ML20235F446
| ML20235F446 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 06/04/1987 |
| From: | Bird R BOSTON EDISON CO. |
| To: | Ronald Bellamy NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| CON-#189-8147 2.206, NUDOCS 8707130388 | |
| Download: ML20235F446 (34) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ -.
FC.kh k k 4
I PR 1
5
- " = " " "
gH7 sosrmems.
F g 93ses "z E xecutive Off'ces
'9 6
SEE{lcylggca voc 7
800 Boylston stree*
q Boston, Massachusetts 02199 g p 3g l'
F A
y Ralph G. Bird 5 r Vice Presloent - Nuclear June 4, 1987 BECo. Ltr. 87-97 Ronald R. Bellamy, Chief Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 License DPR-35 Docket No.:
50-293
Dear Dr. Bellamy:
Please forward the attached material to the Regional Director, FEMA, Region 1 for review, in accordance with accepted procedure.
By copy of this letter this information is being transmitted to appropriate state and local agencies so that they may use it in updating sections of their plans found to contain outdated material.
7 t*
/
Ralph RGB/mg Attachments cc: Messrs. Peter Agnes, Jr.
(with attachments)
Robert Boulay Thomas Rodgers Al Slaney Daniel Daly David Vogler Joseph Costa Riche d Levin David Malaguti David Canepa Richard Johnson William Lazarus 4
' aW i k q ca l b o 3 E E #
s pster?
Wo s
t
\\
EVACUATIONTIMEESTIMATE AND 1
BEACHPOPULATIONSHELTERING The followir:g information resolves FEMA concerns involving an updated Evacuation Time Estimate and the sheltering of beach populations within the EPZ.
This information updates that presented in the 1981 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Radiological Emergency Response Plan and the 1985 Radiological 1
Emergency Response Plans for the Town of Carver, Duxbury, Kingston, Marshfield and Plymouth.
I.
Evacuation Time Estimate A.
Sumary of the Issue An Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Sta:lon was performed in 1981.
This ETE was based upon the 1970 Census data.
An updated ETE should be prepared based upon censider!. tion of the most recent census data (1980), a traffic pattern' analysis and a population density analysis (with attention to surrer beach and tourist populations).
B.
SECo. Response BECo. has contracted with KLD Associates (July 1986) to provide an updated ETE.
This firm is recognized nationally as an expert in providing evacuation time estimates and comprehensive traffic mahagement plans.
Their computer models have been validated against Washington D.C. Intercity traffic flows and are presently used by FEMA as part of their Integrated Emergency Management Information System (IEMIS).
KLD has conducted'ETE's for utilities including Long Island Lighting Co. (Shoreham), Public Service of New Hampshire (Seabrook), Toledo Edison Co. (Davis-Besse) and Rochester Gas and Electric Co. (Ginna).
Their analytical work has been substantiated by several ASLB hearing panels.
While the final ETE report for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant is scheduled for receipt by BECo. in June 1987 (ref 1), substantial preliminary information was obtained during meetings and telephone conversations with KLD in May.
The report's table of. contents (attachment 1) and summary of analytical methodology (attachment 2) 1 are provided as the results of these discussions.
Information gathered during these meetings and the final report will be made available to the town and state emergency planning personnel.
Table 1 provides comparative Evacuation Time Estimates for several nuclear facility sites using conservative assumptions (see the Table 1 footnotes).
The Pilgrim estimates are on the low side of the norm and within the expected bounds for this population.
a
I J
Table 1: Comparison of Evacuation Time Estimates Total Area Population Site Population Sa. Miles Density ETE Davis Besse 74451 180 413 5:15 Ginna 57437 160 360 5:00 i
Shoreham 159959 160 1000 4:35 Pilgrim 106100 180 589 4:40 Assumptions:
1.
Total population is based upon a peak season scenario.
2.
ETE is based upon a simultaneous eva:uation of
- ne entire EPZ.
l 3.
The ETE reflects the planning basis of a rapidly l
escalating accident.
4 The ETE's presented here reflect the use of the IDYNEV Model and comparable methodologies.
The new eva:uation time estimates for the Pilgri site indicate that there is little variance from the old estimates.
These numbers include.the 1980 census data, varied weather and road conditions, varied time of day and year, and updated beach population data.
Hbile the new estimates are actually lower, direct comparisons between the old vs. new Pilgrim ETE should be pe 'ormed with caution because of changes in modeling technique which hase only recently become available.
BECo. recognizes that the ETEs may need to be updated in the future to remain current with population shifts.
In order to do this, arrangements have been made to procure the computer software and raw data which is specific to the Pilgrim EPZ.
With this package, emergency planning personnel will also have the capability to graphically demonstrate evacuation scenarios.
The i
software will display, in color, the movement of people in vehicles i
over the eva uation network, using animation techniques in a i
user-interaction mode.
This resource will be made available to the local and state emergency planning personnel so that they may enter data into the modeling process and maintain an accurate assessment of Evacuation Time Estimates in the future. !
1 C.
Conclusion A new ETE has been generated using the most current population statistics (1980 census) and addro:: sing recently identified issues that were.outside the previous ETE work scope, (i.e., evacuation of beach population, and adverse weather conditions)..The results indicate that the updated statistics do not negatively affect evacuation planning which was done for the 1981 State and 1985 Town plans.
The original evacuation planning of these documents therefore remains valid.
The new ETE information is being incorporated into BECo. planning i
documents and PECo. will make the study available to local and state emergency planning groups for inclusion into their plans.
I l
i l
l II. Sheltering of Beach Populations A.
Summary of the Issue 1
Transient beach / tourist populations need to be estimated and 1
considered in emergency planning for events in which a shelter
/
advisory is recommended.
Shelter resources should be identified to house these persons.
B.
BECo. Response l
Two elements are necessary for ensuring adequate planning for the sheltering of beach populations:
- 1) an estimate of the number of persons who will require sheltering and 2) identification of the facilities for sheltering that population.
1 l
Estimates for the population requiring sheltering are contained in Section I, Evacuation Time Estimate of this submittal which discusses the ETE Report prepared by KLD Associates.
Statistics for estimating the beach population are presented in Section 2, Demand Estimaticn i
and Appendix H, Census Data of that report.
Sheltering of beach populations must consider beach / tourist population and populations of day workers in the region.
The latter I
population has an indirect effect on sheltering beach populations i
because they will also occupy shelter space.
Estimates for the beach / tourist population and the regional day workers were taken from the KLD ETE Report and are presented in Table j
2.
Conservatively these numbers account for approximately 22,922 people, distributed over the four towns with recreational beach areas.
I
-TABLE 2:
Seacoast Area Populations (From KLD Associates ETE Study)
Day Workers Tourists / Beach Population Total Number Town In Seacoast Region In Seacoast Region of People Plymouth 6754 6341 13095 Kingston 1116 1220 2336 Duxbury 516 6145 6661 l
Marshfield 170 660 830 TOTtLS 8556 14366 22922
! 1
In.the early part of 1987, BECo. contracted with Stone'and Webster to conduct a comprehensive shelter study in the beach area (ref. 3).
i Potential sheltering capabilities of municipal and commercial buildings along the Massachusetts coastline arithin the ten-mile Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) were identified.
The-towns in this region from, north to south, are: Marshfield, Duxbury, Kingston, and Plymouth.
The coastline region shown is approximately one half mile' to one mile wide and is shown in Figure 1 U
~
The study conducted by SHEC consisted of several steps.
The first step was to contact various local, state, and federal organizations to gather background information, including previous sheltering 1
studies.
These organizations included the Region 1 Office of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency and Office of Emergency Preparedness (MCDA/0EP),.and the American Red Cross.
The Facility Survey Program (Ref. 4) i listings obtained from MCDA/0EP provided useful information for the i
study.
The next step was to visit the Tax Assessors' offices at the town j
halls of the four towns.
Available listings of all commercial l
properties and tax-exempt properties (e.g., municipal and church j
buildings) in the study region were examined. Maps were obtained for field use. Of particular interest were the building address, construction characteristics, and available floor space.
Each L
building was then visually inspected to confirm the tax assessment.
information.
A list of potential shelters was developed from this information.
Within the. study region, Plymouth has a total potential sheltering area of approximately 2,370,000 square feet in 164 public shelters;
<ingsten has 122,000 square feet in 22 public shelters; Duxbury has 476,000 square feet in 60 public shelters; and Marshfield has 56,700 square feet in 10 public shelters. The number of persons that can be
_I sheltered in a given area for a few hours can be estimated by 4
dividing the potential sheltering area by a factor in the range of ten to twenty square feet per person.
The Facility Survey Program l
I I
l (Ref. 4) uses ten square feet per person. Using this value, the areas given above indicate a potential to provide short-term public l
sheltering capacities of 237,000 persons for Plymouth, 12,200 persons l
for Kingston, 47,600 persons for Duxbury, and 5,670 persons for Marshfield.
Based upon the data available from the SMEC Shelter Study, Table 3 indicates the porcent of available shelter space needed to shelter beach / tourist and regional worker-population.
i TABLE 3:
Comparison of Shelter Capacity Versus Shelter Needs Total Potential
% Needed Shelter of Total Capacity:
Shelter j
- of Persons Capacity.
(Assuming Day Workers Town 10 Ft.1/ Person)
+ Beach / Tourists Plymouth 233,000 6
Kingston 12,200 19 i
Durbury 47,600 14 Ma shfield 5,670 15 TOTALS.
298,470 8
j
.I 1
1 1
- - - - ~ _ _ - - _ _. _ _ - - _ - _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _. _ _.
1
Results of the SWEC Shelter Study, as summarized in Table 3, indicate that the Town of Kingston representing the worst case, would utilize only 19% of the total available space for sheltering beach and associated populations during an advisory. Other towns show significantly lower occupancy percentages, thus indicating a large surplus of sheltering capacity.
Per section A.3.8 of the 1981 Revision to the Massachusetts Radiological Emergency Response Plan, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will evaluate which shelters of those identified warrant letters of agreement and make these arrangements to ensure their availability.
C.
Conclusion A shelter study was conducted to determine if adequate sheltering is available for the beach and tourist population. The results, summarized in Table 3 above, indicate that on the ave-age there is available approximately 12 1/2 times the shelter space required to shelter those :ersons which comprise the beach / tourist population.
This excess of sheltering capacity for even the most conservative population estimates demonstrates that adequate planning is possible for sheltering beach / tourist transient populations.
f III.
References 1.
Evacuation Time Estimate for the Pilgrim Nuclear ower Station, KLD Associates, June 1987 2.
Evacuatien Time Estimate for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, HMM Assoc'ates, 1981 3.
A Study to Identify Potential Shelters in the EPZ Coastline Region of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Stone and Hebster Engineering Corporation, April 1987 l
4.
Reception and Care Facility Listing as of May 31, 1986, from l
Facility Survey Program of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (1978 data). l
l L.
~ ATTACHMENT 1 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Pace l '.
INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Overview of the Plan Update Process 1-1 1.2 Description of the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) 1-3 1.3 Preliminary Activities 1-5 2.
DEMAND ESTIMATION 2-1 Trip Generation; Permanent Residents; Seasonal Residents and Transients; Summer Residents; Tourists at Beaches, Parks and Historical Sites; Tourists at Hotels and Motels; Tourists at Camps and Campsites; Estimation of Day-Trippers and Elimination of Double-Counting; Employees; Other Vehicles j
3.
ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY 3-1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections; Capacity Estimation Along Sections of Highway; General Considerations;
'y Application to Pilgrim EPZ; Two-Lane Roads; Freeway Capacity; Freeway Ramps; Fog; Link Capacities 4.
ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME 4-1 Background; Fundamental Considerations; Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5; Time Distribution of the Notification Process; Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution;. Algorithm No. 1; Computed Time distribution of event
{
k+1; Trip Generation Distributions for Week-end Scenarios; Trip Generation Distributions for Week-day Scenarios; Snow Clearance Time Distribution 5.
DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS 5-1 4
6.
TRAFFIC CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT TACTICS.
6-1 l
7.
TRAFFIC ROUTING PLANS 7-1 8.
ACCESS CONTROL WITHIN, AND AT THE PERIPHERY I
OF, THE EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE (EPZ) AND i
DIVERSION ROUTES 8-1 Identification and Installation of Control Devices
_g_
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
Section Title Pace 9.
. EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) FOR GENERAL POPULATION 9-1 Discussion of ETE; Example 1; Example 2; Example 3; ' Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation (Region 1, Scenario 1) ;
Evacuation Rates; Summary of Evacuation Time Analysis APPENDIX A - Glossary of Terms A-1 l
APPENDIX B - Traffic Assignment Model B-1 APPENDIX C - Traffic Simulation Model: I-DYNEV C-1 APPENDIX D - Detailed Description of Study Procedure' D-1 APPENDIX E - Supporting Data E-1 APPENDIX F - Telephone Survey Instrument F-1 APPENDIX G - Tabulations of Telephone Survey Data G-1 APPENDIX H - 1980 Census Data E-1 APPENDIX I - Traffic Management and Control I-l APPENDIX J - Description of Evacuation Routes J-l APPENDIX K - Evacuation Route Maps K-1 APPENDIX L - Access Control L-1 APPENDIX M - Estimated Traffic Demands at all Origin Centroids, Loading Rates and Origin-l Destination Patterns M-1 APPENDIX N - Network Link Attributes N-1 l
_9_
ATTACHMENT 2 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ETE PROCEDURE This attachment describes the activities performed in order to produce accurate estimates of evacuation times on the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) for a nuclear power plant.
These steps accurately reflect the process used by KLD Associates to provide the ETE study for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.
Step 1 The first activity is to obtain data defining the spatial distribution of population within the EPZ.
Specifically, obtain the population in each of 160 cells of a polar grid which is centered at the nuclear station, and consists of 22.5" sections and rings spaced one mile apart.
Transient population characteristics must also be estimated on the same basis.
Steo 2 The next activity is to examine a large-scale map of the EPZ.
This map enables one to identify the access roads from each residential development to the adjoining elements of the analysis roadway network.
Th'is information is necessary in order to assign generated trics to the correct links of the network.
This map also enables one to represent the geometrics of complex intersections properly in terms of their network configuration.
Ste: 3 With this information absorbed, the next step is to conduct a physical survey of the roadway system within the EPZ.
The purpose of this survey is to determine the necessary measurements of roadway length and of the number of lanes on each link, the channel 12ation of these lanes, whether or not there were any turn restrictions or special treatment of traffic at intersections and to gain the necessary insight required for estimating realistic values of roadway capacity.
At each major intersection, take note of the traffic control device which was installed.
In addition, determine whether or not, under emergency evacuation conditions, it would be possible to employ paved shoulders as an additional lane in the event such additional capacity was required.
Step 4 With this information, develop the evacuation network representation of the physical roadway system. - _ _ _
Step 5 Hith the network drawn, proceed to estimate the capacities of each link and to locate the centroids where trips would be generated during the evacuation process and then enter the analysis network.
Step 6 Hith all the information at hand, it is time to perform the effort of creating the input stream for the Traffic Assignment Model.
This model was designed to be compatible with the Traffic Simulation Model used later in the project, in the sense that the input format required for one model was entirely compatible l
with the input format required by the other, thus avoiding duplication of j
effort.
This step in the procedure is labor-intensive.
Fortunately, this j
input stream need only be developed once; any changes made can be implemented quickly and at small cost.
Thus, it is possible to execute these models on different scenarios with very little effort needed to modify the basic input stream to represent the specific attributes of each scenario.
Step 7 After creating the input stream by using PREDYN, execute the Traffic Assignment Hocel.
This computer program contains upwards of 1,000 diagnostic inconsistencies and any other improper input.
This alagnostic software produces messages which assist the user in identifying the source of the problem and gd ce the user in preparing the necessary corrections.
Steo 8 With the input stream free of error, execute the Traffic Assignment Model.
The Traffic Assignment program is a very efficient software code.
Step 9 The next activity is to examine critically the statistics produced by the Traffic Assignment program.
This is a labor-intensive activity, requiring the direct participation of skilled engineers who possess the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any problems reflected in the result.
Essentially, the approach is to identify those " hot spots" in the network which represent locations where congested conditions are extreme.
It is then i
necessary to identify the cause of this congestion.
This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to improper routing, as a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative error in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream..
m_a
______1.
The examination of the Traffic Assignment output leads to one of two conclusions:
The results are as satisfactory as could be expected at this stage of the analysis process, or i
Treatments must be introduced in order to improve the flow of traffic.
e This decision requires, of course, the application of the user's judgment l
based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the Traffic Assignment Model and a comparison of the results of this last case with the
?
previous ones.
In the event the results are satisfactory, in the opinion of the user then the process continues with the exercise of the simulation model in Step 12.
Otherwise, proceed to Step 10.
Step 10 There are many " treatments" available to the user in resolving such problems.
These treatments range 4cm decisions to reroute the traffic by imposing turn restrictions where they can produce significant improvements in capacity, changing the control treatment at critical intersections so as to provide improved service for one or more movements, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems or changing the trip table. Such " treatments" take the form of modifications to the original input stream.
We then perform the mccifications to the input stream, reflecting the control treatments described above. As indicated previously, such modifications are implemented quickly to the extent that more than one execution of the computer program is possible in a single day.
Step 11 As noted above, the physical changes to the input stream must be implemented in order to reflect the changes in the control treatments undertaken in Step
- 10. At the completion of this activity, the process returns to Step 8 where the Traffic Assignment Model is once again executed.
Step 12 The output of the Traffic Assignment Model includes the computed turn movements for each link.
If the user is executing the Traffic Assignment and the Traffic Simulation models in a single run, then this data is automatically accessed by the latter model.
If the simulation model is executed separately,
'j the user must modify the input stream for the Traffic Assignment model by beginning in the turn-movement data, using PREDYN.
I Step 13 After the input s'.*eam has been debugged, the simulation model is executed to provide the user with detailed estimates, expressed as statistical measures of effectiveness (HOE), which describe the detailed performance of traffic operations on each link of the network.
Step 14 In this step, the detailed output of the Traffic Simulation Model is examined in order to identify once again the problems which exist on the network.
The res0lts of the simulation model are extremely detailed and are far more accurate in their ability to describe traffic operations than those provided by the Traffic Assignment Model.
Thus, it is possible to identify the cause of the problems by carefully studying the output.
Again, one can implement corrective treatments designed to expedite the flow i
i of traffic on the network in the event that the results are considered to be less efficient than is possible to achieve.
In the event that changes are needed, the analysis process preceeds to Step 15. On the other hand, if the results were satisfactory, then one can decide whether it is necessary to return to Step 8 to execute the Traffic Assignment Model once again and repeat the whole process, or to accept the final results as being the "best" that can be achieved within the reasonable constraints of budget and time allotments.
Generally, if there are no changes indicated by the activities of Step 14, then we can conclude that all results were satisfactory, and we can then proceed to document them in Ste; 17.
Otherwise, we have to return to Step 8 in order to determine the-effects of the changes implemented in Step 14 on the optimal routing patterns over the network.
This determination,can only be ascertained by executing the Traffic Assignment Model.
Step 15 This activity implements the changes in control treatments or in the i
assignment of destinations associated with one or more origins in order to improve the flow of traffic over the network.
These treatments can also include the consideration of additional roadway segments to the existing analysis network in order to disperse the traffic demand and thus avoid the focusing of traffic demand which can produce high levels of congestion.
Step 16 Once the treatments have been identified, it is necessary to modify the input stream accordingly.
At the completion of this effort, the procedure returns to step 13 to execute the simulation model once more.
Step 17 The simulation results are then analyzed, tabulated and graphed.
The results are then documented, as required.
I j
i ATTACHMENT 3 SHELTER STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS l
Section LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES i
INTRODUCTION APPROACH Initial _ Work Municipal Tax Records Visual Inspection Shielding Factors Residential Shelters Large Special-Needs Facilities RESULTS Public Shelters Residential Shelters Jordan Hospital Plymcuth County House of Correction REFERENCES LIST OF TABLES Number Title 1
Sample Shelter Survey Form 2
Plymouth - Characteristics of Potential Puolic Shelters 3
Kingston - Characteristics of Potential Public Shelters 4
Duxbury - Characteristics of Potential Public Shelters 5
Marshfield - Characteristics of Potential Public Shelters
{
6 Residences with Basements 7
Sheltering Characteristics of Special-Needs Facilities LIST OF FIGURES 1
Map of Pilgrim Nuc' ear Power Station EPZ Area (showing shelter study region) i 2
Jordan Hospital Sheltering Areas _ _ _ _. _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _
n------_______-_
l N'23,,}
p FIGURE 1
'Y SHELTER STUDY REGl0N MARSHFi[LO I
a t
w v
w EW8R0sE s s l
N 14 f
/
/
/
's i
's 53 DUX80Ry M
-[,,
3 MMT
~
M l0 y/jf
,f '
~
D ss
- /
/
&#IN
's (MSTON l
/-
natw s.
/
1 I
/
3A A TL A N TIC
/
/*,/
M/M Ntafjp
/
,WR SW/M 3A i
OCEAN ggg
\\
\\
d N
plYWOUTH Ma '
s
's
\\
[
\\
CARVER s
j
\\
\\
.,/
y
/
( 58
/
\\',
l' g
i p
~
N._ _ _ L _ _ _ _ _.
__7 I
/
WAREHAN
(/ /souME,/y~
r MOBILIHIMPA! RED l
The following information resolves a FEMA concern involving the Mobility I
Impaired population within the Pilgrim EPZ.
This information updates that l
presented in the 1981 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Radiological Emergency b
Response Plan and the 1985 Radiological Emergency Response Plans for the Towns of Carver, Duxbury, Kingston, Marshfield and Plymouth, i
l A.
Summary of the Issue i
l Emergency Planning provisions for the mobility impaired (deaf and hearing impaired, transit dependent, handicapped) populations within the EPZ towns are inadequate.
These populations need to be identified and planning performed to assure their safety during an emergency.
B.
BECo. Response Boston Edison has developed a special needs survey (attachment 1) which was mailed to mc e than 35,000 households in May, 1987.
The survey was designed to identify the number of persons that were mcbility impaired 1
(visual, hearing, handicapped, transit dependent), or in need of special equipment to facilitate an evacuation. As of 6/1/87, approximately 1,200 persons have responded and indicated that some assistance would be required.
In addition, advertisements have been placed in local papers requesting deaf and hearing impaired persons contact BECo. and make arrangements for emergency notification.
To ensure ccetinued i
identification of the mobility impaired EPZ residents, SECo. will implement an outreach program to periodically resurvey the area.
Survey responses by the public are being analyzed to cetermine the measures that ntst be taken to ensure that the mcbility impaired are adequately not!#ied and supported should protective a:d on recommendations be made during an emergency.
BECo. is developing a computer database which will be used to track names, addresses, and special equipment provided to town residents.
Equipment to be tracked includes Telecommunication Devices (TTDs) and telephone amplification devices which will ensure that the hearing impaired are notified.
Additionally it is BECo.'s recommendation to the state that televised EBS messages should include closed captioned emergency instructions.
Procedures will be developed to document BECo. administration of the mobility impaired program.
Oraft sections of town and state plans have been submitted to them for their plans and procedures and await their review and comments. A synopsis of these follows.
1.
Physically Impaired A list of physically impaired residents, compiled through the BECo.
survey, will be maintained by the Town Civil Defense Directors at the l
Emergency Operations Centers.
Notification will be via the prompt public alerting system or previously determined means.
Special arrangements necessary to support shelter or evacuation will be made (ref. Area II, Operations Plan,Section V.H.3.c).
i 1
?
I i
1 2.
Transportation Dependent I
Mobility impaired persons requiring transportation, as identified by f
the BECo. survey, will be evacuated via buses, ambulances, or other appropriate vehicles, under the coordination of' Area II and town i
Civil Defense Directors.
Section A.3.8 of the 1981 State Plan contains a provision for the establishment of letters of agreement with private support companies for this purpose.
Sufficient buses equipped for the mobility impaired (wheelchair capable) were identified in the March 1987.HMM Bus Capability Study (Reference 1)-
which was prepared for BECo..
Table 1 presents a summary of that survey.
4 TABLE 1:
NUMBER OF TOTAL VEHICLES. CAPACITY OF EACH Average Seating Vehicle Capacity
)
Quantity Per Vehicle j
School Bus 1929 44 Transit Bus 1453 47 Wheelchair Van 51 15 Van 139 15 Mini Bus 54 20 Trolley Bus 36 30 Buses will initially report to Transportation Dispatch Centers within each town and be dispatched to staging areas for receipt of the transit dependent population.
Persons transported will be taken to Reception Centers outside the EPZ per direction in the town and state plans.
C.
Conclusion Mobility impaired persons within the EPZ have been identified and a program enacted to ensure their registry is updated.
Notification of this segment of the EPZ population has been addressed, including the scheduled procurement of special communications equipment by BECo.
Evacuation provisions will be addressed in the town plans.
Wheel chair vans, buses, j
ambulances, etc. will be relied upon for the transport of these people.
Logistical studies confirm that adequate resources are available to support this effort.
D.
References 1.
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Bus Response Capability Study; HMM Associates, March 1987. _-
7 c
l 0
ATTACHMENT 1 l
L C --
e I
)
SPECIAL NEEDS SURVEY If you or someone who lives with you would need transportation assistance or notification assistance in the event an evacuation order were given; please completely fill out this card an return in the postage paid envelope enclosed.
Name Check, if Appropriate em mam cup Visually Impaired?........... [ ]
Any special equipment Address Hearing impaired?........... [ ]
used/needed?................ [ ]
Mobility Impaired?..........
Bedridden?................. (( ))
If yes, specify l
moi
<surtom >
l Other Disabilities?........... [ ]
l C"'**
Phone: (
)
If yes, clarify Would you need a ride in the case of an Evacuation?.... [ ]
1..
I
- _ _ _ _ - _ _-- -__ A
SPECIALFACILITIES The following information resolves a FEMA concern involving Special Facilities within the EPZ.
This information updates that presented in the 1981 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Radiological Emergency Response Plan and the 1985 Radiological Emergency Response Plans for the Towns of Carver, Ouxbury, Kingston, Marshfield and Plymouth.
A.
Summarv of the Issue The current otate and Town plans do not adequately address sheltering or i
evacuation of special facilities (e.g. schools, day care centers, etc.).
Special facilities within the EPZ need to be identified and detailed plans developed for their emergency response.
1 S.
BECo. Response Ac:r:dmately 65 special facilities and 35 camps within the EPZ were icert fied by BECo. via listings from previous emergency plans, telephone i
bock reviews, and contacts with professional agencies.
The identified facilities were surveyed in April 1987 (Attachment 1) to determine each facility's present level of emergency preparedness, resources, points of contact, and special sheltering or evacuation requirements which must be considered during an emergency.
The results of the survey were evaluated, facili ties categorized, and generic plans developed for each category (e.g. scnools, day care centers, sumn.er carps, correctional institutions).
Meetings were held with each facility director to determine the need for site specific plans.
For facilities verified in possession of adequate pla-s, no further action was taken.
For facilities without plans, the ge e" c plans were modified to include specific information such as facility director comments, checklists, telephone numbers, and detailed emergency response procedures.
These are scheduled for distribution by the first week of June 1987 (ref 1-4 for example special facility plans).
The special facility survey results, particularly those requests that require special arrangements to support shelter or evacuation, will be made available to the town and state emergency planning agencies.
Per section A.3.8 of the 1981 Revision to the Massachusetts Radiological Emergency Response Plan, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will evaluate these needs and obtain the necessary letters of agreement to ensure support from the private sector. Additionally,Section V.H.3.e of the MCDA Area II Operations Plan contains the provision for the state to provide special transportation arrangements for institutional 12ed persons during an emergency.
BECo. has procured five hundred tone alert radios and will distribute these to identified special facilities requiring supplemental devices to ensure notification in the event of an emergency.
This system will be supported by a long term program that ensures tone alerts are maintained, tested and replaced when inoperable.
I
i The effort-to develop and improve plLns and procedures for special j
facilities is an ongoing process. is the listing of those facilities for which specific plans have been or are in the process of' being developed.
A synopsis of typical special facility emergency response actions are provided by category as follows:
a.
Schools Twenty-eight schools (attachment 2) were identified within the EPZ as f
of 5/22/87.
Following notification, the Superintendent of Schools for each town notifies each Principal within his jurisdiction-to take the recommended protective action.
This would include implementation of early dismissal procedures, sheltering of students at schools or i
evacuating students to a reception center.
Procedures to accomplish these protective actions are being developed by BECo. and the appropriate school officials and will be prov'ded to each facility.
If add'O cnal resources are necessary, the re:.esting principal (s) will ccc:act tne superintendent in the appro:M ate town who will contact the Area II EOC. Area II will be res;cnsible for cocrdina:Ing any additional resource needs, b.
Day Care Centers Twenty-c e day care centers (attachment 2) ws e identified within the EPZ as c' 5/22/87.
Following notification, 5 eltering at Day Care Centers would be accomplished according to established Emergency Procedures.
In the event that an evacuation 's recommended, the Day
{
Care Center Director, or his designee, would :e contacted by the Civil De'ense Director located at the EOC.
e Day Care Center Directer, under advisement of the Civil Defe se Director, would initiate established emergency procedures to effect an evacuation and relocation to the appropriate Reception Center.
If additional resources are necessary, the recuesting Day Care Center Director (s) will contact the Superintendent of Schools in the appropriate town who will contact the Area II E0C. Area II will be responsible for coordinating any additional resource needs.
c.
Summer Camps Thirty-five summer camps (attachment 2) were identified within the EPZ as of 5/22/87.
Following notification by the town civil defense director (s), camp directors will be instructed to either shelter or evacuate.
Should an evacuation be directed, camp personnel will be transported by camp owned buses or vans and private automobiles to the nearest potential public shelter and/or reception center.
The town civil defense director (s) maintains a list which identifies the i
potential public shelters. _ - _ _ - - - - _ _ _
K
_j Y
q d
d.
Jails and Detention Centers J
l There are two facilities which fit into this category and both are located within the town of Plymouth.
These facilities are the Plymouth County House of Correction and the Massachusetts Correctional Institute in Plymouth. They will be alerted of any emergency via tone alert radios.
The Director of each of the I
facilities will be notified by the Plymouth Police of a recommendation to shelter or evacuate and will take appropriate protective actions according to procedure.
The procedures are being developed by BECo. in coordination with the facility directors.
Reception for inmates, in the event of an evacuation, will be provided by the Massachusetts Correctional Institution in 1
Bridgewater.
Transportation will be accomplished via buses and vans provided by each institution, with additional backup available from j
the National Guard. The local jails in each town do not'need extensive planning because most prisoners are released after a few hours following posting of ball.
If further detention is necessary they are transferred to the county facility, e.
Nursing Homes i
There are twelve nursing homes located in the EPZ which will be alerted of any emergency via tone alert radios. The nursing home director will receive notification of any emergency from the health _
director and will take the appropriate protective action according to procedure.
The site specific emergency procedures are teing developed by BECo. with input from the facility direct:r.
In the event of an evacuation, residents who cannot be relocated by automobile will be moved by bus, ambulance, or other appropriate vehicle.
Ambulance transportation will be provided by the Fire Department and coordinated with the Health Director.
l f.
Hospitals Jordan Hospital l's the only hospital in the EPZ and it will be notified of an emergency via tone alert radios.
In the event of an emergency at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, the hospital administrator would be notified by the Health Director.
If evacuation is recommended, many of the patients would be evacuated by private automobiles or buses in coordination with the Health Director.
Intensive care and orthopedic patients who need life-support systems or special care in evacuation will be transported by the Fire Department Ambulance Service by ambulance or other appropriate vehicle and coordinated with the Health Director.
The protection factor afforded by hospital building structures would, in many cases, be sufficient to allow shelter-in-place as a l
appropriate protective action.
This'will be evaluated by hospital administrators in coordination with local and state civil defense and health officials. !
i I
l f
l If necessary, patients of. Jordan Hospital would be evacuated to 4
l designated hospitals outside.the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone.
Specific facility procedures are being developed by 1
BECo. in concert with the hospital staff.
C.
BECo. Conclusion BECo. has established a program to identify special facilities within the EPZ and incorporate them into the emergency planning process. Adequate emergency response plans for each special facility have either been verified or have been or are being developed by BECo. in coordination with I
the special facility director (s).
The list of special facilities will be updated annually.
Each facility plan will be on file with MCDA and the local E0C's, and will be periodically reviewed and updated.
D.
References 4
1.
Governor Winslow School. Warshfield, Mass., Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
4 2.
Manomet Elementary Schocl, Plymouth, Mass., Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
3.
Pilgrim Manor Nursing Home, Plymouth, Mass., Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
4.
Camp Wing, Duxbury, Mass., Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
j i
! f
)
ATTACHMENT 1
{
- FAClllTY NAME:
l TYPE:
l
't LOCAll0N:
8 i
f ACILITY ADMINISTRATOR:
l BUSINESS TELEPHONE NUMBER:
HOME TELEPHONE NUMBER:
l l
j ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR:
'i BUSINESS TELEPHONE NUMBER:
HOME TELEPHONE NUMBER:
I i 1.0 POPULAT10N i
1,1 NAXINUM RESIDENT POPULATION t
1 I
r 1.2 MAXIMUN STAFF POPULATION l
l 1.3 NUMBER Of NON-AMBU'JTORY PERSONS j
t.4 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESIDENTS THAT REQUIRE I
SPECIAL ATTENTION IN AN EVACUAT10N?
l I
l 1.5 IF SO, HOW MANY?
i l
1.6 PLEASE IDENTIFY THEIR RESPECTIVE SPECIAL ATTENTIONS i
t i
i i
i i
i
, 2.0 EVACUATION 2.1 DO YOU HAVE AN EVACUATION PLAN?
I 2.2 WHERE WOULD RESIDENTS BE RELOCATED?
f i
2.3 DO YOU HAVE A LETTER Of A6REEMENT WITH THAT FACILITY?
l I
2.4 DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVE ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO SUCCESSFULLY EXECUTE AN EVACUATION?
IF NOT, PLEASE IDENTIFY THESE CONSTRAINTS?
t I
t
l C
l a
2.5 HOW LONG VOULD IT TAKE TO PREPARE THE RESIDENTS I
FOR AN EVACUATION AND HAVE THEN READY TO BOARD ENER6ENCY VEHICLES?
l I
\\
TIME NEEDED TO PREPARE (NINUTES)
{
DAY-TIME NI6HT TIME l
AMBULATORY I
l NON-AMBULATORY BEDRIDDEN WHEEL-CHAIR 3.0 TRANSPORTATION 3.1 HOW MANY OF THE FOLLOWING VEHlCLES DO YOU HAVE AVAILABLE'.
l OWN AND H AVE ON-SITE LEASE FROM OTHERS AND STORED OFF-SITE VEHICLE TYPE
' NUMBER C AP ACITY*
NUMBER C APACITY*
BUSES VANS I
t AMBULANCES LIFT VANS l
PASSENGER i
CARS I
'IN PERSONS 3.2 HOW MANY ADDITIONAL VEHICLES, IF ANY, WOULD BE NEEDED TO SERVICE THE TOTAL POPULATION Of YOUR FACILITY 7 CONSIDER THE NEED TO SUPPLY STAFF SUPPORT ENROUTE AND THE AVAILABILITY OF STAFF OWNED VEHICLES.
VEHICLE TYPE NUMBER CAPACITY (PERSONS)
BUSES VANS AMBULANCES i
l l
LIFT VANS I
PASSEN6ER l
CARS i
l a
e 3.3 ARE PRIVATE CON 1RACTORS OR LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS USED TO l
i SUPPLY BUSES?
I i
IF S0. IDENTIFY AND INDICATE NUMBER of BUSES SUPPLIED l
?
COMPANY NtMBER OF BUSES SUPPLIED i
1 l
i i
t i
c l
l 4.0 '.* 1TiflCATION l
i l
l 4.1 UPON NOTIFICATION, WHAT OTHER INDIVIDUALS WILL YOU CALL 7 NAME TITLE TELEPHONE NUMBER l
l i
l i
I l
t 1
i I
l l
I i
- 5.0 SHELTERING l
5.1 00 YOU HAVE A SHELTERING PLAN?
l i
' 6.0 OR6ANIZATION l
6.1 HOW MANY INDIVIDUALS IN YOUR STAFF WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR i
i IMPLEMENTING THE ENER6ENCY PLAN 7 i
.NAME
. TITLE EMERGENCY FUNCTION REPORTS TO l
l 1
I l
i t
l; ii 4
i i
I 1
6
_7_
i
ATTACHMENT'2 1
SPECIAL FACILITIES DUXBURY
)
l Q.y_ Care Centersa i
a f
Berrybrook School, Inc. (585-2307)
First Parish Nursery (934-6532)
Cood Shepherd Nursery School (934-6007)
Learn in Play Preschool (585-9048)
I North Hill-Country (934-5800)
Pied Piper Preschool (585-5070)
St.. John's Nursery School (934-6523) l Schools:
Munch-Kin Montessori / Bay' Farm Academy (934-7101)
Ellison-High School (934-6541) l Intermediate School (934-6521)
Chandler Street School (585-4318)
Elementary School (lower) (934-6528) l Elementary School (upper) (934-5667)
I Nurs_ing Homes:
l r
Duxbury House Nursing Home (585-2397)
Bay Path Nursing Home (585-5561)
I Casal Blairhaven (934-5123)
{
Camp Wing (837-6144)
Hay"22, 1987
4
$PECIAL FACILITIES i
MARSHFIELD Schools:
Governor Hinslow School (837-2871)
Campi; Camp Daniel Hebster Camp Hillbrook I
i
)
i May 22, 1987 _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
I
.=
l SPECIAL FACILITIES PLYM0VIH 1
Ray Care Centers:
Cooperative Child Care (746-0612)
L Happy Day Nursery School (746-0812)
Jack and Jill Nursery (224-2526)
Kidsport, Inc.. (747-4733)
Kincer Haus Nursery School (746-6038)
Seven -ills Nursery School (746-4275)
Little People's Place (746-5989)
Kinder College, Inc. (224-8753)
Zion Christian Pre-School (746-3213)
Methodist Nursery School (746-7063)
I Schools:
Pinewoca School Montessori, Inc. (746-5127)
Hedge School (746-1140)
{
(St. Peter's Kindergarten)
Cold Spring School (746-0708)
Oak Street School (746-1661)
Mt. Pleasant School (746-1097)
West Elementary School (747-0435)
Plymouth Carver Intermediate School (746-8450)
Federal 'rurnace School (746-5134) 130 Court Street (Pupil Personnel)
May 22, 1987 l _
J
y.
i q
SPECIAL FACILITIES
)
-)
PLYMOUTH Schools:
(Contin'ued)
I Manomet Elementary School (224-3940)
Indian Brook School (224-6753)
South School (224-8186)
Nathaniel Morton School (746-6500)
Plymouth Carver Regional HS (746-4700) hultsina Hgmpn Plymouth Nursing Home (746-2085)
Mayflower House Nursing Home (746-4343)
Pilgrim Manor Nursing Home (746-7016)
Newfield House Convalescent Home (746-2912)
Happiness House Rest Home (746-2982)
Beverly Manor H:me (747-4790)
Jails:
Plymouth County House of Correction (746-0610)
Town of Plymouth Jail (746-1212)
Hospitals:
s Jordan Hospital (746-2000)
May 22, 1987 SEXCIAL FACILITIES PLYMOUTH Campi; Blueberry Hill (746-3708)
Indian Head Resort (888-3688)
Ellis Haven (746-0803)
Sandy Pond Campground (759-9336)
Pinewood Lodge Trailer Park (746-3548)
Miles Standish SF (866-2526)
Plymouth Rock K0A Campground (947-6435)
Camp Clark (888-2290)
Camp Massasoit (888-6484:
Camp Squanto (224-2010)
Camp Norse Boy Scouts (746-2256)
Pinewood Camp (224-3480)
Camp Bournedale (888-2634)
Camp Child (224-2080)
Camp Dennen (888-1939)
Baird Center (224-3041)
Wind in the Pines Girlscout Center May 22, 1987 I
0 SEE.CJAL FACILITI($
PLYMOUTH Campn (Continued)
- Camp Dorothy Carleton Timberland - Cedarwood
- Plymouth Recreation Center Camc H.H. Arthur Count y Dance and Song Society of America May 22, 1987 u_________----.
SPECIAL FACILITIES KINGSJTM Day _ Car 3_ Centers:
Growth Unlimited Preschool (585-5864)
Sunny Acres Schools:
Silver Lake Regional.HS (585-6544)
- ' Kincston Elementary / Intermediate School (535-3821)
Sacred Heart Elementary School (746-2113)
Sacred Heart Junior / Senior HS (746-2374)
- Sacred Heart Pre - Primary School (746-0350)
N_grsina Home11
- Provincial Residence (746-0570)
Evans. cod Retirement Apts. (585-2576)
-- Margaret H. Carter Vets Home (585-6028)
- Meadowcrest Apts. (585-8028)
- Blueberry Hill Rest Home (585-3657)
Camp 11 Camp Hishannock (746-0790) i Hay 22, 1987 ;
_ _ _ = _ - _ - _ _ -
i 4..
SPECIAL FACILITIES' l
j CARVER
.{
a
'03 y_C6re Centers:
.)
_ Captain Pal Preschool (866-5415) o Cranberry Crossings (866-2400)
Schools:
Governor John' Carver' School (866-5361)
. Benjamin Ellis School (866-3348).
Nursing Homasl
- Hilltop Nursing Home (866-4548)
CAMS 1
- Camp Clear (866-4549)
- Web of Life Cut:oor Education Center (866-5353)
- Cachalot-Scout Reservation (295-2117)
Miles Standish State Forest (866-2526)
Shady Acres (866-4040)
- Jarvio Concho (866-4511)
Pinewood Way (866-3392)
Pine Acres. Campground May 22, 1987 l i