalE A Ft kT TC. lvgp sTTSU6 Rev. 5 )
U U U U D U V U \./~ U V l
'j rE OFIP 3.6.4 Page 76 of 124 Attachment 9 Page 5 of 31 TRANSFRR POINT COORDINATOR DISPATCH FORM (PORT JEFFERSON STACING AREA)
Names Transfer Points Hiller P' lace Shopfing Center Route Buses & (Zones F. C) - 7/ pr. gjf r: Page 1 ot 5 Transfer Buses: 22 (x-1 thru x-22) l I Dispatch I Estimated l No. of i Trip #1 1 Trip # 2 1 Trip #3 i Trip #4 l l l Bus Number l Interval l Route Timel Trips l l l l l l l l l Nabt of Driver l, l l(hinutes) l (Hinutes)*l Per Bus l S ta r t l R e t u rp l S ta r t l R e t u rn l S ta rt lR e t u rn l S ta r t lR e t u ra l l (F1-1) 1 l 0 s 90 l 2 81//d il lll l12 l
~~
l
~
l
~
l l ( F1-1) 2 l 20 // l 90 l 2 # 1 ll b l l ll 12 l ~l ~ l
~ '
l l (F1-2) 1 l 0 3l 90 l 2 # llf l l1 lll l ll- l ~l ' l l l l 1 I I I I ( F1-2 ) 2 3 lo> l' ! f)g i'l/Sp'll ~lI I - l ~ l l 1 20 t/ l 9b l 2 e ill li
~
l l l l l l 1 1 I I I I I i l I l 1 I l l l l l l l l l l l l ( F2-3 ) 1 Jl 1 I I -l ~i _ l ~ i I I I l l 0 80 l 1 s l ll C. l ll 37l I l l l
~
l~ l l 1 1 I I I I I I I I l l ( F2-3 ) 2 l 10 /p l 80 l 1 ell$ olllll39- lI ' l l
~
l
~
l l
~
l 1 1 I I I l nI I l l l o l llk( i l M I -l l l l ( F2-3) 3 1 20 #5l 80 l 1 1 -l - l
~
l
~
l l ( F2-3 ) 4 l 30 2 (I 80 l 2 a ll/ N l I l l() llJ l -l ~ l
"~
l
~
l l ( F2-3) 5 40 F' l 80
- l // N l 13 ' lt) l /) 3 ~
l'l ' l i I l I 2 I I l ~l l I I I I I l' I I I l' l l l l 1 l l t l l i i I p I I I -1 1 - ett i l- l n-l ( F2-4 ) 1 0 */ l 80 e l // d l ll '3 lil F lI 11 ~ l l 1 2 l -l l l' i E I (62-4 ) 2 I 10 #, I ho l I 2 o lfl N ll N ll' ltJb l -l-l~l'l I I l ~l i I i l n 8 lIl )l l , o;l/ ' l l (62-4 ) 3 l 20 ' 'l l 80 _ ~ _ l 1 l l l' l~ l l o us
- Normal (not adverse) weather time.
U U U U U U U- U U U V m ?k r?'
, OPIP 3.6.4 Page 77 of 124 Attachment 9 Page 6 of 31 TRANSFER POINT COORDINATOR DISPATCH FORM (PORT JEFFERSON STACING AREA)
Name: Route Buses: 37 (Zones F, G)
'Iransfer Points Miller Place Shopping Center Transfer Buses: 22 (s-1 thru s-22)
Page 2 of 5 . l I Dispatch l Estimated _l No. of I Trip #1 1 Trip # 2 i Trip #3 l Trip #4 l l l Bus Number l Interval l Route Timel Trips l l l l l l l l l Name of Driver l l l(hinutes) 1 (Hinutes)*j Per bus IStartlHeturnl Start l Return l Start l Return l Start lRetural l l 1 1 I I ~ i i i i i i
~
I ( F2-4 ) 4 1 30 ul 60 l 1 8 l ll'be Il l A 'e I'l l l
~
l-
~
l ~l ~ l l 1 I I I I I I I I I I ( F2-4 ) 5 1 1 40 Pl 80 l 1 o lll NIIf } ) 1l ' l l 'I
~
l 'l
- l 1 I I I I I I I I I I l l 1 l l 1 l l l 1 l l l l l (t3-5) 1 l 0 s'! 40 l 2 elt:(1lil'NlliO i 11 -l-l -l -
l ( F3-5) 2 l 10 /.l l 40 l 3 # l gl b l l: ll l11 l l1 Il. l
- ~
l 1 1 I I I 11 y i I l (F3-5) 3 l 20 u l' 4u l 3 p lit Y' Ill* cy Il l > g. Illlk l ip) lgI u'- ll- l ~ l l l (t3-5) 4 I l 30 271 I 40 1 I 3 ftllill lkcvfi lV I ll)y- 11: 1*-illl. f- l ~Il _ .3s'l 1 ' l l l ( F3-5 ) 5 1 40 )1l 40 1 3 a II lI ll? # l/ l/ ~l l l l 1 1 I I I I I I l l l l l 1 I l l l l l l l l l l (F4 4 ) 1 1 0 ( 30 l 3 e lll 0 l Il l ll l (I ll ~l
~
l (F44) 2 20 J;l 30 l 3 4 ll N l Il 3 . l 11 ll3 II) / - ' l (F44) 3 l 40 Til 30 l 4 p lf 8 l l)- l l 13 lf3 / (64 4 ) 4 l 60 1/ 30 l 4 p l18 l l} l f) ll ll) ~ f) g; /1 l l i I I I I I I I I I l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 8 Normal (not adverse) weather time.
?T /
I o* t
U U U U U U U U U U 'U s g m:' 7 ,"
~~P.
OPIP 3.6.4 Page 78 of 124 Attachment 9 Page 7 of 31 TRANSPER POINT COORDINATOR DISPATCM FORM (PORT JEFFERSON STACING AkEA) homes Route Buses: 37 (Zones F. C) Transfer Points Miller Place Shopping Center Transfer Buses 22 (m-1 thru m-22) Page 3 of S - l l Dispatch i Estimated l No. of i Trip #1 1 Trip # 2 l Trip #3 Trip #4 l l l Bue Number i Interval l Route Timel Tripe l l l l l l l l 1 Name of Driver l l(hinutes) l- (Hinutes)*l Per Bus lStartlReturnl Start lReturalStartl Return lStartitetural i I I I
~
i _ l I (F5-7) 1 I O 7l 50 l 3 e IIll , 1b lAll'il ti'D. Illl;Jl 3 I lli)lil'lsi l ~~ l l (FS-7) 2 10 Nl 50 1 3 dlll bl0 l lt ltl Iil I /> l l l I (F5-7) 3 l I 20 211 I 50 1 I 3 p iti I I () I III I I it: I /I l
~
l I I I I I I l 1 l l l l l l l l l 1 l 1 i C3-1A 1 I I I I 0ggl0J ggl W't
-l a i I I i 1. I I O Yi 130 1 1 g g -
g ,
- y. g. g- g i l i i s l ji efll gl#-
I I I I I c3-In 1 0 vi 130 1 1 / ll - l g g I g-I g
' I l
l 1 1 I I -41 /I I I~ I I I I l C3-2A l 10 f */ l 130 l 1 e lilfilM l l~ l l
~
l~ l l I I I I l I I I I I I I l c3-2 m i 10 8il 130 l 1 s l e.3A ltVl f ) p/l ~ l- I l
~
l~ l
~
l l I I I I I I 8 lll # 1I) p ll I 30 l' I I I I c3-3A l 20 ))I 130 l 1 ' l
~
l -1 - l ~~ l l l c3-3m l i I 20 2l I 130 l I 1 s lI\ N ll@ l -l-l I I I I l~ l~ I
- l. - !
I 1 # l l1 .I7 l11 y il F I l c3-4A l 30 J il 130 1 l l
~
i
~
l~ l
~
l 1 1 I I I SY l _ g) i I ." I I I l l l c3-4 a i 30 1 11 130 I i e lIl /I ly l l l 1 l l l 1 I I I I .- 7I I I l' I I I l c3-SA l 40 31l 130 l 1 e ll! '/s lji /l -l - l I- l l l l l .1 I I i c3-S E I qi l ll3 y li ~l I I I I i i 40 ) ~' l 130 1 1 e lIl ~ l
~
l l
~
l l a Normal (not adverse) weather time.
U U U U U U v U- v \> v i, 3 p', t .G.i f :i OPIP 3.6.4 Pese 79 of 124
, Attachment 9 Page 8 of 31 TRANSFER POINT COORDINATOR DISPATCN FORM (PORT JEFFERSON STACING AREA)
Name: Route Buses 37 (Zones F, C) Transfer Points Miller Place Shopping Center Transfer suaea: 22 (m-1 thru m-22) Pase 4 of 5 . , l' l Dispatch I Estimated i No. of I Trip #1 1 Trip # 2 i Trip #3 Trip #4 I I l Bue Number i Interval i Route Timel Tripa l l l l l l l l Name of Driver l l l(hinutes) l (Himutes)*l Per hua l Start lReturalStartlReturnistertlReturalstartlRetural l I I I I I I I i 1 I I I l l C3-4A l 50 7( I 130 1 1 , l il'l l l )- I' l
~
l ~l
~
l
~
l l l 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I l i I I I l l l l l l I I I i s 1 l 1-1 1 ** I I i I k( li lin \ l
~
I l- 1 I
-1 I
I I
-l I
I l i I I I i I I I I I I i i x-2 I aa I i i l lI .g-Ipl N l -l - 1 1- I -' l ! l I I I I I I I I I I I
** I \ ~
l x-3 1 l l 1 1// 'l l l ~l - I~ l' l~ l l
- I I I I I y i I i i i I l III 'r tl aa s - -
1- I- l~ l x-4 l i I i 1 I l~ l l I I I I , i I I I i 1 I I x-s I a i 1 1 1/1/' ylI \ l l
~
l- l l l 1 I I I I I l l l l l 1 I l x-6 aa 1 I b: l \ 1- l- - - l l i 1 1 l 1 1 1- 1 I I I I I I I I I~ I x-7 l I
** I I I i 1 lilb l \
I l I 1- l I I I l- l I l 1 I I I I I I' I l x-e l ** I i 1 Ill 5 9 l ' ~ l
- - - ~
I I I l l l I I I I I fl i I I I I I i l x-9 l ** l I 1 Ill b i ' l 'i ' I- l' I -- 1 l l 1 l I I s I i l I I I_ i l x-10 I " i i 1 lig (( ll l l l l l' l I I I I I i gis l I i 1 I I I I x-11 1 aa l i 1 lil - 1 1~l - l l I- l
~
l l I I I i1 i s I i I ,, I. l_ I_ l 1 x-12 I a I l 1 lli .l ' l I ~l l l l l l a Normal (not adverse) weather time. f f
** See Attachment 6 for transf er bus dispatch intervals. .
$ % $ O U U O U U U V f.,- g ei.; .
i-
~ .t.
1,
, OPIP 3.6.4 Page 80 of 124 Attachment 9
. Page 9 of 31 TRANSFER POINT COORDINATOR DISPATCI PORM (PORT JEFFERSON STAGING AREA)
Name: Route Buses 37 (Zones F. C) Transfer Points Hiller Place Stiopping Center Transfer suaea: 22 (x-1 thru x-22) Page S of 5 . l I Diapatch I Estimated i No. of l Trap #1 i Trip i 2 l Trip #3 Trip #4 I I l Bus Number l Interval l Route Timel Tripe l 1 l l l l t l l Name of Driver l l l(Hinutes) l (Hinutes)*l Per Bus IStartl Return l Start l Return l Start lReturalStartlRetural l 1 1 l l l 1 1 I I I I I I x-13 1 ** I l 1 II) U li I' I - l I~ l l 'I l 1 I l l ,1 I I I I I I I I x-14 1 ** l l 1 f (>,- 1 I- 1 - I -1 - I -l ' l. l I I I I i I I I I I I l x-15 1 ** I l 1 l11eJll l ~l- I ~~ l l 'l ' l
'l 1 I I I fl i I I I I I l I x-16 i ** I i 1 l# 1*/l 1 1 l -l -
I- l
~
l l l l l 1 l I I I l l x-17 l ** l l 1 ff}ifl l l 1 I~ l ~l l~ l l ' l l 1 I I I vi l i - I I I I I - I I x-la i l l 1 IIlel 1 l 1 1 l -l l lx-1, l l I ** l i l I 1 ist! i
!-l-l-I-!-l-l l X-20 l I l ** I I
l I 1 1/2 I
..s . 1 l
I I l I
~
I l-I l l' I i l I~ l~1l_ l l l
' l l
l l x-21 I u l l 1 l l 1 1- l 1- l l l l 1 I I I I I I I I I l l l x-22 l ** l l 1 l l l 'I- l -l ** I l 1 i I I I I i I I I I I l' l l l l l 1 l l l 1 I l l l 1 I I I I I I I I I l l l l 1 1 I I I l l l l l l l 1 I I i l 1 I I I I I I I I I l l l l l l l 1 l l l I I I I I I I I I I l l l 3 I I l l l l l l l l l l
- Normal (not adverse) weather time.
** See Attaciment 6 f or transfer bus dispatch intervals. .
t Attachnent D.6 w.+';t,~1.Q3itik-,
. N.
w' ' ' ' = 0. " e.._ e - n_ - p,a n \
*?hny'AlI3[ge
. . . . ~. . : . :.
\\
.kJL L % Pw n.nve cu wa<, u ou
~
. : .. /0lf yno72 YL .Q
, w,. ... . . ..
f M z e ' m ./ l /2 w 'J '
. ^
y . . . . y
. . . . s.ar. ._$_U &y ~~L - - . - -
. ; .L ..
se ee.m;.e. =-. toJr Q Vai d L ~ M l % e & ~ b --
.y (M~~i.Q. n .b. . . . . . .
ecsiearxo s- u n e~ s'.' 'n. t.< ~ 't _g. 0 o c c. , ra. in ~ s i,- m.,
. />.m ~ , ~ ~. . .
N f9td,Me . W . j_g _.._
.. . Il.0 M JLl4Lua*sa.4% MJ/ -~~d-p+s h L' - -
.....c. g f.a_ts1.kw ..L4A T c-L., . . _ . . .
ILlo- I Mo.r< A . ) %.... a/ .:.,u. 4 - - --
... . ,s
. ,= ^.tic .
I(3s PT u.p.z a p,._2 , M or5-WA aa.,.sl_
~ '
.. v . #.:- 5:: e .
. Ll45 A u m & RseL'a_*_AIIS .Lthtkiz. . . . . - . - - - _
g . - 3.s .. . : :. . a
):;.;;.l. .
u - -
.. -:. . c.s .x . -
...,. .. q: .: ;
f1
'A
-Y-~
LW Wcm& -WJm * ' " ~ '$ f 4
) *fQ.]l*f'f.- in2 ( GL,.
" * ~ ~ ' - '
p ,y tt:aoyrau Onu.w;wawpA-..Lpw. 4 y g g2 45_ y p _ 3.g-- n',' 'lv" '"u;g-'~ * ~ -
~ ' sI
/ '
p t/c m ,t c , if %,
%.v.--/.~ '
- r 9' 1 -
7,
, y ,_.
g g- f f& $ s. b SV V L .W? f
. . . . - , . . .d.. . .
- .-w.j
/1..g ] //
E) " b[ fr ,34- '/ 7.a
)7/@$- . . ... m. ; ?. -
4 /2.d _ [7 "__.. _=
/'
__. . _.3 s' _ Zo
' * ' ~j * ~ N * /$ $.
/ e (Lt$r/p 2 12D)
* .4r.g** .. .
.l]ul }/tsttr r Sv- dxf a i f f 22 pp' A 8' I [ *
/ 30 J
) /3_3t the Asd A ce p_i._?,a-o
. ; r ....._ . . . _ . _ . L *b dr.') Ll* ._, Y. *
., f_ . ' IES
/
[.;. _ . 4' _ 'b' _
' ::. g EiJuGftr- r eiar n1y/.tTC. ) .. .
) ) ) ) ) ATTACHMENT E ) ) ) ) ) )
. 8 Attachment E.1 3
28 aE ImiI a E 4 a i
=
c a J c G i 4 *
)
a y5 V s - 4 N O E 8 N - e 3 '
]. -
H s - l t 5 8 vi i u .n W O I
, w 3' ( 3*.
Y l
- = 5 2
g= 3 w *
}
a 3> - M
]8
.- g-ly .
= *
=
. O es .
,i -
* ,=5 1 3 =3 h 9;i *
"E g 3 3 L
- e y u N ~
O =
" I w
aJ
, 8 . ~
e ma
. - I a 3.
S. g - 6 - O J w
'I
.t-e me D. N t
I'
't
( O C G
o, . RE EN GO AH PP v 1 0 E 1 EN MO E OH G HP A P E . KN _ RO U OH WP ET /q 4 NU IO Y T
)' 2-U A
/ /
)
b N [ 6 g [ 6 f( E '
' 'l /
R E MN ) f W) 5 /
)# #
b I h
. /
A II T g, [ ( r *( q
- d C/ f,
/
G N f [ / '
/[7 1, /n '
U I G Y - 4 A - M - _ P T M O S C G N D A I E A U. T R ! H A G E - I N L H I B R H t G A E t L S
._ S V -
I I - G - N R O - u.. L R
. O F
R E R 1 8 3 9 0 5 8 1 , 6 5 1 2 8 6 LE 1 5 5 9 0 9 0 2 7 3 8 9 6 9 2 T 8 3 4 8 6 3 0 4 6 4 8 2 6 6 Pe Mt 1 6 7 0 1 4 6 0 0 3 4 5 7 4 7 3 O ,- S EU H d e 8 C 9 1 0 2 1 2 2 2 6 3 0 5 6 5 6 5 7 6 7 6 9 7 1 8 8 8 3 9
. O u w n , R i t
n o O C R E L U- . E L F T R I X T E L T C w
- N C
H E e r s P G C R
. E d
,G M a R E o
.H R E
L 1 T 2 P R p h h' ? P C b C n ' l
Attachment E.2
)
y a.s x a
) u -
m 2 s)
' a 5
4 W
< 15 7 %V 9 h i \p h 'D e
Ez
~~ O.
N N
@ o.. O.
8h s c . 4 N
~. C, > . O 6 pQ d-Y '
2 Y Q ,
) i
. r E : 3 g "-
- o : .
w . t e.e w 3 . g-* a 4
=
r (* e6 R y lr
!'- ~
i
~ 1 8 ! ) -
a .L. t i a i i- i -t *
\
a5 W*2 : " 2 5 : sO g =3 z R : s a g =im. ; gF 2 w l se2 : :: gaaze: :: ~
) eg ga: : : . :: : 2 s a a :: s2 3
- 2 s a so
. .3 l . .k E 9 W
m i 3* l I i .t y l I u. d m e - ' 4 - , e es J e
~ %a 73 i, I l'
( t L U G t_ t .. O C C U L L L t
) Attach ent E.3 M e aa N s.a
.m
)I x t w s* I.-l 4
~
c h 3 II '
]:
l = D a E- 8 N N - 3 - - - . N'.~ s t, g 3 o h E 4D h g o a % @ ab i % 4 f d to $j v m 2 Q s .5 t B 3 % 6 R.a S Q o- cra n sk;R g %kw %% R E.g {,
!a 9 .. 9
, ~ .
3 - I L i i. g.- o i
. a 1= < j 3-j" -=
iC
.= .s -
3u g I
~
j
<A.
3 5 : '~ a . e o
- }
=
i- m g
, s w
.s - -- :::: aes: = x = = ; a g *g s m:g :
3 a aI
!=5 Ega
- !: _===m:
x: : : ::
- : a
- =
- =: 5. :: -: 5. s. .
" b w
I 5 ) k W 0 3 'o 5 5 i
'f. ~
3 . l l' C
- L L L t C O L. C C G L C C C
a , , * ,
\ !
m E / EN G0
'j Ali PP e 5 3
EtI E t o t E G OH HF A P E KN RO OH a WP ET MU IO T = A E d 5 u R E J o 6 t N t
*. S, 3 A II T g / p -
G f [ f O
/
N I a G Y N A A Pt T t o S C ~ - -r G E A D E T U R H A a _' G G N
' I L O I S H N I G A C I L S S T I
A G H P C L a - R O F R R 4 5 E LE 0 3 n s
. T PB Mt 1
4 2 0 s L . S EU H d e u 5 9 % * - O n I-. R O i t C n o
- R ... E L
c~ t E
- L F T R I x
.- T E
L Y t C hlgI a - G i D r rP G R G R E M E d C a o
.. H. R
.. L ,,,
'1 T 2 P
.w
. R e
e_... ^( , p. ,,L r r r
;; ,,I
Attachmnt E.4
/
if n OPIP 4.1.2 f f [f ($ h ff Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 ) LERO MESSAGE FORM No. ) LLKU ILCle Location 1 Name From: h) haff$.,ls o'/n lf r l To: $rre{ Avis Gond 4/ SdC Date/TLae: 0 l/ r/Ff Mo f Message: Yt s r? A ft e $
'20rA ckew 3 n m is m
) 400/" .to o S .t so34-Jan y 81/d TA J' o fin .e T /s d k T/?u e /l #' 300 t Wpn / ) D isp, /c/, J r/ pco //,,, Tk.r <r A br71 // ) (08/ TD [dC DiCJnl red t S u s i, o ,, 4 00 m n, !> w f h l0 ' Ud ) t T
&\'
Routing for: l[l Action l Information , ; ) Response Required: l[l In Response to Message No. 8 /_, C 3 White copy - Addressee Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Communicator )
~
l i Attachment E.5 I ) OPIP 4.1.2 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 ) Page 1 of 1 LERO MESSAGF. FORM No. ) Ltnu u. tie Location l Name From: ,
/ /[ </
To: M z. k%/l [d ) Date/ Time: 1 J/f( //,2/ M , 6 Message: 4' 4 au ~c aun L 2~ cL Ot' ) % /c Ctiun . Rnd 1 4 .3 co ?
#Gs, cal LA Cw doo Y i <b$}}'
OL Wb{.n e A J!l /h N 3 &la s.: d #197 n ' ) Nh 00 ff//1 C uh kr o a
,s,, .,.
.~
! dx, u er en les -
/ .,
3 lf7hr /s A % ll I ( Routing for: l[l Action Information / ) . Response Required: l(( In Response to Message No. [2C k White copy - Addressee *
- Yellow copy - Originator Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Communicator
)
Attachment E.6 l OPIP 4.1.2 . ) Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 ) LERO MESSAGF. FORM No. , t,r.nu ut te uscacton sage h From: t-0 7//f Cut 06 _ To: /2o D C d W C b M GWO Dete/ Time: L.];xQ-[ ( 2, *M . , Message: ) . O fY x.oa} & w W b ~ e A dd . I
\
/ l 3
'Z*w F a4e :
loo r v369 t o < ?, , n i b * //uTW \ 4 To d6R. To IMid I//G' h did vn d 2002 Lao - two
~
J ) Routing for: l[lAction l[lInformation Response Required: l[] ) In Response to Message No. ! (signature) White copy - Addressee Yellow copy - Originator Rev.'5 Pink copy - Lead Communicator 3 , _ _ . _ , . . , - _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ , ___ _}}