ML22258A039

Evacuation Time Estimate Report, Rev. 0 (Kld TR-1272)

ML22258A039
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee, Mcguire, Catawba, Brunswick, Robinson, McGuire
Issue date:	09/09/2022
From:	KLD Engineering, PC
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML22258A029	List: ML22258A030 ML22258A034 ML22258A038 ML22258A039 ML22258A040 RA-22-0262, Evacuation Time Estimate Report, Rev. 0 (Kld TR-1237)
References
RA-22-0262 KLD TR-1272
Download: ML22258A039 (435)

Text

Enclosure 4 RA-22-0262 ENCLOSURE 4: Oconee 2022 Evacuation Time Estimate Report

Oconee Nuclear Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Duke Energy, by:

KLD Engineering, P.C.

1601 Veterans Memorial Highway Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 email: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com September 9, 2022 Final Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1272

Table of Contents EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

............................................................................................................................. ES1 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Oconee Nuclear Station 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 .................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times .......................................................................................... 23 2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions ................................................................................................ 23 2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions .................................................................................... 25 2.6 Scenarios and Regions ............................................................................................................... 25 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Permanent Residents ................................................................................................................. 32 3.2 Shadow Population .................................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Transient Population .................................................................................................................. 33 3.4 Employees .................................................................................................................................. 33 3.5 Medical Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 34 3.6 Transit Dependent Population ................................................................................................... 34 3.7 School Population Demand........................................................................................................ 37 3.7.1 Universities......................................................................................................................... 37 3.8 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 39 3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ........................................................................... 310 3.10 Correctional Facilities ............................................................................................................... 310 3.11 External Traffic ......................................................................................................................... 310 3.12 Background Traffic ................................................................................................................... 311 3.13 Summary of Demand ............................................................................................................... 311 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 Oconee Nuclear Station Study Area ............................................................. 46 4.3.1 TwoLane Roads ................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2 Multilane Highway ............................................................................................................. 47 4.3.3 Freeways ............................................................................................................................ 47 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 ..................................................................................................... 52 Oconee Nuclear Station i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ................................................... 54 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution ...................................................................... 55 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers .............................................................................................................. 55 5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation ................................................................................... 57 5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas ................................................... 59 6 EVACUATION CASES ........................................................................................................................... 61 7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) .......................................................... 71 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation ......................................................................... 71 7.2 Staged Evacuation ...................................................................................................................... 72 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation ..................................................................... 72 7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................ 74 7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results .................................................................................... 74 7.6 Staged Evacuation Results ......................................................................................................... 76 7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ................................................................................................... 76 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES ................................. 81 8.1 ETEs for Schools, Transit Dependent People, Medical and Correctional Facilities .................... 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................... 811 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 .................................................................................................................... 102 List of Appendices 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. FACILITY DATA .................................................................................................................................... E1 F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY ..................................................................................................................... F1 F.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... F1 Oconee Nuclear Station ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan ....................................................................................... F1 F.3 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ F2 F.3.1 Household Demographic Results ........................................................................................... F2 F.3.2 Evacuation Response ............................................................................................................. F3 F.3.3 Time Distribution Results ....................................................................................................... F4 F.3.4 Emergency Communications ................................................................................................. F5 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Manual Traffic Control .............................................................................................................. G1 G.2 Analysis of Key TCP /ACP Locations .......................................................................................... G1 H EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. Zone 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 the Permanent Resident Population ....................................................... M2 M.4 Changes in Emergency Planning Zone ..................................................................................... M3 M.4.1 Methodology .................................................................................................................... M4 M.4.2 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... M5 M.5 Enhancements in Evacuation Time .......................................................................................... M5 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped Oconee Nuclear Station iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Figures Figure 11. ONS Location ......................................................................................................................... 112 Figure 12. ONS LinkNode Analysis Network .......................................................................................... 113 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ....................................................................................... 29 Figure 31. Zones Comprising the ONS EPZ ............................................................................................. 322 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................ 323 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 324 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 325 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 326 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 327 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 328 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 329 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 330 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 410 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................ 515 Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities ........................................................................................ 516 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution....................................................... 517 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 518 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region .................................................................................................... 519 Figure 61. ONS EPZ Zones ......................................................................................................................... 68 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ..................................................................................... 716 Figure 72. ONS Shadow Region .............................................................................................................. 717 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate ............................................. 718 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 719 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 720 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 721 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 722 Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 723 Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 ....................................................... 724 Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 .................................................... 724 Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 .................................................... 725 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 .................................................... 725 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 .................................................... 726 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 .................................................... 726 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 .................................................... 727 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 .................................................... 727 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 .................................................... 728 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 ................................................. 728 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 .................................................. 729 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 ................................................. 729 Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 .................................................. 730 Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 .................................................. 730 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ...................................................................... 830 Figure 101. Major Evacuation Routes ..................................................................................................... 108 Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes ............................................................................................ 109 Oconee Nuclear Station iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. General Population Reception Centers and School Pickup Points ................................... 1010 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B4 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ......................................................................................... C13 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ......................................................................................................... C14 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ............................................................................ C14 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) ..................................................... C15 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools within the Study Area ................................................................................................. E9 Figure E2. Childcare Centers and Day Camps within the Study Area ..................................................... E10 Figure E3. Medical Facilities within the Study Area................................................................................ E11 Figure E4. Major Employers within the Study Area ................................................................................ E12 Figure E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ......................................................................................... E13 Figure E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E14 Figure E7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ .................................................................................... E15 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ....................................................................................................... F7 Figure F2. Household 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 in Households in the EPZ ..................................................................................... F9 Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ................................................................................................... F10 Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic ......................................................... F10 Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs .......................................................... F11 Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation ........................................................................... F11 Figure F11. Study Area Evacuation Destinations .................................................................................... F12 Figure F12. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals ......................................................................... F12 Figure F13. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/School .............................................................. F13 Figure F14. Work to Home Travel Time ................................................................................................. F13 Figure F15. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation................................................................................ F14 Figure F16. Time to Remove Snow/Ice from Driveway ........................................................................ F14 Figure F17. Cell Phone Signal Reliability ................................................................................................. F15 Figure F18. Likelihood to Take Action Based off Emergency Management Officials Guidelines ........... F15 Figure F19. Emergency Communication Alert ........................................................................................ F16 Figure G1. Traffic Control Points and Access Control Points for the ONS EPZ ........................................ G5 Figure H1. Region R01.............................................................................................................................. H3 Figure H2. Region R02.............................................................................................................................. H4 Figure H3. Region R03.............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H4. Region R04.............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H5. Region R05.............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H6. Region R06.............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H7. Region R07.............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H8. Region R08............................................................................................................................ H10 Figure H9. Region R09............................................................................................................................ H11 Figure H10. Region R10.......................................................................................................................... H12 Figure H11. Region R11 ......................................................................................................................... H13 Figure H12. Region R12.......................................................................................................................... H14 Figure H13. Region R13.......................................................................................................................... H15 Oconee Nuclear Station v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14.......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H15. Region R15.......................................................................................................................... H17 Figure H16. Region R16.......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H17. Region R17.......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure H18. Region R18.......................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H19. Region R19.......................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H20. Region R20.......................................................................................................................... H22 Figure H21. Region R21.......................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H22. Region R22.......................................................................................................................... H24 Figure H23. Region R23.......................................................................................................................... H25 Figure H24. Region R24.......................................................................................................................... H26 Figure H25. Region R25.......................................................................................................................... H27 Figure H26. Region R26.......................................................................................................................... H28 Figure H27. Region R27.......................................................................................................................... H29 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins.......................................................................................................... J6 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) .............. J7 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) ............................... J7 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3).............. J8 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) .............................. J8 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5) ......................................................................................................... J9 Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) ................ J9 Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7) ............................... J10 Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Ice (Scenario 8) .................................. J10 Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9) ............ J11 Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10) ........................... J11 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Ice (Scenario 11) ............................. J12 Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12) ..................................................................................................... J12 Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13) ............................................................................. J13 Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) ........................................................................ J13 Figure K1. ONS 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 Oconee Nuclear Station vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 K23. LinkNode 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 Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 ............................................................................... K46 Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 ............................................................................... K47 Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 ............................................................................... K48 Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 ............................................................................... K49 Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 ............................................................................... K50 Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 ............................................................................... K51 Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 ............................................................................... K52 Figure M1. Existing and Proposed ONS EPZ ......................................................................................... M12 Oconee Nuclear Station vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Tables Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction ........................................................................................................... 18 Table 12. Highway Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 18 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons ............................................................................................................ 19 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 27 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 28 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ...................................................................................... 312 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone .......................................................... 312 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ............................................................................ 313 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ...................................................................... 313 Table 35. Summary of Resident Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ............. 314 Table 36. Special Facility Transit Demand ............................................................................................. 315 Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates .............................................................................. 316 Table 38. School, Childcare Center, and Day Camp Population Demand Estimates ............................. 317 Table 39. Demand Estimates for Homebound Population with Access and/or Functional Needs ........ 318 Table 310. Oconee Nuclear Station EPZ External Traffic ....................................................................... 319 Table 311. Summary of Population Demand ......................................................................................... 320 Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand ............................................................................................... 321 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities .............................................................................. 510 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 510 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................. 511 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................ 511 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate ..................................................... 512 Table 56. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 512 Table 57. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 512 Table 58. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation .................... 513 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ......................... 514 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions........................................................................................... 64 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 65 Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................ 66 Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario.................................................................................................. 67 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 Area within the Indicated Region ............................ 713 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region .......................... 714 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Region .......................................................................................... 715 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................. 813 Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather............................................................... 814 Table 83. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain ............................................................................... 816 Table 84. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Ice ................................................................................. 818 Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ........................................... 820 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain ........................................................... 821 Table 87. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Ice .............................................................. 822 Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ................................................ 823 Table 89. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain ................................................................ 825 Table 810. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Ice ................................................................. 827 Oconee Nuclear Station viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates ............................ 829 Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 103 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 104 Table 103. School Pickup Points ............................................................................................................ 107 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C9 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ......................................................................... C10 Table C3. Glossary ..................................................................................................................................C11 Table E1. Schools within the Study Area .................................................................................................. E2 Table E2. Childcare Centers and Day Camps within the Study Area ........................................................ E3 Table E3. Medical Facilities within the Study Area ................................................................................... E4 Table E4. Major Employers within the Study Area ................................................................................... E5 Table E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E6 Table E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E7 Table E7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ........................................................................................ E8 Table F1. Oconee Demographic Survey Sampling Plan and Results Obtained ........................................ F6 Table G1. List of Manual Traffic Control Locations at intersections without Actuated Signals .............. G3 Table G2. ETE with and without Modification to TMP ........................................................................... G4 Table H1. Percent of Zone 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)................................................................................... J4 Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 ......................... J5 Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control .............................................................................. K1 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ........................................ M6 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study ..................................................... M6 Table M3. Evacuation Time Estimates for Variation with Population Change ....................................... M6 Table M4. Evacuation Population Demand for the Existing and Proposed EPZs ................................... M7 Table M5. Evacuating Vehicle Demand for the Existing and Proposed EPZs ......................................... M9 Table M6. ETE Results for Change in Zone Boundaries ........................................................................ M11 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist ................................................................................................. N1 Oconee Nuclear Station ix KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS) located in Oconee County, South Carolina. ETE provide Duke Energy and state and local governments with site specific information needed for Protective Action decisionmaking.

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.

• Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG 0654/Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual, FEMA P1028, December 2019.

Overview of Project Activities This project began in February 2021 and extended over a period of 18 months. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Conducted a virtual kickoff meeting with Duke Energy personnel and emergency management personnel representing county agencies.

Accessed the U.S. Census Bureau data files for the year 2010.

Obtained the number of employees who reside outside the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ1) and commute to work within the EPZ based upon data provided by Oconee and Pickens Counties. The plant employee data was provided by Duke Energy.

Studied Geographical Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of the plant, then conducted a detailed field survey of the highway network to observe any roadway changes relative to the previous ETE study done in 2012.

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

Designed and conducted an online 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.

1 All references to EPZ refer to the plume exposure pathway EPZ.

Oconee Nuclear Station ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

A data needs matrix (requesting data) was provided to Duke Energy and the OROs at the kickoff meeting. Available data was provided by Oconee and Pickens Counties for transient attractions, schools, employees, medical, and correctional facilities. Internet searches and aerial imagery was also utilized where data was unavailable or not provided.

The traffic demand and tripgeneration rates of evacuating vehicles were estimated from the gathered data. The trip generation rates reflected 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.

Following federal guidelines, the EPZ is subdivided into 13 Zones. These Zones are then grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 27 Evacuation Regions (numbered R01 through R27).

The timevarying external circumstances are 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, Ice). One special event scenario involving a football game at Clemson University was considered. One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane was closed on US 123 eastbound for the duration of the evacuation.

Staged evacuation was considered for those regions wherein the 2Mile Region and sectors downwind to 5 miles were evacuated.

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

A rapidly escalating event at the plant that quickly assumes the status of a general emergency wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented.

While an unlikely accident scenario, this planning basis will yield ETE, measured as the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate (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.

If the emergency occurs while schools or childcares are in session, the ETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to school pickup points or reception centers located outside the EPZ. Parents, relatives, and neighbors are advised to not pick up their children at school prior to the arrival of the buses dispatched for that purpose. The ETE for schoolchildren are calculated separately.

Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either rideshare with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided as specified in the counties evacuation plans. Those in special facilities will likewise be evacuated with public transit, as needed: bus, wheelchair transport vehicles, or ambulance, as required.

Separate ETE are calculated for the transitdependent evacuees, for the access and/or Oconee Nuclear Station ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

functional needs population, and for those evacuated from schools, childcare centers, day camps, and medical facilities.

Conducted a virtual final meeting with Duke Energy personnel and emergency management personnel representing the OROs to present final results from the study.

Computation of ETE A total of 378 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 27 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 14 Evacuation Scenarios (27 x 14 = 378). 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% 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 evacuate voluntarily. In addition, 20% of the population in the Shadow Region will also elect to evacuate. These voluntary evacuees could impede those who are evacuating from within the impacted region. The impedance that could be caused by voluntary 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 even though they are advised to shelter inplace.

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 a 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 location of the plant), then simulate the traffic flow movements over space and time. This simulation process estimates the rate that traffic flow exits the impacted region.

Oconee Nuclear Station ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90% and 100%, 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 to mobilize. This is referred to as the evacuation tail in Section 4.0 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Traffic Management This study reviewed, modeled and analyzed the existing comprehensive Traffic Management Plans (TMP) provided by Oconee and Pickens Counties. As per federal guidance, traffic and access control points were modeled accordingly in the evacuation simulation. No additional traffic control points are recommended due to the prevalence of actuated signals in the EPZ and the presence of traffic congestion along both competing approaches (north/south and east/west) at intersections. Refer to Section 9 and Appendix G for additional information.

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.

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

Table 61 defines each of the 27 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Zones.

Table 62 lists the Evacuation Scenarios.

Tables 71 and 72 are compilations of ETE for the general population. These data are the times needed to clear the indicated regions of 90% and 100% 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.

Tables 73 and 74 presents ETE for the 2Mile Region for unstaged and staged evacuations for the 90th and 100th percentiles, respectively.

Table 82 presents ETE for the schools, childcare centers, and day camps in good weather.

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

Table 88 presents ETE for the medical facilities in good weather.

Table M3 compares the results of the sensitivity study conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the permanent resident population within the study area (EPZ plus Shadow Region).

Table M6 compares the ETE results for the proposed EPZ Zone boundary changes.

Figure 61 displays a map of the ONS EPZ showing the layout of the 13 Zones that comprise, in aggregate, the EPZ.

Oconee Nuclear Station ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 378 unique cases - a combination of 27 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 2:00 (hr:min) to 5:45 at the 90th percentile.

Inspection of Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the ETE for the 100th percentile are significantly longer (ranging from 4:45 to 11:50) than those for the 90th percentile. This is the result of the congestion within the EPZ. 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, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand. See Figures 79 through 722.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicates that a staged evacuation provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region and unnecessarily delays the evacuation of those beyond 2 miles (compare Regions R02, R04 through R11 with Regions R19 through R27, respectively, in Tables 71 and 72). See Section 7.6 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 9 (winter, weekend, midday) and 13 (winter, weekend, midday) in Table 72 indicates that the special event significantly increases the ETE for regions involving the evacuation of Zones B2, C2, and/or D2 (regions R03, R12, R13, R16, R17, and R18). The 34,552 vehicles present at the stadium for the special event impede residents trying to evacuate. The resulting congestion increases the 90th percentile ETE by as much as 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 5 minutes. The congestion also increases the 100th percentile ETE by as much as 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes, well beyond trip generation.

See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure - one lane eastbound on US 123 from the interchange with State Highway 93 (Clemson) to the interchange with State Highway 93 (Easley) - has a slight impact on 90th and 100th percentile ETE (increasing the ETE by up to 20 minutes) specifically for regions with wind towards the south and the southeast. Winds to the south and southeast require Clemson to evacuate. Clemson traffic routes onto US 123 eastbound. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Walhalla, Westminster, Seneca, Clemson, and Central are the most congested areas during an evacuation. The last roadways to exhibit congestion in the EPZ are Wells Highway and Issaqueena Trail along the southern boundary of the EPZ. All congestion within the EPZ clears by 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 40 minutes after the ATE. See Section 7.3 and Figures 73 through 78.

Oconee Nuclear Station ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Separate ETE were computed for schools, childcare centers, day camps, medical facilities, transitdependent persons, and the access and/or functional needs population. (Correctional facilities shelter in place.) The average good weather single wave ETE for schools, medical facilities, and transitdependent persons, and the access and/or functional needs population in good weather are comparable to or less than the general population ETE at the 90th percentile for evacuation of the entire EPZ. However, the average singlewave ETE for the access and/or functional needs population are longer than the general population ETE at the 90th percentile for evacuation of the entire EPZ. See Section 8.

Table 81 indicates that there are not enough transportation resources available to evacuate the transitdependent population within the EPZ in a single wave. The multi wave ETE for these resources exceed the general population ETE at the 90th percentile.

See Section 8.

The general population ETE at the 90th percentile is relatively insensitive (increases ETE by 10 minutes) to increases or decreases in the base trip generation time of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes due to the traffic congestion within the EPZ. See Section M.1 and Table M1.

The general population ETE is sensitive (tripling the shadow evacuation percentage increases 90th percentile ETE by 25 minutes, and a full shadow evacuation increases the 90th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />) to the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region. See Section M.2 and Table M2.

Population increases of 17% or more result in ETE changes (30 minutes or more) which meet the NRC criteria for updating ETE between decennial Censuses. See Section M.3 and Table M3.

The existing EPZ boundaries were used in this study. A sensitivity study was done determine if the proposed changes to the Zone boundaries within the EPZ do not result in any change to the ETE - when comparing against the existing EPZ. No change was seen. See Section M.4 and Table M6.

Oconee Nuclear Station ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2010 Population 2020 Population A0 777 930 A1 850 932 A2 2,298 2,543 B1 3,010 3,225 B2 6,368 6,604 C1 538 588 C2 27,507 32,604 D1 876 1,191 D2 22,257 23,355 E1 1,502 1,865 E2 12,215 12,955 F1 2,123 2,511 F2 3,782 3,822 EPZ TOTAL: 84,103 93,125 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 10.73%

Oconee Nuclear Station ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Zone Region Description A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R01 2Mile Region X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R04 NNW, N, NNE X X X R05 NE, ENE X X X R06 E X X R07 ESE, SE, SSE X X X R08 S X X X R09 SSW X X X X R10 SW, WSW X X X R11 W, WNW, NW X X X Evacuate 5Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R12 NNW, N X X X X X X X X X R13 NNE, NE, ENE X X X X X X X X X R14 E, ESE, SE X X X X X X X X X R15 SSE, S, SSW X X X X X X X X X R16 SW, WSW X X X X X X X X X R17 W, WNW X X X X X X X X X R18 NW X X X X X X X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R19 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R20 NNW, N, NNE X X X R21 NE, ENE X X X R22 E X X R23 ESE, SE, SSE X X X R24 S X X X R25 SSW X X X X R26 SW, WSW X X X R27 W, WNW, NW X X X Zone(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace for R01, then Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season2 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Weekend Evening Good None 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Ice None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Ice None Midweek, 12 Winter Weekend Evening Good None Clemson University 13 Winter Weekend Midday Good Football Game Roadway Impact -

Lane Closure on US 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good 123 Eastbound 2

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).

Oconee Nuclear Station ES9 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 Winter 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 Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Radial Regions R01 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:00 R02 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:30 2:35 R03 3:50 4:05 3:35 3:45 3:35 3:55 4:10 4:40 3:40 3:55 4:15 3:35 5:30 4:00 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:25 R05 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:15 R06 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:15 R07 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:20 R08 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:20 R09 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:25 R10 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:25 R11 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:35 2:35 Evacuate 5Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary R12 3:05 3:10 3:00 3:10 2:55 3:15 3:20 3:40 3:00 3:10 3:25 2:50 4:55 3:25 R13 2:50 3:00 2:50 3:00 2:40 2:55 3:05 3:15 2:50 3:00 3:05 2:45 3:50 2:50 R14 3:00 3:00 2:55 2:55 2:55 3:00 3:00 3:05 2:55 3:00 3:00 2:55 2:55 3:00 R15 2:50 3:05 2:45 2:55 2:45 2:50 3:00 3:10 2:45 2:50 3:00 2:45 2:45 2:50 R16 3:05 3:15 3:00 3:10 2:55 3:10 3:25 3:25 3:05 3:10 3:25 3:00 3:35 3:10 R17 3:25 3:35 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:35 3:50 4:10 3:15 3:30 3:40 3:15 5:20 3:40 R18 3:45 3:55 3:35 3:45 3:30 3:55 4:15 4:30 3:40 3:55 4:15 3:35 5:30 4:00 Oconee Nuclear Station ES10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter 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 Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R19 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:05 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:00 3:00 3:00 R20 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:55 2:50 2:50 2:55 3:00 2:50 2:55 3:00 2:50 2:50 2:50 R21 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:40 R22 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 R23 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 R24 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 R25 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 R26 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 R27 2:55 2:55 2:55 2:55 2:55 2:55 2:55 3:00 2:55 3:00 3:00 2:55 2:55 2:55 Oconee Nuclear Station ES11 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 Winter 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 Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Radial Regions R01 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R02 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R03 5:15 5:55 5:30 5:55 4:55 5:40 6:10 6:40 5:20 5:50 6:25 5:15 7:10 5:35 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R06 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R07 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R08 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R09 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R10 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R11 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 Evacuate 5Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary R12 4:55 5:00 4:55 5:00 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:10 4:55 4:55 5:10 4:55 6:40 4:55 R13 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:05 4:55 R14 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R15 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R16 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R17 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:05 5:35 4:55 4:55 5:00 4:55 7:00 4:55 R18 5:05 5:10 5:15 5:25 4:55 5:00 5:25 6:25 4:55 5:20 5:50 4:55 7:10 5:15 Oconee Nuclear Station ES12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter 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 Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R19 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R20 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R21 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R22 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R23 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R24 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R25 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R26 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R27 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 Oconee Nuclear Station ES13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area 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 Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation Radial Regions R01 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R02 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R03 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 Unstaged Evacuation Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R05 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R06 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R07 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R08 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R09 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R10 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R11 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R19 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R20 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R21 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R22 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R23 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R24 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R25 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R26 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R27 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 Oconee Nuclear Station ES14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area 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 Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation Radial Regions R01 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R02 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R03 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Unstaged Evacuation Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R05 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R06 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R07 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R08 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R09 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R10 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R11 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R19 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R20 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R21 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R22 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R23 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R24 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R25 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R26 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R27 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Oconee Nuclear Station ES15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Travel Travel Dist. EPZ Time from Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE PP/RC PP/RC PP/RC School, Childcare Center, Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

SCHOOLS OCONEE COUNTY, SC Blue Ridge Elementary School 90 15 1.1 2.5 26 2:15 9.0 12 2:30 Faith Christian School (Faith Training Center) 90 15 2.3 12.5 11 2:00 6.0 8 2:10 James M Brown Elementary School 90 15 1.8 12.1 9 1:55 6.0 8 2:05 Keowee Elementary School 90 15 9.2 14.6 38 2:25 6.0 8 2:35 Northside Elementary School 90 15 2.9 2.2 80 3:05 9.0 12 3:20 Oconee Academy 90 15 2.9 15.9 11 2:00 7.0 9 2:10 Oconee Christian Academy 90 15 3.6 15.9 14 2:00 7.0 9 2:10 Ravenel Elementary School 90 15 5.3 1.8 173 4:40 9.0 12 4:55 Salem Seventh Day Adventist Elementary School 90 15 17.0 8.4 122 3:50 4.0 5 3:55 Seneca High School 90 15 3.2 9.8 20 2:05 7.0 9 2:15 Seneca Middle School 90 15 3.2 9.8 20 2:05 7.0 9 2:15 TamasseeSalem Elementary School 90 15 13.3 7.0 114 3:40 5.0 7 3:50 Walhalla Elementary School 90 15 4.8 6.6 44 2:30 4.0 5 2:35 Walhalla High School 90 15 2.3 4.6 30 2:15 6.0 8 2:25 Walhalla Middle School 90 15 2.6 4.9 32 2:20 6.0 8 2:30 Fred P Hamilton Career Center 90 15 Inside Shadow Region N/A 6.0 8 1:55 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Central Elementary School 90 15 4.9 17.6 17 2:05 13.0 17 2:25 Clemson Elementary School 90 15 6.5 14.3 27 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 Clemson Montessori School 90 15 7.6 16.1 28 2:15 11.0 15 2:30 Clemson University 90 15 6.5 16.6 23 2:10 13.0 17 2:30 Clemson University Graduate School 90 15 6.5 16.6 23 2:10 13.0 17 2:30 Daniel High School 90 15 10.0 6.2 96 3:25 11.0 15 3:40 R. C. Edwards Middle School 90 15 6.3 17.5 22 2:10 12.0 16 2:30 Six Mile Elementary School 90 15 6.3 12.5 30 2:15 3.0 4 2:20 School Maximum for EPZ: 4:40 School Maximum: 4:55 School Average for EPZ: 2:30 School Average: 2:45 Oconee Nuclear Station ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Dist. EPZ Time from Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE PP/RC PP/RC PP/RC School, Childcare Center, Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CHILDCARE CENTERS AND DAY CAMPS OCONEE COUNTY, SC Foothills Early Learning Center 90 15 3.2 2.2 88 3:15 27.0 36 3:55 Seneca Head Start Center 90 15 3.3 2.1 93 3:20 27.0 36 4:00 Trinity Baptist Church Preschool 90 15 1.9 2.0 56 2:45 27.0 36 3:25 St. Mark Child Development Center 90 15 2.0 2.0 59 2:45 27.0 36 3:25 Our Clubhouse 90 15 2.9 2.2 80 3:05 27.0 36 3:45 Seneca Baptist Church Day Care 90 15 1.1 2.2 30 2:15 27.0 36 2:55 Upstate Children's Center 90 15 3.1 7.4 25 2:10 38.0 51 3:05 St John's Lutheran Preschool 90 15 1.0 3.8 16 2:05 40.0 53 3:00 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Kid's Stuff Academy 90 15 8.7 13.5 39 2:25 27.0 36 3:05 Clemson Tiger Tennis Camp (Day Camp) 90 15 8.9 13.5 39 2:25 27.0 36 3:05 Clemson Head Start 90 15 6.0 14.9 24 2:10 27.0 36 2:50 The Growing Place 90 15 3.8 18.9 12 2:00 27.0 36 2:40 Little Lights Child Care 90 15 4.2 18.9 13 2:00 27.0 36 2:40 Clemson Montessori School 90 15 7.6 16.1 28 2:15 11.0 15 2:30 Childcare, Day Camp Childcare, Day Camp Maximum for EPZ: 3:20 4:00 Maximum:

Childcare, Day Camp Childcare, Day Camp Average for EPZ: 2:30 3:10 Average:

Oconee Nuclear Station ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Zone(s) of Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. R.C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Serviced Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 30 A2 1 120 16 10.1 95 30 4:05 26.0 35 5 10 78 30 6:45 31 B2 1 120 6 7.3 50 30 3:20 23.0 31 5 10 48 30 5:25 32 A1 1 120 12 19.1 38 30 3:10 26.0 35 5 10 67 30 5:40 33 B1 1 120 11 17.4 38 30 3:10 19.0 25 5 10 54 30 5:15 34 C2 (Rt 1) 1 120 12 6.6 109 30 4:20 26.0 35 5 10 67 30 6:50 35 A0/C1 2 120 20 12.5 96 30 4:10 26.0 35 5 10 88 30 7:00 36 C2 (Rt 2) 1 120 12 9.3 78 30 3:50 2.0 3 5 10 66 30 5:45 37 A0/D1 1 120 18 11.0 98 30 4:10 14.0 19 5 10 67 30 6:25 38 D2 1 120 12 13.4 54 30 3:25 17.0 23 5 10 56 30 5:30 39 E1 1 120 14 17.1 49 30 3:20 17.0 23 5 10 60 30 5:30 40 F1 1 120 16 12.8 75 30 3:45 40.0 53 5 10 96 30 7:00 41 F2 1 120 22 45.0 29 30 3:00 40.0 53 5 10 112 30 6:30 46 E2 1 120 7 14.0 30 30 3:00 18.0 24 5 10 43 30 4:55 Maximum ETE: 4:20 Maximum ETE: 7:00 Average ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 6:05 Oconee Nuclear Station ES18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

OCONEE COUNTY, SC Ambulatory 90 1 23 23 5.4 7 2:00 Keowee Place Wheelchair bound 120 5 10 20 5.4 8 2:30 Bedridden 20 15 2 30 5.4 16 1:10 Belvedere Commons of Seneca Ambulatory 90 1 60 30 4.2 19 2:20 Ambulatory 90 1 1 1 3.7 27 2:00 Cottingham Hospice House Bedridden 20 15 14 30 3.7 12 1:05 Prisma Health Hospice of 1:05 Foothills Bedridden 20 15 6 30 3.7 12 Ambulatory 90 1 197 30 3.4 21 2:25 The Tribble Center Wheelchair bound 120 5 24 20 3.4 17 2:40 Ambulatory 90 1 8 8 1.9 10 1:50 Lila Doyle Nursing Care Facility Wheelchair bound 120 5 70 20 1.9 6 2:30 Bedridden 20 15 10 30 1.9 5 0:55 Ambulatory 90 1 23 23 1.8 9 2:05 Oconee Medical Center Wheelchair bound 120 5 23 20 1.8 6 2:30 Bedridden 20 15 23 30 1.8 5 0:55 Ambulatory 90 1 43 30 1.9 9 2:10 Residences at Park Place Bedridden 20 15 10 30 1.9 5 0:55 Ambulatory 90 1 50 30 3.5 16 2:20 Foothills Assisted Living Bedridden 20 15 1 15 3.5 6 0:45 Ambulatory 90 1 23 23 1.5 14 2:10 Morningside of Seneca Wheelchair bound 120 5 8 20 1.5 9 2:30 Ambulatory 90 1 25 25 0.1 1 2:00 Seneca Residential Care Center Wheelchair bound 120 5 1 5 0.1 1 2:10 Oconee Nuclear Station ES19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 90 1 68 30 0.1 1 2:05 Seneca Health and Wheelchair bound 120 5 25 20 0.1 1 2:25 Rehabilitation Bedridden 20 15 3 30 0.1 2 0:55 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Ambulatory 90 1 28 28 6.6 33 2:35 PruittHealth Pickens Wheelchair bound 120 5 12 20 6.6 26 2:50 Bedridden 20 15 4 30 6.6 13 1:05 Six Mile Assisted Living Ambulatory 90 1 40 30 6.7 9 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 34 30 3.5 13 2:15 Brookdale Central Wheelchair bound 120 5 14 20 3.5 14 2:35 Bedridden 20 15 4 30 3.5 9 1:00 Ambulatory 90 1 8 8 4.8 20 2:00 Clemson Downs Wheelchair bound 120 5 30 20 4.8 47 3:10 Bedridden 20 15 3 30 4.8 6 1:00 Ambulatory 90 1 36 30 0.1 0 2:00 AnMed Health Cannon Hospital Wheelchair bound 120 5 15 20 0.1 2 2:25 Bedridden 20 15 4 30 0.1 0 0:50 Maximum ETE: 3:10 Average ETE: 1:55 Oconee Nuclear Station ES20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M3. Evacuation Time Estimates for Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Population Change Shadow Permanent Base 16% 17% 18%

Resident Population 104,366 121,065 122,073 123,151 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 16% 17% 18%

2Mile Region (R01) 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 5Mile Region (R02) 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 Entire EPZ (R03) 5:45 6:10 6:15 6:20 th ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100 Percentile Population Change Region Base 16% 17% 18%

2Mile Region (R01) 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 5Mile Region (R02) 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 Entire EPZ (R03) 11:50 12:50 13:00 13:00 Table M6. ETE Results for Change in Zone Boundaries 90th Percentile ETE (hr:min)

Scenario 5 (Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Scenario 6 (Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Evening, Good Weather) Weather)

Region Existing EPZ Proposed EPZ Difference Existing EPZ Proposed EPZ Difference 2Mile (R01) 2:15 2:15 0:00 2:05 2:05 0:00 5Mile (R02) 2:30 2:30 0:00 2:35 2:35 0:00 Full EPZ (R03) 3:35 3:35 0:00 3:55 3:55 0:00 th 100 Percentile ETE (hr:min)

Scenario 5 (Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Scenario 6 (Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Evening, Good Weather) Weather)

Region Existing EPZ Proposed EPZ Difference Existing EPZ Proposed EPZ Difference 2Mile (R01) 4:45 4:45 0:00 4:45 4:45 0:00 5Mile (R02) 4:50 4:50 0:00 4:50 4:50 0:00 Full EPZ (R03) 4:55 4:55 0:00 5:40 5:40 0:00 Oconee Nuclear Station ES21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. ONS EPZ Zones Oconee Nuclear Station ES22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Oconee Nuclear Station ES23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 INTRODUCTION This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS), located in Oconee County, South Carolina. This ETE study provide Duke Energy and state and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decisionmaking.

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.

• Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG 0654/Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual, FEMA P1028, December 2019.

The work effort reported herein was supported and guided by Duke Energy and the 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 Duke Energy.

b. Attended project kickoff meeting with personnel from Duke Energy, the emergency planners from Pickens County Emergency Management (PCEM), and Oconee County Emergency Services (OCES) to discuss methodology, project assumptions and to identify issues to be addressed and resources available.

c. Conducted a detailed field survey of the highway system and of the area traffic conditions within the Emergency Planning Zone1 (EPZ) and Shadow Region.

d. Reviewed the ONS and existing county emergency plans.

e. Obtained demographic data from census, state and local agencies.

f. Conducted an online demographic survey of EPZ residents (see Appendix F).

g. Obtained demographic data from the 2020 Census (see Section 3.1).

1 All references to Emergency Planning Zone or EPZ refer to the plume exposure pathway EPZ.

Oconee Nuclear Station 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

h. Conducted a data collection effort to update the database of special facilities (i.e., schools, childcare centers, day camp, colleges, medical facilities, and correctional facilities), major employers, access and/or functional needs populations, transportation providers/resources available, the special event data and other important information.

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 results of the online 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 (TCP) located within the EPZ. See Section 9 and Appendix G.

5. Used existing Zones to define Evacuation Regions. The EPZ is partitioned into 13 Zones along jurisdictional and geographic boundaries. Regions are groups of contiguous Zones 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, colleges, childcare centers, day camp, medical facilities, transitdependent persons at home, and those with access and/or functional needs. (Correctional facilities shelter in place.)

7. Prepared the input streams for DYNEV II, which computes ETE. (See Appendices B and C).

a. Estimated the evacuation traffic demand, based on the available information derived from Census data, and from data provided by PCEM and OCES, Duke Energy and from the demographic survey.

b. Applied the procedures specified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM2 2016) to the data acquired during the field survey to estimate the capacity of all highway segments comprising the evacuation routes.

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

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

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

Oconee Nuclear Station 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

e. Specified selected candidate destinations for each origin (location of each source where evacuation trips are generated over the mobilization time) to support evacuation travel consistent with outbound movement relative to the location of the Oconee Nuclear Station.

8. Executed the DYNEV II system to provide the estimates of evacuation routing and 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, childcares, day camp, medical facilities), for the transitdependent population and for homebound population with access and/or functional needs. (Correctional facilities shelter in place.)

1.2 The Oconee Nuclear Station Location The ONS is located along Lake Keowee in Seneca, Oconee County, South Carolina. The site is approximately 30 miles southwest of Greenville, SC. The site is approximately 25 miles south of the Blue Ridge mountain range. The EPZ is a full 360 degrees and consists of parts of Oconee and Pickens Counties in South Carolina.

Figure 11 displays the area surrounding the plant. This map identifies the major cities in the area and the major roads.

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

Field Surveys of the Highway Network In February 2021, 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 geographical Oconee Nuclear Station 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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:

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 127 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 Exhibit 1546. 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 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 were used to calibrate the analysis network.

Demographic survey An online demographic survey was performed in 2021 to gather information needed for the ETE study. Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used, and tabulations of data Oconee Nuclear Station 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

compiled from the survey returns along with discussion validating the use of the survey results in this study.

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.

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 ONS.

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 current ETE study with the previous ETE study (KLD TR 494, dated November 2012). The 90th percentile ETE for the entire EPZ increased by 5 minutes for a winter midweek midday scenario and decreased by 15 minutes for a summer weekend midday scenario when compared with the 2012 study. The 100th percentile ETE increased by 30 minutes, and 20 minutes for a winter midweek midday scenario and for a summer weekend midday scenario, respectively. The major factors contributing to the differences between the ETE values obtained in this study and those of the previous study can be summarized as follows:

The permanent resident population increased by 10.7% and the number of evacuating vehicles for the permanent resident population increased by 11% from the 2012 study.

Similarly, the permanent resident population and vehicles in the Shadow Region increased by 6.1% and 11.5%, respectively, from the 2012 study. More evacuating vehicles (increase in demand) can increase ETE.

The number of transients and employees reduced by 12% and 13%, respectively (federal guidance changed the definition of a major employer from 50 or more employees per shift to 200 or more employees per shift). A decrease these quickly mobilizing evacuees can increase the 90th percentile ETE. A reduction in vehicles, however, can also decrease ETE.

Off campus commuting students increased by 47% due to updated data and improved methodology for computing these vehicles. An increase these quickly mobilizing evacuees can decrease the 90th percentile ETE, specifically for winter, midweek scenarios. An increase in evacuating vehicles, however, can also increase ETE.

Oconee Nuclear Station 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The completion of trip generation for the previous study was 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />. In this study, it is 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes. A decrease in the time to mobilize means more vehicles are getting on the road in less time. This can overwhelm the roadway system and increase congestion and therefore prolong ETE.

o In the previous study, the 100th percentile ETE was dictated by trip generation time plus a 10minute travel time to exit the EPZ (except for some adverse weather cases) for an evacuation of the full EPZ. In this study, traffic congestion dictates the 100th percentile ETE for the full EPZ for nearly all cases as it takes longer to clear the ETE of congestion than it takes people to mobilize. As a result, the 100th percentile ETE is longer in this study.

Oconee Nuclear Station 17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction Stakeholder Nature of Stakeholder Interaction Attended kickoff meeting to define project methodology and data requirements. Set up contacts with local government agencies. Provided recent plant employee data. Reviewed and Duke Energy approved all project assumptions and draft report.

Engaged in the ETE development and was informed of the study results and coordinated with the OROs. Attended final meeting where the ETE study results were presented.

Attended kickoff meeting to discuss the project methodology, key project assumptions and to define data needs. Provided county emergency plans, special facility data and existing traffic Oconee County Emergency Services (OCES) and management plans. Reviewed and approved all Pickens County Emergency Management (PCEM) project assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and was informed of the study results. Attended final meeting where the ETE study results were presented.

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons Topic Previous ETE Study (2012) Current ETE Study Resident Population ArcGIS Software using 2010 US Census ArcGIS Software using 2020 US Census Basis blocks; area ratio method used. blocks; area ratio method used.

Population = 84,103 Population = 93,125 Vehicles = 47,780 Vehicles = 53,025 Resident Population 2.32 persons/household, 1.37 2.17 persons/household, 1.36 Vehicle Occupancy evacuating vehicles/household evacuating vehicles/household yielding: 1.69 persons/vehicle. yielding: 1.60 persons/vehicle.

Employee Employee estimates based on Estimates of employees who reside Population information provided about major outside the EPZ and commute to work employers in EPZ, 1.07 employees per within the EPZ are based upon the US vehicle based on telephone survey Census Longitudinal Employer results. 54% of the workforce is Household Dynamics from the residents of the EPZ, based on data OnTheMap Census analysis tool and provided. Duke Energy.

Employees = 6,244 Employees = 5,436 Vehicles = 5,916 Vehicles = 4,899 TransitDependent Estimates based upon U.S. Census data Estimates based upon U.S. Census data Population and the results of the telephone and the results of the online survey. A total of 1,231 people who do demographic survey. A total of 109 not have access to a vehicle, requiring people who do not have access to a 42 buses to evacuate. An additional vehicle, requiring 14 buses to evacuate.

568 homebound special needs persons An additional 536 access and/or need special transportation to evacuate functional needs population need (420 required a bus, 128 required a special transportation to evacuate (415 wheelchairaccessible vehicle, and 20 required a bus, 95 required a required an ambulance). wheelchairaccessible vehicle, and 26 required an ambulance).

Transient Transient estimates based upon Transient estimates based upon Population information provided from Oconee and information provided from Oconee and Pickens Counties about transient Pickens Counties about transient attractions in EPZ, supplemented by attractions in EPZ, supplemented by observations of the facilities during the the previous ETE study, and internet road survey and information online. searches where data was missing.

Transients = 10,911 Transients = 9,616 Vehicles = 7,405 Vehicles = 4,760 Special Facilities Medical Facilities: Medical Facilities:

Population Current census = 918 Current census = 983 Buses Required = 28 Buses Required = 30 Wheelchair Bus Required = 27 Wheelchair Bus Required = 20 Ambulances Required = 40 Ambulances Required = 39 Oconee Nuclear Station 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study (2012) Current ETE Study Correctional Facilities: Correctional Facilities:

Capacity = 122, which would shelterin Capacity = 122, which would shelterin place place School Population School population based on School population based on information provided by each county information provided by each county within the EPZ. within the EPZ, supplemented by the previous ETE study, and internet searches where data was missing.

Schools, childcares, and day camp Schools, childcares, and day camp enrollment = 34,203 enrollment = 41,516 Buses required = 319 Buses required = 272 Off campus student vehicles = 3,810 Off campus student vehicles = 5,601 External Traffic ACP Established in 120 Minutes ACP Established in 120 Minutes Total External Traffic: 5,728 Total External Traffic: 6,768 Voluntary 20 percent of the population within the 20 percent of the population within the evacuation from EPZ, but not within the Evacuation EPZ, but not within the Evacuation within EPZ in areas Region (see Figure 21) Region (see Figure 21) outside region to be evacuated Shadow Population ArcGIS Software using 2010 US Census ArcGIS Software using 2020 US Census Basis blocks; area ratio method used. blocks; area ratio method used.

Shadow Population = 52,981 Shadow Population = 56,204 Shadow Vehicles = 31,276 Shadow Vehicles = 34,869 Shadow Evacuation 20% of people outside of the EPZ 20% of people outside of the EPZ within the Shadow Region within the Shadow Region (See Figure 72) (See Figure 72)

Network Size 274 links; 369 nodes 1,614 links; 1,220 nodes Roadway Geometric Field surveys conducted in September Field surveys conducted in February Data 2011. Roads and intersections were 2021. Roads and intersections were video archived. video archived.

Road capacities based on 2010 HCM. Road capacities based on 2016 HCM.

School Evacuation Direct evacuation to designated Pickup Direct evacuation to designated Pickup Point Point/Reception Center Ridesharing 50 percent of transitdependent 82 percent of transitdependent persons will evacuate with a neighbor persons will evacuate with a neighbor or friend. or friend.

Oconee Nuclear Station 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study (2012) Current ETE Study Based on residential telephone survey Based on the online demographic of specific pretrip mobilization survey of specific pretrip mobilization activities: activities:

Residents with commuters returning Residents with commuters returning leave between 30 and 300 minutes. leave between 45 and 285 minutes.

Trip Generation for Residents without commuters Residents without commuters Evacuation returning leave between 15 and 240 returning leave between 15 and 225 minutes. minutes.

Employees and transients leave Employees and transients leave within between 15 and 105 minutes. 105 minutes.

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

Weather Normal, Rain, or Snow. The capacity Normal, Rain, or Ice. The capacity and and free flow speed of all links in the free flow speed of all links in the network are reduced by 10% in the network are reduced by 10% in the event of rain and 20% for snow. event of rain and 20% for Ice.

Modeling DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.2.0 DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.21.0 Special Events Football Game at Clemson University Football Game at Clemson University Special Event Population = 75,000 Special Event Population = 75,000 additional transients additional transients Special Event Vehicles = 34,849 Special Event Vehicles = 34,552 additional transient vehicles transient vehicles (including 12,000 residents)

Evacuation Cases 27 Regions (central sector wind 27 Regions (central sector wind direction and each adjacent sector direction and each adjacent sector technique used) and 14 Scenarios technique used) and 14 Scenarios producing 378 unique cases. producing 378 unique cases.

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

Evacuation Time Winter Midweek Midday, Winter Midweek Midday, Estimates for the Good Weather: 3:50 Good Weather: 3:55 entire EPZ, 90th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 3:50 Good Weather: 3:35 Evacuation Time Winter Midweek Midday, Winter Weekday Midday, Estimates for the Good Weather: 5:10 Good Weather: 5:40 entire EPZ, 100th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 5:10 Good Weather: 5:30 Oconee Nuclear Station 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 11. ONS Location Oconee Nuclear Station 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 12. ONS LinkNode Analysis Network Oconee Nuclear Station 113 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 or the previous study as verified by each county. Data for the plant was verified by Duke Energy.

(See Section 3.4.)

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based on data received from the counties within the EPZ and the previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches and aerial imagery to count parking spaces where data was missing. For facilities wherein aerial imagery is used, it is assumed the parking lots are full during peak times.

4. The relationship between permanent resident population and evacuating vehicles are based on Census data and the results of the online demographic survey. Values of 2.46 persons per household (Census Data) and 1.36 evacuating vehicles per household was used for the permanent resident population. See Appendix F.

5. Where data was not provided, the average household size is assumed to be the vehicle occupancy rate for transient facilities. It was assumed that for the special event, vehicle occupancy averages 2.5 people per vehicle.

6. Employee vehicle occupancies are based on the results of the demographic survey; 1.11 employees per vehicle is used in the study. (See Figure F7). In addition, it is assumed there are two people per carpool, on average.

7. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ will be 45 mph based on South Carolina state laws2 for public school buses and average posted speed limits on roadways within the EPZ.

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

1 www.census.gov 2

https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess110_1993-1994/bills/3596.htm Oconee Nuclear Station 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 following3 (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.

c. ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

2. The centerpoint of the plant is located at 34°47'35.3"N, 82°53'36.8"W.

3. The DYNEV II4 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 Zone 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 Zones 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. Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuating vehicles per household, and mobilization time) was assumed to be the same as that of permanent resident population within the EPZ.

9. 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.

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

Rather, there is an 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 3

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.

4 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

11. 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.

12. ExternalExternal through trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region is considered in the ETE. Normal traffic flow is assumed to be present within the EPZ at the start of the emergency.

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.

2. One hundred percent (100%) of the Emergency Planning Zone (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) will be based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, 26.7% of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter; 50.6% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip. Therefore, 14 percent (26.7% x 50.6% = 13.5%, or 14% rounded) 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 is based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 82% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

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

a. Schools and day care centers

i. If schools and day cares are in session, these facilities will close according to their normal early closure procedures. All children at schools and day cares will be evacuated to reception centers or predesignated pickup facilities outside of the evacuated area via buses.

Oconee Nuclear Station 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ii. It is assumed that only children at small day care centers (less than 30 students) will be picked up by their parents prior to beginning their evacuation trip and that the time to complete this activity is included in the survey responses presented in Appendix F. All other schools will evacuate via buses.

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

b. Medical and Correctional Facilities

i. Buses, wheelchair vans and ambulances will evacuate patients at medical facilities and at nursing facilities within the EPZ, as needed.

ii. The percent breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at most medical facilities was provided by the counties. The percent breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients from the 2012 study will be used to determine the number of ambulatories, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at the medical facilities wherein data was not provided.

iii. Inmates at the Oconee County Detention Center will shelter in place if an evacuation were ordered.

c. Transitdependent permanent residents:

i. Transitdependent general population will be evacuated to reception centers.

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

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 will be 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/childcare centers and 50 students per bus for middle/high schools

b. Ambulatory transitdependent persons and medical facility patients = 30 persons per bus.

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

d. Wheelchair vans = 4 wheelchair bound persons.

e. Wheelchair buses = 15 wheelchair bound persons.

4. Transit vehicles mobilization times:

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

Oconee Nuclear Station 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

b. Transit dependent buses are mobilized when approximately 80% of residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization at 120 minutes after the ATE. If necessary, multiple waves of buses will be utilized to gather transit dependent people who mobilize more slowly.

c. Buses, wheelchair vans, and ambulances will arrive at all medical and senior living facilities to be evacuated within 90 minutes, 120 minutes, and 20 minutes of the ATE, respectively.

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. Buses for schools are loaded in 15 minutes.

b. Transit Dependent buses require 1 minute of loading time per passenger.

c. Buses for hospitals and medical facilities require 1 minute of loading time per ambulatory passenger.

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

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

f. Concurrent loading on multiple buses/transit vehicles is assumed.

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 parish and state emergency plans are considered in the ETE analysis, as per NRC guidance.

See Appendix G.

2. 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 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.

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. Clemson University Football Game 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. This study considers the closure of one lane of the limited access (freeway) portion of US123 eastbound from SR93 to the junction with Ross Ave in Easley for the roadway impact scenario - Scenario 14.

Oconee Nuclear Station 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2. Two types of adverse weather scenarios are considered. Rain may occur for either winter or summer scenarios; ice occurs in winter scenarios only. It is assumed that the rain or ice begins earlier or at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued. No weather related reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed.

It is further assumed that ice removal equipment is available, the appropriate agencies are clearing/treating the roads as they would normally during icy conditions, and the roads are passable albeit at lower speeds and capacities.

3. Adverse weather affects roadway capacity and free flow speeds. Transportation research indicates capacity and speed reductions of about 10% for rain and 20% for ice. This study assumes a 10% reduction in speed and capacity for rain and a speed and capacity reduction of 20% for ice. The factors are shown in Table 22.

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 and ice, respectively5. It is assumed that loading times are 5 minutes and 10 minutes longer for school buses and 10 minutes to 20 minutes longer for transit buses in rain and ice, respectively5. Refer to Table 22.

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

6. 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 Zone 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 Zone forming a Region that is issued an ATE will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.

7. Due to the irregular shapes of the Zones, there are instances where a small portion of a Zone (a sliver) is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (less than 500 people or 10% of the Zone population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the Zone 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 PAR document.

5 Does not apply to medical facilities and those with access and/or functional needs as loading times for these people are already conservative.

Oconee Nuclear Station 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8. 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 R19 through R27 in Table 61.

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Time of 6

Scenarios Season Day of Week Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None 5 Summer Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Ice None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Ice None 12 Winter Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 13 Winter Weekend Midday Good Clemson University Football Game Lane Closure on US123 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good eastbound from SR93 to Ross Ave 6

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).

Oconee Nuclear Station 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Mobilization Loading Free Time for Mobilization Loading Time Time for Highway Flow General Time for Transit for Transit School Scenario Capacity* Speed* Population Vehicles Buses7 Buses 10minute 10minute 5minute Rain 90% 90%

increase increase increase No Effect 20minute 20minute 10minute Ice 80% 80%

increase increase increase

• Adverse weather capacity and speed values are given as a percentage of good weather conditions.

Roads are assumed to be passable.

7 Does not apply to medical facilities and those with access and/or functional needs as loading times for these people are already conservative.

Oconee Nuclear Station 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Oconee Nuclear Station 29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 (resident, employee, transient).

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 camps within the EPZ could be counted as a resident, again as an employee and once again as a camper.

A visitor who stays at a hotel and spends time at a park, then goes camping 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 ONS 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 (camping, recreation) and then leave the area.

Employees people who reside outside of the EPZ and commute to work 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 Zone and by polar coordinate representation (population distribution). The ONS EPZ is subdivided into 13 Zones. The Zones comprising the EPZ are shown in Figure 31.

Oconee Nuclear Station 31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 (2.17 persons/household -

See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1) and the number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.36 vehicles/household - See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.2) were adapted from the demographic survey.

The permanent resident population is estimated by cutting the census block polygons by the Zone 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 Zone, for 2010 and for 2020 (based on the methodology above). As indicated, the permanent resident population within the EPZ has increased by 10.73% since the 2010 Census.

To estimate the number of vehicles, the 2020 Census permanent resident population is divided by the average household size and then 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 ONS. 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, college/university student housing, prisons, 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.

3.2 Shadow Population A portion of the population living outside the evacuation area extending to 15 miles radially from the ONS 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% 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 those for the EPZ permanent resident population. Table 33, Figure 34, and Figure 35 present estimates of the shadow population and vehicles, by sector. 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 (camping, recreation).

Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at camping facilities, hotels and motels. Data for transient attractions were provided by Oconee County and by Pickens County.

When data could not be provided, the transient vehicles were estimated based on parking capacity or accommodation capacity obtained from the aerial imagery and the facility website.

Any gaps were filled in with data from the previous study. It is assumed that transients travel to recreational areas as a family/household. As such, the average household size of 2.17 persons per household (see Section 3.1) was used to estimate the transient population for those facilities in which exact data could not be obtained. The transient attractions within the ONS EPZ are summarized as follows:

Campgrounds - 847 transients and 899 vehicles; 0.94 transients per vehicle (Note:

Recreational Vehicles (RVs) are modeled as 2 vehicles in DYNEV due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics. As a result, the vehicle occupancies are lower for campgrounds.)

Golf Courses - 656 transients and 323 vehicles; 2.03 transients per vehicle Marinas - 483 transients and 325 vehicles; 1.49 transients per vehicle (NOTE: vehicles with boat trailers are modeled as 2 vehicles in DYNEV. As a result, the vehicle occupancies are lower for marinas.)

Parks - 3,233 transients and 1,312 vehicles; 2.46 transients per vehicle Other Recreational Facilities - 1,117 transients and 460 vehicles; 2.43 transients per vehicle Lodging Facilities - 3,280 transients and 1,441 vehicles; 2.28 transients per vehicle Appendix E summarizes the transient data that was estimated for the EPZ. Table E5 presents the number of transients visiting recreational areas, while Table E6 presents the number of transients at lodging facilities within the EPZ.

In total, there are 9,616 transients evacuating in 4,760 vehicles (an average of 2.02 transients per vehicle) in the EPZ. Table 34 presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by Zone. Figure 36 and Figure 37 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.

3.4 Employees Employees and transients have different scenario percentages (see Table 63). For example, employees peak during the winter, weekday, midday scenarios while transients peak during the summer weekends. For this reason, employees were treated separately from transients.

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Those of the first category are already counted as part of the permanent resident population. To avoid double counting vehicles, we focus only on those employees commuting from outside the EPZ who will evacuate along with the permanent resident population.

The employment data provided by Oconee County and Pickens County includes the maximum shift employment and percent of employees living outside of the EPZ for a list of employers with the study area. The employment data for ONS was provided by Duke Energy. As per the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, employers with 200 or more employees working in a single shift are considered to be major employers. As such, the employers not meeting this criterion are not considered in this study.

Note, Borg Warner Inc., identified as a major employer, is located outside of the EPZ but included in the analysis to be consistent with the Oconee County Emergency Operations Plan.

In total, there are 5,436 employees commuting into the EPZ on a daily basis. To estimate the number of evacuating employee vehicles, a vehicle occupancy of 1.11 employees per vehicle obtained from the demographic survey (see Appendix F, SubSection F.3.1) was used for all the major employers. The detailed information of each major employer is included in Appendix E, Table E4. Table 35 presents the estimates of employees and vehicles commuting into the study area by Zone. Figure 38 and Figure 39 present these data by sector.

3.5 Medical Facilities Medical Facility data were provided by the counties for each facility within the EPZ. Table E3 in Appendix E summarizes the data gathered. Table 36 presents the capacity and census of each medical facility in the EPZ. As shown in these tables, 983 people have been identified as living in, or being treated in, these facilities. Since the average number of patients as these facilities fluctuates often, the capacity, current census and breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients from the 2012 ETE study was used to determine the number of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at the medical facilities within the EPZ for this study.

The transportation requirements for the special facility population are also presented in Table

36. The number of ambulances is determined by assuming that 2 patients can be accommodated per ambulance trip; the number of wheelchair buses assumes 15 wheelchairs per trip; and the number of buses estimated assumes 30 ambulatory patients per trip.

3.6 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 37 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, Ontario1 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 (see Appendix F, sub section F.3.1), 81.9% 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%. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 37 by 50%, the demand for service can still be accommodated by the available bus seating capacity.

2 20 10 40 1.5 1.00 3

Table 37 indicates that transportation must be provided for 109 people. Therefore, a total of four (4) bus run is required from a capacity standpoint. In order to service all of the transit dependent population and have at least one bus drive through each of the Zones to pick up transit dependent people, 14 buses are used in the ETE calculations. See Section 8.1 for further discussion. These buses are represented as two vehicles in the ETE 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 ONS EPZ:

1 Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto, THE MISSISSAUGA EVACUATION FINAL REPORT, June 1981. The report indicates that 6,600 people of a transit-dependent population of 8,600 people shared rides with other residents; a ride share rate of 77% (Page 5-10).

Oconee Nuclear Station 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Where:

A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 42,915 1.00 0.0024 0.171 1.44 1 0.267 0.494 0.607 2.16 2 0.267 0.494 604 1 0.819 30 4 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 number of households (HH) is computed by dividing the EPZ population by the average household size (93,125 2.17) and is 42,915.

• All members (1.00 avg.) of households (HH) with no vehicles (0.24%) will evacuate by public transit or rideshare. The term 42,915 (number of households) x 0.0024 x 1.00, accounts for these people.

• The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (17.1%), who are at home, equal (1.441).

The number of HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (42,915 x 0.171 x 0.44 x 0.267 x 0.494), as 26.7% of EPZ households have a commuter, 49.4%

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 (60.7%), who are at home, equal (2.16 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 42,915 x 0.607 x 0.16 x (0.267 x 0.494)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 number of buses is computed based on the fact that 81.9% of the transit dependent population will rideshare with a neighbor or friend and a capacity of 30 people per bus.

The estimate of transitdependent population in Table 37 is somewhat close to the number of registered transitdependent persons in the EPZ as provided by the counties (discussed below in Section 3.9).

Oconee Nuclear Station 36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.7 School Population Demand Table 38 presents the school population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all schools within the EPZ for the 20202021 school year. This information was adopted from the local county emergency management plans. The column in Table 38 entitled Buses Required specifies the number of buses required for each school under the following set of assumptions and estimates:

• No students except children at small day care centers (less than 30 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 does 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.

• Commuter students at Clemson University and Southern Wesleyan University will use passenger vehicles. See SubSection 3.7.1 for more details.

The counties in the EPZ could introduce procedures whereby the schools are contacted prior to the dispatch of buses from the depot, to ascertain the current estimate of students to be evacuated. 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.

Table 103 presents a list of the school pickup points for each school in the EPZ. Students will be transported to these centers where they will be subsequently retrieved by their respective families or guardians.

3.7.1 Universities There are two universities within the ONS EPZ: Clemson University and Southern Wesleyan University. The enrollment data for the universities were provided by Pickens County and the National Application Center (NAC)2 database, supplemented by the previous ETE study where data could not be provided. The data/information is summarized as follows:

Clemson University:

Located in Zone C2, 8.5 miles southsoutheast of ONS.

2 https://www.nationalapplicationcenter.com/

Oconee Nuclear Station 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

According to Pickens County, Clemson University has a total enrollment of 26,406 students, including students from graduate school.

Based on the information obtained from the university website3, approximately 33% of the students live on campus and 63% of them own vehicles. As such, 8,714 (26,406 x 33%) students live on campus and 17,692 (26,406 - 8,714) students live off campus. Of the 8,714 oncampus students, 5,490 (8,714 x 63%) students own private vehicles.

The remaining 3,224 (8,714 - 5,490) oncampus students without vehicles are considered transit dependent and can be evacuated by ridesharing with fellow classmates or by buses. According to the demographic survey, approximately 82% of the transitdependent people would rideshare with a neighbor or friend for evacuation (see Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1). As such, 2,644 (3,224 x 82%) students would rideshare with fellow classmates, leaving 580 (3,224 - 2,644) students who would be evacuated by buses. Using the capacity of 30 people per transitdependent bus, the total number of buses needed for this university is 20 (580 ÷ 30 = 20, rounded up) or 40 vehicles (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

As indicated in the previous ETE study, approximately 33% of the commuter students live outside of the EPZ. Assuming this data is still applicable, 5,838 (17,692 x 33%)

commuter students live outside of the EPZ. Since these commuter students have similar travel patterns with commuters, the commuter vehicle occupancy rate (1.11 persons per vehicle - see Appendix F) obtained from the demographic survey was used, resulting in 5,259 (5,838 ÷ 1.11) commuter student vehicles.

The remaining on campus students and off campus students residing within the EPZ are assumed to be included within the Census data.

Southern Wesleyan University:

Located in Zone C2, 9.0 miles eastsoutheast of ONS.

According to the NAC database (as of December 2019), there are 1,001 fulltime students; 62% of the students live on campus and 85% of them own vehicles. As such, 621 (1,001 x 62%) students live on campus and 380 (1,001 - 621) students live off campus. Of the 621 oncampus students, 528 (621 x 85%) students own private vehicles.

The remaining 93 (621 - 528) oncampus students without private vehicles are considered transit dependent and can be evacuated by ridesharing or by buses. Apply the same estimate approach as discussed above, there would be 76 (93 x 82%) students evacuated by ridesharing and 17 (93 - 76) students evacuated by 1 (17 ÷ 30, rounded up) bus or 2 passenger vehicles.

As for the offcampus students, the percentage of students who live outside of the EPZ is unavailable. Thus, it is conservatively assumed that all the 380 commuter students live outside of the EPZ and also evacuate in private vehicles. Applying the same commuter vehicle occupancy rate above, 342 (380 ÷ 1.11) commuter vehicles were assigned to Southern Wesleyan University.

3 https://housing.clemson.edu/

Oconee Nuclear Station 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.8 Special Event One special event (Scenario 13) is considered for the ETE study - a football game at Clemson University. This event was unanimously decided to be the event that would attract the most transients into the EPZ by Duke Energy, Pickens and Oconee Counties. Other two events -

Clemson Basketball and Clemson Baseball - are much smaller events which attract 9,000 and 6,000 transients, respectively. The largest games occur on Saturdays during the fall football season. Data from 2012 ETE study were confirmed by the county emergency management personnel. Memorial Stadium, where the games are held, has a maximum occupancy of 85,000 people. Approximately 20,000 people are on site in addition to those attending the game.

According to the chief of police for Clemson University, approximately 75,000 of the 105,000 attendees live outside the EPZ. It was assumed vehicle occupancy for the game averages 2.5 people per vehicle, resulting in 30,000 additional transient vehicles. Considering some of these people are already considered at lodging facilities in the Pickens County portion of the EPZ (1,927 transients in 866 vehicles), as off campus students (6,218 students in 5,601 vehicles),

and as faculty members (assuming half of the employees [0.5 x 2,178 people and 0.5 x 1,962 vehicles] 1,089 employees in 981 vehicles), the total number of transient demand was adjusted to 65,766 transients in 22,552 vehicles. According to the counties, traffic and access control in the vicinity of Memorial Stadium does not permit vehicles to turn north from US 123. Thus, EPZ residents attending the game cannot return home; As such, 30,000 residents in 12,000 vehicles also evacuate from the stadium. A total of 34,552 vehicles (12,000 resident vehicles and 22,552 transient vehicles) were incorporated at various parking locations throughout Clemson for the special event. To account for the EPZ residents evacuating from the stadium, the resident vehicles were reduced by 23% (12,000 ÷ 53,025 from Table 32) to 41,025 for this Scenario. The special event vehicle trips were generated utilizing the same mobilization distributions as transients. The special event vehicles are carefully distributed amongst the roadways in Clemson University campus based on the parking capacity of the parking lots and on street parking areas.

Gameday traffic operations, shuttle information, and parking lot information were obtained from online sources4. The IPTAY website describes the pregame inflow and postgame outflow traffic management plans as well as floor plans of each parking lot. The postgame outflow plans incorporate contraflow on State Highway 93, and Perimeter Road away from Memorial Stadium. Traffic control points are set up along SH 93 and Perimeter Rd. These traffic management strategies were modeled in the linknode analysis network.

A shuttle bus is provided to transport visitors from the stadium to some of the farther lots.

These buses run until 90 minutes after the game. Since transients are estimated to fully mobilize in 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes, it was assumed that the time needed to utilize the shuttle bus to access their vehicle is included in the mobilization time for transients.

4 https://iptaycuad.com/football-parking-information/

Oconee Nuclear Station 39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population The county emergency management agencies have a combined registration for homebound (noninstitutionalized) people with access and/or functional needs. Based on data provided by Oconee County, there are an estimated 412 access and/or functional needs people within the Oconee County portion of the EPZ who require transportation assistance to evacuate. There 124 people with the Pickens County portion of the EPZ who require transportation assistance to evacuate were provided by the Pickens County. Details on the number of ambulatory, wheelchairbound and bedridden people were only provided by Pickens County. It is assumed that the percentage of ambulatory (77%), wheelchairbound (18%) and bedridden populations (5%) are similar for Oconee County to the percentages provided by Pickens County. Thus these 536 people are comprised of 415 ambulatory persons, 95 wheelchairbound persons and 26 bedridden persons (see Table 39). The same occupancies that are assumed for vehicles used at medical facilities are assumed for this population as well, however more vehicles are assumed to be dispatched to evacuate these people in a reasonable amount of time. Buses and wheelchair buses needed to evacuate the access and/or functional needs population are represented as two vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

3.10 Correctional Facilities As documented in Table E7, there is one correctional facility in the EPZ - Oconee County Detention Center. The total inmate population at this facility is 122 persons. According to Oconee County emergency management personnel the inmates at this facility would shelter in place if an evacuation were ordered.

3.11 External Traffic Vehicles will be traveling through the EPZ (externalexternal trips) at the time of an emergency event. After the Advisory to Evacuate is announced, these throughtravelers will also evacuate.

These through vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes traversing the EPZ - US 178, US 123 and US 76. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the EPZ during the first 120 minutes following the Advisory to Evacuate.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data was obtained from South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) to estimate the number of vehicles per hour 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 vehicles per hour (vph). The DHV is then multiplied 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 /> (access control points -

ACP - are assumed to be activated at 120 minutes after the advisory to evacuate) to estimate Oconee Nuclear Station 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. The AADT for US 123 and US 76 were taken on US 123 at the east of the intersection of Old Clemson Hwy because these roads are the same road throughout most of the EPZ. A Dfactor of 0.25 was applied to the AADT to represent traffic on US 123 eastbound and US 76 eastbound just west of the EPZ boundary and US 123 westbound and US 76 westbound just east of the EPZ boundary. As indicated, there are 6,768 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) as discussed in Section 6.

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 58, there are 15 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 the evacuation (Time Period 1). Rather, there is an initialization period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the anticipated traffic volumes from the start of the evacuation 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 evacuation depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated (see Section 6). There are 1,862 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 the population and vehicle demand is provided in Table 311 and Table 312, respectively. This summary includes all population groups described in this section. A total of 227,914 people and 105,290 vehicles are considered in this study.

Oconee Nuclear Station 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2010 Population 2020 Population A0 777 930 A1 850 932 A2 2,298 2,543 B1 3,010 3,225 B2 6,368 6,604 C1 538 588 C2 27,507 32,604 D1 876 1,191 D2 22,257 23,355 E1 1,502 1,865 E2 12,215 12,955 F1 2,123 2,511 F2 3,782 3,822 EPZ TOTAL: 84,103 93,125 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 10.73%

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone 2020 Zone 2020 Population Resident Vehicles A0 930 583 A1 932 564 A2 2,543 1,595 B1 3,225 2,004 B2 6,604 4,141 C1 588 369 C2 32,604 15,415 D1 1,191 748 D2 23,355 14,471 E1 1,865 1,169 E2 12,955 8,000 F1 2,511 1,571 F2 3,822 2,395 EPZ TOTAL: 93,125 53,025 Oconee Nuclear Station 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Evacuating Sector 2020 Population Vehicles N 430 271 NNE 587 368 NE 3,636 2,283 ENE 10,526 6,373 E 9,317 5,827 ESE 3,307 2,068 SE 5,208 3,223 SSE 3,900 2,447 S 3,407 2,137 SSW 4,759 2,903 SW 5,499 3,434 WSW 3,063 1,928 W 1,087 683 WNW 690 432 NW 511 317 NNW 277 175 TOTAL: 56,204 34,869 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles Zone Transients Transient Vehicles A0 1,668 545 A1 1,129 420 A2 201 76 B1 0 0 B2 0 0 C1 300 60 C2 2,616 1,309 D1 0 0 D2 1,933 1,037 E1 232 300 E2 744 541 F1 194 144 F2 599 328 EPZ TOTAL: 9,616 4,760 Oconee Nuclear Station 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 35. Summary of Resident Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ5 Zone Employees Employee Vehicles A0 642 578 A1 0 0 A2 0 0 B1 0 0 B2 317 286 C1 0 0 C2 2,648 2,386 D1 115 104 D2 1,132 1,020 E1 0 0 E2 456 411 F1 0 0 F2 0 0 Shadow Region 126 114 EPZ5 TOTAL: 5,436 4,899 5

Also includes Borg Warner Inc. which is outside of the EPZ.

Oconee Nuclear Station 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 36. Special Facility Transit Demand Wheel Wheel Current Ambu chair Bed chair Zone Facility Name Municipality Capacity Census latory Bound ridden Buses Buses Ambulances OCONEE COUNTY, SC D2 Keowee Place Seneca 50 35 23 10 2 1 1 1 D2 Belvedere Commons of Seneca Seneca 62 60 60 0 0 2 0 0 D2 Cottingham Hospice House Seneca 15 15 1 0 14 1 0 7 D2 Prisma Health Hospice of Foothills Seneca 15 6 0 0 6 0 0 3 D2 The Tribble Center Seneca 331 221 197 24 0 7 2 0 D2 Lila Doyle Nursing Care Facility Seneca 88 88 8 70 10 1 5 5 D2 Oconee Medical Center Seneca 169 69 23 23 23 1 2 12 D2 Residences at Park Place Seneca 78 53 43 10 0 2 1 0 E2 Foothills Assisted Living West Union 76 51 50 0 1 2 0 1 S.R. Morningside of Seneca Seneca 50 31 23 8 0 1 1 0 S.R. Seneca Residential Care Center Seneca 33 26 25 1 0 1 1 0 S.R. Seneca Health and Rehabilitation Seneca 132 96 68 25 3 3 2 2 Oconee County Subtotal: 1099 751 521 171 59 22 15 31 PICKENS COUNTY, SC A1 PruittHealth Pickens Six Mile 44 44 28 12 4 1 1 2 B1 Six Mile Assisted Living Six Mile 41 40 40 0 0 2 0 0 C2 Brookdale Central Central 52 52 34 14 4 2 1 2 C2 Clemson Downs Clemson 56 41 8 30 3 1 2 2 S.R. AnMed Health Cannon Hospital Pickens 55 55 36 15 4 2 1 2 Pickens County Subtotal: 248 232 146 71 15 8 5 8 EPZ TOTAL: 1,347 983 667 242 74 30 20 39 Oconee Nuclear Station 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Percent Survey Average HH Size Survey Percent HH Survey Percent HH Total People Population with Indicated No. of Estimated with Indicated No. of Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring 2020 EPZ Vehicles No. of Vehicles with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 93,125 1.00 1.44 2.16 42,915 0.24% 17.10% 60.70% 26.7% 49.4% 604 81.9% 109 0.1%

Oconee Nuclear Station 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 38. School, Childcare Center, and Day Camp Population Demand Estimates Buses Zone School Name Enrollment Required OCONEE COUNTY, SC D2 Oconee Christian Academy 213 5 D2 Ravenel Elementary School 592 9 D2 Northside Elementary School 681 10 D2 Oconee Academy 80 2 D2 Blue Ridge Elementary School 577 9 D2 Seneca High School 1,000 20 D2 Seneca Middle School 855 18 E1 Keowee Elementary School 400 6 E2 Walhalla Elementary School 620 9 E2 Walhalla High School 1,172 24 E2 Walhalla Middle School 842 17 E2 James M Brown Elementary School 610 9 E2 Faith Christian School (Faith Training Center) 36 1 F2 Salem Seventh Day Adventist Elementary School 8 1 F2 TamasseeSalem Elementary School 220 4 S.R. Fred P Hamilton Career Center 450 9 Oconee County Subtotal: 8,356 153 PICKENS COUNTY, SC B1 Six Mile Elementary School 480 7 C2 Daniel High School 1,144 23 C2 R. C. Edwards Middle School 838 17 C2 Central Elementary School 394 6 C2 Clemson University6 26,406 20 C2 Clemson University Graduate School Included Above C2 Southern Wesleyan University 1,001 1 C2 Clemson Elementary School 750 11 S.R. Clemson Montessori School 67 1 Pickens County Subtotal: 31,080 86 School Subtotal: 39,436 239 Buses Zone Childcare Center Name Enrollment Required7 OCONEE COUNTY, SC D2 Foothills Early Learning Center 130 2 D2 Code Learning Center 22 0 D2 Smiling Angels Child Care Center 21 0 D2 Seneca Head Start Center 203 3 D2 Trinity Baptist Church Preschool 101 2 6

The number of vehicles required for Clemson University/Clemson University Graduate School, and Southern Wesleyan University shown in this table does not include the private vehicles required to transport commuter student vehicles. See Section 3.7.1 for additional information.

7 It is assumed that only children at small day care centers (less than 30 students) will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of these buses and that the time to complete this activity is included in the survey responses presented in Appendix F.

Oconee Nuclear Station 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Buses Zone School Name Enrollment Required D2 St. Mark Child Development Center 140 2 D2 Our Clubhouse 70 1 D2 Seneca Baptist Church Day Care 246 4 E2 Tots and Toddlers 6 0 E2 Upstate Children's Center 180 3 E2 St John's Lutheran Preschool 200 3 F2 Pennsylvania Childrens Center 27 0 Oconee County Subtotal: 1,346 20 PICKENS COUNTY, SC B2 Merck Family Day Care 6 0 B2 Sonja's Little Darlings 6 0 C2 Kid's Stuff Academy 116 2 C2 Clemson Tiger Tennis Camp8 150 3 C2 Clemson Child Development Center 120 2 C2 Clemson Head Start 40 1 C2 The Growing Place 99 2 C2 Little Lights Child Care 130 2 S.R. Clemson Montessori School 67 1 Pickens County Subtotal: 734 13 Childcare Center and Day Camp Subtotal: 2,080 33 TOTAL: 41,516 272 Table 39. Demand Estimates for Homebound Population with Access and/or Functional Needs Population Group Transportation Needed Population Vehicles deployed Ambulatory9 Bus 415 30 Wheelchair bound9 Wheelchair Bus 95 20 Bedridden Ambulance 26 13 TOTAL: 536 63 8

Clemson Tiger Tennis Camp is a day camp where children will be evacuated by buses in the event of an emergency at the ONS.

9 Only 14 buses, and 7 wheelchair buses are needed from a capacity standpoint. However, 30 buses and 20 wheelchair buses were considered to limit the number of stops made by each bus. See Section 8.2 for additional information. Also, buses are modeled as 2 passenger car equivalents in DYNEV.

Oconee Nuclear Station 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 310. Oconee Nuclear Station EPZ External Traffic Upstream Downstream Hourly External 10 11 11 Node Node Road Name Direction AADT KFactor DFactor Volume Traffic 8054 729 US 178 SB 6,000 0.118 0.5 354 708 8097 864 US 178 NB 6,000 0.118 0.5 354 708 8053 53 US 123 WB 25,000 0.107 0.25 669 1,338 8003 3 US 123 EB 25,000 0.107 0.25 669 1,338 8202 202 US 76 WB 25,000 0.107 0.25 669 1,338 8165 165 US 76 EB 25,000 0.107 0.25 669 1,338 TOTAL 6,768 10 South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) Traffic AADT 11 HCM 2016 Oconee Nuclear Station 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 311. Summary of Population Demand Universities, Schools, Additional Childcare Special Transit Special Centers, and Event Shadow External Zone Residents12 Dependent Transients Employees Facilities13 Day camps Transients Population14 Traffic Total A0 930 1 1,668 642 0 0 0 0 0 3,241 A1 932 1 1,129 0 44 0 0 0 0 2,106 A2 2,543 3 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,747 B1 3,225 4 0 0 40 480 0 0 0 3,749 B2 6,604 8 0 317 0 12 0 0 0 6,941 C1 588 1 300 0 0 0 0 0 0 889 C2 32,604 39 2,616 2,648 93 31,188 65,766 0 0 134,954 D1 1,191 1 0 115 0 0 0 0 0 1,307 D2 23,355 27 1,933 1,132 547 4,931 0 0 0 31,925 E1 1,865 2 232 0 0 400 0 0 0 2,499 E2 12,955 15 744 456 173 3,666 0 0 0 18,009 F1 2,511 3 194 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,708 F2 3,822 4 599 0 0 255 0 0 0 4,680 Shadow 0 0 0 126 208 584 0 11,241 0 12,159 Region TOTAL: 93,125 109 9,616 5,436 1,105 41,516 65,766 11,241 0 227,914 12 Special Facilities (medical and correctional facilities), and School Population is captured in the U.S. Census data and is included the Permanent Residents totals. However, resident vehicle estimates in Table 3-12 have been adjusted accordingly to avoid double counting.

13 Special Facilities include medical and correctional facilities.

14 Shadow Population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 2-1 for additional information.

Oconee Nuclear Station 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand15 Universities, Additional Schools, University Special Childcare Off Event Transit Medical Centers, and Campus Transient Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent16 Transients Employees Facilities16 Day camps16 Student17 Vehicles Vehicles18 Traffic Total A0 583 2 545 578 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,708 A1 564 2 420 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 992 A2 1,595 2 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,673 B1 2,004 2 0 0 4 14 0 0 0 0 2,024 B2 4,141 2 0 286 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,429 C1 369 2 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 431 C2 15,415 4 1,309 2,386 16 180 5,601 22,552 0 0 47,463 D1 748 2 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 854 D2 14,471 2 1,037 1,020 80 174 0 0 0 0 16,784 E1 1,169 2 300 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 1,483 E2 8,000 2 541 411 5 132 0 0 0 0 9,091 F1 1,571 2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,717 F2 2,395 2 328 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 2,735 Shadow 0 0 0 114 28 22 0 0 6,974 6,768 13,906 Region TOTAL: 53,025 28 4,760 4,899 139 544 5,601 22,552 6,974 6,768 105,290 15 According to the Oconee County emergency management personnel, inmates at the correctional facilities within the EPZ would shelter-in-place if an evacuation were ordered. Thus, no vehicles are required to evacuate these facilities and are excluded from the Vehicle Demand estimation.

16 Buses for transit-dependent population, medical facilities, and schools are represented as two passenger vehicles.

17 Represents the number of vehicles required for Clemson University/Clemson University Graduate School, and Southern Wesleyan University to transport commuter student. See Section 3.1.1 for additional information.

18 Shadow vehicles have been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 2-1 for additional information.

Oconee Nuclear Station 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 31. Zones Comprising the ONS EPZ Oconee Nuclear Station 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Oconee Nuclear Station 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Oconee Nuclear Station 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Oconee Nuclear Station 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Oconee Nuclear Station 326 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Oconee Nuclear Station 327 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Oconee Nuclear Station 328 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Oconee Nuclear Station 329 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Oconee Nuclear Station 330 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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). This section discusses how the capacity of the roadway network was estimated 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 "Levels 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, the 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 SV would drop the rating to a lower letter grade.

This distinction is illustrated in Exhibit 1237 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, ice, 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. Consequently, lane and shoulder widths at the narrowest points were observed 1

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

Oconee Nuclear Station 41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 influence both FFS and capacity. The estimated FFS were measured using the survey vehicles speedometer and observing local traffic, under free flow conditions. Free flow speeds ranged from 25 to 75 mph.

Capacity is estimated from the procedures of the 2016 HCM. For example, HCM 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).

The amount of traffic that can flow on a roadway is effectively governed by vehicle speed and spacing. The faster that vehicle can travel when closely spaced, the higher the amount of flow.

As discussed in Section 2.6, it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent the prevailing conditions. Adverse conditions like inclement weather, construction, and other incidents tend to slow traffic down and often, also increases vehicletovehicle separation, thus decreasing the amount of traffic flow. 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 25 percent depending on wind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.6, we employ a reduction in free speed and in highway capacity of 10 percent and 20 percent for rain and ice, respectively.

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. The existing traffic management plans documented in the county emergency plans are extensive and were adopted without change. See Appendix G for more information.

Oconee Nuclear Station 42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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) 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, Oconee Nuclear Station 43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 22 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 Oconee Nuclear Station 44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 breakdown. These queue discharge flow (QDF) rates vary from one location to the next and 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 ETE 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 Highway Capacity Manual 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.

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

Oconee Nuclear Station 45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 2016 HCM. 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 Oconee Nuclear Station 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.

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.

4.3.1 TwoLane Roads Ref: HCM 2016 Chapter 15 Two lane roads comprise the majority of highways within the study area (EPZ and Shadow Region). The perlane capacity of a twolane highway is estimated at 1700 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 3200 pc/h.

The HCM 2016 procedures then estimate Level of Service (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 study area, are classified as Class I, with "level terrain"; some are rolling terrain.

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

Oconee Nuclear Station 46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 70 mph, respectively. Based on observation, the multilane highways outside of urban areas within the study area service traffic with freespeeds in this range. The actual timevarying speeds computed by the simulation model reflect the demand to capacity relationship and the impact of control at intersections. A conservative estimate of perlane capacity of 1900 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 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 127 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 2250 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 13 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 Oconee Nuclear Station 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 ramp free flow speed. 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 does not address LOS F explicitly).

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. The type of traffic control for nodes in the evacuation network are 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 involving 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 Oconee Nuclear Station 48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

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) Free flow speed (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. These parameters are listed in Appendix K, for each network link.

It is important to note that simulation is a mathematical representation of an assumed set of conditions using the best available knowledge and understanding of traffic flow and available inputs. Simulation should not be assumed to be a prediction of what will happen under any event because a real evacuation can be impacted by an infinite number of things - many of which will differ from these test cases - and many others cannot be taken into account with the tools available.

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. Rather than neglect these boundary conditions, this study assumes a 25% reduction in capacity on two lane roads (Section 4.3.1 above) and multilane highways (Section 4.3.2 above). There is no reduction in capacity for freeways due to boundary conditions. The 25% reduction in capacity is based on the prevalence of actuated traffic signals in the study area (see Table K1) 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Oconee Nuclear Station 410 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal guidance (see NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1) recommends that the 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):

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 event 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 15 minutes after the siren notification.

3. The 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.

For example, suppose onehour 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 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 report. Consequently, the ETE presented in this report are likely to be higher than the actual Oconee Nuclear Station 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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).

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

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 320 square miles and are 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 4.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from a demographic survey of the EPZ permanent residents. Such a demographic survey was conducted in support of this ETE study. Appendix F discusses the survey sampling plan, the number of completed surveys obtained (including statistical confidence bounds), 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 ETE 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 online demographic survey to the development of the ETE documented in this report.

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

It is seen from Figure 51, that the Trip Generation time (i.e., 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

In some cases, assuming certain events occur strictly sequential (for instance, commuter returning home before beginning 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, the 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual Part V Section B.1 Bullet 3 states that Notification methods will be established to ensure coverage within 45 minutes of essentially 100% of the population.

Given the federal regulations and guidance, and the presence of siren, it is assumed that 100%

of those within the EPZ will be aware of the accident within 45 minutes The assumed notification distribution for notifying the EPZ population is provided in Table 52 and 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. 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.

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 as shown 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 56 presents the summing procedure to arrive at each designated distribution.

Table 56 presents the summing procedure to arrive at each designated distribution. Table 57 presents a description of each of the final trip generation distributions achieved after the summing process is completed.

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 alternates 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 Oconee Nuclear Station 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions are created (see Figure 51, Table 56, Table 57);

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;

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 3.5 standard deviations from the mean are allowed to be considered outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected. For the distribution for the time to prepare to leave home (Activity 2, 4 5, Table 55), values more than 3.3 standard deviations from the mean were considered outliers due to the convergence of the normal and cumulative data curves.

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 below 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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). In general, these are additive, using weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 54 presents the combined trip generation distributions designated A, C, D, E and F. 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 - travel home from work follows preparation to leave work, preparation for departure follows the return of the commuter, and so forth. In practice, it is reasonable that some of these activities 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 58 (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. Zones comprising the 2Mile region are advised to evacuate immediately.

2. Zones 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%.

Oconee Nuclear Station 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Assumptions

1. The EPZ population in Zones beyond 5 miles will first shelter in place, with the exception of the 20% noncompliance.

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, on a beach, or 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.

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 Zones comprising the 2Mile region. This value, TScen*, obtained from simulation results is scenariospecific. 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 2:15 on average for all scenarios (see Region R01 in Table 7 1).

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

a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters Figure 55 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters; as discussed above, the 90th percentile 2Mile evacuation time is 135 minutes for all scenarios. At the 90th percentile evacuation time, 20% of the population (who Oconee Nuclear Station 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

normally would have completed their mobilization activities for an unstaged evacuation) 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 period, 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 30 minutes. After TScen*+30, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the unstaged trip generation distribution.

Table 59 provides the trip generation for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas Appendix 11 to Annex Q of the Pickens County Radiological Emergency Response Emergency Operations Plan indicates Department of Natural Resources (DNR) officers respond to an emergency for ONS. These officers will be notified by radio or telephone and will be mobilized within one hour. The plan states that DNR officers will patrol Lake Keowee and prevent water transportation access to the facility. Attachment 3 to Annex Q of the Oconee County Emergency Operations Plan states that the SC Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) will patrol Lake Keowee and Lake Hartwell to prevent water transportation access to the facility and to initiate lake clearing and evacuation procedures.

As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes which is consistent with the FEMA REP Manual. Table 58 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 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> 45 minute timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and other transients to return to their vehicles and begin their evacuation trip.

Oconee Nuclear Station 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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%

Oconee Nuclear Station 510 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work Cumulative Cumulative Percent Percent Elapsed Time Employees Elapsed Time Employees (Minutes) Leaving Work (Minutes) Leaving Work 0 0% 35 91.2%

5 30.3% 40 92.4%

10 55.3% 45 94.9%

15 71.2% 50 96.0%

20 76.3% 55 96.2%

25 79.5% 60 100.0%

30 86.1%

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.

Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Elapsed Time Percent (Minutes) Returning Home (Minutes) Returning Home 0 0% 35 84.5%

5 5.8% 40 88.3%

10 15.7% 45 89.6%

15 33.2% 50 91.4%

20 53.3% 55 94.2%

25 68.5% 60 98.0%

30 79.7% 75 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Decline to State" response Oconee Nuclear Station 511 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Ready to Elapsed Time Percent Ready to (Minutes) Evacuate (Minutes) Evacuate 0 0% 105 81.7%

15 3.9% 120 87.9%

30 21.8% 135 94.4%

45 36.7% 150 95.5%

60 60.5% 165 96.3%

75 73.5% 180 97.3%

90 79.3% 195 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Decline to State" response Table 56. 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 Table 57. 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).

Oconee Nuclear Station 512 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 58. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Residents Residents with Without Time Duration Employees Transients Commuters Commuters Period (Min) (Distribution A) (Distribution A) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) 1 15 6% 6% 0% 0%

2 15 31% 31% 0% 3%

3 15 37% 37% 0% 10%

4 15 16% 16% 3% 16%

5 15 6% 6% 7% 18%

6 15 3% 3% 11% 18%

7 15 1% 1% 15% 10%

8 15 0% 0% 15% 5%

9 15 0% 0% 13% 5%

10 30 0% 0% 16% 9%

11 30 0% 0% 10% 3%

12 30 0% 0% 5% 3%

13 30 0% 0% 4% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

NOTE:

Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 12) using Distributions C.

Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.

Oconee Nuclear Station 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period1 Residents with Residents Without Time Duration Commuters Commuters Period (Min) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) 1 15 0% 0%

2 15 0% 1%

3 15 0% 2%

4 15 1% 3%

5 15 1% 3%

6 15 2% 4%

7 15 3% 2%

8 15 3% 1%

9 15 3% 1%

10 30 67% 77%

11 30 10% 3%

12 30 5% 3%

13 30 4% 0%

14 30 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0%

1 Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 5-8) is the same for Un-staged and Staged Evacuation.

Oconee Nuclear Station 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Oconee Nuclear Station 515 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities 100%

80%

60%

Notification Prepare to Leave Work Travel Home 40%

Prepare Home 20%

Percent of Population Completing Mobilization Activity 0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Activity (min)

Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities Oconee Nuclear Station 516 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)

Cumulative Data Cumulative Normal Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution Oconee Nuclear Station 517 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Oconee Nuclear Station 518 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged and Unstaged Evacuation Trip Generation Employees / Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters Staged Residents with Commuters Staged Residents with no Commuters 100 80 60 40 20 Percentage of Population Beginning Evacuation Trip 0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region Oconee Nuclear Station 519 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Zones that forms either a keyhole sectorbased area, or a circular area within the 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 27 Regions were defined which encompass all the groupings of Zones considered.

These Regions are defined in Table 61. The Zone configurations are identified in Figure 61.

Each 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. These sectors extend to 5 miles from the plant (Regions R04 through R11) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R12 through R18).

Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R19 through R27 are identical to Regions R02, R04 through R11, respectively; however, those Zones between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2 mile region (Region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 14 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 27x14=378 evacuation cases. Table 62 provides a description of all Scenarios.

Each combination of region and scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated. Table 63 presents the percentage of each population group estimated to evacuate for each scenario.

Table 64 presents the vehicle counts for each scenario for an evacuation of Region R03 - the entire EPZ. The population and vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 are peak values. These peak values are adjusted depending on the scenario and region being considered, using scenario and regionspecific percentages, such that the average population is considered for each evacuation case. The scenario percentages are presented in Table 63, while the regional percentages are provided in Table H1.

Table 64 presents the vehicle counts for each Scenario for an evacuation of Region R02 - 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 the product of 26.7% (the number of households with at least one commuter) and 49.4% (the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the Oconee Nuclear Station 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

commuter prior to evacuating). See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. Therefore, 14 percent (26.7% x 50.6% = 14% rounded) of EPZ households have returning commuters. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of households with returning commuters will have a commuter at work during those times.

It can be argued that the 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% of all households vacation for a period over the summer.

Assume these vacations, in aggregate, are uniformly dispersed over 10 weeks, i.e., 10%

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% 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.

Employment is assumed to be at its peak 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 further estimated that only 10% of the employees are working in the evenings and during the weekends.

Transient activity is estimated to be at its peak (80%) during summer weekends and less (60%)

during the week. As shown in Appendix E, lodging and campgrounds offering overnight accommodations make up about 50% of the total transient attractions in the EPZ; thus, transient activity is estimated to be 60% and 50% for summer and winter evenings, respectively. Transient activity on winter weekends is estimated to be 45% and less (30%)

during the week as many facilities are open but at lower levels during the winter than the summer.

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:

4,703 20% 1 22%

7,163 45,862 Oconee Nuclear Station 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

One special event - a football game at Clemson University - was considered as Scenario 13.

Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for Scenario 13, and 0% for all other scenarios.

Since about 23% of the permanent resident population is at the game, the vehicles for households with and without returning commuters was reduced by 23% for this scenario.

Vehicles evacuation medical facilities include buses, wheelchair vans and ambulances as discussed in Section 3.5. These vehicles are 100% evacuated for all scenarios as the medical facility population is present in the EPZ for all scenarios.

Day camp activities are assumed to be at its peak (100%) during summer, 25% less (i.e., 75%)

during winter, and 0% during evening hours.

Students commuting at Clemson University and Southern Wesleyan University from outside the EPZ were assumed to be evacuated 100% and 10% during winter and summer scenarios respectively.

As discussed in the footnote to Table 21, schools are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday and 100% of buses 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 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 (40%) during the evening scenarios 5 and 12.

Oconee Nuclear Station 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Zone Region Description A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R01 2Mile Region X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R04 NNW, N, NNE X X X R05 NE, ENE X X X R06 E X X R07 ESE, SE, SSE X X X R08 S X X X R09 SSW X X X X R10 SW, WSW X X X R11 W, WNW, NW X X X Evacuate 5Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R12 NNW, N X X X X X X X X X R13 NNE, NE, ENE X X X X X X X X X R14 E, ESE, SE X X X X X X X X X R15 SSE, S, SSW X X X X X X X X X R16 SW, WSW X X X X X X X X X R17 W, WNW X X X X X X X X X R18 NW X X X X X X X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R19 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R20 NNW, N, NNE X X X R21 NE, ENE X X X R22 E X X R23 ESE, SE, SSE X X X R24 S X X X R25 SSW X X X X R26 SW, WSW X X X R27 W, WNW, NW X X X Zone(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace for R01, then Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season1 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Weekend Evening Good None 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Ice None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Ice None Midweek, 12 Winter Weekend Evening Good None Clemson University 13 Winter Weekend Midday Good Football Game Roadway Impact -

Lane Closure on US 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good 123 Eastbound 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).

Oconee Nuclear Station 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Households Households With Without External Returning Returning Special Medical Day University School Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Events Facilities Camp Commuters Buses Buses Traffic 1 14% 86% 96% 60% 22% 0% 100% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100%

2 14% 86% 96% 60% 22% 0% 100% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100%

3 1% 99% 10% 80% 20% 0% 100% 100% 10% 0% 100% 100%

4 1% 99% 10% 80% 20% 0% 100% 100% 10% 0% 100% 100%

5 1% 99% 10% 60% 20% 0% 100% 0% 10% 0% 100% 40%

6 14% 86% 100% 30% 22% 0% 100% 75% 100% 100% 100% 100%

7 14% 86% 100% 30% 22% 0% 100% 75% 100% 100% 100% 100%

8 14% 86% 100% 30% 22% 0% 100% 75% 100% 100% 100% 100%

9 1% 99% 10% 45% 20% 0% 100% 75% 100% 0% 100% 100%

10 1% 99% 10% 45% 20% 0% 100% 75% 100% 0% 100% 100%

11 1% 99% 10% 45% 20% 0% 100% 75% 100% 0% 100% 100%

12 1% 99% 10% 50% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 40%

13 1% 99% 10% 45% 20% 100% 100% 75% 100% 0% 100% 100%

14 14% 86% 96% 60% 22% 0% 100% 100% 10% 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 incident 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 Events ............................................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).

External Through Traffic .............................Traffic on interstates/freeways and major arterial roads at the start of the evacuation. This traffic is stopped by access control 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario2 Households Households External Total With Without Special Medical Day University School Transit Scenario Employees Transients Shadow Through Scenario Returning Returning Events Facilities Camp Commuters Buses3 Buses Traffic Vehicles Commuters Commuters 1 7,163 45,862 4,703 2,856 7,592 0 139 6 560 54 28 6,768 75,731 2 7,163 45,862 4,703 2,856 7,592 0 139 6 560 54 28 6,768 75,731 3 716 52,309 490 3,808 7,038 0 139 6 560 0 28 6,768 71,862 4 716 52,309 490 3,808 7,038 0 139 6 560 0 28 6,768 71,862 5 716 52,309 490 2,856 7,038 0 139 0 560 0 28 2,707 66,843 6 7,163 45,862 4,899 1,428 7,618 0 139 5 5,601 538 28 6,768 80,049 7 7,163 45,862 4,899 1,428 7,618 0 139 5 5,601 538 28 6,768 80,049 8 7,163 45,862 4,899 1,428 7,618 0 139 5 5,601 538 28 6,768 80,049 9 716 52,309 490 2,142 7,038 0 139 5 5,601 0 28 6,768 75,236 10 716 52,309 490 2,142 7,038 0 139 5 5,601 0 28 6,768 75,236 11 716 52,309 490 2,142 7,038 0 139 5 5,601 0 28 6,768 75,236 12 716 52,309 490 2,380 7,038 0 139 0 5,601 0 28 2,707 71,408 4

13 554 40,471 490 2,142 7,058 34,552 139 5 5,601 0 28 6,768 97,808 14 7,163 45,862 4,703 2,856 7,592 0 139 6 560 54 28 6,768 75,731 2

Vehicle estimates are for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R02).

3 School Buses also include buses for childcare centers, and universities (except commuter students) and are represented as 2 passenger car equivalents.

4 Consists of 22,552 transient vehicles and 12,000 resident vehicles. See Section 3.8 for more details.

Oconee Nuclear Station 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. ONS EPZ Zones Oconee Nuclear Station 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 27 regions within the ONS 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 for the 2mile region for 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 permanent residents within the EPZ in Zones 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 permanent residents 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 ONS EPZ addresses the issue of voluntary evacuees in the manner shown in Figure 71. Within the EPZ, 20% of permanent residents located in Zones outside of the evacuation region who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate. Similarly, it is assumed that 20% of the 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 ONS 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 56,204 permanent residents reside in the Shadow Region; 20% 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 ONS location, has the potential for impeding evacuating vehicles from within the Evacuation Region. All ETE calculations include this shadow traffic movement.

Oconee Nuclear Station 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

2. Zones 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. 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 78 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):

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).

• 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 condition.

All highway "links" which experience LOS F are delineated in these figures by a thick red line; all others are lightly indicated. Congestion develops rapidly around concentrations of population and traffic bottlenecks.

Oconee Nuclear Station 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73 displays congestion developing within the population centers within the EPZ, including Walhalla, Westminster, Seneca, Clemson, Central, Norris and Salem, just 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> after the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE). Nearly all major evacuation routes show some congestion. At this time, 37% of evacuees have mobilized and 20% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. Note that US Highway 123 (US 123)/US 76, which is servicing the externalexternal trips and evacuating trips, is displaying heavy traffic demand (LOS D, E, and F) on those sections exiting the EPZ (westbound on the west; eastbound on the east). At this time, 2Mile Region shows no congestion.

At 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the ATE, Figure 74 displays fully developed congestion within the population centers within, and just outside, the EPZ and along nearly all of the major evacuation routes leaving the EPZ (US 123/US 76, SR 11, SR 59, SR 133, SR 88, SR 93, SR 183, and SR 130). The congestion in the southwest portion of the study area is amplified by the mixing of shadow evacuees from the Westminster community with EPZ evacuees. The confluence of the congestion in the communities of Walhalla, Westminster, and Seneca is clearly impacting the rate of travel out of Zones D2 and E2. The congestion present throughout Clemson and Central is impacting the rate of travel out of Zone C2. Congestion in the northern portion of the EPZ is at its peak near the city center of Salem and Pickens (in the Shadow Region). Congestion in Pickens impedes the flow of evacuating vehicles from Zones A2 and B2. In addition, congestion in Liberty and Easley is impacting the rate of travel out of Zone B2 and C2. At this time, however, the 5Mile Region is nearly clear of congestion. Within the 5Mile Region, congestion only remains on SR 130. The congestion along SR 130 clears 45 minutes later at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> 45 minutes after the ETE. At this time, about 80% of evacuees have mobilized and 50% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

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, as shown in Figure 75, the congestion to the north of the plant in Zones F2 and A2 has dissipated. SR 130, SR 133, SR 183, and SR S37198 remain congested but for shorter stretches of roadway than at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the ATE. 5Mile Region is clear of congestion. In the southern portion of the EPZ, Norris, Central, Clemson, and Seneca, and Westminster in the Shadow Region, remain congested. Congestion in Walhalla has dissipated.

At this time, about 95% of evacuees have mobilized and 73% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

Congested conditions remain in Clemson and Seneca in the EPZ, and Westminster and Liberty in the Shadow Region, at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> after the ATE (Figure 76). At this time, about 99% of evacuees have mobilized and 91% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. Congestion in the northern portion of the EPZ has completely dissipated due to the lower population density of this portion of the EPZ and sufficient roadway capacity. Congestion in the EPZ continues to dissipate, as seen by comparing Figure 76 with Figure 75.

At 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> after the ATE, as shown in Figure 77, congestion within the EPZ has nearly subsided.

The last roadways to exhibit congestion within the EPZ are Wells Highway and Issaqueena Trail (which are both along the southern boundary of the EPZ). In the Shadow Region, congestion remains along US 123/US 76 westbound in Westminster, US 123 just east of Central (at the EPZ boundary) into Easley, and south of Seneca along SH 59. At this time, 100% of evacuees have Oconee Nuclear Station 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

mobilized and 99% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. The EPZ completely clears of congestion 40 minutes later at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 40 minutes after the ATE.

The last roadway to exhibit congestion in the Shadow Region is US 123 eastbound, as shown in Figure 78, at 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. This congestion clears the Shadow Region 10 minutes later at 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and 10 minutes after the ATE. LOS F conditions remain outside of the study area in South Union which clears at 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and 35 minutes after the ATE.

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 79 through Figure 722. These figures display the rate at which traffic flows out of the indicated areas for the case of an evacuation of the full EPZ (Region R03) under the indicated conditions. One figure is presented for each scenario considered.

As indicated in Figure 79 through Figure 722, 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 a few evacuation routes servicing the remaining demand.

This 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 of mobilization time - 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 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results Table 71 and Table 72 present the ETE values for all 27 Evacuation Regions and all 14 Evacuation Scenarios. Table 73 and Table 74 present the ETE values for the 2Mile Region for both staged and unstaged keyhole regions downwind to 5 miles. They are organized as follows:

Table Contents The 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.

The 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The 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.

The 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 above reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (un staged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure 78.

Most of the congestion is located in Zones C2, B2, D2, and E2 which are beyond the 5mile area; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R01 (the 2mile region) range from 2:00 to 2:20 (hr:min) for all Scenarios.

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R02 (the 5mile region) range from 2:30 to 2:35 for all Scenarios.

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R03 (full EPZ) range from 3:35 to 5:40 and are approximately an hour and a half longer (on average) than the 5mile region for all Scenarios except the Special Event Scenario (discussed below).

The 100th percentile ETE for all Regions except R03, R12, R13, R17, and R18 (which extend to the EPZ boundary and include Seneca and/or Clemson) are equal to trip generation time plus a 5 or 10minute travel time. This fact implies that the congestion within the EPZ dissipates prior to the end of mobilization for these regions.

Comparison of Scenarios 9 and 13 in Table 71 indicates that the Special Event - Clemson University football game - has significant impact on the ETE for the 90th and 100th percentile for Regions containing Zones B2, C2, and/or D2 (regions R03, R12, R13, R16, R17, and R18).

Evacuees from these regions utilize the same roadways as the 34,552 vehicles present for the special event. As such, the capacities of these roadways are constrained, and congestion develops. The resulting congestion increases the 90th percentile ETE by as much as 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 5 minutes. The congestion also increases the 100th percentile ETE by as much as 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes, well beyond trip generation. Game day traffic management strategies were modeled to accurately represent this case; see Section 3.8 for additional information.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure - one lane eastbound on US 123 from the interchange with SH 93 in Clemson to the interchange with SH 93 in Easley - has a slight impact (up to 20 minutes increase) on the 90th percentile ETE for the regions that extend to the EPZ boundary with wind toward the south and southeast (Regions R12, R16 through R18). The roadway closure also increases the 100th percentile ETE for the entire EPZ (Region R03) and wind toward the southeast (Region R18) by as much as 10 minutes.

Wind toward the south and southeast carries the plume over Clemson, which routes traffic onto US 123 eastbound. With a lane closed on US 123 eastbound in Clemson, the capacity of US 123 is nearly cut in half, increasing congestion and prolonging ETE. Regions R04 through R11, R13 through R15, and R19 through R27 involve evacuation out to 5 miles from ONS or involve Oconee Nuclear Station 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

evacuation predominately westbound along US 123/US 76 and northbound on US 178 and are not materially impacted by the decreased capacity along US 123 eastbound.

The results of the roadway impact scenario indicate that events such as adverse weather or traffic accidents which close a lane on US 123, for example, could impact ETE. State and local police could consider traffic management tactics such as using the shoulder of the roadway as a travel lane or rerouting of traffic along other evacuation routes to avoid overwhelming any major evacuation route. All efforts should be made to remove blockages along any major evacuation route.

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 results. Note that Regions R19 through R27 are the same geographic areas as Regions R02, R04 through R11, respectively, as discussed in Section 6. The times shown in Table 73 and Table 74 are when the 2Mile Region is 90 percent clear and 100 percent clear, respectively.

The objective of a staged evacuation strategy is to ensure that the ETE for the 2Mile Region is not significantly increased (30 minutes or 25%, whichever is less) when evacuating areas beyond 2Miles. Additionally, staged evacuation should not significantly increase the ETE for people evacuating beyond 2Miles. In all cases, as shown in Table 73 and Table 7-4, the 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region the same for all Regions and Scenarios with and without staging. As discussed in Section 7.3, there is little congestion within the 5Mile Region, and no congestion in the 2Mile Region. As such, the evacuation of those between 2 and 5 miles does not impede the evacuation of those evacuees within 2 miles of ONS.

While failing to provide assistance to evacuees from within 2 miles of the ONS, staging produces a negative impact on the ETE for those evacuating from within the 5mile area. A comparison of ETE between Regions R19 to R27 with Regions R02, R04 through R11; reveals that staging retards the 90th percentile evacuation time for those in the 2 to 5mile area by up to 35 minutes (see Table 71). These prolonged ETE are 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, the staged evacuation option provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2 Mile region and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the ONS.

Staged evacuation is not recommended 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:

Oconee Nuclear Station 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1. Identify the applicable Scenario (Step 1):

• Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

• Day of Week Midweek Weekend

• Time of Day Midday Evening

• Weather Condition Good Weather Rain Ice

• Special Event Clemson University football game Road Closure (A single lane on US 123 EB)

• 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 are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (2) and (4) apply.

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (7) and (10) for rain apply.

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and Ice are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (8) and (11) for Ice apply.

• The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes that public schools are 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 (Step 2):

• Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of compass orientation: from N, NNE, NE, Oconee Nuclear Station 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• Determine the distance that the Evacuation Region will extend from the ONS. The applicable distances and their associated candidate Regions are given below:

2 Miles (Region R01)

To 5 Miles (Region R02, R04 through R11)

To EPZ Boundary (Regions R03, R12 through R18)

• Enter Table 75 and identify the applicable group of candidate Regions based on the distance that the selected Region extends from the ONS. 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 4:00 AM.

• It is raining.

• Wind direction is from the northwest (NW).

Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 5mile radius and downwind to 10 miles (to EPZ boundary).

• 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 5Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary for wind direction from the NW and read Region R18 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 R18. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R18; it contains the ETE value of 3:45.

Oconee Nuclear Station 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 Winter 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 Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Radial Regions R01 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:00 R02 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:30 2:35 R03 3:50 4:05 3:35 3:45 3:35 3:55 4:10 4:40 3:40 3:55 4:15 3:35 5:30 4:00 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:25 R05 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:15 R06 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:15 R07 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:20 R08 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:20 R09 2:25 2:30 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:25 R10 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:25 2:30 2:25 R11 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:35 2:35 Evacuate 5Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary R12 3:05 3:10 3:00 3:10 2:55 3:15 3:20 3:40 3:00 3:10 3:25 2:50 4:55 3:25 R13 2:50 3:00 2:50 3:00 2:40 2:55 3:05 3:15 2:50 3:00 3:05 2:45 3:50 2:50 R14 3:00 3:00 2:55 2:55 2:55 3:00 3:00 3:05 2:55 3:00 3:00 2:55 2:55 3:00 R15 2:50 3:05 2:45 2:55 2:45 2:50 3:00 3:10 2:45 2:50 3:00 2:45 2:45 2:50 R16 3:05 3:15 3:00 3:10 2:55 3:10 3:25 3:25 3:05 3:10 3:25 3:00 3:35 3:10 R17 3:25 3:35 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:35 3:50 4:10 3:15 3:30 3:40 3:15 5:20 3:40 R18 3:45 3:55 3:35 3:45 3:30 3:55 4:15 4:30 3:40 3:55 4:15 3:35 5:30 4:00 Oconee Nuclear Station 79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter 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 Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R19 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:05 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:00 3:00 3:00 R20 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:55 2:50 2:50 2:55 3:00 2:50 2:55 3:00 2:50 2:50 2:50 R21 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:40 2:45 2:40 R22 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:40 2:45 2:40 2:40 2:40 R23 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 R24 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 R25 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 R26 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:45 2:50 2:45 2:45 2:45 R27 2:55 2:55 2:55 2:55 2:55 2:55 2:55 3:00 2:55 3:00 3:00 2:55 2:55 2:55 Oconee Nuclear Station 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 Winter 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 Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Radial Regions R01 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R02 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R03 5:15 5:55 5:30 5:55 4:55 5:40 6:10 6:40 5:20 5:50 6:25 5:15 7:10 5:35 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R06 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R07 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R08 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R09 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R10 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R11 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 Evacuate 5Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary R12 4:55 5:00 4:55 5:00 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:10 4:55 4:55 5:10 4:55 6:40 4:55 R13 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:05 4:55 R14 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R15 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R16 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 R17 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:05 5:35 4:55 4:55 5:00 4:55 7:00 4:55 R18 5:05 5:10 5:15 5:25 4:55 5:00 5:25 6:25 4:55 5:20 5:50 4:55 7:10 5:15 Oconee Nuclear Station 711 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Winter 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 Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R19 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R20 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R21 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R22 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R23 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R24 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R25 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R26 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 R27 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 Oconee Nuclear Station 712 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area 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 Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation Radial Regions R01 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R02 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R03 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 Unstaged Evacuation Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R05 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R06 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R07 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R08 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R09 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R10 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R11 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R19 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R20 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R21 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R22 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R23 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R24 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R25 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R26 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 R27 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:15 2:00 Oconee Nuclear Station 713 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area 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 Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Ice Rain Ice Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation Radial Regions R01 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R02 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R03 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Unstaged Evacuation Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R05 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R06 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R07 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R08 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R09 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R10 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R11 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R19 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R20 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R21 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R22 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R23 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R24 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R25 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R26 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 R27 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 Oconee Nuclear Station 714 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Region Radial Regions Zone Region Description A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R01 2Mile Region X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R04 NNW, N, NNE X X X R05 NE, ENE X X X R06 E X X R07 ESE, SE, SSE X X X R08 S X X X R09 SSW X X X X R10 SW, WSW X X X R11 W, WNW, NW X X X Evacuate 5Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R12 NNW, N X X X X X X X X X R13 NNE, NE, ENE X X X X X X X X X R14 E, ESE, SE X X X X X X X X X R15 SSE, S, SSW X X X X X X X X X R16 SW, WSW X X X X X X X X X R17 W, WNW X X X X X X X X X R18 NW X X X X X X X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R19 5Mile Region X X X X X X X R20 NNW, N, NNE X X X R21 NE, ENE X X X R22 E X X R23 ESE, SE, SSE X X X R24 S X X X R25 SSW X X X X R26 SW, WSW X X X R27 W, WNW, NW X X X Zone(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace for R01, then Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Oconee Nuclear Station 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 72. ONS Shadow Region Oconee Nuclear Station 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 1) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 79. 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%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 Oconee Nuclear Station 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 711. 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%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 Oconee Nuclear Station 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 5) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 5 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 50 (Thousands) 40 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 Oconee Nuclear Station 726 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Ice (Scenario 8) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 Oconee Nuclear Station 727 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 9) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 717. 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%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 Oconee Nuclear Station 728 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Ice (Scenario 11) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 719. 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%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 Oconee Nuclear Station 729 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good, Special Event (Scenario 13) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

100 90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 60 50 (Thousands) 40 30 20 10 0

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 721. 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%

80 70 60 Vehicles Evacuating 50 40 (Thousands) 30 20 10 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 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 Oconee Nuclear Station 730 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES This section details the analyses applied and the results obtained in the form of Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for transit vehicles (e.g., buses, wheelchair transport vehicles, and ambulances). The demand for transit service reflects the needs of three population groups:

residents with no vehicles available; residents of special facilities such as schools, medical facilities, and correctional facilities; and access and/or functional needs population.

These transit vehicles mix with the general evacuation traffic that is comprised mostly of passenger cars (pcs). The presence of each transit vehicle 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.

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 the counties, bus mobilization time will average approximately 90 minutes for all schools within both counties extending from the ATE, to the time when buses first arrive at the facility to be evacuated and are ready to load students. In addition, based on discussions with the offsite agencies, it is estimated that transit dependent buses and access and/or functional need buses mobilize within 120 minutes, which is when approximately 80% of the residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization activities. Buses, wheelchair vans, and ambulances will arrive at all medical facilities to be evacuated within 90 minutes, 120 minutes, and 20 minutes of the ATE, respectively.

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 ONS EPZ indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to pickup points if an evacuation was ordered, and that parents should pick schoolchildren up at the pickup points.

As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a rapidly escalating event at the plant wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented.

Therefore, children are evacuated to pickup points. Picking up children at school could add to Oconee Nuclear Station 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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. This report provides estimates of buses under the assumption that no children at schools and large day care centers will be picked up by their parents (in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1), to present an upper bound estimate of buses required. Many small day care centers have no means for transporting children. As such, it was assumed parents will pick up children at small day care centers (less than 30 students) will be picked up by parents prior to beginning their evacuation trip and that the time to complete 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 or school pickup points The ETE for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. 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, Transit Dependent People, Medical and Correctional Facilities The EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if school is 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 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 transport service to evacuees. For this reason, the ETE for the transitdependent population was calculated for both a single wave transit evacuation and for a second wave evacuation.

The number of available transportation resources were based on information 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, medical facilities, transitdependent population, and access and/or functional needs population (discussed below in Section 8.2). There is a shortfall of buses, wheelchair capable vehicles, and ambulances to evacuate the children at schools, patients at medical facilities, the transit dependent population and the access and/or functional needs population in the EPZ in a single wave. However, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R03 (the entire EPZ), then there may be sufficient transit resources relative to demand in the impacted Region and this discussion of a second wave would likely not apply. It is assumed that there are enough drivers available to man all resources listed in Table 81.

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 Oconee Nuclear Station 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

dispatched after people have completed their mobilization activities and are in a position to board the buses when they arrive at the pickup points along the transit routes.

Evacuation of Schools, Childcare Centers, and Day Camps Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization is the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate until the time the buses arrive at the facility to be evacuated. It is assumed that for a rapidly escalating event at the plant wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented, drivers would likely 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, 110 minutes in icy conditions.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

Based on discussions with offsite agencies, a loading time of 15 minutes for good weather (20 minutes for rain and 25 minutes for ice) for school buses is used.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The buses servicing the schools, childcare centers, and day camps are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the advisory to evacuate - 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 school pickup point or reception center. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes from the school, childcare center or day camp 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 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., 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 for school/childcare center/day camp evacuation in good weather, rain and icy conditions, respectively. The travel time to the EPZ boundary was computed for each bus using the computed average speed and the distance to Oconee Nuclear Station 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

the EPZ boundary along the most likely route out of the EPZ. The travel time from the EPZ boundary to the school pickup point was computed assuming an average speed of 45 mph (41 mph for rain - 10% decrease - and 36 mph for ice - 20% decrease), 41 mph, and 36 mph for good weather, rain and ice, respectively. Speeds were reduced in Table 82 through Table 84 and in Table 85 through Table 87 to 45 mph, 41 mph, and 36 mph for those calculated bus speeds which exceed 45 mph (or 41 mph or 36 mph), as the school bus speed limit for state routes in South Carolina is 45 mph (see assumption 7 in Section 2.1).

Table 82 (good weather), Table 83 (rain) and Table 84 (ice) present the following evacuation time estimates (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for schools in the EPZ:

(1) The elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate until the bus exits the EPZ; and (2) The elapsed time until the bus reaches the school pickup point.

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 + 27 = 2:15 for Blue Ridge Elementary, with good weather).

The average ETE for schools, childcare centers, and day camps are about 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 25 minutes less than the 90th percentile ETE for Region R03 for the general population during Scenario 6 conditions (3:55 -2:30 = 1:25) in good weather respectively. Hence, ETE is not likely to impact protective action decision making.

The evacuation time to the School Pickup Point (PP) or Reception Center (R.C.) is determined by adding the time associated with Activity EF (discussed below), to this EPZ evacua on me.

Activity: Travel to Pickup Point (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the Pickup Points/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 Pickup Points and Reception Centers are mapped in Figure 103. For a single wave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. For a twowave evacuation, the ETE for buses must be considered separately when making a protective action decision, since it could exceed the ETE for the general public.

Assumed bus speeds of 45 mph, 41 mph, and 36 mph for good weather, rain, and ice, respectively, are applied for this activity, for the buses servicing the schools in the EPZ.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

A bus can empty within 5 minutes. The driver takes a 10minute break.

Activity: Bus Returns to Route for Second Wave Evacuation (GC DE)

As shown in Table 81, there is a shortfall of buses for evacuation of children in a single wave, if the entire EPZ is evacuated at once (a highly unlikely event). However, there might be a shortfall of drivers in any cases. As such, a twowave evacuation may be needed for some schools. Due to the large number of schools in the EPZ, second wave ETE were not computed for each school. Rather, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation of schools, childcare centers, and day camps. The Oconee Nuclear Station 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

travel time from the PP/R.C. back to the EPZ boundary and then back to the school was computed assuming an average speed of 45 mph (good weather), 41 mph (rain) and 36 mph (ice) as buses will be traveling counter to the evacuation traffic. Time and distance are based on averages for all schools, childcare centers, and day camps in the EPZ for good weather:

• School buses arrive at PP/RC at 2:51 on average.

• Bus discharges passengers (5 minutes) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 15 minutes.

• Bus returns to EPZ and completes second route: 20.3 minutes to return to the EPZ (equal to average travel time to PP/RC for good weather) + 6.5 minutes to return to the start of the route (4.9 miles, average distance to EPZ boundary from Table 82 @

45 mph) + 28.1 minutes to perform a second wave of service on the route (4.9 miles, average distance to EPZ boundary from Table 82 @ 10.45 mph, average network speed at this time, 3:35, rounded) = 55 minutes, rounded.

• Loading Time: 15 minutes.

• Bus exits EPZ at time 2:51 + 0:15 + 0:55 + 0:15 = 4:20 after the ATE, rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

Given the average single wave ETE for schools, childcare centers, and day camps is about 2:30, a second wave evacuation would require an additional 1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes, on average for good weather. In addition, this second wave ETE (4:20) exceeds the 90th percentile ETE (3:55) for Region R03 for the general population during Scenario 6 conditions in good weather by 25 minutes. Thus, it will likely impact protective action decision making.

Evacuation of TransitDependent Population (Residents without access to a vehicle)

A detailed computation of the transit dependent population was performed and is discussed in Section 3.6. The total number of transit dependent people per Zone was determined using a weighted distribution based on population. The number of buses required to evacuate this population was determined by the capacity of 30 people per bus.

Buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along major evacuation routes then proceed out of the EPZ. The county emergency plans do not define transit dependent bus routes. The 13 bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102 and described in Table 101 were designed by KLD to service the major routes through each Zone. It is assumed that residents will walk to and congregate at the major evacuation routes to flag down buses, and that they can arrive at these roads within the 120minute bus mobilization time (good weather).

Evacuation Time Estimates for Transit Trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. 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.

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 Oconee Nuclear Station 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters),

80% of the evacuees will complete their mobilization when the buses begin their routes, approximately 120 minutes after the ATE. Zone C2 has a high transitdependent population and requires more buses than any other Zone (Table 101). As such, two separate routes have been identified for this Zone. Due to the low population in Zones A0, C1, and D1, two routes was assigned for these three Zones. All other Zones have been assigned a single route each.

Mobilization times are 10 and 20 minutes longer in rain and ice, respectively, to account for slower travel speeds and reduced roadway capacity.

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 mph = 37 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; total loading time is 40 minutes per bus in rain, 50 minutes in ice.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective bus routes within the EPZ is estimated using the GIS 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.

Table 85 through Table 87 present the transitdependent population evacuation time estimates for each bus route calculated using the above procedures for good weather, rain and ice, respectively.

Oconee Nuclear Station 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

For example, the ETE for the bus route servicing Zone A2 is computed as 120 + 95 + 30 = 4:05 for good weather (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 95 minutes is the time to travel 16 miles at 10.1 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route at 120 minutes.

The average single wave ETE (3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 35 minutes) for the transit dependent population does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE for the general population which is 3:55 minutes for a winter, midweek, midday, with good weather scenario (Scenario 6) and R03. Hence, Transit dependent population ETE is not likely to impact the protective action decision making.

The ETE for a second wave (discussed below) is presented in the event there is a shortfall of available buses or bus drivers, as previously discussed. The evacuation time to the Reception Center (R.C.) 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 GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the reception center. The reception centers are mapped in Figure 101. For a onewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. For a twowave evacuation, the ETE for buses must be considered separately, since it could exceed the ETE for the general public. Assumed bus speeds of 45 mph, 41 mph, and 36 mph for good weather, rain, and ice respectively, are applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

A bus can empty within 5 minutes. The driver takes a 10minute break.

Activity: Bus Returns to Route for Second Wave Evacuation (GC)

The buses assigned to return to the EPZ to perform a second wave evacuation of transit dependent evacuees will be those that have already evacuated transitdependent people who mobilized more quickly. The first wave of transitdependent people departs the bus, and the bus then returns to the EPZ, travels to its route and proceeds to pick up more transit dependent evacuees along the route. The travel time back to the EPZ is equal to the travel time to the reception center.

The second wave ETE for the bus route servicing Zone A2 is computed as follows for good weather:

• Bus arrives at reception center at 4:40 in good weather (4:05 to exit EPZ + 35 minute travel time to reception center).

• Bus discharges passengers (5 minutes) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 15 minutes.

• Bus returns to EPZ and completes second route: 35 minutes (equal to travel time to reception center) + 21.3 minutes (16 miles @ 45 mph to return to start of route) +

21.3 minutes (16 miles @ 45 mph [average speed along this route at this time]) = 78 minutes (1:28), rounded

• Bus completes pickups along route: 30 minutes.

Oconee Nuclear Station 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• Bus exits EPZ at time 4:05 + 0:35 + 0:15 + 1:28 + 0:30 = 6:45 (rounded to nearest 5 minutes) after the Advisory to Evacuate.

The ETE for the completion of the second wave for all transitdependent bus routes are provided in Table 85 through Table 87. The average ETE for a twowave evacuation of transit dependent people exceeds the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile.

The average second wave ETE (6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and 5 minutes) for the transit dependent population exceeds the 90th percentile ETE by two hours and 10 minutes for the general population which is 3:55 minutes for a winter, midweek, midday, with good weather scenario (Scenario 6) and R03. Hence, the second wave transitdependent population ETE is likely to impact the protective action decision making.

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.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities The evacuation of these facilities is similar to school evacuation except:

• Buses are assigned on the basis of 30 patients to allow for staff to accompany the patients. Wheelchair buses can accommodate 15 patients and ambulances can accommodate 2 patients.

• Loading times of 1 minutes, 5 minutes, and 15 minutes per patient are assumed for ambulatory patients, wheelchair bound patients, and bedridden patients, respectively.

Table 36 indicates that 30 buses, 20 wheelchair buses and 39 ambulances are needed to service all of the special facilities in the EPZ. According to Table 81, the counties can collectively provide 277 buses, wheelchair capacity for 80 wheelchair bound people, 9 wheelchair vans, and 49 ambulances. Thus, there are sufficient resources, from a capacity standpoint, to evacuate the ambulatory, bedridden persons from within the EPZ in a single wave. However, there is a shortfall of all types of vehicles to evacuate the children at schools, patients at medical facilities, the transitdependent population and the access and/or functional needs population in the EPZ in a single wave. Hence, multiple waves of buses, wheelchair transport vehicles, and ambulances are needed to evacuate the ambulatory, wheelchair bound, and bedridden population at the medical facilities within the EPZ when a full EPZ (R03) evacuation is ordered.

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

As discussed in Section 2, It is estimated that mobilization time averages 90 minutes for buses, 120 minutes for wheelchair vans, and 20 minutes for ambulances for medical facilities.

Specially trained medical support staff (working their regular shift) will be on site to assist in the evacuation of patients. It is assumed additional staff (if needed) could be mobilized over this same 90minute, 120minute, and 20minute timeframe.

Oconee Nuclear Station 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

Item 5 of Section 2.4 discusses transit vehicle loading times for medical facilities. Loading times are assumed to be 1 minute per ambulatory passenger, 5 minutes per wheelchair bound passenger, and 15 minutes per bedridden passenger for buses, wheelchair accessible buses/vans, and ambulances, respectively. Item 3 of Section 2.4 discusses transit vehicle capacities to cap loading times per vehicle type.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective evacuation routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Vehicle travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school and childcare center evacuation.

Table 88 through Table 810 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather, rain, and ice. Based on the locations of the medical facilities in Figure E3, it is estimated that buses will have to travel 5 miles, on average, to leave the EPZ. Average speeds output by the model, capped at 45 mph (41 mph for rain and 36 mph for ice), are used to compute travel time to EPZ boundary. The ETE is the sum of the mobilization time, total passenger loading time, and travel time out of the EPZ. Concurrent loading on multiple buses, wheelchair buses/vans, and ambulances at capacity is assumed such that the maximum loading times for buses, wheelchair buses, wheelchair vans and ambulances are 90, 75, 20 and 30 minutes, respectively. All ETE are rounded to the nearest 5 minutes. For example, the calculation of ETE for the Keowee Place with 23 ambulatory residents during good weather is:

ETE: 90 + 23 x 1 + 7 = 120 min. or 2:00 rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

It is assumed that the medical facility population is directly evacuated to appropriate host medical facilities. Relocation of this population to permanent facilities and/or passing through the reception center before arriving at the host facility are not considered in this analysis.

The average ETE (1:55) for medical facilities is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> less than the 90th percentile ETE (3:55) for Region R03 for the general population during Scenario 6 conditions in good weather. Hence, ETE is not likely to impact protective action decision making.

Activity: Vehicles Travel to Host Facilities (EF), Passengers Leave (FG), Vehicle Returns to Route for Second Wave Evacuation (GCDE)

As shown in Table 81, there are insufficient buses, wheelchair vehicles, and ambulances to evacuate the wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at the medical facilities in the EPZ. It is assumed that these medical facilities are evacuated to the Prisma Health Greenville Memorial Hospital in Greenville, South Carolina, which is 24 miles from the EPZ boundary.

For simplicity, second wave ETE for these vehicle types were not computed for each medical facility. Rather, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation for ambulances.

Oconee Nuclear Station 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Times and distances are based on facilitywide averages:

• Ambulatory patients:

o Buses arrive at Host Hospitals at 2:41 (2:09 Average ETE for buses to exit the EPZ plus 32 minutes to travel 24 miles at 45 mph).

o Bus discharges passengers (24 minutes - average loading time for buses from Table 88) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 34 minutes.

o Bus returns to facility: 32 minutes to travel back to the EPZ boundary (time needed to travel 24 miles back to the EPZ at 45 mph) + 4 minutes to travel back to the facility (average distance to EPZ = 3 miles for buses from Table 88 @ 45 mph) = 36 minutes.

o Remaining patients loaded on bus (average): 24 minutes.

o Bus travels to EPZ boundary: 20.8 minutes (average distance from medical facilities to EPZ boundary (3 miles) at 8.65 mph (network wide average speed at 4:20).

o Bus exits EPZ at time 2:41 + 0:34 + 0:36 + 0:24 + 0:21 = 4:40 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Thus, the second wave evacuation for buses requires about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 35 minutes (4:45 - 2:10

= 2:35) more than the first wave ETE. The average ETE for a twowave evacuation of medical facilities exceeds the ETE for the general population (3:55) at the 90th percentile for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 6) conditions and could impact protective action decision making.

• Wheelchair bound patients:

o Vans arrive at Host Hospitals at 3:06 (2:34 Average ETE for vans to exit the EPZ plus 32 minutes to travel 24 miles at 45 mph).

o Van discharges passengers (19 minutes - average loading time for vans from Table 88) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 29 minutes.

o Van returns to facility: 32 minutes to travel back to the EPZ boundary (time needed to travel 24 miles back to the EPZ at 45 mph) + 4 minutes to travel back to the facility (average distance to EPZ = 3 miles for vans from Table 88 @ 45 mph) = 36 minutes.

o Remaining patients loaded on vans (average): 19 minutes.

o Van travels to EPZ boundary: 22 minutes (average distance from medical facilities to EPZ boundary (3 miles) at 8.16 mph (network wide average speed at 4:30).

o Van exits EPZ at time 3:06 + 0:29 + 0:36 + 0:19 + 0:22 = 4:55 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Thus, the second wave evacuation for wheelchair vehicles requires about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 20 minutes (4:55 - 2:35 = 2:20) more than the first wave ETE. The average ETE for a twowave evacuation of medical facilities using vans exceeds the ETE for the general population (3:55) at the 90th percentile for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 6) conditions and could impact protective action decision making.

Oconee Nuclear Station 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• Bedridden patients:

o Ambulances arrive at Host Hospitals at 1:30 (0:58 Average ETE for ambulances to exit the EPZ plus 32 minutes to travel 24 miles at 45 mph).

o Ambulance discharges passengers (29 minutes - average loading time for ambulances from Table 88) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 39 minutes.

o Ambulance returns to facility: 32 minutes to travel back to the EPZ boundary (time needed to travel 24 miles back to the EPZ at 45 mph) + 4 minutes to travel back to the facility (average distance to EPZ = 3 miles for ambulances from Table 88@ 45 mph) = 36 minutes.

o Remaining patients loaded on ambulance (average): 29 minutes.

o Ambulance travels to EPZ boundary: 17.8 minutes (average distance from medical facilities to EPZ boundary (3 miles) at 10.13 mph (network wide average speed at 3:15).

o Ambulance exits EPZ at time 1:30 + 0:39 + 0:36 + 0:29 + 0:18 = 3:35 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Thus, the second wave evacuation for ambulances requires about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 35 minutes (3:35

- 1:00 = 2:35) more than the first wave ETE. The average ETE for a twowave evacuation of medical facilities using ambulances does not exceed the ETE for the general population (3:55) at the 90th percentile for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 6) conditions and thus, the evacuation time for bedridden patients is unlikely to impact protective action decision making.

Correctional Facilities As detailed in Section 3.10 and Table E7, there is one correctional facility within the EPZ - the Oconee County Detention Center. The total inmate population at the facility is 122 persons.

This facility will shelter in place in the event of an evacuation, as per the Oconee County emergency plan. As such, ETE are not computed for this facility.

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population The county emergency management agencies have a combined registration for transit dependent and access and/or functional needs people. Based on data provided by the counties, there is 536 access and/or functional needs person within the entire EPZ. See Section 3.9 for details.

Table 811 summarizes the ETE for access and/or functional needs person. 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 to reduce the number of stops per vehicle. It is conservatively assumed that all special needs households (ambulatory, wheelchair bound, and bedridden) are spaced 5 miles apart. Bus, van and ambulance speed approximate 20 mph between households in good weather (10% slower in rain, 20% slower in ice).

Mobilization times of 120 minutes were used (130 minutes for rain, and 140 minutes for ice).

The last HH is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 45 mph (41 mph for rain and 36 mph for ice), after the last pickup is used to Oconee Nuclear Station 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

compute travel time. 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 to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, assuming no more than one access and/or functional needs person per HH implies that 415 ambulatory households need to be serviced. While only 14 buses are needed from a capacity perspective, if 30 buses are deployed to service these access and/or functional needs HH, then each would require about 14 stops. The following outlines the ETE calculations:

1. Assume 30 buses are deployed, each with about 14 stops, to service a total of 415 HH.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the first pickup location: 120 minutes

b. Load HH members at first pickup: 1 minutes

c. Travel to subsequent pickup locations: 13 @ 9 minutes = 117 minutes

d. Load HH members at subsequent pickup locations: 13 @ 1 minutes = 13 minutes

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 35 minutes (5 miles at 8.6 mph).

ETE: 120 + 1 + 117 + 13 + 35 = 4:50 rounded to the nearest 5 minutes The average single wave ETE (4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 15 minutes) for the access and functional needs person which exceeds the 90th percentile ETE (3:55) for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, with good weather scenario (Scenario 6) for the full EPZ by 20 minutes.

Therefore, the time to evacuate the access and/or functional needs population is likely to impact the protective action decision making.

For simplicity, second wave ETE for access and functional needs person were not computed for each vehicle type. Rather, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation for buses.

The following outlines the ETE calculations of a second wave using buses after the medical facilities have been evacuated assuming the host medical facilities are located 24 miles away from the EPZ boundary:

a. Buses arrive at host medical facilities: 2:41 (2:09 Average ETE for buses to exit the EPZ from Table 88 plus 32 minutes to travel 24 miles @ 45 mph) or 161 minutes on average.

b. Unload patients at host medical facilities: 24 minutes on average.

c. Driver takes 10minute rest: 10 minutes.

d. Travel time back to EPZ: 32 minutes (24 miles @ 45 mph).

e. Travel to first household: 15 minutes (5 miles @ 20 mph).

f. Loading time at first household: 1 minutes.

g. Travel to subsequent pickup location: 13 @ 9 minutes = 117 minutes

h. Loading time at subsequent household: 13 stop @ 1 minutes = 13 minutes

i. Travel time to EPZ boundary: 5 miles @6.51 mph (at 6:13) = 46 minutes Bus exits EPZ at time: 161 + 24 + 10 + 32 + 15 + 1 + 117 + 13 + 46 = 419 or 7:00 after the ATE, rounded to the nearest 5minutes.

Oconee Nuclear Station 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The average ETE of a secondwave evacuation of the ambulatory access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ is 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 5 minutes longer than the 90th percentile ETE for an evacuation of the general population in the Full EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and could impact protective action decision making.

Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Wheelchair Transportation Capacity/ Wheelchair Buses Ambulances Resource Wheelchair Vans Population Resources Available School District of Oconee 123 0 0 0 PRISMA 0 1 0 30 Clemson Area Transit (CAT) 8 0 0 0 Oconee County 0 32 4 0 Pickens County 0 47 5 19 Pickens School District 146 0 0 0 TOTAL: 277 80 9 49 Resources Needed Schools (Table 38): 272 0 0 0 TransitDependent Population (Table 37): 14 0 0 0 Medical Facilities (Table 36): 30 242 0 39 Access and/or Functional Needs (Table 39): 30 95 0 13 Correctional Facilities (Section 3.10): ShelterinPlace TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 346 337 0 52 Oconee Nuclear Station 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Dist. Travel Dist. Time to EPZ Time from Driver Loading To EPZ Average EPZ Bdry to EPZ Bdry ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE PP/RC to PP/RC PP/RC School, Childcare Center, Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

SCHOOLS OCONEE COUNTY, SC Blue Ridge Elementary School 90 15 1.1 2.5 26 2:15 9.0 12 2:30 Faith Christian School (Faith Training Center) 90 15 2.3 12.5 11 2:00 6.0 8 2:10 James M Brown Elementary School 90 15 1.8 12.1 9 1:55 6.0 8 2:05 Keowee Elementary School 90 15 9.2 14.6 38 2:25 6.0 8 2:35 Northside Elementary School 90 15 2.9 2.2 80 3:05 9.0 12 3:20 Oconee Academy 90 15 2.9 15.9 11 2:00 7.0 9 2:10 Oconee Christian Academy 90 15 3.6 15.9 14 2:00 7.0 9 2:10 Ravenel Elementary School 90 15 5.3 1.8 173 4:40 9.0 12 4:55 Salem Seventh Day Adventist Elementary School 90 15 17.0 8.4 122 3:50 4.0 5 3:55 Seneca High School 90 15 3.2 9.8 20 2:05 7.0 9 2:15 Seneca Middle School 90 15 3.2 9.8 20 2:05 7.0 9 2:15 TamasseeSalem Elementary School 90 15 13.3 7.0 114 3:40 5.0 7 3:50 Walhalla Elementary School 90 15 4.8 6.6 44 2:30 4.0 5 2:35 Walhalla High School 90 15 2.3 4.6 30 2:15 6.0 8 2:25 Walhalla Middle School 90 15 2.6 4.9 32 2:20 6.0 8 2:30 Fred P Hamilton Career Center 90 15 Inside Shadow Region N/A 6.0 8 1:55 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Central Elementary School 90 15 4.9 17.6 17 2:05 13.0 17 2:25 Clemson Elementary School 90 15 6.5 14.3 27 2:15 13.0 17 2:35 Clemson Montessori School 90 15 7.6 16.1 28 2:15 11.0 15 2:30 Clemson University 90 15 6.5 16.6 23 2:10 13.0 17 2:30 Clemson University Graduate School 90 15 6.5 16.6 23 2:10 13.0 17 2:30 Daniel High School 90 15 10.0 6.2 96 3:25 11.0 15 3:40 R. C. Edwards Middle School 90 15 6.3 17.5 22 2:10 12.0 16 2:30 Six Mile Elementary School 90 15 6.3 12.5 30 2:15 3.0 4 2:20 School Maximum for EPZ: 4:40 School Maximum: 4:55 School Average for EPZ: 2:30 School Average: 2:45 Oconee Nuclear Station 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Dist. Travel Dist. Time to EPZ Time from Driver Loading To EPZ Average EPZ Bdry to EPZ Bdry ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE PP/RC to PP/RC PP/RC School, Childcare Center, Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CHILDCARE CENTERS AND DAY CAMPS OCONEE COUNTY, SC Foothills Early Learning Center 90 15 3.2 2.2 88 3:15 27.0 36 3:55 Seneca Head Start Center 90 15 3.3 2.1 93 3:20 27.0 36 4:00 Trinity Baptist Church Preschool 90 15 1.9 2.0 56 2:45 27.0 36 3:25 St. Mark Child Development Center 90 15 2.0 2.0 59 2:45 27.0 36 3:25 Our Clubhouse 90 15 2.9 2.2 80 3:05 27.0 36 3:45 Seneca Baptist Church Day Care 90 15 1.1 2.2 30 2:15 27.0 36 2:55 Upstate Children's Center 90 15 3.1 7.4 25 2:10 38.0 51 3:05 St John's Lutheran Preschool 90 15 1.0 3.8 16 2:05 40.0 53 3:00 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Kid's Stuff Academy 90 15 8.7 13.5 39 2:25 27.0 36 3:05 Clemson Tiger Tennis Camp (Day Camp) 90 15 8.9 13.5 39 2:25 27.0 36 3:05 Clemson Head Start 90 15 6.0 14.9 24 2:10 27.0 36 2:50 The Growing Place 90 15 3.8 18.9 12 2:00 27.0 36 2:40 Little Lights Child Care 90 15 4.2 18.9 13 2:00 27.0 36 2:40 Clemson Montessori School 90 15 7.6 16.1 28 2:15 11.0 15 2:30 Childcare, Day Camp Childcare, Day Camp Maximum for EPZ: 3:20 4:00 Maximum:

Childcare, Day Camp Childcare, Day Camp Average for EPZ: 2:30 3:10 Average:

Oconee Nuclear Station 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain Travel Dist. Travel Dist. Time to EPZ Time from Driver Loading To EPZ Average EPZ Bdry to EPZ Bdry ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE PP/RC to PP/RC PP/RC School, Childcare Center, Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

SCHOOLS OCONEE COUNTY, SC Blue Ridge Elementary School 100 20 1.1 2.1 31 2:35 9.0 13 2:50 Faith Christian School (Faith Training Center) 100 20 2.3 9.9 14 2:15 6.0 9 2:25 James M Brown Elementary School 100 20 1.8 9.9 11 2:15 6.0 9 2:25 Keowee Elementary School 100 20 9.2 15.5 36 2:40 6.0 9 2:50 Northside Elementary School 100 20 2.9 1.8 94 3:35 9.0 13 3:50 Oconee Academy 100 20 2.9 13.8 13 2:15 7.0 10 2:25 Oconee Christian Academy 100 20 3.6 14.0 15 2:15 7.0 10 2:25 Ravenel Elementary School 100 20 5.3 1.8 182 5:05 9.0 13 5:20 Salem Seventh Day Adventist Elementary School 100 20 17.0 7.7 132 4:15 4.0 6 4:25 Seneca High School 100 20 3.2 8.6 22 2:25 7.0 10 2:35 Seneca Middle School 100 20 3.2 8.6 22 2:25 7.0 10 2:35 TamasseeSalem Elementary School 100 20 13.3 6.7 119 4:00 5.0 7 4:10 Walhalla Elementary School 100 20 4.8 5.2 55 2:55 4.0 6 3:05 Walhalla High School 100 20 2.3 5.4 25 2:25 6.0 9 2:35 Walhalla Middle School 100 20 2.6 5.4 29 2:30 6.0 9 2:40 Fred P Hamilton Career Center 100 20 Inside Shadow Region N/A 6.0 9 2:10 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Central Elementary School 100 20 4.9 15.8 19 2:20 13.0 19 2:40 Clemson Elementary School 100 20 6.5 16.5 24 2:25 13.0 19 2:45 Clemson Montessori School 100 20 7.6 17.0 27 2:30 11.0 16 2:50 Clemson University 100 20 6.5 17.6 22 2:25 13.0 19 2:45 Clemson University Graduate School 100 20 6.5 17.6 22 2:25 13.0 19 2:45 Daniel High School 100 20 10.0 5.5 110 3:50 11.0 16 4:10 R. C. Edwards Middle School 100 20 6.3 15.6 24 2:25 12.0 18 2:45 Six Mile Elementary School 100 20 6.3 12.9 29 2:30 3.0 4 2:35 School Maximum for EPZ: 5:05 School Maximum: 5:20 School Average for EPZ: 2:50 School Average: 3:00 Oconee Nuclear Station 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Dist. Travel Dist. Time to EPZ Time from Driver Loading To EPZ Average EPZ Bdry to EPZ Bdry ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE PP/RC to PP/RC PP/RC School, Childcare Center, Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CHILD CARES AND DAY CAMP OCONEE COUNTY, SC Foothills Early Learning Center 100 20 3.2 1.9 104 3:45 27.0 40 4:25 Seneca Head Start Center 100 20 3.3 1.9 104 3:45 27.0 40 4:25 Trinity Baptist Church Preschool 100 20 1.9 1.9 60 3:00 27.0 40 3:40 St. Mark Child Development Center 100 20 2.0 1.9 63 3:05 27.0 40 3:45 Our Clubhouse 100 20 2.9 1.8 94 3:35 27.0 40 4:15 Seneca Baptist Church Day Care 100 20 1.1 1.7 39 2:40 27.0 40 3:20 Upstate Children's Center 100 20 3.1 5.2 36 2:40 38.0 56 3:40 St John's Lutheran Preschool 100 20 1.0 5.6 11 2:15 40.0 59 3:15 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Kid's Stuff Academy 100 20 8.7 15.3 34 2:35 27.0 40 3:15 Clemson Tiger Tennis Camp (Day Camp) 100 20 8.9 15.3 35 2:35 27.0 40 3:15 Clemson Head Start 100 20 6.0 16.5 22 2:25 27.0 40 3:05 The Growing Place 100 20 3.8 16.0 14 2:15 27.0 40 2:55 Little Lights Child Care 100 20 4.2 15.8 16 2:20 27.0 40 3:00 Clemson Montessori School 100 20 7.6 17.0 27 2:30 11.0 16 2:50 Childcare, Day Camp Childcare, Day Camp Maximum for EPZ: 3:45 4:25 Maximum:

Childcare, Day Camp Childcare, Day Camp Average for EPZ: 2:50 3:30 Average:

Oconee Nuclear Station 817 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Ice Travel Dist. To Travel Dist. EPZ Time from Driver Loading EPZ Average Time to Bdry to EPZ Bdry ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE PP/RC to PP/RC PP/RC School, Childcare Center, Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

SCHOOLS OCONEE COUNTY, SC Blue Ridge Elementary School 110 25 1.1 1.5 45 3:00 9.0 15 3:15 Faith Christian School (Faith Training Center) 110 25 2.3 4.7 30 2:45 6.0 10 2:55 James M Brown Elementary School 110 25 1.8 7.8 14 2:30 6.0 10 2:40 Keowee Elementary School 110 25 9.2 9.2 60 3:15 6.0 10 3:25 Northside Elementary School 110 25 2.9 1.5 117 4:15 9.0 15 4:30 Oconee Academy 110 25 2.9 10.4 17 2:35 7.0 12 2:50 Oconee Christian Academy 110 25 3.6 10.6 20 2:35 7.0 12 2:50 Ravenel Elementary School 110 25 5.3 1.6 200 5:35 9.0 15 5:50 Salem Seventh Day Adventist Elementary School 110 25 17.0 7.0 146 4:45 4.0 7 4:55 Seneca High School 110 25 3.2 8.0 24 2:40 7.0 12 2:55 Seneca Middle School 110 25 3.2 8.0 24 2:40 7.0 12 2:55 TamasseeSalem Elementary School 110 25 13.3 6.1 132 4:30 5.0 8 4:40 Walhalla Elementary School 110 25 4.8 3.9 73 3:30 4.0 7 3:40 Walhalla High School 110 25 2.3 2.8 49 3:05 6.0 10 3:15 Walhalla Middle School 110 25 2.6 2.8 55 3:10 6.0 10 3:20 Fred P Hamilton Career Center 110 25 Inside Shadow Region N/A 6.0 10 2:25 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Central Elementary School 110 25 4.9 13.8 21 2:40 13.0 22 3:05 Clemson Elementary School 110 25 6.5 16.1 24 2:40 13.0 22 3:05 Clemson Montessori School 110 25 7.6 17.3 26 2:45 11.0 18 3:05 Clemson University 110 25 6.5 17.8 22 2:40 13.0 22 3:05 Clemson University Graduate School 110 25 6.5 17.8 22 2:40 13.0 22 3:05 Daniel High School 110 25 10.0 6.1 99 3:55 11.0 18 4:15 R. C. Edwards Middle School 110 25 6.3 14.3 26 2:45 12.0 20 3:05 Six Mile Elementary School 110 25 6.3 8.7 43 3:00 3.0 5 3:05 School Maximum for EPZ: 5:35 School Maximum: 5:50 School Average for EPZ: 3:15 School Average: 3:25 Oconee Nuclear Station 818 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Dist. To Travel Dist. EPZ Time from Driver Loading EPZ Average Time to Bdry to EPZ Bdry ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE PP/RC to PP/RC PP/RC School, Childcare Center, Day Camp Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CHILD CARES AND DAY CAMP OCONEE COUNTY, SC Foothills Early Learning Center 110 25 3.2 1.6 124 4:20 27.0 45 5:05 Seneca Head Start Center 110 25 3.3 1.6 128 4:25 27.0 45 5:10 Trinity Baptist Church Preschool 110 25 1.9 1.4 80 3:35 27.0 45 4:20 St. Mark Child Development Center 110 25 2.0 1.4 85 3:40 27.0 45 4:25 Our Clubhouse 110 25 2.9 1.5 117 4:15 27.0 45 5:00 Seneca Baptist Church Day Care 110 25 1.1 1.4 48 3:05 27.0 45 3:50 Upstate Children's Center 110 25 3.1 4.1 45 3:00 38.0 63 4:05 St John's Lutheran Preschool 110 25 1.0 4.3 14 2:30 40.0 67 3:40 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Kid's Stuff Academy 110 25 8.7 15.6 33 2:50 27.0 45 3:35 Clemson Tiger Tennis Camp (Day Camp) 110 25 8.9 15.6 34 2:50 27.0 45 3:35 Clemson Head Start 110 25 6.0 16.1 22 2:40 27.0 45 3:25 The Growing Place 110 25 3.8 15.3 15 2:30 27.0 45 3:15 Little Lights Child Care 110 25 4.2 14.0 18 2:35 27.0 45 3:20 Clemson Montessori School 110 25 7.6 17.3 26 2:45 11.0 18 3:05 Childcare, Day Camp Childcare, Day Camp Maximum for EPZ: 4:25 5:10 Maximum:

Childcare, Day Camp Childcare, Day Camp Average for EPZ: 3:15 4:00 Average:

Oconee Nuclear Station 819 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Zone(s) of Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. R.C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Served Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 30 A2 1 120 16 10.1 95 30 4:05 26.0 35 5 10 78 30 6:45 31 B2 1 120 6 7.3 50 30 3:20 23.0 31 5 10 48 30 5:25 32 A1 1 120 12 19.1 38 30 3:10 26.0 35 5 10 67 30 5:40 33 B1 1 120 11 17.4 38 30 3:10 19.0 25 5 10 54 30 5:15 34 C2 (Rt 1) 1 120 12 6.6 109 30 4:20 26.0 35 5 10 67 30 6:50 35 A0/C1 2 120 20 12.5 96 30 4:10 26.0 35 5 10 88 30 7:00 36 C2 (Rt 2) 1 120 12 9.3 78 30 3:50 2.0 3 5 10 66 30 5:45 37 A0/D1 1 120 18 11.0 98 30 4:10 14.0 19 5 10 67 30 6:25 38 D2 1 120 12 13.4 54 30 3:25 17.0 23 5 10 56 30 5:30 39 E1 1 120 14 17.1 49 30 3:20 17.0 23 5 10 60 30 5:30 40 F1 1 120 16 12.8 75 30 3:45 40.0 53 5 10 96 30 7:00 41 F2 1 120 22 45.0 29 30 3:00 40.0 53 5 10 112 30 6:30 46 E2 1 120 7 14.0 30 30 3:00 18.0 24 5 10 43 30 4:55 Maximum ETE: 4:20 Maximum ETE: 7:00 Average ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 6:05 Oconee Nuclear Station 820 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Zone(s) of Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. R.C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Served Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 30 A2 1 130 16.0 9.6 100 40 4:30 26.0 38 5 10 85 35 7:25 31 B2 1 130 6.0 6.9 52 40 3:45 23.0 34 5 10 52 35 6:05 32 A1 1 130 12.0 17.7 41 40 3:35 26.0 38 5 10 73 35 6:20 33 B1 1 130 11.0 18.2 36 40 3:30 19.0 28 5 10 60 35 5:50 34 C2 (Rt 1) 1 130 12.0 6.6 109 40 4:40 26.0 38 5 10 73 35 7:25 35 A0/C1 2 130 20.0 11.7 103 40 4:35 26.0 38 5 10 97 35 7:40 36 C2 (Rt 2) 1 130 12.0 14.5 50 40 3:40 2.0 3 5 10 85 35 6:00 37 A0/D1 1 130 18.0 10.3 105 40 4:35 14.0 20 5 10 73 35 7:00 38 D2 1 130 12.0 11.6 62 40 3:55 17.0 25 5 10 61 35 6:15 39 E1 1 130 14.0 13.8 61 40 3:55 17.0 25 5 10 66 35 6:20 40 F1 1 130 16.0 13.2 73 40 4:05 40.0 59 5 10 106 35 7:40 41 F2 1 130 22.0 41.0 32 40 3:25 40.0 59 5 10 123 35 7:20 46 E2 1 130 7.0 12.3 34 40 3:25 18.0 26 5 10 46 35 5:30 Maximum ETE: 4:40 Maximum ETE: 7:40 Average ETE: 4:00 Average ETE: 6:40 Oconee Nuclear Station 821 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Ice OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Zone(s) of Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. R.C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Served Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 30 A2 1 140 16.0 8.5 113 50 5:05 26.0 43 5 10 91 40 8:15 31 B2 1 140 6.0 6.2 58 50 4:10 23.0 38 5 10 56 40 6:40 32 A1 1 140 12.0 13.3 54 50 4:05 26.0 43 5 10 79 40 7:05 33 B1 1 140 11.0 13.3 50 50 4:00 19.0 32 5 10 65 40 6:35 34 C2 (Rt 1) 1 140 12.0 7.0 103 50 4:55 26.0 43 5 10 79 40 7:55 35 A0/C1 2 140 20.0 11.9 101 50 4:55 26.0 43 5 10 103 40 8:20 36 C2 (Rt 2) 1 140 12.0 16.7 43 50 3:55 2.0 3 5 10 118 40 6:55 37 A0/D1 1 140 18.0 10.5 103 50 4:55 14.0 23 5 10 77 40 7:30 38 D2 1 140 12.0 9.9 73 50 4:25 17.0 28 5 10 64 40 6:55 39 E1 1 140 14.0 9.6 87 50 4:40 17.0 28 5 10 70 40 7:15 40 F1 1 140 16.0 15.2 63 50 4:15 40.0 67 5 10 115 40 8:15 41 F2 1 140 22.0 36.0 37 50 3:50 40.0 67 5 10 133 40 8:05 46 E2 1 140 7.0 7.3 58 50 4:10 18.0 30 5 10 51 40 6:30 Maximum ETE: 5:05 Maximum ETE: 8:20 Average ETE: 4:25 Average ETE: 7:25 Oconee Nuclear Station 822 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

OCONEE COUNTY, SC Ambulatory 90 1 23 23 5.4 7 2:00 Keowee Place Wheelchair bound 120 5 10 20 5.4 8 2:30 Bedridden 20 15 2 30 5.4 16 1:10 Belvedere Commons of Seneca Ambulatory 90 1 60 30 4.2 19 2:20 Ambulatory 90 1 1 1 3.7 27 2:00 Cottingham Hospice House Bedridden 20 15 14 30 3.7 12 1:05 Prisma Health Hospice of 1:05 Foothills Bedridden 20 15 6 30 3.7 12 Ambulatory 90 1 197 30 3.4 21 2:25 The Tribble Center Wheelchair bound 120 5 24 20 3.4 17 2:40 Ambulatory 90 1 8 8 1.9 10 1:50 Lila Doyle Nursing Care Facility Wheelchair bound 120 5 70 20 1.9 6 2:30 Bedridden 20 15 10 30 1.9 5 0:55 Ambulatory 90 1 23 23 1.8 9 2:05 Oconee Medical Center Wheelchair bound 120 5 23 20 1.8 6 2:30 Bedridden 20 15 23 30 1.8 5 0:55 Ambulatory 90 1 43 30 1.9 9 2:10 Residences at Park Place Bedridden 20 15 10 30 1.9 5 0:55 Ambulatory 90 1 50 30 3.5 16 2:20 Foothills Assisted Living Bedridden 20 15 1 15 3.5 6 0:45 Ambulatory 90 1 23 23 1.5 14 2:10 Morningside of Seneca Wheelchair bound 120 5 8 20 1.5 9 2:30 Ambulatory 90 1 25 25 0.1 1 2:00 Seneca Residential Care Center Wheelchair bound 120 5 1 5 0.1 1 2:10 Oconee Nuclear Station 823 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 90 1 68 30 0.1 1 2:05 Seneca Health and Wheelchair bound 120 5 25 20 0.1 1 2:25 Rehabilitation Bedridden 20 15 3 30 0.1 2 0:55 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Ambulatory 90 1 28 28 6.6 33 2:35 PruittHealth Pickens Wheelchair bound 120 5 12 20 6.6 26 2:50 Bedridden 20 15 4 30 6.6 13 1:05 Six Mile Assisted Living Ambulatory 90 1 40 30 6.7 9 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 34 30 3.5 13 2:15 Brookdale Central Wheelchair bound 120 5 14 20 3.5 14 2:35 Bedridden 20 15 4 30 3.5 9 1:00 Ambulatory 90 1 8 8 4.8 20 2:00 Clemson Downs Wheelchair bound 120 5 30 20 4.8 47 3:10 Bedridden 20 15 3 30 4.8 6 1:00 Ambulatory 90 1 36 30 0.1 0 2:00 AnMed Health Cannon Hospital Wheelchair bound 120 5 15 20 0.1 2 2:25 Bedridden 20 15 4 30 0.1 0 0:50 Maximum ETE: 3:10 Average ETE: 1:55 Oconee Nuclear Station 824 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 89. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

OCONEE COUNTY, SC Ambulatory 100 1 23 23 5.4 10 2:15 Keowee Place Wheelchair bound 130 5 10 20 5.4 8 2:40 Bedridden 30 15 2 30 5.4 24 1:25 Belvedere Commons of 2:35 Seneca Ambulatory 100 1 60 30 4.2 21 Ambulatory 30 1 1 1 3.7 8 0:40 Cottingham Hospice House Bedridden 130 15 14 30 3.7 20 3:00 Prisma Health Hospice of 1:30 Foothills Bedridden 30 15 6 30 3.7 28 Ambulatory 100 1 197 30 3.4 24 2:35 The Tribble Center Wheelchair bound 130 5 24 20 3.4 20 2:50 Ambulatory 100 1 8 8 1.9 11 2:00 Lila Doyle Nursing Care Facility Wheelchair bound 30 5 70 20 1.9 6 1:00 Bedridden 100 15 10 30 1.9 11 2:25 Ambulatory 30 1 23 23 1.8 8 1:05 Oconee Medical Center Wheelchair bound 100 5 23 20 1.8 11 2:15 Bedridden 130 15 23 30 1.8 7 2:50 Ambulatory 100 1 43 30 1.9 11 2:25 Residences at Park Place Bedridden 100 15 10 30 1.9 11 2:25 Ambulatory 130 1 50 30 3.5 14 2:55 Foothills Assisted Living Bedridden 10 15 1 15 3.5 5 0:30 Ambulatory 100 1 23 23 1.5 17 2:20 Morningside of Seneca Wheelchair bound 130 5 8 20 1.5 13 2:45 Oconee Nuclear Station 825 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Seneca Residential Care Ambulatory 100 1 25 25 0.1 1 2:10 Center Wheelchair bound 100 5 1 5 0.1 2 1:50 Ambulatory 30 1 68 30 0.1 2 1:05 Seneca Health and Wheelchair bound 100 5 25 20 0.1 1 2:05 Rehabilitation Bedridden 130 15 3 30 0.1 1 2:45 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Ambulatory 100 1 28 28 6.6 28 2:40 PruittHealth Pickens Wheelchair bound 130 5 12 20 6.6 29 3:00 Bedridden 30 15 4 30 6.6 12 1:15 Six Mile Assisted Living Ambulatory 100 1 40 30 6.7 10 2:20 Ambulatory 30 1 34 30 3.5 7 1:10 Brookdale Central Wheelchair bound 100 5 14 20 3.5 13 2:15 Bedridden 130 15 4 30 3.5 21 3:05 Ambulatory 30 1 8 8 4.8 7 0:45 Clemson Downs Wheelchair bound 100 5 30 20 4.8 21 2:25 Bedridden 130 15 3 30 4.8 59 3:40 Ambulatory 30 1 36 30 0.1 0 1:00 AnMed Health Cannon Wheelchair bound 100 5 15 20 0.1 0 2:00 Hospital Bedridden 130 15 4 30 0.1 1 2:45 Maximum ETE: 3:40 Average ETE: 2:10 Oconee Nuclear Station 826 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 810. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Ice Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

OCONEE COUNTY, SC Ambulatory 110 1 23 23 5.4 9 2:25 Keowee Place Wheelchair bound 140 5 10 20 5.4 9 2:50 Bedridden 40 15 2 30 5.4 34 1:45 Belvedere Commons of 2:45 Seneca Ambulatory 110 1 60 30 4.2 23 Ambulatory 110 1 1 1 3.7 36 2:30 Cottingham Hospice House Bedridden 40 15 14 30 3.7 35 1:45 Prisma Health Hospice of 1:45 Foothills Bedridden 40 15 6 30 3.7 35 Ambulatory 110 1 197 30 3.4 27 2:50 The Tribble Center Wheelchair bound 140 5 24 20 3.4 23 3:05 Ambulatory 110 1 8 8 1.9 12 2:10 Lila Doyle Nursing Care Facility Wheelchair bound 140 5 70 20 1.9 9 2:50 Bedridden 40 15 10 30 1.9 12 1:25 Ambulatory 110 1 23 23 1.8 11 2:25 Oconee Medical Center Wheelchair bound 140 5 23 20 1.8 8 2:50 Bedridden 40 15 23 30 1.8 12 1:25 Ambulatory 110 1 43 30 1.9 11 2:35 Residences at Park Place Bedridden 40 15 10 30 1.9 12 1:25 Ambulatory 110 1 50 30 3.5 20 2:40 Foothills Assisted Living Bedridden 40 15 1 15 3.5 18 1:15 Ambulatory 110 1 23 23 1.5 20 2:35 Morningside of Seneca Wheelchair bound 140 5 8 20 1.5 12 2:55 Oconee Nuclear Station 827 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Seneca Residential Care Ambulatory 110 1 25 25 0.1 2 2:20 Center Wheelchair bound 140 5 1 5 0.1 3 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 68 30 0.1 3 2:25 Seneca Health and Wheelchair bound 140 5 25 20 0.1 2 2:45 Rehabilitation Bedridden 40 15 3 30 0.1 2 1:15 PICKENS COUNTY, SC Ambulatory 110 1 28 28 6.6 42 3:00 PruittHealth Pickens Wheelchair bound 140 5 12 20 6.6 31 3:15 Bedridden 40 15 4 30 6.6 22 1:35 Six Mile Assisted Living Ambulatory 110 1 40 30 6.7 11 2:35 Ambulatory 110 1 34 30 3.5 16 2:40 Brookdale Central Wheelchair bound 140 5 14 20 3.5 14 2:55 Bedridden 40 15 4 30 3.5 8 1:20 Ambulatory 110 1 8 8 4.8 18 2:20 Clemson Downs Wheelchair bound 140 5 30 20 4.8 47 3:30 Bedridden 40 15 3 30 4.8 8 1:20 Ambulatory 110 1 36 30 0.1 1 2:25 AnMed Health Cannon Wheelchair bound 140 5 15 20 0.1 1 2:45 Hospital Bedridden 40 15 4 30 0.1 0 1:10 Maximum ETE: 3:30 Average ETE: 2:20 Oconee Nuclear Station 828 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Population 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 120 117 35 4:50 Buses 415 30 14 Rain 130 1 130 13 41 5:15 Ice 140 143 45 5:45 Good 120 36 30 3:35 Wheelchair 95 20 5 Rain 130 5 40 20 33 3:50 Buses Ice 140 44 37 4:10 Good 120 9 30 3:10 Ambulances 26 13 2 Rain 130 15 10 15 34 3:25 Ice 140 11 37 3:40 Maximum ETE: 5:45 Average ETE: 4:15 Oconee Nuclear Station 829 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/Pickup Point G Bus Available for Second Wave Evacuation Service 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 FG Passengers Leave Bus; Driver Takes a Break Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations Oconee Nuclear Station 830 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY This section discusses the suggested traffic control and management strategy that is designed to expedite the movement of evacuating traffic. The resources required to implement this strategy 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 plan that defines all 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.

The terms "facilitate" and "discourage" rather than "enforce" and "prohibit" are used to indicate the need for flexibility in performing the traffic control function. There are always legitimate reasons for a driver to prefer a direction other than that indicated. For example:

• 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 en route to perform an important activity.

The implementation of a plan must also be flexible enough for the application of sound judgment by the traffic guide.

The traffic management plan is the outcome of the following process:

1. The existing TCPs and ACPs identified by the offsite agencies in their existing emergency plans serve as the basis of the traffic management plan, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev 1.

Appendix K identifies the number of intersections that were modeled as TCP/ACPs.

2. Evacuation simulations were run using DYNEV II to predict traffic congestion during evacuation (see Figures 73 through 78). This analysis identifies the best routing and those critical intersections that experience pronounced congestion. Any critical intersections that would benefit from traffic or access control which are not already identified in the existing offsite plans are then suggested as additional TCPs and ACPs.

No additional TCPs or ACPs were identified as part of this study.

Oconee Nuclear Station 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 a list of priority TCP/ACPs 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 through 3 in Section 2.5 further 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 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 the evacuation trip.

These are only some examples of how ITS technologies can benefit the evacuation process.

Consideration should be given that ITS technologies be used to facilitate the evacuation process, and any additional signage placed should consider evacuation needs.

Oconee Nuclear Station 92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

10 EVACUATION ROUTES AND RECEPTION CENTERS 10.1 Evacuation Routes Evacuation routes are comprised of two distinct components:

• Routing from a Zone being evacuated to the boundary of the Evacuation Region and thence out of the EPZ.

• Routing of transitdependent evacuees (schools, childcare centers, day camp, medical facilities, employees, transients, or permanent residents who do not own or have access to private vehicles) from the EPZ boundary to reception 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 transitdependent population evacuating in buses. General population may evacuate to a reception center or some alternate destination (e.g., lodging facilities, relatives home, campgrounds) outside the EPZ utilizing these routes.

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 13 bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102 and described in Table 101 were designed by KLD to service the major routes through each Zone, as no pre established transitdependent bus routes exist within the EPZ or identified within the county emergency plans, in order to compute the ETE. This does not imply that these exact routes would be used in an emergency. It is assumed that residents will walk to and congregate at the major evacuation routes to flag down buses, and that they can arrive at these roads within the 120minute bus mobilization time (good weather). Schools, and medical facilities were routed along the most likely path from the facility being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate pickup points or receptions centers. Childcare centers and day camps were routed to the general population reception center assigned to the Zone in which they originate.

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). Transit dependent evacuees are transported to the nearest reception center. It is assumed that all school evacuees will be taken to the appropriate pickup point outside the EPZ and subsequently picked up by parents or guardians. This study does not consider the transport of evacuees from reception centers to congregate care centers.

Oconee Nuclear Station 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

10.2 Reception Centers Figure 103 presents a map showing the general population reception centers and school pick up points for evacuees.

As per the public information calendar for 2021, Pickens County school children not picked up at their school pickup point within 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> will be moved to a temporary reception center at Easley High School. Similarly, Oconee County school children not picked up at their school pickup point within 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> will be moved to the designated reception center for their school as listed in the public information calendar for 2021. This study does not consider the transport of schoolchildren from pickup points to the temporary reception center or the designated reception center.

Table 103 presents a list of school pickup points for each evacuating school in the EPZ. The current public information disseminated to residents of the ONS EPZ indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to school pickup points if an evacuation was ordered, and that parents should pick schoolchildren up at the pickup points. Childcare centers and day camps were routed to the general population reception center assigned to the Zone in which they originate. As such, childcare centers and day camps are not listed in the table.

Oconee Nuclear Station 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes Bus Route No. of Length Number Buses Descriptions (mi.)

30 1 Servicing Zone A2 16 31 1 Servicing Zone B2 6 32 1 Servicing Zone A1 12 33 1 Servicing Zone B1 11 34 1 Servicing Zone C2 12 35 2 Servicing Zones A0 and C1 20 36 1 Servicing Zone C2 12 37 1 Servicing Zones A0 and D1 18 38 1 Servicing Zone D2 12 39 1 Servicing Zone E1 14 40 1 Servicing Zone F1 16 41 1 Servicing Zone F2 22 46 1 Servicing Zone E2 7 Total: 14 Oconee Nuclear Station 103 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary School Routes 1 Blue Ridge Elementary School 203, 997, 204, 205, 206 3 Northside Elementary School 175, 645, 207, 208, 203, 997, 204, 205, 206 4 Ravenel Elementary School 225, 226, 227, 1117, 1118, 1119, 228, 205, 206 5 Oconee Christian Academy, Oconee Academy 511, 20, 19, 18 6 Seneca High School, Seneca Middle School 512, 20, 19, 18 347, 348, 135, 136, 137, 138, 975, 139, 974, 140, 141, 142, 8 Keowee Elementary School 143, 144, 145, 973, 146, 147, 312, 148, 149, 150 James M Brown Elementary School, Faith Christian School 9 312, 148, 149, 150 (Faith Training Center) 10 Six Mile Elementary School 420, 421, 422, 106, 107, 108, 919, 109, 110, 111 Walhalla Elementary School, Salem Seventh Day Adventist 11 244, 233, 234, 235 Elementary School, TamasseeSalem Elementary School 12 Walhalla Middle School, Walhalla High School 656, 145, 973, 146, 147, 312, 148, 149, 150 13 R. C. Edwards Middle School, Central Elementary School 376, 633, 901, 539, 536, 537, 38, 895, 39, 40 Clemson University, Clemson University Graduate School, 14 33, 1061, 1113, 34, 374, 35, 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 Clemson Montessori School 15 Clemson Elementary School 368, 374, 35, 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 397, 398, 393, 375, 32, 33, 1061, 1113, 34, 374, 35, 36, 37, 38, 16 Daniel High School 895, 39, 40 Childcare and Day Camp Routes Foothills Early Learning Center, Seneca Head Start Center, Trinity Baptist Church Preschool, St. Mark Child 3 175, 645, 207, 208, 203, 997, 204, 205, 206 Development Center, Our Clubhouse, Seneca Baptist Church Day Care 11 Upstate Children's Center 244, 233, 234, 235 12 St John's Lutheran Preschool 656, 145, 973, 146, 147, 312, 148, 149, 150 Oconee Nuclear Station 104 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 13 The Growing Place, Little Lights Child Care 376, 633, 901, 539, 536, 537, 38, 895, 39, 40 14 Clemson Montessori School 33, 1061, 1113, 34, 374, 35, 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 Kid's Stuff Academy, Clemson Tiger Tennis Camp (Day 15 368, 374, 35, 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 Camp), Clemson Head Start Medical Facility Routes 13 Brookdale Central 376, 633, 901, 539, 536, 537, 38, 895, 39, 40 17 PruittHealth Pickens 105, 917, 106, 107, 108, 919, 109, 110, 111 18 Foothills Assisted Living 340, 1051, 1075, 304, 305, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18 19 Belvedere Commons of Seneca 340, 1051, 1075, 304, 305, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18 Cottingham Hospice House, Prisma Health Hospice of 21 305, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18 Foothills, The Tribble Center Lila Doyle Nursing Care Facility, Oconee Medical Center, 22 513, 21, 20, 19, 18 Residences at Park Place 25 Keowee Place 32, 33, 193, 572, 194, 195, 870, 192 26 Morningside of Seneca 176, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18 Seneca Residential Care Center, Seneca Health and 27 205, 206, 209 Rehabilitation 28 Six Mile Assisted Living 409, 411, 890, 412, 891, 413 29 Clemson Downs 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 S.R. AnMed Health Cannon Hospital Inside Shadow Region Transit Dependent Routes 443, 444, 445, 920, 695, 446, 921, 922, 430, 923, 431, 432, 30 TransitDependent Bus Route A2 924, 925, 433, 434, 926, 927, 264, 265 891, 413, 414, 415, 892, 893, 416, 380, 889, 381, 382, 888, 31 TransitDependent Bus Route B2 887, 383, 384 913, 914, 915, 102, 916, 1125, 103, 104, 113, 105, 917, 106, 32 TransitDependent Bus Route A1 107, 108, 919, 109, 110, 111 33 TransitDependent Bus Route B1 409, 410, 417, 418, 113, 105, 917, 106, 107, 108, 919, 109, Oconee Nuclear Station 105 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 110, 111 405, 404, 1049, 397, 398, 393, 375, 32, 33, 1061, 1113, 34, 34 TransitDependent Bus Route C2 (1) 374, 35, 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 1121, 99, 100, 911, 910, 909, 737, 738, 908, 739, 423, 426, 814, 815, 816, 817, 818, 819, 820, 821, 822, 823, 824, 780, 35 TransitDependent Bus Route A0/C1 428, 990, 429, 991, 992, 171, 172, 797, 26, 27, 28, 1004, 29, 30, 1059, 1058, 638, 31, 1055, 1056, 636, 528, 32, 33, 1061, 1113, 34, 374, 35, 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 654, 655, 1107, 571, 194, 572, 193, 33, 1061, 1113, 34, 374, 36 TransitDependent Bus Route C2 (2) 35, 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 131, 1122, 98, 166, 167, 987, 988, 168, 169, 170, 989, 171, 172, 797, 26, 27, 28, 1004, 29, 30, 1059, 1058, 638, 31, 1055, 37 TransitDependent Bus Route A0/D1 1056, 636, 528, 32, 33, 1061, 1113, 34, 374, 35, 36, 37, 38, 895, 39, 40 304, 305, 22, 639, 23, 24, 25, 796, 26, 27, 28, 1004, 29, 30, 38 TransitDependent Bus Route D2 1059, 1058, 638, 31, 1055, 1056, 636, 528, 32, 33, 193, 572, 194, 195, 870, 192 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 135, 136, 137, 138, 975, 139, 974, 39 TransitDependent Bus Route E1 140, 249, 248, 247, 246, 1072, 245, 615, 244, 233, 234, 235 272, 273, 983, 984, 274, 985, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 986, 40 TransitDependent Bus Route F1 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 260, 1040, 261, 262, 263, 665, 264 250, 251, 969, 252, 253, 254, 697, 255, 256, 964, 257, 258, 41 TransitDependent Bus Route F2 259, 260, 1040, 261, 262, 263, 665, 264 137, 138, 975, 139, 974, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 973, 46 TransitDependent Bus Route E2 146, 147, 312, 148, 149, 150 Oconee Nuclear Station 106 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 103. School Pickup Points School Pickup Points OCONEE COUNTY, SC Blue Ridge Elementary School Northside Elementary School Fair Oak Elementary School Ravenel Elementary School TamasseeSalem Elementary School Orchard Park Elementary School Fred P Hamilton Career Center Seneca High School West Oak High School Seneca Middle School James M Brown Elementary School Keowee Elementary School Oconee Academy Oconee Christian Academy West Oak Middle School Walhalla Elementary School Walhalla High School Walhalla Middle School Faith Christian School (Faith Training Center)

Westminster Elementary School Salem Seventh Day Adventist Elementary School PICKENS COUNTY, SC Clemson University AMRL1 Daniel High School Easley High School Central Elementary School Forest Acres Elementary R. C. Edwards Middle School Gettys Middle School Clemson University Graduate School AMRL1 Six Mile Elementary School Pickens High School Clemson Elementary School West End Elementary Clemson Montessori School 1

These are the reception centers for the corresponding universities.

Oconee Nuclear Station 107 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 101. Major Evacuation Routes Oconee Nuclear Station 108 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes Oconee Nuclear Station 109 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. General Population Reception Centers and School Pickup Points Oconee Nuclear Station 1010 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX A Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms

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 vehicles per hour (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 vehicles per hour (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.

Oconee Nuclear Station A1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 vehicles per hour (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 vehicles per hour (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.

Oconee Nuclear Station A2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX B DTRAD: Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution Model

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 DYNEVII 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 DYNEVII 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 ta la sa ,

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 Oconee Nuclear Station B2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 = 10 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station B3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Oconee Nuclear Station B4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

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 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, EVAN Calculates ETE statistics Oconee Nuclear Station C1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 Oconee Nuclear Station C2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 Oconee Nuclear Station C3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Q E O If Q 0 , then Calculate Q , M with Algorithm A Else Q 0, M E End if 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 Oconee Nuclear Station C4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Computation of unit problem is now complete. Check for excessive inflow causing spillback.

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 v not discharge due to inadequate capacity. That is, Mb Q M E . This queue length, Q v Q M E Cap can be extended to Q by L3 traffic 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:

Oconee Nuclear Station C5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 Oconee Nuclear Station C6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 Oconee Nuclear Station C7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station C8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Route Statistics Length (mi); Mean Speed (mph); Travel Time (min) Route Mean Travel Time Minutes Evacuation Trips; Network Oconee Nuclear Station C9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 6) 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 Oconee Nuclear Station C10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

The number of queued vehicles on the link, of a particular turn movement, at the Q ,Q

[beginning, end] of the time interval.

Oconee Nuclear Station C11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station C12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Oconee Nuclear Station C13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Oconee Nuclear Station C14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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)

Oconee Nuclear Station C15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX D Detailed Description of Study Procedure

D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE This appendix describes the activities that were performed to compute 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 EPZ boundary information and create a 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 and Zone boundaries.

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. Employee data were estimated using data provided by Oconee County, Pickens County, and Duke Energy. Data for schools, preschools/daycare centers, medical facilities, and transient facilities were obtained from the Counties of Oconee and Pickens, and the previous ETE study (reviewed and confirmed still accurate), supplemented by internet searches where data were missing. In addition, transportation resources available during an emergency were also provided by the Oconee and Pickens County.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with major stakeholders (state and local emergency managers, onsite and offsite utility emergency managers, local and state law enforcement agencies). 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 presented to local emergency managers. 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 An online demographic survey of households within the EPZ was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic Oconee Nuclear Station D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

information of the EPZ population. 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.

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). Estimates of highway capacity for each link and other linkspecific characteristics were introduced to the network description. Traffic signal timings were input accordingly. The linknode 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 13 Zones. Based on wind direction and speed, Regions (groupings of Zone) 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 model, 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 Oconee Nuclear Station D2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1.3) and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a laborintensive activity, requiring the direct participation of skilled engineers who possess the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any problems reflected in the 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 special facilities are included in the evacuation analysis. Fixed routing for transit buses and for school buses, ambulances, and other transit vehicles 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 and special facility population groups.

Oconee Nuclear Station D3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 were available, quality control procedures were used to assure the results were consistent, dynamic routing was reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks were addressed properly.

Step 16 Once vehicular evacuation results are accepted, average travel speeds for transit and special facility routes were used to compute ETE for transitdependent permanent residents, schools, hospitals, and other special facilities.

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated and graphed. Traffic management plans are analyzed, and traffic control points are prioritized, if applicable. Additional analysis is conducted to identify the sensitivity of the ETE to changes in some base evacuation conditions and model assumptions. The results were then documented, as required by NUREG/CR7002, rev. 1.

Step 18 Following the completion of documentation activities, the ETE criteria checklist (see Appendix N) was completed. An appropriate report reference is provided for each criterion provided in the checklist.

Oconee Nuclear Station D4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

A Step 1 Step 10 Create GIS Base Map Examine Prototype Evacuation Case using EVAN 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 Review and Calibrate LinkNode Analysis Routes and Update DYNEV II Database Network 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 Special Facility 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 Oconee Nuclear Station D5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX E Facility Data

E. FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of April 2022, for facilities within the ONS EPZ. Special facilities are defined as schools, childcare centers, day camps, medical facilities, and correctional facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for recreational areas (campgrounds, golf courses, marinas, parks, other recreational facilities) and lodging facilities. Employment data is included in the table for major employers. 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, childcare center, day camp, medical facility, major employer, recreational area (campground, golf course, marina, park, other recreational facility), lodging facility, and correctional facility are also provided. Some facilities included in the counties emergency plans are located in the Shadow Region (S.R.) as indicated in the Zone column in the following tables.

Oconee Nuclear Station E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools within the Study Area Distance Dire Enroll Zone (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment OCONEE COUNTY, SC D2 7.4 SW Oconee Christian Academy 150 His Way Cir Seneca 213 D2 7.5 S Ravenel Elementary School 150 Ravenel School Rd Seneca 592 D2 7.6 SSW Northside Elementary School 710 N Townville St Seneca 681 D2 7.6 SW Oconee Academy 100 Vocational Dr Seneca 80 D2 9.0 SSW Blue Ridge Elementary School 995 S Oak St Seneca 577 D2 9.1 SSW Seneca High School 100 Bobcat Ridge Seneca 1,000 D2 9.3 SSW Seneca Middle School 810 W S Fourth St Seneca 855 E1 3.5 W Keowee Elementary School 7051 Keowee School Rd Seneca 400 E2 7.7 W Walhalla Elementary School 508 Fowler Rd West Union 620 E2 8.2 WNW Walhalla High School 151 Razorback Ln Walhalla 1,172 E2 9.0 W Walhalla Middle School 177 Razorback Ln Walhalla 842 E2 10.5 W James M Brown Elementary School 225 Coffee Rd Walhalla 610 E2 11.1 W Faith Christian School (Faith Training Center) 115 Worley Ln Walhalla 36 F2 8.7 NNW Salem Seventh Day Adventist Elementary School 240 W Main St Salem 8 F2 9.2 NW TamasseeSalem Elementary School 9950 N Hwy 11 Tamassee 220 S.R. 10.9 SW Fred P Hamilton Career Center 445 Oconee Business Pkwy Westminster 450 Oconee County Subtotal: 8,356 PICKENS COUNTY, SC B1 5.3 ENE Six Mile Elementary School 777 N Main St Six Mile 480 C2 5.4 SE Daniel High School 1819 Six Mile Hwy Central 1,144 C2 6.3 SE R. C. Edwards Middle School 1157 Madden Bridge Rd Central 838 C2 8.1 ESE Central Elementary School 608 Johnson Rd Central 394 C2 8.5 SSE Clemson University 105 Sikes Hall Clemson 26,406 C2 8.7 SSE Clemson University Graduate School Martin Hall, E108 Clemson Included Above C2 9.0 ESE Southern Wesleyan University 907 Wesleyan Dr Central 1,001 C2 9.3 SE Clemson Elementary School 581 Berkeley Dr Clemson 750 S.R. 9.7 SSE Clemson Montessori School 207 Pendleton Rd Clemson 67 Pickens County Subtotal: 31,080 EPZ TOTAL: 39,436 Oconee Nuclear Station E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E2. Childcare Centers and Day Camps within the Study Area Distance Dire Enroll Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality ment OCONEE COUNTY, SC D2 7.5 SSW Foothills Early Learning Center 200 Lee Ln Seneca 130 D2 8.1 SSW Code Learning Center 315 A Holland Ave Seneca 22 D2 8.3 SSW Smiling Angels Child Care Center 800 W N 1st St Seneca 21 D2 8.4 SSW Seneca Head Start Center 340 N Perkins Creek Rd Seneca 203 D2 8.7 SSW Trinity Baptist Church Preschool 210 W South 6th St Seneca 101 D2 9.0 SSW St. Mark Child Development Center 616 Quincy Rd Seneca 140 D2 9.1 SW Our Clubhouse 101 Nelson Ln Seneca 70 D2 9.3 SSW Seneca Baptist Church Day Care 1080 S Oak St Seneca 246 E2 7.6 WSW Tots and Toddlers 441 Burns Mill Rd West Union 6 E2 9.0 WSW Upstate Children's Center 905 E Main St Walhalla 180 E2 9.9 W St John's Lutheran Preschool 301 W Main St Walhalla 200 F2 9.1 NW Pennsylvania Childrens Center 1781 Bumgardner Dr Tamassee 27 Oconee County Subtotal: 1,346 PICKENS COUNTY, SC B2 7.0 ENE Merck Family Day Care 766 Kelly Mill Rd Six Mile 6 B2 7.8 E Sonja's Little Darlings 956 Liberty Hwy Liberty 6 C2 7.9 SSE Kid's Stuff Academy 700 College Ave Clemson 116 C2 8.4 SSE Clemson Tiger Tennis Camp Old Greenville Hwy Seneca 150 C2 8.7 SSE Clemson Child Development Center 214 Butler St Clemson 120 C2 8.7 SE Clemson Head Start 644 Old Greenville Hwy Clemson 40 C2 9.1 ESE The Growing Place 136 Chastain Rd Central 99 C2 9.2 SE Little Lights Child Care 300 Frontage Rd Clemson 130 S.R. 9.6 SSE Clemson Montessori School 207 Pendleton Rd Clemson 67 Pickens County Subtotal: 734 STUDY AREA TOTAL: 2,080 Oconee Nuclear Station E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E3. Medical Facilities within the Study Area Ambul Wheel Bed Distance Dire Capa Current atory chair ridden Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality city Census Patients Patients Patients OCONEE COUNTY, SC D2 5.8 SSW Keowee Place 475 Rochester Hwy Seneca 50 35 23 10 2 D2 7.3 SW Belvedere Commons of Seneca 515 Benton St Seneca 62 60 60 0 0 D2 7.5 SW Cottingham Hospice House 390 Keowee School Rd Seneca 15 15 1 0 14 D2 7.5 SW Prisma Health Hospice of Foothills 390 Keowee School Rd Seneca 15 6 0 0 6 D2 7.7 SW The Tribble Center 116 S Cove Rd Seneca 331 221 197 24 0 D2 8.4 SW Lila Doyle Nursing Care Facility 101 Lila Doyle Dr Seneca 88 88 8 70 10 D2 8.5 SW Oconee Medical Center 298 Memorial Dr Seneca 169 69 23 23 23 D2 9.0 SW Residences at Park Place 115 Gillespie Rd Seneca 78 53 43 10 0 E2 8.4 WSW Foothills Assisted Living 999 W Union Rd West Union 76 51 50 0 1 S.R. 9.3 SW Morningside of Seneca 15855 Wells Hwy Seneca 50 31 23 8 0 S.R. 10.2 SSW Seneca Residential Care Center 126 Tokeena Rd Seneca 33 26 25 1 0 S.R. 10.3 SSW Seneca Health and Rehabilitation 140 Tokeena Rd Seneca 132 96 68 25 3 Oconee County Subtotal: 1,099 751 521 171 59 PICKENS COUNTY, SC A1 4.5 NE PruittHealth Pickens 163 Love and Care Rd Six Mile 44 44 28 12 4 B1 4.6 E Six Mile Assisted Living 114 S Main St Six Mile 41 40 40 0 0 C2 8.6 SE Brookdale Central 131 Vickery Dr Central 52 52 34 14 4 C2 10.0 SE Clemson Downs 500 Downs Lp Clemson 56 41 8 30 3 S.R. 12.2 ENE AnMed Health Cannon Hospital 123 W G Acker Dr Pickens 55 55 36 15 4 Pickens County Subtotal: 248 232 146 71 15 STUDY AREA TOTAL: 1,347 983 667 242 74 Oconee Nuclear Station E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E4. Major Employers within the Study Area

% Employee Employees Employees Vehicles Distance Dire Employees Commuting Commuting Commuting Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ OCONEE COUNTY, SC A0 Oconee Nuclear Station 7812 Rochester Hwy Seneca 1,396 46% 642 578 D1 2.7 SSW Duke Energy 309 Oakleaf Ct Seneca 249 46% 115 104 D2 8.0 SW Covidien 1448 Blue Ridge Blvd Seneca 401 46% 184 166 D2 8.2 SW Schneider Electric 2321 Blue Ridge Blvd Seneca 655 46% 301 271 D2 8.5 SW Oconee Medical Center 298 SR S37347 Seneca 1,134 46% 522 470 D2 9.2 SW Walmart Supercenter 1636 Sandifer Blvd Seneca 272 46% 125 113 E2 8.3 WSW Itron 313 N Hwy 11 #B West Union 752 46% 346 312 E2 8.4 W Koyo Bearings USA 430 Torrington Rd West Union 240 46% 110 99 S.R. 9.9 SSW Borg Warner Inc. 15545 Wells Hwy Seneca 275 46% 126 114 Oconee County Subtotal: 5,374 2,471 2,227 PICKENS COUNTY, SC B2 8.4 ESE BASF Corporation 1215 Greenville Hwy Central 225 46% 103 93 B2 9.9 E Champion Aerospace Inc. 1230 Old Norris Rd Liberty 250 46% 115 104 B2 10.0 E Richmond Gear 1208 Old Norris Rd Liberty 215 46% 99 89 C2 8.6 SE Central Textiles Inc. 237 Mill Ave Central 250 46% 115 104 C2 8.7 SSE Clemson University 209 Martin St Clemson 4,735 46% 2,178 1,962 C2 9.0 SE Milliken & Company Defore Plant US 123 Clemson 500 46% 230 207 C2 9.9 SE Walmart Supercenter 1286 Eighteen Mile Rd Central 272 46% 125 113 Pickens County Subtotal: 6,447 2,965 2,672 STUDY AREA TOTAL: 11,821 5,436 4,899 Oconee Nuclear Station E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles OCONEE COUNTY, SC A0 1.8 W High Falls County Park 671 High Falls Rd Seneca Park 1,548 505 A0 1.9 NW Keowee Key South Marina Marina Dr Lake Keowee Marina Local residents only D2 6.3 SSW Lake Keowee Marina 150 Keowee Marina Dr Seneca Marina 54 50 D2 6.7 SW South Cove County Park 1099 S Cove Rd Seneca Park 204 189 D2 6.7 S Wells Highway RV Park 1145 Wells Hwy Seneca Campground 26 24 D2 8.3 SSW Oconee Community Theater 8001 Utica St Seneca Other, Not Listed 282 150 D2 9.2 SSE Clemson Marina 150 Clemson Marina Dr Seneca Marina 56 52 D2 9.8 SW Oconee Country Club 781 Richland Rd Seneca Golf Course 6 3 E1 4.2 W High Falls RV Park 2753 Pickens Hwy Seneca Campground 232 300 E2 4.9 WSW Crooked Creek RV Park Inc 777 Arvee Lane West Union Campground 262 339 E2 7.6 WNW Falcon's Lair Golf Course 1308 Falcons Dr Walhalla Golf Course 2 2 E2 7.7 WSW Keowee Falls RV Park 150 Jefferson Rd West Union Campground 180 100 E2 9.7 W Walhalla Civic Auditorium 101 E N Broad St Walhalla Other, Not Listed 300 100 F1 2.9 NNW Keowee Key Marina 563 Tall Ship Dr Salem Marina 115 107 F1 3.1 NNW The Club at Keowee Key 1 Country Club Dr Salem Golf Course 1 1 F1 3.5 NW Keowee Key Chestnut Point Marina Safe Haven Ct Lake Keowee Marina 78 36 F2 5.8 WNW Ralph's RV Park 477 Burnt Tanyard Rd West Union Campground 17 16 F2 7.1 N The Cliffs at Keowee Falls 770 S Cherry Laurel Way Salem Golf Course 404 186 F2 9.0 WNW Scenic View RV 8225 N SC11 Tamassee Campground 17 16 F2 10.0 NNW Jocassee RV Camp 105 Campground Dr Salem Campground 113 104 Oconee County Subtotal: 3,897 2,280 PICKENS COUNTY, SC A0 1.5 NE Warpath Landing 276 War Path Rd Six Mile Marina 120 40 A1 3.8 NNE Sunset Marina on Lake Keowee 900 Gap Hill Rd lot 106 Six Mile Marina 60 40 757 Keowee Baptist A1 4.2 N Mile Creek County Park Church Rd Six Mile Park 950 325 A1 4.5 NNE The Cliffs at Keowee Springs 175 Spring Cove Way Six Mile Golf Course 119 55 A2 7.3 NNE The Reserve At Lake Keowee Village Market 200 S Lawn Dr Sunset Golf Course 51 26 A2 9.2 N Keowee Toxaway State Park 108 Residence Dr Sunset Park 150 50 C1 4.2 SSE Lawrence Bridge Lawrence Bridge Central Other, Not Listed 300 60 C2 6.8 SSE Twelve Mile Recreation Area 113 Twelve Mile Park Clemson Park 320 188 C2 7.3 SSE Mountain View Park 12 Mile Park Rd Clemson Park 45 40 C2 8.0 SSE Larry W. Abernathy Waterfront Park 207 Keowee Trail Clemson Park 16 15 C2 8.4 SE Central Clemson Recreation Center 130 Commons Way Central Other, Not Listed 60 30 Oconee Nuclear Station E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles C2 8.8 SE Grand Central Station Disc Golf Course 270 Sanders Rd Central Golf Course 43 20 South Carolina Botanical Garden Fran C2 9.3 SSE Hanson Visitor's Center 150 Discovery Land Clemson Other, Not Listed 75 45 C2 9.3 SSE Walker Golf Course at Clemson University 210 Madren Center Dr Clemson Golf Course 30 30 C2 9.6 SSE Bob Campbell Geology Museum 140 Discovery Ln Clemson Other, Not Listed 100 75 Pickens County Subtotal: 2,439 1,039 EPZ TOTAL: 6,336 3,319 Table E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles OCONEE COUNTY, SC D2 7.0 SSW Hampton Inn & Suites SenecaClemson Area 1011 E N 1st St Seneca 217 100 D2 7.4 SSW Best Western Seneca Clemson 511 Bypass 123 Seneca 138 46 D2 7.5 SSW Best Way Inn 320 Bypass 123 Seneca 52 26 D2 7.5 SSE Lakeside Lodge Clemson Hotel & Resort 13500 Clemson Blvd Seneca 410 189 D2 7.5 SSE Tru By Hilton Seneca Clemson 13050 Clemson Blvd Seneca 213 98 D2 8.6 SW Days Inn by Wyndham Seneca 11015 N Radio Station Rd Seneca 275 110 F2 7.4 NNW Sunrise Farm Bed & Breakfast 325 SR S37234 Salem 48 6 Oconee County Subtotal: 1353 575 PICKENS COUNTY, SC C2 7.5 SSE Hampton Inn Clemson University Area 851 Tiger Blvd Clemson 135 68 C2 8.3 SSE The Abernathy 157 Old Greenville Hwy Clemson 89 41 C2 8.3 SSE Hotel Tillman Clemson Univeristy Area 1303 Tiger Blvd Clemson 150 50 C2 8.3 SSE Comfort Inn Clemson University Area 1305 US 76 Clemson 242 121 C2 8.4 SSE Best Western Plus University Inn & Conference Center 1310 Tiger Blvd Clemson 524 262 C2 8.6 SE Clemson Motel 835 Old Greenville Hwy Clemson 39 18 C2 8.6 SSE Days Inn by Wyndham Clemson 1387 Tiger Blvd Clemson 138 46 C2 8.7 SSE Holiday Inn Express & Suites Clemson University Area 1381 Tiger Blvd Clemson 120 60 C2 8.7 SSE Courtyard by Marriott Clemson 201 Canoy Ln Clemson 220 110 C2 9.5 SSE Clemson University's James F. Martin Inn 240 Madren Center Dr Seneca 258 86 C2 9.7 SSE Dutch Treat Bed and Breakfast 208 Pendleton Rd Clemson 12 4 Pickens County Subtotal: 1,927 866 EPZ TOTAL: 3,280 1,441 Oconee Nuclear Station E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Cap Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality acity OCONEE COUNTY, SC E2 9.9 W Oconee County Detention Center 300 S Church St Walhalla 122 Oconee County Subtotal: 122 EPZ TOTAL: 122 Oconee Nuclear Station E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E1. Schools within the Study Area Oconee Nuclear Station E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E2. Childcare Centers and Day Camps within the Study Area Oconee Nuclear Station E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E3. Medical Facilities within the Study Area Oconee Nuclear Station E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E4. Major Employers within the Study Area Oconee Nuclear Station E12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Oconee Nuclear Station E13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Oconee Nuclear Station E14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Oconee Nuclear Station E15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX F Demographic Survey

F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY F.1 Introduction The development of evacuation time estimates for the EPZ of the Oconee Nuclear Station 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. 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 2021 prior to the release of the 2020 Census data, 2010 Census data was used to develop the sampling plan.

A sample size of approximately 380 completed survey forms yields results with a sampling error of +/-5% at the 95% confidence level. The sample must be drawn from the EPZ population.

Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using Geographic Information System (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 Census data and the EPZ boundary, again using GIS software. The proportional number 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 total of 836 completed samples were obtained, well in excess of our goal, corresponding to a sampling error of +/-3.36% at the 95% confidence level based on the 2020 Census data. Table F1 also shows the number of samples obtained within each zip code.

Oconee Nuclear Station F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 or Decline to State entry for a response. It is accepted practice in conducting surveys of this type to accept the answers of a respondent who offers a dont know or who declines to answer a few questions. To address the issue of occasional dont know/declined 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 dont know/declined 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. According to the responses, the average household contains 2.17 people. The estimated average household size from the 2020 Census data is 2.17 people, as shown in Table F1. The agreement between the Census data and the survey results speaks to the validity of the survey and minimizes any uncertainty in the survey results.

Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the EPZ is 2.11. It should be noted that less than 1% of households do not have access to an automobile. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F2. Figure F3 and Figure F4 present the automobile availability by household size. Note that the households without access to a car are single person households. As expected, nearly all households of 2 or more people have access to at least one vehicle.

Ridesharing The majority (82%) of 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 0.50 commuters in each household in the EPZ, and approximately 27% of households have at least one commuter.

Oconee Nuclear Station F2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 1.11 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 majority (83%) of households indicated no one in their household had a work and/or school commute that was temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic.

Functional or Transportation Needs Figure F9 presents the distribution of the number of individuals with functional or transportation need. The data shows that 4% of households have functional or transportation needs. Of those with functional or transportation needs, about 53% require a bus, 9% require a medical bus/van, 26% require a wheelchair accessible vehicle, and 11% require an ambulance.

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 1.36 vehicles.

Would your family await the return of other family members prior to evacuating the area?

Of the survey participants who responded, nearly 51% said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 49% indicated that they would not await the return of other family members.

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 indicate that 89% of households who are advised to shelter in place would do so; the remaining 11% would choose to evacuate the area. Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20% of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002. Thus, the compliance rate obtained through the survey is higher (9% more) than the federal guidance recommendation. A sensitivity study was conducted to estimate the impact of shadow evacuation (noncompliance to a shelter advisory) on ETE - see 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. Results indicate that 72% of households would follow instructions and Oconee Nuclear Station F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

delay the start of evacuation until so advised, while the balance of 28% 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. Approximately 48% of households indicated that they would evacuate to a friend or relatives home, 3% to a reception center, 17% to a hotel, motel or campground, 11% to a second or seasonal home, less than 1% said they would not evacuate, and the remaining 20% answered other/dont know to this question, 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 the responses to the survey, 51% of households have family animals or farm animals. Of the households with pets, 27% of them indicated that they would take their pets with them to a shelter, 70% indicated that they would take their pets somewhere else and the remaining less than 3% would leave their pet at home, as shown in Figure F12. Of the households that would evacuate with their pets, nearly all (99.75%) indicated that they have sufficient room in their vehicle to evacuate with their pet(s)/animal(s).

What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have? Based on responses from the survey, about 96% of households have a household pet (dog, cat, bird, reptile, rabbit, hamster, hermit crabs, chinchilla, or fish), about 4% of households have farm animals (horse, chicken, goat, pig, sheep, goose).

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.

As discussed in Section F.3.1 and shown in Figure F8, the majority (83%) of respondents indicated no commuters were impacted by the COVID19 pandemic; therefore 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.

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 F13 presents the cumulative distribution; in all cases, the activity is completed by 60 minutes.

Eighty six percent (86%) can leave within 30 minutes.

How long would it take the commuter to travel home? Figure F14 presents the work to home travel time for the EPZ. About 80% of commuters can arrive home within 30 minutes of leaving work; all within 75 minutes.

How long would it take the family to pack clothing, secure the house, and load the car?

Figure F15 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 Oconee Nuclear Station F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

home. Hence, the responses represent the experience of the responder in performing similar activities.

The distribution shown in Figure F15 has a long tail. About 88% of households can be ready to leave home within 120 minutes; the remaining households require up to an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes.

If there are 68 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 68 inches of snow to move the car from the driveway or curb to begin the evacuation trip? Assume the roads are passable. Figure F16 presents the time required to clear the snow/ice accumulation and begin the evacuation trip. Snow/Ice in this area is not common and residents are not used to clearing snow/ice from their driveways so responses to this question vary significantly.

Approximately 88% of households can have their car cleared and the driveway passable within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; the remaining households would require up to an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes to begin their evacuation trip, as seen in Figure F16.

It should be noted that this question was asked for informational purposes only. Since ice was considered and not snow, this distribution was not used in the analysis. Trip generation rates for ice scenarios were not changed from the good weather and rain scenarios for the general population.

F.3.4 Emergency Communications At your place of residence, how reliable is your cell phone signal? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the ability to be notified in case of an evacuation. Approximately 85% of households indicated that they have very reliable signal to receive texts and phone calls, 6% indicated that their signal is reliable for text messages only, about 8% indicated that they do not always receive cell communications at their residence, and less than 1% indicated that they do not have cell service at their residence, as shown in Figure F17.

Emergency management officials in your state may send text messages, similar to AMBER Alerts, with emergency directions for the public during a radiological emergency at the Oconee Nuclear Station. How likely would you be to take action on these directions, if you received the message? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the likelihood of an individual to take action based on emergency management officials guidelines. About 76% of households indicated that they are highly likely to take action on these directions, about 22% indicated likely, about 2% indicated neither likely nor unlikely, and nearly 1% indicated unlikely or highly unlikely for them to take action on emergency management officials directions, as shown in Figure F18.

Which of the following emergency communication methods do you think is most likely to alert you at your residence? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the most efficient way to alert residents within the EPZ. Approximately 67% of households indicated that a text message from emergency officials would be most likely to alert them at their residence, Oconee Nuclear Station F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

about 25% indicated that a siren sounding near their home would be the most likely method, about 5% indicated an alert broadcast on the TV, and about 3% indicated that a phone call/text message from a family member, friend or neighbor and information on Twitter or Facebook would be the most likely way to alert them at their residence, as shown in Figure F19.

Table F1. Oconee Demographic Survey Sampling Plan and Results Obtained EPZ EPZ EPZ EPZ Population Households Population Households Desired Sample Zip Code within Zip within Zip within Zip within Zip Sample Obtained Code (2010) Code (2010) Code (2020) Code (2020) 29630 12,801 5,069 13,996 6,475 60 8 29631 12,849 5,233 16,400 7,346 62 8 29634 5,589 94 6,207 100 1 0 29657 2,538 943 2,522 1,082 11 4 29665 127 60 110 56 1 0 29667 269 107 245 106 1 0 29671 2,464 929 2,393 1,061 11 8 29672 11,821 5,049 13,065 7,192 60 85 29676 4,750 2,268 5,209 3,425 27 671 29678 13,136 5,439 13,677 6,812 66 18 29682 3,818 1,434 4,180 1,905 17 6 29685 387 169 725 688 2 0 29686 586 232 627 322 3 3 29691 8,660 3,363 8,543 3,803 40 7 29693 183 73 260 89 1 2 29696 4,125 1,684 4,966 2,369 20 16 Total: 84,103 32,146 93,125 42,831 383 836 Average HH Size: 2.62 2.17 Oconee Nuclear Station F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ONS Household Size 80%

71.3%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

12.7%

7.6%

5.2% 3.2%

0%

1 2 3 4 5+

People Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ONS Vehicle Availability 70%

60.7%

60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20% 17.1% 17.1%

10%

3.2% 1.6%

0.2%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability Oconee Nuclear Station F7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 14 Person Households 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F3. Vehicle Availability - 1 to 5 Person Households Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 59+ Person Households 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 9+ People 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability - 6 to 9+ Person Households Oconee Nuclear Station F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ONS Rideshare with Neighbor/Friend 100%

81.9%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

18.1%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference ONS Commuters Per Household 80%

73.3%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

11.9%

9.5%

2.9% 2.5%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F6. Commuters in Households in the EPZ Oconee Nuclear Station F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ONS Travel Mode to Work 100%

88.3%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

11.4%

0.3%

0%

Bus Drive Alone Carpool (2+)

Mode of Travel Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ONS Covid19 Impact to Commuters 90%

82.8%

80%

70%

Percent of Households 60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10.9%

10% 4.3%

1.1% 0.8%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic Oconee Nuclear Station F10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Functional or Transportation Needs 60%

52.8%

Percent of Households with 50%

40%

Functional/Transportational Needs 30% 26.4%

20%

11.3%

9.4%

10%

0%

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Ambulance Accessible Vehicle Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs Evacuating Vehicles Per Household 70% 66.8%

60%

Percent of Households 50%

40%

30.5%

30%

20%

10%

0.4% 1.8% 0.6%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Vehicles Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation Oconee Nuclear Station F11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Destinations 50% 48.0%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20.3%

20% 17.3%

11.2%

10%

3.0%

0.2%

0%

Figure F11. Study Area Evacuation Destinations Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals 80%

70.2%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

27.1%

20%

2.6%

0%

Take with me to a Shelter Take with me to Somewhere Leave Pet at Home Else Figure F12. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals Oconee Nuclear Station F12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Prepare to Leave Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F13. 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 15 30 45 60 75 Travel Time (min)

Figure F14. Work to Home Travel Time Oconee Nuclear Station F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F15. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Time to Remove Snow/Ice from Driveway 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 Time (min)

Figure F16. Time to Remove Snow/Ice from Driveway Oconee Nuclear Station F14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Cell Phone Signal Reliability 100%

85.2%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

6.4% 8.0%

0.4%

0%

Reliable (text and call) Reliable (text only) Unreliable service No service Figure F17. Cell Phone Signal Reliability Resident's Compliance to Given Instruction 80%

75.5%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

21.6%

20%

1.9% 1.0%

0%

Highly Likely Likely Neutral Unlikely (Highly)

Figure F18. Likelihood to Take Action Based off Emergency Management Officials Guidelines Oconee Nuclear Station F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Perception of Public Alert Method 70% 66.8%

60%

Percent of Households 50%

40%

30%

24.6%

20%

10%

5.5% 3.2%

0%

Siren Emergency Alert Text TV/Radio Phone Call/Text Message Message from Family

/Friend Figure F19. Emergency Communication Alert Oconee Nuclear Station F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ATTACHMENT A Demographic Survey Instrument Oconee Nuclear Station F17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey Oconee Nuclear Station 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 local emergency planners 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?

• https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 1/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 2/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 3/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 Skip to question 7 COVID-19 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 4/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 normally (during non-COVID conditions) 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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 5/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 6/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 7/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 8/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 9/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 10/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 11/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 12/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 13/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 14/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 15/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 16/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 17/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 18/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 19/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 20/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 21/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 22/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 23/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 24/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 25/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 26/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 27/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 28/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 />.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 29/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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" Transportation 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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 30/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 31/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

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 Skip to question 69 DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 69 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:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 32/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey 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 TO A SHELTER TAKE PET WITH ME SOMEWHERE ELSE LEAVE PET AT HOME Skip to question 69 DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 69 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:

Emergency Communications https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 33/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

69. 17A. At your place of residence, how reliable is your cell phone signal?

Mark only one oval.

VERY RELIABLE TO RECEIVE TEXTS AND PHONE CALLS RELIABLE FOR TEXT MESSAGES ONLY I DO NOT ALWAYS RECEIVE CELL COMMUNICATIONS AT MY RESIDENCE I DO NOT HAVE CELL SERVICE AT MY RESIDENCE

70. 17B. Emergency management officials in your state may send text messages, similar to AMBER Alerts, with emergency directions for the public during a radiological emergency at Oconee Nuclear Station. How likely would you be to take action on these directions, if you received the message?

Mark only one oval.

HIGHLY LIKELY LIKELY NEITHER LIKELY NOR UNLIKELY UNLIKELY HIGHLY UNLIKELY https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 34/35

2/3/2021 Oconee Nuclear Station Demographic Survey

71. 17C. Which of the following emergency communication methods do you think is most likely to alert you at your residence?

Mark only one oval.

A SIREN SOUNDING NEAR YOUR HOME A TEXT MESSAGE FROM EMERGENCY OFFICIALS ALERT BROADCAST ON RADIO ALERT BROADCAST ON TV INFORMATION ON TWITTER OR FACEBOOK PHONE CALL/TEXT MESSAGE FROM FAMILY, FRIEND, OR NEIGHBOR OTHER

72. Fill in OTHER answers for question 17C This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.

Forms https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1mJ7g6sfy--ugwz4-C2spf2pA8b6fCN9rjXTVEZUu5jw/edit 35/35

APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

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 EPZ were provided by the county emergency management agencies. These plans were reviewed, and the TCPs and ACPs were modeled in the ETE simulations accordingly.

G.1 Manual Traffic Control TCPs and ACPs are forms of manual traffic control (MTC). 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 TCP (or ACP), the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system, in accordance with Section 3.3 of NUREG/CR 7002, Rev. 1. MTC at existing actuated traffic signalized intersections were essentially left alone.

Table K1 provides the control type and number of nodes with each control type in the analysis network. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a TCP or ACP, the control type is indicated as TCP/ACP in Table K1. These MTC locations are mapped as green dots in Figure G1. No additional locations for MTC are suggested as a result of the ETE simulations in this study.

It is assumed that the ACPs will be established within 120 minutes of the 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 US 178, US 123 and US 76 in this analysis.

G.2 Analysis of Key TCP /ACP 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 (TMPs) 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 TMPs.

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, with good weather (Scenario 6) evacuation of the 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region and the entire EPZ (Region R01, R02, R03) were simulated wherein these intersections were left as is (without MTC). The results shown in Table G2 were compared to the results presented in Section 7. The ETE were not impacted at the 90th or 100th percentile. The remaining TCPs/ACPs Oconee Nuclear Station G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

at controlled intersections were left as actuated signals in the model and, therefore, had no material impact on ETE.

The ETE simulations discussed in Section 7 indicate that the evacuation routes are oversaturated, and experience pronounced traffic congestion during evacuation due to the limited capacity of the roadways and the large volume of evacuating traffic. The traffic signals along the state and US routes are significant bottlenecks. Nearly all of the traffic signals in the EPZ are actuated traffic signals and will adjust their timing to changing traffic patterns. Traffic control at signalized intersections will not have a pronounced impact on the evacuation process as most of the intersections have significant volume on the eastwest approaches as well as the northsouth approaches (see Figure 73 through 77 - all major intersections along US 76/123).

Thus, MTC does little to improve ETE as there is heavy traffic in competing directions.

Although there is no material 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/ACPs, the list of locations provided in Table G1 could be considered as priority locations when implementing the TMP.

Oconee Nuclear Station G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G1. List of Manual Traffic Control Locations at intersections without Actuated Signals Node Number Type of Control TCP/ACP Number (See Appendix K) Intersection (Prior to being a TCP/ACP) 1 32 US 76 and SR 133 Pretimed Signal 2 368 & 369 US 123 and SR 93 (east) Pretimed Signal 3 365 & 366 US 76 and SR 93 (east) Stop Sign & Pretimed Signal 4 79 SR 93 and US 178 Pretimed Signal 5 83 & 84 US 178 and US 123 Stop Sign 12 119 SR 8 and SR 183 (west) Pretimed Signal 13 117 SR 8 and SR 183 (east) Pretimed Signal 15 66 & 67 US 178 and SR 183 Pretimed Signal 16 54 SR 11 and US 178 Stop Sign A1/ST01 1125 Gap Hill Road and SR 183 Stop Sign B2/ST04 423 Seneca Rd and Jones Mill Rd Stop Sign D1/2/ST05 988 SR 130 and S3738 Stop Sign E1 133 SR 130 and SR 183 Pretimed Signal 1 113 SR 183 and SR 133 Stop Sign Oconee Nuclear Station G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G2. ETE with and without Modification to TMP Scenario 6 th 90 Percentile ETE 100th Percentile ETE Region ETE with TMP in ETE with no TMP in ETE with TMP in ETE with no TMP Difference Difference place place place in place R01 (2Mile) 2:05 2:05 0:00 4:45 4:45 0:00 R02 (5Mile) 2:35 2:35 0:00 4:50 4:50 0:00 R03 (Full EPZ) 3:55 3:55 0:00 5:20 5:20 0:00 Oconee Nuclear Station G4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G1. Traffic Control Points and Access Control Points for the ONS EPZ Oconee Nuclear Station G5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX H Evacuation Regions

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 H27). 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Each Region Radial Regions Zone Region Description A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R01 2Mile Region 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R02 5Mile Region 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R03 Full EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R04 NNW, N, NNE 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R05 NE, ENE 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R06 E 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R07 ESE, SE, SSE 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R08 S 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R09 SSW 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R10 SW, WSW 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R11 W, WNW, NW 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Evacuate 5Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R12 NNW, N 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R13 NNE, NE, ENE 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R14 E, ESE, SE 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R15 SSE, S, SSW 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

R16 SW, WSW 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R17 W, WNW 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R18 NW 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Zone Region From (Degrees) A0 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2 R19 5Mile Region 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R20 NNW, N, NNE 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R21 NE, ENE 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R22 E 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R23 ESE, SE, SSE 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R24 S 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R25 SSW 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R26 SW, WSW 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R27 W, WNW, NW 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Zone(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, Zone(s) Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace then Evacuate Oconee Nuclear Station H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H1. Region R01 Oconee Nuclear Station H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H2. Region R02 Oconee Nuclear Station H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H3. Region R03 Oconee Nuclear Station H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H4. Region R04 Oconee Nuclear Station H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H5. Region R05 Oconee Nuclear Station H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 Oconee Nuclear Station H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H7. Region R07 Oconee Nuclear Station H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Oconee Nuclear Station H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09 Oconee Nuclear Station H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H10. Region R10 Oconee Nuclear Station H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 Oconee Nuclear Station H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H12. Region R12 Oconee Nuclear Station H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H13. Region R13 Oconee Nuclear Station H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14 Oconee Nuclear Station H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15 Oconee Nuclear Station H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H16. Region R16 Oconee Nuclear Station H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H17. Region R17 Oconee Nuclear Station H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H18. Region R18 Oconee Nuclear Station H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H19. Region R19 Oconee Nuclear Station H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H20. Region R20 Oconee Nuclear Station H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 Oconee Nuclear Station H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H22. Region R22 Oconee Nuclear Station H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H23. Region R23 Oconee Nuclear Station H25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H24. Region R24 Oconee Nuclear Station H26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H25. Region R25 Oconee Nuclear Station H27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H26. Region R26 Oconee Nuclear Station H28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H27. Region R27 Oconee Nuclear Station H29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX J Representative Inputs to and Outputs from the DYNEV II System

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. In total, there are a total of 524 source links (origins) in the model. The source links are shown as centroid points in Figure J1. On average, evacuees travel a straightline distance of 5.73 miles to exit the study area.

Table J2 provides network-wide statistics (average travel time, average delay, average speed and number of vehicles) for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) for each scenario. As expected, Scenarios with icy conditions (Scenario 8 and 11), and the special event (Scenario 13) exhibit higher average delay, slower average speed and longer average travel time compared to other scenarios.

Table J3 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes through the EPZ - US 123 and US 76 - for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03). As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figures 73 through 78, US123/US 76 WB is congested for most of the evacuation. As such, the average speeds are significantly lower (and travel times higher) for the first 4 to 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> after the ATE.

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 spatially separated as a result of the traffic congestion in the EPZ, which was discussed in detail in Section 7.3. The maximum travel time is about 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, 20 minutes on average for midday good weather scenarios, 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> for the special event, and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, 30 minutes for the roadway impact.

Oconee Nuclear Station J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Entering Upstream Downstream Network Directional Destination Destination Route Name Node Node on this Link Preference Nodes Capacity 8243 1,700 SR 183 1121 99 4 SW 8003 1,700 8217 1,700 8053 2,850 SR 137 419 918 435 E 8152 1,275 8124 1,700 8145 1,700 Keith Ave 752 751 1,040 SE 8202 2,850 8097 1,425 8165 1,700 SR 188 342 1052 225 SW 8003 1,700 8243 1,700 8165 1,700 SR 183 141 142 170 W 8003 1,700 8243 1,700 8271 1,700 SR 130 984 274 408 NW 8165 1,700 8129 1,700 8053 2,850 US 178 70 71 44 NE 8124 1,700 8129 1,700 8243 1,700 SR 24 506 508 19 SW 8217 1,700 8501 1,700 S Peachtree Rd 705 708 35 E 8053 2,850 8152 1,275 Oconee Nuclear Station 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 4.4 4.9 4.0 4.6 4.1 4.6 5.2 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 3.1 3.6 2.7 3.3 2.8 3.3 3.9 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 13.7 12.2 14.9 13.0 14.5 13.1 11.5 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 79,325 79,379 75,158 75,165 69,184 84,029 84,076 Exiting Network Scenario 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NetworkWide Average 5.9 4.3 4.9 5.7 4.4 5.3 4.3 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 4.6 3.0 3.6 4.4 3.1 4.0 3.0 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 10.1 13.9 12.2 10.6 13.8 11.3 14.1 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 83,973 78,867 78,950 78,821 74,099 103,171 79,307 Exiting Network Oconee Nuclear Station J3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1)

Elapsed Time (hours) 1 2 3 4 5 5:15 Travel Length Speed Time Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Route Name (miles) (mph) (min) Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time US 123 Westbound 17.6 16.8 62.8 14.2 74.6 12.7 83.0 8.9 118.4 54.2 19.5 54.2 19.5 US 123 Eastbound 17.6 28.4 37.2 15.7 67.0 5.6 188.5 13.9 76.2 46.6 22.6 54.4 19.4 US 76 Westbound 12.9 13.3 57.9 10.9 70.8 9.8 78.4 6.8 113.9 51.2 15.1 51.2 15.1 US 76 Eastbound 12.8 23.5 32.8 15.1 50.9 12.2 63.0 20.5 37.7 42.3 18.2 51.5 15.0 Oconee Nuclear Station J4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 Elapsed Time (hours)

Route Upstream Downstream 1 2 3 4 5 5:15 Name Node Node Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval 1,066 2,591 3,745 4,831 5,730 6,105 US 123 4 3 11.4% 9.2% 8.3% 8.0% 8.0% 7.8%

1,317 3,878 6,440 9,001 11,562 14,124 US 123 52 53 14.0% 13.7% 14.3% 14.9% 16.1% 18.1%

571 1,955 3,503 4,863 5,249 5,249 SR 11 54 271 6.1% 6.9% 7.8% 8.0% 7.3% 6.7%

250 894 1,169 1,275 1,301 1,301 SR 183 122 123 2.7% 3.2% 2.6% 2.1% 1.8% 1.7%

116 439 595 657 672 672 SR 186 127 128 1.2% 1.6% 1.3% 1.1% 0.9% 0.9%

222 402 484 519 535 535 SR 8 129 130 2.4% 1.4% 1.1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7%

819 2,167 3,581 4,897 6,058 6,623 US 76 164 165 8.7% 7.7% 8.0% 8.1% 8.5% 8.5%

1 28 52 59 61 61 SR 130 302 303 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

1 39 76 87 90 90 SR 28 334 335 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

305 994 1,609 2,205 2,227 2,227 SR 88 500 501 3.3% 3.5% 3.6% 3.6% 3.1% 2.9%

325 1,263 2,147 2,905 3,954 4,345 SH 24 719 720 3.5% 4.5% 4.8% 4.8% 5.5% 5.6%

368 1,230 2,157 3,031 3,208 3,240 US 178 742 864 3.9% 4.4% 4.8% 5.0% 4.5% 4.2%

1,277 3,714 4,351 5,772 6,231 6,289 US 76 865 202 13.6% 13.2% 9.7% 9.5% 8.7% 8.1%

322 1,229 2,316 3,483 3,728 3,728 US 178 929 729 3.4% 4.4% 5.2% 5.8% 5.2% 4.8%

1 58 127 150 157 157 SR 107 1038 361 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2%

678 1,339 2,454 3,153 4,225 4,341 Rt 187 1148 1145 7.2% 4.7% 5.5% 5.2% 5.9% 5.6%

347 1,928 3,290 4,114 4,187 4,187 SH 135 1177 1152 3.7% 6.8% 7.3% 6.8% 5.9% 5.4%

652 2,137 3,692 5,223 6,757 8,063 SR 11 1240 243 7.0% 7.6% 8.2% 8.6% 9.4% 10.3%

743 1,968 3,159 4,344 5,704 6,734 SR 59 1249 217 7.9% 7.0% 7.0% 7.2% 8.0% 8.6%

Oconee Nuclear Station J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins Oconee Nuclear Station J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 6:00 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 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Oconee Nuclear Station J7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 6:00 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 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Oconee Nuclear Station J8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 6:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

Oconee Nuclear Station J9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (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 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Ice (Scenario 8)

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 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Ice (Scenario 8)

Oconee Nuclear Station J10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 6:00 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 (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 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10)

Oconee Nuclear Station J11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Ice (Scenario 11)

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 6:00 6:30 7:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Ice (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 6:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12)

Oconee Nuclear Station J12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good, Special Event (Scenario 13)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Evening, 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 6:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Oconee Nuclear Station J13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX K Evacuation Roadway Network

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 50 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K51) 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 February 2021.

Table K1 summarizes the number of nodes by the type of control (stop sign, yield sign, pre timed signal, actuated signal, traffic control points and access control points [TCP/ACP], or uncontrolled).

Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control Number of Control Type Nodes Uncontrolled 945 Pretimed 1 Actuated 123 Stop 111 TCP/ACP 19 Yield 21 Total: 1,220 Oconee Nuclear Station K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K1. ONS LinkNode Analysis Network Oconee Nuclear Station K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 Oconee Nuclear Station K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 Oconee Nuclear Station K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 Oconee Nuclear Station K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 Oconee Nuclear Station K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 Oconee Nuclear Station K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 Oconee Nuclear Station K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 Oconee Nuclear Station K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 Oconee Nuclear Station K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 Oconee Nuclear Station K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 Oconee Nuclear Station K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 Oconee Nuclear Station K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 Oconee Nuclear Station K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 Oconee Nuclear Station K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 Oconee Nuclear Station K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 Oconee Nuclear Station K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 Oconee Nuclear Station K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 Oconee Nuclear Station K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 Oconee Nuclear Station K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 Oconee Nuclear Station K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 Oconee Nuclear Station K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 Oconee Nuclear Station K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 Oconee Nuclear Station K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 Oconee Nuclear Station K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 Oconee Nuclear Station K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 Oconee Nuclear Station K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 Oconee Nuclear Station K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 Oconee Nuclear Station K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 Oconee Nuclear Station K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 Oconee Nuclear Station K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 Oconee Nuclear Station K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 Oconee Nuclear Station K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 Oconee Nuclear Station K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 Oconee Nuclear Station K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 Oconee Nuclear Station K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 Oconee Nuclear Station K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 Oconee Nuclear Station K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 Oconee Nuclear Station K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 Oconee Nuclear Station K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 Oconee Nuclear Station K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 Oconee Nuclear Station K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 Oconee Nuclear Station K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 Oconee Nuclear Station K44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 Oconee Nuclear Station K45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 Oconee Nuclear Station K46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 Oconee Nuclear Station K47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 Oconee Nuclear Station K48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 Oconee Nuclear Station K49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 Oconee Nuclear Station K50 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 Oconee Nuclear Station K51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 Oconee Nuclear Station K52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX L Zone Boundaries

L. ZONE BOUNDARIES A0 County: Oconee and Pickens Communities: South of ONS, North of the ONS, Keowee Key, Gap Hill, East Cove Defined as the area within the following boundary: Midstream on Lake Keowee, two miles north of ONS, east on the two mile radius arc from ONS to the junction of War Path Rd and Walhalla Highway (SC 183); southeast on two mile arc to a point east of junction of Dan Ross Rd and Ridgeland Rd; south on the two mile arc to Jones Mill Rd (SSR 160); SSR 160 east to junction with Old Seneca Rd (SSR 291); SSR 291 southwest to junction with Brown Bottom Rd; northwest to two mile arc south of ONS; west to Rochester Highway (SC 130);

Rochester Highway south to junction with Katelynn Lane; Katelynn Lane north to two mile arc; northwest to junction of Ellenburg Rd and Knox Campground Rd; two mile arc north to junction of Highfalls Rd and Jubie Lane; two mile arc northeast to SC 183 bridge (west of Flagship Drive); two mile arc northeast to a point south of junction Highway 130 and South Craggmore Drive; two mile arc east to midstream of Lake Keowee two miles north of ONS.

A1 County: Pickens Communities: Mile Creek, Mile Creek County Park Defined as the area within the following boundary: Midstream of Lake Keowee at midstream of Cedar Creek Inlet east to and along Lakeside Drive to junction with 30th Street, then east to junction with Crowe Creek Rd (SC 133);

SC 133 south to junction with Hunting Hollow Rd; east to junction with Love And Care Rd; southeast overland to junction of Walhalla Highway (SC 183) and High Hope Rd; southwest along SC 183 to junction with War Path Road; two mile radius arc from ONS west to midstream of Lake Keowee; north to midstream of Cedar Creek Inlet.

Oconee Nuclear Station L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

A2 County: Pickens Communities: Shady Grove, Mountain View, Piney Grove, Cedar Creek, Crowe Creek Defined as the area within the following boundary: Midspan SC 11 bridge over Lake Keowee east to junction of SC 11 and Crowe Creek Road (SC 133); SC 133 east to junction with Shady Grove Rd (SSR 32); SSR 32 east to junction with Concord Church Rd; south to junction with Prison Camp Rd; southeast along Prison Camp Rd, then overland to Holder Knob Rd at Walhalla Highway (SC 183); SC 183 southwest to junction with High Hope Rd; north overland to junction of Duncan Rd and Love And Care Rd; to Hunting Hollow Road northwest to junction with Crowe Creek Rd (SC 133); SC 133 north to junction with 30th Street; 30th Street west to Lakeside Drive, then along Lakeside Drive; west to lake shore; west midstream of Cedar Creek to midstream of Lake Keowee; north midstream of Lake Keowee to midspan SC 11 bridge.

B1 County: Pickens Communities: Six Mile, Kings Grove Defined as the area within the following boundary: Junction of War Path Rd and Walhalla Highway (SC 183) northeast along SC 183 to junction with Cedar Hill Rd; south to junction with Lusk Rd; southeast to junction with Holliday Rd; northeast along Holliday Rd to junction with North Main St (SC 137) south along N. Main St to junction with Belle Shoals Rd (SSR 267); SSR 267 southeast to junction with Ridgeland Dr.; southeast to junction with Liberty Highway (SSR 137); SSR 137 west to junction with John Holliday Rd (SSR 125); SSR 125 south to junction with Norris Highway (SC 137); SC 137 southeast to junction with Camp Creek Rd (SSR 65); SSR 65 southwest to junction with Maw Bridge Rd (SSR 337); SSR337 south to junction with Brookbend Rd; west to junction with Six Mile Highway (SC 133)and Pleasant Hill Church Road; Pleasant Hill Church Road west to Jones Mill Rd (SSR 160); SSR 160 northwest to two mile radius arc from ONS; two mile radius arc north to Junction of War Path Rd and Walhalla Highway (SC 183).

Oconee Nuclear Station L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

B2 County: Pickens Communities: Norris, Cateechee, Praters, Roanoke, Golden Creek, Terrapin Crossing Defined as the area within the following boundary: Junction Walhalla Highway (SC 183) and Cedar Hill Rd east to crossing of Cannon Creek; southeast along Cannon Creek to Twelve Mile Creek: south along Twelve Mile Creek to Wolf Creek; southeast overland to junction of Daniel Boone Trail and Belle Shoals Rd (SSR 267); SSR267 east to Roanoke Rd (SSR 223); along SSR 223 (Roanoke, Campground, McAlister Rds) to junction with Summit (SSR158) and Hunter Mill Rd; Hunter Mill Rd west to Liberty city limit; southeast along Liberty city limit to Greenville Highway (SC 93); SC 93 southwest to Old Norris Road; southeast to Farmers Hill Rd; south to Pine Thicket Rd; southwest to Gavin Rd (SSR 270);

south to Chastain Rd (SSR 395); SSR 395 west to junction with SC 93; junction west along an unnamed creek to the junction of Blue Jay Rd and Johnson Rd; southwest on Blue Jay Rd to Maw Bridge Rd (SSR 337); SSR 337 north to Camp Creek Rd (SSR 65); SSR 65 east to Norris Highway (SC 137); SC 137 northwest to John Holliday Rd (SSR 125); SSR 125 north to Liberty Highway (SSR 137); east to Ridgeland Drive; northwest to Belle Shoals RD (SSR 267); northwest to North Main Street (SC 137); SC 137 north to Holliday Rd; west to Lusk Rd; northwest to Cedar Hill Rd; Cedar Hill Rd north to junction with Walhalla Highway (SC 183).

C1 County: Pickens Communities: Pleasant Hill Defined as the area within the following boundary: Midstream of Seneca River on twomile arc south of ONS east to Brown Bottom Rd; south on Brown Bottom Rd to Old Seneca Rd (SSR 291); SSR 291 northeast to Jones Mill Rd (SSR 160); SSR 160 southeast to Six Mile Highway (SC 133); SC 133 southwest to Isaqueena Dam Rd; Isaqueena Dam Rd west to outlet of Isaqueena Lake; west and north along Seneca River to two mile arc south of ONS.

Oconee Nuclear Station L3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

C2 County: Pickens Communities: Central, Clemson, Clemson University Defined as the area within the following boundary: Seneca River at outlet of Isaqueena Lake along Isaqueena Dam Rd to Six Mile Highway (SC 133); north to Brookbend Rd; southeast to Maw Bridge RD (SSR 337); SSR 337 south and east to Blue Jay Rd; southeast and east to junction with Johnson Rd (SSR 52); east along unnamed creek to junction of Greenville Highway (SC 93) and Chastain Rd (SSR 395); SSR 395 east to White Oak Rd (SSR 91); SSR 91 south to US Highway 123; US Highway 123 southwest to Isaqueena Trail (SSR 30); south and southwest to Pendleton Rd (SC 28); SC 28 northwest to US 76; US 76 south to Old Stone Church Rd; west to Old Cherry Rd (SSR 37); SSR 37 to midspan of bridge at Lake Hartwell; north along midsteam Seneca River to outlet of Lake Isaqueena.

D1 County: Oconee Communities: Fairview Defined as the area within the following boundary: Junction SC188 and Petty Rd (SSR589) east and north on Clyde Crenshaw Rd to Frenge Branch Rd (SSR 61; SSR 61 northeast to Lake Keowee west shore; northeast to two mile arc southwest of ONS; southeast along arc to Doug Hollow Rd; south and east to Rochester highway (SC 130); north on SC 130 for 0.75 mile; east to midstream of Seneca River; downstream to a point due east of Dodd Farm Rd; west overland to Dodd Farm Rd across Lawrence Bridge Rd and overland to midstream of little River; Little River west to Little River spillway; west northwest across Lake Keowee to east end of Maughan Trail; northwest to Harbor Way; west to to Mallard Bend Rd; north to Fairview Church Rd; westnorthwest to a point between Hampton Shores and Fairview Shores developments; north overland to midstream of Crooked Creek; northwest to midspan Keowee School Rd bridge (SC 188); SC 188 northwest to junction with Biggerstaff Rd (SSR 589).

Oconee Nuclear Station L4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

D2 County: Oconee Communities: Bayshore, Newry, Hanover Hills Defined as the area within the following boundary: Junction of SC 188 and Biggerstaff Rd (SSR 46); southeast along Biggerstaff Rd Fairview Church Rd northeast and east to Mallard Bend Rd; south to Harbers Way; southeast to Maughan Trail; southeast to west shore of Lake Keowee; southeast across Lake Keowee to the Little River spillway on SC 130; east along the Little River to a point west of junction of Lawrence Bridge Rd (SSR 225) and Dodd Farm Rd; east to the junction and northeast along Dodd Farm Rd to midstream Seneca River; downstream to midspan of Old Cherry Rd (SSR 37) bridge; SSR 37 west to J P Stevens Rd (SSR 37); south Curry Drive (SSR 65); SSR 65 west and south to midspan of bridge over Lake Hartwell at Martin Creek; west midstream to west shore, east to junction of Seneca Springs Landing and Singing Pines Rd (SSR 137); SSR 137 north to Wells Highway (SSR 488); SSR 488 west and northwest to Sandifer Blvd (US 76123); US 76123 southwest to Richland Rd (SSR 13); SSR 13 west to Poplar Springs Rd (SSR 35); SSR 35 north to West Halfway Branch Rd; east to Blue Ridge Blvd (SC 28); east northeast overland to a point on Keowee School Rd (SC 188) halfway between the junctions with Old Walhalla Highway (SSR 60) and Mt Olive Church Rd (W A66); SC 188 northeast to junction with Biggerstaff Rd (SSR 46).

E1 County: Oconee Communities: Keowee, New Hope Defined as the area within the following boundary: Junction Jones Rd (SSR 24) and Old Station (SSR 40) north on Alexander Rd to Burnt Tanyard Rd (SSR132);

SSR 132 northeast to midspan Tanyard Bridge; east midstream of Little River to midstream Stamp Creek Inlet (Fork Bottom Bend); southeast to two mile arc northwest of ONS; south along arc across junction of High Falls Rd and Jubie Lane; south along arc across Ellenburg Rd and the east end of Knox Landing to midstream of Lake Keowee; south west to the northwest end of Fenge Branch Rd; southwest to Clyde Crenshaw Rd; west to junction of Keowee School Rd (SC 188) and Petty RD (SSR 589); south on SC 188 to mid span of the bridge over Crooked Creek; Crooked Creek northwest to the Wolf Stake Church Rd (SSR 223) creek crossing; SSR 223 northeast and north to junction SC 183 and Old Station Rd (SSR 40); SSR 40 northwest to the junction with Jones Rd (SSR 24).

Oconee Nuclear Station L5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

E2 County: Oconee Communities: Wolfs Stake, Ebenezer, West Union, Poplar Springs Defined as the area within the following boundary: Junction White Cut Rd (SSR 174) and Oconee Station Rd (SSR 95) east along SSR 95 to junction with SC 11 and LeCroy Rd (SSR 198); SSR 198 (Le Croy, Deaton, Jones Rds) east to Old Station Rd (SSR40); SSR 40 to junction with Pickens Highway (SC 183); and Wolf Stake Church Rd (SSR223); SSR 223 south to crossing of Crooked Creek; southeast along midstream of Crooked Creek past Tanyard Bridge (on SC 188) to a point midstream, north of the midpoint between Hampton Shores and Fairview Shores developments on Fairview Church Rd; south along the line formed by the points, then west on Fairview Church Rd to Biggerstaff Rd (SSR 46); northwest to Keowee School Rd (SC 188); southwest along SC 188 to a point due east of the junction of Blue Ridge Blvd (SC 28) and Halfway Branch Rd; west overland to the junction and along Halfway Branch Rd to Poplar Springs Rd (SSR 35); south to Levi Lane; northwest to junction with SC 11; north to West Bear Swamp Rd (SSR 220); northwest to junction with ScS37 241 and SC 183; south to Flat Rock Rd; south to Flat Rock Rd; south to Skyview Drive; northwest along the intermittent creek bed of the Negro Fork to the junction of Coffee RD and ScS37176; along a line overland to the west end of Boomer Rd, then north paralleling Zion Rd (ScS37176) to the junction of Highlands Highway (SC 28) and W A3 road; northeast along a line overland to the junction of Playground Road and Kyle Drive; east northeast along a line overland to the junction of Picket Post Rd and Twin Branch Drive; north along Picket Post Rd to White Cut Rd(ScS37174); north to junction with Oconee Station Rd (SSR 95).

F1 County: Oconee Communities: Stamp Creek Defined as the area within the following boundary: Tanyard Bridge on Burnt Tanyard Rd (SSR 132) northeast to Collins Rd; east and north to Rochester Highway (SC 130); northwest to Stamp Creek Rd east to Nimmons Bridge Rd (SSR 128); south to Keowee Town Landing Rd (SSR 98); SSR 98 to west shore of Lake Keowee; east to midstream of Lake Keowee; south along midstream to two mile arc north of ONS; southwest along the arc to midstream of Stamp Creek Inlet; northwest midstream to midstream of the Little River Inlet; west to the Tanyard Bridge on Burnt Tanyard Rd (SSR 132).

Oconee Nuclear Station L6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F2 County: Oconee Communities: Tamassee, Salem, Picket Poast, Oconee Creek, D.A.R., Fall Creek, Flat Shoals Defined as the area within the following boundary: Junction White Cut Rd (SSR 174) and Oconee Station RD (SSR 95)northwest along SSR 95 to Rocky Ford Rd; north to ScS3795; north to Tamassee Knob Rd; north and east to junction with Cherokee Valley Rd; east overland to Mud Creek; north up Mud Creek to the creek crossing of Lewin Way; Lewin Way north to Whitmire Church Rd; southeast to Baineridge Drive; northeast overland to the shore of Whitewater Lake ; north overland to Little River Rd; southeast to Little River Rd creek crossing of the Whitewater Lake outfall; northeast overland to a point midway between North Fork Little River and Ridge Rd; southeast to Smeltzer Creek; north along Smeltzer Creek to a point due west of the junction of Whitewater Falls Rd (SC 130) and Smeltzer Mtn. Rd; east to the junction; Smeltzer Mtn Rd east overland to Boone Trail: east to Shallow Shack Rd; north to Jocassee Lake Rd; northeast to the junction with Patterson Ridge Rd; due east overland to Jocassee Rd; Jocassee Rd southwest to west shore of Lake Keowee; southeast to midstream of Lake Keowee; south to Keowee Town Landing; Keowee Town Landing Rd west to Nimmons Bridge Rd (SSR 128); north to Stamp Creek Rd (SSR 200); west to SC 130; south to Collins Rd; south and west to Burnt Tanyard Rd (SSR 132); southwest to Alexander Springs Rd; southwest to Old Station Rd (SSR 24); northwest on Jones, Denton and LeCroy Rd (SSR198) to Oconee Station Rd (SSR95); northwest to junction with White Cut Rd (SSR 174).

Oconee Nuclear Station L7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX M Evacuation Sensitivity Studies

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 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 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, 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 remain unchanged. If evacuees mobilize one hour slower, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE are increased by 10 minutes and 15 minutes, respectively - a moderate change.

As discussed in Section 7.3, traffic congestion persists within the EPZ for about 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 40 minutes due to the large population centers (Seneca, Clemson, and Walhalla) in the EPZ. As such, congestion dictates the 100th percentile ETE until 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 40 minutes after the ATE. After this time, trip generation, (plus a 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary), dictates the 100th percentile ETE.

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 of 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 for 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 Section 3.2 and Section 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 eliminating (0%),

the shadow evacuation decreases the 90th percentile ETE and 100th percentile ETE by 5 minutes and 20 minutes, respectively. Doubling (40%) the shadow evacuation increases the 90th percentile ETE and 100th percentile ETE by 10 minutes and 15 minutes, respectively. Tripling (60%) the shadow evacuation increases the 90th percentile ETE and 100th percentile ETE by 25 minutes and 40 minutes, respectively. Increasing the shadow evacuation to 80% increases the 90th percentile ETE and 100th percentile ETE by 45 minutes and 50 minutes, respectively. A full shadow evacuation (100%)

increases the 90th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and increases the 100th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 25 minutes.

Note, the demographic survey results presented in Appendix F indicate that 11% of households would elect to evacuate if advised to shelter, which differs from the assumption of 20 percent non Oconee Nuclear Station M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

compliance as suggested in NUREG/CR7002, Rev 1. A sensitivity study was considered using a 11%

shadow evacuation and the 90th and 100th percentile ETEs were minimally impacted - a 150minute reduction at the 100th percentile and no impact at the 90th percentile.

Reducing the shadow evacuation has little impact on ETE because the traffic congestion in the major population centers within the EPZ is significant. Increasing the shadow evacuation, however, does have a significant impact on ETE because the additional vehicles in the major population centers just outside of the EPZ (specifically in Easley, Pickens, Westminster, Liberty, and Pendleton) using roadways outside the EPZ reduces the available roadway capacity for EPZ evacuees thereby exacerbating the traffic congestion along the major evacuation routes leaving the EPZ.

M.3 Effect of Changes in the Permanent 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) 2013 001, 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.

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 18%.

Changes in population were applied to permanent residents only (as per federal guidance), in both the EPZ and the Shadow Region.

2. The transportation infrastructure (as presented in Appendix K) remained fixed; the presence of future proposed roadway changes and/or highway capacity improvements were not considered.

3. The study was performed for the 2Mile Region (R01), 5Mile Region (R02) and the Entire EPZ (R03).

4. The scenario which yielded the longest 90th percentile ETE values was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 13 - Winter, Weekend, Midday with Good Weather and a Clemson Football Game) since the special event occurs more than one day a year.

5. The number of transients present for the Clemson University Football Game and the traffic management plan for the game is assumed to remain the same Table M3 presents the results of the sensitivity study.Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, 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 Oconee Nuclear Station M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

values (for the 2Mile, 5Mile Region or entire EPZ) to increase by 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. The base ETE for the 2Mile Region (R01), 5Mile Region (R02) and for 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 />; thus, 25% of these base ETE is always greater than 30 minutes.

Therefore, the R01, R02, and R03 criterion for updating is 30 minutes.

Those percent population changes which result in changes to the longest 90th percentile ETE greater than or equal to 30 minutes are highlighted in red in Table M3 - a 17% or greater increase in the Entire EPZ permanent resident population (includes 20% of the Shadow Region permanent resident population). Duke Energy will have to estimate the full EPZ population on an annual basis. If the entire EPZ population increases by 17% or more, an updated ETE analysis will be needed.

M.4 Changes in Emergency Planning Zone Oconee County is requesting changes to the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). A majority of the Zones in Oconee County have borders that separate neighborhoods or developed properties. The changes proposed to the boundaries of Zones A0, D1, D2, E1 and E2 follow existing neighborhood boundaries, such as roads, and serve to assign entire neighborhoods to the same Zone. If each county/neighborhood/developed property has a distinct Zone, different protective actions could be considered for each. The need becomes more evident with a hostile actionbased event where the response to the event may require a more specific protective action (i.e., go inside/stay inside) close to the nuclear site. Figure M1 shows the existing EPZ overlaid with the proposed EPZ.

Section B of the December 2019 FEMA Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) Program Manual outlines the process for making changes to the EPZ boundary:

If an ORO wants to change the boundary of an existing EPZ, the proposal must be submitted to the FEMA Regional Administrator or designee, usually the RAC [Regional Assistance Committee] Chair. The proposal shall include, but not be limited to:

Action by appropriate ORO officials desiring the change to the boundary (i.e.,

resolution by elected official, etc.).

Description of the change to the boundary.

Discussion of the population affected by the change.

Effect that the change has on evacuation routes or ETEs.

Maps showing the existing EPZ boundary and proposed new boundary.

FEMA and the RAC will review the request on its merits. After the regional review, the request and RAC recommendation will be forwarded to FEMA Headquarters for final action.

If the EPZ boundary change is approved, the approval is contingent on the ORO submitting for review the appropriate changes to their plans/procedures, maps of the EPZ, public information material, and impact that the addition or subtraction of population from the EPZ has on the ETEs. The information would include changes to the geographical boundary descriptions and the ANS, including additional sirens or other means for public notification.

Oconee Nuclear Station M3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Any modifications to any ANS must be consistent with Part V of the RPM [REP Program Manual].

According to NRCs Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 50.54(q),

The licensee may make changes to its emergency plan without NRC approval only if the licensee performs and retains an analysis demonstrating that the changes do not reduce the effectiveness of the plan and the plan, as changed, continues to meet the requirements in appendix E to this part and, for nuclear power reactor licensees, the planning standards of § 50.47(b).

The changes to a licensee's emergency plan that reduce the effectiveness of the plan as defined in paragraph (q)(1)(iv) of this section may not be implemented without prior approval by the NRC. A licensee desiring to make such a change after February 21, 2012 shall submit an application for an amendment to its license. In addition to the filing requirements of §§ 50.90 and 50.91, the request must include all emergency plan pages affected by that change and must be accompanied by a forwarding letter identifying the change, the reason for the change, and the basis for concluding that the licensee's emergency plan, as revised, will continue to meet the requirements in appendix E to this part and, for nuclear power reactor licensees, the planning standards of § 50.47(b).

M.4.1 Methodology The changes to the boundaries of Zones A0, D1, D2, E1 and E2 changes the population and vehicles evacuating from each of these Zones. The population for all other Zones in the EPZ is not impacted. Since the changes to the boundaries of these Zones is internal to the EPZ only, the total population of the EPZ as a whole is not impacted as well. Table M4 and Table M5 compare the evacuating population demand and evacuating vehicle estimates, respectively, by Zone for the existing and proposed EPZs.

The linknode analysis that was used as port of this study was used asis for this sensitivity study except for exit links (links that cross the boundary of each region which are used to track when the evacuated area has been cleared) that had to be revised due to the proposed boundary changes. The change in exit links was introduced into the input streams for the DYNEVII modeling system. Evacuation simulations were then run and the ETE predicted by these simulations were compared with the ETE of the proposed EPZ (presented in Section 7) to quantify the change in ETE caused by the change in the Zone boundaries.

Two different scenarios (temporal variations) and three different regions (wind strength/

direction) were considered to bound the potential impact of the boundary changes, on the ETE:

Scenario 5 - summer, midweek, weekend, evening with good weather was chosen because it represents the scenario with the lowest number of evacuating vehicles (see Table 64).

Scenario 6 - winter, midweek, midday with good weather was also chosen because it represents the scenario with the largest number of evacuating vehicles (see Table 64).

Oconee Nuclear Station M4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Regions R01, R02 and R03 were considered as they represent the evacuation radii emphasized in the federal guidance - 2 miles, 5 miles and full EPZ (approximately 10 miles), respectively.

Table M6 presents the ETE results for the Zone boundary changes (Proposed EPZ - used as the EPZ for this study), the ETE results that were calculated as part of this sensitivity study (Existing EPZ), and the difference in ETE caused by the change in Zone boundaries. As shown in Table M6, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE for all regions remains unchanged. The changes to the Zone boundaries are very minor and only change the population between Zones by 4% at most. The change in population is not significant enough to change the congestion or the 90th or 100th percentile ETE.

M.4.2 Conclusions The FEMA REP Program Manual indicates that a proposal to change an existing EPZ boundary should include a discussion of the population affected by the change, as well an estimate of the effect of the EPZ change on ETE. The EPZ population (all population groups) does not change as a result of the proposed EPZ change since all proposed changes are internal to the EPZ. The distribution of the population between Zones within the EPZ, however, is changed. No changes in ETE are seen at the 90th or 100th percentile for bounding cases.

M.5 Enhancements in Evacuation Time This appendix documents sensitivity studies on critical variables that could potentially impact ETE.

Possible improvements to ETE are further discussed below:

Prolonging the trip generation time by an hour has a moderate impact on the 90th and 100th percentile ETE (Section M.1). Public outreach encouraging evacuees to mobilize more quickly or in a timely manner could decrease ETE.

Increasing the shadow evacuation percent has a significant impact on ETE (Section M.2).

Public outreach could be considered to inform those people within the EPZ (and potentially beyond the EPZ) that if they are not advised to evacuate, they should not.

Population growth results in more evacuating vehicles, which could significantly increase ETE (Section M.3). Public outreach to inform people within the EPZ to evacuate as a family in a single vehicle would reduce the number of evacuating vehicles and could reduce ETE or offset the impact of population growth.

Oconee Nuclear Station M5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study Trip Generation Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Period th 90 Percentile 100th Percentile 3 Hours and 45 Minutes 3:55 5:40 4 Hours and 45 Minutes (Base) 3:55 5:40 5 Hours and 45 Minutes 4:05 5:55 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Percent Shadow Evacuating Shadow Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Evacuation Vehicles1 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 0 0 3:50 5:20 11 4,190 3:55 5:25 20 (Base) 7,618 3:55 5:40 40 15,236 4:05 5:55 60 22,854 4:20 6:20 80 30,472 4:40 6:30 100 38,090 4:55 7:05 Table M3. Evacuation Time Estimates for Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Population Change Shadow Permanent Base 16% 17% 18%

Resident Population 104,366 121,065 122,073 123,151 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 16% 17% 18%

2Mile Region (R01) 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 5Mile Region (R02) 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:30 Entire EPZ (R03) 5:45 6:10 6:15 6:20 th ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100 Percentile Population Change Region Base 16% 17% 18%

2Mile Region (R01) 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:45 5Mile Region (R02) 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 Entire EPZ (R03) 11:50 12:50 13:00 13:00 1

The Evacuating Shadow Vehicles in Table M-2 represent the residents and employees who will spontaneously decide to relocate from the Shadow Region during the evacuation. The basis for the values shown is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees. See Section 6 for further discussion.

Oconee Nuclear Station M6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M4. Evacuation Population Demand for the Existing and Proposed EPZs Universities, Schools, Childcare Centers, Transit Special and Day Special Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Camp Event Population Traffic Total Existing EPZ A0 930 1 1,668 642 0 0 0 0 0 3,241 A1 932 1 1,129 0 44 0 0 0 0 2,106 A2 2,543 3 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,747 B1 3,225 4 0 0 40 480 0 0 0 3,749 B2 6,604 8 0 317 0 24 0 0 0 6,953 C1 588 1 300 0 0 6 0 0 0 895 C2 32,604 39 2,616 2,648 93 31,448 65,766 0 0 135,214 D1 1,191 1 0 115 0 0 0 0 0 1,307 D2 23,355 27 1,933 1,132 547 5,301 0 0 0 32,295 E1 1,865 2 232 0 0 400 0 0 0 2,499 E2 12,955 15 744 456 173 3,746 0 0 0 18,089 F1 2,511 3 194 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,708 F2 3,822 4 599 0 0 455 0 0 0 4,880 Shadow Region 0 0 0 126 208 189 0 11,241 0 11,764 EPZ TOTAL 93,125 109 9,616 5,436 1,105 42,049 65,766 11,241 0 228,447 Proposed EPZ A0 946 1 1,668 642 0 0 0 0 0 3,257 A1 932 1 1,129 0 44 0 0 0 0 2,106 A2 2,543 3 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,747 B1 3,225 4 0 0 40 480 0 0 0 3,749 B2 6,604 8 0 317 0 24 0 0 0 6,953 C1 588 1 300 0 0 6 0 0 0 895 Oconee Nuclear Station M7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Universities, Schools, Childcare Centers, Transit Special and Day Special Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Camp Event Population Traffic Total C2 32,604 39 2,616 2,648 93 31,448 65,766 0 0 135,214 D1 1,234 1 0 115 0 0 0 0 0 1,350 D2 23,297 27 1,933 1,132 547 5,301 0 0 0 32,237 E1 1,858 2 232 0 0 400 0 0 0 2,492 E2 12,961 15 744 456 173 3,746 0 0 0 18,095 F1 2,511 3 194 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,708 F2 3,822 4 599 0 0 455 0 0 0 4,880 Shadow Region 0 0 0 126 208 189 0 11,241 0 11,764 EPZ TOTAL 93,125 109 9,616 5,436 1,105 42,049 65,766 11,241 0 228,447 Oconee Nuclear Station M8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M5. Evacuating Vehicle Demand for the Existing and Proposed EPZs Universities, Schools, Childcare University Centers, Off Transit Special and Day Campus Special Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Camp Student Event Vehicles Traffic Total Existing EPZ A0 583 2 545 578 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,708 A1 564 2 420 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 992 A2 1,595 2 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,673 B1 2,004 2 0 0 4 14 0 0 0 0 2,024 B2 4,141 2 0 286 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,429 C1 369 2 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 431 C2 15,415 4 1,309 2,386 16 188 5,601 22,552 0 0 47,471 D1 748 2 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 854 D2 14,471 2 1,037 1,020 80 188 0 0 0 0 16,798 E1 1,169 2 300 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 1,483 E2 8,000 2 541 411 5 136 0 0 0 0 9,095 F1 1,571 2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,717 F2 2,395 2 328 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 2,743 Shadow Region 0 0 0 114 28 6 0 0 6,974 6,768 13,890 EPZ TOTAL 53,025 28 4,760 4,899 139 562 5,601 22,552 6,974 6,768 105,308 Proposed EPZ A0 594 2 545 578 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,719 A1 564 2 420 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 992 A2 1,595 2 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,673 B1 2,004 2 0 0 4 14 0 0 0 0 2,024 B2 4,141 2 0 286 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,429 C1 369 2 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 431 C2 15,415 4 1,309 2,386 16 188 5,601 22,552 0 0 47,471 Oconee Nuclear Station M9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Universities, Schools, Childcare University Centers, Off Transit Special and Day Campus Special Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Camp Student Event Vehicles Traffic Total D1 774 2 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 880 D2 14,435 2 1,037 1,020 80 188 0 0 0 0 16,762 E1 1,164 2 300 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 1,478 E2 8,004 2 541 411 5 136 0 0 0 0 9,099 F1 1,571 2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,717 F2 2,395 2 328 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 2,743 Shadow Region 0 0 0 114 28 6 0 0 6,974 6,768 13,890 EPZ TOTAL 53,025 28 4,760 4,899 139 562 5,601 22,552 6,974 6,768 105,308 Oconee Nuclear Station M10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M6. ETE Results for Change in Zone Boundaries 90th Percentile ETE (hr:min)

Scenario 5 (Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Scenario 6 (Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Evening, Good Weather) Weather)

Region Existing EPZ Proposed EPZ Difference Existing EPZ Proposed EPZ Difference 2Mile (R01) 2:15 2:15 0:00 2:05 2:05 0:00 5Mile (R02) 2:30 2:30 0:00 2:35 2:35 0:00 Full EPZ (R03) 3:35 3:35 0:00 3:55 3:55 0:00 th 100 Percentile ETE (hr:min)

Scenario 5 (Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Scenario 6 (Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Evening, Good Weather) Weather)

Region Existing EPZ Proposed EPZ Difference Existing EPZ Proposed EPZ Difference 2Mile (R01) 4:45 4:45 0:00 4:45 4:45 0:00 5Mile (R02) 4:50 4:50 0:00 4:50 4:50 0:00 Full EPZ (R03) 4:55 4:55 0:00 5:40 5:40 0:00 Oconee Nuclear Station M11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure M1. Existing and Proposed ONS EPZ Oconee Nuclear Station M12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Section 1.4, 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

a. The scenarios in Table 13, Evacuation Scenarios, are Yes Table 21, Section 6, Table 62 developed for the ETE analysis. A reason is provided for use of other scenarios or for not evaluating specific scenarios.

Oconee Nuclear Station 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, Section 5.4.2 discussed.

b. A table similar to Table 15, Evacuation Areas for a Staged Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1 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

c. Population values are adjusted as necessary for growth to N/A N/A 2020 Census used as the base reflect population estimates to the year of the ETE. year of the analysis Oconee Nuclear Station 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 E5, and Table E6 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 E4

c. The average population during the season is used, itemized Yes Table 34, Table 35 and Appendix E and totaled for each scenario. itemize the peak transient population and employee estimates. These estimates are multiplied by the scenario specific percentages provided in Table 63 to estimate average transient population and employee 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 vary by scenario, and if so, reasons for the variation are discussed.

Oconee Nuclear Station 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 3.6 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 3.9 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 3.6, Table 37, Table 311

f. A summary table showing the total number of buses, Yes Table 312, 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 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 E3, Table E7 lists all medical and average population, are listed. Special facility staff is correctional facilities by facility name, included in the total special facility population. location, and average population.

b. The method of obtaining special facility data is discussed. Yes Section 3.5, Section 3.10

c. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles assumed Yes Table 36 available to support the evacuation of the facility is provided.

d. The logistics for mobilizing specially trained staff (e.g., Yes Section 8.1 - under Evacuation of medical support or security support for prisons, jails, and Medical Facilities and Correctional other correctional facilities) are discussed when appropriate. Facilities (Correctional Facilities within the EPZ will shelterinplace.)

2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student Yes Table 38, Table E1, Table E2, and population, and transportation resources required to Section 3.7 support the evacuation, is provided. The source of this information should be identified.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle schools Yes Section 3.7 are based on 100 percent of the school capacity.

c. The estimate of high school students who will use personal Yes Section 3.7 vehicle to evacuate is provided and a basis for the values used is given.

d. The need for return trips is identified. Yes Section 8.1 Oconee Nuclear Station 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 3.8 information on the population, estimated duration, and season of the event.

b. The special event that encompasses the peak transient Yes Section 3.8 population is analyzed in the ETE.

c. The percentage of permanent residents attending the event Yes Section 3.8 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station 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 10 and 12 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, Section 3.11 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, Roadway Network Identifying Nodes and Links, and Figure A2, Grid Map Showing Detailed Nodes and Links.

Oconee Nuclear Station 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 Assumptions 2, 3, and 4 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 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 adverse weather conditions are described, if applicable. adverse weather conditions.

Oconee Nuclear Station 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 of Section 2.6, Table 22 and assumptions for snow removal on streets and driveways 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, Table C1, and Table C3 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 survey, number of participants, and statistical relevance are provided.

c. Data used to develop trip generation times are summarized. Yes Appendix F, Section 5 Oconee Nuclear Station 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 Yes Appendix F trip generation times are discussed, if applicable.

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 Public Transportation is not provided expected is considered. for the special event and was therefore not considered.

Oconee Nuclear Station 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 TransitDependent Population (Residents without access to a vehicle)

b. The means of evacuating ambulatory and nonambulatory Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of residents are discussed. TransitDependent Population (Residents without access to a vehicle),

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 prepare and then travel to a bus pickup point, including the TransitDependent Population expected means of travel to the pickup point, is described. (Residents without access to a vehicle)

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 and 8.2 necessary.

Oconee Nuclear Station N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.3.3 Special Facilities

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 88 provided. through Table 810

b. The logistics of evacuating wheelchair and bed bound Yes Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 8 residents are discussed. 10

c. Time for loading of residents is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 810

d. 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.

e. Discussion is provided on whether special facility residents Yes Section 8.1 are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

f. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1 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.

Oconee Nuclear Station N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

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 through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

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 Oconee Nuclear Station N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 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.

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 J2 through J15 (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 J3 the EPZ.

c. Color coded roadway maps are provided for various times Yes Figure 73 through Figure 78 (e.g., at 2, 4, 6 hrs.) during a full EPZ evacuation scenario, identifying areas where congestion exists.

Oconee Nuclear Station N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 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.

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 zone. zone.

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 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.

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.

Oconee Nuclear Station N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0