ML22178A164

Enclosucallaway Energy Center - Development of Evacuation Time Estimates

ML22178A164
Person / Time
Site:	Callaway
Issue date:	06/27/2022
From:	Ameren Missouri, Union Electric Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML22178A162	List: ML22178A164 ULNRC-06752, Evacuation Time Estimates Report
References
ULNRC-06752
Download: ML22178A164 (424)

Text

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 1 of 424 ENCLOSURE CALLAWAY ENERGY CENTER DEVELOPMENT OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 2 of 424 Callaway Energy Center Development of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Ameren Missouri, by:

KLD Engineering, P.C.

1601 Veterans Memorial Highway, Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 email: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com April 12, 2022 Final Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1233

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 3 of 424 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Callaway Energy Center Location ........................................................................................ 13 1.3 Preliminary Activities ................................................................................................................. 13 1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study .............................................................................................. 16 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS............................................................................................. 21 2.1 Data Estimate Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Methodological Assumptions .................................................................................................... 21 2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times .......................................................................................... 23 2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions ................................................................................................ 23 2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions .................................................................................... 24 2.6 Scenarios and Regions ............................................................................................................... 25 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Permanent Residents ................................................................................................................. 32 3.1.1 Colleges and Universities ................................................................................................... 33 3.2 Shadow Population .................................................................................................................... 33 3.3 Transient Population .................................................................................................................. 33 3.4 Employees .................................................................................................................................. 34 3.5 Medical Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 35 3.6 School Population ...................................................................................................................... 35 3.7 Transit Dependent Population ................................................................................................... 36 3.8 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................................. 38 3.9 Correctional Facilities ................................................................................................................. 38 3.10 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 38 3.11 External Traffic ........................................................................................................................... 38 3.12 Background Traffic ..................................................................................................................... 39 3.13 Summary of Demand ................................................................................................................. 39 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY................................................................................................ 41 4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections .............................................................. 42 4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway ........................................................................ 44 4.3 Application to the Callaway Energy Center Study Area ............................................................. 45 4.3.1 TwoLane Roads ................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2 Multilane Highway ............................................................................................................. 46 4.3.3 Freeways ............................................................................................................................ 46 4.3.4 Intersections ...................................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation .......................................................................................... 48 4.5 Boundary Conditions .................................................................................................................. 49 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME .......................................................................................... 51 5.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 51 5.2 Fundamental Considerations ..................................................................................................... 53 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ................................................... 54 Callaway Energy Center i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 4 of 424 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution ...................................................................... 55 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers .............................................................................................................. 56 5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation ................................................................................... 58 5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas ................................................. 510 6 EVACUATION CASES ........................................................................................................................... 61 7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) .......................................................... 71 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation ......................................................................... 71 7.2 Staged Evacuation ...................................................................................................................... 71 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation ..................................................................... 72 7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................ 73 7.5 ETE Results ................................................................................................................................. 74 7.6 Staged Evacuation Results ......................................................................................................... 75 7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ................................................................................................... 76 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SCHOOL EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES ............................................... 81 8.1 ETEs for Schools and Transit Dependent People ....................................................................... 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ................................................................. 86 8.3 Medical and Correctional Facilities ............................................................................................ 87 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ................................................................................................... 91 9.1 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 92 9.2 Additional Considerations .......................................................................................................... 92 10 EVACUATION ROUTES AND RECEPTION CENTERS ....................................................................... 101 10.1 Evacuation Routes.................................................................................................................... 101 10.2 Reception Centers .................................................................................................................... 101 A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS .................................................................................. A1 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL ......................................................... B1 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL ............................................................................................... C1 C.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. C2 C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram ................................................................................................. C2 C.1.2 The Simulation Model ........................................................................................................ C2 C.1.3 Lane Assignment ................................................................................................................ C6 C.2 Implementation ......................................................................................................................... C6 C.2.1 Computational Procedure .................................................................................................. C6 C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD) ..................................................... C7 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE .............................................................................. D1 E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA ...................................................................................................................... E1 F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY ..................................................................................................................... F1 F.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... F1 F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan ....................................................................................... F1 F.3 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ F2 Callaway Energy Center ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 5 of 424 F.3.1 Household Demographic Results ........................................................................................... F2 F.3.2 Evacuation Response ............................................................................................................. F3 F.3.3 Time Distribution Results ....................................................................................................... F4 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Manual Traffic Control .............................................................................................................. G1 G.2 Analysis of Key TCP/ACP/SRB Locations ................................................................................... G1 H EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES ...................................................................................................................... L1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ............................................................................................. M1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................ M1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate ................. M1 M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population ......................................................................... M2 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped Callaway Energy Center iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 6 of 424 List of Figures Figure 11. Callaway Energy Center Location .......................................................................................... 111 Figure 12. Callaway Energy Center LinkNode Analysis Network ........................................................... 112 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ....................................................................................... 29 Figure 31. Subareas Comprising the CEC EPZ ......................................................................................... 318 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................ 319 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 320 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 321 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 322 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 323 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 324 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 325 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 326 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams ............................................................................................................ 49 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................. 519 Figure 52. Time Distributions for Evacuation Mobilization Activities .................................................... 520 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution ..................................................... 521 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions ....................................................................... 522 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5Mile Region .................................................................................................... 523 Figure 61. Subareas Comprising the Callaway Energy Center EPZ ......................................................... 615 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ...................................................................................... 723 Figure 72. Callaway Energy Center Shadow Region ............................................................................... 724 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 30 Minutes after the ATE ................................................................. 725 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the ATE ........................................................................ 726 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 30 Minutes after the ATE .............................................. 727 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 30 Minutes after the ATE............................................. 728 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 50 Minutes after the ATE............................................. 729 Figure 78. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 1 for Region R03....................................................... 730 Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 2 for Region R03....................................................... 730 Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 3 for Region R03..................................................... 731 Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 4 for Region R03..................................................... 731 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 5 for Region R03..................................................... 732 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 6 for Region R03..................................................... 732 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 7 for Region R03..................................................... 733 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 8 for Region R03..................................................... 733 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 9 for Region R03..................................................... 734 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 10 for Region R03................................................... 734 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 11 for Region R03................................................... 735 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 12 for Region R03................................................... 735 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 13 for Region R03................................................... 736 Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 14 for Region R03................................................... 736 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ....................................................................... 814 Figure 101. Evacuation Route Map......................................................................................................... 104 Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes ............................................................................................ 105 Figure 103. CEC Reception Centers ........................................................................................................ 106 Callaway Energy Center iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 7 of 424 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B4 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network .......................................................................................... C12 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... C13 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ............................................................................. C13 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) ...................................................... C14 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ...................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools and Colleges/Universities within the EPZ ................................................................... E6 Figure E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E7 Figure E3. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................. E8 Figure E4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E9 Figure E5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E10 Figure E6. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ .................................................................................... E11 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ........................................................................................................ F7 Figure F2. Vehicle Availability ................................................................................................................... F7 Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 5 Person Households ....................................................................... F8 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 6 to 9+ Person Households ..................................................................... F8 Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference ......................................................................................... F9 Figure F6. Commuters per Households in the EPZ ................................................................................... F9 Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ .................................................................................................... F10 Figure F8. Commuters Impacted by COVID19 ....................................................................................... F10 Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs .......................................................... F11 Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation ............................................................................ F11 Figure F11. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving ........................... F12 Figure F12. Shelter in Place Characteristics ............................................................................................ F12 Figure F13. Shelter in Place Characteristics - Staged Evacuation .......................................................... F13 Figure F14. Study Area Evacuation Destinations .................................................................................... F13 Figure F15. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/School ............................................................... F14 Figure F16. Work to Home Travel Time .................................................................................................. F14 Figure F17. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation ................................................................................ F15 Figure F18. Time to Clear Driveway of 6"8" of Snow ............................................................................ F15 Figure G1. Traffic Control and Access Control Points for the CEC EPZ .................................................... G4 Figure H1 Region R01............................................................................................................................. H11 Figure H2 Region R02............................................................................................................................. H12 Figure H3 Region R03............................................................................................................................. H13 Figure H4 Region R04............................................................................................................................. H14 Figure H5 Region R05............................................................................................................................. H15 Figure H6 Region R06............................................................................................................................. H16 Figure H7 Region R07............................................................................................................................. H17 Figure H8 Region R08............................................................................................................................. H18 Figure H9 Region R09............................................................................................................................. H19 Figure H10 Region R10........................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H11 Region R11........................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H12 Region R12........................................................................................................................... H22 Figure H13 Region R13........................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H14 Region R14........................................................................................................................... H24 Figure H15 Region R15........................................................................................................................... H25 Figure H16 Region R16........................................................................................................................... H26 Callaway Energy Center v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 8 of 424 Figure H17 Region R17........................................................................................................................... H27 Figure H18 Region R18........................................................................................................................... H28 Figure H19 Region R19........................................................................................................................... H29 Figure H20 Region R20........................................................................................................................... H30 Figure H21 Region R21........................................................................................................................... H31 Figure H22 Region R22........................................................................................................................... H32 Figure H23 Region R23........................................................................................................................... H33 Figure H24 Region R24........................................................................................................................... H34 Figure H25 Region R25........................................................................................................................... H35 Figure H26 Region R26........................................................................................................................... H36 Figure H27 Region R27........................................................................................................................... H37 Figure H28 Region R28........................................................................................................................... H38 Figure H29 Region R29........................................................................................................................... H39 Figure H30 Region R30........................................................................................................................... H40 Figure H31 Region R31........................................................................................................................... H41 Figure H32 Region R32........................................................................................................................... H42 Figure H33 Region R33........................................................................................................................... H43 Figure H34 Region R34........................................................................................................................... H44 Figure H35 Region R35........................................................................................................................... H45 Figure H36 Region R36........................................................................................................................... H46 Figure H37 Region R37........................................................................................................................... H47 Figure H38 Region R38........................................................................................................................... H48 Figure H39 Region R39........................................................................................................................... H49 Figure H40 Region R40........................................................................................................................... H50 Figure H41 Region R41........................................................................................................................... H51 Figure H42 Region R42........................................................................................................................... H52 Figure H43 Region R43........................................................................................................................... H53 Figure H44 Region R44........................................................................................................................... H54 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins.......................................................................................................... J5 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) .............. J6 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 2) ............ J6 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3).............. J7 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 4) ........... J7 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5) ....................................................................................................................... J8 Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) ................ J8 Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7) .............. J9 Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8) ..................... J9 Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9) ............ J10 Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10) ........ J10 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11) .............. J11 Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12) ................................................................................................................... J11 Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13) ...................................................................................................................... J12 Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) ................................................................................................................ J12 Callaway Energy Center vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 9 of 424 Figure K1 Callaway LinkNode Analysis Network...................................................................................... K2 Figure K2 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 ....................................................................................... K3 Figure K3 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 ....................................................................................... K4 Figure K4 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 ....................................................................................... K5 Figure K5 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 ....................................................................................... K6 Figure K6 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 ....................................................................................... K7 Figure K7 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 ....................................................................................... K8 Figure K8 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 ....................................................................................... K9 Figure K9 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 ..................................................................................... K10 Figure K10 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 ................................................................................... K11 Figure K11 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 ................................................................................. K12 Figure K12 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 ................................................................................. K13 Figure K13 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 ................................................................................. K14 Figure K14 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 ................................................................................. K15 Figure K15 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 ................................................................................. K16 Figure K16 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 ................................................................................. K17 Figure K17 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 ................................................................................. K18 Figure K18 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 ................................................................................. K19 Figure K19 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 ................................................................................. K20 Figure K20 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 ................................................................................. K21 Figure K21 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 ................................................................................. K22 Figure K22 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 ................................................................................. K23 Figure K23LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 .................................................................................. K24 Figure K24 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 ................................................................................. K25 Figure K25 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 ................................................................................. K26 Figure K26 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 ................................................................................. K27 Figure K27 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 ................................................................................. K28 Figure K28 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 ................................................................................. K29 Figure K29 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 ................................................................................. K30 Figure K30 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 ................................................................................. K31 Figure K31 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 ................................................................................. K32 Figure K32 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 ................................................................................. K33 Figure K33 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 ................................................................................. K34 Figure K34 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 ................................................................................. K35 Figure K35 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 ................................................................................. K36 Figure K36 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 ................................................................................. K37 Figure K37 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 ................................................................................. K38 Figure K38 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 ................................................................................. K39 Figure K39 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 ................................................................................. K40 Figure K40 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 ................................................................................. K41 Figure K41 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 ................................................................................. K42 Figure K42 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ................................................................................. K43 Figure K43 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 ................................................................................. K44 Figure K44 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 ................................................................................. K45 Callaway Energy Center vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 10 of 424 List of Tables Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction ............................................................................................................ 17 Table 12. Highway Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 17 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons ............................................................................................................. 18 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 27 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 28 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ...................................................................................... 310 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Subarea ..................................................... 310 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ............................................................................ 311 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ...................................................................... 311 Table 35. Summary Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ................................ 312 Table 36. Medical Facilities Transit Demand .......................................................................................... 313 Table 37. School Population Demand Estimates .................................................................................... 314 Table 38. TransitDependent Population Estimates ............................................................................... 315 Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates .............................. 315 Table 310. CEC EPZ External Traffic ........................................................................................................ 315 Table 311. Summary of Population Demand .......................................................................................... 316 Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand................................................................................................ 317 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities ............................................................................... 511 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public .............................................................................. 511 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work .................................................. 512 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................. 513 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate ...................................................... 514 Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow ....................................................... 515 Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events............................................................................................. 515 Table 58. Description of the Distributions .............................................................................................. 516 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation ..................... 517 Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ........................ 518 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions ........................................................................................... 64 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions ............................................................................................. 612 Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ........................................... 613 Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario ................................................................................................ 614 Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ............................ 79 Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ........................ 711 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region ......................... 713 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region ....................... 714 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions ......................................................................................... 715 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................... 88 Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather................................................................. 89 Table 83. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ........................................................... 810 Table 84. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow .................................................................. 811 Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ........................................... 812 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ........................................ 812 Table 87. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow............................................... 813 Table 88. Access and/or Functional Needs Evacuation Time Estimates................................................. 813 Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ......................................................................... 102 Callaway Energy Center viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 11 of 424 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ......................................................................................................... 102 Table 103. School Reception Centers ..................................................................................................... 103 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ......................................................... C8 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ............................................................................ C9 Table C3. Glossary ...................................................................................................................................C10 Table E1. Schools and Colleges/Universities within the EPZ .................................................................... E2 Table E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ............................................................................................... E3 Table E3. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E3 Table E4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E4 Table E5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E5 Table E6. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ........................................................................................ E5 Table F1. Callaway Energy Center Demographic Survey Sampling Plan................................................... F6 Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations ........................................................................... G3 Table G2. ETE with No MTC .................................................................................................................... G3 Table H1. Percent of Subarea Population Evacuating for Each Region ................................................... H2 Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input ................................................................................................ J2 Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03) ............................ J3 Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1)................................................................................... J3 Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 .......................... J4 Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control ............................................................................... K1 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ........................................ M4 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study ..................................................... M4 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change .................................................................................. M5 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist ................................................................................................. N1 Callaway Energy Center ix KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 12 of 424 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Callaway Energy Center (CEC) located in Reform, Missouri. ETE are part of the required planning basis and provide Ameren Missouri and state and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decision making.

In the performance of this effort, guidance is provided by documents published by Federal Governmental agencies. Most important of these are:

Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix E to Part 50 (10CFR50), Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities, NRC, 2011.

Revision 1 of the Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, February 2021.

FEMA, Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual (FEMA P1028),

December 2019.

Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR6863, January 2005.

Project Activities This project began in September 2020 and extended over a period of 18 months. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

1. Conducted a virtual kickoff meeting with Ameren Missouri personnel.

2. Accessed U.S. Census Bureau data files for the year 2020.

3. Obtained the estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ from each county.

4. Studied Geographical Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of the CEC, then conducted a detailed field survey of the highway network to observe roadway characteristics and note any roadway changes relative to the previous ETE study done in 2010.

5. Updated the analysis network representing the highway system topology and capacities within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ), plus a Shadow Region covering the region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles radially from the plant.

6. Designed and sponsored a demographic survey of residents within the EPZ to gather focused data needed for this ETE study that were not contained within the census database. The survey instrument was reviewed and modified by the licensee and offsite response organization (ORO) personnel prior to the survey.

Callaway Energy Center ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 13 of 424

7. Data from the previous study was provided to the licensee and OROs for review. The OROs indicated the data pertaining to employment, transients, and special facilities (schools, medical facilities, correctional facilities) was still valid.

8. The traffic demand and tripgeneration rates of evacuating vehicles were estimated from the gathered data. The trip generation rates reflect the estimated mobilization time (i.e., the time required by evacuees to prepare for the evacuation trip) computed using the results of the demographic survey of EPZ residents.

9. Following federal guidelines, the existing 15 Subareas within the EPZ were grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 44 Evacuation Regions (numbered R01 through R44).

10. The timevarying external circumstances were represented as Evacuation Scenarios, each described in terms of the following factors: (1) Season (Summer, Winter); (2) Day of Week (Midweek, Weekend); (3) Time of Day (Midday, Evening); and (4) Weather (Good, Rain, Snow). One special event scenario involving a refueling outage at the Callaway Energy Center site was considered. One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane was closed on Interstate (I)70 eastbound (east of the plant) and westbound (west of the plant) for the duration of the evacuation.

11. Staged evacuation was considered for those regions wherein the 2mile radius and sectors downwind to 5 miles are evacuated.

12. As per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the Planning Basis for the calculation of ETE is:

a. A rapidly escalating accident at the plant that quickly assumes the status of a general emergency wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective action have been implemented such that the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) is virtually coincident with the siren alert.

b. While an unlikely accident scenario, this planning basis will yield ETE, measured as the elapsed time from the ATE until the stated percentage of the population exits the impacted Region, that represent upper bound estimates. This conservative Planning Basis is applicable for all initiating events.

13. If the emergency occurs while schools are in session, the ETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to reception centers located outside the EPZ.

It is assumed that parents will pick up school children at day care facilities prior to the start of evacuation. The ETE for schoolchildren are calculated separately.

14. Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either rideshare with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided by the counties in the EPZ. Those in schools will likewise be evacuated by bus. Separate ETE are calculated for schools, the transitdependent evacuees, and for access and/or functional needs population.

15. Attended final meeting with Ameren Missouri personnel and county OROs to present final results of the study.

Callaway Energy Center ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 14 of 424 Computation of ETE A total of 616 ETE were computed for the evacuation of the general public. Each ETE quantifies the aggregate evacuation time estimated for the population within one of the 44 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 14 Evacuation Scenarios (44 x 14 = 616). Separate ETE are calculated for transitdependent evacuees, including schoolchildren for applicable scenarios.

Except for Region R03, which is the evacuation of the entire EPZ, only a portion of the people within the EPZ would be advised to evacuate. That is, the ATE applies only to those people occupying the specified impacted region. It is assumed that 100 percent of the people within the impacted region will evacuate in response to this ATE. The people occupying the remainder of the EPZ outside the impacted region may be advised to take shelter.

The computation of ETE assumes that 20% of the population within the EPZ but outside the impacted region will elect to voluntarily evacuate. In addition, 20% of the population in the Shadow Region will also elect to evacuate. These voluntary and shadow evacuees could impede those who are evacuating from within the impacted region. The impedance that could be caused by voluntary and shadow evacuees is considered in the computation of ETE for the impacted region.

Staged evacuation is considered wherein those people within the 2Mile Region evacuate immediately, while those beyond 2 miles, but within the EPZ, shelterinplace. Once 90% of the 2Mile Region is evacuated, those people beyond 2 miles begin to evacuate. As per federal guidance, 20% of people beyond 2 miles will evacuate (noncompliance) even though they are advised to shelterinplace during a staged evacuation.

The computational procedure is outlined as follows:

A linknode representation of the highway network is coded. Each link represents a unidirectional length of highway; each node usually represents an intersection or merge point. The capacity of each link is estimated based on the field survey observations and on established traffic engineering procedures.

The evacuation trips are generated at locations called zonal centroids located within the EPZ and Shadow Region. The trip generation rates vary over time reflecting the mobilization process, and from one location (centroid) to another depending on population density and on whether a centroid is within, or outside, the impacted area.

The evacuation model computes the routing patterns for evacuating vehicles that are compliant with federal guidelines (outbound relative to the plant), and then simulates the traffic flow movements over space and time. This simulation process estimates the rate that traffic flow exits the impacted region.

The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90 percent and 100 percent, respectively, of the population within the impacted region, to evacuate from within the impacted region. These statistics are presented in tabular and graphical formats. The 90th percentile ETE have been identified as the values that should be considered when making protective action decisions because the 100th percentile ETE are prolonged by those relatively few people who take longer Callaway Energy Center ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 15 of 424 to mobilize. This is referred to as the evacuation tail in Section 4.0 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Traffic Management This study modeled the comprehensive existing traffic management plans provided by the OROs. No additional Traffic Management is recommended based on observations of the simulations. Refer to Section 9 and in Appendix G.

Selected Results A compilation of selected information is presented on the following pages in the form of figures and tables extracted from the body of the report; these are described below.

1. Table 31 presents the estimates of permanent resident population in each Subarea based on the 2020 Census data.

2. Table 61 defines each of the 44 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Subarea.

3. Table 62 defines the Evacuation Scenarios.

4. Tables 71 and 72 are compilations of ETE. These data are the times needed to clear the indicated regions of 90 and 100 percent of the population occupying these regions, respectively. These computed ETE include consideration of mobilization time and of estimated voluntary evacuations from other regions within the EPZ and from the Shadow Region.

5. Tables 73 and 74 present ETE for the 2Mile Region, when evacuating additional Subareas downwind to 5 miles for unstaged and staged evacuations for the 90th and 100th percentiles, respectively.

6. Table 82 presents ETE for the schoolchildren in good weather.

7. Table 85 presents ETE for the transitdependent population in good weather.

8. Figure 61 displays a map of the CEC EPZ showing the layout of the 15 Subareas that comprise, in aggregate, the EPZ.

9. Figure H8 presents an example of an Evacuation Region (Region R08) to be evacuated under the circumstances defined in Table 61. Maps of all Regions are provided in Appendix H.

Conclusions

• General population ETE were computed for 616 unique cases - a combination of 44 unique Evacuation Regions and 14 unique Evacuation Scenarios. Table 71 and Table 72 document these ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles. These ETE range from 1:25 (hr:min) to 4:20 at the 90th percentile and the 100th percentile mirrors trip generation time for all scenarios.

• Inspection of Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the 100th percentile ETE are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile. This is the result congestion within the EPZ clearing prior to the completion of trip mobilization. As a result, the 100th percentile ETE is dictated by the time needed to mobilize (the evacuation tail) and are therefore, substantially longer than the 90th percentile ETE. See Section 7.5 and Figures Callaway Energy Center ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 16 of 424 78 through 721.

• Fulton is the most congested area during an evacuation and the last location in the EPZ to exhibit traffic congestion is Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard/Missouri F. All congestion within the EPZ clears by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE during Scenario 6 conditions (winter, weekday, midday with good weather). See Section 7.3 and Figures 73 through 77.

• The inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicates that a staged evacuation provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the CEC. Staged evacuation should not be Implemented. See Section 7.6 for additional discussion.

• The comparison of Scenarios 6 (winter, midweek, midday, good) and 13 (winter, midweek, midday, good) in Table 72 indicates that the Special Event - a refueling outage at the CEC - has little to no impact on the 90th and 100th percentile ETE. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

• Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 (summer, weekday, midday, in good weather) in Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that traffic accidents that reduce capacity on I70 does not have a material impact on the 90th or 100th percentile ETE. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

• The average ETE for schools are shorter than the 90th percentile ETE for the general population for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 6 conditions by 55 minutes. The average ETE for transitdependent persons and access and/or functional needs persons exceeds the 90th percentile ETE by 25 minutes (in good weather) and 35 minutes, respectively. See Section 8.

• Table 81 indicates that there is sufficient transportation resources available to evacuate the school, transit dependent and access and/or functional needs populations within the EPZ in a single wave. As such, second wave ETE are not computed. See Section 8.

• The general population ETE at the 90th and 100th percentiles are greatly impacted when the base trip generation time (4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes) is increased or decreased by an hour due to the lack of traffic congestion within the EPZ and the ETE being dictated by trip generation time. See Section M.1 and Table M1.

• The general population ETE is not impacted by the change in percentage of voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region. See Section M.2 and Table M2.

• An increase in permanent resident population (EPZ plus Shadow Region) of 19% or greater results in an increase in the 90th percentile ETE by 25% for the 2mile region (Region R01), which meets the federal criterion for performing a fully updated ETE between decennial Censuses. See Section M.3.

Callaway Energy Center ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 17 of 424 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Subarea 2010 Population 2020 Population C1 90 62 C2 363 333 C3 441 455 C4 264 249 C5 86 75 C6 492 496 C7 1,406 1,434 C8 2,493 2,331 C9 12,112 11,869 C10 544 454 C11 239 254 G1 107 86 M1 181 171 M2 496 483 O1 859 806 EPZ TOTAL: 20,173 19,558 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 3.05%

Callaway Energy Center ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Subarea Region

Description:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 R01 2Mile Radius X R02 5Mile Radius X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

N/NNE R04 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R04 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R05 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R06 60 75 L, M, N X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E 76 82 L, M, N, P (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

See Region R06 M, N, P, E/ESE 98 104 Q (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 18 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

ESE/SE R07 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SE R08 128 142 P, Q, R X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S 166 172 Q, R, A, B See Region R08 (4Sector Keyhole)

S 173 187 R, A, B (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW 188 194 R, A, B, C (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R09 195 210 A, B, C X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R10 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW 218 232 B, C, D (3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW 233 239 B, C, D, E (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R10 WSW 240 255 C, D, E (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W 256 262 C, D, E, F (4Sector Keyhole)

W R11 263 277 D, E, F X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 19 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

W/WNW R12 278 284 D, E, F, G X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW 285 300 E, F, G (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R12 NW 308 322 F, G, H (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R13 330 345 G, H, J X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N 346 352 G, H, J, K (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R04 N

353 7 H, J, K (3Sector Keyhole)

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

N/NNE R14 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R14 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 20 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 NE/ENE R15 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R16 60 75 L, M, N X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E R17 76 82 L, M, N, P X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q See Region R17 (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R18 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SE R19 128 142 P, Q, R X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R19 SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S R20 166 172 Q, R, A, B X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

S R21 173 187 R, A, B X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW R22 188 194 R, A, B, C X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R23 195 210 A, B, C X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 SSW/SW R24 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW June 27, 2022 R25 218 232 B, C, D X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Page 21 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 SW/WSW R26 233 239 B, C, D, E X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WSW 240 255 C, D, E See Region R26 (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W R27 256 262 C, D, E, F X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

W R28 263 277 D, E, F X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

W/WNW R29 278 284 D, E, F, G X X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW R30 285 300 E, F, G X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

NW 308 322 F, G, H See Region R30 (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R31 330 345 G, H, J X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N R32 346 352 G, H, J, K X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

N R33 353 7 H, J, K X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 22 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

R34 5Mile Radius X X X X X X N/NNE R35 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R35 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R36 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R37 60 75 L, M, N X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E 76 82 L, M, N, P (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

See Region R37 E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R38 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 23 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 SE R39 128 142 P, Q, R X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S 166 172 Q, R, A, B See Region R39 (4Sector Keyhole)

S 173 187 R, A, B (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW 188 194 R, A, B, C (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R40 195 210 A, B, C X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R41 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW 218 232 B, C, D (3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW 233 239 B, C, D, E (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R41 WSW 240 255 C, D, E (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W 256 262 C, D, E, F (4Sector Keyhole)

W R42 263 277 D, E, F X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 24 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction Subarea Cardinal Compass Region From: Sectors:

Equivalent: C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

D, E, F, W/WNW R43 278 284 X X X G (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW 285 300 E, F, G (3Sector Keyhole)

E, F, G, WNW/NW 301 307 H (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R43 NW 308 322 F, G, H (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R44 330 345 G, H, J X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N 346 352 G, H, J, K (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R35 N

353 7 H, J, K (3Sector Keyhole)

ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Subarea(s) Evacuate Subarea(s) ShelterinPlace Evacuate Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 25 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 26 of 424 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Time of Scenario Season1 Week Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 2

Summer Midweek Midday Snow None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 4

Summer Weekend Midday Snow None Midweek, 5

Summer Weekend Evening Good None 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 7

Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 10 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Weekend Evening Good None Special Event - Outage at 13 Winter Midweek Midday Good the CEC Roadway Impact - Lane 14 Closure on I70 Outbound Summer Midweek Midday Good in both directions 1

Winter means that school is in session at normal enrollment levels (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer means that school is in session at summer school enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Callaway Energy Center ES15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Rain/Light Good Rain/Light Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Weather Snow Weather Snow Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R02 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:35 2:20 2:45 R03 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:45 2:55 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R04 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:45 2:35 R05 2:35 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:50 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 2:00 2:35 R06 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:55 2:35 R07 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:35 2:35 4:00 2:35 2:10 2:40 R08 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:35 2:35 3:45 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:55 2:35 R09 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 3:35 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:35 2:25 R10 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:35 2:40 4:00 2:35 1:50 2:35 R11 2:20 2:20 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 3:25 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:35 1:35 2:20 R12 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 3:30 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:35 2:25 R13 1:45 1:50 2:25 2:25 2:25 1:45 1:45 2:35 2:25 2:25 3:40 2:25 1:30 1:45 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R14 2:50 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:35 2:50 R15 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:55 2:55 4:20 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:45 2:55 R16 2:50 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:15 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:40 2:50 R17 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:45 2:55 R18 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:45 2:55 R19 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:40 2:55 R20 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:40 2:55 R21 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:15 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:40 2:50 R22 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:15 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:40 2:50 R23 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:15 2:45 R24 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:20 2:45 R25 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:15 2:45 R26 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:45 2:25 2:50 R27 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:45 2:25 2:50 R28 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:15 2:45 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 R29 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:40 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:30 2:50 R30 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:05 2:40 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:25 2:50 R31 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 3:50 2:40 2:40 3:55 2:40 2:00 2:45 June 27, 2022 R32 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:20 2:45 R33 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:40 3:55 2:40 2:15 2:45 Page 27 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R34 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:50 2:50 4:00 2:50 2:20 2:45 R35 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 3:40 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 1:50 2:35 R36 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 3:50 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 2:00 2:40 R37 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 1:55 2:35 R38 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:45 2:10 2:40 R39 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 3:45 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 1:55 2:35 R40 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 3:35 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 1:45 2:25 R41 2:35 2:35 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:50 2:50 4:00 2:50 1:55 2:35 R42 2:20 2:20 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:20 3:25 2:50 2:50 3:55 2:50 1:40 2:20 R43 2:25 2:25 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:25 2:25 3:30 2:50 2:50 3:55 2:50 1:45 2:25 R44 1:50 1:50 2:40 2:40 2:40 1:50 1:50 2:40 2:40 2:40 3:50 2:40 1:30 1:50 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 28 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Rain/Light Good Rain/Light Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Weather Snow Weather Snow Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R02 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R03 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R04 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R06 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R07 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R08 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R09 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R10 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R11 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R12 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R13 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R14 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R15 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R16 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R17 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R18 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R19 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R20 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R21 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R22 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R23 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R24 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R25 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R26 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R27 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R28 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 R29 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R30 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R31 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 June 27, 2022 R32 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R33 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 Page 29 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R34 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R35 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R36 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R37 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R38 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R39 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R40 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R41 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R42 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R43 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R44 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 30 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Rain/Light Good Rain/Light Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Weather Snow Weather Snow Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R02 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R05 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R06 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R07 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R08 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R09 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R10 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R11 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R12 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R13 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R34 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R35 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R36 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R37 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R38 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R39 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R40 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R41 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 R42 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R43 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 June 27, 2022 R44 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 Page 31 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Rain/Light Good Rain/Light Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Weather Snow Weather Snow Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R02 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R05 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R06 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R07 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R08 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R09 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R10 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R11 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R12 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R13 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R34 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R35 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R36 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R37 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R38 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R39 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R40 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R41 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 R42 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R43 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 June 27, 2022 R44 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Page 32 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Travel Time Travel Dist. from Dist. To Time to EPZ EPZ Driver Loading EPZ Average EPZ Bdry to Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE R.C. R.C. R.C.

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CALLAWAY COUNTY SCHOOLS Bartley Elementary School 90 15 1.5 37.4 2 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 Bush Elementary School 90 15 2.4 29.1 5 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 Fulton High School 90 15 1.6 45.6 2 1:50 26.1 26 2:20 Fulton Middle School 90 15 2.1 36.2 3 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 Kingdom Christian Academy 90 15 2.1 33.2 4 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 McIntire Elementary School 90 15 1.0 45.3 1 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 Missouri School for the Deaf 90 15 1.7 29.0 4 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 South Callaway RII Elementary School 90 15 6.0 52.8 7 1:55 17.7 18 2:15 South Callaway RII Middle School 90 15 6.0 52.8 7 1:55 17.7 18 2:15 South Callaway RII High School 90 15 6.0 52.8 7 1:55 17.7 18 2:15 St. Peter's Catholic School 90 15 3.0 34.7 5 1:50 26.1 26 2:20 Westminster College 90 15 1.1 45.3 1 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 William Woods University 90 15 3.0 39.4 5 1:50 26.1 26 2:20 OSAGE COUNTY SCHOOLS Chamois High School 90 15 9.1 47.9 11 2:00 24.8 25 2:25 Osage County Chamois R1 School 90 15 9.1 47.9 11 2:00 24.8 25 2:25 District Maximum for EPZ: 2:00 Maximum: 2:25 Average for EPZ: 1:55 Average: 2:20 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 33 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Route Travel Bus Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to ETA to Route Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. R.C.

Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (hr:min) 1 150 6.0 55.3 7 30 3:10 17.7 18 3:30 2 150 11.2 36.8 18 30 3:20 26.1 26 3:50 3 150 9.1 44.8 12 30 3:15 24.8 25 3:40 Maximum ETE: 3:20 Maximum ETE: 3:50 Average ETE: 3:15 Average ETE: 3:40 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 34 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Figure 61. Subareas Comprising the Callaway Energy Center EPZ June 27, 2022 Page 35 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H8. Region R08 Page 36 of 424 Callaway Energy Center ES25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 37 of 424 1 INTRODUCTION This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Callaway Energy Center (CEC), located in Callaway County, ten miles southeast of Fulton, Missouri. This ETE study provides Ameren Missouri, state and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decision making.

In the performance of this effort, guidance is provided by documents published by federal governmental agencies. Most important of these are:

• Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix E to Part 50 (10CFR50), Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities, NRC, 2011.

• Revision 1 of the Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, February 2021.

• FEMA, Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual (FEMA P1028),

December 2019.

• Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR 6863, January 2005.

The work effort reported herein was supported and guided by local stakeholders who contributed suggestions, critiques, and the local knowledge base required. Table 11 presents a summary of stakeholders and interactions.

1.1 Overview of the ETE Process The following outline presents a brief description of the work effort in chronological sequence:

1. Information Gathering:

a. Defined the scope of work in discussions with representatives from Ameren Missouri.

b. Attended project kickoff meeting with personnel from Ameren Missouri to identify issues to be addressed and resources available.

c. Conducted a detailed field survey of the highway system and of area traffic conditions within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and Shadow Region.

d. Obtained demographic data from the 2020 Census.

e. Estimated the number of nonEPZ employees using data from the previous study.

f. Conducted a random sample demographic survey of EPZ residents.

g. Conducted a data collection effort to identify and describe schools, medical facilities, correctional facilities, transient attractions, major employers, transit Callaway Energy Center 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 38 of 424 dependent residents, access and/or functional needs populations, transportation resources available and the special event.

2. Estimated distributions of trip generation times representing the time required by various population groups (permanent residents, employees, and transients) to prepare (mobilize) for the evacuation trip. These estimates are primarily based upon the random sample demographic survey.

3. Defined Evacuation Scenarios. These scenarios reflect the variation in demand, in trip generation distribution and in highway capacities, associated with different seasons, day of week, time of day and weather conditions.

4. Reviewed the existing traffic management plan to be implemented by local and state police in the event of an incident at the plant. Traffic control is applied at specified Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Access Control Points (ACPs) located within the study area.

5. Used existing Subareas to define Evacuation Regions. The EPZ is partitioned into 15 Subareas along jurisdictional and geographic boundaries. Regions are groups of contiguous Subareas for which ETE are calculated. The configurations of these Regions reflect wind direction and the radial extent of the impacted area. Each Region, other than those that approximate circular areas, approximates a keyhole section within the EPZ as recommended by NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

6. Estimated demand for transit services for persons at schools, transitdependent persons at home, and those with access and/or functional needs. (Medical and correctional facilities shelter in place.)

7. Prepared the input streams for the DYNEV II.

a. Estimated the evacuation traffic demand, based on the available information derived from Census data, and from data provided by local and state agencies, Ameren Missouri and from the demographic survey.

b. Updated the linknode representation of the evacuation network using the road survey and aerial imagery, which is used as the basis for the computer analysis that calculates the ETE.

c. Applied the procedures specified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 20161) to the data acquired during the field survey and the linknode analysis network, to estimate the capacity of all highway segments comprising the evacuation routes.

d. Calculated the evacuating traffic demand for each Region and for each Scenario.

e. Specified selected candidate destinations for each origin (location of each source where evacuation trips are generated over the mobilization time) to 1

Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016), Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2016.

Callaway Energy Center 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 39 of 424 support evacuation travel consistent with outbound movement relative to the location of the CEC.

8. Executed the DYNEV II model to determine optimal evacuation routing and compute ETE for all residents, transients and employees (general population) with access to private vehicles. Generated a complete set of ETE for all specified Regions and Scenarios.

9. Documented ETE in formats in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

10. Calculated the ETE for all transit activities including those for special facilities (schools, medical facilities, and correctional facilities), for the transitdependent population and for the homebound access and/or functional needs population.

1.2 The Callaway Energy Center Location The CEC is about 5 miles north of the Missouri River and 10 miles southeast of Fulton in Callaway County, Missouri. The site is approximately 80 miles west of St. Louis. The EPZ consists of portions of the counties of Callaway, Gasconade, Montgomery, and Osage. Figure 11 shows the location of the CEC relative to St. Louis, as well as the major population centers and roadways in the area.

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

Field Surveys of the Highway Network In 2020, KLD personnel drove the entire highway system within the EPZ and the Shadow Region which consists of the area between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles radially from the plant. The characteristics of each section of highway were recorded. These characteristics are shown in Table 12.

Video and audio recording equipment were used to capture a permanent record of the highway infrastructure. No attempt was made to meticulously measure such attributes as lane width and shoulder width; estimates of these measures based on visual observation and recorded images were considered appropriate for the purpose of estimating the capacity of highway sections. For example, Exhibit 157 in the HCM 2016 indicates that a reduction in lane width from 12 feet (the base value) to 10 feet can reduce free flow speed (FFS) by 1.1 mph - not a material difference - for twolane highways. Exhibit 1546 in the HCM 2016 shows little sensitivity for the estimates of Service Volumes at Level of Service (LOS) E (near capacity), with respect to FFS, for twolane highways.

The data from the audio and video recordings were used to create detailed geographic information systems (GIS) shapefiles and databases of the roadway characteristics and of the traffic control devices observed during the road survey; this information was referenced while preparing the input stream for the DYNEV II System. Roadway types were assigned based on the following criteria:

Callaway Energy Center 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 40 of 424 Freeway: limited access highway, 2 or more lanes in each direction, high free flow speeds Freeway ramp: ramp on to or off of a limited access highway Major arterial: 3 or more lanes in each direction Minor arterial: 2 or more lanes in each direction Collector: single lane in each direction Local roadway: single lane in each direction, local road with low free flow speeds As documented on page 156 of the HCM 2016, the capacity of a twolane highway is 1,700 passenger cars per hour in one direction. For freeway sections, a value of 2,250 vehicles per hour per lane is assigned, as per Exhibit 1237 of the HCM 2016. The road survey has identified several segments which are characterized by adverse geometrics on twolane highways which are reflected in reduced values for both capacity and speed. These estimates are consistent with the service volumes for LOS E presented in HCM 2016 Exhibit 1546. These links may be identified by reviewing Appendix K. Link capacity is an input to DYNEV II which computes the ETE. Further discussion of roadway capacity is provided in Section 4 of this report.

Traffic signals are either pretimed (signal timings are fixed over time and do not change with the traffic volume on competing approaches) or are actuated (signal timings vary over time based on the changing traffic volumes on competing approaches). Actuated signals require detectors to provide the traffic data used by the signal controller to adjust the signal timings.

These detectors are typically magnetic loops in the roadway, or video cameras mounted on the signal masts and pointed toward the intersection approaches. If detectors were observed on the approaches to a signalized intersection during the road survey, detailed signal timings were not collected as the timings vary with traffic volume. TCPs or ACPs at locations which have control devices are represented as actuated signals in the DYNEV II system.

If no detectors were observed, the signal control at the intersection was considered pretimed, and detailed signal timings were gathered for several signal cycles. These signal timings were input to the DYNEV II system used to compute ETE, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance.

Figure 12 presents the linknode analysis network that was constructed to model the evacuation roadway network in the EPZ and Shadow Region. The directional arrows on the links and the node numbers have been removed from Figure 12 to clarify the figure. The detailed figures provided in Appendix K depict the analysis network with directional arrows shown and node numbers provided. The observations made during the field survey and aerial imagery was used to calibrate the analysis network.

Demographic Survey An online demographic survey was undertaken to gather information needed for the ETE study.

Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used, and tabulations of data compiled from the survey returns.

These data were utilized to develop estimates of vehicle occupancy to estimate the number of evacuating vehicles during an evacuation and to estimate elements of the mobilization process.

This database was also referenced to estimate the number of transitdependent residents.

Callaway Energy Center 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 41 of 424 Computing the Evacuation Time Estimates The overall study procedure is outlined in Appendix D. Demographic data were obtained from several sources, as detailed later in this report. These data were analyzed and converted into vehicle demand data. The vehicle demand was loaded onto appropriate source links of the analysis network using GIS mapping software. The DYNEV II system was then used to compute ETE for all Regions and Scenarios.

Analytical Tools The DYNEV II System that was employed for this study is comprised of several integrated computer models. One of these is the DYNEV (DYnamic Network EVacuation) macroscopic simulation model, a new version of the IDYNEV model that was developed by KLD under contract with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

DYNEV II consists of four submodels:

A macroscopic traffic simulation model (for details, see Appendix C).

A Trip Distribution (TD), model that assigns a set of candidate destination (D) nodes for each origin (O) located within the analysis network, where evacuation trips are generated over time. This establishes a set of OD tables.

A Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA), model which assigns trips to paths of travel (routes) which satisfy the OD tables, over time. The TD and DTA models are integrated to form the DTRAD (Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution) model, as described in Appendix B.

A Myopic Traffic Diversion model which diverts traffic to avoid intense, local congestion, if possible.

Another software product developed by KLD, named UNITES (UNIfied Transportation Engineering System) was used to expedite data entry and to automate the production of output tables.

The dynamics of traffic flow over the network are graphically animated using the software product, EVAN (EVacuation ANimator), developed by KLD. EVAN is GIS based, and displays statistics such as LOS, vehicles discharged, average speed, and percent of vehicles evacuated, output by the DYNEV II System. The use of a GIS framework enables the user to zoom in on areas of congestion and query road name, town name and other geographical information.

The procedure for applying the DYNEV II System within the framework of developing ETE is outlined in Appendix D. Appendix A is a glossary of terms.

For the reader interested in an evaluation of the original model, IDYNEV, the following references are suggested:

NUREG/CR4873 - Benchmark Study of the IDYNEV Evacuation Time Estimate Computer Code NUREG/CR4874 - The Sensitivity of Evacuation Time Estimates to Changes in Input Callaway Energy Center 15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 42 of 424 Parameters for the IDYNEV Computer Code The evacuation analysis procedures are based upon the need to:

Route traffic along paths of travel that will expedite their travel from their respective points of origin to points outside the EPZ.

Restrict movement toward the plant to the extent practicable and disperse traffic demand so as to avoid focusing demand on a limited number of highways.

Move traffic in directions that are generally outbound, relative to the location of the plant.

DYNEV II provides a detailed description of traffic operations on the evacuation network. This description enables the analyst to identify bottlenecks and to develop countermeasures that are designed to represent the behavioral responses of evacuees. The effects of these countermeasures may then be tested with the model.

1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study Table 13 presents a comparison of the present ETE study with the previous ETE study (KLD TR 492, dated June 2012. The 90th percentile ETE for the full EPZ increases by as much as 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 35 minutes and as little as 40 minutes when compared with the previous study. The 100th percentile ETE increased for the full EPZ by 45 minutes for nearly all scenarios. The major factor contributing to the differences between the ETE values obtained in this study and those of the previous study is primarily due to the increase in the time needed to mobilize residents who reside within the EPZ. Trip mobilization (also known as trip generation) rates for residents increased by 65 minutes from the previous study. Since congestion clears at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE, mobilization time dictates the ETE (See Section 7.4). As such, this increase directly results in the increase in ETE.

Callaway Energy Center 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 43 of 424 Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction Stakeholder Nature of Stakeholder Interaction Attended kickoff meeting to define data requirements and set up contacts with local government agencies. Provided recent Callaway Energy Center data. Reviewed and approved Ameren Missouri all project assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and were informed of the study results. Reviewed and approved report.

Provided emergency plans, reviewed and approved special Callaway, Gasconade, Montgomery, and facility and transient data. Reviewed and approved all Osage County Emergency Management project assumptions. Informed of the study results.

Departments (EMD)

Reviewed and approved report.

Provided state emergency plans. Reviewed and approved all Missouri State Emergency Management project assumptions. Informed of the study results.

Department Reviewed and approved report.

Table 12. Highway Characteristics Number of lanes Posted speed Lane width Actual free speed Shoulder type & width Abutting land use Interchange geometries Control devices Lane channelization & queuing Intersection configuration (including capacity (including turn bays/lanes) roundabouts where applicable)

Geometrics: curves, grades (>4%) Traffic signal type Unusual characteristics: Narrow bridges, sharp curves, poor pavement, flood warning signs, inadequate delineations, toll booths, etc.

Callaway Energy Center 17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 44 of 424 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study ArcGIS Software using 2020 US ArcGIS Software using 2010 US Census Census blocks; area ratio method Resident Population blocks; area ratio method used.

used.

Basis Population = 20,173 Population = 19,558 Vehicles = 10,929 Vehicles = 9,063 2.40 persons/household, 1.35 2.79 persons/household, 1.55 Resident Population evacuating vehicles/household yielding: evacuating vehicles/household Vehicle Occupancy 1.78 persons/vehicle. yielding: 1.80 persons/vehicle.

ArcGIS software using 2010 US ArcGIS software using 2010 US Census Census blocks; area ratio method blocks; area ratio method used.

Shadow Population used.

20% Population = 1,340 20% Population = 1,312 20% Vehicles = 757 20% Vehicles = 730 Data was provided by offsite agencies Previous data was confirmed by the and supplemented by data gathered in client.

phone calls to major employers. 1.09 Employee employees per vehicle based on 1.09 employees per vehicle based on Population demographic survey results. demographic survey results.

Employees = 747 Employees = 559 Vehicles = 687 Vehicles = 513 Estimates based upon U.S. Census data Estimates based upon U.S. Census and the results of the demographic data and the results of the survey. A total of 342 people who do not demographic survey. A total of 37 have access to a vehicle, requiring 12 people who do not have access to a buses to evacuate. vehicle, requiring 3 buses to TransitDependent evacuate.

Population An additional 31 homebound access and/or functional needs persons need An additional 20 homebound access special transportation to evacuate (19 and/or functional needs persons require a bus, 11 require a wheelchair need special transportation to accessible vehicle, and 1 require an evacuate (16 require a bus and 4 ambulance). require an ambulance).

Transient estimates based upon Transient estimates based upon information provided about transient information provided about transient attractions in EPZ, supplemented by attractions in EPZ, supplemented by Transient observations of the facilities during the observations of the facilities during Population road survey and from aerial the road survey and from aerial photography. photography.

Transients = 2,456 Transients = 984 Transient Vehicles = 919 Transient Vehicles = 437 Callaway Energy Center 18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 45 of 424 Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Special facility population based on Special facility population based on information provided by each county information provided by each county within the EPZ. within the EPZ.

Medical Facilities: Current census = 17 Population at Medical Facilities = 730 Special Facilities Buses Required = 2 Population at Correctional Facilities =

Population 1,455 Wheelchair Bus Required = 0 Medical and correctional Facilities Ambulances Required = 0 within the EPZ are advised to shelter Correctional Facility: in place.

Current Census = 1,455 School population based on information School population based on provided by each county within the EPZ. information provided by each county These estimates only include those at within the EPZ. These estimates School Population college/universities that need a bus. include college/universities.

School enrollment = 5,703 School enrollment = 7,849 Buses required = 117 Buses required = 108 Voluntary evacuation from 20% of the population within the EPZ, 20% of the population within the EPZ, within EPZ in areas but not within the Evacuation Region but not within the Evacuation Region outside region to be evacuated 20% of people outside of the EPZ within 20% of people outside of the EPZ Shadow Evacuation the Shadow Region within the Shadow Region Network Size 1,086 links; 918 nodes. 1,770 links; 1,558 nodes.

Field surveys conducted in July, 2011. Field surveys conducted in October, Roadway Geometric Roads and intersections are video 2020. Roads and intersections are Data archived and capacities are based on video archived and capacities are 2010 HCM. based on 2016 HCM.

Direct evacuation to designated Direct evacuation to designated School Evacuation Reception Center. Reception Center.

Based on the results of the 50 percent of transitdependent persons demographic survey, 87% of transit Ridesharing will evacuate with a neighbor or friend. dependent persons will evacuate with a neighbor or friend.

Callaway Energy Center 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 46 of 424 Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Based on demographic survey of Based on residential telephone survey of specific pretrip mobilization specific pretrip mobilization activities:

activities:

Residents with commuters returning Residents with commuters returning leave between 40 and 220 minutes.

leave between 45 and 285 minutes.

Trip Generation for Residents without commuters returning Residents without commuters Evacuation leave within 200 minutes.

returning leave within 225 minutes.

Employees and transients leave within Employees and transients leave 100 minutes.

within 105 minutes.

All times measured from the Advisory to All times measured from the Advisory Evacuate.

to Evacuate.

Normal, Rain/Light Snow, or Heavy Normal, Rain, or Snow. The capacity and Snow. The free flow speed and free flow speed of all links in the capacity of all links in the network are Weather network are reduced by 10% in the reduced by 10% in the event of event of rain and 20% for snow. rain/light snow and 15% and 25% for heavy snow, respectively.

Modeling DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.0.0 DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.22.0 Construction of a new unit at the A refueling outage at the Callaway Special Events Callaway Plant site. Energy Center.

28 Regions (central sector wind 44 Regions (central sector wind direction and each adjacent sector direction and each adjacent sector Evacuation Cases technique used) and 14 Scenarios technique used) and 14 Scenarios producing 392 unique cases. producing 616 unique cases.

ETE reported for 90th and 100th ETE reported for 90th and 100th Evacuation Time percentile population. Results presented percentile population. Results Estimates Reporting by Region and Scenario. presented by Region and Scenario.

Evacuation Time Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Estimates for the Weather: 2:05 Weather: 2:50 entire EPZ, 90th Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Summer Weekend, Midday, Good percentile Weather: 2:00 Weather: 2:55 Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Evacuation Time Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather: 4:55 Estimates for the Weather: 4:10 Summer Weekend, Midday, Good entire EPZ, 100th Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 4:55 percentile Weather: 4:10 Callaway Energy Center 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 11. Callaway Energy Center Location Page 47 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 12. Callaway Energy Center LinkNode Analysis Network Page 48 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 49 of 424 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS This section presents the estimates and assumptions utilized in the development of the evacuation time estimates.

2.1 Data Estimate Assumptions

1. The permanent resident population are based on the 2020 U.S. Census population from the Census Bureau website1. (See Section 3.1.)

2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon data provided by each county.

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based on the data received from the counties within the EPZ and the previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches where data was missing.

4. The relationship between permanent resident population and evacuating vehicles is based on the results of the demographic survey (see Appendix F). Values of 2.79 persons per household and 1.55 evacuating vehicles per household are used for the permanent resident population.

5. The average household size was used for vehicle occupancies at transient facilities wherein data was not provided.

6. Employee vehicle occupancies are based on the results of the demographic survey; 1.09 employees per vehicle is used in the study. (See Figure F7).

7. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ is 60 mph for buses and average posted speed limits on roadways within the EPZ.

8. Roadway capacity estimates are based on field surveys performed in October 2020 (verified by aerial imagery), and the application of the Highway Capacity Manual 2016.

2.2 Methodological Assumptions

1. The Planning Basis Assumption for the calculation of ETE is a rapidly escalating accident that requires evacuation, and includes the following2 (as per NRC guidance):

a. Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) is announced coincident with the siren notification.

b. Mobilization of the general population will commence within 15 minutes after siren notification.

1 www.census.gov 2

We emphasize that the adoption of this planning basis is not a representation that these events will occur within the indicated time frame. Rather, these assumptions are necessary in order to:

1. Establish a temporal framework for estimating the Trip Generation distribution in the format recommended in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR-6863.

2. Identify temporal points of reference that uniquely define "Clear Time" and ETE.

It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various stages of an emergency. See Section 5.1 for more detail.

Callaway Energy Center 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 50 of 424

c. ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

2. The centerpoint of the plant is located at the center of the containment building 38°45 40.86 N, 91° 46 50.88 W.

3. The DYNEV II3 system is used to compute ETE in this study.

4. Evacuees will drive safely, travel radially away from the plant to the extent practicable given the highway network, and obey all control devices and traffic guides. All major evacuation routes are used in the analysis.

5. The existing EPZ and Subarea boundaries are used. See Figure 31.

6. The Shadow Region extends to 15 miles radially from the plant or approximately 5 miles radially from the EPZ boundary, as per NRC guidance. See Figure 72.

7. One hundred percent (100%) of the people within the impacted keyhole will evacuate.

Twenty percent (20%) of the population within the Shadow Region and within Subareas of the EPZ not advised to evacuate will voluntarily evacuate, as shown in Figure 21, as per NRC guidance. Sensitivity studies explore the effect on ETE of increasing the percentage of voluntary evacuees in the Shadow Region (see Appendix M).

8. ETE are presented at the 90th and 100th percentiles, as well as in graphical and tabular format, as per NRC guidance. The percentile ETE is defined as the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate issued to a specific Region of the EPZ, to the time that Region is clear of the indicated percentile of evacuees.

9. The ETE also includes consideration of through (ExternalExternal) trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region. See Section 3.11.

10. To account for boundary conditions beyond the study area, this study assumes a 25%

reduction in capacity on twolane roads and multilane highways for roadways that have traffic signals downstream. The 25% reduction in capacity is based on the prevalence of actuated traffic signals in the study area and the fact that the evacuating traffic volume will be more significant than the competing traffic volume at any downstream signalized intersections, thereby warranting a more significant percentage (75% in this case) of the signal green time. There is no reduction in capacity for freeways due to boundary conditions.

11. This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of the first time period.

Rather, there is a 30minute initialization period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from the first time period are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of the first time period depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated. See Section 3.12.

3 The models of the I-DYNEV System were recognized as state of the art by the Atomic Safety & Licensing Board (ASLB) in past hearings. (Sources: Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Hearings on Seabrook and Shoreham; Urbanik). The models have continuously been refined and extended since those hearings and were independently validated by a consultant retained by the NRC. The DYNEV II model incorporates the latest technology in traffic simulation and in dynamic traffic assignment.

Callaway Energy Center 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 51 of 424 2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times

1. Trip generation time (also known as mobilization time, or the time required by evacuees to prepare for the evacuation) are based upon the results of the demographic survey. It is assumed that stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur.

2. One hundred percent (100%) of the EPZ population can be notified within 45 minutes, in accordance with the 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual.

3. Commuter percentages (and percentage of residents awaiting the return of a commuter) are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, 70%

of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter (see Section F.3.1.); 60% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip (see Section F.3.2.). Therefore, 42 percent (70% x 60% = 42%) of EPZ households will await the return of a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.

2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions

1. The percentage of transitdependent people who will rideshare with a neighbor or friend are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 87% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

2. Transit vehicles are used to transport those without access to private vehicles:

a. Schools and childcare centers

i. If schools are in session, buses will evacuate students directly to the designated reception centers.

ii. It is assumed that parents pick up children at childcare facilities prior to evacuation.

iii. For the schools that area evacuated via buses, it is assumed no school children are picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

iv. Schoolchildren, if school is in session, are given priority in assigning transit vehicles.

b. Medical and correctional facilities

i. According to the emergency plans, all medical facilities and correctional facilities located within the 10mile EPZ ShelterinPlace according to the Callaway County/Fulton Radiological Emergency Response Plan dated February 2017.

c. Transitdependent permanent residents:

i. Transitdependent general population are evacuated to reception centers.

ii. Access and/or functional needs population may require county assistance (ambulance, bus, or wheelchair transport) to evacuate. This is considered separately from the general population ETE, as per NRC guidance.

Callaway Energy Center 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 52 of 424 iii. Households with 3 or more vehicles were assumed to have no need for transit vehicles.

d. Analysis of the number of required roundtrips (waves) of evacuating transit vehicles is presented.

e. Transport of transitdependent evacuees from reception centers to congregate care centers is not considered in this study.

3. Transit vehicle capacities:

a. School buses = 70 students per bus for primary schools and 50 students per bus for middle/high schools

b. Ambulatory transitdependent persons = 30 persons per bus

c. Wheelchair buses = 15 wheelchair bound persons per bus

d. Ambulances = 2 bedridden persons (includes advanced and basic life support)

4. Transit vehicles mobilization times:

a. School buses will arrive at schools to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

b. Transit dependent buses are mobilized when approximately 90% of residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization at 150 minutes of the ATE. This mobilization time is assumed to be applicable to the access and/or functional needs population as well.

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. School buses are loaded in 15 minutes.

b. Buses will require 1 minute of loading time per ambulatory passenger.

c. Wheelchair transport vehicles require 5 minutes of loading time per passenger.

d. Ambulances are loaded in 15 minutes per bedridden passenger.

6. It is assumed that drivers for all transit vehicles are available.

2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions

1. Traffic Control Points (TCP) and Access Control Points (ACP) as defined in the approved county and state emergency plans are considered in the ETE analysis, as per NRC guidance. See Appendix G.

2. TCP and ACP are assumed to be staffed approximately 120 minutes after the ATE, as per NRC guidance. Earlier activation of ACP locations could delay returning commuters. It is assumed that no through traffic will enter the EPZ after this 120minute time period.

3. It is assumed that all transit vehicles and other responders entering the EPZ to support the evacuation are unhindered by personnel manning TCPs and ACPs.

Callaway Energy Center 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 53 of 424 2.6 Scenarios and Regions

1. A total of 14 Scenarios representing different temporal variations (season, time of day, day of week) and weather conditions are considered. Scenarios to be considered are defined in Table 21:

a. A refueling outage at Callaway Energy Center is considered as the special event (single or multiday event that attracts a significant population into the EPZ; recommended by NRC guidance) for Scenario 13.

b. As per NRC guidance, one of the top 5 highest volume roadways must be closed or one lane outbound on a freeway must be closed for a roadway impact scenario. This study considers the closure of one lane on I70 in each direction outbound from the site for the roadway impact scenario - Scenario 14. For the westbound lane closure, one lane is closed from the intersection with Missouri A/Z (Exit 155) to the intersection with Missouri M (Exit 144). In the eastbound direction, one lane is closed from the intersection with Missouri A/Z (Exit 155) to the intersection with Missouri J/Rt 161 (Exit 170).

2. Two types of adverse weather scenarios are considered. Rain may occur for either winter or summer scenarios; heavy snow occurs in winter scenarios only. It is assumed that the rain or snow begins earlier or at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued.

No weatherrelated reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed. It is assumed that roads are passable and that the appropriate agencies are clearing/treating the roads as they would normally with ice and the roads are passable albeit at lower speeds and capacities.

3. Adverse weather scenarios affect roadway capacity and the free flow highway speeds.

The capacity and free flow speed are reduced by 10% for rain/light snow, and range 10%

to 25% for heavy snow. In accordance with Table 31 of Revision 1 to NUREG/CR7002, this study assumes a 10% reduction in speed and capacity for rain/light snow and a speed and capacity reduction of 15% and 25%, respectively, for heavy snow.

4. It is also assumed that mobilization and loading times for transit vehicles are slightly longer in adverse weather. It is assumed that mobilization times are 10 minutes and 20 minutes longer in rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. It is assumed that loading times for school buses are 5 minutes and 10 minutes longer in rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. It is further assumed that loading times for other transit vehicles are 10 minutes and 20 minutes longer in rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. Refer to Table 22.

Callaway Energy Center 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 54 of 424

5. It is assumed for heavy snow scenarios that some evacuees will need additional time to clear their driveways and access the public roadway system. The distribution of time for this activity was gathered through a demographic survey of the public and takes up to 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes. It is assumed that the time needed by evacuees to remove snow from their driveways is sufficient time for snow removal crews to mobilize and clear/treat the public roadway system.

6. It is assumed that employment is reduced slightly (4% reduction) in the summer for vacations.

7. Regions are defined by the underlying keyhole or circular configurations as specified in Section 1.4 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. These Regions, as defined, display irregular boundaries reflecting the geography of the Subareas included within these underlying configurations. All 16 cardinal and intercardinal wind direction keyhole configurations are considered. Regions to be considered are defined in Table 61. It is assumed that everyone within the group of Subareas forming a Region that is issued an ATE will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.

8. Due to the irregular shapes of the Subareas, there are instances where a small portion of a Subarea (a sliver) is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (less than 500 people or 10% of the Subarea population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the Subarea is not included in the Region so as to not evacuate large numbers of people outside of the keyhole for a small number of people that are actually in the keyhole, unless otherwise stated in the current PAR document.

9. Staged evacuation is considered as defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 - those people between 2 and 5 miles will shelterinplace until 90% of the 2mile region has evacuated, then they will evacuate. See Regions R34 through R44 in Table 61.

Callaway Energy Center 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 55 of 424 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Time of Scenario Season4 Weather Special Week Day 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain/Light Snow None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain/Light Snow None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain/Light Snow None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain/Light Snow None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Special Event - Refueling 13 Winter Midweek Midday Good Outage at Callaway Energy Center Roadway Impact - Lane 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Closure on I70 Outbound 4

Winter means that school is in session, at normal enrollment levels (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer means that school is in session at summer school enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Callaway Energy Center 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 56 of 424 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Free Mobilization Mobilization Loading Time Loading Time for Highway Flow Time for General Time for Transit for School Other Transit Scenario Capacity* Speed* Population Vehicles Buses Vehicles Rain/Light 10minute 5minute 10minute 90% 90% No Effect Snow increase increase increase 20minute 10minute 20minute Heavy Snow 75% 85% No Effect increase increase increase

• Adverse weather capacity and speed values are given as a percentage of good weather conditions. Roads are assumed to be passable.

Callaway Energy Center 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Page 57 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 58 of 424 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION The estimates of demand, expressed in terms of people and vehicles, constitute a critical element in developing an evacuation plan. These estimates consist of three components:

1. An estimate of population within the EPZ, stratified into groups (e.g., resident, employee, transient, special facilities, etc.).

2. An estimate, for each population group, of mean occupancy per evacuating vehicle. This estimate is used to determine the number of evacuating vehicles.

3. An estimate of potential doublecounting of vehicles.

Appendix E presents much of the source material for the population estimates. Our primary source of population data, the 2020 Census, is not adequate for directly estimating some transient groups.

Throughout the year, vacationers and tourists enter the EPZ. These nonresidents may dwell within the EPZ for a short period (e.g., a few days or one or two weeks), or may enter and leave within one day. Estimates of the size of these population components must be obtained, so that the associated number of evacuating vehicles can be ascertained.

The potential for doublecounting people and vehicles must be addressed. For example:

A resident who works and shops within the EPZ could be counted as a resident, again as an employee and once again as a shopper.

A visitor who stays at a hotel and spends time at a park, then goes shopping could be counted three times.

Furthermore, the number of vehicles at a location depends on time of day. For example, motel parking lots may be full at dawn and empty at noon. Similarly, parking lots at area parks, which are full at noon, may be almost empty at dawn. Estimating counts of vehicles by simply adding up the capacities of different types of parking facilities will tend to overestimate the number of transients and can lead to ETE that are too conservative.

Analysis of the population characteristics of the CEC EPZ indicates the need to identify three distinct groups:

Permanent residents people who are yearround residents of the EPZ.

Transients people who reside outside of the EPZ who enter the area for a specific purpose (shopping, recreation) and then leave the area.

Employees people who reside outside of the EPZ and commute to businesses within the EPZ on a daily basis.

Estimates of the population and number of evacuating vehicles for each of the population groups are presented for each Subarea and by polar coordinate representation (population rose). The CEC EPZ is subdivided into 15 Subareas. The Subareas comprising the EPZ are shown in Figure 31.

Callaway Energy Center 31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 59 of 424 3.1 Permanent Residents The primary source for estimating permanent population is the latest U.S. Census data with an availability date of September 16, 2021. The average household size (2.79 persons/household was obtained from the demographic survey - See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1). The number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.55 vehicles/household - See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.2) was adapted from the demographic survey.

The permanent resident population is estimated by cutting the census block polygons by the Subarea and EPZ boundaries using GIS software. A ratio of the original area of each census block and the updated area (after cutting) is multiplied by the total block population to estimate the population within the EPZ. This methodology (referred to as the area ratio method) assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 31 provides permanent resident population within the EPZ, by Subarea, for 2010 and for 2020 (based on the methodology above). As indicated, the permanent resident population within the EPZ has decreased by 3.05% since the 2010 Census.

To estimate the number of vehicles, the year 2020 permanent resident population is divided by the average household size and multiplied by the average number of evacuating vehicles per household. Permanent resident population and vehicle estimates are presented in Table 32.

Figure 32 and Figure 33 present the permanent resident population and permanent resident vehicle estimates by sector and distance from CEC. This population rose was constructed using GIS software. Note, the 2020 Census includes residents living in group quarters, such as skilled nursing facilities, group homes, prisons, college/university student housing, etc. These people are transit dependent (will not evacuate in personal vehicles) and are included in the special facility evacuation demand estimates. To avoid double counting vehicles, the vehicle estimates for these people have been removed. The resident vehicles in Table 32 and Figure 33 have been adjusted accordingly.

It can be argued that this estimate of permanent residents overstates, somewhat, the number of evacuating vehicles, especially during the summer. It is certainly reasonable to assert that some portion of the population would be on vacation during the summer and would travel elsewhere. A rough estimate of this reduction can be obtained as follows:

Assume 50 percent of all households vacation for a period over the summer.

Assume these vacations, in aggregate, are uniformly dispersed over 10 weeks, i.e. 10 percent of the population is on vacation during each twoweek interval.

Assume half of these vacationers leave the area.

On this basis, the permanent resident population would be reduced by 5 percent in the summer and by a lesser amount in the offseason. Given the uncertainty in this estimate, we elected to apply no reductions in permanent resident population for the summer scenarios to account for residents who may be out of the area.

Callaway Energy Center 32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 60 of 424 3.1.1 Colleges and Universities There are two higher education facilities in the Callaway EPZ: Westminster College and William Woods University. To estimate the demand for these facilities, it was assumed that all students without personal vehicles on campus would need to be provided transportation assistance from the county, and that all students with personal vehicles would evacuate with a ratio of one person per vehicle. For the previous study, the percentage of students without personal vehicles on campus was determined from the US News College and World Reports website1.

Since then, the individual school websites have been updated and the percentage of students who have a car on campus have been removed. As such, the percentage of students without personal vehicles is 23% for Westminster College and 10% for William Woods University based on the data from the previous study. The enrollment data from National Application Center (NAC)2 database indicate there are 760 fulltime students at Westminster College and 1,737 fulltime students at William Woods University. As a result, Westminster College has 175 (760 x 23%) students without personal vehicles and 585 (760 - 175) students with personal vehicles; William Woods University has 174 (1,737 x 10%) students without personal vehicles and 1,563 (1,737 - 174) students with personal vehicles. According to the demographic survey, approximately 87% of the transitdependent people would rideshare with a neighbor or friend (see Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1). As such, 152 (175 x 87%) students at Westminster College and 151 (174 x 87%) students at William Woods University would rideshare with a fellow classmate, leaving 23 (175 - 152, 174 - 151) students who would be evacuated by buses for each school. Using the capacity of 30 people per transitdependent bus, the number of buses needed for each school is 1 (23 ÷ 30 = 1, rounded up) or 2 vehicles (1 bus equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles). In total, there are 2,148 (585 + 1,563) commuter vehicles and 2 transit dependent buses for these two facilities.

3.2 Shadow Population A portion of the population living outside the evacuation area extending to 15 miles radially from the CEC may elect to evacuate without having been instructed to do so. This area is called the Shadow Region. Based upon NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance, it is assumed that 20 percent of the permanent resident population, based on U.S. Census Bureau data, in the Shadow Region will elect to evacuate.

Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuating vehicles per household, mobilization time) are assumed to be the same as that for the EPZ permanent resident population. Similar to the EPZ resident vehicle estimates, resident vehicles at group quarters have been removed from the shadow population vehicle demand in Table 33 and Figure 35.

3.3 Transient Population Transient population groups are defined as those people (who are not permanent residents, nor commuting employees) who enter the EPZ for a specific purpose (shopping, recreation).

1 https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges?int=top_nav_Colleges 2

https://www.nationalapplicationcenter.com/,

Callaway Energy Center 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 61 of 424 Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at camping facilities, hotels and motels. Data from the previous ETE study was reviewed by the counties within the EPZ and confirmed to be still accurate. An addition, two new lodging facilities were identified within the study area. Data for the new lodging facilities were estimated based on the number of rooms.

It is assumed that transients would travel as a family/household. As such, the average household size of 2.79 persons per household (see Section 3.1) was used for the new lodging facilities. The transient facilities within the CEC EPZ are summarized as follows:

Campgrounds - 191 transients and 90 vehicles; an average of 2.12 transients per vehicle.

Golf Courses - there is one golf course within the CEC EPZ. However, this facility was reported having local residents only. Therefore, no transients or vehicles were assigned to this facility to avoid double counting.

Hunting/Fishing Areas - 72 transients and 56 vehicles; an average of 1.29 transients per vehicle.

Parks and Other Recreational Areas - 510 transients and 187 vehicles; an average of 2.73 transients per vehicle.

Lodging Facilities - 211 transients and 104 vehicles; an average of 2.03 transients per vehicle.

Appendix E summarizes the transient data that was estimated for the EPZ. Table E4 presents the number of transients visiting recreational areas, while Table E5 presents the number of transients at lodging facilities within the EPZ and select portions of the Shadow Region.

In total there are 984 transients evacuating in 437 vehicles (an average of 2.25 transients per vehicle) in the EPZ and select portions of the Shadow Region. Table 34 presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by Subarea. Figure 36 and Figure 37 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.

3.4 Employees Employees who work within the EPZ fall into two categories:

Those who live and work in the EPZ Those who live outside of the EPZ and commute to jobs within the EPZ.

Those of the first category are already counted as part of the permanent resident population.

To avoid double counting, we focus only on those employees commuting from outside the EPZ who will evacuate along with the permanent resident population.

The employment data from the previous study was reviewed by Ameren Missouri and by the counties within the EPZ. It was confirmed the data was still applicable. As per the NUREG/CR 7002, Rev. 1 guidance, employers with 200 or more employees working in a single shift are considered as major employers. As such, the employers with less than 200 employees (during the maximum shift) are not considered in this study. Table E3 in Appendix E presents the major employers within the EPZ.

Callaway Energy Center 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 62 of 424 To estimate the evacuating employee vehicles, a vehicle occupancy of 1.09 employees per vehicle obtained from the demographic survey (See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1) was used for the major employers. Table 35 presents employee and vehicle estimates commuting into the EPZ by Subarea. Figure 38 and Figure 39 present these data by sector.

3.5 Medical Facilities The capacity, current census and general information for each medical facility were provided by the county emergency management department and from the facilities themselves. According to the counties, all medical facilities and nursing homes within the EPZ shelterinplace. Table 36 presents a list of medical facilities and their capacity.

3.6 School Population Table 37 presents the school population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all schools within the EPZ for the 20202021 school year (7,849 students, 108 buses). It should be noted that this table includes the total enrollment at colleges and universities within the EPZ which is also discussed in Section 3.1.1. This information was provided by the local county emergency management agencies. The column in Table 37 entitled Buses Required specifies the number of buses required for each school under the following set of assumptions and estimates:

• No students will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

• While many high school students commute to school using private automobiles (as discussed in Section 2.4 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1), the estimate of buses required for school evacuation do not consider the use of these private vehicles.

• Bus capacity, expressed in students per bus, is set to 70 for primary schools and 50 for middle and high schools.

• Those staff members who do not accompany the students will evacuate in their private vehicles.

• No allowance is made for student absenteeism, typically 3 percent daily.

It is recommended that the counties in the EPZ implement a process to confirm individual school transportation needs prior to bus dispatch which may improve bus utilization. In this way, the number of buses dispatched to the schools will reflect the actual number needed. The need for buses would be reduced by any high school students who have evacuated using private automobiles (if permitted by school authorities). Those buses originally allocated to evacuate schoolchildren that are not needed due to children being picked up by their parents, can be gainfully assigned to service other facilities or those persons who do not have access to private vehicles or to ridesharing.

School buses are represented as two vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

Callaway Energy Center 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 63 of 424 3.7 Transit Dependent Population The demographic survey (see Appendix F) results were used to estimate the portion of the population requiring transit service:

• Those persons in households that do not have a vehicle available.

• Those persons in households that do have vehicle(s) that would not be available at the time the evacuation is advised.

In the latter group, the vehicle(s) may be used by a commuter(s) who does not return (or is not expected to return) home to evacuate the household.

Table 38 presents estimates of transitdependent people. Note:

• Estimates of persons requiring transit vehicles include schoolchildren. For those evacuation scenarios where children are at school when an evacuation is ordered, separate transportation is provided for the schoolchildren. The actual need for transit vehicles by residents is thereby less than the given estimates. However, estimates of transit vehicles are not reduced when schools are in session.

• It is reasonable and appropriate to consider that many transitdependent persons will evacuate by ridesharing with neighbors, friends or family. For example, nearly 80 percent of those who evacuated from Mississauga, Ontario who did not use their own cars, shared a ride with neighbors or friends. Other documents report that approximately 70 percent of transit dependent persons were evacuated via ride sharing. Based on the results of the demographic survey, approximately 87% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

The estimated number of bus trips needed to service transitdependent persons is based on an estimate of average bus occupancy of 30 persons at the conclusion of the bus run. Transit vehicle seating capacities typically equal or exceed 60 children (roughly equivalent to 40 adults). If transit vehicle evacuees are two thirds adults and one third children, then the number of adult seats taken by 30 persons is 20 + (2/3 x10) = 27. On this basis, the average load factor anticipated is (27/40) x 100 = 68 percent. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 38 by 50 percent, the demand for service can still be accommodated by the available bus seating capacity.

2 20 10 40 1.5 1.00 3

Table 38 indicates that transportation must be provided for 37 people. Therefore, a total of 2 buses are required from a capacity standpoint. Subareas with less than one transitdependent person requiring transportation were ignored for this study. In order to service all transit dependent people while minimizing evacuation time, 4 buses are used in the ETE calculations, see section 8.1 for further discussion. These buses are represented as two vehicles in the ETE Callaway Energy Center 36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 64 of 424 simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

To illustrate this estimation procedure, we calculate the number of persons, P, requiring public transit or rideshare, and the number of buses, B, required for the CEC EPZ:

Where, A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 7,010 0.1200 1.56 1 0.70 0.40 0.4280 2.64 2 0.70 0.40 282 1 0.87 30 0.13 282 30 2 These calculations are explained as follows:

• The total number of persons requiring public transit is the sum of such people in HH with no vehicles, or with 1 or 2 vehicles that are away from home.

• The approximate number of households is 7,010 (19,558 ÷2.79).

• No households (HH) indicated that they did not have access to a vehicle.

• The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (12.00%), who are at home, equal 0.56 (1.561). The number of HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (7,010 x 0.12 x 0.70 x 0.40), as 70% of EPZ households have a commuter, 40% of which would not return home in the event of an emergency. The number of persons who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms.

• The members of HH with 2 vehicles that are away (42.80%), who are at home, equal 0.64 (2.64 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 7,010 x 0.4280 x (0.70 x 0.40)2. The number of persons who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms (the last term is squared to represent the probability that neither commuter will return).

• Households with 3 or more vehicles are assumed to have no need for transit vehicles.

The estimate of transitdependent population in Callaway Energy Center 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 65 of 424 Table 38 exceeds the number of registered transitdependent persons in the EPZ as provided by the counties. This is consistent with the findings of NUREG/CR6953, Volume 2, in that a large majority of the transitdependent population within the EPZs of U.S. nuclear plants does not register with their local emergency response agency.

3.8 Access and/or Functional Needs Population The county emergency management agencies have a combined registration for transit dependent and access and/or functional needs persons. Based on data provided by the counties, there are an estimated 20 access and/or functional needs people within EPZ who require transportation assistance to evacuate. Out of the 20 total access and/or functional needs persons there are 16 ambulatory persons and 4 bedridden persons. (See Table 39) Buses and wheelchair buses needed to evacuate the special needs population are represented as two vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

3.9 Correctional Facilities As detailed in Table E9, there are two correctional facilities within the EPZ - The Fulton Reception and Diagnostic Center and the Callaway County Jail. As shown in the table, there are a total of 1,455 inmates at these facilities. Both of these facilities will shelter in place in the event of an evacuation, as per county plans (Callaway County/Fulton Radiological Emergency Response Plan,Section VI.F).

3.10 Special Event Based on discussion with Ameren Missouri and the offsite agencies, the special event considered is a refueling outage at Callaway Energy Center - Scenario 13. Ameren Missouri estimates a refueling outage would bring 1,080 contractors from outside the EPZ. The employee vehicle occupancy rate of 1.09 employees per vehicle was used to estimate the number of additional vehicles (991) present for this event.

3.11 External Traffic Vehicles will be traveling through the EPZ (externalexternal trips) at the time of an accident.

After the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) is announced, these throughtravelers will also evacuate.

These through vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes traversing the EPZ -

Interstate (I) 70 and US Highway (US) - 54. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the EPZ during the first 120 minutes following the ATE.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data was obtained from Federal Highway Administration to estimate the number of vehicles per hour (vph) on the aforementioned routes. The AADT was multiplied by the KFactor, which is the proportion of the AADT on a roadway segment or link during the design hour, resulting in the design hour volume (DHV). The design hour is usually the 30th highest hourly traffic volume of the year, measured in vph. The DHV is then multiplied Callaway Energy Center 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 66 of 424 by the DFactor, which is the proportion of the DHV occurring in the peak direction of travel (also known as the directional split). The resulting values are the directional design hourly volumes (DDHV) and are presented in Table 310, for each of the routes considered. The DDHV is then multiplied by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />, since access control points (ACPs) are assumed to be activated at 120 minutes after the ATE, to estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. As indicated, there are 7,256 vehicles entering the EPZ as externalexternal trips prior to the activation of the ACP and the diversion of this traffic. This number is reduced by 60% for evening scenarios (Scenarios 5 and 12).

3.12 Background Traffic Section 5 discusses the time needed for the people in the EPZ to mobilize and begin their evacuation trips. As shown in Table 59 there are 14 time periods during which traffic is loaded on to roadways in the study area to model the mobilization time of people in the EPZ. Note, there is no traffic generated during the 15th time period, as this time period is intended to allow traffic that has already begun evacuating to clear the study area boundaries.

This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of Time Period 1. Rather, there is a 45minute initialization time period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from Time Period 1 are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of Time Period 1 depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated (see Section 6). There are 1,568 vehicles on the roadways in the study area at the end of fill time for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 6 (winter, midweek, midday, good weather) conditions.

3.13 Summary of Demand A summary of population and vehicle demand is summarized in Table 311 and Table 312, respectively. This summary includes all population groups described in this section. A total of 32,484 people and 20,371 vehicles are considered in this study.

Callaway Energy Center 39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 67 of 424 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Subarea 2010 Population 2020 Population C1 90 62 C2 363 333 C3 441 455 C4 264 249 C5 86 75 C6 492 496 C7 1,406 1,434 C8 2,493 2,331 C9 12,112 11,869 C10 544 454 C11 239 254 G1 107 86 M1 181 171 M2 496 483 O1 859 806 EPZ TOTAL: 20,173 19,558 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 3.05%

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Subarea Subarea 2020 Population Resident Vehicles C1 62 36 C2 333 185 C3 455 252 C4 249 142 C5 75 42 C6 496 276 C7 1,434 781 C8 2,331 1,293 C9 11,869 4,8023 C10 454 247 C11 254 145 G1 86 48 M1 171 97 M2 483 268 O1 806 449 EPZ TOTAL: 19,558 9,063 3

Modified to avoid double counting the vehicles at correctional and higher education facilities located in Subarea C9.

Callaway Energy Center 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 68 of 424 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Evacuating Sector Population Vehicles N 157 83 NNE 101 57 NE 148 82 ENE 139 77 E 89 52 ESE 228 126 SE 302 168 SSE 92 53 S 210 119 SSW 388 218 SW 402 227 WSW 538 300 W 661 370 WNW 1,754 974 NW 1,029 563 NNW 322 182 TOTAL: 6,560 3,651 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles Subarea Transients Transient Vehicles C1 10 4 C2 151 76 C3 41 15 C4 2 2 C5 0 0 C6 10 4 C7 20 12 C8 500 183 C9 144 71 C10 4 2 C11 0 0 G1 0 0 M1 0 0 M2 5 5 O1 35 32 EPZ TOTAL: 922 406 Shadow Region4: 62 31 STUDY AREA TOTAL: 984 437 4

A lodging facility in Callaway County is located in the Shadow Region. As per the countys request, this facility is included in the study due to the close proximity to the EPZ boundary. Figure 3-6 and Figure 3-7 display the transients and transient vehicles within the EPZ only, therefore, the total numbers shown in these two figures do not align with the study area total numbers in Table 3-4.

Callaway Energy Center 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 69 of 424 Table 35. Summary Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ Subarea Employees Employee Vehicles C1 331 304 C2 0 0 C3 0 0 C4 0 0 C5 0 0 C6 0 0 C7 0 0 C8 0 0 C9 228 209 C10 0 0 C11 0 0 G1 0 0 M1 0 0 M2 0 0 O1 0 0 EPZ TOTAL: 559 513 Callaway Energy Center 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 36. Medical Facilities Transit Demand Subarea Facility Name Municipality Capacity CALLAWAY COUNTY, MO C7 Riverview Nursing Center C7 60 C9 Ashbury Heights Independent Living C9 12 C9 Bridgeway Assisted Living Care C9 94 C9 Bristol Manor C9 12 C9 Churchill Terrace C9 44 C9 Fulton Manor Care Center C9 52 C9 Fulton Medical Center C9 39 C9 Fulton Nursing & Rehab C9 100 C9 Fulton State Hospital C9 281 C9 Kingdom Care Senior Living C9 36 Callaway County Subtotal: 730 TOTAL: 730 Note: According to the Callaway RERP, dated February 2017, all medical facilities and nursing homes located within the 10mile EPZ will shelterinplace.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 70 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 37. School Population Demand Estimates Buses Subarea School Name Enrollment Required CALLAWAY COUNTY, MO C7 South Callaway RII Middle School 6 C7 South Callaway RII High School 8 864 South Callaway RII Elementary 4 C7 School C9 Bush Elementary School 370 6 C9 Missouri School for the Deaf 80 2 C9 Bartley Elementary School 282 5 C9 St Peter's Catholic School 128 2 C9 Fulton Middle School 580 12 C9 Kingdom Christian Academy 174 3 C9 Westminster College 760 1 C9 Rosa Parks Center 8 1 C9 William Woods University 1,737 1 C9 McIntire Elementary School 389 6 C9 Fulton High School 2,129 43 C10 Missouri Girls Town Foundation 50 1 Callaway County Subtotal: 7,551 101 OSAGE COUNTY, MO O1 Chamois High School 79 2 Osage County Chamois R1 School 219 5 O1 District Lake County Subtotal: 298 7 EPZ TOTAL: 7,849 108 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 71 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 38. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Average Survey Percent HH Size Survey Percent HH Survey Percent HH Total People Population with Indicated Estimated with Indicated No. of Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring 2020 EPZ No. of Vehicles No. of Vehicles with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 19,558 0.00 1.56 2.64 7,010 0.0% 12.0% 42.8% 70.00% 40.00% 282 87% 37 0.2%

Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Population Group Population Vehicles deployed Ambulatory 16 4 buses Bedridden 4 2 ambulances Total: 20 3 vehicles Table 310. CEC EPZ External Traffic Road Name Hourly External Upstream Node Downstream Node Direction AADT5 KFactor6 DFactor9 Volume Traffic 8005 5 I70 Eastbound 27,758 0.107 0.5 1,485 2,970 8800 800 I70 Westbound 27,758 0.107 0.5 1,485 2,970 8073 756 US 54 Northbound 11,348 0.116 0.5 329 658 8028 28 US 54 Southbound 11,348 0.116 0.5 329 658 TOTAL 7,256 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 5

Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Washington, D.C., 2011.

6 June 27, 2022 HCM 2016 Page 72 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 311. Summary of Population Demand Colleges Transit Special and Shadow External Subarea Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Universities Schools Population Traffic Total C1 62 0 10 331 0 0 0 0 0 403 C2 333 0 151 0 0 0 0 0 0 484 C3 455 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 496 C4 249 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 251 C5 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 C6 496 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 506 C7 1,434 3 20 0 60 0 864 0 0 2,381 C8 2,331 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 23,866 C9 11,869 144 228 2,125 2,497 4,140 0 0 C10 454 0 4 0 0 0 50 0 0 508 C11 254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 G1 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 M1 171 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 171 M2 483 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 488 O1 806 2 35 0 0 0 298 0 0 1,141 Shadow Region 0 0 62 0 0 0 0 1,312 0 1,374 TOTAL: 19,558 37 984 559 2,185 2,497 5,352 1,312 0 32,484 NOTE: Shadow Population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 21 for additional information.

NOTE: Special Facilities (medical and correctional facilities) are instructed to ShelterinPlace during an evacuation.

NOTE: There is some inherent double counting in this table (specifically group quarters in the EPZ). This double counting is removed when computing the vehicular demand summarized in Table 312 which is what is used in the simulation of ETE. Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 73 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand Transit Special Colleges and Shadow External Subarea Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Universities Schools Vehicles Traffic Total C1 36 0 4 304 0 0 0 0 0 334 C2 185 0 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 261 C3 252 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 267 C4 142 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 C5 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 C6 276 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 280 C7 781 2 12 0 0 0 36 0 0 831 C8 1,293 183 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8,874 C9 4,802 71 209 0 2,148 164 0 0 C10 247 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 251 C11 145 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 145 G1 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 M1 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 97 M2 268 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 273 O1 449 2 32 0 0 0 14 0 0 497 Shadow 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 730 7,256 8,017 Region TOTAL: 9,063 8 437 513 0 2,148 216 730 7,256 20,371 NOTE: Buses (including wheelchair buses) are represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 8 for additional information.

NOTE: Shadow Population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 21 for additional information.

NOTE: Special Facilities are instructed to ShelterinPlace during an evacuation.

NOTE: Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, they are not included in this table.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 74 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Figure 31. Subareas Comprising the CEC EPZ June 27, 2022 Page 75 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 76 of 424 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Callaway Energy Center 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 77 of 424 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Callaway Energy Center 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 78 of 424 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Callaway Energy Center 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 79 of 424 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Callaway Energy Center 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 80 of 424 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Callaway Energy Center 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 81 of 424 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Callaway Energy Center 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 82 of 424 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Callaway Energy Center 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 83 of 424 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Callaway Energy Center 326 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 84 of 424 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY The ability of the road network to service vehicle demand is a major factor in determining how rapidly an evacuation can be completed. The capacity of a road is defined as the maximum hourly rate at which persons or vehicles can reasonably be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a lane of roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic and control conditions, as stated in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016).

In discussing capacity, different operating conditions have been assigned alphabetical designations, A through F, to reflect the range of traffic operational characteristics. These designations have been termed "Level of Service" (LOS). For example, LOS A connotes freeflow and highspeed operating conditions; LOS F represents a forced flow condition. LOS E describes traffic operating at or near capacity.

Another concept, closely associated with capacity, is Service Volume. Service volume (SV) is defined as The maximum hourly rate at which vehicles, bicycles or persons reasonably can be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a roadway during an hour under specific assumed conditions while maintaining a designated level of service. This definition is similar to that for capacity. The major distinction is that values of SV vary from one LOS to another, while capacity is the SV at the upper bound of LOS E, only.

Thus, in simple terms, an SV is the maximum traffic that can travel on a road and still maintain a certain perceived level of quality to a driver based on the A, B, C, rating system (LOS). Any additional vehicles above the service SV would drop the rating to a lower letter grade.

This distinction is illustrated in Exhibit 127 of the HCM 2016. As indicated there, the SV varies with Free Flow Speed (FFS), and LOS. The SV is calculated by the DYNEV II simulation model, based on the specified link attributes, FFS, capacity, control device and traffic demand.

Other factors also influence capacity. These include, but are not limited to:

Lane width Shoulder width Pavement condition Horizontal and vertical alignment (curvature and grade)

Percent truck traffic Control device (and timing, if it is a signal)

Weather conditions (rain, snow, fog, wind speed, ice)

These factors are considered during the road survey and in the capacity estimation process; some factors have greater influence on capacity than others. For example, lane and shoulder width have only a limited influence on Base Free Flow Speed (BFFS1) according to Exhibit 157 of the HCM 2016. Consequently, lane and shoulder widths at the narrowest points were observed during the road survey and these observations were recorded, but no detailed measurements of lane or shoulder width were taken. Horizontal and vertical alignment can 1

A very rough estimate of BFFS might be taken as the posted speed limit plus 10 mph (HCM 2016 Page 15-15).

Callaway Energy Center 41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 85 of 424 influence both FFS and capacity. The estimated FFS were measured using the survey vehicles speedometer and observing local traffic, under free flow conditions. Capacity is estimated from the procedures of the HCM 2016. For example, HCM 2016 Exhibit 71(b) shows the sensitivity of SV at the upper bound of LOS D to grade (capacity is the SV at the upper bound of LOS E).

As discussed in Section 2.6 it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent the prevailing conditions during inclement weather. Based on limited empirical data, weather conditions such as rain reduce the values of freeflow speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10 percent. Over the last decade new studies have been made on the effects of rain on traffic capacity. These studies indicate a range of effects between 5 and 20 percent depending on wind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.6, we employ a reduction in free flow speed and in highway capacity of a 10 percent for rain/light snow and a freeflow speed and capacity reduction of 15 percent and 25 percent, respectively, for heavy snow.

Since congestion arising from evacuation may be significant, estimates of roadway capacity must be determined with great care. Because of its importance, a brief discussion of the major factors that influence highway capacity is presented in this section.

Rural highways generally consist of: (1) one or more uniform sections with limited access (driveways, parking areas) characterized by uninterrupted flow; and (2) approaches to at grade intersections where flow can be interrupted by a control device or by turning or crossing traffic at the intersection. Due to these differences, separate estimates of capacity must be made for each section. Often, the approach to the intersection is widened by the addition of one or more lanes (turn pockets or turn bays), to compensate for the lower capacity of the approach due to the factors there that can interrupt the flow of traffic. These additional lanes are recorded during the field survey and later entered as input to the DYNEV II system.

4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections Atgrade intersections are apt to become the first bottleneck locations under local heavy traffic volume conditions. This characteristic reflects the need to allocate access time to the respective competing traffic streams by exerting some form of control. During evacuation, control at critical intersections will often be provided by traffic control personnel assigned for that purpose, whose directions may supersede traffic control devices. See Appendix G for more information.

The perlane capacity of an approach to a signalized intersection can be expressed (simplistically) in the following form:

3600 3600 where:

Qcap,m = Capacity of a single lane of traffic on an approach, which executes movement, m, upon entering the intersection; vehicles per hour (vph)

Callaway Energy Center 42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 86 of 424 hm = Mean queue discharge headway of vehicles on this lane that are executing movement, m; seconds per vehicle G = Mean duration of GREEN time servicing vehicles that are executing movement, m, for each signal cycle; seconds L = Mean "lost time" for each signal phase servicing movement, m; seconds C = Duration of each signal cycle; seconds Pm = Proportion of GREEN time allocated for vehicles executing movement, m, from this lane. This value is specified as part of the control treatment.

m = The movement executed by vehicles after they enter the intersection: through, leftturn, rightturn, and diagonal.

The turnmovementspecific mean discharge headway hm, depends in a complex way upon many factors: roadway geometrics, turn percentages, the extent of conflicting traffic streams, the control treatment, and others. A primary factor is the value of "saturation queue discharge headway", hsat, which applies to through vehicles that are not impeded by other conflicting traffic streams. This value, itself, depends upon many factors including motorist behavior.

Formally, we can write, where:

hsat = Saturation discharge headway for through vehicles; seconds per vehicle F1,F2 = The various known factors influencing hm fm( ) = Complex function relating hm to the known (or estimated) values of hsat, F1, F2, The estimation of hm for specified values of hsat, F1, F2, ... is undertaken within the DYNEV II simulation model by a mathematical model2. The resulting values for hm always satisfy the condition:

That is, the turnmovementspecific discharge headways are always greater than, or equal to the saturation discharge headway for through vehicles. These headways (or its inverse equivalent, saturation flow rate), may be determined by observation or using the procedures of the HCM 2016.

The above discussion is necessarily brief given the scope of this ETE report and the complexity of the subject of intersection capacity. In fact, Chapters 19, 20 and 21 in the HCM 2016 address 2

Lieberman, E., "Determining Lateral Deployment of Traffic on an Approach to an Intersection", McShane, W. & Lieberman, E.,

"Service Rates of Mixed Traffic on the far Left Lane of an Approach". Both papers appear in Transportation Research Record 772, 1980. Lieberman, E., Xin, W., Macroscopic Traffic Modeling for Large-Scale Evacuation Planning, presented at the TRB 2012 Annual Meeting, January 22-26, 2012 Callaway Energy Center 43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 87 of 424 this topic. The factors, F1, F2, , influencing saturation flow rate are identified in equation (198) of the HCM 2016.

The traffic signals within the EPZ and Shadow Region are modeled using representative phasing plans and phase durations obtained as part of the field data collection. Traffic responsive signal installations allow the proportion of green time allocated (Pm) for each approach to each intersection to be determined by the expected traffic volumes on each approach during evacuation circumstances. The amount of green time (G) allocated is subject to maximum and minimum phase duration constraints; 2 seconds of yellow time are indicated for each signal phase and 1 second of allred time is assigned between signal phases, typically. If a signal is pre timed, the yellow and allred times observed during the road survey are used. A lost time (L) of 2.0 seconds is used for each signal phase in the analysis.

4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway The capacity of highway sections as distinct from approaches to intersections is a function of roadway geometrics, traffic composition (e.g. percent heavy trucks and buses in the traffic stream) and, of course, motorist behavior. There is a fundamental relationship which relates SV (i.e. the number of vehicles serviced within a uniform highway section in a given time period) to traffic density. The top curve in Figure 41 illustrates this relationship.

As indicated, there are two flow regimes: (1) Free Flow (left side of curve); and (2) Forced Flow (right side). In the Free Flow regime, the traffic demand is fully serviced; the SV increases as demand volume and density increase, until the SV attains its maximum value, which is the capacity of the highway section. As traffic demand and the resulting highway density increase beyond this "critical" value, the rate at which traffic can be serviced (i.e. the SV) can actually decline below capacity (capacity drop). Therefore, in order to realistically represent traffic performance during congested conditions (i.e. when demand exceeds capacity), it is necessary to estimate the SV, VF, under congested conditions.

The value of VF can be expressed as:

where:

R = Reduction factor which is less than unity We have employed a value of R=0.90. The advisability of such a capacity reduction factor is based upon empirical studies that identified a falloff in the service flow rate when congestion occurs at bottlenecks or choke points on a freeway system. Zhang and Levinson3 describe a research program that collected data from a computerbased surveillance system (loop detectors) installed on the Interstate Highway System, at 27 active bottlenecks in the twin cities metro area in Minnesota over a 7week period. When flow breakdown occurs, queues are formed which discharge at lower flow rates than the maximum capacity prior to observed 3

Lei Zhang and David Levinson, Some Properties of Flows at Freeway Bottlenecks, Transportation Research Record 1883, 2004.

Callaway Energy Center 44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 88 of 424 breakdown. These queue discharge flow (QDF) rates vary from one location to the next and also vary by day of week and time of day based upon local circumstances. The cited reference presents a mean QDF of 2,016 passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl). This figure compares with the nominal capacity estimate of 2,250 pcphpl estimated for the ETE and indicated in Appendix K for freeway links. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 which translates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.

Since the principal objective of evacuation time estimate analyses is to develop a realistic estimate of evacuation times, use of the representative value for this capacity reduction factor (R=0.90) is justified. This factor is applied only when flow breaks down, as determined by the simulation model.

Rural roads, like freeways, are classified as uninterrupted flow facilities. (This is in contrast with urban street systems which have closely spaced signalized intersections and are classified as interrupted flow facilities.) As such, traffic flow along rural roads is subject to the same effects as freeways in the event traffic demand exceeds the nominal capacity, resulting in queuing and lower QDF rates. As a practical matter, rural roads rarely break down at locations away from intersections. Any breakdowns on rural roads are generally experienced at intersections where other model logic applies, or at lane drops which reduce capacity there.

Therefore, the application of a factor of 0.90 is appropriate on rural roads, but rarely, if ever, activated.

The estimated value of capacity is based primarily upon the type of facility and on roadway geometrics. Sections of roadway with adverse geometrics are characterized by lower freeflow speeds and lane capacity. Exhibit 1546 in the HCM 2016 was referenced to estimate saturation flow rates. The impact of narrow lanes and shoulders on freeflow speed and on capacity is not material, particularly when flow is predominantly in one direction as is the case during an evacuation.

The procedure used here was to estimate "section" capacity, VE, based on observations made traveling over each section of the evacuation network, based on the posted speed limits and travel behavior of other motorists and by reference to the HCM 2016. The DYNEV II simulation model determines for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether its capacity would be limited by the "sectionspecific" SV, VE, or by the intersectionspecific capacity. For each link, the model selects the lower value of capacity.

4.3 Application to the Callaway Energy Center Study Area As part of the development of the linknode analysis network for the study area, an estimate of roadway capacity is required. The source material for the capacity estimates presented herein is contained in:

2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016)

Transportation Research Board National Research Council Washington, D.C.

Callaway Energy Center 45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 89 of 424 The highway system in the study area consists primarily of three categories of roads and, of course, intersections:

TwoLane roads: Local, State Multilane Highways (atgrade)

Freeways Each of these classifications will be discussed below.

4.3.1 TwoLane Roads Ref: HCM 2016 Chapter 15 Two lane roads comprise the majority of highways within the EPZ. The perlane capacity of a twolane highway is estimated at 1,700 passenger cars per hour (pc/h). This estimate is essentially independent of the directional distribution of traffic volume except that, for extended distances, the twoway capacity will not exceed 3,200 pc/h. The HCM 2016 procedures then estimate LOS and Average Travel Speed. The DYNEV II simulation model accepts the specified value of capacity as input and computes average speed based on the timevarying demand: capacity relations.

Based on the field survey and on expected traffic operations associated with evacuation scenarios:

Most sections of twolane roads within the EPZ are classified as Class I, with "level terrain"; some are rolling terrain.

Class II highways are mostly those within urban and suburban centers.

4.3.2 Multilane Highway Ref: HCM 2016 Chapter 12 Exhibit 128 of the HCM 2016 presents a set of curves that indicate a perlane capacity ranging from approximately 1,900 to 2,200 pc/h, for freespeeds of 45 to 60 mph, respectively. Based on observation, the multilane highways outside of urban areas within the EPZ, service traffic with freespeeds in this range. The actual timevarying speeds computed by the simulation model reflect the demand: capacity relationship and the impact of control at intersections. A conservative estimate of perlane capacity of 1,900 pc/h is adopted for this study for multilane highways outside of urban areas, as shown in Appendix K.

4.3.3 Freeways Ref: HCM 2016 Chapters 10, 12, 13, 14 Chapter 10 of the HCM 2016 describes a procedure for integrating the results obtained in Chapters 12, 13 and 14, which compute capacity and LOS for freeway components. Chapter 10 Callaway Energy Center 46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 90 of 424 also presents a discussion of simulation models. The DYNEV II simulation model automatically performs this integration process.

Chapter 12 of the HCM 2016 presents procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for Basic Freeway Segments". Exhibit 1237 of the HCM 2016 presents capacity vs. free speed estimates, which are provided below.

Free Speed (mph): 55 60 65 70+

PerLane Capacity (pc/h): 2,250 2,300 2,350 2,400 The inputs to the simulation model are highway geometrics, freespeeds and capacity based on field observations. The simulation logic calculates actual timevarying speeds based on demand:

capacity relationships. A conservative estimate of perlane capacity of 2,250 pc/h is adopted for this study for freeways, as shown in Appendix K.

Chapter 13 of the HCM 2016 presents procedures for estimating capacity, speed, density and LOS for freeway weaving sections. The simulation model contains logic that relates speed to demand volume: capacity ratio. The value of capacity obtained from the computational procedures detailed in Chapter 12 depends on the "Type" and geometrics of the weaving segment and on the "Volume Ratio" (ratio of weaving volume to total volume).

Chapter 14 of the HCM 2016 presents procedures for estimating capacities of ramps and of "merge" areas. There are three significant factors to the determination of capacity of a ramp freeway junction: The capacity of the freeway immediately downstream of an onramp or immediately upstream of an offramp; the capacity of the ramp roadway; and the maximum flow rate entering the ramp influence area. In most cases, the freeway capacity is the controlling factor. Values of this merge area capacity are presented in Exhibit 1410 of the HCM 2016 and depend on the number of freeway lanes and on the freeway free speed. Ramp capacity is presented in Exhibit 1412 and is a function of the ramps FFS. The DYNEV II simulation model logic simulates the merging operations of the ramp and freeway traffic in accord with the procedures in Chapter 14 of the HCM 2016. If congestion results from an excess of demand relative to capacity, then the model allocates service appropriately to the two entering traffic streams and produces LOS F conditions (The HCM 2016 does not address LOS F explicitly).

Callaway Energy Center 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 91 of 424 4.3.4 Intersections Ref: HCM 2016 Chapters 19, 20, 21, 22 Procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for approaches to intersections are presented in Chapter 19 (signalized intersections), Chapters 20, 21 (unsignalized intersections) and Chapter 22 (roundabouts). The complexity of these computations is indicated by the aggregate length of these chapters. The DYNEV II simulation logic is likewise complex.

The simulation model explicitly models intersections: Stop/yield controlled intersections (both 2way and allway) and traffic signal controlled intersections. Where intersections are controlled by fixed time controllers, traffic signal timings are set to reflect average (non evacuation) traffic conditions. Actuated traffic signal settings respond to the timevarying demands of evacuation traffic to adjust the relative capacities of the competing intersection approaches.

The model is also capable of modeling the presence of manned traffic control. At specific locations where it is advisable or where existing plans call for overriding existing traffic control to implement manned control, the model will use actuated signal timings that reflect the presence of traffic guides. At locations where a special traffic control strategy (continuous left turns, contraflow lanes) is used, the strategy is modeled explicitly. A list that includes the total number of intersections modeled that are unsignalized, signalized, or manned by response personnel is noted in Appendix K.

4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation Chapter 6 of the HCM 2016 is entitled, HCM and Alternative Analysis Tools. The chapter discusses the use of alternative tools such as simulation modeling to evaluate the operational performance of highway networks. Among the reasons cited in Chapter 6 to consider using simulation as an alternative analysis tool is:

The system under study involves a group of different facilities or travel modes with mutual interactions invoking several HCM chapters. Alternative tools are able to analyze these facilities as a single system.

This statement succinctly describes the analyses required to determine traffic operations across an area encompassing an EPZ operating under evacuation conditions. The model utilized for this study, DYNEV II, is further described in Appendix C. It is essential to recognize that simulation models do not replicate the methodology and procedures of the HCM 2016 - they replace these procedures by describing the complex interactions of traffic flow and computing Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) detailing the operational performance of traffic over time and by location. The DYNEV II simulation model includes some HCM 2016 procedures only for the purpose of estimating capacity.

Callaway Energy Center 48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 92 of 424 All simulation models must be calibrated properly with field observations that quantify the performance parameters applicable to the analysis network. Two of the most important of these are: (1) FFS; and (2) saturation headway, hsat. The first of these is estimated by direct observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using the concepts of the HCM 2016, as described earlier.

4.5 Boundary Conditions As illustrated in Figure 12 and in Appendix K, the linknode analysis network used for this study is finite. The analysis network extends well beyond the 15mile radial study area in some locations in order to model intersections with other major evacuation routes beyond the study area. However, the network does have an end at the destination (exit) nodes as discussed in Appendix C. Beyond these destination nodes, there may be signalized intersections or merge points that impact the capacity of the evacuation routes leaving the study area. As there are no signalized intersections leaving the study area, this study did not assume a reduction in capacity on twolane roads (Section 4.3.1 above) and multilane highways (Section 4.3.2 above). There is also no reduction in capacity for freeways due to boundary conditions.

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kopt kj ks Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams Callaway Energy Center 49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 93 of 424 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal guidance (see NUREG CR7002, Rev. 1) recommends that the Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) study estimate the distributions of elapsed times associated with mobilization activities undertaken by the public to prepare for the evacuation trip. The elapsed time associated with each activity is represented as a statistical distribution reflecting differences between members of the public. The quantification of these activitybased distributions relies largely on the results of the demographic survey. We define the sum of these distributions of elapsed times as the Trip Generation Time Distribution.

5.1 Background

In general, an accident at a nuclear power plant is characterized by the following Emergency Classification Levels (see Section C of Part IV of Appendix E of 10 CFR 50 for details):

1. Unusual Event

2. Alert

3. Site Area Emergency

4. General Emergency At each level, the Federal guidelines specify a set of Actions to be undertaken by the licensee, and by the state and local offsite agencies. As a Planning Basis, we will adopt a conservative posture, in accordance with Section 1.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, that a rapidly escalating accident at the plant wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented will be considered in calculating the Trip Generation time. We will assume:

1. The Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) will be announced coincident with the siren notification.

2. Mobilization of the general population will commence within 10 minutes after the siren notification.

3. ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

We emphasize that the adoption of this planning basis is not a representation that these events will occur within the indicated time frame. Rather, these assumptions are necessary in order to:

1. Establish a temporal framework for estimating the Trip Generation distribution in the format recommended in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR6863.

2. Identify temporal points of reference that uniquely define "Clear Time" and ETE.

It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various classes of an emergency.

For example, suppose one hour elapses from the siren alert to the ATE. In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public during this one hour period. As a result, the population within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) will be lower when the ATE is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an Advisory will be broadcasted. Thus, the time needed to complete the mobilization activities and the number of people remaining to evacuate the EPZ after the ATE, will both be somewhat less than the estimates presented in this Callaway Energy Center 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 94 of 424 report. Consequently, the ETE presented in this report are higher than the actual evacuation time, if this hypothetical situation were to take place.

The notification process consists of two events:

1. Transmitting information using the alert and notification systems (ANS) available within the EPZ (e.g. sirens, tone alerts, EAS broadcasts, loudspeakers and REVERSE911).

2. Receiving and correctly interpreting the information that is transmitted.

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 420 square miles and is engaged in a wide variety of activities. It must be anticipated that some time will elapse between the transmission and receipt of the information advising the public of an accident.

The amount of elapsed time will vary from one individual to the next depending on where that person is, what that person is doing, and related factors. Furthermore, some persons who will be directly involved with the evacuation process may be outside the EPZ at the time the emergency is declared. These people may be commuters, shoppers and other travelers who reside within the EPZ and who will return to join the other household members upon receiving notification of an emergency.

As indicated in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR6863, the estimated elapsed times for the receipt of notification can be expressed as a distribution reflecting the different notification times for different people within, and outside, the EPZ. By using time distributions, it is also possible to distinguish between different population groups and different dayofweek and timeofday scenarios, so that accurate ETE may be computed.

For example, people at home or at work within the EPZ will be notified by siren, and/or tone alert and/or radio (if available). Those well outside the EPZ will be notified by telephone, radio, TV and wordofmouth, with potentially longer time lags. Furthermore, the spatial distribution of the EPZ population will differ with time of day families will be united in the evenings but dispersed during the day. In this respect, weekends will differ from weekdays.

As indicated in Section 4.1 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from a demographic survey of EPZ residents. Such a survey was conducted in support of this ETE study for this site. Appendix F discusses the survey sampling plan, number of completed surveys obtained, documents the survey instrument utilized, and provides the survey results. It is important to note that the shape and duration of the evacuation trip mobilization distribution is important at sites where traffic congestion is not expected to cause the evacuation time estimate to extend in time well beyond the trip generation period. The remaining discussion will focus on the application of the trip generation data obtained from the demographic survey to the development of the ETE documented in this report.

Callaway Energy Center 52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 95 of 424 5.2 Fundamental Considerations The environment leading up to the time that people begin their evacuation trips consists of a sequence of events and activities. Each event (other than the first) occurs at an instant in time and is the outcome of an activity.

Activities are undertaken over a period of time. Activities may be in "series" (i.e. to undertake an activity implies the completion of all preceding events) or may be in parallel (two or more activities may take place over the same period of time). Activities conducted in series are functionally dependent on the completion of prior activities; activities conducted in parallel are functionally independent of one another. The relevant events associated with the public's preparation for evacuation are:

Event Number Event Description 1 Notification 2 Awareness of Situation 3 Depart Work 4 Arrive Home 5 Depart on Evacuation Trip Associated with each sequence of events are one or more activities, as outlined in Table 51:

These relationships are shown graphically in Figure 51.

An Event is a state that exists at a point in time (e.g., depart work, arrive home)

An Activity is a process that takes place over some elapsed time (e.g., prepare to leave work, travel home)

As such, a completed Activity changes the state of an individual (e.g. the activity, travel home changes the state from depart work to arrive home). Therefore, an Activity can be described as an Event Sequence; the elapsed times to perform an event sequence vary from one person to the next and are described as statistical distributions on the following pages.

An employee who lives outside the EPZ will follow sequence (c) of Figure 51. A household within the EPZ that has one or more commuters at work and will await their return before beginning the evacuation trip will follow the first sequence of Figure 51(a). A household within the EPZ that has no commuters at work, or that will not await the return of any commuters, will follow the second sequence of Figure 51(a), regardless of day of week or time of day.

Households with no commuters on weekends or in the evening/nighttime, will follow the applicable sequence in Figure 51(b). Transients will always follow one of the sequences of Figure 51(b). Some transients away from their residence could elect to evacuate immediately without returning to the residence, as indicated in the second sequence.

Callaway Energy Center 53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 96 of 424 It is seen from Figure 51, that the Trip Generation time (the total elapsed time from Event 1 to Event 5) depends on the scenario and will vary from one household to the next. Furthermore, Event 5 depends, in a complicated way, on the time distributions of all activities preceding that event. That is, to estimate the time distribution of Event 5, we must obtain estimates of the time distributions of all preceding events. For this study, we adopt the conservative posture that all activities will occur in sequence.

In some cases, assuming certain events occur strictly sequential (for instance, commuter returning home before beginning preparation to leave, or removing snow only after the preparation to leave) can result in rather conservative (that is, longer) estimates of mobilization times. It is reasonable to expect that at least some parts of these events will overlap for many households, but that assumption is not made in this study.

5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 The time distribution of an event is obtained by "summing" the time distributions of all prior contributing activities. (This "summing" process is quite different than an algebraic sum since it is performed on distributions - not scalar numbers).

Time Distribution No. 1, Notification Process: Activity 1 2 Federal regulations (10CFR50 Appendix E, Item IV.D.3) stipulate, [t]he design objective of the prompt public alert and notification system shall be to have the capability to essentially complete the initial alerting and initiate notification of the public within the plume exposure pathway EPZ within about 15 minutes. Furthermore, FEMA REP Program Manual Section V Part B.1 Bullet 3 states that arrangements will be made to assure 100 percent coverage within 45 minutes of the population who may not have received the initial notification within the entire plume exposure EPZ.

Given the federal regulations and guidance, and the assumed presence of sirens within the EPZ, it is assumed that 87 percent of those within the EPZ will be aware of the accident within 30 minutes with the remainder notified within the following 15 minutes. The notification distribution is provided in Table 52. The distribution is plotted in Figure 52.

Distribution No. 2, Prepare to Leave Work: Activity 2 3 It is reasonable to expect that the vast majority of business enterprises within the EPZ will elect to shut down following notification and most employees would leave work quickly. Commuters, who work outside the EPZ could, in all probability, also leave quickly since facilities outside the EPZ would remain open and other personnel would remain. Personnel or farmers responsible for equipment/livestock would require additional time to secure their facility. The distribution of Activity 2 3 shown in Table 53 reflects data obtained by the demographic survey for employees working inside or outside of the EPZ who returns home prior to evacuating. This distribution is also applicable for residents to leave stores, restaurants, parks and other locations within the EPZ. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52.

Callaway Energy Center 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 97 of 424 Distribution No. 3, Travel Home: Activity 3 4 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the demographic survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 54.

Distribution No. 4, Prepare to Leave Home: Activity 2, 4 5 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the demographic survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 55.

Distribution No. 5, Snow Clearance Time Distribution Inclement weather scenarios involving snowfall must address the time lags associated with snow clearance. It is assumed that snow equipment is mobilized and deployed during the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snowplowing efforts are generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snow accumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours.

Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that the highway system will remain passable - albeit at a lower capacity - under the vast majority of snow conditions. Nevertheless, for the vehicles to gain access to the highway system, it may be necessary for driveways and employee parking lots to be cleared to the extent needed to permit vehicles to gain access to the roadways. These clearance activities take time; this time must be incorporated into the trip generation time distributions. These data are provided by those households which responded to the demographic survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 56.

5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution The time distributions for each of the mobilization activities presented herein must be combined to form the appropriate Trip Generation Distributions. As discussed above, this study assumes that the stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur. For example, if a household awaits the return of a commuter, the worktohome trip (Activity 3 4) must precede Activity 4 5.

To calculate the time distribution of an event that is dependent on two sequential activities, it is necessary to sum the distributions associated with these prior activities. The distribution summing algorithm is applied repeatedly to form the required distribution. As an outcome of this procedure, new time distributions are formed; we assign letter designations to these intermediate distributions to describe the procedure. Table 57 presents the summing procedure to arrive at each designated distribution.

Table 58 presents a description of each of the final trip generation distributions achieved after the summing process is completed.

Callaway Energy Center 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 98 of 424 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers As already mentioned, some portion of the survey respondents answer decline to state to some questions or choose to not respond to a question. The mobilization activity distributions are based upon actual responses. But, it is the nature of surveys that a few numeric responses are inconsistent with the overall pattern of results. An example would be a case in which for 500 responses, almost all of them estimate less than two hours for a given answer, but 3 say four hours and 4 say six or more hours.

These outliers must be considered: are they valid responses, or so atypical that they should be dropped from the sample?

In assessing outliers, there are three alternatives to consider:

1) Some responses with very long times may be valid, but reflect the reality that the respondent really needs to be classified in a different population subgroup, based upon special needs;

2) Other responses may be unrealistic (6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> to return home from commuting distance, or 2 days to prepare the home for departure);

3) Some high values are representative and plausible, and one must not cut them as part of the consideration of outliers.

The issue of course is how to make the decision that a given response or set of responses are to be considered outliers for the component mobilization activities, using a method that objectively quantifies the process.

There is considerable statistical literature on the identification and treatment of outliers singly or in groups, much of which assumes the data is normally distributed and some of which uses non parametric methods to avoid that assumption. The literature cites that limited work has been done directly on outliers in sample survey responses.

In establishing the overall mobilization time/trip generation distributions, the following principles are used:

1) It is recognized that the overall trip generation distributions are conservative estimates, because they assume a household will do the mobilization activities sequentially, with no overlap of activities;

2) The individual mobilization activities (prepare to leave work, travel home, prepare home, clear snow) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions are created (see Figure 51, Table 57, Table 58);

3) Outliers can be eliminated either because the response reflects a special population (e.g.

special needs, transit dependent) or lack of realism, because the purpose is to estimate trip generation patterns for personal vehicles; Callaway Energy Center 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 99 of 424

4) To eliminate outliers, a) the mean and standard deviation of the specific activity are estimated from the responses, b) the median of the same data is estimated, with its position relative to the mean noted, c) the histogram of the data is inspected, and d) all values greater than 3 standard deviations are flagged for attention, taking special note of whether there are gaps (categories with zero entries) in the histogram display.

In general, only flagged values more than 3 standard deviations from the mean are allowed to be considered outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected. The distribution for the time to prepare to leave work or college was truncated to 3.5 standard deviations as there were many respondents that indicated it would take up to an hour to complete this activity despite a gap in the histogram.

When flagged values are classified as outliers and dropped, steps a to d are repeated.

5) As a practical matter, even with outliers eliminated by the above, the resultant histogram, viewed as a cumulative distribution, is not a normal distribution. A typical situation that results is shown in Figure 53.

6) In particular, the cumulative distribution differs from the normal distribution in two key aspects, both very important in loading a network to estimate evacuation times:

Most of the real data is to the left of the normal curve above, indicating that the network loads faster for the first 8085% of the vehicles, potentially causing more (and earlier) congestion than otherwise modeled; The last 1015% of the real data tails off slower than the comparable normal curve, indicating that there is significant traffic still loading at later times.

Because these two features are important to preserve, it is the histogram of the data that is used to describe the mobilization activities, not a normal curve fit to the data. One could consider other distributions, but using the shape of the actual data curve is unambiguous and preserves these important features;

7) With the mobilization activities each modeled according to Steps 16, including preserving the features cited in Step 6, the overall (or total) mobilization times are constructed.

This is done by using the data sets and distributions under different scenarios (e.g. commuter returning, no commuter returning, no snow or snow in each). In general, these are additive, using weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 54 presents the combined trip generation distributions designated for each population group considered. These distributions are presented on the same time scale. (As discussed earlier, the use of strictly additive activities is a conservative approach, because it makes all activities sequential -

preparation for departure follows the return of the commuter; snow clearance follows the preparation for departure, and so forth. In practice, it is reasonable that some of these activities Callaway Energy Center 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 100 of 424 are done in parallel, at least to some extent - for instance, preparation to depart begins by a household member at home while the commuter is still on the road.)

The mobilization distributions that result are used in their tabular/graphical form as direct inputs to later computations that lead to the ETE.

The DYNEV II simulation model is designed to accept varying rates of vehicle trip generation for each origin centroid, expressed in the form of histograms. These histograms, which represent Distributions A, C, D, E and F, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 59 (Distribution B, Arrive Home, omitted for clarity).

The final time period (15) is 600 minutes long. This time period is added to allow the analysis network to clear, in the event congestion persists beyond the trip generation period. Note that there are no trips generated during this final time period.

5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation As defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Subareas comprising the 2Mile Region are advised to evacuate immediately

2. Subareas comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the 2Mile Region is cleared

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2Mile Region, sheltered people from 2 to 5 miles downwind continue preparation for evacuation

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5Mile Region are advised to begin evacuating when approximately 90% of those originally within the 2Mile Region evacuate across the 2Mile Region boundary

5. Noncompliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadow evacuation percentage of 20%

Assumptions

1. The EPZ population in Subareas beyond 5 miles will shelter in place, with 20% non compliance.

2. The population in the shadow region beyond the EPZ boundary, extending to approximately 15 miles radially from the plant, will react as they do for all nonstaged evacuation scenarios. That is 20% of these households will elect to evacuate with no shelter delay.

3. The transient population will not be expected to stage their evacuation because of the limited sheltering options available to people who may be at parks, or at other venues.

Also, notifying the transient population of a staged evacuation would prove difficult.

4. Employees will also be assumed to evacuate without first sheltering.

Callaway Energy Center 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 101 of 424 Procedure

1. Trip generation for population groups in the 2Mile Region will be as computed based upon the results of the demographic survey and analysis.

2. Trip generation for the population subject to staged evacuation will be formulated as follows:

a. Identify the 90th percentile evacuation time for the Subareas comprising the 2 Mile Region. This value, TScen* is obtained from simulation results. It will become the time at which the region being sheltered will be told to evacuate for each scenario.

b. The resultant trip generation curves for staging are then formed as follows:

i. The nonshelter trip generation curve is followed until a maximum of 20%

of the total trips are generated (to account for shelter noncompliance).

ii. No additional trips are generated until time TScen*

iii. Following time TScen*, the balance of trips are generated:

1. by stepping up and then following the nonshelter trip generation curve (if TScen* is < max trip generation time) or

2. by stepping up to 100% (if TScen* is > max trip generation time)

c. Note: This procedure implies that there may be different staged trip generation distributions for different scenarios. NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 uses the statement approximately 90th percentile as the time to end staging and begin evacuating.

The value of TScen* is 1:30 for all weekdaymidday scenarios (regardless of weather); TScen* is 2:15 for weekend and evening scenarios, and 3:30 for weekend/eveningheavy snow scenarios. The reason for the time difference between weekday and weekend scenarios is that approximately 88% of the vehicles within the 2Mile Region are those of the employees at the Callaway Energy Center. This population group mobilizes faster (100% have mobilized within 105 minutes) than the general population and will therefore evacuate in a shorter amount of time. While this has no impact on the 100th percentile evacuation time, the 90th percentile evacuation time during a weekday good weather scenario is almost an hour shorter than during a weekend good weather scenario when employee vehicles only account for 10% of all vehicles within the 2Mile Region.

3. Staged trip generation distributions are created for the following population groups:

a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters

c. Residents with returning commuters and snow conditions

d. Residents without returning commuters and snow conditions Figure 55 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters; the 90th percentile 2mile evacuation time is 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes for weekday scenarios, 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes for weekend and evening scenarios in good weather and rain/light snow, and 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes for weekend/eveningheavy snow Callaway Energy Center 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 102 of 424 scenarios. At the 90th percentile evacuation time, approximately 20% of the population advised to shelter has nevertheless departed the area. These people do not comply with the shelter advisory. Also included on the plot are the trip generation distributions for these groups as applied to the regions advised to evacuate immediately.

Since the 90th percentile evacuation time occurs before the end of the trip generation time, after the sheltered region is advised to evacuate, the shelter trip generation distribution rises to meet the balance of the nonstaged trip generation distribution. Following time TScen*, the balance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 15 or 30 minutes.

After TScen*+15 (or +30), the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the unstaged trip generation distribution.

Figure 55 and Table 510Table 51 provides the trip generation for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas The Special Notification of the Public Section of Appendix 1 of the State of Missouri Nuclear Power Plant Accident Plan (MoNAP) (dated December 2019) establishes the basic procedures and organizational responsibilities for the emergency alert and notification on the Missouri River and the Katy Trail State Park in addition to associated recreational sites, conservation areas, surrounding areas and other facilities within the 10mile EPZ. Individuals located in these areas will be alerted by the public alert sirens, as well as instructional material posted at parking areas at state parks, conservation areas and public access points along the river to explain what to do if the fixed sirens were activated. As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100 percent notification in 45 minutes which is consistent with the FEMA REP Manual.

Table 59 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 45 minutes. It is assumed that this timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers, and other transients to return to their vehicles or lodging facilities and begin their evacuation trip.

Callaway Energy Center 510 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 103 of 424 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities Event Sequence Activity Distribution 12 Receive Notification 1 23 Prepare to Leave Work 2 2,3 4 Travel Home 3 2,4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4 N/A Snow Clearance 5 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public Elapsed Time Percent of (Minutes) Population Notified 0 0%

5 7%

10 13%

15 27%

20 47%

25 66%

30 87%

35 92%

40 97%

45 100%

Callaway Energy Center 511 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 104 of 424 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work Elapsed Time Cumulative Percent Employees (Minutes) Leaving work 0 0%

5 37%

10 57%

15 72%

20 78%

25 81%

30 89%

35 90%

40 92%

45 94%

50 97%

55 97%

60 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Decline to State" response. That is, the sample was reduced in size to include only those households who responded to this question. The underlying assumption is that the distribution of this activity for the Decline to State responders, if the event takes place, would be the same as those responders who provided estimates.

Callaway Energy Center 512 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 105 of 424 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Cumulative Percent Returning Elapsed Time (Minutes)

Home 0 0 5 10%

10 28%

15 42%

20 58%

25 67%

30 79%

35 88%

40 92%

45 95%

50 99%

55 99%

60 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Decline to State" response.

Callaway Energy Center 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 106 of 424 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate Cumulative Percent Ready to Elapsed Time (Minutes)

Evacuate 0 0%

15 5%

30 23%

45 35%

60 54%

75 69%

90 75%

105 78%

120 86%

135 95%

150 95%

165 96%

180 98%

195 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Decline to State" response.

Callaway Energy Center 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 107 of 424 Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow Cumulative Percent Ready to Elapsed Time (Minutes)

Evacuate 0 22%

15 38%

30 47%

45 57%

60 71%

75 78%

90 82%

105 84%

120 87%

135 91%

150 93%

165 94%

180 98%

210 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Decline to State" response.

Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events Apply Summing Algorithm To: Distribution Obtained Event Defined Distributions 1 and 2 Distribution A Event 3 Distributions A and 3 Distribution B Event 4 Distributions B and 4 Distribution C Event 5 Distributions 1 and 4 Distribution D Event 5 Distributions C and 5 Distribution E Event 5 Distributions D and 5 Distribution F Event 5 Callaway Energy Center 515 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 108 of 424 Table 58. Description of the Distributions Distribution Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also applies A to employees who work within the EPZ who live outside, and to Transients within the EPZ.

B Time distribution of commuters arriving home (Event 4).

Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home C

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents without commuters returning home, leaving home D

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home E

to begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents with no commuters returning home, leaving to F

begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).

Callaway Energy Center 516 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Residents Residents Residents With Duration Residents with Without Time Period Employees Transients Without Commuters (Min) Commuters Commuters (Distribution A) (Distribution A) Commuters Snow (Distribution C) Snow (Distribution D) (Distribution E)

(Distribution F) 1 15 6% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 15 33% 33% 0% 4% 0% 1%

3 15 36% 36% 1% 10% 0% 3%

4 15 15% 15% 3% 14% 1% 6%

5 15 6% 6% 8% 16% 3% 7%

6 15 3% 3% 11% 16% 4% 10%

7 15 1% 1% 14% 11% 7% 10%

8 30 0% 0% 25% 11% 17% 17%

9 30 0% 0% 17% 12% 17% 15%

10 30 0% 0% 11% 3% 15% 10%

11 30 0% 0% 6% 3% 12% 9%

12 60 0% 0% 4% 0% 15% 9%

13 60 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 2%

14 60 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

NOTE: Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 12) using Distributions C and E for good weather and snow, respectively. Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A June 27, 2022 Page 109 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 517 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Weekend/Evening Weekday Residents Residents Residents Residents Time Duration Residents Residents Residents with With Without Residents with With Without Period (Min) Without Without Commuters Commuters Commuters Commuters Commuters Commuters Commuters Commuters (Distribution Snow Snow (Distribution Snow Snow (Distribution (Distribution C) (Distribution (Distribution C) (Distribution (Distribution D) D)

E) F) E) F) 1 15 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 15 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0%

3 15 0% 2% 0% 1% 0% 2% 0% 1%

4 15 1% 3% 0% 1% 1% 3% 0% 1%

5 15 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 3% 1% 1%

6 15 3% 3% 1% 2% 3% 3% 1% 2%

7 15 2% 2% 1% 2% 32% 59% 13% 32%

8 30 5% 2% 3% 4% 25% 11% 17% 17%

9 30 67% 78% 4% 3% 17% 12% 17% 15%

10 30 11% 3% 3% 2% 11% 3% 15% 10%

11 30 6% 3% 63% 72% 6% 3% 12% 9%

12 60 4% 0% 15% 9% 4% 0% 15% 9%

13 60 0% 0% 7% 2% 0% 0% 7% 2%

14 60 0% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% 2% 1%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

NOTE: Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 59) is the same for Unstaged and Staged Evacuation. Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 NOTE: Trip Generation for Snow Distributions is referring to heavy snow weather conditions.

June 27, 2022 Page 110 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 518 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 111 of 424 1 2 3 4 5 Residents Households wait 1

for Commuters Households without Residents 1 2 5 Commuters and households who do not wait for Commuters (a) Accident occurs during midweek, at midday; year round Residents, Transients 1 2 4 5 Return to residence, away from then evacuate Residence Residents, 1 2 5 Residents at home; Transients at transients evacuate directly Residence (b) Accident occurs during weekend or during the evening2 1 2 3, 5 (c) Employees who live outside the EPZ ACTIVITIES EVENTS 1 2 Receive Notification 1. Notification 2 3 Prepare to Leave Work 2. Aware of situation 2, 3 4 Travel Home 3. Depart work 2, 4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4. Arrive home

5. Depart on evacuation trip Activities Consume Time 1

Applies for evening and weekends also if commuters are at work.

2 Applies throughout the year for transients.

Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip Callaway Energy Center 519 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities 100%

80%

60%

Notification Prepare to Leave Work Travel Home 40% Prepare Home Time to Clear Snow 20%

Percent of Population Completing Mobilization Activity 0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Activity (min)

June 27, 2022 Figure 52. Time Distributions for Evacuation Mobilization Activities Page 112 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 520 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

Cumulative Percentage (%)

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

2.5 7.5 12.5 17.5 22.5 27.5 32.5 37.5 42.5 47.5 52.5 57.5 67.5 82.5 97.5 112.5 Center of Interval (minutes) Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Cumulative Data Cumulative Normal June 27, 2022 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution Page 113 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 521 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Trip Generation Distributions Employees/Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters Res with Comm and Snow Res no Comm with Snow 100 80 60 40 20 Percent of Population Beginning Evacuation Trip 0

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

June 27, 2022 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Page 114 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 522 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged and Unstaged Evacuation Trip Generation Employees / Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters Res with Comm and Snow Res no Comm with Snow Staged Residents with Commuters (Weekend/Evening)

Staged Residents with no Commuters (Weekend/Evening) Staged Residents with Commuters (Snow) (Weekend/Evening)

Staged Residents with no Commuters (Snow) (Weekend/Evening) Staged Residents with Commuters (Weekday)

Staged Residents with no Commuters (Weekday) Staged Residents with Commuters (Snow) (Weekday)

Staged Residents with no Commuters (Snow) (Weekday) 100 80 60 40 Percent of Population Evacuating 20 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

June 27, 2022 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5Mile Region Page 115 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 523 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 116 of 424 6 EVACUATION CASES An evacuation case defines a combination of Evacuation Region and Evacuation Scenario. The definitions of Region and Scenario are as follows:

Region A grouping of contiguous evacuating Subareas that forms either a keyhole sectorbased area, or a circular area within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ),

that must be evacuated in response to a radiological emergency.

Scenario A combination of circumstances, including time of day, day of week, season, and weather conditions. Scenarios define the number of people in each of the affected population groups and their respective mobilization time distributions.

A total of 44 Regions were identified which encompass all the groupings of Subareas considered. These Regions are defined in Table 61. The Subarea configurations are identified in Figure 61. Each 3sector keyhole sectorbased area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and three adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. In addition, 4sector keyholes - consisting of two sectors on either side of the central angle of the wind direction - are also considered to follow the current Protective Action Recommendation (PAR) strategy. These sectors extend to 5 miles from the plant (Regions R04 through R13) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R14 through R33).

Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R34 through R44 are identical to Regions R02 and R04 through R13, respectively; however, those Subareas between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2Mile Region (Region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 14 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 44 x 14 = 616 evacuation cases. Table 62 is a description of all Scenarios.

Each combination of Region and Scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated. The population group and the vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 and in Appendix E are peak values. These peak values are adjusted depending on the Scenario and Region being considered, using Scenario and Regionspecific percentages, such that the population is considered for each evacuation case. The Scenario percentages are presented in Table 63, while the Region percentages are provided in Table H1.

Table 64 presents the vehicle counts for each Scenario for an evacuation of Region R03 - the entire EPZ, based on the Scenario percentages in Table 63. The percentages presented in Table 63 were determined as follows:

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to 42%, which is the product of 70% (the number of households with at least one commuter - see Figure F6) and 60% (the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating - see Figure F11. See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of those households Callaway Energy Center 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 117 of 424 with returning commuters during the week (42%) will have a commuter at work during those time, or approximately 4% of households overall.

Employment is assumed to be at its peak (100%) during the winter, midweek, midday scenarios.

Employment is reduced slightly (96%) for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. This is based on the estimation that 50% of the employees commuting into the EPZ will be on vacation for a week during the approximate 12 weeks of summer. It is further estimated that those taking vacation will be uniformly dispersed throughout the summer with approximately 4% of employees vacationing each week. It is assumed that only 10% of the employees are working in the evenings and during the weekends.

Transient activity is estimated to be at its peak (100%) during summer evenings and less (70%)

during the day, due to a large number of facilities offering overnight accommodations (lodging facilities and campgrounds). Transient activity on summer weekends is estimated 95% since nearly all the facilities are open or operate on summer weekends. The recreational areas in the EPZ (shown in Appendix E, Table E4) are predominantly outdoors and will be frequented more often during the summer than the winter. As a result, transient activity during winter weekends is estimated to be 55% and less during the week (45%). Due to the large number of lodging facilities and campgrounds, transient activity during the evenings in the winter are estimated to be slightly higher at 65%.

As noted in the shadow footnote to Table 63, the shadow percentages are computed using a base of 20% (see assumption 7 in Section 2.2); to include the employees within the Shadow Region who may choose to evacuate, the voluntary evacuation is multiplied by a scenario specific proportion of employees to permanent residents in the Shadow Region. For example, using the values provided in Table 64 for Scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows:

492 20% 1 21%

3,811 5,252 One special event - a refueling outage at the Callaway Energy Center site - was considered as Scenario 13. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for Scenario 13, and 0% for all other scenarios.

As discussed in Section 7, schools/colleges/universities are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday and 100% of buses/student vehicles will be needed under those circumstances. It is estimated that summer school enrollment is approximately 10% of enrollment during the regular school year for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. School is not in session during weekends and evenings, thus no buses for school children (or commuting student vehicles) are needed under those circumstances.

Transit buses for the transitdependent population are set to 100% for all scenarios as it is assumed that the transitdependent population is present in the EPZ for all scenarios.

External traffic is estimated to be 100% for all midday scenarios, while it is significantly less Callaway Energy Center 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 118 of 424 (40%) during evening scenarios.

Callaway Energy Center 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Subarea Region

Description:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 R01 2Mile Radius X R02 5Mile Radius X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 N/NNE R04 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R04 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R05 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R06 60 75 L, M, N X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E 76 82 L, M, N, P (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

See Region R06 E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 119 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 ESE/SE R07 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SE R08 128 142 P, Q, R X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S 166 172 Q, R, A, B See Region R08 (4Sector Keyhole)

S 173 187 R, A, B (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW 188 194 R, A, B, C (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R09 195 210 A, B, C X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R10 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW 218 232 B, C, D (3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW 233 239 B, C, D, E (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R10 WSW 240 255 C, D, E (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W 256 262 C, D, E, F (4Sector Keyhole)

W R11 263 277 D, E, F X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 120 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 W/WNW R12 278 284 D, E, F, G X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW 285 300 E, F, G (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R12 NW 308 322 F, G, H (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R13 330 345 G, H, J X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N 346 352 G, H, J, K (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R04 N

353 7 H, J, K (3Sector Keyhole)

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 N/NNE R14 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R14 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 121 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea Wind Direction From:

Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 NE/ENE R15 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R16 60 75 L, M, N X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E R17 76 82 L, M, N, P X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q See Region R17 (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R18 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SE R19 128 142 P, Q, R X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R19 SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S R20 166 172 Q, R, A, B X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

S R21 173 187 R, A, B X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW R22 188 194 R, A, B, C X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R23 195 210 A, B, C X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R24 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW R25 218 232 B, C, D X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole) Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 122 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea Wind Direction From:

Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 SW/WSW R26 233 239 B, C, D, E X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WSW 240 255 C, D, E See Region R26 (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W R27 256 262 C, D, E, F X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

W R28 263 277 D, E, F X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

W/WNW R29 278 284 D, E, F, G X X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW R30 285 300 E, F, G X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

NW 308 322 F, G, H See Region R30 (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R31 330 345 G, H, J X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N R32 346 352 G, H, J, K X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

N R33 353 7 H, J, K X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 123 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 R34 5Mile Radius X X X X X X N/NNE R35 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R35 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R36 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R37 60 75 L, M, N X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E 76 82 L, M, N, P (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

See Region R37 E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R38 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 124 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea Wind Direction From:

Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 SE R39 128 142 P, Q, R X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S 166 172 Q, R, A, B See Region R39 (4Sector Keyhole)

S 173 187 R, A, B (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW 188 194 R, A, B, C (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R40 195 210 A, B, C X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R41 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW 218 232 B, C, D (3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW 233 239 B, C, D, E (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R41 WSW 240 255 C, D, E (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W 256 262 C, D, E, F (4Sector Keyhole)

W R42 263 277 D, E, F X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 125 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 610 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea Wind Direction From:

Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 W/WNW R43 278 284 D, E, F, G X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW 285 300 E, F, G (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R43 NW 308 322 F, G, H (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R44 330 345 G, H, J X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N 346 352 G, H, J, K (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R35 N

353 7 H, J, K (3Sector Keyhole)

Subarea(s) Evacuate Subarea(s) ShelterinPlace ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 126 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 611 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 127 of 424 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Time of 1

Scenario Season Week Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 2

Summer Midweek Midday Snow None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 4

Summer Weekend Midday Snow None Midweek, 5

Summer Weekend Evening Good None 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 7

Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 10 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Weekend Evening Good None Special Event - Outage at 13 Winter Midweek Midday Good the CEC Roadway Impact - Lane 14 Closure on I70 Outbound Summer Midweek Midday Good in both directions 1

Winter means that school is in session at normal enrollment levels (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer means that school is in session at summer school enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Callaway Energy Center 612 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Households Households School With Without Buses and External Returning Returning Special Colleges/ Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Universities Buses Traffic 1 42% 58% 96% 70% 21% 0% 10% 100% 100%

2 42% 58% 96% 70% 21% 0% 10% 100% 100%

3 4% 96% 10% 95% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%

4 4% 96% 10% 95% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%

5 4% 96% 10% 100% 20% 0% 0% 100% 40%

6 42% 58% 100% 45% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100%

7 42% 58% 100% 45% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100%

8 42% 58% 100% 45% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100%

9 4% 96% 10% 55% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%

10 4% 96% 10% 55% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%

11 4% 96% 10% 55% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%

12 4% 96% 10% 65% 20% 0% 0% 100% 40%

13 42% 58% 100% 45% 21% 100% 100% 100% 100%

14 42% 58% 96% 70% 21% 0% 10% 100% 100%

Resident Households with Commuters .......Households of EPZ residents who await the return of commuters prior to beginning the evacuation trip.

Resident Households with No Commuters ..Households of EPZ residents who do not have commuters or will not await the return of commuters prior to beginning the evacuation trip.

Employees..................................................EPZ employees who live outside the EPZ Transients ..................................................People who are in the EPZ at the time of an accident for recreational or other (nonemployment) purposes.

Shadow ......................................................Residents and employees in the Shadow Region (outside of the EPZ) who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis for the values shown is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees.

Special Event ..............................................Additional vehicles in the EPZ due to the identified special event.

School and Transit Buses ............................Vehicleequivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing schools and transitdependent people (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles). Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 External Through Traffic .............................Traffic passing through the EPZ on interstates/freeways and major arterial roads at the start of the evacuation. This traffic is stopped by access control approximately 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the evacuation begins.

June 27, 2022 Page 128 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 613 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario2 School, Households Households College and College, External Total With Without Special University Transit Scenario Employees Transients Shadow and Through Scenario Returning Returning Event Student Buses University Traffic Vehicles Commuters Commuters Vehicles Buses 1 3,811 5,252 492 306 770 215 22 8 7,256 18,132 2 3,811 5,252 492 306 770 215 22 8 7,256 18,132 3 381 8,682 51 415 734 8 7,256 17,527 4 381 8,682 51 415 734 8 7,256 17,527 5 381 8,682 51 437 734 8 2,902 13,195 6 3,811 5,252 513 197 772 2,148 216 8 7,256 20,173 7 3,811 5,252 513 197 772 2,148 216 8 7,256 20,173 8 3,811 5,252 513 197 772 2,148 216 8 7,256 20,173 9 381 8,682 51 240 734 8 7,256 17,352 10 381 8,682 51 240 734 8 7,256 17,352 11 381 8,682 51 240 734 8 7,256 17,352 12 381 8,682 51 284 734 8 2,902 13,042 13 3,811 5,252 513 197 772 991 2,148 216 8 7,256 21,164 14 3,811 5,252 492 306 770 215 22 8 7,256 18,132 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 2

Vehicle estimates are for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03)

Page 129 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 614 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Figure 61. Subareas Comprising the Callaway Energy Center EPZ June 27, 2022 Page 130 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 615 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 131 of 424 7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE)

This section presents the ETE results of the computer analyses using the DYNEV II System described in Appendices B, C and D. These results cover 44 regions within the Callaway Energy Center (CEC) Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and the 14 Evacuation Scenarios discussed in Section 6.

The ETE for all evacuation cases are presented in Table 71 and Table 72. These tables present the estimated times to clear the indicated population percentages from the evacuation regions for all evacuation scenarios. The ETE of the 2Mile Region in both staged and unstaged regions are presented in Table 73 and Table 74. Table 75 defines the evacuation regions considered.

The tabulated values of ETE are obtained from the DYNEV II System outputs which are generated at 5minute intervals.

7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation Voluntary evacuees are people within the EPZ in subareas for which an Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) has not been issued, yet who elect to evacuate. Shadow evacuation is the voluntary outward movement of some people from the Shadow Region (outside the EPZ) for whom no protective action recommendation has been issued. Both voluntary and shadow evacuations are assumed to take place over the same time frame as the evacuation from within the impacted evacuation region.

The ETE for the CEC EPZ addresses the issue of voluntary evacuees in the manner shown in Figure 71. Within the EPZ, 20 percent of permanent residents located in subareas outside of the evacuation region who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate.

Similarly, it is assumed that 20 percent of those permanent residents in the shadow region will choose to leave the area.

Figure 72 presents the area identified as the Shadow Region. This region extends radially from the CEC to cover a region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles. The population and number of evacuating vehicles in the shadow region were estimated using the same methodology that was used for permanent residents within the EPZ (see Section 3.1). As discussed in Section 3.2, it is estimated that a total of 6,560 people reside in the Shadow Region; 20 percent of them would evacuate. See Table 64 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

Traffic generated within this Shadow Region including externalexternal traffic (see Section 3.11), traveling away from the plant location, has the potential for impeding evacuating vehicles from within the evacuation region. All ETE calculations include this shadow traffic movement.

7.2 Staged Evacuation As defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Subareas comprising the 2Mile Region are advised to evacuate immediately.

Callaway Energy Center 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 132 of 424

2. Subareas comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the 2Mile Region is cleared.

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2Mile Region, people from 2 to 5 miles downwind continue preparation for evacuation while they shelter.

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5Mile Region is advised to evacuate when approximately 90% of the 2Mile Region evacuating traffic crosses the 2Mile Region boundary.

5. The population in the 5to10mile region (to the EPZ boundary) shelters in place.

6. Noncompliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadow evacuation percentage of 20%.

See Section 5.4.2 for additional information on staged evacuation.

7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation Figure 73 through Figure 77 illustrate the patterns of traffic congestion that arise for the case when the entire EPZ (Region R03) is advised to evacuate during the winter, midweek, midday period under good weather conditions (Scenario 6).

Traffic congestion, as the term is used here, is defined as Level of Service (LOS) F. LOS F is defined as follows (HCM 2016, page 55):

The HCM uses LOS F to define operations that have either broken down (i.e., demand exceeds capacity) or have reached a point that most users would consider unsatisfactory, as described by a specified service measure value (or combination of service measure values). However, analysts may be interested in knowing just how bad the LOS F condition is, particularly for planning applications where different alternatives may be compared. Several measures are available for describing individually, or in combination, the severity of a LOS F condition:

• Demandtocapacity ratios describe the extent to which demand exceeds capacity during the analysis period (e.g., by 1%, 15%);

• Duration of LOS F describes how long the condition persists (e.g., 15 min, 1 h, 3 h); and

• Spatial extent measures describe the areas affected by LOS F conditions. They include measures such as the back of queue and the identification of the specific intersection approaches or system elements experiencing LOS F conditions.

All highway "links" which experience LOS F are delineated in these figures by a thick red line; all others are lightly indicated.

At 30 minutes after the ATE, slight congestion can be seen along State Route O as employees evacuate CEC towards Fulton as seen in Figure 73. W 12th Street in Fulton exhibits LOS F conditions due to students evacuating from Williams Wood University. W 12th Street intersects Callaway Energy Center 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 133 of 424 Westminster Ave at a stop sign. The low capacity (about 900 vehicles per hour) of the stop sign causes a queue of vehicles leaving the campus generating congestion. Similarly, W7th Street exhibits LOS D conditions due to the students evacuating from Westminster College. Again, W 7th Street intersects Westminster Ave at a stop sign. Slight congestion (LOS B or better) has developed in other parts of Fulton - along Westminster Ave, Missouri F, and US54 Business. As shown in the figure, congestion does not back up into the 2mile region (Subarea C1). At this time, approximately 11 percent of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 6 percent of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

Figure 74 displays the patterns of congestion at 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> after the ATE. It can be seen that at this time congestion primarily only exists in Fulton (Subarea C9). In Fulton, W 12th Street continues to exhibit LOS F conditions as students from William Woods University continue to evacuate.

Similar to 30 minutes prior, many major evacuation routes in Fulton experience slight congestion (LOS C or better). At this time, the 5mile region is clear of congestion, approximately 34 percent of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 23 percent of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

Congestion peaks in Fulton at 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE as seen in Figure 75. W 12th Street still exhibits LOS F conditions, and now Westminster Ave exhibits LOS E conditions as the students mix with more evacuating residents and attempt to access US54. The ramps that give access to US54 are a single lane and have limited capacity to process the demand that is trying to access US54. As such traffic builds along Westminster Ave and congestion develops. In addition, Missouri F exhibits LOS E and F leaving Fulton (mostly in the Shadow Region) as vehicles attempt to access US54, but again are limited to the capacity of the on ramps. Some vehicles choose to remain on Missouri F and travel toward Columbia. In the shadow region, slight congestion exists along I70 and US54. At this time, approximately 58 percent of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 47 percent of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

Congestion from Williams Wood University clears at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE as shown in Figure 76. Nearly all congestion within the EPZ has dissipated. The last remnants of congestion are along Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard/Missouri F both in the EPZ and Shadow Region. At this time, approximately 85 percent of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 84 percent of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

The study area is completely clear of congestion at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE as shown in Figure 77. At this time, approximately 92 percent of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 91 percent of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. Vehicles are still present in the network for another 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 5 minutes after the ATE due to the mobilization time. The remaining vehicles are not enough to cause congestion such that roadways in the study area experience any LOS lower than LOS A for the remainder of the evacuation.

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 78 through Figure 721. These figures display the rate at which traffic flows out of the indicated areas for the case of an evacuation of Callaway Energy Center 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 134 of 424 the full EPZ (Region R03) under the indicated conditions. One figure is presented for each scenario considered.

As indicated in Figure 78 through Figure 721, there is typically a long "tail" to these distributions. Vehicles begin to evacuate an area slowly at first, as people respond to the ATE at different rates. Then traffic demand builds rapidly (slopes of curves increase). When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, there are few evacuation routes to service the remaining demand.

The decline in aggregate flow rate, towards the end of the process, is characterized by these curves flattening and gradually becoming horizontal. Ideally, it would be desirable to fully saturate all evacuation routes equally so that all will service traffic near capacity levels, and all will clear at the same time. For this ideal situation, all curves would retain the same slope until the end - thus minimizing evacuation time. In reality, this ideal is generally unattainable reflecting the spatial variation in population density, mobilization rates and in highway capacity over the EPZ.

7.5 ETE Results Table 71 through Table 72 present the ETE values for all 44 Evacuation Regions and all 14 Evacuation Scenarios. Table 73 through Table 74 present the ETE values for 2Mile Region for both staged and unstaged keyhole regions downwind to 5 miles. They are organized as follows:

Table Contents ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90 percent of the 71 population within a Region, to evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100 percent of the 72 population within a Region, to evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90 percent of the 73 population within the 2Mile Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100 percent of the 74 population within the 2Mile Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations.

The animation snapshots described in Section 7.3, reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (unstaged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure

77. Most of the congestion is located in Subarea C9, which is beyond the 5mile area, and is reflected in the ETE statistics:

Callaway Energy Center 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 135 of 424 The 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region (R01) generally ranges from 1:25 (hours:minutes) to 2:15 (longer during heavy snow scenarios).

The 90th percentile ETE for the 5Mile Region (R02) generally ranges from 2:20 to 2:45 (longer during heavy snow scenarios).

The 90th percentile ETE for the full EPZ (R03) generally ranges from 2:40 to 2:55 (longer during heavy snow scenarios).

The 100th percentile ETE for all Regions and Scenarios mirror the trip generation times.

This fact implies that the congestion within the EPZ dissipates prior to the end of mobilization, as displayed in Figure 77 and discussed in Section 7.3.

Comparison of Scenarios 6 and 13 in Table 71 indicates that the Special Event - a refueling outage at the Callaway Energy Center - has little impact on the ETE for the 90th percentile ETE.

The additional 991 vehicles at the CEC increases congestion slightly on roadways surrounding the CEC, but congestion quickly dissipates as vehicles are dispersed throughout the network.

For most regions, the 90th percentile ETE for Scenario 13 is slightly shorter than Scenario 6 because the added vehicles in Scenario 13 mobilize at a faster rate than the general population, bringing down the overall average 90th percentile ETE.

The Special Event scenario occurs during good weather as this is the most probable weather condition throughout the year. Any ETE increases for rain/light snow or heavy snow can be estimated by comparing effects between Scenarios 6, 7, and 8 and applying any differences to Scenario 13. Note that there is no significant time increase for rain/light snow and about 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 25 minute increase for heavy snow at the 90th percentile.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the roadway closure

- one lane on I70 - does not significantly impact ETE because there is no significant congestion on the mainline of I70. However, the ramps to I70, especially US54, do experience congestion. Thus, the mainline is underutilized and removing a lane does not impact ETE.

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 73 and Table 74 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (un staged) and staged evacuation studies. Note that Regions R34 through R44 are the same geographic areas as Regions R02 and R04 through R13, respectively.

The objective of a staged evacuation strategy is worthy of consideration, one must show that the ETE for the 2Mile Region can be reduced (30 minutes or 25%, whichever is less) without significantly affecting the region between 2 miles and 5 miles. In all cases, as shown in Table 73 and Table 74, the ETE for the 2Mile Region is unchanged when a staged evacuation is implemented. The reason for this is that there is no significant congestion in the 5mile area.

Staging the evacuation to attempt to reduce congestion within the 5mile area provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region.

To determine the effect of staged evacuation on residents beyond the 2mile region, the ETE for Regions R02 and R04 through R13 are compared to Regions R34 through R44, respectively, in Table 71 and Table 72. A comparison of ETE between these similar regions reveals that Callaway Energy Center 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 136 of 424 staging increases the 90th percentile ETE for those in the 2 to 5mile area by at most 15 minutes (see Table 71). This extending of ETE is due to the delay in beginning the evacuation trip, experienced by those who shelter, plus the effect of the tripgeneration spike (significant volume of traffic beginning the evacuation trip at the same time) that follows their eventual ATE, in creating congestion within the EPZ area beyond 2 miles.

In summary, staging evacuation provides no benefit to evacuees within 2 miles of the CEC, and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the CEC. Based on the guidance in NUREG0654, Supplement 3, this analysis would result in staged evacuation not being implemented for this site.

7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables The user first determines the percentile of population for which the ETE is sought (The NRC guidance calls for the 90th percentile). The applicable value of ETE within the chosen table may then be identified using the following procedure:

1. Identify the applicable Scenario:

• Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

• Day of Week Midweek Weekend

• Time of Day Midday Evening

• Weather Condition Good Weather Rain/Light Snow Heavy Snow

• Special Event A Refueling Outage at the Callaway Energy Center

• Roadway Impact A single lane closed on I70 eastbound (east of the CEC) and I70 westbound (west of the CEC), as explained in Section 2.6.

• Evacuation Staging No, Staged Evacuation is not considered Yes, Staged Evacuation is considered While these Scenarios are designed, in aggregate, to represent conditions throughout the year, some further clarification is warranted:

• The conditions of a summer evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain/light snow are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (2) and (4) apply.

Callaway Energy Center 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 137 of 424

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain/light snow are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (7) and (10) for rain/light snow apply.

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and heavy snow are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (8) and (11) for heavy snow apply.

• The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes public school is in session at summer enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

Winter (includes Spring and Autumn) considers that public schools are in session at normal enrollment levels.

• Time of Day: Midday implies the time over which most commuters are at work or are travelling to/from work.

2. With the desired percentile ETE and Scenario identified, now identify the Evacuation Region:

• Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of compass orientation: from the N, NNE, NE, etc.

• Determine the distance that the Evacuation Region will extend from the nuclear power plant. The applicable distances and their associated candidate Regions are given below:

2 Miles (Region R01)

To 5 Miles (Region R02, R04 through R13) to EPZ Boundary (Regions R03, R14 through R33)

• Enter Table 75 and identify the applicable group of candidate Regions based on the distance that the selected Region extends from the CEC. Select the Evacuation Region identifier in that row, based on the azimuth direction of the plume, from the first column of the Table.

3. Determine the ETE Table based on the percentile selected. Then, for the Scenario identified in Step 1 and the Evacuation Region identified in Step 2, proceed as follows:

• The columns of Table 71 are labeled with the Scenario numbers. Identify the proper column in the selected Table using the Scenario number defined in Step 1.

• Identify the row in this table that provides ETE values for the Region identified in Step 2.

• The unique data cell defined by the column and row so determined contains the desired value of ETE expressed in Hours:Minutes.

Example It is desired to identify the ETE for the following conditions:

• Sunday, August 10th at 10:00 PM.

• It is raining.

• Wind direction is from the southwest (SW).

• Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 2mile radius Callaway Energy Center 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 138 of 424 and downwind to 10 miles (to EPZ boundary) with a 3sector keyhole.

• The desired ETE is that value needed to evacuate 90 percent of the population from within the impacted Region.

• A staged evacuation is not desired.

Table 71 is applicable because the 90th percentile ETE is desired. Proceed as follows:

1. Identify the Scenario as summer, weekend, evening and raining. Entering Table 71, it is seen that there is no match for these descriptors. However, the clarification given above assigns this combination of circumstances to Scenario 4.

2. Enter Table 75 and locate the Region described as Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary for wind direction from the SW with a 3sector keyhole and read Region R25 in the first column of that row.

3. Enter Table 71 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for Scenario 4 and Region R25. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R25; it contains the ETE value of 2:45.

Callaway Energy Center 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Rain/Light Good Rain/Light Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Weather Snow Weather Snow Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R02 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:35 2:20 2:45 R03 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:45 2:55 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R04 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:45 2:35 R05 2:35 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:50 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 2:00 2:35 R06 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:55 2:35 R07 2:40 2:40 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:35 2:35 4:00 2:35 2:10 2:40 R08 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:35 2:35 3:45 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:55 2:35 R09 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 3:35 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:35 2:25 R10 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:35 2:40 4:00 2:35 1:50 2:35 R11 2:20 2:20 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 3:25 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:35 1:35 2:20 R12 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 3:30 2:35 2:35 3:55 2:35 1:35 2:25 R13 1:45 1:50 2:25 2:25 2:25 1:45 1:45 2:35 2:25 2:25 3:40 2:25 1:30 1:45 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R14 2:50 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:35 2:50 R15 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:55 2:55 4:20 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:45 2:55 R16 2:50 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:15 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:40 2:50 R17 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:45 2:55 R18 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:45 2:55 R19 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:40 2:55 R20 2:55 2:55 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:05 2:40 2:40 2:55 R21 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:15 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:40 2:50 R22 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:15 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:40 2:50 R23 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:15 2:45 R24 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:20 2:45 R25 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:15 2:45 R26 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:45 2:25 2:50 R27 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:45 2:25 2:50 R28 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:40 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:15 2:45 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 R29 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:10 2:40 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:30 2:50 R30 2:50 2:50 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:50 2:50 4:05 2:40 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:25 2:50 R31 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 3:50 2:40 2:40 3:55 2:40 2:00 2:45 June 27, 2022 R32 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:40 2:20 2:45 R33 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:40 2:40 3:55 2:40 2:15 2:45 Page 139 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R34 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:45 2:45 4:05 2:50 2:50 4:00 2:50 2:20 2:45 R35 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 3:40 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 1:50 2:35 R36 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 3:50 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 2:00 2:40 R37 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 1:55 2:35 R38 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:40 4:00 2:45 2:45 4:00 2:45 2:10 2:40 R39 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 3:45 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 1:55 2:35 R40 2:25 2:25 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 3:35 2:45 2:45 3:55 2:45 1:45 2:25 R41 2:35 2:35 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:35 2:35 3:50 2:50 2:50 4:00 2:50 1:55 2:35 R42 2:20 2:20 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:20 2:20 3:25 2:50 2:50 3:55 2:50 1:40 2:20 R43 2:25 2:25 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:25 2:25 3:30 2:50 2:50 3:55 2:50 1:45 2:25 R44 1:50 1:50 2:40 2:40 2:40 1:50 1:50 2:40 2:40 2:40 3:50 2:40 1:30 1:50 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 140 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 710 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Rain/Light Good Rain/Light Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Weather Snow Weather Snow Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R02 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R03 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R04 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R06 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R07 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R08 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R09 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R10 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R11 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R12 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R13 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R14 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R15 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R16 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R17 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R18 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R19 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R20 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R21 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R22 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R23 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R24 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R25 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R26 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R27 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R28 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 R29 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R30 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R31 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 June 27, 2022 R32 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R33 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 6:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 Page 141 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 711 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R34 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R35 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R36 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R37 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R38 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R39 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R40 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R41 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R42 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R43 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R44 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 6:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 142 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 712 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Rain/Light Good Rain/Light Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Weather Snow Weather Snow Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R02 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R05 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R06 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R07 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R08 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R09 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R10 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R11 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R12 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R13 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R34 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R35 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R36 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R37 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R38 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R39 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R40 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R41 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 R42 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 R43 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 June 27, 2022 R44 1:25 1:25 2:15 2:15 2:10 1:25 1:25 1:40 2:15 2:15 3:30 2:15 1:30 1:25 Page 143 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 713 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Region Good Rain/Light Good Rain/Light Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Weather Snow Weather Snow Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R02 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R05 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R06 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R07 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R08 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R09 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R10 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R11 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R12 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R13 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R34 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R35 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R36 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R37 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R38 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R39 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R40 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R41 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 R42 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R43 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 June 27, 2022 R44 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 6:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Page 144 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 714 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Subarea Region

Description:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 R01 2Mile Radius X R02 5Mile Radius X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 N/NNE R04 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R04 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R05 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R06 60 75 L, M, N X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E 76 82 L, M, N, P (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

See Region R06 E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 145 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 ESE/SE R07 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SE R08 128 142 P, Q, R X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S 166 172 Q, R, A, B See Region R08 (4Sector Keyhole)

S 173 187 R, A, B (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW 188 194 R, A, B, C (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R09 195 210 A, B, C X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R10 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW 218 232 B, C, D (3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW 233 239 B, C, D, E (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R10 WSW 240 255 C, D, E (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W 256 262 C, D, E, F (4Sector Keyhole)

W R11 263 277 D, E, F X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 146 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 W/WNW R12 278 284 D, E, F, G X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW 285 300 E, F, G (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R12 NW 308 322 F, G, H (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R13 330 345 G, H, J X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N 346 352 G, H, J, K (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R04 N

353 7 H, J, K (3Sector Keyhole)

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 N/NNE R14 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R14 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 147 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea Wind Direction From:

Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 NE/ENE R15 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R16 60 75 L, M, N X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E R17 76 82 L, M, N, P X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q See Region R17 (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R18 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SE R19 128 142 P, Q, R X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R19 SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S R20 166 172 Q, R, A, B X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

S R21 173 187 R, A, B X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW R22 188 194 R, A, B, C X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R23 195 210 A, B, C X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R24 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW R25 218 232 B, C, D X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole) Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 148 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea Wind Direction From:

Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 SW/WSW R26 233 239 B, C, D, E X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WSW 240 255 C, D, E See Region R26 (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W R27 256 262 C, D, E, F X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

W R28 263 277 D, E, F X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

W/WNW R29 278 284 D, E, F, G X X X X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW R30 285 300 E, F, G X X X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

NW 308 322 F, G, H See Region R30 (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R31 330 345 G, H, J X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N R32 346 352 G, H, J, K X X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

N R33 353 7 H, J, K X X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 149 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction From: Subarea Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 R34 5Mile Radius X X X X X X N/NNE R35 8 14 H, J, K, L X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R35 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R36 53 59 K, L, M, N X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R37 60 75 L, M, N X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E 76 82 L, M, N, P (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

See Region R37 E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R38 121 127 N, P, Q, R X X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 150 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea Wind Direction From:

Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 SE R39 128 142 P, Q, R X X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S 166 172 Q, R, A, B See Region R39 (4Sector Keyhole)

S 173 187 R, A, B (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW 188 194 R, A, B, C (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R40 195 210 A, B, C X X (3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R41 211 217 A, B, C, D X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

SW 218 232 B, C, D (3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW 233 239 B, C, D, E (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R41 WSW 240 255 C, D, E (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W 256 262 C, D, E, F (4Sector Keyhole)

W R42 263 277 D, E, F X X (3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 151 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea Wind Direction From:

Region Sectors: Cardinal Compass Equivalent:

(Degrees)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 W/WNW R43 278 284 D, E, F, G X X X (4Sector Keyhole)

WNW 285 300 E, F, G (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R43 NW 308 322 F, G, H (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R44 330 345 G, H, J X X (3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N 346 352 G, H, J, K (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R35 N

353 7 H, J, K (3Sector Keyhole)

Subarea(s) Evacuate Subarea(s) ShelterinPlace ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 152 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Page 153 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 72. Callaway Energy Center Shadow Region Page 154 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 30 Minutes after the ATE Page 155 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the ATE Page 156 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 726 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 30 Minutes after the ATE Page 157 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 727 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 30 Minutes after the ATE Page 158 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 728 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 50 Minutes after the ATE Page 159 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 729 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 160 of 424 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 1) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

12 10 Vehicles Evacuating 8

6 (Thousands) 4 2

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 78. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 1 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

12 10 Vehicles Evacuating 8

6 (Thousands) 4 2

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 2 for Region R03 Callaway Energy Center 730 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 161 of 424 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

10 9

8 Vehicles Evacuating 7

6 5

(Thousands) 4 3

2 1

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 3 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

10 9

8 Vehicles Evacuating 7

6 5

(Thousands) 4 3

2 1

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 4 for Region R03 Callaway Energy Center 731 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 162 of 424 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 5) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

10 9

8 Vehicles Evacuating 7

6 5

(Thousands) 4 3

2 1

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 5 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

14 12 Vehicles Evacuating 10 8

(Thousands) 6 4

2 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 6 for Region R03 Callaway Energy Center 732 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 163 of 424 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

14 12 Vehicles Evacuating 10 8

(Thousands) 6 4

2 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 7 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario 8) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

14 12 Vehicles Evacuating 10 8

(Thousands) 6 4

2 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 8 for Region R03 Callaway Energy Center 733 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 164 of 424 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 9) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

10 9

8 Vehicles Evacuating 7

6 5

(Thousands) 4 3

2 1

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 9 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

10 9

8 Vehicles Evacuating 7

6 5

(Thousands) 4 3

2 1

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 10 for Region R03 Callaway Energy Center 734 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 165 of 424 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario 11) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

10 9

8 Vehicles Evacuating 7

6 5

(Thousands) 4 3

2 1

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 11 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 12) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

10 9

8 Vehicles Evacuating 7

6 5

(Thousands) 4 3

2 1

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 12 for Region R03 Callaway Energy Center 735 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 166 of 424 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good, Special Event (Scenario 13) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

14 12 Vehicles Evacuating 10 8

(Thousands) 6 4

2 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 13 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

12 10 Vehicles Evacuating 8 6

(Thousands) 4 2

0 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates - Scenario 14 for Region R03 Callaway Energy Center 736 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 167 of 424 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SCHOOL EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES This section details the analyses applied and the results obtained in the form of Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for transit vehicles (buses, wheelchair buses and ambulances). The demand for transit service reflects the needs of three population groups: (1) residents with no vehicles available; (2) residents of special facilities such as schools; and (3) access and/or functional needs population.

These transit vehicles mix with the general evacuating traffic that is comprised mostly of passenger cars (pcs). The presence of each bus in the evacuating traffic stream is represented within the modeling paradigm described in Appendix D as equivalent to two pcs.

This equivalence factor represents the longer size and more sluggish operating characteristics of a transit vehicle, relative to those of a pc. An ambulance is treated as one pc.

Transit vehicles must be mobilized in preparation for their respective evacuation missions.

Specifically:

• Bus drivers must be alerted

• They must travel to the bus depot

• They must be briefed there and assigned to a route or facility These activities consume time. Based on discussion with offsite agencies, it is estimated that bus mobilization time for schools will average approximately 90 minutes extending from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), to the time when buses first arrive at the facility to be evacuated. It is assumed transit dependent buses and access and/or functional needs vehicles are mobilized when about 90% of the residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization activities at 150 minutes after the ATE, as discussed in item 4b of Section 2.4.

During this mobilization period, other mobilization activities are taking place. One of these is the action taken by parents, neighbors, relatives and friends to pick up children from school prior to the arrival of buses, so that they may join their families. Virtually all studies of evacuations have concluded that this bonding process of uniting families is universally prevalent during emergencies and should be anticipated in the planning process. The current public information disseminated to residents of the Callaway Energy Center (CEC) Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) indicates that each school has its own evacuation plan and covers where children will go if their school is in an evacuation area. Emergency Alert System (EAS) stations will give information about school actions.

As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a fastbreaking general emergency. This report provides estimates of buses under the assumption that no children will be picked up by their parents (in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1) to present an upper bound estimate of buses required. Picking up children at school could add to traffic congestion at the schools, delaying the departure of the buses evacuating schoolchildren, which may have to return in a subsequent wave to the EPZ to evacuate the transitdependent population.

Callaway Energy Center 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 168 of 424 Based on the emergency plans provided by the offsite agencies, children at daycare centers should be picked up by parents or guardians. It is assumed that the time to perform this activity is included in the trip generation times discussed in Section 5.

The procedure for computing transitdependent ETE is to:

• Estimate demand for transit service (discussed in Section 3)

• Estimate time to perform all transit functions

• Estimate route travel times to the EPZ boundary and to the reception centers Figure 81 presents the chronology of events relevant to transit operations. The elapsed time for each activity will now be discussed with reference to Figure 81.

8.1 ETEs for Schools and Transit Dependent People The EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if schools are in session at the time of the ATE) as the first priority in the event of an emergency. In the event that the allocation of buses dispatched from the depots to the various facilities and to the bus routes is somewhat inefficient, or if there is a shortfall of available drivers, then there may be a need for some buses to return to the EPZ from the reception center after completing their first evacuation trip, to complete a second wave of providing transportation service to evacuees.

The number of available transportation resources were provided by the offsite agencies. Table 81 summarizes the capacity of transportation resources. Also included in the table is the transportation resource capacity needed to evacuate schools, transitdependent population, and access and/or functional needs (discussed below in Section 8.2). There are no transportation resources needed for medical and correction facilities as they will shelterin place (discussed in Section 2.4). There are sufficient bus resources available to evacuate the schoolchildren and transitdependent population in the EPZ in a single wave. Furthermore, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R03 (the entire EPZ), then there will likely be ample transit resources relative to demand in the impacted Region.

When school evacuation needs are satisfied, subsequent assignments of buses to service the transitdependent should be sensitive to their mobilization time. Clearly, the buses should be dispatched after people have completed their mobilization activities and are in a position to board the buses when they arrive along the transit routes.

Evacuation of Schools Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at the school to be evacuated. As previously stated, it is assumed that for a rapidly escalating radiological emergency with no observable indication before the fact, drivers would require 90 minutes to be contacted, to travel to the depot, be briefed, and to travel to the schools. Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather - 100 minutes in rain/light snow and 110 minutes in heavy snow conditions.

Callaway Energy Center 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 169 of 424 Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

As discussed in Section 2.6, a loading time of 15 minutes for good weather (20 minutes for rain/light snow and 25 minutes for heavy snow) for school buses is used.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The buses servicing the schools are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the ATE - 90 minutes mobilization time plus 15 minutes loading time - in good weather. The UNITES software discussed in Section 1.3 was used to define bus routes along the most likely path from a school being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate reception center. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes from the school to the EPZ boundary. Each bus route is given an identification number and is written to the DYNEV II input stream. DYNEV computes the route length and outputs the average speed for each 5minute interval, for each bus route. The specified bus routes are documented in Section 10 in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). Data provided by DYNEV during the appropriate timeframe depending on the mobilization and loading times (i.e., 100 to 105 minutes after the ATE for good weather) were used to compute the average speed for each route, as follows:

. . 60 .

. 1 .

60 .

1 .

The average speed computed (using this methodology) for the buses servicing each of the schools in the EPZ is shown in Table 82 through Table 84. To comply with state bus speed regulations, the computed speeds are restricted to 60 mph, 55 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. The travel time to the EPZ boundary was computed for each bus using the computed average speed and the distance to the EPZ boundary along the most likely route out of the EPZ. The travel time from the EPZ boundary to the Reception Center was computed assuming an average speed of 60 mph, 55 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively.

Table 82 (good weather), Table 83 (rain/light snow) and Table 84 (heavy snow) present the following ETEs (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for schools in the EPZ:

(1) The elapsed time from the ATE until the bus exits the EPZ; and (2) The elapsed time until the bus reaches the School Reception Center.

Callaway Energy Center 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 170 of 424 The evacuation time out of the EPZ can be computed as the sum of times associated with Activities ABC, CD, and DE (For example: 90 min. + 15 + 2 = 1:50 rounded to the nearest 5 minutes for Bartley Elementary School in good weather). The average ETE for schools are 55 minutes less than the 90th percentile ETE for Region R03 for the general population during Scenario 6 conditions (2:50 -1:55 = 0:55) in good weather.

The evacuation time to the School Reception Center is determined by adding the time associated with Activity EF (discussed below), to this EPZ evacuation time.

Activity: Travel to Reception Centers (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the reception centers are measured using geographic information system (GIS) software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the reception center. The reception centers are mapped in Figure 103. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 60 mph, 55 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively, are applied for this activity for buses servicing the schools in the EPZ.

Evacuation of Transit Dependent People (Residents without access to a vehicle)

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at their designated route. The buses dispatched from the depots to service the transitdependent evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), 90 percent of the evacuees will complete their mobilization when the buses begin their routes at approximately 150 minutes after the ATE. The residents taking longer to mobilize are assumed to rideshare with a friend or neighbor. Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather -

160 minutes in rain/light snow and 170 minutes in heavy snow conditions.

A detailed computation of the transit dependent people is discussed in Section 3.7. The total number of transit dependent people per Subarea was determined using a weighted distribution based on population. Subareas that were determined to have less than one transitdependent person were ignored and no transit bus routes were assigned. It was estimated that the four Subareas with the highest population (C7, C8, C9 & O1) are the only Subareas that required transitdependent buses. The bus routes utilized in this study were designed by KLD to service the most populated Subareas. These routes are described in Table 101 and mapped in Figure 102. Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along their pickup routes, then proceed out of the EPZ. It is assumed that residents will walk to the nearest major roadway and flag down a passing bus, and that they can arrive at the roadway within the 150 minute bus mobilization time (good weather).

The ETEs for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. Each route has one bus that departs at 150 minutes after the ATE. Table 85 (good weather), Table 86 (rain/light snow) and Table 87 (heavy snow) show the ETE breakdown for each step in the transitdependent evacuation process.

Callaway Energy Center 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 171 of 424 Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

For multiple stops along a pickup route (transitdependent bus routes) estimation of travel time must allow for the delay associated with stopping and starting at each pickup point. The time, t, required for a bus to decelerate at a rate, a, expressed in ft/sec/sec, from a speed, v, expressed in ft/sec, to a stop, is t = v/a. Assuming the same acceleration rate and final speed following the stop yields a total time, T, to service boarding passengers:

2 ,

Where B = Dwell time to service passengers. The total distance, s in feet, travelled during the deceleration and acceleration activities is: s = v2/a. If the bus had not stopped to service passengers, but had continued to travel at speed, v, then its travel time over the distance, s, would be: s/v = v/a. Then the total delay (i.e. pickup time, P) to service passengers is:

Assigning reasonable estimates:

• B = 50 seconds: a generous value for a single passenger, carrying personal items, to board per stop

• v = 25 miles per hour (mph) = 37 feet/second (ft/sec)

• a = 4 ft/sec/sec, a moderate average rate Then, P 1 minute per stop. Allowing 30 minutes pickup time per bus run implies 30 stops per run, for good weather. It is assumed that bus acceleration and speed will be less in rain/light snow resulting in 40 minutes of pickup time per bus and 50 minutes in heavy snow.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Bus travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school evacuation, where they are restricted to 60 mph, 55 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively.

Table 85 through Table 87 present the transitdependent population ETE for each bus route calculated using the above procedures for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively.

For example, the ETE for the Bus Route 3 is computed as 150 + 12 + 30 = 3:15 for good weather (rounded to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 12 minutes is the time to travel 9.1 miles at 44.8 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route at 150 minutes.

Activity: Travel to Reception Centers (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the reception centers are measured using geographic information system (GIS) software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the reception center. The reception centers are mapped in Figure 103. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus Callaway Energy Center 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 172 of 424 speeds of 60 mph, 55 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population.

The average ETE for a singlewave evacuation of transitdependent population exceed the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile.

The relocation of transitdependent evacuees from the reception centers to congregate care centers, if the counties decide to do so, is not considered in this study.

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population Table 88 summarizes the ETE for access and/or functional needs population. The table is categorized by type of vehicle required and then broken down by weather condition. The table takes into consideration the deployment of multiple vehicles (not filled to capacity) to reduce the number of stops per vehicle. Due to the limitations on driving for access and/or functional needs persons, it assumed they will be picked up from their homes. Furthermore, it is conservatively assumed that ambulatory access and/or functional needs households are spaced 3 miles apart and bedridden households are spaced 5 miles apart. Bus speeds approximate 20 mph between households and ambulance speeds approximate 30 mph in good weather (10%

slower in rain/light snow, 20% slower in heavy snow). Similar to transit dependent evacuees, mobilization times of 150 minutes were used (160 minutes for rain/light snow, and 170 minutes for heavy snow). Loading times of 1 minute per person are assumed for ambulatory people and 15 minutes per person are assumed for bedridden people. For buses evacuating ambulatory access and/or functional needs, the last household is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 60 mph (55 mph for rain/light snow and 45 mph for heavy snow), is used to compute travel time after the last pickup. ETE is computed by summing mobilization time, loading time at first household, travel to subsequent households, loading time at subsequent households, and travel time to EPZ boundary. All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, assuming no more than one access and/or functional need person per HH implies that 16 households need to be serviced. While only 1 bus is needed from a capacity perspective, if 4 buses are deployed to service these special needs HH, then each would require 4 stops maximum. For example, the ETE for access and/or functional needs ambulatory people in good weather is computed as follows :

1. Assume 4 buses are deployed, each with about 4 stops, to service a total of 16 HH.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the first pickup location: 2:30

b. Load HH members at first pickup: 1 minute

c. Travel to subsequent pickup locations: 4 @ 9 minutes (3 miles at 20 mph) = 27 minutes

d. Load HH members at subsequent pickup locations: 3 @ 1 minutes = 3 minutes

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 5 miles @ 53 mph (network wide average speed at 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> after the ATE) = 6 minutes Callaway Energy Center 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 173 of 424 ETE: 2:30 + 1 + 27 + 3 + 6 = 3:10 It is estimated that 2 ambulances will be needed to evacuate the 4 homebound bedridden person within the EPZ. As discussed above, there are 19 ambulances available within the EPZ and only 2 are required to evacuate the bedridden access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ (see Table 81).

For example, the ETE for access and/or functional needs bedridden people in good weather is computed as follows:

3. Ambulance arrives at first household: 150 minutes

4. Loading time at first household: 15 minutes

5. Ambulance travels to second household: 5 miles @ 30 mph = 10 minutes

6. Loading time at second household: 15 minutes

7. Travel time to EPZ boundary: 5 miles @ 53 mph (network wide average speed at 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 10 minutes after the ATE) = 6 minutes ETE: 150 + 15 + 10 + 15 + 6 = 3:20 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes).

The average ETE for a single wave evacuation of the access and/or functional needs population exceeds the general population ETE at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03), during Scenario 6 conditions.

8.3 Medical and Correctional Facilities As discussed in Section 2.4, all medical facilities and correctional facilities located within the 10 mile EPZ will shelterinplace according to county emergency plans.

Callaway Energy Center 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 174 of 424 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Transportation Wheelchair Wheelchair Resource Drivers Buses Vans Buses Vans Ambulances Resources Available Callaway County Ambulance District (Fulton) 6 0 0 0 0 6 Fulton School District 34 33 0 1 0 0 Holts Summit (Callaway Ambulance District) 2 0 0 0 0 2 Joe Zimmer, Chamois (Osage R1 Schools) 4 4 0 0 0 0 Montgomery County 7 0 0 0 3 4 North Callaway RI Schools 20 20 0 0 0 0 Osage RI School District (Chamois) 2 1 1 0 0 0 RI School District (Hermann) 12 12 0 0 0 0 Riverview Nursing Center (Mokane) 1 0 0 0 1 0 Rudroff Bus Company (Linn) 36 36 0 0 0 0 SERVE (Fulton) 11 9 0 0 2 0 South Callaway RII School District (Mokane) 19 17 0 2 0 0 Swartz Bus Co. (Gasconade/Montgomery) 23 23 0 0 0 0 University of Missouri Hospital 7 0 0 0 0 7 William Woods University (Fulton) 7 4 3 0 0 0 TOTAL: 191 159 4 3 6 19 Resources Needed Medical Facilities (Table 36): ShelterinPlace Schools (Table 37): 108 0 0 0 0 Homebound Access and/or Functional Needs 4 0 0 0 2 (Table 39):

Correctional Facilities (Section 3.9): ShelterinPlace TransitDependent Population (Table 101): 3 0 0 0 0 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 115 0 0 0 2 Callaway Energy Center 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Time Travel Dist. from Dist. To Time to EPZ EPZ Driver Loading EPZ Average EPZ Bdry to Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE R.C. R.C. R.C.

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CALLAWAY COUNTY SCHOOLS Bartley Elementary School 90 15 1.5 37.4 2 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 Bush Elementary School 90 15 2.4 29.1 5 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 Fulton High School 90 15 1.6 45.6 2 1:50 26.1 26 2:20 Fulton Middle School 90 15 2.1 36.2 3 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 Kingdom Christian Academy 90 15 2.1 33.2 4 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 McIntire Elementary School 90 15 1.0 45.3 1 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 Missouri School for the Deaf 90 15 1.7 29.0 4 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 South Callaway RII Elementary School 90 15 6.0 52.8 7 1:55 17.7 18 2:15 South Callaway RII Middle School 90 15 6.0 52.8 7 1:55 17.7 18 2:15 South Callaway RII High School 90 15 6.0 52.8 7 1:55 17.7 18 2:15 St. Peter's Catholic School 90 15 3.0 34.7 5 1:50 26.1 26 2:20 Westminster College 90 15 1.1 45.3 1 1:50 22.6 23 2:15 William Woods University 90 15 3.0 39.4 5 1:50 26.1 26 2:20 OSAGE COUNTY SCHOOLS Chamois High School 90 15 9.1 47.9 11 2:00 24.8 25 2:25 Osage County Chamois R1 School 90 15 9.1 47.9 11 2:00 24.8 25 2:25 District Maximum for EPZ: 2:00 Maximum: 2:25 Average for EPZ: 1:55 Average: 2:20 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 175 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow Travel Time Travel Dist. from Dist. To Time to EPZ EPZ Driver Loading EPZ Average EPZ Bdry to Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE R.C. R.C. R.C.

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CALLAWAY COUNTY SCHOOLS Bartley Elementary School 100 20 1.5 34.2 3 2:05 22.6 25 2:30 Bush Elementary School 100 20 2.4 23.9 6 2:10 22.6 25 2:35 Fulton High School 100 20 1.0 41.6 1 2:05 22.6 25 2:30 Fulton Middle School 100 20 2.1 32.3 4 2:05 22.6 25 2:30 Kingdom Christian Academy 100 20 2.1 24.9 5 2:05 22.6 25 2:30 McIntire Elementary School 100 20 3.0 39.1 5 2:05 26.1 28 2:35 Missouri School for the Deaf 100 20 1.7 21.7 5 2:05 22.6 25 2:30 South Callaway RII Elementary School 100 20 6.0 48.1 7 2:10 17.7 19 2:30 South Callaway RII Middle School 100 20 6.0 48.1 7 2:10 17.7 19 2:30 South Callaway RII High School 100 20 6.0 48.1 7 2:10 17.7 19 2:30 St. Peter's Catholic School 100 20 3.0 32.2 6 2:10 26.1 28 2:40 Westminster College 100 20 1.1 39.1 2 2:05 22.6 25 2:30 William Woods University 100 20 3.0 35.0 5 2:05 26.1 28 2:35 OSAGE COUNTY SCHOOLS Chamois High School 100 20 9.1 43.4 13 2:15 24.8 27 2:45 Osage County Chamois R1 School 100 20 9.1 43.4 13 2:15 24.8 27 2:45 District Maximum for EPZ: 2:15 Maximum: 2:45 Average for EPZ: 2:10 Average: 2:35 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 176 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow Travel Time Travel Dist. from Dist. To Time to EPZ EPZ Driver Loading EPZ Average EPZ Bdry to Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE R.C. R.C. R.C.

School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CALLAWAY COUNTY SCHOOLS Bartley Elementary School 110 25 1.5 32.5 3 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 Bush Elementary School 110 25 2.4 23.7 6 2:25 22.6 30 2:55 Fulton High School 110 25 1.0 39.0 2 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 Fulton Middle School 110 25 2.1 30.8 4 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 Kingdom Christian Academy 110 25 2.1 26.3 5 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 McIntire Elementary School 110 25 3.0 32.9 5 2:20 26.1 35 2:55 Missouri School for the Deaf 110 25 1.7 22.8 4 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 South Callaway RII Elementary School 110 25 6.0 43.6 8 2:25 17.7 24 2:50 South Callaway RII Middle School 110 25 6.0 43.6 8 2:25 17.7 24 2:50 South Callaway RII High School 110 25 6.0 43.6 8 2:25 17.7 24 2:50 St. Peter's Catholic School 110 25 3.0 30.6 6 2:25 26.1 35 3:00 Westminster College 110 25 1.1 33.3 2 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 William Woods University 110 25 3.0 33.4 5 2:20 26.1 35 2:55 OSAGE COUNTY SCHOOLS Chamois High School 110 25 9.1 41.0 13 2:30 24.8 33 3:05 Osage County Chamois R1 School 110 25 9.1 41.0 13 2:30 24.8 33 3:05 District Maximum for EPZ: 2:30 Maximum: 3:05 Average for EPZ: 2:25 Average: 2:55 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 177 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Route Travel Bus Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to ETA to Route Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. R.C.

Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (hr:min) 1 150 6.0 55.3 7 30 3:10 17.7 18 3:30 2 150 11.2 36.8 18 30 3:20 26.1 26 3:50 3 150 9.1 44.8 12 30 3:15 24.8 25 3:40 Maximum ETE: 3:20 Maximum ETE: 3:50 Average ETE: 3:15 Average ETE: 3:40 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow Route Travel Bus Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to ETA to Route Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. R.C.

Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (hr:min) 1 160 6.0 50.0 7 40 3:30 17.7 19 3:50 2 160 11.2 33.7 20 40 3:40 26.1 28 4:10 3 160 9.1 40.3 14 40 3:35 24.8 27 4:05 Maximum ETE: 3:40 Maximum ETE: 4:10 Average ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 4:05 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 178 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow Route Travel Bus Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to ETA to Route Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. R.C.

Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (hr:min) 1 170 6.0 45.0 8 50 3:50 17.7 24 4:15 2 170 11.2 31.9 21 50 4:05 26.1 35 4:40 3 170 9.1 38.2 14 50 3:55 24.8 33 4:30 Maximum ETE: 4:05 Maximum ETE: 4:40 Average ETE: 4:00 Average ETE: 4:30 Table 88. Access and/or Functional Needs Evacuation Time Estimates Total Travel Mobiliza Loading Loading Time to People tion Time at Travel to Time at EPZ Requiring Vehicles Weather Time 1st Stop Subsequent Subsequent Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Stops Conditions (min) (min) Stops (min) Stops (min) (min) (hr:min)

Good 150 27 6 3:10 Buses 16 4 4 Rain 160 1 30 3 6 3:20 Snow 170 33 7 3:35 Good 150 10 6 3:20 Ambulances 4 2 2 Rain 160 15 11 15 6 3:30 Snow 170 13 7 3:40 Maximum ETE: 3:40 Average ETE: 3:25 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 179 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(Subsequent Wave)

A B C D E F G Time Event A Advisory to Evacuate B Bus Dispatched from Depot C Bus Arrives at Facility/Pickup Route D Bus Departs for Reception Center E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Reception Center/Host Facility Activity AB Driver Mobilization BC Travel to Facility or to Pickup Route CD Passengers Board the Bus DE Bus Travels Towards Region Boundary EF Bus Travels Towards Reception Center Outside the EPZ Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations June 27, 2022 Page 180 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 181 of 424 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY This section discusses the suggested Traffic Management Plan (TMP) that is designed to expedite the movement of evacuating traffic. The resources required to implement the TMP include:

• Personnel with the capabilities of performing the planned control functions of traffic guides (preferably, not necessarily, law enforcement officers).

• The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) of the U.S.D.O.T. provides guidance for Traffic Control Devices to assist these personnel in the performance of their tasks. All state and most county transportation agencies have access to the MUTCD, which is available online:

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov which provides access to the official PDF version.

• A written plan that defines all Access Control Points (ACP) and Traffic Control Point (TCP) locations, provides necessary details and is documented in a format that is readily understood by those assigned to perform traffic control.

The functions to be performed in the field are:

1. Facilitate evacuating traffic movements that safely expedite travel out of the EPZ.

2. Discourage traffic movements that move evacuating vehicles in a direction which takes them significantly closer to the power plant, or which interferes with the efficient flow of other evacuees.

We employ the terms "facilitate" and "discourage" rather than "enforce" and "prohibit" to indicate the need for flexibility in performing the traffic control function. There are always legitimate reasons for a driver to prefer direction other than that indicated. For example:

• A driver may be traveling home from work or from another location, to join other family members prior to evacuating.

• An evacuating driver may be travelling to pick up a relative, or other evacuees.

• The driver may be an emergency worker entering the area being evacuated to perform an important emergency service.

The implementation of a TMP must also be flexible enough for the application of sound judgment by the traffic guide.

The TMP is the outcome of the following process:

1. The existing mandatory TCPs and ACPs identified by the offsite response organizations in their existing emergency plans serve as the basis of the traffic management plan, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev 1. The ETE analysis treated all controlled intersections that are existing TCP or ACP locations in the offsite agency plans as being controlled by actuated signals. Appendix K identifies the number of intersections that were modeled as TCPs.

2. Evacuation simulations were run using DYNEV II to predict traffic congestion during evacuation (see Section 7.3 and Figure 73 through Figure 77). These simulations help to identify the best routing and critical intersections that experience pronounced Callaway Energy Center 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 182 of 424 congestion during evacuation. Any critical intersections that would benefit from traffic or access control which are not already identified in the existing offsite plans are examined. No additional TCPs or ACPs were identified as part of this study

3. Prioritization of TCPs and ACPs. Application of traffic and access control at some TCPs and ACPs will have a more pronounced influence on expediting traffic movements than at other TCPs and ACPs. For example, TCPs controlling traffic originating from areas in close proximity to the power plant could have a more beneficial effect on minimizing potential exposure to radioactivity than those TCPs located far from the power plant.

Key locations for manual traffic control (MTC) were analyzed and their impact to ETE was quantified, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. See Appendix G for more detail.

Appendix G documents the existing TMP and its use in the study using the process enumerated above.

9.1 Assumptions The ETE calculations documented in Section 7 and 8 assume that the traffic management plan is implemented during evacuation.

The ETE calculations reflect the assumptions that all externalexternal trips are interdicted and diverted after 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> have elapsed from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE).

All transit vehicles and other responders entering the EPZ to support the evacuation are assumed to be unhindered by personal manning TCPs and ACPs.

Study assumptions 1 and 2 in Section 2.5 discuss TCP and ACP operations.

9.2 Additional Considerations The use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies can reduce the manpower and equipment needs, while still facilitating the evacuation process. Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) can be placed within the EPZ to provide information to travelers regarding traffic conditions, route selection, and reception/care center information. DMS placed outside of the EPZ will warn motorists to avoid using routes that may conflict with the flow of evacuees away from the power plant. Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) can be used to broadcast information to evacuees during egress through their vehicles stereo systems. Automated Travel Information Systems (ATIS) can also be used to provide evacuees with information. Internet websites can provide traffic and evacuation route information before the evacuee begins their trip, while the on board navigation systems (GPS units) and smartphones can be used to provide information during evacuation trip.

These are only some examples of how ITS technologies can benefit the evacuation process.

Considerations should be given that ITS technologies can be used to facilitate the evacuation process, and any additional signage placed should consider evacuation needs.

Callaway Energy Center 92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 183 of 424 10 EVACUATION ROUTES AND RECEPTION CENTERS 10.1 Evacuation Routes Evacuation routes are comprised of two distinct components:

• Routing from a Subarea being evacuated to the boundary of the Evacuation Region and thence out of the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ).

• Routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception/care centers.

Evacuees will select routes within the EPZ in such a way as to minimize their exposure to risk.

This expectation is met by the DYNEV II model routing traffic away from the location of the plant, to the extent practicable. The DTRAD model satisfies this behavior by routing traffic so as to balance traffic demand relative to the available highway capacity to the extent possible. See Appendices B through D for further discussion. The major evacuation routes for the EPZ are presented in Figure 101. These routes will be used by the general population evacuating in private vehicles, and by the school and transitdependent population evacuating in buses.

Transitdependent evacuees and school buses will be routed to reception centers. General population may evacuate to either a reception center or some alternate destination (e.g.,

lodging facility, relatives home, campground) outside the EPZ.

The routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception centers is designed to minimize the amount of travel outside the EPZ, from the points where these routes cross the EPZ boundary. The three bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102 and described in Table 101 have been identified to service the transitdependent evacuees throughout the entire EPZ. These routes were designed by KLD to service the major routes through the Subareas with the largest population and then proceed to the nearest reception center. It is assumed that residents will walk to and congregate at the nearest major road to be picked up.

The specified bus routes for all the transitdependent population are documented in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations).

Representative routes were developed for all schools within the EPZ. It is assumed that all school evacuees will be taken to their appropriate reception center. School evacuees will subsequently be picked up by parents or guardians. Transitdependent evacuees are transported to the nearest reception center for each county. This study does not consider the transport of evacuees from reception centers to alternate care centers or congregate care centers if the counties do make the decision to relocate evacuees.

10.2 Reception Centers Figure 103 presents a map showing the general population reception centers for evacuees.

Transitdependent evacuees are transported to the nearest reception center for each county.

Callaway Energy Center 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 184 of 424 Table 103 presents a list of the reception centers for each school in the EPZ. It is assumed that all school evacuees will be taken to the appropriate reception center and will be subsequently picked up by parents or guardians.

Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes Route No. of Buses Route Description Length (mi.)

1 1 Servicing communities in Subarea C7 6.0 2 1 Servicing communities in Subarea C8 & C9 11.2 3 1 Servicing communities in Subarea O1 9.1 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 7 Bartley Elementary School 402, 403, 404, 405, 963, 66, 441, 65, 64, 67 780, 982, 779, 776, 865, 387, 388, 813, 394, 395, 396, 397, 6 Bush Elementary School 398, 58, 57, 56, 59 4 Fulton High School 399, 400, 48, 40, 45 11 Fulton Middle School 779, 776, 386, 809, 399, 400, 48, 40, 45 10 Kingdom Christian Academy 388, 813, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 58, 57, 56, 59 5 McIntire Elementary School 397, 398, 58, 57, 56, 59 938, 618, 788, 551, 550, 1411, 549, 548, 1410, 547, 1409, Osage County Chamois 1408, 546, 545, 544, 1407, 1406, 543, 542, 1405, 541, 540, 1

R1 School District 1404, 1403, 539, 538, 537, 536, 535, 534, 1614, 1402, 1401, 533, 1400, 532, 1399, 531 3 School for the Deaf 863, 815, 813, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 58, 57, 56, 59 428, 1236, 429, 430, 431, 185, 1220, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 2 South Callaway Schools 197, 191, 192 8 St. Peter Catholic School 780, 1616, 384, 1019, 385, 386, 809, 399, 400, 48, 40, 45 12 Westminster College 397, 398, 58, 57, 56, 59 9 William Woods University 810, 386, 809, 399, 400, 48, 40, 45 422, 1242, 423, 1241, 1240, 424, 425, 1239, 426, 1237, 1238, Transit Dependent Bus 23 427, 428, 1236, 429, 430, 431, 185, 1220, 186, 187, 188, 189, Route #1 - Subarea C7 190, 197, 191 369, 1176, 370, 371, 1175, 1174, 372, 1173, 1172, 373, 1171, Transit Dependent Bus 374, 375, 376, 1170, 1169, 377, 1168, 378, 379, 1167, 232, 19 Route #2 - Subareas C8 + C9 1269, 393, 392, 1274, 1275, 391, 390, 815, 387, 865, 776, 386, 809, 399, 400, 48, 40, 45 617, 678, 618, 788, 551, 1506, 552, 1507, 1508, 553, 911, 554, Transit Dependent Bus 22 555, 556, 557, 910, 558, 559, 1423, 1424, 560, 1425, 561, Route #3 - Subarea O1 1426, 562, 1427, 1428, 1429, 563, 1431, 564, 1430, 565 Callaway Energy Center 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 185 of 424 Table 103. School Reception Centers School Reception Center Bartley Elementary School Osage County Chamois R1 School District South Callaway RII Elementary School Lincoln University South Callaway RII High School South Callaway RII Middle School Bush Elementary School Chamois High School Fulton High School Fulton Middle School Kingdom Christian Academy McIntire Elementary School University of Missouri Missouri Girls Town Foundation Missouri School for the Deaf Rosa Parks Center St Peter's Catholic School Westminster College William Woods University Callaway Energy Center 103 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 101. Evacuation Route Map Page 186 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 104 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes Page 187 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 105 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure 103. CEC Reception Centers Page 188 of 424 Callaway Energy Center 106 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 189 of 424 APPENDIX A Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 190 of 424 A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms Term Definition Analysis Network A graphical representation of the geometric topology of a physical roadway system, which is comprised of directional links and nodes.

Link A network link represents a specific, onedirectional section of roadway. A link has both physical (length, number of lanes, topology, etc.) and operational (turn movement percentages, service rate, freeflow speed) characteristics.

Measures of Effectiveness Statistics describing traffic operations on a roadway network.

Node A network node generally represents an intersection of network links. A node has control characteristics, i.e., the allocation of service time to each approach link.

Origin A location attached to a network link, within the EPZ or Shadow Region, where trips are generated at a specified rate in vehicles per hour (vph). These trips enter the roadway system to travel to their respective destinations.

Prevailing Roadway and Relates to the physical features of the roadway, the nature (e.g.,

Traffic Conditions composition) of traffic on the roadway and the ambient conditions (weather, visibility, pavement conditions, etc.).

Service Rate Maximum rate at which vehicles, executing a specific turn maneuver, can be discharged from a section of roadway at the prevailing conditions, expressed in vehicles per second (vps) or vph.

Service Volume Maximum number of vehicles which can pass over a section of roadway in one direction during a specified time period with operating conditions at a specified Level of Service (The Service Volume at the upper bound of Level of Service, E, equals Capacity).

Service Volume is usually expressed as vph.

Signal Cycle Length The total elapsed time to display all signal indications, in sequence.

The cycle length is expressed in seconds.

Signal Interval A single combination of signal indications. The interval duration is expressed in seconds. A signal phase is comprised of a sequence of signal intervals, usually green, yellow, red.

Callaway Energy Center A1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 191 of 424 Term Definition Signal Phase A set of signal indications (and intervals) which services a particular combination of traffic movements on selected approaches to the intersection. The phase duration is expressed in seconds.

Traffic (Trip) Assignment A process of assigning traffic to paths of travel in such a way as to satisfy all trip objectives (i.e., the desire of each vehicle to travel from a specified origin in the network to a specified destination) and to optimize some stated objective or combination of objectives. In general, the objective is stated in terms of minimizing a generalized "cost". For example, "cost" may be expressed in terms of travel time.

Traffic Density The number of vehicles that occupy one lane of a roadway section of specified length at a point in time, expressed as vehicles per mile (vpm).

Traffic (Trip) Distribution A process for determining the destinations of all traffic generated at the origins. The result often takes the form of a Trip Table, which is a matrix of origindestination traffic volumes.

Traffic Simulation A computer model designed to replicate the realworld operation of vehicles on a roadway network, so as to provide statistics describing traffic performance. These statistics are called Measures of Effectiveness.

Traffic Volume The number of vehicles that pass over a section of roadway in one direction, expressed in vph. Where applicable, traffic volume may be stratified by turn movement.

Travel Mode Distinguishes between private auto, bus, rail, pedestrian and air travel modes.

Trip Table or Origin A rectangular matrix or table, whose entries contain the number Destination Matrix of trips generated at each specified origin, during a specified time period, that are attracted to (and travel toward) each of its specified destinations. These values are expressed in vph or in vehicles.

Turning Capacity The capacity associated with that component of the traffic stream which executes a specified turn maneuver from an approach at an intersection.

Callaway Energy Center A2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 192 of 424 APPENDIX B DTRAD: Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution Model

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 193 of 424 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL This section describes the integrated dynamic trip assignment and distribution model named DTRAD (Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution) that is expressly designed for use in analyzing evacuation scenarios. DTRAD employs logitbased pathchoice principles and is one of the models of the DYNEV II System. The DTRAD module implements pathbased Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) so that time dependent OriginDestination (OD) trips are assigned to routes over the network based on prevailing traffic conditions.

To apply the DYNEV II System, the analyst must specify the highway network, link capacity information, the timevarying volume of traffic generated at all origin centroids and, optionally, a set of accessible candidate destination nodes on the periphery of the EPZ for selected origins.

DTRAD calculates the optimal dynamic trip distribution (i.e., trip destinations) and the optimal dynamic trip assignment (i.e., trip routing) of the traffic generated at each origin node traveling to its set of candidate destination nodes, so as to minimize evacuee travel cost.

Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model The underlying premise is that the selection of destinations and routes is intrinsically coupled in an evacuation scenario. That is, people in vehicles seek to travel out of an area of potential risk as rapidly as possible by selecting the best routes. The model is designed to identify these best routes in a manner that realistically distributes vehicles from origins to destinations and routes them over the highway network, in a consistent and optimal manner, reflecting evacuee behavior.

For each origin, a set of candidate destination nodes is selected by the software logic and by the analyst to reflect the desire by evacuees to travel away from the power plant and to access major highways. The specific destination nodes within this set that are selected by travelers and the selection of the connecting paths of travel, are both determined by DTRAD. This determination is made by a logitbased path choice model in DTRAD, so as to minimize the trip cost, as discussed later.

The traffic loading on the network and the consequent operational traffic environment of the network (density, speed, throughput on each link) vary over time as the evacuation takes place.

The DTRAD model, which is interfaced with the DYNEV simulation model, executes a succession of sessions wherein it computes the optimal routing and selection of destination nodes for the conditions that exist at that time.

Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. An algorithm was developed to support the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (OD matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next. Another algorithm executes a mapping from the specified geometric network (linknode analysis network) that represents the physical highway system, to a path network that represents the vehicle [turn] movements. DTRAD computations are performed on the path network: DYNEV simulation model, on the geometric network.

Callaway Energy Center B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 194 of 424 DTRAD Description DTRAD is the DTA module for the DYNEV II System.

When the road network under study is large, multiple routing options are usually available between trip origins and destinations. The problem of loading traffic demands and propagating them over the network links is called Network Loading and is addressed by DYNEV II using macroscopic traffic simulation modeling. Traffic assignment deals with computing the distribution of the traffic over the road network for given OD demands and is a model of the route choice of the drivers. Travel demand changes significantly over time, and the road network may have time dependent characteristics, e.g., timevarying signal timing or reduced road capacity because of lane closure, or traffic congestion. To consider these time dependencies, DTA procedures are required.

The DTRAD DTA module represents the dynamic route choice behavior of drivers, using the specification of dynamic origindestination matrices as flow input. Drivers choose their routes through the network based on the travel cost they experience (as determined by the simulation model). This allows traffic to be distributed over the network according to the timedependent conditions. The modeling principles of DTRAD include:

It is assumed that drivers not only select the best route (i.e., lowest cost path) but some also select less attractive routes. The algorithm implemented by DTRAD archives several efficient routes for each OD pair from which the drivers choose.

The choice of one route out of a set of possible routes is an outcome of discrete choice modeling. Given a set of routes and their generalized costs, the percentages of drivers that choose each route is computed. The most prevalent model for discrete choice modeling is the logit model. DTRAD uses a variant of PathSizeLogit model (PSL). PSL overcomes the drawback of the traditional multinomial logit model by incorporating an additional deterministic path size correction term to address path overlapping in the random utility expression.

DTRAD executes the traffic assignment (TA) algorithm on an abstract network representation called "the path network" which is built from the actual physical link node analysis network. This execution continues until a stable situation is reached: the volumes and travel times on the edges of the path network do not change significantly from one iteration to the next. The criteria for this convergence are defined by the user.

Travel cost plays a crucial role in route choice. In DTRAD, path cost is a linear summation of the generalized cost of each link that comprises the path. The generalized cost for a link, a, is expressed as ca t a l a s a ,

where ca is the generalized cost for link a, and , , and are cost coefficients for link travel time, distance, and supplemental cost, respectively. Distance and supplemental costs are defined as invariant properties of the network model, while travel time is a dynamic property dictated by prevailing traffic conditions. The DYNEV simulation model Callaway Energy Center B2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 195 of 424 computes travel times on all edges in the network and DTRAD uses that information to constantly update the costs of paths. The route choice decision model in the next simulation iteration uses these updated values to adjust the route choice behavior. This way, traffic demands are dynamically reassigned based on time dependent conditions.

The interaction between the DTRAD traffic assignment and DYNEV II simulation models is depicted in Figure B1. Each round of interaction is called a Traffic Assignment Session (TA session). A TA session is composed of multiple iterations, marked as loop B in the figure.

The supplemental cost is based on the survival distribution (a variation of the exponential distribution).The Inverse Survival Function is a cost term in DTRAD to represent the potential risk of travel toward the plant:

sa = ln (p), 0 p l ; 0 p=

dn = Distance of node, n, from the plant d0 =Distance from the plant where there is zero risk

= Scaling factor The value of do = 15 miles, the outer distance of the EPZ. Note that the supplemental cost, sa, of link, a, is (high, low), if its downstream node, n, is (near, far from) the power plant.

Network Equilibrium In 1952, John Wardrop wrote:

Under equilibrium conditions traffic arranges itself in congested networks in such a way that no individual tripmaker can reduce his path costs by switching routes.

The above statement describes the User Equilibrium definition, also called the Selfish Driver Equilibrium. It is a hypothesis that represents a [hopeful] condition that evolves over time as drivers search out alternative routes to identify those routes that minimize their respective costs. It has been found that this equilibrium objective to minimize costs is largely realized by most drivers who routinely take the same trip over the same network at the same time (i.e.,

commuters). Effectively, such drivers learn which routes are best for them over time. Thus, the traffic environment settles down to a nearequilibrium state.

Clearly, since an emergency evacuation is a sudden, unique event, it does not constitute a long term learning experience which can achieve an equilibrium state. Consequently, DTRAD was not designed as an equilibrium solution, but to represent drivers in a new and unfamiliar situation, who respond in a flexible manner to realtime information (either broadcast or observed) in such a way as to minimize their respective costs of travel.

Callaway Energy Center B3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 196 of 424 Start of next DTRAD Session A

Set T0 Clock time.

Archive System State at T0 Define latest Link Turn Percentages Execute Simulation Model from B time, T0 to T1 (burn time)

Provide DTRAD with link MOE at time, T1 Execute DTRAD iteration; Get new Turn Percentages Retrieve System State at T0 ;

Apply new Link Turn Percents DTRAD iteration converges?

No Yes Next iteration Simulate from T0 to T2 (DTA session duration)

Set Clock to T2 B A Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface Callaway Energy Center B4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 197 of 424 APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 198 of 424 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL The DYNEV traffic simulation model is a macroscopic model that describes the operations of traffic flow in terms of aggregate variables: vehicles, flow rate, mean speed, volume, density, queue length, on each link, for each turn movement, during each Time Interval (simulation time step). The model generates trips from sources and from Entry Links and introduces them onto the analysis network at rates specified by the analyst based on the mobilization time distributions. The model simulates the movements of all vehicles on all network links over time until the network is empty. At intervals, the model outputs Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) such as those listed in Table C1.

Model Features Include:

Explicit consideration is taken of the variation in density over the time step; an iterative procedure is employed to calculate an average density over the simulation time step for the purpose of computing a mean speed for moving vehicles.

Multiple turn movements can be serviced on one link; a separate algorithm is used to estimate the number of (fractional) lanes assigned to the vehicles performing each turn movement, based, in part, on the turn percentages provided by the Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution (DTRAD) model.

At any point in time, traffic flow on a link is subdivided into two classifications: queued and moving vehicles. The number of vehicles in each classification is computed. Vehicle spillback, stratified by turn movement for each network link, is explicitly considered and quantified. The propagation of stopping waves from link to link is computed within each time step of the simulation. There is no vertical stacking of queues on a link.

Any link can accommodate source flow from zones via side streets and parking facilities that are not explicitly represented. This flow represents the evacuating trips that are generated at the source.

The relation between the number of vehicles occupying the link and its storage capacity is monitored every time step for every link and for every turn movement. If the available storage capacity on a link is exceeded by the demand for service, then the simulator applies a metering rate to the entering traffic from both the upstream feeders and source node to ensure that the available storage capacity is not exceeded.

A path network that represents the specified traffic movements from each network link is constructed by the model; this path network is utilized by the DTRAD model.

A twoway interface with DTRAD: (1) provides link travel times; (2) receives data that translates into link turn percentages.

Provides MOE to animation software, Evacuation Animator (EVAN)

Calculates ETE statistics All traffic simulation models are dataintensive. Table C2 outlines the necessary input data elements.

To provide an efficient framework for defining these specifications, the physical highway environment is represented as a network. The unidirectional links of the network represent Callaway Energy Center C1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 199 of 424 roadway sections: rural, multilane, urban streets or freeways. The nodes of the network generally represent intersections or points along a section where a geometric property changes (e.g. a lane drop, change in grade or free flow speed).

Figure C1 is an example of a small network representation. The freeway is defined by the sequence of links, (20,21), (21,22), and (22,23). Links (8001, 19) and (3, 8011) are Entry and Exit links, respectively. An arterial extends from node 3 to node 19 and is partially subsumed within a grid network. Note that links (21,22) and (17,19) are gradeseparated.

C.1 Methodology C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram It is necessary to define the fundamental diagram describing flowdensity and speeddensity relationships. Rather than settling for a triangular representation, a more realistic representation that includes a capacity drop, (IR)Qmax, at the critical density when flow conditions enter the forced flow regime, is developed and calibrated for each link. This representation, shown in Figure C2, asserts a constant free speed up to a density, k , and then a linear reduction in speed in the range, k k k 45 vpm, the density at capacity. In the flowdensity plane, a quadratic relationship is prescribed in the range, k k 95 vpm which roughly represents the stopandgo condition of severe congestion. The value of flow rate, Q , corresponding to k , is approximated at 0.7 RQ . A linear relationship between k and k completes the diagram shown in Figure C2. Table C3 is a glossary of terms.

The fundamental diagram is applied to moving traffic on every link. The specified calibration values for each link are: (1) Free speed, v ; (2) Capacity, Q  ; (3) Critical density, k 45 vpm ; (4) Capacity Drop Factor, R = 0.9 ; (5) Jam density, k . Then, v ,k k

. Setting k k k , then Q RQ k for 0 k k 50 . It can be shown that Q 0.98 0.0056 k RQ for k k k , where k 50 and k 175.

C.1.2 The Simulation Model The simulation model solves a sequence of unit problems. Each unit problem computes the movement of traffic on a link, for each specified turn movement, over a specified time interval (TI) which serves as the simulation time step for all links. Figure C3 is a representation of the unit problem in the timedistance plane. Table C3 is a glossary of terms that are referenced in the following description of the unit problem procedure.

The formulation and the associated logic presented below are designed to solve the unit problem for each sweep over the network (discussed below), for each turn movement serviced on each link that comprises the evacuation network, and for each TI over the duration of the evacuation.

Given Q , M , L , TI , E , LN , G C , h , L , R , L , E , M Compute O , Q , M Callaway Energy Center C2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 200 of 424 Define O O O O ;E E E

1. For the first sweep, s = 1, of this TI, get initial estimates of mean density, k , the R - factor, R and entering traffic, E , using the values computed for the final sweep of the prior TI.

For each subsequent sweep, s 1 , calculate E P O S where P , O are the relevant turn percentages from feeder link, i , and its total outflow (possibly metered) over this TI; S is the total source flow (possibly metered) during the current TI.

Set iteration counter, n = 0, k k , and E E .

2. Calculate v k such that k 130 using the analytical representations of the fundamental diagram.

Q TI G Calculate Cap C LN , in vehicles, this value may be reduced 3600 due to metering Set R 1.0 if G C 1 or if k k ; Set R 0.9 only if G C 1 and k k L

Calculate queue length, L Q LN

3. Calculate t TI . If t 0 , set t E O 0 ; Else, E E .

4. Then E E E ;t TI t

5. If Q Cap , then O Cap , O O 0 If t 0 , then Q Q M E Cap Else Q Q Cap End if Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A below

6. Else Q Cap O Q , RCap Cap O

7. If M RCap , then t Cap

8. If t 0 ,O M ,O min RCap M , 0 TI Q E O If Q 0 , then Calculate Q , M with Algorithm A Else Q 0 ,M E End if Callaway Energy Center C3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 201 of 424 Else t 0 O M and O 0 M M O E; Q 0 End if

9. Else M O 0 If t 0 , then O RCap , Q M O E Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A

10. Else t 0 M M If M ,

O RCap Q M O Apply Algorithm A to calculate Q and M Else O M M M O E and Q 0 End if End if End if End if

11. Calculate a new estimate of average density, k k 2k k ,

where k = density at the beginning of the TI k = density at the end of the TI k = density at the midpoint of the TI All values of density apply only to the moving vehicles.

If k k and n N where N max number of iterations, and is a convergence criterion, then

12. set n n 1 , and return to step 2 to perform iteration, n, using k k .

End if Computation of unit problem is now complete. Check for excessive inflow causing spillback.

Callaway Energy Center C4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 202 of 424

13. If Q M , then The number of excess vehicles that cause spillback is: SB Q M ,

where W is the width of the upstream intersection. To prevent spillback, meter the outflow from the feeder approaches and from the source flow, S, during this TI by the amount, SB. That is, set SB M 1 0 , where M is the metering factor over all movements .

E S This metering factor is assigned appropriately to all feeder links and to the source flow, to be applied during the next network sweep, discussed later.

Algorithm A This analysis addresses the flow environment over a TI during which moving vehicles can join a standing or discharging queue. For the case Qb vQ shown, Q Cap, with t 0 and a queue of Qe Qe length, Q , formed by that portion of M and E that reaches the stopbar within the TI, but could not v discharge due to inadequate capacity. That is, Q Mb M E . This queue length, Q Q v M E Cap can be extended to Q by traffic L3 entering the approach during the current TI, traveling at speed, v, and reaching the rear of the t1 t3 queue within the TI. A portion of the entering TI vehicles, E E , will likely join the queue. This analysis calculates t , Q and M for the input values of L, TI, v, E, t, L , LN, Q .

When t 0 and Q Cap:

L L Define: L Q . From the sketch, L v TI t t L Q E .

LN LN Substituting E E yields: vt E L v TI t L . Recognizing that the first two terms on the right hand side cancel, solve for t to obtain:

L t such that 0 t TI t E L v

TI LN If the denominator, v 0, set t TI t .

t t t Then, Q Q E , M E 1 TI TI The complete Algorithm A considers all flow scenarios; space limitation precludes its Callaway Energy Center C5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 203 of 424 inclusion, here.

C.1.3 Lane Assignment The unit problem is solved for each turn movement on each link. Therefore, it is necessary to calculate a value, LN , of allocated lanes for each movement, x. If in fact all lanes are specified by, say, arrows painted on the pavement, either as full lanes or as lanes within a turn bay, then the problem is fully defined. If however there remain unchannelized lanes on a link, then an analysis is undertaken to subdivide the number of these physical lanes into turn movement specific virtual lanes, LNx.

C.2 Implementation C.2.1 Computational Procedure The computational procedure for this model is shown in the form of a flow diagram as Figure C4. As discussed earlier, the simulation model processes traffic flow for each link independently over TI that the analyst specifies; it is usually 60 seconds or longer. The first step is to execute an algorithm to define the sequence in which the network links are processed so that as many links as possible are processed after their feeder links are processed, within the same network sweep. Since a general network will have many closed loops, it is not possible to guarantee that every link processed will have all of its feeder links processed earlier.

The processing then continues as a succession of time steps of duration, TI, until the simulation is completed. Within each time step, the processing performs a series of sweeps over all network links; this is necessary to ensure that the traffic flow is synchronous over the entire network. Specifically, the sweep ensures continuity of flow among all the network links; in the context of this model, this means that the values of E, M, and S are all defined for each link such that they represent the synchronous movement of traffic from each link to all of its outbound links. These sweeps also serve to compute the metering rates that control spillback.

Within each sweep, processing solves the unit problem for each turn movement on each link.

With the turn movement percentages for each link provided by the DTRAD model, an algorithm allocates the number of lanes to each movement serviced on each link. The timing at a signal, if any, applied at the downstream end of the link, is expressed as a G/C ratio, the signal timing needed to define this ratio is an input requirement for the model. The model also has the capability of representing, with macroscopic fidelity, the actions of actuated signals responding to the timevarying competing demands on the approaches to the intersection.

The solution of the unit problem yields the values of the number of vehicles, O, that discharge from the link over the time interval and the number of vehicles that remain on the link at the end of the time interval as stratified by queued and moving vehicles: Q and M . The procedure considers each movement separately (multipiping). After all network links are processed for a given network sweep, the updated consistent values of entering flows, E; metering rates, M; and source flows, S are defined so as to satisfy the no spillback condition.

The procedure then performs the unit problem solutions for all network links during the Callaway Energy Center C6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 204 of 424 following sweep.

Experience has shown that the system converges (i.e. the values of E, M and S settle down for all network links) in just two sweeps if the network is entirely undersaturated or in four sweeps in the presence of extensive congestion with link spillback. (The initial sweep over each link uses the final values of E and M, of the prior TI). At the completion of the final sweep for a TI, the procedure computes and stores all measures of effectiveness for each link and turn movement for output purposes. It then prepares for the following time interval by defining the values of Q and M for the start of the next TI as being those values of Q and M at the end of the prior TI. In this manner, the simulation model processes the traffic flow over time until the end of the run. Note that there is no spacediscretization other than the specification of network links.

C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD)

The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. Thus, an algorithm was developed to identify an appropriate set of destination nodes for each origin based on its location and on the expected direction of travel. This algorithm also supports the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (OD matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next.

Figure B1 depicts the interaction of the simulation model with the DTRAD model in the DYNEV II system. As indicated, DYNEV II performs a succession of DTRAD sessions; each such session computes the turn link percentages for each link that remain constant for the session duration, T , T , specified by the analyst. The end product is the assignment of traffic volumes from each origin to paths connecting it with its destinations in such a way as to minimize the networkwide cost function. The output of the DTRAD model is a set of updated link turn percentages which represent this assignment of traffic.

As indicated in Figure B1, the simulation model supports the DTRAD session by providing it with operational link MOE that are needed by the path choice model and included in the DTRAD cost function. These MOE represent the operational state of the network at a time, T T , which lies within the session duration, T , T . This burn time, T T , is selected by the analyst. For each DTRAD iteration, the simulation model computes the change in network operations over this burn time using the latest set of link turn percentages computed by the DTRAD model. Upon convergence of the DTRAD iterative procedure, the simulation model accepts the latest turn percentages provided by the Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) model, returns to the origin time, T , and executes until it arrives at the end of the DTRAD session duration at time, T . At this time the next DTA session is launched and the whole process repeats until the end of the DYNEV II run.

Additional details are presented in Appendix B.

Callaway Energy Center C7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 205 of 424 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II Measure Units Applies To Vehicles Discharged Vehicles Link, Network, Exit Link Speed Miles/Hours (mph) Link, Network Density Vehicles/Mile/Lane Link Level of Service LOS Link Content Vehicles Network Travel Time Vehiclehours Network Evacuated Vehicles Vehicles Network, Exit Link Trip Travel Time Vehicleminutes/trip Network Capacity Utilization Percent Exit Link Attraction Percent of total evacuating vehicles Exit Link Max Queue Vehicles Node, Approach Time of Max Queue Hours:minutes Node, Approach Length (mi); Mean Speed (mph); Travel Route Statistics Route Time (min)

Mean Travel Time Minutes Evacuation Trips; Network Callaway Energy Center C8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 206 of 424 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model HIGHWAY NETWORK Links defined by upstream and downstream node numbers Link lengths Number of lanes (up to 9) and channelization Turn bays (1 to 3 lanes)

Destination (exit) nodes Network topology defined in terms of downstream nodes for each receiving link Node Coordinates (X,Y)

Nuclear Power Plant Coordinates (X,Y)

GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES On all entry links and source nodes (origins), by Time Period TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS Traffic signals: linkspecific, turn movement specific Signal control treated as fixed time or actuated Location of traffic control points (these are represented as actuated signals)

Stop and Yield signs Rightturnonred (RTOR)

Route diversion specifications Turn restrictions Lane control (e.g. lane closure, movementspecific)

DRIVERS AND OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS Drivers (vehiclespecific) response mechanisms: freeflow speed, discharge headway Bus route designation.

DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Candidate destination nodes for each origin (optional)

Duration of DTA sessions Duration of simulation burn time Desired number of destination nodes per origin INCIDENTS Identify and Schedule of closed lanes Identify and Schedule of closed links Callaway Energy Center C9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 207 of 424 Table C3. Glossary The maximum number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that can discharge Cap from a link within a time interval.

The number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that enter the link over the E

time interval. The portion, ETI, can reach the stopbar within the TI.

The green time: cycle time ratio that services the vehicles of a particular turn G/C movement on a link.

h The mean queue discharge headway, seconds.

k Density in vehicles per lane per mile.

The average density of moving vehicles of a particular movement over a TI, on a k

link.

L The length of the link in feet.

The queue length in feet of a particular movement, at the [beginning, end] of a L ,L time interval.

The number of lanes, expressed as a floating point number, allocated to service a LN particular movement on a link.

L The mean effective length of a queued vehicle including the vehicle spacing, feet.

M Metering factor (Multiplier): 1.

The number of moving vehicles on the link, of a particular movement, that are M ,M moving at the [beginning, end] of the time interval. These vehicles are assumed to be of equal spacing, over the length of link upstream of the queue.

The total number of vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a O

link over a time interval.

The components of the vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a link within a time interval: vehicles that were Queued at the beginning of O ,O ,O the TI; vehicles that were Moving within the link at the beginning of the TI; vehicles that Entered the link during the TI.

The percentage, expressed as a fraction, of the total flow on the link that P

executes a particular turn movement, x.

Callaway Energy Center C10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 208 of 424 The number of queued vehicles on the link, of a particular turn movement, at the Q ,Q

[beginning, end] of the time interval.

The maximum flow rate that can be serviced by a link for a particular movement Q in the absence of a control device. It is specified by the analyst as an estimate of link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the HCM 2016.

R The factor that is applied to the capacity of a link to represent the capacity drop when the flow condition moves into the forced flow regime. The lower capacity at that point is equal to RQ .

RCap The remaining capacity available to service vehicles of a particular movement after that queue has been completely serviced, within a time interval, expressed as vehicles.

S Service rate for movement x, vehicles per hour (vph).

t Vehicles of a particular turn movement that enter a link over the first t seconds of a time interval, can reach the stopbar (in the absence of a queue down stream) within the same time interval.

TI The time interval, in seconds, which is used as the simulation time step.

v The mean speed of travel, in feet per second (fps) or miles per hour (mph), of moving vehicles on the link.

v The mean speed of the last vehicle in a queue that discharges from the link within the TI. This speed differs from the mean speed of moving vehicles, v.

W The width of the intersection in feet. This is the difference between the link length which extends from stopbar to stopbar and the block length.

Callaway Energy Center C11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 209 of 424 8011 8009 2 3 8104 8107 6 5 8008 8010 8 9 10 8007 8012 12 11 8006 8005 13 14 8014 15 25 8004 16 24 8024 17 8003 23 22 21 20 8002 Entry, Exit Nodes are 19 numbered 8xxx 8001 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network Callaway Energy Center C12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 210 of 424 Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kc kj ks Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams Distance OQ OM OE Down Qb vQ Qe v

v L

Mb Me Up t1 t2 Time E1 E2 TI Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 Callaway Energy Center C13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 211 of 424 Sequence Network Links Next Timestep, of duration, TI A

Next sweep; Define E, M, S for all B

Links C Next Link D Next Turn Movement, x Get lanes, LNx Service Rate, Sx ; G/Cx Get inputs to Unit Problem:

Q b , Mb , E Solve Unit Problem: Q e , Me , O No D Last Movement ?

Yes No Last Link ? C Yes No B Last Sweep ?

Yes Calc., store all Link MOE Set up next TI :

No A Last Time - step ?

Yes DONE Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3)

Callaway Energy Center C14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 212 of 424 APPENDIX D Detailed Description of Study Procedure

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 213 of 424 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE This appendix describes the activities that were performed to compute Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE). The individual steps of this effort are represented as a flow diagram in Figure D1. Each numbered step in the description that follows corresponds to the numbered element in the flow diagram.

Step 1 The first activity was to obtain Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) boundary information and create a geographical information system (GIS) base map. The base map extends beyond the Shadow Region which extends approximately 15 miles (radially) from the power plant location.

The base map incorporates the local roadway topology, a suitable topographic background and the EPZ boundary.

Step 2 2020 Census block information was obtained in GIS format. This information was used to estimate the permanent resident population within the EPZ and Shadow Region and to define the spatial distribution and demographic characteristics of the population within the study area. Data for employees, transients, schools, and other facilities were obtained from the county emergency management departments, supplemented by internet searches and data from the previous ETE study where new data could not be obtained.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with project stakeholders. The purpose of the kickoff meeting was to present an overview of the work effort, identify key agency personnel, and indicate the data requirements for the study. Specific requests for information were also presented. Unique features of the study area were discussed to identify the local concerns that should be addressed by the ETE study.

Step 4 Next, a physical survey of the roadway system in the study area was conducted to determine the geometric properties of the highway sections, the channelization of lanes on each section of roadway, whether there are any turn restrictions or special treatment of traffic at intersections, the type and functioning of traffic control devices, gathering signal timings for pretimed traffic signals (if any exist within the study area) and to make the necessary observations needed to estimate realistic values of roadway capacity. Roadway characteristics were also verified using aerial imagery.

Step 5 A demographic survey of households within the EPZ was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic information of the EPZ population for this study. This information was used to determine important study factors including the average number of evacuating vehicles used by each household, and the time required to perform preevacuation mobilization activities.

Callaway Energy Center D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 214 of 424 Step 6 A computerized representation of the physical roadway system, called a linknode analysis network, was developed using the most recent UNITES software (see Section 1.3) developed by KLD. Once the geometry of the network was completed, the network was calibrated using the information gathered during the road survey (Step 4) and information obtained from aerial imagery. Estimates of highway capacity for each link and other linkspecific characteristics were introduced to the network description. Traffic signal timings were input accordingly. The link node analysis network was imported into a GIS map. The 2020 Census data were overlaid in the map, and origin centroids where trips would be generated during the evacuation process were assigned to appropriate links.

Step 7 The EPZ is subdivided into 15 Subareas. Based on wind direction and speed, Regions (groupings of Subarea) that may be advised to evacuate, were developed.

The need for evacuation can occur over a range of timeofday, dayofweek, seasonal and weatherrelated conditions. Scenarios were developed to capture the variation in evacuation demand, highway capacity and mobilization time, for different time of day, day of the week, time of year, and weather conditions.

Step 8 The input stream for the DYNEV II system, which integrates the dynamic traffic assignment and distribution model, DTRAD, with the evacuation simulation model, was created for a prototype evacuation case - the evacuation of the entire EPZ for a representative scenario.

Step 9 After creating this input stream, the DYNEV II System was executed on the prototype evacuation case to compute evacuating traffic routing patterns consistent with the appropriate NRC guidelines. DYNEV II contains an extensive suite of data diagnostics which check the completeness and consistency of the input data specified. The analyst reviews all warning and error messages produced by the model and then corrects the database to create an input stream that properly executes to completion.

The model assigns destinations to all origin centroids consistent with a (general) radial evacuation of the EPZ and Shadow Region. The analyst may optionally supplement and/or replace these modelassigned destinations, based on professional judgment, after studying the topology of the analysis highway network. The model produces link and networkwide measures of effectiveness as well as estimates of evacuation time.

Step 10 The results generated by the prototype evacuation case are critically examined. The examination includes observing the animated graphics (using the EVAN software - see Section 1.3) and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a laborintensive activity, requiring Callaway Energy Center D2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 215 of 424 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 results.

Essentially, the approach is to identify those bottlenecks in the network that represent locations where congested conditions are pronounced and to identify the cause of this congestion. This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to high rates of trip generation, improper routing, a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative flaw in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream. This examination leads to one of two conclusions:

The results are satisfactory; or The input stream must be modified accordingly.

This decision requires, of course, the application of the user's judgment and experience based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the model and a comparison of the results of the latest prototype evacuation case iteration with the previous ones. If the results are satisfactory in the opinion of the user, then the process continues with Step 13. Otherwise, proceed to Step 11.

Step 11 There are many "treatments" available to the user in resolving apparent problems. These treatments range from decisions to reroute the traffic by assigning additional evacuation destinations for one or more sources, 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, adding routes (which are paved and traversable) that were not previously modelled but may assist in an evacuation and increase the available roadway network capacity, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems.

Such "treatments" take the form of modifications to the original prototype evacuation case input stream. All treatments are designed to improve the representation of evacuation behavior.

Step 12 As noted above, the changes to the input stream must be implemented to reflect the modifications undertaken in Step 11. At the completion of this activity, the process returns to Step 9 where the DYNEV II System is again executed.

Step 13 Evacuation of transitdependent evacuees and schools are included in the evacuation analysis.

Fixed routing for transit buses, school buses, ambulatory buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances, are introduced into the final prototype evacuation case data set. DYNEV II generates routespecific speeds over time for use in the estimation of evacuation times for the transit dependent population and schools.

Callaway Energy Center D3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 216 of 424 Step 14 The prototype evacuation case was used as the basis for generating all region and scenario specific evacuation cases to be simulated. This process was automated through the UNITES user interface. For each specific case, the population to be evacuated, the trip generation distributions, the highway capacity and speeds, and other factors are adjusted to produce a customized casespecific data set.

Step 15 All evacuation cases are executed using the DYNEV II System to compute ETE. Once results are available, quality control procedures are used to assure the results were consistent, dynamic routing is reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks are addressed properly.

Step 16 Once vehicular evacuation results are accepted, average travel speeds for transit and school routes are used to compute evacuation time estimates for transitdependent permanent residents and schools.

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated and graphed. The results are then documented, as required by NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Step 18 Following the completion of documentation activities, the ETE criteria checklist (see Appendix N) is completed. An appropriate report reference is provided for each criterion provided in the checklist.

Callaway Energy Center D4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 217 of 424 A

Step 1 Step 10 Create GIS Base Map Examine Prototype and DYNEV II Output Step 2 Gather Census Block and Demographic Data for Results Satisfactory Study Area Step 11 Step 3 Modify Evacuation Destinations and/or Develop Conduct Kickoff Meeting with Stakeholders Traffic Control Treatments Step 4 Step 12 Field Survey of Roadways within Study Area Modify Database to Reflect Changes to Prototype Evacuation Case Step 5 Conduct Demographic Survey and Develop Trip Generation Characteristics B

Step 13 Step 6 Establish Transit and Special Facility Evacuation Create and Calibrate LinkNode Analysis Network Routes and Update DYNEV II Database Step 14 Step 7 Generate DYNEV II Input Streams for All Evacuation Cases Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 15 Step 8 Execute DYNEV II to Compute ETE for All Create and Debug DYNEV II Input Stream Evacuation Cases Step 16 Step 9 Use DYNEV II Average Speed Output to Compute ETE for Transit and School Bus Routes B Execute DYNEV II for Prototype Evacuation Case Step 17 Documentation A Step 18 Complete ETE Criteria Checklist Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities Callaway Energy Center D5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 218 of 424 APPENDIX E Special Facility Data

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 219 of 424 E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of November 2021, for special facilities, transient attractions, and major employers that are located within the Callaway Energy Center EPZ. Special facilities are defined as schools, colleges/universities, hospitals, other medical care facilities, and correctional facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for recreational areas (parks, campgrounds, hunting/fishing areas) and lodging facilities. Each table is grouped by county. The location of the facility is defined by its straightline distance (miles) and direction (magnetic bearing) from the center point of the plant. Maps of each school, college/university, medical facility, major employer, recreational facility, lodging facility, and correctional facility are also provided.

Callaway Energy Center E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools and Colleges/Universities within the EPZ Distance Dire Enroll Subarea (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment CALLAWAY COUNTY C7 7.8 SW South Callaway RII Middle School 10135 State Rd C Mokane C7 7.9 SW South Callaway RII High School 10135 State Rd C Mokane 864 C7 7.9 SW South Callaway RII Elementary School 10135 State Rd C Mokane C9 10.5 NW Bush Elementary School 908 Wood St Fulton 370 C9 10.5 NW Missouri School for the Deaf 505 E 5th St Fulton 80 C9 10.7 WNW Bartley Elementary School 603 S Business 54 Fulton 282 C9 10.8 NW St Peter's Catholic School 700 State Rd Z Fulton 128 C9 10.9 NW Fulton Middle School 403 E 10th St Fulton 580 C9 11.2 WNW Kingdom Christian Academy 605 Old Jefferson City Rd Fulton 174 C9 11.3 WNW Westminster College 501 Westminster Ave Fulton 760 C9 11.3 NW Rosa Parks Center 211 W 12th St Fulton 8 C9 11.4 NW William Woods University One University Ave Fulton 223 C9 11.4 WNW McIntire Elementary School 706 Hickman Ave Fulton 1,737 C9 11.7 NW Fulton High School 1 Hornet Dr Fulton 2,129 C10 11.8 N Missouri Girls Town Foundation 8548 Jade Rd Fulton 50 Callaway County Subtotal: 7,551 OSAGE COUNTY O1 6.2 S Chamois High School 614 Poplar St Chamois 79 O1 6.2 S Osage County Chamois R1 School District 614 S Poplar St Chamois 219 Osage County Subtotal: 298 EPZ TOTAL: 7,849 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 220 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambul Wheel Bed Distance Dire atory chair ridden Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Capacity Patients Patients Patients CALLAWAY COUNTY C7 7.8 SW Riverview Nursing Center 10303 State Rd C Mokane 60 Shelter in Place C9 10.3 NW Fulton State Hospital 600 E 5th St Fulton 281 Shelter in Place C9 10.9 NW Kingdom Care Senior Living 811 Center St Fulton 36 Shelter in Place C9 11.1 WNW Ashbury Heights Independent Living 704 W Chestnut St Fulton 12 Shelter in Place C9 11.1 NW Bridgeway Assisted Living Care 828 Jefferson St Fulton 94 Shelter in Place C9 11.2 NW Fulton Nursing & Rehab 1510 N Bluff St Fulton 100 Shelter in Place C9 11.2 WNW Bristol Manor 750 Sign Painter Rd Fulton 12 Shelter in Place C9 11.3 NW Fulton Manor Care Center 520 Manor Dr Fulton 52 Shelter in Place C9 11.4 WNW Fulton Medical Center 10 S Hospital Dr Fulton 39 Shelter in Place C9 11.5 WNW Churchill Terrace 120 Hospital Dr Fulton 44 Shelter in Place Callaway County Subtotal: 730 0 0 0 EPZ TOTAL: 730 0 0 0 Table E3. Major Employers within the EPZ

% Employee Employees Employees Vehicles Distance Dire Employees Commuting Commuting Commuting Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ CALLAWAY COUNTY C1 Callaway Nuclear Plant County Rd 459 Callaway 770 43% 331 304 C9 12.4 NW Dollar General 1990 North Bluff St Fulton 350 65% 228 209 Callaway County Subtotal: 1,120 559 513 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 EPZ TOTAL: 1,120 559 513 June 27, 2022 Page 221 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Distance Dire Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles CALLAWAY COUNTY C1 0.9 NE Reform Conservation Area Portland Hunting/Fishing 10 4 C2 3.0 WNW Harmony Hills Youth Camp 8033 State Rd O Fulton Campground 150 75 C2 3.1 W Hams Prairie Access County Rd 449 Auxvasse Hunting/Fishing 1 1 C3 3.3 N Wildwood Lot Owners Association 7233 Wildwood Estates Dr Steedman Campground 41 15 C4 6.8 ESE Tate Island CA Portland Hunting/Fishing 2 2 C6 3.7 S KATY Trail Route 94 Portland Park 10 4 C7 7.9 SW High Hopes Hunting Sports Club 440 Fulton Rd Mokane Hunting 20 12 C8 9.2 WNW Kingdom of Callaway County Fair 7217 State Rd C Fulton Other 500 183 C9 10.6 NW Fulton Country Club1 701 E 10th St Fulton Golf Course Local residents only C10 10.4 N Moores Mill Access County Rd 139 Calwood Hunting/Fishing 4 2 Callaway County Subtotal: 738 298 MONTGOMERY COUNTY M2 9.5 ESE Grand Bluffs CA Bluffton Rd Fulton Hunting/Fishing 5 5 Montgomery County Subtotal: 5 5 OSAGE COUNTY O1 5.6 S Chamois Access Highway 100 Chamois Hunting/Fishing 30 30 Osage County Subtotal: 30 30 EPZ TOTAL: 773 333 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 1

Fulton Country Club was reported having all local residents, resulting in no transients or transient vehicles.

Page 222 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles CALLAWAY COUNTY C9 10.8 WNW Travelier Motel 600 South Business 54 Fulton 10 5 C9 11.1 WNW Loganberry Inn 310 West Seventh St Fulton 4 2 C9 11.8 WNW Westwoods Motel 422 Gaylord Dr Fulton 19 9 C9 12.5 NW Baymont Inn and Suites Fulton Hotel 2205 Cardinal Dr Fulton 111 55 S.R. 12.0 WNW Country Hearth Inn 556 Amerihost Dr Fulton 62 31 Callaway County Subtotal: 206 102 OSAGE COUNTY O1 6.1 S Old School on the Hill Bed & Breakfast 402 S Main St Chamois 5 2 Osage County Subtotal: 5 2 EPZ TOTAL: 211 104 Table E6. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Cap Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality acity CALLAWAY COUNTY C9 9.6 NW Fulton Reception and Diagnostic Center 1393 Highway O Fulton 1,346 C9 9.8 NW Callaway County Jail 1201 Missouri O Fulton 109 Callaway County Subtotal: 1,455 EPZ TOTAL: 1,455 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 223 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure E1. Schools and Colleges/Universities within the EPZ Page 224 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Page 225 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure E3. Major Employers within the EPZ Page 226 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure E4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Page 227 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure E5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Page 228 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure E6. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Page 229 of 424 Callaway Energy Center E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 230 of 424 APPENDIX F Demographic Survey

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 231 of 424 F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY F.1 Introduction The development of evacuation time estimates (ETE) for the Callaway Energy Center (CEC)

Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) requires the identification of travel patterns, car ownership and household size of the population within the EPZ. Demographic information can be obtained from Census data; however, the use of this data has several limitations when applied to emergency planning. First, the Census data do not encompass the range of information needed to identify the time required for preliminary activities (mobilization) that must be undertaken prior to evacuating the area. Secondly, Census data do not contain attitudinal responses needed from the population of the EPZ and consequently may not accurately represent the anticipated behavioral characteristics of the evacuating populace.

These concerns are addressed by conducting a demographic survey of a representative sample of the EPZ population. The survey is designed to elicit information from the public concerning family demographics and estimates of response times to well defined events. The design of the survey includes a limited number of questions of the form What would you do if ? and other questions regarding activities with which the respondent is familiar (How long does it take you to?)

F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan Attachment A presents the final survey instrument used in this study. A draft of the instrument was submitted to stakeholders for comment. Comments were received and the survey instrument was modified accordingly, prior to conducting the survey.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. Since the demographic survey discussed herein was performed in 2020 and the 2020 Census data had not been released, 2010 Census data was used to develop the sampling plan.

The sample must be drawn from the EPZ population. Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using GIS software. This list is shown in Table F1. Along with each zip code, an estimate of the population and number of households in each area was determined by overlaying 2010 Census data and the EPZ boundary, again using GIS software. The proportional percentage of desired completed survey interviews for each area was identified, as shown in Table F1. Note that the average household size computed in Table F1 was an estimate for sampling purposes and was not used in the ETE study. A sample size of 304 completed survey forms was obtained and yielded results with a sampling error of +/-5.5% at the 95% confidence level. The number of samples obtained from each zip code is also shown in Table F1.

Callaway Energy Center F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 232 of 424 F.3 Survey Results The results of the survey fall into two categories. First, the household demographics of the area can be identified. Demographic information includes such factors as household size, automobile ownership, and automobile availability. The distributions of the time to perform certain pre evacuation activities are the second category of survey results. These data are processed to develop the trip generation distributions used in the evacuation modeling effort, as discussed in Section 5.

A review of the survey instrument reveals that several questions have a dont know (DK) or refused entry for a response. It is accepted practice in conducting surveys of this type to accept the answers of a respondent who offers a DK response for a few questions or who refuses to answer a few questions. To address the issue of occasional DK/refused responses from a large sample, the practice is to assume that the distribution of these responses is the same as the underlying distribution of the positive responses. In effect, the DK/refused responses are ignored, and the distributions are based upon the positive data that is acquired.

F.3.1 Household Demographic Results Household Size Figure F1 presents the distribution of household size within the EPZ, based on the responses to the demographic survey. The average household contains 2.79 people. The estimated household size (2.87 persons) used to determine the survey sample (Table F1) was drawn from the 2010 Census data. According to the 2020 Census data, the average household size is 2.78 people per household, which is in good agreement with the results of the demographic survey and falls within the margin of error of the survey.

Automobile Ownership The average number of vehicles available per household in the EPZ is 2.65. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F2. Figure F3 and Figure F4 present the vehicle availability by household size. It should be noted that all households, according to the survey, have access to at least one vehicle.

Ridesharing Approximately 87% of the households surveyed responded that they would share a ride with a neighbor, relative, or friend if a car was not available to them when advised to evacuate in the event of an emergency, as shown in Figure F5.

Commuters Figure F6 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household.

Commuters are defined as household members who travel to work or college on a daily basis.

The data shows an average of 1.19 commuters per household in the EPZ, and 70 percent of households have at least one commuter.

Callaway Energy Center F2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 233 of 424 Commuter Travel Modes Figure F7 presents the mode of travel that commuters use on a daily basis. The vast majority of commuters use their private automobiles to travel to work. The data shows an average of 1.09 employees per vehicle, assuming 2 people per vehicle - on average - for carpools.

Impact of COVID19 on Commuters Figure F8 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household that were temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic. The data shows an average of 0.66 commuters per household were impacted. Sixty one percent of households indicated that no one in their household had a work and/or school commute that was temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic; 23% indicated one commuter was impacted; 9% indicated two were impacted; 3% indicated 3 were impacted and 4% indicated 4 or more commuters were impacted. Since the majority of respondents indicated no commuters were impacted, the results for the time distribution of commuters (time to prepare to leave work/college and time to travel home from work/college) were used as is in this study.

Functional or Transportation Needs Figure F9 presents the distribution of the number of individuals with functional or transportation need. The survey results show that approximately 10.5 percent of households have functional or transportation needs. Of those with functional or transportation need, 47%

require a bus, 19% require a medical bus/van, 9% require a wheelchair accessible van, 3%

require an ambulance, and 22% indicated that they would need other accommodations.

F.3.2 Evacuation Response Several questions were asked to gauge the populations response to an emergency. These are now discussed:

How many of the vehicles would your household use during an evacuation? The response is shown in Figure F10. On average, evacuating households would use 1.55 vehicles.

Would your family await the return of other family members prior to evacuating the area?

Of the survey participants who responded, 60 percent said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 40 percent indicated that they would not await the return of other family members, as shown in Figure F11.

If you had a household pet, would you take your pet with you if you were asked to evacuate the area? Based on responses from the survey, 79 percent of households have a family pet/animal; 21 percent said they do not. Of the 79 percent of households with pets/animals, 89 percent of them indicated that they would take their pets with them during an evacuation. The remaining 11% said they would leave their pets/animals at home. Of the households that would evacuate with their pets, 98 percent indicated that they have sufficient room in their vehicle to evacuate with their pet(s)/animal(s).

Callaway Energy Center F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 234 of 424 What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have? Based on responses from the survey, 82 percent of households have a household pet (dog, cat, bird, reptile, or fish), 14% of households have farm animals (horse, chicken, goat, pig, etc.), and 4 percent have other small pets/animals.

Emergency officials advise you to take shelter at home in an emergency. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information regarding compliance with instructions to shelter in place. The results, as shown in Figure F12, indicate that 90 percent of households who are advised to shelter in place would do so; the remaining 10 percent would choose to evacuate the area. Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Revision 1. Thus, the data obtained through the survey is less than the federal guidance recommendation. A sensitivity study was conducted to estimate the impact of shadow evacuation noncompliance of shelter advisory on ETE - see Table M2 in Appendix M.

Emergency officials advise you to take shelter at home now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas are advised to evacuate now. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information specifically related to the possibility of a staged evacuation. That is, asking a population to shelter in place now and then to evacuate after a specified period of time. As shown in Figure F13, results indicate that 71 percent of households would follow instructions and delay the start of evacuation until so advised, while the balance of 29 percent would choose to begin evacuating immediately.

Emergency officials advise you to evacuate due to an emergency. Where would you evacuate to? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the destination of evacuees in case of an evacuation. As shown in Figure F14, fifty one percent of households indicated that they would evacuate to a friend or relatives home, 6% to a reception center, 9% to a hotel, motel or campground, 8% to a second or seasonal home, 1% of people indicated they would not evacuate, and the remaining 25% answered other/dont know to this question.

F.3.3 Time Distribution Results The survey asked several questions about the amount of time it takes to perform certain pre evacuation activities. These activities involve actions taken by residents during the course of their daytoday lives. Thus, the answers fall within the realm of the responders experience.

The mobilization distributions provided below are the result of having applied the analysis described in Section 5.4.1 on the component activities of the mobilization.

How long does it take the commuter to complete preparation for leaving work? Figure F15 presents the cumulative distribution; in all cases, the activity is completed by about 60 minutes.

Approximately 80 percent can leave within 25 minutes.

How long would it take the commuter to travel home? Figure F16 presents the work to home travel time for the EPZ. Nearly 80 percent of commuters can arrive home within about 30 minutes of leaving work; all within 60 minutes.

Callaway Energy Center F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 235 of 424 How long would it take the family to pack clothing, secure the house, and load the car?

Figure F17 presents the time required to prepare for leaving on an evacuation trip. In many ways this activity mimics a familys preparation for a short holiday or weekend away from home. Hence, the responses represent the experience of the responder in performing similar activities.

The distribution shown in Figure F17 has a long tail. About 75 percent of households can be ready to leave home within 90 minutes; the remaining households require up to an additional hour and 45 minutes.

How long would it take you to clear 6 to 8 inches of snow from your driveway? During adverse, snowy weather conditions, an additional activity must be performed before residents can depart on the evacuation trip. Although snow scenarios assume that the roads and highways have been plowed and are passable (albeit at lower speeds and capacities), it may be necessary to clear a private driveway prior to leaving the home so that the vehicle can access the street. Figure F18 presents the time distribution for removing 6 to 8 inches of snow from a driveway. The time distribution for clearing the driveway has a long tail; about 70 percent of driveways are passable within 60 minutes. The last driveway is cleared three hours and 30 minutes after the start of this activity. Note that those respondents (22%) who answered that they would not take time to clear their driveway were assumed to be ready immediately at the start of this activity. Essentially, they would drive through the snow on the driveway to access the roadway and begin their evacuation trip.

Callaway Energy Center F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 236 of 424 Table F1. Callaway Energy Center Demographic Survey Sampling Plan EPZ EPZ Population Households Required Samples Zip Code within EPZ within Zip Sample Obtained (2010) Code (2010) 63361 181 84 5 8 63388 579 250 14 16 65016 4 2 0 1 65024 831 338 18 13 65041 28 10 1 0 65059 867 326 18 23 65061 131 55 3 1 65067 379 162 9 13 65069 597 258 14 3 65077 641 242 13 20 65080 32 11 1 2 65251 15,843 5,250 282 202 65262 137 38 2 2 Total 20,173 7,026 380 304 Average Household Size: 2.87 Callaway Energy Center F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 237 of 424 Household Size 50%

40%

Percent of Households 30%

20%

10%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6+

Household Size Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ Vehicle Availability 50%

43%

40%

Percent of Households 30%

26%

20%

12% 12%

10%

7%

0%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F2. Vehicle Availability Callaway Energy Center F7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 238 of 424 Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 15 Person Households 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 100%

Percent of Households 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 5 Person Households Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 69+ Person Households 6 People 7 People 8 People 9+ People 100%

Percent of Households 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 6 to 9+ Person Households Callaway Energy Center F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 239 of 424 Rideshare with Neighbor/Friend 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference Commuters per Household 50%

40%

Percent of Households 30%

20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F6. Commuters per Households in the EPZ Callaway Energy Center F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 240 of 424 Travel Mode to Work 100%

88.0%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

9.0%

1.5% 1.5% 0.0%

0%

Rail Bus Walk/Bike Drive Alone Carpool (2+)

Mode of Travel Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ Covid19 Pandemic Impact to Commuters 80%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F8. Commuters Impacted by COVID19 Callaway Energy Center F10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 241 of 424 Functional or Transportation Needs 50%

Percent of Households with Functional or 40%

30%

Transportation Needs 20%

10%

0%

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Ambulance Other Accessible Vehicle Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs Evacuating Vehicles Per Household 80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3+

Vehicles Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation Callaway Energy Center F11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 242 of 424 Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving 80%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

0%

Yes, would await return No, would evacuate Figure F11. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving Shelter in Place Characteristics 100%

Percent of Households 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Shelter Evacuate Figure F12. Shelter in Place Characteristics Callaway Energy Center F12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 243 of 424 Shelter then Evacuate Characteristics 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Shelter, then Evacuate Evacuate Immediately Figure F13. Shelter in Place Characteristics - Staged Evacuation Evacuation Destinations 60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Figure F14. Study Area Evacuation Destinations Callaway Energy Center F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 244 of 424 Time to Prepare to Leave Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F15. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/School Time to Commute Home From Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Travel Time (min)

Figure F16. Work to Home Travel Time Callaway Energy Center F14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 245 of 424 Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F17. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Time to Remove Snow from Driveway 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F18. Time to Clear Driveway of 6"8" of Snow Callaway Energy Center F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 246 of 424 ATTACHMENT A Demographic Survey Instrument Callaway Energy Center F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 247 of 424 Callaway Energy Center Demographic Survey

• Required Purpose The purpose of this survey is to identify local behavior during emergency situations. The information gathered in this survey will be shared with Ameren Missouri to enhance emergency response plans in your area. Your responses will greatly contribute to local emergency preparedness. Please do not provide your name or any personal information, and the survey will take less than 5 minutes to complete.

1. 1. What is your gender?

Mark only one oval.

Male Female Decline to State Other:

2. 2. What is your home zip code?

• Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 248 of 424

3. 3A. In total, how many running cars, or other vehicles are usually available to the household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

DECLINE TO STATE

4. 3B. In an emergency, could you get a ride out of the area with a neighbor or friend?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 249 of 424

5. 4. How many vehicles would your household use during an evacuation?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

I WOULD EVACUATE BY BICYCLE I WOULD EVACUATE BY BUS DECLINE TO STATE

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 250 of 424

6. 5. How many people usually live in this household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE TEN ELEVEN TWELVE THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN NINETEEN OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE COVID-19

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 251 of 424

7. 6. How many people in your household have a work and/or school commute that has been temporarily impacted due to the COVID-19 pandemic?

Mark only one oval.

ZERO ONE TWO THREE FOUR OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 8 Commuters

8. 7. How many people in the household commute to a job, or to college on a daily basis?

• Mark only one oval.

ZERO Skip to question 53 ONE Skip to question 9 TWO Skip to question 10 THREE Skip to question 11 FOUR OR MORE Skip to question 12 DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 53 Mode of Travel

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 252 of 424

9. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or more Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone people know Commuter 1

Skip to question 13 Mode of Travel

10. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or more Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Skip to question 15 Mode of Travel

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 253 of 424

11. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or more Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Skip to question 19 Mode of Travel

12. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or more Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Commuter 4

Skip to question 25 Travel Home From Work/College

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 254 of 424

13. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

14. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 33 Travel Home From Work/College

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 255 of 424

15. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

16. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 256 of 424

17. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

18. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 35 Travel Home From Work/College

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 257 of 424

19. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

20. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 258 of 424

21. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

22. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 259 of 424

23. 9-3. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #3 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

24. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 39 Travel Home From Work/College

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 260 of 424

25. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

26. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 261 of 424

27. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

28. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 262 of 424

29. 9-3. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #3 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

30. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 263 of 424

31. 9-4. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #4 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

32. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-4, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 45 Preparation to leave Work/College

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 264 of 424

33. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

34. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 53 Preparation to leave Work/College

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 265 of 424

35. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

36. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 266 of 424

37. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

38. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 53 Preparation to leave Work/College

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 267 of 424

39. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

40. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 268 of 424

41. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

42. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 269 of 424

43. 10-3. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #3 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

44. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 53 Preparation to leave Work/College

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 270 of 424

45. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

46. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 271 of 424

47. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

48. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 272 of 424

49. 10-3. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #3 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

50. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 273 of 424

51. 10-4. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #4 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

52. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-4, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 53 Additional Questions

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 274 of 424

53. 11. If you were advised by local authorities to evacuate, how much time would it take the household to pack clothing, medications, secure the house, load the car, and complete preparations prior to evacuating the area?

Mark only one oval.

LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 15-30 MINUTES 31-45 MINUTES 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 3 HOURS TO 3 HOURS 15 MINUTES 3 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 30 MINUTES 3 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 45 MINUTES 3 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 4 HOURS TO 4 HOURS 15 MINUTES 4 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 30 MINUTES 4 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 45 MINUTES 4 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 5 HOURS TO 5 HOURS 30 MINUTES 5 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 6 HOURS OVER 6 HOURS WILL NOT EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 275 of 424

54. If Over 6 Hours for Question 11, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 11, is under 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

55. 12. If there are 6-8 inches of snow on your driveway or curb, would you need to shovel out to evacuate? If yes, how much time, on average, would it take you to clear the 6-8 inches of snow to move the car from the driveway or curb to begin the evacuation trip? Assume the roads are passable.

Mark only one oval.

LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 15-30 MINUTES 31-45 MINUTES 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS NO, WILL NOT SHOVEL OUT OVER 3 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

56. If Over 3 Hours for Question 12, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 12, is under 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 276 of 424

57. 13. Please specify the number of people in your household who require Functional or Transportation needs in an evacuation:

Mark only one oval per row.

More 0 1 2 3 4 than 4 Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle Ambulance Other

58. Specify "Other" Transporation Need Below

59. 14. Please choose one of the following:

Mark only one oval.

I would await the return of household members to evacuate together.

I would evacuate independently and meet other household members later.

Decline to State

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 277 of 424

60. 15A. Emergency officials advise you to shelter-in-place in an emergency because you are not in the area of risk. Would you:

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

61. 15B. Emergency officials advise you to shelter-in-place now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas are advised to evacuate now.

Would you:

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

62. 15C. Emergency officials advise you to evacuate due to an emergency. Where would you evacuate to?

Mark only one oval.

A RELATIVES OR FRIENDS HOME A RECEPTION CENTER A HOTEL, MOTEL OR CAMPGROUND A SECOND/SEASONAL HOME WOULD NOT EVACUATE DON'T KNOW OTHER (Specify Below)

DECLINE TO STATE

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 278 of 424

63. Fill in OTHER answers for question 15C Pet Questions

64. 16A. Do you have any pet(s) and/or animal(s)?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

65. 16B. What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have?

Check all that apply.

DOG CAT BIRD REPTILE HORSE FISH CHICKEN GOAT PIG OTHER SMALL PETS/ANIMALS (Specify Below)

OTHER LARGE PETS/ANIMALS (Specify Below)

Other:

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 279 of 424 66.

Mark only one oval.

DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

67. 16C. What would you do with your pet(s) and/or animal(s) if you had to evacuate?

Mark only one oval.

TAKE PET WITH ME SOMEWHERE ELSE LEAVE PET AT HOME DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

68. 16D. Do you have sufficient room in your vehicle(s) to evacuate with your pet(s) and/or animal(s)?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE Other:

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 280 of 424 APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 281 of 424 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 indicates that the existing Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Access Control Points (ACPs) identified by the offsite agencies should be used in the evacuation simulation modeling. The traffic control plans for the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) were provided by the offsite response organizations within the EPZ.

These plans were reviewed, and the TCPs and ACPs were modeled accordingly. An analysis of the TCP and ACP locations was performed, and it was determined to model the ETE simulations with existing TCPs and ACPs that were provided in the approved county and state emergency plans, with no additional TCPs or ACPs.

G.1 Manual Traffic Control TCPs and ACPs are forms of manual traffic control (MTC). As discussed in Section 9, MTC at intersections (which are controlled) are modeled as actuated signals. If an intersection has a pretimed signal, stop, or yield control, and the intersection is identified as a traffic control point (or ACP), the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system, in accordance with Section 3.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. MTCs at existing actuated traffic signalized intersections were essentially left alone. Table K1 provides the control type and node number for those nodes which are controlled. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a TCP/ACP, the control type is indicated as TCP/ACP in Table K1. The TCPs within the study area are mapped as blue dots in Figure G1 while ACPs are mapped as red squares. No additional locations for MTC are suggested in this study.

It is assumed that the ACPs will be established within 120 minutes of the advisory to evacuate (ATE) to discourage through travelers from using major through routes which traverse the EPZ.

As discussed in Section 3.11, external traffic was considered on Interstate 70 (I70) and US Highway 54 (US54) in this analysis.

G.2 Analysis of Key TCP/ACP/SRB Locations As discussed in Section 5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, MTC at intersections could benefit from the ETE analysis. The MTC locations contained within the traffic management plans were analyzed to determine key locations where MTC would be most useful and can be readily implemented. As previously mentioned, signalized intersections that were actuated based on field data collection were essentially left as actuated traffic signals in the model, with modifications to green time allocation as needed. Other controlled intersections (pretimed signals, stop signs and yield signs) were changed to actuated traffic signals to represent the MTC that would be implemented according to the traffic management plans.

Table G1 shows a list of the controlled intersections that were identified as MTC points in the TMPs that were not previously actuated signals, including the type of control that currently exists at each location. To determine the impact of MTC at these locations, a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 6) evacuation of the 2Mile, 5Mile and entire EPZ Callaway Energy Center G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 282 of 424 (Region R01, R02, R03) were simulated wherein these intersections were left as is (without MTC). The results are shown in Table G2. The ETE remained unchanged when compared to the cases wherein these controlled intersections were modeled as actuated signals (with MTC) presented in Section 7 for Scenario 6 Regions R01, R02, and R03. Although localized congestion worsened, there is no change in ETE at both the 90th and 100th percentile when MTC was not present at these intersections. The remaining TCPs and ACPs at controlled intersections were left as actuated signals in the model and, therefore, had no impact to ETE.

As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 77, the only area in the EPZ that experiences any congestion is Fulton (Subarea C9). The congestion in Fulton clears by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE. As a result, the TCPs and ACPs within the EPZ do very little to reduce the 90th percentile ETE as there is very little congestion in the EPZ as a whole. Since Subarea C9 does not evacuate for Regions R01 or R02, there is no congestion when these regions evacuate, and as a result, there is no benefit to ETE from MTC for these regions.

Since all congestion within the EPZ clears prior to trip generation time, the time to mobilize dictates the 100th percentile ETE; as a result, MTC has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE.

Although there is no reduction in ETE when MTC is implemented, traffic and access control can be beneficial in the reduction of localized congestion and driver confusion and can be extremely helpful for fixed point surveillance, amongst other things. Should there be a shortfall of personnel to staff the TCPs or ACPs, the list of locations provided in Table G1 could be considered as priority locations when implementing the TMP.

Callaway Energy Center G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 283 of 424 Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations Type of Control Node #

(Prior to being a TCP) 319 Stop Control 157 Stop Control 1283 Stop Control 64 Stop Control 80 Stop Control 876 Stop Control 880 Stop Control 276 Stop Control 298 Stop Control 857 Stop Control 444 Stop Control 55 Stop Control 45 Stop Control 96 Stop Control 967 Yield Sign 966 Yield Sign 968 Yield Sign 64 Stop Control 65 Stop Control 40 Yield Sign 405 Stop Control Table G2. ETE with No MTC Scenario 6 90th 100th Region Percentile Percentile ETE ETE R01 (2mile) 1:25 4:45 R02 (5mile) 2:45 4:50 R03 (full EPZ) 2:50 4:55 Callaway Energy Center G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure G1. Traffic Control and Access Control Points for the CEC EPZ Page 284 of 424 Callaway Energy Center G4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 285 of 424 APPENDIX H Evacuation Regions

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 286 of 424 H EVACUATION REGIONS This appendix presents the evacuation percentages for each Evacuation Region (Table H1) and maps of all Evacuation Regions (Figure H1 through Figure H44). The percentages presented in Table H1 are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 7 of Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 21.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Callaway Energy Center H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of Subarea Population Evacuating for Each Region Radial Regions Subarea Region

Description:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 R01 2Mile Radius 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R02 5Mile Radius 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R03 Full EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Subarea Direction Cardinal Compass Region Sectors:

From: Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

N/NNE R04 8 14 H, J, K, L 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R04 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R05 53 59 K, L, M, N 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R06 60 75 L, M, N 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 287 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Subarea Direction Cardinal Compass Region Sectors:

From: Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

ENE/E 76 82 L, M, N, P (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

See Region R06 E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R07 121 127 N, P, Q, R 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

SE R08 128 142 P, Q, R 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S 166 172 Q, R, A, B See Region R08 (4Sector Keyhole)

S 173 187 R, A, B (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW 188 194 R, A, B, C (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R09 195 210 A, B, C 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 288 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Subarea Direction Cardinal Compass Region Sectors:

From: Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

SSW/SW R10 211 217 A, B, C, D 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

SW 218 232 B, C, D (3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW 233 239 B, C, D, E (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R10 WSW 240 255 C, D, E (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W 256 262 C, D, E, F (4Sector Keyhole)

W R11 263 277 D, E, F 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

W/WNW R12 278 284 D, E, F, G 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

WNW 285 300 E, F, G (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R12 NW 308 322 F, G, H (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R13 330 345 G, H, J 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N 346 352 G, H, J, K (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R04 N

353 7 H, J, K (3Sector Keyhole) Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 289 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Subarea Direction Cardinal Compass Region Sectors:

From: Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

N/NNE R14 8 14 H, J, K, L 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

(4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R14 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R15 53 59 K, L, M, N 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

(4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R16 60 75 L, M, N 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E R17 76 82 L, M, N, P 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q See Region R17 (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R18 121 127 N, P, Q, R 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

SE R19 128 142 P, Q, R 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R19 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

June 27, 2022 Page 290 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Subarea Direction Cardinal Compass Region Sectors:

From: Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

SSE/S R20 166 172 Q, R, A, B 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

S R21 173 187 R, A, B 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW R22 188 194 R, A, B, C 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R23 195 210 A, B, C 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R24 211 217 A, B, C, D 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

SW R25 218 232 B, C, D 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW R26 233 239 B, C, D, E 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

WSW 240 255 C, D, E See Region R26 (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W R27 256 262 C, D, E, F 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

W R28 263 277 D, E, F 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

W/WNW R29 278 284 D, E, F, G 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

(4Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 291 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Subarea Direction Cardinal Compass Region Sectors:

From: Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

WNW R30 285 300 E, F, G 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100%

(3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

NW 308 322 F, G, H See Region R30 (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R31 330 345 G, H, J 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100%

(3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N R32 346 352 G, H, J, K 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100%

(4Sector Keyhole)

N R33 353 7 H, J, K 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

(3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 292 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Subarea Cardinal Compass Region From: Sectors:

Equivalent:

(Degrees) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 R34 5Mile Radius 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

N/NNE R35 8 14 H, J, K, L 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

NNE 15 30 J, K, L (3Sector Keyhole)

NNE/NE 31 37 J, K, L, M See Region R35 (4Sector Keyhole)

NE 38 52 K, L, M (3Sector Keyhole)

NE/ENE R36 53 59 K, L, M, N 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

ENE R37 60 75 L, M, N 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

ENE/E 76 82 L, M, N, P (4Sector Keyhole)

E 83 97 M, N, P (3Sector Keyhole)

See Region R37 E/ESE 98 104 M, N, P, Q (4Sector Keyhole)

ESE 105 120 N, P, Q (3Sector Keyhole)

ESE/SE R38 121 127 N, P, Q, R 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 293 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Subarea Direction Cardinal Compass Region Sectors:

From: Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

SE R39 128 142 P, Q, R 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

SE/SSE 143 149 P, Q, R, A (4Sector Keyhole)

SSE 150 165 Q, R, A (3Sector Keyhole)

SSE/S 166 172 Q, R, A, B See Region R39 (4Sector Keyhole)

S 173 187 R, A, B (3Sector Keyhole)

S/SSW 188 194 R, A, B, C (4Sector Keyhole)

SSW R40 195 210 A, B, C 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

SSW/SW R41 211 217 A, B, C, D 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

SW 218 232 B, C, D (3Sector Keyhole)

SW/WSW 233 239 B, C, D, E (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R41 WSW 240 255 C, D, E (3Sector Keyhole)

WSW/W 256 262 C, D, E, F (4Sector Keyhole)

W R42 263 277 D, E, F 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 294 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Subarea Direction Cardinal Compass Region Sectors:

From: Equivalent:

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 G1 M1 M2 O1 (Degrees)

W/WNW R43 278 284 D, E, F, G 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(4Sector Keyhole)

WNW 285 300 E, F, G (3Sector Keyhole)

WNW/NW 301 307 E, F, G, H (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R43 NW 308 322 F, G, H (3Sector Keyhole)

NW/NNW 323 329 F, G, H, J (4Sector Keyhole)

NNW R44 330 345 G, H, J 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

(3Sector Keyhole)

NNW/N 346 352 G, H, J, K (4Sector Keyhole)

See Region R35 N

353 7 H, J, K (3Sector Keyhole)

Subarea(s) Evacuate Subarea(s) ShelterinPlace ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 295 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H1 Region R01 Page 296 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H2 Region R02 Page 297 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H3 Region R03 Page 298 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H4 Region R04 Page 299 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H5 Region R05 Page 300 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H6 Region R06 Page 301 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H7 Region R07 Page 302 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H8 Region R08 Page 303 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H9 Region R09 Page 304 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H10 Region R10 Page 305 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H11 Region R11 Page 306 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H12 Region R12 Page 307 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H13 Region R13 Page 308 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H14 Region R14 Page 309 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H15 Region R15 Page 310 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H16 Region R16 Page 311 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H17 Region R17 Page 312 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H18 Region R18 Page 313 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H19 Region R19 Page 314 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H20 Region R20 Page 315 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H21 Region R21 Page 316 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H22 Region R22 Page 317 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H23 Region R23 Page 318 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H24 Region R24 Page 319 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H25 Region R25 Page 320 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H26 Region R26 Page 321 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H27 Region R27 Page 322 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H28 Region R28 Page 323 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H29 Region R29 Page 324 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H30 Region R30 Page 325 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H31 Region R31 Page 326 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H32 Region R32 Page 327 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H33 Region R33 Page 328 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H34 Region R34 Page 329 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H35 Region R35 Page 330 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H36 Region R36 Page 331 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H37 Region R37 Page 332 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H38 Region R38 Page 333 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H39 Region R39 Page 334 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H40 Region R40 Page 335 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H50 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H41 Region R41 Page 336 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H42 Region R42 Page 337 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H43 Region R43 Page 338 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure H44 Region R44 Page 339 of 424 Callaway Energy Center H54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 340 of 424 APPENDIX J Representative Inputs to and Outputs from the DYNEV II System

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 341 of 424 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM This appendix presents data input to and output from the DYNEV II System.

Table J1 provides source (vehicle loading) and destination information for several roadway segments (links) in the analysis network. there are a total of 295 source links (origins) in the model. The source links are shown as centroid points in Figure J2. On average, evacuees travel a straightline distance of 5.10 miles to exit the network.

Table J2 provides network-wide statistics (average travel time, average delay time1 average speed and number of vehicles) for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) for each scenario. Rain/light snow scenarios (Scenarios 2, 4, 7 and 10) exhibit slower average speeds and longer average travel times compared to good weather scenarios. Heavy snow scenarios (Scenarios 8 and 11) exhibit slower average speeds and longer average travel times compared to rain/light snow and good weather scenarios. On average the network wide average delay is less than one tenth mins per vehicle mile for all scenarios. When comparing scenario 13 (special event) and scenario 6, the additional vehicles the special event introduces slightly lowers the average speeds but has no effect on travel time or average delay. When comparing scenario 14 (roadway closure) and scenario 1, the lane closure along I70 does not have an impact on travel time, average delay or average speeds for the network as a whole.

Table J3 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes -

Interstate 70 (I70) and US Highway 54 (US54) - for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. As discussed in Section 7.3 and 7.5, as there is no significant congestion on the mainline of I70 the travel times and speeds are minimally affected.

Table J4 provides the number of vehicles discharged and the cumulative percent of total vehicles discharged for each link exiting the analysis network, for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions.

Figure J2 through Figure J15 plot the trip generation time versus the ETE for each of the 14 Scenarios considered. The distance between the trip generation and ETE curves is the travel time. Plots of trip generation versus ETE are indicative of the level of traffic congestion during evacuation. For low population density sites, the curves are close together, indicating short travel times and minimal traffic congestion. For higher population density sites, the curves are farther apart indicating longer travel times and the presence of traffic congestion. As seen in Figure J2 through Figure J15, the curves are close together (outside of heavy snow scenarios) as a result of limited traffic congestion in the EPZ, which was discussed in detail in Section 7.3.

1 Computed as the difference of the average travel time and the average ideal travel time under free flow condition.

Callaway Energy Center J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 342 of 424 Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Entering Link Upstream Downstream Network Directional Destination Destination Number Node Node on this Link Preference Nodes Capacity 8005 4,500 1398 1284 1283 78 W 8073 4,500 8221 1,700 8005 4,500 1272 1171 374 69 NW 8028 3,800 8073 4,500 8028 3,800 905 833 832 35 NW 8005 4,500 8073 4,500 8028 3,800 468 387 865 48 NW 8005 4,500 8073 4,500 8113 1,700 1239 1138 1139 28 N 8005 4,500 8028 3,800 8550 1,700 1379 1265 1266 7 E 8300 1,700 1679 1562 1551 7 N 8028 3,800 Callaway Energy Center J2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03)

Scenario 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NetworkWide Average 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 60.0 57.5 60.0 57.8 58.6 60.0 55.8 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 19,560 19,700 18,875 19,019 13,666 21,794 21,944 Exiting Network Scenario 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NetworkWide Average 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 51.4 60.0 57.9 53.5 58.8 58.7 60.0 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 22,072 18,720 18,850 18,967 13,498 22,911 19,560 Exiting Network Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1)

Elapsed Time (hours) 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 4:55 Travel Length Speed Time Travel Travel Travel Travel Route# (miles) (mph) (min) Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time I70 Westbound 13.3 75.0 10.6 71.7 11.1 72.1 11.0 69.0 11.5 75.0 10.6 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 I70 Eastbound 13.3 75.0 10.6 73.5 10.8 73.8 10.8 70.7 11.3 75.0 10.6 US54 Westbound 8.0 72.5 6.6 71.6 6.7 71.2 6.8 70.9 6.8 74.2 6.5 June 27, 2022 US54 Eastbound 8.0 72.0 6.7 71.4 6.7 70.5 6.8 70.1 6.9 74.6 6.5 Page 343 of 424 Callaway Energy Center J3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 344 of 424 Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 Elapsed Time (hours) 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 4:55 Network Upstream Downstrea Exit Link Node m Node Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval 0 10 21 25 25 585 489 488 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

687 1,906 2,829 3,189 3,242 1095 997 756 13% 14% 15% 16% 17%

1,570 3,202 3,854 3,879 3,881 1099 999 976 30% 23% 21% 20% 20%

91 434 656 733 743 1314 1213 682 2% 3% 4% 4% 4%

28 176 274 308 313 1375 1261 133 1% 1% 1% 2% 2%

323 1,402 1,852 1,960 1,975 1418 1302 221 6% 10% 10% 10% 10%

3 32 56 64 66 1566 1449 904 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

4 28 46 49 49 1620 1504 1503 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

29 167 263 299 303 1639 1523 300 1% 1% 1% 2% 2%

38 216 339 382 386 1665 1548 1549 1% 2% 2% 2% 2%

710 2,228 2,988 3,208 3,236 1681 1564 28 13% 16% 16% 17% 17%

1,827 4,111 5,095 5,215 5,235 1683 1565 975 34% 29% 28% 27% 27%

3 45 84 94 95 1710 1587 589 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

0 6 10 12 12 1729 1606 1607 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Callaway Energy Center J4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins Page 345 of 424 Callaway Energy Center J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 346 of 424 ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 1)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 2)

Callaway Energy Center J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 347 of 424 ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 4)

Callaway Energy Center J7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 348 of 424 ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 5)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

Callaway Energy Center J8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 349 of 424 ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8)

Callaway Energy Center J9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 350 of 424 ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 9)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10)

Callaway Energy Center J10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 351 of 424 ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 12)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12)

Callaway Energy Center J11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 352 of 424 ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good, Special Event (Scenario 13)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Callaway Energy Center J12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 353 of 424 APPENDIX K Evacuation Roadway Network

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 354 of 424 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK As discussed in Section 1.3, a linknode analysis network was constructed to model the roadway network within the study area. Figure K1 provides an overview of the linknode analysis network. The figure has been divided up into 43 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K44) which show each of the links and nodes in the network.

The analysis network was calibrated using the observations made during the field surveys conducted in October 2020.

Table K1 summarizes the number of nodes by the type of control (stop sign, yield sign, pre timed signal, actuated signal, traffic or access control point [TCP/ACP], or uncontrolled).

Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control Control Type Number of Nodes Uncontrolled 1,377 Pretimed Signal 0 Actuated Signal 7 Stop Sign 115 TCP/ACP 51 Yield Sign 8 Total: 1,558 Callaway Energy Center K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Figure K1 Callaway LinkNode Analysis Network Page 355 of 424 Callaway Energy Center K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 356 of 424 Figure K2 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 Callaway Energy Center K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 357 of 424 Figure K3 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 Callaway Energy Center K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 358 of 424 Figure K4 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 Callaway Energy Center K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 359 of 424 Figure K5 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 Callaway Energy Center K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 360 of 424 Figure K6 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 Callaway Energy Center K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 361 of 424 Figure K7 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 Callaway Energy Center K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 362 of 424 Figure K8 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 Callaway Energy Center K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 363 of 424 Figure K9 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 Callaway Energy Center K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 364 of 424 Figure K10 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 Callaway Energy Center K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 365 of 424 Figure K11 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 Callaway Energy Center K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 366 of 424 Figure K12 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 Callaway Energy Center K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 367 of 424 Figure K13 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 Callaway Energy Center K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 368 of 424 Figure K14 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 Callaway Energy Center K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 369 of 424 Figure K15 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 Callaway Energy Center K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 370 of 424 Figure K16 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 Callaway Energy Center K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 371 of 424 Figure K17 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 Callaway Energy Center K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 372 of 424 Figure K18 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 Callaway Energy Center K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 373 of 424 Figure K19 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 Callaway Energy Center K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 374 of 424 Figure K20 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 Callaway Energy Center K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 375 of 424 Figure K21 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 Callaway Energy Center K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 376 of 424 Figure K22 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 Callaway Energy Center K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 377 of 424 Figure K23LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 Callaway Energy Center K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 378 of 424 Figure K24 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 Callaway Energy Center K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 379 of 424 Figure K25 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 Callaway Energy Center K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 380 of 424 Figure K26 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 Callaway Energy Center K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 381 of 424 Figure K27 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 Callaway Energy Center K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 382 of 424 Figure K28 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 Callaway Energy Center K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 383 of 424 Figure K29 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 Callaway Energy Center K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 384 of 424 Figure K30 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 Callaway Energy Center K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 385 of 424 Figure K31 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 Callaway Energy Center K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 386 of 424 Figure K32 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 Callaway Energy Center K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 387 of 424 Figure K33 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 Callaway Energy Center K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 388 of 424 Figure K34 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 Callaway Energy Center K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 389 of 424 Figure K35 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 Callaway Energy Center K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 390 of 424 Figure K36 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 Callaway Energy Center K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 391 of 424 Figure K37 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 Callaway Energy Center K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 392 of 424 Figure K38 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 Callaway Energy Center K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 393 of 424 Figure K39 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 Callaway Energy Center K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 394 of 424 Figure K40 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 Callaway Energy Center K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 395 of 424 Figure K41 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 Callaway Energy Center K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 396 of 424 Figure K42 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 Callaway Energy Center K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 397 of 424 Figure K43 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 Callaway Energy Center K44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 398 of 424 Figure K44 LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 Callaway Energy Center K45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 399 of 424 APPENDIX L Subarea Boundaries

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 400 of 424 L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES Subarea C1 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area within a two mile radius of the Callaway Energy Center.

Subarea C2 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by Route UU on the north; Route AD and County Road (CR)428 on the south; CR111 and CR419 on the west; and CR133 on the east.

Subarea C3 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by CR132 and CR134 on the north; Route O on the south; Route D on the east; and CR133 on the west.

Subarea C4 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by Routes O and K on the north; the Missouri River on the south; the Montgomery County line on the east; and CR469 and CR448 on the west.

Subarea C5 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by CR469 and CR448 on the east; CR459, Highway 94 and Auxvasse Creek on the west; the Missouri River on the south, and two miles from the plant on the north.

Subarea C6 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by Route AD and CR 428 on the north; Highway 94 on the south; CR459 on the east; and Routes C, VV, and CR 447 on the west.

Subarea C7 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area south of Hams Prairie bounded on the north by Route C from Hams Prairie extended directly west to the Middle River; by Routes C, VV and CR447 on the east; the Middle River on the west; and the Missouri River on the south.

Callaway Energy Center L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 401 of 424 Subarea C8 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area southeast of Fulton bounded by Route JJ, Route UU, CR111 and CR419, and Route AD on the east, Route C from Hams Prairie extended directly west to the Middle River on the south; and Route NN, Fulton city limits and Route Z on the west and north. This does not include the City of Fulton.

Subarea C9 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The City of Fulton Subarea C10 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by Route Z and Interstate (I)70 on the north, CR132 and CR134 on the south, Route D on the east; and Route JJ on the west.

Subarea C11 County: Callaway Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by I 70 on the north; Route K on the south; the Montgomery County line on the east; and Route D on the west.

Subarea G1 County: Gasconade Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area south of the Missouri River, east of the Osage County line, and northwest of Shawnee Creek, including Morrison.

Subarea M1 County: Montgomery Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by I 70 on the north; Route K on the south; the Callaway County line on the west; and CR278 (Graveyard Hill Rd), CR283 (Mill Pond Rd) and Route HH on the east.

Subarea M2 County: Montgomery Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area bounded by Route K on the north; the Missouri River on the south; the Callaway County line on the west; and Route P, CR295 and Route EE on the east, including the town of Rhineland.

Subarea O1 County: Osage Defined as the area within the following boundary: The area east of St.

Aubert, west of Route N, and within five miles of the Missouri River.

Callaway Energy Center L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 402 of 424 APPENDIX M Evacuation Sensitivity Studies

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 403 of 424 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES This appendix presents the results of a series of sensitivity analyses. These analyses are designed to identify the sensitivity of the Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) to changes in some base evacuation conditions.

M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times A sensitivity study was performed to determine whether changes in the estimated trip generation time have an effect on the ETE for the entire Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ).

Specifically, if the tail of the mobilization distribution were truncated (i.e., if those who responded most slowly to the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), could be persuaded to respond much more rapidly) or if the tail were elongated (i.e. spreading out the departure of evacuees to limit the demand during peak times), how would the ETE be affected? The case considered was Scenario 6, Region 3; a winter (school in session), midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. Table M1 presents the results of this study.

If evacuees mobilize one hour quicker, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE are reduced by 25 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, respectively. If evacuees mobilize one hour slower, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE are increased by 30 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, respectively.

As discussed in Section 7.3, traffic congestion within the EPZ clears at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE, well before the completion of trip generation time. As such, congestion dictates the 100th percentile until 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE. After this time, trip generation (plus a 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary), dictates the 100th percentile ETE. See Table M1.

M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the percentage of people who decide to relocate from the Shadow Region. The case considered was Scenario 6, Region 3; a winter, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. The movement of people in the Shadow Region has the potential to impede vehicles evacuating from an Evacuation Region within the EPZ. Refer to Sections 3.2 and 7.1 for additional information on population within the Shadow Region.

Table M2 presents the ETE for each of the cases considered. The results show that the ETE is not impacted by the elimination, reduction or increase in shadow evacuation. (Note that the demographic survey results presented in Appendix F, indicate that 10% of households would elect to evacuate if advised to shelter, which is half the base assumption of 20% noncompliance suggested in the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1).

The Shadow Region is sparsely populated. As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 77, the only congestion in the Shadow Region outside of Fulton and is caused by evacuees from Fulton, not from those evacuating from the Shadow Region. In addition, this congestion dissipates by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE. Any additional shadow residents that decide to voluntarily evacuate Callaway Energy Center M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 404 of 424 are accommodated by the excess capacity available in the study area such that ETE are not impacted.

M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the permanent resident population within the study area (EPZ plus Shadow Region). As population in the study area changes over time, the time required to evacuate the public may increase, decrease, or remain the same. Since the ETE is related to the demand to capacity ratio present within the study area, changes in population will cause the demand side of the equation to change and could impact ETE.

As per the NRCs response to the Emergency Planning Frequently Asked Question (EPFAQ) 2013001, the ETE population sensitivity study must be conducted to determine what percentage increase in permanent resident population causes an increase in the 90th percentile ETE of 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. The sensitivity study must use the scenario with the longest 90th percentile ETE (excluding the roadway impact scenario and the special event scenario if it is a one day per year special event).

Thus, the sensitivity study was conducted using the following planning assumptions:

1. The percent change in population within the study area was increased by up to 20%.

Changes in population were applied to permanent residents only (as per federal guidance), in both the EPZ area and the Shadow Region.

2. The transportation infrastructure remained fixed (as presented in Appendix K); the presence of future proposed roadway changes and/or highway capacity improvements were not considered.

3. The study was performed for the 2Mile Region, the 5Mile Region and the entire EPZ (Full EPZ).

4. The scenario (excluding roadway impact and special event) which yielded the highest 90th percentile ETE values for the Full EPZ was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 8 - Winter, Midweek, Midday with Heavy Snow).

Table M3 presents the results of the sensitivity study.Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and NUREG/CR7002, Section 5.4, require licensees to provide an updated ETE analysis to the NRC when a population increase within the EPZ causes the longest 90th percentile ETE values (for the 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region or entire EPZ) to increase by 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. Note that the base ETE Values for the 2Mile Region (R01) is less than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; R01 criterion for updated is 25 minutes (100 minutes multiplied by 25%). Base ETE values for 5 mile Region and the entire EPZ (R03) are greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; therefore, the criterion for updating is 30 minutes.

Those percent population changes which result in a 90th percentile ETE greater than the respective criterion for each region are highlighted in red below - a 19% or greater increase in the 2mile Region permanent resident population. Ameren Missouri will have to estimate the Callaway Energy Center M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 405 of 424 EPZ population on an annual basis. If the EPZ population increases by 19% or more, an updated ETE analysis will be needed.

Callaway Energy Center M3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 406 of 424 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study Trip Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Generation Period 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes 2:25 3:55 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes (Base) 2:50 4:55 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes 3:20 5:55 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Evacuating Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Percent Shadow Shadow Evacuation 90th Percentile 100th Percentile Vehicles1 0 0 2:50 4:55 10 386 2:50 4:55 20 (Base) 772 2:50 4:55 40 1,543 2:50 4:55 60 2,315 2:50 4:55 80 3,086 2:50 4:55 100 3,858 2:50 4:55 1

The Evacuating Shadow Vehicles, in Table M-2, represent the residents and employees who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis, for the base values shown, is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees. See Section 6 for further discussion.

Callaway Energy Center M4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 407 of 424 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Shadow Population Change Base Permanent Resident 18% 19% 20%

Population 20,870 24,627 24,835 25,044 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 18% 19% 20%

2MILE 1:40 1:55 2:05 2:05 5MILE 4:00 4:10 4:10 4:10 FULL EPZ 4:10 4:10 4:10 4:10 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100th Percentile Population Change Region Base 18% 19% 20%

2MILE 6:45 6:45 6:45 6:45 5MILE 6:50 6:50 6:50 6:50 FULL EPZ 6:55 6:55 6:55 6:55 Callaway Energy Center M5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 408 of 424 APPENDIX N ETE Criteria Checklist

N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 1.0 Introduction

a. The emergency planning zone (EPZ) and surrounding area is Yes Section 1 described.

b. A map is included that identifies primary features of the site Yes Figures 11, 31, 61 including major roadways, significant topographical features, boundaries of counties, and population centers within the EPZ.

c. A comparison of the current and previous ETE is provided Yes Table 13 including information similar to that identified in Table 11, ETE Comparison.

1.1 Approach

a. The general approach is described in the report as outlined Yes Section 1.1, Section 1.3, Appendix D, in Section 1.1, Approach. Table 11 1.2 Assumptions

a. Assumptions consistent with Table 12, General Yes Section 2 Assumptions, of NUREG/CR7002 are provided and include the basis to support use.

1.3 Scenario Development Enclosure to ULNRC-06752

a. The scenarios in Table 13, Evacuation Scenarios, are Yes Section 6, Table 62 developed for the ETE analysis. A reason is provided for use June 27, 2022 of other scenarios or for not evaluating specific scenarios.

Page 409 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 1.4 Evacuation Planning Areas

a. A map of the EPZ with emergency response planning areas Yes Figure 31, Figure 61 (ERPAs) is included.

1.4.1 Keyhole Evacuation

a. A table similar to Table 14 Evacuation Areas for a Keyhole Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1 Evacuation, is provided identifying the ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

1.4.2 Staged Evacuation

a. The approach used in development of a staged evacuation is Yes Section 7.2 discussed.

b. A table similar to Table 15, Evacuation Areas for a Staged Yes Table 73, Table 74 Evacuation, is provided for staged evacuations identifying the ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

2.0 Demand Estimation

a. Demand estimation is developed for the four population Yes Section 3 groups (permanent residents of the EPZ, transients, special facilities, and schools).

2.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. The U.S. Census is the source of the population values, or Yes Section 3.1 another credible source is provided.

b. The availability date of the census data is provided. Yes Section 3.1 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752

c. Population values are adjusted as necessary for growth to Yes N/A 2020 used as the base year of the reflect population estimates to the year of the ETE. analysis June 27, 2022 Page 410 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. A sector diagram, similar to Figure 21, Population by Yes Figure 32 Sector, is included showing the population distribution for permanent residents.

2.1.1 Permanent Residents with Vehicles

a. The persons per vehicle value is between 1 and 3 or Yes Section 3.1 justification is provided for other values.

2.1.2 Transient Population

a. A list of facilities that attract transient populations is Yes Section 3.3, Table E4 and Table E5 included, and peak and average attendance for these facilities is listed. The source of information used to develop attendance values is provided.

b. Major employers are listed. Yes Section 3.4, Table E3

c. The average population during the season is used, itemized Yes Table 34 and Appendix E itemize the and totaled for each scenario. peak transient population and employee estimates. These estimates are multiplied by the scenario specific percentages provided in Table 63 to estimate average transient population by scenario - see Table 64.

d. The percentage of permanent residents assumed to be at Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 facilities is estimated.

e. The number of people per vehicle is provided. Numbers may Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 vary by scenario, and if so, reasons for the variation are discussed. June 27, 2022 Page 411 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

f. A sector diagram is included, similar to Figure 21, Yes Figure 36 (transients) and Figure 38 Population by Sector, is included showing the population (employees) distribution for the transient population.

2.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. The methodology (e.g., surveys, registration programs) used Yes Section 3.7 to determine the number of transit dependent residents is discussed.

b. The State and local evacuation plans for transit dependent Yes Section 8.1 residents are used in the analysis.

c. The methodology used to determine the number of people Yes Section 3.8 with disabilities and those with access and functional needs who may need assistance and do not reside in special facilities is provided. Data from local/county registration programs are used in the estimate.

d. Capacities are provided for all types of transportation Yes Item 3 of Section 2.4 resources. Bus seating capacity of 50 percent is used or justification is provided for higher values.

e. An estimate of the transit dependent population is provided. Yes Section 3.7, Table 38, Table 39

f. A summary table showing the total number of buses, Yes Table 39, Table 81 ambulances, or other transport assumed available to support evacuation is provided. The quantification of resources is detailed enough to ensure that double counting has not occurred. Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 412 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 2.3 Special Facility Residents

a. Special facilities, including the type of facility, location, and Yes Table E2 lists all medical facilities by average population, are listed. Special facility staff is facility name, location, and average included in the total special facility population. population. Staff estimates were not provided.

b. The method of obtaining special facility data is discussed. Yes Section 3.5 and 3.9

c. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles assumed N/A According to Callaway RERP, all medical available to support the evacuation of the facility is provided. and correctional facilities located within the EPZ are to shelterinplace.

d. The logistics for mobilizing specially trained staff (e.g., N/A According to Callaway RERP, all medical medical support or security support for prisons, jails, and and correctional facilities located within other correctional facilities) are discussed when appropriate. the EPZ are to shelterinplace.

2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student Yes Table 37, Table E1, Section 3.6 population, and transportation resources required to support the evacuation, is provided. The source of this information should be identified.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle schools Yes Section 3.6 are based on 100 percent of the school capacity.

c. The estimate of high school students who will use personal Yes Section 3.6 vehicle to evacuate is provided and a basis for the values used is given. Enclosure to ULNRC-06752

d. The need for return trips is identified. Yes Section 8.1 - no return trips are needed. June 27, 2022 Page 413 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 2.5 Other Demand Estimate Considerations 2.5.1 Special Events

a. A complete list of special events is provided including Yes Section 3.10 information on the population, estimated duration, and season of the event.

b. The special event that encompasses the peak transient Yes Section 3.10 population is analyzed in the ETE.

c. The percentage of permanent residents attending the event Yes Section 3.10 is estimated.

2.5.2 Shadow Evacuation

a. A shadow evacuation of 20 percent is included consistent Yes Item 7 of Section 2.2, Figure 21 and with the approach outlined in Section 2.5.2, Shadow Figure 71, Section 3.2 Evacuation.

b. Population estimates for the shadow evacuation in the Yes Section 3.2, Table 33, Figure 34 shadow region beyond the EPZ are provided by sector.

c. The loading of the shadow evacuation onto the roadway Yes Section 5 - Table 58 (footnote) network is consistent with the trip generation time generated for the permanent resident population.

2.5.3 Background and Pass Through Traffic

a. The volume of background traffic and passthrough traffic is Yes Section 3.11 and Section 3.12 based on the average daytime traffic. Values may be reduced for nighttime scenarios. Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 414 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. The method of reducing background and passthrough traffic Yes Section 2.2 - Assumptions 9 and 10 is described. Section 2.5 Section 3.11 and Section 3.12 Table 63 - External Through Traffic footnote

c. Passthrough traffic is assumed to have stopped entering the Yes Section 2.5 EPZ about two (2) hours after the initial notification.

2.6 Summary of Demand Estimation

a. A summary table is provided that identifies the total Yes Table 311, Table 312, and Table 64 populations and total vehicles used in the analysis for permanent residents, transients, transit dependent residents, special facilities, schools, shadow population, and passthrough demand in each scenario.

3.0 Roadway Capacity

a. The method(s) used to assess roadway capacity is discussed. Yes Section 4 3.1 Roadway Characteristics

a. The process for gathering roadway characteristic data is Yes Section 1.3, Appendix D described including the types of information gathered and how it is used in the analysis.

b. Legible maps are provided that identify nodes and links of Yes Appendix K the modeled roadway network similar to Figure A1, Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 Roadway Network Identifying Nodes and Links, and Figure A2, Grid Map Showing Detailed Nodes and Links. June 27, 2022 Page 415 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 3.2 Model Approach

a. The approach used to calculate the roadway capacity for the Yes Section 4 transportation network is described in detail, and the description identifies factors that are expressly used in the modeling.

b. Route assignment follows expected evacuation routes and Yes Appendix B and Appendix C traffic volumes.

c. A basis is provided for static route choices if used to assign N/A Static route choices are not used to evacuation routes. assign evacuation routes. Dynamic traffic assignment is used.

d. Dynamic traffic assignment models are described including Yes Appendix B and Appendix C calibration of the route assignment.

3.3 Intersection Control

a. A list that includes the total numbers of intersections Yes Table K1 modeled that are unsignalized, signalized, or manned by response personnel is provided.

b. The use of signal cycle timing, including adjustments for Yes Section 4, Appendix G manned traffic control, is discussed.

3.4 Adverse Weather

a. The adverse weather conditions are identified. Yes Assumption 2 and 3 of Section 2.6

b. The speed and capacity reduction factors identified in Table Yes Table 22 31, Weather Capacity Factors, are used or a basis is Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 provided for other values, as applicable to the model.

c. The calibration and adjustment of driver behavior models for N/A Driver behavior is not adjusted for June 27, 2022 adverse weather conditions are described, if applicable. adverse weather conditions.

Page 416 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. The effect of adverse weather on mobilization is considered Yes Assumption 4 and 5 of Section 2.6 and and assumptions for snow removal on streets and driveways Table 22 are identified, when applicable.

4.0 Development of Evacuation Times 4.1 Traffic Simulation Models

a. General information about the traffic simulation model used Yes Section 1.3, Table 13, Appendix B, in the analysis is provided. Appendix C

b. If a traffic simulation model is not used to perform the ETE N/A Not applicable since a traffic simulation calculation, sufficient detail is provided to validate the model was used.

analytical approach used.

4.2 Traffic Simulation Model Input

a. Traffic simulation model assumptions and a representative Yes Section 2, Appendix J set of model inputs are provided.

b. The number of origin nodes and method for distributing Yes Appendix J, Appendix C vehicles among the origin nodes are described.

c. A glossary of terms is provided for the key performance Yes Appendix A measures and parameters used in the analysis.

4.3 Trip Generation Time

a. The process used to develop trip generation times is Yes Section 5 identified.

b. When surveys are used, the scope of the survey, area of the Yes Appendix F Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 survey, number of participants, and statistical relevance are provided.

June 27, 2022

c. Data used to develop trip generation times are summarized. Yes Appendix F, Section 5 Page 417 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. The trip generation time for each population group is Yes Section 5 developed from sitespecific information.

e. The methods used to reduce uncertainty when developing N/A There was no uncertainty when trip generation times are discussed, if applicable. developing trip generation times.

4.3.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. Permanent residents are assumed to evacuate from their Yes Section 5 discusses trip generation for homes but are not assumed to be at home at all times. Trip households with and without returning generation time includes the assumption that a percentage commuters. Table 63 presents the of residents will need to return home before evacuating. percentage of households with returning commuters and the percentage of households either without returning commuters or with no commuters. Appendix F presents the percent households who will await the return of commuters. Section 2.3, Assumption 3

b. The trip generation time accounts for the time and method Yes Section 5 to notify transients at various locations.

c. The trip generation time accounts for transients potentially Yes Section 5, Figure 51 returning to hotels before evacuating.

d. The effect of public transportation resources used during Yes Section 3.8 special events where a large number of transients are expected is considered. Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 418 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.3.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. If available, existing and approved plans and bus routes are N/A Established bus routes do not exist.

used in the ETE analysis. Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit Dependent Population

b. The means of evacuating ambulatory and nonambulatory Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit residents are discussed. Dependent Population, Section 8.2

c. Logistical details, such as the time to obtain buses, brief Yes Section 8.1, Figure 81 drivers and initiate the bus route are used in the analysis.

d. The estimated time for transit dependent residents to Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit prepare and then travel to a bus pickup point, including the Dependent Population expected means of travel to the pickup point, is described.

e. The number of bus stops and time needed to load Yes Section 8.1, Table 85 though Table 87 passengers are discussed.

f. A map of bus routes is included. Yes Figure 102

g. The trip generation time for nonambulatory persons Yes Section 8.2 including the time to mobilize ambulances or special vehicles, time to drive to the home of residents, time to load, and time to drive out of the EPZ, is provided.

h. Information is provided to support analysis of return trips, if Yes Section 8.1 - no return trips are necessary. needed.

4.3.3 Special Facilities Enclosure to ULNRC-06752

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is N/A According to Callaway RERP, all medical provided. and correctional facilities located within June 27, 2022 the EPZ are to shelterinplace.

Page 419 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. The logistics of evacuating wheelchair and bed bound N/A residents are discussed.

c. Time for loading of residents is provided. N/A

d. Information is provided that indicates whether the N/A According to Callaway RERP, all medical evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional and correctional facilities located within trips are needed.

the EPZ are to shelterinplace.

e. Discussion is provided on whether special facility residents N/A are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

f. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time N/A elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.3.4 Schools

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 provided. through Table 84

b. Time for loading of students is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 84

c. Information is provided that indicates whether the Yes Section 8.1 evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

d. If used, reception centers should be identified. A discussion Yes Section 8.1, Table 103 is provided on whether students are expected to pass Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination. June 27, 2022 Page 420 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

e. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 84 elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.4 Stochastic Model Runs

a. The number of simulation runs needed to produce average N/A DYNEV does not rely on simulation results is discussed. averages or random seeds for statistical

b. If one run of a single random seed is used to produce each N/A confidence. For DYNEV/DTRAD, it is a ETE result, the report includes a sensitivity study on the 90 mesoscopic simulation and uses percent and 100 percent ETE using 10 different random dynamic traffic assignment model to seeds for evacuation of the full EPZ under Summer, obtain the "average" (stable) network Midweek, Daytime, Normal Weather conditions. work flow distribution. This is different from microscopic simulation, which is montecarlo random sampling by nature relying on different seeds to establish statistical confidence. Refer to Appendix B for more details.

4.5 Model Boundaries

a. The method used to establish the simulation model Yes Section 4.5 boundaries is discussed.

b. Significant capacity reductions or population centers that Yes Section 4.5 may influence the ETE and that are located beyond the evacuation area or shadow region are identified and included in the model, if needed. Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 421 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.6 Traffic Simulation Model Output

a. A discussion of whether the traffic simulation model used Yes Appendix B must be in equilibration prior to calculating the ETE is provided.

b. The minimum following model outputs for evacuation of the Yes 1. Appendix J, Table J2 entire EPZ are provided to support review: 2. Table J2

1. Evacuee average travel distance and time. 3. Table J4

2. Evacuee average delay time. 4. None and 0%. 100 percent ETE is

3. Number of vehicles arriving at each destination node. based on the time the last

4. Total number and percentage of evacuee vehicles not vehicle exits the evacuation exiting the EPZ. zone

5. A plot that provides both the mobilization curve and 5. Figures J1 through J14 (one evacuation curve identifying the cumulative percentage plot for each scenario of evacuees who have mobilized and exited the EPZ. considered)

6. Average speed for each major evacuation route that exits 6. Table J5, Network wide average the EPZ. speed also provided in Table J3

c. Color coded roadway maps are provided for various times Yes Figure 73 through Figure 77 (e.g., at 2, 4, 6 hrs.) during a full EPZ evacuation scenario, identifying areas where congestion exists.

4.7 Evacuation Time Estimates for the General Public

a. The ETE includes the time to evacuate 90 percent and 100 Yes Table 71 and Table 72 percent of the total permanent resident and transient population.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752

b. Termination criteria for the 100 percent ETE are discussed, if N/A 100 percent ETE is based on the time not based on the time the last vehicle exits the evacuation the last vehicle exits the evacuation June 27, 2022 zone. zone.

Page 422 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

c. The ETE for 100 percent of the general public includes all Yes Section 5.4.1 - truncating survey data members of the general public. Any reductions or truncated to eliminate statistical outliers data is explained. Table 72 - 100th percentile ETE for general population

d. Tables are provided for the 90 and 100 percent ETEs similar Yes Table 73 and Table 74 to Table 43, ETEs for a Staged Evacuation, and Table 44, ETEs for a Keyhole Evacuation.

e. ETEs are provided for the 100 percent evacuation of special Yes Section 8 facilities, transit dependent, and school populations.

5.0 Other Considerations 5.1 Development of Traffic Control Plans

a. Information that responsible authorities have approved the Yes Section 9, Appendix G traffic control plan used in the analysis are discussed.

b. Adjustments or additions to the traffic control plan that Yes Section 9, Appendix G affect the ETE is provided.

5.2 Enhancements in Evacuation Time

a. The results of assessments for enhancing evacuations are Yes Appendix M provided.

5.3 State and Local Review

a. A list of agencies contacted is provided and the extent of Yes Table 11 interaction with these agencies is discussed.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 423 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. Information is provided on any unresolved issues that may Yes Results of the ETE study were formally affect the ETE. presented to state and local agencies at the final project meeting. Comments on the draft report were provided and were addressed in the final report.

There are no unresolved issues.

5.4 Reviews and Updates

a. The criteria for when an updated ETE analysis is required to Yes Appendix M, Section M.3 be performed and submitted to the NRC is discussed.

5.4.1 Extreme Conditions

a. The updated ETE analysis reflects the impact of EPZ N/A This ETE is being updated as a result of conditions not adequately reflected in the scenario the availability of US Census Bureau variations. decennial census data.

5.5 Reception Centers and Congregate Care Center

a. A map of congregate care centers and reception centers is Yes Figure 103 provided.

Enclosure to ULNRC-06752 June 27, 2022 Page 424 of 424 Callaway Energy Center N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0