Text

Attachment 8 - Limerick Generating Station-Development of Evacuation Time Estimates
	ML22269A413
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	09/06/2022
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: ML22269A413 (523)
	v • d • e

LIMERICK 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 September 6, 2022 Final Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1274

Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Limerick 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 Estimate Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Methodological Assumptions .................................................................................................... 21 2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times .......................................................................................... 23 2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions ................................................................................................ 23 2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions .................................................................................... 25 2.6 Scenarios and Regions ............................................................................................................... 25 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Permanent Residents ................................................................................................................. 32 3.2 Shadow Population .................................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Transient Population .................................................................................................................. 33 3.4 Employees .................................................................................................................................. 33 3.5 Medical Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 34 3.6 Transit Dependent Population ................................................................................................... 34 3.7 School Population Demand........................................................................................................ 36 3.7.1 Colleges and Universities ................................................................................................... 37 3.8 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 38 3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................................. 39 3.10 Correctional Facilities ................................................................................................................. 39 3.11 External Traffic ........................................................................................................................... 39 3.12 Background Traffic ................................................................................................................... 310 3.13 Summary of Demand ............................................................................................................... 310 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 LGS 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 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ................................................... 54 Limerick Generating Station i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 ......................................................................................... 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 (ETE) 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 ETEs for Schools, Transit Dependent People, Special Facilities ................................................. 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ................................................................. 89 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 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 Limerick Generating Station ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Access Control Points ................................................................................................................ G1 G.2 Analysis of Key TCP and ACP Locations ..................................................................................... G2 H. EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES .................................................................................................................... L1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ................................................................................................. M1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................ M1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate ................. M1 M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population ......................................................................... M2 M.4 Enhancements in Evacuation Time .......................................................................................... M3 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped Limerick Generating Station iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Figures Figure 11. LGS Location........................................................................................................................... 113 Figure 12. LGS LinkNode Analysis Network ........................................................................................... 114 Figure 13. Trip Generation and ETE Comparison ................................................................................... 115 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ....................................................................................... 29 Figure 31. Zones Comprising the LGS EPZ .............................................................................................. 325 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................ 326 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 327 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 328 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 329 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 330 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 331 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 332 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 333 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 410 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................ 515 Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities ........................................................................................ 516 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution....................................................... 517 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 518 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region .................................................................................................... 519 Figure 61. LGS EPZ Subareas.................................................................................................................. 610 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ..................................................................................... 719 Figure 72. LGS Shadow Region ............................................................................................................... 720 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate ............................................ 721 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate .......................................... 722 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate .......................................... 723 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate .......................................... 724 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ...................... 725 Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ...................... 726 Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 ...................................................... 727 Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 .................................................... 727 Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 .................................................... 728 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 .................................................... 728 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 .................................................... 729 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 .................................................... 729 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 .................................................... 730 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 .................................................... 730 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 .................................................... 731 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 .................................................. 731 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 .................................................. 732 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 .................................................. 732 Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 .................................................. 733 Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 .................................................. 733 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ...................................................................... 834 Figure 101. Evacuation Route Map ...................................................................................................... 1011 Limerick Generating Station iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 102. Berks County TransitDependent Bus Routes .................................................................... 1012 Figure 103. Chester County TransitDependent Bus Routes ................................................................ 1013 Figure 104. Montgomery County TransitDependent Bus Routes ...................................................... 1014 Figure 105. General Population Reception Centers and Host Schools ................................................. 1015 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B5 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ......................................................................................... C13 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ......................................................................................................... C14 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ............................................................................ C14 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) .................................................... C15 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Overview of Schools within the Study Area........................................................................... E13 Figure E2. Schools within the Study Area - North .................................................................................. E14 Figure E3. Schools within the Study Area - South .................................................................................. E15 Figure E4. Overview of Preschools/Day Care Centers and Day Camps within the EPZ .......................... E16 Figure E5. Preschools/Day Care Centers within the EPZ - North ........................................................... E17 Figure E6. Preschools/Day Care Centers and Day Camps within the EPZ - South ................................. E18 Figure E7. Medical Facilities within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E19 Figure E8. Major Employers within the EPZ............................................................................................ E20 Figure E9. Transient Attractions within the EPZ ..................................................................................... E21 Figure E10. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ .......................................................................................... E22 Figure E11. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ .................................................................................. E23 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ....................................................................................................... F7 Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability ................................................................................................ F7 Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 5 Person Households ...................................................................... F8 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 6 to 9+ Person Households .................................................................... F8 Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Percentage ........................................................................................ F9 Figure F6. Commuters in Households in the EPZ ..................................................................................... F9 Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ................................................................................................... F10 Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic ........................................................ F10 Figure F9. Access and/or Functional Needs Vehicle Requirements ...................................................... 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. Shelter Locations .................................................................................................................. F13 Figure F14. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work or College ......................................................... F13 Figure F15. Time to Commute Home from Work or College ................................................................. F14 Figure F16. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation................................................................................ F14 Figure F17. Time to Clear Driveway of 6"8" of Snow ........................................................................... F15 Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Points for the LGS ........................................................................ G5 Figure H1. Region R01.............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H2. Region R02.............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H3. Region R03.............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H4. Region R04.............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H5. Region R05.............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H6. Region R06............................................................................................................................ H10 Figure H7. Region R07............................................................................................................................ H11 Figure H8. Region R08............................................................................................................................ H12 Limerick Generating Station v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09............................................................................................................................ H13 Figure H10. Region R10.......................................................................................................................... H14 Figure H11. Region R11.......................................................................................................................... H15 Figure H12. Region R12.......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H13. Region R13.......................................................................................................................... H17 Figure H14. Region R14.......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H15. Region R15.......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure H16. Region R16.......................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H17. Region R17.......................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H18. Region R18.......................................................................................................................... H22 Figure H19. Region R19.......................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H20. Region R20.......................................................................................................................... H24 Figure H21. Region R21.......................................................................................................................... H25 Figure H22. Region R22.......................................................................................................................... H26 Figure H23. Region R23.......................................................................................................................... H27 Figure H24. Region R24.......................................................................................................................... H28 Figure H25. Region R25.......................................................................................................................... H29 Figure H26. Region R26.......................................................................................................................... H30 Figure H27. Region R27.......................................................................................................................... H31 Figure H28. Region R28.......................................................................................................................... H32 Figure H29. Region R29.......................................................................................................................... H33 Figure H30. Region R30.......................................................................................................................... H34 Figure H31. Region R31.......................................................................................................................... H35 Figure H32. Region R32.......................................................................................................................... H36 Figure H33. Region R33.......................................................................................................................... H37 Figure H34. Region R34.......................................................................................................................... H38 Figure H35. Region R35.......................................................................................................................... H39 Figure H36. Region R36.......................................................................................................................... H40 Figure H37. Region R37.......................................................................................................................... H41 Figure H38. Region R38.......................................................................................................................... H42 Figure H39. Region R39.......................................................................................................................... H43 Figure H40. Region R40.......................................................................................................................... H44 Figure H41. Region R41.......................................................................................................................... H45 Figure H42. Region R42.......................................................................................................................... H46 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins.......................................................................................................... J8 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) .............. J9 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) ............................... J9 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)............ J10 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) ............................ J10 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5) .................................................................... J11 Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) .............. J11 Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7) ............ J12 Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8) ................... J12 Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9) ............ J13 Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10) ........ J13 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11) .............. J14 Limerick Generating Station vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12) .................................................................. J14 Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13) ............................................................ J15 Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) ....................................................... J15 Figure K1. LGS LinkNode Analysis Network ............................................................................................. K2 Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 ...................................................................................... K3 Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 ...................................................................................... K4 Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 ...................................................................................... K5 Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 ...................................................................................... K6 Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 ...................................................................................... K7 Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 ...................................................................................... K8 Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 ...................................................................................... K9 Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 .................................................................................... K10 Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 ................................................................................. K11 Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 ................................................................................ K12 Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 ................................................................................ K13 Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 ................................................................................ K14 Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 ................................................................................ K15 Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 ................................................................................ K16 Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 ................................................................................ K17 Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 ................................................................................ K18 Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 ................................................................................ K19 Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 ................................................................................ K20 Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 ................................................................................ K21 Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 ................................................................................ K22 Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 ................................................................................ K23 Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 ................................................................................ K24 Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 ................................................................................ K25 Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 ................................................................................ K26 Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 ................................................................................ K27 Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 ................................................................................ K28 Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 ................................................................................ K29 Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 ................................................................................ K30 Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 ................................................................................ K31 Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 ................................................................................ K32 Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 ................................................................................ K33 Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 ................................................................................ K34 Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 ................................................................................ K35 Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 ................................................................................ K36 Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 ................................................................................ K37 Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 ................................................................................ K38 Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 ................................................................................ K39 Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 ................................................................................ K40 Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 ................................................................................ K41 Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 ................................................................................ K42 Limerick Generating Station vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ................................................................................ K43 Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 ................................................................................ K44 Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 ................................................................................ K45 Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 ................................................................................ K46 Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 ................................................................................ K47 Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 ................................................................................ K48 Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 ............................................................................... K49 Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 ................................................................................ K50 Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 ................................................................................ K51 Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 ................................................................................ K52 Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 ................................................................................ K53 Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 ................................................................................ K54 Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 ................................................................................ K55 Figure K55. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 54 ................................................................................ K56 Figure K56. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 55 ................................................................................ K57 Figure K57. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 56 ................................................................................ K58 Figure K58. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 57 ................................................................................ K59 Figure K59. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 58 ................................................................................ K60 Figure K60. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 59 ................................................................................ K61 Figure K61. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 60 ................................................................................ K62 Figure K62. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 61 ................................................................................ K63 Figure K63. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 62 ................................................................................ K64 Figure K64. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 63 ................................................................................ K65 Figure K65. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 64 ................................................................................ K66 Figure K66. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 65 ................................................................................ K67 Figure K67. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 66 ................................................................................ K68 Figure K68. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 67 ................................................................................ K69 Figure K69. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 68 ................................................................................ K70 Figure K70. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 69 ................................................................................ K71 Figure K71. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 70 ................................................................................ K72 Figure K72. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 71 ................................................................................ K73 Figure K73. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 72 ................................................................................ K74 Figure K74. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 73 ................................................................................ K75 Figure K75. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 74 ................................................................................ K76 Figure K76. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 75 ................................................................................ K77 Figure K77. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 76 ................................................................................ K78 Figure K78. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 77 ................................................................................ K79 Figure K79. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 78 ................................................................................ K80 Figure K80. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 79 ................................................................................ K81 Figure K81. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 80 ................................................................................ K82 Figure K82. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 81 ................................................................................ K83 Figure K83. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 82 ................................................................................ K84 Figure K84. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 83 ................................................................................ K85 Figure K85. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 84 ................................................................................ K86 Figure K86. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 85 ................................................................................ K87 Figure K87. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 86 ................................................................................ K88 Figure K88. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 87 ................................................................................ K89 Limerick Generating Station viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K89. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 88 ................................................................................ K90 Figure K90. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 89 ................................................................................ K91 Figure K91. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 90 ................................................................................ K92 Figure K92. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 91 ................................................................................ K93 Figure K93. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 92 ................................................................................ K94 Figure K94. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 93 ................................................................................ K95 Figure K95. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 94 ................................................................................ K96 Figure K96. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 95 ................................................................................ K97 Figure K97. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 96 ................................................................................ K98 Figure K98. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 97 ................................................................................ K99 Figure K99. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 98 .............................................................................. K100 Figure K100. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 99 ............................................................................ K101 Limerick 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............................................................................................... 27 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 28 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ..................................................................................... 311 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Subarea................................................... 312 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ........................................................................... 313 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ..................................................................... 314 Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ........................... 315 Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand ............................................................................................ 316 Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates .............................................................................. 317 Table 38. School Population Demand Estimates ................................................................................... 318 Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Estimates .......................................................... 319 Table 310. LGS EPZ External Traffic ....................................................................................................... 320 Table 311. Summary of Population Demand ......................................................................................... 321 Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand ............................................................................................... 323 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities .............................................................................. 510 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 510 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................. 510 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................ 511 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate ..................................................... 511 Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow ...................................................... 512 Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 512 Table 58. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 512 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation .................... 513 Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ....................... 514 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions........................................................................................... 64 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 67 Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................ 68 Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario.................................................................................................. 69 Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ......................... 710 Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ....................... 712 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region ............................ 714 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region .......................... 715 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions......................................................................................... 716 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................. 811 Table 82. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather ............................................................. 812 Table 83. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow........................................................... 814 Table 84. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow ................................................................. 816 Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather ......................................... 818 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ....................................... 821 Table 87. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow ............................................. 824 Table 88. Medical Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather ............................................ 827 Table 89 Medical Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ........................................... 829 Limerick Generating Station x KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 810. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow ................................................. 831 Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates ............................ 833 Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 102 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 106 Table 103. Reception Centers ................................................................................................................ 109 Table 104. Host Schools ....................................................................................................................... 1010 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C9 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ......................................................................... C10 Table C3. Glossary ..................................................................................................................................C11 Table E1. Schools within the Study Area .................................................................................................. E2 Table E2. Preschools/Child Care Centers and Day Camps within the EPZ ................................................ E5 Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ............................................................................................... E9 Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................. E10 Table E5. Transient Attractions within the EPZ ...................................................................................... E11 Table E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................. E12 Table E7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ...................................................................................... E12 Table F1. LGS Demographic Survey Sampling Plan and Results Obtained ............................................... F6 Table G1. List of Key TCP/ACP Locations ................................................................................................. G3 Table G2. ETE with No MTC ..................................................................................................................... G4 Table H1. Percent of Subarea Population Evacuating for Each Region ................................................. H2 Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input ............................................................................................... J2 Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03) ........................... J3 Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1)................................................................................... J4 Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 ......................... J5 Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control .............................................................................. K1 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ....................................... M4 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study .................................................... M4 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change ................................................................................. M4 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist ................................................................................................. N1 Limerick Generating Station xi 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 Limerick Generating Station (LGS) located in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. ETE are part of the required planning basis and provide Constellation and state and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decisionmaking.

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

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

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

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

December 2019.

Overview of Project Activities This project began in November 2020 and extended over a period of nearly 2 years. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Attended kickoff meetings with Constellation personnel and emergency management personnel representing state and county governments.

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

Employee data was obtained from the county emergency management agencies and from Constellation.

Studied Geographic Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of the LGS, then conducted a detailed field survey of the highway network to observe any roadway changes relative to the previous ETE study done in 2014.

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

Designed and conducted an online demographic survey of residents within the study area (EPZ and Shadow Region), 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 county/state emergency management personnel prior to conducting the survey.

A data needs matrix (requesting data) was provided to Constellation and the county/state emergency management agencies at the kickoff meeting. The data for Limerick Generating Station ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

transient and special facilities (schools, medical facilities and correctional facilities) in each county was based on the data received from the counties and data from the previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches where data was missing.

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 the study area.

Following federal guidelines, the EPZ is subdivided into 43 Subareas. These Subareas are then grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 42 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 - the Firebird Festival in Phoenixville was considered. One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane was closed on US 422 eastbound for the duration of the evacuation.

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

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

A rapidly escalating accident at the LGS 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 notification.

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

Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either rideshare with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided as specified in the county evacuation plans. 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.

Limerick Generating Station ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Attended a final meeting with Constellation personnel and county and state representatives to present results from the ETE study.

Computation of ETE A total of 588 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 42 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 14 Evacuation Scenarios (42 x 14 = 588). Separate ETE are calculated for transitdependent evacuees, including schoolchildren for applicable scenarios.

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

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

Staged evacuation is considered wherein those people within the 2Mile Region evacuate immediately, while those beyond 2 miles, but within the EPZ, shelterinplace. Once 90% of the 2Mile Region is evacuated, those people beyond the 2Mile Region begin to evacuate. As per federal guidance, 20% of people beyond the 2Mile Region 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 simulate 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% and 100%, respectively, of the population within the impacted region, to evacuate from within the impacted region. These statistics are presented in tabular and graphical formats. The 90th percentile ETE have been identified as the values that should be considered when making protective action decisions because the 100th Limerick Generating Station ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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. The 100th percentile ETE is when the last vehicle to evacuate crosses the boundary of the area being evacuated.

Traffic Management This study reviewed, modeled and analyzed the existing comprehensive traffic management plans provided in the Berks County, Chester County, and Montgomery County Radiological Emergency Response Plans.

Due to the detailed plans already in place and the traffic congestion patterns within the EPZ (discussed in Section 7.3), no additional traffic or access control measures have been identified as a result of this study. See 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.

Tables 61 define each of the 42 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Subareas.

Table 62 lists the Evacuation Scenarios.

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

Tables 73 and 74 present ETE for the 2mile region for unstaged and staged evacuations for the 90th and 100th percentiles, respectively.

Table 82 presents ETE for schools in good weather.

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

Table 88 presents ETE for the medical facility population in good weather.

Table M3 presents the growth in population that would trigger and updated ETE study prior to the release of the next Census data.

Figure 61 displays a map of the LGS EPZ showing the layout of the 43 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. Maps of all regions are provided in Appendix H.

Limerick Generating Station ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Conclusions General population ETE were computed for 588 unique cases - a combination of 42 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 2:30 (hr:min) to 6:20 at the 90th percentile.

Inspection of Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the ETE for the 100th percentile are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile, ranging from 4:45 to 10:35. This is the result of the congestion within the EPZ. When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand. See Figures 79 through 722.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicates that a staged evacuation provides no benefit to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region. However, evacuees from 2 to 5 miles are delayed by as much as 55 minutes. Staged evacuation is not beneficial for the LGS EPZ. See Section 7.6 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 12 (winter, midweek/weekend, evening) and 13 (winter, weekend, evening) in Table 72 indicates that the special event does not materially affect the ETE. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 indicates that events such as adverse weather or traffic accidents which close a lane on US 422, could significantly impact the 90th percentile ETE (up to 60 minutes). State and local police could consider traffic management tactics such as using the shoulder of the roadway as a travel lane or re routing of traffic along other evacuation routes to avoid overwhelming US 422. All efforts should be made to remove the blockage on US 422, particularly within the first 5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months of the evacuation. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

The majority of the EPZ is congested throughout a full EPZ evacuation. All congestion within the EPZ clears by 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and 45 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate. See Section 7.3 and Figures 73 through 78.

Separate ETE were computed for schools, medical facilities, transitdependent persons, and access and/or functional needs persons. The average singlewave ETE for these facilities are comparable to or less than the general population ETE at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (region R03). See Section 8.

Table 81 indicates that there are sufficient resources to evacuate all medical facilities, access and functional needs population, school children and the transit dependent population in a single wave.

A one hour reduction in the base trip generation time of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months and 45 minutes has no impact on the the general population ETE at the 90th percentile. An increase in mobilization time of one hour increases the 90th percentile ETE by 15 minutes. See Section M.1.

The general population ETE is significantly impacted by the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region. Tripling the shadow evacuation percentage increases Limerick Generating Station ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

90th and 100th percentile ETE by 35 minutes. See Section M.2.

An increase in permanent resident population (EPZ plus Shadow Region) of 12% or greater results in an increase in the longest 90th percentile ETE of 30 minutes, which meets the federal criterion for performing a fully updated ETE study between decennial Censuses. See Section M.3.

Limerick Generating Station ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Subarea 2010 Population 2020 Population Amity 10,815 11,607 Boyertown 4,055 4,273 Charlestown 4,141 4,391 Colebrookdale 5,078 5,115 Collegeville 5,089 5,043 Douglass (Berks) 3,306 3,663 Douglass (Montgomery) 10,195 10,579 Earl 717 717 East Coventry 6,636 7,068 East Nantmeal 1,500 1,509 East Pikeland 7,079 8,260 East Vincent 6,821 7,433 Green Lane 508 493 Limerick 18,074 20,498 Lower Frederick 4,840 4,830 Lower Pottsgrove 12,059 12,210 Lower Providence 25,436 25,625 Lower Salford 1,503 1,907 Marlborough 492 525 New Hanover 10,939 12,990 North Coventry 7,866 8,441 Perkiomen 9,139 8,954 Phoenixville 16,440 18,602 Pottstown 22,377 23,434 Royersford 4,752 4,900 Schuylkill 8,516 8,780 Schwenksville 1,385 1,301 Skippack 13,715 14,382 South Coventry 2,604 2,796 Spring City 3,323 3,494 Trappe 3,509 4,002 Union 1,215 1,540 Upper Frederick 3,523 3,693 Upper Pottsgrove 5,315 5,864 Upper Providence 21,219 24,091 Upper Salford 3,299 3,235 Upper Uwchlan 8,089 9,150 Uwchlan 1,343 1,356 Warwick 2,192 2,270 Washington 715 687 West Pikeland 3,876 3,859 West Pottsgrove 3,874 3,798 West Vincent 4,567 6,668 EPZ TOTAL: 292,136 314,033 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 7.50%

Limerick Generating Station ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions 2Mile 5Mile Full Region

Description:

Region Region EPZ Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R01 R02 R03 R04 R05 R06 R07 R08 R09 R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 NE, SSE, S, WNW, NW, Wind Direction From: N/A N/A N/A N NNE ENE E ESE SE SSW SW WSW W NNW SubArea Amity X Boyertown X Charlestown X Colebrookdale X Collegeville X Douglass (Berks) X Douglass (Montgomery) X Earl X East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal X East Pikeland X East Vincent X X X X X X X Green Lane X Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick X Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence X Lower Salford X Marlborough X New Hanover X X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X X Perkiomen X Phoenixville X Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X X Schuylkill X Schwenksville X Skippack X South Coventry X X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X X Trappe X Union X Upper Frederick X Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X X Upper Salford X Upper Uwchlan X Uwchlan X Warwick X Washington X West Pikeland X West Pottsgrove X West Vincent X SubArea SheltersInPlace SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Region Number: R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 R21 R22 R23 R24 R25 R26 R27 R28 R29 R30 Wind Direction From: N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW SubArea Amity X X X X X X Boyertown X X X X X Charlestown X X X X X X Colebrookdale X X X X X Collegeville X X X X X Douglass (Berks) X X X X X X Douglass(Montgomery) X X X X X X Earl X X X X X East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal X X X X X East Pikeland X X X X X X East Vincent X X X X X X X X Green Lane X X X X X Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick X X X X X X Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence X X X X X X Lower Salford X X X X X X Marlborough X X X X X New Hanover X X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X Perkiomen X X X X X X Phoenixville X X X X X X Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X X Schuylkill X X X X X X Schwenksville X X X X X X Skippack X X X X X X X South Coventry X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X X Trappe X X X X X X Union X X X X X Upper Frederick X X X X X X Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X X X Upper Salford X X X X X X Upper Uwchlan X X X X X X Uwchlan X X X X X Warwick X X X X X Washington X X X X X West Pikeland X X X X X X West Pottsgrove X X X X X X West Vincent X X X X X X X SubArea not within Plume, but Evacuates because it is surrounded by other SubArea(s) which SubArea SheltersInPlace are Evacuating SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station ES9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R31 R32 R33 R34 R35 R36 R37 R38 R39 R40 R41 R42 WNW, 5Mile NE, SSE, S, N NNE E ESE SE SW WSW W NW, Region ENE SSW Wind Direction From: NNW SubArea Amity Boyertown Charlestown Colebrookdale Collegeville Douglass (Berks)

Douglass (Montgomery)

Earl East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal East Pikeland East Vincent X X X X X X Green Lane Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence Lower Salford Marlborough New Hanover X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X Perkiomen Phoenixville Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X Schuylkill Schwenksville Skippack South Coventry X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X Trappe Union Upper Frederick Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X Upper Salford Upper Uwchlan Uwchlan Warwick Washington West Pikeland West Pottsgrove West Vincent SubArea SheltersinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate SubArea SheltersInPlace SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station ES10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Time of Scenario Season1 Week Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None 5 Summer Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None 12 Winter Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 13 Winter Midweek, Evening Good Phoenixville Firebird Weekend Festival 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Single Lane Closure US422 Eastbound2 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).

2 US-422 will be reduced to a single lane in the eastbound direction from the interchange with Evergreen Rd to the interchange with US-202.

Limerick Generating Station ES11 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 Evening 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 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:30 R02 3:25 3:30 3:10 3:20 3:05 3:20 3:35 4:40 3:10 3:20 4:10 3:00 3:00 3:55 R03 4:45 5:10 4:40 5:00 4:25 4:50 5:05 6:20 4:35 5:00 6:00 4:25 4:30 5:20 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 3:20 3:25 2:55 3:05 2:40 3:15 3:20 4:20 2:55 3:05 4:05 2:40 2:40 3:50 R05 2:55 2:55 2:35 2:45 2:30 2:55 3:00 4:00 2:35 2:45 3:30 2:35 2:35 3:25 R06 2:55 2:55 2:35 2:45 2:35 2:55 2:55 4:00 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:35 3:25 R07 3:00 3:05 2:40 2:50 2:40 3:00 3:05 4:05 2:40 2:50 3:40 2:40 2:45 3:25 R08 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:00 3:15 3:20 4:20 3:05 3:05 4:05 3:00 3:00 3:40 R09 3:20 3:20 3:10 3:10 3:00 3:15 3:20 4:20 3:05 3:10 4:00 3:00 3:00 3:45 R10 3:15 3:25 3:05 3:05 3:05 3:15 3:25 4:15 3:00 3:05 4:10 3:05 3:05 3:50 R11 3:05 3:15 2:50 2:55 2:55 3:10 3:10 4:15 2:50 3:00 3:50 2:50 2:55 3:50 R12 3:15 3:30 3:00 3:15 2:55 3:20 3:30 4:25 3:00 3:05 4:10 2:55 2:55 3:50 R13 3:15 3:25 3:00 3:05 2:40 3:20 3:20 4:15 3:00 3:10 4:05 2:45 2:35 4:00 R14 3:15 3:30 3:00 3:05 2:45 3:15 3:20 4:20 2:55 3:10 4:05 2:45 2:40 3:50 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R15 4:10 4:30 4:00 4:10 3:40 4:15 4:25 5:25 3:55 4:10 5:10 3:40 3:50 4:45 R16 3:25 3:40 3:10 3:20 3:15 3:30 3:40 4:35 3:15 3:25 4:15 3:10 3:25 3:45 R17 3:10 3:20 2:55 3:05 2:55 3:15 3:20 4:15 2:55 3:05 3:55 2:55 2:55 3:30 R18 3:40 3:55 3:25 3:30 3:20 3:40 3:50 5:00 3:25 3:35 4:25 3:20 3:20 4:15 R19 3:45 4:00 3:30 3:45 3:25 3:50 4:00 5:00 3:35 3:40 4:35 3:30 3:25 4:25 R20 4:40 5:05 4:40 4:55 4:30 4:40 5:15 6:10 4:40 4:55 6:00 4:35 4:35 5:00 R21 4:55 5:05 4:45 5:10 4:35 5:00 5:15 6:10 4:40 5:05 6:10 4:35 4:30 5:10 R22 4:45 5:05 4:35 4:50 4:25 4:50 5:00 6:10 4:30 4:55 6:00 4:25 4:25 5:00 R23 4:45 5:10 4:40 5:05 4:30 4:45 5:10 6:15 4:30 5:05 6:00 4:25 4:40 4:55 R24 4:00 4:05 3:45 4:05 3:50 4:00 4:15 5:10 3:40 3:55 4:50 3:45 3:45 4:20 R25 3:35 3:55 3:25 3:45 3:20 3:40 3:50 4:50 3:25 3:45 4:40 3:20 3:20 4:10 R26 4:20 4:40 4:05 4:15 3:55 4:10 4:40 5:25 3:55 4:15 5:10 3:45 3:50 5:05 R27 4:25 4:55 4:10 4:30 4:00 4:25 4:55 5:45 4:10 4:30 5:20 4:00 4:00 5:10 Limerick 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 Evening 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 R28 4:35 4:50 4:15 4:30 4:00 4:35 5:00 5:55 4:20 4:30 5:25 4:00 4:00 5:20 R29 4:25 4:50 4:10 4:30 3:55 4:30 4:55 5:45 4:15 4:30 5:25 4:05 4:00 5:25 R30 4:20 4:40 4:10 4:20 3:55 4:20 4:40 5:40 4:05 4:25 5:25 3:55 4:00 5:15 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 Miles R31 3:50 4:00 3:40 3:50 3:40 3:50 3:55 5:10 3:35 3:50 5:05 3:40 3:40 4:30 R32 3:40 3:45 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:35 3:45 4:55 3:25 3:35 4:50 3:30 3:30 4:20 R33 3:15 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 4:35 3:05 3:10 4:25 3:10 3:10 3:40 R34 3:10 3:15 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:15 3:15 4:30 3:05 3:05 4:20 3:05 3:05 3:35 R35 3:20 3:30 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:25 4:35 3:10 3:10 4:25 3:10 3:10 3:35 R36 3:40 3:45 3:25 3:30 3:30 3:40 3:45 4:55 3:25 3:35 4:45 3:30 3:30 3:55 R37 3:35 3:40 3:25 3:25 3:25 3:40 3:40 4:55 3:25 3:30 4:45 3:30 3:30 4:00 R38 3:35 3:40 3:25 3:30 3:25 3:40 3:40 4:55 3:30 3:30 4:40 3:30 3:25 4:00 R39 3:30 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:20 3:30 3:30 4:45 3:20 3:25 4:30 3:25 3:20 3:55 R40 3:40 3:50 3:35 3:45 3:35 3:45 3:45 4:55 3:30 3:40 4:55 3:35 3:35 4:35 R41 3:35 3:45 3:20 3:35 3:25 3:35 3:40 4:50 3:25 3:35 4:45 3:30 3:25 4:30 R42 3:35 3:50 3:35 3:40 3:30 3:40 3:45 4:50 3:25 3:35 4:55 3:35 3:35 4:25 Limerick Generating Station ES13 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 Evening 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 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 5:55 R02 5:00 5:15 4:50 5:10 4:50 4:55 5:00 6:25 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 R03 6:45 7:30 6:25 6:50 6:20 6:50 7:20 8:35 6:20 6:50 8:55 6:00 6:10 10:35 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 R05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R06 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R07 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R08 5:00 5:15 4:50 4:55 4:50 4:55 5:00 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R09 5:00 5:05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 5:00 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R10 4:55 5:05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 5:00 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R11 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R12 4:55 5:00 4:50 4:55 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:25 R13 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 R14 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R15 6:05 6:25 5:50 5:55 5:20 6:15 6:15 7:20 5:45 5:55 7:00 5:20 5:25 9:55 R16 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:55 4:55 6:05 R17 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:55 4:55 6:10 R18 6:05 6:45 6:05 6:35 5:15 6:10 6:25 7:35 5:15 6:15 6:55 5:25 5:40 6:20 R19 6:00 6:20 5:45 6:25 5:05 5:50 6:20 7:45 5:45 6:05 6:55 5:10 5:25 6:45 R20 6:10 6:45 6:05 6:35 5:55 6:10 7:20 8:05 5:55 6:10 7:40 5:50 5:50 6:45 R21 6:30 7:15 6:20 6:40 5:50 6:45 7:00 8:00 6:05 6:35 8:00 6:00 6:00 6:30 R22 6:05 6:40 5:55 6:20 5:55 6:10 6:40 7:55 5:45 6:30 7:50 5:40 5:40 6:40 R23 6:05 6:40 5:55 6:40 5:55 6:10 6:40 8:20 5:50 6:30 7:50 5:45 6:00 6:05 R24 5:50 6:05 5:40 6:20 5:45 5:50 6:20 7:55 5:35 6:05 7:25 5:35 5:35 6:30 R25 5:00 6:05 5:10 5:25 5:00 5:25 5:30 7:35 5:15 5:20 6:50 5:10 5:20 9:00 R26 6:05 6:30 5:35 5:35 5:35 5:50 6:25 7:05 5:40 5:50 7:00 5:20 5:35 10:05 R27 6:15 7:10 6:05 6:15 6:05 6:15 7:10 8:00 6:05 6:25 7:20 6:00 6:00 10:25 Limerick Generating Station ES14 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 Evening 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 R28 6:45 7:05 6:10 6:20 5:55 6:40 7:10 8:00 6:10 6:35 7:35 5:55 6:00 10:35 R29 6:30 6:45 6:05 6:35 5:55 6:30 7:00 8:00 6:15 6:30 7:20 5:45 5:45 10:35 R30 6:30 6:40 6:05 6:15 5:40 6:05 6:45 8:05 5:55 6:15 7:20 5:40 5:45 10:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 Miles R31 5:35 6:00 5:25 5:35 5:15 5:20 5:45 6:50 5:20 5:30 7:00 5:30 5:30 8:55 R32 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 R33 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R34 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R35 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R36 5:25 5:35 5:05 5:25 5:10 5:15 5:40 7:05 5:20 5:45 6:55 5:15 5:25 5:55 R37 5:25 5:35 5:05 5:25 5:10 5:15 5:35 7:05 5:20 5:35 6:55 5:15 5:25 5:55 R38 5:25 5:35 5:05 5:25 5:10 5:15 5:35 7:05 5:20 5:35 6:55 5:15 5:25 5:55 R39 5:20 5:30 5:05 5:25 5:05 5:15 5:20 7:05 5:05 5:35 6:50 4:55 5:05 5:55 R40 5:20 5:35 5:15 5:25 5:20 5:15 5:45 7:30 5:20 5:35 7:05 4:55 5:05 8:40 R41 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:50 R42 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 Limerick Generating Station ES15 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 Evening 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 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R02 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R05 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R06 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R07 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R08 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R09 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R10 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R11 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R12 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R13 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R14 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 Miles R31 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R32 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R33 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R34 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 Impediment to Evacuation. Not Analyzed R35 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R36 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R37 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R38 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R39 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R40 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R41 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R42 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 Limerick Generating Station ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter 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 Evening 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 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R02 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R05 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R06 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R07 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R08 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R09 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R10 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R11 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R12 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R13 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R14 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 Miles R31 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R32 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R33 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R34 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R35 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 Impediment to Evacuation. Not Analyzed R36 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R37 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R38 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R39 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R40 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R41 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R42 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 Limerick Generating Station ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Schools in Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) H.S. (mi.) to H.S. (min) (hr:min)

BERKS COUNTY SCHOOLS Amity 90 15 1.3 4.6 17 2:05 6.8 10 2:15 Boyertown 90 15 2.9 8.9 20 2:05 7.1 11 2:20 Colebrookdale 90 15 1.8 13.1 8 1:55 8.1 12 2:10 Douglass (Berks) 90 15 4.0 13.7 18 2:05 6.8 10 2:15 Earl 90 15 2.2 5.9 22 2:10 6.3 9 2:20 Union 90 15 3.2 5.5 35 2:20 5.4 8 2:30 Washington 90 15 1.2 14.6 5 1:50 13.1 20 2:10 CHESTER COUNTY SCHOOLS Charlestown 90 15 1.0 14.6 4 1:50 12.5 19 2:10 East Coventry 90 15 10.9 9.5 69 2:55 3.0 5 3:00 East Pikeland 90 15 8.2 6.2 79 3:05 2.5 4 3:10 East Nantmeal 90 15 5.1 23.5 13 2:00 2.7 4 2:05 East Vincent 90 15 10.7 6.2 103 3:30 2.5 4 3:35 North Coventry 90 15 6.5 7.5 52 2:40 5.3 8 2:50 Phoenixville 90 15 5.2 3.9 80 3:05 15.4 23 3:30 Schuylkill 90 15 2.7 5.7 29 2:15 15.4 23 2:40 South Coventry 90 15 6.6 6.4 62 2:50 3.0 5 2:55 Spring City 90 15 11.6 7.4 94 3:20 2.5 4 3:25 Upper Uwchlan 90 15 2.7 10.0 16 2:05 7.2 11 2:20 Uwchlan 90 15 1.7 4.6 22 2:10 2.4 4 2:15 Warwick 90 15 3.1 17.4 11 2:00 3.1 5 2:05 West Pikeland 90 15 4.5 9.7 28 2:15 1.2 2 2:20 West Vincent 90 15 9.2 7.0 79 3:05 3.9 6 3:15 MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOLS Collegeville 90 15 2.9 2.4 73 3:00 8.9 13 3:15 Douglass (Montgomery) 90 15 3.2 6.7 29 2:15 13.1 20 2:35 Green Lane 90 15 2.6 38.9 4 1:50 8.4 13 2:05 Limerick 90 15 8.4 5.8 87 3:15 10.0 15 3:30 Lower Frederick 90 15 5.1 40.0 8 1:55 7.2 11 2:10 Lower Pottsgrove 90 15 9.5 3.6 158 4:25 17.6 26 4:55 Lower Providence 90 15 4.2 1.8 142 4:10 30.8 46 5:00 Lower Salford 90 15 0.9 1.0 53 2:40 7.5 11 2:55 Marlborough 90 15 0.8 34.2 1 1:50 14.0 21 2:15 New Hanover 90 15 3.4 2.6 79 3:05 17.7 27 3:35 Limerick Generating Station ES18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Driver Dist. To Average Travel Time Dist. EPZ Travel Time Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed to EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to from EPZ Bdry ETA to H.S.

Schools in Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) H.S. (mi.) to H.S. (min) (hr:min)

Perkiomen 90 15 11.0 7.1 93 3:20 6.4 10 3:30 Pottstown 90 15 9.9 3.4 175 4:40 13.1 20 5:00 Royersford 90 15 10.7 6.1 105 3:30 12.5 19 3:50 Schwenksville 90 15 6.2 28.7 13 2:00 9.8 15 2:15 Skippack 90 15 2.9 26.7 7 1:55 9.9 15 2:10 Trappe 90 15 7.4 2.4 186 4:55 9.2 14 5:10 Upper Frederick 90 15 7.1 6.8 62 2:50 6.8 10 3:00 Upper Pottsgrove 90 15 7.9 2.4 195 5:00 13.0 20 5:20 Upper Providence 90 15 7.9 9.6 50 2:35 30.6 46 3:25 Upper Salford 90 15 2.4 33.6 4 1:50 7.2 11 2:05 West Pottsgrove 90 15 6.0 2.5 146 4:15 4.8 7 4:25 Maximum for EPZ: 5:00 Maximum: 5:20 Average for EPZ: 2:45 Average: 3:05 Limerick Generating Station ES19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BERKS COUNTY 3 120 1.3 4.4 18 30 2:50 6.8 10 5 10 38 30 4:25 Amity 3 140 1.3 3.0 26 30 3:20 6.8 10 5 10 39 30 4:55 Boyertown 3 120 2.9 4.5 38 30 3:10 7.1 11 5 10 64 30 5:10 Colebrookdale 3 120 1.8 10.4 10 30 2:40 8.1 12 5 10 29 30 4:10 Douglass (Berks) 2 120 4.0 10.1 24 30 2:55 6.8 10 5 10 49 30 4:40 Earl 1 120 2.2 4.3 31 30 3:05 6.3 9 5 10 46 30 4:45 Union 1 120 3.2 5.4 36 30 3:10 5.4 8 5 10 25 30 4:30 Washington 1 120 1.2 6.0 12 30 2:45 13.1 20 5 10 43 30 4:35 CHESTER COUNTY Charlestown 3 120 1.0 11.3 5 30 2:35 12.5 19 5 10 27 30 4:10 3 120 10.9 10.3 64 30 3:35 3.0 5 5 10 38 30 5:05 East Coventry 1 140 10.9 12.2 54 30 3:45 3.0 5 5 10 38 30 5:15 2 120 8.2 6.7 74 30 3:45 2.5 4 5 10 31 30 5:05 East Pikeland 2 140 8.2 7.7 64 30 3:55 2.5 4 5 10 29 30 5:15 East Nantmeal 1 120 5.1 20.6 15 30 2:45 2.7 4 5 10 26 30 4:00 2 120 10.7 7.0 91 30 4:05 2.5 4 5 10 36 30 5:30 East Vincent 2 140 10.7 8.2 78 30 4:10 2.5 4 5 10 36 30 5:35 3 120 6.5 7.7 51 30 3:25 5.3 8 5 10 28 30 4:50 North Coventry 2 140 6.5 10.0 39 30 3:30 5.3 8 5 10 28 30 4:55 4 120 5.2 3.9 80 30 3:50 15.4 23 5 10 39 30 5:40 Phoenixville 4 140 5.2 4.7 67 30 4:00 15.4 23 5 10 39 30 5:50 2 160 5.2 5.5 57 30 4:10 15.4 23 5 10 39 30 6:00 3 120 2.7 6.5 25 30 2:55 15.4 23 5 10 44 30 4:50 Schuylkill 2 140 2.7 7.7 21 30 3:15 15.4 23 5 10 42 30 5:05 South Coventry 2 120 6.6 6.7 59 30 3:30 3.0 5 5 10 26 30 4:50 Spring City 2 120 11.6 7.9 88 30 4:00 2.5 4 5 10 39 30 5:30 3 120 2.7 10.5 15 30 2:45 7.2 11 5 10 27 30 4:10 Upper Uwchlan 2 140 2.7 10.4 16 30 3:10 7.2 11 5 10 27 30 4:35 Limerick Generating Station ES20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Uwchlan 1 120 1.7 3.5 30 30 3:00 2.4 4 5 10 12 30 4:05 Warwick 2 120 3.1 19.0 10 30 2:40 3.1 5 5 10 20 30 3:50 West Pikeland 2 120 4.5 9.6 28 30 3:00 1.2 2 5 10 25 30 4:15 2 120 9.2 6.8 81 30 3:55 3.9 6 5 10 36 30 5:25 West Vincent 2 140 9.2 7.6 73 30 4:05 3.9 6 5 10 35 30 5:35 MONTGOMERY COUNTY Collegeville 3 120 2.9 1.8 98 30 4:10 8.9 13 5 10 51 30 6:00 Douglass 3 120 3.2 3.1 61 30 3:35 13.1 20 5 10 51 30 5:35 (Montgomery) 3 140 3.2 2.5 77 30 4:10 13.1 20 5 10 32 30 5:50 Green Lane 1 120 2.6 38.9 4 30 2:35 8.4 13 5 10 21 30 3:55 4 120 8.4 6.1 83 30 3:55 10.0 15 5 10 43 30 5:40 Limerick 4 140 8.4 5.6 90 30 4:20 10.0 15 5 10 40 30 6:00 3 160 8.4 6.6 76 30 4:30 10.0 15 5 10 40 30 6:10 Lower Frederick 3 120 5.1 40.0 8 30 2:40 7.2 11 5 10 33 30 4:10 3 120 9.5 3.7 152 30 5:05 17.6 26 5 10 55 30 7:15 Lower Pottsgrove 3 140 9.5 4.1 139 30 5:10 17.6 26 5 10 55 30 7:20 4 120 4.2 1.8 139 30 4:50 30.8 46 5 10 59 30 7:20 4 140 4.2 1.8 139 30 5:10 30.8 46 5 10 59 30 7:40 Lower Providence 4 160 4.2 1.9 131 30 5:25 30.8 46 5 10 59 30 7:55 1 180 4.2 2.1 121 30 5:35 30.8 46 5 10 59 30 8:05 Lower Salford 1 120 0.9 1.0 52 30 3:25 7.5 11 5 10 22 30 4:45 Marlborough 1 120 0.8 34.2 1 30 2:35 14.0 21 5 10 23 30 4:05 3 120 3.4 2.0 101 30 4:15 17.7 27 5 10 41 30 6:10 New Hanover 3 140 3.4 2.0 104 30 4:35 17.7 27 5 10 37 30 6:25 1 160 3.4 2.2 95 30 4:45 17.7 27 5 10 37 30 6:35 3 120 11.0 7.6 87 30 4:00 6.4 10 5 10 43 30 5:40 Perkiomen 2 140 11.0 8.2 80 30 4:10 6.4 10 5 10 43 30 5:50 Limerick Generating Station ES21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 3 120 9.9 3.4 173 30 5:25 13.1 20 5 10 50 30 7:20 3 140 9.9 3.7 159 30 5:30 13.1 20 5 10 50 30 7:25 Pottstown 3 160 9.9 3.9 153 30 5:45 13.1 20 5 10 50 30 7:40 3 180 9.9 4.3 139 30 5:50 13.1 20 5 10 50 30 7:45 Royersford 3 120 10.7 6.1 105 30 4:15 12.5 19 5 10 51 30 6:10 Schwenksville 1 120 6.2 26.0 14 30 2:45 9.8 15 5 10 63 30 4:50 3 120 2.9 25.6 7 30 2:40 9.9 15 5 10 50 30 4:30 Skippack 3 140 2.9 23.7 7 30 3:00 9.9 15 5 10 38 30 4:40 2 160 2.9 12.5 14 30 3:25 9.9 15 5 10 27 30 4:55 Trappe 2 120 7.4 2.4 183 30 5:35 9.2 14 5 10 36 30 7:10 Upper Frederick 2 120 7.1 7.6 56 30 3:30 6.8 10 5 10 46 30 5:15 Upper Pottsgrove 3 120 7.9 2.6 182 30 5:35 13.0 20 5 10 44 30 7:25 3 120 7.9 6.6 72 30 3:45 30.6 46 5 10 70 30 6:30 3 140 7.9 6.3 76 30 4:10 30.6 46 5 10 70 30 6:55 Upper Providence 3 160 7.9 6.9 68 30 4:20 30.6 46 5 10 70 30 7:05 3 180 7.9 8.8 54 30 4:25 30.6 46 5 10 70 30 7:10 Upper Salford 2 120 2.4 38.5 4 30 2:35 7.2 11 5 10 19 30 3:50 West Pottsgrove 2 120 6.0 2.4 147 30 5:00 4.8 7 5 10 37 30 6:30 Maximum ETE: 5:50 Maximum ETE: 8:05 Average ETE: 3:55 Average ETE: 5:40 Limerick Generating Station ES22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BERKS COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 190 30 1.3 18 2:20 Amity Wheelchair bound 90 5 19 75 1.3 29 3:15 Bedridden 90 15 5 30 1.3 18 2:20 Ambulatory 90 1 90 30 2.9 38 2:40 Boyertown Wheelchair bound 90 5 8 40 2.9 52 3:05 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 2.9 38 2:40 Ambulatory 90 1 20 20 3.2 36 2:30 Union Wheelchair bound 90 5 3 15 3.2 35 2:20 Bedridden 90 15 1 15 3.2 35 2:20 CHESTER COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 40 30 10.9 64 3:05 East Coventry Wheelchair bound 90 5 64 75 10.9 44 3:30 Bedridden 90 15 16 30 10.9 64 3:05 Ambulatory 90 1 130 30 8.2 74 3:15 East Pikeland Wheelchair bound 90 5 10 50 8.2 64 3:25 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 8.2 74 3:15 Ambulatory 90 1 165 30 10.7 91 3:35 East Vincent Wheelchair bound 90 5 16 75 10.7 61 3:50 Bedridden 90 15 4 30 10.7 91 3:35 Ambulatory 90 1 210 30 5.2 80 3:20 Phoenixville Wheelchair bound 90 5 92 75 5.2 55 3:40 Bedridden 90 15 23 30 5.2 80 3:20 Ambulatory 90 1 33 30 6.6 59 3:00 South Coventry Wheelchair bound 90 5 6 30 6.6 59 3:00 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 6.6 59 3:00 Limerick Generating Station ES23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

MONTGOMERY COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 170 30 9.5 152 4:35 Lower Pottsgrove Wheelchair bound 90 5 27 75 9.5 121 4:50 Bedridden 90 15 7 30 9.5 152 4:35 Ambulatory 90 1 272 30 4.2 139 4:20 Lower Providence Wheelchair bound 90 5 48 75 4.2 129 4:55 Bedridden 90 15 12 30 4.2 139 4:20 Ambulatory 90 1 218 30 9.9 173 4:55 Pottstown Wheelchair bound 90 5 226 75 9.9 152 5:20 Bedridden 90 15 57 30 9.9 173 4:55 Ambulatory 90 1 96 30 7.1 56 3:00 Upper Frederick Wheelchair bound 90 5 24 75 7.1 47 3:35 Bedridden 90 15 6 30 7.1 56 3:00 Ambulatory 90 1 400 30 7.9 72 3:15 Upper Providence Wheelchair bound 90 5 41 75 7.9 62 3:50 Bedridden 90 15 10 30 7.9 72 3:15 Maximum ETE: 5:20 Average ETE: 3:30 Limerick Generating Station ES24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Shadow Population Change Base Permanent Resident 10% 11% 12%

Population 374,214 411,635 415,378 419,120 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 10% 11% 12%

2MILE 3:55 3:55 3:55 4:00 5MILE 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 Full EPZ 6:20 6:45 6:45 6:50 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100th Percentile Population Change Region Base 10% 11% 12%

2MILE 6:25 6:25 6:25 6:25 5MILE 6:25 6:50 6:50 6:50 Full EPZ 8:35 9:05 9:15 9:15 Limerick Generating Station ES25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. LGS EPZ Subareas Limerick Generating Station ES26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Limerick Generating Station ES27 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 Limerick Generating Station (LGS), located in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. ETE provide state and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decisionmaking.

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

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

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

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

December 2019.

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

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

1. Information Gathering:

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

b. Attended meetings with emergency planners from state and local emergency management agencies 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 - circle with an approximate 10mile radius centered at the plant) and the Shadow Region (area between the EPZ boundary and 15 miles radially from the plant).

d. Obtained demographic data from the 2020 Census (See Section 3.1).

e. Conducted an online demographic survey of the study area residents (See Appendix F).

f. Conducted a data collection effort to identify and describe special facilities (schools, medical facilities and correctional facilities), major employers, access and/or functional needs population, transportation resources available, the special event, and other important information.

Limerick Generating Station 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 online demographic survey.

3. Defined Evacuation Scenarios (See Section 6). These scenarios reflect the variation in demand, in trip generation distribution and in highway capacity, associated with different seasons, day of week, time of day and weather conditions.

4. Reviewed the existing traffic management plan to be implemented by local and state police in the event of an incident at the plant. Traffic control is applied at specified Traffic Control Points (TCP), Access Control Points (ACP) and Control Entry Points (CEP) located within the EPZ. See Section 9 and Appendix G.

5. Divided the EPZ into 43 Subareas along township and borough boundaries. Used these Subareas to define Evacuation Regions. Regions are groups of contiguous subareas for which ETE are calculated. The configurations of these regions reflect wind direction and the radial extent of the impacted area. Each region, other than those that approximate circular areas, approximates a keyhole section within the EPZ as recommended by NUREG/CR7002 Rev. 1.

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

7. Prepared the input streams for the DYNEV II system.

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

b. Applied the procedures specified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM1) to the data acquired during the field survey, to estimate the capacity of all highway segments comprising the evacuation routes.

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

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

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

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

Limerick Generating Station 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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, medical facilities, etc.), for the transitdependent population and for the access and/or functional needs population.

1.2 The Limerick Generating Station Location The LGS is located along the Schuylkill River in Limerick Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. The site is approximately 30 miles northwest of Philadelphia, PA. The EPZ consists of parts of Berks, Chester and Montgomery Counties in Pennsylvania. Figure 11 displays the area surrounding the LGS. This map identifies the communities in the area and the major roads.

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

Field Surveys of the Highway Network KLD personnel drove the entire highway system within the EPZ and the Shadow Region. 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 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 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:

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 Limerick Generating Station 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 and ACPs at locations which have control devices are represented as actuated signals in the DYNEV II system.

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

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

Demographic Survey An online demographic survey was performed to gather information needed for the evacuation study. Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used, and tabulations of data compiled from the survey responses received.

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

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

Limerick Generating Station 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 Level of Service (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 Limerick Generating Station 15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

NUREG/CR4874 - The Sensitivity of Evacuation Time Estimates to Changes in Input Parameters for the IDYNEV Computer Code The evacuation analysis procedures are based upon the need to:

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

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

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

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 expedite the movement of vehicles and 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 The 90th percentile ETE for the entire EPZ decreased by 15 minutes for a winter midweek midday good weather scenario (Scenario 6) and by 5 minutes for a summer weekend midday good weather scenario (Scenario 3) when compared with the 2014 study. The 100th percentile ETE is unchanged for Scenario 6 and is decreased by 15 minutes for Scenario 3.

Table 13 presents a comparison of the present ETE study with the previous ETE study (KLD TR 617, dated January 2014). The major factors contributing to the differences between the ETE values obtained in this study and those of the previous study are:

The permanent resident population increased by approximately 7%, the number of evacuating vehicles for the permanent resident population increased by approximately 16% (approximately 26,000 vehicles). This significant increase in permanent resident evacuating vehicles is caused by the increased number of evacuating vehicles per household as per the demographic survey, resulting in a significant decrease in permanent resident vehicle occupancy. An increase in evacuating resident vehicles (demand) can increase ETE.

The number of evacuating vehicles within the Shadow Region increased by 17% (largely the result of the significant decrease in permanent resident vehicle occupancy discussed above), compared to the previous ETE. The significant increase in evacuating vehicles (demand) in the Shadow Region can increase congestion and ETE.

The number of employees commuting into the EPZ decreased significantly (60%) due to the updated NRC criteria for major employers from 50 or more employees per shift to 200 or more employees per shift. A decrease in the number of employee vehicles (demand) can decrease ETE.

Trip mobilization times are significantly different compared to 2014 study:

Limerick Generating Station 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

o Residents without commuters take an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 45 minutes to mobilize.

o Resident with commuters (population group that takes the longest to mobilize) take an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 30 minutes to mobilize.

o Employees and transients take an additional 15 minutes to mobilize.

This change in trip generation can increase or decrease ETE. The longer people take to mobilize, the longer it will take to reach the 100th percentile ETE, in an uncongested environment. Alternatively, elongating the trip generation rate could reduce congestion since less vehicles get on the road at one time giving the roadway system time to flush out vehicles at a faster rate. If vehicles load onto the network too quickly, the roadway system becomes overwhelmed and functions at or below capacity, resulting in congestion and longer ETE. Table 13 shows a comparison of the trip generation and ETE curves from the previous and current studies for a Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather evacuation of the Entire EPZ. As shown in the figure, the 2014 trip generation curve is shifted to the left of the 2020 trip generation curve. As a result, the 2014 ETE curve shows that vehicles are loaded more quickly onto the roadway network until capacity is reached and the rate of egress slows (see Section 7.4) giving the curve a flatter slope. Alternatively, the 2020 ETE curve shows a steeper slope, indicating an evacuation of more vehicles in less time and less congestion overall. This is also abundantly clear when comparing congestion diagrams in the 2014 study to Figure 73 through Figure 78 in this study at the same time intervals.

Those factors that can decrease ETE outweigh those that increase ETE resulting in slightly lower ETE in this study relative to the 2014 ETE study. The NRC considers a change in ETE of 30 minutes or more to be a significant changed. As such, the changes in ETE relative to the last study are not significant.

Limerick Generating Station 17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction Stakeholder Nature of Stakeholder Interaction Attended meetings to define project methodology and data requirements and set up contacts with local government agencies. Reviewed and Constellation approved the demographic survey instrument and all project assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and were informed of the study results.

Attended meetings to define project methodology and data requirements. Provided emergency plans and traffic management plans. Provided/

Berks, Chester, and Montgomery County confirmed special facility data, transient data and Emergency Management Agencies special event data. Reviewed and approved the demographic survey instrument and all study assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and were informed of the study results.

Attended the project kickoff meeting to define project methodology and data requirements.

Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agencies Provided state radiological emergency preparedness plans. Were informed of study results.

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.

Limerick 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 2020 US ArcGIS Software using 2010 US Census Census blocks; area ratio method Resident Population blocks; area ratio method used.

used.

Basis Population = 292,136 Population = 314,033 Vehicles = 138,354 Vehicles = 164,299 2.54 persons per household, 1.21 2.68 persons per household, 1.44 Resident Population evacuating vehicles per household, evacuating vehicles per household, Vehicle Occupancy yielding 2.10 persons per evacuating yielding 1.86 persons per vehicle. evacuating vehicle.

ArcGIS Software using 2020 US ArcGIS Software using 2010 US Census Census blocks; area ratio method blocks; area ratio method used.

Shadow Population used.

20% Population = 55,803 20% Population = 60,181 20% Vehicles = 26,570 20% Vehicles = 31,876 Employee estimates based on Estimates of employees who reside information provided about major outside the EPZ and commute to employers in EPZ, US Census work within the EPZ are based upon Longitudinal EmployerHousehold data provided by each county and Employee Dynamics by Constellation Population 1.04 employees/vehicle based on Assumed 1.00 employees/vehicle demographic survey results.

Employees = 13,930 Employees = 5,716 Vehicles = 13,750 Vehicles = 5,497 Transient estimates are based on Transient estimates based upon the information provided by each information provided about transient county supplemented by internet Transient Population attractions in EPZ. searches and aerial imagery where updated data was not available.

Transients = 14,486 Transients = 17,003 Vehicles = 6,814 Vehicles = 7,699 Special facility population based on School population based on information provided by each information provided by Constellation county supplemented by internet (previously Exelon) searches and aerial imagery where Special Facilities updated data was not available.

Population Medical Facilities: Medical Facilities:

Current census = 2,765 Current census = 2,765 Buses Required = 78 Buses Required = 78 Wheelchair Vans Required = 149 Wheelchair Bus Required = 50 Ambulances Required = 77 Ambulances Required = 76 Limerick Generating Station 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study TransitDependent population Estimates based upon U.S. Census data estimated using population and the results of the telephone survey. estimates and results of demographic survey.

A total of 4,607 people who do not A total of 3,533 people who do not TransitDependent have access to a personal vehicle, have access to a vehicle, requiring 118 Population require 175 buses to evacuate. An buses to evacuate. An additional 264 additional 264 homebound special homebound special needs persons needs persons needed special needed special transportation to transportation to evacuate (61 evacuate (61 wheelchair vans and 11 wheelchair vans and 11 ambulances ambulances are required to evacuate are required to evacuate this this population).

population).

School population based on School population based on information provided by each information provided by Constellation county within the EPZ, the previous (previously Exelon) ETE study and supplemented by internet searches.

School Population School Enrollment = 49,321 School Enrollment = 49,494 Preschool Enrollment = 12,110 Preschool Enrollment = 10,677 College Enrollment = 2,550 College Enrollment = 1,806 Commuter Vehicles = 1,245 Commuter Vehicles = 1,291 Buses Required = 1,131 Buses Required = 1,089 Voluntary evacuation from 20 percent of the population within the 20 percent of the population within within EPZ in areas EPZ, but not within the Evacuation the EPZ, but not within the outside region to be Region (see Figure 21) Evacuation Region (see Figure 21) evacuated 20% of people outside of the EPZ within 20% of people outside of the EPZ Shadow Evacuation the Shadow Region within the Shadow Region (See Figure 72) (See Figure 72)

Network Size 5,156 Links; 3,020 Nodes. 5,832 Links; 4,129 Nodes.

Field surveys conducted in November 2020. Major Field surveys conducted in November intersections were video archived.

2013. Roads and intersections were Roadway Geometric GIS shapefiles of signal locations video archived.

Data and roadway characteristics created during road survey.

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

HCM.

Limerick Generating Station 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Direct evacuation to designated Host Direct evacuation to designated School Evacuation School. Host School.

50 percent of transitdependent 68 percent of transitdependent Ridesharing persons will ride out with a neighbor or persons will ride out with a friend. neighbor or friend.

External Traffic is loaded on I476 and External Traffic is loaded on I476 Route 309, I76, I276, US 202, US 30 and Route 309, I76, I276, US 202, and US 422. Externaltraffic trips are US 30 and US 422. Externaltraffic External Traffic stopped within the 2hour ACP trips are stopped within the 2hour establish time. ACP establish time.

Vehicles = 41,386 Vehicles = 45,508 Based on residential telephone survey Based on residential demographic of specific pretrip mobilization survey of specific pretrip activities: mobilization activities:

Residents with commuters Residents with commuters returning returning leave between 45 and leave between 5 and 195 minutes.

285 minutes (375 with heavy snow).

Trip Generation for Evacuation Residents without commuters Residents without commuters returning returning leave between 15 and leave between 5 and 120 minutes.

225 minutes (315 with heavy snow).

Employees and transients leave Employees and transients leave between 5 and 75 minutes. between 5 and 90 minutes.

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

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

Modeling DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.17.0 DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.21.0 Phoenixville Firebird Festival Phoenixville Firebird Festival Special Event Population = 6,000 Special Event Population = 6,000 Special Events additional transients additional transients Special Event Vehicles = 3,000 Special Event Vehicles = 2,239 46 regions (central sector wind 42 Regions (central sector wind direction and two adjacent sectors direction and each adjacent sector Evacuation Cases technique used) and 14 scenarios technique used) and 14 Scenarios producing 644 unique cases. producing 588 unique cases.

Limerick Generating Station 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study 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 Midweek Midday, Winter Midweek Midday, Evacuation Time Good Weather: 5:05 Good Weather: 4:50 Estimates for the entire EPZ, 90th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 4:45 Good Weather: 4:40 Winter Weekday Midday, Winter Weekday Midday, Evacuation Time Good Weather: 6:50 Good Weather: 6:50 Estimates for the entire EPZ, 100th percentile Summer Weekend, Midday, Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 6:40 Good Weather: 6:25 Limerick Generating Station 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 11. LGS Location Limerick Generating Station 113 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 12. LGS LinkNode Analysis Network Limerick Generating Station 114 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6) 2020 Trip Generation 2020 ETE 2014 Trip Generation 2014 ETE 100%

80%

60%

Percent of Total Vehicles 40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure 13. Trip Generation and ETE Comparison Limerick Generating Station 115 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 ETE.

2.1 Data Estimate Assumptions

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

2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon data provided by each county and by Constellation for Limerick Generating Station (LGS). (See Section 3.4).

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based on data received from the counties within the EPZ, the National Center for Education Statistics website2, Child Care Center website3 and the previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches and aerial imagery where updated data was not available.

4. The average household size (2.68 people per household) is based on the 2020 U.S. Census.

5. Evacuating vehicles per household (1.44 evacuating vehicles per household - see Appendix F, subsection F.3.2) are based on the results of the online demographic survey.

6. Where data was not provided, the average household size is assumed to be the vehicle occupancy rate for transient facilities and special event.

7. Employee vehicle occupancies are based on the results of the demographic survey; 1.04 employees per vehicle are used in the study. (See Appendix F, subsection F.3.1 and Figure F7). In addition, it is assumed there are two people per carpool, on average.

8. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ is 40 mph based on Pennsylvania state laws for buses and average posted speed limits on major roadways within the EPZ.

9. 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):

1 www.census.gov 2

https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/index.asp 3

https://childcarecenter.us 4

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

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

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

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

Limerick Generating Station 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

c. ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

2. The centerpoint of the plant is located at the geometric center of the containment building at 40° 13' 28.52" N, 75° 35' 13.92" 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 traffic control devices and traffic guides. All major evacuation routes are used in the analysis.

5. The existing EPZ and township boundaries are used. Townships serve as SubAreas (or emergency response planning areas) for this study. See Figure 31.

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

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

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

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

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

10. This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of the evacuation. Rather, there is an initialization period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the anticipated traffic volumes from the start of the evacuation are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of the evacuation depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated. See Section 3.12.

11. To account for boundary conditions (roadway conditions outside the study area that are not specifically modeled due to the limited radius of the study area) beyond the study area, this study assumes a 25% reduction in capacity on twolane roads and multilane highways 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.

Limerick Generating Station 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 (main street) traffic volume 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. There is no reduction in capacity for freeways due to boundary conditions.

12. 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.

2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times

1. Trip generation time (also known as mobilization time, or the time required by evacuees to prepare for the evacuation) are based upon the results of the demographic survey.

2. One hundred percent (100%) of the 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, 84%

of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter (see Appendix F, subsection F.3.1 and Figure F6); 57% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip (see Appendix F, subsection F.3.2).

Therefore, 48% (84% x 57% = 48%) 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 68% of the transitdependent population will rideshare (see Appendix F, subsection F.3.1 and Figure F5).

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

a. Schools and day care centers:

i. If schools and day cares are in session, buses will evacuate students directly to the host schools6.

ii. For the schools and day care centers that are evacuated via buses, it is assumed no school children will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

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

6 Public schools that are not assigned a host school inside the LGS public information brochure were assigned to the closest reception center. See Section 10.

Limerick Generating Station 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

iv. Schools located in the Shadow Region are evacuated to host schools if the emergency plans states that the facilities will be evacuated.

b. Medical Facilities

i. Buses, 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 2014 was used to determine the percentage of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at medical facilities wherein data was not provided.

c. Transitdependent permanent residents:

i. Transitdependent general population are evacuated to reception centers.

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

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

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

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

3. Transit vehicle capacities:

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

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

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

d. Wheelchair vans = 4 wheelchair bound persons.

e. Wheelchair buses = 15 wheelchair bound persons.

4. Transit vehicles mobilization times:

a. Vehicles will arrive at schools and medical 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 120 minutes after the ATE (see Figure 54). Multiple waves of buses were dispatched using 20minute headways to gather those who may be slower to mobilize.

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. Buses for schools are loaded in 15 minutes.

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

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

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

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

Limerick Generating Station 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6. Drivers for all transit vehicles are available.

7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ will shelterinplace during an emergency.

2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions

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

See Appendix G.

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

3. 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. Phoenixville Firebird Festival is considered as the special event (single or multiday event that attracts a significant number of transients into the EPZ; recommended by NRC guidance) for Scenario 13.

b. As per NRC guidance, one of the top 5 highest volume roadways must be closed or one lane outbound on a freeway must be closed for a roadway impact scenario.

This study considers the closure of one lane on US422 eastbound from the interchange with Evergreen Rd to the interchange with US202 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 at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued. Thus, no weather related reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed.

It is assumed that roads are passable and that the appropriate agencies are clearing/treating the roads as they would normally with snow and the roads are passable albeit at lower speeds and capacities.

3. Adverse weather scenarios affect roadway capacity and free flow highway speeds. In accordance with Table 31 of Revision 1 to NUREG/CR7002, this study assumes a 10%

Limerick Generating Station 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

reduction in speed and capacity for rain and light snow and a speed and capacity reduction of 15% and 25%, respectively, for heavy snow. The factors are shown in Table 22.

4. Some evacuees will need additional time for heavy snow scenarios 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 180 minutes (see Figure 52). It is assumed that the time needed by evacuees to remove snow from their driveways is sufficient time for snow removal crews to mobilize and clear/treat the public roadway system.

5. Employment is reduced slightly in the summer for vacations.

6. 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 and 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 and are based on local wind persistence. 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, and the keyhole includes the downwind sector and two adjoining sectors on each side (a five sector keyhole). It is assumed that everyone within the group of SubAreas forming a Region that is issued an ATE will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.

8. Due to the irregular shapes of the SubArea, there are instances where a small portion of a SubArea (a sliver) is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (less than 500 people or 10% of the SubArea population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the SubArea is not included in the Region so as to not evacuate large numbers of people outside of the keyhole for a small number of people that are actually in the keyhole, unless otherwise stated in the 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 R31 through R42 in Table 61.

Limerick Generating Station 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season7 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 Phoenixville Firebird 13 Winter Weekend Evening Good Festival Roadway Impact - Single Lane Closure US422 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Eastbound 7

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).

Limerick Generating Station 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Mobilization Time Mobilization Time Loading Time for Loading Time for Highway Free Flow for General for Transit Vehicles School Buses Transit Buses8 Scenario Capacity* Speed* Population Rain/Light 90% 90% No Effect 10minute increase 5minute increase 10minute increase Snow Heavy Snow 75% 85% See Section 5.3 20minute increase 10minute increase 20minute increase

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

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

Limerick Generating Station 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Limerick 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 (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 U.S. 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 LGS EPZ indicates the need to identify three distinct groups:

Permanent residents people who are yea-round residents of the EPZ.

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

Employees - people who reside outside of the EPZ and commute to 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 LGS EPZ is subdivided into 43 Subareas. The Subareas comprising the EPZ are shown in Figure 31.

Limerick 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 2020 U.S. Census data with an availability date of September 16, 2021. The average household size (2.68 persons/household was estimated using the U.S. Census data - See Section 2.1 and Appendix F). The number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.44 vehicles/household - See Appendix F, SubSection F.3.2) was adapted from the demographic survey.

The permanent resident population is estimated by cutting the census block polygons by the Subarea and EPZ boundaries using GIS software. A ratio of the original area of each census block and the updated area (after cutting) is multiplied by the total block population to estimate the population within the EPZ. This methodology (referred to as the area ratio method) assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 31 summarizes the 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 7.50% since the 2010 Census.

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

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

Limerick 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 (shopping, recreation).

Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at camping facilities, hotels and motels. Data for transient attractions were provided by the counties within the EPZ. When data could not be provided, transient vehicles were estimated based on the parking capacity obtained from aerial imagery or from information on the facility website. It is assumed that transients travel to the recreational areas as a family/household. As such, the average household size (2.68 persons per household - See Section 3.1) was used to estimate the transient population for those facilities in which exact data could not be obtained. The transient attractions within the LGS EPZ are summarized as follows:

Campgrounds - 915 transients and 305 vehicles; 3.00 transients per vehicle (Note that RVs are represented as 2 passenger car equivalents.)

Parks - 3,044 transients and 1,188 vehicles; 2.56 transients per vehicle (Note that local parks are not included; visitors to these facilities are local residents and have already been counted as permanent residents in Section 3.1.)

Greater Philadelphia Expo Center - 1,800 transients and 900 vehicles; 2.00 transients per vehicle Shopping Centers - 9,379 transients and 4,261 vehicles; 2.20 transients per vehicle.

(Note that Providence Town Center and Costco Wholesale have 4,400 and 642 parking spots, respectively. It was assumed that at peak times 50% of the parking lots are full and 25% of these vehicles are commuting outside of the EPZ.)

Appendix E summarizes the transient data that was gathered 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 17,003 transients in the EPZ at peak times, evacuating in 7,699 vehicles (an average vehicle occupancy of 2.21 transients per vehicle). Table 34 presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by Subarea. Figure 36 and Figure 37 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.

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

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

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

The counties within the EPZ provided employment data for a list of employers within the EPZ and Constellation provided the data for the LGS. This data includes the maximum shift Limerick Generating Station 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

employment and percent of employees living outside of the EPZ for each employer. As per the federal guidance (NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1), employers with 200 or more employees working in a single shift are considered to be major employers. As such, the employers not meeting this criterion are not considered in this study.

In total, there are 5,716 employees commuting into the EPZ on a daily basis. To estimate the number of evacuating employee vehicles, 1.04 employees per vehicle obtained from the demographic survey (see Appendix F, SubSection F.3.1) was used for all the major employers.

The detailed information for each major employer is included in Appendix E, Table E4. Table 35 presents the estimates of employees and vehicles 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 the counties for each of the medical facilities within the EPZ, supplemented by online searches and the previous study where data was missing. Table E3 in Appendix E summarizes the data provided. Table 36. presents the current census of medical facilities in the EPZ along with the breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound, and bedridden patients. As shown in this table, a total of 2,765 people has been identified as living in or being treated in these facilities.

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

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

3.6 Transit Dependent Population The demographic survey (see Appendix F) results were used to estimate the portion of the population requiring transit service:

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

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

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

Table 37 presents estimates of transitdependent people. Note:

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

Limerick Generating Station 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

It is reasonable and appropriate to consider that many transitdependent persons will evacuate by ridesharing with neighbors, friends or family. For example, nearly 80% of those who evacuated from Mississauga, Ontario3 who did not use their own cars, shared a ride with neighbors or friends. Other documents report that approximately 70% of transit dependent persons were evacuated via ride sharing.

Based on the results of the demographic survey, 68% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

The estimated number of bus trips needed to service transitdependent persons is based on an estimate of average bus occupancy of 30 persons at the conclusion of the bus run. Transit vehicle seating capacities typically equal or exceed 60 children (roughly equivalent to 40 adults). If transit vehicle evacuees are two thirds adults and one third children, then the number of adult seats taken by 30 persons is 20 + (2/3 x10) = 27. On this basis, the average load factor anticipated is (27/40) x 100 = 68%. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 37 by 50 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 4,607 people. Therefore, a total of 154 buses are required from a capacity standpoint. The transitdependent population by Sub area was estimated by multiplying the total transitdependent population by the ratio of the Subarea permanent resident population to the EPZ permanent resident population. In order to service all of the transit dependent population and have at least one bus drive through each of the Subareas to pick up transit dependent people, 175 buses are used in the ETE calculations; see Section 10 for further discussion. These buses are represented as two vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

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

Where:

A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 3

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).

Limerick Generating Station 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

117,176 0.002 2.33 0.142 1.71 1 0.84 0.43 0.57 3.10 2 0.84 0.43 14,398 0.68 1 30 154 These calculations are explained as follows:

The number of households (HH) is computed by dividing the EPZ population by the average household size (314,033 ÷ 2.68) and is 117,176.

All members (2.33 avg.) of households (HH) with no vehicles (0.2%) will evacuate by public transit or rideshare. The term 117,176 (number of households) x 0.002 x 2.33, accounts for these people.

The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (14.2%), who are at home, equal (1.711).

The number of HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (117,176 x 0.142 x 0.71 x 0.84 x 0.43), as 84% of EPZ households have a commuter, 43% 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 (57%), who are at home, equal (3.10 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 117,176 x 1.10 x (0.84 x 0.43)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 number of buses needed is computed as the product of the number of people requiring public transit and the percentage of people who will not rideshare (100%

minus 68%) divided by the bus occupancy (30 passengers - see Section 2.4, Item 3b).

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 do not register with their local emergency response agency.

3.7 School Population Demand Table 38 presents the school population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all schools within the EPZ for the 20202021 school year. This information was provided by the counties supplemented by internet searches where no data was provided. 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.

Limerick 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 does not consider the use of these private vehicles, since the intent of schools is to evacuate all students by bus.

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

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

No allowance is made for student absenteeism, which is typically 3% daily.

3.7.1 Colleges and Universities There are two college/university campuses within the EPZ: Ursinus College and University of Valley Forge. The enrollment data was obtained from the National Application Center4 (NAC) database, as of December 2021. The data/information is summarized below:

Ursinus College:

Located in Collegeville, 7.3 miles eastsoutheast of the LGS.

Data found online indicates this college has a total enrollment of 1,408 fulltime students and 97% of these students live oncampus5. Thus, 1,366 (1,408 x 0.97) students are oncampus students and the remaining 42 (1,408 - 1,366) students are offcampus students.

Using aerial imagery, student parking lots were located, and the parking spaces (908 parking spaces in total) were counted on campus to estimate the upper bound of student vehicles on campus. As such, a total of 908 evacuating vehicles was assigned to this college.

It is assumed that all the offcampus students own personal vehicles (42 offcampus vehicles) and the remaining parking spaces are for oncampus students, which is 866 (908 - 42) parking spaces.

In the event of an emergency, it is assumed all the students have access to their personal vehicles or assistance from their fellow classmates to evacuate. A total of 1,408 students evacuating in 908 vehicles is assigned to this university.

University of Valley Forge:

Located in Schuylkill, 7.6 miles southsoutheast of the LGS.

The NAC database shows this university has a total enrollment of 398 fulltime students and 72% of them live on campus. As such, there are 287 (398 x 72%) oncampus students and 111 (398 - 287) offcampus students.

In the event of an emergency, it is assumed all the students have access to their personal vehicles.

It is conservatively assumed that all the oncampus students own personal vehicles. As 4

https://www.nationalapplicationcenter.com/

5 https://www.ursinus.edu/student-life/housing/

Limerick Generating Station 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

such, there are 287 oncampus student vehicles.

Since commuter students have the similar travel patterns as the commuters in the EPZ, the commuter vehicle occupancy rate (1.04 - see Appendix F, SubSection F.3.1) obtained from the demographic survey was used to estimate the number of offcampus student vehicles, resulting in 107 (111 ÷ 1.04) offcampus student vehicles.

A total of 398 students evacuating in 394 vehicles is assigned to this university.

Table 38 also includes commuter students at colleges. The column in Table 38 entitled Student Vehicles specifies the number of student vehicles at the school parking lots during an evacuation.

It is recommended that the counties in the EPZ introduce procedures whereby the schools are contacted prior to the dispatch of buses from the depot, to ascertain the current estimate of students to be evacuated. In this way, the number of buses dispatched to the schools will reflect the actual number needed. The need for buses would be reduced by any high school students who have evacuated using private automobiles (if permitted by school authorities).

Those buses originally allocated to evacuate schoolchildren that are not needed due to children being picked up by their parents, can be gainfully assigned to service other facilities or those persons who do not have access to private vehicles or to ridesharing.

Table 104 presents a list of the host schools for the school districts within the EPZ. Students will be transported to these host schools where they will be subsequently retrieved by their respective families or guardians.

3.8 Special Event One special event (Scenario 13) is considered for the ETE study6 - the Phoenixville Firebird Festival, which occurs annually in December (winter) on a weekend in the evening. The festival is located in downtown Phoenixville and the exact location of the event varies from year to year.

Using the data from the previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches7, it was estimated that there are 15,000 people that attend this event, 40% of attendees are transients (nonEPZ residents), and the average household size (2.68 people) was used as the vehicles occupancy rate. It should be noted that due to the COVID19 pandemic, in 2021, this event was limited to 1,000 people. It was assumed that in the future, event attendance will return to pre pandemic rates.

This results in 6,000 (15,000 x 0.40 = 6,000) additional transients in 2,239 (6,000 2.68 = 2,239) vehicles which are added to the roadway network throughout the town of Phoenixville. The special event vehicle trips were generated utilizing the same mobilization distributions as transients.

6 A second event, County Spirit Music Festival, was mentioned by Chester County but it was not considered as it attracts similar number of transients into the EPZ.

7 https://www.timesherald.com/2016/12/03/thousands-attend-annual-firebird-festival-in-phoenixville/#:~:text=PUBLISHED%3A Limerick Generating Station 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Shuttle buses are used to transport attendees from parking lots to the festival site; however, these shuttle buses would not be used to evacuate attendees. It is assumed that the time to shuttle attendees to parking lots or for attendees to walk to their vehicles is within the 90 minute mobilization time for transients discussed in Section 5. It is assumed any temporary road closures that are used for the parade portion of the festival, could be quickly reopened in the event of an emergency.

3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population Counties within the EPZ confirmed the access and/or functional needs population was still accurate from the 2012 study. It was estimated that there are an estimated 264 access and/or functional needs people within the EPZ who require transportation assistance to evacuate.

Table 39 summarizes the data provided. Approximately 242 transit dependent people would require a wheelchair capable vehicle and 22 would require an ambulance.

The transportation requirements for the access and/or functional needs population are also presented in Table 39. The number of ambulance runs is determined by assuming that 2 patients can be accommodated per ambulance trip and the number of wheelchair bus runs assumes 15 wheelchairs per trip.

3.10 Correctional Facilities As detailed in Table E7, there are two correctional facilities within the EPZ - Montgomery County Correctional Facility and Graterford State Correctional Institution. The total inmate capacity of these facilities is 4,957 persons. County emergency personal indicated that these facilities will shelterinplace.

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

After the Advisory to Evacuate is announced, these throughtravelers will also evacuate. These through vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes traversing the EPZ - I476, Route 309, I76, I276, US 202, US 30 and US 422. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the EPZ during the first 120 minutes following the Advisory to Evacuate.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data was obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation website 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 points - ACP - are assumed to be activated at 120 minutes after the advisory to evacuate) to Limerick Generating Station 39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. As indicated, there are 45,508 vehicles entering the study area 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, 12 and 13) 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 Time Period 1 depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated (see Section 6). There are 9,068 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 477,239 people and 261,280 vehicles are considered in this study.

Limerick Generating Station 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Subarea 2010 Population 2020 Population Amity 10,815 11,607 Boyertown 4,055 4,273 Charlestown 4,141 4,391 Colebrookdale 5,078 5,115 Collegeville 5,089 5,043 Douglass (Berks) 3,306 3,663 Douglass (Montgomery) 10,195 10,579 Earl 717 717 East Coventry 6,636 7,068 East Nantmeal 1,500 1,509 East Pikeland 7,079 8,260 East Vincent 6,821 7,433 Green Lane 508 493 Limerick 18,074 20,498 Lower Frederick 4,840 4,830 Lower Pottsgrove 12,059 12,210 Lower Providence 25,436 25,625 Lower Salford 1,503 1,907 Marlborough 492 525 New Hanover 10,939 12,990 North Coventry 7,866 8,441 Perkiomen 9,139 8,954 Phoenixville 16,440 18,602 Pottstown 22,377 23,434 Royersford 4,752 4,900 Schuylkill 8,516 8,780 Schwenksville 1,385 1,301 Skippack 13,715 14,382 South Coventry 2,604 2,796 Spring City 3,323 3,494 Trappe 3,509 4,002 Union 1,215 1,540 Upper Frederick 3,523 3,693 Upper Pottsgrove 5,315 5,864 Upper Providence 21,219 24,091 Upper Salford 3,299 3,235 Upper Uwchlan 8,089 9,150 Uwchlan 1,343 1,356 Warwick 2,192 2,270 Washington 715 687 West Pikeland 3,876 3,859 West Pottsgrove 3,874 3,798 West Vincent 4,567 6,668 EPZ TOTAL: 292,136 314,033 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 7.50%

Limerick Generating Station 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Subarea Subarea 2020 Population 2020 Resident Vehicles Amity 11,607 6,228 Boyertown 4,273 2,259 Charlestown 4,391 2,336 Colebrookdale 5,115 2,751 Collegeville 5,043 2,052 Douglass (Berks) 3,663 1,872 Douglass (Montgomery) 10,579 5,689 Earl 717 386 East Coventry 7,068 3,692 East Nantmeal 1,509 743 East Pikeland 8,260 4,427 East Vincent 7,433 3,863 Green Lane 493 265 Limerick 20,498 11,010 Lower Frederick 4,830 2,593 Lower Pottsgrove 12,210 6,438 Lower Providence 25,625 12,947 Lower Salford 1,907 1,026 Marlborough 525 282 New Hanover 12,990 6,967 North Coventry 8,441 4,529 Perkiomen 8,954 4,810 Phoenixville 18,602 9,970 Pottstown 23,434 12,341 Royersford 4,900 2,630 Schuylkill 8,780 4,705 Schwenksville 1,301 688 Skippack 14,382 6,029 South Coventry 2,796 1,484 Spring City 3,494 1,877 Trappe 4,002 2,149 Union 1,540 819 Upper Frederick 3,693 1,956 Upper Pottsgrove 5,864 3,141 Upper Providence 24,091 12,737 Upper Salford 3,235 1,737 Upper Uwchlan 9,150 4,918 Uwchlan 1,356 730 Warwick 2,270 1,221 Washington 687 369 West Pikeland 3,859 2,072 West Pottsgrove 3,798 2,036 West Vincent 6,668 3,525 EPZ TOTAL: 314,033 164,299 Limerick Generating Station 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Sector 2020 Population Evacuating Vehicles N 5,985 3,210 NNE 18,838 9,843 NE 5,755 3,087 ENE 31,172 16,333 E 27,813 14,836 ESE 49,945 26,341 SE 38,763 20,772 SSE 29,257 15,537 S 30,802 16,038 SSW 24,411 13,102 SW 4,798 2,539 WSW 3,912 2,096 W 6,377 3,416 WNW 14,620 7,690 NW 4,096 2,204 NNW 4,363 2,336 TOTAL: 300,907 159,380 Limerick Generating Station 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles Subarea Transients Transient Vehicles Amity 0 0 Boyertown 0 0 Charlestown 0 0 Colebrookdale 289 104 Collegeville 0 0 Douglass (Berks) 65 36 Douglass (Montgomery) 0 0 Earl 0 0 East Coventry 0 0 East Nantmeal 0 0 East Pikeland 40 22 East Vincent 0 0 Green Lane 0 0 Limerick 3,098 1,527 Lower Frederick 0 0 Lower Pottsgrove 112 42 Lower Providence 971 498 Lower Salford 0 0 Marlborough 0 0 New Hanover 0 0 North Coventry 3,000 1,500 Perkiomen 0 0 Phoenixville 47 26 Pottstown 581 323 Royersford 0 0 Schuylkill 0 0 Schwenksville 0 0 Skippack 458 222 South Coventry 0 0 Spring City 0 0 Trappe 0 0 Union 0 0 Upper Frederick 1,547 581 Upper Pottsgrove 0 0 Upper Providence 5,865 2,497 Upper Salford 0 0 Upper Uwchlan 0 0 Uwchlan 0 0 Warwick 930 321 Washington 0 0 West Pikeland 0 0 West Pottsgrove 0 0 West Vincent 0 0 EPZ TOTAL: 17,003 7,699 Limerick Generating Station 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ Subarea Employees Employee Vehicles Amity 117 113 Boyertown 0 0 Charlestown 0 0 Colebrookdale 117 113 Collegeville 0 0 Douglass (Berks) 0 0 Douglass (Montgomery) 0 0 Earl 0 0 East Coventry 0 0 East Nantmeal 0 0 East Pikeland 175 168 East Vincent 0 0 Green Lane 0 0 Limerick 439 422 Lower Frederick 0 0 Lower Pottsgrove 0 0 Lower Providence 175 168 Lower Salford 0 0 Marlborough 0 0 New Hanover 0 0 North Coventry 0 0 Perkiomen 0 0 Phoenixville 0 0 Pottstown 397 382 Royersford 0 0 Schuylkill 146 140 Schwenksville 0 0 Skippack 195 188 South Coventry 0 0 Spring City 0 0 Trappe 161 155 Union 0 0 Upper Frederick 0 0 Upper Pottsgrove 0 0 Upper Providence 3,794 3,648 Upper Salford 0 0 Upper Uwchlan 0 0 Uwchlan 0 0 Warwick 0 0 Washington 0 0 West Pikeland 0 0 West Pottsgrove 0 0 West Vincent 0 0 EPZ TOTAL: 5,716 5,497 Limerick Generating Station 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand Wheel Wheel chair Ambu Current Ambu chair Bed Bus Bus lance Subarea Facility Name Census latory Bound ridden Runs Runs Runs Berks County Amity Hearthstone at Amity 100 90 8 2 3 1 1 Amity Keystone Villa 114 100 11 3 4 1 2 Boyertown Chestnut Knoll 100 90 8 2 3 1 1 Union Colonial Manor Adult Home 24 20 3 1 1 1 1 Berks County Subtotal: 338 300 30 8 11 4 5 Chester County East Coventry Manatawny Manor 120 40 64 16 2 5 8 East Pikeland Atria Woodbridge Place 120 110 8 2 4 1 1 East Pikeland Genesis Health Care at Spring Mill 22 20 2 0 1 1 0 East Vincent Southeastern Pennsylvania Veterans Center 185 165 16 4 6 2 2 Phoenixville Phoenixville Hospital of the UPENN Health System 127 67 48 12 3 4 6 Phoenixville Phoenix Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing 130 125 4 1 5 1 1 Phoenixville Phoenixville Convalescent Manor 68 18 40 10 1 3 5 South Coventry Gardens of Pottstown 41 33 6 2 2 1 1 Chester County Subtotal: 813 578 188 47 24 18 24 Montgomery County Lower Pottsgrove Sanatoga Court 85 75 8 2 3 1 1 Lower Pottsgrove Sanatoga Center 119 95 19 5 4 2 3 Lower Providence Eagleville Hospital 272 222 40 10 8 3 5 Lower Providence Shannondell at Valley Forge 60 50 8 2 2 1 1 Pottstown Pottstown Memorial Medical Center 295 115 144 36 4 10 18 Pottstown ProMedica Pottstown 206 103 82 21 4 6 11 Upper Frederick Frederick Living 126 96 24 6 4 2 3 Upper Providence Parkhouse, Providence Pointe 451 400 41 10 14 3 5 Montgomery County Subtotal: 1,614 1,156 366 92 43 28 47 EPZ TOTAL: 2,765 2,034 584 147 78 50 76 Limerick Generating Station 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Percent HH Survey Percent Survey Average HH Size with Indicated No. of Survey Percent HH Total People Population with Indicated No. of Vehicles Estimated Vehicles Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring 2020 EPZ No. of with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 314,033 2.33 1.71 3.10 117,176 0.2% 14.2% 57.0% 84% 43% 14,398 68.0% 4,607 1.5%

Limerick Generating Station 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 38. School Population Demand Estimates Buses Student Subarea Enrollment Required Vehicles Berks County Amity 2,546 49 0 Boyertown 2,204 45 0 Colebrookdale 2,025 37 0 Douglass (Berks) 24 1 0 Union 6 1 0 Washington 42 1 0 Berks County Subtotal: 6,847 134 0 Chester County Charlestown 313 5 0 East Coventry 612 10 0 East Pikeland 201 3 0 East Vincent 1,054 19 0 North Coventry 1,174 20 0 Phoenixville 2,038 39 0 Schuylkill 4,971 73 394 South Coventry 2,904 57 0 Spring City 29 1 0 Upper Uwchlan 923 14 0 Warwick 35 1 0 West Pikeland 271 4 0 West Vincent 506 8 0 Chester County Subtotal: 15,031 254 394 Montgomery County Collegeville 2,563 18 908 Douglass (Montgomery) 1,204 21 0 Limerick 5,787 105 0 Lower Frederick 274 4 0 Lower Pottsgrove 3,208 58 0 Lower Providence 3,678 64 0 Marlborough 163 3 0 New Hanover 1,652 30 0 Perkiomen 3,484 68 0 Pottstown 4,808 90 0 Royersford 1,723 32 0 Schwenksville 580 10 0 Skippack 902 15 0 Limerick Generating Station 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Buses Student Subarea Enrollment Required Vehicles Trappe 206 3 0 Upper Frederick 563 12 0 Upper Pottsgrove 777 16 0 Upper Providence 6,065 106 0 Upper Salford 537 9 0 West Pottsgrove 378 6 0 S.R. 1,547 31 0 Montgomery County Subtotal: 40,099 701 908 TOTAL: 61,977 1,089 1,302 Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Estimates Population Group Transportation Needed Population Vehicles deployed Wheelchair bound Wheelchair Van 242 30 Bedridden Ambulance 22 11 TOTAL: 264 41 Limerick Generating Station 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 310. LGS EPZ External Traffic Upstream Downstream Hourly External 8 9 9 Node Node Road Name Direction AADT KFactor DFactor Volume Traffic 8265 265 I476 SB 53,000 0.091 0.5 2,412 4,824 8237 237 I476 NB 53,000 0.091 0.5 2,412 4,824 8868 1868 Route 309 SB 35,000 0.107 0.5 1,873 3,746 8884 1884 Route 309 NB 35,000 0.107 0.5 1,873 3,746 8185 185 I76 WB 50,000 0.107 0.5 2,675 5,350 8112 112 I76 EB 50,000 0.107 0.5 2,675 5,350 8167 228 I276 WB 54,000 0.091 0.5 2,457 4,914 8375 4119 US 202 WB 13,000 0.116 0.5 754 1,508 8227 3989 US 202 EB 13,000 0.116 0.5 754 1,508 8279 279 US 30 EB 41,000 0.107 0.5 2,194 4,388 8090 90 US 422 SB 50,000 0.107 0.5 2,675 5,350 TOTAL 45,508 8

https://www.penndot.pa.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Pages/Traffic-Volume.aspx 9

HCM 2016 Limerick Generating Station 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 311. Summary of Population Demand10 Schools and Transit Special Universities/ Preschools/Day Special Shadow External 11 12 Subarea Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Colleges Care Centers Event Population Traffic Total Amity 11,607 170 0 117 214 0 2,546 0 0 0 14,654 Boyertown 4,273 63 0 0 100 0 2,204 0 0 0 6,640 Charlestown 4,391 64 0 0 0 0 313 0 0 0 4,768 Colebrookdale 5,115 75 289 117 0 0 2,025 0 0 0 7,621 Collegeville 5,043 74 0 0 0 1,408 1,155 0 0 0 7,680 Douglass (Berks) 3,663 54 65 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 3,806 Douglass (Montgomery) 10,579 155 0 0 0 0 1,204 0 0 0 11,938 Earl 717 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 728 East Coventry 7,068 104 0 0 120 0 612 0 0 0 7,904 East Nantmeal 1,509 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,531 East Pikeland 8,260 120 40 175 142 0 201 0 0 0 8,938 East Vincent 7,433 109 0 0 185 0 1,054 0 0 0 8,781 Green Lane 493 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 Limerick 20,498 301 3,098 439 0 0 5,787 0 0 0 30,123 Lower Frederick 4,830 71 0 0 0 0 274 0 0 0 5,175 Lower Pottsgrove 12,210 179 112 0 204 0 3,208 0 0 0 15,913 Lower Providence 25,625 376 971 175 1,33213 0 3,678 0 0 0 32,157 Lower Salford 1,907 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,935 Marlborough 525 8 0 0 0 0 163 0 0 0 696 New Hanover 12,990 191 0 0 0 0 1,652 0 0 0 14,833 North Coventry 8,441 124 3,000 0 0 0 1,174 0 0 0 12,739 Perkiomen 8,954 131 0 0 0 0 3,484 0 0 0 12,569 Phoenixville 18,602 273 47 0 325 0 2,038 6,000 0 0 27,285 10 Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, they are not included in this table.

11 Special Facilities includes both medical facilities and correctional facilities.

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

13 Includes 1,000 inmates at the Montgomery County Correctional Facility.

Limerick Generating Station 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Schools and Transit Special Universities/ Preschools/Day Special Shadow External Subarea Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities11 Colleges Care Centers Event Population12 Traffic Total Pottstown 23,434 344 581 397 501 0 4,808 0 0 0 30,065 Royersford 4,900 72 0 0 0 0 1,723 0 0 0 6,695 Schuylkill 8,780 129 0 146 0 398 4,573 0 0 0 14,026 Schwenksville 1,301 19 0 0 0 0 580 0 0 0 1,900 Skippack 14,382 211 458 195 3,95714 0 902 0 0 0 20,105 South Coventry 2,796 41 0 0 41 0 2,904 0 0 0 5,782 Spring City 3,494 51 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 3,574 Trappe 4,002 59 0 161 0 0 206 0 0 0 4,428 Union 1,540 23 0 0 24 0 6 0 0 0 1,593 Upper Frederick 3,693 54 1,547 0 126 0 563 0 0 0 5,983 Upper Pottsgrove 5,864 86 0 0 0 0 777 0 0 0 6,727 Upper Providence 24,091 353 5,865 3,794 451 0 6,065 0 0 0 40,619 Upper Salford 3,235 47 0 0 0 0 537 0 0 0 3,819 Upper Uwchlan 9,150 134 0 0 0 0 923 0 0 0 10,207 Uwchlan 1,356 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,376 Warwick 2,270 33 930 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 3,268 Washington 687 10 0 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 739 West Pikeland 3,859 57 0 0 0 0 271 0 0 0 4,187 West Pottsgrove 3,798 56 0 0 0 0 378 0 0 0 4,232 West Vincent 6,668 98 0 0 0 0 506 0 0 0 7,272 Shadow Region 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,547 0 60,181 0 61,728 TOTAL: 314,033 4,607 17,003 5,716 7,722 1,806 60,171 6,000 60,181 0 477,239 14 Represents the inmates at Graterford State Correctional Institution.

Limerick Generating Station 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand15 Schools and Transit Medical Universities/ Preschools/Day Special Shadow External Subarea Residents Dependent16 Transients Employees Facilities17 Colleges Care Centers Event Population Traffic Total Amity 6,228 12 0 113 21 0 98 0 0 0 6,472 Boyertown 2,259 6 0 0 9 0 90 0 0 0 2,364 Charlestown 2,336 6 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 2,352 Colebrookdale 2,751 6 104 113 0 0 74 0 0 0 3,048 Collegeville 2,052 6 0 0 0 908 36 0 0 0 3,002 Douglass (Berks) 1,872 4 36 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1,914 Douglass (Montgomery) 5,689 12 0 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 5,743 Earl 386 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 388 East Coventry 3,692 8 0 0 22 0 20 0 0 0 3,742 East Nantmeal 743 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 745 East Pikeland 4,427 8 22 168 15 0 6 0 0 0 4,646 East Vincent 3,863 8 0 0 18 0 38 0 0 0 3,927 Green Lane 265 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 267 Limerick 11,010 22 1,527 422 0 0 210 0 0 0 13,191 Lower Frederick 2,593 6 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 2,607 Lower Pottsgrove 6,438 12 42 0 24 0 116 0 0 0 6,632 Lower Providence 12,947 26 498 168 34 0 128 0 0 0 13,801 Lower Salford 1,026 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,028 Marlborough 282 2 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 290 New Hanover 6,967 14 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 7,041 North Coventry 4,529 10 1,500 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 6,079 Perkiomen 4,810 10 0 0 0 0 136 0 0 0 4,956 Phoenixville 9,970 20 26 0 46 0 78 2,239 0 0 12,379 15 Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, they are not included in this table.

16 Buses evacuating transit-dependent residents are represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 3.6 and Section 8 for additional information.

17 Buses and wheelchair buses are represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 3.5 and Section 8 for additional information. Note that correctional facilities are not included here as they shelter in place. See Section 3.10.

Limerick Generating Station 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Schools and Transit Medical Universities/ Preschools/Day Special Shadow External Subarea Residents Dependent16 Transients Employees Facilities17 Colleges Care Centers Event Population Traffic Total Pottstown 12,341 24 323 382 77 0 180 0 0 0 13,327 Royersford 2,630 6 0 0 0 0 64 0 0 0 2,700 Schuylkill 4,705 10 0 140 0 394 146 0 0 0 5,395 Schwenksville 688 2 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 710 Skippack 6,029 16 222 188 0 0 30 0 0 0 6,485 South Coventry 1,484 4 0 0 7 0 114 0 0 0 1,609 Spring City 1,877 4 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1,883 Trappe 2,149 4 0 155 0 0 6 0 0 0 2,314 Union 819 2 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 828 Upper Frederick 1,956 4 581 0 15 0 24 0 0 0 2,580 Upper Pottsgrove 3,141 6 0 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 3,179 Upper Providence 12,737 24 2,497 3,648 39 0 212 0 0 0 19,157 Upper Salford 1,737 4 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 1,759 Upper Uwchlan 4,918 10 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 4,956 Uwchlan 730 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 732 Warwick 1,221 4 321 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1,548 Washington 369 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 373 West Pikeland 2,072 4 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 2,084 West Pottsgrove 2,036 4 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 2,052 West Vincent 3,525 8 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 3,549 Shadow Region 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 31,876 45,508 77,446 TOTAL: 164,299 350 7,699 5,497 332 1,302 2,178 2,239 31,876 45,508 261,280 Limerick Generating Station 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 31. Zones Comprising the LGS EPZ Limerick Generating Station 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Limerick Generating Station 326 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Limerick Generating Station 327 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Limerick Generating Station 328 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Limerick Generating Station 329 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Limerick Generating Station 330 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Limerick Generating Station 331 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Limerick Generating Station 332 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Limerick Generating Station 333 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, a 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, ice)

These factors are considered during the road survey and in the capacity estimation process; some factors have greater influence on capacity than others. For example, lane and shoulder width have only a limited influence on Base Free Flow Speed (BFFS1) according to Exhibit 157 of the HCM. Consequently, lane and shoulder widths at the narrowest points were observed 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)

Limerick 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. 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%. 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% 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%

for rain/light snow. The free speed and highway capacity reductions are 15% and 25%,

respectively, during heavy snow conditions.

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

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

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

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

Limerick Generating Station 42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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, Limerick 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 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.

Limerick 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 for freeway links. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 which translates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.

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

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

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

The estimated value of capacity is based primarily upon the type of facility and on roadway geometrics. Sections of roadway with adverse geometrics are characterized by lower freeflow speeds and lane capacity. Exhibit 1546 in the 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.

Limerick 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 LGS 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)

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 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 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 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 Limerick 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 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 does not address LOS F explicitly).

Limerick Generating Station 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4.3.4 Intersections Ref: HCM 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 provided in Appendix K.

4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation Chapter 6 of the HCM 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 - 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 Limerick 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.

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) if there are 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 (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. There is no reduction in capacity for freeways due to boundary conditions.

Limerick 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 Limerick Generating Station 410 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal Government guidelines (see NUREG CR7002, Rev. 1) specify that the planner 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 state and local offsite authorities. 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 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 ATE.

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

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

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

It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various classes of an emergency. For example, suppose one hour elapses from the siren alert to the Advisory to Evacuate. In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public during this onehour period. As a result, the population within the EPZ will be lower when the ATE is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an ATE 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 report.

Limerick Generating Station 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 notification systems available within the EPZ (e.g., sirens, tone alerts, EAS broadcasts, loud speakers).

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

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 360 square miles and is engaged in a wide variety of activities. It must be anticipated that some time will elapse between the transmission and receipt of the information advising the public of an accident.

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

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

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

As indicated in Section 4.1 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from a demographic survey of study area residents. Such a survey was conducted in support of this ETE study. 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 Limerick 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 (e.g., the activity, travel home changes the state from depart work to arrive home). Therefore, an Activity can be described as an Event Sequence; the elapsed times to perform an event sequence vary from one person to the next and are described as statistical distributions on the following pages.

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

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

It is seen from Figure 51, that the Trip Generation time (i.e., the total elapsed time from Event 1 to Event 5) depends on the scenario and will vary from one household to the next.

Furthermore, Event 5 depends, in a complicated way, on the time distributions of all activities preceding that event. That is, to estimate the time distribution of Event 5, we must obtain estimates of the time distributions of all preceding events. For this study, we adopt the conservative posture that all activities will occur in sequence.

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 Limerick 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, Part V, Section B.1, item 3 of the 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual states that Notification methods will be established to ensure coverage within 45 minutes of essentially 100% of the population within the entire plume exposure pathway who may not have received the initial notification.

Given the federal regulations and guidance, and the presence of sirens within the EPZ, it is assumed that 100% of the population in the EPZ can be notified within 45 minutes. The notification distribution is provided in Table 52 . The distribution is plotted in Figure 52.

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

Distribution No. 3, Travel Home: Activity 2, 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 plowing equipment is mobilized and deployed during Limerick Generating Station 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snowplowing efforts are generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snow accumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours. (Note - evacuation may not be a prudent protective action under such blizzard conditions).

Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that the highway system will remain passable - albeit at a lower capacity - under the vast majority of snow conditions. Nevertheless, for the vehicles to gain access to the highway system, it may be necessary for driveways and employee parking lots to be cleared to the extent needed to permit vehicles to gain access to the roadways.

These clearance activities take time; this time must be incorporated into the trip generation time distributions. These data are provided by those households which responded to the demographic survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 56.

Note that those respondents (about 10%) 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 as shown to form the required distribution. As an outcome of this procedure, new time distributions are formed; we assign letter designations to these intermediate distributions to describe the procedure. Table 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 Decline to State to some questions or choose to not respond to a question. The mobilization activity distributions are based upon actual responses. But, it is the nature of surveys that a few numeric responses are inconsistent with the overall pattern of results. An example would be a case in which for 500 responses, almost all of them estimate less than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months 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?

Limerick Generating Station 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

In assessing outliers, there are three alternates to consider:

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

2) Other responses may be unrealistic (6 hours6.944444e-5 days 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/college, 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.,

those people with 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 3.0 standard deviations are flagged for attention, taking special note of whether there are gaps (categories with zero entries) in the histogram display.

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

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

Limerick Generating Station 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

Figure 54 presents the resultant trip generation distributions for each of the population groups identified. The DYNEV II simulation model is designed to accept varying rates of vehicle trip generation for each origin centroid, expressed in the form of histograms. These histograms, which represent Distributions A, C, D, E and F, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 59 (Distribution B, Arrive Home, omitted for clarity).

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

Limerick Generating Station 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 to prepare for an 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 in place.

Procedure

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

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

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

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

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

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

ii. No additional trips are generated until time TScen*.

Limerick Generating Station 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 90% as the time to end staging and begin evacuating.

The value of TScen* is 2:30 for nonheavy snow scenarios and 3:45 for heavy 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 heavy snow conditions

d. Residents without returning commuters and heavy snow conditions Figure 55 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters; the 90th percentile twomile evacuation time is approximately 150 minutes for good weather and approximately 225 minutes for snow scenarios, on average. At the approximate 90th percentile evacuation time, at most 20% of the 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 30 minutes. After TScen*+30, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the unstaged trip generation distribution.

Table 510 provides the trip generation histograms for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA) determines the need to restrict river traffic and notifies the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission and the Pennsylvania State Police. The Fish and Boat Commission will establish and operate waterway access control points as required.

As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes. Table 59 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 30 minutes. It is assumed that this timeframe is sufficient time for boaters to return to their vehicles and begin their evacuation trip.

Limerick Generating Station 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities Event Sequence Activity Distribution 12 Receive Notification 1 23 Prepare to Leave Work 2 2,3 4 Travel Home 3 2,4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4 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%

Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work Cumulative Percent Cumulative Percent Elapsed Time Employees Leaving Elapsed Time Employees Leaving (Minutes) Work (Minutes) Work 0 0% 35 92%

5 31% 40 94%

10 54% 45 96%

15 70% 50 97%

20 78% 55 97%

25 81% 60 100%

30 89%

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

Limerick Generating Station 510 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Elapsed Time Percent (Minutes) Returning Home (Minutes) Returning Home 0 0% 40 76%

5 4% 45 84%

10 13% 50 89%

15 25% 55 92%

20 37% 60 97%

25 46% 75 99%

30 58% 90 100%

35 67%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the " Decline to State" response Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Ready to Elapsed Time Percent Ready to (Minutes) Evacuate (Minutes) Evacuate 0 0% 105 84%

15 4% 120 89%

30 22% 135 96%

45 41% 150 97%

60 62% 165 98%

75 76% 180 99%

90 82% 195 100%

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow Cumulative Percent Cumulative Percent Elapsed Time of Households Elapsed Time of Households (Minutes) Completing Activity (Minutes) Completing Activity 0 10% 105 90%

15 23% 120 93%

30 39% 135 97%

45 55% 150 98%

60 72% 165 99%

75 82% 180 100%

90 87%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the " Decline to State" response Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events Apply Summing Algorithm To: Distribution Obtained Event Defined Distributions 1 and 2 Distribution A Event 3 Distributions A and 3 Distribution B Event 4 Distributions B and 4 Distribution C Event 5 Distributions 1 and 4 Distribution D Event 5 Distributions C and 5 Distribution E Event 5 Distributions D and 5 Distribution F Event 5 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).

Limerick Generating Station 512 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Residents Residents With Residents Residents with Without Commuters Without Time Duration Employees Transients Commuters Commuters Snow Commuters Snow Period (Min) (Distribution A) (Distribution A) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) (Distribution E) (Distribution F) 1 15 6% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 30 69% 69% 0% 13% 0% 2%

3 15 16% 16% 2% 18% 0% 5%

4 30 9% 9% 16% 36% 4% 17%

5 30 0% 0% 29% 15% 11% 24%

6 30 0% 0% 25% 10% 20% 19%

7 30 0% 0% 14% 5% 21% 14%

8 30 0% 0% 8% 2% 16% 9%

9 15 0% 0% 2% 1% 7% 3%

10 30 0% 0% 3% 0% 10% 4%

11 30 0% 0% 1% 0% 6% 2%

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

13 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%

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

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

NOTE:

Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 12) using Distributions C and E for good weather and snow, respectively.

Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.

Limerick Generating Station 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period*

Residents Residents Residents with Without Residents With Without Time Duration Commuters Commuters Commuters Snow Commuters Snow Period (Min) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) (Distribution E) (Distribution F) 1 15 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 30 0% 3% 0% 0%

3 15 0% 3% 0% 1%

4 30 4% 7% 1% 4%

5 30 5% 3% 2% 5%

6 30 5% 2% 4% 3%

7 30 72% 79% 4% 3%

8 30 8% 2% 3% 2%

9 15 2% 1% 2% 1%

10 30 3% 0% 73% 78%

11 30 1% 0% 6% 2%

12 30 0% 0% 3% 1%

13 30 0% 0% 1% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 59) is the same for Unstaged and Staged Evacuation.

Limerick Generating Station 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 2 3 4 5 Residents Households wait for Commuters 1 Residents 1 2 5 Households without 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 2

(b) Accident occurs during weekend or during the evening 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 Limerick Generating Station 515 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities Notification Prepare to Leave Work Travel Home Prepare Home Time to Clear Snow 100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

Percent of Population Completing Mobilization Activity 0%

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

Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities Limerick Generating Station 516 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

Cumulative Percentage (%)

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

112.5 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 Center of Interval (minutes)

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Limerick Generating Station 518 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Staged and Unstaged Evacuation Trip Generation Employees / Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters Residents with Comm and Snow Residents 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 20 Percent of Population Beginning Evacuation Trip 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 EVACUATION CASES An evacuation case defines a combination of Evacuation Region and Evacuation Scenario.

The definitions of Region and Scenario are as follows:

Region A grouping of contiguous evacuating 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 42 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 five adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. These sectors extend from 2 miles to 5 miles downwind from the plant (Regions R04 through R14) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R15 through R30).

Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R31 through R42 are identical to Regions R02, R04 through R14, respectively; however, those Subareas between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2mile region (Region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 14 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 42 x 14 = 588 evacuation cases. Table 62 is a description of all Scenarios. Each combination of region and scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated.

The population and vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 and in Appendix E are peak values.

These peak values are adjusted depending on the Scenario and Region being considered using Scenario and Regionspecific percentages such that the average population is considered for each evacuation case. The scenario percentages for each population group are presented in Table 63, while the Region percentages are provided in Table H1.

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

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to 48%, which is the product of 84% (the number of households with at least one commuter) and 57% (the number of households with a commuter who would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating). See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of those households with returning commuters (48%)

will have a commuter at work during those times, or approximately 5% (10% x 48% = 5%) of households overall.

Limerick Generating Station 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

of the population is on vacation during each twoweek interval.

Assume half of these vacationers leave the area.

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

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

Employment is reduced slightly (96%) for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. This is based on the assumption 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 assumed that those taking vacation will be uniformly dispersed throughout the summer with approximately 4% of employees vacationing each week. It is further assumed that only 10% of the employees are working in the evening and during the weekend.

As shown in Appendix E, there are a significant number of parks and malls within the EPZ; thus, transient activity during weekends during the midday is at its peak - 90% in the summer and 75% in the winter. Transient activity on weekdays is estimated to be 65% and 45% during the summer and winter, respectively, since many facilities are open but operate at lower levels than on weekends. Due to the presence of overnight accommodations of campgrounds and lodging facilities, transient activity is at about half or a third during evening hours - 50% in the summer and 30% in the winter.

The shadow percentages are computed using a base of 20% (see assumption 7 in Section 2.2),

as noted in the shadow footnote to Table 63. To include the employees within the shadow region who may choose to evacuate, the voluntary evacuation is multiplied by a scenario specific proportion of employees to permanent residents in the shadow region. For example, using the values provided in Table 64 for Scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows:

5,277 20% 1 21%

78,667 85,632 One special event - Phoenixville Firebird Festival - was considered as Scenario 13. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for Scenario 13, and 0% for all other scenarios.

Schools are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday scenarios. As such, school buses and on and off campus students are all present during winter, midweek, midday Limerick Generating Station 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

scenarios. Since on campus students live in campus housing, it is assumed they are also present on weekends and evenings in the winter. It is estimated that summer school enrollment (including colleges) is approximately 10% of enrollment during the regular school year for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. Similar to winter scenarios, on campus students are assumed to be present at the same rate (10%) during summer weekends and evenings. School and colleges are not in session during weekends and evenings, as such school buses and off campus students are assumed to be 0% for weekend and evening scenarios.

Transit vehicles for the transitdependent population and medical facility population are set to 100% for all scenarios as it is assumed that these population groups are present in the EPZ at all times.

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

Limerick Generating Station 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions 2Mile 5Mile Full Region

Description:

Region Region EPZ Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R01 R02 R03 R04 R05 R06 R07 R08 R09 R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 NE, SSE, S, WNW, NW, Wind Direction From: N/A N/A N/A N NNE ENE E ESE SE SSW SW WSW W NNW SubArea Amity X Boyertown X Charlestown X Colebrookdale X Collegeville X Douglass (Berks) X Douglass (Montgomery) X Earl X East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal X East Pikeland X East Vincent X X X X X X X Green Lane X Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick X Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence X Lower Salford X Marlborough X New Hanover X X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X X Perkiomen X Phoenixville X Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X X Schuylkill X Schwenksville X Skippack X South Coventry X X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X X Trappe X Union X Upper Frederick X Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X X Upper Salford X Upper Uwchlan X Uwchlan X Warwick X Washington X West Pikeland X West Pottsgrove X West Vincent X SubArea SheltersInPlace SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Region Number: R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 R21 R22 R23 R24 R25 R26 R27 R28 R29 R30 Wind Direction From: N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW SubArea Amity X X X X X X Boyertown X X X X X Charlestown X X X X X X Colebrookdale X X X X X Collegeville X X X X X Douglass (Berks) X X X X X X Douglass(Montgomery) X X X X X X Earl X X X X X East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal X X X X X East Pikeland X X X X X X East Vincent X X X X X X X X Green Lane X X X X X Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick X X X X X X Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence X X X X X X Lower Salford X X X X X X Marlborough X X X X X New Hanover X X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X Perkiomen X X X X X X Phoenixville X X X X X X Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X X Schuylkill X X X X X X Schwenksville X X X X X X Skippack X X X X X X X South Coventry X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X X Trappe X X X X X X Union X X X X X Upper Frederick X X X X X X Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X X X Upper Salford X X X X X X Upper Uwchlan X X X X X X Uwchlan X X X X X Warwick X X X X X Washington X X X X X West Pikeland X X X X X X West Pottsgrove X X X X X X West Vincent X X X X X X X SubArea not within Plume, but Evacuates because it is surrounded by other SubArea(s) which SubArea SheltersInPlace are Evacuating SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R31 R32 R33 R34 R35 R36 R37 R38 R39 R40 R41 R42 WNW, 5Mile NE, SSE, S, N NNE E ESE SE SW WSW W NW, Region ENE SSW Wind Direction From: NNW SubArea Amity Boyertown Charlestown Colebrookdale Collegeville Douglass (Berks)

Douglass (Montgomery)

Earl East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal East Pikeland East Vincent X X X X X X Green Lane Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence Lower Salford Marlborough New Hanover X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X Perkiomen Phoenixville Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X Schuylkill Schwenksville Skippack South Coventry X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X Trappe Union Upper Frederick Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X Upper Salford Upper Uwchlan Uwchlan Warwick Washington West Pikeland West Pottsgrove West Vincent SubArea SheltersinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate SubArea SheltersInPlace SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station 66 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 5 Summer Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain/Light None Snow 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain/Light None Snow 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None 12 Winter Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 13 Winter Midweek, Evening Good Phoenixville Firebird Festival Weekend 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Single Lane Closure US422 Eastbound2 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).

2 US-422 will be reduced to a single lane in the eastbound direction from the interchange with Evergreen Rd to the interchange with US-202.

Limerick Generating Station 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Households Households School With Without Buses & Off On External Returning Returning Special Medical Campus Campus Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Facilities Students Students Buses Traffic 1 48% 52% 96% 65% 21% 0% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100%

2 48% 52% 96% 65% 21% 0% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100%

3 5% 95% 10% 90% 20% 0% 100% 0% 10% 100% 100%

4 5% 95% 10% 90% 20% 0% 100% 0% 10% 100% 100%

5 5% 95% 10% 50% 20% 0% 100% 0% 10% 100% 40%

6 48% 52% 100% 45% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

7 48% 52% 100% 45% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

8 48% 52% 100% 45% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

9 5% 95% 10% 75% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

10 5% 95% 10% 75% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

11 5% 95% 10% 75% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

12 5% 95% 10% 30% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 40%

13 5% 95% 10% 30% 20% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 40%

14 48% 52% 96% 65% 21% 0% 100% 10% 10% 100% 100%

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

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

Employees ................................................. EPZ employees who live outside the EPZ Transients ................................................. People who are in the EPZ at the time of an 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 Events............................................ Additional vehicles in the EPZ due to the identified special event.

School, Transit and Medical Vehicles ......... Vehicleequivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing schools, transitdependent people and medical facilities (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

On and off Campus Student VehiclesPersonal vehicles used to evacuate by college/university students.

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

Limerick Generating Station 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario Households Households Off On With Without Campus Campus External Total Returning Returning Special Medical Students Student School Transit Through Scenario Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Events Facilities Vehicles Vehicles Buses Buses Traffic Vehicles 1 78,667 85,632 5,277 5,004 33,470 332 15 115 218 350 45,508 254,588 2 78,667 85,632 5,277 5,004 33,470 332 15 115 218 350 45,508 254,588 3 7,867 156,432 550 6,929 31,876 332 115 350 45,508 249,959 4 7,867 156,432 550 6,929 31,876 332 115 350 45,508 249,959 5 7,867 156,432 550 3,850 31,876 332 115 350 18,203 219,575 6 78,667 85,632 5,497 3,465 33,470 332 153 1,153 2,178 350 45,508 256,405 7 78,667 85,632 5,497 3,465 33,470 332 153 1,153 2,178 350 45,508 256,405 8 78,667 85,632 5,497 3,465 33,470 332 153 1,153 2,178 350 45,508 256,405 9 7,867 156,432 550 5,774 31,876 332 1,153 350 45,508 249,842 10 7,867 156,432 550 5,774 31,876 332 1,153 350 45,508 249,842 11 7,867 156,432 550 5,774 31,876 332 1,153 350 45,508 249,842 12 7,867 156,432 550 2,310 31,876 332 1,153 350 18,203 219,073 13 7,867 156,432 550 2,310 31,876 2,239 332 1,153 350 18,203 221,312 14 78,667 85,632 5,277 5,004 33,470 332 15 115 218 350 45,508 254,588 Note: Vehicle estimates are for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03)

Limerick Generating Station 69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. LGS EPZ Subareas Limerick Generating Station 610 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 the 42 evacuation regions within the LGS EPZ, and the 14 evacuation scenarios discussed in Section 6.

The ETE for all evacuation cases are presented in Table 71 and Table 72. These tables present the estimated times to clear the indicated population percentages from the evacuation regions for all evacuation scenarios. The ETE of the 2mile region in both staged and unstaged regions are presented in Table 73 and Table 74. Table 75 defines the evacuation regions considered.

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

7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation Voluntary evacuees are permanent residents within the EPZ in Subareas for which an 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 LGS 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 the permanent residents in the Shadow Region will also 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 the permanent residents within the EPZ (see Section 3.1).

As discussed in Section 3.2, it is estimated that a total of 300,907 permanent residents reside in the Shadow Region; 20% of them would evacuate. See Table 64 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

Traffic generated within this Shadow Region, traveling away from the LGS, 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. Subarea comprising the 2Mile Region are advised to evacuate immediately.

Limerick Generating Station 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2. Subarea 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 crosses the 2 Mile Region boundary.

5. The population between the 5Mile Region boundary to the full EPZ boundary (approximately 10 miles radially from plant) shelters in place.

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

See Section 5.4.2 for additional information on staged evacuation.

7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion During Evacuation Figure 73 through Figure 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 to describe individually, or in combination, the severity of a LOS F condition:

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

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

Spatial extent measures describe the areas affected by LOS F conditions. 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.

Limerick Generating Station 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73 displays the developing congestion within the population centers 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months after the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE). Phoenixville, Upper and Lower Providence, Perkiomen, Schuylkill, Boyertown, Colebrookdale, and New Hanover are already experiencing significant congestion.

Sections of many of the major evacuation routes, including State Route (SR) 73, US 422, SR 24, SR 23, SR 100 southbound, SR 724, SR 23, SR29, and SR 63, are already exhibiting LOS F conditions. To the North, Route 100 northbound and Route 663 are also operating at LOS F conditions. These two routes serve as the major evacuation routes for most of the Subareas to the north of LGS. I76 exhibits LOS C or better in most of the study area. I476 exhibits LOS B or better. At this time, approximately 21% of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 12% of vehicles have evacuated the EPZ.

At 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months after the ATE, Figure 74 displays fully developed congestion throughout the study area with LOS F along every major evacuation route. At this time, access control is established on major evacuation routes to stop external traffic from entering the study area. Although there is some congestion within the 2mile Region at this time, most of the congestion is beyond 2 miles from LGS, most notably in Phoenixville, Upper Providence, Upper Providence, Trappe, Collegeville, Schuylkill, Upper Pottsgrove, New Hanover, Colebrookdale, Boyertown, and Amity. At this time, approximately 67% of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 36% of vehicles have evacuated the EPZ.

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 75, congestion persists throughout the EPZ.

Congestion is completely clear within the 2mile radius; slight congestion remains in the 2mile Region. Beyond 2 miles, US 422 is amongst the most heavily used evacuation routes in the EPZ, with pronounced congestion west and southeast of LGS. In the southeast, traffic queues emanate from where US 422 splits into US 202 and I76. The severe congestion along US 422 results in many vehicles finding alternate routes on other state routes and arterials throughout the EPZ. In the north and northwest, SR 73, SR 100, and SR 663 remain heavily congested as well. At this time, approximately 92% of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 57% of vehicles have evacuated the EPZ.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months after the ATE, Figure 76 shows congestion migrating away from LGS. Congestion remains along US 422, but now the congestion backs up to SR 29 in the eastbound direction and to Stowe in the westbound direction. Parts of SR 73, SR 100, SR 663, SR 113, SR 29, SR 23, SR 29, and SR 562 still exhibit LOS F conditions. The major population centers of Collegeville, Upper and Lower Providence, Phoenixville, Stowe, Amity, Colebrookdale, and Boyertown are still heavily congested. The 2mile region is nearly clear of congestion; the last bit of congestion in the 2mile Region clears 15 minutes later at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months and 15 minutes after the ATE. At this time, approximately 99% of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 78% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months and 30 minutes after the ATE, as shown in Figure 77, the EPZ is nearly clear of traffic congestion. Congestion persists in the north and west on arterials leaving Boyertown and Pottstown/West Pottsgrove SR 73, SR 100, SR 662, SR 562, and US 422. In the southeast, congestion persists in Lower Providence as vehicles attempt to access US 422 Eastbound, I276, I476, and other limited access highways. Congestion in the Chester County portion of the EPZ Limerick Generating Station 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

and the 5mile Region are fully clear of congestion; the 5mile Region completely clears of all vehicles 5 minutes later at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months and 35 minutes after the ATE. At this time, 100% of evacuees have mobilized, and approximately 97% of vehicles have evacuated the EPZ.

Figure 78 shows the patterns of congestion at 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and 30 minutes after the ATE with the last bit of congestion in the EPZ at the US 422 on ramp from SR 363, which clears 15 minutes later at 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and 45 minutes after the ATE. At this time, 100% of evacuees have mobilized, and 99% of vehicles have successfully evacuated the EPZ. LOS F conditions are still present inside the shadow region along US 422 westbound and Kutztown Rd. The last road to clear in the study area is US 422 westbound which clears at 7 hours8.101852e-5 days 0.00194 hours 1.157407e-5 weeks 2.6635e-6 months and 5 minutes after the ATE.

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 79 through Figure 722. These figures indicate 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, 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 evacuees (those with the longest mobilization times) travel freely out of the EPZ.

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 (ETE) Results Table 71 and Table 72 present the ETE values for all 46 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:

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

Limerick Generating Station 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table Contents 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.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90% of the population 73 within the 2mile Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100% of the population 74 within the 2mile Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations.

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

Congestion exists throughout the EPZ, but migrates away from the plant throughout the evacuation; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

At the 90th percentile:

o The 90th percentile ETE for Region R01 range between 2:30 and 2:55 for non special event, nonsnow scenarios (3:30 to 3:55 for snow and the special event).

o The 90th percentile ETE for Region R02 are 25 to 45 minutes longer than the ETE for R01 and range between 3:00 and 3:35 for nonspecial, nonsnow scenarios (3:55 to 4:40 for snow and the special event).

o As discussed in Section 7.3, heavy congestion exists within the 5 to 10mile region. Hence, the 90th percentile ETE for Region R03 are 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 20 minutes to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 50 minutes longer than the ETE for R02 and range between 4:25 and 5:20 for nonsnow scenarios (6:00 to 6:20 for snow).

o At the 90th percentile, rain increases the ETE by up to 35 minutes; snow by 80 minutes (some of this increase is due to longer mobilization times associated with clearing snow from driveways prior to evacuating).

o The 90th percentile ETE for midweek scenarios are approximately 15 to 20 minutes longer on average than weekend and evening scenarios. This is due to the large number of employees present in the EPZ during midweek scenarios.

o The 90th percentile ETE for the keyhole regions downwind to the EPZ boundary that do not include Upper Providence and Lower Providence (R16 through R19) and Amity, West Pottsgrove, and Upper Pottsgrove (i.e., Regions R24 and R25) are less (60 minutes on average) across all scenarios than the ETE for other keyholes extending to the EPZ boundary. As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 78, these Subareas are highly congested throughout the evacuation, and the ETE for Regions that contain these Subareas is, therefore, longer.

At the 100th percentile:

o The 100th percentile ETE for Region R01 range from 4:45 to 4:50 for nonsnow and nonspecial event cases (6:15 to 6:25 for snow cases and 5:55 for the special event).

Limerick Generating Station 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

o The 100th percentile ETE for Region R02 and keyholes to 5 miles (Region R04 through R14) range from 4:50 to 5:15 for nonsnow and nonspecial event cases (6:20 to 6:25 for snow cases and 5:55 to 8:40 for the special event).

o The 100th percentile ETE for Region R03 and keyholes to the EPZ boundary (Region R15 through R30) range from 4:55 to 7:30 for nonsnow and nonspecial event cases (6:25 to 8:55 for snow cases and 6:05 to 10:35 for the special event).

o The 100th percentile ETE for regions that include Upper Providence, Lower Providence, Amity, West Pottsgrove, and/or Upper Pottsgrove (Region R03, R15 and R18 through R30) are significantly longer (up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months and 35 minutes) than the trip mobilization time (4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months and 45 minutes for nonsnow scenarios).

All other regions are comparable to the trip mobilization time (differences of 5 to 25 minutes).

Comparison of Scenarios 12 and 13 in Table 71 indicates that the Special Event - Phoenixville Firebird Festival - has little impact (at most 15 minutes) on the ETE for the 90th and the 100th percentile. As discussed in Section 6, the external traffic is reduced by 60% for evening scenarios which is when the burning occurs. The additional 2,239 vehicles present for the special event increase congestion on the local roads in Phoenixville and exiting arterials.

However, the quickly mobilizing transients are able to evacuate before significant congestion develops. As a result, the entire EPZ (Region R03) ETE, for example, increases by only 5 minutes.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure - one lane eastbound on US 422 from the interchange with Evergreen Rd to the interchange with US 202 -

has a material impact on 90th percentile ETE with increases in ETE by as much as 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months . The impacts from the roadway closure are more significant when the wind blows towards the southeast. Wind blowing towards the southeast carries the plume over Upper Providence and surrounding areas, which rely heavily on US 422 eastbound. With a lane closed on US 422 eastbound, the capacity is reduced by approximately 60%, increasing congestion and prolonging ETE.

The results of the roadway impact scenario indicate that events such as adverse weather or traffic accidents which close a lane on US 422, 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 US 422. All efforts should be made to remove the blockage on US 422.

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 R31 through R42 are the same geographic areas as Regions R02 and R04 through R14, respectively. The times shown in Table 73 and Table 74 are when the 2mile region is 90% clear and 100% clear, respectively.

To determine whether the staged evacuation strategy is worthy of consideration, one must determine if the ETE for the 2Mile Region significantly increases (defined in the federal regulations as 30 minutes or 25%, whichever is less) when evacuating Subareas downwind to 5 Limerick Generating Station 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

miles. A significant increase in the 2Mile Region ETE when evacuating Subareas downwind would be indicative of traffic congestion beyond 2 miles delaying the egress of those within the 2Mile Region. In all cases, as shown in these tables, the ETE for the 2Mile Region is unchanged when a staged evacuation is implemented. Thus, the impedance due to the traffic congestion within the 5Mile Region to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region is not sufficient to materially influence the 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region. Therefore, staging the evacuation to sharply reduce congestion within the 5Mile Region provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region. It should be noted that as discussed in Section 7.5, the roadway impact scenario has a significant impact to ETE and would then be considered an impediment to evacuation. As a result, the roadway impact scenario was not included as part of the staged evacuation analysis.

While failing to provide assistance to evacuees from within 2 miles of the LGS, staging produces a negative impact on the ETE for those evacuating downwind to 5 miles. A comparison of ETE between Regions R31 through R42 with R02 and R04 through R14, respectively, reveals that staging retards the 90th percentile ETE for those downwind to 5 miles by up to 55 minutes (see Table 71). This extension of ETE is due to the delay in beginning the evacuation trip, experienced by those who shelter, plus the effect of the tripgeneration spike (significant volume of traffic beginning the evacuation trip at the same time - see Figure 55) that follows their eventual ATE, in creating congestion within the EPZ area beyond 2 miles. The 100th percentile ETE for those evacuating downwind to 5 miles is also affected by up to 65 minutes for regions that include New Hanover, which extends out to the EPZ boundary (see Table 72).

In summary, the staged evacuation protective action strategy provides no benefits to the evacuees within 2 miles of the LGS and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the LGS.

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 Limerick Generating Station 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Rain/Light Snow Heavy Snow

Special Event Phoenixville Firebird Festival Road Closure (One lane on US 422 eastbound is closed)

Evacuation Staging No, Staged Evacuation is not considered Yes, Staged Evacuation is considered While these Scenarios are designed, in aggregate, to represent conditions throughout the year, some further clarification is warranted:

The conditions of a summer evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (2) and (4) apply.

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

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

The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes that public schools are not in session.

Winter (includes Spring and Autumn) considers that public schools are in session.

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 (Region R02, and R04 through R14)

To EPZ Boundary (Regions R03, R15 through R30)

Enter Table 75 and identify the applicable group of candidate Regions based on the distance that the selected Region extends from the LGS. 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 Limerick Generating Station 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

in Step 1.

Identify the row in the 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 radius and downwind to 10 miles (to EPZ boundary).

The desired ETE is that value needed to evacuate 90 percent of the population from within the impacted Region.

A staged evacuation is not desired.

Table 71 is applicable because the 90th percentile ETE is desired. Proceed as follows:

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

2. Enter Table 75 and locate the Region described as Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary for wind direction from the NE and read Region R17.

3. Enter Table 71 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for Scenario 4 and Region R17. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R17; it contains the ETE value of 3:05.

Limerick 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 Evening 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 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:30 R02 3:25 3:30 3:10 3:20 3:05 3:20 3:35 4:40 3:10 3:20 4:10 3:00 3:00 3:55 R03 4:45 5:10 4:40 5:00 4:25 4:50 5:05 6:20 4:35 5:00 6:00 4:25 4:30 5:20 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 3:20 3:25 2:55 3:05 2:40 3:15 3:20 4:20 2:55 3:05 4:05 2:40 2:40 3:50 R05 2:55 2:55 2:35 2:45 2:30 2:55 3:00 4:00 2:35 2:45 3:30 2:35 2:35 3:25 R06 2:55 2:55 2:35 2:45 2:35 2:55 2:55 4:00 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:35 3:25 R07 3:00 3:05 2:40 2:50 2:40 3:00 3:05 4:05 2:40 2:50 3:40 2:40 2:45 3:25 R08 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:00 3:15 3:20 4:20 3:05 3:05 4:05 3:00 3:00 3:40 R09 3:20 3:20 3:10 3:10 3:00 3:15 3:20 4:20 3:05 3:10 4:00 3:00 3:00 3:45 R10 3:15 3:25 3:05 3:05 3:05 3:15 3:25 4:15 3:00 3:05 4:10 3:05 3:05 3:50 R11 3:05 3:15 2:50 2:55 2:55 3:10 3:10 4:15 2:50 3:00 3:50 2:50 2:55 3:50 R12 3:15 3:30 3:00 3:15 2:55 3:20 3:30 4:25 3:00 3:05 4:10 2:55 2:55 3:50 R13 3:15 3:25 3:00 3:05 2:40 3:20 3:20 4:15 3:00 3:10 4:05 2:45 2:35 4:00 R14 3:15 3:30 3:00 3:05 2:45 3:15 3:20 4:20 2:55 3:10 4:05 2:45 2:40 3:50 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R15 4:10 4:30 4:00 4:10 3:40 4:15 4:25 5:25 3:55 4:10 5:10 3:40 3:50 4:45 R16 3:25 3:40 3:10 3:20 3:15 3:30 3:40 4:35 3:15 3:25 4:15 3:10 3:25 3:45 R17 3:10 3:20 2:55 3:05 2:55 3:15 3:20 4:15 2:55 3:05 3:55 2:55 2:55 3:30 R18 3:40 3:55 3:25 3:30 3:20 3:40 3:50 5:00 3:25 3:35 4:25 3:20 3:20 4:15 R19 3:45 4:00 3:30 3:45 3:25 3:50 4:00 5:00 3:35 3:40 4:35 3:30 3:25 4:25 R20 4:40 5:05 4:40 4:55 4:30 4:40 5:15 6:10 4:40 4:55 6:00 4:35 4:35 5:00 R21 4:55 5:05 4:45 5:10 4:35 5:00 5:15 6:10 4:40 5:05 6:10 4:35 4:30 5:10 R22 4:45 5:05 4:35 4:50 4:25 4:50 5:00 6:10 4:30 4:55 6:00 4:25 4:25 5:00 R23 4:45 5:10 4:40 5:05 4:30 4:45 5:10 6:15 4:30 5:05 6:00 4:25 4:40 4:55 R24 4:00 4:05 3:45 4:05 3:50 4:00 4:15 5:10 3:40 3:55 4:50 3:45 3:45 4:20 R25 3:35 3:55 3:25 3:45 3:20 3:40 3:50 4:50 3:25 3:45 4:40 3:20 3:20 4:10 R26 4:20 4:40 4:05 4:15 3:55 4:10 4:40 5:25 3:55 4:15 5:10 3:45 3:50 5:05 R27 4:25 4:55 4:10 4:30 4:00 4:25 4:55 5:45 4:10 4:30 5:20 4:00 4:00 5:10 Limerick 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 Evening 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 R28 4:35 4:50 4:15 4:30 4:00 4:35 5:00 5:55 4:20 4:30 5:25 4:00 4:00 5:20 R29 4:25 4:50 4:10 4:30 3:55 4:30 4:55 5:45 4:15 4:30 5:25 4:05 4:00 5:25 R30 4:20 4:40 4:10 4:20 3:55 4:20 4:40 5:40 4:05 4:25 5:25 3:55 4:00 5:15 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 Miles R31 3:50 4:00 3:40 3:50 3:40 3:50 3:55 5:10 3:35 3:50 5:05 3:40 3:40 4:30 R32 3:40 3:45 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:35 3:45 4:55 3:25 3:35 4:50 3:30 3:30 4:20 R33 3:15 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 4:35 3:05 3:10 4:25 3:10 3:10 3:40 R34 3:10 3:15 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:15 3:15 4:30 3:05 3:05 4:20 3:05 3:05 3:35 R35 3:20 3:30 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:25 4:35 3:10 3:10 4:25 3:10 3:10 3:35 R36 3:40 3:45 3:25 3:30 3:30 3:40 3:45 4:55 3:25 3:35 4:45 3:30 3:30 3:55 R37 3:35 3:40 3:25 3:25 3:25 3:40 3:40 4:55 3:25 3:30 4:45 3:30 3:30 4:00 R38 3:35 3:40 3:25 3:30 3:25 3:40 3:40 4:55 3:30 3:30 4:40 3:30 3:25 4:00 R39 3:30 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:20 3:30 3:30 4:45 3:20 3:25 4:30 3:25 3:20 3:55 R40 3:40 3:50 3:35 3:45 3:35 3:45 3:45 4:55 3:30 3:40 4:55 3:35 3:35 4:35 R41 3:35 3:45 3:20 3:35 3:25 3:35 3:40 4:50 3:25 3:35 4:45 3:30 3:25 4:30 R42 3:35 3:50 3:35 3:40 3:30 3:40 3:45 4:50 3:25 3:35 4:55 3:35 3:35 4:25 Limerick 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 Evening 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 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 5:55 R02 5:00 5:15 4:50 5:10 4:50 4:55 5:00 6:25 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 R03 6:45 7:30 6:25 6:50 6:20 6:50 7:20 8:35 6:20 6:50 8:55 6:00 6:10 10:35 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 R05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R06 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R07 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R08 5:00 5:15 4:50 4:55 4:50 4:55 5:00 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R09 5:00 5:05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 5:00 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R10 4:55 5:05 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 5:00 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R11 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R12 4:55 5:00 4:50 4:55 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:25 R13 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 R14 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R15 6:05 6:25 5:50 5:55 5:20 6:15 6:15 7:20 5:45 5:55 7:00 5:20 5:25 9:55 R16 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:55 4:55 6:05 R17 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:55 4:55 6:10 R18 6:05 6:45 6:05 6:35 5:15 6:10 6:25 7:35 5:15 6:15 6:55 5:25 5:40 6:20 R19 6:00 6:20 5:45 6:25 5:05 5:50 6:20 7:45 5:45 6:05 6:55 5:10 5:25 6:45 R20 6:10 6:45 6:05 6:35 5:55 6:10 7:20 8:05 5:55 6:10 7:40 5:50 5:50 6:45 R21 6:30 7:15 6:20 6:40 5:50 6:45 7:00 8:00 6:05 6:35 8:00 6:00 6:00 6:30 R22 6:05 6:40 5:55 6:20 5:55 6:10 6:40 7:55 5:45 6:30 7:50 5:40 5:40 6:40 Limerick 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 Evening 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 R23 6:05 6:40 5:55 6:40 5:55 6:10 6:40 8:20 5:50 6:30 7:50 5:45 6:00 6:05 R24 5:50 6:05 5:40 6:20 5:45 5:50 6:20 7:55 5:35 6:05 7:25 5:35 5:35 6:30 R25 5:00 6:05 5:10 5:25 5:00 5:25 5:30 7:35 5:15 5:20 6:50 5:10 5:20 9:00 R26 6:05 6:30 5:35 5:35 5:35 5:50 6:25 7:05 5:40 5:50 7:00 5:20 5:35 10:05 R27 6:15 7:10 6:05 6:15 6:05 6:15 7:10 8:00 6:05 6:25 7:20 6:00 6:00 10:25 R28 6:45 7:05 6:10 6:20 5:55 6:40 7:10 8:00 6:10 6:35 7:35 5:55 6:00 10:35 R29 6:30 6:45 6:05 6:35 5:55 6:30 7:00 8:00 6:15 6:30 7:20 5:45 5:45 10:35 R30 6:30 6:40 6:05 6:15 5:40 6:05 6:45 8:05 5:55 6:15 7:20 5:40 5:45 10:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 Miles R31 5:35 6:00 5:25 5:35 5:15 5:20 5:45 6:50 5:20 5:30 7:00 5:30 5:30 8:55 R32 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 R33 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R34 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:20 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R35 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 5:55 R36 5:25 5:35 5:05 5:25 5:10 5:15 5:40 7:05 5:20 5:45 6:55 5:15 5:25 5:55 R37 5:25 5:35 5:05 5:25 5:10 5:15 5:35 7:05 5:20 5:35 6:55 5:15 5:25 5:55 R38 5:25 5:35 5:05 5:25 5:10 5:15 5:35 7:05 5:20 5:35 6:55 5:15 5:25 5:55 R39 5:20 5:30 5:05 5:25 5:05 5:15 5:20 7:05 5:05 5:35 6:50 4:55 5:05 5:55 R40 5:20 5:35 5:15 5:25 5:20 5:15 5:45 7:30 5:20 5:35 7:05 4:55 5:05 8:40 R41 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:50 R42 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:50 4:55 6:25 4:50 4:50 6:20 4:50 4:50 8:40 Limerick 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 Evening 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 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R02 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R05 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R06 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R07 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R08 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R09 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R10 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R11 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R12 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R13 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R14 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 Miles R31 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R32 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R33 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R34 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 Impediment to Evacuation. Not Analyzed R35 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R36 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R37 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R38 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R39 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R40 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R41 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 R42 2:50 2:55 2:30 2:40 2:30 2:50 2:55 3:55 2:30 2:40 3:30 2:30 2:30 Limerick 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 Evening 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 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R02 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R05 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R06 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R07 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R08 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R09 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R10 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R11 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R12 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R13 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R14 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 Miles R31 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R32 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R33 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R34 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R35 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 Impediment to Evacuation. Not Analyzed R36 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R37 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R38 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R39 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R40 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R41 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 R42 4:50 4:50 4:45 4:45 4:45 4:50 4:50 6:25 4:45 4:45 6:15 4:45 4:45 Limerick Generating Station 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions 2Mile 5Mile Full Region

Description:

Region Region EPZ Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R01 R02 R03 R04 R05 R06 R07 R08 R09 R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 NE, SSE, S, WNW, NW, Wind Direction From: N/A N/A N/A N NNE ENE E ESE SE SSW SW WSW W NNW SubArea Amity X Boyertown X Charlestown X Colebrookdale X Collegeville X Douglass (Berks) X Douglass (Montgomery) X Earl X East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal X East Pikeland X East Vincent X X X X X X X Green Lane X Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick X Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence X Lower Salford X Marlborough X New Hanover X X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X X Perkiomen X Phoenixville X Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X X Schuylkill X Schwenksville X Skippack X South Coventry X X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X X Trappe X Union X Upper Frederick X Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X X Upper Salford X Upper Uwchlan X Uwchlan X Warwick X Washington X West Pikeland X West Pottsgrove X West Vincent X SubArea SheltersInPlace SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Region Number: R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 R21 R22 R23 R24 R25 R26 R27 R28 R29 R30 Wind Direction From: N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW SubArea Amity X X X X X X Boyertown X X X X X Charlestown X X X X X X Colebrookdale X X X X X Collegeville X X X X X Douglass (Berks) X X X X X X Douglass(Montgomery) X X X X X X Earl X X X X X East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal X X X X X East Pikeland X X X X X X East Vincent X X X X X X X X Green Lane X X X X X Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick X X X X X X Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence X X X X X X Lower Salford X X X X X X Marlborough X X X X X New Hanover X X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X Perkiomen X X X X X X Phoenixville X X X X X X Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X X Schuylkill X X X X X X Schwenksville X X X X X X Skippack X X X X X X X South Coventry X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X X Trappe X X X X X X Union X X X X X Upper Frederick X X X X X X Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X X X Upper Salford X X X X X X Upper Uwchlan X X X X X X Uwchlan X X X X X Warwick X X X X X Washington X X X X X West Pikeland X X X X X X West Pottsgrove X X X X X X West Vincent X X X X X X X SubArea not within Plume, but Evacuates because it is surrounded by other SubArea(s) which SubArea SheltersInPlace are Evacuating SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R31 R32 R33 R34 R35 R36 R37 R38 R39 R40 R41 R42 WNW, 5Mile NE, SSE, S, N NNE E ESE SE SW WSW W NW, Region ENE SSW Wind Direction From: NNW SubArea Amity Boyertown Charlestown Colebrookdale Collegeville Douglass (Berks)

Douglass (Montgomery)

Earl East Coventry X X X X X X X X X X X X East Nantmeal East Pikeland East Vincent X X X X X X Green Lane Limerick X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Frederick Lower Pottsgrove X X X X X X X X X X X X Lower Providence Lower Salford Marlborough New Hanover X X X X X X North Coventry X X X X X X Perkiomen Phoenixville Pottstown X X X X X X X X X X X X Royersford X X X X Schuylkill Schwenksville Skippack South Coventry X X X X X X Spring City X X X X X Trappe Union Upper Frederick Upper Pottsgrove X X X X X Upper Providence X X X X X Upper Salford Upper Uwchlan Uwchlan Warwick Washington West Pikeland West Pottsgrove West Vincent SubArea SheltersinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate SubArea SheltersInPlace SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Limerick Generating Station 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 72. LGS Shadow Region Limerick Generating Station 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Limerick Generating Station 726 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%

250 200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 (Thousands) 100 50 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 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%

250 200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 (Thousands) 100 50 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 727 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%

250 200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 (Thousands) 100 50 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 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%

250 200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 (Thousands) 100 50 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 728 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%

200 180 160 Vehicles Evacuating 140 120 100 (Thousands) 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 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%

250 200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 (Thousands) 100 50 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 729 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

250 200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 (Thousands) 100 50 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

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

250 Vehicles Evacuating 200 150 (Thousands) 100 50 0

Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 730 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%

250 200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 (Thousands) 100 50 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 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

200 180 160 Vehicles Evacuating 140 120 100 (Thousands) 80 60 40 20 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 731 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

250 200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 (Thousands) 100 50 0

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%

200 180 160 Vehicles Evacuating 140 120 100 (Thousands) 80 60 40 20 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 732 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

200 Vehicles Evacuating 150 100 (Thousands) 50 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 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%

250 Vehicles Evacuating 200 150 (Thousands) 100 50 0

Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 Limerick Generating Station 733 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, buses, vans, ambulances, and wheelchair transport 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 and childcare centers, medical facilities, and correctional facilities; and access and/or functional needs population.

These transit vehicles mix with the general evacuation traffic that is comprised mostly of passenger cars (pcs). The presence of each transit vehicle in the evacuating traffic stream is represented within the modeling paradigm described in Appendix D as equivalent to two pcs.

This equivalence factor represents the longer size and more sluggish operating characteristics of a transit vehicle, relative to those of a pc. Ambulances and vans are considered one pc.

Transit vehicles must be mobilized in preparation for their respective evacuation missions.

Specifically:

Bus drivers must be alerted

They must travel to the bus depot

They must be briefed there and assigned to a route or facility These activities consume time. The location of bus depots impacts the time to travel from the bus depots to the facilities being evacuated. Locations of bus depots were not identified in this study. Rather, the offsite agencies were asked to factor the location of the depots and the distances to the EPZ into the estimate of mobilization time.

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 LGS EPZ indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to host schools at emergency classification levels of Alert or higher, and that parents should pick schoolchildren up at host schools. As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a fastbreaking general emergency. Therefore, schools (including day cares) and special facilities receive initial notification at the same time as the rest of the EPZ and children are evacuated to host schools.

Picking up children at school could add to traffic congestion at the schools, delaying the departure of the buses evacuating schoolchildren, which may have to return in a subsequent wave to the EPZ to evacuate the transitdependent population. 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.

The procedure for computing transitdependent ETE is to:

Limerick Generating Station 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 host schools/general population reception centers.

Evacuation Time Estimates for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. Figure 81 presents the chronology of events relevant to transit operations.

The elapsed time for each activity will now be discussed with reference to Figure 81. ETE are only presented for those facilities that are within the EPZ. The facilities that are in the Shadow Region or beyond are already out of the area being evacuated and, therefore, ETE cannot be computed.

8.1 ETEs for Schools, Transit Dependent People, Special Facilities Table 81 lists the transportation resources and transportation needs to evacuate the transit dependent and special facility population in the EPZ. As shown in the table, there are sufficient resources to evacuate all medical facilities, access and functional needs population, schoolchildren and transit dependent population in a single wave.

The EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if school is in session at the time of the Advisory to Evacuate [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 centers 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 are 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. It is assumed that there are enough drivers available to man all resources listed in Table 81.

When school evacuation needs are satisfied, subsequent assignments of buses to service the transitdependent should be sensitive to their mobilization time. Clearly, the buses should be 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.

Evacuation of Schools and Day Cares Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at the facility to be evacuated. It is assumed that for a rapidly escalating radiological emergency with no observable indication before the fact, drivers would require 90 minutes to be contacted, to travel to the depot, be briefed, and to travel to the schools. Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather - 100 minutes for rain/light snow and 110 minutes for heavy snow.

Limerick Generating Station 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

Based on discussions with offsite agencies, a loading time of 15 minutes (20 minutes for rain/light snow and 25 minutes for heavy snow) for school buses is used. See Section 2.4, assumption 5 and Table 22.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The buses servicing the schools are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the ATE - 90 minutes mobilization time plus 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 host school. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes from the school to the EPZ boundary. Each bus route is given an identification number and is written to the DYNEV II input stream. DYNEV computes the route length and outputs the average speed for each 5minute interval, for each bus route. The specified bus routes are documented in Section 10 in Table 10 2 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). Data provided by DYNEV during the appropriate timeframe depending on the mobilization and loading times (i.e., 105 minutes after the ATE for good weather) were used to compute the average speed for each route, as follows:

60 .

1 .

. 60 .

. . 1 .

The average speed computed (using this methodology) for the buses servicing all of the schools within each Subarea shown in Table 82 through Table 84. 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 host/receiving school was computed assuming an average speed of 40 mph for good weather, 36 mph (10% decrease) for rain/light snow, and 34 mph (15% decrease) for heavy snow. Speeds were reduced in Table 82 through Table 84 to 40 mph, 36 mph, and 34 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively, for those calculated bus speeds which exceed 40 mph.

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

Limerick Generating Station 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

2. The elapsed time until the bus reaches the host school.

The evacuation time out of the EPZ can be computed as the sum of times associated with Activities ABC, CD, and DE (For example: 90 min. + 15 + 17 = 2:05, rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes, for Schools in Amity, in good weather). Here, 17 minutes is the time to travel 1.3 miles at 4.6 mph.

The average singlewave ETE, for schools is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months and 5 minutes (4:50 2:45 = 2:05) less than the 90th percentile ETE 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.

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

Activity: Travel to Host Schools (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the host schools/receiving schools are measured using GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the host school/receiving school. The host schools are mapped in Figure 105. For a onewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 40 mph, 36 mph and 34 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the school population.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

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

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

As shown in Table 81, there are sufficient buses for evacuation of children in a single wave, if the entire EPZ is evacuated at once (a highly unlikely event). In the event of a shortfall of resources or drivers, a twowave evacuation is calculated. Due to the large number of schools in the EPZ, second wave ETE were not computed for each school or each Subarea. Rather, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation of schools in each Subarea. The travel time from the host school back to the EPZ boundary and then back to the school was computed assuming an average speed of 40 mph as buses will be traveling counter to evacuating traffic. Times and distances are based on averages for all schools in the EPZ for good weather:

Buses arrive at the H.S at 3:05 (see average value in Table 82)

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

Bus returns to facility: 22 minutes (average distance to H.S (9.2 miles) + average distance to EPZ boundary (5.3 miles) at 40 mph)

Loading Time: 15 minutes

Bus travels back to the EPZ boundary: 30 minutes [average distance to EPZ boundary (5.3 miles) at network wide average speed at 4:00 (10.47 mph)]

Limerick Generating Station 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus exits EPZ at time 3:05 + 0:15 + 0:22 + 0:15 + 0:30 = 4:30 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Given the average singlewave ETE for schools is 2:45 (see Table 82); a secondwave evacuation would require an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 45 minutes on average. The average twowave ETE of schools is 20 minutes (4:50 4:30 = 0:20) less than the 90th percentile ETE of the full EPZ during a winter, midweek, midday scenario (Scenario 6), and does not impact protective action decision making.

Evacuation of Transit Dependent People (Residents without access to a vehicle)

A detailed computation of transit dependent population was done and is discussed in Section 3.6. The total number of transit dependent people per Subarea was determined using a weighted distribution based on population. See Table 311 for the distribution used. The number of buses required to evacuate this population was determined by the capacity of 30 people per bus. KLD designed 43 bus routes to service the major evacuation route in each Subarea from the center of the Subarea to the EPZ boundary, for the purposes of this study. The designed routes (as discussed in Section 10) are shown graphically in Figure 102 through Figure 104 and described in Table 101. Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along these routes, then proceed out of the EPZ to give a representative ETE for transit dependent people within each Subarea.

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at their designated route. The buses dispatched from the depots to service the transitdependent evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after majority of their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), 80% of the evacuees will have completed their mobilization when the buses will begin their routes, 120 minutes after the ATE for good weather. Those routes with multiple buses have been designed such that buses are dispatched using 20minute headways. The use of bus headways ensures that those people who take longer to mobilize will be picked up.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

For multiple stops along a route, estimation of travel time must allow for the delay associated with stopping and starting at each pickup point. The time, t, required for a bus to decelerate at a rate, a, expressed in ft/sec/sec, from a speed, v, expressed in ft/sec, to a stop, is t = v/a.

Assuming the same acceleration rate and final speed following the stop yields a total time, T, to service boarding passengers:

2 ,

Where B = Dwell time to service passengers. The total distance, s in feet, travelled during the deceleration and acceleration activities is: s = v2/a. If the bus had not stopped to service passengers, but had continued to travel at speed, v, then its travel time over the distance, s, would be: s/v = v/a. Then the total delay (i.e. pickup time, P) to service passengers is:

Limerick Generating Station 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Assigning reasonable estimates:

B = 50 seconds: a generous value for a single passenger, carrying personal items, to board per stop

v = 25 mph = 37 ft/sec

a = 4 ft/sec/sec, a moderate average rate Then, P 1 minute per stop. Allowing 30 minutes pickup time per bus run implies 30 stops per run, for good weather. It is assumed that bus acceleration and speed will be less in rain/light snow resulting in 10minute delays per bus and 20minute delays in heavy snow.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

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

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

For example, the ETE for the bus route servicing Amity is computed as 120 + 18 + 30 = 2:50 for good weather (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 18 minutes is the time to travel 1.3 miles at 4.4 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route at 120 minutes.

The average single wave ETE (3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months and 55 minutes) for the transit dependent population does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE (4:50) for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario and will not impact protective action decision making.

The ETE for a second wave (discussed below) is presented in the event there is a shortfall of available buses or bus drivers.

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 general population reception centers are mapped in Figure 105. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 40 mph, 36 mph and 34 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

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

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

The buses assigned to return to the EPZ to perform a second wave evacuation of transit dependent evacuees will be those that have already evacuated transitdependent people who mobilized more quickly. The first wave of transitdependent people depart the bus, and the bus Limerick Generating Station 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

then returns to the EPZ, travels to the start of its route and proceeds to pick up more transit dependent evacuees along the route. The travel time back to the EPZ is equal to the travel time to the reception center.

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

Bus arrives at reception center at 3:00 in good weather (2:50 to exit EPZ + 10minute travel time to reception center).

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

Bus returns to EPZ and completes second route: 10minutes (equal to travel time to reception center) + 28 minutes to travel to the start of the route and to rerun the route a second time (1.3 miles @ 40 mph [assumed speed since bus is traveling against traffic] + 1.3 miles @ 2.95 mph [route specific speed output from the model at this time]) = 38 minutes

Bus completes pickups along route: 30 minutes.

Bus exits EPZ at time 3:00 + 0:15 + 0:38 + 0:30 = 4:25 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

The ETE for the completion of the second wave for all transitdependent bus routes are provided in Table 85 through Table 87. The average ETE (5:40) for a twowave evacuation of transit dependent people exceeds the ETE (4:50) for the general population at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather conditions (Scenario 6) and could impact protective action decision making.

The relocation of transitdependent evacuees from the reception centers to mass care centers, if the counties decide to do so, is not considered in this study.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

As discussed in Section 2.4, and shown in Table 22, it is assumed that the mobilization time for medical facilities averages 90 minutes in good weather, 100 minutes in rain/light snow and 110 minutes in heavy snow. Specially trained medical support staff (working their regular shift) will be on site to assist in the evacuation of patients. It is further assumed that additional staff (if needed) could be mobilized over this same 90minute timeframe.

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. Item 3 of Section 2.4 discusses transit vehicle capacities to cap loading times per vehicle type. Concurrent loading on multiple buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances at capacity is assumed such that the maximum loading times for buses (30 passengers times 1 minute per passenger), wheelchair vans (15 passengers times 5 minutes per passenger) and ambulances (2 passengers times 15 minutes per passenger) are 30, 75 and 30 minutes, respectively.

Limerick Generating Station 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

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

Table 88 through Table 810 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. Average speeds output by the model for Scenario 6 (Scenario 7 for rain/light snow and Scenario 8 for heavy snow), Region 3, capped at 40 mph (36 mph for rain/light snow and 34 mph for heavy snow), are used to compute travel time to the EPZ boundary. 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. Concurrent loading on multiple buses, wheelchair buses/vans, and ambulances at capacity is assumed. All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, the calculation of ETE for the medical facilities within Amity with 190 ambulatory residents during good weather is:

ETE: 90 + 1 x 30 + 18 = 168 min. or 2:20 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes)

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

The average single wave ETE (3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months 30 minutes) for medical facilities in the EPZ does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE (4:50) for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario and will not impact protective action decision making.

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

As shown in Table 81, there are sufficient resources to evacuate the ambulatory patients at medical facilities within the EPZ in a single wave. In the event of a shortfall of resources or drivers, a twowave evacuation is calculated. A representative second wave ETE for medical facilities is computed as follows for good weather assuming the host medial facilities for these facilities are about 10 miles from the EPZ boundary following the most probable route:

Ambulatory patients (buses):

o On average, buses for ambulatory patients leave the EPZ at 3:22 after the ATE.

o Buses travels to host facility: 15 minutes (10 miles at 40 mph).

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

o Bus returns to facility: 15 minutes to travel back to the EPZ boundary (equal to the average travel time to host facility) + 10 minutes to travel back to the facility (average distance to EPZ = 6.7 miles from Table 88 @ 40 mph) = 25 minutes.

Limerick Generating Station 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

o Remaining ambulatory patients loaded on bus: 29 minutes (average from Table 88).

o Bus travels to EPZ boundary: 34 minutes (average distance from medical facilities to EPZ boundary (6.7 miles) at 11.94 mph (network wide average speed at 5:10).

o Bus exits EPZ at time 3:22 + 0:15 + 0:39 + 0:25 + 0:29 + 0:34 = 5:45 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

The average ETE for a secondwave evacuation of transitdependent people exceeds the 90th percentile ETE of the entire EPZ for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 6), which could impact the protective action decision making.

Correctional Facilities As discussed in Section 3.10, there are two correctional facilities within the EPZ - Montgomery County Correctional Facility and Graterford State Correctional Institution. The total inmate capacity of these facilities is 4,957 persons. County emergency personal indicated that these facilities will shelterinplace. As such, an ETE was not calculated for this facility.

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population The access and/or functional needs population was provided by the offsite agencies and is further discussed in Section 3.9. Table 811 summarizes the ETE for access and/or functional needs population. The table is broken down by weather condition. It is assumed that the access and/or functional needs population will be picked up from their homes. Furthermore, it is conservatively assumed that patients are spaced 3 miles apart. Vehicle speeds approximate 20 mph between households in good weather (10% slower in rain/light snow and 15% in heavy snow).

Mobilization times of 120 minutes were used (130 minutes for rain/light snow and 140 minutes for heavy snow). The last household is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 40 mph (36 mph for rain/light snow and 34 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 the 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, conservatively assuming no more than one access and/or functional needs person per household implies that 242 households need a wheelchair transport vehicle. It is assumed that 30 wheelchair buses are needed for wheelchair bound people to evacuate in a reasonable amount of time. The following outlines the ETE calculation for ambulances:

1. Assume 30 wheelchair buses are deployed, each with about 9 stops, to service a total of 242 households.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Wheelchair buses arrive at the first pickup location: 120 minutes

b. Load passenger at first pickup: 5 minutes

c. Travel to next pickup locations: 72 minutes (3 miles @ 20 mph for 8 stops)

d. Load passenger at subsequent pickup location: 40 minutes (5 x 8 stops)

Limerick Generating Station 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 28 minutes (5 miles @ 10.9 mph).

ETE: 120 + 5 + 72 + 40 + 28 = 4:25 after the ATE (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes)

The ETE for the wheelchair bound access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ is less than the 90th percentile ETE for evacuation of the general population in the Full EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions.

As shown in Table 81, there are sufficient resources available to evacuate all access and/or functional needs population in a single wave. Therefore, a second wave ETE calculation was not considered for the access and/or functional needs population.

Limerick Generating Station 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Transportation Wheelchair Resource Buses Vans Buses Ambulances Resources Available BERKS COUNTY Various Sources Not Listed 265 200 36 75 CHESTER COUNTY Various Sources Not Listed 1,079 150 80 60 MONTGOMERY COUNTY Montgomery School District 548 47 Goodwill Fire Company 8 Harleysville Community 4 Gilbertsville Area 4 Plymouth Community 2 Friendship Fire Company 4 Trappe Fire Company 4 Skippack Emergency Medical Services 3 Ambulance Service Outside of EPZ 84 TOTAL: 1,892 397 116 248 Resources Needed Schools (Table 38): 1,089 Medical Facilities (Table 36): 78 50 76 TransitDependent Population (Section 3.6): 175 Access and/or Functional Needs (Table 39): 30 11 Correctional Facilities (Section 3.10): ShelterInPlace TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 1,342 0 80 87 Limerick Generating Station 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Schools in Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) EPZ Bdry (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BERKS COUNTY SCHOOLS Amity 90 15 1.3 4.6 17 2:05 6.8 10 2:15 Boyertown 90 15 2.9 8.9 20 2:05 7.1 11 2:20 Colebrookdale 90 15 1.8 13.1 8 1:55 8.1 12 2:10 Douglass (Berks) 90 15 4.0 13.7 18 2:05 6.8 10 2:15 Earl 90 15 2.2 5.9 22 2:10 6.3 9 2:20 Union 90 15 3.2 5.5 35 2:20 5.4 8 2:30 Washington 90 15 1.2 14.6 5 1:50 13.1 20 2:10 CHESTER COUNTY SCHOOLS Charlestown 90 15 1.0 14.6 4 1:50 12.5 19 2:10 East Coventry 90 15 10.9 9.5 69 2:55 3.0 5 3:00 East Pikeland 90 15 8.2 6.2 79 3:05 2.5 4 3:10 East Nantmeal 90 15 5.1 23.5 13 2:00 2.7 4 2:05 East Vincent 90 15 10.7 6.2 103 3:30 2.5 4 3:35 North Coventry 90 15 6.5 7.5 52 2:40 5.3 8 2:50 Phoenixville 90 15 5.2 3.9 80 3:05 15.4 23 3:30 Schuylkill 90 15 2.7 5.7 29 2:15 15.4 23 2:40 South Coventry 90 15 6.6 6.4 62 2:50 3.0 5 2:55 Spring City 90 15 11.6 7.4 94 3:20 2.5 4 3:25 Upper Uwchlan 90 15 2.7 10.0 16 2:05 7.2 11 2:20 Uwchlan 90 15 1.7 4.6 22 2:10 2.4 4 2:15 Warwick 90 15 3.1 17.4 11 2:00 3.1 5 2:05 West Pikeland 90 15 4.5 9.7 28 2:15 1.2 2 2:20 West Vincent 90 15 9.2 7.0 79 3:05 3.9 6 3:15 MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOLS Collegeville 90 15 2.9 2.4 73 3:00 8.9 13 3:15 Douglass (Montgomery) 90 15 3.2 6.7 29 2:15 13.1 20 2:35 Green Lane 90 15 2.6 38.9 4 1:50 8.4 13 2:05 Limerick 90 15 8.4 5.8 87 3:15 10.0 15 3:30 Lower Frederick 90 15 5.1 40.0 8 1:55 7.2 11 2:10 Lower Pottsgrove 90 15 9.5 3.6 158 4:25 17.6 26 4:55 Limerick Generating Station 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Dist. To Average Dist. EPZ Travel Time from Driver Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed Travel Time to ETE Bdry to H.S. EPZ Bdry to H.S. ETA to H.S.

Schools in Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) EPZ Bdry (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Lower Providence 90 15 4.2 1.8 142 4:10 30.8 46 5:00 Lower Salford 90 15 0.9 1.0 53 2:40 7.5 11 2:55 Marlborough 90 15 0.8 34.2 1 1:50 14.0 21 2:15 New Hanover 90 15 3.4 2.6 79 3:05 17.7 27 3:35 Perkiomen 90 15 11.0 7.1 93 3:20 6.4 10 3:30 Pottstown 90 15 9.9 3.4 175 4:40 13.1 20 5:00 Royersford 90 15 10.7 6.1 105 3:30 12.5 19 3:50 Schwenksville 90 15 6.2 28.7 13 2:00 9.8 15 2:15 Skippack 90 15 2.9 26.7 7 1:55 9.9 15 2:10 Trappe 90 15 7.4 2.4 186 4:55 9.2 14 5:10 Upper Frederick 90 15 7.1 6.8 62 2:50 6.8 10 3:00 Upper Pottsgrove 90 15 7.9 2.4 195 5:00 13.0 20 5:20 Upper Providence 90 15 7.9 9.6 50 2:35 30.6 46 3:25 Upper Salford 90 15 2.4 33.6 4 1:50 7.2 11 2:05 West Pottsgrove 90 15 6.0 2.5 146 4:15 4.8 7 4:25 Maximum for EPZ: 5:00 Maximum: 5:20 Average for EPZ: 2:45 Average: 3:05 Limerick Generating Station 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow Dist. To Average Dist. EPZ Travel Time from Driver Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed Travel Time to ETE Bdry to H.S. EPZ Bdry to H.S. ETA to H.S.

Schools in Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) EPZ Bdry (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BERKS COUNTY SCHOOLS Amity 100 20 1.3 3.1 25 2:25 6.8 11 2:40 Boyertown 100 20 2.9 5.9 30 2:30 7.1 12 2:45 Colebrookdale 100 20 1.8 12.0 9 2:10 8.1 14 2:25 Douglass (Berks) 100 20 4.0 6.3 38 2:40 6.8 11 2:55 Earl 100 20 2.2 3.3 40 2:40 6.3 11 2:55 Union 100 20 3.2 5.9 33 2:35 5.4 9 2:45 Washington 100 20 1.2 17.5 4 2:05 13.1 22 2:30 CHESTER COUNTY SCHOOLS Charlestown 100 20 1.0 8.7 7 2:10 12.5 21 2:35 East Coventry 100 20 10.9 8.6 76 3:20 3.0 5 3:25 East Pikeland 100 20 8.2 6.6 74 3:15 2.5 4 3:20 East Nantmeal 100 20 5.1 10.5 29 2:30 2.7 5 2:35 East Vincent 100 20 10.7 6.2 103 3:45 2.5 4 3:50 North Coventry 100 20 6.5 8.3 47 2:50 5.3 9 3:00 Phoenixville 100 20 5.2 4.7 67 3:10 15.4 26 3:40 Schuylkill 100 20 2.7 5.4 30 2:30 15.4 26 3:00 South Coventry 100 20 6.6 5.5 72 3:15 3.0 5 3:20 Spring City 100 20 11.6 7.7 91 3:35 2.5 4 3:40 Upper Uwchlan 100 20 2.7 9.8 17 2:20 7.2 12 2:35 Uwchlan 100 20 1.7 5.1 20 2:20 2.4 4 2:25 Warwick 100 20 3.1 14.7 13 2:15 3.1 5 2:20 West Pikeland 100 20 4.5 9.7 28 2:30 1.2 2 2:35 West Vincent 100 20 9.2 7.6 73 3:15 3.9 7 3:25 MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOLS Collegeville 100 20 2.9 1.7 102 3:45 8.9 15 4:00 Douglass (Montgomery) 100 20 3.2 3.5 54 2:55 13.1 22 3:20 Green Lane 100 20 2.6 35.3 4 2:05 8.4 14 2:20 Limerick 100 20 8.4 4.4 115 3:55 10.0 17 4:15 Lower Frederick 100 20 5.1 36.0 9 2:10 7.2 12 2:25 Lower Pottsgrove 100 20 9.5 3.1 184 5:05 17.6 29 5:35 Limerick Generating Station 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Dist. To Average Dist. EPZ Travel Time from Driver Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed Travel Time to ETE Bdry to H.S. EPZ Bdry to H.S. ETA to H.S.

Schools in Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) EPZ Bdry (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Lower Providence 100 20 4.2 1.8 140 4:20 30.8 51 5:15 Lower Salford 100 20 0.9 1.3 41 2:45 7.5 13 3:00 Marlborough 100 20 0.8 31.8 2 2:05 14.0 23 2:30 New Hanover 100 20 3.4 1.7 122 4:05 17.7 30 4:35 Perkiomen 100 20 11.0 7.0 94 3:35 6.4 11 3:50 Pottstown 100 20 9.9 3.2 184 5:05 13.1 22 5:30 Royersford 100 20 10.7 4.6 138 4:20 12.5 21 4:45 Schwenksville 100 20 6.2 13.1 28 2:30 9.8 16 2:50 Skippack 100 20 2.9 15.5 11 2:15 9.9 17 2:35 Trappe 100 20 7.4 2.4 183 5:05 9.2 15 5:20 Upper Frederick 100 20 7.1 5.3 80 3:20 6.8 11 3:35 Upper Pottsgrove 100 20 7.9 2.3 204 5:25 13.0 22 5:50 Upper Providence 100 20 7.9 5.4 88 3:30 30.6 51 4:25 Upper Salford 100 20 2.4 31.3 5 2:05 7.2 12 2:20 West Pottsgrove 100 20 6.0 1.9 187 5:10 4.8 8 5:20 Maximum for EPZ: 5:25 Maximum: 5:50 Average for EPZ: 3:10 Average: 3:30 Limerick Generating Station 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow Dist. To Average Dist. EPZ Travel Time from Driver Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed Travel Time to ETE Bdry to H.S. EPZ Bdry to H.S. ETA to H.S.

Schools in Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) EPZ Bdry (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BERKS COUNTY SCHOOLS Amity 110 25 1.3 5.8 13 2:30 6.8 12 2:45 Boyertown 110 25 2.9 8.2 21 2:40 7.1 13 2:55 Colebrookdale 110 25 1.8 9.4 11 2:30 8.1 14 2:45 Douglass (Berks) 110 25 4.0 7.3 33 2:50 6.8 12 3:05 Earl 110 25 2.2 3.3 40 2:55 6.3 11 3:10 Union 110 25 3.2 5.4 36 2:55 5.4 10 3:05 Washington 110 25 1.2 4.8 15 2:30 13.1 23 2:55 CHESTER COUNTY SCHOOLS Charlestown 110 25 1.0 10.1 6 2:25 12.5 22 2:50 East Coventry 110 25 10.9 10.2 64 3:20 3.0 5 3:25 East Pikeland 110 25 8.2 6.8 73 3:30 2.5 4 3:35 East Nantmeal 110 25 5.1 34.0 9 2:25 2.7 5 2:30 East Vincent 110 25 10.7 5.9 109 4:05 2.5 4 4:10 North Coventry 110 25 6.5 6.1 63 3:20 5.3 9 3:30 Phoenixville 110 25 5.2 4.3 72 3:30 15.4 27 4:00 Schuylkill 110 25 2.7 5.6 29 2:45 15.4 27 3:15 South Coventry 110 25 6.6 9.3 43 3:00 3.0 5 3:05 Spring City 110 25 11.6 6.7 103 4:00 2.5 4 4:05 Upper Uwchlan 110 25 2.7 7.3 22 2:40 7.2 13 2:55 Uwchlan 110 25 1.7 5.8 18 2:35 2.4 4 2:40 Warwick 110 25 3.1 13.5 14 2:30 3.1 5 2:35 West Pikeland 110 25 4.5 6.8 40 2:55 1.2 2 3:00 West Vincent 110 25 9.2 7.7 72 3:30 3.9 7 3:40 MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOLS Collegeville 110 25 2.9 9.5 18 2:35 8.9 16 2:55 Douglass (Montgomery) 110 25 3.2 4.5 43 3:00 13.1 23 3:25 Green Lane 110 25 2.6 32.8 5 2:20 8.4 15 2:35 Limerick 110 25 8.4 3.8 132 4:30 10.0 18 4:50 Lower Frederick 110 25 5.1 34.0 9 2:25 7.2 13 2:40 Lower Pottsgrove 110 25 9.5 2.6 222 6:00 17.6 31 6:35 Limerick Generating Station 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Dist. To Average Dist. EPZ Travel Time from Driver Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed Travel Time to ETE Bdry to H.S. EPZ Bdry to H.S. ETA to H.S.

Schools in Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) EPZ Bdry (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

Lower Providence 110 25 4.2 1.7 145 4:40 30.8 54 5:35 Lower Salford 110 25 0.9 1.1 47 3:05 7.5 13 3:20 Marlborough 110 25 0.8 29.6 2 2:20 14.0 25 2:45 New Hanover 110 25 3.4 2.1 98 3:55 17.7 31 4:30 Perkiomen 110 25 11.0 10.0 66 3:25 6.4 11 3:40 Pottstown 110 25 9.9 2.8 211 5:50 13.1 23 6:15 Royersford 110 25 10.7 3.6 178 5:15 12.5 22 5:40 Schwenksville 110 25 6.2 20.5 18 2:35 9.8 17 2:55 Skippack 110 25 2.9 18.4 9 2:25 9.9 17 2:45 Trappe 110 25 7.4 3.2 139 4:35 9.2 16 4:55 Upper Frederick 110 25 7.1 30.3 14 2:30 6.8 12 2:45 Upper Pottsgrove 110 25 7.9 2.0 241 6:20 13.0 23 6:45 Upper Providence 110 25 7.9 5.6 85 3:40 30.6 54 4:35 Upper Salford 110 25 2.4 31.5 5 2:20 7.2 13 2:35 West Pottsgrove 110 25 6.0 3.7 98 3:55 4.8 8 4:05 Maximum for EPZ: 6:20 Maximum: 6:45 Average for EPZ: 3:20 Average: 3:40 Limerick Generating Station 817 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BERKS COUNTY 3 120 1.3 4.4 18 30 2:50 6.8 10 5 10 38 30 4:25 Amity 3 140 1.3 3.0 26 30 3:20 6.8 10 5 10 39 30 4:55 Boyertown 3 120 2.9 4.5 38 30 3:10 7.1 11 5 10 64 30 5:10 Colebrookdale 3 120 1.8 10.4 10 30 2:40 8.1 12 5 10 29 30 4:10 Douglass (Berks) 2 120 4.0 10.1 24 30 2:55 6.8 10 5 10 49 30 4:40 Earl 1 120 2.2 4.3 31 30 3:05 6.3 9 5 10 46 30 4:45 Union 1 120 3.2 5.4 36 30 3:10 5.4 8 5 10 25 30 4:30 Washington 1 120 1.2 6.0 12 30 2:45 13.1 20 5 10 43 30 4:35 CHESTER COUNTY Charlestown 3 120 1.0 11.3 5 30 2:35 12.5 19 5 10 27 30 4:10 3 120 10.9 10.3 64 30 3:35 3.0 5 5 10 38 30 5:05 East Coventry 1 140 10.9 12.2 54 30 3:45 3.0 5 5 10 38 30 5:15 2 120 8.2 6.7 74 30 3:45 2.5 4 5 10 31 30 5:05 East Pikeland 2 140 8.2 7.7 64 30 3:55 2.5 4 5 10 29 30 5:15 East Nantmeal 1 120 5.1 20.6 15 30 2:45 2.7 4 5 10 26 30 4:00 2 120 10.7 7.0 91 30 4:05 2.5 4 5 10 36 30 5:30 East Vincent 2 140 10.7 8.2 78 30 4:10 2.5 4 5 10 36 30 5:35 3 120 6.5 7.7 51 30 3:25 5.3 8 5 10 28 30 4:50 North Coventry 2 140 6.5 10.0 39 30 3:30 5.3 8 5 10 28 30 4:55 4 120 5.2 3.9 80 30 3:50 15.4 23 5 10 39 30 5:40 Phoenixville 4 140 5.2 4.7 67 30 4:00 15.4 23 5 10 39 30 5:50 2 160 5.2 5.5 57 30 4:10 15.4 23 5 10 39 30 6:00 3 120 2.7 6.5 25 30 2:55 15.4 23 5 10 44 30 4:50 Schuylkill 2 140 2.7 7.7 21 30 3:15 15.4 23 5 10 42 30 5:05 South Coventry 2 120 6.6 6.7 59 30 3:30 3.0 5 5 10 26 30 4:50 Spring City 2 120 11.6 7.9 88 30 4:00 2.5 4 5 10 39 30 5:30 3 120 2.7 10.5 15 30 2:45 7.2 11 5 10 27 30 4:10 Upper Uwchlan 2 140 2.7 10.4 16 30 3:10 7.2 11 5 10 27 30 4:35 Limerick Generating Station 818 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Uwchlan 1 120 1.7 3.5 30 30 3:00 2.4 4 5 10 12 30 4:05 Warwick 2 120 3.1 19.0 10 30 2:40 3.1 5 5 10 20 30 3:50 West Pikeland 2 120 4.5 9.6 28 30 3:00 1.2 2 5 10 25 30 4:15 2 120 9.2 6.8 81 30 3:55 3.9 6 5 10 36 30 5:25 West Vincent 2 140 9.2 7.6 73 30 4:05 3.9 6 5 10 35 30 5:35 MONTGOMERY COUNTY Collegeville 3 120 2.9 1.8 98 30 4:10 8.9 13 5 10 51 30 6:00 Douglass 3 120 3.2 3.1 61 30 3:35 13.1 20 5 10 51 30 5:35 (Montgomery) 3 140 3.2 2.5 77 30 4:10 13.1 20 5 10 32 30 5:50 Green Lane 1 120 2.6 38.9 4 30 2:35 8.4 13 5 10 21 30 3:55 4 120 8.4 6.1 83 30 3:55 10.0 15 5 10 43 30 5:40 Limerick 4 140 8.4 5.6 90 30 4:20 10.0 15 5 10 40 30 6:00 3 160 8.4 6.6 76 30 4:30 10.0 15 5 10 40 30 6:10 Lower Frederick 3 120 5.1 40.0 8 30 2:40 7.2 11 5 10 33 30 4:10 3 120 9.5 3.7 152 30 5:05 17.6 26 5 10 55 30 7:15 Lower Pottsgrove 3 140 9.5 4.1 139 30 5:10 17.6 26 5 10 55 30 7:20 4 120 4.2 1.8 139 30 4:50 30.8 46 5 10 59 30 7:20 4 140 4.2 1.8 139 30 5:10 30.8 46 5 10 59 30 7:40 Lower Providence 4 160 4.2 1.9 131 30 5:25 30.8 46 5 10 59 30 7:55 1 180 4.2 2.1 121 30 5:35 30.8 46 5 10 59 30 8:05 Lower Salford 1 120 0.9 1.0 52 30 3:25 7.5 11 5 10 22 30 4:45 Marlborough 1 120 0.8 34.2 1 30 2:35 14.0 21 5 10 23 30 4:05 3 120 3.4 2.0 101 30 4:15 17.7 27 5 10 41 30 6:10 New Hanover 3 140 3.4 2.0 104 30 4:35 17.7 27 5 10 37 30 6:25 1 160 3.4 2.2 95 30 4:45 17.7 27 5 10 37 30 6:35 3 120 11.0 7.6 87 30 4:00 6.4 10 5 10 43 30 5:40 Perkiomen 2 140 11.0 8.2 80 30 4:10 6.4 10 5 10 43 30 5:50 Limerick Generating Station 819 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 3 120 9.9 3.4 173 30 5:25 13.1 20 5 10 50 30 7:20 3 140 9.9 3.7 159 30 5:30 13.1 20 5 10 50 30 7:25 Pottstown 3 160 9.9 3.9 153 30 5:45 13.1 20 5 10 50 30 7:40 3 180 9.9 4.3 139 30 5:50 13.1 20 5 10 50 30 7:45 Royersford 3 120 10.7 6.1 105 30 4:15 12.5 19 5 10 51 30 6:10 Schwenksville 1 120 6.2 26.0 14 30 2:45 9.8 15 5 10 63 30 4:50 3 120 2.9 25.6 7 30 2:40 9.9 15 5 10 50 30 4:30 Skippack 3 140 2.9 23.7 7 30 3:00 9.9 15 5 10 38 30 4:40 2 160 2.9 12.5 14 30 3:25 9.9 15 5 10 27 30 4:55 Trappe 2 120 7.4 2.4 183 30 5:35 9.2 14 5 10 36 30 7:10 Upper Frederick 2 120 7.1 7.6 56 30 3:30 6.8 10 5 10 46 30 5:15 Upper Pottsgrove 3 120 7.9 2.6 182 30 5:35 13.0 20 5 10 44 30 7:25 3 120 7.9 6.6 72 30 3:45 30.6 46 5 10 70 30 6:30 3 140 7.9 6.3 76 30 4:10 30.6 46 5 10 70 30 6:55 Upper Providence 3 160 7.9 6.9 68 30 4:20 30.6 46 5 10 70 30 7:05 3 180 7.9 8.8 54 30 4:25 30.6 46 5 10 70 30 7:10 Upper Salford 2 120 2.4 38.5 4 30 2:35 7.2 11 5 10 19 30 3:50 West Pottsgrove 2 120 6.0 2.4 147 30 5:00 4.8 7 5 10 37 30 6:30 Maximum ETE: 5:50 Maximum ETE: 8:05 Average ETE: 3:55 Average ETE: 5:40 Limerick Generating Station 820 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

BERKS COUNTY 3 130 1.3 2.9 27 40 3:20 6.8 11 5 10 42 40 5:10 Amity 3 150 1.3 2.6 30 40 3:40 6.8 11 5 10 38 40 5:25 Boyertown 3 130 2.9 2.9 59 40 3:50 7.1 12 5 10 45 40 5:45 Colebrookdale 3 130 1.8 4.6 24 40 3:15 8.1 14 5 10 28 40 4:55 Douglass (Berks) 2 130 4.0 6.2 39 40 3:30 6.8 11 5 10 39 40 5:15 Earl 1 130 2.2 3.4 39 40 3:30 6.3 11 5 10 38 40 5:15 Union 1 130 3.2 6.0 32 40 3:25 5.4 9 5 10 36 40 5:05 Washington 1 130 1.2 4.3 17 40 3:10 13.1 22 5 10 49 40 5:20 CHESTER COUNTY Charlestown 3 130 1.0 8.5 7 40 3:00 12.5 21 5 10 30 40 4:50 3 130 10.9 9.0 72 40 4:05 3.0 5 5 10 41 40 5:50 East Coventry 1 150 10.9 10.7 61 40 4:15 3.0 5 5 10 41 40 6:00 2 130 8.2 7.2 69 40 4:00 2.5 4 5 10 32 40 5:35 East Pikeland 2 150 8.2 8.2 60 40 4:10 2.5 4 5 10 31 40 5:40 East Nantmeal 1 130 5.1 8.0 38 40 3:30 2.7 5 5 10 26 40 5:00 2 130 10.7 6.8 95 40 4:25 2.5 4 5 10 40 40 6:05 East Vincent 2 150 10.7 8.1 80 40 4:30 2.5 4 5 10 40 40 6:10 3 130 6.5 9.6 41 40 3:35 5.3 9 5 10 32 40 5:15 North Coventry 2 150 6.5 12.0 32 40 3:45 5.3 9 5 10 31 40 5:20 4 130 5.2 4.8 65 40 3:55 15.4 26 5 10 44 40 6:00 Phoenixville 4 150 5.2 5.2 60 40 4:10 15.4 26 5 10 44 40 6:15 2 170 5.2 6.1 51 40 4:25 15.4 26 5 10 44 40 6:30 3 130 2.7 6.1 27 40 3:20 15.4 26 5 10 48 40 5:30 Schuylkill 2 150 2.7 7.1 23 40 3:35 15.4 26 5 10 45 40 5:45 South Coventry 2 130 6.6 5.9 67 40 4:00 3.0 5 5 10 27 40 5:30 Spring City 2 130 11.6 8.2 85 40 4:15 2.5 4 5 10 43 40 6:00 3 130 2.7 9.8 17 40 3:10 7.2 12 5 10 30 40 4:50 Upper Uwchlan 2 150 2.7 10.0 16 40 3:30 7.2 12 5 10 30 40 5:10 Limerick Generating Station 821 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Uwchlan 1 130 1.7 6.5 16 40 3:10 2.4 4 5 10 10 40 4:20 Warwick 2 130 3.1 15.0 12 40 3:05 3.1 5 5 10 22 40 4:30 West Pikeland 2 130 4.5 10.7 25 40 3:15 1.2 2 5 10 19 40 4:35 2 130 9.2 7.6 73 40 4:05 3.9 7 5 10 39 40 5:50 West Vincent 2 150 9.2 8.0 69 40 4:20 3.9 7 5 10 38 40 6:00 MONTGOMERY COUNTY Collegeville 3 130 2.9 1.7 104 40 4:35 8.9 15 5 10 44 40 6:30 Douglass 3 130 3.2 2.6 75 40 4:05 13.1 22 5 10 41 40 6:05 (Montgomery) 3 150 3.2 2.7 71 40 4:25 13.1 22 5 10 33 40 6:15 Green Lane 1 130 2.6 36.0 4 40 2:55 8.4 14 5 10 23 40 4:30 4 130 8.4 4.6 110 40 4:40 10.0 17 5 10 45 40 6:40 Limerick 4 150 8.4 5.1 98 40 4:50 10.0 17 5 10 45 40 6:50 3 170 8.4 6.0 84 40 4:55 10.0 17 5 10 45 40 6:55 Lower Frederick 3 130 5.1 23.9 13 40 3:05 7.2 12 5 10 29 40 4:45 3 130 9.5 3.2 176 40 5:50 17.6 29 5 10 61 40 8:15 Lower Pottsgrove 3 150 9.5 3.5 162 40 5:55 17.6 29 5 10 61 40 8:20 4 130 4.2 1.8 138 40 5:10 30.8 51 5 10 65 40 8:05 4 150 4.2 1.9 135 40 5:25 30.8 51 5 10 65 40 8:20 Lower Providence 4 170 4.2 2.0 126 40 5:40 30.8 51 5 10 65 40 8:35 1 190 4.2 2.1 119 40 5:50 30.8 51 5 10 65 40 8:45 Lower Salford 1 130 0.9 1.6 34 40 3:25 7.5 13 5 10 29 40 5:05 Marlborough 1 130 0.8 31.2 2 40 2:55 14.0 23 5 10 26 40 4:40 3 130 3.4 1.6 127 40 5:00 17.7 30 5 10 41 40 7:10 New Hanover 3 150 3.4 1.7 120 40 5:10 17.7 30 5 10 41 40 7:20 1 170 3.4 1.9 109 40 5:20 17.7 30 5 10 41 40 7:30 3 130 11.0 7.2 92 40 4:25 6.4 11 5 10 48 40 6:20 Perkiomen 2 150 11.0 8.0 83 40 4:35 6.4 11 5 10 48 40 6:30 Limerick Generating Station 822 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 3 130 9.9 3.3 180 40 5:50 13.1 22 5 10 55 40 8:05 3 150 9.9 3.5 172 40 6:05 13.1 22 5 10 55 40 8:20 Pottstown 3 170 9.9 3.9 154 40 6:05 13.1 22 5 10 55 40 8:20 3 190 9.9 4.3 138 40 6:10 13.1 22 5 10 55 40 8:25 Royersford 3 130 10.7 5.0 128 40 5:00 12.5 21 5 10 57 40 7:15 Schwenksville 1 130 6.2 7.8 48 40 3:40 9.8 16 5 10 40 40 5:35 3 130 2.9 10.1 17 40 3:10 9.9 17 5 10 39 40 5:05 Skippack 3 150 2.9 5.0 35 40 3:45 9.9 17 5 10 28 40 5:25 2 170 2.9 5.4 32 40 4:05 9.9 17 5 10 28 40 5:45 Trappe 2 130 7.4 2.4 182 40 5:55 9.2 15 5 10 40 40 7:45 Upper Frederick 2 130 7.1 6.0 71 40 4:05 6.8 11 5 10 36 40 5:50 Upper Pottsgrove 3 130 7.9 2.4 196 40 6:10 13.0 22 5 10 48 40 8:15 3 130 7.9 5.7 84 40 4:15 30.6 51 5 10 77 40 7:20 3 150 7.9 6.9 69 40 4:20 30.6 51 5 10 77 40 7:25 Upper Providence 3 170 7.9 7.7 62 40 4:35 30.6 51 5 10 77 40 7:40 3 190 7.9 8.1 58 40 4:50 30.6 51 5 10 77 40 7:55 Upper Salford 2 130 2.4 26.3 5 40 2:55 7.2 12 5 10 20 40 4:25 West Pottsgrove 2 130 6.0 1.9 194 40 6:05 4.8 8 5 10 42 40 7:50 Maximum ETE: 6:10 Maximum ETE: 8:45 Average ETE: 4:20 Average ETE: 6:15 Limerick Generating Station 823 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

BERKS COUNTY 3 140 1.3 5.5 14 50 3:25 6.8 12 5 10 49 50 5:35 Amity 3 160 1.3 4.0 20 50 3:50 6.8 12 5 10 49 50 6:00 Boyertown 3 140 2.9 8.8 20 50 3:30 7.1 13 5 10 82 50 6:10 Colebrookdale 3 140 1.8 9.5 11 50 3:25 8.1 14 5 10 39 50 5:25 Douglass (Berks) 2 140 4.0 6.4 38 50 3:50 6.8 12 5 10 51 50 6:00 Earl 1 140 2.2 3.1 42 50 3:55 6.3 11 5 10 47 50 6:00 Union 1 140 3.2 5.5 35 50 3:45 5.4 10 5 10 48 50 5:50 Washington 1 140 1.2 5.2 14 50 3:25 13.1 23 5 10 47 50 5:40 CHESTER COUNTY Charlestown 3 140 1.0 9.0 7 50 3:20 12.5 22 5 10 33 50 5:20 3 140 10.9 9.7 67 50 4:20 3.0 5 5 10 46 50 6:20 East Coventry 1 160 10.9 9.1 72 50 4:45 3.0 5 5 10 43 50 6:40 2 140 8.2 6.3 79 50 4:30 2.5 4 5 10 54 50 6:35 East Pikeland 2 160 8.2 5.8 85 50 4:55 2.5 4 5 10 42 50 6:50 East Nantmeal 1 140 5.1 34.0 9 50 3:20 2.7 5 5 10 52 50 5:25 2 140 10.7 5.7 112 50 5:05 2.5 4 5 10 44 50 7:00 East Vincent 2 160 10.7 5.8 111 50 5:25 2.5 4 5 10 42 50 7:20 3 140 6.5 5.9 67 50 4:20 5.3 9 5 10 44 50 6:20 North Coventry 2 160 6.5 5.6 69 50 4:40 5.3 9 5 10 38 50 6:35 4 140 5.2 3.9 79 50 4:30 15.4 27 5 10 62 50 7:05 Phoenixville 4 160 5.2 3.2 98 50 5:10 15.4 27 5 10 46 50 7:30 2 180 5.2 3.3 94 50 5:25 15.4 27 5 10 46 50 7:45 3 140 2.7 5.2 31 50 3:45 15.4 27 5 10 56 50 6:15 Schuylkill 2 160 2.7 5.2 31 50 4:05 15.4 27 5 10 51 50 6:30 South Coventry 2 140 6.6 8.0 50 50 4:00 3.0 5 5 10 39 50 5:50 Spring City 2 140 11.6 6.5 107 50 5:00 2.5 4 5 10 50 50 7:00 3 140 2.7 7.3 22 50 3:35 7.2 13 5 10 36 50 5:30 Upper Uwchlan 2 160 2.7 7.0 23 50 3:55 7.2 13 5 10 35 50 5:50 Limerick Generating Station 824 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Uwchlan 1 140 1.7 3.8 27 50 3:40 2.4 4 5 10 26 50 5:15 Warwick 2 140 3.1 13.0 14 50 3:25 3.1 5 5 10 23 50 5:00 West Pikeland 2 140 4.5 5.8 46 50 4:00 1.2 2 5 10 42 50 5:50 2 140 9.2 7.2 76 50 4:30 3.9 7 5 10 62 50 6:45 West Vincent 2 160 9.2 6.9 80 50 4:50 3.9 7 5 10 48 50 6:50 MONTGOMERY COUNTY Collegeville 3 140 2.9 7.7 23 50 3:35 8.9 16 5 10 110 50 6:50 Douglass 3 140 3.2 4.4 43 50 3:55 13.1 23 5 10 73 50 6:40 (Montgomery) 3 160 3.2 3.3 59 50 4:30 13.1 23 5 10 75 50 7:15 Green Lane 1 140 2.6 32.9 5 50 3:15 8.4 15 5 10 25 50 5:00 4 140 8.4 3.8 133 50 5:25 10.0 18 5 10 57 50 7:45 Limerick 4 160 8.4 4.1 123 50 5:35 10.0 18 5 10 53 50 7:55 3 180 8.4 4.4 114 50 5:45 10.0 18 5 10 50 50 8:00 Lower Frederick 3 140 5.1 34.0 9 50 3:20 7.2 13 5 10 39 50 5:20 3 140 9.5 2.5 225 50 6:55 17.6 31 5 10 69 50 9:40 Lower Pottsgrove 3 160 9.5 2.4 235 50 7:25 17.6 31 5 10 65 50 10:10 4 140 4.2 1.7 147 50 5:40 30.8 54 5 10 73 50 8:55 4 160 4.2 1.7 148 50 6:00 30.8 54 5 10 69 50 9:10 Lower Providence 4 180 4.2 1.7 148 50 6:20 30.8 54 5 10 69 50 9:30 1 200 4.2 1.7 145 50 6:35 30.8 54 5 10 69 50 9:45 Lower Salford 1 140 0.9 1.1 47 50 4:00 7.5 13 5 10 33 50 5:55 Marlborough 1 140 0.8 30.0 2 50 3:15 14.0 25 5 10 28 50 5:15 3 140 3.4 2.0 100 50 4:50 17.7 31 5 10 119 50 8:25 New Hanover 3 160 3.4 1.8 113 50 5:25 17.7 31 5 10 107 50 8:50 1 180 3.4 1.5 133 50 6:05 17.7 31 5 10 77 50 9:00 3 140 11.0 9.9 67 50 4:20 6.4 11 5 10 64 50 6:40 Perkiomen 2 160 11.0 8.6 77 50 4:50 6.4 11 5 10 52 50 7:00 Limerick Generating Station 825 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Number of Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Buses Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Route Servicing Dispatched (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 3 140 9.9 2.8 216 50 6:50 13.1 23 5 10 65 50 9:25 3 160 9.9 2.8 213 50 7:05 13.1 23 5 10 61 50 9:35 Pottstown 3 180 9.9 2.9 205 50 7:15 13.1 23 5 10 59 50 9:45 3 200 9.9 3.0 196 50 7:30 13.1 23 5 10 58 50 10:00 Royersford 3 140 10.7 3.6 179 50 6:10 12.5 22 5 10 60 50 8:40 Schwenksville 1 140 6.2 19.8 19 50 3:30 9.8 17 5 10 59 50 5:55 3 140 2.9 18.8 9 50 3:20 9.9 17 5 10 38 50 5:20 Skippack 3 160 2.9 14.7 12 50 3:45 9.9 17 5 10 38 50 5:45 2 180 2.9 19.2 9 50 4:00 9.9 17 5 10 37 50 6:00 Trappe 2 140 7.4 2.7 166 50 6:00 9.2 16 5 10 56 50 8:20 Upper Frederick 2 140 7.1 26.8 16 50 3:30 6.8 12 5 10 80 50 6:10 Upper Pottsgrove 3 140 7.9 1.9 243 50 7:15 13.0 23 5 10 53 50 9:40 3 140 7.9 5.6 85 50 4:35 30.6 54 5 10 87 50 8:05 3 160 7.9 6.4 74 50 4:45 30.6 54 5 10 83 50 8:10 Upper Providence 3 180 7.9 5.3 89 50 5:20 30.6 54 5 10 82 50 8:45 3 200 7.9 5.0 95 50 5:45 30.6 54 5 10 82 50 9:10 Upper Salford 2 140 2.4 24.2 6 50 3:20 7.2 13 5 10 22 50 5:00 West Pottsgrove 2 140 6.0 2.8 130 50 5:20 4.8 8 5 10 89 50 8:05 Maximum ETE: 7:30 Maximum ETE: 10:10 Average ETE: 4:45 Average ETE: 7:10 Limerick Generating Station 826 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BERKS COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 190 30 1.3 18 2:20 Amity Wheelchair bound 90 5 19 75 1.3 29 3:15 Bedridden 90 15 5 30 1.3 18 2:20 Ambulatory 90 1 90 30 2.9 38 2:40 Boyertown Wheelchair bound 90 5 8 40 2.9 52 3:05 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 2.9 38 2:40 Ambulatory 90 1 20 20 3.2 36 2:30 Union Wheelchair bound 90 5 3 15 3.2 35 2:20 Bedridden 90 15 1 15 3.2 35 2:20 CHESTER COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 40 30 10.9 64 3:05 East Coventry Wheelchair bound 90 5 64 75 10.9 44 3:30 Bedridden 90 15 16 30 10.9 64 3:05 Ambulatory 90 1 130 30 8.2 74 3:15 East Pikeland Wheelchair bound 90 5 10 50 8.2 64 3:25 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 8.2 74 3:15 Ambulatory 90 1 165 30 10.7 91 3:35 East Vincent Wheelchair bound 90 5 16 75 10.7 61 3:50 Bedridden 90 15 4 30 10.7 91 3:35 Ambulatory 90 1 210 30 5.2 80 3:20 Phoenixville Wheelchair bound 90 5 92 75 5.2 55 3:40 Bedridden 90 15 23 30 5.2 80 3:20 Ambulatory 90 1 33 30 6.6 59 3:00 South Coventry Wheelchair bound 90 5 6 30 6.6 59 3:00 Bedridden 90 15 2 30 6.6 59 3:00 Limerick Generating Station 827 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

MONTGOMERY COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 170 30 9.5 152 4:35 Lower Pottsgrove Wheelchair bound 90 5 27 75 9.5 121 4:50 Bedridden 90 15 7 30 9.5 152 4:35 Ambulatory 90 1 272 30 4.2 139 4:20 Lower Providence Wheelchair bound 90 5 48 75 4.2 129 4:55 Bedridden 90 15 12 30 4.2 139 4:20 Ambulatory 90 1 218 30 9.9 173 4:55 Pottstown Wheelchair bound 90 5 226 75 9.9 152 5:20 Bedridden 90 15 57 30 9.9 173 4:55 Ambulatory 90 1 96 30 7.1 56 3:00 Upper Frederick Wheelchair bound 90 5 24 75 7.1 47 3:35 Bedridden 90 15 6 30 7.1 56 3:00 Ambulatory 90 1 400 30 7.9 72 3:15 Upper Providence Wheelchair bound 90 5 41 75 7.9 62 3:50 Bedridden 90 15 10 30 7.9 72 3:15 Maximum ETE: 5:20 Average ETE: 3:30 Limerick Generating Station 828 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BERKS COUNTY Ambulatory 100 1 190 30 1.3 27 2:40 Amity Wheelchair bound 100 5 19 75 1.3 28 3:25 Bedridden 100 15 5 30 1.3 27 2:40 Ambulatory 100 1 90 30 2.9 59 3:10 Boyertown Wheelchair bound 100 5 8 40 2.9 64 3:25 Bedridden 100 15 2 30 2.9 59 3:10 Ambulatory 100 1 20 20 3.2 33 2:35 Union Wheelchair bound 100 5 3 15 3.2 34 2:30 Bedridden 100 15 1 15 3.2 34 2:30 CHESTER COUNTY Ambulatory 100 1 40 30 10.9 72 3:25 East Coventry Wheelchair bound 100 5 64 75 10.9 49 3:45 Bedridden 100 15 16 30 10.9 72 3:25 Ambulatory 100 1 130 30 8.2 69 3:20 East Pikeland Wheelchair bound 100 5 10 50 8.2 60 3:30 Bedridden 100 15 2 30 8.2 69 3:20 Ambulatory 100 1 165 30 10.7 95 3:45 East Vincent Wheelchair bound 100 5 16 75 10.7 61 4:00 Bedridden 100 15 4 30 10.7 95 3:45 Ambulatory 100 1 210 30 5.2 65 3:15 Phoenixville Wheelchair bound 100 5 92 75 5.2 50 3:45 Bedridden 100 15 23 30 5.2 65 3:15 Ambulatory 100 1 33 30 6.6 67 3:20 South Coventry Wheelchair bound 100 5 6 30 6.6 67 3:20 Bedridden 100 15 2 30 6.6 67 3:20 Limerick Generating Station 829 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

MONTGOMERY COUNTY Ambulatory 100 1 170 30 9.5 176 5:10 Lower Pottsgrove Wheelchair bound 100 5 27 75 9.5 147 5:25 Bedridden 100 15 7 30 9.5 176 5:10 Ambulatory 100 1 272 30 4.2 138 4:30 Lower Providence Wheelchair bound 100 5 48 75 4.2 125 5:00 Bedridden 100 15 12 30 4.2 138 4:30 Ambulatory 100 1 218 30 9.9 180 5:10 Pottstown Wheelchair bound 100 5 226 75 9.9 153 5:30 Bedridden 100 15 57 30 9.9 180 5:10 Ambulatory 100 1 96 30 7.1 71 3:25 Upper Frederick Wheelchair bound 100 5 24 75 7.1 70 4:05 Bedridden 100 15 6 30 7.1 71 3:25 Ambulatory 100 1 400 30 7.9 84 3:35 Upper Providence Wheelchair bound 100 5 41 75 7.9 63 4:00 Bedridden 100 15 10 30 7.9 84 3:35 Maximum ETE: 5:30 Average ETE: 3:45 Limerick Generating Station 830 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BERKS COUNTY Ambulatory 110 1 190 30 1.3 14 2:35 Amity Wheelchair bound 110 5 19 75 1.3 33 3:40 Bedridden 110 15 5 30 1.3 14 2:35 Ambulatory 110 1 90 30 2.9 20 2:40 Boyertown Wheelchair bound 110 5 8 40 2.9 24 2:55 Bedridden 110 15 2 30 2.9 20 2:40 Ambulatory 110 1 20 20 3.2 37 2:50 Union Wheelchair bound 110 5 3 15 3.2 37 2:45 Bedridden 110 15 1 15 3.2 37 2:45 CHESTER COUNTY Ambulatory 110 1 40 30 10.9 67 3:30 East Coventry Wheelchair bound 110 5 64 75 10.9 67 4:15 Bedridden 110 15 16 30 10.9 67 3:30 Ambulatory 110 1 130 30 8.2 79 3:40 East Pikeland Wheelchair bound 110 5 10 50 8.2 85 4:05 Bedridden 110 15 2 30 8.2 79 3:40 Ambulatory 110 1 165 30 10.7 112 4:15 East Vincent Wheelchair bound 110 5 16 75 10.7 97 4:45 Bedridden 110 15 4 30 10.7 112 4:15 Ambulatory 110 1 210 30 5.2 79 3:40 Phoenixville Wheelchair bound 110 5 92 75 5.2 89 4:35 Bedridden 110 15 23 30 5.2 79 3:40 Ambulatory 110 1 33 30 6.6 50 3:10 South Coventry Wheelchair bound 110 5 6 30 6.6 50 3:10 Bedridden 110 15 2 30 6.6 50 3:10 Limerick Generating Station 831 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

MONTGOMERY COUNTY Ambulatory 110 1 170 30 9.5 225 6:05 Lower Pottsgrove Wheelchair bound 110 5 27 75 9.5 227 6:55 Bedridden 110 15 7 30 9.5 225 6:05 Ambulatory 110 1 272 30 4.2 147 4:50 Lower Providence Wheelchair bound 110 5 48 75 4.2 147 5:35 Bedridden 110 15 12 30 4.2 147 4:50 Ambulatory 110 1 218 30 9.9 216 6:00 Pottstown Wheelchair bound 110 5 226 75 9.9 204 6:30 Bedridden 110 15 57 30 9.9 216 6:00 Ambulatory 110 1 96 30 7.1 16 2:40 Upper Frederick Wheelchair bound 110 5 24 75 7.1 83 4:30 Bedridden 110 15 6 30 7.1 16 2:40 Ambulatory 110 1 400 30 7.9 85 3:45 Upper Providence Wheelchair bound 110 5 41 75 7.9 94 4:40 Bedridden 110 15 10 30 7.9 85 3:45 Maximum ETE: 6:55 Average ETE: 4:05 Limerick Generating Station 832 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Total Mobiliza Loading Loading Travel Time People tion Time at Travel to Time at to EPZ Requiring Vehicles Weather Time 1st Stop Subsequent Subsequent Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Stops Conditions (min) (min) Stops (min) Stops (min) (min) (hr:min)

Good 120 72 28 4:25 Wheelchair Rain/Light 242 30 9 130 5 80 40 4:50 Buses Snow 31 Heavy Snow 140 88 39 5:15 Good 120 9 32 3:30 Rain/Light Ambulances 22 11 2 130 15 10 15 3:45 Snow 36 Heavy Snow 140 11 36 3:55 Maximum ETE: 5:15 Average ETE: 4:25 Limerick 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/Host School E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Reception Center/Host School 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/Host School Outside the EPZ FG Passengers Leave Bus; Driver Takes a Break Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations Limerick 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 TMP include:

Personnel with the capabilities of performing the planned control functions of traffic guides (preferably, not necessarily, law enforcement officers).

The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) of the U.S.D.O.T. provides guidance for Traffic Control Devices to assist these personnel in the performance of their tasks. All state and most county transportation agencies have access to the MUTCD, which is available online:

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov which provides access to the official PDF version.

A written plan that defines all Traffic Control Point (TCP) and Access Control Point (ACP 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 entering the area being evacuated to perform an important emergency service.

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

The TMP is the outcome of the following process:

1. The existing TCPs and ACPs1 identified by each county agency in their existing emergency plans serve as the basis of the TMP, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

2. The ETE analysis treated all controlled intersections that are existing TCP or ACP locations in the county plans as being controlled by actuated signals. In Appendix K, Table K1 identifies the number of intersections that were modeled as TCPs/ACPs.

1 Including Control Entry Points (CEP)

Limerick Generating Station 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3. Evacuation simulations were run using DYNEV II to predict traffic congestion during evacuation (see Section 7.3 and Figure 73 through Figure 78). These simulations help to identify the best routing and critical intersections that experience pronounced traffic congestion during an evacuation. Any critical intersections that would benefit from traffic or access control which are not already identified in the existing offsite agency plans are examined. No additional TCPs or ACPs were identified, which could benefit the ETE, as part of this study.

4. 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 farther from the power plant. Key locations for manual traffic control (MTC) were analyzed and their impact to ETE was quantified, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. See Appendix G for more detail.

Appendix G documents the existing TMP and a list of priority TCPs using the process enumerated above. No additional TCPs or ACPs were recommended as part of this study.

9.1 Assumptions The following are TMP assumptions made for this study:

The ETE calculations documented in Sections 7 and 8 assume that the TMP is implemented during evacuation.

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 ATE.

All transit vehicles and other responders entering the EPZ to support the evacuation are assumed to be unhindered by personnel manning TCPs and ACPs.

Study assumptions 1 through 3 in Section 2.5 further discuss the TCP and ACP operations.

9.2 Additional Considerations The use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies can reduce the manpower and equipment needs, while still facilitating the evacuation process. Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) can also be placed within the EPZ to provide information to travelers regarding traffic conditions, route selection, and reception center information. DMS placed outside of the EPZ will warn motorists to avoid using routes that may conflict with the flow of evacuees away from the power plant. Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) can be used to broadcast information to evacuees during egress through their vehicles stereo systems. Automated 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 onboard navigation systems (GPS units) and smartphones can be used to provide information during the evacuation trip.

Limerick Generating Station 92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

Limerick Generating Station 93 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, medical facilities, or permanent residents who do not own or have access to a private vehicle) from the EPZ boundary to host schools/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 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 transport vehicles, or ambulances. Transitdependent evacuees will be routed to reception centers. General population may evacuate to either a reception center or some alternate destination (i.e.,

lodging facilities, relatives home, campgrounds) outside the EPZ.

The routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception centers is designed to minimize the amount of travel outside the EPZ from the points where these routes cross the EPZ boundary. The 43 bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102 through Figure 104 were designed by KLD to service the major routes through each Subarea. Some routes service the predefined pickup locations identified in the county public information brochure (not all Subareas have predefined pickup points). It is assumed that residents will walk to and congregate at these predesignated pickup locations, and that they can arrive at the stops within the 120minute bus mobilization time (good weather). The 43 routes listed in Table 101 are generalized representations of the bus routes shown in Figure 102 through Figure 104.

The routes listed in Table 101 are used to compute average speeds along major evacuation routes servicing each Subarea for the computation of the transit dependent ETE discussed in Section 8.

The specified bus routes are documented in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations).

10.2 Reception Centers Figure 105 maps the general population and host schools for evacuees. Table 103 and Table 104 presents a list of reception centers by Subarea and the host schools by school district, respectively. Students will be transported to these host schools where they will be subsequently retrieved by their respective families, friends or guardians.

Limerick Generating Station 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Transit Dependent Representative 6 Route 422 West & Route 662 North to Route 73 East to reception center 1.3 Route for Amity Transit Dependent Representative 3 Route 73 West to reception center 2.9 Route for Boyertown Transit Dependent Representative 3 Route 29 South to Route 202 South to the reception center. 1.0 Route for Charlestown Transit Dependent Representative 3 Route 73 West & Route 100 North to Route 29 North to the reception center 1.8 Route for Colebrookdale Transit Dependent Representative 3 Germantown Pike East, right on Chemical Road to the reception center. 2.9 Route for Collegeville Transit Dependent Representative Route 662 North to Route 73 East & Take Route 562 West to Route 662 North to 2 4.0 Route for Douglass (Berks) Route 73 East to the reception center Transit Dependent Representative 6 Route 100 North to Route 29 North to the reception center. 3.2 Route for Douglass (Montgomery)

Transit Dependent Representative 1 Route 562 West to 662 North to Route 73 East to the reception center. 2.2 Route for Earl Transit Dependent Representative 4 Route 23 West to the reception center. 10.9 Route for East Coventry Transit Dependent Representative Route 401 West & Route 100 South to Route 113 South to Route 30 Bypass West 1 5.1 Route for East Nantmeal to 322 East to the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative 4 Route 113 South to Gordon Drive to Route 100 South to the reception center. 8.2 Route for East Pikeland Transit Dependent Representative Route 23 East to Route 113 South to Gordon Drive to Route 100 South to the 4 10.7 Route for East Vincent reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative 1 Route 63 East to Route 113 North to the reception center. 2.6 Route for Green Lane Limerick Generating Station 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

No. of Route Buses Route Description to Reception Center Length (mi.)

Transit Dependent Representative Ridge Pike East to Germantown Pike East, right on Chemical Road to the 11 8.4 Route for Limerick reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative Route 29 North to Perkiomenville Road to Route 63 East to Route 113 North to 3 5.1 Route for Lower Frederick the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative 6 Route 663 North to Route 309 North to the reception center. 9.5 Route for Lower Pottsgrove Transit Dependent Representative Route 363 South to Route 422 East to Route 202 North to Pennsylvania Turnpike 13 4.2 Route for Lower Providence East to Exit 351 to Route 1 North to the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative 1 Route 113 North to the reception center. 0.9 Route for Lower Salford Transit Dependent Representative 1 Route 63 East to Route 113 North to the reception center. 0.8 Route for Marlborough Transit Dependent Representative 7 Route 663 North to Route 309 North to the reception center. 3.4 Route for New Hanover Transit Dependent Representative 5 Route 100 South to Route 23 West & Route 724 West to the reception center. 6.5 Route for North Coventry Transit Dependent Representative Route 29 South to Route 113 North to Route 73 East to Route 202 North to the 5 11.0 Route for Perkiomen reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative Route 23 East to Route 252 South & Route 29 South to Route 202 South to the 10 5.2 Route for Phoenixville reception center.

Route 100 North to Route 29 North, Route 663 (North Charlotte Street) to Route Transit Dependent Representative 12 309 North, Route 422 Bypass West, Hanover Street South via Hanover Street 9.9 Route for Pottstown Bridge to Route 724 West & Route 422 West to the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative Township Line Road to Ridge Pike East to Germantown Pike East, Right on 3 10.7 Route for Royersford Chemical Road to the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative Route 23 East to Route 252 South & Route 29 South to Route 202 South to the 5 2.7 Route for Schuylkill reception center.

Limerick Generating Station 103 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

No. of Route Buses Route Description to Reception Center Length (mi.)

Transit Dependent Representative 1 Route 73 East to Route 202 North to the reception center. 6.2 Route for Schwenksville Transit Dependent Representative 8 Route 113 North to Route 73 East to Route 202 North to the reception center. 2.9 Route for Skippack Transit Dependent Representative 2 Route 23 West to the reception center. 6.6 Route for South Coventry Transit Dependent Representative Route 724 East to Route 23 E. to Route 113 South to Gordon Drive to Route 100 2 11.6 Route for Spring City South to the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative Route 113 North to Route 73 East to Route 202 North & Ridge Pike East to 2 7.4 Route for Trappe Germantown Pike East, right on Chemical Road to the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative 1 Route 724 West to the reception center. 3.2 Route for Union Transit Dependent Representative 2 Perkiomenville Rd. to Route 63 East to Route 113 North to the reception center. 7.1 Route for Upper Frederick Transit Dependent Representative 3 Route 100 North to Route 29 North to the reception center. 7.9 Route for Upper Pottsgrove Transit Dependent Representative Route 422 East to Route 202 North to Pennsylvania Turnpike East to Exit 351, 12 7.9 Route for Upper Providence then Route 1 North to the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative 2 Route 63 East to Route 113 North to reception center. 2.4 Route for Upper Salford Transit Dependent Representative Route 100 South to Route 113 South to Route 30 Bypass West to Route 322 East 5 2.7 Route for Upper Uwchlan to the reception center.

Transit Dependent Representative 1 Route 113 South to Gordon Drive to Route 100 South to the reception center. 1.7 Route for Uwchlan Transit Dependent Representative 2 Route 23 West to the reception center 3.1 Route for Warwick Limerick Generating Station 104 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

No. of Route Buses Route Description to Reception Center Length (mi.)

Transit Dependent Representative 1 Route 100 North to Route 29 North to the reception center 1.2 Route for Washington Transit Dependent Representative 2 Route 113 South to Gordon Drive to Route 100 South to the reception center. 4.5 Route for West Pikeland Transit Dependent Representative 2 High Street West to Route 422 West to the reception center. 6.0 Route for West Pottsgrove Transit Dependent Representative Route 100 South to Route 113 South to Route 30 Bypass West to Route 322 East 4 9.2 Route for West Vincent to the reception center.

Total: 175 Limerick Generating Station 105 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions Bus Route Number Route Serving Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 1 Amity 3940, 30, 27, 393, 394, 4439, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400 2 Boyertown 646, 647, 648, 649, 650, 651, 413, 430, 431, 432, 433, 547, 434, 435, 4799 3 Charlestown 3398, 3399, 3400, 3401, 3402, 3403, 3404, 3508, 3904 4 Colebrookdale 543, 544, 545, 546, 547, 434, 435, 4799 5 Collegeville 762, 4384, 763, 764, 765, 766, 767, 768, 4392, 1997, 1998, 1999, 3000 721, 722, 723, 724, 725, 726, 700, 701, 702, 703, 704, 705, 706, 707, 708, 709, 710, 711, 418, 419, 420, 694, 6 Douglass (Berks) 421 7 Douglass (Mont) 640, 669, 670, 671, 672, 4744, 673, 4743, 674, 556, 684, 557, 558, 496, 497, 4448, 477 8 Earl 419, 420, 694, 421 1224, 3559, 3560, 3561, 3562, 3563, 3564, 1414, 1413, 3565, 1412, 1292, 1345, 1347, 1346, 1411, 1410, 4413, 9 East Coventry 1409, 1408, 1407, 1402 1301, 1302, 1303, 1304, 1305, 1306, 1307, 4437, 1308, 3579, 3580, 3581, 3582, 3583, 3584, 3585, 3586, 3587, 10 East Nantmeal 3588, 1451 3840, 3841, 3842, 3843, 3509, 3850, 1232, 3853, 3854, 3411, 3412, 3413, 3414, 3415, 3416, 3417, 3418, 3419, 11 East Pikeland 3420, 3421, 3422, 3423, 3424, 3425, 3426, 3427, 3428, 3433, 3432, 3429, 3430 1226, 4591, 1415, 1416, 1417, 3845, 1229, 1230, 1231, 1232, 3853, 3855, 1233, 3411, 3412, 3413, 3414, 3415, 12 East Vincent 3416, 3417, 3418, 3419, 3420, 3421, 3422, 3423, 3424, 3425, 3426, 3427, 3428, 3433, 3432, 3429, 3430 13 Green Lane 1154, 1155, 562, 4395, 1156, 1172 744, 745, 746, 747, 748, 749, 1034, 1033, 4387, 1032, 4607, 1602, 1603, 4388, 1604, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 14 Limerick 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 87, 88, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 1625, 1626, 4390, 4389, 999, 4163, 1122, 1129, 4166, 1127, 1128, 1188, 1107, 1143, 1153, 1116, 1154, 1155, 15 Lower Fredrick 562, 4368, 563, 564, 565 807, 908, 907, 906, 905, 904, 965, 966, 967, 968, 892, 893, 987, 635, 971, 972, 973, 974, 977, 4737, 552, 1035, 16 Lower Pottsgrove 1036, 1037, 625, 4382 768, 769, 4514, 4515, 770, 4160, 771, 772, 773, 774, 775, 4155, 3083, 4668, 3377, 3922, 3374, 3373, 4393, 17 Lower Providence 3084, 3381, 79, 80 18 Lower Salford 1809, 1810, 1807, 1806 19 Marlborough 1146, 1145, 1144, 1143, 1153, 1116, 1154, 1155, 562, 4368, 563, 564, 565 Limerick Generating Station 106 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Route Serving Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 20 New Hanover 893, 987, 635, 971, 972, 973, 974, 977, 4737, 552, 1035, 1036, 1037, 625, 4382 1191, 927, 934, 896, 897, 898, 899, 3829, 3304, 1223, 1192, 1193, 1194, 1195, 1196, 1197, 1198, 1199, 1200, 21 North Coventry 1201, 1202, 1203, 3293 1778, 1779, 4175, 1780, 1781, 1763, 1764, 1765, 1766, 1767, 1836, 1835, 1837, 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, 22 Perkiomen 1566, 1567, 1568, 1569, 1570, 1571 3342, 3343, 3344, 3345, 3346, 3347, 3848, 3348, 3857, 3859, 4427, 3389, 4474, 1238, 3862, 3863, 4430, 4426, 23 Phoenixville 3395, 3396, 3397, 3398, 3399, 3400, 3401, 3402, 3403, 3404, 3508, 3904 811, 4496, 913, 914, 4495, 4734, 932, 3823, 4493, 933, 3824, 873, 869, 4497, 3298, 825, 455, 456, 727, 457, 24 Pottstown 458, 459, 460, 461, 462, 463, 464, 465, 3805, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477 1701, 1700, 1699, 1698, 1601, 3325, 1611, 1610, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 87, 88, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 25 Royersford 78, 79, 80 26 Schuylkill 3395, 3503, 3919, 3920, 4565, 3918, 3912, 4566, 1247, 1248, 1249, 1250 4400, 1621, 1555, 1556, 1557, 1558, 1559, 1560, 1561, 1562, 1563, 1564, 1565, 1566, 1567, 1568, 1569, 1570, 27 Schwenksville 1571 28 Skippack 1560, 1561, 1562, 1563, 1564, 1565, 1566, 1567, 1568, 1569, 1570, 1571 29 South Coventry 1288, 1289, 4434, 1290, 1291, 1292, 1345, 1347, 1346, 1411, 1410, 4413, 1409, 1408, 1407, 1402 1703, 1702, 1704, 3838, 3839, 3840, 3841, 3842, 3843, 3509, 3850, 1232, 3853, 3855, 1233, 3411, 3412, 3413, 30 Spring City 3414, 3415, 3416, 3417, 3418, 3419, 3420, 3421, 3422, 3423, 3424, 3425, 3426, 3427, 3428, 3433, 3432, 3429, 3430 31 Trappe 759, 760, 761, 4463, 762, 4384, 763, 764, 765, 766, 767, 768, 4392, 1997, 1998, 1999, 3000 32 Union 1333, 1195, 1196, 1197, 1198, 1199, 1200, 1201, 1202, 1203, 3293 995, 1109, 1119, 1110, 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114, 1115, 1108, 1106, 1107, 1143, 1153, 1116, 1154, 1155, 562, 33 Upper Frederick 4368, 563, 564, 565 34 Upper Pottsgrove 859, 860, 861, 862, 461, 462, 463, 464, 465, 3805, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477 1724, 1725, 1726, 1727, 1728, 3349, 1729, 1730, 3350, 1731, 3865, 1732, 4754, 3340, 68, 69, 70, 87, 88, 71, 35 Upper Providence 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 36 Upper Salford 1147, 4258, 1148, 1149, 1658, 1659, 1660, 1661, 1662, 1663, 1647, 1789, 1540, 1790 37 Upper Uwchlan 1312, 1313, 3607, 1314, 1315, 3979, 3977, 1316, 1317, 1318 38 Uwchlan 3614, 3615, 3616, 3617, 3618, 3429, 3430 39 Warwick 4415, 4421, 4422, 4416, 4420, 4419, 4413, 1409, 1408, 1407, 1402 Limerick Generating Station 107 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Route Serving Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 40 Washington 499, 498, 497, 4448, 477 41 West Pikeland 3422, 3423, 3424, 3425, 3426, 3427, 3428, 3433, 3432, 3429, 3430 42 West Pottsgrove 3935, 4403, 4404, 831, 836, 847, 848, 34, 33, 31, 3940, 30, 27, 26, 3941, 4440, 23, 22, 21, 20 3835, 3836, 4707, 3837, 3625, 3626, 3594, 3593, 3569, 3568, 3612, 3610, 3611, 1313, 3607, 1314, 1315, 3979, 43 West Vincent 3977, 1316, 1317, 1318 Limerick Generating Station 108 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 103. Reception Centers SubArea Reception Center BERKS COUNTY Exeter Township Building Amity Oley Township Reception Center Boyertown Oley Township Reception Center Oley Township Reception Center Colebrookdale Emmaus High School Douglass (Berks) Oley Township Reception Center Earl Oley Township Reception Center Union Robeson Township Building Washington Emmaus High School CHESTER COUNTY Charlestown Stetson Middle School East Coventry Twin Valley Fire Department East Pikeland W. Whiteland Township Building Twin Valley Fire Department East Nantmeal Downingtown High School West East Vincent W. Whiteland Township Building Twin Valley Fire Department North Coventry Robeson Township Building Phoenixville Stetson Middle School Schuylkill Stetson Middle School South Coventry Twin Valley Fire Department Spring City W. Whiteland Township Building Upper Uwchlan Downingtown High School West Uwchlan W. Whiteland Township Building Warwick Twin Valley Fire Department West Pikeland W. Whiteland Township Building West Vincent Downingtown High School West MONTGOMERY COUNTY Collegeville Plymouth Meeting Metroplex Douglass (Montgomery) Emmaus High School Green Lane County Line Plaza Limerick Plymouth Meeting Metroplex Lower Frederick County Line Plaza Lower Pottsgrove Southern Lehigh High School Lower Providence Neshaminy Mall Lower Salford County Line Plaza Marlborough County Line Plaza New Hanover Southern Lehigh High School Perkiomen Montgomery Mall Emmaus High School Emmaus, Southern Lehigh High School Pottstown Exeter Township Building Robeson Township Building Royersford Plymouth Meeting Metroplex Schwenksville Montgomery Mall Skippack Montgomery Mall Limerick Generating Station 109 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SubArea Reception Center Montgomery Mall Trappe Plymouth Meeting Metroplex Upper Frederick County Line Plaza Upper Pottsgrove Emmaus High School Upper Providence Neshaminy Mall Upper Salford County Line Plaza West Pottsgrove Exeter Township Building Table 104. Host Schools School District Host School BERKS COUNTY Daniel Boone Daniel Boone High School Keystone Hall, Kutztown University Boyertown Area Kutztown Area Middle School Kutztown Elementary School CHESTER COUNTY Twin Valley High School Owen J. Roberts District Schools Twin Valley Middle School Twin Valley Elementary Center TredyffrinEasttown Middle School Phoenixville Area School District Conestoga High School Downingtown Area School District Downington High School (East)

Great Valley School District Great Valley High School MONTGOMERY COUNTY Methacton Norristown Area High School North Penn High School Pennfield Middle School Perkiomen Valley Penndale Middle School Pennbrook Middle School Pottsgrove Southern Lehigh High School Complex Pottstown Emmaus High School Complex Souderton Area Retained at Indian Valley Middle School SpringFord Area Montgomery County Community College Upper Perkiomen Retained at Upper Perkiomen High School Vocational Schools Upper Perkiomen High School Limerick Generating Station 1010 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 101. Evacuation Route Map Limerick Generating Station 1011 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 102. Berks County TransitDependent Bus Routes Limerick Generating Station 1012 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. Chester County TransitDependent Bus Routes Limerick Generating Station 1013 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 104. Montgomery County TransitDependent Bus Routes Limerick Generating Station 1014 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 105. General Population Reception Centers and Host Schools Limerick Generating Station 1015 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.

Limerick 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.

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

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

DTRAD calculates the optimal dynamic trip distribution (i.e., trip destinations) and the optimal dynamic trip assignment (i.e., trip routing) of the traffic generated at each origin node traveling to its set of candidate destination nodes, so as to minimize evacuee travel cost.

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 geometric network (linknode analysis network) that represents the physical highway system, Limerick Generating Station B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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, c, for a link, a, is expressed as ca ta la sa ,

Limerick 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.

Limerick 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.

Limerick 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 Limerick 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 DTRAD model.

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

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

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

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

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

Provides MOE to animation software, EVAN Calculates ETE statistics Limerick 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 Limerick 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 Limerick 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 Limerick 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:

Limerick 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 Limerick 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 Limerick 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 DTA session is launched and the whole process repeats until the end of the DYNEV II run.

Additional details are presented in Appendix B.

Limerick Generating Station C8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Mean Travel Time Minutes Evacuation Trips; Network Limerick Generating Station C9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model HIGHWAY NETWORK Links defined by upstream and downstream node numbers Link lengths Number of lanes (up to 9) and channelization Turn bays (1 to 3 lanes)

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

Nuclear Power Plant Coordinates (X,Y)

GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES On all entry links and source nodes (origins), by Time Period TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS Traffic signals: linkspecific, turn movement specific Signal control treated as fixed time or actuated Location of traffic control points (these are represented as actuated signals)

Stop and Yield signs Rightturnonred (RTOR)

Route diversion specifications Turn restrictions Lane control (e.g. lane closure, movementspecific)

DRIVERS AND OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS Drivers (vehiclespecific) response mechanisms: freeflow speed, discharge headway Bus route designation.

DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Candidate destination nodes for each origin (optional)

Duration of DTA sessions Duration of simulation burn time Desired number of destination nodes per origin INCIDENTS Identify and Schedule of closed lanes Identify and Schedule of closed links Limerick Generating Station C10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table C3. Glossary The maximum number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that can discharge Cap from a link within a time interval.

The number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that enter the link over the E

time interval. The portion, ETI, can reach the stopbar within the TI.

The green time: cycle time ratio that services the vehicles of a particular turn G/C movement on a link.

h The mean queue discharge headway, seconds.

k Density in vehicles per lane per mile.

The average density of moving vehicles of a particular movement over a TI, on a k

link.

L The length of the link in feet.

The queue length in feet of a particular movement, at the [beginning, end] of a L ,L time interval.

The number of lanes, expressed as a floating point number, allocated to service a LN particular movement on a link.

L The mean effective length of a queued vehicle including the vehicle spacing, feet.

M Metering factor (Multiplier): 1.

The number of moving vehicles on the link, of a particular movement, that are M ,M moving at the [beginning, end] of the time interval. These vehicles are assumed to be of equal spacing, over the length of link upstream of the queue.

The total number of vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a O

link over a time interval.

The components of the vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a link within a time interval: vehicles that were Queued at the beginning of O ,O ,O the TI; vehicles that were Moving within the link at the beginning of the TI; vehicles that Entered the link during the TI.

The percentage, expressed as a fraction, of the total flow on the link that P

executes a particular turn movement, x.

Limerick Generating Station C11 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 Q in the absence of a control device. It is specified by the analyst as an estimate of link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the HCM 2016.

R The factor that is applied to the capacity of a link to represent the capacity drop when the flow condition moves into the forced flow regime. The lower capacity at that point is equal to RQ .

RCap The remaining capacity available to service vehicles of a particular movement after that queue has been completely serviced, within a time interval, expressed as vehicles.

S Service rate for movement x, vehicles per hour (vph).

t Vehicles of a particular turn movement that enter a link over the first t seconds of a time interval, can reach the stopbar (in the absence of a queue down stream) within the same time interval.

TI The time interval, in seconds, which is used as the simulation time step.

v The mean speed of travel, in feet per second (fps) or miles per hour (mph), of moving vehicles on the link.

v The mean speed of the last vehicle in a queue that discharges from the link within the TI. This speed differs from the mean speed of moving vehicles, v.

W The width of the intersection in feet. This is the difference between the link length which extends from stopbar to stopbar and the block length.

Limerick Generating Station C12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8011 8009 2 3 8104 8107 6 5 8008 8010 8 9 10 8007 8012 12 11 8006 8005 13 14 8014 15 25 8004 16 24 8024 17 8003 23 22 21 20 8002 Entry, Exit Nodes are 19 numbered 8xxx 8001 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network Limerick Generating Station C13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kc kj ks Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams Distance OQ OM OE Down Qb vQ Qe v

v L

Mb Me Up t1 t2 Time E1 E2 TI Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 Limerick Generating Station C14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sequence Network Links Next Timestep, of duration, TI A

Next sweep; Define E, M, S for all B

Links C Next Link D Next Turn Movement, x Get lanes, LNx Service Rate, Sx ; G/Cx Get inputs to Unit Problem:

Q b , Mb , E Solve Unit Problem: Q e , Me , O No D Last Movement ?

Yes No Last Link ? C Yes No B Last Sweep ?

Yes Calc., store all Link MOE Set up next TI :

No A Last Time - step ?

Yes DONE Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3)

Limerick Generating Station C15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX D Detailed Description of Study Procedure

D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE This appendix describes the activities that were performed to compute 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 Geographic Information System (GIS) base map. The base map extends beyond the Shadow Region which extends approximately 15 miles (radially) from the power plant location.

The base map incorporates the local roadway topology, a suitable topographic background and the EPZ boundary.

Step 2 The 2020 Census block population 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, by each county within the EPZ and the previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches and aerial imagery where data was missing.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with major stakeholders (state and county emergency officials and Constellation personnel). 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 and Constellation utility managers. Unique features of the study area were discussed to identify the local concerns that should be addressed by the ETE study.

Step 4 Next, a physical survey of the roadway system in the study area was conducted to determine any changes to the roadway network since the previous study. The 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, and to make the necessary observations needed to estimate realistic values of roadway capacity. Roadway characteristics were also verified using aerial imagery.

Step 5 An online demographic survey of the households within the EPZ was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic information of the EPZ population. This information was used to determine important study Limerick Generating Station D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 43 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.

Limerick 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) produced by DYNEV II and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a labor intensive activity, requiring the direct participation of skilled engineers who possess the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any problems reflected in the results.

Essentially, the approach is to identify those bottlenecks in the network that represent locations where congested conditions are pronounced and to identify the cause of this congestion. This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to high rates of trip generation, improper routing, a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative flaw in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream. This examination leads to one of two conclusions:

The results are satisfactory; or The input stream must be modified accordingly.

This decision requires, of course, the application of the user's judgment and experience based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the model and a comparison of the results of the latest prototype evacuation case iteration with the previous ones. If the results are satisfactory in the opinion of the user, then the process continues with Step 13. Otherwise, proceed to Step 11.

Step 11 There are many "treatments" available to the user in resolving apparent problems. These treatments range from decisions to reroute the traffic by assigning additional evacuation destinations for one or more sources, imposing turn restrictions where they can produce significant improvements in capacity, changing the control treatment at critical intersections so as to provide improved service for one or more movements, adding minor routes (which are paved and traversable) that were not previously modelled but may assist in an evacuation and increase the available roadway network capacity, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems.

Such "treatments" take the form of modifications to the original prototype evacuation case input stream. All treatments are designed to improve the representation of evacuation behavior.

Step 12 As noted above, the changes to the input stream must be implemented to reflect the modifications undertaken in Step 11. At the completion of this activity, the process returns to Step 9 where the DYNEV II System is again executed.

Limerick Generating Station D3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 13 Evacuation of transitdependent evacuees and special facilities are included in the evacuation analysis. Fixed routing for transit buses and for school buses, ambulances, and other transit vehicles are introduced into the final prototype evacuation case data set. DYNEV II generates routespecific speeds over time for use in the estimation of evacuation times for the transit dependent and special facility population groups.

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. Traffic management plans are analyzed, and traffic control points are prioritized, if applicable.

Additional analysis is conducted to identify the sensitivity of the ETE to changes in some base evacuation conditions and model assumptions.

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, preschools/day care centers, medical facilities, and other special facilities, except for correctional facilities, as correctional facilities shelter in place.

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated and graphed. The results were then documented, as required by NUREG/CR7002 Rev. 1.

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

Limerick Generating Station D4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

A Step 1 Step 10 Create GIS Base Map Examine Prototype Evacuation Case using EVAN and DYNEV II Output Step 2 Gather Census Block and Demographic Data for Results Satisfactory Study Area Step 11 Step 3 Modify Evacuation Destinations and/or Develop Conduct Kickoff Meeting with Stakeholders Traffic Control Treatments Step 4 Step 12 Field Survey of Roadways within Study Area Modify Database to Reflect Changes to Prototype Evacuation Case Step 5 Conduct and Analyze Demographic Survey and Develop Trip Generation Characteristics B

Step 13 Step 6 Establish Transit and Special Facility Evacuation Update LinkNode Analysis Network Routes and Update DYNEV II Database Step 14 Step 7 Generate DYNEV II Input Streams for All Evacuation Cases Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 15 Step 8 Use DYNEVII to Simulate All Evacuation Cases Create and Debug DYNEV II Input Stream and Compute ETE Step 16 Step 9 Use DYNEV II Average Speed Output to Compute ETE for Transit and Special Facility Routes B Execute DYNEV II for Prototype Evacuation Case Step 17 Documentation A Step 18 Complete ETE Criteria Checklist Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities Limerick 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 July 2022, for special facilities, transient attractions and major employers that are located within the LGS EPZ. Special facilities are defined as schools, preschools/day care centers, day camps, medical facilities, and correctional facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for transient attractions (campgrounds, parks, shopping centers, the Expo Center) 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 care center, day camp, medical facility, correctional facility, transient attraction (campground, park, shopping center, Expo Center), lodging facility, and major employer are also provided.

Limerick Generating Station E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools within the Study Area Distance Dire Enroll Subarea (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment Berks County Amity 9.3 WNW Daniel Boone Area Intermediate Center 200 Boone Dr Douglassville 726 Amity 9.8 WNW Daniel Boone Area Primary Center 576 Monocacy Creek Rd Birdsboro 617 Amity 9.9 WNW Daniel Boone Area Middle School 1845 Weavertown Rd Douglassville 802 Boyertown 7.5 NNW Boyertown Area Senior High School 120 N Monroe St Boyertown 2,119 Colebrookdale 7.3 NNW Boyertown Elementary School 641 E Second St Boyertown 445 Colebrookdale 7.3 NNW Boyertown Area Middle School West 380 S Madison St Boyertown 782 Colebrookdale 8.3 NNW Colebrookdale Elementary School 1001 Montgomery Ave Boyertown 291 Douglass (Berks) 7.4 WNW Jessie R. Wagner Adventist Elementary School 742 Douglas Dr Pine Forge 24 Washington 10.3 N Brookeside Montessori 1075 Route 100 Bechtelsville 42 Berks County Subtotal: 5,848 Chester County Charlestown 10.2 SSE Charlestown Elementary School 2060 Charlestown Rd Malvern 313 East Coventry 1.6 SW East Coventry Elementary School 2461 E Cedarville Rd Pottstown 578 East Vincent 4.0 S East Vincent Elementary School 340 Ridge Rd Spring City 536 East Vincent 4.2 SSE Spring City Elementary School 190 Wall St Spring City 158 East Vincent 5.6 S KimbertonWaldorf School 410 W 7 Stars Rd Phoenixville 301 North Coventry 3.5 W North Coventry Elementary School 475 Kemp Rd Pottstown 613 North Coventry 3.7 W WestMont Christian Academy 873 S Hanover St Pottstown 315 Phoenixville 6.7 SSE Renaissance Academy 413 Fairview St Phoenixville 942 Phoenixville 7.6 SSE Barkley Elementary School 320 2nd Ave Phoenixville 356 Phoenixville 7.7 SSE Holy Family School 221 Third Ave Phoenixville 352 Schuylkill 7.6 SSE University of Valley Forge 1401 Charlestown Rd Phoenixville 398 Schuylkill 7.7 SSE Center for Arts and TechnologyPickering Campus 1580 Charlestown Rd Phoenixville 517 Schuylkill 8.1 SSE Kindergarten Center 1 Phantom Way Phoenixville 295 Schuylkill 8.1 SSE Phoenixville Area High School 1200 Gay St Phoenixville 898 Schuylkill 8.1 SSE Manavon Elementary School 2 Phantom Way Phoenixville 443 Schuylkill 8.2 SSE Phoenixville Area Middle School 1000 Purple Pride Pkwy Phoenixville 750 Schuylkill 8.8 SSE Schuylkill Elementary School 290 S Whitehorse Rd Phoenixville 693 South Coventry 4.8 SW Owen J. Roberts Middle School 881 Ridge Rd Pottstown 781 South Coventry 5.2 SW Owen J. Roberts High School 981 Ridge Rd Pottstown 1,485 South Coventry 6.7 SW French Creek Elementary School 3590 Coventryville Rd Pottstown 527 Limerick Generating Station E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dire Enroll Subarea (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment Upper Uwchlan 11.4 SSW Pickering Valley Elementary School 121 Byers Rd Chester Springs 688 West Pikeland 9.5 S Montgomery School 1141 Route 113 Chester Springs 271 West Vincent 9.4 SSW West Vincent Elementary School 2750 Conestoga Rd Chester Springs 506 Chester County Subtotal: 12,716 Montgomery County Collegeville 7.1 ESE Holy Cross Regional Catholic School 701 Locust St Collegeville 530 Collegeville 7.3 ESE Ursinus College 601 E Main St Collegeville 1,408 Collegeville 7.7 ESE South Elementary School 200 E Third Ave Collegeville 460 Douglass (Montgomery) 6.4 NNW Wayside Christian School 911 Sweinhart Rd Boyertown 6 Douglass (Montgomery) 6.8 N Gilbertsville Elementary School 36 Congo Rd Gilbertsville 689 Limerick 2.4 ENE Limerick Elementary School 81 Limerick Center Rd Royersford 413 Limerick 3.2 ENE St. Teresa Of Calcutta School 256 Swamp Pike Schwenksville 258 Limerick 3.3 SE Brooke Elementary School 339 N Lewis Rd Royersford 641 Limerick 3.5 E Chapel Christian Academy 378 W Ridge Pike Limerick 235 Limerick 4.0 SE SpringFord Senior High School 1012 Grade Center 350 S Lewis Rd Royersford 1,750 Limerick 4.1 E Evans Elementary School 125 Sunset Rd Limerick 865 Limerick 4.2 ENE Western Montgomery Career and Technology Center 77 Gratersford Rd Limerick 358 Lower Frederick 7.1 ENE St. Mary's School 40 Spring Mount Rd Schwenksville 274 Lower Pottsgrove 1.8 N Coventry Christian Schools 699 N Pleasantview Rd Pottstown 294 Lower Pottsgrove 2.6 NW St. Aloysius Parish School 220 N Hanover St Pottstown 310 Lower Pottsgrove 2.6 NNW Lower Pottsgrove Elementary School 1329 Buchert Rd Pottstown 677 Lower Pottsgrove 3.2 NNW Pottsgrove High School 1345 Kauffman Rd Pottstown 1,020 Lower Pottsgrove 3.3 NNW Ringing Rocks Elementary 1401 Kauffman Rd Pottstown 363 Lower Providence 8.4 ESE Arrowhead Elementary School 232 Level Rd Collegeville 382 Lower Providence 9.9 ESE Arcola Intermediate School 4000 Eagleville Rd Eagleville 767 Lower Providence 10.6 ESE Eagleville Elementary School 125 Summit Ave Eagleville 369 Lower Providence 11.5 ESE Woodland Elementary 2700 Woodland Ave Norristown 438 Lower Providence 12.0 ESE Skyview Upper Elementary School 4001 B Eagleville Rd Eagleville 727 New Hanover 6.3 N Boyertown Area Middle School East 2020 Big Rd Gilbertsville 895 New Hanover 6.5 NNE New HanoverUpper Frederick Elementary School 2547 Big Rd Frederick 675 New Hanover 8.0 N Perkiomen Valley Academy Hoffmansville Rd Frederick 24 Perkiomen 6.6 E Perkiomen Valley Middle School East 100 Kagey Rd Collegeville 705 Perkiomen 6.6 E Evergreen Elementary School 98 Kagey Rd Collegeville 486 Limerick Generating Station E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dire Enroll Subarea (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment Perkiomen 7.1 E Perkiomen Valley High School 509 Gravel Rd Collegeville 1,737 Pottstown 2.2 NW Wyndcroft School 1395 Wilson St Pottstown 245 Pottstown 2.2 WNW Rupert Elementary School 1230 S St Pottstown 332 Pottstown 2.9 WNW The Hill School 860 Beech St Pottstown 506 Pottstown 3.3 NW Pottstown High School 750 N Washington St Pottstown 863 Pottstown 3.3 NW Franklin Elementary School 970 N Franklin St Pottstown 324 Pottstown 3.4 NW Pottstown Middle School 600 N Franklin St Pottstown 972 Pottstown 3.9 WNW Lincoln Elementary School 461 N York St Pottstown 345 Pottstown 4.9 WNW Elizabeth B. Barth Elementary School 467 W Walnut St Norristown 345 Pottstown 5.0 WNW St. Peter's Lutheran Church School 564 Glasgow St Pottstown 182 Royersford 3.9 SE SpringFord 8th Grade Center 700 Washington St Royersford 661 Royersford 3.9 SE Royersford Elementary School 450 Spring St Royersford 625 Schwenksville 6.8 ENE Schwenksville Elementary School 55 2nd St Schwenksville 465 Skippack 8.9 E Skippack Elementary School 4081 Heckler Rd Collegeville 593 Upper Frederick 5.9 NE Perkiomen Valley Middle School West 200 Big Rd Zieglerville 563 Upper Pottsgrove 4.1 NW Pottsgrove Middle School 1351 N Hanover St Pottstown 743 Upper Providence 4.1 SE SpringFord Senior High School 9th Grade Center 400 S Lewis Rd Royersford 586 Upper Providence 4.5 ESE Pope John Paul II High School 181 Rittenhouse Rd Royersford 825 Upper Providence 4.7 ESE SpringFord 5th6th Grade Center 833 S Lewis Rd Royersford 1,230 Upper Providence 4.7 ESE SpringFord 7th Grade Center 833 S Lewis Rd Royersford 643 Upper Providence 4.7 ESE Upper Providence Elementary School 833 S Lewis Rd Bldg 3 Royersford 670 Upper Providence 6.1 SE Valley Forge Baptist Temple Academy 616 S Trappe Rd Collegeville 175 Upper Providence 8.6 SE Oaks Elementary School 325 N Oaks School Dr Oaks 814 Upper Salford 9.1 ENE New Life Youth & Family Services 585 Freeman School Rd Schwenksville 46 Upper Salford 9.8 NE Salford Hills Elementary 2721 Barndt Rd Harleysville 423 West Pottsgrove 5.5 WNW West Pottsgrove Elementary School 25 Grosstown Rd Stowe 257 S.R. 10.6 ESE Methacton High School1 1005 Kriebel Mill Rd Eagleville 1,547 Montgomery County Subtotal: 32,736 STUDY AREA TOTAL: 51,300 1

Methacton High School is located in the Shadow Region (S.R.) but near the EPZ boundary. Students in Methacton High School will be evacuated in the event of an emergency at the LGS.

Limerick Generating Station E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E2. Preschools/Child Care Centers and Day Camps within the EPZ Distance Dire Enroll Subarea (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment Berks County Amity 7.8 WNW Douglassville KinderCare 195 Old Swede Rd Douglassville 115 Amity 7.8 WNW St. Gabriel's Good Shepherd Learning Center 1188 Benjamin Franklin Hwy Douglassville 121 Amity 8.0 WNW St. Paul's Day Care 548 Old Swede Rd Douglassville 159 Amity 8.9 NW Teresa Walter Family Daycare 100 Highland Ct Douglassville 6 Boyertown 8.0 NNW St. John's Lutheran Church 45 N Reading Ave Boyertown 85 Colebrookdale 7.8 NNW Almost Home Children's Center 611 Montgomery Ave Boyertown 76 Colebrookdale 7.9 NNW Saint Columbkills Preschool 200 Indian Spring Rd Boyertown 60 Colebrookdale 8.4 NNW Boyertown Area YMCA 301 W Spring St Boyertown 371 Union 10.0 W Gail Swartz Family Daycare 69 Shed Rd Douglassville 6 Berks County Subtotal: 999 Chester County East Coventry 1.6 SW East Coventry Elementary A Child's Place 2461 E Cedarville Rd Pottstown 34 East Pikeland 6.3 SSE Phoenixville KinderCare 331 Schuylkill Rd Phoenixville 137 East Pikeland 6.5 SSE Bright Futures Early Learning Academy 289 Schuylkill Rd Phoenixville 64 East Vincent 4.0 S Grace Assembly Day Care Center 1271 W Bridge St Spring City 59 North Coventry 3.7 W Warwick Child Care North Coventry Center 145 W Urner St Pottstown 246 Phoenixville 6.7 SSE Phoenixville Area Children's Learning Center 2 400 Franklin Ave Phoenixville 91 Phoenixville 6.8 SSE Stepping Stone Education Center 475 Grant St Phoenixville 50 Phoenixville 7.4 SE Little Angels Day Care Bridge & Starr St Phoenixville 70 Phoenixville 7.4 SSE International Montessori 149 Hall St Phoenixville 56 Phoenixville 7.6 SSE Phoenixville Area Children Learning Center 310 Main St Phoenixville 78 Phoenixville 8.2 SSE Valley Forge Kinder House Montessori School 865 Main St Phoenixville 43 Schuylkill 6.8 SSE Kiddie Academy 10 Chrisevyn Ln Phoenixville 135 Schuylkill 7.6 SSE Phoenixville YMCA Program Center 400 E Pothouse Rd Phoenixville 540 Schuylkill 8.5 SE Magic Memories 897 Valley Forge Rd Phoenixville 65 Schuylkill 8.6 SSE Phoenixville Area YMCA Child Care Center 400 E Pothouse Rd Phoenixville 237 South Coventry 5.6 SW Warwick Child Care South Coventry Center 1190 Ridge Rd Pottstown 89 South Coventry 6.7 SW Pottstown YMCA French Creek Elementary 3590 Coventryville Rd Pottstown 22 Spring City 3.8 SE Kids Kare Korner 45 N Church St Spring City 29 Upper Uwchlan 11.3 SSW Bright Light Early Learning Center 70 Senn Dr Chester Springs 119 Upper Uwchlan 11.5 SSW The Goddard School Chester Springs 50 Seaboldt Way Chester Springs 116 Limerick Generating Station E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dire Enroll Subarea (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment Warwick 6.8 WSW Children's House of Northern Chester County 1621 Old Ridge Rd Pottstown 35 Chester County Subtotal: 2,315 Montgomery County Collegeville 6.9 ESE Creative Child Care Too 955 E Main St Collegeville 66 Collegeville 7.5 ESE Tot Spot Learning Center 555 2nd Ave Collegeville 99 Douglass (Montgomery) 5.8 NNW The Goddard School Gilbertsville 1452 Grosser Rd Gilbertsville 101 Douglass (Montgomery) 6.0 N Little Faces Learning Center 1610 Swamp Pike Gilbertsville 49 Douglass (Montgomery) 6.8 NNW Boyertown Children's Center 500 Sweinhart Rd Boyertown 76 Douglass (Montgomery) 7.6 NNW YMCA Growing Dreams Child Care Center 144 Holly Rd Gilbertsville 283 Limerick 2.4 ESE The Malvern School Royersford 538 N Lewis Rd Royersford 141 Limerick 2.4 ESE Kiddie Academy Royersford 525 N Lewis Rd Royersford 175 Limerick 2.4 ENE FV YMCA Limerick Elementary School 81 Limerick Center Rd Royersford 47 Limerick 2.7 ESE Chesterbrook Academy Limerick 441 N Lewis Rd Limerick 225 Limerick 2.8 ESE Country Tyme Day Care 441 N Lewis Rd Royersford 225 Limerick 3.3 SE FV YMCA Brooke Elementary School 339 N Lewis Rd Royersford 69 Limerick 3.4 E Bright Beginnings Child Care Center 385 Ridge Pike Royersford 74 Limerick 4.1 E FV YMCA Evans Elementary School 125 Sunset Rd Limerick 101 Limerick 4.3 ESE FV YMCA Spring Valley 19 W LinfieldTrappe Rd Limerick 29 Limerick 4.5 E Kinder Works 36 W Ridge Pike Limerick 181 Lower Pottsgrove 1.4 N Wee Care Child Dev Center 2573 E High St Pottstown 81 Lower Pottsgrove 1.6 NW The Goddard School Sanatoga 2074 High St Sanatoga 119 Lower Pottsgrove 1.8 N Coventry Christian PreSchool 699 N Pleasantview Rd Pottstown 184 Lower Pottsgrove 2.0 WNW Pottstown KinderCare 1550 Industrial Hwy Pottstown 160 Lower Providence 8.4 ESE Phoenixville Area YMCAArrowhead Elementary 232 Level Rd Collegeville 62 Lower Providence 8.7 ESE Play and Learn Collegeville 35 Evansburg Rd Collegeville 102 Lower Providence 8.8 ESE Chesterbrook Academy Collegeville 3822 Germantown Pike Collegeville 169 Lower Providence 8.9 ESE Creative Beginnings Preschool 3768 Germantown Pike Collegeville 40 Lower Providence 10.4 SE Chesterbrook Academy Norristown 1001 Surrey Ln Norristown 137 Lower Providence 10.7 ESE Phoenixville Area YMCA Eagleville Elementary 125 Summit Ave Norristown 62 Lower Providence 10.8 SE FV YMCA Audubon Elementary 2460 Blvd Of The Generals Norristown 65 Lower Providence 11.3 SE Valley Forge Children's Academy 1010 Adams Ave Audubon 31 Lower Providence 11.4 SE Victory Early Learning Academy 2650 Audubon Rd Audubon 105 Lower Providence 11.5 ESE FV YMCA Woodland Elementary 2700 Woodland Ave Norristown 90 Limerick Generating Station E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dire Enroll Subarea (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment Lower Providence 11.8 ESE Short Stuff & Co 225 S Trooper Rd Norristown 132 Marlborough 10.1 NE Play and Learn Green Lane 3000 Main St Green Lane 163 New Hanover 4.9 N New Hanover Child Care 2797 N Charlotte St Gilbertsville 58 Perkiomen 5.9 E Kiddie Academy Collegeville 301 Wartman Rd Collegeville 186 Perkiomen 6.2 ENE The Goddard School Schwenksville 300 Seitz Rd Schwenksville 76 Perkiomen 6.6 E FV YMCA Perkiomen Valley Middle School 98 Kagey Rd Collegeville 144 Perkiomen 6.8 E Cadence Academy Preschool 2 Iron Bridge Dr Collegeville 150 Pottstown 3.0 WNW YWCA Hill School Preschool 717 E High St Pottstown 11 Pottstown 3.1 NW FV YMCA Pottstown Day Care 724 N Adams St Pottstown 193 Pottstown 3.4 WNW Sunny Dayz Child Care 333 E High St Pottstown 31 Pottstown 3.5 WNW YWCA Ready Set Grow 315 King St Pottstown 137 Pottstown 3.6 WNW Little Mary Daycare 238 E High St Pottstown 58 Pottstown 3.7 WNW Montgomery Early Learning Center 150 N Hanover St Pottstown 202 Pottstown 3.8 WNW YWCA TriCounty Daycare 71 E High St Pottstown 12 Pottstown 4.0 WNW Dotlen Academy 59 W 8th St Pottstown 50 Royersford 3.6 ESE The Goddard School Royersford 197 Royersford Rd Royersford 129 Royersford 3.7 SE Kids Kare Korner III 380 Church St Royersford 144 Royersford 3.7 SE Spring Valley YMCA Child Care Facility 6th & Main St Royersford 81 Royersford 3.9 SE FV YMCA Royersford Elementary School 450 Spring St Royersford 83 Schwenksville 6.8 ENE North Penn YMCA Schwenksville Elementary 55 2nd St Schwenksville 72 Schwenksville 6.8 ENE Jerusalem Lutheran Day Care Center 311 2nd St Schwenksville 43 Skippack 9.0 E Tykes and Tots Day Care 1015 Bridge Rd Collegeville 86 Skippack 9.5 E The Goddard School Skippack 1246 Bridge Rd Skippack 223 Trappe 5.6 ESE Twin Acres Country Day School 105 Cherry Ave Collegeville 68 Trappe 6.6 ESE Bright Spot Kindergarten 200 W Main St Trappe 69 Trappe 7.7 ESE Bright Spot Child Care 200 W Main St Trappe 69 Upper Pottsgrove 4.8 NW Creative Minds Montessori 1374 Commerce Dr Pottstown 34 Upper Providence 5.4 ESE Children of America Trappe 1600 Ridge Pike Collegeville 156 Upper Providence 5.7 SE Providence Christian Preschool 1560 Yeager Rd Royersford 215 Upper Providence 6.0 SE Play and Learn Royersford 1600 Black Rock Rd Royersford 67 Upper Providence 7.5 ESE The Malvern School Collegeville 1844 S Collegeville Rd Collegeville 136 Upper Providence 7.8 ESE Kindercare 3060 100 Campus Dr Collegeville 135 Upper Providence 8.5 SE The Malvern School of Oaks 1023 Egypt Rd Phoenixville 136 Limerick Generating Station E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dire Enroll Subarea (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment Upper Providence 9.2 SE Oaks Early Learning 1173 Egypt Rd Oaks 124 Upper Providence 9.3 SE SEI Family Center One Freedom Valley Dr Oaks 74 Upper Providence 9.7 SE Phoenixville Area YMCAOaks Elementary School 325 N Oaks School Dr Oaks 79 Upper Salford 9.8 NE North Penn YMCA Salford Hills Elementary 2720 Barndt Rd Harleysville 68 West Pottsgrove 5.3 WNW Little Footprints 127 E Howard St Pottstown 121 Montgomery County Subtotal: 7,363 EPZ TOTAL: 10,677 Limerick Generating Station E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambul Wheel Bed Distance Dire Current atory chair ridden Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Census Patients Patients Patients Berks County Amity 7.6 WNW Hearthstone at Amity 139 Old Swede Rd Douglassville 100 90 8 2 Amity 8.0 WNW Keystone Villa 1180 Benjamin Franklin Hwy Douglassville 114 100 11 3 Boyertown 8.1 NNW Chestnut Knoll 120 W 5th St Boyertown 100 90 8 2 Union 8.3 WNW Colonial Manor Adult Home 2308 E Main St Douglassville 24 20 3 1 Berks County Subtotal: 338 300 30 8 Chester County East Coventry 1.9 W Manatawny Manor 30 Old Schuylkill Rd Pottstown 120 40 64 16 East Pikeland 6.6 SSE Atria Woodbridge Place 1191 Rapps Dam Rd Phoenixville 120 110 8 2 East Pikeland 6.9 S Genesis Health Care at Spring Mill 3000 Balfour Circle Phoenixville 22 20 2 0 Southeastern Pennsylvania Veterans East Vincent 2.7 SSE Center 1 Veterans Dr Spring City 185 165 16 4 Phoenixville Hospital of the UPENN Phoenixville 8.0 SSE Health System 140 Nutt Rd Phoenixville 127 67 48 12 Phoenix Center for Rehabilitation Phoenixville 8.1 SSE and Nursing 833 S Main St Phoenixville 130 125 4 1 Phoenixville 8.1 SSE Phoenixville Convalescent Manor 833 S Main St Phoenixville 68 18 40 10 South Coventry 6.4 WSW Gardens of Pottstown 3031 Chestnut Hill Rd Pottstown 41 33 6 2 Chester County Subtotal: 813 578 188 47 Montgomery County Lower Pottsgrove 1.0 NNE Sanatoga Court 227 Evergreen Rd Pottstown 85 75 8 2 Lower Pottsgrove 1.0 NNE Sanatoga Center 225 Evergreen Rd Pottstown 119 95 19 5 Lower Providence 10.4 ESE Eagleville Hospital 100 Eagleville R Eagleville 272 222 40 10 Lower Providence 11.3 ESE Shannondell at Valley Forge 6000 Shannondell Blvd Norristown 60 50 8 2 Pottstown 1.8 NW Pottstown Memorial Medical Center 1600 E High St Pottstown 295 115 144 36 Pottstown 3.5 NW ProMedica Pottstown 724 N Charlotte St Pottstown 206 103 82 21 Upper Frederick 6.3 NNE Frederick Living 2849 Big Rd Frederick 126 96 24 6 Upper Providence 5.9 SE Parkhouse, Providence Pointe 1600 Black Rock Rd Royersford 451 400 41 10 Montgomery County Subtotal: 1,614 1,156 366 92 EPZ TOTAL: 2,765 2,034 584 147 Limerick Generating Station E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ

% Employee Employees Employees Vehicles Distance Dire Employees Commuting Commuting Commuting Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ Berks County Amity 8.8 WNW Stv Group Inc. 205 W Welsh Dr Douglassville 200 58.5% 117 113 Colebrookdale 8.0 NNW Drug Plastics & Glass Co. Inc. 1 Bottle Dr Boyertown 200 58.5% 117 113 Berks County Subtotal: 400 234 226 Chester County East Pikeland 6.7 S Henry Co. 336 Cold Stream Rd Kimberton 300 58.3% 175 168 Schuylkill 8.6 SSE Phoenixville YMCA 400 E Pothouse Rd Phoenixville 250 58.4% 146 140 Chester County Subtotal: 550 321 308 Montgomery County Limerick Limerick Generating Station 3146 Sanatoga Rd Pottstown 450 58.7% 264 254 Limerick 1.6 E Iron Mountain 1101 Enterprise Dr Royersford 300 58.3% 175 168 Lower Providence 8.3 ESE Superior Tube Co Inc. 3900 Germantown Pike Collegeville 300 58.3% 175 168 Pottstown Memorial Medical Pottstown 1.8 NW Center 1600 E High St Pottstown 480 58.3% 280 269 Pottstown 3.7 WNW Pottstown Boro City Hall 100 E High St Pottstown 200 58.5% 117 113 Skippack 9.3 E Haines & Kibblehouse Inc. 2052 Lucon Rd Schwenksville 334 58.4% 195 188 Trappe 5.7 ESE Viant 200 W 7th Ave Collegeville 275 58.5% 161 155 Upper Providence 7.2 SE Quest Diagnostics 1201 S Collegeville Rd Collegeville 750 58.4% 438 421 Upper Providence 7.6 ESE Pfizer 500 Arcola Rd Collegeville 2,800 58.3% 1,633 1,570 Upper Providence 7.6 SE GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceutical 1250 S Collegeville Rd Collegeville 1,600 58.3% 933 897 Upper Providence 8.5 SE Graphic Packaging International 1035 Longford Rd Phoenixville 200 58.5% 117 113 Upper Providence 8.9 SE J J Haines & Co. Inc. 125 Green Tree Rd # 4 Phoenixville 350 58.6% 205 197 Upper Providence 9.4 SE Sei Investments Co. 1 Freedom Valley Dr Oaks 700 58.4% 409 393 Upper Providence 9.7 SE Total Containment Inc. 422 Business Ctr Oaks 200 29.5% 59 57 Montgomery County Subtotal: 8,939 5,161 4,963 EPZ TOTAL: 9,889 5,716 5,497 Limerick Generating Station E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E5. Transient Attractions within the EPZ Distance Dire Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles Berks County Colebrookdale 9.5 NNW Lazy K Campground 109 Washington Rd Bechtelsville Campground 255 85 Berks County Subtotal: 255 85 Chester County North North Coventry 4.1 W Coventry Mall 351 W Schuylkill Rd Coventry Shopping Center 3,000 1,500 Warwick 8.3 SW Warwick County Park 191 County Park Rd Pottstown Park 270 101 Warwick 9.4 WSW Warwick Woods Camp Resort 401 Trythall Rd Warwick Campground 660 220 Chester County Subtotal: 3,930 1,821 Montgomery County Limerick 1.0 NE Philadelphia Premium Outlets 18 Lightcap Rd Pottstown Shopping Center 2,250 1,125 Limerick 1.1 NNE Costco Wholesale 14 Lightcap Rd Pottstown Shopping Center 431 161 Lower Pottsgrove 1.4 N Beulah Land Park 2675 E High St Pottstown Park 112 42 Lower Providence 10.5 ESE Ridge Pike at Township Line 9 W Ridge Pike Royersford Shopping Center 750 375 Skippack 7.2 ENE Central Perkiomen Valley Park 1 Plank Rd Schwenksville Park 68 26 Skippack 9.9 E Evansburg State Park 851 Mayhall Rd Collegeville Park 361 180 Upper Frederick 9.1 NNE Green Lane Park 2144 Snyder Rd Green Lane Park 1,547 581 Upper Providence 6.0 SE Upper Schuylkill Valley Park 1600 Black Rock Rd Royersford Park 316 119 Upper Providence 7.0 SE Providence Town Center 1300 S Collegeville Rd Collegeville Shopping Center 2,948 1,100 Upper Providence 9.8 SE Greater Philadelphia Expo Center 100 Station Ave Oaks Expo Center 1,800 900 Upper Providence 9.8 SE Lower Perkiomen Valley Park 101 New Mill Rd Norristown Park 370 139 Montgomery County Subtotal: 10,953 4,748 EPZ TOTAL: 15,138 6,654 Limerick Generating Station E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles Berks County Colebrookdale 9.0 NNW MelDor Motel 5 Spring Garden Dr New Berlinville 34 19 Douglass (Berks) 5.8 WNW Econo Lodge DouglassvillePottstown 387 Ben Franklin Hwy Douglassville 65 36 Berks County Subtotal: 99 55 Chester County East Pikeland 5.9 SSE French Creek Inn 2 Ridge Rd Phoenixville 40 22 Phoenixville 7.3 SSE The Mainstay Inn 184 Bridge St Phoenixville 47 26 Chester County Subtotal: 87 48 Montgomery County Limerick 1.2 E Fellowship Farm 2488 Sanatoga Rd Pottstown 100 65 Limerick 2.0 ESE Holiday inn Express 15 Keystone Dr Limerick 128 71 Limerick 3.2 ESE Staybridge Suites 88 Anchor Parkway Royersford 189 105 Lower Providence 11.7 ESE Homewood Suites 681 Shannondell Blvd Audubon 221 123 Pottstown 3.9 WNW America's Best Value 29 High St Pottstown 106 59 Pottstown 4.0 WNW Quality Inn 61 W King St Pottstown 176 98 Pottstown 4.4 WNW Comfort Inn & Suites 99 Robinson St Pottstown 214 119 Pottstown 4.5 WNW Motel 6 78 Robinson St Pottstown 85 47 Skippack 9.8 E Hotel Fiesole Skippack Village, Rte 73 Skippack 29 16 Upper Providence 7.5 SE Marriott Courtyard 600 Campus Dr Collegeville 238 132 Upper Providence 9.6 SE Hampton Inn & Suites 100 Cresson Blvd Oaks 193 107 Montgomery County Subtotal: 1,679 942 EPZ TOTAL: 1,865 1,045 Table E7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Cap Subarea (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality acity Montgomery County Lower Providence 9.8 ESE Montgomery County Correctional Facility 60 Eagleville Rd Eagleville 1,000 Skippack 8.1 E Graterford State Correctional Institution 1200 Mokychic Rd Graterford 3,957 Montgomery County Subtotal: 4,957 EPZ TOTAL: 4,957 Limerick Generating Station E12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E1. Overview of Schools within the Study Area Limerick Generating Station E13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E2. Schools within the Study Area - North Limerick Generating Station E14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E3. Schools within the Study Area - South Limerick Generating Station E15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E4. Overview of Preschools/Day Care Centers and Day Camps within the EPZ Limerick Generating Station E16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E5. Preschools/Day Care Centers within the EPZ - North Limerick Generating Station E17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E6. Preschools/Day Care Centers and Day Camps within the EPZ - South Limerick Generating Station E18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E7. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Limerick Generating Station E19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E8. Major Employers within the EPZ Limerick Generating Station E20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E9. Transient Attractions within the EPZ Limerick Generating Station E21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E10. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Limerick Generating Station E22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E11. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Limerick Generating Station E23 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 Limerick Generating Station (LGS) 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 in this study. A draft of the instrument was submitted to stakeholders for comment. Comments were received and the survey instrument was modified accordingly, prior to conducting the survey.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. Since the demographic survey discussed herein was performed in 2020 and the 2020 Census data had not yet been released1, 2010 Census data was used to develop the sampling plan.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. A sample size of approximately 475 completed survey forms yields results with a sampling error of +/-4.5% at the 95% confidence level. The sample should be drawn from the EPZ population. Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using GIS software. This list is shown in Table F1.

Along with each zip code, an estimate of the population and number of households in each area was determined by overlaying 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 2010 average household size computed in Table F1 was an estimate of sampling purposes and was not sued in the ETE study.

The results of the survey exceeded the sampling plan. A total of 1,447 completed samples were obtained corresponding to a sampling error of +/-2.56% at the 95% confidence level based on the 2020 Census Data. Table F1 also shows the number of samples obtained within each zip code.

1 2020 Census data was released on September 16, 2021.

Limerick Generating Station F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.3 Survey Results The results of the survey fall into two categories. First, the household demographics of the area can be identified. Demographic information includes such factors as household size, automobile ownership, and automobile availability. The distributions of the time to perform certain pre evacuation activities are the second category of survey results. These data are processed to develop the trip generation distributions used in the evacuation modeling effort, as discussed in Section 5.

A review of the survey instrument reveals that several questions have a 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 3.08 people according to the survey results. The 2020 Census indicates the average household size is 2.68 people. The difference between the household size obtained from the demographic survey and the Census data is approximately 15%, which exceeds the survey sampling error of 2.56%. Using the Census data household size will generate more evacuating vehicles (more conservative ETE). As such, we elected to use the Census estimate for people per household in this study.

Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the EPZ is 2.25. It should be noted that less than 1% of households do not have an access to a vehicle. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F2. Figure F3 and Figure F4 present the automobile availability by household size.

Ridesharing Approximately 68% of households responded that they would share a ride with a neighbor, relative, or a 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 1.60 commuters in each household in the EPZ, and 84% of households have at least one commuter.

Limerick 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. The data shows an average of 1.04 employees per vehicle, assuming 2 people per vehicle - on average - for carpools.

Impact of COVID19 on Commuters Figure F8 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household that were temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic. Approximately 70% of households indicated that one ore more people in their household had a work and/or school commute that was temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic. The commuter distributions were compared to the 2013 telephone survey to potentially measure the effects of the pandemic. See Section F.3.3.

Functional or Transportation Needs Figure F9 presents the distribution of the number of individuals with functional or transportation needs. Approximately 4% of households responded to the survey as having functional or transportation needs. Of those households, about 37% require a bus, 9% require a medical bus/van, 20% require a wheelchair accessible van, 6% require an ambulance, and 28%

require another type of transportation.

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 1.44 vehicles.

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

Of the survey participants who responded, 57% said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 43% 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 the responses to the survey, about 74% of households have a family pet.

Of the households with pets, about 97% of them indicated that they would take their pets with them in an evacuation, as shown in Figure F12.

What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have? Based on the responses to the survey, about 95% of households with a pet have a household pet (dog, cat, bird, reptile, fish, rodent, ferret, hermit crab, frog, rabbit, snail, and/or turtle) and about 4% have farm animals (horse, chicken, goat, pig, duck, sheep, and/or cow) and less than 1% have other types of animals.

Do you have sufficient room in your vehicle(s) to evacuate with your pet(s) and/or animal(s)?

Based on the responses to the survey, 98% of households with a pet have sufficient room in their vehicle with their pet.

Limerick Generating Station F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Emergency officials advise you to take shelter at home in an emergency. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information regarding compliance with instructions to shelter in place. The results indicate that 78% of households who are advised to shelter in place would do so; the remaining 22% would choose to evacuate the area. Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20% of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. Thus, the data obtained from the survey is in good agreement with the federal guidance.

Emergency officials advise you to take shelter at home now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas are advised to evacuate now. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information specifically related to the possibility of a staged evacuation. That is, asking a population to shelter in place now and then to evacuate after a specified period of time. Results indicate that 54% of households would follow instructions and delay the start of evacuation until so advised, while the other 46% 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. 52% of households indicated that they would evacuate to a friend or relatives home, about 2% would choose to go to a reception center, 12% to a hotel, motel or campground, 7% to a second or seasonal home, less than 1% would choose not the evacuate and the remaining 26% 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.

As discussed in Section F.3.1 and shown in Figure F8, the COVID19 pandemic impacted more than half of the houses surveyed and could have an impact on the commuting patterns of those who live in the LGS EPZ. To compare the results obtained from the 2011 telephone survey and the 2020 demographic survey, the figures showing distributions involving commuters (time to prepare to leave work/college and time to travel home from work/college) will present both distributions.

How long does it take the commuter to complete preparation for leaving work or college?

Figure F14 presents the cumulative distribution for the 2020 and 2011 survey responses. For the 2020 survey, in all cases, the activity is completed within 60 minutes and approximately 90% can leave within 30 minutes. For the 2011 survey, in all cases, the activity is completed within 75 minutes and approximately 92% can leave within 30 minutes. The distributions are very similar for the first 60 minutes but the 2011 survey has a longer tail. The 2020 survey results for this question were utilized in this study.

Limerick Generating Station F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

How long would it take the commuter to travel home? Figure F15 presents the time to commute home from work or college for the EPZ population for the 2020 and 2011 survey responses. Approximately 84% of commuters can arrive home within 45 minutes of leaving work; all within 90 minutes, according to the 2020 survey. Approximately 87% of commuters can arrive home within 45 minutes of leaving work; all within 75 minutes, according to the 2011 survey. The 2020 survey results are shifted to the right, resulting in longer commuting times and more conservative estimates of the time to complete this activity. The 2020 survey results for this question were utilized in this study.

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

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.

The distribution shown in Figure F16 has a long tail. About 90% of households can be ready to leave home within 120 minutes; the remaining households require up to an additional one hour and 15 minutes.

How long would it take you to clear 6 to 8 inches of snow from your driveway? During adverse, snowy weather conditions, an additional activity may 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 distribution for removing 6 to 8 inches of snow from a driveway. The time distribution for clearing the driveway also has a long tail; about 90% of driveways are passable within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 45 minutes. The last driveway is cleared 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months after the start of this activity. Note that those respondents (about 10%) 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.

Limerick Generating Station F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table F1. LGS Demographic Survey Sampling Plan and Results Obtained EPZ EPZ EPZ EPZ Desired Obtained Zip Code Population Households Population in Households in Sample Sample in Zip (2010) in Zip (2010) Zip (2020) Zip (2020) 18054 1,342 549 1,406 555 2 4 18074 5,775 2,179 5,674 2,197 10 22 18969 225 74 232 83 0 0 19335 1,304 405 1,371 440 2 3 19341 26 8 15 8 0 2 19343 3,114 1,062 3,955 1,366 5 2 19355 2,034 676 2,678 885 3 5 19403 19,249 6,624 19,094 6,951 29 53 19425 13,752 4,658 16,092 5,356 21 20 19426 37,153 11,132 39,531 12,404 49 193 19435 100 40 105 37 0 0 19438 4,371 1,541 4,966 1,773 7 16 19442 45 16 46 14 0 0 19453 1,483 720 1,421 696 3 2 19456 737 273 703 257 1 1 19457 125 44 89 31 0 1 19460 39,923 15,772 44,348 18,083 70 87 19464 45,788 17,965 48,028 18,896 79 232 19465 17,038 6,538 18,329 6,899 29 139 19468 25,536 9,939 27,224 10,790 44 364 19472 74 30 75 33 0 3 19473 15,713 5,619 16,291 5,900 25 100 19474 733 349 743 345 2 8 19475 11,283 4,260 12,081 4,674 19 86 19492 717 338 901 496 1 3 19504 1,717 602 1,691 648 3 1 19505 1,207 468 1,187 469 2 4 19508 517 225 539 243 1 4 19512 13,092 5,459 13,197 5,489 24 10 19518 12,196 4,185 13,627 4,966 18 20 19520 1,220 473 1,286 491 2 8 19525 14,107 4,785 16,602 5,645 21 54 19542 12 7 30 9 0 0 19545 428 172 476 196 1 0 Total EPZ 292,136 107,187 314,033 117,325 473 1,447 Average 2.73 2.68 HH Size:

Limerick Generating Station F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Limerick Generating Station Household Size 40%

31.0%

30%

Percent of Households 26.6%

20.7%

20%

8.9% 9.1%

10%

3.7%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6+

Household Size Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ Limerick Generating Station Vehicle Availability 60% 57.0%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20.5%

20%

14.2%

10% 6.2%

1.9%

0.2%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability Limerick Generating Station F7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 15 Person Households 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 100%

Percent of Households 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 5 Person Households Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 69+ Person Households 6 People 7 People 8 People 9+ People 100%

Percent of Households 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 6 to 9+ Person Households Limerick Generating Station F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Limerick Generating Station Rideshare with Neighbor/Friend 100%

80%

Percent of Households 67.91%

60%

40% 32.09%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Percentage Limerick Generating Station Commuters 50%

40% 38%

Percent of Households 30%

30%

20% 16%

10%

10% 6%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F6. Commuters in Households in the EPZ Limerick Generating Station F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Limerick Generating Station Travel Mode to Work 100%

87.30%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

7.15% 4.01%

1.06% 0.48%

0%

Rail Bus Walk/Bike Drive Alone Carpool (2+)

Mode of Travel Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ COVID19 Impact to Commuters 50%

40%

Percent of Households 31.5%

30% 26.2%

21.5%

20%

10.3% 10.5%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Functional Vehicle Transportation Needs 50%

40% 37.5%

Percent of Households 30% 27.9%

20.1%

20%

8.7%

10%

5.8%

0%

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Ambulance Other Accessible Vehicle Figure F9. Access and/or Functional Needs Vehicle Requirements Evacuating Vehicles Per Household 100%

80%

Percent of Households 63.6%

60%

40%

29.9%

20%

6.2%

0.3%

0%

0 1 2 3+

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60% 56.9%

43.1%

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%

73%

60%

Percent of Households 40%

24%

20%

3%

0%

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Shelter Locations 60%

52.33%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30% 26.45%

20%

12.27%

10% 6.84%

1.76% 0.35%

0%

Friend/Relative's Reception Hotel, Motel, A Would not Other/Don't Home Center or Campground Second/Seasonal Evacuate Know Home Figure F13. Shelter Locations Time to Prepare to Leave Work/College 2020 2011 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F14. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work or College Limerick Generating Station F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Commute Home From Work/College 2020 2011 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Travel Time (min)

Figure F15. Time to Commute Home from Work or College Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F16. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Limerick 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 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Time (min)

Figure F17. Time to Clear Driveway of 6"8" of Snow Limerick Generating Station F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ATTACHMENT A Demographic Survey Instrument Limerick Generating Station F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Limerick 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 local emergency planners to enhance emergency response plans in your area. Your responses will greatly contribute to local emergency preparedness. .

( ) . Do not provide your name or any personal information, and the survey will take less than 5 minutes to complete.

1. 1. What is your gender?

Mark only one oval.

Male Female Decline to State Other:

2. 2. What is your home zip code? *

3. 3A. In total, how many running cars, or other vehicles are usually available to the household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

DECLINE TO STATE

4. 3B. In an emergency, could you get a ride out of the area with a neighbor or friend?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE

5. 4. How many vehicles would your household use during an evacuation?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

I WOULD EVACUATE BY BICYCLE I WOULD EVACUATE BY BUS DECLINE TO STATE

6. 5. How many people usually live in this household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE TEN ELEVEN TWELVE THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN NINETEEN OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE COVID-19

7. 6. How many people in your household have a work and/or school commute that has been temporarily impacted due to the COVID-19 pandemic?

Mark only one oval.

ZERO ONE TWO THREE FOUR OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE Commuters

8. 7. How many people in the household normally (during non-COVID conditions)

commute to a job, or to college on a daily basis?

Mark only one oval.

ZERO Skip to question 53 ONE Skip to question 9 TWO Skip to question 10 THREE Skip to question 11 FOUR OR MORE Skip to question 12 DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 53 Mode of Travel

9. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone more people know Commuter 1

Skip to question 13 Mode of Travel

10. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone more people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Skip to question 15 Mode of Travel

11. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone more people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Skip to question 19 Mode of Travel

12. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone more people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Commuter 4

Skip to question 25 Travel Home From Work/College

13. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

14. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Skip to question 33 Travel Home From Work/College

15. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

16. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

17. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

18. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Skip to question 35 Travel Home From Work/College

19. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

20. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

21. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

22. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

23. 9-3. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #3 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

24. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Skip to question 39 Travel Home From Work/College

25. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

26. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

27. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

28. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

29. 9-3. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #3 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

30. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

31. 9-4. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #4 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

32. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-4, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Skip to question 45 Preparation to leave Work/College

33. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

34. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Skip to question 53 Preparation to leave Work/College

35. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

36. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

37. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

38. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Skip to question 53 Preparation to leave Work/College

39. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

40. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

41. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

42. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

43. 10-3. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #3 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

44. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Skip to question 53 Preparation to leave Work/College

45. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

46. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

47. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

48. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

49. 10-3. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #3 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

50. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

51. 10-4. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #4 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

52. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-4, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months .

Skip to question 53 Additional Questions

53. 11. If you were advised by local authorities to evacuate, how much time would it take the household to pack clothing, medications, secure the house, load the car, and complete preparations prior to evacuating the area?

Mark only one oval.

LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 15-30 MINUTES 31-45 MINUTES 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 3 HOURS TO 3 HOURS 15 MINUTES 3 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 30 MINUTES 3 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 45 MINUTES 3 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 4 HOURS TO 4 HOURS 15 MINUTES 4 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 30 MINUTES 4 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 45 MINUTES 4 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 5 HOURS TO 5 HOURS 30 MINUTES 5 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 6 HOURS OVER 6 HOURS WILL NOT EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

54. If Over 6 Hours for Question 11, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 11, is under 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months .

55. 12. If there are 6-8 inches of snow on your driveway or curb, would you need to shovel out to evacuate? If yes, how much time, on average, would it take you to clear the 6-8 inches of snow to move the car from the driveway or curb to begin the evacuation trip? Assume the roads are passable.

Mark only one oval.

LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 15-30 MINUTES 31-45 MINUTES 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS NO, WILL NOT SHOVEL OUT OVER 3 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

56. If Over 3 Hours for Question 12, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 12, is under 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months .

57. 13. Please specify the number of people in your household who require Functional or Transportation needs in an evacuation:

Mark only one oval per row.

More than 0 1 2 3 4 4

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle Ambulance Other

58. Specify "Other" Transportation Need Below

59. 14. Please choose one of the following:

Mark only one oval.

I would await the return of household members to evacuate together.

I would evacuate independently and meet other household members later.

Decline to State

60. 15A. Emergency officials advise you to shelter-in-place in an emergency because you are not in the area of risk. Would you:

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

61. 15B. Emergency officials advise you to shelter-in-place now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas are advised to evacuate now.

Would you:

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

62. 15C. Emergency officials advise you to evacuate due to an emergency. Where would you evacuate to?

Mark only one oval.

A RELATIVES OR FRIENDS HOME A RECEPTION CENTER A HOTEL, MOTEL OR CAMPGROUND A SECOND/SEASONAL HOME WOULD NOT EVACUATE DON'T KNOW OTHER (Specify Below)

DECLINE TO STATE

63. Fill in OTHER answers for question 15C Pet Questions

64. 16A. Do you have any pet(s) and/or animal(s)?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

65. 16B. What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have?

Check all that apply.

DOG CAT BIRD REPTILE HORSE FISH CHICKEN GOAT PIG OTHER SMALL PETS/ANIMALS (Specify Below)

OTHER LARGE PETS/ANIMALS (Specify Below)

Other:

66.

Mark only one oval.

DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

67. 16C. What would you do with your pet(s) and/or animal(s) if you had to evacuate?

Mark only one oval.

TAKE PET WITH ME TO A SHELTER TAKE PET WITH ME SOMEWHERE ELSE LEAVE PET AT HOME DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

68. 16D. Do you have sucient room in your vehicle(s) to evacuate with your pet(s) and/or animal(s)?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE Other:

APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 indicates that the existing Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Access Control Points (ACPs) identified by the offsite agencies should be used in the evacuation simulation modeling. The traffic and access control plans for the EPZ were provided by each county.

These traffic management plans (TMP) were reviewed, and the TCPs and ACPs were modeled accordingly. An analysis of the TCP and ACP locations was performed, and it was determined to model the ETE simulations with existing TCPs and ACPs that were documented in the county emergency plans, with no additional TCPs or ACPs recommended. Figure G1 maps the existing TCPs and ACPs.

The TCPs and ACPs are forms of manual traffic control (MTC). As discussed in Section 9, MTC at intersections (which are controlled) are modeled as actuated signals. If an intersection has a pretimed signal, stop, or yield control, and the intersection is identified as a TCP or ACP, the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system, in accordance with Section 3.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. TCPs and ACPs at existing actuated traffic signalized intersections were essentially left alone except where modifications to green time allocation were deemed necessary.

Table K1 provides the number of nodes with each control type in the analysis network. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a TCP or ACP, the control type is indicated as a TCP/ACP in Table K1. The TCPs within the study area are mapped as blue/green dots in Figure G1. These TCPs are concentrated along major evacuation routes throughout the EPZ (SR 73, SR 23, SR 100, SR 663, SR 113, etc.) and in population centers (Pottstown, Phoenixville, Boyertown, Royersford, Spring City and Schwenksville) and at access ramps to US 422. Theses TCPs would be manned during evacuation by traffic guides who would direct evacuees in the proper direction and facilitate the flow of traffic through the intersections.

G.1 Access Control Points The existing ACPs are located along the periphery of the EPZ tend to limit entry into the EPZ.

The existing ACPs as listed in the county plans are mapped as red squares in Figure G1. Some locations are both traffic and access control points (shown as orange circles with a black center). It is assumed that ACPs will be established within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months of the ATE to discourage through travelers from using major through routes which traverse the EPZ.

As discussed in Section 3.11, external traffic was considered along I476, Route 309, I76, I276, US 202 US 30 and US 422. The generation of these external trips (45,508 vehicles during daytime conditions and 18,203 vehicles in evening conditions) ceased at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months after the ATE in the simulation to represent the diversion of traffic at these locations.

Limerick Generating Station G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

G.2 Analysis of Key TCP and ACP Locations As discussed in Section 5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, MTC at intersections could benefit from ETE analysis. The TCP locations contained within the traffic management plan 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 plan.

The majority of the TCPs identified in the TMP were located at intersections with actuated signals or intersections without control. Table G1 shows a list of the controlled intersections that were identified as TCPs in the TMP 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 entire EPZ (Region R03) was simulated wherein these intersections were left as is (without MTC). The results were compared to the results presented in Section 7. Although localized congestion worsens, the ETE was not significantly impacted (at most 10 minutes) at the 90th percentile and was not impacted at the 100th percentile when MTC was not present at these intersections, as shown in Table G2. The remaining TCPs were left as actuated signals in the model and, therefore, had no impact to ETE.

The majority of the TCPs and ACPs in the study area are located along major evacuation routes near major population centers, as shown in Figure G1. The main thoroughfare on nearly all major evacuation routes and within the population centers are severely congested for several hours, as shown in Figures 73 through 78. Positioning police officers at intersections to facilitate access these roadways would have minimal benefit as the main thoroughfare is already heavily congested and there is heavy traffic in competing directions (northsouth and eastwest).

Although there is no reduction in ETE when MTC is implemented, traffic 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 traffic signals which would mimic MTC.

Limerick Generating Station G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G1. List of Key TCP/ACP Locations Previous County ID Intersection Node #

Control Berks Amity5 Rt. 662 & Pine Forge Rd. 398 STOP Berks Douglass1 Rt. 562 & Douglass Dr. 418 STOP Rt. 562 & Old Airport Rd. /

107/ACP PSP7/TCP 421 STOP Berks Powder Mill Hollow Rd.

Berks Boyertown4 Philadelphia Ave. & 2nd St. 431 STOP Berks PSP9 / TCP Rt. 73 & Main St. 444 STOP Berks Colebrookdale2 Colebrookdale2 / TCP 449 STOP Berks PSP10 / TCP Rt. 100 & Hoffmansville Rd. 477 STOP ACP124 County Line Rd. & Hoffmansville Rd. 497 STOP Berks Washington1 Berks Colebrrokdale1 Rt. 73 & Funk Rd. 547 STOP Berks Douglass3 Ben Franklin Hwy & Old Douglass Dr. 717 STOP Berks 103 ACP Rt. 724 & Shed Rd. (Rt. 345) 1203 STOP Berks 101 / ACP Shed Rd. & Park Rd. 1356 STOP Berks 106/ACP Old Airport & Weavertown Rds. 4438 STOP Chester E. Pikeland1 Rt. 724 & Pikeland Ave. 1228 STOP Chester POST 43 Rt. 23 & Valley Park Rd. 1247 STOP Chester POST 1 Rt. 23 & Rt. 401 1442 STOP Chester POST 25 Rt. 401 & Rt. 345 1451 ALL WAY STOP Chester E. Pikeland4 Rt. 113 & Hares Hill Rd. 3418 STOP Chester POST 37 Rt. 401 & SR 1031 (Saint Matthew's Rd.) 3569 ALL WAY STOP Chester E. Brandywine1 Rt. 232 & Dorlan's Mill Rd. 3670 STOP Chester POST 212 Diamond Rock Hill Rd. & Ashenfelter 3914 STOP Chester POST 29 Rt. 23 & SR 4041 (Saint Peters Rd.) 4413 STOP Montgomery 8420 Ridge Pike & Nieffer Rd 745 STOP Montgomery 9416 West High St & Glasgow St 830 STOP Montgomery 964 Manatawny St & Grosstown Rd 838 STOP Montgomery 883 Route 663 & Bleim St 892 STOP Montgomery 942 Keim St & Industrial Highway Bridge 922 STOP Montgomery 882 Route 663 & Keim St 968 STOP Montgomery 8969 Route 663 & Route 73 North 977 STOP Montgomery 7574 Perkiomenville Rd & Deep Creek Rd 1108 STOP Montgomery 733 Salford Station Rd & Route 29 1129 STOP Montgomery 7178 Route 63 & Route 563 1152 STOP Limerick Generating Station G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Previous County ID Intersection Node #

Control Montgomery 782 Collegeville Rd & Route 73 1568 STOP Montgomery 783 Evansburg Rd & Route 73 1569 STOP Montgomery 826 Main St & Centennial St 1621 STOP Montgomery 828 Main St & Walnut St 1622 STOP Montgomery 686 Lewis Rd & Vaughn Rd 1708 STOP Montgomery 923 Gilbertsville Rd & Moyer Rd 3798 STOP Table G2. ETE with No MTC Scenario 1 th Region 90 Percentile ETE 100th Percentile ETE Base No MTC Difference Base No MTC Difference R01 (2Mile) 2:50 2:50 0:00 4:50 4:50 0:00 R02 (5Mile) 3:25 3:25 0:00 5:00 5:00 0:00 R03 (Entire EPZ) 4:45 4:55 0:10 6:45 6:45 0:00 Limerick Generating Station G4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Points for the LGS Limerick 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 H42). The percentages presented in Table H1 are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 7 of Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 21.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20% of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Limerick Generating Station H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of Subarea Population Evacuating for Each Region 2Mile 5Mile Full Region

Description:

Region Region EPZ Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R01 R02 R03 R04 R05 R06 R07 R08 R09 R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 NE, SSE, S, WNW, NW, Wind Direction From: N/A N/A N/A N NNE ENE E ESE SE SSW SW WSW W NNW SubArea Amity 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Boyertown 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Charlestown 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Colebrookdale 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Collegeville 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Douglass (Berks) 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Douglass (Montgomery) 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Earl 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

East Coventry 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

East Nantmeal 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

East Pikeland 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

East Vincent 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

Green Lane 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Limerick 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lower Frederick 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Lower Pottsgrove 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lower Providence 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Lower Salford 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Marlborough 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

New Hanover 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

North Coventry 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Perkiomen 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Phoenixville 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Pottstown 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Royersford 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

Schuylkill 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Schwenksville 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Skippack 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

South Coventry 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Spring City 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

Trappe 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Union 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Frederick 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Pottsgrove 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Providence 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

Upper Salford 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Uwchlan 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Uwchlan 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Warwick 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Washington 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

West Pikeland 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

West Pottsgrove 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

West Vincent 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

SubArea SheltersInPlace SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Region Number: R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 R21 R22 R23 R24 R25 R26 R27 R28 R29 R30 Wind Direction From: N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW SubArea Amity 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Boyertown 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Charlestown 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

Colebrookdale 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Collegeville 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Douglass (Berks) 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Douglass (Montgomery) 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Earl 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

East Coventry 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

East Nantmeal 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

East Pikeland 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

East Vincent 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

Green Lane 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

Limerick 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lower Frederick 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

Lower Pottsgrove 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lower Providence 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lower Salford 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

Marlborough 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

New Hanover 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

North Coventry 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Perkiomen 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

Phoenixville 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Pottstown 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Royersford 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Schuylkill 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Schwenksville 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

Skippack 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

South Coventry 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Spring City 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Trappe 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Union 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Frederick 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Pottsgrove 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Providence 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Upper Salford 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

Upper Uwchlan 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

Uwchlan 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

Warwick 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Washington 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

West Pikeland 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

West Pottsgrove 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

West Vincent 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

SubArea not within Plume, but Evacuates because it is surrounded by other SubAreas that SubArea SheltersInPlace are Evacuating SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Region

Description:

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Region Number: R31 R32 R33 R34 R35 R36 R37 R38 R39 R40 R41 R42 SSE, S, WNW, NW, 5Mile Region N NNE NE, ENE E ESE SE SW WSW W Wind Direction From: SSW NNW SubArea Amity 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Boyertown 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Charlestown 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Colebrookdale 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Collegeville 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Douglass (Berks) 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Douglass (Montgomery) 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Earl 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

East Coventry 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

East Nantmeal 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

East Pikeland 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

East Vincent 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

Green Lane 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Limerick 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lower Frederick 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Lower Pottsgrove 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lower Providence 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Lower Salford 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Marlborough 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

New Hanover 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

North Coventry 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Perkiomen 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Phoenixville 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Pottstown 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Royersford 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

Schuylkill 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Schwenksville 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Skippack 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

South Coventry 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Spring City 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

Trappe 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Union 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Frederick 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Pottsgrove 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Providence 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

Upper Salford 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Upper Uwchlan 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Uwchlan 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Warwick 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Washington 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

West Pikeland 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

West Pottsgrove 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

West Vincent 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

SubArea SheltersinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate SubArea SheltersInPlace SubArea Evacuates Limerick Generating Station H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H1. Region R01 Limerick Generating Station H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H2. Region R02 Limerick Generating Station H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H3. Region R03 Limerick Generating Station H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H4. Region R04 Limerick Generating Station H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H5. Region R05 Limerick Generating Station H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 Limerick Generating Station H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H7. Region R07 Limerick Generating Station H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Limerick Generating Station H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09 Limerick Generating Station H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H10. Region R10 Limerick Generating Station H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 Limerick Generating Station H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H12. Region R12 Limerick Generating Station H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H13. Region R13 Limerick Generating Station H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14 Limerick Generating Station H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15 Limerick Generating Station H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H16. Region R16 Limerick Generating Station H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H17. Region R17 Limerick Generating Station H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H18. Region R18 Limerick Generating Station H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H19. Region R19 Limerick Generating Station H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H20. Region R20 Limerick Generating Station H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 Limerick Generating Station H25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H22. Region R22 Limerick Generating Station H26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H23. Region R23 Limerick Generating Station H27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H24. Region R24 Limerick Generating Station H28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H25. Region R25 Limerick Generating Station H29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H26. Region R26 Limerick Generating Station H30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H27. Region R27 Limerick Generating Station H31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H28. Region R28 Limerick Generating Station H32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H29. Region R29 Limerick Generating Station H33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H30. Region R30 Limerick Generating Station H34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H31. Region R31 Limerick Generating Station H35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H32. Region R32 Limerick Generating Station H36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H33. Region R33 Limerick Generating Station H37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H34. Region R34 Limerick Generating Station H38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H35. Region R35 Limerick Generating Station H39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H36. Region R36 Limerick Generating Station H40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H37. Region R37 Limerick Generating Station H41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H38. Region R38 Limerick Generating Station H42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H39. Region R39 Limerick Generating Station H43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H40. Region R40 Limerick Generating Station H44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H41. Region R41 Limerick Generating Station H45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H42. Region R42 Limerick Generating Station H46 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. There are a total of 924 source links (origins) in the model. The source links are shown as centroid points in Figure J1. Evacuees travel a straight line distance of 5.34 miles, on average, to exit the study area.

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. As expected, rain, rain/light snow and heavy snow scenarios (Scenarios 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 and 11) exhibit slower average speeds, higher delays and longer average travel times than good weather scenarios. When comparing scenario 13 (special event) and scenario 12, the additional vehicles the special event introduces has no impact on average travel times and delay and minimal impact on network speeds. When comparing scenario 14 (roadway closure) and Scenario 1, the single lane closure on US 422 eastbound lowers the average speeds, causes higher delays and increases the travel times.

Table J3 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes -

US 422, State Route (SR) 100, SR 73 and SR 23 - for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figures 73 through 78, all major evacuation routes are congested for most of the evacuation after the first hour.

As such, the average speeds are slower (and travel times longer) after the first hour. By the fourth and fifth hour of the evacuation, congestion on most of these routes (except SR 100 northbound and US 422 westbound) starts to dissipate and average speeds increase.

Table J4 provides the number of vehicles discharged and the cumulative percent of total vehicles discharged for each link exiting the analysis network for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (region R03) under scenario 1 conditions.

Figure J2 through Figure J15 plot the trip generation time versus the ETE for each of the 14 Scenarios considered. The distance between the trip generation and ETE curves is the travel time. Plots of trip generation versus ETE are indicative of the level of traffic congestion during evacuation. For low population density sites, the curves are close together, indicating short travel times and minimal traffic congestion. For higher population density sites, the curves are farther apart indicating longer travel times and the presence of traffic congestion. As seen in Figure J2 through Figure J15, the curves are spatially separated as a result of the pronounced traffic congestion in the EPZ, which was discussed in detail in Section 7.3.

1 Computed as the difference of the average travel time and the average ideal travel time under free flow conditions.

Limerick Generating Station J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Entering Upstream Downstream Network Directional Destination Destination Route Name Node Node on this Link Preference Nodes Capacity 8265 4,500 County Line 667 500 15 N 8868 2,850 Road 8487 1,700 8923 1,275 Meng Road 1628 1627 54 NE 8898 1,275 8884 3,800 8224 2,850 Seitz Road 1785 1782 931 E 8949 1,275 8531 1,275 8167 6,750 Mill Road 1976 1970 691 E 8800 2,850 8061 2,850 8884 3,800 Route 63 1789 1664 117 NE 8064 1,275 8868 2,850 8265 4,500 Knight Road 568 595 7 NE 8064 1,275 8868 2,850 8090 4,500 White Bear 1506 1507 56 W 8449 1,700 Road 8112 4,500 8167 6,750 Route 363 3023 3011 62 E 8800 2,850 8061 2,850 8466 1,700 SR 282 3648 3649 29 SW 8279 4,500 Limerick 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 4.0 4.6 4.3 4.9 4.5 4.1 4.6 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 2.7 3.3 3.0 3.6 3.2 2.8 3.3 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 15.0 13.1 14.1 12.4 13.4 14.7 13.0 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 268,278 268,374 264,234 264,370 228,763 270,462 269,683 Exiting Network Scenario 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NetworkWide Average 5.0 4.3 4.9 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 3.7 3.0 3.6 3.7 3.2 3.2 3.2 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 11.9 14.0 12.4 11.9 13.3 13.2 13.2 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 270,767 264,286 264,058 264,626 227,581 230,017 266,659 Exiting Network Limerick 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) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Travel Length Speed Time Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Route Name (miles) (mph) (min) Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time US 422 Eastbound 26.0 35.8 43.5 5.5 284.8 7.6 204.1 29.6 52.6 67.1 23.2 67.1 23.2 67.1 23.2 US 422 Westbound 26.0 55.4 28.1 12.7 122.5 4.6 336.8 7.4 210.9 15.7 99.4 31.6 49.3 67.0 23.3 SR 100 Northbound 11.4 42.5 16.1 3.1 220.0 2.9 239.2 4.0 169.4 4.3 158.3 33.0 20.8 54.4 12.6 SR 100 Southbound 14.8 29.4 30.3 10.8 82.3 9.9 89.4 18.6 47.7 44.9 19.8 44.9 19.8 44.9 19.8 SR 73 Eastbound 15.9 31.1 30.7 19.8 48.3 10.8 88.4 25.3 37.8 45.3 21.1 45.8 20.9 45.8 20.9 SR 73 Westbound 15.6 27.6 34.0 20.5 45.7 7.9 118.8 10.9 86.3 23.1 40.6 45.4 20.6 45.4 20.6 SR 23 Eastbound 10.3 21.1 29.3 4.3 144.8 5.0 122.8 15.5 40.0 44.3 14.0 44.8 13.8 44.8 13.8 SR 23 Westbound 9.4 24.0 23.4 7.7 72.5 12.3 45.7 45.6 12.3 48.6 11.6 48.6 11.6 48.6 11.6 Limerick 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) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Upstream Downstream Route Name Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Node Node Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval 954 3,089 4,971 7,024 9,175 10,864 12,767 US 422 89 90 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 5%

968 1,785 2,607 3,272 3,738 3,749 3,749 I76 113 112 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1%

4,955 10,909 13,493 15,649 17,448 17,959 18,139 I276 229 228 15% 12% 9% 8% 7% 7% 7%

519 1,975 3,027 4,136 5,300 6,237 6,675 SR 100 486 487 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

147 992 2,413 3,959 5,485 6,758 7,270 SR 29 486 4412 0% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3%

SR 1022/Huffs Church 0 3 6 7 7 7 7 532 540 Road 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

840 1,727 2,825 3,685 4,552 5,758 6,210 Ridge Parkway 799 800 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

201 617 1,099 1,679 2,237 2,565 2,662 SR 724 1220 1221 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

481 1,734 2,944 4,078 4,234 4,234 4,234 SR 23 1448 1449 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

107 291 472 651 815 971 1,011 SR 10 1497 3264 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

140 444 822 1,251 1,674 1,921 1,985 SR 568 1500 1501 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

297 1,202 2,100 2,871 3,496 3,838 3,898 SR 73 1578 4277 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

200 1,119 2,225 3,189 3,868 4,279 4,351 US 202 1579 4119 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2%

1,997 4,763 6,312 7,359 8,066 8,109 8,109 SR 309 1883 1884 6% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3%

4 96 181 219 250 250 250 State Road 1890 4223 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

112 867 1,450 1,830 2,017 2,178 2,178 Ridge Road 1895 4228 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

166 1,265 2,263 3,412 4,201 4,330 4,330 Cowpath Road 1898 1909 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2%

117 1,195 2,270 3,095 3,686 3,771 3,771 SR 63 1922 1923 0% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1%

83 873 1,644 2,308 2,674 2,754 2,765 Sumneytown Pike 1949 3036 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

Limerick Generating Station J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Elapsed Time (hours) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Upstream Downstream Route Name Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Node Node Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval 114 990 1,831 2,507 2,895 2,965 2,971 E Walnut Street 1949 4531 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

483 1,661 2,710 3,433 4,033 4,786 5,518 US 422 4282 691 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

143 597 986 1,414 1,815 2,130 2,220 Bingaman Street 4284 4300 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

3 92 194 229 236 236 236 Alleghenyville Road 4301 4302 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

803 1,798 2,947 4,080 4,844 5,911 6,116 E Township Line Road 4331 4332 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

1,949 3,791 6,267 7,572 9,043 10,091 10,354 I476 4341 265 6% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%

325 1,017 1,709 2,468 3,204 3,819 4,080 Limekiln Road 4489 4488 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2%

1,544 5,866 9,916 13,966 17,888 18,271 18,271 US 30 4518 279 5% 6% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7%

141 1,255 2,826 3,803 4,335 4,584 4,584 US 30B 4608 323 0% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

3,644 8,344 12,618 15,658 17,985 19,125 19,482 I476 4609 237 11% 9% 8% 8% 8% 7% 7%

312 1,579 2,680 2,777 3,084 3,604 3,699 W Germantown Pike 4617 4061 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1%

80 755 1,959 3,191 4,020 4,020 4,020 US 30B 4629 344 0% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2%

240 504 1,265 1,577 1,969 2,196 2,275 SR 23 4648 4276 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

288 1,185 2,036 2,762 3,090 3,168 3,179 SR 2001 4689 3035 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

296 1,391 2,047 2,483 2,925 2,953 2,953 SR 113 4702 4224 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

354 903 1,553 2,081 2,805 3,417 3,695 SR 662 4725 412 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

221 987 1,805 2,622 3,451 4,288 4,643 Main Street 4727 4447 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2%

277 1,304 2,674 3,946 5,210 6,285 6,594 SR 2027 4733 1068 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

3,975 8,369 12,108 15,541 18,318 19,414 19,765 I76 4873 185 12% 9% 8% 8% 8% 7% 7%

297 1,626 3,069 4,441 5,018 5,018 5,018 Horseshoe Pike 4892 1466 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

Limerick Generating Station J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Elapsed Time (hours) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Upstream Downstream Route Name Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Node Node Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Interval 37 168 695 1,112 1,639 1,643 1,643 US 322 4935 4938 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1%

2,061 6,289 10,691 14,801 18,418 20,074 20,074 US 202 4965 3989 6% 7% 7% 7% 8% 8% 7%

229 1,007 1,394 1,793 2,117 2,519 2,611 SR 663 4977 1064 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

2,089 4,452 5,579 6,101 6,616 7,000 7,088 SR 309 4978 1868 6% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3%

282 1,349 1,629 2,406 3,362 3,789 3,789 SR 252 5016 5017 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

172 1,186 3,504 5,014 5,702 6,136 6,136 West Chester Pike 5027 4954 1% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2%

129 543 942 1,222 1,521 1,731 1,758 Upper Gulph Road 5047 5046 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

178 501 721 846 972 1,100 1,121 SR 23 5051 1277 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Limerick Generating Station J7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins Limerick Generating Station J8 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 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Limerick Generating Station J9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Limerick Generating Station J10 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 6:00 6:30 7:00 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 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

Limerick Generating Station J11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8)

Limerick Generating Station J12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 9)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10)

Limerick Generating Station J13 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%

Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 12)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12)

Limerick Generating Station J14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, 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 6:00 6:30 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Limerick Generating Station J15 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 99 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K100) 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 November 2020.

Table K1 summarizes the number of nodes by the type of control (stop sign, yield sign, pretimed signal, actuated signal, traffic and/or access control point [TCP/ACP], uncontrolled).

Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control Number of Control Type Nodes Uncontrolled 2,653 Pretimed 2 Actuated 698 Stop 385 TCP/ACP 356 Yield 35 Total: 4,129 Limerick Generating Station K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K1. LGS LinkNode Analysis Network Limerick Generating Station K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 Limerick Generating Station K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 Limerick Generating Station K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 Limerick Generating Station K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 Limerick Generating Station K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 Limerick Generating Station K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 Limerick Generating Station K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 Limerick Generating Station K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 Limerick Generating Station K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 Limerick Generating Station K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 Limerick Generating Station K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 Limerick Generating Station K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 Limerick Generating Station K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 Limerick Generating Station K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 Limerick Generating Station K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 Limerick Generating Station K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 Limerick Generating Station K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 Limerick Generating Station K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 Limerick Generating Station K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 Limerick Generating Station K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 Limerick Generating Station K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 Limerick Generating Station K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 Limerick Generating Station K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 Limerick Generating Station K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 Limerick Generating Station K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 Limerick Generating Station K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 Limerick Generating Station K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 Limerick Generating Station K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 Limerick Generating Station K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 Limerick Generating Station K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 Limerick Generating Station K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 Limerick Generating Station K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 Limerick Generating Station K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 Limerick Generating Station K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 Limerick Generating Station K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 Limerick Generating Station K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 Limerick Generating Station K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 Limerick Generating Station K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 Limerick Generating Station K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 Limerick Generating Station K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 Limerick Generating Station K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 Limerick Generating Station K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 Limerick Generating Station K44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 Limerick Generating Station K45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 Limerick Generating Station K46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 Limerick Generating Station K47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 Limerick Generating Station K48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 Limerick Generating Station K49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 Limerick Generating Station K50 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 Limerick Generating Station K51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 Limerick Generating Station K52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 Limerick Generating Station K53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 Limerick Generating Station K54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 Limerick Generating Station K55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K55. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 54 Limerick Generating Station K56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K56. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 55 Limerick Generating Station K57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K57. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 56 Limerick Generating Station K58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K58. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 57 Limerick Generating Station K59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K59. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 58 Limerick Generating Station K60 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K60. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 59 Limerick Generating Station K61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K61. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 60 Limerick Generating Station K62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K62. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 61 Limerick Generating Station K63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K63. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 62 Limerick Generating Station K64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K64. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 63 Limerick Generating Station K65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K65. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 64 Limerick Generating Station K66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K66. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 65 Limerick Generating Station K67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K67. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 66 Limerick Generating Station K68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K68. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 67 Limerick Generating Station K69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K69. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 68 Limerick Generating Station K70 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K70. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 69 Limerick Generating Station K71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K71. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 70 Limerick Generating Station K72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K72. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 71 Limerick Generating Station K73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K73. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 72 Limerick Generating Station K74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K74. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 73 Limerick Generating Station K75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K75. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 74 Limerick Generating Station K76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K76. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 75 Limerick Generating Station K77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K77. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 76 Limerick Generating Station K78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K78. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 77 Limerick Generating Station K79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K79. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 78 Limerick Generating Station K80 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K80. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 79 Limerick Generating Station K81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K81. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 80 Limerick Generating Station K82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K82. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 81 Limerick Generating Station K83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K83. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 82 Limerick Generating Station K84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K84. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 83 Limerick Generating Station K85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K85. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 84 Limerick Generating Station K86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K86. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 85 Limerick Generating Station K87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K87. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 86 Limerick Generating Station K88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K88. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 87 Limerick Generating Station K89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K89. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 88 Limerick Generating Station K90 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K90. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 89 Limerick Generating Station K91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K91. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 90 Limerick Generating Station K92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K92. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 91 Limerick Generating Station K93 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K93. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 92 Limerick Generating Station K94 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K94. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 93 Limerick Generating Station K95 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K95. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 94 Limerick Generating Station K96 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K96. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 95 Limerick Generating Station K97 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K97. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 96 Limerick Generating Station K98 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K98. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 97 Limerick Generating Station K99 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K99. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 98 Limerick Generating Station K100 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K100. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 99 Limerick Generating Station K101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX L Subarea Boundaries

L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES County: Berks Defined as the area within the following boundary: Amity Township boundary to the Amity north, east, and south. Bounded to the west by Old Airport Rd to Weavertown Rd to Geiger Rd to Monocacy Hill Rd to Limekiln Rd to Monocacy Creek Rd to Main St to the southern boundary to Amity Township.

County: Berks Boyertown Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Boyertown boundary.

County: Chester Charlestown Defined as the area within the following boundary: Charlestown Township boundary to the west, north, and east. Bounded by Interstate76 to the south.

County: Berks Colebrookdale Defined as the area within the following boundary: Colebrookdale Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Collegeville Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Collegeville boundary.

Douglass County: Berks (Berks) Defined as the area within the following boundary: Douglass Township boundary.

Douglass County: Montgomery (Montgomery) Defined as the area within the following boundary: Douglass Township boundary.

County: Berks Earl Defined as the area within the following boundary: Earl Township boundary to the north, east, and south. Bounded by Powder Mill Hollow Rd to the west.

County: Chester East Coventry Defined as the area within the following boundary: East Coventry Township boundary.

County: Chester East Nantmeal Defined as the area within the following boundary: East Nantmeal Township boundary to the north, east, and south. Bounded to the west by Route 345 to Route 401 to Marsh Rd to the southern boundary of East Nantmeal Township.

County: Chester East Pikeland Defined as the area within the following boundary: East Pikeland Township boundary.

Limerick Generating Station L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

County: Chester East Vincent Defined as the area within the following boundary: East Vincent Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Green Lane Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Green Lane boundary.

County: Montgomery Limerick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Limerick Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Lower Frederick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Lower Frederick Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Lower Pottsgrove Defined as the area within the following boundary: Lower Pottsgrove Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Lower Providence Defined as the area within the following boundary: Lower Providence Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Defined as the area within the following boundary: Lower Salford Township boundary Lower Salford to the north, west, and south. Bounded to the east by Route 113 to Old Skippack Rd to Groff Mill Rd to Salfordville Rd to the northern boundary of Lower Salford Township County: Montgomery Marlborough Defined as the area within the following boundary: Marlborough Township boundary to the south, west, and north. Bounded to the east by Route 63.

County: Montgomery New Hanover Defined as the area within the following boundary: New Hanover Township boundary.

County: Chester North Coventry Defined as the area within the following boundary: North Coventry Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Perkiomen Defined as the area within the following boundary: Perkiomen Township boundary.

County: Chester Phoenixville Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Phoenixville boundary.

Limerick Generating Station L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

County: Montgomery Pottstown Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Pottstown boundary.

County: Montgomery Royersford Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Royersford boundary.

County: Chester Schuylkill Defined as the area within the following boundary: Schuykill Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Schwenksville Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Schwenksville boundary.

County: Montgomery Skippack Defined as the area within the following boundary: Skippack Township boundary.

County: Chester South Coventry Defined as the area within the following boundary: South Coventry Township boundary.

County: Chester Spring City Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Spring City boundary.

County: Montgomery Trappe Defined as the area within the following boundary: Borough of Trappe boundary.

County: Berks Union Defined as the area within the following boundary: Union Township boundary to the north, east, and south. Bounded to the west by Main St to Shed Rd to Route 345 to the southern boundary of Union Township.

County: Montgomery Upper Frederick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Upper Frederick Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Upper Pottsgrove Defined as the area within the following boundary: Upper Pottsgrove Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Upper Providence Defined as the area within the following boundary: Upper Providence Township boundary.

County: Montgomery Upper Salford Defined as the area within the following boundary: Upper Salford Township boundary.

Limerick Generating Station L3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

County: Chester Upper Uwchlan Defined as the area within the following boundary: Upper Uwchlan Township boundary to the west, north, and east. Bounded by Interstate76 to the south.

County: Chester Uwchlan Defined as the area within the following boundary: Uwchlan Township boundary to the west, north, and east. Bounded by Interstate76 to the south.

County: Chester Warwick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Warwick Township boundary to the north, east, and south. Bounded by Route 345 to the west.

County: Berks Washington Defined as the area within the following boundary: Washington Township boundary to the south and east. Bounded by Route 100 to the west and Hoffmansville Rd to the north.

County: Chester West Pikeland Defined as the area within the following boundary: West Pikeland Township boundary to the west, north, and east. Bounded by Interstate76 to the south.

County: Montgomery West Pottsgrove Defined as the area within the following boundary: West Pottsgrove Township boundary.

County: Chester West Vincent Defined as the area within the following boundary: West Vincent Township boundary.

Limerick Generating Station L4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX M Evacuation Sensitivity Studies

M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES This appendix presents the results of a series of sensitivity analyses. These analyses are designed to identify the sensitivity of the ETE to changes in some base evacuation conditions.

M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times A sensitivity study was performed to determine whether changes in the estimated trip generation time have an effect on the ETE for the EPZ. Specifically, if the tail of the mobilization distribution were truncated (i.e., if those who responded most slowly to the 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 R03; a summer, midweek, midday, good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. Table M1 presents the results of this study.

As discussed in Section 7.3, traffic congestion persists within the EPZ for 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and 45 minutes after the ATE. Since the base trip generation time is shorter than this time, the ETE for the 100th percentile are dictated by the time needed to clear the congestion within the EPZ.

Compressing the mobilization time by one hour reduces the 100th percentile ETE by 20 minutes

- not a significant change - and has no impact on the 90th percentile ETE. When elongating the mobilization time, the 100th percentile ETE decreases by 10 minutes and the 90th percentile ETE increases by 15 minutes - not significant changes. Although counterintuitive, elongating the trip generation can reduce ETE since vehicles load onto the roadway system at a lower rate which gives the system more time to process the same number of vehicles. As a result, less congestion builds and the 100th percentile ETE decreases. As such, if the time to mobilize varies, ETE will remain about the same (+ 15 minutes at most).

M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE of changes in the percentage of people who decide to relocate from the Shadow Region. The case considered was scenario 1, region R03; a summer, midweek, midday, good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. The movement of people in the Shadow Region has the potential to impede vehicles evacuating from an evacuation region within the EPZ. Refer to Sections 3.2 and 7.1 for additional information on population within the Shadow Region.

Table M2 presents the evacuation time estimates for each of the cases considered. The results show that reducing the shadow evacuation to 0% reduces the 90th and 100th percentile ETE by 10 minutes and 35 minutes, respectively. Tripling the shadow percentage increases the ETE by 35 for both the 90th and 100th percentiles - a significant change. Full evacuation of the Shadow Region increases the ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 15 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 35 minutes for the 90th and 100th percentiles, respectively - also a significant change.

As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figures 73 through 78, there is pronounced congestion in the Shadow Region, especially in King of Prussia, Norristown, Birdsboro and East Greenville. The Limerick Generating Station M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

additional evacuating shadow vehicles intensifies this congestion and significantly increases ETE.

Limiting shadow evacuation could help to reduce ETE.

M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE of changes in the permanent resident population within the study area (EPZ plus Shadow Region). As population in the study area changes over time, the time required to evacuate the public may increase, decrease, or remain the same. Since the ETE is related to the demand to capacity ratio present within the study area, changes in population will cause the demand side of the equation to change and could impact ETE.

As per the NRCs response to the Emergency Planning Frequently Asked Question (EPFAQ) 2013001, the ETE population sensitivity study must be conducted to determine what percentage increase in permanent resident population causes an increase in the 90th percentile ETE of 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. The sensitivity study must use the scenario with the longest 90th percentile ETE (excluding the roadway impact scenario and the special event scenario if it is a one day per year special event).

Thus, the sensitivity study was conducted using the following planning assumptions:

1. The percent change in population within the study area was increased by up to 12%.

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 remained fixed (as presented in Appendix K); the presence of future proposed roadway changes and/or highway capacity improvements were not considered.

3. The study was performed for the 2Mile Region (R01), the 5Mile Region (R02) and the entire EPZ (R03).

4. The scenario (excluding roadway impact and special event) which yielded the highest 90th percentile ETE values for the entire EPZ was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 8 - Winter, Midweek, Midday with Heavy Snow).

Table M3 presents the results of the sensitivity study.Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and NUREG/CR7002 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 Region, 5Mile Region or entire EPZ) to increase by 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. All the base ETE values are greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months ; thus, 25% of these base ETE is always greater than 30 minutes. Therefore, 30 minutes is the lesser and is the criterion for updating.

Those percent population changes which result in the longest 90th percentile ETE change greater than or equal to 30 minutes are highlighted in red in Table M3 - a 12% or greater increase in the EPZ permanent resident population. Constellation will have to estimate the EPZ population on an annual basis. If the EPZ population increases by 12% or more between decennial censuses, an updated ETE analysis will be needed.

Limerick Generating Station M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 15 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE by up to 20 minutes (Section M.1). Public outreach encouraging evacuees to mobilize more quickly or in a timely manner could slightly impact the ETE.

Increased shadow evacuation can impact the 90th percentile ETE by up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 15 minutes (Section M.2). Public outreach could be considered to inform those people within the EPZ (and potentially beyond the EPZ) that if they are not advised to evacuate, they should not.

Population growth results in more evacuating vehicles, which could 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.

Limerick Generating Station M3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Trip Generation Period 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months and 45 minutes 4:45 6:25 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months and 45 minutes (Base) 4:45 6:45 5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months and 45 minutes 5:00 6:35 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Percent Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Evacuating Shadow Shadow Vehicles1 90th Percentile 100th Percentile Evacuation 0 0 4:35 6:10 20 (Base) 33,470 4:45 6:45 40 65,346 5:05 7:15 60 98,816 5:20 7:20 80 132,285 5:40 7:45 100 164,161 6:00 8:20 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Shadow Population Change Base Permanent Resident 10% 11% 12%

Population 374,214 411,635 415,378 419,120 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 10% 11% 12%

2MILE 3:55 3:55 3:55 4:00 5MILE 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 Full EPZ 6:20 6:45 6:45 6:50 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100th Percentile Population Change Region Base 10% 11% 12%

2MILE 6:25 6:25 6:25 6:25 5MILE 6:25 6:50 6:50 6:50 Full EPZ 8:35 9:05 9:15 9:15 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.

Limerick 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 Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 1.0 Introduction

a. The emergency planning zone (EPZ) and surrounding area is Yes Section 1 described.

b. A map is included that identifies primary features of the site Yes Figures 11, 31, 61 including major roadways, significant topographical features, boundaries of counties, and population centers within the EPZ.

c. A comparison of the current and previous ETE is provided Yes Table 13 including information similar to that identified in Table 11, ETE Comparison.

1.1 Approach

a. The general approach is described in the report as outlined Yes Section 1.1, Section 1.3, Appendix D, in Section 1.1, Approach. Table 11 1.2 Assumptions

a. Assumptions consistent with Table 12, General Yes Section 2 Assumptions, of NUREG/CR7002 are provided and include the basis to support use.

1.3 Scenario Development

a. The scenarios in Table 13, Evacuation Scenarios, are Yes Section 6, Table 62 developed for the ETE analysis. A reason is provided for use of other scenarios or for not evaluating specific scenarios.

Limerick Generating Station N1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 1.4 Evacuation Planning Areas

a. A map of the EPZ with emergency response planning areas Yes Figure 31, Figure 61 (ERPAs) is included.

1.4.1 Keyhole Evacuation

a. A table similar to Table 14 Evacuation Areas for a Keyhole Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1 Evacuation, is provided identifying the ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

1.4.2 Staged Evacuation

a. The approach used in development of a staged evacuation is Yes Section 7.2 discussed.

b. A table similar to Table 15, Evacuation Areas for a Staged Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1 Evacuation, is provided for staged evacuations identifying the ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

2.0 Demand Estimation

a. Demand estimation is developed for the four population Yes Section 3 groups (permanent residents of the EPZ, transients, special facilities, and schools).

2.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. The U.S. Census is the source of the population values, or Yes Section 3.1 another credible source is provided.

b. The availability date of the census data is provided. Yes Section 3.1

c. Population values are adjusted as necessary for growth to Yes N/A 2020 used as the base year of the reflect population estimates to the year of the ETE. analysis Limerick Generating Station N2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. A sector diagram, similar to Figure 21, Population by Yes Figure 32 Sector, is included showing the population distribution for permanent residents.

2.1.1 Permanent Residents with Vehicles

a. The persons per vehicle value is between 1 and 3 or Yes Section 3.1 justification is provided for other values.

2.1.2 Transient Population

a. A list of facilities that attract transient populations is Yes Section 3.3, Table E5 and Table E6 included, and peak and average attendance for these facilities is listed. The source of information used to develop attendance values is provided.

b. Major employers are listed. Yes Section 3.4, Table E4

c. The average population during the season is used, itemized Yes Table 34, Table 35 and Appendix E and totaled for each scenario. itemize the peak transient population and employee estimates. These estimates are multiplied by the scenario specific percentages provided in Table 63 to estimate average transient population by scenario - see Table 64.

d. The percentage of permanent residents assumed to be at Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 facilities is estimated.

e. The number of people per vehicle is provided. Numbers may Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 vary by scenario, and if so, reasons for the variation are discussed.

Limerick Generating Station N3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

f. A sector diagram is included, similar to Figure 21, Yes Figure 36 (transients) and Figure 38 Population by Sector, is included showing the population (employees) distribution for the transient population.

2.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. The methodology (e.g., surveys, registration programs) used Yes Section 3.6 to determine the number of transit dependent residents is discussed.

b. The State and local evacuation plans for transit dependent Yes Section 8.1 residents are used in the analysis.

c. The methodology used to determine the number of people Yes Section 3.9 with disabilities and those with access and functional needs who may need assistance and do not reside in special facilities is provided. Data from local/county registration programs are used in the estimate.

d. Capacities are provided for all types of transportation Yes Item 3 of Section 2.4 resources. Bus seating capacity of 50 percent is used or justification is provided for higher values.

e. An estimate of the transit dependent population is provided. Yes Section 3.6, Table 37, Table 311

f. A summary table showing the total number of buses, Yes Table 312, Table 81 ambulances, or other transport assumed available to support evacuation is provided. The quantification of resources is detailed enough to ensure that double counting has not occurred.

Limerick Generating Station N4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 2.3 Special Facility Residents

a. Special facilities, including the type of facility, location, and Yes Table E3 lists all medical facilities by average population, are listed. Special facility staff is facility name, location, and average included in the total special facility population. population. Table E8 lists all correctional facilities by facility name, location, and average population.

b. The method of obtaining special facility data is discussed. Yes Section 3.5 and Section 3.9

c. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles assumed Yes Table 36 available to support the evacuation of the facility is provided.

d. The logistics for mobilizing specially trained staff (e.g., Yes Section 8.1 - under Evacuation of medical support or security support for prisons, jails, and Medical Facilities and Correctional other correctional facilities) are discussed when appropriate. Facilities.

2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student Yes Table 38, Table E1, Table E2, Section population, and transportation resources required to 3.7 support the evacuation, is provided. The source of this information should be identified.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle schools Yes Section 3.7 are based on 100 percent of the school capacity.

c. The estimate of high school students who will use personal Yes Section 3.7 vehicle to evacuate is provided and a basis for the values used is given.

d. The need for return trips is identified. Yes Section 8.1 Limerick Generating Station N5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 2.5 Other Demand Estimate Considerations 2.5.1 Special Events

a. A complete list of special events is provided including Yes Section 3.8 information on the population, estimated duration, and season of the event.

b. The special event that encompasses the peak transient Yes Section 3.8 population is analyzed in the ETE.

c. The percentage of permanent residents attending the event Yes Section 3.8 is estimated.

2.5.2 Shadow Evacuation

a. A shadow evacuation of 20 percent is included consistent Yes Item 7 of Section 2.2, Figure 21 and with the approach outlined in Section 2.5.2, Shadow Figure 71, Section 3.2 Evacuation.

b. Population estimates for the shadow evacuation in the Yes Section 3.2, Table 33, Figure 34 shadow region beyond the EPZ are provided by sector.

c. The loading of the shadow evacuation onto the roadway Yes Section 5 - Table 59 (footnote) network is consistent with the trip generation time generated for the permanent resident population.

2.5.3 Background and Pass Through Traffic

a. The volume of background traffic and passthrough traffic is Yes Section 3.11 and Section 3.12 based on the average daytime traffic. Values may be reduced for nighttime scenarios.

Limerick Generating Station N6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. The method of reducing background and passthrough traffic Yes Section 2.2 - Assumptions 10 and 12 is described. Section 2.5 Section 3.11 and Section 3.12 Table 63 - External Through Traffic footnote

c. Passthrough traffic is assumed to have stopped entering the Yes Section 2.5 EPZ about two (2) hours after the initial notification.

2.6 Summary of Demand Estimation

a. A summary table is provided that identifies the total Yes Table 311, Table 312, and Table 64 populations and total vehicles used in the analysis for permanent residents, transients, transit dependent residents, special facilities, schools, shadow population, and passthrough demand in each scenario.

3.0 Roadway Capacity

a. The method(s) used to assess roadway capacity is discussed. Yes Section 4 3.1 Roadway Characteristics

a. The process for gathering roadway characteristic data is Yes Section 1.3, Appendix D described including the types of information gathered and how it is used in the analysis.

b. Legible maps are provided that identify nodes and links of Yes Appendix K the modeled roadway network similar to Figure A1, Roadway Network Identifying Nodes and Links, and Figure A2, Grid Map Showing Detailed Nodes and Links.

Limerick Generating Station N7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 3.2 Model Approach

a. The approach used to calculate the roadway capacity for the Yes Section 4 transportation network is described in detail, and the description identifies factors that are expressly used in the modeling.

b. Route assignment follows expected evacuation routes and Yes Appendix B and Appendix C traffic volumes.

c. A basis is provided for static route choices if used to assign N/A Static route choices are not used to evacuation routes. assign evacuation routes. Dynamic traffic assignment is used.

d. Dynamic traffic assignment models are described including Yes Appendix B and Appendix C calibration of the route assignment.

3.3 Intersection Control

a. A list that includes the total numbers of intersections Yes Table K1 modeled that are unsignalized, signalized, or manned by response personnel is provided.

b. The use of signal cycle timing, including adjustments for Yes Section 4, Appendix G manned traffic control, is discussed.

3.4 Adverse Weather

a. The adverse weather conditions are identified. Yes Assumptions 2 and 3 of Section 2.6

b. The speed and capacity reduction factors identified in Table Yes Table 22 31, Weather Capacity Factors, are used or a basis is 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.

Limerick Generating Station N8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. The effect of adverse weather on mobilization is considered Yes Table 22 and assumptions for snow removal on streets and driveways are identified, when applicable.

4.0 Development of Evacuation Times 4.1 Traffic Simulation Models

a. General information about the traffic simulation model used Yes Section 1.3, Table 13, Appendix B, in the analysis is provided. Appendix C

b. If a traffic simulation model is not used to perform the ETE N/A Not applicable since a traffic simulation calculation, sufficient detail is provided to validate the model was used.

analytical approach used.

4.2 Traffic Simulation Model Input

a. Traffic simulation model assumptions and a representative Yes Section 2, Appendix J set of model inputs are provided.

b. The number of origin nodes and method for distributing Yes Appendix J, Appendix C vehicles among the origin nodes are described.

c. A glossary of terms is provided for the key performance Yes Appendix A 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 Limerick Generating Station N9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. The trip generation time for each population group is Yes Section 5 developed from sitespecific information.

e. The methods used to reduce uncertainty when developing Yes Appendix F trip generation times are discussed, if applicable.

4.3.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. Permanent residents are assumed to evacuate from their Yes Section 5 discusses trip generation for homes but are not assumed to be at home at all times. Trip households with and without returning generation time includes the assumption that a percentage commuters. Table 63 presents the of residents will need to return home before evacuating. percentage of households with returning commuters and the percentage of households either without returning commuters or with no commuters. Appendix F presents the percent households who will await the return of commuters. Section 2.3, Assumption 2 and 3

b. The trip generation time accounts for the time and method Yes Section 5 to notify transients at various locations.

c. The trip generation time accounts for transients potentially Yes Section 5, Figure 51 returning to hotels before evacuating.

d. The effect of public transportation resources used during Yes Section 3.8 special events where a large number of transients are Public Transportation is not provided expected is considered. for the special event and was therefore not considered.

Limerick Generating Station N10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.3.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. If available, existing and approved plans and bus routes are N/A Established bus routes do not exist.

used in the ETE analysis.

Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit Dependent People

b. The means of evacuating ambulatory and nonambulatory Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit residents are discussed. Dependent People, 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 expected means of travel to the pickup point, is described.

e. The number of bus stops and time needed to load Yes Section 8.1, Table 85 through Table 87 passengers are discussed.

f. A map of bus routes is included. Yes Figure 102 through Figure 104

g. The trip generation time for nonambulatory persons Yes Section 8.2 including the time to mobilize ambulances or special vehicles, time to drive to the home of residents, time to load, and time to drive out of the EPZ, is provided.

h. Information is provided to support analysis of return trips, if Yes Section 8.1 and Section 8.2 necessary.

4.3.3 Special Facilities

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 88 provided. through Table 810 Limerick Generating Station N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. The logistics of evacuating wheelchair and bed bound Yes Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 8 residents are discussed. 10

c. Time for loading of residents is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 810

d. Information is provided that indicates whether the Yes Section 8.1 evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

e. Discussion is provided on whether special facility residents Yes Section 8.1 are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

f. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1 elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.3.4 Schools

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 provided. through Table 84

b. Time for loading of students is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 84

c. Information is provided that indicates whether the Yes Section 8.1 evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

d. If used, reception centers should be identified. A discussion Yes Section 8.1, Table 105 is provided on whether students are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

Limerick Generating Station N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

e. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 84 elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.4 Stochastic Model Runs

a. The number of simulation runs needed to produce average N/A DYNEV does not rely on simulation results is discussed. averages or random seeds for statistical

b. If one run of a single random seed is used to produce each N/A confidence. For DYNEV/DTRAD, it is a ETE result, the report includes a sensitivity study on the 90 mesoscopic simulation and uses percent and 100 percent ETE using 10 different random dynamic traffic assignment model to seeds for evacuation of the full EPZ under Summer, obtain the "average" (stable) network Midweek, Daytime, Normal Weather conditions. work flow distribution. This is different from microscopic simulation, which is montecarlo random sampling by nature relying on different seeds to establish statistical confidence. Refer to Appendix B for more details 4.5 Model Boundaries

a. The method used to establish the simulation model Yes Section 4.5 boundaries is discussed.

b. Significant capacity reductions or population centers that Yes Section 4.5 may influence the ETE and that are located beyond the evacuation area or shadow region are identified and included in the model, if needed.

Limerick Generating Station N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.6 Traffic Simulation Model Output

a. A discussion of whether the traffic simulation model used Yes Appendix B must be in equilibration prior to calculating the ETE is provided.

b. The minimum following model outputs for evacuation of the Yes 1. Appendix J, Table J2 entire EPZ are provided to support review: 2. Table J2

1. Evacuee average travel distance and time. 3. Table J4

2. Evacuee average delay time. 4. None and 0%. 100 percent ETE is

3. Number of vehicles arriving at each destination node. based on the time the last

4. Total number and percentage of evacuee vehicles not vehicle exits the evacuation exiting the EPZ. zone

5. A plot that provides both the mobilization curve and 5. Figures J2 through J15 (one evacuation curve identifying the cumulative percentage plot for each scenario of evacuees who have mobilized and exited the EPZ. considered)

6. Average speed for each major evacuation route that exits 6. Table J3 the EPZ.

c. Color coded roadway maps are provided for various times Yes Figure 73 through Figure 78 (e.g., at 2, 4, 6 hrs.) during a full EPZ evacuation scenario, identifying areas where congestion exists.

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.

Limerick Generating Station N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

c. The ETE for 100 percent of the general public includes all Yes Section 5.4.1 - truncating survey data members of the general public. Any reductions or truncated to eliminate statistical outliers data is explained. Table 72 - 100th percentile ETE for general population

d. Tables are provided for the 90 and 100 percent ETEs similar Yes Table 73 and Table 74 to Table 43, ETEs for a Staged Evacuation, and Table 44, ETEs for a Keyhole Evacuation.

e. ETEs are provided for the 100 percent evacuation of special Yes Section 8 facilities, transit dependent, and school populations.

5.0 Other Considerations 5.1 Development of Traffic Control Plans

a. Information that responsible authorities have approved the Yes Section 9, Appendix G traffic control plan used in the analysis are discussed.

b. Adjustments or additions to the traffic control plan that Yes Section 9, Appendix G affect the ETE is provided.

5.2 Enhancements in Evacuation Time

a. The results of assessments for enhancing evacuations are Yes Appendix M provided.

5.3 State and Local Review

a. A list of agencies contacted is provided and the extent of Yes Table 11 interaction with these agencies is discussed.

Limerick Generating Station N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. Information is provided on any unresolved issues that may Yes Results of the ETE study were formally affect the ETE. presented to state and local agencies at the final project meeting. Comments on the draft report were provided and were addressed in the final report.

There are no unresolved issues.

5.4 Reviews and Updates

a. The criteria for when an updated ETE analysis is required to Yes Appendix M, Section M.3 be performed and submitted to the NRC is discussed.

5.4.1 Extreme Conditions

a. The updated ETE analysis reflects the impact of EPZ N/A This ETE is being updated as a result of conditions not adequately reflected in the scenario the availability of US Census Bureau variations. decennial census data.

5.5 Reception Centers and Congregate Care Center

a. A map of congregate care centers and reception centers is Yes Figure 105 provided.

Limerick Generating Station N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ML22269A413

Text

SUMMARY

Description:

Description:

Description:

5.1 Background

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Navigation menu

Search