Text

Duane Arnold Energy Center - Evaluation of Proposed Amendment for License Amendment Request (TSCR-165) for Revision to Emergency Planning Zone in the Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Plan
	ML17102B184
Person / Time
Site:	Duane Arnold
Issue date:	03/31/2017
From:	; NextEra Energy Duane Arnold
To:	; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17102B194	List: ML17102B183; ML17102B184; NG-17-0037, Duane Arnold Energy Center - Evaluation of Proposed Amendment for License Amendment Request (TSCR-165) for Revision to Emergency Planning Zone in the Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Plan; NG-17-0037, Duane Arnold Energy Center - Submittal of License Amendment Request (TSCR-165) for Revision to Emergency Planning Zone in the Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Plan; NG-17-0037, Kld TR-910, Duane Arnold Energy Center Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Revised EPZ Boundary (in Support of License Amendment Request (TSCR-165));
References
	NG-17-0037, TSCR-165
	Download: ML17102B184 (123)
	v • d • e

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 1 of 17 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC

Subject:

License Amendment Request to Revise the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) in the Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Preparedness Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0

SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION 2.0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION 3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION 3.1 Emergency Plan Background 3.2 Background for Emergency Planning Zone Changes 3.3 Basis for the Proposed Changes and Their Impacts 3.4 Other Impacts of the Emergency Planning Zone Boundary Changes

4.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

4.1 Significant Hazards Consideration 4.2 Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria 4.3 Conclusions 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

6.0 REFERENCES

ATTACHMENTS

1. Marked-Up Pages of E Plan Section I, Figure 1-1, DAEC Emergency Planning Zone 2. Clean Copy Pages of E Plan Section I, Figure 1-1, DAEC Emergency Planning Zone 3. Proposed DAEC E Plan, Appendix 3, Linn I Benton Counties Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) ("Duane Arnold Energy Center Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Revised EPZ Boundary," KLD Engineering, P.C., March 9, 2017, Final Report, Rev. 0, KLD TR-910:")

First 42 of 588 pages provided as hard copy. Full document provided on CD. 4. Linn County Emergency Management Commission Request to Modify DAEC Subarea 24 Boundary, with Resolutions and Letters of Support, June 17, 2016. 5. Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Department, Letter of Transmittal and Support, June 27, 2016 6. The Regional FEMA approval letter to FEMA Headquarters (Enclosure

1) and the FEMA Headquarters approval letter of August 11, 2016 (Enclosure 2, copied to NRC, ADAMS ML 16225A677)

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 2 of 17 1.

SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC (NextEra Duane Arnold) proposes changes to the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) Emergency Plan (E Plan) that revise the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) boundary for an area beyond the 1 O mile required EPZ. The proposed change would modify subarea 24 of the EPZ by designating U.S. Highway 30 as its southern boundary.

Currently, there is a tract within the DAEC EPZ subarea 24 that is to the south of US Highway 30. This tract in subarea 24 is unique --otherwise, the entire DAEC EPZ is to the north of US Highway 30, which is a four lane, divided highway. Subarea 24 is within Linn County, Iowa. The EPZ boundary change requires that a new Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) study. be performed for the DAEC host counties of Linn and Benton, Iowa, and this revision is also included in the proposal.

The proposed change to the southern boundary of the EPZ is considered a reduction in effectiveness as defined in 10 CFR 50.54(q)(1

)(iv) due to the reduction in EPZ area beyond the 10 mile boundary, and it requires prior Nuclear Regulatory Commission approval in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(q)(4).

Therefore, DAEC is submitting the proposed change as a license amendment.

The proposed change to the subarea 24 boundary will enhance law enforcement's ability to evacuate subareas in the Cedar Rapids area as well as improve their ability to control access back into evacuated metro areas. Further, the proposed change to subarea 24 will make the overall DAEC EPZ boundary more consistent and easier for the public to understand.

2. DETAILED DESCRIPTION The proposed changes to the DAEC E Plan are: 1. Attachment 1 reflects the current E Plan Section 'I', "Accident Assessment," with the proposed changes shown by markup, including Figure 1-1, DAEC EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE, with the proposed change designated.

Attachment 2 shows the procedure section with the proposed changes made, including the modification to Figure 1-1, with U.S. Highway 30 designated as all of the southern boundary of subarea 24. Currently, US Highway 30 is the southern boundary for DAEC EPZ contiguous subareas 16, 17; 18, and 23. Subarea 24 is the only subarea to extend to the south beyond this highway. The portion of subarea 24 proposed for removal from the current DAEC EPZ -that area south of the highway -is entirely beyond the required radius of 10 miles from the plant required per 10CFR 50.47. The area is from 12 to 15 miles distant from the DAEC facility.

The proposed change to the subarea 24 boundary will make the overall DAEC EPZ boundary more consistent and easier for the public to understand.

Subarea 24 is within Linn County, Iowa.* 2. Attachment 3 reflects the completely updated 2017 E Plan Appendix 3, "Duane Arnold Energy Center Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Revised EPZ Boundary," KLD Engineering, P.C., March 9, 2017. This analysis incorporated the proposed EPZ reduction in subarea 24, population changes, and a review of potential traffic bottlenecks beyond the original study area. Results of this ETE study Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 3 of 17 show that, in isolation, the revision to EPZ subarea 24 will decrease the evacuation time by up to seventy minutes at the 100 1 h percentile ETE value. An increase in overall evacuation times since the last ETE study in 2012 was observed due to roadway changes beyond the original study area, and population increases.

3. TECHNICAL EVALUATION 3.1 Emergency Plan Background 10 CFR 50.47, "Emergency plans," defines emergency planning standards that nuclear power reactors must meet. Planning standard 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) states, in part: Generally, the plume exposure pathway EPZ for nuclear power plants shall consist of an area about 10 miles (16 km) in radius and the ingestion pathway EPZ shall consist of an area about 50 miles (80 km) in radius. The exact size and configuration of the EPZs surrounding a particular nuclear power reactor shall be determined in relation to local emergency response needs and capabilities as they are affected by such conditions as demography, topography, land characteristics, access routes, and jurisdictional boundaries.

10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Section Ill states, in part: The plans submitted must include a description of the elements set out in Section IV for the emergency planning zones (EPZs) to an extent sufficient to demonstrate that the plans provide reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of an emergency.

NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, "Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants," Revision 1, Section 1.0.2 and Table 1 states: With regard to the area over which planning efforts should be carried out, "Emergency Planning Zones" (EPZs) about each nuclear facility must be defined ... The choice of the size of the Emergency Planning Zones represents a judgment on the extent of detailed planning which must be performed to assure an adequate response base .... The Task Force selected a radius of about 10 miles for the plume exposure pathway. ... Although the radius for the EPZ implies a circular area, the actual shape would depend upon the characteristics of a* particular site .... [Table 1] Judgment should be used in adopting this distance based upon considerations of local conditions such as demography, topography, land characteristics, access routes, and local jurisdictional boundaries.

The EPZ changes described above were submitted by Linn County, Iowa, and the State of Iowa to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) pursuant to the requirements of FEMA Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual.

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 4of17 Linn County, Iowa has since obtained conditional approval from FEMA Headquarters regarding this submitted application for the EPZ boundary change, which is contingent upon the following two actions. (See Attachment

6. Copied to NRC, ADAMS ML 16225A677.):

1. That the licensee NextEra Energy Resources receive approval for the proposed revisions to the EPZ for the Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Plan from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRG), in accordance with all applicable NRG regulations and procedures.

2. Once received, the offsite response organizations surrounding the Duane Arnold Energy Center site submit for review to FEMA Region VII the appropriate changes to their plans/procedures, maps of the EPZ, public information material, and affect that the addition or subtraction of population from the EPZ has on the evacuation time estimates.

The required information would include changes to the geographical boundary descriptions and the alert and notification system (ANS), including additional sirens or other means for public notification.

Any modification to an ANS must be consistent with the REP Program Manual, January 2016. The Linn County EPZ boundary change application to FEMA can be found in Attachm_ent 4, and the Regional FEMA approval letter to FEMA Headquarters and the Headquarters FEMA approval letter can be found in Attachment

6. The State of Iowa supported the boundary change request to FEMA in a letter dated June 27, 2016, which is found in Attachment

5. As noted above, the Regional FEMA approval letter to FEMA Headquarters and the Headquarters FEMA approval letter are found in Attachment

6. A complete update of the 2012 DAEC Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) study was developed by KLD Engineering, incorporating the modification to subarea 24. The 2017 complete update of the ETE can be found in Attachment

3. The requested revision to the DAEC 10-mile EPZ described in this license amendment request meets the above regulatory criteria.

The State of Iowa and the Linn County Radiological Emergency Response plans describe actions that would be applicable for events at DAEC that warrant a protective action of sheltering or evacuation.

Aligning the DAEC 10-mile EPZ with those desired by these offsite response organizations will ensure clear and consistent communications are used when determining actions to protect the health and safety of the public. 3.2 Background for Emergency Planning Zone Boundary Changes This license amendment request proposes one change that reduces the DAEC EPZ boundaries within Linn County, Iowa. See Figure 1, below, which provides a map of the Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 5of17 current EPZ used by offsite agencies and Figure 2 which provides a map showing the proposed change. The 1982 Safety Analysis Report (SAR) did not provide a written description of the EPZ nor an EPZ map. The SAR, under Section I. (Accident Assessment), provided that "The capability and resources for field monitoring within the plume exposure pathway EPZ have been described in the plan." Section "I" of the 1982 E Plan displayed an EPZ with a 1 O mile boundary but no subarea delineation.

Instead, the EPZ was broken down into radials extending to a 10 mile radius from the DAEC plant. This encompasses portions of Linn County and Benton County, Iowa, and included some areas within the boundaries of the cities of Cedar Rapids, Marion, and Urbana, Iowa. In 1988, DAEC modified the EPZ to include all of the areas within the corporate boundaries of Cedar Rapids, Marion and Urbana. This included locations which were beyond the 10 mile radius from the DAEC plant, but within these cities' corporate limits. At that time, the EPZ was broken down into seven subareas.

The practice of the EPZ following the corporate city limits of Cedar Rapids, Marion, and Urbana would continue for the next few years with the EPZ boundaries periodically expanding (outside of the 1 O mile radius) as these cities grew in size. However, since 1994 the EPZ boundaries have not been changed even though the corporate boundaries for all three cities have continued to expand outward. Informal discussions with FEMA Region 7 personnel indicate that following city corporate boundaries was the preferred FEMA practice back in the 1980s and 1990s, but the approach then fell from use as corporate boundaries continued to move outward. Figure 1, the current EPZ Boundary Map (below) has been in existence since 1994. This EPZ boundary was used for the Evacuation Time Estimates for Linn and Benton Counties performed using 2000 Census, and for the study currently in place using the 2010 Census (the 2012 study).

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Plann i ng Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arno l d , LLC Page 6of17 Current EPZ Boundaries

-Figure 1 Proposed EPZ Boundaries

-Figure 2 Area Removed Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 7of17 3.3 Basis for the Proposed Changes and Their Impacts The current E Plan defines the DAEC EPZ in Figure 1-1 (Figure 1 above). It includes areas further than 10 miles from the plant. These EPZ boundaries were set with the guidance and approval of FEMA. The description of the subarea boundaries for messaging evacuation information to the public was a consideration.

The proposed change to the E Plan is to designate US Highway 30 as the southern boundary of EPZ subarea 24 in southwest Cedar Rapids, Linn County, Iowa, replacing the smaller 76 1 h Avenue SW located further to the south. The EPZ locations under consideration are all beyond the 10 mile radius of DAEC. The proposed change is considered by Linn County, the Iowa Homeland Security Emergency Management Department (HSEMD), and DAEC as an improvement to the current E Plan for the following reasons: 1. Improved Ability to Feed Vehicles Onto Major Evacuation Routes, and Improved Ability of Law Enforcement to Control Access to the EPZ U.S. Highway 30 is categorized as an expressway, which is defined by the Federal Highway Administration as "a controlled access, divided arterial highway for through traffic, the intersections of which are usually separated from other roadways by differing grades." According to the Iowa Department of Transportation, the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count on US Highway 30 in the proposed new EPZ boundary area is 24, 100 with a capacity of each directional pair of bound lanes carrying 86,400 vehicles per day. US Highway 30 in this area also directly feeds into the Interstate 380 (1-380) north and south bound lanes. Using US Highway 30 as a boundary can better support law enforcement's ability to move traffic out of the EPZ and control access to the evacuated area. US Highway 30 also has wide shoulders, which provide a safer location for law enforcement personnel and vehicles, as well as providing a better safe zone for vehicles that may break down during an evacuation.

Conversely the current southern boundary of EPZ subarea 24 is 75th Avenue SW. It is classified as a 2-way collector street. The current ADT for 76 1 h Avenue SW is 1,750. This street is in proximity to College Community Schools, which have a main campus of over 6,500 students and faculty, and the street can be a very high trafficked area when the schools go in and out of session. 76 1 h Avenue SW also has narrow shoulders and no direct access to the area's major evacuation routes of US Highway 30 or 1-380. Impact of Proposed Change: US Highway 30 has greater vehicle capacity to move more people out of an evacuated area than 76 1 h Avenue SW, and is a safer roadway for evacuation as it provides no two-way directional conflicts for traffic. US Highway 30 also provides better access control and a safer location for law enforcement than 75th Avenue SW.

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold , LLC Page 8of17 A visual comparison of US Highway 30 and 76 1 h Avenue SW can be seen in Figures 1-3 and 1-4 (below). Figure 3 -76m Ave. Kirkwood Blvd. SW looking west along 76m Ave Figure 4 -Highway 30 Kirkwood Blvd. SW looking along U.S. Highway 30 Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC -Page 9of17 2. Improved Evacuation Messaging US Highway 30 is a well-known landmark for Cedar Rapids residents and businesses.

The proposed change removes the only EPZ property that extends south of this highway. This eliminates the need to include several small roadways within the description of the EPZ boundary and evacuation routes. Impact of Proposed Change: This simplification of the EPZ will help ensure clear and consistent communications with county and state emergency management agencies when determining actions to protect the health and safety of the public. Additionally, this simplification helps ensure that the public understands what area is covered by the protective actions they are being advised to take. 3. Avoid Splitting of the College Community School District and Kirkwood Community College Campuses into EPZ and Non-EPZ Areas Because of community growth over the past twenty years, the EPZ boundary established in 1994, 76 1 h Avenue SW, no longer encompasses the entire College Community School District campus. In addition, part of the Kirkwood Community College campus also now resides outside of the EPZ. The issue facing College Community School District is the precautionary relocation of school children upon a Site Area Emergency declaration, as guided by the current Linn County Radiological Emergency Response Plan (REP). While attending school a majority of students in the District are currently within the EPZ and subject to evacuation via buses. The district has also found it prudent to address those students whose nearby facility (a middle school) is located just outside of the EPZ -they are also evacuated via buses. Removal of the entire College Community School campus from the EPZ would correspond with the status of other school districts that are at a similar distance from the DAEC plant. The main campus of College Community is 15.1 miles from DAEC. The Central City School District, which is not in the EPZ, is 14.8 miles from the DAEC plant, and the North Linn School District campus, also not in the EPZ, is 14.4 miles from the DAEC plant. See Figure 5, below. The Kirkwood Community College campus is also now split by the southern boundary of the EPZ at 76 1 h Avenue SW. If the EPZ were recommended for evacuation, the college administration would have a complex decision regarding actions for those students and on-campus SE;lrvices within and outside of the EPZ. As previously noted, the current inclusion of a portion of the College Community School District and Kirkwood Community College campuses in the EPZ is due to the Cedar Rapids city limits at the time the EPZ was last established, and not because of these institutions' distance from the DAEC.

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold , LLC Page 10 of 17 Impact of Proposed Change: The proposed new boundary using Highway 30 as the southern border for subarea 24 would remove the entire College Community School District campus from the EPZ. Therefore , children and staff would not be subject to relocation under the guidance of the REP Plan. Similarly , with the proposed modification , the entire Kirkwood Community College campus would be placed outside of the EPZ boundary , simplifying the college's response to EPZ recommendations. (See Figure 5 below.) Distant from Schools -Figure 5 Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 11 of 17 Summary of the Basis for the Proposed Changes: The proposed changes will provide a more effective EPZ boundary for the protection of the health and safety of the public. The proposed changes are supported by the Linn County Emergency Management Commission, the (Cedar Rapids) College Community School District, and Kirkwood Community College. (See Attachment 4 for the FEMA application from Linn County, including resolutions and letters of support).

3.4 Other Impacts of the Emergency Planning Zone Boundary Changes 1. Linn County, Iowa Interface This DAEC license amendment request proposes changes to the DAEC E Plan that revise the Emergency Planning Zone boundary for an area beyond the 10 mile required EPZ. The change is supported by Linn County, Iowa and the State of Iowa, with conditional approval from FEMA subject to concurrence by the NRC (see Attachments 4 through 6). 2. Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) Study In 2017, KLD Engineering completed an ETE Study for NextEra Energy Duane Arnold. ("Duane Arnold Energy Center Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Revised EPZ Boundary," KLD Engineering, P.C., March 9, 2017, Final Report, Rev. 0, KLD TR-91 O.") The study area for the effort remained unchanged throughout unless otherwise noted. This study area extended out to 15 miles radially from the plant (as per NRC guidance to incorporate shadow evacuation), with the addition of the portion of subarea 23 which extends beyond 15 miles. Following federal guidelines, the existing 24 different subareas within the EPZ were grouped within circular areas or "keyhole" configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 38 evacuation regions. Phase 1 of the KLD Engineering study was performed to determine if the proposed change in the EPZ bounda_ry of subarea 24 impacted the ETE determined in 2012. This review was a strict comparison wherein both the roadway systems modeled and the populations from the 2012 ETE study were maintained except for the removal of the portion of subarea 24 to the south of US Highway 30. The objective of the comparison was to ensure that any change in ETE noted would be the result of the change in the EPZ subarea boundary.

This preliminary Phase 1 study found a potential decrease in ETE of up to 40 minutes following the redrawing of subarea 24. KLD Engineering then completed the final Phase 2 of the project: a complete revised (2017) ETE for DAEC. Phase 2 is a full update to the 2012 ETE study. It incorporates the reduction in the size of the subarea 24 EPZ boundary as requested by the Linn County Emergency Management Commission.

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 12 of 17 Specifically, the area south of U.S. Highway 30 in subarea 24 was removed, resulting in fewer people and vehicles evacuating from the subarea. The 2017 ETE study also considered an overall increase since 2012 in population and evacuating vehicles within the study area. In addition, potential traffic bottlenecks beyond the original study area were included. (The most significant was the recent installation in a nearby community of a single lane traffic circle on the US 30 eastbound route, reducing traffic flow capacity by 80%.) Calculated times in all scenarios will vary depending on the calendar date and the weather conditions, among other factors. Comparing the completed 2017 ETE study to the 2012 review, the impacts are as follows:

When considered independently of other changes, the proposed alteration of the EPZ subarea 24 boundary would have the effect of reducing the ETE for the full EPZ by up to 35 minutes at the goth percentile and up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 1 O minutes at the 1 oath percentile.

This would be because approximately g,ooo less vehicles would be evacuating from subarea 24.

The 2 mile and 5 mile regions, and the keyholes comprised of the 2 mile region and downwind sectors to 5 miles would not be significantly impacted (ETE changes of 5 minutes or less), as the changes considered by the 2017 study identified above are primarily well beyond the 5-mile radius from DAEC.

Overall, the ETE for the full EPZ and for the keyholes comprised of the 2 mile region and downwind sectors to the EPZ boundary (10 miles and beyond) were found to have increased since the 2012 study. The increase was up to 55 minutes at the goth percentile and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 55 minutes at the 1 oath percentile for wind directions which blow over the City of Cedar Rapids. The increase in ETE was the direct result of the consideration of bottlenecks beyond the original study area of 15 miles, as well increases in population and evacuating vehicles within the study area. 3. Emergency Alert Notification System (ANS) Design Report Evaluation No sirens will be added to the system, and no sirens will be removed from the system or otherwise altered. While sirens 24-E and 24-F are located within the area to be removed from the EPZ, their siren coverage needs to be maintained as both sirens provide overlapping coverage in the remaining area of subarea 24. An update regarding sirens is not needed for DAEC's status relative to the FEMA Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) Program Manual, January 2016 (formerly FEMA-REP-10, "Guide for the Evaluation of Alert and Notification Systems for Nuclear Power Plants".)

A map of EPZ subareas is included in DAEC's REP status document and this is in the process of being updated.

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 13of17 4. Emergency Dose Assessment and Protective Action Recommendations There will be no change to DAEC protective action recommendations (PARs) due to this proposed EPZ boundary change. DAEC provides PARs during emergency events, which are typically based upon dose projections at the site boundary and at 2, 5, 10 and greater than 10 miles out from the plant. The DAEC dose projection methodology contains the ability to provide dose assessment from DAEC out to 50 miles. Therefore the methodology for determination of PARs will not change. What will change is that a PAR which would impact subarea 24, i.e. evacuation or shelter in place, will extend to a smaller area. 5. Ingestion Exposure EPZ This DAEC license amendment request proposes no changes to any DAEC onsite ingestion exposure pathway and no changes to the 0-50 mile ingestion exposure EPZ. The single change to the subarea 24 boundary that is being proposed to be removed from 10 mile EPZ boundary will remain within the current 0-50 mile ingestion exposure EPZ.

4.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC proposes changes to the DAEC Emergency Plan that revise the Emergency Planning Zone boundary for an area beyond the 10 mile required EPZ. The proposed change would modify subarea 24 of the EPZ by designating U.S. Highway 30 as its southern boundary.

Currently, there is property within DAEC EPZ subarea 24 that is to the south of US Highway 30. The southern property in subarea 24 is unique --otherwise, the entire DAEC EPZ is to the north of US Highway 30, which is a four lane, divided highway. The proposed change to the southern boundary of the DAEC Emergency Planning Zone is considered a reduction in effectiveness as defined in 10 CFR 50.54(q)(1

)(iv) due to the reduction in EPZ area beyond the 10 mile boundary, and requires prior Nuclear Regulatory Commission approval in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(q)(4).

Therefore, DAEC is submitting the proposed change as a license amendment.

The proposed change to the subarea 24 boundary will make the overall DAEC EPZ boundary more consistent and easier for the public to understand.

4.1 Significant Hazards Considerations DAEC has evaluated whether or not a significant hazards consideration is involved with the proposed license amendment by focusing on the three standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92, "Issuance of amendment," as described and discussed below. 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

Response:

No. l Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 14of17 This amendment request would alter portions of the southern, outer EPZ boundary defined in the DAEC E Plan to align with the EPZ boundaries requested by the Linn County Emergency Management Commission.

The proposed amendment does not involve any modifications or physical changes to plant systems, structures, or components.

The proposed amendment does not change plant operations or maintenance of plant systems, structures, or components, nor does the proposed amendment alter any DAEC E Plan facility or equipment.

Changing the EPZ boundaries cannot increase the probability of an accident since emergency plan functions would be implemented after a postulated accident occurs. The proposed amendment does not alter or prevent the ability of the DAEC emergency response organization to perform intended emergency plan functions to mitigate the consequences of, and to respond adequately to, radiological emergencies.

Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

Response:

No. This amendment request alters the EPZ boundary described in the DAEC E Plan. The proposed amendment does not involve any design modifications or physical changes to the plant, does not change plant operation or maintenance of equipment, and does not alter DAEC E Plan facilities or equipment.

The proposed amendment to the DAEC E Plan does not alter any DAEC emergency actions that would be implemented in response to postulated accident events. The proposed amendment does not create any credible new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident initiators not previously considered.

Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response:

No. This amendment request would alter one subarea in the EPZ boundary defined in the DAEC E Plan. The proposed amendment does not involve any design or licensing bases functions of the plant, no physical changes to the plant are to be made, it does not impact plant operation or maintenance of equipment, and it does not alter DAEC E Plan facilities or equipment.

This change does not alter any DAEC emergency actions that would be implemented in response to Enclosure to NG-17-0037

Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 15of17 postulated accident events. The DAEC E Plan continues to meet 10 CFR 50.47 and 10 CFR 50, Appendix E requirements for emergency response.

Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Based on the above, DAEC concludes that the proposed amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration under the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c) and, accordingly, a finding of "no significant hazards consideration" is justified.

4.2 Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria Changes described in this license amendment request would not affect plant design or operation, nor change any DAEC emergency action. With respect to the proposed change, DAEC remains in compliance with the following regulations and guidance documents:

10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) states, in part: The exact size and configuration of the EPZs surrounding a particular nuclear power reactor shall be determined in relation to local emergency response needs and capabilities as they are affected by such conditions as demography, topography, land characteristics, access routes, and jurisdictional boundaries.

10 CFR 50 Appendix E, Ill states, in part: The plans submitted must include a description of the elements set out in Section IV for the emergency planning zones (EPZs) to an extent sufficient to demonstrate that the plans provide reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of an emergency.

10 CFR 50 Appendix E, IV.3 states, in part: Nuclear power reactor licensees shall use NRC approved evacuation time estimates (ETEs) and updates to the ETEs in the formulation of protective action recommendations and shall provide the ETE's and ETE update to State and local governmental authorizes for use in developing offsite protective action strategies.

44 CFR 350.3(e) states, in part: FEMA has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the NRC to which it will furnish assessments, findings, and determinations as to whether State and local emergency plans and preparedness are adequate and continue to be capable of implementation.

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 16of17 Regulatory Guide 1.101, "Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Nuclear Power Reactors," Revision 5, states, in part: The Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA), the NRC, and other involved Federal agencies use the guidance and acceptance criteria contained in Revision 1 of NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1 in their individual and joint reviews of the radiological emergency response plans and preparedness of State and local governments and the plans and preparedness of applicants for and holders of licenses to operate nuclear power reactors.

NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1, "Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plans, ' and NUREG-0396, "Planning Basis for the Development of State and Local government Radiological Emergency Response Plans in support of Light Water Nuclear Power Plants," December 1978, include the following criteria for EPZ:

The choice of the size of the EPZ represent a judgment on the extent of detailed planning which must be performed to assure an adequate response base.

The task force selected a radius of 10 miles for the plume exposure pathway and a radius of 50 miles for the ingestion exposure pathway.

Although the radius implies a circular area, the actual shape would depend upon the characteristics of the particular site.

Detailed planning within the 10 miles would provide a substantial base for expansion of response efforts in the event that this proved necessary.

As a result, the proposed change to the DAEC E Plan will continue to meet the requirements of 1 O CFR 50, Appendix E, and the planning standards of 10 CFR 50.47(c).

4.3 Conclusions In conclusion, based on the considerations discussed above, (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be disadvantageous to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Enclosure to NG-17-0037 Evaluation of Proposed Amendment to Emergency Planning Zone NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC Page 17of17 5. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION NextEra Energy Duane Arnold believes this amendment would not have significant environmental impacts. The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the updated Safety Analysis Report. There will be no change to radioactive effluents that effect radiation exposures to plant workers and members of the public. No changes will be made to plant buildings or the site property or to land use or water use, or changes to the quality or quantity of non-radiological effluents.

6.0 REFERENCES

1. "Duane Arnold Energy Center Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Revised EPZ Boundary," March 9, 2017, Final Report, Rev. 0, KLD TR-910, prepared by KLD Engineering, P.C.

I -Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAEC EMERGE"NCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Usage Level: INFORMATION SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-78 Page 1 of 15 Record the following:

Date I Time: ______ I ____ Initials:

__ _ NOTE: User shall perform and document a Temp Issue I Rev. Check to ensure revision is current, in accordance with procedure use and adherence requirements.

I Date: ----Print Signature Approved By I Signature Date: ------1 Print Signature Date: ------1 Approved By I Print Approved By I Signature Date: -----1 Print I Approved By Signature

Date: -----1 Print Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 15 Pages Section Numbers 1.0 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 3.0 TABLE 1-1 TABLE 1-2 TABLE 1-3 FIGURE 1-1 DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Table of Contents Section Titles PURPOSE REQUIREMENTS SECTION 'I' Rev. 2+8 Page 2 of 15 CHARACTERISTIC PLANT SYSTEM AND EFFLUENT PARAMETER VALUES ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT CAPABILITIES AND RESOURCES RADIOLOGICAL SOURCE TERM AND MAGNITUDE DETERMINATION EFFLUENT MONITOR READINGS VS. EXPOSURE AND CONTAMINATION LEVELS METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION ACQUISITION/EVALUATION RELEASE RATE/PROJECTED DOSE METHODOLOGY FOR OFF-SCALE OR INOPERABLE INSTRUMENTS FIELD MONITORING RADIOLOGICAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT DETECTION AND MEASUREMENT OF RADIOIODINE CONCENTRATIONS RELATIONSHIP OF MEASURED PARAMETERS TO DOSE RATES ATIACHMENTS AREA RADIATION MONITORS PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS FOR HIGH RANGE EFFLUENT MONITORING SYSTEM DAEC EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE Page 3 3 3 3 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold. Energy Center TSCR-165 , 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT 1.0 PURPOSE SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-78 Page 3of15 (1) This section describes the methods, systems, and equipment currently available for assessing and monitoring actual or potential offsite consequences of a radiological emergency condition.

2.0 REQUIREMENTS 2:1 CHARACTERISTIC PLANT SYSTEM AND EFFLUENT PARAMETER VALUES (1) Table D-1 identifies plant conditions, parameters, and potentially hazardous occurrences in the environment which enable definition of the emergency classification.

Instrumentation, equipment status and parameter values associated with each condition are included in the EAL Tables located in the EPIP's. 2.2 ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT CAPABILITIES AND RESOURCES

('1) Systems or equipment which will be available during the course of an event to monitor and assess the magnitude of an actual or potential radiological release at the DAEC include the following, each of these is further described in the following paragraphs:

High Range Effluent Monitoring System

Containment High Range Radiation Monitoring System

Area Radiation Monitoring System

Low Level Iodine Sampling and Analysis Equipment

Dose Projection Program (a) The Kaman Effluent Monitoring System consists of 11 monitor units installed in the Turbine Building vent stack, three Reactor Building vent stacks, Off-gas stack, and LLRSF vent The Normal Range Monitor is capable of detecting gaseous activity ranging from 1 x 10-7 µCi/cc to 3 x 10-1 µCi/cc using a scintillation detector. (i) Each of the monitors has particulate and iodine collectors for laboratory sample analysis as well as a means for obtaining a gas grab sample. (ii) The five Accident Range Monitors consist of two Geiger-Mueller detectors within a shielded sample chamber and is capable of detecting gaseous activity ranging from 5 x 10-2 µCi/cc to 1 x 10 5 µCi/cc. Each monitor, as well, includes three particulate/iodine shielded collection assemblies and associated Geiger-Mueller detectors.

Sample collection is automatically initiated within one assembly, shifting to the next upon reaching a pre-set radiation level and minimum set amount of time until all assemblies reach the maximum radiation levels at which point the last assembly will continue to collect although assembly has met saturation conditions.

Technicians can collect filter media and reset collection.

Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 15 Pages DAECEMERGENCYPLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-78 Page 4 of 15 (iii) One microcomputer is provided for each radiation monitoring unit and provides for complete control over the monitor. Pulse inputs from the detectors are converted into counts per minute and based upon the sample flow rate is displayed in µCi/cc. Release rate calculations can be made using existing vent stack flow rate monitoring instrumentation.

The microcomputer also calculates average radiation levels over a 1-minute, 10-minute, 1-hour, and 24-hour period. These averages can be displayed for the last 30 periods calculated; e.g., the last thirty 1-minute periods, 10-minute periods, etc. (iv) Control and readout of units can be exercised from the Control Room and the Chemistry Laboratory through a minicomputer and associated peripheral equipment.

Color CRT displays are available in both locations while a logger and CRT display printer are available in the Chemistry Laboratory. (v) Alarm functions provided include alert and high level alarms, rate of change alarms, and equipment failure alarms. Automatic control functions provided include check source activities, purging, and sample flow control. (b) The High Range Containment Monitoring System consists of four y sensitive ion chambers, two in the torus area and the other two inside the drywell. The detectors are capable of measuring radiation levels up to 1 to 10 7 R/hr, and can be monitored in the Control Room. * (i) Further information regarding how these monitor readings can be used to calculate offsite doses based on the potential for release are discussed in Section D and the Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures. (ii) In addition to direct readout meter indications in the Control Room, a recorder is provided as well as several high level and inoperable alarms. (c) In addition to the above mentioned high range radiation monitoring systems, additional process and area radiation monitoring capabilities are available which enable assessment of inplant radiological conditions, fuel clad deterioration and effluent releases.

The area radiation monitors, their range and location are provided in Table 1-1. Information regarding the process monitors is provided in Tables 1-2 and 1-3. (d) Under accident conditions, the normal sampling stations for obtaining representative Reactor Coolant System samples or primary containment atmospheric samples may be inaccessible or, if accessible, obtaining such samples may result in an individual receiving exposures in excess of 10 CFR 20 limits (10 CFR 50).

Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-78 Page 5of15 Conditions may vary widely and change quickly during preparation for sampling and actual sampling during the period following an accident.

The Site Radiation Protection Coordinator (SRPC)/Rad

& EOF Manager must be conferred with prior to attempting to retrieve a sample. Assembly of temporary shielding may be necessary. (i) Locations from which samples can be drawn include the following points listed below. Containment isolation logic circuitry modifications have been provided, where required, to permit obtaining samples under isolated conditions.

A depressurized Reactor Coolant System sample from the RHR Heat Exchanger discharge line when RHR is in the shutdown cooling mode of operation.

A torus sample from the RHR/Core Spray Fill Pump 1 P-70 casing drain, if pump is running and RHR is in the LCPI, torus cooling, or test mode of operation.

A torus sample from the RHR Heat Exchanger discharge line when RHR is in the LCPI, torus cooling, or test mode of operation.

A drywell atmospheric sample from the Containment Atmosphere Monitoring System analyzer sample lines.

A torus atmospheric sample from the Containment Atmospheric Monitoring system analyzer sample lines. (ii) The lab is equipped with standard chemistry as well as special equipment used to handle high level samples, etc. Sample preparation and routine chemical analyses activities will be accomplished in a shielded hood provided in the lab.

Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 15 Pages DAECEMERGENCYPLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT*

SECTION 'I' Rev. 2+8 Page 6 of 15 (e) Radiological data from the Kaman Effluent Monitoring system and meteorological data from the met tower are sent to the SPDS computer and assembled into one-minute raw data averages.

The raw data is then available to the MIDAS program via the Local Area Network. The MIDAS program then assembles these raw one-minute averages into 15-minute average raw data files. An internal quality control program either validates the data in the 15-minute average raw data files, or identifies the data as "questionable" and rejects it. The 15-minute raw data files are then used with preset, site-specific information and the 24 accident parameters to complete dose projections. (i) An interactive computer code (MIDAS) has been developed to perform dose projection calculations.

The code can calculate, print, and plot the plume dispersion results of a Class B model for a single release. The calculations produce results for each of 31 spatial intervals (or distances) using a time-dependent plume segment model. Plume trajectory is normally determined by changes in wind direction with time. (ii) The MIDAS program uses the plume segment model (CLASS B) repeatedly for each 15-minute release period to compute cumulative doses. Doses from each plume track are overlaid successively on a finely spaced radial grid. Contours of equal dose can be drawn through the doses calculated in the fine grid to produce isopleths over the integration time period. Doses are calculated for up to four projection periods. Results can be plotted on the graphics CRT and can utilize up to four release points (each one treated with a separate plume). (iii) To support all types of dose calculations within the B model, both time-integrated and "snapshot" (for dose rates) processing will be used. Snapshot processing enables estimation of the plume location at the current time as well as dose rate estimates from deposited particulates (ground shine) after the plume has left.

Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-78 Page 7 of 15 2.3 RADIOLOGICAL SOURCE TERM AND MAGNITUDE DETERMINATION (1) The ratio of iodine to total gaseous activity has been established in the program and companion procedures assuming a TIO 14844 source term. Modifications to this source term can be input to the program based upon the results of isotopic analyses conducted on containment atmospheric sampling and effluent stream filter cartridges.

The means available to obtain and analyze these samples is discussed in paragraph 2.2 preceding.

(2) As discussed in paragraph 2.2, the effluent monitoring system is capable of detecting and measuring a wide range of effluent activity concentrations up to those that could be present presuming the TIO 14844 source term. In addition, the containment radiation monitors discussed in paragraph 2.2 will provide an indication of the quantity of radioactive material available for release using the relationship specified.

A procedure has been developed to relate containment radiation monitor readings to offsite doses. (a) Process monitors are available to provide an indication of radioactivity released in effluent water streams. An estimate of the magnitude of activity released can be made using installed plant instrumentation; e.g., tank levels and flow rates, and isotopic analyses of the source of activity.

Further refinements can be made by sampling and analyses of effluent streams, aquatic biota, etc. The MIDAS source code can also be used to make dose projections for liquid releases.

2.4 EFFLUENT MONITOR READINGS VS. EXPOSURE AND CONTAMINATION LEVELS (1) The MIDAS dose projection program discussed in paragraph 2.2 provides the mechanism to relate effluent monitor readings to onsite and offsite exposures.

Due to the inherent inaccuracies in attempting to predict plume shape, downwind meteorological conditions, elevated atmospheric conditions and the like, field monitoring and analyses of airborne, waterborne, and environmental media provide the only real means of assessing the impact of radiological releases that may occur. (2) The MIDAS dose projection program is installed on Laptops in the Control Room, TSC, and EOF. 2.5 METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION ACQUISITION/EVALUATION (1) The DAEC onsite meteorological program was initiated January 10, 1971. New redundant instrumentation was added in November, 1984. In accordance with the regulatory position on Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2, the meteorological system was designed in accordance with proposed Revision 1 to Regulatory Guide 1.23. Instrumentation is provided that is capable of measuring wind direction, wind speed, and ambient air temperature at two levels on the DAEC meteorological tower. Instrumentation is also provided for measuring the dewpoint at one level. For a discussion of the instrumentation, refer to Chapter 2 of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. Meteorological parameters monitored are also identified in Section H of this plan.

Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 15 Pages DAECEMERGENCYPLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-78 Page 8of15 2.6 RELEASE RATE/PROJECTED DOSE METHODOLOGY FOR OFF-SCALE OR INOPERABLE INSTRUMENTS (1) Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures exist for estimating release rate based on drywell and torus containment radiation monitor readings.

2.7 FIELD MONITORING (1) Field monitoring is performed by DAEC personnel entailing, at a minimum, dose rate measurements and airborne sampling in the Plume Exposure Emergency Planning Zone. Results are reported to the Radiological Assessment Coordinator in the Emergency Operations Facility (or to the Site Radiation Protection Coordinator in the Technical Support Center if the EOF is not yet activated) where direction and control of the teams is exercised.

Whereas DAEC personnel will most likely be the first radiation survey teams dispatched to monitor the environs surrounding the site, the State of Iowa is also responsible for offsite monitoring.

State teams will be dispatched to conduct similar monitoring activities and DAEC personnel will continue to supplement the State efforts. FPLE Duane Arnold will coordinate offsite monitoring efforts conducted by DAEC personnel with those conducted by the State of Iowa. Upon termination of the release, FPLE Duane Arnold will coordinate as required with the State of Iowa in establishing a long term environmental monitoring program. 2.8 RADIOLOGICAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT (1) Radiological hazard assessment offsite commences with activation of the emergency plan, for those events with actual or potential releases.

Field monitoring teams are dispatched from the Operational Support Center along the probable plume path, to ascertain the magnitude and location of contamination and radiation areas. (2) Teams will be dispatched and report locations by using reference locations or grid coordinates as shown on the DAEC Emergency Planning Zone map provided as Figure 1-1. (3) Teams will normally be dispatched in FPLE Duane Arnold vehicles.

The monitoring teams are equipped with portable radios (described in Section F), survey and dose rate instruments, airborne sampling equipment, protective clothing and respiratory protection equipment.

A further delineation of emergency equipment carried by the Field Teams is specifically identified in the Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures.

2.9 DETECTION AND MEASUREMENT OF RADIOIODINE CONCENTRATIONS (1) Field teams dispatched are capable of measuring radioiodine concentration in air in the Plume Exposure EPZ as low as 10-7 µCi/cc. Estimates of airborne concentrations made using a survey meter with pancake probe on contact with a Silver Zeolite cartridge are provided to the Radiological Assessment Coordinator in the EOF. Filters and cartridges will be retained and a more accurate estimate of airborne concentrations obtained using laboratory counting equipment available at the DAEC or offsite laboratory facilities.

A further discussion of additional laboratory facilities is contained in Section C.

Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN SECTION 'I' . ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 2-78 Page 9 of 15 2:10 RELATIONSHIP OF MEASURED PARAMETERS TO DOSE RATES (1) Various radiological parameters (contamination levels, water activity concentrations, air activity concentrations, etc.) measured in the field following an incident may be related to dose rates through the identification of key isotopes and gross radioactivity measurements.

As discussed in paragraph 2.2, the MIDAS dose projection computer program incorporates the use of real time meteorological information, effluent release data and appropriate plant status inputs to calculate Deep Dose Equivalent (whole body dose) rates and estimate both Deep Dose Equivalent (whole body) and Committed Dose Equivalent (thyroid dose) commitments.

(2) The results of analysis of environmental media and calculations related to total population exposure through the inhalation and ingestion pathways will be accomplished in accordance with the existing Appendix I Program.

Attachment 1*: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages .. DAECEMERGENCYPLAN SECTION 'I' ' ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 2-78 Page 10of15 3.0 ATTACHMENTS

('l) TABLE 1-1, "AREA RADIATION MONITORS" (2) TABLE 1-2, "PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS" (3) TABLE 1-3, "PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS FOR HIGH RANGE EFFLUENT MONITORING SYSTEM" (4) FIGURE 1-1, "DAEC EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE" Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT TABLE 1-1 AREA RADIATION MONITORS

c.* "', ... . Monitor location' . Designator

.*.** * ' *' .. RE-9151 RW Radwaste Control Room (786') RE-9152 RW Radwaste Hallway (786') RE-9153 RB New Fuel Vault Area (855') RE-9154 RW Radwaste Drumming Area (757'-6")

RE-9155 RB Jungle Room (812') RE-9156 RB RWCU Pump Room (786')

RE-9157 RB RWCU HX ROOM (786') RE-9158 TB Condensate Pump Area (734') RE-9159 TB Feed Pump Area (734') RE-9160 TB Lube Oil Purifier Area (734') RE-9161 RW Machine Shop (757'-6")

RE-9162 CB Control Room (786') RE-9163 RB North Refuel Floor (855') RE-9164 RB South Refuel Floor (855') RE-9165 AB Admin Bldg Hallway (757'-6")

RE-9166 RB SW Corner Radwaste Pump Room (716'-9")

RE-9167 RB RB Railroad Access Area (757'-6")

RE-9168 RB North CRD Module Area (757'-6")

RE-9169 RB South CRD Module Area (757'-6")

RE-9170 RB CRD Repair Room (757'-6")

RE-9171 RB Main Plant Exhaust Fan Room (812')

RE-9172 AB Rad. Chem. Hot Lab (786') RE-9173 RB RWCU Spent Resin Room (786') RE-9174 TB Normal Waste Sump Area (734') RE-9175 RB Condensate Phase Sep. Room (833'-6")

RE-9176 RB TIP Room (757'-6")

RE-9177 RB RWCU Phase Sep Tank Room (786')

RE-9178 RB Spent Fuel Pool Area (855') RE-9179 TB Turbine Front Standard (780') RE-9180 RB Waste Collector Tank Room above RCIC ... SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-78 Page 11 of 15 . *Range, ., .. -' -0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAECEMERGENCYPLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Monitor -Designator Monitor Location RE-9184A NW Drywell Area Hi Range Rad Monitor RE-9184B South Drywell Area Hi Range Rad Monitor RE-9185A NW Torus Area Hi Range Rad Monitor RE-9185B East Torus Area Hi Range Rad Monitor CODE -RW Radwaste Bldg. RB Reactor Bldg. TB Turbine Bldg. AB Administrative Bldg. SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-78 Page 12of15 Range 1-10 7 R/hr 1-10 7 R/hr 1-10 7 R/hr 1-10 7 R/hr Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT TABLE 1-2 PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS Monitor Monitor Location Designator RE-4448A A Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor RE-4448B B Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor RE-4448C C Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor RE-4448D D Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor Radwaste Effluent to Discharge Pipe (OUTFALL RE-3972 Gaf:lal...

Rad Monitor RE-1997 RHRSW and ESW Discharge to Cooling Tower Rad Monitor RE-4820 RBCCW Rad Monitor RE-4767 General Service Water Rad Monitor RE-4104 Off Gas Pre Treatment Rad Monitor RE-4101A Off Gas Post Treatment Rad Monitor RE-4101B Off Gas Post Treatment Rad Monitor RE-4131A Fuel Pool Exhaust Radiation Monitor RE-4131B Fuel Pool Exhaust Radiation Monitor RE-7606A Reactor Bldg Vent Shaft Radiation Monitor RE-7606B Reactor Bldg Vent Shaft Radiation Monitor RE-6101A Control Building Air Intake Radiation Monitor RE-6101B Control Building Air Intake Radiation Monitor RE-7722A Technical Support Center Building Intake (Left) RE-7722B Technical Support Center Building Intake (Right) RE-7722C Technical Support Center Working Area RE-4138 Carbon Bed Vault (Off-Gas Building)

RE-4268 RHRSW I ESW Dilution Line Radiation Monitor RE-4116A Stack Vent Pipe A Rad Monitor RE-4116B Stack Vent Pipe B Rad Monitor SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-7 8 Page 13 of 15 Range 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 1-10 6 mR/hr 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 0.01-100 mR/hr 0.01-100 mR/hr 0.01-10 4 mR/hr 0.01-10 4 mR/hr 0.01-10 4 mR/hr 0.01-10 4 mR/hr 0.1-10 4 mR/hr 0.1-10 4 mR/hr 0.1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT TABLE 1-3 SECTION 'I' Rev. 2+8 Page 14of15 PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS FOR HIGH RANGE EFFLUENT MONITORING SYSTEM Monitor Monitor Location Range Des i gnator RE-5945 Turbine Building Ventilation Exhaust Normal Range 1 x 1a-7 to 3 x 1a-1 µCi/cc RE-5946 Turbine Building Ventilation Exhaust Accident Range 5 x 10-2 to 1 x 10s µCi/cc RE-7645 Reactor Building Ventilation Shaft 1 Normal Range 1 x 1a-7 to 3 x 1a-1 µCi/cc Radiation Monitor RE-7644 Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 1 5 x 10-2 to 1 x 10 s µCi/cc Accident Range Radiation Monitor RE-7647 Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 2 Normal 1 x 1a-7 to 3 x 1a-1 µCi/cc Range Radiation Monitor RE-7646 Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 2 5 x 1 a-2 to 1 x 1 a s µCi/cc Accident Range Radiation Monitor RE-7649 Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 3 Normal 1x10-7 to 3 x 1a-1 µCi/cc Range Radiation Monitor RE-7648 Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 3 5 x 10-2 to 1 x 10 s µCi/cc Accident Range Radiation Monitor RE-4176 Off-Gas Stack Discharge Normal Range Radiation 1x1a-7 to 3 x 10-1 µCi/cc Monitor RE-4175 Off-Gas Stack Discharge Accident Range Radiation 5 x 1 a-2 to 1 x 1 a s µCi/cc Monitor Attachment 1: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT FIGURE 1-1 DAEC EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE SECTION 'I' Rev. 2-7 8 Page 15of15 Attachment 2:

Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN SECTION 'I' ' ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 28 Page 1 of 15 Usage Level: INFORMATION Record the following:

Date I Time: ______ I ____ Initials:

__ _ NOTE: User shall perform and document a Temp Issue I Rev. Check to ensure revision is current, in accordance with procedure use and adherence requirements.

Prepared By: I Date: ---------------------

Print Signature

.. APPROVAL BY EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS MANAG.ER . ' .. Approved By Date:

I Print Signature

- APPROVAL

'BY.ORG Approved By I Date: ____ ___, Print Signature

APPRov Af sv oAEc s1l'E *v1Ci: PRESIDENT Approved By I Date:

Print Signature APPROVAL BY CORPORA"FE DJRl;CTOROF EMERGENCY PLANNING -. . Approved By I Date:

Print Signature

: Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages Section Numbers 1.0 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 3.0 TABLE 1-1 TABLE 1-2 TABLE 1-3 FIGURE 1-1 :;: QAEC

> ' " ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Table of Contents Section Titles PURPOSE REQUIREMENTS SECTION 'I' Rev. 28 Page 2 of 15 CHARACTERISTIC PLANT SYSTEM AND EFFLUENT PARAMETER VALUES ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT CAPABILITIES AND RESOURCES RADIOLOGICAL SOURCE TERM AND MAGNITUDE DETERMINATION EFFLUENT MONITOR READINGS VS. EXPOSURE AND CONTAMINATION LEVELS METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION ACQUISITION/EVALUATION RELEASE RATE/PROJECTED DOSE METHODOLOGY FOR OFF-SCALE OR INOPERABLE INSTRUMENTS FIELD MONITORING RADIOLOGICAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT DETECTION AND MEASUREMENT OF RADIOIODINE CONCENTRATIONS RELATIONSHIP OF MEASURED PARAMETERS TO DOSE RATES ATTACHMENTS AREA RADIATION MONITORS PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS FOR HIGH RANGE EFFLUENT MONITORING SYSTEM Error! Reference source not found. Page 3 3 3 3 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 r -i' I I, Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages ' . ' . -. *;* GAEC *FMERGENCY Pl:AN *, ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT 1.0 PURPOSE I ; SECTION 'I' Rev. 28 Page 3 of 15 (1) This section describes the methods, systems, and equipment currently available for assessing and monitoring actual or potential offsite consequences of a radiological emergency condition.

2.0 REQUIREMENTS 2.1 CHARACTERISTIC PLANT SYSTEM AND EFFLUENT PARAMETER VALUES (1) Table D-1 identifies plant conditions, parameters, and potentially hazardous occurrences in the environment which enable definition of the emergency classification.

Instrumentation, equipment status and parameter values associated with each condition are included in the EAL Tables located in the EPIP's. 2.2 ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT CAPABILITIES AND RESOURCES (1) Systems or equipment which will be available during the course of an event to monitor and assess the magnitude of an actual or potential radiological release at the DAEC include the following, each of these is further described in the following paragraphs:

High Range Effluent Monitoring System

Containment High Range Radiation System

Area Radiation Monitoring System

Low Level Iodine Sampling and Analysis Equipment

Dose Projection Program (a) The Kaman Effluent Monitoring System consists of 11 monitor units installed in the Building vent stack, three Reactor Building vent stacks, Off-_gas stack, and LLRSF vent. The Normal Range Monitor is capable of detecting gaseous activity ranging from 1 x 10-7 µCi/cc to 3 x 10*1 µCi/cc using a j3 scintillation detector. (i) Each of the monitors has particulate and iodine collectors for .laboratory sample analysis as well as a means for obtaining a gas grab sample. (ii) The five Accident Range Monitors consist of two Geiger-Mueller detectors within a shielded sample chamber and is capable of detecting gaseous activity ranging from 5 x 10*2 µCi/cc to 1 x 10 5 µCi/cc.

monitor, as well, includes three particulate/iodine shielded collection assemblies and associated Geiger-Mueller detectors.

Sample collection is automatically initiated within one assembly, shifting to the next upon reaching a pre-set radiation level and minimum set amount of time until all assemblies reach the maximum radiation levels at which point the last assembly will continue to collect although assembly has met saturation conditions.

Technicians can collect filter media and reset collection.

I* .. 'ii Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages . ','. " '* "" .. DAEC EMER.GENCV:PLAN

,. SECTION 'I' ', .. . . . -: ,. ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 28 Page 4 of 15 (iii) One microcomputer is provided for each radiation monitoring unit and provides for complete control over the monitor. Pulse inputs from the detectors are converted into counts per minute and based upon the sample flow rate is displayed in µCi/cc. Release rate calculations can be made using existing vent stack flow rate monitoring instrumentation.

The microcomputer also calculates

average radiation levels over a 1-minute, 10-minute, 1-hour, and 24-hour period. These averages can be displayed for the last 30 periods calculated; e.g., the last thirty 1-minute periods, 10-minute periods, etc. (iv) Control and readout of units can be exercised from the Control Room and the Chemistry Laboratory through a minicomputer and associated peripheral equipment.

Color CRT displays are available in both locations while a logger and CRT display printer are available in the Chemistry Laboratory. (v) Alarm functions provided include alert and high level alarms, rate of change alarms, and equipment failure alarms. Automatic control functions provided include check source activities, purging, and sample flow control. (b) The High Range Containment Monitoring System consists of four y sensitive ion chambers, two in the torus area and the other two inside the drywell. The detectors are capable of measuring radiation levels up to 1 to 10 7 R/hr, and can be monitored in the Control Room. (i) Further information regarding how these monitor readings can be used to calculate offsite doses based on the potential for release are discussed in Section D and the Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures. (ii) In addition to direct readout meter indications in the Control Room, a recorder is provided as well as several high level and inoperable alarms. (c) In addition to the above mentioned high range radiation monitoring systems, additional process and area radiation monitoring capabilities are available which enable assessment of inplant radiological conditions, fuel clad deterioration and effluent releases.

The area radiation monitors, their range and location are provided in Table 1-1. Information regarding the process monitors is provided in Tables 1-2 and 1-3. (d) Under accident conditions, the normal sampling stations for obtaining representative Reactor Coolant System samples or primary containment atmospheric samples may be inaccessible or, if accessible, obtaining such samples may result in an individual receiving exposures in excess of 10 CFR 20 limits (10 CFR 50).

Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages . DAEC EME.RGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT SECTION 'I' Rev. 28 Page 5 of 15 Conditions may vary widely and change quickly during preparation for sampling and actual sampling during the period following an accident.*

The Site Radiation Protection Coordinator (SRPC)/Rad

& EOF Manager must be conferred with prior to attempting to retrieve a sample. Assembly of temporary shielding may be necessary. (i) Locations from which samples can be drawn include the following points listed below. Containment isolation logic Circuitry modifications have been provided, where required, to permit obtaining samples under isolated conditions.

A depressurized Reactor Coolant System sample from the RHR Heat Exchanger discharge line when RHR is in the shutdown cooling mode of operation.

A torus sample from the RHR/Core Spray Fill Pump 1 P-70 casing drain, if pump is running and RHR is in the LCPI, torus cooling, or test mode ofoperati6n.

A torus sample from the RHR Heat Exchanger discharge line when RHR is in the LCPI, torus cooling, or test mode of operation.

A drywell atmospheric sample from the Containment Atmosphere Monitoring System analyzer sample lines. * . A torus atmospheric sample from the Containment Atmospheric Monitoring system analyzer sample lines. (ii) The lab is equipped with standard chemistry as well as special equipment used to handle high level samples, etc. Sample preparation and routine chemical analyses activities will be accomplished in a shielded hood provided in the lab.

' *, ' Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages .,., ' ,' :nAEC

,, ' SECTION 'I' * ' " * """' ' * -., > < " ,,, ,,, .. * ,, ,, ' "' ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 28 Page 6 of 15 (e) Radiological data from the Kaman Effluent Monitoring system and meteorological data from the met tower are sent to the SPDS computer and assembled into one-minute raw data averages.

The raw data is then available to the MIDAS program via the Local Area Network. The MIDAS program then assembles these raw one-minute averages into 15-minute average raw data files. An internal quality control program either validates the data in the 15-minute average raw data files, or identifies the data as "questionable" and rejects it. The 15-minute raw data files are then used with preset, site-specific information and the 24 accident parameters to complete dose projections. (i) An interactive computer code (MIDAS) has been developed to perform dose projection calculations.

The code can calculate, print, and plot the plume dispersion results of a Class B model for a single release. The calculations produce results for each of 31 spatial intervals (or distances) using a time-dependent plume segment model. Plume trajectory is normally determined by changes in wind direction with time. (ii) The MIDAS program uses the plume segment model (CLASS B) repeatedly for each 15-minute release period to compute cumulative doses. *Doses from each plume track are overlaid successively on a finely spaced radial grid. Contours of equal dose can be drawn through the doses calculated in the fine grid to produce isopleths over the integration time period. Doses are calculated for up to four projection periods. Results can be plotted on the graphics CRT and can utilize up to four release points (each one treated with a separate plume). (iii) To support all types of dose calculations within the B model, both time-integrated and "snapshot" (for dose rates) processing will be used. Snapshot processing enables estimation of the plume location at the current time as well as dose rate estimates from deposited particulates (ground shine) after the plume has left.

I. Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages Pf\EC EMERGi=N.CY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT SECTION 'I' Rev. 28 Page 7 of 15 2.3 RADIOLOGICAL SOURCE TERM AND MAGNITUDE DETERMINATION (1) The ratio of iodine to total gaseous activity has been established in the program and companion procedures assuming a TIO 14844 source term. Modifications to this source term can be input to the program based upon the results of isotopic analyses conducted on containment atmospheric sampling and effluent stream filter cartridges.

The means available to obtain and analyze these samples is discussed in paragraph 2.2 preceding.

(2) As discussed in paragraph 2.2, the effluent monitoring system is capable of detecting and measuring a wide range of effluent activity concentrations up to those that could be present presuming the TIO 14844 source term. In addition, the containment radiation monitors discussed in paragraph 2.2 will provide an indication of the quantity of radioactive material available for release using the relationship specified.

A procedure . has been developed to relate containment radiation monitor readings to offsite doses. (a) Process monitors are available to provide an indication of radioactivity released in effluent water streams. An estimate of the magnitude of activity released can be made using installed plant instrumentation; e.g., tank levels and flow rates, and isotopic analyses of the source of activity.

Further refinements can be made by sampling and analyses of effluent streams, aquatic biota, etc. The MIDAS source code can also be used to make dose projections for liquid releases.

2.4 EFFLUENT MONITOR READINGS VS. EXPOSURE AND CONTAMINATION LEVELS (1) The MIDAS dose projection program discussed in paragraph 2.2 provides the mechanism to relate effluent monitor readings to onsite and offsite exposures.

Due to the inherent inaccuracies in attempting to predict plume shape, downwind meteorological conditions, elevated atmospheric conditions and the like, field monitoring and analyses of airborne, waterborne, and environmental media provide the only real means of assessing the impact of radiological releases that may occur. (2) The MIDAS dose projection program is installed on Laptops in the Control Room, TSC, and EOF. 2.5 METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION ACQUISITION/EVALUATION (1) The DAEC onsite meteorological program was initiated January 10, 1971. New redundant instrumentation was added in November, 1984. In accordance with the regulatory position on Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2, the meteorological system was designed in accordance with proposed Revision 1 to Regulatory Guide 1.23. Instrumentation is provided that is capable of measuring wind direction, wind speed, and ambient air temperature at two levels on the DAEC meteorological tower. Instrumentation is also provided for measuring the dewpoint at one level. For a discussion of the instrumentation, refer to Chapter 2 of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. Meteorological parameters monitored are also identified in Section H of this plan.

Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages * .. *. .. ,* ., *. . < .: .. .. .. ' .

OAEC EMERGENCY PLAN .. . . ..

SECTION 'I' '" ',," 'l> ' ' ," ,* ,, .* . '. . . ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 28 Page 8of15 2.6 RELEASE RATE/PROJECTED DOSE METHODOLOGY FOR OFF-SCALE OR INOPERABLE INSTRUMENTS (1) Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures exist for estimating release rate based on drywell and torus containment radiation monitor readings.

2. 7 FIELD MONITORING (1) Field monitoring is performed by DAEC personnel entailing, at a minimum, dose rate measurements and airborne sampling in the Plume Exposure Emergency Planning Zone. Results are reported to the Radiological Assessment Coordinator in the Emergency Operations Facility (or to the Site Radiation Protection Coordinator in the Technical Support Center if the EOF is not yet activated) where direction and control of the teams is exercised.

Whereas DAEC personnel will most likely be the first radiation survey teams dispatched to monitor the environs surrounding the site, the State of Iowa is also responsible for offsite monitoring.

State teams will be dispatched to conduct similar monitoring activities and DAEC personnel will continue to supplement the State efforts. FPLE Duane Arnold will coordinate offsite monitoring efforts conducted by DAEC personnel with those conducted by the State of Iowa. Upon termination of the release, FPLE Duane Arnold will coordinate as required with the State of Iowa in establishing a long term environmental monitoring program. 2.8 RADIOLOGICAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT (1) Radiological hazard assessment offsite commences with activation of the emergency plan, for those events with actual or potential releases.

Field monitoring teams are dispatched from the Operational Support Center along the probable plume path, to ascertain the magnitude and location of contamination and radiation areas. (2) Teams will be dispatched and report locations by using reference locations or grid coordinates as shown on the DAEC Emergency Planning Zone map provided as Figure 1-1. (3) Teams will normally be dispatched in FPLE Duane Arnold vehicles.

The monitoring teams are equipped with portable radios (described in Section F), survey and dose rate instruments, airborne sampling equipment, protective clothing and respiratory protection equipment.

A further delineation of emergency equipment carried by the Field Teams is specifically identified in the Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures.

2.9 DETECTION AND MEASUREMENT OF RADIOIODINE CONCENTRATIONS (1) Field teams dispatched are capable of measuring radioiodine concentration in air in the Plume Exposure EPZ as low as 10-7 µCi/cc. Estimates of airborne concentrations made using a survey meter with pancake probe on contact with a Silver Zeolite cartridge are provided to the Radiological Assessment Coordinator in the EOF. Filters and cartridges will be retained and a more accurate estimate of airborne concentrations obtained using laboratory counting equipment available at the DAEC or offsite laboratory facilities.

A further discussion of additional laboratory facilities is contained in Section C.

Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages ',' ', ', >* ' " ' DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ' ,*' ,, SECTION 'I' " : :.: " ' " ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 28 Page 9of15 2.10 RELATIONSHIP OF MEASURED PARAMETERS TO DOSE RATES (1) Various radiological parameters (contamination levels, water activity concentrations, air activity concentrations, etc.) measured in the field following an incident may be related to dose rates through the identification of key isotopes and gross radioactivity measurements.

As discussed in paragraph 2.2, the MIDAS dose projection computer program incorporates the use of real time meteorological information, effluent release data and appropriate plant status inputs to calculate Deep Dose Equivalent (whole body dose) rates and estimate both Deep Dose Equivalent (whole body) and Committed Dose Equivalent (thyroid dose) commitments.

(2) The results of analysis of environmental media and calculations related to total population exposure through the inhalation and ingestion pathways will be accomplished in accordance with the existing Appendix I Program.

i' I ' I I ' ' I Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages *-; DAEC .8MERGENCY:PLAN

,, ,, SECTION 'I' ' ' ,' ' ',* -,; ,*, ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 28 Page 10of15 3.0 ATTACHMENTS (1) TABLE 1-1, "AREA RADIATION MONITORS" (2) TABLE 1-2, "PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS" (3) TABLE 1-3, "PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS FOR HIGH RANGE EFFLUENT MONITORING SYSTEM" (4) FIGURE 1-1, "DAEC EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE" Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT TABLE 1-1 AREA RADIATION MONITORS Monitor Monitor Location Designator RE-9151 RW Radwaste Control Room (786') RE-9152 RW Radwaste Hallway (786') RE-9153 RB New Fuel Vault Area (855') RE-9154 RW Radwaste Drumming Area (757'-6")

RE-9155 RB Jungle Room (812') RE-9156 RB RWCU Pump Room (786') RE-9157 RB RWCU HX ROOM (786') RE-9158 TB Condensate Pump Area (734') RE-9159 TB Feed Pump Area (734') RE-9160 TB Lube Oil Purifier Area (734') RE-9161 RW Machine Shop (757'-6")

RE-9162 CB Control Room (786') RE-9163 RB North Refuel Floor (855') RE-9164 RB South Refuel Floor (855') RE-9165 AB Admin Bldg Hallway (757'-6")

RE-9166 RB SW Corner Radwaste Pttmp Room (716'-9")

RE-9167 RB RB Railroad Access Area (757'-6")

RE-9168 RB North CRD Module Area (757'-6")

RE-9169 RB South CRD Module Area (757'-6")

RE-9170 RB CRD Repair Room (757'-6")

RE-9171 RB Main Plant Exhaust Fan Room (812') RE-9172 AB Rad. Chem. Hot Lab (786') RE-9173 RB RWCU Spent Resin Room (786') RE-9174 TB Normal Waste Sump Area (734') RE-9175 RB Condensate Phase Sep. Room (833'-6")

RE-9176 RB TIP Room (757'-6")

RE-9177 RB RWCU Phase Sep Tank Room (786') RE-9178 RB Spent Fuel Pool Area (855') RE-9179 TB Turbine Front Standard (780') RE-9180 RB Waste Collector Tank Room above RCIC *' SECTION 'I' Rev. 28 Page 11 of 15 Range 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.01-10 2 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 0.1-'10 3 mR/hr 0.1-10 3 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 4 mR/hr Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages , . : ..

DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ' SECTION 'I' ,. .. ', . *::* ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 28 Page 12of15 . Monitor ... ' l<' ' ' . .. ... ' **oesignafor

Mbn!tor

.. Ran , * .. RE-9184A NW Drywell Area Hi Range Rad Monitor 1-10 7 R/hr RE-9184B South Drywell Area Hi Range Rad Monitor 1-10 7 R/hr RE-9185A NW Torus Area Hi Range Rad Monitor 1-10 7 R/hr RE-9185B East Torus Area Hi Range Rad Monitor 1-10 7 R/hr CODE RW Radwaste Bldg. RB Reactor Bldg. TB Turbine Bldg. AB Administrative Bldg.

Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT TABLE 1-2 PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS Monitor Monitor Location Designator RE-4448A A Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor RE-4448B B Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor RE-4448C C Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor RE-4448D D Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor RE-3972 Radwaste Effluent to Discharge Pipe Rad Monitor RE-1997 RHRSW and ESW Discharge to Cooling Tower Rad Monitor RE-4820 RBCCW Rad Monitor RE-4767 General Service Water Rad Monitor RE-4104 Off Gas Pre Treatment Rad Monitor RE-4101A Off Gas Post Treatment Rad Monitor RE-4101B Off Gas Post Treatment Rad Monitor RE-4131A Fuel Pool Exhaust Radiation Monitor RE-4131B Fuel Pool Exhaust Radiation Monitor RE-7606A Reactor Bldg Vent Shaft Radiation Monitor RE-7606B Reactor Bldg Vent Shaft Radiation Monitor RE-6101A Control Building Air Intake Radiation Monitor RE-6101B Control Building Air Intake Radiation Monitor RE-7722A Technical Support Center Building Intake (Left) RE-7722B Technical Support Center Building Intake (Right) RE-7722C Technical Support Center Working Area RE-4138 Carbon Bed Vault (Off-Gas Building)

RE-4268 RHRSW I ESW Dilution Line Radiation Monitor RE-4116A Stack Vent Pipe A Rad Monitor RE-4116B Stack Vent Pipe B Rad Monitor SECTION 'I' Rev. 28 Page 13of15 Range 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 1-10 6 mR/hr 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 0.01-100 mR/hr 0.01-100 mR/hr 0.01-10 4 mR/hr 0.01-10 4 mR/hr 0.01-10 4 mR/hr 0.01-10 4 mR/hr 0.1-10 4 mR/hr 0.1-10 4 mR/hr 0.1-10 4 mR/hr 1-10 6 mR/hr 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps 0.1-10 6 cps Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages : _,' . ' '<, <,' ' ' DAEG

', ;, SECTION 'I' ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT Rev. 28 Page 14of15 TABLE 1-3 PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS FOR HIGH RANGE EFFLUENT MONITORING SYSTEM MoilitQr Designator RE-5945 RE-5946 RE-7645 RE-7644 RE-7647 RE-7646 RE-7649 RE-7648 RE-4176 RE-4175 Monitor uihation Turbine Building Ventilation Exhaust Normal Range Turbine Building Ventilation Exhaust Accident Range Reactor Building Ventilation Shaft 1 Normal Range Radiation Monitor Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 1 Accident Range Radiation Monitor Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 2 Normal Range Radiation Monitor Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 2 Accident Range Radiation Monitor Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 3 Normal Range Radiation Monitor Reactor Building Ventilation Exhaust Shaft 3 Accident Range Radiation Monitor Off-Gas Stack Discharge Normal Range Radiation Monitor Off-Gas Stack Discharge Accident Range Radiation Monitor **Ratl 9 e 1x10-7 to3x10-1 µCi/cc 1x10-7 to 3 x 10-1 µCi/cc 1 x 10-7 to 3 x 10-1 µCi/cc 5 x 10-2 to 1 x 10 5 µCi/cc 1 x 10-7 to 3 x 10-1 µCi/cc 5 x 10-2 to 1 x 10 5 µCi/cc 1 x 10-7 to 3 x 10-1 µCi/cc Attachment 2: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 15 Pages DAEC EMERGENCY PLAN ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT FIGURE 1-1 DAEC EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE 20 -R 19 C:::J lndlp11d111e1 C:::J M1nh1lltuwll C:::J IOWll City C:::J Eldri*** 10 II I SECTION 'I' Rev. 28 Page 15of15 Attachment 3 (Excerpt): Linn I Benton Counties Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) 2016. Abstract , TOC and E xe cutive Summary. First 42 of 588 total pages. CD has been provided with complete document.

Mount Auburn ENGINEERING, P.C. Duane Arnold Energy Center Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Revised EPZ Boundary 10 ' 20 \ 13 I I B e11/011 County \ 14 J ,,;i, __ --i legend

DAE C Q Sub1r .. \..-:. 2, 5 , 10 Mlle Rin es March 9, 2017 19 ' Newhall ' Norw* o.i.: Vn/2011 *Jsllt.UND.u.., .. M-opozol S,lnrliwfllnl,Nu.rln lMrn ' 18 AlKirfs ' Work performed for NextEra, by: KLD Engineering, P.C. 1601 Veterans Memorial Highway, Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 E-mail: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com Final Report, Rev. 0 [.I 111 i County *-<{* Pra irieburg KLD TR-910 ABSTRACT Federal regulations (mCFR50, Appendix E,Section IV, Items 3 and 4) require nuclear power plant licensees to:

Conduct an Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE, the time needed to evacuate the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone -EPZ-around a nuclear power plant) study using the most recent decennial census data and submit the study to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for review

After NRC review, use the approved ETE study to formulate protective action recommendations (PAR)

Provide the ETE to State and local governmental authorities for use in developing offsite protective action strategies NextEra Energy (NextEra) conducted an ETE study in 2012 for the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) using the data from the 2om Census, and submitted to the NRC for review. Following NRC review, the ETE study was used by NextEra and the State and county agencies within the EPZ to formulate PAR and develop offsite protective action strategies.

This document serves as an update to the 2012 ETE study based on the following:

A reduction in the size of the EPZ boundary requested by the Linn County Emergency Management Commission.

Specifically, the area south of U.S. Highway 30 in Subarea 24 will be removed, thereby resulting in less people and vehicles evacuating from the Subarea

Consideration of bottlenecks beyond the original study area (out to 15-miles radially from the plant as per NRC guidance), especially along U.S. Highway 30 eastbound leaving the City of Cedar Rapids towards Mount Vernon. These bottlenecks result in queuing outside the EPZ which significantly reduces the available roadway capacity to evacuees within the EPZ. Comparing the 2012 study and this study, the impact on ETE of these changes is as follows:

The 2-mile region, 5-mile region, and keyholes comprised of the 2-mile region and downwind sectors to 5-miles were not significantly impacted (changes of 5 minutes or less) as both changes identified above were well beyond the 5-mile radius from DAEC.

The reduction in EPZ size reduced the ETE for the full EPZ by up to 35 minutes at the goth percentile and up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and m minutes at the moth percentile as approximately g,ooo less vehicles are evacuating from Subarea 24.

The ETE for the full EPZ and for keyholes comprised of the 2-mile region and downwind sectors to the EPZ boundary were significan.tly increased (up to 55 minutes at the goth percentile and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 55 minutes at the moth percentile) for wind directions which blow over the City of Cedar Rapids. The increase in ETE was the direct result of consideration of bottlenecks beyond the original study area. Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate AB-1 KLD P.C.

Rev. 0 Despite the changes in ETE, the PAR do not change based on the criteria documented in the federal guidance -NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, Supplement 3:

The goth percentile ETE for the 2-mile region are less than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months (criterion for immediate evacuation of the 2-mile region) in the 2012 study, and in this study.

The goth percentile ETE for the keyholes comprised of the 2-mile region and downwind sectors to 5-miles are less than 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months (criterion for immediate evacuation of the downwind sectors to 5 miles) in the 2012 study, and in this study.

The goth percentile ETE for the full EPZ is greater than 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months (criterion for immediate evacuation of the downwind sectors to the EPZ boundary) in the 2012 study, and in this study.

Staged evacuation showed no benefit in the 2012 study, and in this study. Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate AB-2 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION

..................................................................................................................................

1-1 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process ......................................................................................................

1-4 1.2 The Duane Arnold Energy Center Location ................................................................................

1-6 1.3 Preliminary Activities

.................................................................................................................

1-8 1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study ............................................................................................

1-12 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS

.............................................................................................

2-1 2.1 Data Estimates

...........................................................................................................................

2-1 2.2 Study Methodological Assumptions

..........................................................................................

2-2 2.3 Study Assumptions

....................................................................................................................

2-3 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION

.......................................................................................................................

3-1 3.1 Permanent Residents

.................................................................................................................

3-3 3.1.1 College Students ................................................................................................................

3-5 3.2 Shadow Population

..................................................................................................................

3-12 3.3 Transient Population

................................................................................................................

3-15 3.4 Employees

................................................................................................................................

3-19 3.5 Special Facilities

.......................................................................................................................

3-23 3.6 External Traffic .........................................................................................................................

3-23 3. 7 Background Traffic ...................................................................................................................

3-23 3.8 SpecialEvent

............................................................................................................................

3-24 3.9 Summary of Demand ...............................................................................................................

3-24 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY ................................................................................................

4-1 4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections

..............................................................

4-2 4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway ........................................................................

4-4 4.3 Application to the Duane Arnold Energy Center Study Area .....................................................

4-6 4.3.1 Two-Lane Roads .................................................................................................................

4-6 4.3.2 Multi-Lane Highway ...........................................................................................................

4-6 4.3.3 Freeways ............................................................................................................................

4-7 4.3.4 Intersections

......................................................................................................................

4-8 4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation

..........................................................................................

4-8 4.5 Boundary Conditions

..................................................................................................................

4-9 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME ....... * ...................................................................................

5-1 5.1 Background

................................................................................................................................

5-1 5.2 Fundamental Considerations

.....................................................................................................

5-3 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ...................................................

5-6 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution

....................................................................

5-12 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers ............................................................................................................

5-13 5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation

.................................................................................

5-16 6 DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS

.....................................................................

6-1 7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) ..........................................................

7-1 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation

.........................................................................

7-1 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a 7.2 Staged Evacuation

......................................................................................................................

7-1 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation

.....................................................................

7-2 7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................

7-4 7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results ....................................................................................

7-4

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results .........................................................................................................

7-6 7.7 Protective Action Recommendation Logic .................................................................................

7-7 7.8 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ...................................................................................................

7-7 8 TRANSIT-DEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES

.................................

8-1 8.1 Transit Dependent People Demand Estimate ............................................................................

8-2 8.2 School, College, Preschool and Day Care Center Population -Transit Demand .......................

8-4 8.3 Medical Facilities and Group Homes .........................................................................................

8-4 8.4 Evacuation Time Estimates for Transit Dependent People .......................................................

8-5 8.5 .Special Needs Population

.........................................................................................................

8-12 8.6 Correctional Facilities

...............................................................................................................

8-14 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENTSTRATEGY

...................................................................................................

9-1 10 EVACUATION ROUTES ..................................................................................................................

10-1 11 SURVEILLANCE OF EVACUATION OPERATIONS

...........................................................................

11-1 12 CONFIRMATION TIME ..................................................................................................................

12-1 List of Appendices A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS ..................................................................................

A-1 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL .........................................................

B-1 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL ...............................................................................................

C-1 C.1 Methodology

..............................................................................................................................

C-5 C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram .................................................................................................

C-5 C.1.2 The Simulation Model ........................................................................................................

C-5 C.1.3 Lane Assignment

..............................................................................................................

C-12 C.2 Implementation

.......................................................................................................................

C-12 C.2.1 Computational Procedure

................................................................................................

C-12 C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD) ...................................................

C-15 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE

..............................................................................

D-1 E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA ......................................................................................................................

E-1 F. TELEPHONE SURVEY ...........................................................................................................................

F-1 F.1 *Introduction

...............................................................................................................................

F-1 F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan .......................................................................................

F-2 F.3 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................

F-4 F.3.1 Household Demographic Results ...........................................................................................

F-5 F.3.2 Evacuation Response ............................................................................................................

F-10 F.3.3 Time Distribution Results .....................................................................................................

F-14 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ii KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a F.4 Conclusions

..............................................................................................................................

F-17 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN ..........................................................................................................

G-1 G.1 Traffic Control Points ................................................................................................................

G-1 G.2 Access Control Points ................................................................................................................

G-2 H EVACUATION REGIONS .....................................................................................................................

H-1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM .....................................

J-1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK ..................................................................................................

K-1 L. SUBAREA BOUNDARIES

......................................................................................................................

L-1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ..... : .......................................................................................

M-1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................

M-1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate .................

M-2 M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population

.........................................................................

M-3 M.4 Effect of Changes to EPZ Boundary ..........................................................................................

M-5 M.4.1 Introduction

.....................................................................................................................

M-5 M.4.2 Methodology

....................................................................................................................

M-5 M.4.3 Assumptions

.....................................................................................................................

M-6 M.4.4 Results ..............................................................................................................................

M-7 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST

...................................................................................................................

N-1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate iii KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a List of Figures Figure 1-1. Proposed EPZ Change ..............................................................................................................

1-2 Figure 1-2. DAEC Location .........................................................................................................................

1-7 Figure 1-3. DAEC Link-Node Analysis Network .......................................................................................

1-10 Figure 2-1. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology

.......................................................................................

2-9 Figure 3-1. Subareas Comprising the DAEC EPZ .......................................................

.................................

3-2 Figure 3-2. Census Boundaries within the DAEC Study Area .....................................................................

3-7 Figure 3-3. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ...........................................................................

3-10 Figure 3-4. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ...............................................................................

3-11 Figure 3-5. Shadow Population by Sector ...............................................................................................

3-13 Figure 3-6. Shadow Vehicles by Sector ...................................................................................................

3-14 Figure 3-7. Transient Population by Sector .............................................................................................

3-17 Figure 3-8. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................

3-18 Figure 3-9. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................

3-21 Figure 3-10. Employee Vehicles by Sector ..............................................................................................

3-22 Figure 4-1. Fundamental Diagrams ...........................................................................................................

4-9 Figure 5-1. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ..............................................................

5-5 Figure 5-2. Time Distributions for Evacuation Mobilization Activities

....................................................

5-11 Figure 5-3. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution

......................................................

5-14 Figure 5-4. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions

.......................................................................

5-19 Figure 5-5. Comparison of Staged and Un-staged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region ....................................................................................................................................

5-21 Figure 6-1. Subareas Comprising the DAEC EPZ ........................................................................................

6-5 Figure 7-1. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology

.....................................................................................

7-18 Figure 7-2. DAEC Shadow Region .......................................................................................

....................

7-19 Figure 7-3. Congestion Patterns at 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ....................................

7-20 Figure 7-4. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate ............................................

7-21 Figure 7-5. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 45 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................

7-22 Figure 7-6. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours and 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................

7-23 Figure 7-7. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ..........................................

7-24 Figure 7-8. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate ..........................................

7-25 Figure 7-9. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours and 50 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ................

7-26 Figure 7-10. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours and 35 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ..............

7-27 Figure 7-11. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 1 for Region R03 ....................................................

7-28 Figure 7-12. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 2 for Region R03 ....................................................

7-28 Figure 7-13. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 3 for Region R03 ....................................................

7-29 Figure 7-14. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 4 for Region R03 ....................................................

7-29 Figure 7-15. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 5 for Region R03 ....................................................

7-30 Figure 7-16. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 6 for Region R03 ....................................................

7-30 Figure 7-17. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 7 for Region R03 ....................................................

7-31 Figure 7-18. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 8 for Region R03 ....................................................

7-31 Figure 7-19. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 9 for Region R03 ..................................................

,. 7-32 Figure 7-20. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 10 for Region R03 ..................................................

7-32 Figure 7-21. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 11 for Region R03 ..................................................

7-33 Figure 7-22. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 12 for Region R03 ..................................................

7-33 Figure 7-23. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 13 for Region R03 ..................................................

7-34 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate iv KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Figure 7-24. Evacuation Time Estimates

-Scenario 14 for Region R03 ..................................................

7-34 Figure 8-1. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations

......................................................................

8-15 Figure 8-2. Transit-Dependent Bus Routes ..................................

..........................................................

8-16 Figure 8-3. Transit Dependent Bus Routes -Cedar Rapids ....................................................................

8-17 Figure 10-1. General Population and Temporary Relocation Centers ....................................................

10-2 Figure 10-2. Evacuation Route Map ........................................................................................................

10-3 Figure B-1. Flow Diagram of Simulation-DTRAD Interface

........................................................................

B-5 Figure C-1. Representative Analysis Network ...........................................................................................

C-4 Figure C-2. Fundamental Diagrams ...........................................................................................................

C-6 Figure C-3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with ti> O ..............................................................................

C-6 Figure C-4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary:

Table C-3) ....................................................

C-14 Figure D-1. Flow Diagram of Activities

.....................................................................................................

D-5 Figure E-1. Overview of Schools, Pre-Schools and Daycares within the EPZ ..........................................

E-15 Figure E-2. Cedar Rapids Area Schools, Pre-Schools and Daycares within the EPZ (Name Starts with A-G) ............................................................................................................................

E-16 Figure E-3. Cedar Rapids Area Schools, Pre-Schools and Daycares within the EPZ (Name Starts with H-K) ............................................................................................................................

E-17 Figure E-4. Cedar Rapids Area Schools, Pre-Schools and Daycares within the EPZ (Name Starts with L-R) .............................................................................................................................

E-18 Figure E-5. Cedar Rapids Area Schools, Pre-Schools and Daycares within the EPZ (Name Starts with S-Z) .............................................................................................................................

E-19 Figure E-6. Medical Facilities within the EPZ ..........................................................................................

E-20 Figure E-7. Employment Locations within the EPZ which Attract Employees from Outside the EPZ ..... E-21 Figure E-8. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ........................................................................................

E-22 Figure E-9. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ (1of2) ..............................................................................

E-23 Figure E-10. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ (2 of 2) .............................................................................

E-24 Figure E-11. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ ..................................................................................

E-25 Figure F-1. Household Size in the EPZ .......................................................................................................

F-5 Figure F-2. Household Vehicle Availability

................................................................................................

F-6 Figure F-3. Vehicle Availability-1 to 5 Person Households

......................................................................

F-7 Figure F-4. Vehicle Availability-6 to 9+ Person Households

....................................................................

F-7 Figure F-5. Household Ridesharing Preference

.........................................................................................

F-8 Figure F-6. Commuters in Households in the EPZ .....................................................................................

F-9 Figure F-7. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ...................................................................................................

F-10 Figure F-8. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation

.............................................................................

F-11 Figure F-9. Households Evacuating with Pets .........................................................................................

F-12 Figure F-10. Households with Pets that would Evacuate if Evacuation Centers do not Accept Pets ..... F-12 Figure F-11. Evacuation Destinations

......................................................................................................

F-13 Figure F-12. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College

.............................................................

F-14 Figure F-13. Time to Travel Home from Work/College

...........................................................................

F-15 Figure F-14. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation

................................................................................

F-16 Figure F-15. Time to Clear Driveway of 6 11-8 11 of Snow ...........................................................................

F-17 Figure G-1. Traffic and Access Control Points for the Duane Arnold Energy Center ...............................

G-3 Figure G-2. New TCP Schematic-Iowa 1 and Martelle Rd .....................................................................

G-4 Figure G-3. New TCP Schematic-US-151 and Springville Rd ..................................................................

G-5 Figure G-4. New TCP Schematic

-Iowa 1 and Cedar River Rd .................................................................

G-6 Figure G-5. New TCP Schematic

-Iowa 1 and Iowa 382 NE ....................................................................

G-7 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate v KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.0

Figure G-6. New TCP Schematic

-21 51 Ave and 77th St ............................................................................

G-8 Figure G-7. New ACP Schematic

-US-30 and Iowa 1 ..............................................................................

G-9 Figure H-1. Region R01 .............................................................................................................................

H-4 Figure H-2. Region R02 .............................................................................................................................

H-5 Figure H-3. Region R03 .............................................................................................................................

H-6 Figure H-4. Region R04 .............................................................................................................................

H-7 Figure H-5. Region ROS .............................................................................................................................

H-8 Figure H-6. Region R06 .............................................................................................................................

H-9 Figure H-7. Region R07 ...........................................................................................................................

H-10 Figure H-8. Region R08 ...........................................................................................................................

H-11 Figure H-9. Region R09 ...........................................................................................................................

H-12 Figure H-10. Region R10 .........................................................................................................................

H-13 Figure H-11 Region R11 ..........................................................................................................................

H-14 Figure H-12 Region R12 ..........................................................................................................................

H-15 Figure H-13 Region R13 ..........................................................................................................................

H-16 Figure H-14 Region R14 ..........................................................................................................................

H-17 Figure H-15 Region R15 .......................................................................................................................

-... H-18 Figure H-16 Region R16 ..........................................................................................................................

H-19 Figure H-17 Region R17 ..........................................................................................................................

H-20 Figure H-18 Region R18 ........................................................................................................

.................

H-21 Figure H-19 Region R19 ..........................................................................................................................

H-22 Figure H-20 Region R20 ..........................................................................................................................

H-23 Figure H-21 Region R21 ..........................................................................................................................

H-24 Figure H-22 Region R22 ..........................................................................................................................

H-25 Figure H-23 Region R23 ..........................................................................................................................

H-26 Figure H-24 Region R24 ..........................................................................................................................

H-27 Figure H-25 Region R25 ..........................................................................................................................

H-28 Figure H-26 Region R26 ..........................................................................................................................

H-29 Figure H-27 Region R27 ..........................................................................................................................

H-30 Figure H-28 Region R28 ..........................................................................................................................

H-31 Figure H-29 Region R29 ..........................................................................................................................

H-32 Figure H-30 Region R30 ..........................................................................................................................

H-33 Figure H-31 Region R31. .........................................................................................................................

H-34 Figure H-32 Region R32 ......................

...................................................................................................

H-35 Figure H-33 Region R33 ..........................................................................................................................

H-36 Figure H-34 Region R34 ..........................................................................................................................

H-37 Figure H-35 Region R35 ................................................................................................... , ......................

H-38 Figure H-36 Region R36 ..........................................................................................................................

H-39 Figure H-37 Region R37 ..........................................................................................................................

H-40 Figure H-38 Region R38 ..........................................................................................................................

H-41 Figure J-1. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario

1) ..............

J-9 Figure J-2. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario

2) ...............................

J-9 Figure J-3. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario

3) ............

J-10 Figure J-4. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario

4) ............................

J-10 Figure J-5. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario

5) ...............................................................................................................................

- - - - '***

J-11 Figure J-6. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario

6) ..............

J-11 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate vi KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Figure J-7. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario

7) ...............................

J-12 Figure J-8. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario

8) .............................

J-12 Figure J-9. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario

9) ..............

J-13 Figure J-10. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario

10) ...........................

J-13 Figure J-11. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario

11) .........................

J-14 Figure J-12. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario

12) ............................................................................................................................................

J-14 Figure J-13. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Evening, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario

13) ............................................................................................................................................

J-15 Figure J-14. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact {Scenario

14) ............................................................................................................................................

J-15 Figure K-1. Duane Arnold Energy Center Link-Node Analysis Network ....................................................

K-2 Figure K-2. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 1 .....................................................................................

K-3 Figure K-3. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 2 .....................................................................................

K-4 Figure K-4. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 3 .....................................................................................

K-5 Figure K-5. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 4 .....................................................................................

K-6 Figure K-6. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 5 .....................................................................................

K-7 Figure K-7. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 6 .....................................................................................

K-8 Figure K-8. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 7 .....................................................................................

K-9 Figure K-9. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 8 ...................................................................................

K-10 Figure K-10. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 9 .................................................................................

K-11 Figure K-11. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 10 ...............................................................................

K-12 Figure K-12. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 11 ...............................................................................

K..:13 Figure K-13. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 12 ...............................................................................

K-14 Figure K-14. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 13 ...............................................................................

K-15 Figure K-15. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 14 ...............................................................................

K-16 Figure K-16. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 15 ...............................................................................

K-17 Figure K-17. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 16 ...............................................................................

K-18 Figure K-18. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 17 ...............................................................................

K-19 Figure K-19. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 18 ...............................................................................

K-20 Figure K-20. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 19 ...............................................................................

K-21 Figure K-21. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 20 ...............................................................................

K-22 Figure K-22. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 21 ...............................................................................

K-23 Figure K-23. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 22 ...............................................................................

K-24 Figure K-24. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 23 ...............................................................................

K-25 Figure K-25. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 24 ...............................................................................

K-26 Figure K-26. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 25 ...............................................................................

K-27 Figure K-27. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 26 ...............................................................................

K-28 Figure K-28. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 27 ...............................................................................

K-29 Figure K-29. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 28 ...............................................................................

K-30 Figure K-30. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 29 ...............................................................................

K-31 Figure K-31. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 30 ...............................................................................

K-32 Figure K-32. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 31 ...............................................................................

K-33 Figure M-1. Proposed Modification to EPz .. : ...............................................................................................

8 Figure M-2. 2012 Link-Node Analysis Network ............................................................................................

9 Figure M-3. 2016 Link-Node Analysis Network ..........................................................................................

10 Figure M-4. ETE and EPZ Boundary Change -Scenario 1 .....................................................................

M-13 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate vii KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.0 Figure M-5. ETE and EPZ Boundary Change -Scenario 6 .............................. ......................................

M-14 List of Tables Table 1-1. Stakeholder Interaction

...............................................

.' ...........................................................

1-4 Table 1-2. Highway Characteristics

...........................................................................................................

1-8 Table 1-3. ETE Study Comparisons

..........................................................................................................

1-14 Table 2-1. Evacuation Scenario Definitions

...............................................................................................

2-6 Table 2-2. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather .................................................................................

2-8 Table 3-1. County Population Change and Annual Growth Rate from April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2015 ....... 3-6 Table 3-2. Municipality Population Change and Annual Growth Rate from April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2015 .......................................................................................................................

3-6 Table 3-3. EPZ Permanent Resident Population

.......................................................................................

3-8 Table 3-4. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Subarea ......................................................

3-9 Table 3-5. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ...........................................................................

3-12 Table 3-6. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles .....................................................................

3-16 Table 3-7. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ...........................

3-20 Table 3-8. External Traffic Traversing the DAEC Study Area ...................................................................

3-25 Table 3-9. Summary of Population Demand ...........................................................................................

3-26 Table 3-10. Summary of Vehicle Demand ...............................................................................................

3-27 Table 5-1. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities

................................................................................

5-3 Table 5-2. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ...............................................................................

5-6 Table 5-3. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ...................................................

5-7 Table 5-4. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ..................................................................

5-8 Table 5-5. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Leave Home ..................................................

5-9 Table 5-6. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6 11-8 11 of Snow ......................................................

5-10 Table 5-7. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................

5-12 Table 5-8. Description of the Distributions

.............................................................................................

5-12 Table 5-9. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Un-staged Evacuation

....................

5-18 Table 5-10. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation

.......................

5-20 Table 6-1. Description of Evacuation Regions ...........................................................................................

6-3 Table 6-2. Evacuation Scenario Definitions

...............................................................................................

6-6 Table 6-3. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios

............................................

6-7 Table 6-4. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario ..................................................................................................

6-8 Table 7-1. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population

.........................

7-10 Table 7-2. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population

.......................

7-12 Table 7-3. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2-Mile Region when Evacuating Additional Subareas Downwind to 5 Miles ..............................................................

................................................................

7-14 Table 7-4. Time to Clear 100 Percent ofthe 2-Mile Region when Evacuating Additional Subareas Downwind to 5 Miles ...............................................................................................................................

7-15 Table 7-5. Description of Evacuation Regions .........................................................................................

7-16 Table 8-1. Transit-Dependent Population Estimates

..............................................................................

8-18 Table 8-2. School, College, Preschool and Daycare Population Demand Estimates

...............................

8-19 Table 8-3. Temporary Relocation Centers for Schools, Preschools and Daycares ...................................

8-23 Table 8-4. Transit Demand for Medical Facilities and Group Homes .....................................................

8-27 Table 8-5. Summary of Transportation Resource Capacities

...................................................................

8-30 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate viii KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Table 8-6. Bus Route Descriptions

..........................................................................................................

8-32 Table 8-7. Evacuation Time Estimates for Schools, Preschools and Daycares -Good Weather .............

8-39 Table 8-8. Evacuation Time Estimates for Schools, Preschools and Daycares -Rain .............................

8-45 Table 8-9. Evacuation Time Estimates for Schools, Preschools and Daycares -Snow ...........................

8-51 Table 8-10. Summary of Transit-Dependent Bus Routes ........................................................................

8-57 Table 8-11. Transit-Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates

-Good Weather ........................................

8-58 Table 8-12. Transit-Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates

-Rain ........................................................

8-62 Table 8-13. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates

-Snow .......................................................

8-66 Table 8-14. Medical Facility and Group Home Evacuation Time Estimates

-Good Weather .................

8-70 Table 8-15. Medical Facility and Group Home Facility Evacuation Time Estimates

-Rain ....................

8-73 Table 8-16. Medical Facility and Group Home Evacuation Time Estimates

-Snow ...............................

8-76 Table 8-17. Homebound Special Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates

....................................

8-79 Table 8-18. Homebound Special Needs Persons Evacuation Time Estimates

-Second Wave for Ambulatory/Wheelchair Bound ...............................................................................................................

8-80 Table 8-19. Correctional Facility Evacuation Time Estimates

..................................................................

8-81 Table 12-1. Estimated Number of Telephone Calls Required for Confirmation of Evacuation

..............

12-2 Table A-1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms ....................................................................................

A-1 Table C-1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV 11 ........................................................

C-2 Table C-2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ...........................................................................

C-3 Table C-3. Glossary ....................................................................................................................................

C-7 Table E-1. Schools, Pre-Schools and Daycares within the EPZ ..................................................................

E-2 Table E-2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ ..............................................................................................

E-8 Table E-3. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................

E-10 Table E-4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ .........................................................................................

E-11 Table E-5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................

E-12 Table E-6. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ .....................................................................................

E-14 Table F-1. DAEC Telephone Survey Sampling Plan ...................................................................................

F-3 Table H-1. Percent of Subarea Population Evacuating for Each Region ..................................................

H-2

Table J-1. Characteristics of the Ten Highest Volume Signalized Intersections

........................................

J-2 Table J-2. Sample Simulation Model Input ...............................................................................................

J-4 Table J-3. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R03) ...........................

J-5 Table J-4. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1) ............................................................................................................................

J-6 Table J-5. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario-1

.........................

J-7 Table K-1. Evacuation Roadway Network Characteristics

......................................................................

K-34 Table K-2. Nodes in the Link-Node Analysis Network which are Controlled

........................................

K-131 Table M-1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study .......................................

M-1 Table M-2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study ....................................................

M-2 Table M-3. ETE Variation with Population Change .................................................................................

M-4 Table M-4. 2016 Population and Vehicles within the Removed Portion of Subarea 24 ............................

11 Table M-5. Comparison of Vehicle Demand ..............................................................................................

11 Table M-6. ETE Variation with EPZ Boundary & Population Change ....................................................

M-12 Table N-1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist

.................................................................................................

N-1 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ix KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a

]* EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

ES.1. Introduction This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) located in Linn County, Iowa. ETE are part of the required planning basis and provide NextEra Energy and State and local governments with site-specific information needed for Protective Action making. The last ETE study done for the DAEC was dated December 2012. It incorporated 2010 Census data and adhered to new federal regulations and guidance that were published in November 2011. In 2013, the Linn County Emergency Management Commission requested to reduce the size of the DAEC Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The area proposed to be removed is located in Subarea 24 south of U.S. Highway 30 (US-30) bounded on the west by Edgewood Road, the south by 76th Ave SW, and on the east by C Street Road SW. The area removed from the EPZ includes the entire College Community School District main campus, Part IV, Section K of the January 2016 FEMA Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) Program Manual outlines the process for making changes to the EPZ boundary:

If an ORO wants to change the boundary of an existing EPZ, the proposal must be submitted to the FEMA Regional Administrator or his/her designee, usually the RAC [Regional Assistance Committee]

Chair. The proposal shall include, but not be limited to:

Action by appropriate ORO [Offsite Response Organization]

officials desiring the change to the boundary (i.e., resolution by elected official, etc.);

Description of the change to the boundary;

Discussion of the population affected by the change;

Effect that the change has on evacuation routes or evacuation time estimates; and

Maps showing the existing EPZ boundary and proposed new boundary.

FEMA and the RAC will review the request on its merits. After the regional review, the request and RAC recommendation will be forwarded to FEMA Headquarters for final action. If the EPZ boundary change is approved, the approval is contingent on the ORO submitting for review the appropriate changes to their plans/procedures, maps of the EPZ, public information material, and impact that the addition or subtraction of population from the EPZ has on the evacuation time estimates.

The required information would include changes to the geographical boundary descriptions and the ANS [Alert and Notification System], including additional sirens or other means for public notification.

Any modifications to an ANS must be consistent with Section V, Part A of this Manual [the FEMA REP Program Manual], Alert and Notification Systems. Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-1 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a 1,[1 I .1: According to NRC's Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 50.54(q), The licensee may make changes to its emergency plan without NRC approval only if the licensee performs and retains an analysis demonstrating that the changes do not reduce the effectiveness.

of the plan and the plan, as changed, continues to meet the requirements in appendix E to this part and, for nuclear power reactor licensees, the planning standards of§ 50.47(b).

The changes to a licensee's emergency plan that reduce the effectiveness of the plan as defined in paragraph (q)(l)(iv) of this section may not be implemented without prior approval by the NRC. A licensee desiring to make such a change after February 21, 2012 shall submit an application for an amendment to its license. In addition to the filing requirements of§§ 50.90 and 50.91, the request must include all emergency plan pages affected by that change and must be accompanied by a forwarding letter identifying the change, the reason for the change, and the basis for concluding that the licensee's emergency plan, as revised, will continue to meet the requirements in appendix E to this part and, for nuclear power reactor licensees, the planning standards of§ 50.47(b).

In accordance with the aforementioned federal regulations, this report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop ETE for the DAEC utilizing the proposed new EPZ. 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/CR-7002, November 2011.

Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, November 1980.

Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR-6863, January 2005. ES.2. Project Activities This project began in April 2016 and extended over a period of approximately one year. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Phase 1-the identification of whether or not the change in the EPZ boundary impacted the ETE, was performed.

Phase 1 was an "apples to apples" comparison wherein the roadway system and the population from the 2012 ETE study were maintained, except for the removal of the portion of Subarea 24 south of US-30. The objective of the "apples to apples" comparison was to ensure that any change in ETE was the result of Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-2 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a the change in EPZ boundary.

Phase 1 found that the 17,301 people and 9,116 vehicles removed from Subarea 24 resulted in a decrease in goth percentile ETE of up to 20 minutes, and a decrease in moth percentile ETE of up to 40 minutes. The results of Phase 1 are documented in KLD Technical Report (TR) -827, dated May 11, 2016.

Phase 2 -update the complete ETE study (by completing the activities listed below) to incorporate the change in the EPZ boundary.

Projected 2010 Census permanent resident population to 2016 using annual growth rates computed by comparing 2010 data with 2015 1 population estimates published by the Census Bureau.

Updated the link-node 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.

The analysis network was expanded to as far as 25 miles south and east of the DAEC site to incorporate roadway changes since the 2012 ETE study (e.g., Highway 100 Extension in Cedar Rapids, traffic circles in the Cities of Marion and Mt. Vernon).

Utilized the results of the 2012 telephone survey of residents within the EPZ to gather focused data needed for this ETE study that were not contained within the census database.

The U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS)2 household income and household size data for the counties within the EPZ for 2012, 2014 3 , and 2015 were analyzed to validate that EPZ demographics are similar in 2016 to what they were in 2012, thereby justifying the use of the 2012 telephone survey results in this ETE study.

Transient data from the 2012 ETE study were maintained based on discussion with NextEra and the OROs.

Special facility (schools, preschools, day care centers, medical facilities, group homes, and correctional facilities) were updated based on the latest county radiological emergency plans.

Estimated the number of employees commuting into the EPZ using data obtained from the US Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool 4*

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

1 The annual population estimates prepared by the Census Bureau for the entire U.S. involve an extensive data gathering process. As such, population estimates are a year behind -2015 data are released in 2016. The schedule for release of Census data is provided on the Census website: http:Uwww.census.gov/popest/schedule.html 2 http:Ufactfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t 3 Information for 2013 and 2016 was not available.

4 http:Uonthemap.ces.census.gov/

Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-3 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a

Following federal guidelines, the existing 24 Subareas within the EPZ were grouped within circular areas or "keyhole" configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 38 Evacuation Regions.

The time-varying external circumstances were represented as Evacuation Scenarios, each described in terms of the following factors: (1) Season (Summer, Winter); (2) Day of Week (Midweek, Weekend);

(3) Time of Day (Midday, Evening);

and (4) Weather (Good, Rain, Snow). One special event scenario, the Cedar Rapids Freedom Festival, was considered.

One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane was closed on lnterstate-380 southbound from County Home Road (Exit 28) to the interchange with Wright Brothers Blvd (Exit 13), for the duration of the evacuation.

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

As per NUREG/CR-7002, the Planning Basis for the calculation of ETE is:

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

While an unlikely accident scenario, this planning basis will yield ETE, measured as the elapsed time from the ATE until the stated percentage of the population exits the impacted Region that represent "upper bound" estimates.

This conservative Planning Basis is applicable for all initiating events.

The ETE for schoolchildren are calculated separately.

Two separate computations of ETE were considered for school children if an accident occurs at the DAEC while schools are in session:

For a slowly progressing accident, children will be evacuated by bus directly to a temporary relocation center (TRC} located outside the EPZ where they will subsequently be picked up by parents.

For a rapidly progressing accident, children will be evacuated by bus directly to a general population reception center where they can unite with parents or guardians.

Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either ride-share with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided by the counties.

The homebound special needs population and residents of medical facilities, group homes, and correctional facilities will likewise be evacuated with public transit, as needed: bus, van, wheelchair transport or ambulance, as required.

Separate ETE are calculated for the transit-dependent evacuees, homebound special needs population, and residents of medical facilities, group homes, and correctional facilities.

Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-4 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a ES.3. Computation of ETE A total of' 532 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 38 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 14 Evacuation Scenarios (38 x 14 = 532). Separate ETE are calculated for transit-dependent 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 Advisory to Evacuate applies only to those people occupying the specified impacted region. It is assumed that 100 percent of the people within the impacted region will evacuate in response to this Advisory.

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 11 voluntarily" evacuate.

In addition, 20% of the population in the Shadow Region will also_ elect to evacuate.

These voluntary evacuees could impede those who are evacuating from within the impacted region. The impedance that could be caused by voluntary evacuees is considered in the computation of ETE for the impacted region. Staged evacuation is considered wherein those people within the 2-mile Region evacuate immediately, while those beyond 2 miles, but within the EPZ, shelter-in-place.

Once 90 percent of the 2-mile Region is evacuated, those people beyond 2 miles begin to evacuate.

As per federal guidance, 20% of people beyond 2 miles will evacuate (non-compliance) even though they are advised to shelter-in-place.

The computational procedure is outlined as follows:

A link-node 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 11 zonal centroids" located within the EPZ and Shadow Region. The trip generation rates vary over time reflecting the mobilization process, and from one location (centroid) to another depending on population density and on whether a centroid is within, or outside, the impacted area.

The evacuation model computes the routing patterns for evacuating vehicles that are compliant with federal guidelines (outbound relative to the plant) and then simulates the traffic flow movements over space and time. This simulation process estimates the rate that traffic flow exits the impacted region. The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90 percent and 100 percent, respectively, of the population within the impacted region, to evacuate from within the impacted region. These statistics are presented in tabular and graphical formats. The goth percentile ETE have been identified as the values that should be considered when making protective action decisions Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-5 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a I, I I because the 10oth 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/CR-7002.

ES.4. Tra-ffic Management This study modeled the comprehensive "DAEC Emergency Planning Zone Traffic Management Plan" dated October 2014. Based on congestion patterns predicted by the evacuation simulations, five additional Traffic Control Point (TCPs) and one additional Access Control Point (ACP) were identified to expedite the evacuation.

Refer to Section g and Appendix G for additional details. ES.S. 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.

Figure 6-1 displays a map of the DAEC EPZ showing the layout of the 24 Subareas that comprise, in aggregate, the EPZ.

Table 3-1 presents the estimates of permanent resident population in each Subarea based on the 2010 Census data extrapolated to 2016.

Table 6-1 defines each of the 38 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Subareas.

Table 6-2 defines the 14 Evacuation Scenarios.

Tables 7-1 and 7-2 are compilations of ETE. These data are the times needed to clear the indicated regions of go and 100 percent of the population occupying these regions, respectively.

These computed ETE include consideration of mobilization time and of estimated voluntary evacuations from other regions within the EPZ and from the Shadow Region.

Tables 7-3 and 7-4 present ETE for the 2-mile region when evacuating additional Subareas downwind to 5 miles for un-staged and staged evacuations for the goth and 10oth percentiles, respectively.

Table 8-7 presents _ETE for the schoolchildren in good weather.

Table 8-11 presents ETE for the transit-dependent population in good weather.

Figure H-8 presents an example of an Evacuation Region (Region ROS) to be evacuated under the circumstances defined in Table 6-1. Maps of all Regions are provided in Appendix H. ES.6. Conclusions

General population ETE were computed for 532 unique cases. Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 document these ETE for the goth and 10oth percentiles.

These ETE range from 1:30 (hr:min) to 7:40 at the goth percentile and 3:30 to 10:05 at the 10oth percentile.

Inspection of Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 indicates that the ETE for the 10oth percentile are Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-6 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a significantly longer than those for the goth percentile.

This is the result of the congestion within the EPZ. When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand. See Figures 7-11 through 7-24.

Inspection of Table 7-3 and Table 7-4 indicates that a staged evacuation provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2-Mile Region, and adversely impacts (ETE increases of up to 25 minutes at the goth percentile) some evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the plant (compare Regions R02 and R04 through R12 with Regions R2g through R38, respectively, in Table 7-1). See Section 7.6 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 5 (summer, midweek/weekend, evening) and 13 (summer, weekend, evening) in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 indicates that the special event, Cedar Rapids Freedom Festival, has a significant impact on the ETE (goth percentile increases of up to 20 minutes and moth percentile increases of up to 35 minutes) for regions including a portion of Cedar Rapids (R03, R13, R25 -R28). See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 indicates that the roadway closure -one lane southbound on 1-380 -does have a significant impact on ETE (up to 30 minute increases at the goth percentile, and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and m minutes at the moth percentile) for regions including Cedar Rapids (R03, R13, R14, R24-R28).

See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Cedar Rapids, Marion, and Hiawatha are the most congested areas during an evacuation.

The last location in the EPZ to exhibit traffic congestion is US-30 westbound leaving Cedar Rapids. All congestion within the EPZ clears by 8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months and 10 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate during summer, midweek, midday conditions (Scenario 1). See Section 7.3 and Figures 7-3 through 7-m.

Separate ETE were computed for schools, preschools, day care centers, medical facilities, group homes correctional facilities, transit-dependent persons and homebound special needs persons. The average single-wave ETE for all facilities, dependent persons, and homebound special needs persons is comparable or less than the goth percentile ETE for the general population for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 6 conditions.al.

See Section 8.

Table 8-5 indicates that there is sufficient transportation resource capacity available to evacuate wheelchair bound and bedridden population in a single wave. The bus capacity is not sufficient to evacuate all requiring a bus in a single wave. Second wave ETE are computed for all facilities/people.

See Sections 8.4 and 8.5.

The general population ETE at the goth and moth percentiles are reduced by m minutes and 30 minutes, respectively, when the mobilization time is reduced by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months . An increase in mobilization time by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months does not impact the goth or moth percentile ETE due to the traffic congestion within the EPZ. See Table M-1.

The general population ETE is reduced when the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region is reduced and increased when the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region is increased (60% and mo% shadow evacuation increases the goth Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-7 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a percentile ETE by 20 minutes and increases the 10oth percentile ETE by 20 minutes and 55 minutes, respectively).

See Table M-2.

An increase in permanent resident population (EPZ plus Shadow Region) of 10% or greater results in an increase in the goth percentile ETE of 30 minutes, which meets the federal criterion for performing a fully updated ETE study between decennial Censuses.

See Section M.3.

The reduction in EPZ size reduces ETE by up to 35 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 10 minutes for the goth and 10oth percentiles, respectively, as there are 9,231 less vehicles evacuating from within the EPZ. See Section M.4.

The ETE in this study increased significantly relative to those ETE computed in the 2012 ETE study, predominately as a result of the consideration of bottlenecks outside of the study area, and to a lesser extent the increase in population and evacuating vehicles in the study area. Consideration of bottlenecks outside of the study area: the federal guidance (NUREG-0654 and NUREG/CR-7002) recommends an EPZ with an approximate radius of 10 miles centered at the plant, and a Shadow Region which extends to 15 miles radially.

The EPZ for the DAEC is unique in that the EPZ extends beyond 15 miles to the southeast in Subarea 23 (see Figure 7-2). In 2012, the link-node analysis network was stopped just beyond the boundary of Subarea 23 as it was approximately 16 miles from the plant. The last node in the network along US-30 eastbound was just east of the interchange with Iowa State Highway 13 (IA-13). At that point, US-30 eastbound is acting as a freeway with 2 lanes eastbound (each with a capacity of 2,250 vehicles per hour) for a total capacity of 4,500 vehicles per hour. Approximately 3.5 miles east of that, US-30 eastbound narrows to a single lane with a capacity of 1,700 vehicles per hour. An additional 2 miles east of the drop to a single lane, US-30 eastbound enters a single lane traffic circle in Mount Vernon with a posted speed limit of 20 mph and an estimated capacity of 900 vehicles per hour. This study models US-30 eastbound through Mount Vernon (see Figure 1-3) versus the 2012 study which stopped just east of the interchange with IA-13. Thus, the capacity of the network exit along US-30 eastbound in 2012 was 4,500 vehicles per hour, versus 900 vehicles per hour in this study -a reduction in capacity of 80%. This causes significant congestion and queuing along US-30 eastbound leaving Cedar Rapids, which results in thousands of vehicles seeking alternate routes (US-30 westbound, 1-380 southbound, US-151B southbound,.

IA-965 southbound, and Ely Rd southbound), prolonging congestion and significantly increasing ETE. See Section 1.3.

Federal guidance (NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, Supplement

3) advised licensees how to use ETE results to inform Protective Action Recommendations (PAR). The changes in ETE in this study relative to the 2012 study do not impact PAR as the ETE values relative to the NRC criteria have not changed. See Section 7.7. Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-8 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Mount Aubum / Cedar FINer Legend

DA E C Subarea 1....-:. 2 , 5 , 10 Mi l e R i ng s Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Norw* Ditf: l/21/2017

' CoV;richt: f SRI om *nd Map1 201S NertE ra fnerl'( ., .,.... . '---) . . ---""-\ Pra i rieburg ' ...... ,11 10 ' 12 13 I I Linn I Co un t y 14 I I Marldn 0 F a i rfax Figure 6-1. Subareas Comprising the DAEC EPZ ES-9 KLD Eng i neering , P.C. Rev.a Table 3-1. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Subarea 2010 Population 2016 Extrapolated Population 1 1 , 307 1,373 2 271 283 3 889 935 4 3,442 3,588 5 5,205 5,520 6 68 72 7 1,416 1,372 8 248 244 9 2,782 2,924 10 445 463 11 146 153 12 976 1,018 13 487 511 14 45,159 48,424 15 28,472 29,676 16 30,626 31,872 17 2,668 2 , 781 18 2,141 2,298 19 239 238 20 494 488 21 871 857 22 1,729 1,724 23 35,485 37,453 24 18,652 19,407 TOl'.lll.

lM,.Zll EPZ Population Growth (2010-2016):

5.1% Note: The revised EPZ (removal of the portion of Subarea 24 south of US-30} decreases the 2010 EPZ permanent resident population in this study by 5,218 people (approximately 2.8%} relative to the population in the previous ETE study (KLD TR-529, dated December 2012}. Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-10 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.0 Table 6-1. Desc ri ption of Evacuatio n Reg i o n s Sub area Reg i on Descrip t ion 10 11 12 13 14 lS 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 ROl 2-Mile Ring R02 Region W i nd Di r ection From: 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 R04 N NW, N 326.26° -11.25° ROS NN E , N E , EN E 11.26° -78. 7 5° R06 E , ESE, SE 78.76° -146.25° R07 SSE 146.26° -168. 7 5° ROB s 168.7 6° -191.25° R09 SSW, SW 191.26° -236.25° RlO WSW 236.26° -258.7 5° Rll w Reg i on Wind D i rect i on From: 9 1 0 11 1 2 13 R13 N 348. 7 6° -11.25° R14 NN E ll.26° -33. 75° RlS N E 33.76° -56.2 5° R16 ENE 56.26° -78.75° R17 E 78.7 6° -101.25° R18 ES E 101.26° -123.7 5° R19 S E 123. 7 6° -146.25° R 2 0 SSE 146.26° -168.7S 0 R21 s 16 8.76° -191.2s 0 R22 SSW 191.26° -213. 7 5° R23 SW 213.7 6° -236.2 5° R24 WSW 236.26° -258. 75° R25 w 2 5 8. 76° -281.25° R26 WNW 281.26° -303.7 5° R27 N W 303. 76° -326.25° R28 NNW 326.26° -348.7 5° Du a n e Arn o l d En er g y Ce n ter ES-11 KLD Engineering , P.C. E vacuation T ime Estimate Rev.a

Region Wind Direction From: R29 5-Mile Radius N/A R30 NNW , N 326.26° -11.25° R31 NNE , NE , ENE 11.26° -78.75° R32 E , ESE , SE 78.76° -146. 25° R33 SSE 146.26° -168.75° R34 s 168.76° -191.25° R35 SSW, SW 191.26° -236.25° R36 WSW 236.26° -258.75° w 258. 76° -281.25° Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuatio n Time Estimate -:** Subarea 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Subarea(s)

Shelter-in-Place ES-12 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Table 6-2. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Day of Time of Scenario Season 5 Week Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None 5 Summer Midweek , Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None 12 Winter Midweek, Evening Good None Weekend 13 Summer Weekend Evening Good Cedar Rapids Freedom Festival Roadway Impact -Lane 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Closure on 1-380 Southbound 5 Winter mean s school is in session, with 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).

Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate ES-13 KLD Engineering , P.C. Rev.a 1--------Summer Midweek Scenario:

(1) (2) Midday Region Good Rain Weather ROl 1:40 1:40 R02 2: 00 2: 00 R03 6:10 6:50 R04 2:00 2: 00 ROS 1:35 1: 40 ROG 1:40 1: 40 R07 1:40 1: 40 ROS 2: 05 2:10 R09 2:05 2: 10 RlO 2: 05 2: 05 Rll 2:05 2: 05 R12 2: 00 2: 00 R13 5:30 6:05 R14 3: 35 3:50 R15 2:10 2:25 R16 2: 05 2: 25 R17 2: 10 2: 25 R18 1:45 1: 45 R19 2:05 2:05 R20 2:05 2:1 0 R21 2:05 2:10 R22 2:05 2: 05 R23 2:05 2: 05 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate -Table 7-1. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Winter Winter Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend (3) (4) (S) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Midday Evening Midday Midday Good Rain Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Snow Weather Weather Weather Weather Entire 2-Mile Region, 5-Mile Region, and EPZ 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:35 2: 05 2: 00 2: 00 1: 50 2: 00 2:00 2:15 2: 00 2:00 2:15 5: 05 5:35 5:00 6:25 6:55 7:40 5:00 5:35 6: 00 2-Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles 2: 00 2: 00 1:50 2: 00 2: 00 2:10 2: 00 2:00 2:10 1:35 1: 35 1:35 1: 35 1:40 2:10 1:35 1:35 2:10 1: 35 1:35 1: 35 1:4 0 1: 40 2: 15 1: 35 1: 35 2:10 1:30 1: 35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:10 1:35 1:35 2:05 2:05 2: 10 2:05 2: 05 2: 10 2: 15 2: 05 2: 10 2:10 2:05 2: 10 2:05 2: 05 2: 10 2:15 2:05 2: 10 2:10 2:05 2: 05 2:00 2: 05 2: 05 2: 15 2: 05 2: 05 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:00 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:05 2:05 2:15 1: 55 1:55 1:45 2: 00 2:00 2: 10 1:55 1:55 2:1 0 2-Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary 4: 30 4:55 4:20 5:45 6:15 6:50 4: 25 4:55 5: 20 3: 05 3: 20 2:55 3:35 3: 55 4:20 3:00 3: 15 3:30 1: 55 2:1 0 1:55 2: 15 2: 25 2:50 2:00 2:10 2: 30 2: 00 2: 10 1:55 2:05 2:25 2:45 2:00 2: 05 2:20 2:00 2:10 1: 55 2: 10 2:20 2:40 1:55 2: 10 2:20 1: 35 1: 35 1:35 1:45 1: 45 2:20 1:35 1: 35 2: 10 2:05 2: 05 1:55 2:05 2:05 2: 15 2: 05 2:05 2:15 2:05 2: 05 2: 00 2:05 2:05 2:15 2: 05 2: 05 2: 15 2:05 2:05 1:55 2:05 2:10 2: 20 2:05 2:05 2:15 2:05 2: 05 1:55 2:05 2:05 2:20 2: 05 2: 05 2: 15 2:00 2:05 1: 55 2:05 2: 05 2:1 5 2: 05 2:05 2:15 ES-14 Winter Summer Summer Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek (12) (13) (14) Evening Evening Midday Good Special Roadway Weather Event Impact 1:35 1:30 1:40 1: 50 1: 55 2: 00 4: 50 5: 05 6:40 1: 50 1: 55 2: 00 1:35 1:35 1: 35 1:35 1:35 1:40 1:35 1:30 1:40 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:05 2:00 2:00 2: 05 2:00 2:00 2:05 1: 45 1:50 2: 00 4:15 4:40 5:45 2:50 2:55 3: 50 1:50 2:00 2:20 1:50 1:55 2: 10 1:50 1:55 2:10 1:35 1:35 1:45 1:55 1:55 2:05 2:00 2:00 2:05 2:00 1:55 2:05 1: 55 1: 55 2:05 1:55 1:55 2: 05 KLD Eng in eering, P.C. Rev.a Summe r Midweek Scenario:

(1) (2) Midday Region Good Weather Rain R24 3: 0 5 3: 20 R25 4:45 5:05 R26 6:0 0 6:30 R27 6:0 0 6:40 R28 6: 10 6:50 R29 2:1 5 2: 20 R30 2: 15 2: 15 R31 2:2 0 2:20 R32 2:05 2:05 R33 2:0 0 2:00 R34 2:05 2: 10 R35 2: 05 2: 1 0 R36 2: 10 2: 10 R37 2: 10 2:10 R38 2:15 2: 20 Duane Arn o ld Energy Center Evacuation Time Estima t e Summer Weekend (3) (4) Midday Good Ra i n Weather 2:50 3:05 4: 0 0 4:2 0 5: 05 5: 2 0 5: 0 0 5:35 5: 10 5:40 2: 1 5 2: 20 2: 15 2: 20 2: 20 2: 25 2: 0 5 2: 05 2: 00 2: 0 0 2: 05 2: 10 2:05 2: 10 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:2 0 2: 20 Summer Winter W i n t e r Midweek M i dweek Weeke n d Weekend (S) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Even i ng M i dday Midda y Good Good Rai n S n o w Goo d Rai n Weather Weather W ea t h er 2:55 3:15 3: 20 3: 35 2:50 3: 00 4:00 4:50 5:25 6: 00 3:55 4: 25 4: 5 0 6:0 0 6: 40 7: 15 4:55 5: 20 4:5 0 6:15 6:50 7: 25 4:55 5:25 5:00 6: 20 7: 0 5 7:40 5: 00 5: 35 Staged Evacuatio n Mile Region and Keyhole to S Miles 2:15 2: 1 5 2: 15 2: 45 2: 15 2: 20 2: 20 2:15 2: 15 2:45 2: 15 2:20 2:25 2: 2 0 2:20 2: 55 2:25 2: 25 2:05 2: 05 2:05 2:35 2: 05 2: 05 2:00 2:0 0 2: 0 0 2:3 0 2:00 2:00 2:05 2:05 2: 10 2: 25 2: 05 2:10 2:05 2: 05 2:10 2:20 2: 05 2: 10 2: 10 2: 10 2: 10 2:30 2: 10 2: 10 2: 10 2: 10 2: 10 2: 3 0 2:10 2:10 2: 20 2: 1 5 2: 2 0 2: 5 0 2:2 0 2:20 ES-15 Winter Summer Summer M i dweek Wee k end Weekend Midweek (11) (12) (13) (14) Even i ng Even i ng Midd a y Sn o w Good Specia l Roadway Weat h er Ev e n t Im p a c t 3:30 3:00 2:55 3:15 4:4 5 4:00 4: 05 5:05 5:30 4:45 5: 00 6: 05 5: 55 4:50 5:05 6: 20 6:05 4: 55 5:2 0 6: 20 2: 4 5 2: 1 5 2:2 0 2:15 2:45 2:2 0 2: 20 2:15 3:00 2:2 5 2:25 2:2 0 2: 35 2:05 2:05 2: 05 2:30 2:0 0 2: 0 0 2: 0 0 2:2 5 2: 05 2: 05 2:05 2:20 2: 0 5 2:05 2:05 2:30 2: 10 2:10 2:10 2:3 0 2: 10 2:10 2:10 2: 50 2: 20 2:2 0 2:20 KLD Engineering , P.C. Rev.a Summ e r Midweek Scenario:

(1) (2) Midday Region Good Weather Rain ROl 3:30 3:30 R02 3:35 3:35 R03 8:20 9:30 R04 3:35 3:35 ROS 3:35 3:35 ROG 3:35 3:35 R07 3:35 3:35 ROS 3:35 3: 35 R09 3: 35 3: 35 RlO 3: 35 3: 35 Rll 3:35 3: 35 R12 3: 35 3:35 R13 7: 30 7:55 R14 5: 20 5:25 RlS 3: 40 3:40 R16 3: 40 3: 40 R17 3: 40 3:40 R18 3:40 3:40 R19 3:40 3:40 R20 3: 40 3:40 R21 3:40 3: 40 R22 3: 40 3: 40 R23 3:40 3:4 0 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Table 7-2. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Winter Winter Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Midday Evening Midday Midday Good Rain Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Snow Weather Weather Weather Weather Entire 2-Mile Region, 5-Mile Region, and EPZ 3: 30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 4:00 3:30 3:30 4:00 3: 35 3: 35 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3:35 4:05 6:50 7: 50 6:25 9:00 10:05 10: 05 7:00 7:05 7: 45 2-Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3:35 4:05 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 4:05 3: 35 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 4: 05 3:35 3:35 4: 05 3: 35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3: 35 4:05 3: 35 3: 35 3:3 5 3:35 3:35 4: 05 3:35 3: 35 4: 05 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3: 35 4: 05 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 3: 35 4:05 3: 35 3: 35 4: 05 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3:35 4: 05 3:35 3:35 4: 05 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3: 35 4:05 2-Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary 6: 00 6: 55 6: 00 7:50 7:55 9:4 0 6:0 5 6:45 7: 25 4: 35 4: 55 4:30 5:10 5:40 6:25 4: 20 4: 50 5:25 3: 40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:10 3:40 3: 40 4:10 3: 40 3: 40 3:40 3:40 3: 40 4:10 3:40 3: 40 4: 10 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3:40 3:40 4:10 3:40 3:40 4:10 3: 40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:10 3: 40 3: 40 4: 10 3:4 0 3: 40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:10 3:40 3:40 4:10 3:40 3: 40 3: 40 3:40 3: 40 4:10 3:40 3:40 4: 10 3: 40 3: 40 3:40 3:40 3: 40 4: 10 3: 40 3:40 4:10 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3: 40 4:10 3:40 3:40 4: 10 3: 40 3: 40 3:4 0 3:40 3: 40 4:10 3:40 3:40 4:10 ES-16 Winter Summer Summer Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek (12) (13) (14) Evening Evening Midday Good Special Roadway Weather Event Impact 3:30 3:30 3: 30 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 6:30 7: 00 9:05 3:35 3:3 5 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 3: 35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 3: 35 3: 35 5: 50 6:1 0 7:45 4: 10 4:30 5: 20 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3:40 3:40 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3:40 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3:40 3:4 0 3:40 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3: 40 3:4 0 KLD Engineering , P.C. Rev.O

Summer Mi d w e ek Scenario:

(1) (2) Midday Region Good Rain Weather R24 5:00 5:20 R25 6:45 7:10 R26 8:05 8: 35 R27 7:40 8:55 R28 8:2 0 9:30 R29 3:35 3:35 R30 3:35 3: 35 R31 3: 35 3: 35 R32 3:35 3: 35 R33 3: 35 3: 35 R34 3: 35 3:3 5 R35 3:35 3:35 R36 3: 35 3:35 R37 3:35 3:35 R38 3: 35 3:35 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Summer Week e nd (3) (4) Midday Good Rain Weather 4:45 4:55 5:55 6:15 6: 35 7: 10 6:25 7: 05 6: 50 7:50 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 Summer Winter Winter Midweek Midweek Weekend W e ekend (S) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Evening Midday Midday Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Weather Weather Weather 4: 40 5:10 5:25 5:30 4:45 4:55 5:35 6:50 7: 25 8:15 5:40 6:10 6: 20 8: 00 8:55 9:55 6: 25 6: 55 6:25 7: 55 8:40 9:45 6:20 7:05 6:25 9:00 10: 05 10: 05 7: 00 7:05 Staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:3 5 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3:35 3: 35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3:35 3: 35 3: 35 4:05 3: 35 3:35 ES-17 Winter S ummer Summer Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek (11) (12) (13) (14) Evening Evening Midday Snow Good Special Roadway Weather Event Impact 5:20 4:50 4:40 5:10 6:40 5:40 5: 50 6:4 5 7:15 6:1 5 6:30 8:35 7: 40 6:15 6:4 0 8:50 7: 45 6:30 7: 00 9: 05 4:05 3: 35 3:35 3:3 5 4:05 3:35 3: 35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3: 35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3: 35 4:05 3: 35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3: 35 3:35 4: 05 3: 35 3:35 3:35 4:05 3:35 3:35 3: 35 KLD E ngineering, P.C. Rev.a Table 7-3. Time to C lear 90 Percent of the 2-Mile Region when Evacuating Additional Subareas Downwind t o 5 Miles S u mme r M i d w e ek Scenario:

{l) {2) Mi d day R egion G oo d Rain Weather ROl 1:40 1:40 R02 1:40 1:4 0 R04 1:40 1:40 ROS 1: 40 1:40 R OG 1:40 1:40 R07 1:4 0 1:4 0 ROS 1:40 1:40 R 09 1: 40 1: 40 RlO 1:40 1: 40 Rll 1: 40 1:40 R12 1:40 1:40 R 2 9 1:40 1:4 0 R30 1: 40 1:40 R31 1:40 1: 40 R32 1:40 1:40 R33 1:40 1:40 R34 1: 40 1:40 R 3 5 1: 40 1:40 R36 1:40 1: 40 R37 1: 40 1: 40 R38 1: 40 1:40 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Est im ate Summe r W eeke nd (3) (4) Mi dda y Go o d Rain Weather 1:30 1:30 1:3 0 1:30 1:30 1:30 1: 30 1: 30 1:30 1: 30 1: 30 1: 30 1:30 1: 30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1: 30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1: 30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1: 30 1: 30 -1:30 1: 30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:3 0 1:30 1: 30 1: 30 1: 30 1:30 1:30 Su mm er Wi nte r W inter M idw e ek Midweek Weekend Weekend (5) (6) {7) (8) (9) {10) Evening Midday Midday Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Weather Weather Weather 2-Mile Region 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:35 5-Mile Region, 2-Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles 1: 30 1:40 1:40 2: 05 1:30 1:35 1: 30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1: 30 1: 35 1: 30 1: 40 1:40 2: 05 1:30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:3 5 1:30 1:40 1:40 2: 05 1:30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2: 05 1:30 1: 35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1: 35 S taged Evacuati o n Mile Regi o n an d Keyhole to 5 Mi l es 1:30 1:40 1: 40 2: 05 1:3 0 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1: 40 2:05 1: 30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1: 35 1:30 1:40 1: 40 2:05 1: 30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2: 05 1:30 1: 35 1: 30 1: 40 1:40 2: 05 1: 30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1: 30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1: 40 2: 05 1: 30 1:35 1:30 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1: 35 ES-18 Wint e r S u mm er S u mm er Midweek W eekend W eekend Midweek (11) (12) {13) (14) Evening Evening Midday Snow Good Special Roadway Weather Event Impact 2:05 1:3 5 1:30 1: 40 2:0 5 1:35 1:30 1:40 2:05 1:35 1:30 1:40 2:05 1:35 1:30 1:4 0 2:05 1:35 1:30 1:40 2: 05 1:35 1:30 1:40 2: 05 1:35 1:30 1:40 2: 05 1:35 1: 30 1:40 2:05 1: 35 1:30 1:40 2:05 1: 35 1:3 0 1:40 2:05 1: 35 1: 30 1:40 2: 05 1:35 1: 30 1:40 2:05 1: 35 1:30 1: 40 2: 05 1:35 1:30 1: 40 2:05 1: 35 1:30 1: 40 2:05 1:35 1: 30 1:40 2:05 1:35 1:30 1:40 2: 05 1:35 1: 30 1:4 0 2:05 1:35 1:30 1:4 0 2: 05 1:35 1: 30 1: 40 2: 05 1:35 1: 30 1:40 KLD Engineering , P.C. Rev.a Ta bl e 7-4. Time to C lear 100 Percent of the 2-Mile Regi o n when Evacuating Additi o nal Subareas Downwind to S Miles S u mm er Mid w eek Scenario:

{l) (2) Midday Regi o n Good Rain Weather ROl 3:30 3:30 R02 3: 30 3:3 0 R 0 4 3: 30 3:30 R O S 3: 30 3:30 R 0 6 3: 30 3: 30 R07 3:3 0 3:30 ROS 3: 30 3: 30 R09 3: 30 3:30 RlO 3: 30 3:30 Rll 3:3 0 3:3 0 R12 3:30 3:30 R29 3: 30 3: 30 R3 0 3:30 3: 30 R31 3:30 3: 30 R32 3: 30 3: 30 R33 3: 30 3: 30 R34 3:30 3: 30 R35 3: 30 3: 30 R36 3:30 3:30 R3 7 3: 30 3: 30 R38 3: 30 3: 30 Du a ne Arnold Ene rg y Cente r Evacuat i o n T i me E s t imate S um mer Weeke n d (3) (4) Midday Good Rain Weather 3:30 3: 30 3:3 0 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3: 30 3: 3 0 3: 30 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3:3 0 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3:30 S umm er Win t er Winter Winter S ummer S umm er M i dweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend (S) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) {11) (12) (13) (14) Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening Midday Good Good Rain Snow Good Rain Snow Good Special Roadway Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact 2-Mile Region 3:30 3: 30 3:30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 5-Mile Region, 2-Mile Region and Keyhole to S Miles 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3:3 0 4: 00 3: 3 0 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3:30 4:00 3:30 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3:30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3:3 0 3: 30 3:3 0 3:3 0 3: 30 3: 30 4: 0 0 3: 3 0 3: 3 0 4: 0 0 3: 3 0 3: 30 3:3 0 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3: 30 3:30 4:00 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3: 30 3: 30 3:3 0 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3:3 0 3:30 3:3 0 3:3 0 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3:3 0 3:30 4: 0 0 3:3 0 3: 30 3:3 0 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 Staged Evacuati o n Mile Region and Keyhole to S Miles 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3:30 3: 3 0 4: 00 3:30 3: 3 0 3:3 0 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 4: 00 3: 30 3:3 0 4:00 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3:3 0 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 4:00 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3:30 3: 30 4: 00 3:3 0 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 3:30 3: 30 4:00 3: 30 3:30 4: 00 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3:3 0 4: 00 3:3 0 3: 3 0 3:30 3: 30 3: 30 3: 30 4: 00 3: 30 3:30 4: 00 3: 30 3: 30 3:30 ES-19 KLD E ngine e rin g , P.C. R ev.a School Atkins Elementary School Center Point Intermedi a t e School (Urbana) Early Beg i nning s Pres c hool/Dayc ar e Kid Zone Dayca r e (Urbana) Shellsburg E leme ntary School Albu rn ett Schools All Saints Catholic School All Saints Daycare All Saints Preschool Apple Kids Marion School District Apple Ki ds -N o elridge Arthur E le mentary School & P reschoo l ASAC -Heart of Iowa Child Care Ascen s i on L u th era n Preschool Bethany Lutheran P r esc hool Bowman Woods E lementary Busy Bee Day Care Inc. Calvery Chr i st i an P reschool Caring Corner Christian Daycare Cedar Valley Christian High School Cedar Valley Christian P re schoo l Cedar Valley Christian School (7-8) Cedar Valley Christian School (K-6) Cedar Valley Montesso r i School Center Point Elementary School (CP) Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Table 8-7. School Evacuation Time Estimates

-Good Weather Travel Dist. Time EPZ Driver Loading Dist.

To Average to EPZ Bdry Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Speed Bdry ETE toTRC Time(min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) BENTON COUNTY SCHOOLS 60 15 3.5 3.8 56 2:15 9.5 60 15 2.5 44.4 4 1:20 16.3 60 1 5 3.5 3.8 56 2:15 9.5 60 15 2.5 44.4 4 1:20 16.3 60 1 5 5.0 46.0 7 1:25 8.0 LINN COUNTY SCHOOLS 60 15 3.6 54.9 4 1:20 15.3 60 15 8.9 3.7 144 3:40 23.0 60 15 8.9 3.7 144 3:40 23.0 60 15 8.9 3.7 144 3:40 23.0 60 15 10.3 4.4 142 3:40 7.9 60 15 9.9 2.4 249 5:25 18.7 60 15 9.0 2.2 245 5:20 18.7 60 15 11.4 13.3 52 2:10 18.7 60 1 5 10.0 6.2 98 2:55 1 8.7 60 1 5 9.2 2.4 234 5: 10 18.7 60 15 9.5 4.4 130 3:25 18.7 60 15 8.2 5.5 90 2:45 18.7 60 15 8.2 2.4 208 4:45 18.7 60 15 12.8 2.7 285 6:00 18.7 60 15 8.5 2.4 209 4:45 18.7 60 15 8.5 2.4 209 4:45 18.7 60 15 8.5 2.4 209 4:45 18.7 60 15 8.5 2.4 209 4:45 18.7 60 15 5.0 1.9 156 3:55 18.7 60 15 2.5 55.0 3 1:20 18.7 ES-20 l Travel Travel Time Time from Dist. from EPZ EPZ EPZ Bdry ETE to Bdry Bdry ETE to toTRC TRC to RC to RC RC (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) 23 2:35 52.7 80 3:35 40 2: 00 16.9 26 1:45 23 2:35 52.7 80 3:35 40 2:00 16.9 26 1:45 20 1:45 16.9 26 1:50 37 2:00 52.7 80 2:40 56 4:35 68.0 102 5:25 56 4:35 68.0 102 5:25 56 4:35 68.0 102 5:25 19 4:00 23.7 36 4:15 45 6:10 22.3 34 6: 00 45 6:05 22.3 34 5:55 45 2:55 22.3 34 2:45 45 3:40 22.3 34 3:30 45 5:55 22.3 34 5:45 45 4:10 22.3 34 4:00 45 3:30 22.3 34 3:20 45 5:30 22.3 34 5:20 45 6:45 22.3 34 6:35 45 5:30 22.3 34 5:20 45 5:30 22.3 34 5:20 45 5:30 22.3 34 5:20 45 5:30 22.3 34 5:20 45 4:40 22.3 34 4:25 45 2:05 22.3 34 1:55 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a School Center Point Urbana High School (CP) Center Point Urbana Middle School (CP) Children Prevail Children's Corner Children's Weekday M inistry-Lovely Lane Child's Discovery Montessori Preschool Cleveland Elementary School Coolidge Elementary School Echo H i ll Elementary Emerson Elementary Erskine Elementary School Essential Montessori School of Hiawatha Excelsior Middle School Five Season L earning Center -Wright (Age 3-5) Five Seasons LC -Viola Gibson Five Seasons Learning Center -Arthur Five Seasons Learning Center -Coolidge (age 3-5) Five Seasons Learning Center -Nixon Four Oaks Day Program Francis Marion In termediate Franklin Middle School Garfield Elementary School Good Shepard Lutheran School K -8th) Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Driver Loading Dist. To Mobilization Time EPZ Bdry Time(min) (min) (mi) 60 15 2.6 60 15 7.6 60 15 9.3 60 15 11.7 60 15 7.5 60 15 7.9 60 15 3.1 60 15 13.3 60 15 10.7 60 15 10.3 60 15 7.2 60 15 10.5 60 15 8.2 60 15 9.9 60 15 12.2 60 15 9.0 60 15 13.3 60 15 12.1 60 15 3.6 60 15 8.8 60 15 8.3 60 15 8.2 60 15 9.9 Travel Time Average to EPZ Speed Bdry ETE (mph) (min) (hr:min) 55.0 3 1:20 55.0 9 1:25 55.0 11 1:30 2.6 275 5:50 2.2 207 4:45 2.2 214 4:50 4.6 41 2:00 3.5 228 5:05 5.6 115 3:10 4.4 142 3:40 3.9 110 3:05 2.5 257 5:35 5.5 90 2:45 2.4 249 5:25 2.6 281 6:00 2.2 245 5:20 3.5 228 5:05 2.6 278 5:55 3.3 66 2:25 6.1 86 2:45 2.2 227 5:05 2.5 201 4:40 2.4 249 5:25 ES-21 Travel Travel Time Time Dist. from Dist. from EPZ EPZ EPZ EPZ Bdry Bdry ETE to Bdry Bdry ETEto toTRC toTRC TRC to RC to RC RC (mi.) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) 18.7 45 2:05 22.3 34 1:55 18.7 45 2:10 22.3 34 2:00 18.7 45 2:15 22.3 34 2:00 18.7 45 6:35 22.3 34 6:25 18.7 45 5:30 22.3 34 5:20 18.7 45 5:35 22.3 34 5:25 18.7 45 2:45 22.3 34 2:30 15.3 37 5:40 52.7 80 6:25 18.7 45 3:55 22.3 34 3:45 18.7 45 4:25 22.3 34 4:15 18.7 45 3:50 22.3 34 3:40 18.7 45 6:20 22.3 34 6:10 18.7 45 3:30 22.3 34 3:20 18.7 45 6:10 22.3 34 6:00 18.7 45 6:45 22.3 34 6:30 18.7 45 6:05 22.3 34 5:55 15.3 37 5:40 52.7 80 6:25 15.3 37 6:30 52.7 80 7:15 15.3 37 3:00 52.7 80 3:45 15.3 37 3:20 52.7 80 4:05 15.3 37 5:40 52.7 80 6:25 15.3 37 5:15 52.7 80 6:00 15.3 37 6:05 52.7 80 6:45 KLD Engineering, P .C. Rev.a School Grant Element ary School/Preschool Grant Wood Elementa ry HACAP Head Start -Jane Boyd HACAP Head Start -Hayes Center HACAP Head Start -Marion HACAP Head Start -Olivet HACAP Head Start -Urban Family HACAP Horizons Hand in Hand -3 5th Avenue Hand in Hand -Hiawatha Hand in Hand -Linn Grove Elementary Hand in Hand -Tower L ane Harding Middle School Har rison Elementary School Harvest Christian DC & Learn i ng Center H iawa tha Eleme ntary School Holloway House L earni ng Center Hoover Elementary School Indian Creek El e m e nta ry School Isaac N ewt on Christian Academy & Preschool Jackson E le men tary School Jefferson Senior High School Johnson Elementary School Josiah's Playground Jungle Friend s Ke nnedy Senior High Sc hool Kenwood Elementa r y School Kid Zone Daycare & Learning Cente r Kids In c. -Alburnett Kid's Inc. -Marion LC Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Driver Loading Mobilization Time Time(min) (min) 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 lS 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 1 5 60 15 Travel Time Dist. To Average to EPZ EPZ Bdry Speed Bdry (mi) (mph) (min) 6.7 3.4 120 7.8 3.9 120 5.5 5.3 63 3.6 5.2 42 10.3 4.4 142 6.4 3.4 112 7.5 2.2 210 5.0 5.2 58 13.8 5.9 140 8.7 2.4 222 12.1 5.8 125 9.7 2.4 241 10.4 2.5 253 4.4 2.9 92 5.9 3.3 108 10.4 2.4 255 10.4 2.5 253 2.3 4.5 3 1 7.2 5.5 79 7.8 2.2 211 3.6 3.0 72 6.1 4.9 75 7.8 3.9 120 6.4 3.4 112 11.2 2.6 264 9.8 2.4 247 10.2 2.5 249 9.4 55.0 11 3.6 54.9 4 11.2 4.4 154 ES-2 2 Travel Travel Time Time Dist. from Dist. from EPZ EPZ EPZ EPZ Bdry Bdry ETEto Bdry Bdry ETEto ETE toTRC toTRC TRC to RC to RC RC (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) 3:15 15.3 37 3:55 52.7 80 4:35 3:15 lS.3 37 3:55 52.7 80 4:35 2:20 1 5.3 37 2:55 52.7 80 3:40 2:00 15.3 37 2:35 5 2.7 80 3:20 3:40 15.3 37 4:15 52.7 80 5:00 3:10 15.3 37 3:45 52.7 80 4:30 4:45 15.3 3 7 5:25 52.7 80 6:05 2:15 15.3 37 2:50 52.7 80 3:35 3:35 15.3 37 4:15 5 2.7 80 4:55 5:00 15.3 37 5:35 52.7 80 6:20 3:20 15.3 37 4:00 52.7 80 4:40 5:20 15.3 37 5:55 52.7 80 6:40 5:30 15.3 37 6:05 52.7 80 6:50 2:50 15.3 37 3:25 52.7 80 4:10 3:05 15.3 37 3:40 52.7 80 4:25 5:30 15.3 37 6:10 52.7 80 6:50 5:30 15.3 37 6:05 52.7 8 0 6:50 1:50 15.3 37 2:25 52.7 80 3:10 2:35 15.3 37 3:1 5 S2.7 80 3:55 4:50 lS.3 37 5:25 52.7 80 6:10 2:30 15.3 3 7 3:05 52.7 80 3:50 2:30 15.3 37 3:10 52.7 80 3:50 3:15 15.3 37 3:55 52.7 80 4:35 3:10 15.3 37 3:45 52.7 80 4:30 5:40 15.3 37 6:20 52.7 80 7:00 5:25 15.3 37 6:00 52.7 80 6:45 5:25 15.3 37 6:05 52.7 80 6:45 1:30 15.3 37 2:05 52.7 80 2:50 1:20 15.3 37 2:00 52.7 80 2:40 3:50 15.3 37 4:30 52.7 80 5:10 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.O School Kid's Kampus Learning Center Ki dsPoint Downtown Learning Center & Preschool Ki dsPoint North Learning Cen ter & P r es c hool Kinder Kollege Kin dercare Learning Center -West K indercare Learning Center #292 La Petite Academy Lasalle Intermediate School Lily Pad Daycare & P reschool Linn Count y Child Development Center Linn Grove Elementary Linn-Mar Compas s Program Linn-Mar High School Linn-Mar High School Success Program Little Cupcakes Child Care Litt l e Lamb s Christian P rescho ol Little Learners Inc. Little People Dayc are & Learning Center Madison Elementary School Marion High School McKinley Middle School Metro Hig h School Metro Parent -Child Center Mother Goose Daycare Mother Goose Learning Center My Iman M o ntessori P r e s chool Ni x on Elementary School Noah's Ark Pre sc hool Duane Arnold Energy Cente r Evacuation Time Estimate Driver Loading Mobilization Time Time(min) (min) *I 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 1 5 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 1 5 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 Travel Time Dist. To Average to EPZ EPZ Bdry Speed Bdry (mi) (mph) (min) 5.0 1.9 156 11.7 2.6 275 3.5 3.0 70 12.8 12.8 60 12.8 2.7 285 11.8 4.6 154 6.6 4.9 81 12.1 2.6 278 4.2 2.8 89 5.2 5.7 56 7.8 5.5 85 7.8 5.5 85 7.8 4.4 108 1.9 4.6 25 10.4 4.6 137 10.5 2.5 257 2.5 55.0 3 5.5 4.8 69 10.0 7.1 85 5.0 5.2 58 4.1 5.2 48 4.1 5.2 48 2.3 4.5 31 10.5 4.5 140 3.1 4.6 41 12.1 2.6 278 2.9 12.2 15 ES-23 Travel Travel Time Time Dist. from Dist. from EPZ EPZ EPZ EPZ Bdry Bdry ETEto Bdry Bdry ETEto ETE toTRC toTRC TRC to RC to RC RC (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) 52.7 80 3:25 3:55 15.3 37 4:30 52.7 80 5:15 5:50 15.3 37 6:30 52.7 80 7:10 2:25 15.3 37 3:05 52.7 80 3:45 2:15 15.3 37 2:55 52.7 80 3:35 6:00 15.3 37 6:40 52.7 80 7:20 3:50 15.3 37 4:30 52.7 80 5:10 2:40 15.3 37 3: 15 5 2.7 80 4:00 5:55 15.3 37 6:30 52.7 80 7: 15 2:45 15.3 37 3:25 52.7 80 4:05 2:15 15.3 37 2:50 52.7 80 3:35 2:40 15.3 37 3:20 52.7 80 4:00 2:40 15.3 37 3:20 52.7 80 4:00 3:05 15.3 37 3:40 52.7 80 4:25 1:40 15.3 37 2:20 52.7 80 3:00 3:35 15.3 37 4:10 52.7 80 4:55 5:35 15.3 37 6:10 52.7 80 6:55 1:20 1 5.3 37 1:55 52.7 80 2:40 2:25 15.3 37 3:05 52.7 80 3:45 2:40 1 5.3 37 3:20 52.7 80 4: 00 2:15 15.3 37 2:50 52.7 80 3:35 2:05 15.3 37 2:40 52.7 80 3:25 2:05 15.3 37 2:40 52.7 80 3:25 1:50 15.3 37 2:25 5 2.7 80 3:10 3:35 15.3 37 4:15 52.7 80 4:55 2:00 15.3 37 2:35 52.7 80 3:20 5:55 15.3 37 6:30 52.7 80 7:15 1:30 15.3 37 2:10 52.7 80 2:50 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.O School Novak Elementary School Oak Ridge Middle School Our Little Haven Pierce Elementary School Pointer Pup Preschool (Center Point) Polk Alternative School Regis Middle School Rockwell Collins Child Development Center D Roosevelt Middle School Share & Care Christian Preschool St. James Kids Club Daycare St. Joseph Catholic School St. Joseph Early Childhood Daycare St. Joseph Preschool St. Jude's Daycare St. Jude's Elementary School St. Jude's Preschool St. Ludmila Catholic Center St. Ludmila Daycare St. Ludmila Preschool St. Matthew Preschool St. Matthew School St. Matthew's Child Care Program St. Paul's Parents Day Out St. Paul's Preschool FOCUS St. Pius X Child Care Program St. Pius X Preschool St. Pius X School Starry Elementary Summit Preschool Summit School (Pre-K -6th) Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Driver Loading Mobilization Time Time(min) (min) 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 60 15 Travel Time Dist. To Average to EPZ EPZ Bdry Speed Bdry (mi) (mph) (min) mTm 10.1 5.6 109 5.8 4.4 80 9.5 2.4 240 2.6 55.0 3 7.5 3.1 147 8.6 2.5 208 12.8 2.7 285 6.4 3.4 112 2.3 4.5 31 4.4 2.9 92 12.7 4.5 168 12.7 4.5 168 12.7 4.5 168 6.5 4.9 80 6.5 4.9 80 6.5 4.9 80 4.5 5.2 52 4.5 5.2 52 4.5 5.2 52 8.7 2.2 237 8.7 2.2 237 8.7 2.2 237 7.5 2.2 210 7.5 2.2 210 7.5 2.3 193 10.1 2.5 246 10.1 2.5 246 10.1 6.2 99 10.4 2.5 253 10.4 2.5 253 ES-24 Travel Travel Time Time Dist. from Dist. from EPZ EPZ EPZ EPZ Bdry Bdry ETE to Bdry Bdry ETE to ETE toTRC toTRC TRC to RC to RC RC (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) 37 3:25 52.7 80 4:05 3:05 15.3 37 3:45 52.7 80 4:25 2:35 15.3 37 3:15 52.7 80 3:55 5:15 15.3 37 5:55 52.7 80 6:35 1:20 15.3 37 1:55 52.7 80 2:40 3:45 15.3 37 4:20 52.7 80 5:05 4:45 15.3 37 5:20 52.7 80 6:05 6:00 15.3 37 6:40 52.7 80 7:20 3:10 15.3 37 3:45 52.7 80 4:30 1:50 15.3 37 2:25 52.7 80 3:10 2:50 15.3 37 3:25 52.7 80 4:10 4:05 15.3 37 4:40 52.7 80 5:25 4:05 15.3 37 4:40 52.7 80 5:25 4:05 15.3 37 4:40 52.7 80 5:25 2:35 15.3 37 3:15 52.7 80 3:55 2:35 15.3 37 3:15 52.7 80 3:55 2:35 15.3 37 3:15 52.7 80 3:55 2:10 15.3 37 2:45 52.7 80 3:30 2:10 15.3 37 2:45 52.7 80 3:30 2:10 15.3 37 2:45 52.7 80 3:30 5:15 15.3 37 5:50 52.7 80 6:35 5:15 15.3 37 5:50 52.7 80 6:35 5:15 15.3 37 5:50 52.7 80 6:35 4:45 15.3 37 5:25 52.7 80 6:05 4:45 15.3 37 5:25 52.7 80 6:05 4:30 15.3 37 5:05 52.7 80 5:50 5:25 15.3 37 6:00 52.7 80 6:45 5:25 15.3 37 6:00 52.7 80 6:45 2:55 15.3 37 3:35 52.7 80 4:15 5:30 15.3 37 6:05 52.7 80 6:50 5:30 15.3 37 6:05 52.7 80 6:50 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a I L School Taft Middle and Alternative School Taylor Elementary School/Preschool Teddy Bear Childcare Center The Arc of East Central Iowa The Cedar Rapids Day School The Hiawatha Day School The Robyn's Nest Trinity Lane Preschool Trinity Lutheran Childcare Trinity Lutheran School District Truman Elementary School Van Buren Elementary School Vernon Middle School Viola Gibson Elementary School Washington High School We Teach 2 Wee Wisdom (Marion) Westfield Elementary Wilkins Elementary Wilson Middle School Wright Elementary School Xavier High School YMCA-Stoney Point Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Driver Loading Mobilization Time Time(min) (min) 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS 60 lS Travel Time Dist. To Average to EPZ EPZ Bdry Speed Bdry (mi) (mph) (min) 13.2 2.8 198 6.7 S.3 77 s.o S.2 S8 9.7 2.4 239 10.4 2.4 2SS 8.4 2.4 210 9.3 2.8 198 6.0 2.6 140 6.0 2.6 140 2.9 12.2 lS 11.9 3.2 224 10.S 6.2 103 12.2 2.6 281 9.2 2.3 24S S.9 4.8 74 S.8 S.6 63 10.S S.6 113 S.8 4.4 80 7.0 S.3 80 9.9 2.5 240 12.0 2.6 277 1.4 1.8 48 Maximum for EPZ: Average for EPZ: ES-2S Travel Travel Time Time Dist. from Dist. from EPZ EPZ EPZ EPZ Bdry Bdry ETE to Bdry Bdry ETE to ETE toTRC toTRC TRC to RC to RC RC (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min) lS.3 37 2:30 S2.7 80 3:15 4:35 lS.3 37 5:10 S2.7 80 5:55 2:35 lS.3 37 3:10 S2.7 80 3:55 2:15 lS.3 37 2:50 S2.7 80 3:35 5:15 lS.3 37 5:55 S2.7 80 6:35 5:30 lS.3 3 7 6:10 S2.7 80 6:50 4:45 lS.3 37 5:25 S2.7 80 6:05 4:35 lS.3 37 5:10 S2.7 80 5:55 3:35 lS.3 37 4:15 S2.7 80 4:55 3:35 lS.3 37 4:15 S2.7 80 4:55 1:30 lS.3 37 2:10 S2.7 80 2:50 5:00 18.7 4S 5:45 22.3 34 5:35 3:00 18.7 4S 3:45 22.3 34 3:35 6:00 18.7 4S 6:45 22.3 34 6:30 5:20 18.7 4S 6:05 22.3 34 5:55 2:30 18.7 4S 3:15 22.3 34 3:05 2:20 18.7 4S 3:05 22.3 34 2:55 3:10 18.7 4S 3:55 22.3 34 3:45 2:35 18.7 4S 3:20 22.3 34 3:10 2:35 18.7 4S 3:20 22.3 34 3:10 5:15 18.7 4S 6:00 22.3 34 5:50 5:55 18.7 4S 6:40 22.3 34 6:30 2:05 11.9 29 2:35 77.2 116 Maximum: Maximum: Average: Average: KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Route Bus Mobilization Number Number (min) 1 1 90 1 2 120 2 1 90 2 2&3 120 3 1 90 3 2 105 3 3&4 120 4 1 90 4 2 120 5 1 90 5 2&3 120 6 1 90 6 2 120 7 1&2 90 7 3&4 95 7 5&6 100 7 7&8 105 7 9 & 10 110 7 11 & 12 120 8 1&2 90 8 3&4 95 8 5&6 100 8 7&8 105 8 9 & 10 110 8 11 & 12 120 9 1&2 90 9 3&4 95 9 5&6 100 9 7&8 105 Duane Arnold Energy Cente r Evacuation Time Estimate Table 8-11. Transit-Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates

-Good Weather One-Wave Route Travel Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Length Speed Time Time ETE to R.C. R.C. Unload (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) 30.1 51.2 35 30 2:35 20.2 48 5 30.1 52.9 34 30 3:05 20.2 48 5 18.8 4.4 255 30 6:15 21.8 52 5 18.8 4.6 243 30 6:35 21.8 52 5 15.5 7.5 124 30 4:05 22.0 53 5 15.5 7.5 125 30 4:20 22.0 53 5 15.5 7.7 120 30 4:30 22.0 53 5 17.8 47.5 22 30 2:25 15.4 37 5 17.8 51.0 21 30 2:55 15.4 37 5 9.2 4 1.1 13 30 2:15 2.8 7 5 9.2 37.8 15 30 2:45 9.2 22 5 25.8 55.0 28 3 0 2:30 20.2 48 5 25.8 55.0 28 30 3:00 20.2 48 5 32.8 8.6 229 30 5:50 21.8 52 5 32.8 8.7 225 30 5:50 21.8 52 5 32.8 8.8 224 30 5:55 21.8 52 5 32.8 8.9 221 30 6:00 21.8 52 5 3 2.8 9.0 219 30 6:00 21.8 52 5 32.8 9.3 212 30 6:05 21.8 52 5 23.9 6.2 232 30 5:55 21.8 52 5 23.9 6.2 230 30 5:55 21.8 52 5 23.9 6.4 225 30 5:55 21.8 52 5 23.9 6.4 223 30 6:00 21.8 52 5 23.9 6.5 220 30 6:00 21.8 52 5 23.9 6.8 211 30 6:05 21.8 52 5 18.9 3.6 313 30 7:15 21.8 52 5 18.9 3.8 297 30 7:05 21.8 52 5 18.9 3.9 29 5 3 0 7:05 21.8 5 2 5 18.9 3.9 292 30 7:10 21.8 52 5 E5-26 Two-Wave Route Driver Travel Pickup Rest Time Time ETE (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 10 97 30 5:50 10 97 30 6:20 10 89 30 9:25 10 89 30 9:45 10 92 30 7:15 10 93 30 7:35 10 91 30 7:40 10 71 30 5:00 10 71 30 5:30 10 35 30 3:45 1 0 49 30 4:45 10 92 30 5:40 10 93 30 6:10 10 114 30 9:25 10 114 3 0 9:25 10 111 30 9:25 10 109 30 9: 30 10 109 30 9: 30 10 108 30 9:35 10 100 30 9:15 10 100 3 0 9:15 10 100 30 9:15 10 97 30 9:15 10 97 30 9:15 10 96 30 9:20 10 90 30 10:25 10 90 30 10:15 10 90 30 10:15 10 90 30 10:20 KLD Engineering , P.C. Rev.0 Route Bus Mobilization Number Number (min) 9 9 & 10 110 9 11 120 1 0 1&2 90 1 0 3&4 95 10 5&6 100 1 0 7&8 105 10 9 110 1 0 10 & 11 120 11 1&2 90 11 3&4 95 11 5&6 100 11 7&8 105 11 9 & 10 110 11 11 120 12 1&2 90 1 2 3&4 95 1 2 5&6 100 12 7&8 105 12 9 & 10 110 1 2 11 & 12 120 13 1&2 90 13 3&4 95 13 5&6 100 13 7&8 105 13 9 & 10 110 13 11 120 14 1 90 14 2 105 1 4 3&4 120 15 1 90 15 2&3 120 Duane Arnold Ene r gy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Route Length (miles) 18.9 18.9 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 12.7 12.7 12.7 15.9 15.9 One-Wave Route Travel Pickup Speed Time Time ETE (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) 3.9 289 30 7:10 4.0 284 30 7:15 2.9 240 30 6:00 2.9 239 30 6:05 3.0 230 3 0 6:00 3.0 229 30 6:05 3.0 227 30 6:10 3.2 214 30 6:05 3.4 301 30 7:05 3.6 291 30 7:00 3.6 289 30 7:00 3.6 287 30 7:05 3.6 285 30 7:05 4.0 260 30 6:50 8.9 111 30 3:55 9.1 109 30 3:55 9.0 110 30 4:00 9.2 108 30 4:05 9.2 108 30 4:10 9.3 107 30 4:20 5.8 155 30 4:35 5.9 154 30 4:40 5.9 153 30 4:45 6.0 151 3 0 4:50 6.1 149 30 4:50 6.2 147 30 5:00 32.2 24 30 2:25 34.6 22 30 2:40 36.0 21 30 2:55 48.0 20 30 2:20 50.2 19 30 2:50 ES-27 Two-Wave Travel Route Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup to R.C. R.C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 21.8 52 5 10 90 30 10:20 21.8 52 5 10 90 30 10:25 2 1.8 52 5 10 8 1 30 9:00 21.8 52 5 10 81 30 9:05 21.8 52 5 10 81 30 9:00 21.8 52 5 10 81 30 9:05 21.8 52 5 10 8 1 30 9:10 21.8 5 2 5 10 81 30 9:05 21.8 5 2 5 10 87 30 10:10 21.8 52 5 10 8 7 30 10:05 21.8 5 2 5 10 87 30 10:05 21.8 52 5 10 8 7 30 10:10 21.8 52 5 10 8 7 30 10:10 21.8 52 5 10 87 30 9:55 5 4.9 132 5 10 1 7 0 30 9: 45 54.9 132 5 10 170 30 9: 45 5 4.9 132 5 10 167 30 9: 45 54.9 132 5 10 166 30 9:50 5 4.9 132 5 10 165 30 9:55 54.9 132 5 10 165 30 1 0:05 54.9 132 5 10 163 30 1 0:15 54.9 132 5 10 163 30 10:20 54.9 132 5 10 16 3 30 10: 25 54.9 132 5 10 163 30 10:30 54.9 132 5 10 163 30 10: 30 54.9 132 5 10 163 30 10:40 54.9 132 5 10 215 30 9:00 54.9 132 5 10 211 30 9:10 54.9 132 5 10 204 30 9:20 15.4 37 5 10 69 30 4:55 15.4 37 5 10 69 30 5:25 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.O Route Bus Mobilization Number Number (min) 16 1&2 90 16 3&4 95 16 5&6 100 16 7&8 110 16 9 120 17 1 90 17 2 95 17 3 100 17 4 105 17 5 110 17 6&7 115 17 8&9 120 18 1 90 18 2 95 18 3 100 18 4 105 18 5 110 18 6&7 115 18 8&9 120 19 1 90 19 2 95 1 9 3 100 19 4 110 20 1 90 20 2 95 20 3 100 20 4 110 20 5 120 2 1 1 90 2 1 2 95 21 3 100 Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Route Length (miles) 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 18.8 18.8 18.8 18.8 18.8 18.8 18.8 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 9.9 9.9 9.9 9.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 12.6 12.6 12.6 One-Wave Route Travel Pickup Speed Time Time ETE (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) 3.2 337 30 7:40 3.5 308 30 7:15 3.5 306 30 7:20 3.6 302 30 7:25 3.6 297 30 7:30 3.4 330 30 7:30 3.4 329 30 7:35 3.4 328 30 7:40 3.5 327 30 7:45 3.5 325 30 7:45 3.7 303 30 7:30 3.7 301 30 7:35 3.4 320 30 7:20 3.4 319 30 7:25 3.5 314 30 7:25 3.5 312 30 7:30 3.5 309 30 7:30 3.5 308 30 7:35 3.5 306 30 7:40 3.1 192 30 5:15 3.1 190 30 5:15 3.2 188 30 5:20 3.4 174 30 5:15 3.8 218 30 5:40 3.9 216 30 5:45 3.9 213 30 5:45 4.2 200 30 5:40 4.3 195 30 5:45 4.0 189 30 5:10 4.0 188 30 5:15 4.1 184 30 5:15 ES-28 :, Two-Wave Travel Route Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup to R.C. R.C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr: min) 64.5 155 5 10 193 30 14:15 64.5 155 5 10 193 30 13:50 64.5 155 5 10 193 30 13:55 64.5 155 5 10 193 30 14:00 64.5 155 5 10 193 30 14:05 64.5 155 5 10 194 30 14:05 64.5 155 5 10 194 30 14:10 64.5 155 5 10 194 30 14:15 64.5 155 5 10 194 30 14:20 64.5 155 5 10 194 30 14:20 64.5 155 5 10 194 30 14:05 64.5 155 5 10 194 30 14:10 64.6 155 5 10 194 30 13:55 64.6 155 5 10 194 30 14:00 6 4.6 155 5 1 0 194 30 14:00 64.6 155 5 1 0 194 30 14:05 64.6 155 5 10 194 30 14: 05 64.6 155 5 10 194 30 14:10 64.6 155 5 10 194 30 14: 15 76.9 185 5 10 212 30 12:40 76.9 185 5 10 212 30 12:40 76.9 185 5 10 212 30 12:45 76.9 185 5 10 212 30 12:40 76.9 185 5 10 219 30 13:10 76.9 185 5 10 219 30 13:15 76.9 185 5 10 219 30 13:15 76.9 185 5 10 219 30 13:10 76.9 185 5 10 219 30 13:15 64.6 155 5 10 185 30 11:35 64.6 155 5 10 185 30 11:40 64.6 155 5 10 185 30 11:40 KLD Engineering , P.C. Rev.O Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation T i me E s timate ES-29 KLD Eng i neering , P.C. Rev.a

/ Legend

DAEC ('.jl Subarea E vac uate Benton C'Oll!JJ JI \.,-:, 2, S , 10 Mile Rings --Wind Sector Boundary Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate Prai rieburg \ Figure H-8. Region ROS ES-30 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a _J

/J Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages .. °fff iNN COUNTY

' 1' Ti -I 111/Jj'#AQEME#T

PREPARE *RESPOND +RECOVER *MITIGATE _ AGENCY : REQUEST TO MODIFY BOUNDARY FOR NEXTERA ENERGY DUANE ARNOLD EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE SUBAREA24 Linn County Emergency Management Commission June 17, 2016 Serving all of Linn County and the Communities of: Alburnett , Bertram , Cedar Rap i ds. Center Po i nt , Central Cit y. Coggon , E l y, Fairfax , H i awatha , Usbon , Marion , M t. Vernon , Palo , Pra i rieburg , Rob i ns , Springville , Walker, Walford 6301 Kirkwood Blvd. S.W., Cedar Rapids , IA 52404 Office: 319-892-6500 Fax: 319-398-5316 www.llnncounty-ema.org Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 29 Pages TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 1. Description of Proposed Boundary Change 2. History of the Current EPZ Boundary Why Change the Current EPZ Boundary?

Chasing Corporate Boundaries

-Cities 3. Advantage of Using Highway 30 as Subarea 24 EPZ Boundary 4. College Community School DistricUKi r kwood Community College 5. Eliminate Risk of Economic Disruption

6. Impact on Evacuation Routes , Evacuation Time , and Affected Populations

7. Action by ORO and Elected Officials

8. Conclusion APPENDIX A -Resolutions and Letters of Support APPENDIX B -Evacuation Time Estimate for Emergency Planning Zone Change 3 5 6 6 6 6 8 9 10 10 10 12 13 Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages EPZ Boundary Change for DAEC Executive Summary Request The Linn County Emergency Management Commission is submitting this request to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to modify the NextEra Energy Duane Arnold Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The r equest will be to designate H i ghway 30 as the southern boundary of subarea 24. Currently , Highway 30 is the southern boundary for the EPZ with the e xception of subarea 24. Th e portion of subarea 24 that would be removed from the current e mergency planning zon e is 2 to 5 m i les (depending on shortest and longest distance) outside of the 10-mile bou n dary establ i shed under federal regulations. T h e area to be removed is gene r ally described as that area south of Highway 30 , bounded to t h e west by Edgewood Rd., to the south by 76 1 h Ave. SW , and to the east by C. St. SW , Cedar Rapids , Iowa. Figure 1 -Current EPZ Map ....... ...-.. .... c:::::::J1 11 ...... -c::::::J ...........

_ c:::::J I-* OJ c:::::::J

[Wrl*1* Figure 2 -Proposed EPZ Map Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages When the current EPZ map (see Figure 1) was last updated in the mid-1990s , the area south of Highway US 30 followed the City of Cedar Rapids corporate limits as they existed at that time. The city limits of Cedar Rapids now extend beyond the area bounded by Edgewood Rd., 76 1 h Street and C Street as indicated by those gray shaded areas in the " Proposed" map (see Figure 2). These " outside-the EPZ" city areas and any future annexations are well beyond the 10 mile federally mandated emergency planning zone. Using Highway 30 as the southern boundary for subarea 24: 1. Will provide a more consistent and clear description for Emergency Alert System notifications and other public information messages.

2. Will provide a stable boundary for the EPZ in the event of future annexations by the City of Cedar Rapids. Current city limits already extend beyond the current subarea 24 boundary. 3. Will be significantly wider than 76 1 h Avenue SW and will make a continuous boundary along the entire southern bounda r y of the EPZ. This will aid messaging , planning , and traffic control. 4. Will remove the disruption to the College Community School District due to the precautionary relocation of students and staff along with the associated family reunification process as well as for Kirkwood Community College. 5. Will eliminate the potential for unnecessary economic losses caused by workflow disruptions for several large industries associated with area evacuation or place protective orders for the EPZ. Action by ORO and Elected Officials In addition to the Linn County Emergency Management Commission

's " Resolution Requesting Modification", all of the governing entities with concurrent jurisdiction over the proposed area to be removed have provided a resolution or letter of support for this requested change along with additional public entities: Governing bodies with concurrent jurisdiction

Linn County Board of Supervisors (Letter of Support)

City of Cedar Rapids (Resolution of Support) Additional letters of support:

College Community Schools (Letter of Support)

Kirkwood Community College (Letter of Support) End of Executive Summary -

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages 1. Description of Proposed Boundary Change The Linn County (Iowa) Emergency Management Commission is submitting this request to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to modify the NextEra Energy Duane Arnold Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The request is to designate Highway 30 as the southern boundary for subarea 24. c:::J ................

c:::::JCJ1-c1tt c:::::J ....... Proposed Modification According to the Linn County GIS Department, subarea 24 consists of 12,053 acres which would be reduced by 7,411 acres to a final size of 4 , 642 acres. This would result in a reduction of 5,222 permanent residents. Residential/Multi

-residential accounts for 10% of the area to be removed. Additional information on population demographics can be found in Appendix B. Percent of Total Area being Acres Summed proposed for removal Total being removed from Sub Area 24 4610 AGRICULTURAL 1520 33% RESIDENTIAL/

MULTIRESIDENTIAL 465 100/o EXEMPT 640 14% COMMERCIAL 854 19% INDUSTRIAL 645 14% Public ROW 486 11% Total of classifications 4610 100%

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages Using Highway 30 as subarea 24's southern boundary would provide a clearer description and would be consistent with the use of Highway 30 as a boundary in other Emergency Alert System notifications and messaging to the public. The current EAS southern boundary description is very long. See the next section for description of subarea 24. The current description of subarea 24 that is in use in plans , procedures , and which is broadcast in applicable EAS messages is as follows: SUBAREA 24: Iowa 1518 from US 301218 northeast to the Cedar River; The Cedar River and C Street from Iowa 1518 south to US 30; C Street Road from US 30 south to 76th Avenue; 76th Avenue from C Street Road west to Edgewood Road , including College Community Schools' main campus; Edgewood Road from 76th Avenue north to US 301218; US 301218 from Edgewood Road west to Iowa 1518 The description of subarea 24 that would be used in plans , procedures, and messaging should this modification request be granted is as follows: SUBAREA 24: Iowa 1518 from US 301218 northeast to the Cedar River; The Cedar River and C Street from Iowa 1518 south to US 30; US 301218 from C Street west to Iowa 1518 2. History of the Current EPZ Boundary In 1991, working with FEMA, the EPZ boundary was change to better enhance landmark descriptors of subareas, by using the corporate boundaries of Cedar Rapids and Marion. Why Change the Current EPZ Boundary?

Changing the southern border of Subarea 24 will provide a stable boundary for the EPZ in the event of future annexations by the City of Cedar Rapids. Currently the city limits already extend well beyond the current boundary of Subarea 24. Chasing Corporate Boundaries

-Cities When the EPZ map was last updated in the mid-1990s the area south of Highway US 30 followed the then current City of Cedar Rapids corporate limits. There were two other cities with corporate boundaries on the EPZ edge -the cities of Marion and Urbana. Marion, Urbana , and Cedar Rapids have all seen extensive changes to their corporate boundaries since the mid-1990s. The corporate boundary of Marion has increased and has expanded to the east of Highway 13 outside of the current EPZ boundary. Marion's businesses, industries and residents east of Highway 13 are not included in the EPZ. 3. Advantage of Using Highway 30 as Subarea 24 EPZ Boundary 76 1 h Avenue SW, a municipal arterial roadway , splits the College Community School District and Kirkwood Community College campuses. There is also nearby residential housing. U.S. Highway 30 is a four-lane divided highway with interchange controlled access.

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 29 Pages Area t o be r emo v ed from subarea 24 Kirkwood Blvd SW loo king west along 76"' Ave Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages Kirkwood Blvd SW looking west along U.S. Highway 30 U.S. Highway 30 is an identifiable boundary to control traffic and access. As a four-lane divided highway with wide shoulders, the shoulders provide a safer location for law enforcement pe r sonnel and vehicles , as well as providing a better safe zone for vehicles that may break down in the event of an evacuation. As we saw in the flood of 2008, on Interstate 380 , the wide shoulders of this four-lane divided roadway allowed emergency vehicles to have their own lane. 4. College Community School District/Kirkwood Community College 76 1 h Avenue SW, splits the College Community School District and Kirkwood Community College campuses. The southern boundary of subarea 24 was drawn to include the College Community campus that lies south of 76 1 h Avenue. Growth within the school district has caused the addition of a new middle school that lies outside the EPZ boundaries. The current Linn County Radiological Emergency Response Plan directs that during a site area emergency the precautionary measure is for all of the College Community School students on both sides of 76 1 h Avenue SW and Kirkwood Blvd to be bussed to West High School in Iowa City , if the prevailing wind conditions are such that subarea 24 could potentially be affected and schools are in session. The proposed new boundary using Highway 30 as the southern border for subarea 24 would remove all College Community School Districts' buildings from the emergency planning zone. Therefore , ch i ldren , staff, and parents would not be subject to relocation. Similarly , with the proposed modification, the Kirkwood Community College campus which has grown since the 1990s will no longer be split by the EPZ boundary. There is no apparent reason to have the College Community School District within the EPZ other than the inclusion caused by the city limits of the 1990s. As indicated in the map below ,

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 29 Pages College Community Schools are at a farther distance from the Duane Arnold Energy Center located near Palo than other school districts which are currently outside the emergency planning zone (see figure below). The main campus of the school district is 15.1 miles from the DAEC plant , while Central City School District , which is not in the EPZ Boundary is 14.8 miles from the plant , and the North Linn School District campus is 14.4 miles away. 5. Eliminate Risk of Economic Disruption The area that would no longer be i ncluded in the EPZ with the requested modification contains a large area of commercial and industrial properties.

33% of the area consists of industrial/commercial.

All of these properties are beyond the 10 mile radius planning area. Several of these properties contain large, complex industries that have international presences.

Moving the southern boundary from 76 1 h Ave SW to U.S. Highway 30 will el i minate the risk of disruption to their continuous operations , caused by a shelter-in-place or evacuation protective action recommendation , which would result in a negative economic impact. Examples of large international industries that would be impacted by this modification are: ADM (formerly Arthur-Daniels-Midlands) is an international corporation. ADM -Cedar Rapids has provided a letter in support of the boundary change. ADM -Cedar Rapids processes 300 ,

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages 000 bushels of corn daily with an annual output of 275 million gallons of biofuels.

The plant has 471 employees.

Red Star Yeast Company LLC (RSYC), a leader in the Yeast Manufacturing Industry, is a joint venture between Lesaffre Yeast Corporation (France) and ADM. Red Star Yeast operates a state of the art facility that opened its doors in 2005 in Cedar Rapids, IA as the largest fresh yeast manufacturing facility in North America. Red Star Yeast has provided a letter in supporl of the boundary change. 6. Impact on Evacuation Routes, Evacuation Time, and Affected Populations KLD Engineering, P.C. performed a preliminary Phase I review of the impact of the proposed EPZ Boundary change on evacuation routes, evacuation time estimates (ETE), and impacted populations.

A Phase II ETE update will be completed prior to final FEMA approval.

The complete Phase I Report can be found in Attachment B of this request. Conclusions reached by KLD were: "The EPZ population (all population groups) decreases by 17,301 people (Table 1) as a result of the proposed EPZ change. This decrease in population results in 9, 116 fewer evacuating vehicles (Table 1 ). The decrease in population and evacuating vehicles results in a decrease in 90th percentile ETE for the full EPZ (Region R03) ranging from 15 to 20 minutes, and a decrease in 1 OOth percentile ETE for Region R03 ranging from 25 to 40 minutes (see Table 3). The ETE for the 2-mile region (Region R01) and 5-mile region (Region R02) are not impacted by the EPZ change, which is to be expected as the porlion of Subarea 24 to be removed is located well beyond the 5-mile radius of the plant." 7. Action by ORO and Elected Officials The Linn County Emergency Management Commission represents all of the cities and the county within the geographic area of Linn County, Iowa and annually approves the Linn County Radiological Emergency Response Plan. The Commission adopted a resolution requesting the modification to subarea 24 on January 19, 2016, see Appendix A. In addition to the Linn County Emergency Management Commission's "Resolution Requesting Modification", all of the governing entities with concurrent jurisdiction over the proposed area to be removed have provided a resolution or letter of support for this requested change along with additional public entities:

Governing bodies with concurrent jurisdiction:

Linn County Board of Supervisors (Letter of Support)

City of Cedar Rapids (Resolution of Support) Additional letters of support:

College Community Schools (Letter of Support)

Kirkwood Community College (Letter of Support) 8. Conclusion The Linn County (Iowa) Emergency Management Commission is submitting this request to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to modify the NextEra Energy Duane Arnold Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The request is to designate Highway 30 as the southern boundary for subarea 24. This request will not negatively impact radiological plans and procedures in place which serve to provide prompt and effective actions taken to protect the public in case of an incident at the Duane Arnold Energy Center. As explained in this request, there are significant advantages that will occur as a result of granting this request to modify the EPZ boundary.

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages APPENDIX A -Resolutions and Letters of Support -------------

Page 12

. . .. Attachment 4: NG'."17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy CfJnter TSCR-165,29 Pages . LINN COUNTY EMERGENCY IVlANj.\GEiVJENT CQIVjMISSIO.N RESO_LUTION NO:* 201.6-002 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REQUESTING FEMA TO ESTABLISHHiGHWAY 30 AS SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF SUB AREA 24 IN EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE .. " -. . . . . . . . . .. *.. " . *.* ..... * *.* . , .. ' _., . .. .. ... . . . . . . . . . *. . . . . . WHEREAS, the current boundary the Duane Arnold Energy Genter. emergency planning zone*. was last updated in the mid-1990s arid followed.the then current city lirnits of the .City of Cedar Rapids; and, * * * . * * * * .

this establishedthe south em ):>ound9ry for the emergency planning (E.PZ)as .* *. Highway 30 except fa( sub area 24; and, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . . . . . . . .... . .. WHEREAS, incorporated of cedar Rapids ri6w extend the bourldaries area .. 24; arid, * * * * * * *

WHEREAS, ef)tablishing Highway pO the:squtherh boundary of sqb area 24 wHI crea:te a** . consistent southern boundary forthe entire emergency planning zone; will provide a stable boundary for the EPZ in the event of future will remqve the potential for disruptions to operations for schools, businesses and industries currently Within SUb area24 that are O(Jtside*

.. of the.10 !nlle pfapi:1ing area required by Fl;MA; and, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '.* . . WHEREAS, the ofsub area 24 to be removed from the EPZ two to three niiles beyond the * .10 mile planning area required by FEMA; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Linh County Emergency Management Commission that; . . . . -. . . . . . . . .

The Linn County Eniergency Management Comniission hereby that the Federal . *Emergency Management Agency mqdification of the emergency zone for the .Duarie Arn'ofd Energy Center to establish Highway 30 as the southern boundary In sub area 24. . *. " . . ........ _. . . . ' .

2016, **.. * * * * * * * * * * *** * * **.* .* Brian Gardner, Chair * * *. .. . . *.: . ' ,: ' .... ',:* :: .. :: . : .. :: . .... .. .. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Hesolutior:l Number 2016-001 duly aoopted by"the Unn Ccit.irity Emergency Management Comrriissfon.

. * *. * * * *. * *. * * * * * * * * *

Vote: Ayes:

Nos:

Abstain /6 .* 19F .=-tf:Y. _ _j

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages RESOLUTION NO. 0274-03-16 FIR FIR0308-0009 WHEREAS, the current boundary for the Duane Arnold Energy Center emergency planning zone was*1ast updated in the mid-1990s and followed the then current city limits of the City of Cedar Rapids; and WHEREAS, this established the southern boundary for the emergency planning zone (EPZ) as Highway 30 except for Subarea 24, and WHEREAS, incorporated-areas.of Cedar Rapids now extend outside the boundaries of Subarea 24, and WHEREAS, establishing Highway 30 as the southern boundary of Subarea 24 will create a consistent southern boundary for the entire emergency planning zone; will provide a stable boundary for the EPZ in the event of future annexations; will remove the potential for disruptions to operations for schools,.

and industries .currently within Subarea 24 that are beyond the 10.mile planning area required by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC); and, WHEREAS, *the area* of Subarea 24 to be removed from the EPZ is two to five miles beyond the 10 mile planning area required by the (NRC); NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA, the City Council for the City of Cedar Rapids supports the request by the Linn County Emergency Management Commission to the Federal Emergency Management Agency to 111odify the radiological emergency.

planning zone by. establishing Highway 30 as the southern boundary in Subarea 24. * *

Passed this 8th day of March, 2016. Voting: Council member Poe moved the adoption of the resolution; seconded by Council member Overland.

Adopted, Ayes, Council members Olson, Overland, Poe, Russell, Shey, Shields and Mayor Corbett. * * *

Ron* J.Corbett, Mayor Attest:

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR..:165, 29 Pages Board of Supervisors Linn Courity, Iowa James M. Houser -District 1 Linda Langston -District 2 Ben Rogers -District 3 Brent Oleson -District 4 John Harris -District 5

February 17, 2016 Linn County Emergency Management Commission 6301 Kirkwood Blv.d. SW C::edar Rapids, IA 52404 Dear Commission Members: I 935 Second Street SW . Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52404-2100 The Linn County Emergency Management Agency has informed the Linn County Boa.rd of Supervisors of an initiative to modify the existing NextEra Energy Duane Arnold Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The proposed modification would move the southern boundary from 76th Street SW north to Highway 30. By .establishing Highway 30 as the southern boundary of Subarea 24, a consistent southern boundary for the entire emergency planning zone wi.11 be created, providing a stable boundary for the EPZ i.n the event of fi.Jture annexations by tbe City of Cedar Rapids. It will also remove the potential for disruptions to operations for schools, businesses and Industries currently within Subarea 24 that are beyond the planning area required by the Regulatory Commission (NRC). The Linn County Board of Supervisors supports moving the EPZ boundary in Sub area 24 to Highway 30, thereby establishing Highway 30 as the.southern boundary throughout the entire EPZ. Sincerely, .. C:J . . Ben Rogers C:hair phone 319.892.5000

. fax 319.892.5009

www.linncounty.org RECEIVED FEB* 1 8 *WIG' .LINN COUNTY E , . . fvfANA ** * . . GEMENTAGENCY Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Paqes To ensure Quality Learning . ollege '. Community School District

10/29/2015 Linn Col.mty Emergency Management Commi.ssion 6301 Kirkwood Blvd. SW Cedar Rapids; IA ;52404 Dear Commission Members; Today For Tomciriow John Speer .District Superintendent (319) 848-5202 The Linn County Emergency Mdnagerrient Agency has informed the College Community School District qf a_n inif!a,tive to modify the existing NextEra Energy Duane Arnold Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The proposed modification woUld move the solj.thern boundary .from 7 6 1 h Street SW, north tq Highway 30. We $Upport the proposal to.change the. EPZ boundqry, Our school district is located In the area t_hat would be excluded from the EPZ .if the proposed modiflcatio*n is adopted .. our district facilities are 15 miles frOin the Duane Arnold Energy Center; well beyor\p the requiredlOmi!e emergency planning zone, anq similar in distance to other school districts that are not within 'the emergency planning zone. We have discussed those .protective actions relating to. Oil event at the Duane Arnold Energy Center such .as shelter-in-place, or the precautionary relocation of students that will no ionger bE? applicable.

to our facilities.

students and staff. The College Community School District s.upports moving the EPZ qouhddrY in subdrea 24 to. Highway 30 thereby e_st¢1blishing Hl.ghway 3Q as the southern boundory throughout the entire

Sincerely, iJ Speer eriritendent College Community SGhools 401 ?6th Ave.SW . Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 4Q1 76th Ave §W I C!'JC!ar Rapids, IA 52404-7034 J (319) 848,5200 I .F?x (319) 848-4019:

I wv,;*1:prairiepdde:org Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages October 23, 2015 Linn County Emergency Management Commission 0301 Kirkwood Blvd SW Cedar Rapids IA 52404 Dear Commission Members: The Linn County Emergency Mc:magement Agency has informed Kirkwood Community College of an initiative to modify the existing NextEra Energy Duane Arnold Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The proposed modification would move the southern boundary from 75th Street SW north to Highway 30. We support the proposal to change the EPZ boundary.

Kirkwood Community College's main campus is located in the area that would be excluded from the EPZ, if the proposed modification is adopted. Main *campus is 14 miles from the Duane Arnold Energy Center, well beyond the required 10 mile emergency planning zone. We have discussed those protective actions relating to an event at the Duane Arnold Energy Genter, such as shelter-in-place and evacuation of students tha.t will no longer be applicable to our facilities, students and staff. Kirkwood Community College supports moving the EPZ boundary in subarea 24 to Highway 30, thereby establishing Highway 30 as the southern boundary throughout the e_ntire EPZ. Sincerely, Mick Starcevich President SOYEARS of GOLDEN OPPORTUNITIES.

1 I I I I Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages *December 22, 2015 Linn County Emergency Management Commission 630 l Kirkwood Blvd. SW Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 Dear Commission Members; The County Emergency Management Agenc:;y has informed Red Star Yeast Company of an initiative to modify the existing NextEra Energy Duane Arnold Emergency Planning Zone {EPZ). The proposed modification to subarea.24would move the southern boundary from 76th Street SW, north to Highway 30. We support the proposal to change the EPZ boundary.

Our *facility at 950 60th Avenue SW is located in the area that would be excluded from the EPZ if the proposed modification is adopted. We have discussed the protective actions relating to an event at the Duane Arnold Energy Center such as shelter-in-place and evacuation that will no longer be applicable to our facility and employees.

Implementation of these protective actions would result in an economic burden to our operat.ions.

Our facility isl 4 miles from the Duane Arnold Energy Center well beyond the required l 0 mile emergency planning zone. Red Star Yeast Company, LLC, supports moving the. EPZ boundary in subarea 24 to Highway 30 thereby establishing Highway 30 as the s.outhern boundary throughout the entire EPZ. si*.cer.ei.**

...

.EHS Manager .Red Star Yeas.t Co. LLC Phone: 319-896-2620 Email: scott.groth@lsaLcom CC: George Parry Red Star Yeast Company LLC .* 950 6oth Avenuesw Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 (319)896-2600 Attachment 4: NG-17 :-0037 Duane Arnold *Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 " -. *** ..

ADM Febri,Aary 10, 2016 -Unn County Emergency Management c;ommission

-6301 Kirkwood Blvd. sw . . . cedar Rapids; IA 52404 ::* -**: -.. --. : ' . --. . Re: _ Emergency Planning Zone Bou-ndary Dear Commission Me'mbers, . -At-d1er Danicis Midland Company 1350 Waconia-Ave.

sw . Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 _----_ _-*---' --*. ----_--- -' -_: --------------_ ---.. __ ---_----.. _ ---The Ljnn County Emergency ManagemenfAgency has informed Archer Daniels Midland -(AOIYl) of an initiative to -modify the existing NextEra Energy Duane Arnold Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The modification to subarea 24 would move the southern boundary from 76th Street SW, hortli to Highway 30. --. , -*. . ' ---" . , " , -ADM. supports the proposal to change the EPZ -ADM fadlitles at 5450 locust Road -SW, 1350 Waconia* Ave. SW, and 142,5 Goth Ave._ SW are located in the area that woul_d be _ excluded from the EPZ if the proposedmodificatfoti is adopted. ' --ADM personnel have discuss¢d the protecti\/e actions relating to a_n event at the Duane Arri old Energy Center, such as and evacuation; which .will no longer be applicable to _ the ADM and The: A.DM faciiities are 14 miles from the Duane Arp old -Energy.Center, we_li beyond 10 mile emergencyplanning zone. -, .* *. . . . . *, " . '. -*. ".:" -.--: ' -. -, ' -*-:* . : ,-. _.* -: . _;_ . ADM, mo'(ing the EPZ boundary in subateci 24 to Highway 30 thE!reby establishing Highway _30 as the southern bpundary throughout the entire EPZ. -Respectfully, .. --.. , --: . ------

_-* _-... _-_----------,. , . . ,. -... -.-. . " ._-_-

-. . ' : . . . --. . --' . ' : . -' . . . . _ Rich

_ -.-Environmental C9ordinatOr ADMCedar Rapids ----,--_ . __

_-., .. _., : '

-*_ ' GG-_ -c; --* ** *---*-*-----------* -------*-' __ .,. \1 .. ,<:_,..J...

'5-, -, -_----r}* --_ --_-<v*y;

.

'('. -* -cP-s

_-_ . -v

-' --' :* -I I I I -1 I -!I ' 1 --n -11 '-, R I' ' I -ii I ; I : I! 1i ----' -. l I _--_ I I ' ---I" -_-I -I /---1! -. : . d I ll ll --. M : *_ ..

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages APPENDIX B -Evacuation Time Estimate for Planning Zone Change Phase I Report Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 29 Pages ENGINEERING, P.C. Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate for Emergency Planning Zone Change Phase 1 *-¢-* ( . l Van Horne ) le gend

OAE C GJ Subar ea \..--:. 2, S , 1 0 Mile Ri n es I \ 20 19 ' 10 't1 ' 12 ' \ i \ I 13 I P aris @ i N.,.*ha/f

' 18 Alkins Work performed for NextEra Energy, by: KLD Engineering, P.C. 1601 Veterans Memorial Highway Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 E-mail: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com Cen1ral C/ly Prafrteb11rg May 11, 2016 Final Report, Rev 0 KLDTR-827 I' I I: I j, ' "' Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages INTRODUCTION In 2012,

KLD conducted a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for' the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ), located in Linn County, Iowa. The results of this study are documented in KLD Technical Report (TR)-529, dated December 2012. The 2012 ETE report provides NextEra Energy and state and local governments with site-specific information needed for Protective Action decision-making, as per federal regulations.

After the completion of this study, the Linn County Emergency Management Commission requested to reduce the size of the DAEC EPZ. The area proposed to be removed is located in Subarea 24 south of State Highway 30 bounded on the west by Edgewood Road, the south by 76th Ave SW, including the entire College Community School District main campus, and on the east by C. Street Road, which is hatched in Figure 1. Figure 2 shows the revised EPZ boundary with the proposed changes to Subarea 24. Part IV, Section K of the July 2015 FEMA Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) Program Manual outlines the process for making changes to the EPZ boundary:

If an ORO wants to change the boundary of an existing EPZ, the proposal must be submitted to the FEMA Regional Administrator or his/her designee, usually the RAC [Regional Assistance Committee]

Chair. The proposal shall include, but not be limited to:

Action by appropriate ORO officials desiring the change to the boundary (i.e., resolution by elected official, etc.);

Description of the change to the boundary;

Discussion of the population affected by the change;

Effect that the change has on evacuation routes or evacuation time estimates; and

Maps showing the existing EPZ boundary and proposed new boundary.

FEMA and the RAC will review the request o.n its merits. After the regional review, the request and RAC recommendation will be forwarded to FEMA Headquarters for final action. If the EPZ boundary change is approved, the approval is contingent on the ORO submitting for review the appropriate changes to their plans/procedures, maps of the EPZ, public information material, and impact that the addition or subtraction of population from the EPZ has on the evacuation time estimates.

The required information would include changes to the geographical boundary descriptions and the ANS, including additional sirens or other means for public notification.

Any modifications ta an ANS must be consistent with Section V, Part A of this Manual, Alert and Notification Systems. According to NRC's Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 50.54(q), The licensee may make changes to its emergency plan without NRC approval only if the licensee performs and retains an analysis demonstrating that the changes do not reduce the effectiveness of the plan and the plan, as changed, continues to meet the requirements in appendix E to this part and, for nuclear power reactor licensees, the Duane Arnold Energy Center ETE for EPZ Change -Phase 1 1 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a I : Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages planning standards of§ 50.47(b).

The changes to a licensee's emergency plan that reduce the effectiveness of the plan as defined in paragraph (q)(l)(iv) of this section may not be implemented without prior approval by the NRC. A licensee desiring to make such a change after February 21, 2012 shall submit an application for an amendment to its license. In addition to the filing requirements of§§ 50.90 and 50.91, the request must include all emergency plan pages affected by that change and must be accompanied by a forwarding letter identifying the change, the reason for the change, and the basis for concluding that the licensee's emergency plan, as revised, will continue to meet the requirements in appendix E to this part and, for nuclear power reactor licensees, the planning standards of§ 50.47(b).

METHODOLOGY As discussed in Section 3 of TR-529, there are various population groups present throughout the EPZ. The number of vehicles needed to evacuate these different population groups is estimated using data gathered in the original ETE study. The change to the boundary of Subarea 24 reduces the population and vehicles evacuating from the Subarea as shown in Table 1. The population and vehicles for all other Subareas in the EPZ in not impacted.

Those permanent residents that live in the portion of Subarea 24 that has been removed are now included as part of the Shadow Population.

Table 2 compares the vehicle demand estimates from the 2012 ETE study with the estimates resulting from the proposed EPZ change . . The permanent resident population was not extrapolated to 2016 as a base year in accordance with federal guidance (NUREG/CR-7002, Section 2.1) which reads, "[t]he population values used in the ETE should be developed for the year the ETE is prepared" to ensure an "apples to apples" comparison of ETE values wherein the only change is the reduction in vehicles resulting from the change to Subarea 24. Phase 2 of this study will extrapolate the permanent resident population to 2016 and compute ETE with the new EPZ boundary.

The link-node analysis network (computerized replica of the actual roadway system in the study area) used to compute the ETE is documented in Appendix K of TR-529. This link-node analysis network was not revised except for exit links (links that cross the boundary of the Subareas or EPZ which are used to track when the evacuated area has been cleared) that had to be revised for Region R03 due to the boundary change for Subarea 24. The change in exit links was introduced into the input streams for the DYNEV-11 modeling system. Evacuation simulations were then run using the DYNEV-11 modeling system which is described in detail in Appendices B through D of TR-529. The ETE predicted by these simulations were compared with the TR-529 simulations (original EPZ boundary) to quantify the change in ETE caused by the change in the boundary of Subarea 24. Duane Arnold Energy Center ETE for EPZ Change -Phase 1 2 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages Two different scenarios (temporal variations) and three different regions (wind strength/

direction) were considered to bound the potential impact of the Subarea 24 boundary change, on the ETE:

Scenario 6 -winter, midweek, midday with good weather was chosen because it represents maximum employment and schools in session which accounts for most of the days of the year. It is also the scenario with the largest number of evacuating vehicles (see Table 6-4 of TR-529).

Scenario 3 -summer, weekend, midday with good weather was also chosen because it represents maximum transients and no school in session. e Regions R01, R02 and R03 were considered as they represent the evacuation radii emphasized in the federal guidance -2 miles, 5 miles and full EPZ (approximately 10 miles), respectively.

RESULTS Table 3 presents the ETE results for the EPZ change, the ETE results that were calculated in the original 2012 ETE study, and the difference in ETE caused by the change in Subarea 24. As shown in Table 3, the ETE for the goth percentile remained the same for the 2-mile (R01) and mile (R02) regions for both scenarios considered.

The full EPZ (R03) decreased by 20 minutes and by 15 minutes for Scenario 3 and Scenario 6, respectively.

The 10oth percentile ETE for R01 and R02 for Scenarios 3 and 6 were not impacted by the reduction in evacuating vehicles caused by the EPZ change. The 10oth percentile ETE decreased by 40 minutes and by 25 minutes for Scenario 3 and Scenario 6, respectively.

As discussed in Section 7 and shown in Figure 7-8 of TR-529, the last area of the EPZ to clear of traffic congestion is Interstate 380 (f-380) southbound in southern Cedar Rapids. This section of roadway is directly west of Kirkwood Community College. Section 3.1.1 of TR-529 indicates that there are 9,100 students at Kirkwood Community College, 4,000 of which commute to school on a daily basis. The remaining students live in housing surrounding the college. In addition to the students, there are 665 staff members (Table E-1) at the college. Yellowbook's Marketing headquarters is also located just east of Kirkwood Community College, and is also a very large employer.

The college and Yellowbook generate nearly all of the 9,116 vehicles identified in Table 1; all of these vehicles access either US-30 eastbound or 1-380 southbound to evacuate the area. The ramps to access these routes are single lane ramps, which are overwhelmed by the large volume of traffic emanating from the college and Yellowbook.

This results in hours of traffic congestion and explains why 1-380 southbound is the last route to clear in the EPZ. The proposed revision to Subarea 24 eliminates the area south of US-30. This results in Kirkwood Community College and Yellowbook not evacuating, and reduces congestion in the area significantly, explaining the significant decrease in ETE for Region R03. Duane Arnold Energy Center ETE for EPZ Change -Phase 1 3 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 29 Pages CONCLUSIONS The FEMA REP Program Manual indicates that a proposal to change an existing EPZ boundary should include a discussion of the population affected by the change, as well an estimate of the effect of the EPZ change on ETE. The EPZ population (all population groups) decreases by 17,301 people (Table 1) as a result of the proposed EPZ change. This decrease in population results in 9,116 fewer evacuating vehicles (Table 1). The decrease in population and evacuating vehicles results in a decrease in goth percentile ETE for the full EPZ (Region R03} ranging from 15 to 20 minutes, and a decrease in moth percentile ETE for Region R03 ranging from 25 to 40 minutes (see Table 3). The ETE for the 2-mile region (Region ROl) and 5-mile region (Region R02} are not impacted by the EPZ change, which is to be expected as the portion of Subarea 24 to be removed is located well beyond the 5-mile radius of the plant. Duane Arnold Energy Center ETE for EPZ Change -Phase 1 4 KLD Engineering, P.C. Rev.a Van Horne Legend J

OAEC t::jl Subarea Newhall 30 Proposed Modif i cation to EPZ \...-=:, 2 , 5 , 10 M ile R i ngs Duane Arnold Energy Center ETE for EPZ Change -P has e 1 '-..... ..... ' 10 ' 12 20 19 ' ' '-18 Alkins ' Figure 1. Proposed Modification to EPZ 5 "\ v ' \ P aris C entral City Bertram Prairieburg KLD Enginee ring, P.C. Rev.a )> ....... ....... Q) () :::J'" 3 CD ::::l ....... z G) I --lo. "" I 0 0 w "" 0 c:: Q) ::::l CD )> ..... ::::l 0 a. m ::::l CD cO '< () CD ::::l ....... CD ..... --i (/) () :::::0 I --lo. O> 01 I\.) c.o -u Q) co CD CJ) rJ '-i Van Horne .. Le g e n d

D A EC GJ Subarea \.-::;. 2, 5 , 10 Mile Rings Duane A rn o ld Energy Center ETE for EPZ C h ange -Phase 1 I \ Newhall JO .... 21 19 ' ' ' ' 18 Atkins ' ' ..... v -'Piirfs ..... ' 10 ' ' 12 \ 17 Figure 2. R e vised EPZ 6 Centrnl Cily '-... Bertram P rairieburg 10 Miies K LD E n g i neer i ng , P.C. Rev.a )> --Q) (") :::r 3 CD ::l -z GJ I ....... -....I I 0 0 VJ -....I 0 c Q) ::l CD )> ...., ::l 0 Cl.. m ::l CD cO '< 0 CD ::l -CD ...., -I (/) 0 ;a I ....... 0) 01 N c.o ""O Q) co CD (/)

Attachment 4: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165 , 29 Pages Table 1. Removed Vehicle Demand Estimates from the Removed Portion of Subarea 24 Population Group People Vehicles Residents 5,222 2,924 Employees 2,548 2,316 Transients 149 50 Schoolchildren 5,382 19 0 College Students 4,000 3,636 Total 17,301 9,116 Table 2. Comparison of Vehicle Demand Estimates Populat i on Group Evacuating Vehicles 2012 Study EPZ Change Residents 104,765 101,841 Employees 28,469 26,153 Transients 4,660 4,610 Special Facilities 632 632 Shadow Vehicles 10,812 13,736 Cedar Rapids Freedom Festival 5,833 5,833 (Special Event) College Students 6,440 2,804 School Buses 1,622 1,432 Transit Buses 272 272 External Traffic 4,756 4,756 Total 168,261 162,069 Duane Arnold Ene rg y Center ETE for EPZ Chang e -Phase 1 7 KLD Engineering , P.C. Rev.0 Table 3. ETE Results for Change in EPZ Boundary 90 1 h Percentile ETE (hr:min) Scenario 3 (Summer, Weekend , Midday, Good Weather) Scenario 6 (Winter , Midweek, Midday, Good Weather) Region 2012 Study EPZ Change Difference 2012 Study EPZ Change Difference 2-Mile (ROl) 1: 35 1: 35 0: 00 1: 40 1: 40 0: 00 5-Mile (R02) 1: 55 1: 55 0: 00 2: 00 2: 00 0:00 Full EPZ (R03) 4: 45 4:25 0:20 5:40 5: 25 0:15 100 1 h Percentile ETE (hr:min) Scenario 3 (Summer, Weekend , Midday, Good Weather) Region 2012 Study 2-Mile (ROl) 5-Mile (R02) Full EPZ (R03) D uan e A rn o l d E ne r g y Ce nt e r ET E for EPZ Ch ange -P has e 1 3:30 3:35 6:3 0 EPZ Change Difference 3: 30 0: 00 3: 35 0:00 5: 50 0:40 8 Scenario 6 (Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather) 2012 Study EPZ Change Difference 3:35 3: 35 0: 00 3:35 3: 35 0:00 7: 40 7: 15 0:25 K LD E ngineeri ng , P.C. R e v.a z G) I -->. -....J I 0 0 w -....J 0 c O.l ::I CD )> ..., ::I 0 Cl.. m ::I CD ..., co '< 0 CD ::I -CD ..., --i (/) 0 ;o I -->. 0) 01 N (,0 -a O.l co CD (/)

/ i Attachment 5: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165, 1 Page Fields "9f Opportunities TERRYE. BRANSTAD COVE.RN OR KIM REYNOLDS LT. GOVERNOR Mr; Chuck Gregg, RAC Chair U.S. Pepi;ui!Jlent of Homeland Secutity Jirne 27, 2016 Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region. Vil 9221 Ward.Parkway, Suite300

Kansas Miss.oui*i 64114-3372 Ref: Duane Arnold Ei1ergy Genter EPZ Boundaty Change Request Mr.Gregg; STATE OF IOWA ioW.AH6iv.iELANDSECURlTY AND EMERGENcY MANAGEMENTDEPf\RTMENT MARKJ .. SCHOUTEN,.HOMELANDSECUltrfYADVJS()R AND EMJ3RGENCY MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR ]n accordance with the Radiological Einergency Preparedness (REP) Prqgrari1 Manual (January 2016), Patt TV -Sectio!l K,

find enclosed a proposal requesting a change to the southern boundaiy of the Du1:1li.e Arnol4 Energy Cent.er (DAE(;) Emei*gency Plm:mirtg Zpne (EPZ). This proposal was prepared by *officials from the Linn County Emergency Management Agency with suppmt provided by DAEC Emergency Ptep!itedn*ess Department.staff, . The $tate oflowa folly suppo1ts this proposal as outlined and is confidentthat 1 should the proposed 'boundary change be accepted and implemented, our state and local plai1s and. procedures will contini1e to ensure the health and safety of the public is protected in the unlikely event of an accident at the DAEC. We ask for yout catefql and timely approval of the enclo;;ed proposal.

If you have questions or comments regarding.this proposal do* not hesitate to contact Jacob Nicholson qftny staft:at(5lS) 323-433,7.

__

_ Director E11closuJ'e Cc: Mark Fritz, NextEra Energy/DAEC Scott Hansen, B.enton County Emergency Management/DAEG Mike. Goldbe1;g, Linn County Erherge1icyManageme1it/DAEC 7900 HICKMAN ROAD I SUITE'SOO/

WINDSOR HEIGHTS, IOWA 50324-4402 I

* * * * ** * * *

* * * * **

Attachment 6: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165.

Enclosure 1, 2 Pages ,, .JUL ?. '7 20H1 July 14, '.2016 MEMORANDUM FOR: VanessaE, QI.Jitm, Chief FROM: Radiological Emergency Prepared_ne.ss Branch

-NP-TH-RP Chuck Gregg, Chief l: C., Technologic,;al BrmlQh U.S. Department Security Region VII Ward Parkway, 'Suite 300 'l(ansas City,!vIO 64114-3372

SUBJECT:

Approval of B<;>un<,iary Change for the buan.e Arnold.Energy Center IO-Mile Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) in Linn County, IQwa: We received a request froiri the State of Iowarequesting a boundazy Ghange t91he southernpottfon of the Doaµe Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) l Q.,mile EmeJ.'.gency Planning Zor;ie (EPZ) in Lll;in Comtty; This ml:l.de pfunarilyto address.the past histozy.of1he EPZ expanding sout\lwarc,l across Highway30 as Cedar Rapjds grew awa:yfrom the plant, which, in effect,re8ulted in a "chasing the eoiporate limitS" approach . Liqn Co1,1t1ty Emergency Management, in coordination with DAEC, and Iowa Hotneland*

Secqrity and Emergency solicitecl.atid gametedforinal support from the City, Cmmty, local industry, local Qmununity College, @dlocal public schooi districfin the affected area. We arelmaware ofari'ylocal'oppositionfo the pr9posed EPZ b6UJ;1.claty change. Ou.r review in R.ajion VII determinedthejustification and analysis provided in the State formal request are sound and in the best o:fall pariies. The preliminary ETElmpact, indicating fewer residents:and vehicles would IJe inyqlved in an evacuation in the affected subareas, arid this would likeiy reduce the evacl1ation time for those living north of Highway 3Q Still fu the EPZ, also support approval of tills request. *

Based on myreview ofa:ll the.attached documents, :andtherecornmendations of:tny staff, I approve the proposed EPZbouridary change. I reqqest your review and approval of the request.

Attachment 6: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165.

Enclosure 1, 2 Pages If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Andrew Chancellor at 816-738-1957.

- Attachments:

EPZ Boundary Change Request from Iowa HSEMD cc: Mark Schouten, HSEMD, w/o attachments Joyce Flinn, HSEMD, w/o attachments Steve Warren, HSEMD, w/o attachments Mark Fritz, DAEC, w/o attachments Rebecca Palmer, DAEC, w/o attachments Mike Goldberg, Linn County EMD, w/o attachments Lisa Hamilton, HQ REP, w/attachments Albert Coons, HQ REP, w/attachments Allan Barker, NRC III, w/attachments Attachment 6: NG-17-0037 Duane Arnold Energy Center TSCR-165.

Enclosure 2, 2 Pages MEMORANDUM FOR: FROM:

SUBJECT:

August 11, 2016 Chuck Gregg, Chief U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20472 FEMA FEMA Region VII **-Technological Hazards Vanessa E. Quinn, Chief r-1 1 141 t<J . Radiological Emergency Prepar .. ess l3'11u1Ml' f/I FEMA Headquarters

""-. . { ) . Approval of Boundary Change kthe Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) for Linn County, Iowa This is in response to your memorandum and recommendation dated July 14, 2016 requesting FEMA Headquarters' review and approval of the State oflowa's boundary change for the Linn County portion of the 10-mile Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) for Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC). This proposed boundary change is to address the histmy of the EPZ southward across Highway 30 as the City of Cedar Rapids expanded.

It is our understanding that this request has been coordinated with the licensee NextEra Energy Resources and the Iowa Homeland Security and Emergenc:y Management Department (HSEMD). FEMA Headquaiters understands that Linn County in coordination with DAEC and HSEMD solicited and garnered formal support from the City of Cedar Rapids, local industry, Kirkwood Community College, and the local school district for the proposed EPZ boundaiy change. The proposed boundary change involves subarea 24 of the 10-mile EPZ in Linn County. A KLD Engineering, PC' evacuation time estimate determined the boundary change would result in a decrease of 17,301 people in the EPZ. This decrease in population results in 9,1.16 fewer evacuating vehicles evacuating the area. The decrease in population and fewer evacuating vehicles would result in a decrease in the evacuation time estimate of25 to 40 minutes. In accordance with the Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) Program Manual, Part IV, Section K (January 2016), FEMA Headqumters' approval is contingent upon two actions: 1. That licensee NextEra Energy Resources receive approval for the proposed revisions to the EPZ for the Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Plan from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), in accordance with all applicable NRC regulations and procedures.

2. Once received, the offsite response organizations surrounding the Duane Arnold Energy Center*site submit for review to FEMA Region VII the appropriate changes to their plans/procedures, maps of the EPZ, public information material, and affect that the addition or subtraction of population from the EPZ has on the evacuation time www.fenrn.gov

' L___ estimates.

The required information would include changes to the geographical

boundary descriptions and the alert and notification system (ANS), including additional sirens or other means for public notification.

Any modifications to an ANS must be consistent with the REP Program Manual, January 2016. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact Vanessa E. Quinn, at (202) 646-2849, or via email at Vanessa.quinn@fema.dhs.gov.

cc: Vanessa E. Quinn, Chief, Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Lisa Hamilton, FEMA HQ Joseph Anderson, NRC HQ

NG-17-0037, Duane Arnold Energy Center - Evaluation of Proposed Amendment for License Amendment Request (TSCR-165) for Revision to Emergency Planning Zone in the Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Plan

Text

Subject:

SUMMARY

4.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

6.0 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

4.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

6.0 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

SUBJECT:

SUBJECT:

Navigation menu

Search