Text

Attachment 5 - Dresden Nuclear Station-Development of Evacuation Time Estimates
	ML22269A411
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden
Issue date:	07/25/2022
From:	; Constellation Energy Generation, KLD Engineering, PC
To:	; Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML22269A403	List: ML22269A404; ML22269A407; ML22269A408; ML22269A409; ML22269A410; ML22269A411; ML22269A412; ML22269A413; ML22269A414; ML22269A415; ML22269A416; NMP1L3481, Constellation Energy Generation, LLC, 10 CFR 50, Appendix E - Development of Evacuation Time Estimates;
References
	NMP1L3481, RS-22-105
	Download: ML22269A411 (477)
	v • d • e

DRESDEN GENERATING STATION Development of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Constellation, by:

KLD Engineering, P.C.

1601 Veterans Memorial Highway, Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 email: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com July 25, 2022 Final Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1252

Table of Contents EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

.................................................................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Dresden Generating 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 Estimates Assumptions...................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Methodological Assumptions .................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Study 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, PreSchool and Day Camp Population Demand ............................................................ 36 3.7.1 Commuter College ............................................................................................................. 37 3.8 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 38 3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................................. 38 3.10 Correctional Facilities ................................................................................................................. 39 3.11 External Traffic ........................................................................................................................... 39 3.12 Background Traffic ..................................................................................................................... 39 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 DRE Study Area ............................................................................................ 46 4.3.1 TwoLane Roads ................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2 Multilane Highway ............................................................................................................. 46 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 Dresden Generating 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 ................................................................................... 58 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 ...................................................................................................................... 71 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation ..................................................................... 72 7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................ 74 7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate Results ............................................................................................. 74 7.6 Staged Evacuation Results ......................................................................................................... 76 7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ................................................................................................... 77 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES ................................. 81 8.1 ETE for Schools, PreSchools, and Day Camps, Transit Dependent People, Medical Facilities and Correctional Facilities ............................................................................................................................. 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ................................................................. 87 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ................................................................................................... 91 9.1 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 92 9.2 Additional Considerations .......................................................................................................... 92 10 EVACUATION ROUTES AND RECEPTION CENTERS ........................................................................... 101 10.1 Evacuation Routes.................................................................................................................... 101 10.2 Reception Centers .................................................................................................................... 101 Dresden Generating Station ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Appendices A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS .................................................................................. A1 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL ......................................................... B1 B.1 Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model .................................................... B1 B.2 Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD .............................................................. B1 B.2.1 DTRAD Description ............................................................................................................. B2 B.2.2 Network Equilibrium .......................................................................................................... B4 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL ............................................................................................... C1 C.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. C2 C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram ................................................................................................. C2 C.1.2 The Simulation Model ........................................................................................................ C2 C.1.3 Lane Assignment ................................................................................................................ C6 C.2 Implementation ......................................................................................................................... C6 C.2.1 Computational Procedure .................................................................................................. C6 C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD) ..................................................... C7 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE .............................................................................. D1 E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA ...................................................................................................................... E1 F. Demographic SURVEY ........................................................................................................................ F1 F.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... F1 F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan ....................................................................................... F1 F.3 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ F2 F.3.1 Household Demographic Results ........................................................................................... F2 F.3.2 Evacuation Response ............................................................................................................. F3 F.3.3 Time Distribution Results ....................................................................................................... F4 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Manual Traffic Control .............................................................................................................. G1 G.2 Analysis of Key TCP Locations ................................................................................................... G1 H. EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. Subarea BOUNDARIES ...................................................................................................................... L1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ................................................................................................. M1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................ M1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate ................. M1 M.3 Effect of Changes in Permanent Resident Population ............................................................. M2 M.4 Enhancements in Evacuation Time .......................................................................................... M3 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Dresden Generating Station iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped Dresden Generating Station iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Figures Figure 11. DRE Location ......................................................................................................................... 113 Figure 12. DRE LinkNode Analysis Network .......................................................................................... 114 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ....................................................................................... 29 Figure 31. SubAreas Comprising the DRE EPZ ....................................................................................... 327 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................ 328 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 329 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 330 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 331 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 332 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 333 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 334 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 335 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 410 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................ 518 Figure 52. Time Distributions for Evacuation Mobilization Activities.................................................... 519 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution ...................................................... 520 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 521 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region

................................................................................................................................................................. 522 Figure 61. DRE EPZ SubAreas ................................................................................................................ 612 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ..................................................................................... 720 Figure 72. DRE Shadow Region ............................................................................................................... 721 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 45 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ..................................... 722 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................. 723 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................. 724 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 725 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 726 Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 727 Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 ...................................................... 728 Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 .................................................... 728 Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 .................................................... 729 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 .................................................... 730 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 .................................................... 730 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 .................................................... 731 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 .................................................... 731 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 .................................................... 732 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 .................................................... 732 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 .................................................. 733 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 .................................................. 734 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 .................................................. 734 Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 .................................................. 735 Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 .................................................. 735 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ...................................................................... 837 Figure 101. Major Evacuation Routes within the DRE EPZ .................................................................. 1011 Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes ......................................................................................... 1013 Dresden Generating Station v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. TransitDependent Bus Routes (continued) ..................................................................... 1014 Figure 104. General Population Reception Centers ............................................................................ 1015 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B5 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ......................................................................................... C12 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ......................................................................................................... C13 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ........................................................................... C13 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) .................................................... C14 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools within the DRE EPZ ................................................................................................... E12 Figure E2. Preschools and Day Camps within the DRE EPZ .................................................................... E13 Figure E3. Medical Facilities within the DRE EPZ .................................................................................... E14 Figure E4. Major Employers within the DRE EPZ ................................................................................... E15 Figure E5. Recreational Areas within the DRE EPZ ................................................................................. E20 Figure E6. Lodging Facilities within the DRE EPZ .................................................................................... E21 Figure E7. Correctional Facilities within the DRE EPZ ............................................................................. E22 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ....................................................................................................... F7 Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability ................................................................................................ F7 Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households ...................................................................... F8 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 5 to 9 Person Households ...................................................................... F8 Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference......................................................................................... F9 Figure F6. Commuters per Households in the EPZ .................................................................................. F9 Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ................................................................................................... F10 Figure F8. 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. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving .......................... F12 Figure F12. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals ......................................................................... F12 Figure F13. Evacuation Destinations ...................................................................................................... F13 Figure F14. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College ............................................................. F13 Figure F15. Time to Commute Home from Work/College ..................................................................... F14 Figure F16. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation................................................................................ F14 Figure F17. Time to Remove Snow from Driveway ............................................................................... F15 Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Posts for the DRE ........................................................................ G9 Figure H1. Region R01.............................................................................................................................. H4 Figure H2. Region R02.............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H3. Region R03.............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H4. Region R04.............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H5. Region R05.............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H6. Region R06.............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H7. Region R07............................................................................................................................ H10 Figure H8. Region R08............................................................................................................................ H11 Figure H9. Region R09............................................................................................................................ H12 Figure H10. Region R10.......................................................................................................................... H13 Figure H11. Region R11.......................................................................................................................... H14 Figure H12. Region R12.......................................................................................................................... H15 Figure H13. Region R13.......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H14. Region R14.......................................................................................................................... H17 Dresden Generating Station vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15.......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H16. Region R16.......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure H17. Region R17.......................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H18. Region R18.......................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H19. Region R19.......................................................................................................................... H22 Figure H20. Region R20.......................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H21. Region R21.......................................................................................................................... H24 Figure H22. Region R22.......................................................................................................................... H25 Figure H23. Region R23.......................................................................................................................... H26 Figure H24. Region R24.......................................................................................................................... H27 Figure H25. Region R25.......................................................................................................................... H28 Figure H26. Region R26.......................................................................................................................... H29 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins.......................................................................................................... J9 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) ............ J10 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) ............................. J10 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)............ J11 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) ............................ J11 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5)

................................................................................................................................................................. J12 Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) .............. J12 Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7) ............................... J13 Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario 8) ............................. J13 Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9) ............ J14 Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10) ........................... J14 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario 11) ......................... J15 Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12)

................................................................................................................................................................. J15 Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario

13) ............................................................................................................................................................ J16 Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) ............................................................................................................................................ J16 Figure K1. DRE LinkNode Analysis Network ............................................................................................ K3 Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 ...................................................................................... K4 Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 ...................................................................................... K5 Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 ...................................................................................... K6 Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 ...................................................................................... K7 Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 ...................................................................................... K8 Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 ...................................................................................... K9 Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 .................................................................................... K10 Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 .................................................................................... K11 Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 ................................................................................. K12 Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 ................................................................................ K13 Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 ................................................................................ K14 Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 ................................................................................ K15 Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 ................................................................................ K16 Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 ................................................................................ K17 Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 ................................................................................ K18 Dresden Generating Station vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 ................................................................................ K19 Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 ................................................................................ K20 Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 ................................................................................ K21 Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 ................................................................................ K22 Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 ................................................................................ K23 Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 ................................................................................ K24 Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 ................................................................................ K25 Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 ................................................................................ K26 Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 ................................................................................ K27 Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 ................................................................................ K28 Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 ................................................................................ K29 Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 ................................................................................ K30 Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 ................................................................................ K31 Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 ................................................................................ K32 Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 ................................................................................ K33 Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 ................................................................................ K34 Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 ................................................................................ K35 Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 ................................................................................ K36 Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 ................................................................................ K37 Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 ................................................................................ K38 Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 ................................................................................ K39 Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 ................................................................................ K40 Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 ................................................................................ K41 Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 ................................................................................ K42 Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 ................................................................................ K43 Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ................................................................................ K44 Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 ................................................................................ K45 Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 ................................................................................ K46 Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 ................................................................................ K47 Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 ................................................................................ K48 Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 ................................................................................ K49 Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 ................................................................................ K50 Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 ................................................................................ K51 Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 ................................................................................ K52 Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 ................................................................................ K53 Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 ................................................................................ K54 Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 ................................................................................ K55 Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 ................................................................................ K56 Figure K55. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 54 ................................................................................ K57 Figure K56. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 55 ................................................................................ K58 Figure K57. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 56 ................................................................................ K59 Figure K58. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 57 ................................................................................ K60 Figure K59. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 58 ................................................................................ K61 Figure K60. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 59 ................................................................................ K62 Figure K61. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 60 ................................................................................ K63 Figure K62. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 61 ................................................................................ K64 Figure K63. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 62 ................................................................................ K65 Dresden Generating Station viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K64. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 63 ................................................................................ K66 Figure K65. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 64 ................................................................................ K67 Figure K66. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 65 ................................................................................ K68 Figure K67. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 66 ................................................................................ K69 Figure K68. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 67 ................................................................................ K70 Figure K69. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 68 ................................................................................ K71 Figure K70. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 69 ................................................................................ K72 Figure K71. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 70 ................................................................................ K73 Figure K72. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 71 ................................................................................ K74 Figure K73. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 72 ................................................................................ K75 Figure K74. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 73 ................................................................................ K76 Figure K75. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 74 ................................................................................ K77 Figure K76. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 75 ................................................................................ K78 Figure K77. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 76 ................................................................................ K79 Figure K78. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 77 ................................................................................ K80 Figure K79. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 78 ................................................................................ K81 Figure K80. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 79 ................................................................................ K82 Figure K81. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 80 ................................................................................ K83 Figure K82. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 81 ................................................................................ K84 Figure K83. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 82 ................................................................................ K85 Figure K84. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 83 ................................................................................ K86 Figure K85. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 84 ................................................................................ K87 Figure K86. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 85 ................................................................................ K88 Figure K87. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 86 ................................................................................ K89 Figure K88. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 87 ................................................................................ K90 Dresden Generating Station ix 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............................................................................................... 28 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 28 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ...................................................................................... 315 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by SubArea ................................................... 316 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ............................................................................ 316 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ...................................................................... 318 Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ............................ 318 Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand Estimates ............................................................................ 319 Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates ............................................................................... 320 Table 38. School, Preschool and Day Camps Population Demand Estimates ........................................ 321 Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary .............................................................. 324 Table 310. DRE External Traffic............................................................................................................... 324 Table 311. Summary of Population Demand .......................................................................................... 325 Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand................................................................................................ 326 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities .............................................................................. 511 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 511 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................. 512 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................ 512 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Leave Home ................................................ 513 Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow ...................................................... 513 Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 514 Table 58. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 514 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation .................... 515 Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ....................... 516 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions........................................................................................... 64 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 66 Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................ 68 Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario................................................................................................ 610 Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ......................... 712 Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ....................... 714 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region ............................ 716 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region .......................... 717 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions......................................................................................... 718 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................. 810 Table 82. School, PreSchool, and Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ................. 811 Table 83. School, PreSchool, and Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain ................................. 816 Table 84. School and PreSchool Evacuation Time Estimates - Snow ................................................... 821 Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather .......................................... 827 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain .......................................................... 828 Table 87. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Snow......................................................... 829 Table 88. Medical Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ............................................. 830 Table 89. Medical Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain ............................................................. 832 Dresden Generating Station x KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 810. Medical Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates - Snow ......................................................... 834 Table 811. Correctional Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates............................................................... 836 Table 812. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates ............................ 837 Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 103 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 105 Table 103. School, Preschool, and Day Camps Reception Centers......................................................... 108 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C8 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ........................................................................... C9 Table C3. Glossary ..................................................................................................................................C10 Table E1. Schools within the EPZ .............................................................................................................. E2 Table E2. Preschools and Day Camps within the EPZ ............................................................................... E4 Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ............................................................................................... E6 Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E7 Table E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E8 Table E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................. E10 Table E7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ...................................................................................... E11 Table F1. Dresden Generating Station Demographic Survey Sampling Plan ........................................... F6 Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations ........................................................................... G6 Table G2. ETE with No MTC ..................................................................................................................... G7 Table G3. Proposed Modifications of Existing TCPs and/or ACPs........................................................... G7 Table G4. ETE with and without Modification to TMP ........................................................................... G7 Table H1. Percent of SubArea Population Evacuating for Each Region................................................. H2 Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input ............................................................................................... J3 Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03) ........................... J4 Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1) ................................................................................................................................................. J5 Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 ......................... J7 Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control .............................................................................. K1 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ........................................ M4 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study ..................................................... M4 Table M3. Evacuation Time Estimates for Variation with Population Change ....................................... M4 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist .................................................................................................. N1 Dresden Generating Station xi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ACRONYM LIST Table 1. Acronym List ACRONYM DEFINITION AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic ACP Access Control Post ASLB Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ATE Advisory to Evacuate ATIS Automated Traveler Information Systems BFFS Base Free Flow Speed CR County Road or County Route D Destination DDHV Directional Design Hourly Volume DHV Design Hour Volume DMS Dynamic Message Sign DPTMS West Point Directorate of Plans, Training, Mobilization and Security DRE Dresden Generating Station DTA Dynamic Traffic Assignment DTRAD Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution DOT Department of Transportation DYNEV Dynamic Network Evacuation EOC Emergency Operations Center EPZ Emergency Planning Zone ETE Evacuation Time Estimate EVAN Evacuation Animator FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FFS Free Flow Speed FHWA Federal Highway Administration GIS Geographical Information System HAR Highway Advisory Radio HCM Highway Capacity Manual HH Household HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System IPEC Indian Point Energy Center ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems LOS Level of Service MOE Measures of Effectiveness mph Miles Per Hour MUTCD Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Dresden Generating Station AL1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission NYS New York State O Origin OD OriginDestination OEM Office of Emergency Management ORO Offsite Response Organization PAR Protective Action Recommendation PCBES Putnam County Bureau of Emergency Services pce Passenger Car Equivalent pcphpl passenger car per hour per lane PSL PathSizeLogit QDF Queue Discharge Flow RC Reception Center SR State Route SV Service Volume TA Traffic Assignment TCP Traffic Control Post TD Trip Distribution UNITES Unified Transportation Engineering System USDOT United States Department of Transportation vph Vehicles Per Hour vpm Vehicles Per Minute Dresden Generating Station AL2 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 Dresden Generating Station (DRE) located in Grundy County, Illinois. ETE are part of the required planning basis and provide Constellation and state and county governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decision making.

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

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

NUREG/CR7002, SAND 20100061P, Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, November 2011. (NRC, 2011a).

Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, 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 October 2020 and extended over a period of 20 months. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Conducted a virtual kickoff meeting with Constellation personnel and emergency management personnel representing state and county governments.

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

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

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

Conducted a randomsample, 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 ORO personnel prior to the survey.

Data pertaining to employment, transients, and special facilities in each county were provided by Constellation and by state and county OROs, supplemented with internet searches and the previous study where data was missing.

Dresden Generating Station ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

The EPZ is subdivided into 16 Subareas. Following federal guidelines, these existing Sub areas are grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 26 Evacuation Regions.

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/Light Snow, Heavy Snow). One special event scenario - Grundy County Corn Festival - was considered. One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane was closed on Interstate80 (I80) eastbound from the intersection of Ridge Rd/County Route (CR)5/CR11 (Exit 122) to the intersection with I355 (Exit 140) for the duration of the evacuation.

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

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

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

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

If the emergency occurs while schools, preschools, and day camps are in session, the ETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to reception centers located outside the EPZ. Parents, relatives, and neighbors are advised to not pick up their children at schools, preschools, or day camps prior to the arrival of the buses dispatched for that purpose. The ETE for children at these facilities 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 Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents. Those in special facilities will likewise be evacuated with public transit, as needed: bus, wheelchair bus, or ambulance, as required. Separate ETE are calculated for the transitdependent evacuees, for access and/or functional needs population, and for those evacuated from special facilities.

Dresden Generating Station ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Conducted a final meeting with Constellation emergency management personnel and the OROs to present final results of the study.

Computation of ETE A total of 364 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 26 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 14 Evacuation Scenarios (26 x 14 = 364). Separate ETE are calculated for transitdependent evacuees, including children at schools, preschools, and day camps 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 voluntarily evacuate. In addition, 20% of the population in the Shadow Region will also elect to evacuate. These voluntary and shadow evacuees could impede those who are evacuating from within the impacted region. The impedance that could be caused by voluntary and shadow evacuees is considered in the computation of ETE for the impacted region.

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

The computational procedure is outlined as follows:

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

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

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

The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90 percent and 100 percent, respectively, of the population within the impacted region, to evacuate from within the impacted region. These Dresden Generating Station ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 references the comprehensive traffic management plan provided by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA).

Based on the ETE simulations, four Traffic and Access Control Posts (TCP/ACPs) were modified to improve the ETE. Refer to Section 9 and Appendix G.

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

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

Table 61 defines each of the 26 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Subareas.

Table 62 defines the 14 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 percent of the population occupying these regions, respectively. These computed ETE include consideration of mobilization time and of estimated voluntary evacuations from other regions within the EPZ and from the Shadow Region.

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

Table 82 presents ETE for the children at schools, preschools and day camps in good weather.

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

Figure 61 displays a map of the DRE EPZ showing the layout of the 16 SubAreas that comprise, in aggregate, the EPZ.

Figure H8 presents an example of an Evacuation Region (Region R08) to be evacuated under the circumstances defined in Table 61. See Appendix H for maps of all regions.

Conclusions General population ETE were computed for 364 unique cases a combination of 26 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 2:20 (hr:min) to 4:00 at the 90th percentile for all unstaged, nonspecial scenarios. The 100th percentile ETE range from 5:00 to 5:15 for good weather and rain cases, and from 6:15 to 6:25 for heavy snow cases.

Dresden Generating Station ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The comparison of Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the ETE for the 100th percentile are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile. The 100th percentile ETE generally parallel the mobilization times (5:00 for residents with returning commuters plus 5 to 10 minutes travel time to exit the EPZ for good weather and rain and 6:15 in heavy snow). This implies that the congestion within the EPZ dissipates prior to the end of mobilization.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicates that a staged evacuation provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Radius and unnecessarily delays the evacuation of those beyond 2 miles (compare Regions R02 and R04 through R07 with Regions R22 through R26, respectively, in Tables 71 and 72). See Section 7.6 for additional discussion. Staged evacuation is not recommended for the DRE EPZ.

The comparison of Scenarios 9 and 13 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicates that the Special Event - Grundy County Corn Festival - has no impact on the 90th percentile or 100th percentile ETE. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicates that the roadway closure - a single lane I80 eastbound from the intersection of Ridge Rd/CR 5/CR11 (Exit 122) to the intersection with I355 (Exit 140) (see Section 2.6, item 1b) -

increases 90th percentile ETE by at most 15 minutes and has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE. See Section 7.5 for additional information.

The last location in the EPZ to exhibit traffic congestion is along Westhampton Drive in Shorewood. All congestion within the EPZ clears by about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months after the ATE. See Section 7.3 and Figures 73 through 78.

Separate ETE were computed for schools, preschools, and day camps, transitdependent persons, medical facilities, access and/or functional needs persons and correctional facilities. The average singlewave ETE for all these facilities is equal to or less than the general population ETE at the 90th percentile. See Section 8.

Table 81 indicates that there are sufficient bus resources available to evacuate the transit dependent population in a single wave (see Section 8.1).

A reduction or addition of base trip generation time by an hour impacts the 90th percentile ETE by 40 to 20 minutes (respectively) and the 100th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months to 55 minutes (respectively) (significant change). As discussed in Section 7.3, traffic congestion persists within the EPZ for about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months and 25 minutes after the ATE. If the time to mobilize is longer than about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months , the 100th percentile ETE is dictated by trip generation time. See Table M1 in Appendix M.

The general population ETE is significantly affected by the increase in voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region. Full evacuation increases the 90th and 100th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 5 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 50 minutes, respectively.

See Table M2.

A population increase of 29% or more results in ETE changes which meet the NRC criteria for updating ETE between decennial Censuses. See Section M.3.

Dresden Generating Station ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population SubArea 2010 Population 2020 Population 1 13,061 15,329 2 6,122 6,341 3 3,234 3,095 4 1,643 1,716 5 8,9111 9,123 6 4,599 6,792 7 4,427 4,435 8 2,454 2,334 9 211 93 10 6,467 6,463 11 330 293 12 7,401 7,724 13 33,422 37,176 14 3,405 3,238 15 6,698 6,533 16 5,516 5,576 EPZ TOTAL 107,901 116,261 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 7.75%

1 The boundary of Sub-Area 5 was revised in 2017 to include the additional portion in the east of County Route 2. As a result, it increases the 2010 EPZ permanent resident population by 1,801 people (approximately 1.7%) relative to the population reported in the 2014 ETE study (KLD TR-634, dated April 23, 2014). The 2010 population number in Table 3-1 has been adjusted to reflect this change.

Dresden Generating Station ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Subarea Region Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R01 2Mile Region X X X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R04 NNW, N, NNE 327° 34° X X X X X R05 NE, ENE 35° 79° X X X X E, ESE, SE 80° 146° See Region R01 SSE, S, SSW, R06 SW,WSW 147° 259° X X X X R07 W,WNW 260° 304° X X X X X NW 305° 326° See Region R02 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R08 N 350° 11° X X X X X X X X X X R09 NNE 12° 34° X X X X X X X X X X X R10 NE 35° 56° X X X X X X X X X X R11 ENE 57° 79° X X X X X X X X X R12 E, ESE 80° 124° X X X X X X X R13 SE 125° 146° X X X X X X X R14 SSE 147° 169° X X X X X X X R15 S 170° 191° X X X X X X R16 SSW, SW 192° 237° X X X X X X X R17 WSW 238° 259° X X X X X X X R18 W 260° 281° X X X X X X X X R19 WNW 282° 304° X X X X X X X X R20 NW 305° 326° X X X X X X X X X X R21 NNW 327° 349° X X X X X X X X X Dresden Generating Station ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R22 5Mile Region X X X X X X R23 NNW, N, NNE 327° 34° X X X X X R24 NE, ENE 35° 79° X X X X E, ESE, SE 80° 146° See Region R01 SSE, S, SSW, SW, R25 WSW 147° 259° X X X X R26 W, WNW 260° 304° X X X X X NW 305° 326° See Region R22 Subarea(s) ShelterinPlace until 90%

Subarea(s) Evacuate Subarea(s) ShelterinPlace ETE for R01, then Evacuate Dresden Generating 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 Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 7 Winter Midweek Midday None Snow 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 10 Winter Weekend Midday None Snow 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Special Event: Grundy 13 Winter Weekend Midday Good County Corn Festival Roadway Impact: Single 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Lane Closure on I80 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).

Dresden Generating 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R02 2:45 2:45 2:30 2:30 2:40 2:45 2:45 3:35 2:30 2:30 3:20 2:40 2:30 3:00 R03 3:10 3:15 2:55 3:00 3:05 3:10 3:15 4:00 3:00 3:00 3:45 3:05 3:00 3:15 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:35 2:35 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:35 2:35 3:25 2:20 2:25 3:05 2:35 2:20 2:50 R05 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:30 2:40 2:45 2:45 3:35 2:25 2:30 3:20 2:40 2:25 3:00 R06 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:25 2:25 2:25 3:10 2:35 2:25 2:50 R07 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 3:15 2:20 2:25 3:00 2:30 2:20 2:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary R08 2:50 2:55 2:35 2:40 2:50 2:50 2:55 3:45 2:35 2:40 3:25 2:50 2:35 2:55 R09 2:50 2:55 2:35 2:40 2:50 2:55 3:00 3:50 2:35 2:40 3:30 2:50 2:35 2:55 R10 2:55 3:00 2:40 2:45 2:50 2:55 3:00 3:50 2:40 2:45 3:30 2:55 2:40 3:00 R11 2:50 2:50 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:25 2:45 2:35 2:55 R12 3:00 3:05 2:50 2:55 2:50 3:05 3:05 3:55 2:45 2:55 3:40 2:55 2:45 3:05 R13 3:05 3:05 2:50 2:50 3:00 3:00 3:05 3:50 2:50 2:55 3:40 3:05 2:50 3:10 R14 3:05 3:10 2:45 2:50 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:50 2:55 2:55 3:45 3:00 2:55 3:10 R15 3:05 3:05 2:45 2:50 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:50 2:55 2:55 3:40 3:00 2:55 3:10 R16 3:05 3:05 2:45 2:50 3:00 3:00 3:10 3:50 2:55 2:55 3:40 2:55 2:55 3:10 R17 2:55 3:00 2:45 2:45 2:55 3:00 3:05 3:50 2:45 2:50 3:35 2:55 2:45 3:10 R18 2:55 3:00 2:40 2:45 2:55 3:00 3:05 3:50 2:45 2:50 3:35 2:55 2:45 3:10 R19 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:30 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:30 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:50 R20 2:45 2:50 2:30 2:35 2:40 2:45 2:50 3:40 2:30 2:35 3:25 2:40 2:30 2:55 R21 2:45 2:50 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:50 2:50 3:40 2:30 2:35 3:20 2:45 2:30 2:55 Dresden Generating 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R22 2:55 3:00 2:50 2:50 3:05 2:55 3:00 3:55 2:50 2:55 3:50 3:05 2:50 3:00 R23 2:50 2:55 2:45 2:45 2:55 2:50 2:55 3:50 2:45 2:45 3:45 2:55 2:45 3:00 R24 3:00 3:00 2:50 2:50 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:55 2:50 2:50 3:50 3:00 2:50 3:00 R25 3:00 3:05 2:55 2:55 3:05 3:00 3:05 4:00 2:55 2:55 3:55 3:05 2:55 3:05 R26 2:55 2:55 2:50 2:50 3:05 2:55 2:55 3:55 2:50 2:50 3:50 3:05 2:50 3:00 Dresden Generating 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R02 5:10 5:10 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:10 R03 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:15 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R06 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R07 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary R08 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R09 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R11 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R12 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R13 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:13 R14 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:14 R15 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:14 R16 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:14 R17 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R18 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R19 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R20 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R21 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 Dresden Generating 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R22 5:10 5:10 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:10 R23 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R24 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R25 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R26 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 Dresden Generating 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 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R02 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R05 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R06 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R07 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R22 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R23 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R24 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R25 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R26 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 Dresden Generating 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 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R02 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R05 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R06 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R07 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R22 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R23 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R24 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R25 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R26 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 Dresden Generating Station ES15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82. School, PreSchool, and Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

SCHOOLS GRUNDY COUNTY Minooka High School South Campus 90 15 11.7 20.2 35 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Aux Sable Elementary School 90 15 10.7 19.4 33 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Minooka Junior High School 90 15 9.1 18.8 29 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Minooka High School Central Campus 90 15 9.4 18.5 31 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Minooka Intermediate School 90 15 9.5 18.7 31 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Minooka Primary Center 90 15 9.1 18.6 29 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Minooka Elementary School 90 15 9.4 18.5 31 2:20 22.8 25 2:45 Premier Academy 90 15 5.3 51.0 6 1:55 37.3 41 2:40 Saratoga Elementary School 90 15 4.0 55.0 4 1:50 37.3 41 2:35 Immaculate Conception School 90 15 5.5 41.0 8 1:55 37.5 41 2:40 Grundy Area Vocational Center 90 15 5.3 48.3 7 1:55 37.5 41 2:40 Morris Community High School 90 15 5.4 48.3 7 1:55 37.5 41 2:40 Grundy County Special Ed CoOp 90 15 2.7 11.1 15 2:00 37.9 41 2:45 Morris Elementary School 90 15 1.9 10.9 10 1:55 38.2 42 2:40 Coal City Elementary School 90 15 7.3 24.7 18 2:05 32.9 36 2:45 Coal City Intermediate School 90 15 7.3 25.0 18 2:05 35.5 39 2:45 Coal City High School 90 15 6.3 23.7 16 2:05 35.6 39 2:45 Coal City Middle School 90 15 6.8 26.6 15 2:00 35.6 39 2:40 Braceville Elementary School 90 15 2.3 14.0 10 1:55 33.5 37 2:35 3

Nettle Creek Elementary School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ 1:45 37.3 41 2:30 3

Facility is located just outside the EPZ; however, the facility will evacuate as per county plans. ETE for this facility is not included in the average for the EPZ.

Dresden Generating Station ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

KENDALL COUNTY Jones Elementary School 90 15 1.6 27.1 3 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 WILL COUNTY Pioneer Path School 90 15 8.1 16.5 30 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Three Rivers School 90 15 11.3 19.4 35 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 N.B. Galloway Elementary School 90 15 7.2 15.1 29 2:15 22.8 25 2:40 Channahon Junior High School 90 15 7.1 15.1 28 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Walnut Trails Elementary 90 15 5.1 14.8 21 2:10 23.9 26 2:40 Joliet Junior College 90 15 3.4 6.4 32 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 TroyShorewood Elementary School 90 15 3.4 27.8 7 1:55 23.9 26 2:25 Heritage Trail Elementary School 90 15 2.9 14.5 12 2:00 23.9 26 2:30 Joliet Christian School 90 15 2.9 27.8 6 1:55 23.9 26 2:25 Guiding Light Academy West 90 15 2.9 27.8 6 1:55 23.9 26 2:25 Holy Family Catholic School 90 15 1.3 36.7 2 1:50 27.0 29 2:20 Trinity Christian School 90 15 2.9 27.6 6 1:55 23.9 26 2:25 Cronin Elementary School 90 15 0.8 37.5 1 1:50 26.9 29 2:20 Hofer Elementary School 90 15 1.4 26.6 3 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Orenic Intermediate School 90 15 1.4 19.9 4 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Troy Middle School 90 15 1.3 19.9 4 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Elwood Community Consolidated School 90 15 3.1 43.2 4 1:50 34.4 38 2:30 St Rose Catholic Parochial School 90 15 1.1 42.8 2 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 Wilmington Middle School 90 15 1.1 42.8 2 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 L.J. Stevens Intermediate School 90 15 0.9 42.8 1 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 SOWIC Educational Center & ELS 90 15 1.6 42.8 2 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 Wilmington High School 90 15 1.6 42.8 2 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 Trinity Services, Inc. South 90 15 0.5 42.8 1 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 ReedCuster Elementary School 90 15 4.6 55.0 5 1:50 21.6 24 2:15 SOWIC ELS Program 90 15 4.6 54.3 5 1:50 21.6 24 2:15 ReedCuster High School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ3 1:45 21.6 24 2:10 ReedCuster Middle School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ3 1:45 21.6 24 2:10 Dresden Generating Station ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

Bruning Elementary School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ3 1:45 23.8 26 2:15 Troy Craughwell Elementary School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ3 1:45 21.7 24 2:10 Camelot South Suburban Center for Exceptional 90 15 Located Outside EPZ3 1:45 20.7 23 2:10 Learners School Maximum for EPZ: 2:20 School Maximum: 2:45 School Average for EPZ: 2:00 School Average: 2:30 PRESCHOOLS AND DAY CAMPS GRUNDY COUNTY Little Learner Children's Academy 90 15 11.0 19.4 34 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Stephanie Kelsey 90 15 10.9 19.4 34 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Discovery Child Care & Learning Center INC. 90 15 9.2 18.6 30 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Minooka United Methodist Church PreSchool 90 15 9.1 18.6 29 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Two Rivers Headstart 90 15 4.3 52.5 5 1:50 37.5 41 2:35 Step by Step Child Care Center Morris 90 15 4.3 52.5 5 1:50 37.5 41 2:35 Jacquelin Taylor 90 15 4.6 52.5 5 1:50 37.5 41 2:35 Melissa Bledsoe 90 15 4.2 52.5 5 1:50 37.5 41 2:35 Lynn Picardo 90 15 5.5 55.0 6 1:55 37.3 41 2:40 Julia Hanson 90 15 2.1 10.9 12 2:00 37.9 41 2:45 Rainbow Scout Reservation (Day Camp) 90 15 9.5 28.3 20 2:05 36.4 40 2:45 First United Methodist Church Preschool 90 15 5.6 41.3 8 1:55 37.3 41 2:40 Morris Christian School 90 15 5.6 41.3 8 1:55 37.5 41 2:40 Prairieland Kids Daycare 90 15 4.9 48.3 6 1:55 37.3 41 2:40 Step by Step Care CenterElementary School 90 15 7.3 24.7 18 2:05 32.9 36 2:45 Sharon Scholtes 90 15 7.3 24.7 18 2:05 32.9 36 2:45 Rainbow Preschool 90 15 3.9 18.7 13 2:00 35.6 39 2:40 Step by Step Care CenterIntermediate School 90 15 7.4 24.7 18 2:05 35.6 39 2:45 Step by Step Child Care Center Diamond 90 15 8.2 31.6 16 2:05 35.6 39 2:45 Kids Korner 90 15 6.7 24.6 16 2:05 35.6 39 2:45 Danielle Cassani 90 15 7.2 23.1 19 2:05 33.5 37 2:45 Randi McLuckie 90 15 7.9 24.7 19 2:05 32.9 36 2:45 Dresden Generating Station ES18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

Coal City Early Childhood Center 90 15 6.8 26.6 15 2:00 35.6 39 2:40 WILL COUNTY Kids Korner 90 15 8.5 15.9 32 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Kiddie Kampus Learning Center 90 15 7.0 15.1 28 2:15 22.8 25 2:40 Families of Faith Christian Academy 90 15 6.5 15.8 25 2:10 22.9 25 2:35 Joliet Junior College Day Care 90 15 2.8 6.1 28 2:15 22.8 25 2:40 Catholic Charities Head Start 90 15 1.4 10.7 8 1:55 22.9 25 2:20 Shorewood Early Learning and Day Care Center 90 15 3.7 16.0 14 2:00 23.9 26 2:30 Trinity Christian Preschool at Westview Baptist 90 15 1.7 37.2 3 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Church Chesterbrook Academy Preschool 90 15 1.7 26.6 4 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Step By Step Child Care Center Shorewood 90 15 1.1 37.2 2 1:50 26.9 29 2:20 Garden Gate Montessori 90 15 0.2 40.3 0 1:45 22.6 25 2:10 Island City Park District Before and After School 90 15 4.6 50.8 5 1:50 21.8 24 2:15 Program Grace Lutheran Preschool 90 15 0.9 42.8 1 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 First United Methodist Church PreSchool 90 15 0.8 42.8 1 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 Discovery Schoolhouse 90 15 4.6 55.0 5 1:50 21.6 24 2:15 Step by Step Child Care Center Braidwood 90 15 Located Outside EPZ3 1:45 21.6 24 2:10 First Christian Church After School Program 90 15 Located Outside EPZ3 1:45 23.7 26 2:15 PreSchool, Day Camp PreSchool, Day Camp Maximum for EPZ: 2:20 2:45 Maximum:

PreSchool Average for EPZ: 2:00 PreSchool Average: 2:35 Dresden Generating Station ES19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Route Number Mobili Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup of zation Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Name Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) R.C. (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

SubArea 1 3 135 16.5 23.4 42 30 3:30 22.9 25 5 10 61 30 5:45 SubArea 2 2 135 8.4 35.2 14 30 3:00 38.1 42 5 10 62 30 5:30 SubArea 3 1 135 10.4 23.3 27 30 3:15 22.9 25 5 10 52 30 5:20 SubArea 4 1 135 12.2 49.2 15 30 3:00 36.4 40 5 10 67 30 5:35 SubArea 5 2 135 4.9 25.0 12 30 3:00 39.7 43 5 10 57 30 5:25 SubArea 6 2 135 9.9 42.4 14 30 3:00 22.6 25 5 10 48 30 5:00 SubArea 7 1 135 11.2 41.3 16 30 3:05 35.5 39 5 10 65 30 5:35 SubArea 8 1 135 5.4 39.9 8 30 2:55 36.4 40 5 10 52 30 5:15 SubArea 9 1 135 12.2 55.0 13 30 3:00 33.5 37 5 10 64 30 5:30 SubArea 10 2 135 7.4 24.3 18 30 3:05 33.5 37 5 10 53 30 5:20 SubArea 11 1 135 6.2 3.4 110 30 4:35 35.5 39 5 10 54 30 6:55 SubArea 12 2 135 8.6 22.4 23 30 3:10 22.9 25 5 10 47 30 5:10 SubArea 13 (1) 4 135 8.4 32.5 16 30 3:05 27.0 29 5 10 51 30 5:10 SubArea 13 (2) 3 135 8.3 14.8 34 30 3:20 22.6 25 5 10 46 30 5:20 SubArea 14 1 135 3.3 48.4 4 30 2:50 34.4 38 5 10 46 30 5:00 SubArea 15 2 135 9.8 50.9 12 30 3:00 21.8 24 5 10 47 30 5:00 SubArea 16 2 135 6.4 44.5 9 30 2:55 21.8 24 5 10 40 30 4:45 Maximum ETE: 4:35 Maximum ETE: 6:55 Average ETE: 3:10 Average ETE: 5:25 Dresden Generating Station ES20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. DRE EPZ Subareas Dresden Generating Station ES21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Dresden Generating Station ES22 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 Dresden Generating Station (DRE), located in Grundy County, Illinois. This ETE study provides Constellation and state and county 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.

Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, 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 Constellation and 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 proposed EPZ and scope of work in discussions with representatives from Constellation.

b. Attended a project kickoff meeting with personnel from Constellation, Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA), Grundy, Kendall, and Will Counties 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 area traffic conditions within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and Shadow Region.

d. Reviewed existing state and county emergency plans.

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

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

g. Conducted a data collection effort to identify and describe special facilities (i.e.,

schools, preschools and day camp centers, medical facilities, correctional facilities), major employers, access and/or functional needs populations, Dresden Generating Station 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

transportation resources available, the special event, 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 random sample 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 and access control are applied at specified Traffic and Access Control Posts (TCP/ACP) located within the study area. See Section 9 and Appendix G.

5. Used existing SubAreas to define Evacuation Regions. The EPZ is partitioned into 16 SubArea along jurisdictional and geographic boundaries. Regions are groups of contiguous Subareas for which ETE are calculated. The configurations of these Regions reflect wind direction and the radial extent of the impacted area. Each Region, other than those that approximate circular areas, approximates a keyhole section within the EPZ as recommended by NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 and based on wind persistence studies at the site.

6. Estimated demand for transit services for persons at schools, preschools/day camps, medical facility, correctional facility, transitdependent persons at home, and those with access and/or functional needs.

7. Prepared the input streams for the 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 county and state agencies, Constellation and from the telephone survey.

b. Applied the procedures specified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 20161) 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, 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.

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

Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016), Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2010.

Dresden Generating Station 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

support evacuation travel consistent with outbound movement relative to the location of the DRE.

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

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

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

1.2 The Dresden Generating Station Location The DRE site is located approximately 8 miles eastnortheast of the City of Morris in Grundy County, Illinois. The site is approximately 13 miles southwest of Joliet, Illinois and 47 miles southwest of Chicago, Illinois. The EPZ consists of parts of Grundy, Kendall, and Will Counties.

Figure 11 shows the location of the DRE site relative to Joliet and Chicago, as well as the major population centers and roadways in the area.

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

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

These characteristics are shown in Table 12:

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

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

Dresden Generating Station 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 lanes in each direction Collector: single lane in each direction Local Roadway: single lane in each direction, local road with low free flow speeds As documented on page 156 of the HCM 2016, the capacity of a twolane highway is 1,700 passenger cars per hour in one direction. For freeway sections, a value of 2,250 vehicles per hour per lane is assigned, as per Exhibit 1237 of the HCM 2016. The road survey has identified several segments which are characterized by adverse geometrics on twolane highways which are reflected in reduced values for both capacity and speed. These estimates are consistent with the service volumes for LOS E presented in HCM 2016 Exhibit 1546. 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 were used to calibrate the analysis network.

Demographic Survey An online demographic survey was performed in November 2020 to gather information needed for the ETE study. Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used, and tabulations of data compiled from the survey returns.

These data were utilized to develop estimates of vehicle occupancy, to estimate the number of evacuating vehicles during an evacuation, and to estimate elements of the mobilization process. This database was also referenced to estimate the number of transitdependent Dresden Generating Station 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 output by the DYNEV II System, such as LOS, vehicles discharged, average speed, and percent of vehicles evacuated. The use of a GIS framework enables the user to zoom in on areas of congestion and query road name, town name and other geographical information.

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

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

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Parameters for the IDYNEV Computer Code The evacuation analysis procedures are based upon the need to:

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

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

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

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

1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study Table 13 presents a comparison of the present ETE study with the 2018 ETE study (KLD TR970, dated February 6, 2018). As indicated in the final row of the table, the ETE values have significantly changed since the last ETE update. The 90th percentile ETE for full EPZ (Region R03) for a winter, weekday, midday scenario and a summer, weekend, midday scenario increased by at most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 25 minutes each when compared to the 2018 study. The 100th percentile ETE for the full EPZ also increased by as much as 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 50 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 15 minutes for winter, weekday, midday, a summer, weekend, midday scenario, respectively, when compared to the 2018 study.

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 within the EPZ increased by 7.75%, the resident vehicles by increased by 7.32%. An increase in slowly mobilizing resident vehicles can increase the 90th percentile ETE as it will take longer to reach 90% of the evacuating traffic. An increase in vehicles overall can also increase the 100th percentile ETE.

The distribution of the population is very different. The 2018 population was estimated based on 2010 Census blocks projected out to 2017 using 2016 growth rates. Areas with new development are not accurately captured by this method of estimating population.

If a Census block had zero people in 2010 at a location wherein a new community has been built, it will remain zero regardless of the growth rate applied. The population distribution utilized in this study is based on 2020 Census data, which is more accurate.

A redistribution of evacuation demand can increase or decrease ETE depending on where the vehicles are originating and the congestion patterns near those origins. In this case, the majority of the population growth was in SubAreas 1, 6, and 13, which are the most congested areas in the EPZ during an evacuation, see Figure 73 through 78.

Dresden Generating Station 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The number of employees commuting into the EPZ decreased significantly (by 51.7%),

due to the updated NRCs criteria for major employers from 50 or more employees per shift to 200 or more employees per shift. This decrease in quickly mobilizing vehicles can increase the 90th percentile ETE as it will take longer to reach 90% of the evacuating traffic. A reduction in vehicles overall, however, can decrease the 100th percentile ETE.

Estimates of transients decreased by about 10%, compared to the previous study, which results in a decrease in quickly mobilizing transient vehicles. This decrease in quickly mobilizing vehicles can increase the 90th percentile ETE as it will take longer to reach 90% of the evacuating traffic. A reduction in vehicles overall, however, can decrease the 100th percentile ETE.

Roadway capacity reductions for heavy snow cases have increased from 20% to 25%

based on the new NRC guidance. As a result, roadways process less vehicles than previously assumed during heavy snow cases and ETE increase at the 90th and 100th percentile for these scenarios.

The total trip mobilization (also known as trip generation), based on the data collected from the demographic survey, has increased by 75 minutes. Congestion within the EPZ clears within about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months from the advisory to evacuate. After this time, trip generation rates dictate ETE. As such, the increase in mobilization time is directly responsible for the increases in the 100th percentile ETE.

The various factors, discussed above, that can increase the ETE outweigh those that can decrease the ETE, thereby explaining why the 90th and 100th percentile ETE have significantly increased in this study relative to the 2018 ETE study.

Dresden Generating 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. Provided recent DRE employee data. Coordinated information exchange with offsite response Constellation organizations. Reviewed and approved all project assumptions and draft report. Engaged in the ETE development and was informed of the study results. Attended final meeting where the ETE study results were presented.

Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA) Attended kickoff meeting to discuss the project methodology, key project assumptions and to Grundy County define data needs. Provided emergency plans, Kendall County including traffic and access control posts and other information critical to the ETE study. Reviewed and approved project assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and informed of the study results.

Will County Provided data for medical facility in the EPZ.

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.

Dresden Generating Station 18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study ArcGIS Software using 2010 US Census ArcGIS Software using 2020 US blocks and projecting out to 2017 Census blocks; area ratio method using 2016 population changes used.

Resident Population published by the US Census; area ratio Basis method used.

Population = 110,668 Population = 116,261 Vehicles = 60,362 Vehicles = 64,780 2.48 persons/household, 1.36 2.76 persons/household, 1.55 Resident Population evacuating vehicles/household evacuating vehicles/household Vehicle Occupancy yielding: 1.82 persons/vehicle yielding: 1.78 persons/vehicle Employee estimates based on Employee estimates based on information provided by information provided about major Constellation and U.S. Census employers in EPZ, US Census Bureaus OnTheMap Census analysis Employee Population Longitudinal EmployerHousehold tool within the EPZ.

Dynamics Employees = 6,313 Employees = 3,049 Employee Vehicles = 6,313 Employee Vehicles = 2,875 Estimates based upon U.S. Census Estimates based upon U.S. Census data and the results of the data and the results of the telephone demographic survey. A total of 633 survey. A total of 705 people who do people who do not have access to a not have access to a vehicle, requiring vehicle, requiring 30 buses to TransitDependent 24 buses to evacuate. An additional evacuate. An additional 251 access Population 433 access and/or functional needs and/or functional needs persons persons require special transportation require special transportation to to evacuate (44 buses, 23 wheelchair evacuate (30 buses, 14 wheelchair buses, and 6 ambulances are required buses, and 7 ambulances are to evacuate this population). required to evacuate this population).

Transient estimates based upon Transient estimates based upon information provided by counties information provided by Constellation within the EPZ, supplemented with about transient attractions in EPZ, phone calls to individual facilities and supplemented by phone calls made to aerial imagery used to estimate Transient Population facilities from the previous 2012 ETE parking spaces where data was not were reviewed. provided.

Transients = 25,233 Transient Vehicles = 10,570 Transients = 22,695 Transient Vehicles = 9,839 Dresden Generating Station 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Medical facility population based on Medical facility population based on information provided by information provided by Constellation Constellation, county emergency and county agencies Special Facilities management agencies Current Census = 959 Population Current Census = 1,173 Buses Required =24 Buses Required =31 Wheelchair Buses Required = 28 Wheelchair Buses Required = 32 Ambulances Required = 13 Ambulances Required = 24 School population based on School population based on information provided by Constellation information provided by Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA),

county emergency management agencies, phone calls and internet School Population search where data was not provided School enrollment = 28,6542 School enrollment = 35,262 Preschool enrollment = 1,935 Preschool enrollment = 2,443 Day Camp enrollment = 1,000 Day Camp enrollment = 1,000 Buses Required = 483 Buses Required = 530 Voluntary evacuation 20% of the population within the EPZ, 20% of the population within the from within EPZ in but not within the Evacuation Region EPZ, but not within the Evacuation areas outside region (see Figure 21) Region (see Figure 21) to be evacuated 20% of people outside of the EPZ 20% of people outside of the EPZ within the Shadow Region (see Figure within the Shadow Region (see Shadow

72) Figure 72)

Evacuation/Population 20% Population = 35,651 20% Vehicles = 19,726 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)

External (Through) data. data.

Traffic Vehicles = 19,220 Vehicles = 18,934 Network Size 2,267 links; 1,591 nodes 2,462 links; 1,720 nodes Field surveys conducted in January 2014. Roads and intersections were Field surveys conducted in October Roadway Geometric video archived. Aerial imagery used 2020. Roads and intersections were Data for additional roadways within video archived. Road capacities expanded portion of Subarea 5. Road based on 2016 HCM.

capacities based on 2010 HCM.

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

2 Lewis University has officially been closed since the previous study. No impact on buses required as students evacuated in personal vehicles.

Dresden Generating Station 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study 74 percent of transitdependent 50 percent of transitdependent persons will evacuate with a Ridesharing persons will evacuate with a neighbor neighbor or friend based on the or friend.

results of the demographic survey.

Based on residential telephone survey Based on residential demographic of specific pretrip mobilization survey of specific pretrip activities: mobilization activities:

Residents with commuters returning Residents with commuters returning leave between 30 and 225 minutes. leave between 30 and 300 minutes.

Trip Generation for Residents without commuters Residents without commuters Evacuation returning leave between 15 and 150 returning leave between 5 and 240 minutes. minutes.

Employees and transients leave Employees and transients leave between 15 and 105 minutes. between 5 and 90 minutes.

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

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

respectively.

Modeling DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.19.0 DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.21.0 Grundy County Corn Festival - 10,000 Grundy County Corn Festival -

Special Events additional transients 10,000 additional transients 25 Regions (central sector wind 26 Regions (central sector wind direction and each adjacent sector direction and each adjacent sector Evacuation Cases technique used) and 14 Scenarios technique used) and 14 Scenarios producing 350 unique cases. producing 364 unique cases.

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

Winter, Weekday, Midday, Winter, Weekday, Midday, Good Weather: 2:30 Good Weather: 3:10 Evacuation Time Rain/Light Snow: 2:40 Rain/Light Snow: 3:15 Estimates for the Heavy Snow: 3:00 Heavy Snow: 4:00 entire EPZ, 90th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 2:30 Good Weather: 2:55 Rain: 2:35 Rain: 3:00 Dresden Generating Station 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Winter, Weekday, Midday, Winter, Weekday, Midday, Good Weather: 3:55 Good Weather: 5:15 Evacuation Time Rain/Light Snow: 4:00 Rain/Light Snow: 5:15 Estimates for the Heavy Snow: 4:35 Heavy Snow: 6:25 entire EPZ, 100th percentile Summer, Weekend, Midday, Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 3:55 Good Weather: 5:10 Rain: 3:55 Rain: 5:10 Dresden Generating Station 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 11. DRE Location Dresden Generating Station 113 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 12. DRE LinkNode Analysis Network Dresden Generating Station 114 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 (ETE).

2.1 Data Estimates Assumptions

1. Permanent resident population estimates are based upon 2020 U.S. Census population from the Census Bureau website1. A methodology, referred to as the area ratio method, is employed to estimate the population within portions of census blocks that are divided by SubArea boundaries. It is assumed that the population is evenly distributed across a census block in order to employ the area ratio method (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 Constellation, county emergency management agencies within the EPZ, and from the US Census Longitudinal EmployerHousehold Dynamics from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool2 (see Section 3.4).

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based upon data received from the counties within the EPZ, supplemented with phone calls, the previous study, and aerial imagery where data is missing.

4. The relationship between the permanent resident population and evacuating vehicles is developed from the demographic survey. Average values of 2.76 persons per household and 1.55 evacuating vehicles per household are used. See Appendix F.

5. On average, the relationship between persons and vehicles for transients (See Section 3.3) and the special event (See Section 3.8) are as follows:

a. Campgrounds: 2.44 transients per vehicle

b. Golf Courses: 1.79 transients per vehicle

c. Hunting/Fishing Areas: 1.46 transients per vehicle

d. Marinas: 2.43 transients per vehicle

e. Parks: 2.44 transients per vehicle

f. Other Recreational Facilities: 2.48 transients per vehicle

g. Lodging: Vehicle occupancy is 2.05 people per vehicle

h. Special Event: Grundy County Corn Festival has an occupancy of 4 people per vehicle based on data provided by local OROs. See Section 3.8.

6. Employee vehicle occupancies for major employers is based on the results of the demographic survey. 1.06 employees per vehicle is used in the study. In addition, it is assumed there are two people per carpool, on average.

7. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ is 55 mph based on Illinois state laws3 for buses and average posted speed limits on roadways within the EPZ.

1 www.census.gov 2

http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/

3 https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext.asp?DocName=062500050K11-601 Dresden Generating Station 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

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 following4 (as per NRC guidance):

a. Advisory to Evacuate 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 Advisory to Evacuate.

2. The centerpoint of the plant is located at the center of the containment building at 41°23'23.97"N and 88°16'3.93"W.

3. The DYNEV II5 system is used to compute ETE in this study.

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

5. The existing EPZ and SubArea boundaries will be used. See Figure 31.

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

7. One hundred (100%) of people within the impacted keyhole will evacuate. Twenty percent (20%) of the population within the Shadow Region and within SubAreas of the EPZ not advised to evacuate will voluntarily evacuate, as shown in Figure 21, as per NRC guidance. Sensitivity studies explore the effect on ETE of increasing the percentage of voluntary evacuees in the Shadow Region (see Appendix M).

8. Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuating vehicles per household, and mobilization time) is assumed to be the same as that of the permanent resident population within the EPZ.

9. The 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 ATE issued to a specific Region of the EPZ, to the time that Region is clear of the indicated percentile of evacuees.

10. The ETE also includes consideration of through (ExternalExternal traffic that originates its trip outside of the study area and has its destination outside of the study area) trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region.

See Section 3.11.

4 It is emphasized 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.

5 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.

Dresden Generating Station 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

11. 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 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.

12. To account for boundary conditions beyond the study area, this study assumed 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 is 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.

2.3 Study 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 recent, randomsample demographic survey. It is assumed that stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur.

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

3. Commuter percentages (and percentage of residents awaiting the return of a commuter) are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 67% of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter; 54.4% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip. Therefore, 36 percent (67% x 54% = 36%) of EPZ households will await the return of a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.

2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions

1. The percentage of transitdependent people who will rideshare with a neighbor or friend are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 74% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

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

a. Schools, preschools and day camps

i. If schools, preschools and day camps are in session, transport (buses) will evacuate students directly to the designated reception centers.

Dresden Generating Station 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ii. It is assumed that parents will not pick up children at schools, pre schools, and day camps facilities prior to evacuation.

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

b. Medical Facilities

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

ii. The percent breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients from the previous study will be used to determine the number of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at the medical facilities where data was not provided.

c. Correctional Facilities

i. Buses will be used to evacuate inmates from the correctional facilities within the EPZ, as needed.

d. 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 is 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.

e. Analysis of the number of required roundtrips (waves) of evacuating transit vehicles are presented.

f. 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 elementary schools/preschools and 50 students per bus for middle/high schools/day camps

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

c. Vans = 5 persons

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

e. Wheelchair buses = 15 wheelchair bound persons

4. Transit vehicles mobilization times, which will be considered in ETE calculations:

a. School and transit vehicles (including hospitals, medical facilities and correctional facilities) will arrive at schools and facilities to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

b. Transit dependent buses are mobilized when approximately 80% of residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization at about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months and 15 Dresden Generating Station 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

minutes after the ATE. The residents taking longer to mobilize are assumed to rideshare with a friend or neighbor.

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. School buses will be loaded in 15 minutes.

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

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

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

e. Inmates at correctional facilities are assumed to take 2 minutes per inmate to load onto a bus.

f. Ambulances will be loaded in 15 minutes per bedridden passenger.

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

2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions

1. Traffic and Access Control Posts (TCPs/ACPs) as defined in the approved county and state emergency plans are considered in the ETE analysis, as per NRC guidance.

2. ACPs are assumed to staffed approximately 120 minutes after the ATE, as per NRC guidance. It is assumed that no through traffic will enter the EPZ after this 120minute time period.

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

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. Grundy County Corn Festival in Morris, IL (Subarea 5), 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. It is assumed the population estimates for this event that were used in the previous study are still accurate.

b. As per NRC guidance, one segment of one of the highest volume roadways will be out of service or one lane outbound on a freeway must be closed for a roadway impact scenario. This study considers the closure of one lane on I80 Eastbound for the roadway impact scenario - Scenario 14.

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

Dresden Generating Station 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

3. Adverse weather affects roadway capacity and free flow highway speeds.

Transportation research indicates capacity and speed reductions of about 10% for rain and a range of 10% to 25% for snow. In accordance with Table 31 of Revision 1 to NUREG/CR7002, this study assumes a 10% reduction in speed and capacity for rain and light snow. The heavy snow scenarios considered assume that there was a significant snowfall such that minor roadways and driveways have snow on them. Major roadways have been plowed but still have a coating of snow on them that will slow traffic down and reduce roadway capacity. During heavy snow scenarios a speed and capacity reduction of 15% and 25% was used, respectively. The factors are shown in Table 22.

4. It is assumed for heavy snow scenarios that some evacuees will need additional time to clear their driveways and access the public roadway system. The distribution of time for this activity was gathered through a demographic survey of the public and takes up to 150 minutes. It is assumed that the time needed by evacuees to remove snow from their driveways is sufficient time for snow removal crews to mobilize and clear/treat major roadways. There are additional activities that a person will have to do before they actually begin their evacuation trip, which will delay their departure time. This allows additional time to plow the minor roads, as needed.

5. It is assumed that employment is reduced slightly in the summer for vacations.

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

Refer to Table 22.

7. Regions are defined by the underlying keyhole or circular configurations as specified in Section 1.4 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. These Regions, as defined, display irregular boundaries reflecting the geography of the Subareas included within these underlying configurations. All 16 cardinal and intercardinal wind direction keyhole configurations are considered. According to wind persistence studies conducted at the site, a 5sector keyhole is appropriate. Regions to be considered are defined in Table 61. It is assumed that everyone within the group of SubAreas forming a Region that is issued an ATE will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.

8. Due to irregular shapes of the Subareas, there are instances where a small portion of a Subareas (a sliver) is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (less than 500 people or 10% of the Subareas population, whichever is less).

Under those circumstances, the SubAreas would not be included in the Region so as to Dresden Generating Station 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

9. Staged evacuation is considered as defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 - those people between 2 and 5 miles will shelterinplace until 90% of the 2Mile Region has evacuated, then they will evacuate. See Regions R22 through R26 in Table 61.

Dresden Generating Station 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season6 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 Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain/Light Snow None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain/Light Snow None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Special Event: Grundy 13 Winter Weekend Midday Good County Corn Festival Roadway Impact:

14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Single Lane Closure on I80 Eastbound Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Mobilization Loading Time for Loading Time for Mobilization Time Time for School Buses Transit Buses7 Highway Free Flow for General Transit Scenario Capacity* Speed* Population Vehicles Rain 90% 10minute 5minute 10minute 90% No Effect increase increase increase Clear driveway before leaving 20minute 10minute 20minute Snow 75% 85% home increase increase increase (See Figure F17)

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

Roads are assumed to be passable.

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).

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

Dresden Generating Station 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Dresden Generating 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 (e.g., 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 shops within the EPZ could be counted as a resident, again as an employee and once again as a shopper.

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

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

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

Permanent residents people who are year round residents of the EPZ.

Transients people who reside outside of the EPZ who enter the area for a specific purpose (visit a park, camping) 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 SubArea and by polar coordinate representation (population rose). The DRE EPZ is subdivided into 16 SubAreas. The SubAreas comprising the EPZ is shown in Figure 31.

Dresden Generating 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 (2.76 persons/household -

See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1) and the number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.55 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 SubArea and EPZ boundaries using GIS software. A ratio of the original area of each census block and the updated area (after cutting) is multiplied by the total block population to estimate the population within the EPZ. This methodology (referred to as the area ratio method) assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 31 provides permanent resident population within the EPZ, by SubArea, for 2010 and for 2020 (based on the methodology above). As indicated, the permanent resident population within the EPZ has increased by 7.75% since the 2010 Census.

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

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

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

Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuating vehicles per household, mobilization time) are assumed to be the same as that for the EPZ permanent resident population. 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.

Dresden Generating 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 (visit a park, camping).

Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at a campground or lodging facility. Data from the previous ETE study was reviewed by the counties within the EPZ and confirmed to be still accurate. Several new transient facilities were identified within the EPZ.

Data for the new facilities were provided by the EPZ counties, supplemented with phone calls to individual facilities and aerial imagery used to estimate parking spaces where data was not provided. The average transient vehicle occupancy rates vary by facility from 1.00 person per vehicle to 4.42 persons per vehicle. The transient facilities within the DRE EPZ are summarized as follows :

Campgrounds - 5,060 transients; 2,076 vehicles; 2.44 transients per vehicle Golf Courses - 998 transients; 556 vehicles; 1.79 transients per vehicle Hunting/Fishing Areas - 718 transients; 491 vehicles; 1.46 transients per vehicle Marinas - 452 transients; 186 vehicles; 2.43 transients per vehicle Parks - 6,258 transients; 2,564 vehicles; 2.44 transients per vehicle (NOTE: Local parks are not included; visitors to these facilities are local residents and have already been counted as permanent residents in Section 3.1.)

Other Recreational Areas - 6,230 transients; 2,515 vehicles; 2.48 transients per vehicle Lodging Facilities - 2,979 transients; 1,451 vehicles; 2.05 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 22,695 transients evacuating in 9,839 vehicles, an average of 2.31 transients per vehicle. Table 34 presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by Sub Area. Figure 36 and Figure 37 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.

3.4 Employees The employment data for this study was obtained from different sources including data extracted from the previous ETE study, data provided Constellation Energy, and data obtained from U.S. Census Bureaus OnTheMap Census analysis tool1. Data from the previous study included the maximum shift employment and percent of employees commuting into the EPZ for each facility. This was reviewed by the counties within the EPZ, and was deemed still applicable. As per the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance, employers with 200 or more employees working in a single shift are considered as major employers. As such, the employers not meeting this criterion are not considered in this study.

The employment data of DRE was updated by Constellation Energy. In addition to the employers identified in the previous study, an industry park, Elion Logistics Park 55, was 1

https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/

Dresden Generating Station 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

identified as a major employer within the DRE EPZ. Data for this industry park was estimated using the latest data (2019) from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool.

Employees who work within the EPZ fall into two categories:

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

Those of the first category are already counted as part of the permanent resident population. To avoid double counting, we focus only on those employees commuting from outside the EPZ who will evacuate along with the permanent resident population. As discussed above, the employment data used for this study includes the percent of employees living outside of the EPZ.

To estimate the evacuating employee vehicles, a vehicle occupancy rate of 1.06 employees per vehicle obtained from the demographic survey (see Appendix F, subsection F.3.1) was used for all the major employers. Appendix E, Table E4 includes the detailed information of each major employer. Table 35 presents employee and vehicle estimates commuting into the EPZ by Sub Area. Figure 38 and Figure 39 present these data by sector.

3.5 Medical Facilities Data were provided by Constellation, Grundy and Will County Emergency Management Agencies for each of the medical facilities within the EPZ. Table E3 in Appendix E summarizes the data gathered. Table 36 presents the census of medical facilities in the EPZ. As shown in these tables, a total of 1,173 people have been identified as living in, or being treated in, these facilities.

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

36. The number and type of evacuating vehicles that need to be provided depend on the patients' state of health. The number of ambulance runs is determined by assuming that 2 patients can be accommodated per ambulance trip; the number of wheelchair bus and van runs assumes 15 and 4 wheelchairs per trip, respectively, and the number of bus runs estimated assumes 30 ambulatory patients per trip. Table E3 in Appendix E summarizes the data provided.

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 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.

Dresden Generating Station 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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, Ontario2 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. We will adopt a conservative estimate that approximately 74% of transit dependent persons will ride share based on the results of the online demographic survey.

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 on average (roughly equivalent to 40 adults). If transit vehicle evacuees are two thirds adults and one third children, then the number of adult seats taken by 30 persons is 20 + (2/3 x10) = 27. On this basis, the average load factor anticipated is (27/40) x 100 = 68 percent. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 37 by 50 percent, the demand for service can still be accommodated by the available bus seating capacity.

2 20 10 40 1.5 1.00 3

Table 37 indicates that transportation must be provided for 637 people. Therefore, a total of 22 buses are 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 SubAreas picking up transit dependent people, 30 buses runs are used in the ETE calculations, (even though only 22 buses are needed from a capacity standpoint). 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 DRE EPZ:

Where, 2

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).

Dresden Generating Station 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 42,124 0.162 1.50 1 0.67 0.46 0.467 2.74 2 0.67 0.46 2,434 1 0.74 30 22 These calculations based on the demographic survey results are explained as follows:

The number of households (HH) is computed by dividing the EPZ population by the average household size (116,261 ÷ 2.76) and is 42,124.

No households indicated that they did not have access to a vehicle.

The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (16.20%), who are at home, equal (1.501).

The number of HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (42,124 x 0.162 x 0.50 x 0.67 x 0.46), as 67% of EPZ households have a commuter, 46% 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 (46.7%), who are at home, equal (2.74 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 42,124 x 0.467 x 0.74 x (0.67 x 0.46)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 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 estimate of transitdependent population in Table 37 far exceeds the number of registered transitdependent persons in the EPZ as provided by the counties (discussed below in Section 3.9). This is consistent with the findings of NUREG/CR6953, Volume 2, in that a large majority of the transitdependent population within the EPZs of U.S. nuclear plants does not register with their local emergency response agency.

3.7 School, PreSchool and Day Camp Population Demand Table 38 presents the school, preschool, and day camp population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all facilities within the EPZ for the 20202021 school year. This information was obtained from the Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA),

county emergency management agencies, phone calls and internet search where data was not provided and supplemented by old data from the previous ETE study where data was missing.

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 will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

Dresden Generating Station 36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Bus capacity, expressed in students per bus, is set to 70 for elementary schools and preschools and 50 for day camps, 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.

Joliet Junior College - it is assumed that all students have a private vehicle on campus and will not be considered transitdependent. (See Section 3.7.1).

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 (although they are not advised to do so) can be gainfully assigned to service other facilities or those persons who do not have access to private vehicles or to ridesharing.

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

3.7.1 Commuter College There is one higher education facility, Joliet Junior College - Main Campus, within the EPZ. It is assumed that students at the main campus will evacuate using personal vehicles. Thus, no buses were considered for this campus. The trip generation distribution (see Section 5) for employees/commuters was used for the commuter students evacuating in private vehicles at this facility.

The main campus of Joliet Junior College is located in Joliet, Illinois, 8.9 miles northnortheast of DRE. Based on the enrollment data obtained from the college website3, Joliet Junior College has a total of 11,551 students (as of Fall 2021), and approximately 65.7%4 of the students study at the main campus. As such, there are 7,589 commuter students at the main campus. It is conservatively assumed that none of the students are EPZ permanent residents. Applying the commuter vehicle occupancy rate of 1.06 persons per vehicle (See Appendix F, SubSection F.3.1), resulting in 7,159 evacuating vehicles for this college.

3 https://www.jjc.edu/sites/default/files/PDFs/Institutional%20Research/Fall%202021%20Census%20%20Unduplicated%20Totals_0.pdf 4

The enrollment statistics show the percentage of students studying at main campus has dropped significantly since 2020 due to the pandemic. Therefore, the percentages of main campus students prior to the pandemic are more conservative for this study. For this reason, the average percentage between 2017 and 2019 was used assuming main campus percentage levels eventually return to pre-pandemic levels.

Dresden Generating Station 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.8 Special Event One special event (Scenario 13) is considered for the ETE study - the Grundy County Corn Festival - which occurs annually in September. The event occurs in Morris, IL (SubArea 5).

The following summarizes the data used for the event:

The Sunday parade has the peak attendance during the event.

The total attendance for the parade is approximately 20,000 people.

50% of total attendees come from outside of the EPZ.

On average, there are 4 to 6 people per vehicle.

Conservatively assuming 4 people per vehicle, there are approximately 10,000 transients (20,000 X 50% = 10,000) and 2,500 transient vehicles (10,000 ÷ 4 = 2,500) present in downtown Morris for the Grundy County Corn Festival.

There are no roadway closures or special traffic control treatments during the event. Attendees park on local roads near the event. There is no transit service for this event. It is assumed that the 90minute mobilization time for transients (see Section 5) is sufficient time for attendees to return to their car and begin their evacuation trip.

The special event (Scenario 13) is considered during the winter, weekend, midday with good weather.

3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population Based on data provided by the counties, there are an estimated 95 access and/or functional needs people within the Grundy County portion of the EPZ, 4 people within the Kendall County portion of the EPZ, and 152 people within the Will County portion of the EPZ who require transportation assistance to evacuate. Details on the number of ambulatory, wheelchairbound and bedridden people were not available. Since the breakdown of need was not provided the percentage of ambulatory, wheelchairbound and bedridden populations was assumed to be 60%, 37%, and 3%. This results in 151 ambulatory persons that would require a bus to evacuate, 93 wheelchairbound persons that would require a wheelchair bus/van to evacuate and 7 bedridden persons that would require an ambulance to evacuate. A total of 30 buses (capacity of 30 ambulatory persons per bus), 14 wheelchair buses (capacity of 15 wheelchair bound persons per wheelchair bus), and 7 ambulances (capacity 2 bedridden persons per ambulance) for a total number of 51 vehicles are estimated to be needed to evacuate the access and/or functional needs population in a reasonable amount of time.

Table 39 shows the total number of people registered for access and/or functional needs by type of need. The table also estimates the number of transportation resources needed to evacuate these people in a timely manner. 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.

Dresden Generating Station 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.10 Correctional Facilities As shown in Table E7, there are three correctional facilities within the EPZ - Grundy County Jail, Joliet Treatment Center, and River Valley Juvenile Center. The total inmate population at this correctional facility is estimated to be 797 persons. As discussed in item 3b of Section 2.4, it is assumed that buses can accommodate 30 passengers per bus. A total of 29 buses (58 vehicles) are required from a capacity standpoint to evacuate these inmates.

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

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

These through vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes traversing the EPZ - I80, I55 and I355. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the EPZ during the first 120 minutes following the ATE.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data was obtained from the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT)5 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months (access control posts - ACP - are assumed to be activated at 120 minutes after the ATE) to estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. As indicated, there are 18,934 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 59, there are 14 time periods during which traffic is loaded on to roadways in the study area to model the mobilization time of people in the EPZ. Note, there is no traffic generated during the 15th time period, as this time period is intended to allow traffic that has already begun evacuating to clear the study area boundaries.

This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of Time Period 1. Rather, there is an initialization time period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from Time Period 1 are loaded onto roadways in the study area.

The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of 5

https://www.gettingaroundillinois.com/Traffic%20Counts/index.html Dresden Generating Station 39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time Period 1 depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated (see Section 6). There are 5,817 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 1 (summer, midweek, midday, good weather) conditions.

3.13 Summary of Demand A summary of 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 225,002 people and 127,141 vehicles are considered in this study.

Dresden Generating Station 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population SubArea 2010 Population 2020 Population 1 13,061 15,329 2 6,122 6,341 3 3,234 3,095 4 1,643 1,716 5 8,9116 9,123 6 4,599 6,792 7 4,427 4,435 8 2,454 2,334 9 211 93 10 6,467 6,463 11 330 293 12 7,401 7,724 13 33,422 37,176 14 3,405 3,238 15 6,698 6,533 16 5,516 5,576 EPZ TOTAL 107,901 116,261 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 7.75%

6 The boundary of Sub-Area 5 was revised in 2017 to include the additional portion in the east of County Route 2. As a result, it increases the 2010 EPZ permanent resident population by 1,801 people (approximately 1.7%) relative to the population reported in the 2014 ETE study (KLD TR-634, dated April 23, 2014). The 2010 population number in Table 3-1 has been adjusted to reflect this change.

Dresden Generating Station 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by SubArea 2020 SubArea 2020 Population Resident Vehicles 1 15,329 8,609 2 6,341 3,505 3 3,095 1,738 4 1,716 967 5 9,123 5,052 6 6,792 3,814 7 4,435 2,491 8 2,334 1,311 9 93 52 10 6,463 3,621 11 293 162 12 7,724 4,298 13 37,176 20,672 14 3,238 1,815 15 6,533 3,559 16 5,576 3,114 EPZ TOTAL 116,261 64,780 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Sector 2020 Population Evacuating Vehicles N 29,280 16,432 NNE 52,152 29,138 NE 77,727 42,381 ENE 4,455 2,482 E 3,951 2,205 ESE 351 196 SE 2,547 1,430 SSE 1,509 846 S 2,554 1,435 SSW 225 128 SW 1,297 723 WSW 250 142 W 522 291 WNW 567 314 NW 321 180 NNW 548 306 TOTAL 178,256 98,629 Dresden Generating Station 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles SubArea Transients Transient Vehicles 1 164 89 2 1,104 525 3 508 209 4 172 72 5 3,176 1,302 6 0 0 7 400 164 8 0 0 9 1,277 524 10 498 400 11 0 0 12 2,027 986 13 8,091 3,413 14 746 280 15 3,264 1,344 16 1,268 531 EPZ TOTAL 22,695 9,839 Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ SubArea Employees Employee Vehicles 1 253 239 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 263 248 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 8 0 0 9 204 192 10 0 0 11 0 0 12 872 821 13 1,457 1,375 14 0 0 15 0 0 16 0 0 EPZ TOTAL 3,049 2,875 Dresden Generating Station 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand Estimates Wheel Wheel chair Sub Current Ambu chair Bed Bus Bus Ambulance Area Facility Name Municipality Capacity Census latory Bound ridden Runs Runs Runs Grundy County, IL 1 Heritage Woods of Minooka Minooka 171 76 68 8 0 3 1 0 2 Saratoga Towers Morris 190 94 88 6 0 3 1 0 2 Regency Care of Morris Morris 123 123 86 37 0 3 3 0 5 Morris Hospital Morris 90 58 42 10 6 2 1 3 5 Elliot Manor Morris 105 105 73 32 0 3 3 0 5 Park Pointe Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center Morris 142 142 85 53 4 3 4 2 5 The Gardens at Park Pointe Morris 60 60 36 22 2 2 2 1 5 The Pointe At Morris Morris 72 72 50 22 0 2 2 0 Grundy County Subtotal: 953 730 528 190 12 21 17 6 Will County, IL 13 Joliet Area Community Hospice Joliet 30 30 0 10 20 0 1 10 13 Timbers of Shorewood Shorewood 200 200 140 59 1 5 4 1 13 Alden Estates of Shorewood Shorewood 92 70 7 63 0 1 5 0 15 Aperion Care Wilmington Wilmington 171 129 64 53 12 3 4 6 16 Braidwood Senior Housing Braidwood 24 14 7 6 1 1 1 1 Will County Subtotal: 517 443 218 191 34 10 15 18 TOTAL: 1,470 1,173 746 381 46 31 32 24 Dresden Generating Station 314 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 116,261 0.00 1.50 2.74 42,124 0.00% 16.20% 46.70% 67% 46% 2,434 74% 633 0.5%

Dresden Generating Station 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 38. School, Preschool and Day Camps Population Demand Estimates Buses SubArea School Name Enrollment Required Grundy County, IL 1 Minooka High School South Campus 1,420 29 1 Aux Sable Elementary School 571 9 1 Minooka Junior High School 1,102 23 1 Minooka High School Central Campus 1,363 28 1 Minooka Intermediate School 1,005 21 1 Minooka Primary Center 202 3 1 Minooka Elementary School 527 8 2 Premier Academy 93 2 2 Saratoga Elementary School 855 13 5 Immaculate Conception School 218 5 5 Grundy Area Vocational Center 575 12 5 Morris Community High School 891 18 5 Grundy County Special Ed CoOp 700 14 5 Morris Elementary School 1,200 18 7 Coal City Elementary School 328 5 10 Coal City Intermediate School 315 7 10 Coal City High School 652 14 10 Coal City Middle School 488 10 10 Braceville Elementary School 176 3 Shadow Region7 Nettle Creek Elementary School 85 2 Kendall County, IL 6 Jones Elementary School 592 9 Will County, IL 12 Pioneer Path School 272 4 12 Three Rivers School 285 6 12 N.B. Galloway Elementary School 401 6 12 Channahon Junior High School 324 7 13 Walnut Trails Elementary 491 8 13 Joliet Junior College 11,551 08 13 TroyShorewood Elementary School 339 5 13 Heritage Trail Elementary School 383 6 13 Joliet Christian School 79 2 13 Guiding Light Academy West 10 1 13 Holy Family Catholic School 341 7 13 Trinity Christian School 532 11 7

Facility is located just beyond the EPZ boundary; however, the facility will evacuate as per county plans.

8 As discussed in Section 3.1.1, Joliet Junior College is a commuter college. Students will evacuate in personal vehicles.

Dresden Generating Station 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Buses SubArea School Name Enrollment Required Will County, IL 13 Cronin Elementary School 550 8 13 Hofer Elementary School 409 6 13 Orenic Intermediate School 891 18 13 Troy Middle School 989 20 14 Elwood Community Consolidated School 280 6 15 St Rose Catholic Parochial School 95 2 15 Wilmington Middle School 397 8 15 L.J. Stevens Intermediate School 377 8 15 SOWIC Educational Center & ELS 52 2 15 Wilmington High School 471 10 15 Trinity Services, Inc. South 25 1 16 ReedCuster Elementary School 607 9 16 SOWIC ELS Program 51 2 Shadow Region9 ReedCuster High School 478 10 Shadow Region9 ReedCuster Middle School 336 7 Shadow Region9 Bruning Elementary School 226 4 Shadow Region9 Troy Craughwell Elementary School 408 6 Shadow Region9 Camelot South Suburban Center for Exceptional Learners 254 6 School Subtotal: 35,262 449 Buses SubArea Preschool and Day Camps Name Enrollment Required Grundy County, IL 1 Little Learner Children's Academy 42 1 1 Stephanie Kelsey 8 1 1 Discovery Child Care & Learning Center INC. 83 2 1 Minooka United Methodist Church PreSchool 19 1 2 Two Rivers Headstart 34 1 2 Step by Step Child Care Center Morris 149 3 2 Jacquelin Taylor 12 1 2 Melissa Bledsoe 8 1 2 Lynn Picardo 8 1 2 Julia Hanson 8 1 4 Rainbow Scout Reservation (Day Camp) 1,000 20 5 First United Methodist Church Preschool 20 1 5 Morris Christian School 44 1 5 Prairieland Kids Daycare 40 1 7 Step by Step Care CenterElementary School 20 1 9

Facility is located just beyond the EPZ boundary; however, the facility will evacuate as per the county plans.

Dresden Generating Station 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Buses SubArea Preschool and Day Camps Name Enrollment Required Grundy County, IL 7 Sharon Scholtes 8 1 8 Rainbow Preschool 38 1 10 Step by Step Care CenterIntermediate School 30 1 10 Step by Step Child Care Center Diamond 103 2 10 Kids Korner 24 1 10 Danielle Cassani 8 1 10 Randi McLuckie 11 1 11 Coal City Early Childhood Center 351 6 Will County, IL 12 Kids Korner 75 2 12 Kiddie Kampus Learning Center 82 2 12 Families of Faith Christian Academy 19 1 13 Joliet Junior College Day Care 40 1 13 Catholic Charities Head Start 190 3 13 Shorewood Early Learning and Day Care Center 150 3 13 Trinity Christian Preschool at Westview Baptist Church 247 4 13 Chesterbrook Academy Preschool 163 3 13 Step By Step Child Care Center Shorewood 94 2 13 Garden Gate Montessori 80 2 15 Island City Park District Before and After School Program 25 1 15 Grace Lutheran Preschool 16 1 15 First United Methodist Church PreSchool 30 1 16 Discovery Schoolhouse 60 1 Shadow Region10 Step by Step Child Care Center Braidwood 85 2 Shadow Region10 First Christian Church After School Program 19 1 Preschool and Day Camps Subtotal: 3,443 81 TOTAL: 38,705 530 10 Facility is located just beyond the EPZ boundary; however, the facility will evacuate as per the county plans.

Dresden Generating Station 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary Population Group Population Vehicles deployed Buses 151 30 Wheelchair Buses 93 14 Ambulances 7 7 Total: 251 51 Table 310. DRE External Traffic Upstream Downstream IDOT Hourly External Road Name Direction KFactor12 DFactor12 Node Node AADT11 Volume Traffic 8263 1574 I80 Westbound 40,500 0.107 0.25 1,083 2,166 8069 69 I80 Eastbound 40,500 0.107 0.5 2,167 4,334 8043 1036 I55 Northbound 53,300 0.091 0.5 2,425 4,850 8003 3 I55 Southbound 53,300 0.091 0.5 2,425 4,850 8268 268 I355 Southbound 60,100 0.091 0.25 1,367 2,734 TOTAL: 18,934 11 https://www.gettingaroundillinois.com/Traffic%20Counts/index.html 12 Highway Capacity Manual 2016 Dresden Generating Station 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 311. Summary of Population Demand13 Schools Preschools Joliet Sub Transit Special Day Junior Special Shadow External Area Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities14 Camps College Event Population15 Traffic Total 1 15,329 83 164 253 76 6,342 0 0 0 0 22,247 2 6,341 35 1,104 0 217 1,167 0 0 0 0 8,864 3 3,095 17 508 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,620 4 1,716 9 172 263 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 3,160 5 9,123 50 3,176 0 502 3,688 0 10,000 0 0 26,539 6 6,792 37 0 0 0 592 0 0 0 0 7,421 7 4,435 24 400 0 0 356 0 0 0 0 5,215 8 2,334 13 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 2,385 9 93 1 1,277 204 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,575 10 6,463 35 498 0 0 1,807 0 0 0 0 8,803 11 293 2 0 0 0 351 0 0 0 0 646 12 7,724 42 2,027 872 0 1,458 0 0 0 0 12,123 13 37,176 201 8,091 1,457 1,032 5,978 7,589 0 0 0 61,524 14 3,238 18 746 0 0 280 0 0 0 0 4,282 15 6,533 36 3,264 0 129 1,488 0 0 0 0 11,450 16 5,576 30 1,268 0 14 718 0 0 0 0 7,606 Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 1,891 0 0 35,651 0 37,542 Total 116,261 633 22,695 3,049 1,970 27,154 7,589 10,000 35,651 0 225,002 13 Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, they are not included in this table.

14 Special Facilities include medical facilities, Grundy County Jail, Joliet Treatment Center, and the River Valley Juvenile Center.

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

Dresden Generating Station 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand16 Schools Preschools Joliet Sub Transit Special Day Junior Special Shadow External Area Residents Dependent17 Transients Employees Facilities18 Camps17 College Event Population19 Traffic Total 1 8,609 6 89 239 8 252 0 0 0 0 9,203 2 3,505 4 525 0 20 46 0 0 0 0 4,100 3 1,738 2 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,949 4 967 2 72 248 0 40 0 0 0 0 1,329 5 5,052 4 1,302 0 60 140 0 2,500 0 0 9,058 6 3,814 4 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 3,836 7 2,491 2 164 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 2,671 8 1,311 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1,315 9 52 2 524 192 0 0 0 0 0 0 770 10 3,621 4 400 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 4,105 11 162 2 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 176 12 4,298 4 986 821 0 56 0 0 0 0 6,165 13 20,672 14 3,413 1,375 95 220 7,159 0 0 0 32,948 14 1,815 2 280 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 2,109 15 3,559 4 1,344 0 20 68 0 0 0 0 4,995 16 3,114 2 531 0 5 24 0 0 0 0 3,676 Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 76 0 0 19,726 18,934 38,736 Total 64,780 60 9,839 2,875 208 1,060 7,159 2,500 19,726 18,934 127,141 16 Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, vehicles needed to evacuate access and/or functional needs population are not included in this table.

17 Buses (including transit-dependent buses and school buses) represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 3.5 and Section 8 for additional information.

18 Vehicles for special facilities include wheelchair buses, ambulances and buses. Buses are represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 8 for additional information.

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

Dresden Generating Station 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 31. SubAreas Comprising the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Dresden Generating Station 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Dresden Generating Station 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Dresden Generating Station 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Dresden Generating Station 326 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Dresden Generating Station 327 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Dresden Generating Station 328 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Dresden Generating Station 329 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Dresden Generating 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, an SV is the maximum traffic that can travel on a road and still maintain a certain perceived level of quality to a driver based on the A, B, C, rating system (LOS). Any additional vehicles above the 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, snow, fog, wind speed)

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 during the road survey and these observations were recorded, but no detailed measurements 1

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

Dresden Generating Station 41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 15 to 75 mph in the study area. Capacity is estimated from the procedures of the HCM 2016. 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 vehicles 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 increase vehicletovehicles separation, thus decreasing the amount of traffic flow. Based on limited empirical data, 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 for rain\light snow. During heavy snow conditions, the free speed and highway capacity reductions are 15 percent and 25 percent, 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. See Appendix G for more information.

Dresden Generating 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, Dresden Generating 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 evacuation time estimate (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 performance during congested conditions (i.e., when demand exceeds capacity), it is necessary to estimate the service volume, VF, under congested conditions.

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

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

Dresden Generating Station 44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 also vary by day of week and time of day based upon local circumstances. The cited reference presents a mean QDF of 2,016 passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl). This figure compares with the nominal capacity estimate of 2,250 pcphpl estimated for the ETE. 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 HCM 2016 was referenced to estimate saturation flow rates. The impact of narrow lanes and shoulders on freeflow speed and on capacity is not material, particularly when flow is predominantly in one direction as is the case during an evacuation.

The procedure used here was to estimate "section" capacity, VE, based on observations made traveling over each section of the evacuation network, based on the posted speed limits and travel behavior of other motorists and by reference to the HCM 2016. The DYNEV II simulation model determines for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether its 3

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

Dresden Generating Station 45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

capacity would be limited by the "sectionspecific" service volume, VE, or by the intersectionspecific capacity. For each link, the model selects the lower value of capacity.

4.3 Application to the DRE 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. The perlane capacity of a twolane highway is estimated at 1,700 passenger cars per hour (pc/h). This estimate is essentially independent of the directional distribution of traffic volume except that, for extended distances, the twoway capacity will not exceed 3,200 pc/h. The HCM 2016 procedures then estimate LOS and Average Travel Speed. The DYNEV II simulation model accepts the specified value of capacity as input and computes average speed based on the timevarying demand: capacity relations.

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

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

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

4.3.2 Multilane Highway Ref: HCM 2016 Chapter 12 Exhibit 128 of the HCM 2016 presents a set of curves that indicate a perlane capacity ranging from approximately 1,900 to 2,300 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 Dresden Generating Station 46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

traffic with freespeeds in this range. The actual timevarying speeds computed by the simulation model reflect the demand and capacity relationship and the impact of control at intersections. A conservative estimate of perlane capacity of 1,900 pc/h is adopted for this study for multilane highways outside of urban areas.

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 1237 of the HCM 2016 presents capacity vs. free speed estimates, which are provided below.

Free Speed (mph): 55 60 65 70+

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

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

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 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 FFS. The DYNEV II simulation model logic simulates the merging operations of the ramp and freeway traffic in accord with the procedures in Chapter 14 of the HCM 2016. If congestion results from an excess of demand relative to capacity, then the model allocates service appropriately to the two entering traffic streams and produces LOS F conditions (The HCM 2016 does not address LOS F explicitly).

Dresden Generating Station 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

The system under study involves a group of different facilities or travel modes with mutual interactions 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 a study area operating under evacuation conditions. The model utilized for this study, DYNEV II is further described in Appendix C. It is essential to recognize that simulation models do not replicate the methodology and procedures of the HCM 2016 - they replace these procedures by describing the complex interactions of traffic flow and computing Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) detailing the operational performance of traffic over time and by location. The DYNEV II simulation model includes some HCM 2016 procedures only for the purpose of estimating capacity.

All simulation models must be calibrated properly with field observations that quantify the performance parameters applicable to the analysis network. Two of the most important of these are: (1) FFS; and (2) saturation headway, hsat. The first of these is estimated by direct Dresden Generating Station 48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using the concepts of the HCM, as described earlier. These parameters are listed in Appendix K, for each network link.

It is important to note that simulation represents 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 and the fact that the evacuating traffic volume (main street) will be more significant than the competing (side street) traffic volume at any downstream signalized intersections, thereby warranting a more significant percentage (75% in this case) of the signal green time.

Dresden Generating 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 Dresden Generating 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 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) study estimate the distributions of elapsed times associated with mobilization activities undertaken by the public to prepare for the evacuation trip. The elapsed time associated with each activity is represented as a statistical distribution reflecting differences between members of the public. The quantification of these activitybased distributions relies largely on the results of the demographic survey. We define the sum of these distributions of elapsed times as the Trip Generation Time Distribution.

5.1 Background

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

1. Unusual Event

2. Alert

3. Site Area Emergency

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

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

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

3. ETE are measured relative to the Advisory to Evacuate.

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

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

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

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

For example, suppose one hour elapses from the siren alert to the ATE. In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public during this one hour period. As a result, the population within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) will be lower when the ATE is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an Advisory will be broadcast. 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 Dresden Generating Station 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

report. Consequently, the ETE presented in this report are higher than the actual evacuation time, if this hypothetical situation were to take place.

The notification process consists of two events:

1. Transmitting information using the alert and notification systems (ANS) available within the EPZ (e.g., sirens, Emergency Alert System (EAS) broadcasts on radios or TVs).

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

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of 381 square miles and is engaged in a wide variety of activities. It must be anticipated that some time will elapse between the transmission and receipt of the information advising the public of an accident.

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

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

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

As indicated in Section 4.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from a demographic survey of EPZ residents. Such a survey was conducted in support of this ETE study for this site. Appendix F discusses the survey sampling plan, documents the survey instrument utilized and provides the survey results. The remaining discussion will focus on the application of the trip generation data obtained from the demographic survey to the development of the ETE documented in this report.

5.2 Fundamental Considerations The environment leading up to the time that people begin their evacuation trips consists of a sequence of events and activities. Each event (other than the first) occurs at an instant in time and is the outcome of an activity.

Activities are undertaken over a period of time. Activities may be in "series" (i.e., to undertake an activity implies the completion of all preceding events) or may be in parallel (two or more activities may take place over the same period of time). Activities conducted in series are Dresden Generating Station 52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 (i.e., 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.

In some cases, assuming certain events occur strictly sequential (for instance, commuter returning home before beginning preparation to leave, or removing snow only after the preparation to leave) can result in rather conservative (that is, longer) estimates of mobilization Dresden Generating Station 53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

times. It is reasonable to expect that at least some parts of these events will overlap for many households, but that assumption is not made in this study.

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

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

Given the federal regulations and guidance, and the assumed presence of sirens within the EPZ, it is assumed that 100% of the population in the EPZ can be notified within 45 minutes. The assumed distribution for notifying the EPZ population is provided in Table 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. 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.

Distribution No. 5, Snow Clearance Time Distribution Inclement weather scenarios involving snowfall must address the time lags associated with snow clearance. It is assumed that snow equipment is mobilized and deployed during the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snowplowing efforts are Dresden Generating Station 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snow accumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours.

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

Note that those respondents (10.5%) who answered that they would not take time to clear their driveway were assumed to be ready immediately at the start of this activity. Essentially, they would drive through the snow on the driveway to access the roadway and begin their evacuation trip.

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

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

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

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

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

In assessing outliers, there are three alternatives to consider:

Dresden Generating Station 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 access and/or functional needs;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

access and/or functional 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.

Dresden Generating Station 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

In general, only flagged values more than 3.5 standard deviations1 from the mean are allowed to be considered outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected.

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.

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

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

This is done by using the data sets and distributions under different scenarios (e.g. commuter returning, no commuter returning, no snow or snow in each). In general, these are additive, using weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 54 presents the combined trip generation distributions for each population group considered. These distributions are presented on the same time scale. (As discussed earlier, the use of strictly additive activities is a conservative approach, because it makes all activities sequential - preparation for departure follows the return of the commuter; snow clearance follows the preparation for departure, and so forth. In practice, it is reasonable that some of these activities 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 DYnamic Network Evacuation (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 1

For the distribution for the time to prepare to leave home, values more than 3.1 standard deviations were removed due to the convergence of the normal and cumulative distributions when those with standard deviations of more than 3.1 were removed.

Dresden Generating Station 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

histograms, which represent Distributions A, C, D, E and F, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 59 (Distribution B, Arrive Home, omitted for clarity).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Assumptions

1. The EPZ population in SubAreas beyond 5 miles will shelterinplace, 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 at other venues. Also, notifying the transient population of a staged evacuation would prove difficult.

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

Procedure

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

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

a. Identify the 90th percentile evacuation time for the Subareas comprising the 2 Mile Region. This value, TScen*, is obtained from simulation results. It will become Dresden Generating Station 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 on average 2:30 for nonsnow scenarios and 3:30 for snow scenarios.

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

a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters

c. Residents with returning commuters and snow conditions

d. Residents without returning commuters and snow conditions Figure 55 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters, with and without snow; the TScen* is 150 minutes for good weather and 210 minutes for snow scenarios, on average. At TScen*, 20% of the permanent resident population (who 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 time, after the sheltered region is advised to evacuate, the shelter trip generation distribution rises to meet the balance of the nonstaged trip generation distribution. Following time TScen*, the balance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 15 minutes. After TScen*+15, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the unstaged trip generation distribution.

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

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas According to Chapter 2 of the Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA) for Dresden (IPRA, 2019), the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) will warn and/or evacuate visitors at the Des Plains Conservation Area, Illinois and Michigan Canal State Park, Goose Lake Prairie State Park, William G. Stratton State Park, Gebhard Wood State Park, and Channahon Parkway State Park.

Dresden Generating Station 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes. Table 59 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 90 minutes. It is assumed that this 90 minute timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and other transients to return to their vehicles and begin their evacuation trip.

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

5 7%

10 13%

15 27%

20 47%

25 66%

30 87%

35 92%

40 97%

45 100%

Dresden Generating Station 510 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

10 56%

20 77%

30 90%

40 95%

50 97%

60 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" 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 Dont know 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 Percent Elapsed Time Returning (Minutes) Home 0 0%

15 31%

30 64%

45 82%

60 95%

75 98%

90 100%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Dresden Generating Station 511 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Leave Home Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Ready to Elapsed Time Percent Ready to (Minutes) Evacuate (Minutes) Evacuate 0 0% 120 84%

15 3% 135 91%

30 19% 150 92%

45 38% 165 93%

60 53% 180 95%

75 67% 195 99%

90 75% 210 100%

105 76%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow Cumulative Percent Elapsed Time Completing (Minutes) Snow Removal 0 10.5%

15 26.0%

30 48.1%

45 59.5%

60 77.1%

75 89.4%

90 92.6%

105 95.1%

120 96.3%

135 98.4%

150 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Dresden Generating Station 512 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events Apply Summing Algorithm To: Distribution Obtained Event Defined Distributions 1 and 2 Distribution A Event 3 Distributions A and 3 Distribution B Event 4 Distributions B and 4 Distribution C Event 5 Distributions 1 and 4 Distribution D Event 5 Distributions C and 5 Distribution E Event 5 Distributions D and 5 Distribution F Event 5 Table 58. Description of the Distributions Distribution Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also applies A to employees who work within the EPZ who live outside, and to Transients within the EPZ.

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

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

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

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

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

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

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

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

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

Dresden Generating Station 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation2 Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Residents Residents with Time Duration Residents with Residents without Employees Transients without Commuters Period (Min) Commuters Commuters Snow (Distribution A) (Distribution A) Commuters Snow (Distribution C) (Distribution F)

(Distribution D) (Distribution E) 1 30 37% 37% 0% 2% 0% 0%

2 30 55% 55% 2% 25% 0% 7%

3 30 8% 8% 15% 32% 4% 17%

4 30 0% 0% 26% 16% 12% 23%

5 15 0% 0% 12% 5% 9% 10%

6 15 0% 0% 10% 7% 10% 9%

7 30 0% 0% 15% 6% 20% 13%

8 30 0% 0% 9% 4% 16% 9%

9 30 0% 0% 5% 3% 12% 6%

10 30 0% 0% 4% 0% 8% 4%

11 30 0% 0% 2% 0% 4% 1%

12 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 1%

13 15 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%

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

2 Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 1-2) using Distributions C and E for good weather and snow, respectively. Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.

Dresden Generating Station 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period3 Time Duration Residents with Residents without Residents with Residents without Period (Min) Commuters Commuters Commuters Snow Commuters Snow (Distribution C) (Distribution D) (Distribution E) (Distribution F) 1 30 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 30 0% 5% 0% 1%

3 30 3% 7% 1% 4%

4 30 6% 3% 2% 4%

5 15 2% 1% 2% 2%

6 15 2% 1% 2% 2%

7 30 67% 76% 4% 3%

8 30 9% 4% 3% 2%

9 30 5% 3% 69% 76%

10 30 4% 0% 8% 4%

11 30 2% 0% 4% 1%

12 30 0% 0% 3% 1%

13 15 0% 0% 1% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

3 Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 5 9) is the same for Un-staged and Staged Evacuation.

Dresden Generating Station 515 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 Dresden Generating Station 516 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities 100%

80%

60%

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

Percent of Population Completing Mobilization Activity 0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Activity (min)

Figure 52. Time Distributions for Evacuation Mobilization Activities Dresden Generating Station 517 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 Dresden Generating Station 518 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Dresden Generating Station 519 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region Dresden Generating Station 520 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 SubAreas 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 26 Regions were defined which encompass all the groupings of SubAreas considered.

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

Each keyhole sectorbased area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and four adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. These sectors extend to 5 miles from the plant (Regions R04 through R07) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R08 through R21).

Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R22 through R26 are identical to Regions R02, and R04 through R07, respectively; however, those Subareas between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2Mile Region (Region R01) has evacuated.

Each Subarea that intersects the keyhole or radius is included in the Region, unless specified otherwise in the Protective Action Recommendation (PAR) determination flowchart. There are instances when a small portion (a sliver) of a SubArea is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (500 people or 10% of Subarea population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the SubArea would not be included in the Region.

A total of 14 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 26 x 14 = 364 evacuation cases. Table 62 provides a description of all Scenarios.

Each combination of Region and Scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated. The population group and the vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 and in Appendix E are peak values. These peak values are adjusted depending on the scenario and region being considered, using scenario and region specific 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 present the vehicle counts for each scenario for an evacuation of Region R03 - the entire EPZ, based on the Scenario percentages in Table 63 were determined as follows:

Dresden Generating Station 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to 36%, which is the product of 67% (the number of households with at least one commuter - see Figure F6) and 54% (the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating - see Figure F11). See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of those households with 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 percent of the population is on vacation during each twoweek interval.

Assume half of these vacationers leave the area.

On this basis, the permanent resident population would be reduced by 5% 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 estimated to be at its peak (100%) during the winter, midweek, midday scenarios. Employment is reduced slightly (96%) for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. This is based on the estimation that 50% of the employees commuting into the EPZ will be on vacation for a week during the approximate 12 weeks of summer. It is further estimated that those taking vacation will be uniformly dispersed throughout the summer with approximately 4% of employees vacationing each week. Finally, it is 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 (90%) during summer weekends when most transient facilities are open and operational (due to the large number of hotels that have low occupancies during the day, the peak is slightly lower than 100%). Transient activity during the week in the summertime is estimated to be 70%. Transient activity in the winter is estimated to at 50% on weekends and 35% during the week - due to the large number of parks and campgrounds within the EPZ that are closed or less populated during winter months. Due to the number of lodging facilities and campgrounds in the EPZ and due to the Hollywood Casino offering overnight accommodations, transient activity during the evening is estimated to be 65% in the summer and 45% in the winter.

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, Dresden Generating Station 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

using the values provided in Table 64 for Scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows:

2,760 20% 1 21%

23,434 41,346 One special event - Grundy County Corn Festival - was considered as Scenario 13. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for Scenario 13, and 0% for all other scenarios.

As discussed in Section 7, schools 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. The Joliet Junior College (a commuter college) is assumed to have the same scenario percentages as schools within the EPZ.

The day camp at Rainbow Scout Reservation is operational during the summer months only and runs Monday to Friday. The facility also offers a resident camp that runs for 4 days and 3 nights.

As such, the day camp buses are estimated to be 100% during summer weekday scenarios and 50% during summer evening scenarios. Since the camp is closed in the winter, the percentage of winter scenarios is set to 0%.

Transit buses for the transitdependent population, medical facilities, and correctional facilities are set to 100% for all scenarios as it is assumed that the transitdependent population, and the population at medical and correctional facilities, is present in the EPZ for all scenarios.

External traffic is estimated to be reduced by 60% during evening scenarios and is 100% for all other scenarios.

Dresden Generating Station 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Subarea Region Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R01 2Mile Region X X X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R04 NNW, N, NNE 327° 34° X X X X X R05 NE, ENE 35° 79° X X X X E, ESE, SE 80° 146° See Region R01 SSE, S, SSW, R06 SW,WSW 147° 259° X X X X R07 W,WNW 260° 304° X X X X X NW 305° 326° See Region R02 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R08 N 350° 11° X X X X X X X X X X R09 NNE 12° 34° X X X X X X X X X X X R10 NE 35° 56° X X X X X X X X X X R11 ENE 57° 79° X X X X X X X X X R12 E, ESE 80° 124° X X X X X X X R13 SE 125° 146° X X X X X X X R14 SSE 147° 169° X X X X X X X R15 S 170° 191° X X X X X X R16 SSW, SW 192° 237° X X X X X X X R17 WSW 238° 259° X X X X X X X R18 W 260° 281° X X X X X X X X R19 WNW 282° 304° X X X X X X X X R20 NW 305° 326° X X X X X X X X X X R21 NNW 327° 349° X X X X X X X X X Dresden Generating Station 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction Subarea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R22 5Mile Region X X X X X X R23 NNW, N, NNE 327° 34° X X X X X R24 NE, ENE 35° 79° X X X X E, ESE, SE 80° 146° See Region R01 SSE, S, SSW, SW, R25 WSW 147° 259° X X X X R26 W, WNW 260° 304° X X X X X NW 305° 326° See Region R22 Subarea(s) ShelterinPlace until 90%

Subarea(s) Evacuate Subarea(s) ShelterinPlace ETE for R01, then Evacuate Dresden Generating Station 65 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 Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 7 Winter Midweek Midday None Snow 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 10 Winter Weekend Midday None Snow 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Special Event: Grundy 13 Winter Weekend Midday Good County Corn Festival Roadway Impact: Single 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Lane Closure on I80 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).

Dresden Generating Station 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Household Households s With Without Medical and Joliet Day External Returning Returning Special Correctional Junior Camp School Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Vehicles College Buses Buses Buses Traffic 1 36% 64% 96% 70% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 10% 100% 100%

2 36% 64% 96% 70% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 10% 100% 100%

3 4% 96% 10% 90% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

4 4% 96% 10% 90% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

5 4% 96% 10% 65% 20% 0% 100% 0% 50% 0% 100% 40%

6 36% 64% 100% 35% 21% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

7 36% 64% 100% 35% 21% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

8 36% 64% 100% 35% 21% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

9 4% 96% 10% 50% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

10 4% 96% 10% 50% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

11 4% 96% 10% 50% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

12 4% 96% 10% 45% 20% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 40%

13 4% 96% 10% 35% 20% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100%

14 36% 64% 96% 70% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 10% 100% 100%

Resident Households with Commuters ..................................... Households of EPZ residents who await the return of commuters prior to beginning the evacuation trip.

Resident Households with No Commuters ............................... Households of EPZ residents who do not have commuters or will not await the return of commuters prior to beginning the evacuation trip.

Employees................................................................................. EPZ employees who live outside the EPZ Transients ................................................................................. People who are in the EPZ at the time of an accident for recreational or other (nonemployment) purposes.

Shadow ..................................................................................... Residents and employees in the Shadow Region (outside of the EPZ) who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis for the values shown is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees.

Special Event ............................................................................. Additional vehicles in the EPZ due to the identified special event.

Joliet Junior College .................................................................. A commuter college wherein all students drive themselves and would evacuate using their personal vehicles.

School, Day camp, Medical, Correctional and Transit Buses ..... Vehicleequivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing schools, preschools, day camps, medical facilities (except those evacuated in ambulances), correctional facilities, and transitdependent people (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

External Through Traffic ........................................................... Traffic passing through the EPZ on interstates/freeways and major arterial roads at the start of the evacuation. This traffic is stopped by access control approximately 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months after the evacuation begins.

Dresden Generating Station 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario2 Households Households With Without Medical and Joliet Day External Total Returning Returning Special Correctional Junior Camp School Transit Through Scenario Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients3 Shadow Event Vehicles4 College Buses Buses Buses Traffic Vehicles 1 23,434 41,346 2,760 6,887 20,566 0 208 716 40 102 60 18,934 115,053 2 23,434 41,346 2,760 6,887 20,566 0 208 716 40 102 60 18,934 115,053 3 2,343 62,437 288 8,855 19,813 0 208 0 0 0 60 18,934 112,938 4 2,343 62,437 288 8,855 19,813 0 208 0 0 0 60 18,934 112,938 5 2,343 62,437 288 6,395 19,813 0 208 0 20 0 60 7,574 99,138 6 23,434 41,346 2,875 3,444 20,601 0 208 7,159 0 1,020 60 18,934 119,081 7 23,434 41,346 2,875 3,444 20,601 0 208 7,159 0 1,020 60 18,934 119,081 8 23,434 41,346 2,875 3,444 20,601 0 208 7,159 0 1,020 60 18,934 119,081 9 2,343 62,437 288 4,920 19,813 0 208 0 0 0 60 18,934 109,003 10 2,343 62,437 288 4,920 19,813 0 208 0 0 0 60 18,934 109,003 11 2,343 62,437 288 4,920 19,813 0 208 0 0 0 60 18,934 109,003 12 2,343 62,437 288 4,428 19,813 0 208 0 0 0 60 7,574 97,151 13 2,343 62,437 288 3,444 19,813 2,500 208 0 0 0 60 18,934 110,027 14 23,434 41,346 2,760 6,887 20,566 0 208 716 40 102 60 18,934 115,053 2

Vehicles estimates are for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03).

3 Vehicles with trailers are represented as two vehicles in the model.

4 Includes 150 medical facility vehicles and 58 correctional facility vehicles.

Dresden Generating Station 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. DRE EPZ SubAreas Dresden Generating Station 69 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 26 Evacuation Regions within the DRE EPZ and the 14 Evacuation Scenarios discussed in Section 6.

The ETE for all Evacuation Cases are presented in Table 71 and Table 72. These tables present the estimated times to clear the indicated population percentages from the Evacuation Regions for all Evacuation Scenarios. The ETE of the 2Mile Region in both staged and unstaged regions are presented in Table 73 and Table 74. Table 75 defines the Evacuation Regions considered.

The tabulated values of ETE are obtained from the DYNEV II model outputs which are generated at 5minute intervals.

7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation Voluntary evacuees are permanent residents within the EPZ in SubAreas for which an Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) has not been issued, yet who elect to evacuate. Shadow evacuation is the voluntary outward movement of some 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 DRE EPZ addresses the issue of voluntary evacuees in the manner shown in Figure 71. Within the EPZ, 20% of permanent residents located in SubAreas outside of the evacuation region who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate. Similarly, it is assumed that 20% of those permanent residents in the Shadow Region will choose to leave the area.

Figure 72 presents the area identified as the Shadow Region. This region extends radially from the plant 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 178,256 people 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), traveling away from the DRE location, has the potential for impeding evacuating vehicles from within the Evacuation Region. All ETE calculations include this shadow traffic movement.

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

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

Dresden Generating Station 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5Mile Region is advised to begin evacuating when approximately 90% of those originally within the 2Mile Region evacuate across the 2 Mile 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 summer, midweek, midday period under good weather conditions (Scenario 1).

Traffic congestion, as the term is used here, is defined as Level of Service (LOS) F. LOS F is defined as follows (HCM 2016, page 55):

The HCM uses LOS F to define operations that have either broken down (i.e., demand exceeds capacity) or have reached a point that most users would consider unsatisfactory, as described by a specified service measure value (or combination of service measure values). However, analysts may be interested in knowing just how bad the LOS F condition is, particularly for planning applications where different alternatives may be compared. Several measures are available for describing individually, or in combination, the severity of a LOS F condition:

Demandtocapacity ratios describe the extent to which demand exceeds capacity during the analysis period (e.g., by 1%, 15%, etc.);

Duration of LOS F describes how long the condition persists (e.g., 15 min, 1 h, 3 h); and

Spatial extent measures describe the areas affected by LOS F conditions. These include measures such as the back of queue, and the identification of the specific intersection approaches or system elements experiencing LOS F conditions.

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

Figure 73 displays the traffic congestion within the EPZ 45 minutes after the ATE. At this time, about 17% of the evacuees have mobilized and 15% of vehicles have successfully evacuated.

Traffic congestion (LOS F) has developed along IL53 in Gardner, US6 in Rockdale and Morris, and several collectors and local roadways in Joliet in the EPZ and Shadow Region. The roadways Dresden Generating Station 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

leaving Joliet Junior College) Edward Cwiko Ln and Houbolt Rd are heavily congested as commuting students leave the campus. Parts of I80 exhibit LOS F in the Shadow Region in Joliet. I55 exhibits LOS E or better.

Figure 74 displays peak traffic congestion within the EPZ 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 30 minutes after the ATE.

CR2 northbound, County Road 5000 W northbound, and US6 westbound are congested in Morris since as evacuees try to access I80 westbound. Lisbon Road northbound (Lisbon) is congested as evacuees from Morris, Minooka, and Lisbon attempt to access US52. Queuing exists along US6 eastbound from Channahon to Rockdale. Traffic congestion worsens along IL 53 southbound (SubArea 10) as more evacuees begin their trips leaving Braidwood, Godley and Braceville. These vehicles eventually meet Main St in Gardner at a stop sign which has a low capacity causing the congestion in Gardner. County Route 9 (CR9) westbound in Braceville and Carbon Hill Road southbound (From Reed Road to CR9) in SubArea 10 are also operating at LOS F. Evacuees traveling westbound on IL113 and Reed Rd from Carbon Hill, Diamond, and Coal City encounter traffic congestion at the intersection with IL47 as the traffic flow southbound on IL47 is heavy and the TCP at this intersection forces evacuees southbound along IL47. Several roadways are congested in Minooka. O Brien Road northbound and County Route 11 (CR11) northbound are congested in SubArea 6 as evacuees from Minooka traveling northbound. Routes servicing the densely populated suburban communities in Shorewood (River Road northbound, Black Road westbound, and IL59) are congested as the EPZ and Shadow Region evacuees oversaturate the routes. IL102 southbound is congested (Los E) in Wilmington in SubArea 15. At this time, about 50% of evacuees have mobilized and 46% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months and 30 minutes after the ATE, Figure 75 shows that traffic congestion within the EPZ is beginning to dissipate. Congestion persists on County Road 5000 W northbound, and US6 westbound, while the congestion dissipated in CR2 northbound in Morris. Congestion on Lisbon Rd northbound leaving Morris is extensive with queues of several miles as evacuees encounter a stop sign (low capacity) at the intersection with US52. Congestion persists along IL53 southbound with queuing from the Mazon River to E Main Street in Gardner. Congestion along US6 eastbound (from Channahon to Rockdale) has lessened and the road mostly operating at LOS B, with a small section at the ramps with I55. Congestion persists on Washington Street and CR9 southbound in Braceville (SubArea 10). Congestion on Reed Road westbound has worsened. LOS F now occurs on Grove Rd, in addition to O Brien Rd, in Sub Area 6 from Minooka Road to US52. At this time, 82% vehicles have mobilized and successfully evacuated the EPZ, including external traffic, which was stopped 30 minutes earlier at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months after the ATE.

At 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months after the ATE, as shown in Figure 76, congestion clear in the 2 and 5Mile Region except few roads in Minooka and US6, which are operating at LOS B. These roadways clear 5 minutes later at 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months and 5 minutes after the ATE. Congestion along Lisbon Rd northbound along the EPZ boundary in Lisbon persists. Reed Rd westbound is still congested as evacuees try to access IL47 southbound to leave the area. Congestion remains on IL53 southbound in Gardner. Pronounced congestion persists in Joliet, Sunnyland, Crystal Lawns, and Crest Hill in the Shadow Region. Congestion persists on Grove Road in SubArea 6 but has lessened within Dresden Generating Station 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

the EPZ but worsened in the Shadow Region. At this time, approximately 90% vehicles have begun their evacuation trips and have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months after the ATE, Figure 77 shows the last of the traffic congestion in the EPZ clearing along Westhampton Drive in Shorewood. Although the EPZ is essentially clear, many of the routes in the Shadow Region are still congested such as IL7, Lisbon Road northbound in Lisbon, IL53 and Bronk Road, US30, and Renwick Road in Joliet, Reed Rd westbound. Evacuees who depart at this time encounter minimal traffic congestion and delay within the EPZ. At this time, 98% of vehicles have mobilized and successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months (end of mobilization/trip generation time) after the ATE, as shown in Figure 78, study area is clear of congestion and the roads are operating at LOS A. This does not imply that there are no vehicles on the roads; rather, traffic volume is low and vehicles are experiencing no delay in their evacuation trip. The EPZ is completely clear of all evacuating traffic at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months and 15 minutes after the ATE - essentially the time to mobilize and then travel approximately 10 miles to cross the EPZ boundary.

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, relatively few evacuation routes service 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 - 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 Results Table 71 and Table 72 present the ETE values for all 26 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.

The tables are organized as follows:

Dresden Generating Station 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table Contents The ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90% of the 71 population within a Region, to evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100% of the population 72 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 90% of the population within the 2Mile Region, to evacuate from the 2Mile 73 Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations of additional SubAreas downwind in the keyhole Region.

The ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100% of the population within the 2Mile Region, to evacuate from the 2Mile 74 Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations of additional SubAreas downwind in the keyhole Region.

The animation snapshots described in Section 73 above reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (unstaged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure 78. There is congestion within the 2Mile and 5Mile Regions for 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months and 5 minutes due to the densely populated communities of Minooka and Channahon. There is congestion beyond the 5Mile Region for about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R01 (2Mile Region) and R02 (5Mile Region) range from 2:25 (hr:min) to 3:35 for all nonspecial scenarios.

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R03 (full EPZ) is as much as 35 minutes longer than the ETE for Regions R01 and R02 due to the traffic congestion near Lisbon and Joliet.

The ETE range from 2:55 to 3:15 for all nonsnow scenarios and from 3:45 to 4:00 for snow scenarios.

The 100th percentile ETE for all regions range from 5:00 to 5:15 for all nonspecial, non snow scenarios and between 6:15 and 6:25 for heavy snow scenarios. This reflects the time needed to mobilize (5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months in good weather and rain, and 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and 15 minutes in heavy snow) plus 5 or 10 minutes travel time to the EPZ boundary - see Section 5.

Comparison of Scenarios 9 and 13 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicates that the Special Event

- Grundy County Corn Festival - has no impact on the 90th percentile or 100th percentile ETE.

The additional 10,000 transients (see Section 3.7) mobilize and evacuate quickly due to their close proximity to the EPZ boundary. While local congestion in Morris intensifies, the ETE is not impacted because congestion near Joliet (Subarea 13) lasts longer than the additional congestion in Morris caused by special event vehicles.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicates that the roadway closure - a single lane I80 eastbound from the intersection of Ridge Rd/CR5/CR11 (Exit 122) to the intersection with I355 (Exit 140) (see Section 2.6, item 1b ) - increases 90th percentile Dresden Generating Station 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE by at most 15 minutes and has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE. The presence of alternate routes - I55, US6, IL53 and US52 - lessens the impact of the roadway closure.

The results of the roadway impact scenario indicate that events such as adverse weather or traffic accidents which close a lane on a major evacuation route, 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 of the major evacuation routes. All efforts should be made to remove the blockage, particularly within the first 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months of the evacuation when most people begin their evacuation trip.

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 73 and Table 74 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (un staged) and staged evacuation studies. Note that Regions R22 through R26 are the same geographic areas as Regions R02 and R04 through R07, respectively. The times shown in Table 73 and Table 74 are when the 2Mile Region is 90% clear and 100% clear, respectively.

The objective of a staged evacuation strategy is to ensure the ETE for the 2Mile Region is not significantly increased (30 minutes or 25%, whichever is less) when evacuating areas beyond 2 Miles. Additionally, staged evacuation should not significantly increase the ETE for people evacuating beyond 2Miles. In all cases, as shown in Table 73 and Table 74, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region is unchanged when evacuating areas beyond 2Miles.

These results indicate that when an evacuation out to 5Mile Region occurs, the congestion beyond the 2Mile Region does not extend upstream to the extent that it penetrates to within the 2mile region enough to impact the ETE of the 2mile region. Evacuees from within the 2 Mile Region are not impacted by those evacuating beyond 2 miles out to 5 miles. Therefore, staging the evacuation provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region.

To determine the effect of staged evacuation on residents beyond the 2Mile Region, the ETE for Regions R02 and R04 through R07 are compared to Regions R22 through R26, respectively, in Table 71 and Table 72. A comparison of ETE between these similar regions reveals that staging increases the ETE for those in the 2 to 5Mile Region by at most 50 minutes for the 90th percentile and has no impact on the 100th percentile.

The increase in the 90th percentile ETE is due to the evacuating vehicles, beyond the 2Mile Region, sheltering and delaying the start of their evacuation. As shown in Figure 55, staging the evacuation causes a significant spike (sharp increase) in mobilization (tripgeneration rate) of evacuating vehicles. Nearly 80% of the evacuating vehicles between 2 and 5 miles who have sheltered in place while residents within 2 miles evacuated, begin their evacuation trip over a 15minute timeframe. This spike oversaturates evacuation routes, which increases the traffic congestion and prolongs ETE.

In summary, staging evacuation provides no benefit to evacuees in the 2Mile Region while adversely impacting many evacuees located beyond 2Miles Region from the plant. Based on Dresden Generating Station 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

the guidance in NUREG0654, Supplement 3, this analysis would result in staged evacuation not being implemented for this site.

7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables The user first determines the percentile of population for which the ETE is sought (The NRC guidance calls for the 90th percentile). The applicable value of ETE within the chosen table may then be identified using the following procedure:

1. Identify the applicable Scenario:

Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

Day of Week Midweek Weekend

Time of Day Midday Evening

Weather Condition Good Weather Rain/Light Snow Heavy Snow

Special Event Grundy County Corn Festival

Roadway Impact Road Closure (A single lane closed on I80 eastbound between Ridge Rd/CR 5/CR11 (Exit 122) and I355 (Exit 140))

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/light snow apply.

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

The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes public school is in session at summer school enrollment levels Dresden Generating Station 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(lower than normal enrollment).

Winter (includes Spring and Autumn) considers that public schools are in session at normal enrollment levels.

Time of Day: Midday implies the time over which most commuters are at work or are travelling to/from work.

2. With the desired percentile ETE and Scenario identified, now identify the Evacuation Region:

Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of compass orientation: from N, NNE, NE,

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

2 Miles (Region R01)

To 5 Miles (Regions R02, R04 through R07)

To EPZ Boundary (Regions R03, R08 through R21)

Enter Table 75 and identify the applicable group of candidate Regions based on the distance that the selected Region extends from the plant. 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 Region identified in Step 2, proceed as follows:

The columns of Table 71 through Table 74 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 northeast (NE).

Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 2Mile Region and downwind to 10 miles (to EPZ boundary).

The desired ETE is that value needed to evacuate 90% 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:

Dresden Generating Station 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1. Identify the Scenario as summer, weekend, evening and raining. Entering Table 71, it is seen that there is no match for these descriptors. However, the clarification given above assigns this combination of circumstances to Scenario 4.

2. Enter Table 75 and locate the Region described as Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary for wind direction from the NE and read Region R10 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 R10. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R10; it contains the ETE value of 2:45.

Dresden Generating Station 79 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R02 2:45 2:45 2:30 2:30 2:40 2:45 2:45 3:35 2:30 2:30 3:20 2:40 2:30 3:00 R03 3:10 3:15 2:55 3:00 3:05 3:10 3:15 4:00 3:00 3:00 3:45 3:05 3:00 3:15 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:35 2:35 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:35 2:35 3:25 2:20 2:25 3:05 2:35 2:20 2:50 R05 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:30 2:40 2:45 2:45 3:35 2:25 2:30 3:20 2:40 2:25 3:00 R06 2:35 2:35 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:25 2:25 2:25 3:10 2:35 2:25 2:50 R07 2:30 2:30 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:30 2:30 3:15 2:20 2:25 3:00 2:30 2:20 2:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary R08 2:50 2:55 2:35 2:40 2:50 2:50 2:55 3:45 2:35 2:40 3:25 2:50 2:35 2:55 R09 2:50 2:55 2:35 2:40 2:50 2:55 3:00 3:50 2:35 2:40 3:30 2:50 2:35 2:55 R10 2:55 3:00 2:40 2:45 2:50 2:55 3:00 3:50 2:40 2:45 3:30 2:55 2:40 3:00 R11 2:50 2:50 2:35 2:40 2:40 2:50 2:50 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:25 2:45 2:35 2:55 R12 3:00 3:05 2:50 2:55 2:50 3:05 3:05 3:55 2:45 2:55 3:40 2:55 2:45 3:05 R13 3:05 3:05 2:50 2:50 3:00 3:00 3:05 3:50 2:50 2:55 3:40 3:05 2:50 3:10 R14 3:05 3:10 2:45 2:50 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:50 2:55 2:55 3:45 3:00 2:55 3:10 R15 3:05 3:05 2:45 2:50 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:50 2:55 2:55 3:40 3:00 2:55 3:10 R16 3:05 3:05 2:45 2:50 3:00 3:00 3:10 3:50 2:55 2:55 3:40 2:55 2:55 3:10 R17 2:55 3:00 2:45 2:45 2:55 3:00 3:05 3:50 2:45 2:50 3:35 2:55 2:45 3:10 R18 2:55 3:00 2:40 2:45 2:55 3:00 3:05 3:50 2:45 2:50 3:35 2:55 2:45 3:10 R19 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:30 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:30 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:50 R20 2:45 2:50 2:30 2:35 2:40 2:45 2:50 3:40 2:30 2:35 3:25 2:40 2:30 2:55 R21 2:45 2:50 2:35 2:35 2:45 2:50 2:50 3:40 2:30 2:35 3:20 2:45 2:30 2:55 Dresden Generating Station 710 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R22 2:55 3:00 2:50 2:50 3:05 2:55 3:00 3:55 2:50 2:55 3:50 3:05 2:50 3:00 R23 2:50 2:55 2:45 2:45 2:55 2:50 2:55 3:50 2:45 2:45 3:45 2:55 2:45 3:00 R24 3:00 3:00 2:50 2:50 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:55 2:50 2:50 3:50 3:00 2:50 3:00 R25 3:00 3:05 2:55 2:55 3:05 3:00 3:05 4:00 2:55 2:55 3:55 3:05 2:55 3:05 R26 2:55 2:55 2:50 2:50 3:05 2:55 2:55 3:55 2:50 2:50 3:50 3:05 2:50 3:00 Dresden Generating Station 711 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R02 5:10 5:10 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:10 R03 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:15 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R06 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R07 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary R08 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R09 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R11 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R12 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R13 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:13 R14 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:14 R15 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:14 R16 5:15 5:15 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:15 5:15 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:14 R17 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R18 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R19 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R20 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 R21 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 6:25 5:10 5:10 5:10 Dresden Generating Station 712 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R22 5:10 5:10 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:10 R23 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R24 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R25 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 R26 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 Dresden Generating Station 713 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 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R02 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R05 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R06 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R07 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R22 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R23 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R24 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R25 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 R26 2:40 2:40 2:25 2:25 2:35 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:35 2:25 2:55 Dresden Generating Station 714 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 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 Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R02 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R05 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R06 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R07 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R22 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R23 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R24 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R25 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 R26 5:05 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 6:20 5:00 5:00 6:15 5:00 5:00 5:05 Dresden Generating Station 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions SubArea Region Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R01 2Mile Region X X X R02 5Mile Region X X X X X X R03 Full EPZ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R04 NNW, N, NNE 327° 34° X X X X X R05 NE, ENE 35° 79° X X X X E, ESE, SE 80° 146° See Region R01 R06 SSE, S, SSW, SW,WSW 147° 259° X X X X R07 W,WNW 260° 304° X X X X X NW 305° 326° See Region R02 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R08 N 350° 11° X X X X X X X X X X R09 NNE 12° 34° X X X X X X X X X X X R10 NE 35° 56° X X X X X X X X X X R11 ENE 57° 79° X X X X X X X X X R12 E, ESE 80° 124° X X X X X X X R13 SE 125° 146° X X X X X X X R14 SSE 147° 169° X X X X X X X R15 S 170° 191° X X X X X X R16 SSW, SW 192° 237° X X X X X X X R17 WSW 238° 259° X X X X X X X R18 W 260° 281° X X X X X X X X R19 WNW 282° 304° X X X X X X X X R20 NW 305° 326° X X X X X X X X X X R21 NNW 327° 349° X X X X X X X X X Dresden Generating Station 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles SubArea Region Wind Direction From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R22 5Mile Region X X X X X X R23 NNW, N, NNE 327° 34° X X X X X R24 NE, ENE 35° 79° X X X X E, ESE, SE 80° 146° See Region R01 SSE, S, SSW, SW, R25 WSW 147° 259° X X X X R26 W, WNW 260° 304° X X X X X NW 305° 326° See Region R22 SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace until 90%

SubArea(s) Evacuate SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace ETE for R01, then Evacuate Dresden Generating Station 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Dresden Generating Station 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 72. DRE Shadow Region Dresden Generating Station 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 45 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Dresden Generating Station 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Dresden Generating Station 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Dresden Generating Station 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Dresden Generating Station 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Dresden Generating Station 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Dresden Generating Station 725 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 Dresden Generating Station 726 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 Dresden Generating Station 727 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%

100 90 80 Vehicles Evacuating 70 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 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 Dresden Generating Station 728 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

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

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 Dresden Generating Station 729 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 Dresden Generating Station 730 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 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%

90 80 70 Vehicles Evacuating 60 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 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 Dresden Generating Station 731 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 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%

120 100 Vehicles Evacuating 80 60 (Thousands) 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 After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 Dresden Generating Station 732 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. The demand for transit service reflects the needs of three population groups:

residents with no vehicles available; residents of special facilities such as schools, preschools, day camp, medical facilities, and correctional facilities; 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. It is estimated that vehicle mobilization time will average approximately 90 minutes for schools, medical facilities, and correctional facilities and 135 minutes for transit dependent buses extending from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), to the time when buses first arrive at the facility to be evacuated.

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 DRE EPZ indicates that schoolchildren (includes private schools, preschools, and a day camp) will be evacuated to reception centers, and that parents should not try to pick schoolchildren up at schools but at reception centers.

As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a rapidly escalating accident. This report provides estimates of buses under the assumption that no children will be picked up by their parents (in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1), to present an upper bound estimate of buses required. This study assumes that preschools and day camp are also evacuated to reception centers and parents will pick up these children at the reception centers. Picking up children at school, preschool, or a day camp could add to traffic congestion at these facilities, 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.

Dresden Generating Station 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 8.1 ETE for Schools, PreSchools, and Day Camp, Transit Dependent People, Medical Facilities and Correctional Facilities The EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating children (if schools, preschools, or day camp are in session at the time of the ATE) as the first priority in the event of an emergency. In the event that the allocation of buses dispatched from the depots to the various facilities and to the bus routes is somewhat inefficient, or if there is a shortfall of available drivers, then there may be a need for some buses to return to the EPZ from the reception center after completing their first evacuation trip, to complete a second wave of providing transport service to evacuees. For this reason, the ETE for the transitdependent population will be calculated for both a one wave transit evacuation and for two waves. Of course, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R03 (the entire EPZ), then there will likely be ample transit resources relative to demand in the impacted Region and this discussion of a second wave would likely not apply.

Transportation resources available were reviewed and approved by the EPZ county emergency management agencies for use in this study. The transportation resources available, as well as the number of vehicles needed to evacuate schools, preschools, day camp, medical facilities, correctional facilities, the transitdependent population, and the access and/or functional needs population (discussed below in Section 8.2) are summarized in Table 81. These numbers indicate there are sufficient resources available to evacuate all transitdependent people in a single wave.

When school evacuation needs are satisfied, subsequent assignments of buses to service the transitdependent population should be sensitive to their mobilization time. Clearly, the buses should be dispatched after people have completed their mobilization activities and are in a position to board the buses when they arrive along the bus transit route.

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.

Evacuation of Schools, PreSchools, and Day Camp Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at the school, pre school, or day camp to be evacuated. As previously stated, it is assumed that for a rapidly escalating radiological emergency with no observable indication before the fact, bus drivers would likely require 90 minutes to be contacted, to travel to the depot, be briefed, and to travel to the schools, preschools, or day camp to be evacuated. Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather - 100 minutes in rain/light snow, 110 minutes in heavy snow conditions.

Dresden Generating Station 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

As discussed in Section 2.4 and 2.6, a loading time of 15 minutes for good weather (20 minutes for rain/light snow and 25 minutes for heavy snow) for buses is used.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The buses servicing the schools, preschools, and day camp are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the ATE - a 90minute mobilization time plus a 15minute loading time - in good weather. The UNITES software discussed in Section 1.3 was used to define bus routes along the most likely path from a school being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate reception center. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes from the school/preschool/day care to the EPZ boundary. Each bus route is given an identification number and is written to the DYNEV II input stream. DYNEV computes the route length and outputs the average speed for each 5minute interval, for each bus route.

The specified bus routes are documented in Section 10 in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). Data provided by DYNEV during the appropriate timeframe depending on the mobilization and loading times (i.e., 100 to 105 minutes after the ATE for good weather) were used to compute the average speed for each route, as follows:

60 .

1 .

. 60 .

. . 1 .

The average speed1 computed (using this methodology) for the buses servicing each of the schools, preschools, and day camp in the EPZ is shown in Table 82 through Table 84 for school, preschool and day camp evacuation. The travel time to the EPZ boundary was computed for each bus using the computed average speed and the distance to the EPZ boundary along the most likely route out of the EPZ. The travel time from the EPZ boundary to the Reception Center was computed assuming an average speed of 55 mph, 50 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. Speeds were reduced in Table 82 through Table 84 and to 55 mph (50 mph for rain/light snow - 10% decrease and 45 mph for heavy snow - 20% decrease) for those calculated bus speeds which exceed 55 mph, as the school bus speed limit for state routes in Illinois is 55 mph.

1 A winter, midweek, midday scenario was used for schools and pre-schools as that is when they are in session. A summer, midweek, midday scenario was used for day camp as that is when they are in session.

Dresden Generating Station 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82 (good weather), Table 83 (rain/light snow), and Table 84 (heavy snow) present the following ETE (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for schools, preschools, and day camp2 in the EPZ:

1) The elapsed time from the ATE until the bus exits the EPZ; and

2) The elapsed time until the bus reaches the Reception Center.

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 minutes + 15 + 35 = 2:20 for Minooka High School South Campus, in good weather).

The average ETE for a singlewave evacuation of schools, preschools and day cares is 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 10 minutes (3:10 - 2:00 = 1:10) less than the 90th percentile ETE for the general population for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) during Scenario 6 conditions3, which will not affect the protective action decision making.

The evacuation time to the Reception Center is determined by adding the time associated with Activity EF (discussed below), to this EPZ evacua on me.

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 nearest appropriate Reception Center. The Reception Centers are mapped in Figure 104. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 55 mph, 50 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively, are applied for this activity for buses servicing the schools/preschools/day camp in the EPZ. The estimated times of arrival to the reception center for each facility is also shown in Table 82 through Table 84.

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

A detailed computation of the transit dependent people is discussed in Section 3.6. The total number of transit dependent people per SubArea 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. KLD designed 17 bus routes to service the major evacuation routes in each SubArea (except for SubArea 13 where two routes were designed), for the purposes of this study. These routes are described in Table 101 and mapped in Figure 102 and Figure 103. Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along major evacuation routes, then proceed out of the EPZ.

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 2

Day camp is not computed for heavy snow since snow does not occur in the summer when these facilities are operational. As a result, day camp does not appear in Table 8-4.

3 The day camp was removed from the average ETE calculation as to not skew the average ETE for winter conditions as the facility is not operational.

Dresden Generating Station 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), 80%

percent of the evacuees will complete their mobilization when the buses begin their routes, at approximately 135 minutes after the ATE. The residents taking longer to mobilize are assumed to rideshare with a friend or neighbor. Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather -

145 minutes in rain/light snow, 155 minutes in heavy snow conditions.

The ETEs for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions.

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, traveled 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 a 30 minute 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/light snow, 50 minutes in heavy snow.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Bus travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school, pre school and day camp 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/light snow and heavy snow, respectively.

Dresden Generating Station 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

For example, the ETE for the bus route servicing SubArea 1 is computed as 135 + 42 + 30 = 3:30 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for good weather. Here, 42 minutes is the time to travel 16.5 miles at 23.4 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route starting at 135 minutes. 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 average singlewave ETE (3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months and 10 minutes) for transit dependent population equals the general population ETE at the 90th percentile (see Table 71) for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 6 conditions (winter, midweek, midday, good weather) scenario.

The evacuation time to the Reception Center is determined by adding the time associated with Activity EF (discussed below), to this EPZ evacua on me.

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 104. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 55 mph, 50 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively, are applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population. The estimated times to complete the second wave evacuation are presented in Table 85 through Table 87.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

As discussed in Section 2.4, it is assumed that the mobilization time for medical facilities average 90 minutes in good weather, 100 minutes in rain/light snow and 110 minutes in heavy snow.

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 ambulances. 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. Bus travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school, preschool and day camp evacuation.

Table 88 through Table 810 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow. The travel time to the EPZ boundary is computed by dividing the distance to the EPZ boundary by the average travel speed. The ETE is the sum of the mobilization time, total passenger loading time, and travel time out of the EPZ. All ETE are Dresden Generating Station 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, the calculation of ETE for the Heritage Woods of Minooka with 68 ambulatory residents during good weather is:

ETE: 90 + 1 x 30 + 39 = 159 min. or 2:40 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes)

The average single wave ETE (2:25) for medical facilities in the EPZ does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE for the general population (3:10) for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather (scenario 6) and will not impact protective action decision making.

Evacuation of Correctional Facilities Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

As discussed in item 4 of Section 2.4, it is assumed that the mobilization time for correctional facilities average 90 minutes in good weather, 100 minutes in rain/light snow and 110 minutes in heavy snow.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

It is estimated that it takes 60 minutes to load the inmates (2 minutes per inmate, as discussed in item 5 of Section 2.4) onto a bus.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

As detailed in Table 811, there are three correctional facilities within the EPZ - Grundy County Jail, Joliet Treatment Center, and River Valley Juvenile Center. The total inmate population at these facilities is 797 persons. As discussed in Section 3.10, a total of 29 buses are needed to evacuate the three correctional facilities mentioned above. Using GIS software, the shortest route from each facility to the EPZ boundary, traveling away from the plant was determined.

Times and distances are based on the location of the correctional facility in the EPZ.

For example, the ETE for Grundy County Jail is calculated as follows in good weather:

a. Buses arrive at the correctional facility location: 90 minutes

b. Load inmates onto the bus: 60 minutes (concurrent loading on multiple buses is assumed.

c. Travel to EPZ boundary: 8 minutes (5.7 miles at 41 mph).

ETE: 90 + 60 + 8 = 2:40 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes)

The average singlewave ETE, for correctional facilities (2:50), is less than the 90th percentile ETE (3:10) for evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and will not impact protective action decision making.

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population Table 812 summarizes the ETE for access and/or functional needs people. The table is categorized by type of vehicle required and then broken down by weather condition. The table Dresden Generating Station 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

takes into consideration the deployment of multiple vehicles (not filled to capacity) to reduce the number of stops per vehicle. It is conservatively assumed that ambulatory and wheelchair bound households are spaced 3 miles apart and bedridden households are spaced 5 miles apart. Bus and wheelchair bus speeds approximate 20 mph between households and ambulance speeds approximate 30 mph in good weather (10% slower in rain/light snow, 20%

slower in heavy snow). Mobilization times of 90 minutes were used (100 minutes for rain/light snow, and 110 minutes for heavy snow). Loading times of 5 minutes per person are assumed for ambulatory and wheelchair bound people and 15 minutes per person for bedridden people.

The last household (HH) is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 55 mph (50 mph for rain/light snow and 45 mph for heavy snow),

after the last pickup is used to 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 the 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 151 ambulatory, 93 wheelchair bound, and 7 bedridden households need to be serviced.

If 30 buses are deployed to service the access and/or functional needs HH, then each bus would require about 6 stops. The following outlines the ETE calculations for a bus:

1. Assume 30 buses are deployed, each with at most 6 stops, to service a total of 151 HH.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

Buses arrive at the first pickup location: 90 minutes

Load HH members at first pickup: 5 minutes

Travel to subsequent pickup locations: 5 @ 9 minutes (3 miles @ 20 mph) = 45 minutes

Load HH members at subsequent pickup locations: 5 @ 5 minutes = 25 minutes

Travel to EPZ boundary: 18 minutes (5 miles @ 16.6 mph).

ETE: 90 + 5 + 45 + 25 + 12 = 3:00 rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes Table 81 indicates that there are sufficient transportation resources available in the EPZ to evacuate the medical facilities and the access and/or functional needs population simultaneously.

The average single wave ETE (3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months and 5 minutes) in good weather for access and/or functional needs population is 5 minutes less than the 90th percentile ETE (3:10) for the general population evacuating for the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 6 conditions and would likely not affect protective action decision making.

Dresden Generating Station 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Wheelchair County Buses Vans Buses Ambulances Resources Available Will 500 30 23 40 Grundy 80 8 6 2 LaSalle 31 3 2 5 Kendall 85 9 5 2 Kankakee 189 0 26 23 Island City Rehab Center (Formerly Embassy Care Center) 0 1 1 0 Timbers of Shorewood 1 1 0 0 TOTAL: 886 52 63 72 Resources Needed Schools, PreSchools, Day Camp (Table 38): 530 0 0 0 Medical Facilities (Table 36): 31 0 32 24 TransitDependent Population (Section 3.6): 30 0 0 0 Access and/or Functional Needs Population (Table 39): 30 0 14 7 Correctional Facilities (Section 3.10): 29 0 0 0 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 650 0 46 31 Dresden Generating Station 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 82. School, PreSchool, and Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

SCHOOLS GRUNDY COUNTY Minooka High School South Campus 90 15 11.7 20.2 35 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Aux Sable Elementary School 90 15 10.7 19.4 33 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Minooka Junior High School 90 15 9.1 18.8 29 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Minooka High School Central Campus 90 15 9.4 18.5 31 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Minooka Intermediate School 90 15 9.5 18.7 31 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Minooka Primary Center 90 15 9.1 18.6 29 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Minooka Elementary School 90 15 9.4 18.5 31 2:20 22.8 25 2:45 Premier Academy 90 15 5.3 51.0 6 1:55 37.3 41 2:40 Saratoga Elementary School 90 15 4.0 55.0 4 1:50 37.3 41 2:35 Immaculate Conception School 90 15 5.5 41.0 8 1:55 37.5 41 2:40 Grundy Area Vocational Center 90 15 5.3 48.3 7 1:55 37.5 41 2:40 Morris Community High School 90 15 5.4 48.3 7 1:55 37.5 41 2:40 Grundy County Special Ed CoOp 90 15 2.7 11.1 15 2:00 37.9 41 2:45 Morris Elementary School 90 15 1.9 10.9 10 1:55 38.2 42 2:40 Coal City Elementary School 90 15 7.3 24.7 18 2:05 32.9 36 2:45 Coal City Intermediate School 90 15 7.3 25.0 18 2:05 35.5 39 2:45 Coal City High School 90 15 6.3 23.7 16 2:05 35.6 39 2:45 Coal City Middle School 90 15 6.8 26.6 15 2:00 35.6 39 2:40 Braceville Elementary School 90 15 2.3 14.0 10 1:55 33.5 37 2:35 Nettle Creek Elementary School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ4 1:45 37.3 41 2:30 4

Facility is located just outside the EPZ; however, the facility will evacuate as per county plans. ETE for this facility is not included in the average for the EPZ.

Dresden Generating Station 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

KENDALL COUNTY Jones Elementary School 90 15 1.6 27.1 3 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 WILL COUNTY Pioneer Path School 90 15 8.1 16.5 30 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Three Rivers School 90 15 11.3 19.4 35 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 N.B. Galloway Elementary School 90 15 7.2 15.1 29 2:15 22.8 25 2:40 Channahon Junior High School 90 15 7.1 15.1 28 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Walnut Trails Elementary 90 15 5.1 14.8 21 2:10 23.9 26 2:40 Joliet Junior College 90 15 3.4 6.4 32 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 TroyShorewood Elementary School 90 15 3.4 27.8 7 1:55 23.9 26 2:25 Heritage Trail Elementary School 90 15 2.9 14.5 12 2:00 23.9 26 2:30 Joliet Christian School 90 15 2.9 27.8 6 1:55 23.9 26 2:25 Guiding Light Academy West 90 15 2.9 27.8 6 1:55 23.9 26 2:25 Holy Family Catholic School 90 15 1.3 36.7 2 1:50 27.0 29 2:20 Trinity Christian School 90 15 2.9 27.6 6 1:55 23.9 26 2:25 Cronin Elementary School 90 15 0.8 37.5 1 1:50 26.9 29 2:20 Hofer Elementary School 90 15 1.4 26.6 3 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Orenic Intermediate School 90 15 1.4 19.9 4 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Troy Middle School 90 15 1.3 19.9 4 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Elwood Community Consolidated School 90 15 3.1 43.2 4 1:50 34.4 38 2:30 St Rose Catholic Parochial School 90 15 1.1 42.8 2 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 Wilmington Middle School 90 15 1.1 42.8 2 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 L.J. Stevens Intermediate School 90 15 0.9 42.8 1 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 SOWIC Educational Center & ELS 90 15 1.6 42.8 2 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 Wilmington High School 90 15 1.6 42.8 2 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 Trinity Services, Inc. South 90 15 0.5 42.8 1 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 ReedCuster Elementary School 90 15 4.6 55.0 5 1:50 21.6 24 2:15 Dresden Generating Station 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

SOWIC ELS Program 90 15 4.6 54.3 5 1:50 21.6 24 2:15 ReedCuster High School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ4 1:45 21.6 24 2:10 ReedCuster Middle School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ4 1:45 21.6 24 2:10 Bruning Elementary School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ4 1:45 23.8 26 2:15 Troy Craughwell Elementary School 90 15 Located Outside EPZ4 1:45 21.7 24 2:10 Camelot South Suburban Center for Exceptional 90 15 Located Outside EPZ4 1:45 20.7 23 2:10 Learners School Maximum for EPZ: 2:20 School Maximum: 2:45 School Average for EPZ: 2:00 School Average: 2:30 PRESCHOOLS AND DAY CAMP GRUNDY COUNTY Little Learner Children's Academy 90 15 11.0 19.4 34 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Stephanie Kelsey 90 15 10.9 19.4 34 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Discovery Child Care & Learning Center INC. 90 15 9.2 18.6 30 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Minooka United Methodist Church PreSchool 90 15 9.1 18.6 29 2:15 22.9 25 2:40 Two Rivers Headstart 90 15 4.3 52.5 5 1:50 37.5 41 2:35 Step by Step Child Care Center Morris 90 15 4.3 52.5 5 1:50 37.5 41 2:35 Jacquelin Taylor 90 15 4.6 52.5 5 1:50 37.5 41 2:35 Melissa Bledsoe 90 15 4.2 52.5 5 1:50 37.5 41 2:35 Lynn Picardo 90 15 5.5 55.0 6 1:55 37.3 41 2:40 Julia Hanson 90 15 2.1 10.9 12 2:00 37.9 41 2:45 Rainbow Scout Reservation (Day Camp) 90 15 9.5 28.3 20 2:05 36.4 40 2:45 First United Methodist Church Preschool 90 15 5.6 41.3 8 1:55 37.3 41 2:40 Morris Christian School 90 15 5.6 41.3 8 1:55 37.5 41 2:40 Prairieland Kids Daycare 90 15 4.9 48.3 6 1:55 37.3 41 2:40 Step by Step Care CenterElementary School 90 15 7.3 24.7 18 2:05 32.9 36 2:45 Sharon Scholtes 90 15 7.3 24.7 18 2:05 32.9 36 2:45 Dresden Generating Station 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

Rainbow Preschool 90 15 3.9 18.7 13 2:00 35.6 39 2:40 Step by Step Care CenterIntermediate School 90 15 7.4 24.7 18 2:05 35.6 39 2:45 Step by Step Child Care Center Diamond 90 15 8.2 31.6 16 2:05 35.6 39 2:45 Kids Korner 90 15 6.7 24.6 16 2:05 35.6 39 2:45 Danielle Cassani 90 15 7.2 23.1 19 2:05 33.5 37 2:45 Randi McLuckie 90 15 7.9 24.7 19 2:05 32.9 36 2:45 Coal City Early Childhood Center 90 15 6.8 26.6 15 2:00 35.6 39 2:40 WILL COUNTY Kids Korner 90 15 8.5 15.9 32 2:20 22.9 25 2:45 Kiddie Kampus Learning Center 90 15 7.0 15.1 28 2:15 22.8 25 2:40 Families of Faith Christian Academy 90 15 6.5 15.8 25 2:10 22.9 25 2:35 Joliet Junior College Day Care 90 15 2.8 6.1 28 2:15 22.8 25 2:40 Catholic Charities Head Start 90 15 1.4 10.7 8 1:55 22.9 25 2:20 Shorewood Early Learning and Day Care Center 90 15 3.7 16.0 14 2:00 23.9 26 2:30 Trinity Christian Preschool at Westview Baptist 90 15 1.7 37.2 3 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Church Chesterbrook Academy Preschool 90 15 1.7 26.6 4 1:50 22.6 25 2:15 Step By Step Child Care Center Shorewood 90 15 1.1 37.2 2 1:50 26.9 29 2:20 Garden Gate Montessori 90 15 0.2 40.3 0 1:45 22.6 25 2:10 Island City Park District Before and After School 90 15 4.6 50.8 5 1:50 21.8 24 2:15 Program Grace Lutheran Preschool 90 15 0.9 42.8 1 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 First United Methodist Church PreSchool 90 15 0.8 42.8 1 1:50 23.0 25 2:15 Discovery Schoolhouse 90 15 4.6 55.0 5 1:50 21.6 24 2:15 4

Step by Step Child Care Center Braidwood 90 15 Located Outside EPZ 1:45 21.6 24 2:10 First Christian Church After School Program 90 15 Located Outside EPZ4 1:45 23.7 26 2:15 PreSchool, Day Camp Maximum for EPZ: 2:20 PreSchool, Day Camp 2:45 Dresden Generating Station 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to ETE to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

Maximum:

PreSchool Average for EPZ: 2:00 PreSchool Average: 2:35 Dresden Generating Station 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. School, PreSchool, and Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from ETE to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

SCHOOLS GRUNDY COUNTY Minooka High School South Campus 100 20 11.7 18.8 37 2:40 22.9 27 3:10 Aux Sable Elementary School 100 20 10.7 18.1 35 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Minooka Junior High School 100 20 9.1 16.6 33 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Minooka High School Central Campus 100 20 9.4 16.3 35 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Minooka Intermediate School 100 20 9.5 16.6 34 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Minooka Primary Center 100 20 9.1 16.3 34 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Minooka Elementary School 100 20 9.4 16.3 35 2:35 22.8 27 3:05 Premier Academy 100 20 5.3 46.4 7 2:10 37.3 45 2:55 Saratoga Elementary School 100 20 4.0 50.0 5 2:05 37.3 45 2:50 Immaculate Conception School 100 20 5.5 37.7 9 2:10 37.5 45 2:55 Grundy Area Vocational Center 100 20 5.3 43.9 7 2:10 37.5 45 2:55 Morris Community High School 100 20 5.4 43.9 7 2:10 37.5 45 2:55 Grundy County Special Ed CoOp 100 20 2.7 14.6 11 2:15 37.9 45 3:00 Morris Elementary School 100 20 1.9 13.7 8 2:10 38.2 46 3:00 Coal City Elementary School 100 20 7.3 18.3 24 2:25 32.9 39 3:05 Coal City Intermediate School 100 20 7.3 18.3 24 2:25 35.5 43 3:10 Coal City High School 100 20 6.3 16.8 22 2:25 35.6 43 3:10 Coal City Middle School 100 20 6.8 19.6 21 2:25 35.6 43 3:10 Braceville Elementary School 100 20 2.3 36.9 4 2:05 33.5 40 2:45 Nettle Creek Elementary School 100 20 Located Outside EPZ4 2:00 37.3 45 2:45 KENDALL COUNTY Jones Elementary School 100 20 1.6 21.8 4 2:05 22.6 27 2:35 WILL COUNTY Dresden Generating Station 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from ETE to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

Pioneer Path School 100 20 8.1 14.5 34 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Three Rivers School 100 20 11.3 17.7 38 2:40 22.9 27 3:10 N.B. Galloway Elementary School 100 20 7.2 12.5 34 2:35 22.8 27 3:05 Channahon Junior High School 100 20 7.1 12.5 34 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Walnut Trails Elementary 100 20 5.1 10.2 30 2:30 23.9 29 3:00 Joliet Junior College 100 20 3.4 7.3 28 2:30 22.9 27 3:00 TroyShorewood Elementary School 100 20 3.4 22.7 9 2:10 23.9 29 2:40 Heritage Trail Elementary School 100 20 2.9 8.8 20 2:20 23.9 29 2:50 Joliet Christian School 100 20 2.9 22.7 8 2:10 23.9 29 2:40 Guiding Light Academy West 100 20 2.9 22.7 8 2:10 23.9 29 2:40 Holy Family Catholic School 100 20 1.3 32.9 2 2:05 27.0 32 2:40 Trinity Christian School 100 20 2.9 24.1 7 2:10 23.9 29 2:40 Cronin Elementary School 100 20 0.8 33.6 1 2:05 26.9 32 2:40 Hofer Elementary School 100 20 1.4 10.9 8 2:10 22.6 27 2:40 Orenic Intermediate School 100 20 1.4 11.8 7 2:10 22.6 27 2:40 Troy Middle School 100 20 1.3 11.8 7 2:10 22.6 27 2:40 Elwood Community Consolidated School 100 20 3.1 39.5 5 2:05 34.4 41 2:50 St Rose Catholic Parochial School 100 20 1.1 38.5 2 2:05 23.0 28 2:35 Wilmington Middle School 100 20 1.1 38.5 2 2:05 23.0 28 2:35 L.J. Stevens Intermediate School 100 20 0.9 38.5 1 2:05 23.0 28 2:35 SOWIC Educational Center & ELS 100 20 1.6 38.5 2 2:05 23.0 28 2:35 Wilmington High School 100 20 1.6 38.5 2 2:05 23.0 28 2:35 Trinity Services, Inc. South 100 20 0.5 38.5 1 2:05 23.0 28 2:35 ReedCuster Elementary School 100 20 4.6 50.0 6 2:10 21.6 26 2:40 SOWIC ELS Program 100 20 4.6 47.8 6 2:10 21.6 26 2:40 ReedCuster High School 100 20 Located Outside EPZ4 2:00 21.6 26 2:30 ReedCuster Middle School 100 20 Located Outside EPZ4 2:00 21.6 26 2:30 Dresden Generating Station 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from ETE to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min) 4 Bruning Elementary School 100 20 Located Outside EPZ 2:00 23.8 29 2:30 Troy Craughwell Elementary School 100 20 Located Outside EPZ4 2:00 21.7 26 2:30 Camelot South Suburban Center for Exceptional 100 20 Located Outside EPZ4 2:00 20.7 25 2:25 Learners School Maximum for EPZ: 2:40 School Maximum: 3:10 School Average for EPZ: 2:15 School Average: 2:50 PRESCHOOLS AND DAY CAMP GRUNDY COUNTY Little Learner Children's Academy 100 20 11.0 18.1 36 2:40 22.9 27 3:10 Stephanie Kelsey 100 20 10.9 18.1 36 2:40 22.9 27 3:10 Discovery Child Care & Learning Center INC. 100 20 9.2 16.3 34 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Minooka United Methodist Church PreSchool 100 20 9.1 16.3 34 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Two Rivers Headstart 100 20 4.3 48.4 5 2:05 37.5 45 2:50 Step by Step Child Care Center Morris 100 20 4.3 48.4 5 2:05 37.5 45 2:50 Jacquelin Taylor 100 20 4.6 48.4 6 2:10 37.5 45 2:55 Melissa Bledsoe 100 20 4.2 48.4 5 2:05 37.5 45 2:50 Lynn Picardo 100 20 5.5 50.0 7 2:10 37.3 45 2:55 Julia Hanson 100 20 2.1 13.7 9 2:10 37.9 45 2:55 Rainbow Scout Reservation (Day Camp) 100 20 9.5 22.8 25 2:25 36.4 44 3:10 First United Methodist Church Preschool 100 20 5.6 38.0 9 2:10 37.3 45 2:55 Morris Christian School 100 20 5.6 38.0 9 2:10 37.5 45 2:55 Prairieland Kids Daycare 100 20 4.9 43.9 7 2:10 37.3 45 2:55 Step by Step Care CenterElementary School 100 20 7.3 18.3 24 2:25 32.9 40 3:05 Sharon Scholtes 100 20 7.3 18.3 24 2:25 32.9 40 3:05 Rainbow Preschool 100 20 3.9 15.2 15 2:15 35.6 43 3:00 Step by Step Care CenterIntermediate School 100 20 7.4 18.3 24 2:25 35.6 43 3:10 Step by Step Child Care Center Diamond 100 20 8.2 21.3 23 2:25 35.6 43 3:10 Dresden Generating Station 817 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from ETE to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

Kids Korner 100 20 6.7 17.9 22 2:25 35.6 43 3:10 Danielle Cassani 100 20 7.2 16.5 26 2:30 33.5 40 3:10 Randi McLuckie 100 20 7.9 18.8 25 2:25 32.9 40 3:05 Coal City Early Childhood Center 100 20 6.8 19.6 21 2:25 35.6 43 3:10 WILL COUNTY Kids Korner 100 20 8.5 15.5 33 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Kiddie Kampus Learning Center 100 20 7.0 12.5 34 2:35 22.8 27 3:05 Families of Faith Christian Academy 100 20 6.5 12.5 31 2:35 22.9 27 3:05 Joliet Junior College Day Care 100 20 2.8 7.3 23 2:25 22.8 27 2:55 Catholic Charities Head Start 100 20 1.4 13.7 6 2:10 22.9 27 2:40 Shorewood Early Learning and Day Care Center 100 20 3.7 12.8 17 2:20 23.9 29 2:50 Trinity Christian Preschool at Westview Baptist 100 20 1.7 33.4 3 2:05 22.6 27 2:35 Church Chesterbrook Academy Preschool 100 20 1.7 10.9 9 2:10 22.6 27 2:40 Step By Step Child Care Center Shorewood 100 20 1.1 33.4 2 2:05 26.9 32 2:40 Garden Gate Montessori 100 20 0.2 14.3 1 2:05 22.6 27 2:35 Island City Park District Before and After School 100 20 4.6 45.3 6 2:10 21.8 26 2:40 Program Grace Lutheran Preschool 100 20 0.9 38.5 1 2:05 23.0 28 2:35 First United Methodist Church PreSchool 100 20 0.8 38.5 1 2:05 23.0 28 2:35 Discovery Schoolhouse 100 20 4.6 50.0 5 2:05 21.6 26 2:35 Step by Step Child Care Center Braidwood 100 20 Located Outside EPZ4 2:00 21.6 26 2:30 First Christian Church After School Program 100 20 Located Outside EPZ4 2:00 23.7 28 2:30 PreSchool, Day Camp PreSchool, Day Camp Maximum for EPZ: 2:40 3:10 Maximum:

PreSchool Average for EPZ: 2:20 PreSchool Average: 2:55 Dresden Generating Station 818 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. School and PreSchool Evacuation Time Estimates - Snow Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from ETE to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

SCHOOLS GRUNDY COUNTY Minooka High School South Campus 110 25 11.7 20.4 34 2:50 22.9 31 3:25 Aux Sable Elementary School 110 25 10.7 19.2 33 2:50 22.9 31 3:25 Minooka Junior High School 110 25 9.1 18.4 30 2:45 22.9 31 3:20 Minooka High School Central Campus 110 25 9.4 18.6 30 2:45 22.9 31 3:20 Minooka Intermediate School 110 25 9.5 18.4 31 2:50 22.9 31 3:25 Minooka Primary Center 110 25 9.1 18.6 29 2:45 22.9 31 3:20 Minooka Elementary School 110 25 9.4 18.6 30 2:45 22.8 30 3:15 Premier Academy 110 25 5.3 38.2 8 2:25 37.3 50 3:15 Saratoga Elementary School 110 25 4.0 43.3 6 2:25 37.3 50 3:15 Immaculate Conception School 110 25 5.5 32.3 10 2:25 37.5 50 3:15 Grundy Area Vocational Center 110 25 5.3 36.0 9 2:25 37.5 50 3:15 Morris Community High School 110 25 5.4 36.0 9 2:25 37.5 50 3:15 Grundy County Special Ed CoOp 110 25 2.7 12.4 13 2:30 37.9 50 3:20 Morris Elementary School 110 25 1.9 12.7 9 2:25 38.2 51 3:20 Coal City Elementary School 110 25 7.3 20.4 21 2:40 32.9 44 3:25 Coal City Intermediate School 110 25 7.3 20.6 21 2:40 35.5 47 3:30 Coal City High School 110 25 6.3 19.7 19 2:35 35.6 47 3:25 Coal City Middle School 110 25 6.8 22.2 18 2:35 35.6 47 3:25 Braceville Elementary School 110 25 2.3 35.1 4 2:20 33.5 45 3:05 Nettle Creek Elementary School 110 25 Located Outside EPZ4 2:15 37.3 50 3:05 KENDALL COUNTY Jones Elementary School 110 25 1.6 21.3 4 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 WILL COUNTY Dresden Generating Station 819 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from ETE to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

Pioneer Path School 110 25 8.1 13.4 36 2:55 22.9 31 3:30 Three Rivers School 110 25 11.3 19.3 35 2:50 22.9 31 3:25 N.B. Galloway Elementary School 110 25 7.2 12.3 35 2:50 22.8 30 3:20 Channahon Junior High School 110 25 7.1 12.3 35 2:50 22.9 31 3:25 Walnut Trails Elementary 110 25 5.1 8.8 35 2:50 23.9 32 3:25 Joliet Junior College 110 25 3.4 6.0 34 2:50 22.9 31 3:25 TroyShorewood Elementary School 110 25 3.4 20.8 10 2:25 23.9 32 3:00 Heritage Trail Elementary School 110 25 2.9 12.9 13 2:30 23.9 32 3:05 Joliet Christian School 110 25 2.9 20.0 9 2:25 23.9 32 3:00 Guiding Light Academy West 110 25 2.9 20.0 9 2:25 23.9 32 3:00 Holy Family Catholic School 110 25 1.3 30.3 3 2:20 27.0 36 3:00 Trinity Christian School 110 25 2.9 18.8 9 2:25 23.9 32 3:00 Cronin Elementary School 110 25 0.8 30.7 2 2:20 26.9 36 3:00 Hofer Elementary School 110 25 1.4 9.8 9 2:25 22.6 30 2:55 Orenic Intermediate School 110 25 1.4 11.1 8 2:25 22.6 30 2:55 Troy Middle School 110 25 1.3 11.1 7 2:25 22.6 30 2:55 Elwood Community Consolidated School 110 25 3.1 37.2 5 2:20 34.4 46 3:10 St Rose Catholic Parochial School 110 25 1.1 33.6 2 2:20 23.0 31 2:55 Wilmington Middle School 110 25 1.1 33.6 2 2:20 23.0 31 2:55 L.J. Stevens Intermediate School 110 25 0.9 33.6 2 2:20 23.0 31 2:55 SOWIC Educational Center & ELS 110 25 1.6 33.6 3 2:20 23.0 31 2:55 Wilmington High School 110 25 1.6 33.6 3 2:20 23.0 31 2:55 Trinity Services, Inc. South 110 25 0.5 33.6 1 2:20 23.0 31 2:55 ReedCuster Elementary School 110 25 4.6 45.0 6 2:25 21.6 29 2:55 SOWIC ELS Program 110 25 4.6 45.0 6 2:25 21.6 29 2:55 ReedCuster High School 110 25 Located Outside EPZ4 2:15 21.6 29 2:45 Dresden Generating Station 820 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from ETE to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min) 4 ReedCuster Middle School 110 25 Located Outside EPZ 2:15 21.6 29 2:45 Bruning Elementary School 110 25 Located Outside EPZ4 2:15 23.8 32 2:50 Troy Craughwell Elementary School 110 25 Located Outside EPZ4 2:15 21.7 29 2:45 Camelot South Suburban Center for Exceptional 110 25 Located Outside EPZ4 2:15 20.7 28 2:45 Learners School Maximum for EPZ: 2:55 School Maximum: 3:30 School Average for EPZ: 2:30 School Average: 3:10 PRESCHOOLS AND DAY CAMP GRUNDY COUNTY Little Learner Children's Academy 110 25 11.0 19.2 34 2:50 22.9 30 3:20 Stephanie Kelsey 110 25 10.9 19.2 34 2:50 22.9 30 3:20 Discovery Child Care & Learning Center INC. 110 25 9.2 18.6 30 2:45 22.9 30 3:15 Minooka United Methodist Church PreSchool 110 25 9.1 18.6 29 2:45 22.9 31 3:20 Two Rivers Headstart 110 25 4.3 38.5 7 2:25 37.5 50 3:15 Step by Step Child Care Center Morris 110 25 4.3 38.5 7 2:25 37.5 50 3:15 Jacquelin Taylor 110 25 4.6 38.5 7 2:25 37.5 50 3:15 Melissa Bledsoe 110 25 4.2 38.5 7 2:25 37.5 50 3:15 Lynn Picardo 110 25 5.5 43.3 8 2:25 37.3 50 3:15 Julia Hanson 110 25 2.1 12.4 10 2:25 37.9 50 3:15 First United Methodist Church Preschool 110 25 5.6 32.4 10 2:25 37.3 50 3:15 Morris Christian School 110 25 5.6 32.4 10 2:25 37.5 50 3:15 Prairieland Kids Daycare 110 25 4.9 36.0 8 2:25 37.3 50 3:15 Step by Step Care CenterElementary School 110 25 7.3 20.4 22 2:40 32.9 44 3:25 Sharon Scholtes 110 25 7.3 20.4 21 2:40 32.9 44 3:25 Rainbow Preschool 110 25 3.9 17.8 13 2:30 35.6 47 3:20 Step by Step Care CenterIntermediate School 110 25 7.4 20.4 22 2:40 35.6 47 3:30 Step by Step Child Care Center Diamond 110 25 8.2 23.4 21 2:40 35.6 47 3:30 Dresden Generating Station 821 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Travel Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ Time from ETE to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to EPZ Bdry to R.C.

Facility Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

Kids Korner 110 25 6.7 20.8 19 2:35 35.6 47 3:25 Danielle Cassani 110 25 7.2 19.8 22 2:40 33.5 45 3:25 Randi McLuckie 110 25 7.9 20.4 23 2:40 32.9 44 3:25 Coal City Early Childhood Center 110 25 6.8 22.2 18 2:35 35.6 47 3:25 WILL COUNTY Kids Korner 110 25 8.5 12.4 41 3:00 22.9 31 3:35 Kiddie Kampus Learning Center 110 25 7.0 12.3 34 2:50 22.8 30 3:20 Families of Faith Christian Academy 110 25 6.5 11.8 33 2:50 22.9 30 3:20 Joliet Junior College Day Care 110 25 2.8 5.7 29 2:45 22.8 30 3:15 Catholic Charities Head Start 110 25 1.4 12.7 7 2:25 22.9 31 3:00 Shorewood Early Learning and Day Care Center 110 25 3.7 10.5 21 2:40 23.9 32 3:15 Trinity Christian Preschool at Westview Baptist 110 25 1.7 30.6 3 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 Church Chesterbrook Academy Preschool 110 25 1.7 10.3 10 2:25 22.6 30 2:55 Step By Step Child Care Center Shorewood 110 25 1.1 30.6 2 2:20 26.9 36 3:00 Garden Gate Montessori 110 25 0.2 17.7 1 2:20 22.6 30 2:50 Island City Park District Before and After School 110 25 4.6 42.6 7 2:25 21.8 29 2:55 Program Grace Lutheran Preschool 110 25 0.9 33.6 2 2:20 23.0 31 2:55 First United Methodist Church PreSchool 110 25 0.8 33.6 2 2:20 23.0 31 2:55 Discovery Schoolhouse 110 25 4.6 45.0 6 2:25 21.6 29 2:55 Step by Step Child Care Center Braidwood 110 25 Located Outside EPZ4 2:15 21.6 29 2:45 First Christian Church After School Program 110 25 Located Outside EPZ4 2:15 23.7 32 2:50 PreSchool Maximum for EPZ: 3:00 PreSchool Maximum: 3:35 PreSchool Average for EPZ: 2:35 PreSchool Average: 3:15 Dresden Generating Station 822 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Route Number Mobili Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup of zation Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Name Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) R.C. (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

SubArea 1 3 135 16.5 23.4 42 30 3:30 22.9 25 5 10 61 30 5:45 SubArea 2 2 135 8.4 35.2 14 30 3:00 38.1 42 5 10 62 30 5:30 SubArea 3 1 135 10.4 23.3 27 30 3:15 22.9 25 5 10 52 30 5:20 SubArea 4 1 135 12.2 49.2 15 30 3:00 36.4 40 5 10 67 30 5:35 SubArea 5 2 135 4.9 25.0 12 30 3:00 39.7 43 5 10 57 30 5:25 SubArea 6 2 135 9.9 42.4 14 30 3:00 22.6 25 5 10 48 30 5:00 SubArea 7 1 135 11.2 41.3 16 30 3:05 35.5 39 5 10 65 30 5:35 SubArea 8 1 135 5.4 39.9 8 30 2:55 36.4 40 5 10 52 30 5:15 SubArea 9 1 135 12.2 55.0 13 30 3:00 33.5 37 5 10 64 30 5:30 SubArea 10 2 135 7.4 24.3 18 30 3:05 33.5 37 5 10 53 30 5:20 SubArea 11 1 135 6.2 3.4 110 30 4:35 35.5 39 5 10 54 30 6:55 SubArea 12 2 135 8.6 22.4 23 30 3:10 22.9 25 5 10 47 30 5:10 SubArea 13 (1) 4 135 8.4 32.5 16 30 3:05 27.0 29 5 10 51 30 5:10 SubArea 13 (2) 3 135 8.3 14.8 34 30 3:20 22.6 25 5 10 46 30 5:20 SubArea 14 1 135 3.3 48.4 4 30 2:50 34.4 38 5 10 46 30 5:00 SubArea 15 2 135 9.8 50.9 12 30 3:00 21.8 24 5 10 47 30 5:00 SubArea 16 2 135 6.4 44.5 9 30 2:55 21.8 24 5 10 40 30 4:45 Maximum ETE: 4:35 Maximum ETE: 6:55 Average ETE: 3:10 Average ETE: 5:25 Dresden Generating Station 823 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain OneWave TwoWave Route Route Number Mobili Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup of zation Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Name Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) R.C. (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

SubArea 1 3 145 16.5 30.2 33 40 3:40 22.9 27 5 10 65 40 6:10 SubArea 2 2 145 8.4 36.0 14 40 3:20 38.1 46 5 10 66 40 6:10 SubArea 3 1 145 10.4 20.4 31 40 3:40 22.9 27 5 10 55 40 6:00 SubArea 4 1 145 12.2 32.4 23 40 3:30 36.4 44 5 10 72 40 6:25 SubArea 5 2 145 4.9 27.0 11 40 3:20 39.7 48 5 10 61 40 6:05 SubArea 6 2 145 9.9 29.0 21 40 3:30 22.6 27 5 10 51 40 5:45 SubArea 7 1 145 11.2 22.8 29 40 3:35 35.5 43 5 10 69 40 6:25 SubArea 8 1 145 5.4 22.9 14 40 3:20 36.4 44 5 10 56 40 5:55 SubArea 9 1 145 12.2 47.0 16 40 3:25 33.5 40 5 10 69 40 6:10 SubArea 10 2 145 7.4 31.2 14 40 3:20 33.5 40 5 10 57 40 5:55 SubArea 11 1 145 6.2 3.1 119 40 5:05 35.5 43 5 10 58 40 7:45 SubArea 12 2 145 8.6 19.5 26 40 3:35 22.9 27 5 10 50 40 5:50 SubArea 13 (1) 4 145 8.4 27.3 18 40 3:25 27.0 32 5 10 55 40 5:50 SubArea 13 (2) 3 145 8.3 9.6 51 40 4:00 22.6 27 5 10 48 40 6:10 SubArea 14 1 145 3.3 44.4 5 40 3:10 34.4 41 5 10 49 40 5:35 SubArea 15 2 145 9.8 45.5 13 40 3:20 21.8 26 5 10 50 40 5:35 SubArea 16 2 145 6.4 40.3 10 40 3:15 21.8 26 5 10 42 40 5:20 Maximum ETE: 5:05 Maximum ETE: 7:45 Average ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 6:05 Dresden Generating Station 824 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Snow OneWave TwoWave Route Route Number Mobili Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup of zation Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Name Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) R.C. (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

SubArea 1 3 155 16.5 21.8 46 50 4:15 22.9 30 5 10 70 50 7:00 SubArea 2 2 155 8.4 23.5 22 50 3:50 38.1 51 5 10 71 50 7:00 SubArea 3 1 155 10.4 13.0 48 50 4:15 22.9 31 5 10 60 50 6:55 SubArea 4 1 155 12.2 27.5 27 50 3:55 36.4 48 5 10 78 50 7:10 SubArea 5 2 155 4.9 15.8 19 50 3:45 39.7 53 5 10 68 50 6:55 SubArea 6 2 155 9.9 24.5 24 50 3:50 22.6 30 5 10 55 50 6:20 SubArea 7 1 155 11.2 18.0 37 50 4:05 35.5 47 5 10 75 50 7:15 SubArea 8 1 155 5.4 17.9 18 50 3:45 36.4 48 5 10 61 50 6:40 SubArea 9 1 155 12.2 38.4 19 50 3:45 33.5 45 5 10 79 50 6:55 SubArea 10 2 155 7.4 45.0 10 50 3:35 33.5 45 5 10 66 50 6:35 SubArea 11 1 155 6.2 27.8 13 50 3:40 35.5 47 5 10 62 50 6:35 SubArea 12 2 155 8.6 12.7 40 50 4:05 22.9 31 5 10 53 50 6:35 SubArea 13 (1) 4 155 8.4 25.9 19 50 3:45 27.0 36 5 10 58 50 6:25 SubArea 13 (2) 3 155 8.3 9.7 51 50 4:20 22.6 30 5 10 50 50 6:45 SubArea 14 1 155 3.3 41.9 5 50 3:30 34.4 46 5 10 54 50 6:15 SubArea 15 2 155 9.8 42.6 14 50 3:40 21.8 29 5 10 53 50 6:10 SubArea 16 2 155 6.4 37.3 10 50 3:35 21.8 29 5 10 45 50 5:55 Maximum ETE: 4:20 Maximum ETE: 7:15 Average ETE: 3:55 Average ETE: 6:40 Dresden Generating Station 825 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

GRUNDY COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 68 30 11.0 39 2:40 Heritage Woods of Minooka Wheelchair bound 90 5 8 40 11.0 39 2:50 Ambulatory 90 1 88 30 4.4 5 2:05 Saratoga Towers Wheelchair bound 90 5 6 30 4.4 5 2:05 Ambulatory 90 1 86 30 2.6 12 2:15 Regency Care of Morris Wheelchair bound 90 5 37 75 2.6 3 2:50 Ambulatory 90 1 42 30 4.9 6 2:10 Morris Hospital Wheelchair bound 90 5 10 50 4.9 6 2:30 Bedridden 90 15 6 30 4.9 6 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 73 30 4.8 6 2:10 Elliot Manor Wheelchair bound 90 5 32 75 4.8 6 2:55 Ambulatory 90 1 85 30 1.9 10 2:10 Park Pointe Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center Wheelchair bound 90 5 53 75 1.9 2 2:50 Bedridden 90 15 4 30 1.9 10 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 36 30 1.9 10 2:10 The Gardens at Park Pointe Wheelchair bound 90 5 22 75 1.9 2 2:50 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 1.9 10 2:10 Ambulatory 90 1 50 30 1.9 10 2:10 The Pointe At Morris Wheelchair bound 90 5 22 75 1.9 2 2:50 WILL COUNTY Wheelchair bound 90 5 10 50 2.8 11 2:35 Joliet Area Community Hospice Bedridden 90 15 20 30 2.8 14 2:15 Ambulatory 90 1 140 30 1.6 13 2:15 Timbers of Shorewood Wheelchair bound 90 5 59 75 1.6 7 2:55 Dresden Generating Station 826 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Bedridden 90 15 1 15 1.6 9 1:55 Ambulatory 90 1 7 7 1.5 4 1:45 Alden Estates of Shorewood Wheelchair bound 90 5 63 75 1.5 3 2:50 Ambulatory 90 1 64 30 1.0 1 2:05 Aperion Care Wilmington Wheelchair bound 90 5 53 75 1.0 1 2:50 Bedridden 90 15 12 30 1.0 1 2:05 Ambulatory 90 1 7 7 5.3 7 1:45 Braidwood Senior Housing Wheelchair bound 90 5 6 30 5.3 7 2:10 Bedridden 90 15 1 15 5.3 7 1:55 Maximum ETE: 2:55 Average ETE: 2:25 Dresden Generating Station 827 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

GRUNDY COUNTY Ambulatory 100 1 68 30 11.0 30 2:40 Heritage Woods of Minooka Wheelchair bound 100 5 8 40 11.0 27 2:50 Ambulatory 100 1 88 30 4.4 6 2:20 Saratoga Towers Wheelchair bound 100 5 6 30 4.4 6 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 86 30 2.6 9 2:20 Regency Care of Morris Wheelchair bound 100 5 37 75 2.6 3 3:00 Ambulatory 100 1 42 30 4.9 7 2:20 Morris Hospital Wheelchair bound 100 5 10 50 4.9 7 2:40 Bedridden 100 15 6 30 4.9 7 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 73 30 4.8 7 2:20 Elliot Manor Wheelchair bound 100 5 32 75 4.8 6 3:05 Ambulatory 100 1 85 30 1.9 6 2:20 Park Pointe Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center Wheelchair bound 100 5 53 75 1.9 3 3:00 Bedridden 100 15 4 30 1.9 6 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 36 30 1.9 6 2:20 The Gardens at Park Pointe Wheelchair bound 100 5 22 75 1.9 3 3:00 Bedridden 100 15 2 30 1.9 6 2:20 Ambulatory 100 1 50 30 1.9 6 2:20 The Pointe At Morris Wheelchair bound 100 5 22 75 1.9 3 3:00 WILL COUNTY Wheelchair bound 100 5 10 50 2.8 20 2:50 Joliet Area Community Hospice Bedridden 100 15 20 30 2.8 22 2:35 Ambulatory 100 1 140 30 1.6 15 2:25 Timbers of Shorewood Wheelchair bound 100 5 59 75 1.6 9 3:05 Bedridden 100 15 1 15 1.6 15 2:10 Dresden Generating Station 828 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Ambulatory 100 1 7 7 1.5 10 2:00 Alden Estates of Shorewood Wheelchair bound 100 5 63 75 1.5 4 3:00 Ambulatory 100 1 64 30 1.0 2 2:15 Aperion Care Wilmington Wheelchair bound 100 5 53 75 1.0 2 3:00 Bedridden 100 15 12 30 1.0 2 2:15 Ambulatory 100 1 7 7 5.3 7 1:55 Braidwood Senior Housing Wheelchair bound 100 5 6 30 5.3 8 2:20 Bedridden 100 15 1 15 5.3 7 2:05 Maximum ETE: 3:05 Average ETE: 2:35 Dresden Generating Station 829 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

GRUNDY COUNTY Ambulatory 110 1 68 30 11.0 35 2:55 Heritage Woods of Minooka Wheelchair bound 110 5 8 40 11.0 32 3:05 Ambulatory 110 1 88 30 4.4 7 2:30 Saratoga Towers Wheelchair bound 110 5 6 30 4.4 7 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 86 30 2.6 13 2:35 Regency Care of Morris Wheelchair bound 110 5 37 75 2.6 10 3:15 Ambulatory 110 1 42 30 4.9 8 2:30 Morris Hospital Wheelchair bound 110 5 10 50 4.9 7 2:50 Bedridden 110 15 6 30 4.9 8 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 73 30 4.8 8 2:30 Elliot Manor Wheelchair bound 110 5 32 75 4.8 7 3:15 Ambulatory 110 1 85 30 1.9 9 2:30 Park Pointe Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center Wheelchair bound 110 5 53 75 1.9 7 3:15 Bedridden 110 15 4 30 1.9 9 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 36 30 1.9 9 2:30 The Gardens at Park Pointe Wheelchair bound 110 5 22 75 1.9 7 3:15 Bedridden 110 15 2 30 1.9 9 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 50 30 1.9 9 2:30 The Pointe At Morris Wheelchair bound 110 5 22 75 1.9 7 3:15 WILL COUNTY Wheelchair bound 110 5 10 50 2.8 17 3:00 Joliet Area Community Hospice Bedridden 110 15 20 30 2.8 13 2:35 Ambulatory 110 1 140 30 1.6 18 2:40 Timbers of Shorewood Wheelchair bound 110 5 59 75 1.6 13 3:20 Dresden Generating Station 830 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Bedridden 110 15 1 15 1.6 17 2:25 Ambulatory 110 1 7 7 1.5 12 2:10 Alden Estates of Shorewood Wheelchair bound 110 5 63 75 1.5 12 3:20 Ambulatory 110 1 64 30 1.0 2 2:25 Aperion Care Wilmington Wheelchair bound 110 5 53 75 1.0 2 3:10 Bedridden 110 15 12 30 1.0 2 2:25 Ambulatory 110 1 7 7 5.3 8 2:05 Braidwood Senior Housing Wheelchair bound 110 5 6 30 5.3 8 2:30 Bedridden 110 15 1 15 5.3 8 2:15 Maximum ETE: 3:20 Average ETE: 2:45 Dresden Generating Station 831 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 811. Correctional Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates Travel Time to Weather Mobilization Number Loading Rate Number of Total Loading Dist. To EPZ EPZ Boundary ETE Correctional Facility Conditions (min) of Buses (min per person) Inmates Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Good Weather 90 8 2:40 Grundy County Jail Rain 100 3 2 65 60 5.7 8 2:50 Snow 110 8 3:00 Good Weather 110 1 2:55 Joliet Treatment Center Rain 110 17 2 486 60 0.6 1 2:55 Snow 110 1 2:55 Good Weather 90 5 2:35 River Valley Juvenile Center Rain 100 9 2 246 60 0.7 8 2:50 Snow 110 3 2:55 Maximum ETE: 3:00 Average ETE: 2:50 Dresden Generating Station 832 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 812. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Total Loading People Loading Travel to Time at Travel Time to Requiring Vehicles Weather Mobilization Time at 1st Subsequent Subsequent Stops EPZ Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Stops Conditions Time (min) Stop (min) Stops (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Good 90 45 18 3:05 Buses 151 30 6 Rain 100 5 50 25 24 3:25 Snow 110 55 21 3:40 Good 90 54 19 3:20 Wheelchair 93 14 7 Rain 100 5 60 30 25 3:40 Buses Snow 110 66 22 3:55 Good 90 9 1:55 Ambulances 7 7 1 Rain 100 15 N/A N/A 12 2:10 Snow 110 11 2:20 Maximum ETE: 3:55 Average ETE: 3:05 Dresden Generating Station 833 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/Community E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Reception Center/Host Facility 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 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations Dresden Generating Station 834 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY This section discusses the suggested Traffic Management Plan (TMP) that is designed to expedite the movement of evacuating traffic. The resources required to implement 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 Traffic and Access Control Posts (TCPs/ACPs) 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" are employed rather than "enforce" and "prohibit" to indicate the need for flexibility in performing the traffic control function. There are always legitimate reasons for a driver to prefer 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 state emergency plans serve as the basis of the traffic management plan, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

2. Evacuation simulations were run using DYNEV II to predict traffic congestion during evacuation (see Section 7.3 and Figures 73 through 78).

3. These simulations help to identify the best routing and critical intersections that experience pronounced congestion during evacuation. Modifications to the existing TCP and/or ACP locations that would improve congestion and the ETE were analyzed. See Appendix G for more additional information.

Dresden Generating Station 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4. The existing TCPs and ACPs defined in the existing TMP, modifications to TCPs, and how they were applied in this study, are discussed in Appendix G.

5. 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. These priorities should be assigned by state/county emergency management representatives and by law enforcement personnel.

Appendix G documents the existing TMP and modified TCPs 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 and the modifications discussed in Appendix G are in place.

The ETE calculations reflect the assumptions that all externalexternal trips are interdicted and diverted after 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months 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 discuss TCP and ACP operations.

9.2 Additional Considerations The use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies can reduce 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 can also be placed outside of the EPZ to 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 vehicle stereo systems. Automated Traveler 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 several examples of how ITS technologies can benefit the evacuation process.

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

Dresden Generating 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 SubArea being evacuated to the boundary of the Evacuation Region and thence out of the EPZ.

Routing of transitdependent evacuees (schools, preschools, day camps, medical facilities, and residents who do not own or have access to a private vehicle) from the EPZ boundary to reception communities or 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, wheelchair buses, and ambulances. Transitdependent evacuees will be routed to reception centers. General population may evacuate to either reception center or some alternate destination (i.e., lodging facility, relatives home, campground) outside the EPZ.

The routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception communities or reception centers is designed to minimize the amount of travel outside the EPZ, from the points where these routes cross the EPZ boundary.

The 16 bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102 and Figure 103 and described in Table 101 were designed by KLD to service the major evacuation routes through each SubArea for this study, in order to compute ETE. It is assumed that residents will walk to and congregate along the major evacuation routes to flag down a bus, and that they can arrive at the roadway within the 135minute bus mobilization time (good weather).

Schools, preschools, day camps, medical facilities and correctional facilities were routed along the most likely path from the facility being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the reception center, in order to compute ETE.

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).

10.2 Reception Centers Transitdependent evacuees are transported to the nearest reception center for each county.

The Radiological Emergency Response Plan (RERP) for the State of Illinois indicates evacuees can receive congregate care at reception centers.

Dresden Generating Station 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 103 presents a list of the reception centers for each school in the EPZ. It is assumed that all school evacuees will be taken to the appropriate reception center and subsequently be picked up by parents or guardians. Transitdependent evacuees are transported to the nearest reception community.

Figure 104 presents an overview of the general population reception communities (listed in the public information) and reception centers (listed in the state and county RERP) servicing the EPZ. Note reception centers serve both the school population and the general public.

Dresden Generating Station 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Picks up evacuees along US6 East from the intersection of Brisbin Road to Ridge SubArea 1 3 Road North to I80 East to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center 16.5 located at Carl Sandburg High School.

Picks up evacuees along US6 West from the intersection of Brisbin Road to the SubArea 2 2 EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located at Illinois Valley 8.4 Community College.

Picks up evacuees along Mckinley Woods Road North from the intersection of SubArea 3 1 West Woodland Court to US6 East to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception 10.4 Center located at Carl Sandburg High School.

Picks up evacuees along Pine Bluff Road West from the intersection of County SubArea 4 1 Road 8000 E to IL47 South to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center 12.2 located at Pontiac Township High School.

Picks up evacuees along IL47 North from the Subarea boundary at the Illinois River to East Benton Street to Spruce Street to East Jefferson Street/ Fremont SubArea 5 2 4.9 Avenue to Ottawa Street to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located at Illinois Valley Community College.

Picks up evacuees along Ridge Road North from the interchange with I80 to the SubArea 6 2 EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located at Carl Sandburg High 9.9 School.

Picks up evacuees along Dresden Road South from the Subarea boundary to East SubArea 7 1 North Street to North Broadway Street to IL113 West to the EPZ boundary. 11.2 Travels to the Reception Center located at Pontiac Township High School.

Picks up evacuees along Pine Bluff Road West from the intersection of E Old Pine SubArea 8 1 Bluff Road to IL47 South to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center 5.4 located at Pontiac Township High School.

Picks up evacuees along S Kavanaugh Road South from the intersection of Murphy Road to Frontage Road South to Division Street West to Berta Road South from SubArea 9 1 the intersection of IL113 to Division Street East to Mitchell Street South to IL53 12.2 South to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located at Pontiac Township High School.

Picks up evacuees along Berta Road South from the intersection of IL113 to SubArea 10 2 Division Street East Mitchell Street South to IL53 South to the EPZ boundary. 7.4 Travels to the Reception Center located at Pontiac Township High School.

Picks up evacuees along Division Street West from the intersection of Braodway SubArea 11 1 Street to IL47 South to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located 6.2 at Pontiac Township High School.

Picks up evacuees along US6 East from the intersection of West Bridge Street to SubArea 12 2 the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located at Carl Sandburg High 8.6 School.

Dresden Generating Station 103 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

No. of Length Route Buses Route Description (mi.)

Picks up evacuees along Shepley Road East from the Kendall Will County Line to SubArea 13 (1) 4 River Road North to Black Road East to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception 8.4 Center located at Carl Sandburg High School.

Picks up evacuees along US6 East to Empress Road/ Houbolt Road to US52 West SubArea 13 (2) 3 to IL59 North to the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located at 8.3 Carl Sandburg High School.

Picks up evacuees along Chicago Street North/ Brandon Road North to Manhattan SubArea 14 1 Road East to EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located at Kankakee 3.3 Community College.

Pick up evacuees along IL53 South from the boundary between Subarea 14 and SubArea 15 2 Subarea 15 to 5th Street/ River Road South to IL113 South to the EPZ boundary. 9.8 Travels to the Reception Center located at Kankakee Community College.

Picks up evacuees along IL113 South from the intersection of Coal City Road to SubArea 16 2 the EPZ boundary. Travels to the Reception Center located at Kankakee 6.4 Community College.

Total: 31 Dresden Generating Station 104 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 TD SubArea 1, Minooka High School 349, 1214, 1213, 667, 665, 1531, 1533, 534, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 1

South Campus 51, 50, 70, 49, 48, 47, 81 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380, 1282, 381, 382, 1276, 383, 618, 617, 2 TD SubArea 2 1271, 1665, 619, 620, 621, 622, 623, 1859, 1857, 648 TD SubArea 3, TD SubArea 12, Kids 352, 353, 1222, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 910, 1236, 361, 3

Korner 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 1620, 367 412, 413, 414, 415, 501, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 404, 405, 4 TD SubArea 4 1310, 406, 407 1307, 403, 402, 638, 1259, 1251, 401, 1260, 400, 616, 617, 1271, 5 TD SubArea 5 1665, 619, 620, 621, 622, 623, 1859, 1857, 648 6 TD SubArea 6 718, 1168, 720, 1961, 1962, 102, 1187, 1188, 725 TD SubArea 7, Coal City Elementary 7 School, Step by Step Care Center 1413, 439, 1963, 1414, 440, 502, 1789, 441, 1788, 1794, 407 Elementary School, Sharon Scholtes 8 TD SubArea 8 422, 404, 405, 1310, 406, 407 9 TD SubArea 9 1829, 442, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 TD SubArea 10, Braceville Elementary 10 481, 452, 1970, 453, 454, 1762, 455 School, Danielle Cassani 11 TD SubArea 11 494, 1436, 1435, 1434, 1433, 495 12 TD SubArea 13 (1) 721, 1671, 722, 723, 1954, 724, 116, 730, 1155, 731, 1157, 732, 782 1236, 361, 362, 363, 1518, 953, 945, 946, 947, 948, 949, 950, 951, 13 TD SubArea 13 (2) 933, 1528, 123 14 TD SubArea 14 1581, 577, 1363, 570 TD SubArea 15, Island City Park District 15 532, 533, 1408, 596, 597, 598, 509, 511 Before and After School Program 16 TD SubArea 16 444, 1945, 506, 476, 477, 507, 1760, 508, 1453, 510, 509, 511 Aux Sable Elementary School, Little 1216, 1214, 1213, 667, 665, 1531, 1533, 534, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 17 Learner Children's Academy, Stephanie 52, 51, 50, 70, 49, 48, 47, 81 Kelsey Minooka Junior High School, Minooka 1224, 667, 665, 1531, 1533, 534, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 70, 18 Intermediate School 49, 48, 47, 81 Minooka High School Central Campus, Minooka Primary Center, Minooka 1212, 665, 1531, 1533, 534, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 70, 49, 19 Elementary School, Discovery Child Care 48, 47, 81

& Learning Center INC., Minooka United Methodist Church PreSchool 20 Premier Academy 380, 1282, 381, 382, 1276, 383, 391, 392, 965, 64, 65, 66, 1537 21 Saratoga Elementary School, Lynn Picardo 392, 965, 64, 65, 66, 1537 22 Immaculate Conception School 1244, 401, 1260, 400, 616, 617, 618, 383, 391, 392, 965, 64, 65, 66, Dresden Generating Station 105 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 1537 Grundy Area Vocational Center, Morris 23 Community High School, Prairieland Kids 1271, 617, 618, 383, 391, 392, 965, 64, 65, 66, 1537 Daycare Grundy County Special Ed CoOp, Morris 24 Elementary School, Julia Hanson, Catholic 622, 623, 1859, 1857, 648 Charities Head Start Coal City Intermediate School, Step by 25 Step Care CenterIntermediate School, 1411, 1900, 439, 1963, 1414, 440, 502, 1789, 441, 1788, 1794, 407 Randi McLuckie 26 Coal City High School 440, 502, 1789, 441, 1788, 1794, 407 Coal City Middle School, Coal City Early 27 494, 1843, 1840, 440, 502, 1789, 441, 1788, 1794, 407 Childhood Center 28 Pioneer Path School 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 21, 1355, 20, 50, 70, 49, 48, 47, 81 669, 668, 1227, 666, 1224, 667, 665, 1531, 1533, 534, 58, 57, 56, 55, 29 Three Rivers School 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 70, 49, 48, 47, 81 N.B. Galloway Elementary School, Channahon Junior High School, Kiddie 30 678, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 21, 1355, 20, 50, 70, 49, 48, 47, 81 Kampus Learning Center, Families of Faith Christian Academy 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 285, 1635, 124, 127, 128, 31 Walnut Trails Elementary 936 Joliet Junior College, Joliet Junior College 32 953, 48, 47, 81 Day Care TroyShorewood Elementary School, 33 1147, 1144, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 285, 1635, 124, 127, 128, 936 Joliet Christian School 34 Heritage Trail Elementary School 956, 950, 951, 933, 1528, 123, 285, 1635, 124, 127, 128, 936 35 Guiding Light Academy West 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 285, 1635, 124, 127, 128, 936 Holy Family Catholic School, Trinity 36 Christian Preschool at Westview Baptist 731, 1157, 732, 782 Church 37 Trinity Christian School 120, 121, 122, 123, 285, 1635, 124, 127, 128, 936 38 Cronin Elementary School 1157, 732, 782 Hofer Elementary School, Chesterbrook 39 1143, 1142, 1140, 733 Academy Preschool Orenic Intermediate School, Troy Middle 40 728, 1950, 734, 1154, 733 School 41 Elwood Community Consolidated School 1386, 583, 1385, 568, 569, 1754, 570 Dresden Generating Station 106 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary St Rose Catholic Parochial School, Wilmington Middle School, L.J. Stevens Intermediate School, SOWIC Educational 42 Center & ELS, Wilmington High School, 529, 528, 527 Trinity Services, Inc. South, Grace Lutheran Preschool, First United Methodist Church PreSchool ReedCuster Elementary School, SOWIC 43 506, 476, 477, 507, 1760, 508, 1453, 510, 509, 511 ELS Program ReedCuster High School, ReedCuster 44 508, 1453, 510, 509, 511 Middle School Two Rivers Headstart, Step by Step Child 45 Care Center Morris, Jacquelin Taylor, 618, 383, 391, 392, 965, 64, 65, 66, 1537 Melissa Bledsoe 46 Rainbow Scout Reservation (Day Camp) 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 404, 405, 1310, 406, 407 First United Methodist Church Preschool, 1259, 1251, 401, 1260, 400, 616, 617, 618, 383, 391, 392, 965, 64, 65, 47 Morris Christian School 66, 1537 48 Rainbow Preschool 405, 1310, 406, 407 1410, 438, 1819, 1411, 1900, 439, 1963, 1414, 440, 502, 1789, 441, 49 Step by Step Child Care Center Diamond 1788, 1794, 407, 408, 409, 410, 1925, 1437, 1920, 411, 889, 1312, 1018, 1042, 1041, 1040 50 Kids Korner 1414, 440, 502, 1789, 441, 1788, 1794, 407 Shorewood Early Learning and Day Care 51 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 285, 1635, 124, 127, 128, 936 Center Step By Step Child Care Center 52 1158, 1157, 732, 782 Shorewood 53 Garden Gate Montessori 734, 1154, 733 54 Discovery Schoolhouse 506, 1945, 444, 443, 35, 34, 45, 46, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 1331 507, 477, 476, 1442, 1440, 487, 488, 446, 1443, 429, 428, 46, 33, 32, 55 Jones Elementary School 31, 30, 29, 1331 Dresden Generating Station 107 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 103. School, Preschool, and Day Camps Reception Centers School Reception Center Minooka High School South Campus Aux Sable Elementary School Minooka Junior High School Minooka High School Central Campus Minooka Intermediate School Minooka Primary Center Minooka Elementary School Jones Elementary School Pioneer Path School Three Rivers School N.B. Galloway Elementary School Channahon Junior High School Walnut Trails Elementary Carl Sandburg High School Joliet Junior College TroyShorewood Elementary School Heritage Trail Elementary School Joliet Christian School Guiding Light Academy West Holy Family Catholic School Trinity Christian School Cronin Elementary School Hofer Elementary School Orenic Intermediate School Troy Middle School Troy Craughwell Elementary School Premier Academy Saratoga Elementary School Immaculate Conception School Grundy Area Vocational Center Illinois Valley Community College Morris Community High School Grundy County Special Ed CoOp Morris Elementary School Nettle Creek Elementary School Elwood Community Consolidated School St Rose Catholic Parochial School Wilmington Middle School Kankakee Community College L.J. Stevens Intermediate School SOWIC Educational Center & ELS Wilmington High School Dresden Generating Station 108 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

School Reception Center Trinity Services, Inc. South ReedCuster Elementary School SOWIC ELS Program ReedCuster High School Kankakee Community College ReedCuster Middle School Bruning Elementary School Camelot South Suburban Center for Exceptional Learners Coal City Elementary School Coal City Intermediate School Coal City High School Pontiac Township High School Coal City Middle School Braceville Elementary School Preschools and Day Camps Reception Center Little Learner Children's Academy Stephanie Kelsey Discovery Child Care & Learning Center INC.

Minooka United Methodist Church PreSchool Kids Korner Kiddie Kampus Learning Center Families of Faith Christian Academy Carl Sandburg High School Joliet Junior College Day Care Catholic Charities Head Start Shorewood Early Learning and Day Care Center Trinity Christian Preschool at Westview Baptist Church Chesterbrook Academy Preschool Step By Step Child Care Center Shorewood Garden Gate Montessori Two Rivers Headstart Step by Step Child Care Center Morris Jacquelin Taylor Melissa Bledsoe Lynn Picardo Illinois Valley Community College Julia Hanson First United Methodist Church Preschool Morris Christian School Prairieland Kids Daycare Island City Park District Before and After School Program Grace Lutheran Preschool Kankakee Community College First United Methodist Church PreSchool Discovery Schoolhouse Dresden Generating Station 109 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Preschools and Day Camps Reception Center Step by Step Child Care Center Braidwood Kankakee Community College First Christian Church After School Program Rainbow Scout Reservation (Day Camp)

Step by Step Care CenterElementary School Sharon Scholtes Rainbow Preschool Step by Step Care CenterIntermediate School Pontiac Township High School Step by Step Child Care Center Diamond Kids Korner Danielle Cassani Randi McLuckie Coal City Early Childhood Center Dresden Generating Station 1010 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 101. Major Evacuation Routes within the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station 1011 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes Dresden Generating Station 1012 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. TransitDependent Bus Routes (continued)

Dresden Generating Station 1013 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 104. General Population Reception Centers Dresden Generating Station 1014 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.

Dresden Generating 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.

Dresden Generating 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 appendix describes the integrated dynamic trip assignment and distribution model named DTRAD (Dynamic TRaffic Assignment and Distribution) that is expressly designed for use in analyzing evacuation scenarios. DTRAD employs logitbased pathchoice principles and is one of the models of the DYNEV II System. The DTRAD module implements pathbased Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) so that time dependent OriginDestination (OD) trips are assigned to routes over the network based on prevailing traffic conditions.

To apply the DYNEV II System, the analyst must specify the highway network, link capacity information, the timevarying volume of traffic generated at all origin centroids and, optionally, a set of accessible candidate destination nodes on the periphery of the Emergency Planning Zone (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.

B.1 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.

B.2 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 Dresden Generating Station B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

B.2.1 DTRAD Description DTRAD is the DTA module for the DYNEV II System.

When the road network under study is large, multiple routing options are usually available between trip origins and destinations. The problem of loading traffic demands and propagating them over the network links is called Network Loading and is addressed by DYNEV II using macroscopic traffic simulation modeling. Traffic assignment deals with computing the distribution of the traffic over the road network for given OD demands and is a model of the route choice of the drivers. Travel demand changes significantly over time, and the road network may have time dependent characteristics, e.g., timevarying signal timing or reduced road capacity because of lane closure, or traffic congestion. To consider these time dependencies, DTA procedures are required.

The DTRAD DTA module represents the dynamic route choice behavior of drivers, using the specification of dynamic origindestination matrices as flow input. Drivers choose their routes through the network based on the travel cost they experience (as determined by the simulation model). This allows traffic to be distributed over the network according to the timedependent conditions. The modeling principles of DTRAD include:

It is assumed that drivers not only select the best route (i.e., lowest cost path) but some also select less attractive routes. The algorithm implemented by DTRAD archives several efficient routes for each OD pair from which the drivers choose.

The choice of one route out of a set of possible routes is an outcome of discrete choice modeling. Given a set of routes and their generalized costs, the percentages of drivers that choose each route is computed. The most prevalent model for discrete choice modeling is the logit model. DTRAD uses a variant of PathSizeLogit model (PSL). PSL overcomes the drawback of the traditional multinomial logit model by incorporating an additional deterministic path size correction term to address path overlapping in the random utility expression.

DTRAD executes the Traffic Assignment (TA) algorithm on an abstract network representation called "the path network" which is built from the actual physical link node analysis network. This execution continues until a stable situation is reached: the volumes and travel times on the edges of the path network do not change significantly from one iteration to the next. The criteria for this convergence are defined by the user.

Travel cost plays a crucial role in route choice. In DTRAD, path cost is a linear summation of the generalized cost of each link that comprises the path. The generalized cost for a link, a, is expressed as ca t a l a s a ,

Dresden Generating Station B2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 = 12 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.

Dresden Generating Station B3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

B.2.2 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.

Dresden Generating Station B4 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 Dresden Generating Station B5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL This appendix describes the DYNEV traffic simulation model. The DYNEV traffic simulation model is a macroscopic model that describes the operations of traffic flow in terms of aggregate variables: vehicles, flow rate, mean speed, volume, density, queue length, on each link, for each turn movement, during each Time Interval (simulation time step). The model generates trips from sources and from Entry Links and introduces them onto the analysis network at rates specified by the analyst based on the mobilization time distributions. The model simulates the movements of all vehicles on all network links over time until the network is empty. At intervals, the model outputs Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) such as those listed in Table C1.

Model Features Include:

Explicit consideration is taken of the variation in density over the time step; an iterative procedure is employed to calculate an average density over the simulation time step for the purpose of computing a mean speed for moving vehicles.

Multiple turn movements can be serviced on one link; a separate algorithm is used to estimate the number of (fractional) lanes assigned to the vehicles performing each turn movement, based, in part, on the turn percentages provided by the Dynamic TRaffic Assignment and Distribution (DTRAD) model.

At any point in time, traffic flow on a link is subdivided into two classifications: queued and moving vehicles. The number of vehicles in each classification is computed. Vehicle spillback, stratified by turn movement for each network link, is explicitly considered and quantified. The propagation of stopping waves from link to link is computed within each time step of the simulation. There is no vertical stacking of queues on a link.

Any link can accommodate source flow from zones via side streets and parking facilities that are not explicitly represented. This flow represents the evacuating trips that are generated at the source.

The relation between the number of vehicles occupying the link and its storage capacity is monitored every time step for every link and for every turn movement. If the available storage capacity on a link is exceeded by the demand for service, then the simulator applies a metering rate to the entering traffic from both the upstream feeders and source node to ensure that the available storage capacity is not exceeded.

A path network that represents the specified traffic movements from each network link is constructed by the model; this path network is utilized by the DTRAD model.

A twoway interface with DTRAD: (1) provides link travel times; (2) receives data that translates into link turn percentages.

Provides MOE to animation software, Evacuation Animator (EVAN)

Calculates ETE statistics Dresden Generating 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 Dresden Generating 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 Dresden Generating Station C3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

t Cap

8. If t 0, O M ,O min RCap M , 0 TI Q E O If Q 0 , then Calculate Q , M with Algorithm A Else Q 0, M E End if 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 Dresden Generating Station C4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

12. set n n 1 , and return to step 2 to perform iteration, n, using k k .

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

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:

Dresden Generating 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 Dresden Generating 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 Dresden Generating 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 Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) session is launched and the whole process repeats until the end of the DYNEV II run.

Additional details are presented in Appendix B.

Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II Measure Units Applies To Vehicles Discharged Vehicles Link, Network, Exit Link Speed Miles/Hours (mph) Link, Network Density Vehicles/Mile/Lane Link Level of Service LOS Link Content Vehicles Network Travel Time Vehiclehours Network Evacuated Vehicles Vehicles Network, Exit Link Trip Travel Time Vehicleminutes/trip Network Capacity Utilization Percent Exit Link Attraction Percent of total evacuating vehicles Exit Link Max Queue Vehicles Node, Approach Time of Max Queue Hours:minutes Node, Approach Length (mi); Mean Speed (mph); Travel Route Statistics Route Time (min)

Mean Travel Time Minutes Evacuation Trips; Network Dresden Generating Station C8 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 9) and channelization Turn bays (1 to 3 lanes)

Destination (exit) nodes Network topology defined in terms of downstream nodes for each receiving link Node Coordinates (X,Y)

Nuclear Power Plant Coordinates (X,Y)

GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES On all entry links and source nodes (origins), by Time Period TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS Traffic signals: linkspecific, turn movement specific Signal control treated as fixed time or actuated Location of traffic control posts (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 Dresden Generating Station C9 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.

Dresden Generating Station C10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

[beginning, end] of the time interval.

The maximum flow rate that can be serviced by a link for a particular movement in the absence of a control device. It is specified by the analyst as an estimate of Q

link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the Highway Capacity Manual (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.

Dresden Generating Station C11 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 Dresden Generating Station C12 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 Dresden Generating Station C13 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)

Dresden Generating Station C14 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 Evacuation Time Estimates (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 the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) boundary information and create a Geographical Information System (GIS) base map. The base map extends beyond the Shadow Region which extends approximately 15 miles (radially) from the power plant location.

The base map incorporates the local roadway topology, a suitable topographic background and the EPZ boundary and SubArea boundaries.

Step 2 The 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. Transient, employment, and special facility data were obtained from Constellation, the state and counties within the EPZ, the OnTheMap Census analysis tool1, and phone calls to individual facilities, supplemented with data from the previous study where data was missing.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with major stakeholders (state and county emergency officials and Constellation). 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 the state and county emergency officials. 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 any changes to the roadway network since the previous study. This survey included consideration of 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.

1 http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/

Dresden Generating Station D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 5 A demographic survey of households within the EPZ was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic information of the EPZ population for this study. This information was used to determine important study factors including the average number of evacuating vehicles used by each household, and the time required to perform preevacuation mobilization activities.

Step 6 A computerized representation of the physical roadway system, called a linknode analysis network, was developed using the most recent UNITES software (see Section 1.3) developed by KLD. Once the geometry of the network was completed, the network was calibrated using the information gathered during the road survey (Step 4) and information obtained from aerial imagery. Estimates of highway capacity for each link and other linkspecific characteristics were introduced to the network description. Traffic signal timings were input accordingly. The link node analysis network was imported into a GIS map. The 2020 permanent resident population estimates (Step 2) 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 16 Subareas. Based on wind direction and speed, Regions (groupings of Subareas) that may be advised to evacuate, were developed.

The need for evacuation can occur over a range of timeofday, dayofweek, seasonal and weatherrelated conditions. Scenarios were developed to capture the variation in evacuation demand, highway capacity and mobilization time, for different time of day, day of the week, time of year, and weather conditions.

Step 8 The input stream for the DYNEV II system, which integrates the dynamic traffic assignment and distribution model, DTRAD, with the evacuation simulation model, was created for a prototype evacuation case - the evacuation of the entire EPZ for a representative scenario.

Step 9 After creating this input stream, the DYNEV II System was executed on the prototype evacuation case to compute evacuating traffic routing patterns consistent with the appropriate NRC guidelines. DYNEV II contains an extensive suite of data diagnostics which check the completeness and consistency of the input data specified. The analyst reviews all warning and error messages produced by the model and then corrects the database to create an input stream that properly executes to completion.

The model assigns destinations to all origin centroids consistent with a (general) radial evacuation of the EPZ and Shadow Region. The analyst may optionally supplement and/or replace these modelassigned destinations, based on professional judgment, after studying the topology of the analysis highway network. The model produces link and networkwide measures of effectiveness as well as estimates of evacuation time.

Dresden Generating Station D2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 10 The results generated by the prototype evacuation case are critically examined. The examination includes observing the animated graphics (using the EVAN software - See Section 1.3) and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a laborintensive activity, requiring 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, or adding minor routes (which are paved and traversable) that were not previously modelled but may assist in the 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, school buses, ambulances, and other transit vehicles Dresden Generating Station D3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

are introduced into the final prototype evacuation case data set. DYNEV II generates route specific speeds over time for use in the estimation of evacuation times for the transit dependent and special facility population groups.

Step 14 The prototype evacuation case was used as the basis for generating all region and scenario specific evacuation cases to be simulated. This process was automated through the UNITES user interface. For each specific case, the population to be evacuated, the trip generation distributions, the highway capacity and speeds, and other factors are adjusted to produce a customized casespecific data set.

Step 15 All evacuation cases are executed using the DYNEV II System to compute ETE. Once results are available, quality control procedures are used to assure the results are consistent, dynamic routing is reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks are addressed properly.

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

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated, and graphed. The results are then documented, as required by NUREG/CR7002, Rev.1.

Step 18 Following the completion of documentation activities, the ETE criteria checklist (see Appendix N) is completed. Traffic management plans are analyzed, and traffic control posts are prioritized, if applicable. Additional analysis is conducted to identify the sensitivity of the ETE to change in some base evacuation conditions and model assumptions. An appropriate report reference is provided for each criterion provided in the checklist.

Dresden Generating Station D4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

A Step 1 Step 10 Examine Prototype Evacuation Case using EVAN Create GIS Base Map and DYNEV II Output Step 2 Results Satisfactory Gather Census Block and Demographic Data for Step 11 Study Area.

Modify Evacuation Destinations and/or Develop Step 3 Traffic Control Treatments Conduct Kickoff Meeting with Stakeholders Step 12 Modify Database to Reflect Changes to Prototype Evacuation Case Field Survey of Roadways within Study Area Step 5 B Conduct and Analyze Demographic Survey and Step 13 Develop Trip Generation Characteristics Establish Transit and Special Facility Evacuation Step 6 Routes and Update DYNEVII Database Update and Calibrate LinkNode Analysis Step 14 Network Step 7 Generate DYNEVII Input Streams for All Evacuation Cases Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 15 Step 8 Execute DYNEV II to Compute ETE for All Evacuation Cases Create and Debug DYNEVII Input Stream Step 16 Use DYNEVII Average Speed Output to Compute Step 9 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 Dresden Generating Station D5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX E Special Facility Data

E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of March 2022, for special facilities, recreational areas and major employers that are located within the DRE EPZ. Special facilities are defined as schools, preschools, day camps, medical facilities and correctional facilities.

Transient population data is included in the tables for recreational areas (campgrounds, golf courses, hunting/fishing areas, marinas, parks, other recreational areas), 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, preschool, day camp, medical facility, correctional facility, recreational area (campground, golf course, hunting/fishing area, marina, park, other recreational area), lodging facility, and major employer are also provided.

Dresden Generating Station E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Enroll Area (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment Grundy County, IL 1 2.0 NNE Minooka High School South Campus 26655 W Eames St Channahon 1,420 1 2.9 NNW Aux Sable Elementary School 1004 Misty Creek Dr Minooka 571 1 4.1 N Minooka Junior High School 333 W McEvilly Rd Minooka 1,102 1 4.1 N Minooka High School Central Campus 301 S Wabena Ave Minooka 1,363 1 4.3 N Minooka Intermediate School 321 McEvilly Rd Minooka 1,005 1 4.7 N Minooka Primary Center 305 W Church St Minooka 202 1 4.9 N Minooka Elementary School 400 Coady Dr Minooka 527 2 7.0 W Premier Academy 7700 Ashley Rd Morris 93 2 8.1 W Saratoga Elementary School 4040 N Division St Morris 855 5 8.1 WSW Immaculate Conception School 505 E North St Morris 218 5 8.7 W Grundy Area Vocational Center 1002 Union St Morris 575 5 8.7 WSW Morris Community High School 1000 Union St Morris 891 5 8.8 W Grundy County Special Ed CoOp 725 School St Morris 700 5 9.8 W Morris Elementary School 2001 Dupont Ave Morris 1,200 7 6.8 S Coal City Elementary School 300 N Broadway St Coal City 328 10 7.1 S Coal City Intermediate School 305 E Division St Coal City 315 10 7.3 SSW Coal City High School 655 W Division St Coal City 652 10 7.9 SSW Coal City Middle School 500 S Carbon Hill Rd Coal City 488 10 11.3 S Braceville Elementary School 209 N Mitchell St Braceville 176 S.R. 12.8 W Nettle Creek Elementary School1 8820 Scott School Rd Morris 85 Grundy County Subtotal: 12,766 Kendall County, IL 6 10.1 N Jones Elementary School 800 Barberry Way Joliet 592 Kendall County Subtotal: 592 Will County, IL 12 3.5 NE Pioneer Path School 24920 S Sage St Channahon 272 12 4.1 NNE Three Rivers School 24150 W Ford Rd Channahon 285 12 4.4 NE N.B. Galloway Elementary School 24805 W Roberts St Channahon 401 12 4.6 NE Channahon Junior High School 24917 W Sioux Dr Channahon 324 1

Although these facilities are located in the S.R. (Shadow Region), they are listed in county and/or state emergency plans.

Dresden Generating Station E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sub Distance Dire Enroll Area (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment 13 8.8 NNE Walnut Trails Elementary 301 Wynstone Dr Shorewood 491 13 8.9 NNE Joliet Junior College 1215 Houbolt Ave Joliet 11,551 13 9.5 NNE TroyShorewood Elementary School 210 School Rd Shorewood 339 13 9.6 NNE Heritage Trail Elementary School 3389 Longford Dr Joliet 383 13 9.7 NNE Joliet Christian School 114 Channahon St Shorewood 79 13 9.9 NNE Guiding Light Academy West 247 Brook Forest Ave Shorewood 10 13 10.5 NNE Holy Family Catholic School 600 Brook Forest Ave Shorewood 341 13 10.7 NNE Trinity Christian School 901 Shorewood Dr Shorewood 532 13 10.8 NNE Cronin Elementary School 210 W Black Rd Shorewood 550 13 10.8 NNE Hofer Elementary School 910 Vertin Blvd Shorewood 409 13 11.2 N Orenic Intermediate School 5820 W Theodore St Shorewood 891 13 11.2 NNE Troy Middle School 5800 W Theodore St Shorewood 989 14 8.2 E Elwood Community Consolidated School 409 N Chicago Ave Elwood 280 15 8.8 SE St Rose Catholic Parochial School 626 S Kankakee St Wilmington 95 15 8.9 SE Wilmington Middle School 715 S Joliet St Wilmington 397 15 9.0 SE L.J. Stevens Intermediate School 221 Ryan St Wilmington 377 15 9.2 SE SOWIC Educational Center & ELS 209 Wildcat Ct Wilmington 52 15 9.2 SE Wilmington High School 209 Wildcat Ct Wilmington 471 15 9.4 SE Trinity Services, Inc. South 1197 S Buchanan St Wilmington 25 16 9.1 SSE ReedCuster Elementary School 162 S School St Braidwood 607 16 9.1 SSE SOWIC ELS Program 162 S School St Braidwood 51 S.R. 9.6 SSE ReedCuster High School1 249 Comet Dr Braidwood 478 S.R. 9.8 SSE ReedCuster Middle School1 407 Comet Dr Braidwood 336 1

S.R. 9.8 SE Bruning Elementary School 1910 Bruning Dr Wilmington 226 1

S.R. 11.5 NNE Troy Craughwell Elementary School 3333 Black Rd Joliet 408 1

S.R. 12.6 SE Camelot South Suburban Center for Exceptional Learners 35445 Washington St Custer Park 254 Will County Subtotal: 21,904 EPZ TOTAL: 35,262 Dresden Generating Station E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E2. Preschools and Day Camps within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Enroll Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality ment Grundy County, IL 1 2.3 N Little Learner Children's Academy 27754 Bluegrass Dr Channahon 42 1 2.6 N Stephanie Kelsey 1479 Bluestem Ln Minooka 8 1 4.5 N Discovery Child Care & Learning Center INC. 101 W Wapella St Minooka 83 1 4.7 N Minooka United Methodist Church PreSchool 205 W Church St Minooka 19 2 8.0 W Two Rivers Headstart 1715 N Division St Morris 34 2 8.2 W Step by Step Child Care Center Morris 123 Brentwood Dr Morris 149 2 8.3 W Jacquelin Taylor 23 Lynwood Dr Morris 12 2 8.3 W Melissa Bledsoe 2365 Parklake Dr Morris 8 2 8.7 WNW Lynn Picardo 430 Nelson Rd Morris 8 2 9.3 W Julia Hanson 1540 Carol Anne Dr Morris 8 4 5.9 SW Rainbow Scout Reservation (Day Camp) 2600 N Winterbottom Rd Morris 1,000 5 8.4 WSW First United Methodist Church Preschool 118 W Jackson St Morris 20 5 8.5 WSW Morris Christian School 202 W Jefferson St Morris 44 5 8.5 W Prairieland Kids Daycare 519 Bedford Rd Morris 40 7 6.8 S Step by Step Care CenterElementary School 300 N Broadway St Coal City 20 7 7.0 S Sharon Scholtes 95 W 2nd St Coal City 8 8 9.2 WSW Rainbow Preschool 455 W Southmor Rd Morris 38 10 7.1 S Step by Step Care CenterIntermediate School 305 E Division St Coal City 30 10 7.1 S Step by Step Child Care Center Diamond 125 S Berta Rd Diamond 103 10 7.2 S Kids Korner 405 W Division Coal City 24 10 7.7 S Danielle Cassani 915 S Laura Ln Diamond 8 10 7.8 S Randi McLuckie 120 E Elm St Coal City 11 11 8.1 SSW Coal City Early Childhood Center 755 S Carbon Hill Rd Coal City 351 Grundy County Subtotal: 2,068 Will County, IL 12 2.6 NE Kids Korner 25850 W Eames St Channahon 75 12 4.5 NE Kiddie Kampus Learning Center 24735 E Eames St # 7 Channahon 82 12 5.0 NE Families of Faith Christian Academy 24466 W Eames St Channahon 19 13 8.9 NNE Joliet Junior College Day Care 1215 Houbolt Ave Joliet 40 13 9.4 NE Catholic Charities Head Start 1704 Alexandria Dr Joliet 190 13 9.8 NNE Shorewood Early Learning and Day Care Center 651 Deerwood Dr Shorewood 150 Dresden Generating Station E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sub Distance Dire Enroll Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality ment 13 10.4 NNE Trinity Christian Preschool at Westview Baptist Church 24551 W Black Rd Shorewood 247 13 10.4 NNE Chesterbrook Academy Preschool 813 N River Rd Shorewood 163 13 10.6 NNE Step By Step Child Care Center Shorewood 861 Center Ct Shorewood 94 13 11.6 NNE Garden Gate Montessori 860C Center Ct Shorewood 80 15 8.3 SE Island City Park District Before and After School Program 315 N Water St Wilmington 25 15 9.3 SE Grace Lutheran Preschool 907 Luther Dr Wilmington 16 15 9.3 SE First United Methodist Church PreSchool 401 E Kahler Rd Wilmington 30 16 9.1 SSE Discovery Schoolhouse 162 S School St Braidwood 60 S.R. 9.4 SSE Step by Step Child Care Center Braidwood1 306 S Division St Braidwood 85 1

S.R. 9.7 SE First Christian Church After School Program 1824 Church St Wilmington 19 Will County Subtotal: 1,375 EPZ TOTAL: 3,443 Dresden Generating Station E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambul Wheel Bed Sub Distance Dire Capa Current atory chair ridden Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality city Census Patients Patients Patients Grundy County, IL 1 2.1 N Heritage Woods of Minooka 701 Heritage Woods Dr Minooka 171 76 68 8 0 2 8.2 W Saratoga Towers 1700 Newton Pl Morris 190 94 88 6 0 2 9.1 W Regency Care of Morris 1095 Twilight Dr Morris 123 123 86 37 0 5 8.3 W Morris Hospital 150 W High St Morris 90 58 42 10 6 5 8.3 W Elliot Manor 200 W Waverly St Morris 105 105 73 32 0 5 9.4 W Park Pointe Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center 1223 Edgewater Dr Morris 142 142 85 53 4 5 9.4 W The Gardens at Park Pointe 1550 Dupont Ave Morris 60 60 36 22 2 5 9.4 W The Pointe At Morris 1221 S Edgewater Dr Morris 72 72 50 22 0 Grundy County Subtotal: 953 730 528 190 12 Will County, IL 13 9.8 NNE Joliet Area Community Hospice 250 Water Stone Cir Joliet 30 30 0 10 20 13 10.6 NNE Timbers of Shorewood 1100 N River Rd Shorewood 200 200 140 59 1 13 10.6 NNE Alden Estates of Shorewood 710 W Black Rd Shorewood 92 70 7 63 0 15 8.9 SE Aperion Care Wilmington 555 W Kahler Rd Wilmington 171 129 64 53 12 16 8.5 SSE Braidwood Senior Housing 660 W 2nd St Braidwood 24 14 7 6 1 Will County Subtotal: 517 443 218 191 34 EPZ TOTAL: 1,470 1,173 746 381 46 Dresden Generating Station E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ Employee

% Employee Employees Vehicles Sub Distance Dire Employees Commuting Communing Communing Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ Grundy County, IL 1 3.6 WNW Lyondell Basell 8805 N Tabler Rd Morris 400 63.3% 253 239 4 Dresden Generating Station 6500 N Dresden Rd Morris 450 58.4% 263 248 Grundy County Subtotal: 850 516 487 Will County, IL 9 4.7 SE Elion Logistics Park 55 Elion Blvd Wilmington 313 65.2% 204 192 12 4.8 ENE ExxonMobil I55 Channahon 350 63.3% 222 209 12 6.4 NE Flint Hills Resources 23425 Amoco Rd Channahon 325 63.3% 206 194 12 6.6 NE Crane Compositions Inc. 23525 W Eames St Channahon 350 63.3% 222 209 12 6.6 ENE Stepan Co. (Chemical) 22500 W Millsdale Rd Elwood 350 63.3% 222 209 13 8.9 NNE Joliet Junior College 1215 Houbolt Ave Joliet 200 63.3% 127 120 13 9.0 NE Hollywood Casino 777 Hollywood Blvd Joliet 501 63.3% 317 299 13 9.0 NE Eco Lab 3001 Channahon Rd Joliet 250 63.3% 158 149 13 10.0 NE Caterpillar Tractor 2200 Channahon Rd Joliet 1,350 63.3% 855 807 Will County Subtotal: 3,989 2,533 2,388 EPZ TOTAL: 4,839 3,049 2,875 Dresden Generating Station E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Area (miles) ction Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles Grundy County, IL 2 6.1 W Grundy Rod & Gun Club 6817 Gun Club Rd Morris Campground 300 123 4 0.8 NW Dresden Island Lock & Dam 7521 Lock Rd Morris Park 8 4 4 3.5 WSW Heidecke Lake State Fish and Wildlife Area 5010 County Rd 5000 E Morris Park 134 55 4 3.9 SW Goose Lake Prairie State Park 5010 N Jugtown Rd Morris Park 30 13 5 8.1 WSW William G. Stratton State Park Griggs Dr Morris Park 500 205 5 9.0 WSW Gebhard Woods State Park Ottawa St Morris Park 1,000 410 5 9.2 WSW Illinois & Michigan Canal State Trail Visitors 401 Ottawa St Morris Park 1,090 447 5 10.7 W Morris Country Club 2615 US6 Morris Golf Course 586 240 7 5.7 S Coal City Area Club 1500 N Broadway Rd Coal City Park 400 164 10 12.9 S Mazonia State Fish & Wildlife Area IL53 & Hudson Rd Braceville Hunting/Fishing 498 400 Grundy County Subtotal: 4,546 2,061 Kendall County, IL 6 8.8 NNW Baker Woods Forest Preserve 2939 US52 Minooka Park Local residents only Kendall County Subtotal:

Will County, IL 3 1.1 ESE Harborside Marina 27425 S Will Rd Wilmington Marina 12 5 3 1.7 E McKinley Woods County Forest Preserve McKinley Woods Rd Channahon Park 50 21 3 2.1 E Three Rivers Marine Service 25400 Desplaines River Rd Wilmington Marina 80 33 3 3.4 ESE Des Plaines Conservation Area 24621 N River Rd Wilmington Campground 366 150 9 6.2 SSE Lake Point Club 24801 Lakepoint Dr Wilmington Campground 1,080 443 9 6.5 SSE Cinder Ridge Golf Course 24801 Lakepoint Dr Wilmington Golf Course 97 40 9 6.7 SSE Area Number One Outdoor Club 32644 Frontage Rd Coal City Campground 100 41 12 3.1 NE Channahon Parkway State Park 25302 W Story St Channahon Park 144 52 12 4.2 NE Channahon Park District Central Park 24856 W Eames St Channahon Park 875 359 12 4.4 ENE Big Basin Marina 24045 W Front Rd Channahon Marina 360 148 12 4.5 NE Heritage Bluffs Golf Club 24355 W Bluff Rd Channahon Golf Course 250 250 12 7.9 NE Race Camp Chicago LLC 18215 W Schweitzer Rd Elwood Other, Not Listed 244 100 13 7.4 NNE Leisure Lakes Family Resort 21900 SW Frontage Rd Joliet Campground 300 123 13 9.0 NE Hollywood Casino 777 Hollywood Blvd Joliet Other, Not Listed 4,500 1,845 13 9.2 NE Joliet Splash Station Water Park 2780 Channahon Rd Joliet Park 1,000 410 13 9.6 NNE Galowich Family YMCA 749 Houbolt Rd Joliet Other, Not Listed 290 105 Dresden Generating Station E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sub Distance Dire Area (miles) ction Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles 13 9.9 NNE Imperial Mobile Home Community 106 E Jefferson St Shorewood Campground Local residents only 13 10.3 NNE Hammel Woods County Forest Preserve W Black Rd Shorewood Park 50 21 13 10.5 NNE Inwood Golf Course and Recreation Area 3200 W Jefferson St Joliet Park 240 99 14 7.5 E Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery 20953 W Hoff Rd Elwood Other, Not Listed 298 108 14 8.7 ENE U.S. Army Joliet Training Center 20610 Arsenal Rd Elwood Other, Not Listed 248 90 14 8.9 ENE Autobahn Country Club 3795 Centerpoint Way Joliet Other, Not Listed 200 82 15 6.5 SE Des Plaines Game Propagation Center 30550 S Boathouse Rd Wilmington Hunting/Fishing 20 9 15 7.4 SE Will County Sportsmen's Club 23743 Stripmine Rd Wilmington Hunting/Fishing 200 82 15 7.4 SSE Tameling RV Park and Campground 32100 S IL129 Wilmington Campground 98 41 15 7.5 SSE Wilmington Recreation Area Club E Coal City Rd Braidwood Other, Not Listed 450 185 15 7.8 ESE Midewin National Tall Grass Prairie 30239 S Route 53 Wilmington Park 50 21 15 8.4 SSE New Lenox Sportsmen's Club IL53 Braidwood Campground 300 123 15 8.5 SE Wilmington Island Park District 147 N Park St Wilmington Park 500 205 15 8.8 SSE Braidwood Recreation Club 25000 IL113 Braidwood Campground 1,440 591 15 9.7 SE Forsythe Woods Forest Preserve E Kahler Rd Wilmington Park 182 75 16 8.1 SSE Shadow Lakes II Association Inc 24727 Amenity Center Dr Wilmington Campground 1,076 441 16 8.8 SSE Silver Oaks Golf Club 33061 IL53 Wilmington Golf Course 65 26 16 9.6 SSE Braidwood Dunes & Savannah Forest Preserve Route 113 & Essex Rd Braidwood Park 5 3 Will County Subtotal: 15,170 6,327 EPZ TOTAL: 19,716 8,388 Dresden Generating Station E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles Grundy County, IL 1 4.6 N TownePlace Suites Minooka 630 Bob Blair Rd Minooka 80 70 1 4.6 N Hampton Inn & Suites Minooka 621 Bob Blair Rd Minooka 84 19 2 8.0 W Park Motel 1923 N Division St Morris 48 24 2 8.0 W Economy Inn 1801 N Division St Morris 64 32 2 8.1 W Comfort Inn Morris 70 Gore Rd Morris 100 50 2 8.1 W Days Inn Morris 80 Hampton Rd Morris 234 117 2 8.1 W Quality Inn Morris 200 Gore Rd Morris 120 60 2 8.1 W Super 8 Morris 70 Green Acres Dr Morris 118 59 2 8.2 W Holiday Inn Express Morris 222 Gore Rd Morris 120 60 Grundy County Subtotal: 968 491 Will County, IL 12 6.1 NE Manor Motel 23926 W Eames St Channahon 154 77 13 8.8 NE Comfort Inn Joliet 1520 Commerce Ln Joliet 140 70 13 8.9 NE Holiday Inn & Suites 1471 Rock Creek Blvd Joliet 331 120 13 8.9 NE Fairfield Inn 1501 Riverboat Center Dr Joliet 128 64 13 8.9 NE TownePlace Suites Joliet South 1515 Riverboat Center Dr Joliet 226 113 13 9.0 NE Hollywood Casino & Hotel Joliet 777 Hollywood Blvd Joliet 202 101 13 9.0 NE Hampton Inn 1521 Riverboat Center Dr Joliet 178 89 13 9.7 NNE Elk's Motel 270 SE Frontage Rd Joliet 60 30 13 9.8 NNE Best Western 4380 Enterprise Dr Joliet 124 62 13 10.0 NNE Wingate Inn 101 McDonald Ave Joliet 162 81 13 10.1 NNE Joliet Plaza Inn & Suites 4200 W Jefferson St Joliet 160 80 15 8.4 SE Van Duyne's Motel 107 Bridge St Wilmington 24 12 16 8.9 S Sun Motel 140 S Hickory St Braidwood 90 45 16 9.1 SSE Braidwood Motel 120 N Washington St Braidwood 32 16 Will County Subtotal: 2,011 960 EPZ TOTAL: 2,979 1,451 Dresden Generating Station E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Capa Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality city Grundy County, IL 5 8.4 WSW Grundy County Jail 111 E Washington St Morris 65 Grundy County Subtotal: 65 Will County, IL 13 10.4 NE Joliet Treatment Center 2848 McDonough St Joliet 486 13 10.5 NE River Valley Juvenile Center 3200 W McDonough St Joliet 246 Will County Subtotal: 732 EPZ TOTAL: 797 Dresden Generating Station E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E1. Schools within the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station E12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E2. Preschools and Day Camps within the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station E13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E3. Medical Facilities within the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station E14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E4. Major Employers within the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station E15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E5. Recreational Areas within the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station E16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E6. Lodging Facilities within the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station E17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E7. Correctional Facilities within the DRE EPZ Dresden Generating Station E18 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 Dresden Generating Station (DRE)

Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) requires the identification of travel patterns, car ownership and household size of the population within the EPZ. Demographic information can be obtained from Census data. 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 for the demographic survey. A draft of the instrument was submitted to stakeholders for comment. Comments were received and the survey instrument was modified accordingly, prior to conducting the survey.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. Since the demographic survey discussed herein was performed in 2020 prior to the release of the 2020 Census data, 2010 Census data was used to develop the sampling plan.

A sample size of approximately 470 completed survey forms yields results with a sampling error of +/-4.5% 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.

The number of samples obtained was less than the sampling plan despite a good faith effort put forward by the offsite response organizations (OROs) and Constellation. A total of 262 completed samples were obtained corresponding to a sampling error of +/-6.04% at the 95%

confidence level based on the 2020 Census data. Table F1 also shows the number of samples obtained within each zip code. Despite not reaching the desired sample size, the distribution of Dresden Generating Station F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

samples aligned with the sampling plan with the majority of samples from zip codes 60450, 60447, 60481, and 60404.

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 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 decline to state response for a few questions or who refuses to answer a few questions. To address the issue of occasional decline to state 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 decline to state responses are ignored and the distributions are based upon the positive data that is acquired.

F.3.1 Household Demographic Results Household Size Figure F1 presents the distribution of household size within the EPZ based on the responses to the demographic survey. The average household contains 2.76 people. The estimated household size from the 2020 Census data is 2.73 people. The difference between the Census data and survey data is 1.1%, which falls within the sampling error of +/-6.04%. The good agreement between the Census data and the survey data speaks to the validity of the survey results minimizing uncertainty.

Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the EPZ is 2.34. It should be noted that all households in the EPZ have access to an automobile according to the demographic survey. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F2.

Figure F3 and Figure F4 present the automobile availability by household size.

Ridesharing Approximately 74% of the households surveyed responded that they would share a ride with a neighbor, relative, or friend if a car was not available to them when advised to evacuate in the event of an emergency. Figure F5 presents this response.

Commuters Figure F6 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household.

Commuters are defined as household members who travel to work or college on a daily basis.

The data shows an average of 1.12 commuters in each household in the EPZ, and approximately 67% of households have at least one commuter.

Dresden Generating 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 or college. The data shows an average of 1.06 commuters 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. Approximately 40% of households indicated someone 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 approximately 7% of households have functional or transportation needs. Of those with functional or transportation needs, approximately 47%

require a bus, 21% require a medical bus/van, 21% require a wheelchair accessible van, 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 1.55 vehicles.

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

Of the survey participants who responded, approximately 54% said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 46% indicated that they would not await the return of other family members, as shown in Figure F11.

If you had a household pet, would you take your pet with you if you were asked to evacuate the area? Based on responses from the survey, approximately 69% of households have a family pet. Of the households with pets, approximately 22% indicated that they would take their pets with them to a shelter, 76% indicated that they would take their pets somewhere else and only 2% would leave their pet at home, as shown in Figure F12. Of the households that would evacuate with their pets, 98% 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, approximately 99% of households have a household pet (dog, cat, bird, reptile, fish, tarantula, rabbit, chinchilla, or guinea pig), and 1% of households have farm animals (horse, chicken, etc.).

Emergency officials advise you to shelterinplace in an emergency because you are not in the area of risk. Would you: This question is designed to elicit information regarding compliance with instructions to shelter in place. The results indicate that approximately 86% of households who are advised to shelter in place would do so; the remaining 14% would choose Dresden Generating Station F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

to evacuate the area. Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Revision 1. Thus, the data obtained above is less than the federal guidance.

Emergency officials advise you to shelterinplace 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 65% of households would follow instructions and delay the start of evacuation until so advised, while the other 35% 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 51% of households indicated that they would evacuate to a friend or relatives home, 3.5% to a reception center, 16% to a hotel, motel or campground, 3.5% to a second or seasonal home, 1% would not evacuate, and the remaining 25% answered other/dont know to this question, as shown in Figure F13.

F.3.3 Time Distribution Results The survey asked several questions about the amount of time it takes to perform certain pre evacuation activities. These activities involve actions taken by residents during the course of their daytoday lives. Thus, the answers fall within the realm of the responders experience.

The mobilization distributions provided below are the result of having applied the analysis described in Section 5.4.1 on the component activities of the mobilization.

Approximately how much time would it take commuter to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home? Figure F14 presents the cumulative distribution for the survey responses. In all cases, the activity is completed within 60 minutes.

Ninety percent can leave within 30 minutes.

How much time on average, would it take commuter to travel home from work or college?

Figure F15 presents the work to home travel time for the EPZ for the survey responses. Over 75% of commuters can arrive home within 40 minutes of leaving work; all within 90 minutes.

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? Figure F16 presents the time required to prepare for leaving on an evacuation trip. In many ways this activity mimics a familys preparation for a short holiday or weekend away from home. Hence, the responses represent the experience of the responder in performing similar activities. Approximately 91% of households can be ready to leave home within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months and 15 minutes; the remaining households require up to an additional one hour 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 Dresden Generating Station F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

roads are passable. During adverse, snowy weather conditions, an additional activity must be performed before residents can depart on the evacuation trip. Although snow scenarios assume that the roads and highways have been plowed and are passable (albeit at lower speeds and capacities), it may be necessary to clear a private driveway prior to leaving the home so that the vehicle can access the street. Figure F17 presents the time required to clear 68 inches of snow and begin the evacuation trip. Approximately 90% of households can have their car cleared and the driveway passable within one hour and 15 minutes; the remaining households would require up to an additional one hour and 15 minutes to begin their evacuation trip, as seen in Figure F17. It should be noted that 10.5% of households would not shovel out and would simply drive through/over the snow.

Dresden Generating Station F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table F1. Dresden Generating Station Demographic Survey Sampling Plan Population Population Households Households Required Sample Zip Code within EPZ within EPZ (2010) (2020) Sample Obtained (2010) (2020) 60404 17,395 6,147 19917 7195 75 21 60407 1,092 402 995 389 5 0 60408 4,880 1,756 4888 1837 21 6 60410 12,654 4,063 13474 4610 50 21 60416 9,397 3,597 9532 3743 44 37 60421 3,318 1,257 3175 1259 15 2 60424 467 181 370 175 2 2 60431 10,470 3,300 13957 4301 40 4 60435 63 40 61 39 0 0 60436 1,804 774 1358 676 9 0 60444 266 92 253 101 1 2 60447 13,550 4,460 15494 5105 54 36 60450 19,362 7,640 19800 8106 95 103 60481 8,149 3,347 7904 3420 41 26 60541 7 2 0 0 0 0 60560 28 11 29 9 0 1 60586 4,999 1,504 5054 1566 18 1 Total 107,901 38,573 116,261 42,531 470 262 Average HH Size: 2.80 2.73 Dresden Generating Station F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Household Size 50%

40%

Percent of Households 30%

20%

10%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6+

People Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ Vehicle Availability 50%

40%

Percent of Households 30%

20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability Dresden Generating 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%

1 2 3 4+

Vehicles Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 59 Person Households 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 9 People 100%

Percent of Households 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4+

Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 5 to 9 Person Households Dresden Generating Station F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Rideshare with Neighbor/Friend 80%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference Commuters Per Household 40%

30%

Percent of Households 20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F6. Commuters per Households in the EPZ Dresden Generating Station F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Mode to Work 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

Rail/Bus Drive Alone Carpool (2+)

Mode of Travel Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ COVID19 Impact to Commuters 70%

60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Functional or Transportation Needs 10 9

8 Number of Households 7

6 5

4 3

2 1

0 Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Accessible Ambulance Vehicle Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs Evacuating Vehicles Per Household 60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

0%

1 2 3+

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Await Returning Commuter 60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

0%

Yes, would await return No, would evacuate Figure F11. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals 80%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

0%

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Destinations 60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

fsrea Figure F13. Evacuation Destinations Time to Prepare to Leave Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 15 30 45 60 75 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F14. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College Dresden Generating Station F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Commute Home From Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 Travel Time (min)

Figure F15. Time to Commute Home from Work/College Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F16. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Dresden Generating Station F14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Remove Snow from Driveway 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Time (min)

Figure F17. Time to Remove Snow from Driveway Dresden Generating Station F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ATTACHMENT A Demographic Survey Instrument Dresden Generating Station F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Dresden Generating 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 the Dresden Generating Station 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. What is your gender?

Mark only one oval.

Male Female Decline to State Other:

2. What is your home zip code?

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 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

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

5. How many people usually live in this household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE TEN ELEVEN TWELVE THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN NINETEEN OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE COVID-19

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 Commuters

7. How many people in the household commute to a job, or to college on a daily basis?

Mark only one oval.

ZERO ONE TWO THREE FOUR OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE Mode of Travel

8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Carpool-2 Drive Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle or more Alone know people Commuter 1

Mode of Travel

8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Carpool-2 Drive Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle or more Alone know people Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Mode of Travel

8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Carpool-2 Drive Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle or more Alone know people Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Mode of Travel

8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Carpool-2 Drive Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle or more Alone know people Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Commuter 4

Travel Home From Work/College

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Travel Home From Work/College

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Travel Home From Work/College

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Travel Home From Work/College

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Preparation to leave Work/College

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Preparation to leave Work/College

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Preparation to leave Work/College

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Preparation to leave Work/College

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

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 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 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Additional Questions

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 If Over 6 Hours for Question 11, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 11, is under 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months .

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 If Over 3 Hours for Question 12, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 12, is under 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months .

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 Specify "Other" Transportation Need Below

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 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

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 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 Fill in OTHER answers for question 15C Pet Questions 16A. Do you have any pet(s) and/or animal(s)?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE

Pet Questions 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:

Mark only one oval.

DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions 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 DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

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 WILL USE A TRAILER DECLINE TO STATE Other:

This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.

Forms

APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 indicates that the existing Traffic and Access Control Posts (TCPs/ACPs) identified by the offsite agencies should be used in the evacuation simulation modeling. The traffic management plans for the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) were provided by the offsite response organizations (OROs) within the EPZ.

These plans were reviewed and the TCPs/ACPs were modeled accordingly. An analysis of the TCPs/ACPs locations was performed, and it was determined to model the ETE simulations with existing TCPs/ACPs that were provided in the approved county and state emergency plans, with no additional TCPs/ACPs recommended.

G.1 Manual Traffic Control The TCPs/ACPs are forms of manual traffic control (MTC). As discussed in Section 9, MTC at intersections (which are controlled) are modeled as actuated signals. If an intersection has a pretimed signal, stop, or yield control, and the intersection is identified as a TCP, the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system, in accordance with Section 3.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. MTCs at existing actuated traffic signalized intersections were essentially left alone.

Table K1 provides the number of nodes with each control type. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a TCP/ACP, the control type is indicated as TCP/ACP in Table K1, respectively. The TCP/ACPs within the study area are mapped as green dots in Figure G1.

No additional locations for MTC are suggested in this study.

It is assumed that the ACPs will be established within 120 minutes of the advisory to evacuate (ATE) to discourage through travelers from using major through routes which traverse the EPZ.

As discussed in Section 3.11, external traffic was considered on I80, I55, and I255 in this analysis.

G.2 Analysis of Key TCP Locations As discussed in Section 5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, MTC at intersections could benefit from the ETE analysis. The MTC locations contained within the traffic management plans were analyzed to determine key locations where MTC would be most useful and can be readily implemented. As previously mentioned, signalized intersections that were actuated based on field data collection were essentially left as actuated traffic signals in the model, with modifications to green time allocation as needed. Other controlled intersections (pretimed signals, stop signs and yield signs) were changed to actuated traffic signals to represent the MTC that would be implemented according to the traffic management plans.

Table G1 shows a list of the controlled intersections that were identified as MTC points in the TMPs that were not previously actuated signals, including the type of control that currently exists at each location. To determine the impact of MTC at these locations, a summer, midweek, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 1) evacuation of the 2Mile, 5Mile and Dresden Generating Station G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Entire EPZ (Region R01, R02, R03) were simulated wherein these intersections were left as is (without MTC). The results are shown in Table G2. The ETE increased slightly (by at most 5 minutes) compared to the cases wherein these controlled intersections were modeled as actuated signals (with MTC) presented in Section 7 for Scenario 1 Regions R02 and R03. Region R01 remained unchanged. Although localized congestion worsened, there is little change (5 minutes) in ETE at the 90th percentile and no change at the 100th percentile when MTC was not present at these intersections. The remaining TCPs at controlled intersections were left as actuated signals in the model and, therefore, had no impact to ETE.

Since all congestion within the EPZ clears prior to trip generation time, the time to mobilize dictates the 100th percentile ETE; as a result, MTC has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE.

Although there is little to no reduction in ETE when MTC is implemented, traffic and access control can be beneficial in the reduction of localized congestion and driver confusion and can be extremely helpful for fixed point surveillance, amongst other things. Should there be a shortfall of personnel to staff the TCPs, the list of locations provided in Table G1 could be considered as priority locations when implementing the TMP as all other TCPs already have actuated signals which would mimic MTC.

In addition, preliminary simulations were generated and analyzed. Based on the congestion patterns, several TCPs were modified to allow movements that were not permitted based on the TMP to reduce localized congestion, specifically along Theodore St and US6. Table G3 summarizes the modifications that were made to the TMP including the node, TCP/ACP number from the plan, the intersection description, location (SubArea and County) and a description of the modification that was made. These MTC locations are shown as red squares in Figure G1.

To determine the impact of the modifications listed in Table G3, a summer, midweek, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 1) evacuation of the 2Mile, 5Mile and entire EPZ (Region R01, R02, R03) were simulated wherein these intersections were modeled with and without modification. The results are shown in Table G4. There is at most a 10minute and 5minute decrease in ETE at the 90th percentile and 100th percentile, respectively. Since ETE were not significantly impacted and localized congestion improved, these modifications were included for all cases simulated, and the results discussed in Section 7 include these modifications.

Dresden Generating Station G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations Type of Control TCP/ACP Node Number (Prior to being a Number (See Appendix K)

TCP/ACP)

S28/N 648 Stop Control K13/Q 1208 Stop Control K215/Q 1294 Stop Control K611/A 1683 Stop Control S101/J 1536 Stop Control S1011/J 496 Stop Control S1012/K 494 Stop Control S103/J 449 Stop Control S104/J 449 Stop Control S109/J 489 Stop Control S112/B 666 Stop Control S116/K 495 Stop Control S142/D 1758 Stop Control S15/Q 679 Stop Control S157/G 509 Stop Control S158/H 446 Stop Control S212/P 683 Stop Control S26/N 623 Stop Control S29/N 1280 Stop Control S37/H 423 Stop Control S46/K 502 Stop Control S51/M 1266 Stop Control S56/N 1302 Stop Control S613/A 113 Stop Control S63/Q 1292 Stop Control S71/K 440 Stop Control S83/L 407 Stop Control S92/G 1443 Stop Control W124/C 1667 Stop Control W127/D 577 Stop Control W1313/C 809 Stop Control W1315/D 1380 Stop Control W133/A 1679 Stop Control W137/B 1138 Stop Control W147/E 584 Stop Control W151/F 1738 Stop Control W152/F 593 Stop Control W153/F 1742 Stop Control W77/J 437 Stop Control Dresden Generating Station G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G2. ETE with No MTC Scenario 1 th 90 Percentile ETE 100th Percentile ETE Region No No Base Difference Base Difference MTC MTC R01 (2Mile Region) 2:40 2:40 0:00 5:05 5:05 0:00 R02 (5Mile Region) 2:30 2:35 0:05 5:10 5:10 0:00 R03 (Full EPZ) 3:10 3:15 0:05 5:15 5:15 0:00 Table G3. Proposed Modifications of Existing TCPs and/or ACPs Node # TCP/ACP ID No. Intersection SubArea County Modification 623 S26/N USRt 6 and Edgewater Drive 2 Grundy Allow eastbound movements.

648 S28/N USRt 6 and County Road 2 2 Grundy Allow southbound movements.

733 S136/B IL59 and Theodore Street 13 Will Allow southbound movements.

734 W135/B Theodore Street and River Road 13 Will Allow southbound movements.

Table G4. ETE with and without Modification to TMP Scenario 1 th 90 Percentile ETE 100th Percentile ETE Region ETE with ETE without ETE with ETE without Modifications Modification Difference Modifications Modification Difference to TMP to TMP to TMP to TMP R01 (2Mile) 2:40 2:40 0:00 5:05 5:05 0:00 R02 (5Mile) 2:45 2:35 0:10 5:10 5:05 0:05 R03 (Full EPZ) 3:10 3:10 0:00 5:15 5:15 0:00 Dresden Generating Station G4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Posts for the DRE Dresden Generating 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 H26). The percentages presented in Table H1 are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 2 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.

Dresden Generating Station H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of SubArea Population Evacuating for Each Region Radial Regions SubArea Region Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R01 2Mile Region 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R02 5Mile Region 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R03 Full EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction SubArea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R04 NNW, N, NNE 327° 34° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R05 NE, ENE 35° 79° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

E, ESE, SE 80° 146° See Region R01 SSE, S, SSW, R06 SW,WSW 147° 259° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R07 W,WNW 260° 304° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

NW 305° 326° See Region R02 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction SubArea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R08 N 350° 11° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R09 NNE 12° 34° 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R10 NE 35° 56° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

R11 ENE 57° 79° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R12 E, ESE 80° 124° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R13 SE 125° 146° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R14 SSE 147° 169° 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R15 S 170° 191° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R16 SSW, SW 192° 237° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R17 WSW 238° 259° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

R18 W 260° 281° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

R19 WNW 282° 304° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R20 NW 305° 326° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R21 NNW 327° 349° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind Direction SubArea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R22 5Mile Region 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Dresden Generating Station H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind Direction SubArea Region From: Degrees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 R23 NNW, N, NNE 327° 34° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R24 NE, ENE 35° 79° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

E, ESE, SE 80° 146° See Region R01 SSE, S, SSW, R25 SW, WSW 147° 259° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R26 W, WNW 260° 304° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

NW 305° 326° See Region R22 SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then SubArea(s) Evacuate SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace Evacuate Dresden Generating Station H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H1. Region R01 Dresden Generating Station H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H2. Region R02 Dresden Generating Station H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H3. Region R03 Dresden Generating Station H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H4. Region R04 Dresden Generating Station H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H5. Region R05 Dresden Generating Station H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 Dresden Generating Station H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H7. Region R07 Dresden Generating Station H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Dresden Generating Station H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09 Dresden Generating Station H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H10. Region R10 Dresden Generating Station H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 Dresden Generating Station H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H12. Region R12 Dresden Generating Station H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H13. Region R13 Dresden Generating Station H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14 Dresden Generating Station H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15 Dresden Generating Station H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H16. Region R16 Dresden Generating Station H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H17. Region R17 Dresden Generating Station H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H18. Region R18 Dresden Generating Station H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H19. Region R19 Dresden Generating Station H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H20. Region R20 Dresden Generating Station H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 Dresden Generating Station H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H22. Region R22 Dresden Generating Station H25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H23. Region R23 Dresden Generating Station H26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H24. Region R24 Dresden Generating Station H27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H25. Region R25 Dresden Generating Station H28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H26. Region R26 Dresden Generating 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 591 source links (origins) in the model. The source links are shown as centroid points in Figure J2. On average, vehicles travel a straightline distance of 5.14 miles to exit the network.

Table J2 provides network-wide statistics (average travel time, average delay time1, average speed and number of vehicles) for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) for each scenario. Rain/light snow scenarios (Scenarios 2, 4, 7, and 10) and heavy snow scenarios (Scenarios 8 and 11), exhibit slower average speeds, slightly higher average delays, and longer average travel times compared to good weather scenarios. As expected, when comparing Scenario 13 (special event) and Scenario 9, the additional vehicles introduced by the special event slightly lowers the networkwide average speed and increases the networkwide average travel time and delay. When comparing Scenario 14 (roadway closure) and Scenario 1, the lane closure along I80 Eastbound increases the networkwide average travel time and delay and decreases the average travel speed.

Table J3 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes -

Interstate 55 (I55), I80, US Route 6 (US6) and Illinois State Route 53 (IL53) - for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 78, US6, IL53 and I80 eastbound are congested for the first 3 to 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months of the evacuation. As such, the travel speeds on these roads are lower than free flow speed for the first 3 to 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months of the evacuation. As congestion dissipates, travel speeds along these roads increase to free flow speed by the 4th or 5th hour of the evacuation.

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. Refer to the figures in Appendix K for a map showing the geographic location of each link.

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 somewhat separated due to the presence of traffic congestion within the EPZ for the first 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months and 30 minutes, specifically in the major population centers. After this congestion clears, the two curves are close together indicating ETE mimics trip mobilization time.

1 Computed as the difference of the average travel time and the average ideal travel time under free flow condition.

Dresden Generating Station J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Upstream Downstream Entering Link Node Node Network Directional Destination Destination Number on this Link Preference Nodes Capacity 8711 1,275 582 349 372 368 N 8469 2,850 8473 1,700 8043 4,500 999 614 1448 129 SE 8263 6,750 8003 6,750 8043 4,500 2159 1536 437 406 S 8013 1,700 8324 1,700 8268 6,750 1719 1145 1144 134 NE 8343 2,850 8608 1,275 8032 1,700 727 445 446 664 SE 8034 1,700 8035 1,700 8595 1,275 383 219 209 27 NE 8268 6,750 8608 1,275 8343 2,850 2373 1942 779 20 NE 8268 6,750 8608 1,275 8003 6,750 1177 736 747 70 N 8268 6,750 8608 1,275 8859 1,275 1351 860 869 11 NE 8268 6,750 8263 6,750 8343 2,850 1707 1137 1138 105 N 8268 6,750 8608 1,275 Dresden Generating 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 1.9 2.3 2.0 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.6 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 0.6 1.0 0.7 1.2 0.9 0.8 1.3 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 32.4 26.4 29.9 24.4 27.3 29.0 23.3 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 124,313 124,445 122,243 122,526 105,211 128,312 128,325 Exiting Network Scenario 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NetworkWide Average 2.6 2.0 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.4 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 1.3 0.7 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.1 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 23.1 30.4 26.0 26.0 27.9 29.2 25.5 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 128,603 117,733 117,824 117,343 102,853 118,928 124,400 Exiting Network Dresden Generating 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:minutes) 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 5:15 Travel Length Speed Time Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Route# (miles) (mph) (min) Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time I55 Northbound 47.0 70.2 40.2 70.1 40.3 74.4 37.9 74.8 37.7 74.8 37.7 70.2 40.2 I55 Southbound 46.7 72.0 38.9 70.7 39.6 74.3 37.7 74.5 37.6 74.6 37.5 74.8 37.4 I80 Eastbound 37.4 62.6 35.8 51.4 43.7 69.4 32.3 69.5 32.3 69.5 32.3 69.5 32.3 I80 Westbound 37.4 68.0 33.0 67.9 33.1 69.4 32.3 69.5 32.3 69.5 32.3 69.5 32.3 US6 Westbound 19.1 34.9 32.8 33.4 34.3 47.0 24.4 48.9 23.5 50.1 22.9 52.9 21.7 US6 Eastbound 21.0 20.6 61.1 31.1 40.6 38.1 33.1 37.8 33.4 39.6 31.9 44.4 28.4 IL53 Southbound to I55 12.8 28.1 27.4 15.5 49.6 18.0 42.8 51.0 15.1 52.2 14.7 53.3 14.4 IL53 Northbound 28.4 45.3 37.6 31.5 54.1 23.3 73.3 36.2 47.1 48.3 35.3 48.1 35.5 Dresden Generating 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:minutes) 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 5:15 Roadway Network Upstream Downstream Name Exit Link Node Node Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval I55 3,323 9,671 15,513 18,432 20,217 20,265 2 4 3 Northbound 18 17 16 16 16 16 I80 2,867 7,177 10,315 10,957 11,121 11,127 149 68 69 Westbound 15 12 11 10 9 9 USRt 52 390 1,383 2,336 3,262 3,519 3,522 214 111 112 Westbound 2 2 2 3 3 3 US 30 65 721 1,216 1,370 1,414 1,414 291 159 160 Eastbound 0 1 1 1 1 1 I80 2,616 6,848 10,651 10,998 11,121 11,126 446 263 1574 Eastbound 14 12 11 10 9 9 SR59 857 3,489 6,180 8,847 10,152 10,188 568 342 343 Northbound 5 6 7 8 8 8 W Gardner 159 771 1,378 1,854 2,091 2,094 Rd 681 411 890 1 1 1 2 2 Westbound 2 CR9 134 856 1,543 1,914 2,134 2,135 705 432 1539 Westbound 1 1 2 2 2 2 CR25 245 744 1,096 1,252 1,305 1,308 973 595 886 Eastbound 1 1 1 1 1 1 SR71 177 1,136 2,266 2,961 3,102 3,106 1123 704 711 Northbound 1 2 2 3 3 3 Weber Rd 534 2,665 5,085 6,944 7,687 7,704 1206 756 1105 Northbound 3 5 5 6 6 6 US 30 75 1,180 2,351 3,442 3,911 3,912 1220 765 766 Northbound 0 2 3 3 3 3 CR74 273 737 1,104 1,284 1,346 1,348 1350 858 859 Eastbound 1 1 1 1 1 1 USRt 52 95 328 475 541 563 564 1387 884 885 Eastbound 1 1 1 0 0 0 SR102 169 747 1,150 1,315 1,354 1,354 1514 977 978 Southbound 1 1 1 1 1 1 SR113 368 1,005 1,384 1,542 1,582 1,583 1516 980 981 Southbound 2 2 1 1 1 1 CR9 172 538 770 865 916 917 1519 983 1406 Eastbound 1 1 1 1 1 1 SR17 1534 993 994 53 362 560 647 653 653 Dresden Generating Station J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Elapsed Time (hours:minutes) 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 5:15 Roadway Network Upstream Downstream Name Exit Link Node Node Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval Eastbound 0 1 1 1 1 1 SR17 131 394 660 918 1,086 1,113 1549 1004 1313 Westbound 1 1 1 1 1 1 USRt 66 323 930 1,517 2,071 2,555 2,638 1559 1012 1013 Southbound 2 2 2 2 2 2 SR47 104 282 450 617 782 812 1563 1017 1324 Southbound 1 0 0 1 1 1 SR115 132 342 546 738 808 811 1577 1027 1032 Southbound 1 1 1 1 1 1 CR28 30 172 288 368 420 421 1580 1030 1034 Southbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 SR115 28 61 74 82 96 97 1581 1030 1035 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 I55 2,490 6,447 9,428 10,254 10,548 10,566 1583 1037 1036 Southbound 13 11 10 9 9 9 SR47 39 292 640 835 868 868 2095 1468 1469 Northbound 0 1 1 1 1 1 River St 5 49 122 163 186 186 2099 1472 1473 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 SR71 79 557 1,137 1,537 1,626 1,628 2103 1476 710 Southbound 0 1 1 1 1 1 SR53 877 3,264 5,943 8,548 9,811 9,837 2113 1496 1498 Northbound 5 6 6 7 8 8 USRt 6 10 63 131 157 165 166 2165 1542 1543 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 SR7 8 104 216 323 368 368 2225 1593 1594 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 I355 1,681 3,519 5,328 6,655 7,221 7,241 2235 1601 268 Northbound 9 6 6 6 6 6 SR171 14 250 512 694 784 785 2242 1605 1607 Northbound 0 0 1 1 1 1 USRt 6 351 1,150 1,849 2,083 2,152 2,154 2265 1630 1634 Westbound 2 2 2 2 2 2 Dresden Generating Station J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins Dresden Generating Station J7 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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Dresden Generating Station J8 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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Dresden Generating Station J9 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)

Dresden Generating Station J10 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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario 8)

Dresden Generating Station J11 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 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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10)

Dresden Generating Station J12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (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, Snow (Scenario 11)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 12)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12)

Dresden Generating Station J13 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 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Dresden Generating Station J14 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 87 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K88) which show each of the links and nodes in the network.

The analysis network was calibrated using the observations made during the field surveys conducted in October 2020.

Table K1 summarizes the number of nodes by the type of control (stop sign, yield sign, pre timed signal, actuated signal, traffic and access control post [TCP/ACP], uncontrolled).

Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control Number of Control Type Nodes Uncontrolled 1,052 Pretimed 0 Actuated 278 Stop 259 TCP/ACP 127 Yield 4 Total: 1,720 Dresden Generating Station K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K1. DRE LinkNode Analysis Network Dresden Generating Station K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 Dresden Generating Station K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 Dresden Generating Station K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 Dresden Generating Station K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 Dresden Generating Station K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 Dresden Generating Station K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 Dresden Generating Station K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 Dresden Generating Station K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 Dresden Generating Station K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 Dresden Generating Station K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 Dresden Generating Station K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 Dresden Generating Station K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 Dresden Generating Station K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 Dresden Generating Station K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 Dresden Generating Station K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 Dresden Generating Station K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 Dresden Generating Station K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 Dresden Generating Station K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 Dresden Generating Station K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 Dresden Generating Station K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 Dresden Generating Station K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 Dresden Generating Station K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 Dresden Generating Station K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 Dresden Generating Station K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 Dresden Generating Station K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 Dresden Generating Station K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 Dresden Generating Station K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 Dresden Generating Station K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 Dresden Generating Station K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 Dresden Generating Station K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 Dresden Generating Station K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 Dresden Generating Station K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 Dresden Generating Station K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 Dresden Generating Station K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 Dresden Generating Station K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 Dresden Generating Station K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 Dresden Generating Station K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 Dresden Generating Station K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 Dresden Generating Station K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 Dresden Generating Station K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 Dresden Generating Station K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 Dresden Generating Station K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 Dresden Generating Station K44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 Dresden Generating Station K45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 Dresden Generating Station K46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 Dresden Generating Station K47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 Dresden Generating Station K48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 Dresden Generating Station K49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 Dresden Generating Station K50 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 Dresden Generating Station K51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 Dresden Generating Station K52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 Dresden Generating Station K53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 Dresden Generating Station K54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 Dresden Generating Station K55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K55. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 54 Dresden Generating Station K56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K56. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 55 Dresden Generating Station K57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K57. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 56 Dresden Generating Station K58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K58. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 57 Dresden Generating Station K59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K59. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 58 Dresden Generating Station K60 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K60. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 59 Dresden Generating Station K61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K61. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 60 Dresden Generating Station K62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K62. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 61 Dresden Generating Station K63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K63. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 62 Dresden Generating Station K64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K64. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 63 Dresden Generating Station K65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K65. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 64 Dresden Generating Station K66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K66. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 65 Dresden Generating Station K67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K67. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 66 Dresden Generating Station K68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K68. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 67 Dresden Generating Station K69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K69. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 68 Dresden Generating Station K70 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K70. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 69 Dresden Generating Station K71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K71. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 70 Dresden Generating Station K72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K72. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 71 Dresden Generating Station K73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K73. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 72 Dresden Generating Station K74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K74. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 73 Dresden Generating Station K75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K75. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 74 Dresden Generating Station K76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K76. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 75 Dresden Generating Station K77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K77. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 76 Dresden Generating Station K78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K78. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 77 Dresden Generating Station K79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K79. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 78 Dresden Generating Station K80 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K80. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 79 Dresden Generating Station K81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K81. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 80 Dresden Generating Station K82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K82. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 81 Dresden Generating Station K83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K83. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 82 Dresden Generating Station K84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K84. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 83 Dresden Generating Station K85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K85. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 84 Dresden Generating Station K86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K86. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 85 Dresden Generating Station K87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K87. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 86 Dresden Generating Station K88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K88. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 87 Dresden Generating Station K89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX L Subarea Boundaries

L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES Subarea 1 County: Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes the majority of Aux Sable Township. Bounded to the west, north and east by Aux Sable Township. The southern boundary follows the Illinois River.

Subarea 2 County: Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Saratoga Township Subarea 3 County: Will Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes portions of Channahon and Wilmington Townships. Bounded to the north by the Illinois River north of Arsenal Road, across the Illinois River westbound to where US6 meets the Grundy/Will County boundaries. Bounded to the west by the Grundy/Will County boundaries. Bounded to the east by Interstate55.

Bounded to the south by Lorenzo Road.

Subarea 4 County: Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes the majority of Goose Lake Township boundary. Bounded to the east, north and south by the Goose Lake Township boundary. Bounded to the west by the Goose Lake Township boundary to Holderman Road, and then continue north to the Illinois River.

Subarea 5 County: Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes the entire area of Morris Township and portions of Erienna Township. Bounded to the north by US6/Bedford Road and the southern boundary of Saratoga Township to the western boundary of Aux Sable Township. Bounded to the west from the corner of Aux Sable Township and Morris Township straight south to the Illinois River. Bounded to the south by the Illinois River and bounded to the west by Saratoga Road.

Subarea 6 County: Kendall Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes all of Seward Township and part of Lisbon Township. Bounded to the east by the Kendall/Will County boundaries. Bounded to the south by the Grundy/Kendall County boundaries. Bounded to the west by transmission lines from the Grundy/Kendall County boundary to Quarry Road to IL47. Bounded to the north by US52 to Brisbin Road to the northern Seward Township boundary.

Dresden Generating Station L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea 7 County: Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Felix Township Subarea 8 County: Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes Wauponsee Township and part of Goose Lake Township. Bounded to the north by the Wauponsee Township boundary (Illinois River). Bounded to the east by the Wauponsee Township boundary to Holderman Road, and then continue north to the Illinois River. Bounded to the south and west by the Wauponsee Township boundary.

Subarea 9 County: Will Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes a portion of Wilmington Township. Bounded to the north by Lorenzo Road. Bounded to the west and south by the Wilmington Township boundary. Bounded to the east by Interstate55.

Subarea 10 County: Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Braceville Township Subarea 11 County: Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Maine Township Subarea 12 County: Will Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes the eastern and northern portion of Channahon Township. Bounded to the south, east, and north by the Channahon Township boundary. Bounded to the west by Intersate55, to the Illinois River north of Arsenal Road, across the Illinois River westbound to where US6 meets the Grundy/Will County boundaries.

Subarea 13 County: Will Defined as the area within the following boundary: Contains the majority of Troy Township and a portion of Joliet Township excluding the City of Joliet.

Bounded to the west by the Kendall/Will County boundaries. Bounded to the south by the southern boundaries of Troy and Joliet Townships. Bounded to the north by the Troy Township boundary. Bounded to the east by Interstate 55 to US52 (W Jefferson Street) to Joyce Road (the Joliet Township boundary) to US6 to Brandon Road.

Dresden Generating Station L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Subarea 14 County: Will Defined as the area within the following boundary: Contains the western half of Jackson Township. Bounded to the south, west, and north by the Jackson Township boundary. Bounded to the east by IL53 (S. Chicago Street) and S.

Chicago Road.

Subarea 15 County: Will Defined as the area within the following boundary: Contains the eastern portion of Wilmington Township, the northern portion of Custer Township and the western portion of Florence Township. Bounded to the north by the Wilmington and Florence Township boundaries. Bounded to the west by Interstate55. Bounded to the south by E Coal City Road to IL129, continue south to IL113, IL113 east to River Rd, then follow the River Rd north to the southern boundaries of Wilmington and Florence Townships. Bounded to the east by S. Chicago Road.

Subarea 16 County: Will Defined as the area within the following boundary: Contains the northern portion of Reed Township. Bounded to the west, north, and east by the Reed Township boundary. Bounded to the south by West Kennedy Road to S.

Lincoln Street to W. Reed Street to S. Center Street to IL53 to Ridge Street to E. Reed Street to IL113.

Dresden Generating Station L3 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 Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) to changes in some base evacuation conditions.

M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times A sensitivity study was performed to determine whether changes in the estimated trip generation time have an effect on the ETE for the entire Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). Specifically, if the tail of the mobilization distribution were truncated (i.e., if those who responded most slowly to the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), could be persuaded to respond much more rapidly) or if the tail were elongated (i.e., spreading out the departure of evacuees to limit the demand during peak times), how would the ETE be affected? The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 3; a summer, 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 percentile ETE is reduced by 40 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE are reduced by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months (a significant change), respectively. If evacuees mobilize one hour slower, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE are increased by 20 minutes and 55 minutes, respectively - a significant change.

As discussed in Section 7.3, traffic congestion persists within the EPZ for about 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months after the ATE, well before the completion of trip generation time. As such, trip generation (plus a 10 minute travel time to the EPZ boundary), dictates the 90th and 100th percentile ETE, as a result the ETE are sensitive to changes in the trip generation time. See Table M1.

M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the percentage of people who decide to relocate from the Shadow Region. The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 3; a summer, 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 Sections 3.2 and 7.1 for additional information on population within the Shadow Region.

Table M2 presents the ETE for each of the cases considered. The results show that eliminating (0%)

the shadow evacuation decreases the 90th percentile ETE by 5 minutes and has no effect on the 100th percentile ETE, since it is dictated by trip generation time. Doubling (40%) increases the 90th percentile ETE by 5 minutes and has no effect on the 100th percentile ETE. Tripling (60%) results in the 90th percentile ETE increasing by 20 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE by 5 minutes.

Increasing the shadow evacuation by 80% increases the 90th and 100th percentile ETEs by 40 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months , respectively. A full shadow evacuation (100%) increases the 90th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 5 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 50 minutes.

Dresden Generating Station M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Note the demographic survey results presented in Appendix F, indicate that 14% of households would elect to evacuate if advised to shelter, which differs from the base assumption of 20% non compliance suggested in the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. A sensitivity study was run using 14% shadow evacuation, and the 90th and 100th percentile ETE were not impacted.

As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 77, there is heavy congestion in Joliet, which is in the Shadow Region. Therefore, additional shadow residents that decide to voluntarily evacuate can increase the congestion on the major evacuation routes leaving the EPZ thus increasing ETE.

M.3 Effect of Changes in 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 (excluding the roadway impact scenario and the special event scenario if it is a one day per year special event).

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 29%.

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 Radius (R01), the 5Mile Radius (R02) and the entire EPZ (R03).

4. The scenario (excluding roadway impact and special event) which yielded the longest 90th percentile ETE values was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 8- Winter, Midweek, Midday with Heavy Snow).

Table M3 presents the results of the sensitivity study.Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and NUREG/CR7002, 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 values (for the 2Mile Radius, 5Mile Radius or entire EPZ) to increase by 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. Base ETE value for the 2 Mile Radius (R01), 5Mile Radius (R02), and for the Entire EPZ (R03) are greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months ; 25 percent of these base ETE is always equal or greater than 30 minutes. Therefore, the R01, R02, and R03 criteria for updating is 30 minutes.

Dresden Generating Station M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Those percent population changes which result in the longest 90th percentile ETE change greater than the respective criterion for each region are highlighted in red in Table M3 - a 29% or greater increase in the 2Mile Radius permanent resident population (includes 20% of the Shadow permanent resident population). Constellation will have to estimate the full EPZ population on an annual basis. If the 2Mile Radius population increases by 29% or more, an updated ETE analysis will be needed.

M.4 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:

Reducing or prolonging the trip generation time by an hour impacts the 90th percentile ETE by 25 to 15 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months , since trip generation within the EPZ dictates ETE (Section M.1). Public outreach encouraging evacuees to mobilize more quickly or in a timely manner will decrease ETE.

Increasing the shadow evacuation percent has no impact on ETE (Section M.2).

Nonetheless, 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 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.

Dresden Generating Station M3 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 4 Hours 2:30 4:15 5 Hours (Base) 3:10 5:15 6 Hours 3:30 6:10 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Percent Shadow Evacuating Shadow Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Evacuation Vehicles1 th 90 Percentile 100th Percentile 0 0 3:05 5:15 14 (Survey) 14,396 3:10 5:15 20 (Base) 20,566 3:10 5:15 40 41,132 3:15 5:15 60 61,699 3:30 5:20 80 82,265 3:50 6:15 100 102,831 4:15 7:05 Table M3. Evacuation Time Estimates for Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20%

Base Shadow Permanent 27% 28% 29%

Resident Population 151,912 192,928 194,447 195,966 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 27% 28% 29%

2Mile radius (R01) 3:30 3:35 3:40 3:40 5Mile radius (R02) 3:35 3:40 3:40 3:40 Entire EPZ (R03) 4:00 4:25 4:25 4:30 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100th Percentile Population Change Region Base 27% 28% 29%

2Mile radius (R01) 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 5Mile radius (R02) 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 Entire EPZ (R03) 6:25 6:25 6:25 6:30 1

The Evacuating Shadow Vehicles, in Table M-2, represent the residents and employees who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis, for the base values shown, is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees. See Section 6 for further discussion.

Dresden Generating Station M4 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 Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 1.0 Introduction

a. The emergency planning zone (EPZ) and surrounding area is Yes Section 1.2 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 in Yes Section 1.1, Section 1.3, Appendix D Section 1.1, Approach.

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.

Dresden Generating Station N1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (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 Dresden Generating Station N2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. Population values are adjusted as necessary for growth to NA 2020 Census used as the base year of reflect population estimates to the year of the ETE. the analysis

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, Appendix F justification is provided for other values.

2.1.2 Transient Population

a. A list of facilities that attract transient populations is included, Yes Section 3.3, Table E5 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.

Dresden Generating Station N3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

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.

f. A sector diagram is included, similar to Figure 21, Population Yes Figure 36 (transients) and Figure 38 by Sector, is included showing the population distribution for (employees) 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 Dresden Generating Station N4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

f. A summary table showing the total number of buses, Yes Table 38, 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.

2.3 Special Facility Residents

a. Special facilities, including the type of facility, location, and Yes Table E3 lists all medical facilities by average population, are listed. Special facility staff is included facility name, location, and average in the total special facility population. population. Staff estimates were not provided.

b. The method of obtaining special facility data is discussed. Yes Section 3.5

c. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles assumed Yes Section 3.5 available to support the evacuation of the facility is provided.

d. The logistics for mobilizing specially trained staff (e.g., medical Yes Section 8.1 - under:

support or security support for prisons, jails, and other Evacuation of Medical Facilities correctional facilities) are discussed when appropriate. Evacuation of Correctional Facilities 2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student population, Yes Table 38, Table E1, Section 3.7 and transportation resources required to support the evacuation, is provided. The source of this information should be identified.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle schools Yes Section 3.7 are based on 100 percent of the school capacity.

Dresden Generating Station N5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

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 no return trips are needed.

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 is Yes Section 3.8 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 59 (footnote) network is consistent with the trip generation time generated for the permanent resident population.

2.5.3 Background and Pass Through Traffic Dresden Generating Station N6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

a. The volume of background traffic and passthrough traffic is Yes Section 3.11, Section 3.12 based on the average daytime traffic. Values may be reduced for nighttime scenarios.

b. The method of reducing background and passthrough traffic Yes Section 2.2 - Item 11 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 pass through demand in each scenario.

3.0 Roadway Capacity

a. The method(s) used to assess roadway capacity is discussed. Yes Section 4 Dresden Generating Station N7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 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 the Yes Appendix K modeled roadway network similar to Figure A1, Roadway Network Identifying Nodes and Links, and Figure A2, Grid Map Showing Detailed Nodes and Links.

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.

Dresden Generating Station N8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

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 Item 2 and 3 of Section 2.6

b. The speed and capacity reduction factors identified in Table 3 Yes Table 22 1, 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.

d. The effect of adverse weather on mobilization is considered Yes Item 6 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 set Yes Section 2, Appendix J of model inputs are provided.

Dresden Generating Station N9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

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

d. The trip generation time for each population group is Yes Section 5 developed from sitespecific information.

e. The methods used to reduce uncertainty when developing N/A There was no uncertainty when trip generation times are discussed, if applicable. developing trip generation times.

4.3.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population Dresden Generating Station N10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

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 of commuters.

residents will need to return home before evacuating. Table 63 presents the 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.

Item 3 of Section 2.3

b. The trip generation time accounts for the time and method to Yes Section 5 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.

Dresden Generating Station N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (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. Basic bus routes were developed for the ETE analysis.

Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit Dependent People (Residents without access to a vehicle)

b. The means of evacuating ambulatory and nonambulatory Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit residents are discussed. Dependent People (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 Transit prepare and then travel to a bus pickup point, including the Dependent People (Residents without expected means of travel to the pickup point, is described. access to a vehicle)

e. The number of bus stops and time needed to load passengers Yes Section 8.1, Table 85 though Table 87 are discussed.

f. A map of bus routes is included. Yes Figure 102, Figure 103

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.

Dresden Generating Station N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

h. Information is provided to support analysis of return trips, if Yes Sections 8.1 and 8.2 no return trips are necessary. needed.

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 811

b. The logistics of evacuating wheelchair and bed bound Yes Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 8 residents are discussed. 11

c. Time for loading of residents is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 811

d. Information is provided that indicates whether the evacuation Yes Section 8.1 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 Dresden Generating Station N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. Information is provided that indicates whether the evacuation Yes Section 8.1 can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

d. If used, reception centers should be identified. A discussion is Yes Section 8.1, Table 103 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 seeds dynamic traffic assignment model to for evacuation of the full EPZ under Summer, Midweek, obtain the "average" (stable) network 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.

Dresden Generating Station N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (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 may Yes Section 4.5 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 of plot for each scenario evacuees who have mobilized and exited the EPZ. considered)

6. Average speed for each major evacuation route that exits 6. Table J3 the EPZ.

Dresden Generating Station N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

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.

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 to Yes Table 73 and Table 74 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.

Dresden Generating Station N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

b. Adjustments or additions to the traffic control plan that affect Yes Section 9, Appendix G the ETE is provided.

5.2 Enhancements in Evacuation Time

a. The results of assessments for enhancing evacuations are Yes Appendix M provided.

5.3 State and Local Review

a. A list of agencies contacted is provided and the extent of Yes Table 11 interaction with these agencies is discussed.

b. Information is provided on any unresolved issues that may No Will discuss with state and local affect the ETE. authorities during the final meeting.

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 conditions N/A This ETE is being updated as a result of not adequately reflected in the scenario variations. the availability of US Census Bureau decennial census data.

5.5 Reception Centers and Congregate Care Center

a. A map of congregate care centers and reception centers is Yes Figure 104 provided.

Dresden Generating Station N17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ML22269A411

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

5.1 Background

Navigation menu

Search