ML22269A414

Attachment 7 - LaSalle County Station-Development of Evacuation Time Estimates

ML22269A414
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	06/15/2022
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: ML22269A414 (360)

Text

LaSalle County 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 June 15, 2022 Final Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1239

Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The LaSalle County Generating Station Location ....................................................................... 13 1.3 Preliminary Activities ................................................................................................................. 13 1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study .............................................................................................. 16 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS............................................................................................. 21 2.1 Data Estimates ........................................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Methodological Assumptions .................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times .......................................................................................... 23 2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions ................................................................................................ 24 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 Population Demand....................................................................................... 34 3.6 Schools and Preschools/Daycares Population Demand............................................................. 35 3.7 Illinois National Guard Training Center ...................................................................................... 35 3.8 Transit Dependent Population ................................................................................................... 36 3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................................. 37 3.10 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 38 3.11 External Traffic ........................................................................................................................... 39 3.12 Background Traffic ..................................................................................................................... 39 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 LAS 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 ..................................................................................................... 53 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ................................................... 54 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution ...................................................................... 55 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers .............................................................................................................. 56 5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation ................................................................................... 58 LaSalle County Generating Station i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas ................................................. 510 6 EVACUATION CASES ........................................................................................................................... 61 7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) .......................................................... 71 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation ......................................................................... 71 7.2 Staged Evacuation ...................................................................................................................... 71 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation ..................................................................... 72 7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................ 74 7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results .................................................................................... 74 7.6 Staged Evacuation Results ......................................................................................................... 76 7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ................................................................................................... 76 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES ................................. 81 8.1 ETEs for Schools, Preschools/Daycares, Transit Dependent People, and Medical Facilities ................................................................................ 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ................................................................. 87 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ................................................................................................... 91 9.1 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 92 9.2 Additional Considerations .......................................................................................................... 92 10 EVACUATION ROUTES AND RECEPTION CENTERS ........................................................................... 101 10.1 Evacuation Routes.................................................................................................................... 101 10.2 Reception Centers .................................................................................................................... 102 A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS .................................................................................. A1 APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................................................B0 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL ......................................................... B1 B.1 Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model .................................................... B1 B.2 Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD .............................................................. B1 B.2.1 DTRAD Description ............................................................................................................. B2 B.2.2 Network Equilibrium .......................................................................................................... B4 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL ............................................................................................... C1 C.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. C2 C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram ................................................................................................. C2 C.1.2 The Simulation Model ........................................................................................................ C2 C.1.3 Lane Assignment ................................................................................................................ C6 C.2 Implementation ......................................................................................................................... C6 C.2.1 Computational Procedure .................................................................................................. C6 C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD) ..................................................... C7 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE .............................................................................. D1 E. 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 LaSalle County Generating Station ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.3.3 Time Distribution Results ....................................................................................................... F5 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Manual Traffic Control .............................................................................................................. G1 G.2 Analysis of Key TACP Locations ................................................................................................. G1 H. EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. SubAREA BOUNDARIES ..................................................................................................................... L1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ................................................................................................. M1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................ M1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate ................. M1 M.3 Effect of Changes in Permanent Resident Population ............................................................. M2 M.4 Effect of Changes in SubAreas for Region R17 ....................................................................... M3 M.5 Enhancements in Evacuation Time .......................................................................................... M3 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped LaSalle County Generating Station iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Figures Figure 11. LAS Site Location .................................................................................................................... 112 Figure 12. LAS LinkNode Analysis Network ........................................................................................... 113 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ........................................................................................ 29 Figure 31. SubAreas Comprising the LAS EPZ ........................................................................................ 318 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................ 319 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 320 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 321 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 322 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 323 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 324 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 325 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 326 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 410 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................ 516 Figure 52. Time Distributions for Evacuation Mobilization Activities.................................................... 517 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution ...................................................... 518 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 519 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5Mile Region .................................................................................................... 520 Figure 61. SubAreas Comprising the LAS EPZ .......................................................................................... 68 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ...................................................................................... 714 Figure 72. LAS Shadow Region ................................................................................................................ 715 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 45 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ..................................... 716 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................. 717 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................................... 718 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 50 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................. 719 Figure 77. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 ....................................................... 720 Figure 78. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 ....................................................... 720 Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 ....................................................... 721 Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 ..................................................... 721 Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 ..................................................... 722 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 ..................................................... 722 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 ..................................................... 723 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 ..................................................... 723 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 ..................................................... 724 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 ................................................... 724 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 ................................................... 725 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 ................................................... 725 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 ................................................... 726 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 ................................................... 726 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ....................................................................... 817 Figure 101. Evacuation Routes .............................................................................................................. 106 Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................................... 107 Figure 103. Reception Communities and Reception Centers ................................................................ 108 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B5 LaSalle County Generating Station iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ......................................................................................... C12 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ......................................................................................................... C13 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ............................................................................ C13 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) .................................................... C14 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools and Preschools/Daycares within the LAS EPZ............................................................. E5 Figure E2. Medical Facilities within the LAS EPZ ....................................................................................... E6 Figure E3. Major Employers within the LAS EPZ ....................................................................................... E7 Figure E4. Recreational Areas and Military Training Center within the LAS EPZ ...................................... E8 Figure F1. Household Size in the Study Area ............................................................................................ F7 Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability ................................................................................................. F7 Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households ....................................................................... F8 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 5 to 8+ Person Households ..................................................................... F8 Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference ......................................................................................... F9 Figure F6. Commuters in Households in the Study Area .......................................................................... F9 Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the Study Area ........................................................................................ F10 Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic ......................................................... F10 Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs .......................................................... F11 Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation ............................................................................ F11 Figure F11. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Evacuating ...................... F12 Figure F12. Study Area Evacuation Destinations .................................................................................... F12 Figure F13. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals .......................................................................... F13 Figure F14. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work ........................................................................... F13 Figure F15. Time to Commute Home from Work ................................................................................... F14 Figure F16. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation ................................................................................ F14 Figure F17. Time to Remove Snow from Driveway ............................................................................... F15 Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Posts for the LAS EPZ .................................................................. G4 Figure H1. Region R01 ............................................................................................................................. H3 Figure H2. Region R02 ............................................................................................................................. H4 Figure H3. Region R03 ............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H4. Region R04 ............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H5. Region R05 ............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H6. Region R06 ............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H7. Region R07 ............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H8. Region R08 ........................................................................................................................... H10 Figure H9. Region R09 ........................................................................................................................... H11 Figure H10. Region R10 ......................................................................................................................... H12 Figure H11. Region R11 ......................................................................................................................... H13 Figure H12. Region R12 ......................................................................................................................... H14 Figure H13. Region R13 ......................................................................................................................... H15 Figure H14. Region R14 ......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H15. Region R15 ......................................................................................................................... H17 Figure H16. Region R16 ......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H17. Region R17 ......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure H18. Region R18 ......................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H19. Region R19 ......................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H20. Region R20 ......................................................................................................................... H22 LaSalle County Generating Station v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 ......................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H22. Region R22 ......................................................................................................................... H24 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins.......................................................................................................... J7 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) ....................................................................................................................... J8 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) ........................................................................................................................................ J8 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3) ....................................................................................................................... J9 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) ........................................................................................................................................ J9 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5) ....................................................................................................... J10 Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) ..................................................................................................................... J10 Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 7) ................................................................................................................... J11 Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8).......................................................................................................................... J11 Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9) ..................................................................................................................... J12 Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10) ................................................................................................................. J12 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11) ....................................................................................................................... J13 Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12) .................................................................................................... J13 Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13) ............................................................................. J14 Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) ...................................................................................... J14 Figure K1. LAS 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 LaSalle County Generating Station vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 ................................................................................ K18 Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 ................................................................................ K19 Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 ................................................................................ K20 Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 ................................................................................ K21 Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 ................................................................................ K22 Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 ................................................................................ K23 Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 ................................................................................ K24 Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 ................................................................................ K25 Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 ................................................................................ K26 Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 ................................................................................ K27 Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 ................................................................................ K28 Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 ................................................................................ K29 Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 ................................................................................ K30 Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 ................................................................................ K31 Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 ................................................................................ K32 Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 ................................................................................ K33 Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 ................................................................................ K34 Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 ................................................................................ K35 Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 ................................................................................ K36 Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 ................................................................................ K37 Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 ................................................................................ K38 Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 ................................................................................ K39 Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 ................................................................................ K40 Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 ................................................................................ K41 Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 ................................................................................ K42 Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ................................................................................ K43 Figure M1. Region R23 ........................................................................................................................... M6 LaSalle County Generating Station vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Tables Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction ............................................................................................................ 18 Table 12. Highway Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 18 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons ............................................................................................................. 19 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions ............................................................................................... 28 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather ................................................................................. 28 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ...................................................................................... 311 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by SubArea ................................................... 311 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ............................................................................ 312 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ...................................................................... 312 Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ............................ 313 Table 36. Medical Facility Population Estimates .................................................................................... 313 Table 37. School Population Demand Estimates .................................................................................... 314 Table 38. Preschool/Daycare Population Demand Estimates ................................................................ 314 Table 39. TransitDependent Population Estimates .............................................................................. 315 Table 310. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary ............................................................ 315 Table 311. LAS EPZ External Traffic ........................................................................................................ 315 Table 312. Summary of Population Demand ......................................................................................... 316 Table 313. Summary of Vehicle Demand ............................................................................................... 317 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities .............................................................................. 511 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 511 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................. 511 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................ 512 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate ..................................................... 512 Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow ...................................................... 512 Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 513 Table 58. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 513 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation .................... 514 Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ........................ 515 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions ........................................................................................... 64 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions ............................................................................................... 65 Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................. 66 Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario .................................................................................................. 67 Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ............................ 79 Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ........................ 710 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region ......................... 711 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region ....................... 712 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions ......................................................................................... 713 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................... 89 Table 82. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ........................ 810 Table 83. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ..................... 811 Table 84. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow............................ 812 Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ........................................... 813 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ........................................ 813 Table 87. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow............................................... 814 LaSalle County Generating Station viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ................................................ 814 Table 89. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow ............................................. 815 Table 810. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow.................................................. 815 Table 811. Access and/or Functional Needs Evacuation Time Estimates .............................................. 816 Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 103 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ......................................................................................................... 104 Table 103. Reception Centers for Schools and Preschools/Daycares.................................................... 105 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C8 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ........................................................................... C9 Table C3. Glossary ..................................................................................................................................C10 Table E1. Schools within the EPZ .............................................................................................................. E2 Table E2. Preschools and Daycares within the EPZ .................................................................................. E2 Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ............................................................................................... E3 Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E3 Table E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E4 Table E6. Military Training Center within the EPZ .................................................................................... E4 Table F1. LaSalle County Generating Station Demographic Survey Sampling Plan and Results ......................................................................................................................... F6 Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations ........................................................................... G3 Table G2. ETE with No MTC .................................................................................................................... G3 Table H1. Percent of SubArea Population Evacuating for Each Region ................................................ H2 Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input ................................................................................................ J2 Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03) ............................ J3 Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1)................................................................................... 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. Evacuation Time Estimates for Variation with Population Change ....................................... M4 Table M4. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ........................ M5 Table M5.Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ....................... M5 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist .................................................................................................. N1 LaSalle County Generating Station ix KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ACRONYM LIST Table 1. Acronym List ACRONYM DEFINITION AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic ANS Alert and Notification systems ASLB Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ATE Advisory to Evacuate ATIS Automated Traveler Information Systems BFFS Base Free Flow Speed CMAS Commercial Mobile Alert System CR County Road COVID19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 D Destination DDHV Directional Design Hourly Volume DHV Design Hour Volume DMS Dynamic Message Sign DTA Dynamic Traffic Assignment DTRAD Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution DYNEV Dynamic Network Evacuation EAS Emergency Alert System EB Eastbound EPZ Emergency Planning Zone EPFAQ Emergency Planning Frequently Asked Question ETA Estimated Time of Arrival ETE Evacuation Time Estimate EVAN Evacuation Animator FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FFS Free Flow Speed FHWA Federal Highway Administration GIS Geographic Information System HAR Highway Advisory Radio HCM Highway Capacity Manual HH Household I Interstate IL Illinois State Route IPAWS Integrated Public Awareness System ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems LAS LaSalle County Generating Station LOS Level of Service MOE Measures of Effectiveness mph Miles Per Hour MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices MTC Manual Traffic Control LaSalle County Generating Station AL1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ACRONYM DEFINITION NB Northbound NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission O Origin OD OriginDestination ORO Offsite Response Organization PAR Protective Action Recommendation pcphpl passenger car per hour per lane PSL PathSizeLogit QDF Queue Discharge Flow RC Reception Center SB Southbound SV Service Volume TA Traffic Assignment TACP Traffic and Access Control Post TD Trip Distribution TI Time Interval TMP Traffic Management Plan UNITES Unified Transportation Engineering System USDOT United States Department of Transportation US US Highway vph Vehicles Per Hour vpm Vehicles Per Minute WB Westbound LaSalle County Generating Station AL2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS) site located in Brookfield Township, Illinois. 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.

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

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

Project Activities This project began in October, 2020 and extended over a period of about 20 months. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

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

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

Obtained the estimates of employees who reside outside the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ1) and commute to work within the EPZ from Constellation and supplemented by the old data (confirmed by counties) from the previous study, where data was not available.

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

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

Designed and conducted an online demographic survey of residents within the study area (EPZ plus Shadow Region), to gather focused data needed for this ETE study, that were not contained within the census database. The survey instrument was reviewed 1

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

LaSalle County Generating Station ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

and modified by the licensee and offsite response organization (ORO) personnel prior to the survey. In addition, responses from zip codes within the LAS study area collected during the Braidwood and Dresden Generating Stations ETE demographic surveys was reviewed and utilized, as the number of responses received during the LAS survey was significantly less than the sampling plan (see Section F.2 in Appendix F).

A data needs matrix (requesting data) was provided to Constellation and the OROs at the kickoff meeting. The data for major employers, transients, and special facilities (schools, preschools/daycares, medical facilities) were obtained from Constellation, the county emergency management agencies, the Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA), supplemented by internet searches, aerial imagery for parking spaces, and phone calls to individual facilities where data was missing. If updated information was not provided and could not be obtained from online sources/phone calls directly to the facility, data gathered in the previous ETE study was assumed still accurate for this study.

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 study area residents.

Following federal guidelines, the existing 13 SubAreas within the EPZ were grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 22 Evacuation Regions (numbered R01 through R22)

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 scenario, Seneca Shipyard Days, was considered. One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane was closed on Interstate (I)80 westbound from approximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) to approximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange - Exit 90

- with Illinois State Route 23 (IL 23) for the duration of the evacuation.

Staged evacuation was considered for those regions where 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 LAS 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 LaSalle County Generating Station ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

exits the impacted Region, that represent upper bound estimates. This conservative Planning Basis is applicable for all initiating events.

If the emergency occurs while schools or preschools/daycares are in session, the ETE study assumes that the school/preschool/daycare children will be evacuated by bus directly to school reception centers located outside the EPZ and will be subsequently picked up by parents or legal guardians. No children at these facilities will be picked up by parents or relatives prior to the arrival of the buses. The ETE for children at these facilities are calculated separately.

Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either rideshare with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided by the counties in the EPZ. Those in special facilities will likewise be evacuated by bus, wheelchair transport vehicle, or ambulance, as required. Separate ETE are calculated for the transit dependent evacuees, for access and/or functional needs population, and for those evacuated from medical facilities.

Attended final virtual meeting with Constellation personnel and the OROs to present final results of the study.

Computation of ETE A total of 308 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 22 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 14 Evacuation Scenarios (22 x 14 =308). Separate ETE are calculated for transitdependent evacuees, including schoolchildren for applicable scenarios.

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

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

Staged evacuation is considered wherein those people within the 2Mile Region evacuate immediately, while those beyond 2 miles, but within the EPZ, shelterinplace. Once 90% of the 2Mile Region is evacuated, those people between 2Mile Region and 5 miles begin to evacuate.

As per federal guidance, 20% of people beyond the 2Mile Region will evacuate (non compliance) even though they are advised to shelterinplace, during a staged evacuation.

LaSalle County Generating Station ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 has been identified as the value that should be considered when making protective action decisions because the 100th percentile ETE are prolonged by those relatively few people who take longer to mobilize. This is referred to as the evacuation tail in Section 4.0 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Traffic Management This study reviewed, modeled and analyzed the existing comprehensive traffic management plans provided in the sitespecific volume for LAS IPRA and LaSalleTraffic and Access Control Map (IPRAMap A). Due to the limited traffic congestion within the EPZ, no additional traffic and access control posts (TACP) have been identified as a result of this study. Refer to Section 9 and Appendix G.

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

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

Table 61 defines each of the 22 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of SubArea.

Table 62 defines the 14 Evacuation Scenarios.

Table 71 and Table 72 are compilations of ETE for the general population. These data are the times needed to clear the indicated regions of 90% and 100% of the population occupying these regions, respectively. These computed ETE include consideration of mobilization time and of estimated voluntary evacuations from other regions within the EPZ and from the Shadow Region. These tables also include ETE results for staged evacuation on residents beyond the 2Mile Region, the ETE for Regions R02, R04, and R05 are compared to Regions R20, R21 and R22, respectively, in Table 71 and Table 72.

LaSalle County Generating Station ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Table 82 presents the ETE for the children at schools and preschools/daycares in good weather.

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

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

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

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

Figure H6 presents an example of an Evacuation Region (Region R06) to be evacuated under the circumstances defined in Table 61. Maps of all regions are provided in Appendix H.

Conclusions General population ETE were computed for 308 unique cases - a combination of 22 unique Evacuation Regions and 14 unique Evacuation Scenarios. Tables 71 and 72 document these ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles. The 90th percentile ETE range from 2:00 (hr:min) to 3:45. The 100th percentile ETE range from 4:30 to 5:55 and are dictated by trip mobilization of residents (i.e., the time it takes to prepare to evacuate plus the time to travel to the EPZ boundary).

The comparison of Table 71 and 72 indicate that the 100th percentile ETE are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile ETE. This is the result of the long trip generation tail of the evacuation curve caused by those evacuees who take longer to mobilize and not congestion within the EPZ. See Figures 77 through 720.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicate that a staged evacuation provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2Mile Region and unnecessarily delays the evacuation of those beyond the 2Mile Region (compare Regions R02, R04, and R05 with Regions R20, R21, and R22, respectively, in Tables 71 and 72). A comparison of ETE between these similar regions reveals that staging increases the ETE for those in the 2 to 5Mile Region by at most 35 minutes (see Table 71) for the 90th percentile ETE and has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE. The increase in the 90th percentile ETE is due to the evacuating vehicles, beyond the 2Mile Region, sheltering and delaying the start of their evacuation. See Section 7.6 for additional discussion. Staged evacuation is not recommended for the LAS EPZ.

The comparison of Scenarios 5 (summer, midweek/weekend, evening with good weather) and 13 (summer, midweek/weekend, evening, special event) in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicate that the Special Event - Seneca Shipyard Days - has no impact to the 90th and 100th percentile ETEs. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

LaSalle County Generating Station ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicate that the roadway impact (a single lane closure on I80 westbound) does not impact the 90th percentile or 100th percentile ETE. See Section 7.5 for additional information.

The population centers of Marseilles (SubArea 10), experiences the most congestion within the EPZ, yet clears relatively quickly. Ruland St servicing Marseilles exhibits the last of the traffic congestion within the EPZ (See Figure 75). All congestion within the EPZ clears by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE for Scenario 1 (summer, midweek, midday with good weather conditions). See Section 7.3 and Figures 73 through 76.

Separate ETE were computed for schools/preschools/daycares, medical facilities, transitdependent persons, and access and/or functional needs persons. The average (singlewave) ETE for schools and preschools/daycares is less than the 90th percentile ETE for the general population, while the transitdependent and access and/or functional needs population is longer. The medical facilities average ETE is the same when compared to the 90th percentile ETE for the general population. See Section 8.

Table 81 indicates that there are sufficient buses, wheelchair accessible vehicles, and ambulances available to evacuate the school and preschool/daycare, transit dependent people, medical facility patients, and the access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ in a single wave. See Section 8.

A reduction in the base trip generation time by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> reduces the general population ETE at the 90th percentile by 25 minutes. An increase in mobilization time by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> increases the 90th percentile ETE by 40 minutes a significant change. See Appendix M and Table M1.

An increase or decrease in voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region has minimal to no impact on the general population ETE. See Appendix M and Table M2.

An increase in permanent resident population (EPZ plus Shadow Region) of 133% or greater result in an increase in the longest 90th percentile ETE by 30 minutes for the full EPZ (Regions R03), which meets the federal criterion for performing a fully updated ETE study between decennial Censuses. See Appendix M and Table M3.

Table M4 and Table M5 show there are minimal to no impacts to the 90th percentile ETE and no impact to the 100th percentile ETE, for all scenarios, when Region R17 (Sub Areas 1, 13 and 17) also includes the population demand of SubArea 2, to create an additional Region (R23), as requested by Constellation. See Appendix M.4 for additional discussion.

LaSalle County Generating Station ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population SubArea 2010 Population 2020 Population 1 1,060 1,069 2 77 74 3 748 748 4 3,124 2,717 5 507 457 6 108 100 7 695 629 8 551 605 9 308 321 10 6,292 6,181 11 3,046 2,970 13 687 666 17 288 256 TOTAL 17,491 16,793 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 3.99%

LaSalle County Generating Station ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Wind From SubArea Region Description (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 102 112 13 17 North)

R01 2Mile Region N/A X R02 5Mile Region N/A X X X R03 Full EPZ N/A X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North)

R04 NW, NNW, N 305°11° X X N/A NNE 12°34° Refer to Region R02 R05 NE, ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE 35°169° X X N/A S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, WNW 170°304° Refer to Region R01 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 102 112 13 17 North)

R06 N 350°11° X X X X X R07 NNE 12°34° X X X X X R08 NE, ENE 35°79° X X X X R09 E 80°101° X X X X X R10 ESE 102°124° X X X X X R11 SE 125°146° X X X X R12 SSE 147°169° X X X X X R13 S 170°191° X X X X R14 SSW 192°214° X X X X R15 SW, WSW 215°259° X X X X X R16 W 260°281° X X X X R17 WNW 282°304° X X X R18 NW 305°326° X X X X X R19 NNW 327°349° X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North)

R20 5Mile Region N/A X X X R21 NW, NNW, N 305°11° X X N/A NNE 12°34° Refer to Region R20 R22 NE, ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE 35°169° X X N/A S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, WNW 170°304° Refer to Region R01 SubArea (s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE SubArea(s) Evacuate SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace for R01, then Evacuate 2

The entire city of Marseilles evacuates when either Sub-Area 10 or Sub-Area 11 evacuates. See Appendix H (page H-1) for additional information.

LaSalle County Generating Station ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season3 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 7 Winter Midweek Midday None Snow 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 10 Winter Weekend Midday None Snow 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Midweek, Special Event: Seneca 13 Summer Evening Good Weekend Shipyard Days Roadway Impact:

14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Single Lane Closure on I80 Westbound4 3

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).

4 A single lane on Interstate (I)-80 Westbound will be closed from approximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) to approximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange - Exit 90 - with Illinois State Route 23 (IL 23).

LaSalle County Generating Station ES9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Region Weather Rain Weather Rain Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R02 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:40 2:45 3:25 2:25 2:25 3:05 2:30 2:15 2:30 R03 2:40 2:40 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:45 2:45 3:25 2:25 2:25 3:10 2:35 2:30 2:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:40 2:40 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:25 2:15 2:30 R05 2:30 2:30 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:40 2:45 3:25 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:25 2:10 2:30 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R06 2:50 2:50 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:50 2:55 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:35 2:35 2:50 R07 2:45 2:50 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:35 2:30 2:45 R08 2:50 2:50 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:35 2:30 2:50 R09 2:50 2:50 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:55 2:55 3:40 2:40 2:40 3:20 2:40 2:35 2:50 R10 2:30 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:25 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:55 2:30 2:25 2:30 R11 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:25 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:55 2:30 2:25 2:25 R12 2:40 2:40 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:45 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:35 2:30 2:40 R13 2:30 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:25 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:20 2:20 3:00 2:30 2:25 2:30 R14 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:20 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:55 2:30 2:20 2:25 R15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:20 2:30 2:30 3:15 2:15 2:15 2:55 2:30 2:20 2:25 R16 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:35 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:35 2:30 2:45 R17 2:45 2:45 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:45 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:15 2:30 2:25 2:45 R18 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:35 2:30 2:35 3:15 2:35 2:30 2:45 R19 2:45 2:45 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:45 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:30 2:25 2:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R20 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:50 2:55 3:45 2:45 2:45 3:40 2:50 2:40 2:45 R21 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:30 2:20 2:35 R22 2:45 2:45 2:30 2:35 2:40 2:50 2:50 3:45 2:45 2:45 3:40 2:45 2:40 2:45 LaSalle County Generating Station ES10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek, Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend 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 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R02 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 R03 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 R05 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R06 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R07 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R08 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R09 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R10 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R11 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R12 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R13 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R14 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R15 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R16 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R17 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R18 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R19 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R20 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 R21 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 R22 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 LaSalle County Generating Station ES11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Staged Evacuation Results Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek, Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend 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 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R02 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R05 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:40 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R20 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R21 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R22 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 LaSalle County Generating Station ES12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Staged Evacuation Results Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek, Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend 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 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R02 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R05 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R20 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R21 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R22 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 LaSalle County Generating Station ES13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

School and Preschool/Daycare Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) R.C. (min) (hr:min)

LASALLE COUNTY, IL Grace ChurchRhema Christian Academy 90 15 27.0 52.6 31 2:20 4.7 6 2:30 Ransom Consolidated School 90 15 16.8 43.7 24 2:10 3.6 4 2:15 Grand Ridge Grade School 90 15 15.2 53.4 18 2:05 5.5 7 2:15 Central Intermediate School 90 15 15.2 53.4 18 2:05 5.5 7 2:15 Shepherd Middle School 90 15 15.2 53.4 18 2:05 5.5 7 2:15 Seneca Grade School South Campus 90 15 21.2 49.0 26 2:15 14.7 17 2:35 Seneca Grade School North Campus 90 15 21.2 49.2 26 2:15 14.2 16 2:35 Marseilles Elementary School 90 15 21.3 53.1 25 2:10 8.7 10 2:20 Seneca High School 90 15 21.2 49.6 26 2:15 14.3 16 2:35 Holy Trinity Lutheran Preschool 90 15 27.1 29.9 55 2:40 1.3 2 2:45 Glory Land Kids ChildCare Center 90 15 21.2 49.0 26 2:15 14.7 17 2:35 Seneca Head Start 90 15 21.2 49.2 26 2:15 14.2 16 2:30 Maximum for EPZ: 2:40 Maximum: 2:45 Average for EPZ: 2:15 Average: 2:30 LaSalle County Generating Station ES14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Route Route Distance Travel ETA to SubArea(s) Number Mobilization Length Speed Travel Pickup ETE to R. C. Time to R. R.C.

Serviced of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) Time (min) Time (min) (hr:min) (miles) C. (min) (hr:min) 1, 2, and 5 1 150 17.8 54.9 19 30 3:20 9.0 10 3:30 3, 7, and 8 1 150 15.5 51.8 18 30 3:20 11.0 12 3:35 4 1 150 27.5 45.1 36 30 3:40 11.1 12 3:55 10 and 6 1 150 24.7 49.0 30 30 3:30 6.1 7 3:40 9 1 150 25.8 49.0 32 30 3:35 5.0 5 3:40 10 1 150 18.5 49.5 22 30 3:25 10.3 11 3:40 11 1 150 20.8 52.4 24 30 3:25 10.4 11 3:40 13 and 17 1 150 18.8 51.8 22 30 3:25 12.0 13 3:40 Maximum ETE: 3:40 Maximum ETE: 3:55 Average ETE: 3:30 Average ETE: 3:40 Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Loading Travel Time Rate Total Dist. To to EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading EPZ Bdry Speed Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min)

LEXINGTON COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 29 29 27.1 29.5 55 2:55 Heritage Health Wheelchair bound 90 5 96 75 27.1 30.0 54 3:40 Evergreen Place: Supportive Ambulatory 90 1 25 25 27.1 29.6 55 2:50 Living Streator Wheelchair bound 90 5 63 75 27.1 30.0 54 3:40 Ottawa Friendship House Ambulatory 90 1 15 15 15.2 53.4 17 2:05 Ambulatory 90 1 16 15 21.2 53.6 24 1:55 Aperion Care Marseilles Wheelchair bound 90 5 54 75 21.2 53.6 24 1:55 Maximum ETE: 3:40 Average ETE: 2:45 LaSalle County Generating Station ES15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 01. Evacuation Time Estimates for Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Population Change Base Shadow Permanent 131% 132% 133%

Resident Population 26,661 61,587 61,854 62,120 ETE (hrs: mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 131% 132% 133%

2MILE 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:35 5MILE 3:25 3:40 3:40 3:40 FULL EPZ 3:25 3:50 3:50 3:55 ETE (hrs: mins) for the 100th Percentile Population Change Region Base 131% 132% 133%

2MILE 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:45 5MILE 5:50 5:50 5:50 5:50 FULL EPZ 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 LaSalle County Generating Station ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. SubAreas Comprising the LAS EPZ LaSalle County Generating Station ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 LaSalle County Generating Station ES18 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 LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS), located in Brookfield Township, Illinois. This ETE study provides Constellation, 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.

• Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, Rev.

1, February 2021.

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

The work effort reported herein was supported and guided by 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 a project kickoff meeting with personnel from Constellation, the emergency planners of the Counties of LaSalle and Grundy, and the State of Illinois (Illinois Emergency Management Agency, IEMA) to discuss methodology, project assumptions and to identify issues to be addressed and resources available.

c. Conducted a detailed field survey of the highway system and of the area traffic conditions within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ1) and Shadow Region.

d. Reviewed existing county and state Emergency Operations Plans.

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

schools/preschools/daycares and medical facilities), major employers, access and/or functional needs populations, transportation resources available, the special event, and other important information.

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

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

4. Reviewed the existing traffic management plan to be implemented by local and state police in the event of an incident at the plant. Traffic control is applied at specified Traffic and Access Control Points (TCPs/ACPs) located within the study area. See Section 9 and Appendix G.

5. Used existing SubAreas to define Evacuation Regions. The EPZ is partitioned into 13 Sub Areas along jurisdictional and geographic boundaries. Regions are groups of contiguous SubAreas for which ETE are calculated. The configurations of these Regions reflect wind direction and the radial extent of the impacted area. Each Region, other than those that approximate circular areas, approximates a keyhole section within the EPZ as recommended by NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

6. Estimated demand for transit services for persons at schools, preschools/daycares, medical facilities, transit dependent people at home, and those with access and/or functional needs.

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

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

b. Applied the procedures specified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 20162) to the data acquired during the field survey, to estimate the capacity of all highway segments comprising the evacuation routes.

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

1.2 The LaSalle County Generating Station Location The LaSalle County Generating Station is located in Brookfield Township, four miles west of the LaSalle and Grundy County line in LaSalle County, Illinois. The site is approximately 70 miles southwest of Chicago, Illinois. The EPZ consists of part of LaSalle and Grundy Counties. Figure 11 shows the location of the LAS site relative to Chicago, as well as the major population centers and roadways in the area.

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

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

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

- for twolane highways. Exhibit 1546 in the HCM 2016 shows little sensitivity for the estimates of Service Volumes at Level of Service (LOS) E (near capacity), with respect to FFS, for twolane highways.

The data from the audio and video recordings were used to create detailed geographic information systems (GIS) shapefiles and databases of the roadway characteristics and of the traffic control devices observed during the road survey; this information was referenced while LaSalle County Generating Station 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

preparing the input stream for the DYNEV II System. Roadway types were assigned based on the following criteria:

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

Traffic signals are either pretimed (signal timings are fixed over time and do not change with the traffic volume on competing approaches) or are actuated (signal timings vary over time based on the changing traffic volumes on competing approaches). Actuated signals require detectors to provide the traffic data used by the signal controller to adjust the signal timings. These detectors are typically magnetic loops in the roadway, or video cameras mounted on the signal masts and pointed toward the intersection approaches. If detectors were observed on the approaches to a signalized intersection during the road survey, detailed signal timings were not collected as the timings vary with traffic volume. Traffic Control Points (TCPs) at locations which have control devices are represented as actuated signals in the DYNEV II system.

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

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

DYNEV II consists of four submodels:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NUREG/CR4873 - Benchmark Study of the IDYNEV Evacuation Time Estimate Computer Code LaSalle County 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 plant.

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

1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study The 90th percentile ETE for the full EPZ increased by at most 45 minutes for nonheavy snow scenarios and at most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 10 minutes for heavy snow scenarios when compared with the previous ETE study. The 100th percentile ETE (dictated by the trip generation time plus 10minute travel time to EPZ boundary) for the full EPZ increased by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> for nonheavy snow scenarios and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes for heavy snow scenarios.

Table 13 presents a comparison of the present ETE study with the previous ETE study (KLD TR 633, dated April 8, 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 decreased by 4%, which could result in less evacuating vehicles, but the permanent resident occupancy per vehicle decreased by 8.7%, which resulted in an increase (~4%) in the number of permanent resident vehicles, which can increase ETE.

The permanent resident population in the Shadow Region has decreased 5.2%, but due to the decrease in permanent resident occupancy per vehicle, this resulted in an increase

(~5%) in the number of Shadow Region permanent resident vehicles. The increase in number of evacuating vehicles in the Shadow Region, which reduces the available roadway capacity for EPZ evacuees and can increase ETE.

There are significant increases in the transitdependent population (52.7%) and medical facility population (41.9%), which results in more evacuating vehicles within the EPZ, which can increase the ETE.

The number of employees commuting into the EPZ decreased significantly by 45.5%, due to the updated NRCs criteria for major employers from 50 or more employees per shift to 200 or more employees per shift. A decrease in this quickly mobilizing population group can cause the 90th percentile ETE to increase as it will take longer to reach an evacuation LaSalle County Generating Station 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

of 90% of all vehicles. A decrease in the number of employee vehicles can decrease the 100th percentile ETE.

There is a decrease in the school/preschool/daycare population (10.1%) which decreases the number of evacuating buses within the EPZ, which can decrease the ETE.

Trip mobilization (also known as trip generation), based on the data collected from the demographic survey, for the following population groups have changed:

o The permanent residents with commuters during nonheavy snow scenarios and heavy snow scenarios increased by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes, respectively.

o The permanent residents without commuters increased by 45 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes for nonheavy snow and heavy snow scenarios, respectively.

As the mobilization time dictates the ETE, as discussed in Section 7.3, these increases in mobilization can increase ETE.

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction Stakeholder Nature of Stakeholder Interaction Attended kickoff meeting to define project methodology and data requirements. Set up contacts with local government agencies.

Provided recent LAS employee data. Reviewed Constellation and approved all project assumptions and draft report. Engaged in the ETE development and was informed of the study results. Attended final meeting where the ETE study results were presented.

Attended Kickoff meeting to discuss the project Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA) methodology, key project assumptions and to define data needs. Provided emergency plans and traffic management plans. Provided/

confirmed special facility data, transient data and LaSalle County Office of Emergency Management special event data. Reviewed and approved all study assumptions. Engaged in the ETE development and was informed of the study Grundy County Office of Emergency Management results. Attended final meeting where the ETE study results were presented.

Table 12. Highway Characteristics Number of lanes Posted speed Lane width Actual free speed Shoulder type & width Abutting land use Interchange geometrics Control devices Lane channelization & queuing capacity Intersection configuration (including (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.

LaSalle County Generating Station 18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Basis Population = 17,491 Population = 16,793 Vehicles= 9,591 Vehicles = 9,946 2.30 persons/household, 1.26 2.61 persons/household, 1.56 Resident Population evacuating vehicles/household evacuating vehicles/household Vehicle Occupancy yielding: 1.83 persons/vehicle yielding: 1.67 persons/vehicle.

Employee estimates are based on the Employee estimates based on information by Constellation and information provided about major supplemented by previous study data.

employers in EPZ, US Census The values of 1.07 employees per Employee Population Longitudinal EmployerHousehold vehicle based on demographic survey Dynamics. results.

Employees = 1,122 Employees = 612 Vehicles = 1,122 Vehicles = 572 Estimates based upon U.S. Census data Estimates based upon U.S. Census data and the results of the telephone and the results of the Demographic survey. A total of 203 people who do survey. A total of 310 people who do not have access to a vehicle, requiring 7 not have access to a vehicle, requiring 8 TransitDependent buses to evacuate. An additional 12 buses to evacuate. An additional 12 Population homebound special needs persons homebound special needs persons require special transportation to need special transportation to evacuate evacuate (2 buses and 1 ambulance -

(10 require a bus, and 2 require an are required to evacuate this ambulance).

population).

Transient estimates based upon the old data from the previous ETE study Transient estimates based upon (confirmed or updated by the information provided about transient counties), supplemented by internet Transient Population attractions in EPZ.

searches, aerial imagery for parking spaces.

Transients = 8,244 Transients = 8,309 Vehicles = 4,034 Vehicles = 4,059 Medical facility population based upon the old data from the previous ETE Special facility population based on study (confirmed or updated by the information provided by Constellation. counties), supplemented by internet Special Facilities searches and phone calls to specific Population facilities.

Current Census = 210 Current Census = 298 Buses Required = 3 Buses Required = 4 Wheelchair Buses = 11 Wheelchair Buses = 15 Wheelchair Vans = 0 Wheelchair Vans = 1 LaSalle County Generating Station 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study School and preschool/daycare population based on information available in sitespecific volume for School population based on LASIllinois Plan for Radiological information provided by Constellation.

Accidents (IPRA) and supplemented by School Population old data from the previous ETE study where data was missing.

School enrollment = 3,032 School enrollment = 2,822 Preschool and Day Camp enrollment =

Preschool/daycare enrollment = 130 250 Buses required = 67 (134 vehicle) Buses required = 57 (104 vehicle)

Voluntary evacuation 20 percent of the population within the 20 percent of the population within the from within EPZ in EPZ, but not within the Evacuation EPZ, but not within the evacuation areas outside region Region (see Figure 21) region (see Figure 21) to be evacuated 20% of people outside of the EPZ 20% of people outside of the EPZ within the Shadow Region (see Figure within the Shadow Region (see Figure Shadow Evacuation &

72) 72).

Population 20% Population = 10,410 20% Population = 9,868 20% Vehicles = 5,564 20% Vehicles = 5,826 Network Size 962 links; 799 nodes 1,187 links; 1,003 nodes Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)

External Through data from 2013. data from 2019.

Traffic Vehicles = 5,516 Vehicles = 5,456 Field surveys conducted in January Field surveys conducted in October Roadway Geometric 2014. Roads and intersections were 2020. Roads and intersections were Data video archived. video archived.

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

Direct evacuation to designated Direct evacuation to designated School School Evacuation Relocation Center. Reception Center (Host School).

About 75 percent of transitdependent 50 percent of transitdependent persons will evacuate with a neighbor Ridesharing persons will evacuate with a neighbor or friend based on the results of the or friend.

demographic survey.

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

Residents with commuters returning Residents with commuters returning Trip Generation for leave between 15 and 210 minutes leave between 45 and 270 minutes Evacuation (270 minutes in Snow). (345 minutes in Heavy Snow).

Residents without commuters Residents without commuters returning leave between 15 and 150 returning leave between 15 and 195 minutes (210 minutes in Snow). minutes (285 minutes in Heavy Snow).

LaSalle County Generating Station 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Employees and transients leave Employees and transients leave between 15 and 105 minutes. between 15 and 90 minutes.

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

Good, Rain/Light Snow, or Heavy Snow.

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

and 25%, respectively, for heavy snow.

Modeling DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.18.0 DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.21.0 Seneca Shipyard Days Seneca Shipyard Days Special Event Population = 1,500 Special Event Population = 1,500 Special Events additional transients additional transients in Seneca)

Special Event Vehicles = 652 Special Event Vehicles = 575 22 Regions (central sector wind 22 regions (central sector wind direction and each adjacent sector direction and each adjacent sector Evacuation Cases technique used) and 14 Scenarios technique used) and 14 scenarios producing 308 unique cases. producing 308 unique cases.

Evacuation of 2Mile Region with Evacuation of 2Mile Region with sheltering of 25 Mile Region followed sheltering of 25 Mile Region followed by 25 mile evacuation when 2Mile by 2 to 5Mile evacuation when 2Mile Staged Evacuation Region evacuation is 90% complete. Region evacuation is 90% complete.

Region R20 through Region R22 were Region R20 through Region R22 were staged evacuation. staged evacuation.

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.

Summer Midweek, Midday Summer Midweek, Midday Good weather = 1:55 Good weather = 2:40 Evacuation Time Rain = 2:00 Rain = 2:40 Estimates for the Winter Midweek Midday Winter Midweek Midday entire EPZ, 90th Good weather = 2:00 Good weather = 2:45 percentile Rain/Light Snow = 2:00 Rain/Light Snow = 2:45 Heavy Snow = 2:15 Heavy Snow = 3:25 Summer Weekday, Midday, Summer Weekday, Midday, Good Weather= 3:40 Good Weather= 4:40 Evacuation Time Rain = 3:40 Rain = 4:40 Estimates for the Winter, Weekday, Midday, Winter, Weekday, Midday, entire EPZ, 100th Good Weather= 3:40 Good Weather= 4:40 percentile Rain/Light Snow = 3:40 Rain/Light Snow = 4:40 Heavy Snow = 4:40 Heavy Snow = 5:55 LaSalle County Generating Station 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 11. LAS Site Location LaSalle County Generating Station 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 12. LAS LinkNode Analysis Network LaSalle County Generating Station 113 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS This section presents the estimates and assumptions utilized in the development of the evacuation time estimates (ETE).

2.1 Data Estimates

1. The permanent resident population are based on the 2020 U.S. Census population from the Census Bureau website1. A methodology, referred to as the area ratio method, is employed to estimate the population within portions of census blocks that are divided by SubArea boundaries. It is assumed that the population is evenly distributed across a census block in order to employ the area ratio method (see Section 3.1).

2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon data provided by Constellation and supplemented by the old data from the previous study, where data was not available (see Section 3.4).

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based on the data received from the counties within the EPZ, the Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA), the old data from the previous ETE study (confirmed or updated by the counties),

supplemented by internet searches, aerial imagery for parking spaces, and phone calls to specific facilities where data was missing.

4. The relationship between permanent resident population and evacuating vehicles was based on the results of the recent, randomsample demographic survey (see Appendix F). Average values of 2.61 persons per household (Section F.3.1, Figure F1) and 1.56 evacuating vehicles per household (Section F.3.1, Figure F10) are used for permanent resident population.

5. On average, the relationship between persons and vehicles for transients (see Section 3.3) and the special event (see Section 3.10) are as follows:

a. Parks and Wildlife Areas: 2.30 people per vehicle

b. Campgrounds: 2.00 people per vehicle

c. Marinas: 2.31 people per vehicle.

d. Hunting Areas: 2.27 people per vehicle

e. Other Recreational Areas (Woodsmoke Ranch): 1.83 people per vehicle

f. Special Events: 2.61 people per vehicle (the average household size)

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

6. Employee vehicle occupancies are based on the results of the demographic survey. The value of 1.07 employees per vehicle is used in the study (See Figure F7). In addition, it is assumed there are two people per carpool, on average.

1 www.census.gov LaSalle County Generating Station 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ is 55 mph, based on Illinois state laws2 for buses and average posted speed limits on roadways within the EPZ.

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

2.2 Methodological Assumptions

1. The Planning Basis Assumption for the calculation of ETE is a rapidly escalating accident that requires evacuation, and includes the following3 (as per NRC guidance):

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

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

c. The ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

2. The centerpoint of the plant is located at the center of the containment building 41° 14' 43.8"N, 88° 40' 8.4" W.

3. The DYNEV II4 (Dynamic Network EVacuation) macroscopic simulation model is used to compute ETE in this study.

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

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

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

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

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

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

2 https://ilga.gov/legislation 3

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

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

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

10. The ETE also includes consideration of through (ExternalExternal traffic that originates its trip outside of the study area and has its destination outside of the study area) trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region (see Section 3.11).

11. This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of the first time period. Rather, there is a 30minute initialization period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from the first time period are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of the first time period depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated (see Section 3.12).

12. To account for boundary conditions beyond the study area, this study assumed a 25%

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

2.3 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 (see Section 5 and Appendix F). It is assumed that stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur.

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

3. Commuter percentages (and the percentage of residents awaiting the return of a commuter) are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 65% of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter (see Figure F6); 56% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip (see Figure F11). Therefore, 36% (65%

x 56% = 36%,) of EPZ households will await the return of a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.

LaSalle County Generating Station 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 75% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

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

a. Schools, and preschools/daycares

i. If schools and preschools/daycares are in session, transport (buses) will evacuate students directly to the designated Reception Centers (RC).

ii. For the schools and preschool/daycares 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. Children at these facilities, if school/preschools/daycares are in session, are given priority in assigning transit vehicles.

b. Medical Facilities

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

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

c. Transitdependent permanent residents:

i. Transitdependent permanent resident population are evacuated to reception centers.

ii. Access and/or functional needs population may require county assistance (ambulance, bus, or wheelchair transport) to evacuate. The type of assistance breakdown was not provided, so the average breakdown of the medical facilities are utilized. This is considered separately from the general population ETE, as per NRC guidance (see Section 8).

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

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

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

3. Transit vehicle capacities:

a. School buses = 70 students per bus for elementary schools and preschools/

daycares, 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)

LaSalle County Generating Station 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

d. Wheelchair vans = 4 wheelchair bound persons

e. Wheelchair buses = 15 wheelchair bound persons

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

a. School/preschool/daycares buses arrive at schools/preschools/daycares to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

b. Transitdependent buses are mobilized when approximately 90% of residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization at about 150 minutes of the ATE. If necessary, multiple waves of buses will be utilized to gather transit dependent people who mobilize more slowly.

c. Vehicles will arrive at medical facilities and for the access and/or functional needs population to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. School and preschool/daycare buses are loaded in 15 minutes.

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

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

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

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

f. Buses and wheelchair transport vehicles for access and/or functional needs population are loaded in 5 minutes.

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

6. It is assumed that drivers for all transit vehicles, identified in Table 81, are available.

2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions

1. Traffic and Access Control Posts (TACP) as defined in the approved county and state emergency plans are considered in the ETE analysis, as per NRC guidance. See Table G1 in Appendix G.

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

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

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. The Seneca Shipyard Days located in SubArea 10, is considered as the special event (single or multiday event that attracts a significant population into the EPZ; recommended by NRC guidance) for Scenario 13.

LaSalle County Generating Station 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 a single lane on Interstate (I)80 westbound from approximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) to approximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange - Exit 90 - with Illinois State Route (IL) 23 for the roadway impact scenario - Scenario 14.

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

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

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

Transportation research indicates capacity and speed reductions of about 10% for rain and a range of 10% to 25% for snow. In accordance with Table 31 of Revision 1 to NUREG/CR7002, Rev.1, this study assumes a 10% reduction in speed and capacity for rain/light snow and a speed and capacity reduction of 15% and 25%, respectively, for heavy snow. The factors are shown in Table 22.

4. It is assumed for heavy snow scenarios that some evacuees will need additional time to clear their driveways and access the public roadway system. The distribution of time for this activity was gathered through a demographic survey of the public and takes up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes. It is assumed that the time needed by evacuees to remove snow from their driveways is sufficient time for snow removal crews to mobilize and clear/treat the public roadway system.

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

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

Refer to Table 22.

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8. Due to the irregular shapes of the SubAreas, there are instances where a small portion of a SubArea (a sliver) is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (less than 500 people or 10% of the Subarea population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the SubArea is not included in the Region so as to not evacuate large numbers of people outside of the keyhole for a small number of people that are actually in the keyhole, unless otherwise stated in the Protective Action Recommendation (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 R20 through R22 in Table 61.

LaSalle County Generating Station 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Scenarios Season5 Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 7 Winter Midweek Midday None Snow 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 10 Winter Weekend Midday None Snow 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Midweek, Special Event: Seneca 13 Summer Evening Good Weekend Shipyard Days Roadway Impact: Single 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Lane Closure on I80 Westbound6 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Free Mobilization Time Loading Time for Loading time Scenario Highway Flow for General Mobilization Time School/preschool for Transit Capacity* Speed* Population for Transit Vehicles Buses buses7 Rain/Light 5minute 10minute 90% 90% No Effect 10minute increase Snow increase increase Clear driveway Heavy 10minute 20minute 75% 85% before leaving home 20minute increase Snow increase increase (See Figure F17)

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

5 Winter assumes 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).

6 A single lane on Interstate (I)-80 Westbound will be closed from approximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) to approximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange - Exit 90 - with Illinois State Route (IL) 23.

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology LaSalle County 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 emergency planning zone (EPZ), stratified into groups (resident, employee, transient).

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

3. An estimate of potential doublecounting of vehicles.

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

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

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

A resident who works and 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 LAS EPZ indicates the need to identify three distinct groups:

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

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

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

Estimates of the population and number of evacuating vehicles for each of the population groups are presented for each SubArea and by polar coordinate representation (population rose). The LAS EPZ is subdivided into 13 SubAreas. The SubAreas comprising the EPZ are shown in Figure 31.

LaSalle County Generating Station 31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.1 Permanent Residents The primary source for estimating permanent population is the latest U.S. Census data with an availability date of September 16, 2021. The average household size (2.61 persons/household -

See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1) and the number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.56 vehicles/household - See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.2) were adapted from the demographic survey results.

The permanent resident population is estimated by cutting the census block polygons by the SubArea and EPZ boundaries using GIS software. A ratio of the original area of each census block and the updated area (after cutting) is multiplied by the total block population to estimate the population within the EPZ. This methodology (referred to as the area ratio method) assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 31 provides permanent resident population within the EPZ, by SubArea, for 2010 and for 2020 (based on the methodology above). As indicated, the permanent resident population within the EPZ has decreased by 3.99% since the 2010 Census.

To estimate the number of vehicles, the 2020 Census permanent resident population is divided by the average household size (2.61 persons/household) and multiplied by the average number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.56 vehicles/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 LAS. 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. 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 LAS may elect to evacuate without having been instructed to do so. This area is called the Shadow Region. Based upon NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance, it is assumed that 20 percent of the permanent resident population, based on U.S. Census Bureau data, in the Shadow Region will elect to evacuate.

Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuating vehicles per household, mobilization time) are assumed to be the same as that for the EPZ permanent resident population. Table 33, Figure 34, and Figure 35 present estimates of the shadow population and vehicles, by sector. Similar to the EPZ resident vehicle estimates, resident vehicles at group quarters (skilled nursing facilities, group homes, prisons, etc.) have been removed from the shadow population vehicle demand in Table 33 and Figure 35.

LaSalle County 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 (boating, camping, hunting). Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at camping facilities. Data from the previous study was reviewed by LaSalle County and confirmed it was still applicable.

An addition of two new transient facilities were identified within the EPZ - Pet Project and Snug Harbor Marina. Data for Pet Project is unavailable. It is assumed all the visitors at this facility are local residents that have been included as permanent residents in Section 3.1. The Snug Harbor Marina transients and vehicles were estimated based on parking capacity in aerial imagery and average household size (2.61 persons/household - assuming the transients visiting this facility as a family/household). Overall, the average transient vehicle occupancy rates vary by facility from 1.83 persons per vehicle to 2.60 persons per vehicle. The transient facilities within the LAS EPZ are summarized as follows:

Campgrounds - 950 transients and 475 vehicles; an average of 2.00 transients per vehicle Hunting Areas (Seneca Hunt Club) - 50 transients and 22 vehicles; an average of 2.27 transients per vehicle Marinas - 1,423 transients and 616 vehicles; an average of 2.31 transients per vehicle Parks and Wildlife Areas - 2,470 transients and 1,075 vehicles; an average of 2.30 transients per vehicle (Note: Local parks are not included; visitors to these facilities are local residents and have already been counted as permanent residents in Section 3.1.)

Other Recreational Areas (Woodsmoke Ranch) - 3,416 transients and 1,871 vehicles; an average of 1.83 transients per vehicle Appendix E, Table E5 summarizes the transient data that was gathered for the recreational areas within the LAS EPZ. In total, there are 8,309 transients in 4,059 vehicles, an average of 2.05 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 The estimate of employees commuting into the EPZ is based on the data extracted from the previous ETE study and data provided by Constellation. Data from the previous study included the maximum shift employment and percentage of employees commuting into the EPZ for each facility. This data was reviewed by the counties within the EPZ, indicating the data was still applicable. Note, the employment data of LAS was updated by Constellation.

As per the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance, employers with 200 or more employees working in a single shift are considered as major employers. As such, the employers with less than 200 employees (during the maximum shift) are not considered in this study. In the LAS EPZ, two major employers were identified: LaSalle County Generating Station and Sabic Plastics.

LaSalle County Generating Station 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Employees who work within the EPZ fall into two categories:

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

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

To avoid double counting, we focus only on those employees commuting from outside the EPZ who will evacuate along with the permanent resident population. As discussed above, the percentage of employees living outside of the EPZ for each facility is obtained from the previous study.

To estimate the evacuating employee vehicles, a vehicle occupancy rate of 1.07 employees per vehicle obtained from the demographic survey (see Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1) was used for the major employers. Appendix E, Table E4 includes the detailed information of the major employers. Table 35 presents employee and vehicle estimates commuting into the EPZ by Sub Area. Figure 38 and Figure 39 present these data by sector.

3.5 Medical Facilities Population Demand The data of the medical facilities are obtained from previous ETE study, supplemented by internet searches and phone calls to specific facilities where data was missing. One new medical facility (Evergreen Place: Supportive Living - Streator) was identified and the capacity and current census data was gathered from online source1. Since the average number of patients at the medical facilities fluctuates daily, the percent breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound, and bedridden patients from the previous ETE study was used to estimate the number of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at this newly identified medical facility. The number of ambulatory, wheelchairbound and bedridden patients at Ottawa Friendship House and Heritage Health were based on old data from the previous ETE study. The data for Aperion Care Marseilles was obtained from direct phone calls to this facility.

Table E3 in Appendix E summarizes the data gathered. Table 36 presents the census of medical facilities in the EPZ. As shown in these tables, a total of 298 people has been identified as living in, or being treated in, these facilities.

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

36. The number and type of evacuating vehicles that need to be provided depend on the patients' state of health. It is estimated that buses can transport up to 30 people; wheelchair buses up to 15 people; and wheelchair vans up to 4 people. Four buses, 15 wheelchair buses, and one wheelchair van are required to evacuate the medical facility population, as shown in Table 36. Ambulances are not needed to evacuate the medical facilities within the LAS EPZ since there are no bedridden patients at these facilities. Buses are represented as two passenger vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics 1

https://www2.illinois.gov/hfs/SiteCollectionDocuments/EvergreenPlaceStreator2021.pdf LaSalle County Generating Station 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.6 Schools and Preschools/Daycares Population Demand School and preschool/daycare population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all schools and preschools/daycares within the EPZ are presented in Table 37 and Table 38, respectively. This information was obtained from the Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA) and supplemented by old data from the previous ETE study where data was missing. The column in Table 37 and 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.

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

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

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

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

The counties in the EPZ could introduce procedures whereby the schools are contacted prior to the dispatch of buses from the depot to ascertain the current estimate of students to be evacuated, which may improve bus utilization. In this way, the number of buses dispatched to the schools will reflect the actual number needed. The need for buses would be reduced by any high school students who have evacuated using private automobiles (if permitted by school authorities). Those buses originally allocated to evacuate schoolchildren that are not needed due to children being picked up by their parents (although they are not advised to do so), can be gainfully assigned to service other facilities or those persons who do not have access to private vehicles or to ridesharing.

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

3.7 Illinois National Guard Training Center There is one military installation - Illinois National Guard Training Center within the LAS EPZ (see Table E6 in Appendix E). The facility is located in Marseilles, 1.6 miles northnorthwest of LAS. This military institution has a total of 556 personnel using the site for training at peak times (as per the information provided by Constellation for the previous ETE study). Assuming an average occupancy of 2 persons per vehicle, this facility results in additional 278 vehicles. It is conservatively assumed that none of these personnel are EPZ residents.

LaSalle County Generating Station 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.8 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 39 presents estimates of transitdependent people. Note:

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

• It is reasonable and appropriate to consider that many transitdependent persons will evacuate by ridesharing with neighbors, friends or family. For example, nearly 80 percent of those who evacuated from Mississauga, Ontario who did not use their own cars, shared a ride with neighbors or friends. Other documents report that approximately 70 percent of transit dependent persons were evacuated via ride sharing. Based on the results of the demographic survey, approximately 75% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

The estimated number of bus trips needed to service transitdependent persons is based on an estimated 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 x 10) = 27. On this basis, the average load factor anticipated is (27/40) x 100 = 68 percent. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 39 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 39 indicates that transportation must be provided for 79 people. Therefore, a total of 3 bus runs are required from a capacity standpoint. In order to service all of the transit dependent population and have at least one bus drive through each of the SubAreas to pick up transit dependent people, 8 bus runs are used in the ETE calculations, see Sections 8.1 and 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.

LaSalle County Generating Station 36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 LAS EPZ:

Where, A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 6,434 0.199 1.61 1 0.649 0.441 0.434 2.38 2 0.649 0.441 310 1 0.747 30 0.253 310 30 3 These calculations are explained as follows:

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

• The approximate number of HH is 6,434.

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

• The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (19.9%), who are at home, equal (1.61 1).

The number of HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (6,434 x 0.199 x 0.61 x 0.649 x 0.441), as 64.9% of EPZ households have a commuter 44.1% 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 (43.4%), who are at home, equal (2.38 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 6,434 x 0.434 x 0.38 x (0.649 x 0.441)2. The number of persons who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms (the last term is squared to represent the probability that neither commuter will return).

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

The estimate of transitdependent population in Table 39 exceeds the number of registered transitdependent persons in the EPZ as provided by the counties (discussed below in Section 3.9). This is consistent with the findings of NUREG/CR6953, Volume 2, in that a large majority of the transitdependent population within the EPZs of U.S. nuclear plants does not register with their local emergency response agency.

3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population The access and/or functional needs population registered within the EPZ was provided by local offsite response organizations (OROs). Based on data provided by Grundy County, there are 4 access and/or functional needs people within Grundy County. The number of access and/or LaSalle County Generating Station 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

functional needs population within the LaSalle County was not provided. In the previous ETE study, there were a total of 12 access and functional needs people within the LAS EPZ who required transportation assistance to evacuate. In this study, it was assumed that the total number of access and/or functional needs population will be same as last study. Therefore, the remaining 8 access and/or functional needs population is assumed to be located within LaSalle County.

Details on the number of ambulatory and bedridden people were received from Grundy County directly. The breakdown of the type of access and/or functional needs population within LaSalle County was used from the previous study. Table 310 shows the total number of people for access and/or functional needs by type of need. The table also estimates the number of transportation resources needed to evacuate these people in a timely manner. Buses needed to evacuate the access and functional needs population are represented as two vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

3.10 Special Event A special event can attract large numbers of transients to the EPZ for short periods of time, creating a temporary surge in demand as per Section 2.5.1 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. The county and state emergency management agencies were polled regarding potential special events in the EPZ. The only potential special event identified by the county and state agencies that attracts largest number of transients from outside the EPZ is the Seneca Shipyard Days -

which occurs annually in June (summer) over 4 days (Wednesday through Saturday). The event occurs in Seneca, Illinois (SubArea 10).

The data from the previous ETE study and current demographic survey was used in this study.

Seneca Shipyard Days event personnel indicated the evenings have the peak attendance during the event. Event personnel also indicated the total attendance for the event is approximately 5,000 people over all four days. There are at most 2,000 people in attendance during the peak.

The event draws a lot of transients because the Landing Ship Tank manufacturing facility that was in Seneca during World War II has people tied to Seneca who live throughout the state and country. It is conservatively assumed that 25% of the people present during peak times are local residents; thus, there are 1,500 transients present for the event during the peak. It was assumed that families travel to the event as a household unit in a single vehicle; and based on the current demographic survey the average household size of 2.61 was used as the vehicle occupancy, which results in 575 (1,500/2.61 = 575) vehicles.

Temporary road closures on E. Armour Street and Williams Street occur during the festival, but all roadways could be quickly reopened in the event of an emergency. It is assumed that the roads would be reopened by the time transients at the event gather their belongings and return to their vehicles to begin their evacuation trip. Vehicles were loaded on local streets near the event for this scenario. Public transportation to transport attendees for this event are not provided and are not considered as part of this study.

LaSalle County Generating Station 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

Interstate (I)80. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the EPZ during the first 120 minutes following the ATE.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data from 2019 was obtained from the Illinois Department of Transportation website2 to estimate the number of vehicles per hour on the I80. The AADT was multiplied by the KFactor, which is the proportion of the AADT on a roadway segment or link during the design hour, resulting in the design hour volume (DHV). The design hour is usually the 30th highest hourly traffic volume of the year, measured in vph. The DHV is then multiplied 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 311, for each of the routes considered. The DDHV is then multiplied by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> since access control points (ACPs) are assumed to be activated at 120 minutes after the ATE, to estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. As indicated, there are 5,456 vehicles entering the EPZ as externalexternal trips prior to the activation of the ACP and the diversion of this traffic. This number is reduced by 60% for evening scenarios (Scenarios 5, 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 a 30minute initialization time period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from Time Period 1 are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of Time Period 1 depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated (see Section 6). There are 1,477 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, with good weather) conditions.

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.13 Summary of Demand A summary of population and vehicle demand is provided in Table 312 and Table 313, respectively. This summary includes all population groups described in this section. A total of 40,967 people and 26,881 vehicles are considered in this study.

LaSalle County Generating Station 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population SubArea 2010 Population 2020 Population 1 1,060 1,069 2 77 74 3 748 748 4 3,124 2,717 5 507 457 6 108 100 7 695 629 8 551 605 9 308 321 10 6,292 6,181 11 3,046 2,970 13 687 666 17 288 256 TOTAL 17,491 16,793 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 3.99%

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by SubArea 2020 SubArea 2020 Population Resident Vehicles 1 1,069 643 2 74 45 3 748 452 4 2,717 1,554 5 457 277 6 100 60 7 629 375 8 605 353 9 321 192 10 6,181 3,700 11 2,970 1,741 13 666 401 17 256 153 TOTAL 16,793 9,946 LaSalle County Generating Station 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Sector Population Evacuating Vehicles N 653 393 NNE 282 168 NE 5,173 3,031 ENE 2,910 1,732 E 1,346 807 ESE 220 136 SE 96 56 SSE 136 83 S 182 109 SSW 480 287 SW 14,315 8,518 WSW 738 441 W 288 177 WNW 5,555 3,251 NW 15,941 9,327 NNW 1,025 614 TOTAL 49,340 29,130 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles SubArea Transients Transient Vehicles 1 3,202 1,394 2 0 0 3 150 75 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 8 0 0 9 0 0 10 4,679 2,469 11 278 121 13 0 0 17 0 0 TOTAL 8,309 4,059 LaSalle County Generating Station 312 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 1 385 360 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 8 0 0 9 0 0 10 0 0 11 227 212 13 0 0 17 0 0 TOTAL 612 572 Table 36. Medical Facility Population Estimates Wheel Wheel Wheel chair chair Cap Current Ambu chair Bed Bus Bus Vans SubArea Facility Name Municipality acity Census latory Bound ridden Runs Runs Runs LaSalle County, IL 4 Heritage Health Streator 130 125 29 96 0 1 7 0 Evergreen Place: Supportive 4 Streator 88 88 25 63 0 1 4 1 Living Streator 8 Ottawa Friendship House Ottawa 15 15 15 0 0 1 0 0 11 Aperion Care Marseilles Marseilles 103 70 16 54 0 1 4 0 TOTAL: 336 298 85 213 0 4 15 1 LaSalle County Generating Station 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 37. School Population Demand Estimates SubArea School Name Enrollment Buses Required LASALLE COUNTY, IL 4 Grace ChurchRhema Christian Academy 32 1 5 Ransom Consolidated School 93 2 7 Grand Ridge Grade School 259 4 8 Central Intermediate School 415 9 8 Shepherd Middle School 465 10 10 Seneca Grade School South Campus 508 8 10 Seneca Grade School North Campus 10 Marseilles Elementary School 589 9 10 Seneca High School 461 10 LaSalle County Subtotal: 2,822 53 SCHOOLS TOTAL: 2,822 53 Table 38. Preschool/Daycare Population Demand Estimates SubArea Preschool/Daycare Name Enrollment Buses Required LASALLE COUNTY, IL 4 Holy Trinity Lutheran Preschool 90 2 10 Glory Land Kids ChildCare Center 22 1 10 Seneca Head Start 18 1 LaSalle County Subtotal: 130 4 PRESCHOOLS/DAYCARES TOTAL: 130 4 LaSalle County Generating Station 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 39. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Average HH Survey Percent Size Survey Percent HH Survey Percent HH Total People Population with Indicated No. Estimated with Indicated No. Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring 2020 EPZ of Vehicles No. of of Vehicles with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 6,793 0 1.61 2.38 6,434 0 19.9% 43.4% 64.9% 44.1% 310 75% 79 0.5%

Table 310. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary Population Group Population Vehicles deployed Grundy County Ambulatory 3 1 Bus Bedridden 1 1 Ambulance LaSalle County Ambulatory 7 1 Bus Bedridden 1 1 Ambulance Total: 12 4 Table 311. LAS EPZ External Traffic Upstream Downstream External Node Node Road Name Direction IDOT AADT3 KFactor4 DFactor4 Hourly Volume Traffic 8003 3 I80 Eastbound (EB) 25,500 0.107 0.5 1,364 2,728 8023 23 I80 Westbound (WB) 25,500 0.107 0.5 1,364 2,728 TOTAL: 5,456 3

2019 Annual Average Daily Traffic. https://www.gettingaroundillinois.com/Traffic%20Counts/index.html 4

HCM 2016 LaSalle County Generating Station 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Population Demand5 Schools Military Transit Special and Training Special Shadow External SubArea Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Preschools Center6 Event Population7 Traffic Total 1 1,069 5 3,202 385 0 0 556 0 0 0 5,217 2 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 3 748 4 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 902 4 2,717 13 0 0 213 122 0 0 0 0 3,065 5 457 2 0 0 0 93 0 0 0 0 552 6 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 7 629 3 0 0 0 259 0 0 0 0 891 8 605 3 0 0 15 880 0 0 0 0 1,503 9 321 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 323 10 6,181 29 4,679 0 0 1598 0 1500 0 0 13,987 11 2,970 14 278 227 70 0 0 0 0 0 3,559 13 666 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 669 17 256 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 257 Shadow Region 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,868 0 9,868 Total 16,793 79 8,309 612 298 2,952 556 1,500 9,868 0 40,967 5

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

6 Illinois National Guard Training Center - see Section 3.7.

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 313. Summary of Vehicle Demand8 Schools Military Transit Special and Training Special Shadow External SubArea Residents Dependent9 Transients Employees Facilities9 Preschools9 Center10 Event Vehicle11 Traffic Total 1 643 2 1,394 360 0 0 278 0 0 0 2,677 2 45 with SubArea 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 3 452 2 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 529 4 1,554 2 0 0 27 6 0 0 0 0 1,589 5 277 with SubArea 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 281 6 60 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 7 375 with SubArea 3 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 383 8 353 with SubArea 3 0 0 2 38 0 0 0 0 393 9 192 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 194 10 3,700 2 2,469 0 0 58 0 575 0 0 6,804 11 1,741 2 121 212 10 0 0 0 0 0 2,086 13 401 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 403 17 153 with SubArea 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 153 Shadow Region 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,826 5,456 11,282 Total 9,946 16 4,059 572 39 114 278 575 5,826 5,456 26,881 8

Since the spatial distribution of the access and/or functional needs population is unknown, vehicles needed to evacuate access and/or functional needs population are not included in this table.

9 Buses (including transit-dependent buses, school/preschool/daycare buses) represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 8 for additional information.

10 Illinois National Guard Training Center passenger vehicles - see Section 3.7.

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 31. SubAreas Comprising the LAS EPZ LaSalle County Generating Station 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector LaSalle County Generating Station 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector LaSalle County Generating Station 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector LaSalle County Generating Station 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector LaSalle County Generating Station 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector LaSalle County Generating Station 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector LaSalle County Generating Station 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector LaSalle County Generating Station 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector LaSalle County Generating Station 326 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, 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 (good, rain, snow, fog, wind speed)

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

measurements of lane or shoulder width were taken. Horizontal and vertical alignment can influence both FFS and capacity. The estimated FFS were measured using the survey vehicles speedometer and observing local traffic, under free flow conditions. Free flow speeds ranged from 15 mph to 75 mph in the study area. Capacity is estimated from the procedures of the HCM 2016. For example, HCM 2016 Exhibit 71(b) shows the sensitivity of SV at the upper bound of LOS D to grade (capacity is the SV at the upper bound of LOS E).

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

As discussed in Section 2.6 it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent the prevailing conditions. Adverse conditions like inclement weather, construction, and other incidents tend to slow traffic down and often, also increase vehicletovehicles separation, thus decreasing the amount of traffic flow. Based on limited empirical data, conditions such as rain reduce the values of freeflow speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10 percent. Over the last decade new studies have been made on the effects of rain on traffic capacity. These studies indicate a range of effects between 5 and 25 percent depending on wind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.6, we employ, a reduction in free speed and in highway capacity of 10 percent for rain/light snow. During heavy snow conditions, the free speed and highway capacity reductions are 15 percent and 25 percent, respectively.

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

3600 3600 where:

Qcap,m = Capacity of a single lane of traffic on an approach, which executes movement, m, upon entering the intersection; vehicles per hour (vph) hm = Mean queue discharge headway of vehicles on this lane that are executing movement, m; seconds per vehicle G = Mean duration of GREEN time servicing vehicles that are executing movement, m, for each signal cycle; seconds L = Mean "lost time" for each signal phase servicing movement, m; seconds C = Duration of each signal cycle; seconds Pm = Proportion of GREEN time allocated for vehicles executing movement, m, from this lane. This value is specified as part of the control treatment.

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

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

Formally, we can write, where:

hsat = Saturation discharge headway for through vehicles; seconds per vehicle F1,F2 = The various known factors influencing hm fm( ) = Complex function relating hm to the known (or estimated) values of hsat, F1, F2, LaSalle County Generating Station 43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The estimation of hm for specified values of hsat, F1, F2, ... is undertaken within the DYNEV II simulation model by a mathematical model2. The resulting values for hm always satisfy the condition:

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

The above discussion is necessarily brief given the scope of this Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) report and the complexity of the subject of intersection capacity. In fact, Chapters 19, 20 and 21 in the HCM 2016 address this topic. The factors, F1, F2, , influencing saturation flow rate are identified in equation (198) of the HCM 2016.

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

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

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

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

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

LaSalle County 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 vary by day of week and time of day based upon local circumstances. The cited reference presents a mean QDF of 2,016 passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl). This figure compares with the nominal capacity estimate of 2,250 pcphpl estimated for the ETE. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 which translates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.

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

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

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

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

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

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

LaSalle County 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 LAS Study Area As part of the development of the linknode analysis network for the study area, an estimate of roadway capacity is required. The source material for the capacity estimates presented herein is contained in:

2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016)

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

The highway system in the study area consists primarily of three categories of roads and, of course, intersections:

TwoLane roads: Local, State Multilane Highways (atgrade)

Freeways Each of these classifications will be discussed.

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

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

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

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

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

4.3.3 Freeways Ref: HCM 2016 Chapters 10, 12, 13, 14 Chapter 10 of the HCM 2016 describes a procedure for integrating the results obtained in Chapters 12, 13 and 14, which compute capacity and LOS for freeway components. Chapter 10 also presents a discussion of simulation models. The DYNEV II simulation model automatically performs this integration process.

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

Free Speed (mph): 55 60 65 70+

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

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

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

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

All simulation models must be calibrated properly with field observations that quantify the performance parameters applicable to the analysis network. Two of the most important of these are: (1) FFS; and (2) saturation headway, hsat. The first of these is estimated by direct LaSalle County 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 2016, as described earlier.

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

4.5 Boundary Conditions As illustrated in Figure 12 and in Appendix K, the linknode analysis network used for this study is finite. The analysis network extends well beyond the 15mile radial study area in some locations in order to model intersections with other major evacuation routes beyond the study area. However, the network does have an end at the destination (exit) nodes as discussed in Appendix C. Beyond these destination nodes, there may be signalized intersections or merge points that impact the capacity of the evacuation routes leaving the study area. Rather than neglect these boundary conditions, this study assumes a 25% reduction in capacity on two lane roads (Section 4.3.1 above) and multilane highways (Section 4.3.2 above). There is no reduction in capacity for freeways due to boundary conditions. The 25% reduction in capacity is based on the prevalence of actuated traffic signals in the study area and the fact that the evacuating traffic volume will be more significant than the competing traffic volume at any downstream signalized intersections, thereby warranting a more significant percentage (75% in this case) of the signal green time.

LaSalle County 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 LaSalle County Generating Station 410 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

5.1 Background

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

1. Unusual Event

2. Alert

3. Site Area Emergency

4. General Emergency At each level, the Federal guidelines specify a set of Actions to be undertaken by the licensee, and by the state and local offsite 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 at the plant wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented will be considered in calculating the Trip Generation Time. We will assume:

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

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

3. The ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

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

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

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

It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various classes of an emergency. For example, suppose one hour elapses from the siren alert to the ATE. In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public during this onehour period. As a result, the population within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) will be lower when the ATE is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an Advisory will be broadcast. Thus, the time needed to complete the mobilization activities and the number of people remaining to evacuate the EPZ after the ATE, will both be somewhat less than the estimates presented in this report.

LaSalle County Generating Station 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

The notification process consists of two events:

1. Transmitting information using the alert and notification systems (ANS) available within the EPZ [e.g. sirens, tone alerts, Emergency Alert System (EAS) broadcasts on radios (WJDKFM 95.7, WCSJFM 103.1, WCMYAM 1430, WRKXFM 95.3) and TV station, and Integrated Public Awareness System (IPAWS)/Commercial Mobile Alert System (CMAS) message].

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

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 340 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 event.

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 the study area permanent residents. Such a demographic survey was conducted from November 2020 through January 20211, in support of this ETE study for this site. Appendix F discusses the survey sampling plan, the number of completed surveys obtained, documents the survey instrument utilized and provides the survey results. It is important to note that the shape and duration of the evacuation trip mobilization distribution is important at sites where traffic congestion is not expected to cause the ETE to extend well beyond the trip generation period. The remaining 1

As discussed in Appendix F, the zip codes within the LAS study area, received during the demographic surveys for the Braidwood Generating Station and Dresden Generating Station, are being used for this site and was conducted from November 2020 through February 2021.

LaSalle County Generating Station 52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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 (i.e., depart work, arrive home)

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

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

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 after preparing to leave) can result in rather conservative (that is, longer) estimates of mobilization times. It is reasonable to expect that at least some parts of these events will overlap for many households, but that assumption is not made in this study.

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

Time Distribution No. 1, Notification Process: Activity 1 2 Federal regulations (10CFR50 Appendix E, Item IV.D.3) stipulate, [t]he design objective of the prompt public alert and notification system shall be to have the capability to essentially complete the initial alerting and initiate notification of the public within the plume exposure pathway EPZ within about 15 minutes. Furthermore, 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution No. 3, Travel Home: Activity 3 4 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the demographic survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 54.

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

Distribution No. 5, Snow Clearance Time Distribution Inclement weather scenarios involving snowfall must address the time lags associated with snow clearance. It is assumed that snowplowing equipment is mobilized and deployed during the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snowplowing efforts are generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snow accumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours. (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 (17.4%) who answered that they would not take time to clear their driveway were assumed to be ready immediately at the start of this activity. Essentially, they would drive through the snow on the driveway to access the roadway and begin their evacuation trip.

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

In assessing outliers, there are three alternatives to consider:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

access and/or functional needs, transit dependent) or lack of realism, because the purpose is to estimate trip generation patterns for personal vehicles; LaSalle County Generating Station 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

In general, only flagged values more than 3 standard deviations from the mean are allowed to be considered outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected. Values more than 3.30 standard deviations from the mean were removed for Distribution 2 (Prepare to Leave Work). In addition, values more than 2.70 standard deviations from the mean were removed for Distribution 4 (Prepare to Leave Home).

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

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

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

a) Most of the real data is to the left of the normal curve above, indicating that the network loads faster for the first 8085% of the vehicles, potentially causing more (and earlier) congestion than otherwise modeled.

b) The last 1015% of the real data tails off slower than the comparable normal curve, indicating that there is significant traffic still loading at later times.

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

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

This is done by using the data sets and distributions under different scenarios (e.g. commuter returning, no commuter returning, no snow or snow in each). In general, these are additive, using weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 54 presents the combined trip generation distributions designated for each population group considered. These distributions are presented on the same time scale. (As discussed earlier, the use of strictly additive activities is a conservative approach, because it makes all activities sequential - travel home from work follows preparation to leave work; 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 LaSalle County Generating Station 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

instance, preparation to depart begins by a household member at home while the commuter is still on the road.)

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2Mile Region, sheltered people from 2 to 5 miles downwind continue 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. The population between the 5Mile Region Boundary to EPZ boundary shelters in place.

6. 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 react as does the population in the 2 to 5Mile Region; that is, they will first shelterinplace and then evacuate after the 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region, with the exception of the 20% non compliance.

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

3. The transient population will not be expected to stage their evacuation because of the limited sheltering options available to people who may be at parks, at campgrounds, on a beach, or at other venues. Also, notifying the transient population of a staged evacuation would prove difficult.

LaSalle County Generating Station 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Procedure

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

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

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

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

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

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

ii. No additional trips are generated until time TScen*

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

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

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

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

The value of TScen* is 2:25 for nonsnow scenarios and 3:15 for snow scenarios, on average (see Region R01 in Table 71).

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

a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters

c. Residents with returning commuters and snow conditions

d. Residents without returning commuters and snow conditions Figure 55 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters; On average, the 90th percentile 2Mile Region evacuation time is 145 minutes for good weather and rain, and 195 minutes for snow scenarios. At TScen*,

approximately, 20% of the permanent resident population (who normally would have completed their mobilization activities for an unstaged evacuation) advised to shelter has nevertheless departed the area. These people do not comply with the shelter advisory. Also included on the plot are the trip generation distributions for these groups as applied to the regions advised to evacuate immediately.

Since the 90th percentile evacuation time occurs before the end of the trip generation time, after the sheltered region is advised to evacuate, the shelter trip generation distribution rises to meet the balance of the nonstaged trip generation distribution. Following time TScen*, the balance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 15 minutes. After LaSalle County Generating Station 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas The sitespecific volume for LAS Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA), Chapter 2 (State of Illinois Procedures) indicates the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) will warn and/or evacuate visitors at the Illini State Park, Marseilles Conservation Area, and LaSalle Fish and Wildlife Area. The IDNR Office of Law Enforcement will close the Illinois River in the LAS EPZ to recreational boating. Warning of riverborne traffic will be done in conjunction with the 9th U.S. Coast Guard District out of Chicago.

As discussed in Section 2.3, this study assumes a rapidly escalating accident. As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes which is consistent with the FEMA REP Manual. Table 59 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes. It is assumed that this timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and other transients to return to their vehicles or campground facilities, pack their belongings and begin their evacuation trip.

LaSalle County Generating Station 510 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 Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Employees Elapsed Time Percent Employees (Minutes) Leaving Work (Minutes) Leaving Work 0 0% 35 89.6%

5 28.0% 40 92.3%

10 56.0% 45 95.1%

15 73.1% 50 96.2%

20 79.1% 55 97.3%

25 83.5% 60 100.0%

30 89.6%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response. That is, the sample was reduced in size to include only those households who responded to this question. The underlying assumption is that the distribution of this activity for the Dont know responders, if the event takes place, would be the same as those responders who provided estimates.

LaSalle County Generating Station 511 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Returning Elapsed Time Percent Returning (Minutes) Home (Minutes) Home 0 0 40 76.5%

5 6.0% 45 81.4%

10 19.1% 50 88.0%

15 35.0% 55 89.1%

20 41.5% 60 94.5%

25 51.9% 75 97.3%

30 64.5% 90 100.0%

35 71.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" 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% 90 77.0%

15 3.3% 105 78.3%

30 22.4% 120 84.9%

45 40.8% 135 96.7%

60 55.9% 150 98.0%

75 69.1% 165 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response.

Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow Elapsed Cumulative Cumulative Percent Time Percent Ready to Elapsed Time Completing Snow (Minutes) Evacuate (Minutes) Removal 0 17.4% 75 87.6%

15 33.0% 90 91.5%

30 55.1% 105 94.1%

45 60.3% 120 95.4%

60 76.6% 135 100.0%

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

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

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

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

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation2 Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Residents Residents with Residents with without Commuters Residents 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 15 31% 31% 0% 3% 0% 1%

3 15 39% 39% 0% 10% 0% 2%

4 30 20% 20% 9% 34% 2% 15%

5 15 4% 4% 10% 14% 4% 11%

6 30 0% 0% 26% 16% 14% 21%

7 30 0% 0% 22% 13% 19% 18%

8 15 0% 0% 8% 6% 10% 9%

9 30 0% 0% 14% 4% 18% 12%

10 15 0% 0% 4% 0% 8% 4%

11 60 0% 0% 7% 0% 19% 6%

12 15 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1%

13 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0%

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

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period3 Residents with Residents Without Residents With Residents Without Duration Commuters Commuters Commuters Snow Commuters Snow Time Period (Min) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) (Distribution E) (Distribution F) 1 15 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 15 0% 1% 0% 0%

3 15 0% 2% 0% 1%

4 30 2% 6% 0% 3%

5 15 2% 3% 1% 2%

6 30 5% 3% 3% 4%

7 30 24% 28% 4% 4%

8 15 42% 53% 2% 1%

9 30 14% 4% 3% 3%

10 15 4% 0% 62% 75%

11 60 7% 0% 19% 6%

12 15 0% 0% 2% 1%

13 30 0% 0% 3% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 515 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 2 3 4 5 Residents Households wait 1

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

5. Depart on evacuation trip Activities Consume Time 1

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

2 Applies throughout the year for transients.

Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip LaSalle County Generating Station 516 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities 100%

80%

60%

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

Percent of Population Completing Mobilization Activity 0%

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

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

Cumulative Percentage (%)

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

2.5 7.5 12.5 17.5 22.5 27.5 32.5 37.5 42.5 47.5 52.5 57.5 67.5 82.5 97.5 112.5 Center of Interval (minutes)

Cumulative Data Cumulative Normal Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution LaSalle County Generating Station 518 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 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5Mile Region LaSalle County Generating Station 520 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 EVACUATION CASES An evacuation case defines a combination of Evacuation Region and Evacuation Scenario. The definitions of Region and Scenario are as follows:

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

that must be evacuated in response to a radiological emergency.

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

A total of 22 Regions were identified which encompass all the groupings of SubAreas considered. These Regions are defined in Table 61. The SubArea configurations are identified in Figure 61. Each keyhole sectorbased area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and three adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees, as per NUREG/CR 7002, Rev. 1 guidance. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. These sectors extend to 5 miles from the plant (Region R04 and Region R05) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R06 through R19).

Regions R01, R02, and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R20 through R22 are geographically identical to Regions R02, R04, and R05, respectively; however, those SubAreas between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2Mile Region (Region R01) has evacuated.

Each SubArea that intersects the keyhole is included in the Region, unless specified otherwise in the LaSalle Protective Action Recommendation (PAR) Flowchart (Constellation document #

EPAA111F05). There are instances when a small portion of a SubArea is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (500 people or 10% of SubArea population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the SubArea would not be included in the Region.

The City of Marseilles, Illinois is split between 2 SubAreas. The eastern half of the city is in Sub Area 10, while the western half is in SubArea 11. Based on the sitespecific volume for LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS) Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA), the city would always evacuate as a whole when wind is blowing toward the city (SubArea 10, 11, or both included in keyhole). See Appendix H for additional information.

A total of 14 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 14 x 22 = 308 evacuation cases. Table 62 provides a description of all Scenarios.

Each combination of Region and Scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated. The population 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 population is considered for each LaSalle County Generating Station 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

evacuation case. The Scenario percentages are presented in Table 63, while the Region percentages are provided in Table H1.

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

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to 36%, which is the product of 65% (the number of households with at least one commuter - see Figure F6) and 56% (the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating - see Figure F11). See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of those households with returning commuters (36%) will have a commuter at work during those times, or approximately 4% (10% x 36% = 3.6%, rounded up to 4%) of households overall.

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

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

Assume half of these vacationers leave the area.

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

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

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

Transient activity is estimated to be at its peak (100%) during summer weekends and is less (60%) during the week. As shown in Appendix E, Table E5, the majority of transients use campgrounds and a private RV park (Woodsmoke Ranch) offering overnight accommodations in the EPZ, offset by the other transit facilities in which evening use is minimal; thus, transient activity is estimated to be high (60%) during the summer evening. The recreational areas in the EPZ (shown in Table E5) are predominantly outdoors and will be frequented more often during the summer than the winter. As a result, transient activity during winter weekends is estimated to be 30% and less during the week (20%). Since nearly all parks, campgrounds, and marinas are closed during the evenings in the winter, transient activity is estimated to be 15%.

LaSalle County Generating Station 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

549 20% 1 21%

3,609 6,337 One special event - Seneca Shipyard Days - was considered as Scenario 13, during the summer, midweek/weekend, evening, with good weather. Thus, the special event traffic is 100%

evacuated for Scenario 13 and 0% for all other scenarios.

The Illinois National Guard Training Center is a Collective Training Center wherein soldiers temporarily stay for drills. Drill periods typically consist of one weekend per month and one annual twoweek period1. As such, utilization peaks during weekends and evenings. It is estimated weekday utilization is a quarter of the weekend utilization since the National Guard is a parttime commitment.

As discussed in Section 7, schools and preschools/daycares are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday and 100% of buses will be needed under those circumstances. It is estimated that summer school enrollment is approximately 10% of enrollment during the regular school year for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. School is not in session during weekends and evening, thus no buses to evacuate school/preschool/daycare children are needed under those scenarios.

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

External traffic is estimated to be 100% for all midday scenarios, while it is significantly less (40%) during the evening scenarios 5, 12, and 13.

1 https://www.nationalguard.com/guard-faqs LaSalle County Generating Station 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Wind From SubArea Region Description (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 102 112 13 17 North)

R01 2Mile Region N/A X R02 5Mile Region N/A X X X R03 Full EPZ N/A X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North)

R04 NW, NNW, N 305°11° X X N/A NNE 12°34° Refer to Region R02 R05 NE, ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE 35°169° X X N/A S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, WNW 170°304° Refer to Region R01 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North)

R06 N 350°11° X X X X X R07 NNE 12°34° X X X X X R08 NE, ENE 35°79° X X X X R09 E 80°101° X X X X X R10 ESE 102°124° X X X X X R11 SE 125°146° X X X X R12 SSE 147°169° X X X X X R13 S 170°191° X X X X R14 SSW 192°214° X X X X R15 SW, WSW 215°259° X X X X X R16 W 260°281° X X X X R17 WNW 282°304° X X X R18 NW 305°326° X X X X X R19 NNW 327°349° X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North)

R20 5Mile Region N/A X X X R21 NW, NNW, N 305°11° X X N/A NNE 12°34° Refer to Region R20 R22 NE, ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE 35°169° X X N/A S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, WNW 170°304° Refer to Region R01 SubArea (s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE SubArea(s) Evacuate SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace for R01, then Evacuate 2

The entire city of Marseilles evacuates when either Sub-Area 10 or Sub-Area 11 evacuates. See Appendix H (page H-1) for additional information.

LaSalle County Generating Station 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenario Season3 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None Rain/Light 7 Winter Midweek Midday None Snow 8 Winter Midweek Midday Heavy Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None Rain/Light 10 Winter Weekend Midday None Snow 11 Winter Weekend Midday Heavy Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend Midweek, Special Event: Seneca 13 Summer Evening Good Weekend Shipyard Days Roadway Impact:

14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Single Lane Closure on I80 Westbound4 3

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).

4 A single lane on Interstate (I)-80 Westbound will be closed from approximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) to approximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange - Exit 90 - with Illinois State Route (IL) 23.

LaSalle County Generating Station 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Households Households Illinois With Without National External Returning Returning Special Guard Training School Medical Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Center Buses Facility Buses Traffic 1 36% 64% 96% 60% 21% 0% 25% 10% 100% 100% 100%

2 36% 64% 96% 60% 21% 0% 25% 10% 100% 100% 100%

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

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

5 4% 96% 10% 60% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 40%

6 36% 64% 100% 20% 21% 0% 25% 100% 100% 100% 100%

7 36% 64% 100% 20% 21% 0% 25% 100% 100% 100% 100%

8 36% 64% 100% 20% 21% 0% 25% 100% 100% 100% 100%

9 4% 96% 10% 30% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

10 4% 96% 10% 30% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

11 4% 96% 10% 30% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

12 4% 96% 10% 15% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 40%

13 4% 96% 10% 60% 20% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

14 36% 64% 96% 60% 21% 0% 25% 10% 100% 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. These values are rounded to the nearest whole number for this table. The actual values computed by the formula shown on page 63 are used to compute the values shown in Table 64 Special Event ..............................................Additional vehicles in the EPZ due to the identified special event.

Illinois National Guard Training Center .......Military training center wherein all personnel drive themselves and would evacuate using their personal vehicles.

School, Medical, and Transit Buses .............Vehicleequivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing schools, preschools/daycares (except those evacuated in personal passenger vehicles),

medical facility, and transitdependent people (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

External Through Traffic .............................Traffic passing through the EPZ on interstates/freeways and major arterial roads at the start of the evacuation. This traffic is stopped by access control approximately two (2) hours after the evacuation begins.

LaSalle County Generating Station 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario5 Illinois National Residents Residents Guard Total with without Special Training School Medical Transit External Scenario Scenarios Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Center Buses Facility Buses Traffic Vehicles 1 3,609 6,337 549 2,435 6,117 0 70 11 39 16 5,456 24,639 2 3,609 6,337 549 2,435 6,117 0 70 11 39 16 5,456 24,639 3 361 9,585 57 4,059 5,826 0 278 0 39 16 5,456 25,677 4 361 9,585 57 4,059 5,826 0 278 0 39 16 5,456 25,677 5 361 9,585 57 2,435 5,826 0 278 0 39 16 2,182 20,779 6 3,609 6,337 572 812 6,117 0 70 114 39 16 5,456 23,142 7 3,609 6,337 572 812 6,117 0 70 114 39 16 5,456 23,142 8 3,609 6,337 572 812 6,117 0 70 114 39 16 5,456 23,142 9 361 9,585 57 1,218 5,826 0 278 0 39 16 5,456 22,836 10 361 9,585 57 1,218 5,826 0 278 0 39 16 5,456 22,836 11 361 9,585 57 1,218 5,826 0 278 0 39 16 5,456 22,836 12 361 9,585 57 609 5,826 0 278 0 39 16 2,182 18,953 13 361 9,585 57 2,435 5,826 575 278 0 39 16 2,182 21,354 14 3,609 6,337 549 2,435 6,117 0 70 11 39 16 5,456 24,639 5

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. SubAreas Comprising the LAS EPZ LaSalle County Generating Station 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE)

This section presents the ETE results of the computer analyses using the DYNEV II System described in Appendices B, C, and D. These results cover 22 Evacuation Regions within the LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS) Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and the 14 Evacuation Scenarios discussed in Section 6.

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

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

7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation Voluntary evacuees are permanent residents within the EPZ in SubAreas for which an Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) has not been issued, yet who elect to evacuate. Shadow evacuation is the voluntary outward movement of some permanent residents from the Shadow Region (outside the EPZ) for whom no protective action recommendation has been issued. Both voluntary and shadow evacuations are assumed to take place over the same time frame as the evacuation from within the impacted Evacuation Region.

The ETE for the LAS 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 49,340 permanent residents reside in the Shadow Region; 20% of them would evacuate. See Table 64 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

Traffic generated within this Shadow Region, including externalexternal traffic (see Section 3.11), traveling away from the plant location, has the potential for impeding evacuating vehicles from within the Evacuation Region. All ETE calculations include this shadow traffic movement.

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

5. The population between the 5Mile Region boundary to EPZ boundary shelters in place.

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

See Section 5.4.2 for additional information on staged evacuation.

7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation Figure 73 through Figure 76 illustrate the patterns of traffic congestion that arise for the case when the entire EPZ (Region R03) is advised to evacuate during the summer, midweek, midday period under good weather conditions (Scenario 1).

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

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

Several measures are available for describing individually, or in combination, the severity of a LOS F condition:

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

• 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.

At 45 minutes after the ATE, Figure 73 displays significant congestion (LOS F) within the population center of Marseilles and developing congestion within population centers of Mazon, Morris, Ottawa, and Seneca. The large number of vehicles on Main St and Ruland St northbound leaving Marseilles and Illini State Park (transient attraction) are significant, resulting in significant LaSalle County Generating Station 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

congestion for some portions of the roadway. Transient population from Illini State Park (2,000 people evacuating in 870 vehicles) evacuate westbound towards a stop controlled intersection with N 2659th Rd to access Main St northbound, delaying vehicles turning right from N 2659th Rd.

Thus, major congestion (LOS E) is visible on portions of N 2659th Rd (See inset in Figure 73).

Broadway St westbound, accessing Main St experiences minor congestion (LOS D). E 29th Rd and County Road (CR) 4 is significantly congested, as a result of the significant transient population (3,416 people evacuating in 1,871 vehicles) at Woodsmoke Ranch. Evacuees from Woodsmoke Ranch evacuate eastbound on N 2850th Rd to access E 29th Rd northbound, and on E 28th Rd northbound to access CR 4 eastbound, which are stop controlled intersections. There is some congestion northbound on CR 170 leaving Seneca, which limits the number of vehicles turning left from N 2850th Rd (because of the stop sign). US Highway (US) 6 eastbound towards Illinois State Route (IL) 47 operates at LOS D or better. Grand Ridge Rd eastbound operates at LOS B as evacuees access a stopcontrolled intersection with IL 47. Interstate (I)80 and other roads within the study area operates at LOS B or are exhibiting no congestion (LOS A). At this time, about 28%

of evacuees (i.e., about 76% of transients/employees and about 13% of the EPZ residents with no commuter) have begun their evacuation trips and 21% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 15 minutes after the ATE, the roadways within the 2 and 5Mile Regions are operating at a LOS A, as shown in Figure 74. The congestion in the vicinity of Woodsmoke Ranch and Illini State Park has dissipated. Congestion persists on some portions of Main St northbound due to a stop sign at the intersection with US 6. US 6 westbound towards IL 71 operates at LOS D as evacuees access IL 71 at a signalized intersection. US 6 eastbound towards IL 47 operates mostly at LOS D, as evacuees enter Morris which contains multiple stop and signal controlled intersections. CR 4 eastbound and E 29th Rd northbound is now operating at LOS E, as more evacuees begin their evacuation. CR 170 (in Seneca) and parts of Lisbon Rd (in Morris) operates at LOS C or better. Minor congestion (LOS C) is now visible on very small portions of CR 18 within Streator and US 6 just west of Ottawa within the Shadow Region. I80 within the study area operates at LOS C or better, as external traffic has not been stopped by access control yet. At this time, approximately 52% of the evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and about 45% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the ATE, as shown in Figure 75, congestion within the EPZ has dissipated except along Ruland St northbound within Marseilles. US 6, near the population centers of Morris, North Utica and Ottawa, now operate at LOS C or better. Minor congestion persists in Streator along CR 18 in the Shadow Region. All other roads within the study area are exhibiting no congestion and are operating at LOS B or better. At this time, approximately 81% of the evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and about 75% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE, Figure 76 shows the congestion within the EPZ clears and is now operating at a LOS A. At this time, approximately 96% of vehicles have begun their evacuation trips and about 92% have evacuated. Therefore, this indicates that the trip generation time is dictating the 100th percentile ETE, as evacuees who depart at this time are encountering no traffic congestion or delays within the EPZ. Only a small portion of US 6 and CR 18, near the LaSalle County Generating Station 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

population centers of Morris, North Utica, Streator, within the Shadow Region, operate with minimal delays (LOS B), which clears 30 minutes later at 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 20 minutes after the ATE.

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 77 through Figure 720. These figures display the rate at which traffic flows out of the indicated areas for the case of an evacuation of the full EPZ (Region R03) under the indicated conditions. One figure is presented for each scenario considered.

As indicated in Figure 77 through Figure 720, there is typically a long "tail" to these distributions due to the mobilization and not congestion (low population demand). Vehicles begin to evacuate an area slowly at first, as people respond to the ATE at different rates. Then traffic demand builds rapidly (slopes of curves increase). When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, there are a few evacuation routes servicing the remaining demand.

This decline in aggregate flow rate, towards the end of the process, is characterized by these curves flattening and gradually becoming horizontal. Ideally, it would be desirable to fully saturate all evacuation routes equally so that all will service traffic near capacity levels and all will clear at the same time. For this ideal situation, all curves would retain the same slope until the end of mobilization time - thus minimizing evacuation time. In reality, this ideal is generally unattainable reflecting the spatial variation in population density, mobilization rates and in highway capacity over the EPZ.

7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results Table 71 and Table 72 present the ETE values for all 22 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 The ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90% of the population within a Region, to evacuate 71 from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

The ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100% of the population within a Region, to 72 evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The animation snapshots described in Section 7.3 reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (un staged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure 76.

There is no congestion (LOS B or better) within the EPZ, except for some areas beyond the 5Mile Region, along the roads leaving Marseilles and the roads in the vicinity of Woodsmoke Ranch that experience congestion (LOS D or worse). This is reflected in the ETE statistics:

The 2Mile Region (Region R01) and 5Mile Region (Region R02) consists of mostly transient and plant employee vehicles and a small percentage of permanent resident vehicles. All the roadways except Grand Ridge Rd eastbound (LOS B) within the 5Mile Region operates at LOS A. Even though employees and transients mobilize quickly (within 90 minutes), the permanent residents with commuters take much longer to mobilize (270 minutes), as shown in Figure 54. As such, the 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region (R01) and 5Mile Region (R02) are comparable ranging from 2:05 (hr:min) and 2:45 for good weather and rain scenarios and are at most 3:25 for heavy snow scenarios. This mimics the combination of the quick mobilizing employees/transients and the slow mobilizing permanent residents with commuters.

The 90th percentile ETE for the full EPZ (Region R03) are up to 20 minutes longer than for Regions R02 and R05 due to the congestion on roadways leaving Marseilles and in the vicinity of Woodsmoke Ranch. The 90th percentile ETE ranges between 2:20 and 2:45 for good weather and rain, and up to 3:25 for heavy snow.

The 100th percentile ETE for all Regions and Scenarios parallel mobilization time, as the minimal congestion within the EPZ dissipates (no speed and capacity reductions exist) after 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE, as displayed in Figure 76 and discussed in Section 7.3. The 100th percentile ETE ranges from 4:30 to 4:40 (mobilization time plus 10 minutes to travel out of the EPZ) for good weather and rain cases, and from 5:45 to 5:55 for snow cases.

Comparison of Scenarios 5 and 13 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicate that the Special Event -

Seneca Shipyard Days - has no impact to the 90th percentile ETEs. The additional 575 transient vehicles considered for the special event will increase congestion and the number of transients locally in Seneca, LaSalle County, however, the traffic congestion on roadways leaving Marseilles lasts longer and dictates the 90th percentile ETE. Due to the excess capacity to service the additional evacuating demand, traffic congestion within the EPZ clears before the trip generation (plus the travel time to the EPZ boundary). As a result, the 100th percentile ETE are not impacted by the special event.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 and in Table 72 indicate that the roadway impact

- a single lane closure on I80 westbound (from approximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) to approximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange - Exit 90 - with State Route 23) - has no impacts on the 90th percentile ETE. The single lane access ramps to I80 are bottlenecks such that the main thoroughfare of I80 is underutilized. As such, the loss of a single lane on I80 does not significantly impact ETE. The single lane closure has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE, as the trip generation (plus the travel time to the EPZ boundary) dictates the ETE.

LaSalle County Generating Station 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 73 and Table 74 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (unstaged) and staged evacuation results. Note that Regions R20, R21 and R22 are geographically identical to Regions R02, R04, and R05, respectively. The times shown in Table 73 and Table 74 are when the 2Mile Region is 90% clear and 100% clear, respectively.

The objective of a staged evacuation is to show that the ETE for the 2Mile Region can be significantly reduced (30 minutes or 25%, whichever is less) without significantly impacting people beyond the regions between 2 miles and 5 miles. As shown in Table 73 and Table 74, the 90th percentile ETE for the 2Mile Region remains the same when a staged evacuation is implemented for all Regions and Scenarios. The reason for this is that the nearest traffic congestion to the plant is in Marseilles and near Woodsmoke Ranch - well beyond the 5Mile Region. This congestion does not extend upstream to the extent that it penetrates to within the 2Mile Region (see Section 7.3 and Figure 73 through Figure 76). The 100th percentile ETE remains the same, as the trip generation (plus the travel time to the EPZ boundary) dictates the ETE.

To determine the effect of staged evacuation on the residents beyond the 2Mile Region, the ETE for Regions R02, R04, and R05 are compared to Regions R20, R21, and R22, respectively, in Table 71 and Table 72. A comparison of ETE between these similar regions reveals that staging increases the ETE for those in the 2 to 5mile area by at most 35 minutes (see Table 71) for the 90th percentile and has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE. The increase in the 90th percentile ETE is due to the large number of evacuating vehicles, beyond the 2Mile Region, sheltering and delaying the start of their evacuation. As shown in Figure 55, staging the evacuation causes a significant spike (sharp increase) in mobilization (tripgeneration rate) of evacuating vehicles.

This spike oversaturates evacuation routes, which increases traffic congestion and prolongs ETE.

Therefore, staging evacuation provides no benefit to evacuees within the 2Mile Region and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond the 2Mile Region. Based on the guidance in NUREG0654, Supplement 3, this analysis would result in staged evacuation not being implemented for this site.

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

Identify the applicable Scenario (Step 1):

• Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

• Day of Week Midweek Weekend LaSalle County Generating Station 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• Time of Day Midday Evening

• Weather Condition Good Weather Rain/Light Snow Heavy Snow

• Special Event Seneca Shipyard Days

• Roadway Impact A single lane closure on I80 westbound from approximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) to approximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange - Exit 90 - with Illinois State Route 23.

• 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 heavy snow are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (8) and (11) for heavy snow apply.

• The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes public schools are in session at summer school enrollment levels (lower than normal enrollment).

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

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

With the desired percentile ETE and Scenario identified, now identify the Evacuation Region (Step 2):

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2 Miles (Region R01)

To 5 Miles (Regions R02, R04, and R05)

To EPZ Boundary (Regions R03, R06 through R19)

• Enter Table 75 and identify the applicable group of candidate Regions based on the distance that the selected Region extends from the plant. Select the Evacuation Region identifier in that row, based on the azimuth direction of the plume, from the first column of the table.

Determine the ETE Table based on the percentile selected. Then, for the Scenario identified in Step 1 and the Evacuation Region identified in Step 2, proceed as follows:

• The columns of Table 71 are labeled with the Scenario numbers. Identify the proper column in the selected table using the Scenario number determined in Step 1.

• Identify the row in this table that provides ETE values for the Region identified in Step 2.

• The unique data cell defined by the column and row so determined contains the desired value of ETE expressed in Hours: Minutes.

Example It is desired to identify the ETE for the following conditions:

• Sunday, August 10th at 10:00 PM.

• It is raining.

• Wind direction is from the north (N).

• Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 2Mile Region and downwind to the 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 Region and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary for wind direction from the N and read Region R06 in the first column of that row.

3. Enter Table 71 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for Scenario 4 and Region R06. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R06; it contains the ETE value of 2:35.

LaSalle County Generating Station 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Region Weather Rain Weather Rain Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R02 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:40 2:45 3:25 2:25 2:25 3:05 2:30 2:15 2:30 R03 2:40 2:40 2:20 2:25 2:30 2:45 2:45 3:25 2:25 2:25 3:10 2:35 2:30 2:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:40 2:40 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:25 2:15 2:30 R05 2:30 2:30 2:00 2:00 2:10 2:40 2:45 3:25 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:25 2:10 2:30 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R06 2:50 2:50 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:50 2:55 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:35 2:35 2:50 R07 2:45 2:50 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:35 2:30 2:45 R08 2:50 2:50 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:40 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:35 2:30 2:50 R09 2:50 2:50 2:30 2:30 2:35 2:55 2:55 3:40 2:40 2:40 3:20 2:40 2:35 2:50 R10 2:30 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:25 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:55 2:30 2:25 2:30 R11 2:25 2:25 2:15 2:15 2:25 2:25 2:25 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:55 2:30 2:25 2:25 R12 2:40 2:40 2:30 2:30 2:30 2:45 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:35 2:30 2:40 R13 2:30 2:30 2:15 2:15 2:25 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:20 2:20 3:00 2:30 2:25 2:30 R14 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:20 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:15 2:15 2:55 2:30 2:20 2:25 R15 2:25 2:25 2:10 2:10 2:20 2:30 2:30 3:15 2:15 2:15 2:55 2:30 2:20 2:25 R16 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:35 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:35 2:30 2:45 R17 2:45 2:45 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:45 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:15 2:30 2:25 2:45 R18 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:50 2:50 3:35 2:30 2:35 3:15 2:35 2:30 2:45 R19 2:45 2:45 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:45 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:10 2:30 2:25 2:45 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R20 2:45 2:45 2:35 2:35 2:40 2:50 2:55 3:45 2:45 2:45 3:40 2:50 2:40 2:45 R21 2:35 2:35 2:15 2:15 2:20 2:40 2:40 3:30 2:25 2:25 3:15 2:30 2:20 2:35 R22 2:45 2:45 2:30 2:35 2:40 2:50 2:50 3:45 2:45 2:45 3:40 2:45 2:40 2:45 LaSalle County Generating Station 79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek, Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend 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 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R02 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 R03 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles R04 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 R05 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R06 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R07 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R08 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R09 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R10 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R11 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R12 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R13 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R14 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R15 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R16 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R17 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R18 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R19 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles R20 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 R21 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 R22 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 5:50 4:35 4:35 4:35 LaSalle County Generating Station 710 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek, Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend 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 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R02 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R05 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:40 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R20 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R21 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 R22 2:30 2:30 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:20 2:20 2:20 3:05 2:20 2:15 2:30 LaSalle County Generating Station 711 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek, Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend 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 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and 5Mile Region R01 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R02 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R04 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R05 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R20 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R21 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 R22 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 5:45 4:30 4:30 4:30 LaSalle County Generating Station 712 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions Radial Regions Wind From SubArea Region Description (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101 111 13 17 North)

R01 2Mile Region N/A X R02 5Mile Region N/A X X X R03 Full EPZ N/A X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North)

R04 NW, NNW, N 305°11° X X N/A NNE 12°34° Refer to Region R02 R05 NE, ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE 35°169° X X N/A S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, WNW 170°304° Refer to Region R01 Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101 111 13 17 North)

R06 N 350°11° X X X X X R07 NNE 12°34° X X X X X R08 NE, ENE 35°79° X X X X R09 E 80°101° X X X X X R10 ESE 102°124° X X X X X R11 SE 125°146° X X X X R12 SSE 147°169° X X X X X R13 S 170°191° X X X X R14 SSW 192°214° X X X X R15 SW, WSW 215°259° X X X X X R16 W 260°281° X X X X R17 WNW 282°304° X X X R18 NW 305°326° X X X X X R19 NNW 327°349° X X X X Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Wind From SubArea Region Wind Direction From (Degrees from 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North)

R20 5Mile Region N/A X X X R21 NW, NNW, N 305°11° X X N/A NNE 12°34° Refer to Region R20 R22 NE, ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE 35°169° X X N/A S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, WNW 170°304° Refer to Region R01 SubArea (s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for SubArea(s) Evacuate SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace R01, then Evacuate 1

The entire city of Marseilles evacuates when either Sub-Area 10 or Sub-Area 11 evacuates. See Appendix H (page H-1) for additional information.

LaSalle County Generating Station 713 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology LaSalle County Generating Station 714 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 72. LAS Shadow Region LaSalle County Generating Station 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 45 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate LaSalle County Generating Station 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate LaSalle County Generating Station 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate LaSalle County Generating Station 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 50 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate LaSalle County Generating Station 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

25 20 Vehicles Evacuating 15 (Thousands) 10 5

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

Figure 77. 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%

25 20 Vehicles Evacuating 15 (Thousands) 10 5

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

Figure 78. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 LaSalle County Generating Station 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

25 20 Vehicles Evacuating 15 (Thousands) 10 5

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

Figure 79. 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%

25 20 Vehicles Evacuating 15 (Thousands) 10 5

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

Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 LaSalle County Generating Station 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

18 16 14 Vehicles Evacuating 12 10 (Thousands) 8 6

4 2

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

Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

20 18 16 Vehicles Evacuating 14 12 10 (Thousands) 8 6

4 2

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

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 LaSalle County Generating Station 722 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%

20 18 16 Vehicles Evacuating 14 12 10 (Thousands) 8 6

4 2

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

Figure 713. 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%

20 18 16 Vehicles Evacuating 14 12 10 (Thousands) 8 6

4 2

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

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 LaSalle County Generating Station 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

20 18 16 Vehicles Evacuating 14 12 10 (Thousands) 8 6

4 2

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

Figure 715. 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%

20 18 16 Vehicles Evacuating 14 12 10 (Thousands) 8 6

4 2

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

Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 LaSalle County Generating Station 724 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%

20 18 16 Vehicles Evacuating 14 12 10 (Thousands) 8 6

4 2

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

Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

16 14 12 Vehicles Evacuating 10 8

(Thousands) 6 4

2 0

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

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 LaSalle County Generating Station 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

18 16 14 Vehicles Evacuating 12 10 8

(Thousands) 6 4

2 0

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

Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

25 20 Vehicles Evacuating 15 (Thousands) 10 5

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

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 LaSalle County Generating Station 726 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, wheelchair transport vehicles, and ambulances). The demand for transit service reflects the needs of three population groups:

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

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

This equivalence factor represents the longer size and more sluggish operating characteristics of a transit vehicle, relative to those of a pc. An ambulance is treated as one pc.

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

Specifically:

• Bus drivers must be alerted

• They must travel to the bus depot

• They must be briefed there and assigned to a route or facility These activities consume time. Based on discussion with offsite agencies and as discussed in item 4ac of Section 2.4, it is estimated that bus mobilization time for schools and preschools will average approximately 90 minutes extending from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), to the time when buses first arrive at the facility to be evacuated. It is assumed transit dependent buses and access and/or functional needs vehicles are mobilized when about 90% of the residents with no commuters have completed their mobilization activities at 150 minutes after the ATE, as discussed in item 4b of Section 2.4.

During this mobilization period, other mobilization activities are taking place. One of these is the action taken by parents, neighbors, relatives and friends to pick up children from school prior to the arrival of buses, so that they may join their families. Virtually all studies of evacuations have concluded that this bonding process of uniting families is universally prevalent during emergencies and should be anticipated in the planning process. The current public information disseminated to residents of the LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS)

Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to reception centers if an evacuation were ordered, and that parents should pick up schoolchildren at the reception centers.

As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a rapidly escalating accident. This report provides estimates of buses under the assumption that no children will be picked up by their parents (in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1) to present an upper bound estimate of buses required. 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 LaSalle County Generating Station 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

subsequent wave to the EPZ to evacuate the transitdependent population. The procedure for computing transitdependent ETE is to:

• Estimate demand for transit service (discussed in Section 3)

• Estimate time to perform all transit functions

• Estimate route travel times to the EPZ boundary and to the reception centers Figure 81 presents the chronology of events relevant to transit operations. The elapsed time for each activity will now be discussed with reference to Figure 81.

8.1 ETEs for Schools, Preschools/Daycares, Transit Dependent People, and Medical Facilities The EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if schools are in session at the time of the ATE) as the first priority in the event of an emergency. In the event that the allocation of buses dispatched from the depots to the various facilities and to the bus routes is somewhat inefficient, or if there is a shortfall of available drivers, then there may be a need for some buses to return to the EPZ from the reception center after completing their first evacuation trip, to complete a second wave of providing transportation service to evacuees.

The number of available transportation resources were based on the previous study that were confirmed or updated by the offsite agencies. Table 81 summarizes the capacity of transportation resources. Also included in the table is the transportation resource capacity needed to evacuate schools, preschools/daycares, medical facilities, transitdependent population, and access and/or functional needs (discussed below in Section 8.2). There are sufficient bus resources available to evacuate the schoolchildren, patients, the transit dependent population and the access and/or functional needs population in the EPZ in a single wave. Furthermore, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R03 (the entire EPZ), then there will likely be ample transit resources relative to demand in the impacted Region. 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 transit routes.

Evacuation of Schools and Preschools/Daycares Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

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

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The buses servicing the schools and preschools/daycare are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the ATE - 90 minutes mobilization time plus 15 minutes loading time

- in good weather. The UNITES software discussed in Section 1.3 was used to define bus routes along the most likely path from a school or preschool/daycare being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate reception center. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes from the school/preschool/daycare 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., 100 to 105 minutes after the ATE for good weather) were used to compute the average speed for each route, as follows:

. . 60 .

. 1 .

60 .

1 .

The average speed computed (using this methodology) for the buses servicing each of the schools and preschools/daycares in the EPZ is shown in Table 82 through Table 84. To comply with state bus speed regulations, the computed speeds are restricted to 55 mph, 50 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively. The travel time to the EPZ boundary was computed for each bus using the computed average speed and the distance to the EPZ boundary along the most likely route out of the EPZ. The travel time from the EPZ boundary to the Reception Center was computed assuming an average speed of 55 mph, 50 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively.

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

LaSalle County 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 School Reception Center.

The evacuation time out of the EPZ can be computed as the sum of times associated with Activities ABC, CD, and DE (For example: 90 minutes + 15 + 24 = 2:10 rounded to the nearest 5 minutes for Ransom Consolidated School in good weather).

The average ETE for schools and preschools/daycares are 30 minutes less than the 90th percentile ETE for Region R03 for the general population during Scenario 6 conditions (2:45 -

2:15 = 0:30) in good weather. Hence, ETE is not likely to impact protective action decision making.

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

Activity: Travel to School Reception Centers (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the reception centers are measured using geographic information system (GIS) software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the reception center. The reception centers are mapped in Figure 103. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 55 mph, 50 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively, are applied for this activity, for the buses servicing the schools and preschools/daycares in the EPZ.

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

A detailed computation of the transit dependent people is discussed in Section 3.8. The total number of transit dependent people per SubArea was determined using a weighted distribution based on population. SubAreas that were determined to have less than one transitdependent person were ignored and no transit bus routes were assigned. The number of buses required to evacuate this population was determined by the capacity of 30 people per bus. The SubAreas that were determined to have very few transitdependent person were grouped and a bus route was assigned. The eight (8) bus routes utilized in this study were designed by KLD to service a single or group of SubArea. These routes are described in Table 101 and mapped in Figure 102. Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along major evacuation routes, then proceed out of the EPZ. It is assumed that residents will walk to the nearest major roadway and flag down a passing bus, and that they can arrive at the roadway within the 150minute bus mobilization time (good weather).

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at their designated route. The buses dispatched from the depots to service the transitdependent evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), 90%

of the evacuees will complete their mobilization when the buses begin their routes at approximately 150 minutes after the ATE. The residents taking longer to mobilize are assumed LaSalle County Generating Station 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

to rideshare with a friend or neighbor. Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather -

160 minutes in rain/light snow and 170 minutes in heavy snow conditions.

The ETEs for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. Each route has one bus that departs at 150 minutes after the ATE. Table 85 (good weather), Table 86 (rain/light snow) and Table 87 (heavy snow) show the ETE breakdown for each step in the transitdependent evacuation process.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

For multiple stops along a pickup route (transitdependent bus routes) estimation of travel time must allow for the delay associated with stopping and starting at each pickup point. The time, t, required for a bus to decelerate at a rate, a, expressed in ft/sec/sec, from a speed, v, expressed in ft/sec, to a stop, is t = v/a. Assuming the same acceleration rate and final speed following the stop yields a total time, T, to service boarding passengers:

2 ,

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

Assigning reasonable estimates:

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

• v = 25 miles per hour (mph) = 37 feet/second (ft/sec)

• a = 4 ft/sec/sec, a moderate average rate Then, P 1 minute per stop. Allowing 30 minutes pickup time per bus run implies 30 stops per run, for good weather. It is assumed that bus acceleration and speed will be less in rain/light snow resulting in 40 minutes of pickup time per bus and 50 minutes in heavy snow.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Bus travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school and preschool/daycare evacuation, where they are restricted to 55 mph, 50 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow and heavy snow, respectively.

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

For example, the ETE for the bus servicing SubArea 4 is computed as 150 + 36 + 30 = 3:40 for good weather (rounded to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 36 minutes is the time to travel 27.5 miles at 45.1 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route at 150 minutes.

The average singlewave ETE (3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes) for the transit dependent population exceeds the 90th percentile ETE for the general population by 45 minutes (3:302.45=0:45) for a winter, midweek, midday, with good weather scenario (Scenario 6). The 45minute difference is significant to potentially impact the protective action decision making.

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

Activity: Travel to Reception Centers (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the reception centers are measured using geographic information system (GIS) software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the reception center. The reception centers are mapped in Figure 103. For a singlewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 55 mph, 50 mph, and 45 mph for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population. The relocation of transitdependent evacuees from the reception centers to congregate care centers, if the counties decide to do so, is not considered in this study.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

As per item 4c of Section 2.4, it is assumed that the mobilization time for medical facilities average 90 minutes in good weather, 100 minutes in rain/light snow and 110 minutes in heavy snow. Specially trained medical support staff (working their regular shift) will be on site to assist in the evacuation of patients. Additional staff (if needed) could be mobilized over this same 90 minute 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 for buses, wheelchair accessible buses/vans, and ambulances, respectively. Item 3 of Section 2.4 discusses transit vehicle capacities to cap loading times per vehicle type.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

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

Table 88 through Table 810 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather, rain/light snow, and heavy snow. Average speeds output by the model for Scenario 6 LaSalle County Generating Station 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(Scenario 7 for rain/light snow and Scenario 8 for heavy snow) Region 3, capped at 55 mph (50 mph for rain/light snow and 40 mph for heavy snow), are used to compute travel time to 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, and ambulances at capacity is assumed. All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, the calculation of ETE for the Heritage Health with 29 ambulatory residents during good weather is:

ETE: 90 + (29 x 1) + 55 = 174 minutes or 2:55 rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

It is assumed that medical facility population is directly evacuated to appropriate reception center. 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 singlewave ETE for medical facilities is the same as the 90th percentile ETE for Region R03 for the general population during Scenario 6 conditions in good weather. Hence, ETE is not likely to impact protective action decision making.

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population Table 811 summarizes the ETE for access and/or functional needs population. The table is categorized by type of vehicle required and then broken down by weather condition. The table takes into consideration the deployment of multiple vehicles (not filled to capacity) to reduce the number of stops per vehicle. Due to the limitations on driving for access and/or functional needs persons, it assumed they will be picked up from their homes. Furthermore, it is conservatively assumed that ambulatory access and/or functional needs households are spaced 3 miles apart and bedridden households are spaced 5 miles apart. Bus speeds approximate 20 mph between households and ambulance speeds approximate 30 mph in good weather (10%

slower in rain/light snow, 20% slower in heavy snow). Similar to transit dependent evacuees, mobilization times of 150 minutes were used (160 minutes for rain/light snow, and 170 minutes for heavy snow). Loading times of 1 minute per person are assumed for ambulatory people and 15 minutes per person are assumed for bedridden people. For buses evacuating ambulatory access and/or functional needs, the last household is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 55 mph (50 mph for rain/light snow and 45 mph for heavy snow), is used to compute travel time after the last pickup. ETE is computed by summing mobilization time, loading time at first household, travel to subsequent households, loading time at subsequent households, and travel time to EPZ boundary. All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, assuming no more than one access and/or functional needs person per household (HH) implies that 10 households need to be serviced. While only 1 bus is needed from a capacity perspective, if 2 buses are deployed to service the access and/or functional needs HH, LaSalle County Generating Station 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

then each would require 5 stops maximum. For example, the ETE for access and/or functional needs ambulatory people in good weather is computed as follows:

1. Assume 2 buses are deployed, each with about 5 stops, to service a total of 10 HH.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the first pickup location: 150 minutes

b. Load HH members at first pickup: 1 minute

c. Travel to subsequent pickup locations: 4 @ 9 minutes (3 miles at 20 mph) = 36 minutes

d. Load HH members at subsequent pickup locations: 4 @ 1 minutes = 4 minutes

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 5 miles @ 48.2 mph (network wide average speed at 3:10 hours after the ATE) = 6 minutes ETE: 150 + 1 + 36 + 4 + 6 = 3:20 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes)

It is estimated that 2 ambulances will be needed to evacuate the 2 homebound bedridden person within the EPZ. As shown in Table 81, there are 20 ambulances available within the EPZ and only 2 are required to evacuate the bedridden access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ.

For example, the ETE for access and/or functional needs bedridden people in good weather is computed as follows:

3. Ambulance arrives at first household: 150 minutes

4. Loading time at first household: 15 minutes

5. Travel time to EPZ boundary: 5 miles @ 49.4 mph (network wide average speed at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 45 minutes after the ATE) = 7 minutes (rounded up)

ETE: 150 + 15 + 7 = 2:55 (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes).

The average ETE for a single wave evacuation of the access and/or functional needs population exceeds the general population ETE by 35 minutes (3:202:45= 0:35) at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03), during Scenario 6 conditions. The 35minute difference is significant enough to potentially impact the protective action decision making.

LaSalle County Generating Station 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Wheelchair Transportation Provider Buses Vans Buses/Vans Ambulances Resources Available Grundy County 232 13 37 15 LaSalle County 31 3 2 5 North Central Area Transit (NCAT) 0 0 3 0 TOTAL: 263 16 42 20 Resources Needed Medical Facilities(Table 36): 4 0 161 0 Schools (Table 37): 53 0 0 0 Preschools/Daycares (Table 38): 4 0 0 0 TransitDependent Transportation (Table 39): 8 0 0 0 Access and/or Functional Needs (Table 310): 2 0 0 2 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 71 0 16 2 1

Includes one (1) wheelchair van and 15 wheelchair buses.

LaSalle County Generating Station 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

School and Preschool/Daycare Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

LASALLE COUNTY, IL Grace ChurchRhema Christian Academy 90 15 27.0 52.6 31 2:20 4.7 6 2:30 Ransom Consolidated School 90 15 16.8 43.7 24 2:10 3.6 4 2:15 Grand Ridge Grade School 90 15 15.2 53.4 18 2:05 5.5 7 2:15 Central Intermediate School 90 15 15.2 53.4 18 2:05 5.5 7 2:15 Shepherd Middle School 90 15 15.2 53.4 18 2:05 5.5 7 2:15 Seneca Grade School South Campus 90 15 21.2 49.0 26 2:15 14.7 17 2:35 Seneca Grade School North Campus 90 15 21.2 49.2 26 2:15 14.2 16 2:35 Marseilles Elementary School 90 15 21.3 53.1 25 2:10 8.7 10 2:20 Seneca High School 90 15 21.2 49.6 26 2:15 14.3 16 2:35 Holy Trinity Lutheran Preschool 90 15 27.1 29.9 55 2:40 1.3 2 2:45 Glory Land Kids ChildCare Center 90 15 21.2 49.0 26 2:15 14.7 17 2:35 Seneca Head Start 90 15 21.2 49.2 26 2:15 14.2 16 2:30 Maximum for EPZ: 2:40 Maximum: 2:45 Average for EPZ: 2:15 Average: 2:30 LaSalle County Generating Station 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow Travel Travel Time from Driver Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ EPZ Bdry ETA to Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to to R.C. R.C.

School and Preschool/Daycare Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

LASALLE COUNTY, IL Grace ChurchRhema Christian Academy 100 20 27.0 48.0 34 2:35 4.7 6 2:45 Ransom Consolidated School 100 20 16.8 39.8 26 2:30 3.6 5 2:35 Grand Ridge Grade School 100 20 15.2 46.6 20 2:20 5.5 7 2:30 Central Intermediate School 100 20 15.2 46.6 20 2:20 5.5 7 2:30 Shepherd Middle School 100 20 15.2 46.6 20 2:20 5.5 7 2:30 Seneca Grade School South Campus 100 20 21.2 43.3 30 2:30 14.7 18 2:50 Seneca Grade School North Campus 100 20 21.2 43.4 30 2:30 14.2 18 2:50 Marseilles Elementary School 100 20 21.3 46.7 28 2:30 8.7 11 2:45 Seneca High School 100 20 21.2 43.7 30 2:30 14.3 18 2:50 Holy Trinity Lutheran Preschool 100 20 27.1 26.9 61 3:05 1.3 2 3:10 Glory Land Kids ChildCare Center 100 20 21.2 43.3 30 2:30 14.7 18 2:50 Seneca Head Start 100 20 21.2 43.4 30 2:30 14.2 18 2:50 Maximum for EPZ: 3:05 Maximum: 3:10 Average for EPZ: 2:30 Average: 2:45 LaSalle County Generating Station 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. School and Preschool/Daycare Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow Travel Driver Travel Time from Mobilizati Loading Dist. To Average Time to Dist. EPZ EPZ Bdry ETA to on Time Time EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to to R.C. R.C.

School and Preschool/Daycare (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) R.C. (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

LASALLE COUNTY, IL Grace ChurchRhema Christian Academy 110 25 27.0 45.0 37 2:55 4.7 7 3:05 Ransom Consolidated School 110 25 16.8 38.2 27 2:45 3.6 5 2:50 Grand Ridge Grade School 110 25 15.2 45.0 21 2:40 5.5 8 2:50 Central Intermediate School 110 25 15.2 45.0 21 2:40 5.5 8 2:50 Shepherd Middle School 110 25 15.2 45.0 21 2:40 5.5 8 2:50 Seneca Grade School South Campus 110 25 21.2 41.3 31 2:50 14.7 20 3:10 Seneca Grade School North Campus 110 25 21.2 41.4 31 2:50 14.2 19 3:10 Marseilles Elementary School 110 25 21.3 42.8 30 2:45 8.7 12 3:00 Seneca High School 110 25 21.2 41.8 31 2:50 14.3 20 3:10 Holy Trinity Lutheran Preschool 110 25 27.1 26.7 61 3:20 1.3 2 3:25 Glory Land Kids ChildCare Center 110 25 21.2 41.3 31 2:50 14.7 20 3:10 Seneca Head Start 110 25 21.2 41.4 31 2:50 14.2 19 3:05 Maximum for EPZ: 3:20 Maximum: 3:25 Average for EPZ: 2:50 Average: 3:05 LaSalle County Generating Station 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Route Route Distance Time to ETA to SubArea(s) Number Mobilization Length Speed Travel Pickup ETE to R. C. R. C. R.C.

Serviced of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) Time (min) Time (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (hr:min) 1, 2, and 5 1 150 17.8 54.9 19 30 3:20 9.0 10 3:30 3, 7, and 8 1 150 15.5 51.8 18 30 3:20 11.0 12 3:35 4 1 150 27.5 45.1 36 30 3:40 11.1 12 3:55 10 and 6 1 150 24.7 49.0 30 30 3:30 6.1 7 3:40 9 1 150 25.8 49.0 32 30 3:35 5.0 5 3:40 10 1 150 18.5 49.5 22 30 3:25 10.3 11 3:40 11 1 150 20.8 52.4 24 30 3:25 10.4 11 3:40 13 and 17 1 150 18.8 51.8 22 30 3:25 12.0 13 3:40 Maximum ETE: 3:40 Maximum ETE: 3:55 Average ETE: 3:30 Average ETE: 3:40 Table 86. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain/Light Snow Travel Route Route Distance Time to ETA to SubArea(s) Number Mobilization Length Speed Travel Pickup ETE to R. C. R. C. R.C.

Serviced of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) Time (min) Time (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (hr:min) 1, 2, and 5 1 160 17.8 49.9 21 40 3:45 9.0 11 4:00 3, 7, and 8 1 160 15.5 47.0 20 40 3:40 11.0 13 3:55 4 1 160 27.5 39.7 42 40 4:05 11.1 13 4:20 10 and 6 1 160 24.7 44.1 34 40 3:55 6.1 7 4:05 9 1 160 25.8 43.3 36 40 4:00 5.0 6 4:10 10 1 160 18.5 44.8 25 40 3:45 10.3 12 4:00 11 1 160 20.8 47.6 26 40 3:50 10.4 12 4:05 13 and 17 1 160 18.8 47.2 24 40 3:45 12.0 14 4:00 Maximum ETE: 4:05 Maximum ETE: 4:20 Average ETE: 3:50 Average ETE: 4:05 LaSalle County Generating Station 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow Travel Route Route Distance Time to ETA to SubArea(s) Number Mobilization Length Speed Travel Pickup ETE to R. C. R. C. R.C.

Serviced of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) Time (min) Time (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (hr:min) 1, 2, and 5 1 170 17.8 45.0 24 50 4:05 9.0 12 4:20 3, 7, and 8 1 170 15.5 43.4 21 50 4:05 11.0 15 4:20 4 1 170 27.5 37.7 44 50 4:25 11.1 15 4:40 10 and 6 1 170 24.7 41.6 36 50 4:20 6.1 8 4:30 9 1 170 25.8 41.4 37 50 4:20 5.0 7 4:30 10 1 170 18.5 41.4 27 50 4:10 10.3 14 4:25 11 1 170 20.8 43.9 28 50 4:10 10.4 14 4:25 13 and 17 1 170 18.8 43.0 26 50 4:10 12.0 16 4:30 Maximum ETE: 4:25 Maximum ETE: 4:40 Average ETE: 4:15 Average ETE: 4:30 Table 88. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Loading Travel Time Rate Total Dist. To to EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading EPZ Bdry Speed Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min)

LEXINGTON COUNTY Ambulatory 90 1 29 29 27.1 29.5 55 2:55 Heritage Health Wheelchair bound 90 5 96 75 27.1 30.0 54 3:40 Evergreen Place: Supportive Ambulatory 90 1 25 25 27.1 29.6 55 2:50 Living Streator Wheelchair bound 90 5 63 75 27.1 30.0 54 3:40 Ottawa Friendship House Ambulatory 90 1 15 15 15.2 53.4 17 2:05 Ambulatory 90 1 16 15 21.2 53.6 24 1:55 Aperion Care Marseilles Wheelchair bound 90 5 54 75 21.2 53.6 24 1:55 Maximum ETE: 3:40 Average ETE: 2:45 LaSalle County Generating Station 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

LEXINGTON COUNTY Ambulatory 100 1 29 29 27.1 26.8 61 3:10 Heritage Health Wheelchair bound 100 5 96 75 27.1 27.4 59 3:55 Evergreen Place: Supportive Ambulatory 100 1 25 25 27.1 26.7 61 3:10 Living Streator Wheelchair bound 100 5 63 75 27.1 27.4 59 3:55 Ottawa Friendship House Ambulatory 100 1 15 15 15.2 46.6 20 2:15 Ambulatory 100 1 16 15 21.2 47.4 27 2:10 Aperion Care Marseilles Wheelchair bound 100 5 54 75 21.2 48.2 26 2:10 Maximum ETE: 3:55 Average ETE: 3:00 Table 810. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates - Heavy Snow Loading Total Dist. To Travel Time to Mobilization Rate(min Loading EPZ Bdry Speed EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) per person) People Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min)

LEXINGTON COUNTY Ambulatory 110 1 29 29 27.1 26.5 61 3:20 Heritage Health Wheelchair bound 110 5 96 75 27.1 26.2 62 4:10 Evergreen Place: Supportive Ambulatory 110 1 25 25 27.1 26.7 61 3:20 Living Streator Wheelchair bound 110 5 63 75 27.1 26.2 62 4:10 Ottawa Friendship House Ambulatory 110 1 15 15 15.2 44.0 21 2:30 Ambulatory 110 1 16 15 21.2 42.5 30 2:20 Aperion Care Marseilles Wheelchair bound 110 5 54 75 21.2 44.9 28 2:20 Maximum ETE: 4:10 Average ETE: 3:10 LaSalle County Generating Station 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Good 150 36 6 3:20 Buses 10 2 5 Rain/Light Snow 160 1 40 4 7 3:35 Heavy Snow 170 44 7 3:50 Good 150 0 7 2:55 Ambulances 2 2 1 Rain/Light Snow 160 15 0 0 7 3:05 Heavy Snow 170 0 7 3:15 Maximum ETE: 3:50 Average ETE: 3:20 LaSalle County Generating Station 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(Subsequent Wave)

A B C D E F G Time Event A Advisory to Evacuate B Bus Dispatched from Depot C Bus Arrives at Facility/Pickup Route D Bus Departs for Reception Center E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Reception Center within the appropriate Reception Community Activity AB Driver Mobilization BC Travel to Facility or to Pickup Route CD Passengers Board the Bus DE Bus Travels Towards Region Boundary EF Bus Travels Towards Reception Center Outside the EPZ Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations LaSalle County Generating Station 817 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 and Access Control Posts (TACP) 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 Emergency Planning Zone (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 detailed traffic and access control tactics discussed in the sitespecific volume for LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS)Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA),

and LaSalleTraffic and Access Control Map (IPRAMap A) serve as the basis of the traffic management plan, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

LaSalle County Generating Station 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2. The ETE analysis treated all controlled intersections that are existing TACP locations in the offsite agency plans (LASIPRA) as being controlled by actuated signals. In Appendix K, Table K1 identifies the number of intersections that were modeled as TACPs.

3. Evacuation simulations were run using DYNEV II to predict traffic congestion during evacuation (see Section 7.3 and Figure 73 through Figure 76). These simulations help to identify the best routing and critical intersections that experience pronounced congestion during 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 TACPs were identified which would benefit the evacuation time estimate (ETE), as part of this study.

4. Prioritization of TACPs .

a. Application of traffic and access control at some TACPs will have a more pronounced influence on expediting traffic movements than at other TACPs and TACPs. 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 TACPs 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 list of priority TACPs using the process enumerated above.

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 <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> have elapsed from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) by TACPs along the major highways traversing the EPZ.

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

Study assumptions 1 through 3 in Section 2.5 discuss TACP 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 LaSalle County Generating Station 92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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.

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

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

LaSalle County 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 Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ).

• Routing of transitdependent evacuees (schools, preschools/daycares, medical facilities, employees, transients, or permanent residents who do not own or have access to private vehicles) from the EPZ boundary to reception centers located within reception communities.

Evacuees will select routes within the EPZ in such a way as to minimize their exposure to risk.

This expectation is met by the DYNEV II model routing traffic away from the location of the plant, to the extent practicable. The Dynamic TRaffic Assignment and Distribution (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. Transitdependent evacuees will be routed towards a reception center located within the appropriate reception community. General population may evacuate to either a reception center or some alternate destination (i.e., lodging facility, relatives home, campground) outside the EPZ.

The routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception centers is designed to minimize the amount of travel outside the EPZ, from the points where these routes cross the EPZ boundary. The 8 bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102 and described in Table 102 were designed by KLD, as no preestablished transitdependent bus routes or staging areas (pick up points) exist within the EPZ or identified within the county emergency plans, in order to compute ETE. The routes were designed to service the transitdependent population within each SubArea along major evacuation routes and then proceed to the reception communities towards reception centers assigned in the 2018 sitespecific volume for LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS) Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA). This does not imply that these exact routes would be used in an emergency. It is assumed that residents will walk along to the nearest major roadway and flag down a passing bus. Due to the high transit dependent population of Marseilles within SubArea 10, more buses are assigned to SubArea 10 than any other Subarea. As such, two unique routes were developed for Subarea 10 (one route is combined with SubArea 6; see Table 101 and Figure 102).

Schools, preschools/daycares, and medical facilities were routed along the most likely path from the facility being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate reception community and then to the designated school reception center.

LaSalle County Generating Station 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The specified bus routes for all the transitdependent population are documented in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). The LAS IPRA indicates that the evacuees can receive congregate care at reception centers. As such, this study does not consider the transport of evacuees from reception centers to congregate care centers.

10.2 Reception Centers According to the current public information for EPZ residents, evacuees will be directed to reception communities located in the Cities of Joliet, Pontiac, and Oglesby, based on the Sub Area being evacuated. The LASIPRA lists the specific reception centers within these reception communities. Figure 103 presents a map displaying the reception centers (including those used for schools). Note that some reception centers are designated for the general population and special facilities. Transitdependent evacuees are transported to the reception center within the reception community for each SubArea. It is assumed that all special facility evacuees will be taken to the appropriate school reception centers.

Table 103 presents a list of the reception centers for each school and preschool/ daycare in the EPZ. School reception centers (also used for preschools/daycares) are based on the LASIPRA.

Any school/preschool/daycare not listed in the LASIPRA, a reception center was designated based on the SubArea the school/preschool/daycare is located in. It is assumed that all school/preschool/daycare evacuees will be taken to the appropriate school reception center and will be subsequently picked up by parents or legal guardians. No children at these facilities will be picked up by parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

LaSalle County Generating Station 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes Route No. of Length

1. Buses SubArea(s) Serviced Route Description (mi.)

st Starting at N 21 Rd head south on E 27th Rd/ County Road (CR) 39. Continue south on E 27th 1 1 SubAreas 1, 2, and 5 9.0 Rd, then out of the EPZ.

Starting at E 22nd Rd head West on N 21st Rd. Make a right onto Illinois State Road (IL) 23.

2 1 SubAreas 3, 7, and 8 11.0 Follow IL 23 to the EPZ Boundary at E McKinley Rd, then out of the EPZ.

Starting at E 22nd Rd head West on N 17th Rd. Make a Left onto IL 23 at end. Take IL 23 to Marilla Park Rd and make a left. Take Marilla Park Rd to end and make a right onto E 18th Rd.

3 1 SubArea 4 11.1 Make a left onto N Otter Creek St. Stay on N Otter Creek St to CR 14 and make a right onto CR 14 (or 12th St), then out of the EPZ.

Starting at US 6 head south on IL 170. Make a left onto E Union St. Continue on E Union St, 4 1 SubAreas 10 and 6 6.1 then out of the EPZ.

5 1 SubArea 9 Starting at W Dupont Rd head eastbound towards IL 47, then out of the EPZ. 5.0 Starting at Morris Rd on US 6 head west towards Pearl St, make a left onto Pearl St. Take Pearl St to end and make a quick right left over the train tracks. Make a right onto Tolin St then left onto Aurora St. Continue around bend to the left and take Wallace St to end. Make left onto Liberty St then right onto Illinois St. Follow around bend to the left and then make right onto 6 1 SubArea 10 10.3 Washington St. Make left onto Sherman St. Take to end and make left onto Morris Rd. Make right onto Wilson St. Make left onto 2nd Ave. Make right onto Prairie St. Make left onto 7th Ave, again left onto Colorado St. Follow around bend to the left onto Orange Ave. Make right onto US 6. Continue on US 6, then out of the EPZ.

Starting at Mill St on CR 15 head North towards US 6. Make a left onto US 6 and an immediate right onto Rutland St then the first left onto Glen Ave. Follow Glen Ave to the end and make a left onto Young St. Take Young St to the end and make a left onto CR 15. Continue North 7 1 SubArea 11 10.4 towards US 6 and make a left then immediate right onto Rutland St. Take Rutland Rd to I80 Westbound, make a right onto the I80 Westbound ramp and follow I80 West, then out of the EPZ.

Starting on IL 9 head south on Verona Rd. Make a Right onto Gardner Road. Follow Gardner 8 1 SubAreas 13 and 17 12.0 Rd to Johnny Run Rd/CR 22. Make a Left onto Johnny Run Rd/CR 22, then out of the EPZ.

Total: 8 LaSalle County Generating Station 103 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary Transit Route Servicing SubAreas 1, 2, 1 84, 937, 776, 287, 292, 773, 303, 304, 305, 750 and 5 Transit Route Servicing SubAreas 3, 7, 90, 592, 591, 589, 91, 675, 526, 527, 626, 528, 795, 2

and 8 583, 270 334, 336, 390, 389, 388, 387, 386, 385, 384, 813, 3 Transit Route Servicing SubArea 4 814, 815, 379, 373, 376, 375, 360, 353, 365, 903, 401, 901, 407 Transit Route Servicing SubArea 6, and 134, 691, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 4

10 143, 144, 145, 146, 147 5 Transit Route Servicing SubArea 9 174, 175, 578, 176, 822, 177, 178, 179 59, 38, 39, 58, 40, 889, 886, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 6 Transit Route Servicing SubArea 10 48, 49, 50, 57, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 55, 454, 453, 455 432, 433, 819, 820, 41, 109, 110, 111, 112, 818, 113, 7 Transit Route Servicing SubArea 11 738, 114, 115, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 Transit Route Servicing SubAreas 13 8 793, 794, 315, 316, 627, 628, 311 and 17 Grace ChurchRhema Christian 9 336, 390, 389, 388, 387 Academy Crooked Creek Park Afterschool 10 882, 883, 303, 304, 305, 750 Program Grand Ridge Grade School 11 Central Intermediate School 91, 675, 526, 527, 626, 528 Shepherd Middle School Seneca Grade School South Campus 132, 133, 134, 978, 980, 65, 650, 651, 652, 784, 663, 12 Glory Land Kids Child Care Center 738, 114, 115, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 39, 58, 40, 889, 886, 41, 109, 110, 111, 112, 818, 13 Marseilles Elementary School 113, 738, 114, 115, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 433, 819, 820, 41, 109, 110, 111, 112, 818, 113, 738, 14 Aperion Care Marseilles 114, 115, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 Holy Trinity Lutheran Preschool Heritage Health 15 345, 346, 851, 414 Evergreen Place: Supportive Living Streator Seneca Grade School North Campus 133, 134, 978, 980, 65, 650, 651, 652, 784, 663, 738, 16 Seneca Head Start 114, 115, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 134, 978, 980, 65, 650, 651, 652, 784, 663, 738, 114, 17 Seneca High School 115, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 18 Ottawa Friendship House 527, 626, 528 LaSalle County Generating Station 104 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 103. Reception Centers for Schools and Preschools/Daycares Facility Name Reception Center Schools Grace ChurchRhema Christian Academy Pontiac Township High School Ransom Consolidated School Grand Ridge Grade School Central Intermediate School Shepherd Middle School Seneca Grade School South Campus Illinois Valley Community College Seneca Grade School North Campus Marseilles Elementary School Seneca High School Preschools/Daycares Holy Trinity Lutheran Preschool Pontiac Township High School Seneca Head Start Illinois Valley Community College/

Glory Land Kids ChildCare Center Joliet Junior College LaSalle County Generating Station 105 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 101. Evacuation Routes LaSalle County Generating Station 106 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 102. TransitDependent Bus Routes LaSalle County Generating Station 107 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. Reception Communities and Reception Centers LaSalle County Generating Station 108 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX A Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms

A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS This appendix provides a glossary of traffic engineering terms that are used throughout this report.

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.

LaSalle County 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 (MOE).

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.

LaSalle County Generating Station A2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX B DTRAD: Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution Model

B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL This appendix describes the integrated dynamic trip assignment and distribution model named DTRAD (Dynamic TRaffic Assignment and Distribution) that is expressly designed for use in analyzing evacuation scenarios. DTRAD employs logitbased pathchoice principles and is one of the models of the DYNEV II Model. 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 Model, the analyst must specify the highway network, link capacity information, the timevarying volume of traffic generated at all origin centroids and, optionally, a set of accessible candidate destination nodes on the periphery of the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) for selected origins. DTRAD calculates the optimal dynamic trip distribution (i.e., trip destinations) and the optimal dynamic trip assignment (i.e., trip routing) of the traffic generated at each origin node traveling to its set of candidate destination nodes, so as to minimize evacuee travel cost.

B.1 Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model The underlying premise is that the selection of destinations and routes is intrinsically coupled in an evacuation scenario. That is, people in vehicles seek to travel out of an area of potential risk as rapidly as possible by selecting the best routes. The model is designed to identify these best routes in a manner that realistically distributes vehicles from origins to destinations and routes them over the highway network, in a consistent and optimal manner, reflecting evacuee behavior.

For each origin, a set of candidate destination nodes is selected by the software logic and by the analyst to reflect the desire by evacuees to travel away from the power plant and to access major highways. The specific destination nodes within this set that are selected by travelers and the selection of the connecting paths of travel, are both determined by DTRAD. This determination is made by a logitbased path choice model in DTRAD, so as to minimize the trip cost, as discussed later.

The traffic loading on the network and the consequent operational traffic environment of the network (density, speed, throughput on each link) vary over time as the evacuation takes place.

The DTRAD model, which is interfaced with the DYNEV simulation model, executes a succession of sessions wherein it computes the optimal routing and selection of destination nodes for the conditions that exist at that time.

B.2 Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD The DYNEV II model 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 LaSalle County Generating Station B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

geometric network (linknode analysis network) that represents the physical highway system, to a path network that represents the vehicle [turn] movements. DTRAD computations are performed on the path network: DYNEV simulation model, on the geometric network.

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

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.

LaSalle County Generating Station B2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel cost plays a crucial role in route choice. In DTRAD, path cost is a linear summation of the generalized cost of each link that comprises the path. The generalized cost for a link, a, is expressed as where is the generalized cost for link 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 = 14 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.

LaSalle County 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.

LaSalle County 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 LaSalle County Generating Station B5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

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

Model Features Include:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Provides MOE to animation software, EVAN (EVacuation ANimator)

Calculates ETE statistics All traffic simulation models are data intensive. 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 LaSalle County Generating Station C1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

roadway sections: rural, multilane, urban streets, or freeways. The nodes of the network generally represent intersections or points along a section where a geometric property changes (e.g., a lane drop, change in grade, or free flow speed).

Figure C1 is an example of a small network representation. The freeway is defined by the sequence of links, (20,21), (21,22), and (22,23). Links (8001, 19) and (3, 8011) are Entry and Exit links, respectively. An arterial extends from node 3 to node 19 and is partially subsumed within a grid network. Note that links (21,22) and (17,19) are gradeseparated.

C.1 Methodology C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram It is necessary to define the fundamental diagram describing flowdensity and speeddensity relationships. Rather than settling for a triangular representation, a more realistic representation that includes a capacity drop, (IR)Qmax, at the critical density when flow conditions enter the forced flow regime, is developed and calibrated for each link. This representation, shown in Figure C2, asserts a constant free speed up to a density, k , and then a linear reduction in speed in the range, k k k 45 vpm, the density at capacity. In the flowdensity plane, a quadratic relationship is prescribed in the range, k k 95 vpm which roughly represents the stopandgo condition of severe congestion. The value of flow rate, Q , corresponding to k , is approximated at 0.7 RQ . A linear relationship between k and k completes the diagram shown in Figure C2. Table C3 is a glossary of terms.

The fundamental diagram is applied to moving traffic on every link. The specified calibration values for each link are: (1) Free speed, v ; (2) Capacity, Q  ; (3) Critical density, k 45 vpm ; (4) Capacity Drop Factor, R = 0.9 ; (5) Jam density, k . Then, v , k k

. Setting k k k , then Q RQ k for 0 k k 50 . It can be shown that Q 0.98 0.0056 k RQ for k k k , where k 50 and k 175.

C.1.2 The Simulation Model The simulation model solves a sequence of unit problems. Each unit problem computes the movement of traffic on a link, for each specified turn movement, over a specified time interval (TI) which serves as the simulation time step for all links. Figure C3 is a representation of the unit problem in the timedistance plane. Table C3 is a glossary of terms that are referenced in the following description of the unit problem procedure.

The formulation and the associated logic presented below are designed to solve the unit problem for each sweep over the network (discussed below), for each turn movement serviced on each link that comprises the evacuation network, and for each TI over the duration of the evacuation.

LaSalle County Generating Station C2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Given Q , M , L , TI , E , LN , G C , h , L , R , L , E , M Compute O , Q , M Define O O O O ; E E E

1. For the first sweep, s = 1, of this TI, get initial estimates of mean density, k , the R - factor, R and entering traffic, E , using the values computed for the final sweep of the prior TI.

For each subsequent sweep, s 1 , calculate E P O S where P , O are the relevant turn percentages from feeder link, i , and its total outflow (possibly metered) over this TI; S is the total source flow (possibly metered) during the current TI.

Set iteration counter, n = 0, k k , and E E .

2. Calculate v k such that k 130 using the analytical representations of the fundamental diagram.

Q TI G Calculate Cap C LN , in vehicles, this value may be reduced 3600 due to metering Set R 1.0 if G C 1 or if k k ; Set R 0.9 only if G C 1 and k k L

Calculate queue length, L Q LN

3. Calculate t TI . If t 0 , set t E O 0 ; Else, E E .

4. Then E E E ; t TI t

5. If Q Cap , then O Cap , O O 0 If t 0 , then Q Q M E Cap Else Q Q Cap End if Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A below

6. Else Q Cap O Q , RCap Cap O

7. If M RCap , then t Cap

8. If t 0, O M ,O min RCap M , 0 TI Q E O If Q 0 , then LaSalle County Generating Station C3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Calculate Q , M with Algorithm A Else Q 0, M E End if Else t 0 O M and O 0 M M O E; Q 0 End if

9. Else M O 0 If t 0 , then O RCap , Q M O E Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A

10. Else t 0 M M If M ,

O RCap Q M O Apply Algorithm A to calculate Q and M Else O M M M O E and Q 0 End if End if End if End if

11. Calculate a new estimate of average density, k k 2k k ,

where k = density at the beginning of the TI k = density at the end of the TI k = density at the midpoint of the TI All values of density apply only to the moving vehicles.

If k k and n N where N max number of iterations, and is a convergence criterion, then

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

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

LaSalle County Generating Station C4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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:

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 LaSalle County Generating Station C5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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.

LaSalle County Generating Station C6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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 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.

LaSalle County Generating Station C7 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 LaSalle County Generating Station C8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

Nuclear Power Plant Coordinates (X,Y)

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

h The mean queue discharge headway, seconds.

k Density in vehicles per lane per mile.

The average density of moving vehicles of a particular movement over a TI, on a k

link.

L The length of the link in feet.

The queue length in feet of a particular movement, at the [beginning, end] of a L ,L time interval.

The number of lanes, expressed as a floating point number, allocated to service a LN particular movement on a link.

L The mean effective length of a queued vehicle including the vehicle spacing, feet.

M Metering factor (Multiplier): 1.

The number of moving vehicles on the link, of a particular movement, that are M ,M moving at the [beginning, end] of the time interval. These vehicles are assumed to be of equal spacing, over the length of link upstream of the queue.

The total number of vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a O

link over a time interval.

The components of the vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a link within a time interval: vehicles that were Queued at the beginning of O ,O ,O the TI; vehicles that were Moving within the link at the beginning of the TI; vehicles that Entered the link during the TI.

The percentage, expressed as a fraction, of the total flow on the link that P

executes a particular turn movement, x.

LaSalle County Generating Station C10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

[beginning, end] of the time interval.

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

link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016).

R The factor that is applied to the capacity of a link to represent the capacity drop when the flow condition moves into the forced flow regime. The lower capacity at that point is equal to RQ .

RCap The remaining capacity available to service vehicles of a particular movement after that queue has been completely serviced, within a time interval, expressed as vehicles.

S Service rate for movement x, vehicles per hour (vph).

t Vehicles of a particular turn movement that enter a link over the first t seconds of a time interval, can reach the stopbar (in the absence of a queue down stream) within the same time interval.

TI The time interval, in seconds, which is used as the simulation time step.

v The mean speed of travel, in feet per second (fps) or miles per hour (mph), of moving vehicles on the link.

v The mean speed of the last vehicle in a queue that discharges from the link within the TI. This speed differs from the mean speed of moving vehicles, v.

W The width of the intersection in feet. This is the difference between the link length which extends from stopbar to stopbar and the block length.

LaSalle County Generating Station C11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8011 8009 2 3 8104 8107 6 5 8008 8010 8 9 10 8007 8012 12 11 8006 8005 13 14 8014 15 25 8004 16 24 8024 17 8003 23 22 21 20 8002 Entry, Exit Nodes are 19 numbered 8xxx 8001 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network LaSalle County Generating Station C12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kc kj ks Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams Distance OQ OM OE Down Qb vQ Qe v

v L

Mb Me Up t1 t2 Time E1 E2 TI Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 LaSalle County Generating Station C13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sequence Network Links Next Timestep, of duration, TI A

Next sweep; Define E, M, S for all B

Links C Next Link D Next Turn Movement, x Get lanes, LNx Service Rate, Sx ; G/Cx Get inputs to Unit Problem:

Q b , Mb , E Solve Unit Problem: Q e , Me , O No D Last Movement ?

Yes No Last Link ? C Yes No B Last Sweep ?

Yes Calc., store all Link MOE Set up next TI :

No A Last Time - step ?

Yes DONE Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3)

LaSalle County Generating Station C14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX D Detailed Description of Study Procedure

D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE This appendix describes the activities that were performed to compute Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE). The individual steps of this effort are represented as a flow diagram in Figure D1. Each numbered step in the description that follows corresponds to the numbered element in the flow diagram.

Step 1 The first activity was to obtain the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) boundary information and create a 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 information was obtained in GIS format. This information was used to estimate the permanent resident population within the EPZ and Shadow Region and to define the spatial distribution and demographic characteristics of the population within the study area.

Data for employees, transients, schools and preschools, and other facilities were obtained from Constellation, the county emergency management agencies, the Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA), and the old data from the previous study, supplemented by internet searches, aerial imagery for parking spaces, and phone calls to individual facilities where data was missing.

In addition, transportation resources available during an emergency were also provided by the counties within the EPZ.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with major stakeholders (state and county emergency officials, onsite and offsite 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. This survey included consideration of geometric properties of the highway sections, the channelization of lanes on each section of roadway, whether there are any turn restrictions or special treatment of traffic at intersections, the type and functioning of traffic control devices, gathering signal timings for pretimed traffic signals (if any exist within the study area,) and to make the necessary observations needed to estimate realistic values of roadway capacity. Roadway characteristics were also verified using aerial imagery.

LaSalle County Generating Station D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 5 A demographic survey of households within the study area was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic information of the EPZ population for this study. In addition, responses from zip codes within the LAS study area collected during the Braidwood and Dresden Generating Stations ETE demographic surveys was reviewed and utilized, as the number of responses received during the LAS survey was significantly less than the sampling plan (see Section F.2 in Appendix F). Both demographic survey information was used to determine important study factors including the average number of evacuating vehicles used by each household, and the time required to perform preevacuation mobilization activities.

Step 6 A computerized representation of the physical roadway system, called a linknode analysis network, was developed using the most recent UNITES software (see Section 1.3) developed by KLD. Once the geometry of the network was completed, the network was calibrated using the information gathered during the road survey (Step 4) and information obtained from aerial imagery. Estimates of highway capacity for each link and other linkspecific characteristics were introduced to the network description. Traffic signal timings were input accordingly. The link node analysis network was imported into a GIS map. The 2020 permanent resident population estimates (Step 2) were overlaid in the map, and origin centroids where trips would be generated during the evacuation process were assigned to appropriate links.

Step 7 The EPZ is subdivided into 13 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 model 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.

LaSalle County Generating Station D2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The model assigns destinations to all origin centroids consistent with a (general) radial evacuation of the EPZ and Shadow Region. The analyst may optionally supplement and/or replace these modelassigned destinations, based on professional judgment, after studying the topology of the analysis highway network. The model produces link and networkwide measures of effectiveness as well as estimates of evacuation time.

Step 10 The results generated by the prototype evacuation case are critically examined. The examination includes observing the animated graphics (using the EVAN software - see Section 1.3) produced by DYNEV II and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a laborintensive activity, requiring the direct participation of skilled engineers who possess the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any problems reflected in the results.

Essentially, the approach is to identify those bottlenecks in the network that represent locations where congested conditions are pronounced and to identify the cause of this congestion. This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to high rates of trip generation, improper routing, a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative flaw in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream. This examination leads to one of two conclusions:

The results are satisfactory; or The input stream must be modified accordingly.

This decision requires, of course, the application of the user's judgment and experience based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the model and a comparison of the results of the latest prototype evacuation case iteration with the previous ones. If the results are satisfactory in the opinion of the user, then the process continues with Step 13. Otherwise, proceed to Step 11.

Step 11 There are many "treatments" available to the user in resolving apparent problems. These treatments range from decisions to reroute the traffic by assigning additional evacuation destinations for one or more sources, imposing turn restrictions where they can produce significant improvements in capacity, changing the control treatment at critical intersections so as to provide improved service for one or more movements, adding routes (which are paved and traversable) that were not previously modelled but may assist in an evacuation and increase the available roadway network capacity, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems. Such "treatments" take the form of modifications to the original prototype evacuation case input stream. All treatments are designed to improve the representation of evacuation behavior.

Step 12 As noted above, the changes to the input stream must be implemented to reflect the modifications undertaken in Step 11. At the completion of this activity, the process returns to Step 9 where the DYNEV II System is again executed.

LaSalle County 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, vans, wheelchair buses/vans, and ambulances are introduced into the final prototype evacuation case data set. DYNEV II generates routespecific speeds over time for use in the estimation of evacuation times for the transit dependent 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 were executed using the DYNEV II model to compute ETE. Once results were available, quality control procedures were used to assure the results were consistent, dynamic routing was reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks were addressed properly.

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

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

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

LaSalle County 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 Study Results Satisfactory Area Step 11 Step 3 Modify Evacuation Destinations and/or Develop Traffic Conduct Kickoff Meeting with Stakeholders 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 Routes Update LinkNode Analysis Network and Update DYNEV II Database Step 14 Step 7 Generate DYNEV II Input Streams for All Evacuation Cases Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 15 Step 8 Execute DYNEV II to Compute ETE for All Evacuation Create and Debug DYNEV II Input Stream Cases Step 16 Step 9 Use DYNEV II Average Speed Output to Compute ETE for Transit and Special Facility Routes B Execute DYNEV II for Prototype Evacuation Case Step 17 Documentation A Step 18 Complete ETE Criteria Checklist Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities LaSalle County Generating Station D5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX E Facility Data

E. FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of April 2022, for facilities that are located within the LAS EPZ. Special facilities are defined as schools, preschools/daycares, medical facilities and military installations. Transient population data is included in the table for recreational areas (campgrounds, hunting areas, marinas, parks and other recreational areas).

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/daycare, medical facility, major employer, recreational area (campground, hunting area, marina, park and other recreational area), military training center are also provided.

LaSalle County Generating Station E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Enroll Area (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment LaSalle County, IL 4 10.5 SW Grace ChurchRhema Christian Academy 1634 IL23 Streator 32 5 6.4 S Ransom Consolidated School 400 S Lane St Ransom 93 7 8.7 W Grand Ridge Grade School 400 W Main St Grand Ridge 259 8 9.9 WNW Central Intermediate School 711 E McKinley Rd Ottawa 415 8 9.9 WNW Shepherd Middle School 701 E McKinley Rd Ottawa 465 10 5.1 NE Seneca Grade School South Campus 410 S Main St Seneca 508 10 5.4 NE Seneca Grade School North Campus 174 Oak St Seneca 10 5.6 NNW Marseilles Elementary School 201 Chicago St Marseilles 589 10 5.9 NE Seneca High School 307 E Scott St Seneca 461 LaSalle County Subtotal: 2,822 LASALLE COUNTY AND EPZ TOTAL: 2,822 Table E2. Preschools and Daycares within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Enroll Area (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality ment LaSalle County, IL 4 11.4 SW Holy Trinity Lutheran Preschool 101 Trinity Dr Streator 90 10 5.1 NE Glory Land Kids ChildCare Center 423 S Main St Seneca 22 10 5.5 NE Seneca Head Start 104 N Main St Seneca 18 LaSalle County Subtotal: 130 LASALLE COUNTY AND EPZ TOTAL: 130 LaSalle County Generating Station E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambul Wheel Bed Sub Distance Dire Current atory chair ridden Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Capacity Census Patients Patients Patients LaSalle County, IL 4 11.4 SW Heritage Health 1525 E Main St Streator 130 125 29 96 0 4 11.4 SW Evergreen Place: Supportive Living Streator 1529 E Main St Streator 88 88 25 63 0 8 9.3 WNW Ottawa Friendship House 1718 N 2525th Rd Ottawa 15 15 15 0 0 11 6.3 NNW Aperion Care Marseilles 578 Commercial St Marseilles 103 70 16 54 0 LaSalle County Subtotal: 336 298 85 213 0 LASALLE COUNTY AND EPZ TOTAL: 336 298 85 213 0 Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ

% Employee Employees Employees Vehicles Sub Distance Dire Employees Commuting Commuting Commuting Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ LaSalle County, IL 1 LaSalle County Generating Station 2601 N 21st Rd Marseilles 450 85.7% 385 360 11 7.8 NW Sabic Plastics 2148 N 2753rd Rd Ottawa 300 75.7% 227 212 LaSalle County Subtotal: 750 612 572 LASALLE COUNTY AND EPZ TOTAL: 750 612 572 LaSalle County Generating Station E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles LaSalle County, IL 1 1.7 ENE Lasalle Lake State Fish/Wildlife 2649 N 21st Rd Marseilles Park 450 196 1 2.4 NNW Marseilles State Fish & Wild 2374 E 25th Rd Marseilles Park 20 9 1 4.2 NNE Spring Brook Marina 623 N 2553rd Rd Seneca Marina 450 196 1 4.6 NE Hiddencove Marina of the Seneca Yacht Club 219 River Dr Seneca Marina 100 44 1 4.8 NE Anchor Inn Marina 1 E DuPont Rd Seneca Marina 150 65 1 5.4 NNW Illini State Park 2660 E 2350th Rd Marseilles Park 2,000 870 1 5.4 NNW Your Boat Club Chain O' Lakes 25837 W IL173 Antioch Marina 32 14 3 4.4 NW Troll Hollow Campground 2265 N 2453 Rd Marseilles Campground 150 75 10 4.7 NE Mariners Marina 8 Logue Cir Seneca Marina 348 151 10 5.2 N Pet Project 2676 E 2575th Rd Marseilles Other, Not Listed Local residents only 10 5.6 NNW Snug Harbor Marina 103 Liberty St Marseilles Marina 65 25 10 5.9 NNW Glenwood RV Resort 551 Wilson St Marseilles Campground 400 200 10 6.1 NE Seneca Hunt Club 2983 N 26th Rd Seneca Hunting 50 22 10 6.3 N Four Star Campground 2776 E 2625th Rd Marseilles Campground 400 200 10 6.7 NNE Woodsmoke Ranch 2795 E 28th Rd Seneca Other, Not Listed 3,416 1,871 11 9.2 NW Heritage Harbor Marina 1982 N 2753rd Rd Ottawa Marina 278 121 LaSalle County Subtotal: 8,309 4,059 LASALLE COUNTY AND EPZ TOTAL: 8,309 4,059 Table E6. Military Training Center within the EPZ Sub Distance Dire Area (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles LaSalle County, IL 1 1.6 NNW Illinois National Guard Training Center 1700 Army Rd Marseilles 556 278 LaSalle County Subtotal: 556 278 LASALLE COUNTY AND EPZ TOTAL: 556 278 LaSalle County Generating Station E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E1. Schools and Preschools/Daycares within the LAS EPZ LaSalle County Generating Station E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E2. Medical Facilities within the LAS EPZ LaSalle County Generating Station E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E3. Major Employers within the LAS EPZ LaSalle County Generating Station E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E4. Recreational Areas and Military Training Center within the LAS EPZ LaSalle County Generating Station E8 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 LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS)

Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) requires the identification of travel patterns, car ownership and household size of the population within the EPZ. Demographic information can be obtained from Census data; The use of this data has several limitations when applied to emergency planning.

First, the Census data do not encompass the range of information needed to identify the time required for preliminary activities (mobilization) that must be undertaken prior to evacuating the area. Secondly, Census data do not contain attitudinal responses needed from the population of the EPZ and consequently may not accurately represent the anticipated behavioral characteristics of the evacuating populace.

These concerns are addressed by conducting a demographic survey of a representative sample of the EPZ population. The survey is designed to elicit information from the public concerning family demographics and estimates of response times to well defined events. The design of the survey includes a limited number of questions of the form What would you do if ? and other questions regarding activities with which the respondent is familiar (How long does it take you to ?).

F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan Attachment A presents the final survey instrument used for the demographic survey. A draft of the instrument was submitted to stakeholders for comment. Comments were received and the survey instrument was modified accordingly, prior to conducting the survey.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. Since the demographic survey discussed herein began was performed prior to the release of the 2020 Census data had not been released, the 2010 Census data was used to develop the sampling plan.

A sample size of approximately 460 completed survey forms yields results with a sampling error of +/-4.50% at the 95% confidence level. The sample must be drawn from the EPZ population.

Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using Geographic Information System (GIS) software. This list is shown in Table F1. Along with each zip code, an estimate of the population and number of households in each area was determined by overlaying 2010 Census data and the EPZ boundary, again using GIS software. The proportional number of desired completed survey interviews for each zip code was identified, as shown in Table F1. Note that the average household size computed in Table F1 was an estimate for sampling purposes and was not used in the evacuation time estimate (ETE) study.

A total of 30 completed samples within the EPZ were obtained, corresponding to a sampling error of approximately +/-17.9% at the 95% confidence level based on the 2010 Census. The number of samples obtained was significantly less than the sampling plan. Due to the sparse population within the EPZ, the zip codes considered was expanded into the Shadow Region, as the demographics are similar. This increased the number of completed surveys to 33 and reduced LaSalle County Generating Station F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

the sampling error to +/-17%, which is still considerably more than the 4.5% sampling error. The LAS study area is in close proximity to the study areas of the Braidwood Generating Station (BWD) and the Dresden Generating Station (DRE). In addition, the demographic survey questions used for BWD and DRE were the same, as such some responses received could also be used in this study. To ensure an appropriate sample size for the LAS study, responses received within zip codes that are in the LAS Study Area, collected during the DRE and BWD demographic surveys could be considered. This was discussed with Constellation personnel, and it was determined that using the Shadow Region zip codes and the BWD and DRE overlapping zip codes were acceptable to reduce the sampling error.

As shown in Table F1, a total of 167 completed samples were obtained corresponding to a sampling error of +/-7.50% at the 95% confidence level based on the 2010 Census Data. This is still more than the 4.5% sampling error, as per the sampling plan. This was also discussed with Constellation personnel, and the 7.50% was deemed acceptable for this study. Of the 167 completed survey samples (134 responses from DRE and BWD surveys), 145 were obtained from the EPZ population and 22 were obtained from the Shadow Region. The number of samples obtained within each zip code is also shown in Table F1.

F.3 Survey Results The results of the survey fall into two categories. First, the household demographics of the area can be identified. Demographic information includes such factors as household size, automobile ownership, and automobile availability. The distributions of the time to perform certain pre evacuation activities are the second category of survey results. These data are processed to develop the trip generation distributions used in the evacuation modeling effort, as discussed in Section 5.

A review of the survey instrument reveals that several questions have a dont know or decline to state entry for a response. It is accepted practice in conducting surveys of this type to accept the answers of a respondent who offers a dont know/decline to state response for a few questions or who refuses to answer a few questions. To address the issue of occasional dont know/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 dont know/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 study area (EPZ and Shadow Region) based on the responses to the demographic survey. According to the responses, the average household contains 2.61 people. The estimated average household size from the 2020 Census data is 2.49 people (see Table F1). The percent difference between the 2020 Census data LaSalle County Generating Station F2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

and survey data is 4.82%, which is within the sampling error of +/-7.50%, as discussed in Section F.2.

Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the study area is 2.32. It should be noted that all households within the study area have access to an automobile according to the demographic survey. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F2.

Figure F3 and Figure F4 present the automobile availability by household size. As expected, all households of 2 or more people have access to at least one vehicle.

Ridesharing Approximately 75% of the households surveyed responded that they would share a ride with a neighbor, relative, or friend if a car was not available to them when advised to evacuate in the event of an emergency, as shown in Figure F5.

Commuters Figure F6 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household. Commuters are defined as household members who travel to work on a daily basis. The data shows an average of 1.15 commuters per household in the study area, and approximately 65% of households have at least one commuter.

Commuter Travel Modes Figure F7 presents the mode of travel that commuters use on a daily basis. The majority (88.4%)

of commuters use their private automobiles to travel to work. The data shows an average of 1.07 employees per vehicle, assuming 2 people per vehicle - on average - for carpools.

Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID19) on Commuters Figure F8 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household that were temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic. The data shows an average of 0.68 commuters per household were affected by the COVID19 pandemic. Approximately 35% of households indicated someone in their household had a work and/or school commute that was temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic.

Functional or Transportation Needs Figure F9 presents the distribution of the number of individuals with functional or transportation need. The survey result shows that approximately 3% of households have functional or transportation needs. Of those with functional or transportation needs, about 58% require a bus, about 25% require a medical bus/van, and about 17% require a wheelchair accessible vehicle.

F.3.2 Evacuation Response Several questions were asked to gauge the populations response to an emergency. These are now discussed:

LaSalle County Generating Station F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

How many vehicles would your household use during an evacuation? The response is shown in Figure F10. On average, evacuating households would use 1.56 vehicles.

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

Of the survey participants who responded, 56% said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 44% indicated they would not await the return of other family members before evacuating, as shown in Figure F11.

Emergency officials advise you to shelter at home in an emergency. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information regarding compliance with instructions to shelterinplace. The results indicate that nearly 90% of households who are advised to shelter in place would do so; the remaining 10% 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 compliance rate obtained above is relatively higher than the federal guidance. A sensitivity study was conducted to estimate the impact of shadow evacuation noncompliance of shelter advisory on ETE - see Appendix M.

Emergency officials advise you to take shelter at home now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas are advised to evacuate now. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information specifically related to the possibility of a staged evacuation. That is, asking a population to shelter in place now and then to evacuate after a specified period of time. Results indicate that 71% of households would follow instructions and delay the start of evacuation until so advised, while the other 29% 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. Results show that 45.7% of households indicated that they would evacuate to a friend or relatives home, 3.1% to a reception center, 18.3% to a hotel, motel or campground, 5.5% to a second or seasonal home, 1.8% of households would not evacuate, and the remaining 25.6% responded dont know/ other to this question. The response is shown in Figure F12.

If you had a pet and/or animal, would you take your pet and/or animal with you if you were asked to evacuate? Based on the responses to the survey, about 68% of households have a pet and/or animal. Of the households with pets and/or animals, 16.2% of them indicated that they would take their pets with them to a shelter, 80.2% indicated that they would take their pets somewhere else, and 3.6% would leave their pet at home, as shown in Figure F13. Of the households that would evacuate with their pets, approximately 95.3% indicated that they have sufficient room in their vehicle to evacuate with their pets/animals, 0.9% said they did not, and 3.8% would use a trailer.

What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have? Based on responses from the survey, of the households with pet and/or animal, 93% have a household pet (dog, cat, bird, reptile, fish, etc.), about 5.2% have farm animals (horse, chicken, goat, or pig), and 1.8% have other small pets/animals.

LaSalle County Generating Station F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.3.3 Time Distribution Results The survey asked several questions about the amount of time it takes to perform certain pre evacuation activities. These activities involve actions taken by residents during the course of their daytoday lives. Thus, the answers fall within the realm of the responders experience.

As discussed in Section F.3.1 and shown in Figure F8, the majority (65%) of respondents indicated no commuters were impacted by the COVID19 pandemic; therefore the results for the time distribution of commuters (time to prepare to leave work and time to travel home from work) were used, as is, in this study.

The mobilization distributions provided below are the result of having applied the analysis described in Section 5.4.1 on the component activities of the mobilization.

How long does it take the commuter to complete preparation for leaving work? Figure F14 presents the cumulative distribution; in all cases, the activity is completed by about 60 minutes(1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />). Approximately 90% can leave within 30minutes.

How long would it take the commuter to travel home ? Figure F15 presents the work to home travel time for the study area . About 81% of commuters can arrive home within about 45 minutes of leaving work; all within 90 minutes (1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes).

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.

About 85% of households can be ready to leave home within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; the remaining households require up to an additional 45 minutes.

How long would it take you to clear 6 to 8 inches of snow from your driveway? During adverse, snowy weather conditions, an additional activity must be performed before residents can depart on the evacuation trip. Although snow scenarios assume that the roads and highways have been plowed and are passable (albeit at lower speeds and capacities), it may be necessary to clear a private driveway prior to leaving the home so that the vehicle can access the street.

Figure F17 presents the time distribution for removing 6 to 8 inches of snow from a driveway.

About 88% of driveways are passable within 75 minutes; the remaining households require up to an additional hour. Note, that those respondents (about 17%) 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.

LaSalle County Generating Station F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table F1. LaSalle County Generating Station Demographic Survey Sampling Plan and Results 2010 Population 2010 HH in Desired Sample Location Zip Code in Zip Code Zip Code Sample Obtained1 60420 45 17 1 0 60437 187 75 5 2 60444 6 2 0 3 60450 275 106 7 116 60470 616 238 16 0 EPZ 60479 760 277 20 4 61325 956 344 25 1 61341 7667 2,999 202 4 61350 724 280 19 10 61360 3023 1,126 80 3 61364 3232 1,279 85 2 EPZ Total: 17,491 6,743 460 145 60424 56 25 2 Shadow 61348 6 0 N/A 1 Region 61370 24 5 19 Shadow Region Total: 86 30 0 22 Grand Total: 17,577 6,773 460 167 Average HH Size2: 2.6 1

This also includes the samples obtained from the BWD and DRE demographic surveys.

2 Average HH Size is an estimate for sampling purposes and was not used in the ETE study.

LaSalle County Generating Station F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Household Size 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6+

People Figure F1. Household Size in the Study Area Vehicle Availability 50%

43.71%

40%

Percent of Households 30% 26.95%

19.76%

20%

10% 7.78%

1.80%

0.00%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability LaSalle County Generating Station F7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4+

Vehicles Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 58+ Person Households 5 People 6 People 7 People 8+People 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4+

Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 5 to 8+ Person Households LaSalle County Generating Station F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Rideshare with Neighbor/Friend 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F5. Household Ridesharing Preference Commuters Per Household 40%

30%

Percent of Households 20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F6. Commuters in Households in the Study Area LaSalle County Generating Station F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Mode to Work 100%

88.44%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

6.94%

4.04%

0.58%

0%

Drive Alone Carpool (2+) Bus Walk/Bicycle Mode of Travel Figure F7. Modes of Travel in the Study Area COVID19 Impact to Commuters 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic LaSalle County Generating Station F10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Functional Vehicle Transportation Needs 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle Figure F9. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs Evacuating Vehicles Per Household 100%

80%

Percent of Households 54.82%

60%

40% 37.35%

20%

7.83%

0.00%

0%

0 1 2 3+

Vehicles Figure F10. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation LaSalle County Generating Station F11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Yes, would await return No, would evacuate Figure F11. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Evacuating Shelter Locations 60%

45.7%

Percent of Households 40%

25.6%

20% 18.3%

5.5%

3.1% 1.8%

0%

Friend/Relative's Reception Center Hotel, Motel, or A Would not Don't know/Other Home Campground Second/Seasonal evacuate Home Figure F12. Study Area Evacuation Destinations LaSalle County Generating Station F12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Take with me to a Shelter Take with me to Somewhere Leave Pet at Home Else Figure F13. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals Time to Prepare to Leave Work 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F14. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work LaSalle County Generating Station F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Commute Home From Work 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 100 Travel Time (min)

Figure F15. Time to Commute Home from Work Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure F16. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation LaSalle County 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 Time (min)

Figure F17. Time to Remove Snow from Driveway LaSalle County Generating Station F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ATTACHMENT A Demographic Survey Instrument LaSalle County Generating Station F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

          

• Required

• mif^jJ

                                      

                        

     !     "  #     

1.     

Mark only one oval.

Male Female Decline to State Other:

2.      

3.                

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

DECLINE TO STATE

4. !        "   " 

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE

5. #$           

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.            !

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE TEN ELEVEN TWELVE THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN NINETEEN OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 7



7. "           #$ % %  &    %     %!

Mark only one oval.

ZERO ONE TWO THREE FOUR OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 8



8. '        % ( &)  %  *   &!+

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

     

9. , #*&  % % )    %         #  %  * !

Mark only one oval per row.

Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Drive Alone Carpool-2 or more people Dont know Commuter 1 Skip to question 13

     

10.         !     "

Mark only one oval per row.

Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Drive Alone Carpool-2 or more people Dont know Commuter 1 Commuter 2 Skip to question 15

  

11.         !     "

Mark only one oval per row.

Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Drive Alone Carpool-2 or more people Dont know Commuter 1 Commuter 2 Commuter 3 Skip to question 19

  

12.         !     "

Mark only one oval per row.

Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Drive Alone Carpool-2 or more people Dont know Commuter 1 Commuter 2 Commuter 3 Commuter 4 Skip to question 25

      

13. #$%         &%       "

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. ' ( )  * #$%+ ! 

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 33

      

15.                  

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.  ! "# $  %$  &'(

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

17. #         #        

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.  ! "# $  %$  #&'(

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 35

     

19.                

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.    !   "# $

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

21.                

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.    !   "# $

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

23.                  

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.  ! "# $  %$  &'(

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 39

     

25. )         )        

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.  ! "# $  %$  )&'(

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

27.                

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.       !" #

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

29. $         $      

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.       $!" #

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

31.                      

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.  ! "  # $  %$  &' 

leave blank if your answer for Question 9-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 45

     

33. ()( *+ '         (               $    

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.  ! "  # $  %$ ()( &' 

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 53

     

35.                           !    "

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. # $  % &!  '! ( )  &

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

37. %           %               !    "

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. # $  % &!  '! %( )  &

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 53

     

39.                               

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.  !"#   $   %& #

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

41. "         "                   

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.  !"#   $  "%& #

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

43.                 !          "    #

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. $! %  & '" ! (" ) *! '

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 53

     

45.                 !          "    #

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. $! %  & '" ! (" ) *! '

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

47.                          

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. ! " #    $  %& # 

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

49. '         '                

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. ! " #    $  '%& # 

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

51.                                 !

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. " #  $ %    & '  % 

leave blank if your answer for Question 10-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 53

 

53.  "      (       &               &   &     &   & 

          !

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. " #  ) %    & '  % 

leave blank if your answer for Question 11, is under 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

55.                                 

                        !       

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.  " #$   %  & $

leave blank if your answer for Question 12, is under 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />.

57. #'           ( )  *          +

Mark only one oval per row.

0 1 2 3 4 More than 4 Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle Ambulance Other

58. & ," ,*     - . 

59. /'      +

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. 0!1                       2+

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

61. 0.1                                    2+

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

62.            

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.   !"   #

 

64. $%&    '() *  ()

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE

 

65. $+ '  '() *  ()  

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

 

67. $      '() *  ()  

Mark only one oval.

TAKE PET WITH ME TO A SHELTER TAKE PET WITH ME SOMEWHERE ELSE LEAVE PET AT HOME DECLINE TO STATE

 

68.

Mark only one oval.

YES NO WILL USE A TRAILER DECLINE TO STATE Other:

This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.

Forms

APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 indicates that the existing Traffic and Access Control Posts (TACPs) identified by the offsite agencies should be used in the evacuation simulation modeling. The traffic control plans for the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) were provided in the sitespecific volume for LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS)Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA),

and LaSalleTraffic and Access Control Map (IPRAMap A).

These plans were reviewed and the TACPs were modeled accordingly. An analysis of the TACP locations was performed, and it was determined to model the ETE simulations with existing TACPs that were provided in the approved county and state emergency plans, with no additional TACPs.

G.1 Manual Traffic Control The TACPs 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 pre timed signal, stop, or yield control, and the intersection is identified as a traffic control point (or TACP), the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system, in accordance with Section 3.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. MTCs at existing actuated traffic signalized intersections were essentially left alone.

Table K1 provides the number of nodes with each control type. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a TACP, the control type is indicated as TACP in Table K1. These MTC points, as shown in the state emergency plan, are mapped as blue dots in Figure G1. No additional locations for MTC are suggested in this study.

It is assumed that the TACPs will be established within 120 minutes of the advisory to evacuate (ATE) to discourage through travelers from using major through routes which traverse the EPZ.

As discussed in Section 3.11, external traffic was considered on Interstate (I)80 in this analysis.

G.2 Analysis of Key TACP Locations As discussed in Section 5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, MTC at intersections could benefit from the ETE analysis. The MTC locations contained within the traffic management plans (TMPs) were analyzed to determine key locations where MTC would be most useful and can be readily implemented. As previously mentioned, signalized intersections that were actuated based on field data collection were essentially left as actuated traffic signals in the model, with modifications to green time allocation as needed. Other controlled intersections (pretimed signals, stop signs and yield signs) were changed to actuated traffic signals to represent the MTC that would be implemented according to the TMPs.

The majority of the TCPs identified in the TMP were located at intersections with stop control.

Table G1 shows a list of the controlled intersections that were identified as MTC points in the TMPs that were not previously actuated signals, including the type of control that currently exists at each location. To determine the impact of MTC at these locations, a summer, midweek, LaSalle County Generating Station G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

midday, with good weather scenario (Scenario 1) evacuation of the 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region and the entire EPZ (Region R01, R02, R03) were simulated wherein these intersections were left as is (without MTC). The results were compared to the results presented in Section 7. Although localized congestion worsened, as shown in Table G2, the ETE did not change at both the 90th and 100th percentile when MTC was not present at these intersections. The remaining TACPs at controlled intersections were left as actuated signals in the model and, therefore, had no impact to ETE.

As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 76, there is no congestion (LOS B or better) within the 2 Mile Region and 5Mile Region. There is congestion (LOS D or worse) beyond the 5mile radius along the routes leaving Marseilles and the roads in the vicinity of Woodsmoke Ranch. The congestion within EPZ clears 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE and the Shadow Region clears 30 minutes later. As a result, the TACPs within the EPZ do very little to reduce the ETE. In addition, congestion within the EPZ clears prior to the completion of the trip generation time (the time to mobilize, plus travel time to EPZ boundary, dictates the 100th percentile ETE); as a result, the MTC has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE.

Although there is no reduction in ETE when MTC is implemented, traffic and access control can be beneficial in the reduction of localized congestion and driver confusion and can be extremely helpful for fixed point surveillance, amongst other things. Should there be a shortfall of personnel to staff the TACPs, the list of locations provided in Table G1 could be considered as priority locations when implementing the TMP.

LaSalle County Generating Station G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations Location Node Previous Control 1

TACP Number (Description) Number (Prior to being a TACP)

L120/R N. 2553th (River Rd.) and Co. 254 Stop Sign Hwy. 30.

L23/G N. 16th and E. 30th. 637 Stop Sign L210/K N. 17th (Co. Hwy. 5/Richards 318 Stop Sign Rd.) and E. 24th.

L31/R Main St. and Commercial St. in 433 Stop Sign Marseilles.

S41/M IL 23 and N. 18th (Leonore 337 Stop Sign Blacktop)

S42/M IL 23 and N. 17th (Co. Hwy. 336 Stop Sign 5/Richards Rd.)

S43/L IL 23 and N. 15th (Marilla Park 387 PreTimed Signal Rd.)

L53/J N. 13th (Co. Hwy. 40/Ralph 320 Stop Sign Smith Rd.) and E. 24th.

L510/H N. 12th and E. 30th. 631 Stop Sign L511/H N. 13th and E. 30th. 634 Stop Sign L513/H N. 15th and E. 30th. 635 Stop Sign S71/P IL 23 and N. 2450th (Highline 527 Stop Sign Rd.)

O83/P IL 23 and N. 2653rd (McKinley 270 PreTimed Signal Rd.)

S102/B IL 170 and US 6 65 Stop Sign S104/C US 6 and Marseilles Rd. 72 Stop Sign L112/R E. 24th (Co. Hwy. 15/ Marseilles 738 Stop Sign Blacktop) and N. 30th (Morris Blacktop/Co. Hwy. 4)

O117/Q N. 2753rd (Canal Rd.) and Old 437 Stop Sign Chicago Rd.

S179/H Livingston Rd. and Johnny Run 316 Stop Sign Rd.

Table G2. ETE with No MTC Scenario 1 Region 90th Percentile ETE 100th Percentile ETE Base No MTC Difference Base No MTC Difference R01 (2Mile) 2:30 2:30 0:00 4:30 4:30 0:00 R02 (5Mile) 2:30 2:30 0:00 4:35 4:35 0:00 R03 (Full EPZ) 2:40 2:40 0:00 4:40 4:40 0:00 1

Source: Site-specific volume for LAS-IPRA, and LaSalle -Traffic & Access Control Map (IPRA-Map A).

LaSalle County Generating Station G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G1. Traffic and Access Control Posts for the LAS EPZ LaSalle County Generating Station G4 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 H22). The percentages presented in Table H1 are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 7 of Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 21.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

The City of Marseilles, Illinois is split between 2 SubAreas. The eastern half of the city is in Sub Area 10, while the western half is in SubArea 11. Based on the Sitespecific volume for LaSalle Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents (IPRA), the city of Marseilles would always evacuate as a whole when the wind is blowing toward the city (SubAreas 10, 11, or both included in keyhole). Thus, keyholes wherein SubArea 10 is included, but not SubArea 11 would still result in the City of Marseilles evacuating entirely. For example, Region R10 is an evacuation of the 2 Mile Region and downwind to the EPZ boundary with wind toward the eastsoutheast (using the 3sector approach), the city is not within the keyhole, but Subarea 11 (which includes portions of Marseilles) is. Thus, the entire city evacuates. Similarly, keyholes wherein SubArea 10 is included, but not SubArea 11 would also result in the entire city evacuating. For example, Region R14, with the wind blowing toward the southsouthwest, Marseilles is not within the keyhole, but SubArea 10 (which includes portions of Marseilles) is. Thus, the entire city evacuates. The evacuation of the City of Marseilles is shown graphically in Figures H10 through H15.

LaSalle County Generating Station H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of SubArea Population Evacuating for Each Region Radial Regions Degrees SubArea Region Description From North 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101 111 13 17 R01 2Mile Region N/A 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R02 5Mile Region N/A 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R03 Full EPZ N/A 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to 5 Miles Degrees SubArea Wind Direction Region From From 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North R04 NW, NNW, N 305°11° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

N/A NNE 12°34° Refer to Region R02 NE, ENE, E, ESE, R05 35°169° 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

SE, SSE S, SSW, SW, N/A 170°304° Refer to Region R01 WSW, W, WNW Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary Degrees SubArea Wind Direction Region From From North 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101 111 13 17 R06 N 350°11° 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

R07 NNE 12°34° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R08 NE, ENE 35°79° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R09 E 80°101° 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R10 ESE 102°124° 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20%

R11 SE 125°146° 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20%

R12 SSE 147°169° 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R13 S 170°191° 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R14 SSW 192°214° 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R15 SW, WSW 215°259° 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20%

R16 W 260°281° 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R17 WNW 282°304° 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R18 NW 305°326° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R19 NNW 327°349° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Degrees SubArea Wind Direction Region From From 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 North R20 5Mile Region N/A 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R21 NW, NNW, N 305°11° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

N/A NNE 12°34° Refer to Region R20 NE, ENE, E, ESE, R22 35°169° 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

SE, SSE S, SSW, SW, N/A 170°304° Refer to Region R01 WSW, W, WNW SubArea(s) Evacuate SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace SubArea(s) ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate 1

The entire city of Marseilles evacuates when either Sub-Area 10 or Sub-Area 11 evacuates. See page H-1 for additional information.

LaSalle County Generating Station H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H1. Region R01 LaSalle County Generating Station H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H2. Region R02 LaSalle County Generating Station H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H3. Region R03 LaSalle County Generating Station H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H4. Region R04 LaSalle County Generating Station H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H5. Region R05 LaSalle County Generating Station H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 LaSalle County Generating Station H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H7. Region R07 LaSalle County Generating Station H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 LaSalle County Generating Station H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09 LaSalle County Generating Station H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H10. Region R10 LaSalle County Generating Station H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 LaSalle County Generating Station H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H12. Region R12 LaSalle County Generating Station H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H13. Region R13 LaSalle County Generating Station H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14 LaSalle County Generating Station H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15 LaSalle County Generating Station H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H16. Region R16 LaSalle County Generating Station H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H17. Region R17 LaSalle County Generating Station H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H18. Region R18 LaSalle County Generating Station H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H19. Region R19 LaSalle County Generating Station H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H20. Region R20 LaSalle County Generating Station H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 LaSalle County Generating Station H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H22. Region R22 LaSalle County Generating Station H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX J Representative Inputs to and Outputs from the DYNEV II System

J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM This appendix presents data input to and output from the DYNEV II System.

Table J1 provides source (vehicle loading) and destination information for several roadway segments (links) in the analysis network. In total, there are a total of 338 source links (origins) in the model. The source links are shown as centroid points in Figure J1. On average, evacuees travel a straightline distance of 4.73 miles to exit the network.

Table J2 provides network-wide statistics (average travel time, average delay time1, average speed and number of vehicles) for an evacuation of the entire Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ)

(Region R03) for each scenario. Rain scenario (Scenarios 2, 4, 7, and 10) and snow scenarios (Scenarios 8 and 11), exhibit slower average speeds, higher delays, and longer average travel times when compared to good weather scenarios.

Table J3 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes -

Interstate (I) 80, Illinois State Route (IL) 23, US Highway (US) 6, Grand Ridge Rd, and County Road (CR) 170 - for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. The study area has ample roadway capacity to service all evacuating vehicles within the EPZ and Shadow Region. As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figures 73 through 76, there is minimal to no congestion (LOS B or better) on the major evacuation routes, except for CR 170 northbound and US 6, which clears at 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE. Therefore, the speeds are relatively close to the free flow speed on evacuation routes I80, Grand Ridge Rd, and IL 23 for the entirety of the evacuation.

Table J4 provides the number of vehicles discharged and the cumulative percent of total vehicles discharged for each link exiting the analysis network, for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. Refer to the figures in Appendix K for a map showing the geographic location of each link.

Figure J2 through Figure J15 plot the trip generation time versus the ETE for each of the 14 Scenarios considered. The distance between the trip generation and ETE curves is the travel time.

Plots of trip generation versus ETE are indicative of the level of traffic congestion during evacuation. For low population density sites, the curves are close together, indicating short travel times and minimal traffic congestion. For higher population density sites, the curves are farther apart indicating longer travel times and the presence of traffic congestion.

As seen in Figure J2 through Figure J15, the curves are mostly close together as a result of the limited traffic congestion in the EPZ, as discussed in Section 7.3, for all scenarios except during the summer, weekend, midday scenarios. During the summer, weekend, midday scenarios (Scenarios 3 and 4), there is a large number of vehicles at the National Guard Training Center and large number of transients, which are at their peak during these scenarios. Congestion exists until approximately 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes following the ATE. As seen in Figure J4 and Figure J5, the curves are spatially separated for about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> during these scenarios and then become closer together as a result of the minimal traffic congestion in the EPZ after this time.

1 Computed as the difference of the average travel time and the average ideal travel time under free flow conditions.

LaSalle County Generating Station J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Entering Link Upstream Downstream Network Directional Destination Destination Number Node Node on this Link Preference Nodes Capacity 8333 1,700 384 294 83 355 SE 8415 1,700 8191 1,700 8766 1,700 1034 880 879 177 NW 8768 1,700 8767 1,700 8768 1,700 665 527 626 82 W 8767 1,700 8511 1,700 8003 4,500 84 50 57 41 NW 8766 1,700 8768 1,700 8003 4,500 549 432 433 16 NW 8766 1,700 8768 1,700 8243 1,275 216 158 159 9 NE 8023 4,500 8231 3,800 8766 1,700 822 672 507 21 NW 8768 1,700 8767 1,700 8011 1,700 1082 924 450 42 NW 8003 4,500 8464 1,700 8358 1,700 484 373 376 42 SW 8333 1,700 8415 1,700 8011 1,700 659 521 520 54 NW 8003 4,500 8464 1,700 LaSalle County Generating Station J2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03)

Scenario 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NetworkWide Average 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.1 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 56.2 51.0 50.6 43.6 51.2 58.1 52.7 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 26,744 26,847 27,908 28,077 22,034 25,086 25,164 Exiting Network Scenario 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NetworkWide Average 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 48.9 57.8 52.1 48.7 54.0 49.5 51.3 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 25,161 24,786 24,848 24,898 20,002 22,669 26,753 Exiting Network LaSalle County 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 Major Evacuation Travel Travel Travel Route Name Length Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Travel Time Speed Travel Time (miles) (mph) (min) (mph) (min) (mph) (min) (mph) (min) (mph) (min)

I80 Eastbound 33.8 74.0 27.4 74.3 27.2 72.6 27.9 69.8 29.0 74.4 27.2 I80 Westbound 33.8 74.0 27.3 74.1 27.3 74.4 27.2 67.4 30.0 62.1 32.6 IL 23 Northbound 16.3 41.1 23.8 41.6 23.5 41.6 23.5 41.6 23.5 49.3 19.8 IL 23 Southbound 14.0 45.9 18.2 45.0 18.6 45.7 18.3 46.9 17.8 51.0 16.4 US 6 Eastbound 15.2 45.9 19.8 50.3 18.1 51.1 17.8 48.3 18.8 53.8 16.9 US 6 Westbound 20.4 46.3 26.4 47.4 25.8 47.9 25.5 45.2 27.0 39.5 30.9 Grand Ridge Rd Eastbound 12.8 49.7 15.5 57.2 13.5 57.3 13.4 50.8 15.2 57.9 13.3 Grand Ridge Rd Westbound 8.9 52.0 10.3 52.1 10.3 52.1 10.3 38.0 14.1 54.3 9.8 CR 170 Northbound 5.8 49.8 7.0 49.7 7.0 49.6 7.0 49.4 7.0 50.1 6.9 CR 170 Southbound 17.1 55.3 18.5 55.4 18.5 55.4 18.5 55.3 18.5 56.3 18.2 LaSalle County 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)

Up Down 1 2 3 4 5 stream stream Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Road Name Node Node Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time 31 195 309 362 365 I55 Southbound 25 24 0.6% 1.2% 1.3% 1.4% 1.4%

25 175 284 340 344 I55 Northbound 34 33 0.5% 1.1% 1.2% 1.3% 1.3%

105 344 492 565 569 Pine Bluff Rd Eastbound 190 191 1.9% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1%

71 208 275 300 302 CR 113 Eastbound 244 245 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1%

160 268 303 320 321 Reed Rd Eastbound 278 279 3.0% 1.6% 1.3% 1.2% 1.2%

19 89 130 141 142 CR 170 Southbound 309 310 0.4% 0.5% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5%

53 390 689 838 850 IL 23 Southbound 331 415 1.0% 2.4% 2.9% 3.2% 3.2%

34 307 559 686 696 IL 17 Westbound 332 333 0.6% 1.9% 2.4% 2.6% 2.6%

121 1,057 1,877 2,290 2,330 IL 18 Westbound 343 358 2.2% 6.4% 7.9% 8.6% 8.7%

1 9 16 18 18 CR 2 Northbound 721 722 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

234 757 971 1,085 1,095 Lisbon Rd Northbound 723 724 4.3% 4.6% 4.1% 4.1% 4.1%

154 651 993 1,170 1,183 US 6 Eastbound 726 725 2.8% 3.9% 4.2% 4.4% 4.4%

CR 14 Westbound 730 731 9 72 118 140 141 LaSalle County Generating Station J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Elapsed Time (hours)

Up Down 1 2 3 4 5 stream stream Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Road Name Node Node Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time 0.2% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%

9 87 153 190 194 IL 71 Westbound 759 760 0.2% 0.5% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7%

31 171 296 366 370 US 52 Eastbound 765 766 0.6% 1.0% 1.3% 1.4% 1.4%

5 68 130 158 160 US 52 Westbound 765 767 0.1% 0.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%

1 14 26 32 33 CR 1 Northbound 765 768 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

92 390 626 748 758 CR 33 Westbound 799 511 1.7% 2.4% 2.7% 2.8% 2.8%

1,969 4,808 6,083 6,323 6,337 I80 Eastbound 817 23 36.3% 29.0% 25.7% 23.9% 23.7%

105 389 523 598 604 IL 47 Northbound 862 781 1.9% 2.3% 2.2% 2.3% 2.3%

265 745 1,134 1,336 1,348 IL 71 Northbound 863 126 4.9% 4.5% 4.8% 5.0% 5.0%

1,776 4,591 6,219 6,697 6,742 I80 Westbound 950 3 32.7% 27.7% 26.3% 25.3% 25.2%

56 256 423 502 510 US 6 Westbound 957 464 1.0% 1.5% 1.8% 1.9% 1.9%

100 567 1,010 1,301 1,335 CR 178 Northbound 964 952 1.9% 3.4% 4.3% 4.9% 5.0%

LaSalle County Generating Station J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins LaSalle County Generating Station J7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

LaSalle County Generating Station J8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (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 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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

LaSalle County Generating Station J9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (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 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 Weather (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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

LaSalle County Generating Station J10 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%

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 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%

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 J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 8)

LaSalle County Generating Station J11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (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 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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain/Light Snow (Scenario 10)

LaSalle County Generating Station J12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Heavy Snow (Scenario 11)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12)

LaSalle County Generating Station J13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather, 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 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 13)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 14)

LaSalle County Generating Station J14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX K Evacuation Roadway Network

K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK As discussed in Section 1.3, a linknode analysis network was constructed to model the roadway network within the study area. Figure K1 provides an overview of the linknode analysis network. The figure has been divided up into 41 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K42) which show each of the links and nodes in the network.

The analysis network was calibrated using the observations made during the field surveys conducted in October 2020.

Table K1 summarizes the number of nodes by the type of control [stop sign, yield sign, pre timed signal, actuated signal, traffic and access control post (TACP), uncontrolled].

Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control Control Type Number of Nodes Uncontrolled Intersection 682 Pretimed Signal 0 Actuated Signal 77 Stop Sign 191 TACP 50 Yield Sign 3 Total: 1,003 LaSalle County Generating Station K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K1. LAS LinkNode Analysis Network LaSalle County Generating Station K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 LaSalle County Generating Station K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 LaSalle County Generating Station K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 LaSalle County Generating Station K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 LaSalle County Generating Station K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 LaSalle County Generating Station K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 LaSalle County Generating Station K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 LaSalle County Generating Station K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 LaSalle County Generating Station K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 LaSalle County Generating Station K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 LaSalle County Generating Station K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 LaSalle County Generating Station K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 LaSalle County Generating Station K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 LaSalle County Generating Station K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 LaSalle County Generating Station K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 LaSalle County Generating Station K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 LaSalle County Generating Station K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 LaSalle County Generating Station K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 LaSalle County Generating Station K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 LaSalle County Generating Station K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 LaSalle County Generating Station K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 LaSalle County Generating Station K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 LaSalle County Generating Station K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 LaSalle County Generating Station K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 LaSalle County Generating Station K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 LaSalle County Generating Station K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 LaSalle County Generating Station K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 LaSalle County Generating Station K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 LaSalle County Generating Station K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 LaSalle County Generating Station K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 LaSalle County Generating Station K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 LaSalle County Generating Station K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 LaSalle County Generating Station K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 LaSalle County Generating Station K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 LaSalle County Generating Station K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 LaSalle County Generating Station K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 LaSalle County Generating Station K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 LaSalle County Generating Station K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 LaSalle County Generating Station K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 LaSalle County Generating Station K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 LaSalle County Generating Station K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 LaSalle County Generating Station K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX L SubArea Boundaries

L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES SubArea 1 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses all of Brookfield Township, boundaries are defined as: North by the Illinois River, East by E 30th Road (also the Grundy County Line), South by N 18th Road, and West by E 24th Road.

SubArea 2 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses the north 1/3 of Allen Township, boundaries are defined as: North by N 18th Road, East by E 30th Road (also the Grundy County Line), South by N 16th Road, and West by E 24th Road.

SubArea 3 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses all of Grand Rapids Township and the east half of Fall River Township, boundaries are defined as: North on the east half of the North Boundary by the Illinois River and North on the west half of the North boundary by N 24th Road), East by E 24th Road, South by N 18th Road, and West on the south 6 miles of the West Boundary by E 18th Road and on the north 3 miles of the West Boundary by E 21st Road.

SubArea 4 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses all of Otter Creek Township and the northeast most three sections of Bruce Township, boundaries are defined as: North by N 18th Road, East by E 24th Road, South on the east six miles of the South Boundary by N 12th Road (also the Livingston County Line) and on the west one mile of the South Boundary by N 15th Road (also Marilla Park Road), and West on the south half of the West boundary by E 18th Road and on the north half of the West boundary by IL Route 23.

SubArea 5 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses the southern 2/3 of Allen Township, boundaries are defined as: North by N 16th Road, East by E 30th Road (also the Grundy County Line), South by N 12th Road (also the Livingston County Line), and West by E 24th Road.

SubArea 6 County : Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Contains part of Erienna Township. Boundaries are defined as: North by Marseilles Road, East by Nettle School Road, South by Illinois River, and West by E 30th Road/LaSalle Road (Grundy/LaSalle County line).

LaSalle County Generating Station L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SubArea 7 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses the east 1/3 of Farm Ridge Township, boundaries are defined as: North by N 24th Road, East by E 18th Road, South by N 18th Road, and West by E 16th Road.

SubArea 8 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses the west half of Fall River Township and the southeast most three sections of South Ottawa Township, boundaries are defined as: North on the east three miles of the North Boundary by the Illinois River and on the west one mile of the North Boundary by N 27th Road (also McKinley Road) and , East by E 21st Road, South by N 24th Road, and West on the south three miles of the West boundary by IL Route 23 and on the north one mile of the West boundary by E 18th Road.

SubArea 9 County : Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Norman Township boundary.

SubArea 10 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses all of Manlius Township and the south most half mile of Miller Township, boundaries are defined as: North by I80, East by E 30th Road (also the Grundy County Line),

South by Illinois River, and West by E 24th Road.

SubArea 11 County : LaSalle Defined as the area within the following boundary: Encompasses the south third of Rutland Township, boundaries are defined as: North by I80, East by E 24th Road, South by the Illinois River, and West on the south half mile of the West boundary by E 18th and on the north two miles of the West boundary by the Fox River.

SubArea 13 County : Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Vienna Township boundary.

SubArea 17 County : Grundy Defined as the area within the following boundary: Highland Township boundary.

LaSalle County Generating Station L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX M Evacuation Sensitivity Studies

M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES This appendix presents the results of a series of sensitivity analyses. These analyses are designed to identify the sensitivity of the Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) to changes in some base evacuation conditions.

M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times A sensitivity study was performed to determine whether changes in the estimated trip generation time have an effect on the ETE for the entire Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). Specifically, if the tail of the mobilization distribution were truncated (i.e., if those who responded most slowly to the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), could be persuaded to respond much more rapidly) or if the tail were elongated (i.e., spreading out the departure of evacuees to limit the demand during peak times), how would the ETE be affected? The case considered was Scenario 1, Region R03; a summer, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. Table M1 presents the results of this study.

If evacuees mobilize one hour quicker, the 90th percentile ETE is reduced by 25 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE are reduced by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> (a significant change), respectively. If evacuees mobilize one hour slower, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE are increased by 40 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, respectively - a significant change.

As discussed in Section 7.3, traffic congestion persists within the EPZ for about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE, before the completion of trip generation time. As such, congestion dictates the 90th and 100th percentile ETE until 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes after the ATE. After this time, trip generation (plus a 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary), dictates the 100th percentile ETE. See Table M1.

M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the percentage of people who decide to relocate from the Shadow Region. The case considered was Scenario 1, Region R03; a summer, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation for the entire EPZ. The movement of people in the Shadow Region has the potential to impede vehicles evacuating from an Evacuation Region within the EPZ. Refer to Sections 3.2 and 7.1 for additional information on population within the Shadow Region.

Table M2 presents the ETE for each of the cases considered. The results show that eliminating (0%)

or doubling (40%) shadow evacuation does not impact the 90th or 100th percentile ETEs. Tripling the shadow evacuation (60%) or a full shadow evacuation (100%) increases the 90th percentile ETE by 5 minutes - not a significant change - and does not impact the 100th percentile ETE since it is dictated by the trip generation.

LaSalle County Generating Station M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Note the demographic survey results presented in Appendix F, indicate that 10% of households would elect to evacuate if advised to shelter, which differs significantly from the base assumption of 20% noncompliance suggested in the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. A sensitivity study was run using 10% shadow evacuation and the 90th and 100th percentile ETE were not impacted .

The Shadow Region for LAS is sparsely populated except near population centers like Morris, Mazon, Ottawa, and Streator. As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 76, congestion in the Shadow Region does not propagate into the EPZ after two (2) hours of the evacuation such that EPZ evacuees would be delayed. Therefore, any additional shadow residents that decide to voluntarily evacuate are easily accommodated by the excess capacity available in the study area such that ETE are not impacted.

M.3 Effect of Changes in Permanent Resident Population A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the permanent resident population within the study area (EPZ plus Shadow Region). As population in the study area changes over time, the time required to evacuate the public may increase, decrease, or remain the same. Since the ETE is related to the demand to capacity ratio present within the study area, changes in population will cause the demand side of the equation to change and could impact ETE.

As per the NRCs response to the Emergency Planning Frequently Asked Question (EPFAQ) 2013 001, the ETE population sensitivity study must be conducted to determine what percentage increase in permanent resident population causes an increase in the 90th percentile ETE of 25%

or 30 minutes, whichever is less. The sensitivity study must use the scenario with the longest 90th percentile ETE (excluding the roadway impact scenario and the special event scenario if it is a one day per year special event).

The sensitivity study was conducted using the following planning assumptions:

1. The percent change in population within the study area was increased by up to 133%.

Changes in population were applied to permanent residents only (as per federal guidance), in both the EPZ and the Shadow Region.

2. The transportation infrastructure (as presented in Appendix K) remained fixed; the presence of future proposed roadway changes and/or highway capacity improvements were not considered.

3. The study was performed for the 2Mile Region (R01), the 5Mile Region (R02) and the entire EPZ (R03).

4. The scenario (excluding roadway impact and special event) which yielded the longest 90th percentile ETE values was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 8 - Winter, Midweek, Midday with Heavy Snow).

Table M3 presents the results of the sensitivity study.Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, Section 5.4, require licensees to provide an updated ETE analysis to the NRC when a population increase within the EPZ causes the longest 90th percentile ETE values (for the 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region or entire EPZ) to increase by 25% or 30 minutes, LaSalle County Generating Station M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

whichever is less. All base ETE values for the 2Mile Region (R01), 5Mile Region (R02), and for the entire (EPZ) are greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; 25% of these base ETE is always equal or greater than 30 minutes. Therefore, 30 minutes is the lesser and is the criterion for updating ETE.

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 133% or greater increase in the full EPZ permanent resident population (includes 20% of the Shadow permanent resident population). Constellation will have to estimate the full EPZ population on an annual basis. If the EPZ population increases by 133% or more, an updated ETE analysis will be needed.

M.4 Effect of Changes in SubAreas for Region R17 A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE of evacuating an additional Sub Area for Region R17 based on discussions with Constellation. In the base case, Region 17 includes the evacuation of SubAreas 1, 13, and 17 (See Figure H17). This sensitivity study considers the evacuation of SubAreas 1, 13 and 17 (Region R17), plus the evacuation of SubArea 2, which has been identified as Region R23 for this analysis. Figure M1 shows the configuration of Region R23.

Table M4 and Table M5 compare the ETE for Region R17 and Region R23 for the 90th percentile and 100th percentile, respectively. The 90th percentile ETE increased by at most 5 minutes while the 100th percentile ETE were not impacted. As shown in Table 312 and Table 313, the additional 74 permanent residents (45 permanent resident vehicles) from SubArea 2 are not a significant increase in evacuating population or vehicles, which explains the minimal impact on the 90th percentile ETE.

The 100th percentile ETE is dictated by the trip generation time (plus 10 minute travel time to the EPZ boundary), thus explaining why the 100th percentile ETE were not impacted.

M.5 Enhancements in Evacuation Time This appendix documents sensitivity studies on critical variables that could potentially impact ETE.

Possible improvements to ETE are further discussed below:

Reducing or prolonging the trip generation time by an hour impacts the 90th percentile ETE by 25 to 40 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, since trip generation within the EPZ dictates ETE (Section M.1). Public outreach encouraging evacuees to mobilize more quickly or in a timely manner will decrease ETE.

Increasing the shadow evacuation percent has little to no material impact on ETE (Section M.2). Nonetheless, public outreach could be considered to inform those people within the EPZ (and potentially beyond the EPZ) that if they are not advised to evacuate, they should not.

Population growth results in more evacuating vehicles, which could increase ETE (Section M.3). Public outreach to inform people within the EPZ to evacuate as a family in a single vehicle would reduce the number of evacuating vehicles and could reduce ETE or offset the impact of population growth.

LaSalle County Generating Station M3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study Trip Generation Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Period th 90 Percentile 100th Percentile 3 Hours 30 Minutes 2:15 3:40 4 Hours 30 Minutes (Base) 2:40 4:40 5 Hours 30 Minutes 3:20 5:40 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Percent Shadow Evacuating Shadow Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Evacuation Vehicles1 th 90 Percentile 100th Percentile 0 0 2:40 4:40 10 (survey) 3,059 2:40 4:40 20 (Base) 6,117 2:40 4:40 40 12,234 2:40 4:40 60 18,351 2:45 4:40 80 24,468 2:45 4:40 100 30,585 2:45 4:40 Table M3. Evacuation Time Estimates for Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Population Change Base Shadow Permanent 131% 132% 133%

Resident Population 26,661 61,587 61,854 62,120 ETE (hrs:mins) for the 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 131% 132% 133%

2MILE 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:35 5MILE 3:25 3:40 3:40 3:40 FULL EPZ 3:25 3:50 3:50 3:55 th ETE (hrs:mins) for the 100 Percentile Population Change Region Base 131% 132% 133%

2MILE 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:45 5MILE 5:50 5:50 5:50 5:50 FULL EPZ 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 1

The Evacuating Shadow Vehicles, in Table M-2, represent the residents and employees who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis, for the base values shown, is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees. See Section 6 for further discussion.

LaSalle County Generating Station M4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M4. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek, Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Weekend Midweek Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Region Weather Rain Weather Rain Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R17 2:45 2:45 2:20 2:20 2:25 2:45 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:15 2:30 2:25 2:45 R23 2:45 2:45 2:25 2:25 2:30 2:45 2:45 3:30 2:30 2:30 3:15 2:30 2:30 2:45 Table M5.Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek, Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Weekend Midweek Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Good Good Good Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Rain/Light Heavy Good Special Roadway Region Weather Rain Weather Rain Weather Weather Snow Snow Weather Snow Snow Weather Event Impact Evacuate 2Mile Region and Downwind to EPZ Boundary R17 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 R23 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 5:55 4:40 4:40 4:40 LaSalle County Generating Station M5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure M1. Region R23 LaSalle County Generating Station M6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX N ETE Criteria Checklist

N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 1.0 Introduction

a. The emergency planning zone (EPZ) and surrounding area Yes Section 1.2 is described.

b. A map is included that identifies primary features of the Yes Figures 11, 31, 61 site including major roadways, significant topographical features, boundaries of counties, and population centers within the EPZ.

c. A comparison of the current and previous ETE is provided Yes Section 1.4, Table 13 including information similar to that identified in Table 1 1, ETE Comparison.

1.1 Approach

a. The general approach is described in the report as Yes Section 1.1, Section 1.3, Appendix D outlined in Section 1.1, Approach.

1.2 Assumptions

a. Assumptions consistent with Table 12, General Yes Section 2 Assumptions, of NUREG/CR7002 are provided and include the basis to support use.

LaSalle County Generating Station N1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 1.3 Scenario Development

a. The scenarios in Table 13, Evacuation Scenarios, are Yes Table 21, Section 6, Table 62 developed for the ETE analysis. A reason is provided for use of other scenarios or for not evaluating specific scenarios.

1.4 Evacuation Planning Areas

a. A map of the EPZ with emergency response planning Yes Figure 31, Figure 61 areas (ERPAs) is included.

1.4.1 Keyhole Evacuation

a. A table similar to Table 14 Evacuation Areas for a Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1 Keyhole 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 Yes Section 7.2, Section 5.4.2 evacuation is discussed.

b. A table similar to Table 15, Evacuation Areas for a Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1, Table 73, Staged Evacuation, is provided for staged evacuations Table 74 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).

LaSalle County Generating Station N2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 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 N/A N/A 2020 Census used as the base year of to reflect population estimates to the year of the ETE. the analysis

d. A sector diagram, similar to Figure 21, Population by Yes Figure 32 Sector, is included showing the population distribution for permanent residents.

2.1.1 Permanent Residents with Vehicles

a. The persons per vehicle value is between 1 and 3 or Yes Section 3.1, Appendix F justification is provided for other values.

2.1.2 Transient Population

a. A list of facilities that attract transient populations is Yes Section 3.3, Table E5 included, and peak and average attendance for these facilities is listed. The source of information used to develop attendance values is provided.

b. Major employers are listed. Yes Section 3.4, Table E4 LaSalle County Generating Station N3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. The average population during the season is used, Yes Table 34, Table 35, and Appendix E itemize itemized and totaled for each scenario. the peak transient population and employee estimates. These estimates are multiplied by the scenario specific percentages provided in Table 63 to estimate average transient population and employee by scenario - see Table 64.

d. The percentage of permanent residents assumed to be at Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 facilities is estimated.

e. The number of people per vehicle is provided. Numbers Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 may vary by scenario, and if so, reasons for the variation are discussed.

f. A sector diagram is included, similar to Figure 21, Yes Figure 36 (transients) and Figure 38 Population by Sector, is included showing the (employees) population distribution for the transient population.

2.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. The methodology (e.g., surveys, registration programs) Yes Section 3.8 used to determine the number of transit dependent residents is discussed.

b. The State and local evacuation plans for transit Yes Section 8.1 dependent residents are used in the analysis.

LaSalle County Generating Station N4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. The methodology used to determine the number of Yes Section 3.9 people 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 Yes Section 3.8, Table 39,Table 312 provided.

f. A summary table showing the total number of buses, Yes Table 81 ambulances, or other transport assumed available to support evacuation is provided. The quantification of resources is detailed enough to ensure that double counting has not occurred.

2.3 Special Facility Residents

a. Special facilities, including the type of facility, location, Yes Table E3 lists all medical facilities by facility and average population, are listed. Special facility staff is name, location, and average population. Staff included in the total special facility population. estimates were not provided.

b. The method of obtaining special facility data is discussed. Yes Section 3.5

c. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles Yes Table 36 assumed available to support the evacuation of the facility is provided.

LaSalle County Generating Station N5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

d. The logistics for mobilizing specially trained staff (e.g., Yes Section 8.1 - under Evacuation of Medical medical support or security support for prisons, jails, and Facilities other correctional facilities) are discussed when appropriate.

2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student Yes Table 37, Table 38, Table E1, Table E2, population, and transportation resources required to Section 3.6 support the evacuation, is provided. The source of this information should be identified.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle Yes Section 3.6 schools are based on 100 percent of the school capacity.

c. The estimate of high school students who will use Yes Section 3.6 personal vehicle to evacuate is provided and a basis for the values used is given.

d. The need for return trips is identified. Yes Section 8.1 no return trips are needed.

2.5 Other Demand Estimate Considerations 2.5.1 Special Events

a. A complete list of special events is provided including Yes Section 3.10 information on the population, estimated duration, and season of the event.

b. The special event that encompasses the peak transient Yes Section 3.10 population is analyzed in the ETE.

c. The percentage of permanent residents attending the Yes Section 3.10 event is estimated.

LaSalle County Generating Station N6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 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 Figure 7 with the approach outlined in Section 2.5.2, Shadow 1, 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 Yes Section 3.11 and Section 3.12 traffic is based on the average daytime traffic. Values may be reduced for nighttime scenarios.

b. The method of reducing background and passthrough Yes Section 2.2 - Item 10 and 11 traffic 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 Yes Section 2.5, Section 3.11 the EPZ about two (2) hours after the initial notification.

LaSalle County Generating Station N7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 2.6 Summary of Demand Estimation

a. A summary table is provided that identifies the total Yes Table 312, Table 313, 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 Yes Section 4 discussed.

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 Yes Appendix K of the modeled roadway network similar to Figure A1, Roadway Network Identifying Nodes and Links, and Figure A2, Grid Map Showing Detailed Nodes and Links.

3.2 Model Approach

a. The approach used to calculate the roadway capacity for Yes Section 4 the 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 Yes Appendix B and Appendix C and traffic volumes.

LaSalle County Generating Station N8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. A basis is provided for static route choices if used to N/A Static route choices are not used to assign assign evacuation routes. evacuation routes. Dynamic traffic assignment is used.

d. Dynamic traffic assignment models are described Yes Appendix B and Appendix C including 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 Item 2 and 3 of Section 2.6

b. The speed and capacity reduction factors identified in Yes Table 22 Table 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 N/A Driver behavior is not adjusted for adverse for adverse weather conditions are described, if weather conditions.

applicable.

LaSalle County Generating Station N9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

d. The effect of adverse weather on mobilization is Yes Item 6 of Section 2.6, Table 22; considered 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 Yes Section 1.3, Table 13, Appendix B, Appendix C used in the analysis is provided.

b. If a traffic simulation model is not used to perform the N/A Not applicable since a traffic simulation model ETE calculation, sufficient detail is provided to validate was used.

the analytical approach used.

4.2 Traffic Simulation Model Input

a. Traffic simulation model assumptions and a Yes Section 2, Appendix J representative set of model inputs are provided.

b. The number of origin nodes and method for distributing Yes Appendix J, Appendix C vehicles among the origin nodes are described.

c. A glossary of terms is provided for the key performance Yes Appendix A, Table C1, and Table C3 measures and parameters used in the analysis.

4.3 Trip Generation Time

a. The process used to develop trip generation times is Yes Section 5 identified.

b. When surveys are used, the scope of the survey, area of Yes Appendix F the survey, number of participants, and statistical relevance are provided.

LaSalle County Generating Station N10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. Data used to develop trip generation times are Yes Appendix F, Section 5 summarized.

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 N/A There was no uncertainty when developing developing trip generation times are discussed, if trip generation times.

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. households with and without returning Trip generation time includes the assumption that a commuters.

percentage of residents will need to return home before Table 63 presents the percentage of evacuating. households with returning commuters and the percentage of households either without returning commuters or with no commuters.

Appendix F presents the percent households who will await the return of commuters.

Item 3 of Section 2.3

b. The trip generation time accounts for the time and Yes Section 5 method to notify transients at various locations.

c. The trip generation time accounts for transients Yes Section 5, Figure 51 potentially returning to hotels before evacuating.

LaSalle County Generating Station N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

d. The effect of public transportation resources used during Yes Section 3.10 special events where a large number of transients are Public Transportation is not provided for the expected is considered. special event and was therefore not considered.

4.3.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. If available, existing and approved plans and bus routes N/A Established bus routes do not exist. Basic bus are used in the ETE analysis. routes were developed for the ETE analysis.

Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit Dependent People (Residents without access to a vehicle)

b. The means of evacuating ambulatory and non Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit ambulatory residents are discussed. Dependent People (Residents without access to a vehicle)

Section 8.2

c. Logistical details, such as the time to obtain buses, brief Yes Section 8.1, Figure 81 drivers and initiate the bus route are used in the analysis.

d. The estimated time for transit dependent residents to Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation of Transit prepare and then travel to a bus pickup point, including Dependent People (Residents without access the expected means of travel to the pickup point, is to a vehicle) described.

e. The number of bus stops and time needed to load Yes Section 8.1, Table 85 though Table 87 passengers are discussed.

f. A map of bus routes is included. Yes Figure 102 LaSalle County Generating Station N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

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 Yes Sections 8.1 and 8.2 no return trips are trips, if necessary. needed.

4.3.3 Special Facilities

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 88 through times is provided. Table 810

b. The logistics of evacuating wheelchair and bed bound Yes Section 8.1, Table 88 through Table 810 residents are discussed.

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 Yes Section 8.1 residents 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.

LaSalle County Generating Station N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA) 4.3.4 Schools

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82 through times is provided. 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 Yes Section 8.1, Table 103 discussion is provided on whether students are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

e. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1, Table 82 through Table 84 elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.4 Stochastic Model Runs

a. The number of simulation runs needed to produce N/A DYNEV does not rely on simulation averages average results is discussed. or random seeds for statistical confidence. For LaSalle County Generating Station N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

b. If one run of a single random seed is used to produce N/A DYNEV/DTRAD, it is a mesoscopic simulation each ETE result, the report includes a sensitivity study on and uses dynamic traffic assignment model to the 90 percent and 100 percent ETE using 10 different obtain the "average" (stable) network work random seeds for evacuation of the full EPZ under flow distribution. This is different from Summer, Midweek, Daytime, Normal Weather microscopic simulation, which is montecarlo conditions. 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.

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.

LaSalle County Generating Station N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

b. The minimum following model outputs for evacuation of Yes 1. Appendix J, Table J2 the 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 based

3. Number of vehicles arriving at each destination node. on the time the last vehicle exits the

4. Total number and percentage of evacuee vehicles not evacuation zone exiting the EPZ. 5. Figures J2 through J15 (one plot for

5. A plot that provides both the mobilization curve and each scenario considered) evacuation curve identifying the cumulative 6. Table J3 percentage of evacuees who have mobilized and exited the EPZ.

6. Average speed for each major evacuation route that exits the EPZ.

c. Color coded roadway maps are provided for various Yes Figure 73 through Figure 76 times (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 Yes Table 71 and Table 72 100 percent of the total permanent resident and transient population.

b. Termination criteria for the 100 percent ETE are N/A 100 percent ETE is based on the time the last discussed, if not based on the time the last vehicle exits vehicle exits the evacuation zone.

the evacuation zone.

LaSalle County Generating Station N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

c. The ETE for 100 percent of the general public includes all Yes Section 5.4.1 - truncating survey data to members of the general public. Any reductions or eliminate statistical outliers truncated data is explained. Table 72 - 100th percentile ETE for general population

d. Tables are provided for the 90 and 100 percent ETEs Yes Table 73 and Table 74 similar 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 Yes Section 8 special facilities, transit dependent, and school populations.

5.0 Other Considerations 5.1 Development of Traffic Control Plans

a. Information that responsible authorities have approved Yes Section 9, Appendix G the 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.

LaSalle County Generating Station N17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Analysis Comments (Yes/No/NA)

b. Information is provided on any unresolved issues that No Results of the ETE study were formally may 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 Yes Appendix M, Section M.3 to 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 the conditions not adequately reflected in the scenario availability of US Census Bureau decennial variations. census data.

5.5 Reception Centers and Congregate Care Center

a. A map of congregate care centers and reception centers Yes Figure 103 is provided.

LaSalle County Generating Station N18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0