RA-22-0262, Evacuation Time Estimate Report, Rev. 0 (Kld TR-1237)

Evacuation Time Estimate Report, Rev. 0 (Kld TR-1237)

ML22258A031
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee, Mcguire, Catawba, Brunswick, Robinson, McGuire
Issue date:	06/08/2022
From:	KLD Engineering, PC
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML22258A029	List: ML22258A030 ML22258A034 ML22258A038 ML22258A039 ML22258A040 RA-22-0262, Evacuation Time Estimate Report, Rev. 0 (Kld TR-1237)
References
RA-22-0262 KLD TR-1237
Download: ML22258A031 (595)

Text

Brunswick Nuclear Plant Development of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Duke Energy, by:

KLD Engineering, P.C.

1601 Veterans Memorial Highway, Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 email: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com June 08, 2022 Final Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1237

Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Brunswick Nuclear Plant Location ....................................................................................... 13 1.3 Preliminary Activities ................................................................................................................. 13 1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study .............................................................................................. 16 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................ 21 2.1 Data Estimates Assumptions...................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Methodological Assumptions .................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times .......................................................................................... 23 2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions ................................................................................................ 23 2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions .................................................................................... 25 2.6 Scenarios and Regions ............................................................................................................... 25 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Permanent Residents ................................................................................................................. 32 3.2 Shadow Population .................................................................................................................... 33 3.3 Transient Population .................................................................................................................. 33 3.4 Employees .................................................................................................................................. 34 3.5 Medical Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 35 3.6 Transit Dependent Population ................................................................................................... 35 3.7 School Population Demand........................................................................................................ 37 3.8 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 38 3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................................. 38 3.10 External Traffic ........................................................................................................................... 39 3.11 Background Traffic ..................................................................................................................... 39 3.12 Summary of Demand ............................................................................................................... 311 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY ............................................................................................... 41 4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections .............................................................. 42 4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway ........................................................................ 44 4.3 Application to the BNP Study Area ............................................................................................ 46 4.3.1 TwoLane Roads ................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2 Multilane Highway ............................................................................................................. 47 4.3.3 Freeways ............................................................................................................................ 47 4.3.4 Intersections ...................................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation .......................................................................................... 48 4.5 Boundary Conditions .................................................................................................................. 49 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME.......................................................................................... 51 5.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 51 5.2 Fundamental Considerations ..................................................................................................... 52 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ................................................... 54 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution ...................................................................... 54 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers .............................................................................................................. 55 5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation ................................................................................... 57 5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas ................................................... 59 Brunswick Nuclear Plant i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS ..................................................................... 61 7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) .......................................................... 71 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation ......................................................................... 71 7.2 Staged Evacuation ...................................................................................................................... 72 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation ..................................................................... 72 7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................ 74 7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results .................................................................................... 75 7.6 Staged Evacuation Results ......................................................................................................... 77 7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ................................................................................................... 78 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES ................................. 81 8.1 ETEs for Schools/Preschools/Childcare Centers, Transit Dependent People, and Medical Facilities.................................................................................................................................................. 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ................................................................. 89 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ................................................................................................... 91 9.1 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 92 9.2 Additional Considerations .......................................................................................................... 92 10 EVACUATION ROUTES ...................................................................................................................... 101 10.1 Evacuation Routes.................................................................................................................... 101 10.2 Reception Centers .................................................................................................................... 102 A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS .................................................................................. A1 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL ......................................................... B1 B.1 Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model .................................................... B1 B.2 Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD .............................................................. B1 B.2.1 DTRAD Description ............................................................................................................. B2 B.2.2 Network Equilibrium .......................................................................................................... B4 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL ............................................................................................... C1 C.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. C2 C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram ................................................................................................. C2 C.1.2 The Simulation Model ........................................................................................................ C2 C.1.3 Lane Assignment ................................................................................................................ C6 C.2 Implementation ......................................................................................................................... C6 C.2.1 Computational Procedure .................................................................................................. C6 C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD) ..................................................... C7 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE .............................................................................. D1 E. FACILITY DATA.................................................................................................................................... E1 F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY ..................................................................................................................... F1 F.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... F1 F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan ....................................................................................... F1 F.3 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ F2 F.3.1 Household Demographic Results ....................................................................................... F2 F.3.2 Evacuation Response ......................................................................................................... F3 F.3.3 Time Distribution Results ................................................................................................... F4 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.3.4 Emergency Communications ............................................................................................. F5 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Manual Traffic Control .............................................................................................................. G1 G.2 Analysis of Key TCP/SRB Locations ........................................................................................... G1 H EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. ZONE BOUNDARIES ............................................................................................................................ L1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ............................................................................................. M1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................ M1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate ................. M1 M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population ......................................................................... M2 M.4 Effect of NC211 Widening....................................................................................................... M4 M.5 Effect of Changes in Average Household Size .......................................................................... M4 M.6 Enhancements in Evacuation Time .......................................................................................... M5 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped List of Figures Figure 11. BNP Location .......................................................................................................................... 112 Figure 12. BNP LinkNode Analysis Network ......................................................................................... 113 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ....................................................................................... 28 Figure 31. Zones Comprising the BNP EPZ .............................................................................................. 319 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................ 320 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 321 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 322 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 323 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 324 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 325 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 326 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 327 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 410 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................ 515 Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities ........................................................................................ 516 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution ................................................... 517 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 518 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2mile to EPZ Boundary Area ......................................................................................................................................... 519 Figure 61. BNP EPZ Zones ......................................................................................................................... 69 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation ............................................................................................................ 720 Figure 72. BNP Shadow Region ............................................................................................................... 721 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 20 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ..................................... 722 Brunswick Nuclear Plant iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour, 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................ 723 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................ 724 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................ 725 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ....................... 726 Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ....................... 727 Figure 79. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ....................... 728 Figure 710. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................... 729 Figure 711. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................... 730 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R02 .................................................... 731 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R02 .................................................... 731 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R02 .................................................... 732 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R02 .................................................... 732 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R02 .................................................... 733 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R02 .................................................... 733 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R02 .................................................... 734 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R02 .................................................... 734 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R02 .................................................... 735 Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R02 .................................................. 735 Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R02 ................................................... 736 Figure 723. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R02 ................................................... 736 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ...................................................................... 818 Figure 101. Major Evacuation Routes ..................................................................................................... 106 Figure 102. Transit Dependent Bus Routes ............................................................................................ 107 Figure 103. Evacuation Shelters, Reception Centers and Relocation Schools........................................ 108 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B5 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ......................................................................................... C12 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ......................................................................................................... C13 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ............................................................................ C13 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) .................................................... C14 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers within the EPZ ..................................................... E8 Figure E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................. E9 Figure E3. Major Employers within the EPZ............................................................................................ E10 Figure E4. Beaches, Golf Courses and Marinas within the EPZ .............................................................. E11 Figure E5. Campgrounds, Historical Sites, Parks and Other Recreational Areas within the EPZ ............ E12 Figure E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E13 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ....................................................................................................... F7 Figure F2. Household with Seasonal Residents ....................................................................................... F7 Figure F3. Household Vehicle Availability ................................................................................................ F8 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households ...................................................................... F8 Figure F5. Vehicle Availability 5+ Person Households ........................................................................... F9 Figure F6. Household Ridesharing Preference......................................................................................... F9 Figure F7. Commuters in Households in the EPZ ................................................................................... F10 Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic ......................................................... F10 Figure F9. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ................................................................................................... F11 Figure F10. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs ....................................................... F11 Figure F11. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation ........................................................................... F12 Brunswick Nuclear Plant iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure F12. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving .......................... F12 Figure F13. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals ......................................................................... F13 Figure F14. ShelterinPlace Characteristics ........................................................................................... F13 Figure F15. Shelter then Evacuate Characteristics ................................................................................. F14 Figure F16. Study Area Evacuation Destinations .................................................................................... F14 Figure F17. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College .............................................................. F15 Figure F18. Work/College to Home Travel Time .................................................................................... F15 Figure F19. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation ................................................................................ F16 Figure F20. Cell Phone Signal Reliability ................................................................................................. F16 Figure F21. Likelihood to Take Action Based off Emergency Management Officials Guidelines ........... F17 Figure F22. Emergency Communication Alert ........................................................................................ F17 Figure G1. Traffic Control Points and Security Road Blocks for the BNP Site .......................................... G5 Figure G2. Comparison of Congestion Patterns at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE ..................... G6 Figure H1. Region R01.............................................................................................................................. H4 Figure H2. Region R02.............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H3. Region R03.............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H4. Region R04.............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H5. Region R05.............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H6. Region R06.............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H7. Region R07............................................................................................................................ H10 Figure H8. Region R08............................................................................................................................ H11 Figure H9. Region R09............................................................................................................................ H12 Figure H10. Region R10.......................................................................................................................... H13 Figure H11. Region R11.......................................................................................................................... H14 Figure H12. Region R12.......................................................................................................................... H15 Figure H13. Region R13.......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H14. Region R14.......................................................................................................................... H17 Figure H15. Region R15.......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H16. Region R16.......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure H17. Region R17.......................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H18. Region R18.......................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H19. Region R19.......................................................................................................................... H22 Figure H20. Region R20.......................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H21. Region R21.......................................................................................................................... H24 Figure H22. Region R22.......................................................................................................................... H25 Figure H23. Region R23.......................................................................................................................... H26 Figure H24. Region R24.......................................................................................................................... H27 Figure H25. Region R25.......................................................................................................................... H28 Figure H26. Region R26.......................................................................................................................... H29 Figure H27. Region R27.......................................................................................................................... H30 Figure H28. Region R28.......................................................................................................................... H31 Figure H29. Region R29.......................................................................................................................... H32 Figure H30. Region R30.......................................................................................................................... H33 Figure H31. Region R31.......................................................................................................................... H34 Figure H32. Region R32.......................................................................................................................... H35 Figure H33. Region R33.......................................................................................................................... H36 Figure H34. Region R34.......................................................................................................................... H37 Brunswick Nuclear Plant v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H35. Region R35.......................................................................................................................... H38 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins.......................................................................................................... J6 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) .............. J7 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) ............................... J7 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3).............. J8 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) .............................. J8 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5)

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

................................................................................................................................................................. J11 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 11) ............................................................................................................................................ J12 Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12) ............................................................................................................................................ J12 Figure K1. BNP LinkNode Analysis Network ............................................................................................ K2 Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 ..................................................................................... K3 Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 ..................................................................................... K4 Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 ..................................................................................... K5 Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 ..................................................................................... K6 Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 ..................................................................................... K7 Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 ..................................................................................... K8 Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 ..................................................................................... K9 Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 ................................................................................... K10 Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 ................................................................................. K11 Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 ............................................................................... K12 Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 ............................................................................... K13 Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 ............................................................................... K14 Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 ............................................................................... K15 Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 ............................................................................... K16 Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 ............................................................................... K17 Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 ............................................................................... K18 Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 ............................................................................... K19 Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 ............................................................................... K20 Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 ............................................................................... K21 Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 ............................................................................... K22 Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 ............................................................................... K23 Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 ............................................................................... K24 Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 ............................................................................... K25 Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 ............................................................................... K26 Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 ............................................................................... K27 Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 ............................................................................... K28 Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 ............................................................................... K29 Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 ............................................................................... K30 Brunswick Nuclear Plant vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 ............................................................................... K31 Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 ............................................................................... K32 Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 ............................................................................... K33 Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 ............................................................................... K34 Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 ............................................................................... K35 Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 ............................................................................... K36 Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 ............................................................................... K37 Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 ............................................................................... K38 Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 ............................................................................... K39 Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 ............................................................................... K40 Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 ............................................................................... K41 Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 ............................................................................... K42 Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ............................................................................... K43 Brunswick Nuclear Plant vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Tables Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction ........................................................................................................... 17 Table 12. Highway Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 17 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons ............................................................................................................ 18 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 26 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 27 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ...................................................................................... 311 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone ......................................................... 311 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ............................................................................ 312 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ...................................................................... 312 Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ............................ 313 Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand ............................................................................................. 314 Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates .............................................................................. 315 Table 38. School and Preschools/Childcare Center Population Demand Estimates ............................. 315 Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary ............................................................. 316 Table 310. BNP EPZ External Traffic ....................................................................................................... 316 Table 311. Summary of Population Demand ......................................................................................... 317 Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand................................................................................................ 318 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities .............................................................................. 510 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 510 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................. 511 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................ 511 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate ..................................................... 512 Table 56. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 512 Table 57. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 513 Table 58. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation .................... 513 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ......................... 514 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions........................................................................................... 64 Table 62. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions ............................................................................... 65 Table 63. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 66 Table 64. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................ 67 Table 65. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario.................................................................................................. 68 Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ......................... 710 Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ....................... 712 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region ............................ 714 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region .......................... 716 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions......................................................................................... 718 Table 76. Descriptions of Evacuation Regions ........................................................................................ 719 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................. 810 Table 82. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ..... 811 Table 83. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ...................... 812 Table 84. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather .......................................... 813 Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ........................................................... 814 Table 86. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ............................................... 815 Table 87. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ................................................................ 816 Table 88. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates ............................. 817 Brunswick Nuclear Plant viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 102 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 103 Table 103. Relocation Schools/Pickup Point.......................................................................................... 105 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C8 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ........................................................................... C9 Table C3. Glossary ..................................................................................................................................C10 Table E1. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers within the EPZ ....................................................... E2 Table E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ............................................................................................... E3 Table E3. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E3 Table E4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E4 Table E5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E6 Table F1. BNP Demographic Survey Sampling Plan ................................................................................. F6 Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations ........................................................................... G3 Table G2. ETE with No MTC and Priority MTC - Scenario 1 Region R02 ................................................ G4 Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions ............................................................... H2 Table H2. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Staged Regions ................................................... H3 Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input ............................................................................................... J2 Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R02) ........................... J3 Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R02, Scenario 1) ................................................................................................................................................. J4 Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R02, Scenario 1 ......................... J5 Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control ............................................................................... K1 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ....................................... M5 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study .................................................... M6 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change ................................................................................. M6 Table M4. Evacuation Time Estimates for Roadway Project .................................................................. M6 Table M5. ETE Results for Change in Average Household Size............................................................... M7 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist ................................................................................................. N1 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ix KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Brunswick Nuclear Plant (BNP) located in Brunswick County, North Carolina. ETE provide Duke Energy and offsite response organizations (OROs) with sitespecific information needed for protective action decisionmaking.

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

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

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

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

December 2019.

Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR6863, January 2005.

Project Activities This project began in December 2020 and extended over a period of 16 months. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Conduced a virtual kickoff meeting with Duke Energy personnel and emergency management personnel representing state and county governments.

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

Studied Geographical Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of the BNP, then conducted a detailed field survey of the highway network.

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

Conducted a randomsample online demographic survey of residents within the EPZ, to gather focused data needed for this ETE study that were not contained within the census database. The survey instrument was reviewed and modified by the licensee and ORO personnel prior to the survey.

The data gathered for the 2018 ETE study were reviewed and updated accordingly by the offsite response organizations (OROs). Special facility data was requested from the OROs at the kickoff meeting. If updated information was not provided and data could not be obtained from online sources, the data gathered in the 2018 ETE study was utilized.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Estimated the number of employees commuting into the EPZ are based upon 2018 Workplace Area Characteristic (WAC) data from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool2.

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

Following federal guidelines, the EPZ is subdivided into 13 Zones. These Zones are then grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 35 Evacuation Regions.

The timevarying external circumstances are represented as Evacuation Scenarios, each described in terms of the following factors: (1) Season (Summer, Winter); (2) Day of Week (Midweek, Weekend); (3) Time of Day (Midday, Evening); and (4) Weather (Good, Rain). One special event scenario involving the 4th of July Festival in Southport was considered. A roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a roadway segment of SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way SE - was closed for the duration of the evacuation.

Staged evacuation was considered for those regions wherein the 2mile radius and sectors downwind to the EPZ boundary were evacuated.

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

A rapidly escalating event at the BNP wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented.

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

If the event occurs while schools are in session, the ETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to relocation schools or pickup points as stated in the public information. Parents, relatives, and neighbors are advised to not pick up their children at school prior to the arrival of the buses dispatched for that purpose. The ETE for schoolchildren are calculated separately.

Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either rideshare with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided by the counties in the EPZ. Those in special facilities will likewise be evacuated with public transit, as needed:

bus, van, wheelchair vehicle, or ambulance, as required. Separate ETE are calculated for the transitdependent evacuees, for access and/or functional needs population, and for those evacuated from special facilities.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Computation of ETE A total of 420 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 35 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 12 Evacuation Scenarios (35 x 12 = 420). Separate ETE are calculated for transitdependent evacuees, including schoolchildren for applicable scenarios.

Except for Region R02, 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 (ATE) 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 the ATE. The people occupying the remainder of the EPZ outside the impacted region may be advised to take shelter.

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

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

The computational procedure is outlined as follows:

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

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

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

The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90 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 90th percentile ETE have been Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Traffic Management This study references the existing traffic management plan within the EPZ provided by offsite response organizations within the EPZ. Nearly all of the traffic signals in the study area are actuated signals which will adapt their timing to the changing traffic patterns during evacuation. Based on the ETE simulations, a group of six intersections with manual traffic control (MTC) has been identified as the most critical (first priority) that can be significantly impact ETEs. Refer to Section 9 and in Appendix G.

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

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

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

Table 61 and Table 62 define each of the 35 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Zone.

Table 63 lists the Evacuation Scenarios.

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

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

Table 82 present ETE for the schoolchildren in good weather.

Table 84 present ETE for the transitdependent population in good weather.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Conclusions General population ETE were computed for 420 unique cases - a combination of 35 unique Evacuation Regions and 12 unique Evacuation Scenarios. Table 71 and Table 72 document these ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles. These ETE range from 2:55 (hr:min) to 7:30 at the 90th percentile.

Inspection of Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the ETE for the 100th percentile are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile. 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 712 through 723.

The 90th percentile ETE for Regions R02 and R04 through R08, wherein Zone 4 (Oak Island) evacuates, are on average 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes longer than regions that do not include Zone 4 for nonspecial scenarios. The 90th percentile ETEs are longer when Zones 4 and 5 (St. James) evacuate together than when 4 evacuates without Zone 5.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicates that a staged evacuation would be beneficial for evacuating the resident population within the 2mile region of BNP, but not enough to warrant a significant change, and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the BNP. See section 7.6 for further explanation.

Comparison of Scenarios 3 (summer, weekend, midday) and 11 (summer, weekend, midday) in Table 71 indicates that the special event has a significant effect on ETE at the 90th and 100th percentile for all regions. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 12 in Table 71 indicates that the closure of a roadway segment on SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way has a material impact on 90th percentile ETE for some regions. The ETE for keyhole regions with wind from east (Regions R04 through R11), and an evacuation of the entire EPZ (R02), experience increases up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes.

See Section 7.5.

Separate ETE were computed for schools, medical facilities, transitdependent persons, and access and/or functional needs persons. The average singlewave ETE for these facilities are less than or equaled to the general population ETE at the 90th percentile.

See Section 8.

Table 81 indicates that there are enough buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances available to evacuate the transitdependent population within the EPZ in a single wave.

See Sections 8.1 and 8.2.

Six TCP/SRB locations were determined to be the most critical for an evacuation of the entire EPZ. These intersections are focused along US 17/US 17 Business and should be Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

considered as priority locations in the event of a shortfall of TCP personnel. See Appendix G.

The general population ETE at the 90th percentile is insensitive to reductions in the base trip generation time of 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes due to the traffic congestion within the EPZ. See Table M1.

The general population ETE is relatively insensitive to the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region (tripling the shadow evacuation percentage increases the 100th percentile ETE by 5 minutes), unless the entire Shadow Region evacuates. See Table M2.

A population increase of 15% or more results in ETE changes which meet the NRC criteria for updating ETE between decennial Censuses. See Section M.3.

The widening of NC211 between NC87 and NC906 does not provide a significant benefit to an evacuation of the entire EPZ.

Increasing the average household size to 2.45 people per household (obtained from the survey) can have a significant impact on the ETE for the full EPZ. Reducing the vehicular demand on the capacity constrained roadway network can reduce congestion and, therefore, decrease ETE. See Section M.5.

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2010 Population 2020 Population 1 2,689 3,475 2 2,774 3,348 3 663 652 4 5,868 7,368 5 5,627 9,734 6 1,148 1,277 7 4,193 4,494 8 1,711 1,888 9 195 124 10 7,841 8,872 11 2,383 2,731 12 0 0 13 158 268 TOTAL 35,250 44,231 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 25.48%

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R01 2Mile Radius x x R02 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R03 NNW, N 328°009° x x x x x R04 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R05 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R06 NE 039°051° x x x x x R07 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R08 E 091°112° x x x x x R09 ESE x x x x R10 SE, SSE x x x x x x R11 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R12 S 180°195° x x x x x x R13 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R14 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R15 W 272°288° x x x x x R16 WNW x x x x R17 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R18 NW 317°327° x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R19 NNW, N 329°009° x x x x x R20 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R21 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R22 NE 039°051° x x x x x R23 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R24 E 091°112° x x x x x R25 ESE x x x x R26 SE, SSE x x x x x x R27 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R28 S 180°195° x x x x x x R29 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R30 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R31 W 272°288° x x x x x R32 WNW x x x x R33 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R34 NW 317°327° x x x x R35 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season3 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend 4th of July 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good Festival in Southport Closure of a 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good segment of SR 211 3

Winter assumes that school is in session (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer assumes that regular school is not in session.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and EPZ R01 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R02 5:30 6:05 5:50 6:25 4:30 4:50 5:15 5:10 5:35 4:25 6:45 6:35 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R03 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:15 3:10 3:25 3:25 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:50 3:20 R04 4:35 4:55 5:15 5:45 3:20 3:40 3:50 4:15 4:35 3:05 5:50 5:10 R05 5:35 6:25 6:20 7:00 4:20 4:45 5:10 5:20 6:00 4:15 6:55 6:50 R06 5:35 6:25 6:20 7:00 4:20 4:45 5:10 5:20 6:00 4:15 6:55 6:50 R07 5:55 6:35 6:30 7:10 4:45 5:10 5:30 5:30 6:10 4:35 7:25 7:25 R08 5:40 6:25 6:15 6:55 4:40 4:55 5:30 5:15 5:55 4:35 7:15 7:00 R09 4:10 4:20 4:15 4:30 3:50 4:00 4:10 4:00 4:10 3:45 6:10 4:35 R10 3:40 3:45 3:25 3:35 3:25 3:45 3:50 3:20 3:30 3:25 5:40 3:50 R11 3:55 4:20 3:55 4:15 3:35 3:50 4:05 3:50 4:00 3:40 5:35 4:35 R12 3:30 3:40 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:40 3:10 3:25 3:20 5:00 3:30 R13 3:55 4:20 4:25 4:45 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:40 4:00 3:10 5:00 3:55 R14 3:55 4:20 4:25 4:50 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:40 4:00 3:10 5:00 3:55 R15 3:10 3:15 2:50 3:05 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:55 2:55 3:10 5:35 3:10 R16 3:10 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:50 2:50 3:05 5:35 3:10 R17 3:10 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:50 2:50 3:05 5:35 3:10 R18 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:40 5:50 3:40 R20 4:35 4:55 5:15 5:45 4:35 4:30 4:40 4:20 4:40 4:35 5:50 5:10 R21 5:40 6:25 6:20 7:00 5:25 5:20 5:35 5:30 6:00 5:25 7:05 6:50 R22 5:40 6:25 6:20 7:00 5:25 5:20 5:35 5:30 6:00 5:25 7:05 6:50 R23 6:00 6:35 6:30 7:10 5:25 5:30 5:50 5:45 6:10 5:30 7:30 7:25 R24 6:00 6:25 6:15 6:55 5:25 5:30 5:40 5:45 6:05 5:25 7:20 7:10 R25 4:50 5:05 4:45 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:15 5:10 R26 4:25 4:35 4:15 4:30 4:20 4:25 4:35 4:15 4:30 4:20 5:50 4:25 R27 5:00 5:05 4:50 5:05 4:55 4:55 5:00 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:55 5:25 R28 4:20 4:30 4:15 4:25 4:20 4:20 4:30 4:20 4:25 4:20 5:20 4:20 R29 4:25 4:30 4:25 4:50 4:30 4:30 4:35 4:25 4:30 4:35 5:00 4:25 R30 4:25 4:30 4:25 4:50 4:35 4:30 4:40 4:25 4:35 4:35 5:00 4:25 R31 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:45 3:45 5:35 3:45 R32 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 5:35 3:40 R33 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 5:35 3:40 R34 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R35 5:35 6:05 5:55 6:40 5:15 5:20 5:30 5:30 5:50 5:20 6:55 6:45 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and EPZ R01 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R02 7:05 7:50 7:45 8:45 5:55 5:55 6:40 6:50 7:30 5:55 8:35 9:00 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R03 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R04 5:55 6:00 6:20 6:45 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:05 6:10 R05 6:55 7:45 7:40 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:00 5:55 8:10 8:05 R06 6:55 7:45 7:40 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:00 5:55 8:10 8:05 R07 7:00 7:50 7:45 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:35 6:40 7:10 5:55 8:35 8:55 R08 7:00 7:40 7:45 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:10 5:55 8:35 8:55 R09 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 6:00 R10 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R11 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R12 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:20 5:55 R13 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R14 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R15 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R16 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R17 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R18 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R20 5:55 6:00 6:20 6:45 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:05 6:10 R21 6:55 7:45 7:50 8:35 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:40 7:00 6:20 8:35 8:25 R22 6:55 7:45 7:50 8:35 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:40 7:00 6:20 8:35 8:25 R23 7:00 7:50 7:50 8:35 6:25 6:25 6:45 6:50 7:10 6:20 8:35 9:10 R24 7:00 7:40 7:45 8:35 6:15 6:25 6:45 6:50 7:10 6:15 8:35 9:10 R25 6:00 6:00 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:50 6:10 R26 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R27 6:10 6:15 5:55 6:20 6:00 5:55 6:10 6:00 6:00 5:55 7:55 6:40 R28 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:40 5:55 R29 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R30 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R31 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R32 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R33 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R34 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R35 7:05 7:50 7:55 8:45 6:25 6:35 6:55 6:50 7:30 6:20 8:40 9:10 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R01 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R02 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:35 3:35 3:10 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:35 R03 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R04 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:35 R05 3:25 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:30 R06 3:25 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:30 R07 3:30 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:15 3:30 3:30 3:15 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:35 R08 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:15 3:25 3:25 3:15 3:20 3:20 5:55 3:35 R09 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R10 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R11 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R12 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R13 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R14 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R15 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R16 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R17 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R18 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R20 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R21 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R22 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R23 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R24 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R25 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R26 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R27 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R28 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R29 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R30 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R31 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R32 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R33 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R34 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R35 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R01 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R02 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R03 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R04 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R05 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R06 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R07 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R08 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R09 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R10 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R11 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R12 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R13 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R14 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R15 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R16 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R17 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R18 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R20 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R21 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:55 5:50 R22 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:55 5:50 R23 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 7:10 5:50 R24 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R25 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R26 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R27 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R28 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R29 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R30 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R31 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R32 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R33 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R34 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R35 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 6:20 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BRUNSWICK COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Childcare Network 90 15 14.4 13.5 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Southport Baptist Church Preschool 90 15 14.7 13.8 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Kids World Academy II 90 15 14.5 13.5 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Southport Elementary School 90 15 11.5 12.0 57 2:45 6.4 9 2:55 L & L Montessori School 90 15 13.6 9.1 90 3:15 0.9 1 3:20 Sharon's Childcare 90 15 13.5 7.2 112 3:40 0.9 1 3:45 Kids World Academy 90 15 12.9 14.8 52 2:40 0.8 1 2:45 Southport Christian School 90 15 12.6 11.9 63 2:50 0.9 1 2:55 South Brunswick High School 90 15 8.6 10.6 49 2:35 8.1 11 2:50 South Brunswick Middle School 90 15 7.6 8.9 51 2:40 13.2 18 3:00 Learn and Play 90 15 6.2 18.9 20 2:05 0.8 1 2:10 NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Carolina Beach After School Program 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Carolina Beach Elementary 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Island Time DropNPlay 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Maximum for EPZ: 3:40 Maximum: 3:45 Average for EPZ: 2:40 Average: 2:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Route Bus Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to E.S. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Servicing of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) E.S (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Zone 1 1 135 17.5 44.9 23 30 3:10 11.1 15 5 10 63 30 5:15 Zone 2 1 135 16.4 45.0 22 30 3:10 11.1 15 5 10 60 30 5:10 Zone 3 1 135 15.3 8.6 107 30 4:35 14.5 19 5 10 63 30 6:45 Zone 4 2 135 12.8 6.7 114 30 4:40 14.5 19 5 10 54 30 6:40 Zone 5 2 135 8.1 3.9 125 30 4:50 14.5 19 5 10 43 30 6:40 Zone 6 1 135 4.0 40.6 6 30 2:55 15.6 21 5 10 48 30 4:50 Zone 7 1 135 8.5 9.9 51 30 3:40 13.9 19 5 10 67 30 5:55 Zone 8 1 135 4.5 39.5 7 30 2:55 13.9 19 5 10 32 30 4:35 Zone 9 1 135 11.0 45.0 15 30 3:00 11.1 15 5 10 46 30 4:50 Zone 10 2 135 3.6 13.2 16 30 3:05 3.6 5 5 10 16 30 4:15 Zone 11 1 135 6.9 17.9 23 30 3:10 3.6 5 5 10 27 30 4:30 Maximum ETE: 4:50 Maximum ETE: 6:45 Average ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 5:25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. BNP Zones Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 INTRODUCTION This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Brunswick Nuclear Plant (BNP), located in Brunswick County, North Carolina. ETE provide Duke Energy, along with State and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decisionmaking.

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

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

• Revision 1 of the Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, November 2011.

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

• Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR 6863, January 2005.

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

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

1. Information Gathering:

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

b. Attended meetings with emergency planners from North Carolina Emergency Management, North Carolina Department of Public Safety, Brunswick County, and New Hanover County to identify issues to be addressed and resources available.

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

d. Obtained demographic EPZ data from the 2020 census.

e. Estimated the number of nonEPZ employees using data obtained from the US Census Workplace Area Characteristic2 (see Section 3.4).

f. Utilized data from a random sample demographic survey of EPZ residents.

g. Obtained data (to the extent available) to update the database of schools, 1

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

medical facilities, transient attractions, major employers, access and/or functional needs, transportation resources available and the special event.

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

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

4. Reviewed the existing traffic management plan to be implemented by local and state police in the event of an incident at the plant. Traffic control is applied at specified Traffic Control Points (TCP) and Security Road Blocks (SRB) located within the EPZ. An analysis of priority TCP and SRB locations was conducted. See Section 9 and Appendix G.

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

6. Estimated demand for transit services for persons at Special Facilities and for transit dependent persons at home.

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

a. Estimated the evacuation traffic demand, based on the available information derived from Census data, and from data provided by local and state agencies, online sources, Duke Energy and from the demographic survey.

b. Updated the linknode representation of the evacuation network, which is used as the basis for the computer analysis that calculates the ETE.

c. Applied the procedures specified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM3) to the data acquired during the field survey, to estimate the capacity of all highway segments comprising the evacuation routes.

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

1.2 The Brunswick Nuclear Plant Location The Brunswick Nuclear Plant (BNP) is located near Southport, Brunswick County, North Carolina. The site is approximately 19 miles south of Wilmington, NC. The Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) consists of parts of Brunswick and New Hanover Counties in North Carolina. A large portion of the EPZ is made up of the Atlantic Ocean. New Hanover and Brunswick Counties are separated by the Cape Fear River. Figure 11 displays the area surrounding the BNP. This map identifies the communities in the area and the major roads.

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

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

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

The data from the audio and video recordings were used to create detailed geographical information systems (GIS) shapefiles and databases of the roadway characteristics and of the Brunswick Nuclear Plant 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

traffic control devices observed during the road survey; this information was referenced while preparing the input stream for the DYNEV II model.

As documented on page 156 of the HCM 2016, the capacity of a twolane highway is 1700 passenger cars per hour in one direction. For freeway sections, a value of 2250 vehicles per hour per lane is assigned, as per Exhibit 127 of the HCM 2016. The road survey has identified several segments which are characterized by adverse geometrics on twolane highways which are reflected in reduced values for both capacity and speed. These estimates are consistent with the service volumes for LOS E presented in HCM 2016 Exhibit 1546. Link capacity is an input to DYNEV II. Further discussion of roadway capacity is provided in Section 4 of this report.

Traffic signals are either pretimed (signal timings are fixed over time and do not change with the traffic volume on competing approaches) or are actuated (signal timings vary over time based on the changing traffic volumes on competing approaches). Actuated signals require detectors to provide the traffic data used by the signal controller to adjust the signal timings.

These detectors are typically magnetic loops in the roadway, or video cameras mounted on the signal masts and pointed toward the intersection approaches. If detectors were observed on the approaches to a signalized intersection during the road survey, detailed signal timings were not collected as the timings vary with traffic volume. TCPs at locations which have control devices are represented as actuated signals in the DYNEV II model.

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

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

The linknode analysis network from the previous study was updated to include newly constructed and ongoing roadway improvements based on data collected during the road survey.

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

Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used, and tabulations of data compiled from the survey returns along with discussion validating the use of the survey results in this study.

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

DYNEV II consists of four submodels:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NUREG/CR4873 - Benchmark Study of the IDYNEV Evacuation Time Estimate Computer Code Brunswick Nuclear Plant 15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

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

1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study Table 13 presents a comparison of the present ETE study with the 2018 study (KLD TR1039, dated October 2018). As indicated in the final two rows of the table, the ETE values have changed since the last ETE update. The 90th percentile ETE for the full EPZ (Region R02) increase by as much as 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> 35 minutes when compared with the 2018 study. The 100th percentile ETE for the full EPZ increase by as much as 1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes for nonspecial scenarios. For some scenarios, the 90th and 100th percentile ETE for the full EPZ decrease by as much as 40 minutes.

The major factors contributing to the significant changes between the ETE values obtained in this study and those of the previous study can be summarized as follows:

Despite the population growing less than 1% since 2018, the distribution of the population is very different. The 2018 population was estimated based on 2010 Census blocks projected out to 2018. Areas with new development (St. James, for example) are not accurately captured by this method of estimating population. If a Census block had zero people in 2010 at a location wherein a new community has been built, it will remain zero regardless of the growth rate applied. The population distribution utilized in this study is based on 2020 Census data, which is more accurate. A redistribution of evacuation demand can increase or decrease ETE depending on where the vehicles are originating.

This study utilizes a resident vehicle occupancy of 1.37 people per vehicle, rather than 1.6 people per vehicle that was used in the last study. In conjunction with the slight growth in population, this results in an increase of about 18% evacuating EPZ resident vehicles and a 23% increase in resident vehicles from the shadow region, which can increase ETE.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Trip generation times are longer than the previous study. This can increase ETE, most notably for the cases wherein trip generation dictates ETE.

Employee population decreased by nearly 70%. This is a result of the NRCs change in threshold for a major employer from 50 or more employees to 200 or more employees.

This can decrease ETE.

Transient population decreased by 6.5% which can decrease ETE.

Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction Stakeholder Nature of Stakeholder Interaction Attended KickOff meeting to define data requirements and set up contacts with local government agencies. Reviewed and approved all study assumptions and draft report. Coordinated Duke Energy emergency planning personnel with the OROs to discuss and collect their comments on the Draft Report. Attended Final Meeting where the results of the ETE study were formally presented.

Brunswick County Emergency Services Attended KickOff meeting to define data requirements. Provided local emergency plans, special facility data, and transient data. Reviewed New Hanover County Emergency Management and approved all study assumptions and draft report. Attended Final Meeting where the results of the ETE study were formally presented.

Table 12. Highway Characteristics Number of lanes Posted speed Lane width Actual free speed Shoulder type & width Abutting land use Interchange geometries Control devices Lane channelization & queuing Intersection configuration (including capacity (including turn bays/lanes) roundabouts where applicable)

Geometrics: curves, grades (>4%) Traffic signal type Unusual characteristics: Narrow bridges, sharp curves, poor pavement, flood warning signs, inadequate delineations, toll booths, etc.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons Topic Previous (2018) ETE Study Current ETE Study ArcGIS software using 2010 US Census blocks projected out to 2018 using ArcGIS software using 2020 US Census Resident Population 2017 population changes published by blocks; area ratio method used.

Basis the US Census; area ratio method used. Population = 44,231 Population = 43,975 Vehicles = 32,151 Vehicles = 27,285 2.15 persons/household, 1.34 2.11 persons/household, 1.54 Resident Population evacuating vehicles/household evacuating vehicles/household Vehicle Occupancy yielding: 1.60 persons/vehicle. yielding: 1.37 persons/vehicle.

Employee estimates based on Employee estimates based on information provided about major information provided about major employers in EPZ. 1.03 employees per employers in EPZ. 1.07 employees per Employee vehicle based on telephone survey vehicle based on demographic survey Population results. results.

Employees = 3,004 Employees = 933 Employee Vehicles = 2,917 Employee Vehicles = 866 ArcGIS software using 2010 US Census blocks and projecting out to 2018 using ArcGIS software using 2020 US Census 2017 population changes published by blocks; area ratio method used.

Shadow Population the US Census; area ratio method used. 20% Population = 8,907 20% Population = 8,368 20% Vehicles = 6,420 20% Vehicles = 5,216 Estimates based upon U.S. Census data and the results of the Estimates based upon U.S. Census data demographic survey. A total of 213 and the results of the telephone people who do not have access to a survey. A total of 508 people who do vehicle, requiring 14 buses to not have access to a vehicle, requiring evacuate. An additional 1,294 access TransitDependent 28 buses to evacuate. Only 8 additional and/or functional needs persons need Population people are registered as non special transportation to evacuate institutionalized mobility impaired and based on the data provided by would need transportation. counties (770 require a bus, 388 require a wheelchairaccessible paratransit, and 136 require an ambulance).

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous (2018) ETE Study Current ETE Study Transient estimates based upon information provided about transient Transient estimates based upon attractions in EPZ, supplemented by information provided about transient observations of the facilities during attractions in EPZ, supplemented by the road survey, estimations made Transient phone calls made to facilities. based on parking capacity from aerial Population Transients = 63,495 photography and phone calls placed to individual facilities.

Vehicles = 21,793 Transients = 59,394 Vehicles = 20,322 Special facility population based on Special facility population based on information provided by each county information provided by Duke Energy. within the EPZ, internet searches Current census = 184 where necessary.

Special Facilities Population Buses Required = 5 Current census = 247 Wheelchair Bus Required = 5 Buses Required = 7 Ambulances Required = 10 Wheelchair Bus Required = 7 Ambulances Required = 14 School population based on information provided by each county School population based on within the EPZ. information provided by each county within the EPZ, internet searches, and School enrollment = 3,534 School Population phone call surveys where necessary.

Buses Required = 88 School enrollment = 3,483 Vans Required = 2 Buses Required = 78 MiniBus Required = 1 Voluntary evacuation from 20 percent of the population within the 20 percent of the population within within EPZ in areas EPZ, but not within the Evacuation the EPZ, but not within the Evacuation outside region to be Region (see Figure 21) Region (see Figure 21) evacuated 20% of people outside of the EPZ 20% of people outside of the EPZ Shadow Evacuation within the Shadow Region within the Shadow Region (see Figure 72) (see Figure 72)

Network Size 879 links; 708 nodes 1111 links; 877 nodes Brunswick Nuclear Plant 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous (2018) ETE Study Current ETE Study Field surveys conducted in November Field surveys conducted in December 2017. Roads and intersections were 2020. Roads and intersections were video archived. video archived.

Roadway Geometric Aerial imagery used for additional Aerial imagery used for additional Data roadways which were not included in roadways which were not included in the Field surveys. the Field surveys.

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

Direct evacuation to designated Direct evacuation to designated School Evacuation Evacuation Shelter/Relocation School. Evacuation Shelter/Relocation School.

50 percent of transitdependent 84 percent of transitdependent Ridesharing persons will evacuate with a neighbor persons will evacuate with a neighbor or friend. or friend.

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

Residents with commuters returning Residents with commuters returning leave between 30 and 270 minutes. leave between 45 and 345 minutes.

Trip Generation for Residents without commuters Residents without commuters Evacuation returning leave between 15 and 270 returning leave between 15 and 285 minutes. minutes.

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

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

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

Modeling DYNEV II model - Version 4.0.19.2 DYNEV II model - Version 4.0.23.0 4th of July Festival in Southport 4th of July Festival in Southport Special Event Population = 19,500 Special Event Population = 19,500 Special Events additional transients and 6,500 additional transients and 6,500 transient vehicles transient vehicles 37 Regions and 12 Scenarios and 12 35 Regions and 12 Scenarios producing Evacuation Cases Scenarios producing 444 unique cases. 420 unique cases.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Topic Previous (2018) ETE Study Current ETE Study Winter, Midweek, Midday, Winter, Midweek, Midday, Evacuation Time Good Weather: 4:00 Good Weather: 4:50 Estimates for the entire EPZ, 90th percentile Summer, Weekend, Midday, Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 6:15 Good Weather: 5:50 Winter, Midweek, Midday, Winter, Midweek, Midday, Evacuation Time Good Weather: 5:45 Good Weather: 5:50 Estimates for the entire EPZ, 100th percentile Summer, Weekend, Midday, Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather: 8:20 Good Weather: 7:45 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 11. BNP Location Brunswick Nuclear Plant 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 12. BNP LinkNode Analysis Network Brunswick Nuclear Plant 113 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

2.1 Data Estimates Assumptions

1. Permanent resident population estimates are based upon 2020 U.S. Census population from the Census Bureau website1. (See Section 3.1).

2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon 2018 Workplace Area Characteristic (WAC) data from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool2 extrapolated to 2020 using the shortterm employment projection for the State of North Carolina3. The number of NonEPZ Employees was calculated within the EPZ by Census block using the work area profile and GIS inflow/outflow analysis (see Section 3.4).

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based upon data provided by county emergency management agencies within EPZ, the ChildcareCenter4, the North Carolina Division of Child Development and Early Education5 and the 2017 ETE study, supplemented by internet searches where data was missing.

4. The relationship between permanent resident population and evacuating vehicles is based on the 2020 Census and the results of the demographic survey. Values of 2.11 persons per household and 1.54 evacuating vehicles per household will be used for the permanent resident population.

5. Where data cannot be obtained for recreational facilities, aerial imagery is used to count parking spaces and it is assumed that during peak times, parking lots at these facilities are full.

6. The data from 2012 ETE study is used for lodging facilities to estimate the number of transients at these facilities.

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

8. Employee vehicle occupancies is based on the results of the demographic survey. 1.07 employees per vehicle is used in the study. In addition, it is assumed there are two people per carpool, on average.

9. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ is 45 mph based on North Carolina state laws for buses and average posted speed limits on roadways within the EPZ.

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

1 www.census.gov 2

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

3 https://www.nccommerce.com/data-tools-reports/labor-market-data-tools/employment-projections 4

https://childcarecenter.us/

5 https://ncchildcaresearch.dhhs.state.nc.us/search.asp Brunswick Nuclear Plant 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2.2 Methodological Assumptions

1. The Planning Assumption for the calculation of ETE is a rapidly escalating accident that requires evacuation, and includes the following6 (as per NRC guidance):

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

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

c. The ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

2. The centerpoint of the plant will be located at the center of the containment building 33°57'29.60"N and 78°00'34.46"W.

3. As indicated in Figure 21, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, 100% of people within the impacted keyhole evacuate. 20% of those people within the EPZ, not within the impacted keyhole, will voluntarily evacuate. 20% of those people within the Shadow Region (the area beyond the EPZ boundary out to 15 miles radially from BNP) will voluntarily evacuate.

4. The DYNEV II model is used to compute ETE in this study.

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

6. The existing EPZ and Zone boundaries are used. (See Figure 31.)

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

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

9. ETE are presented for the evacuation of the 90th and 100th percentiles of population for each Region and for each Scenario. The percentile ETE is defined as the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) issued to a specific Region of the EPZ, to the time that Region is clear of the indicated percentile of evacuees. A Region is defined as a group of zones that is issued an Advisory to Evacuate. A scenario is a combination of circumstances, including time of day, day of week, season, and weather conditions.

10. This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of the first time period. Rather, there is a 45minute initialization period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from the first time period are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of the first time period depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated. See Section 3.11.

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

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

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

See Section 5.1 for more detail.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

11. To account for boundary conditions beyond the study area, this study assumes a 25%

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

12. The ETE also includes consideration of through (ExternalExternal) trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region. See Section 3.10.

2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times

1. Trip generation time (also known as mobilization time, or the time required by evacuees to prepare for the evacuation) are based upon the results of the demographic survey (See Section 5 and Appendix F). It is assumed that stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur.

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

3. Commuter percentages (and percentage of residents awaiting the return of a commuter) are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, 60.9% of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter; 69.9% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip. Therefore, 42.6 percent (60.9% x 69.9% = 42.6%) of EPZ households will await the return of a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.

2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions

1. The percentage of transitdependent people who will rideshare with a neighbor or friend will be based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 84% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

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

a. Schools and childcare facilities

i. If schools are in session, buses will evacuate students, including children at preschools and childcare centers, directly to the designated relocation schools (pickup points).

ii. It is assumed staff will accompany students on buses.

iii. It is assumed that parents will not pick up children at preschools and childcare facilities prior to evacuation7.

iv. Schoolchildren, if school is in session, are given priority in assigning 7

According to the BNP 2021 Emergency Preparedness Information, for Preschools and Childcare Centers, children will be transported directly to Relocation Schools (Pickup Points).

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

transit vehicles.

b. Medical Facilities

i. Buses, shuttle buses, trollies, paratransit vehicles and ambulances will evacuate patients at medical facilities and at any senior facilities within EPZ, as needed.

ii. The percent breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients from the 2017 study will be used to determine the number of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at the medical facilities wherein data was not provided.

c. Transitdependent permanent residents

i. Transitdependent general population are evacuated to reception centers.

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

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

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

e. Transport of transitdependent evacuees from reception centers/relocation schools (pickup points) to congregate care centers is not considered in this study.

3. Transit vehicle capacities:

a. School buses = the study assumes an average 50 students per bus according to the Standard Operating Guideline (SOG) for Brunswick County and New Hanover County schools.

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

c. Basic Life Support (BLS) (ambulances) = 2 bedridden persons

d. Paratransit = 15 wheelchair bound and/or persons.

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

a. School buses will arrive at schools, preschools, and childcare centers to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

b. Transit dependent buses are mobilized within 135 minutes of the ATE, which is the time it takes approximately 75% of residents with no commuters to complete their mobilization. If necessary, multiple waves of buses will be utilized to gather transit dependent people who mobilize more slowly.

c. Vehicles will arrive at hospitals and medical facilities to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. School buses will be loaded in 15 minutes.

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

6. It is assumed that drivers are available for transit dependent and special facility vehicles.

2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions

1. Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Security Road Blocks (SRBs) as defined in the approved county and state emergency plans are considered in the ETE analysis, as per NRC guidance. See Appendix G.

2. TCP and SRB will be staffed within approximately 120 minutes after the ATE, as per NRC guidance. It is assumed that no through traffic will enter the EPZ after this 120minute time period.

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

2.6 Scenarios and Regions

1. A total of 12 Scenarios representing different temporal variations (season, time of day, day of week) and weather conditions are considered. Scenarios to be considered are defined in Table 21:

a. Fourth of July in Southport is considered as the special event (single or multiday event that attracts a significant population into the EPZ; recommended by NRC guidance) for Scenario 11.

b. As per NRC guidance, one segment of one of the highest volume roadways was set to be out of service for the roadway impact scenario. This study will consider the closure of a roadway segment of SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way SE for the roadway impact scenario - Scenario 12.

2. One type of adverse weather scenario is considered. Rain may occur for either winter or summer scenarios. It is assumed that the rain begins earlier or at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued. No weatherrelated reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed.

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

Transportation research indicates capacity and speed reductions of about 10% for rain.

In accordance with Table 31 of Revision 1 to NUREG/CR7002, this study assumes a 10%

reduction in speed and capacity for rain, as shown in Table 22.

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

5. It is also assumed that mobilization and loading times for transit vehicles are slightly longer in adverse weather. It is assumed that mobilization times are 10 minutes longer in rain. It is assumed that loading times are 5 minutes longer in rain. Refer to Table 22.

6. Regions are defined by the underlying keyhole or circular configurations as specified in Section 1.4 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. These Regions, as defined, display irregular Brunswick Nuclear Plant 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

boundaries reflecting the geography of the Zones included within these underlying configurations. All 16 cardinal and intercardinal wind direction keyhole configurations are considered. Regions to be considered are defined in Table 61. It is assumed that everyone within the group of Zones forming a Region that is issued an ATE will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.

7. Due to the irregular shapes of the Zones, there are instances where a small portion of a Zone (a sliver) is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (less than 500 people or 10% of the Zone population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the Zone would not be included in the Region so as to not evacuate large numbers of people outside of the keyhole for a small number of people that are actually in the keyhole, unless otherwise stated in the PAR document.

8. Staged evacuation is considered as defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 - those people beyond 2 and 10 miles will shelterinplace until 90% of the 2Mile Region has evacuated, then they will evacuate. See Regions R19 through R35 in Table 61.

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend 4th of July 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good Festival in Southport Closure of a 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good segment of SR 211 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Highway Free Flow Mobilization Time for Mobilization Time for Loading Time for Scenario Capacity* Speed* General Population Transit Vehicles Transit Vehicles Rain 90% 90% No Effect 10 Minute Increase 5 Minute Increase

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Brunswick Nuclear Plant 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3 DEMAND ESTIMATION The estimates of demand, expressed in terms of people and vehicles, constitute a critical element in developing an evacuation plan. These estimates consist of three components:

1. An estimate of population within the EPZ, stratified into groups (e.g., resident, employee, transient).

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

3. An estimate of potential doublecounting of vehicles.

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

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

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

A resident who works and shops within the EPZ could be counted as a resident, again as an employee and once again as a shopper.

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

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

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

Permanent residents people who are yearround residents of the EPZ.

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

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

Estimates of the population and number of evacuating vehicles for each of the population groups are presented for each Zone and by polar coordinate representation (population distribution). The BNP EPZ is subdivided into 13 Zones. The Zones comprising EPZ are shown in Figure 31.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.1 Permanent Residents The primary source for estimating permanent population is the latest U.S. Census data with an availability date of September 16, 2021. The average household size (2.11 persons/household was estimated using the U.S. Census data - See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.1). The number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.54 vehicles/household - See Appendix F, Subsection F.3.2) was adapted from the demographic survey.

The permanent resident population is estimated by cutting the census block polygons by the Zone and EPZ boundaries using GIS software. A ratio of the original area of each census block and the updated area (after cutting) is multiplied by the total block population to estimate the population within the EPZ. This methodology (referred to as the area ratio method) assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 31 provides permanent resident population within the EPZ, by Zone, for 2010 and for 2020 (based on the methodology above). As indicated, the permanent resident population within the EPZ has increased by 25.5% since the 2010 Census.

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

3.3 Transient Population Transient population groups are defined as those people (who are not permanent residents, nor commuting employees) who enter the EPZ for a specific purpose (shopping, recreation).

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

Data for the new facilities were provided by the EPZ counties, supplemented by internet searches and aerial imagery where data was not provided. For those newly identified facilities, it is assumed that transients would travel as a family/household. As such, the average household size of 2.11 persons per household (see Section 3.1) was used to estimate the transients and transient vehicles at facilities wherein data could not be obtained. Overall, the average transient vehicle occupancy rates vary by facility from one to six persons per vehicle.

The transient facilities within the BNP EPZ are summarized as follows:

Beaches - 48,899 transients and 15,796 vehicles; an average of 3.10 transients per vehicle Campgrounds - 652 transients and 386 vehicles; an average of 1.69 transients per vehicle Golf Courses - 305 transients and 132 vehicles; an average of 2.31 transients per vehicle Historical Sites - 1,550 transients and 709 vehicles; an average of 2.19 transients per vehicle Marinas - 1,463 transients and 770 vehicles; an average of 1.90 transients per vehicle Parks and Other Recreational Areas - 1,224 transients and 629 vehicles; an average of 1.95 transients per vehicle Lodging Facilities - 5,301 transients and 1,900 vehicles; an average of 2.79 transients per vehicle It is recognized there are a number of shortterm vacation rentals (AirBnb, VRBO, etc.) along the coast in New Hanover County and on Oak Island. Since many of these visitors utilizes the Brunswick Nuclear Plant 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

beaches, golf courses, parks and other recreational facilities in the EPZ, it is assumed these people are already included in the data estimates for these facilities. For this reason, the population at the shortterm rental homes are not included in the study to avoid double counting.

Appendix E summarizes the transient data that was estimated for the EPZ. Table E4 presents the number of transients visiting recreational areas, while Table E5 presents the number of transients at lodging facilities within the EPZ.

In total, there are 59,394 transients and 20,322 vehicles (an average of 2.92 transients per vehicle) in the EPZ. Table 34 presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by Zone. Figure 36 and Figure 37 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.

3.4 Employees The estimate of employees who work within the EPZ is based on the 2018 Workplace Area Characteristic (WAC) data from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool1 extrapolated to 2020 using the shortterm employment projection for the State of North Carolina2.

The WAC data provides the employee counts by industry sector for each census block within the BNP EPZ. Since not all employees are working at facilities within the EPZ at one time, a maximum shift reduction was applied to each census block. Assuming maximum shift employment occurs Monday through Friday between 9 AM and 5 PM, the following jobs take place outside the typical 95 workday:

Manufacturing - takes place in shifts over 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation - takes place in evenings and on weekends Accommodations and Food Services - peaks in the evenings Therefore, the number of employees working in these 3 industry sectors was subtracted from the total number for each census block to represent the maximum number of employees present in the EPZ at any one time. As per the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 guidance, employers with 200 or more employees working in a single shift are considered as the major employers.

As such, the census blocks with less than 200 employees (during the maximum shift) are not included in this study.

Employees who work within the EPZ fall into two categories:

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

Those of the first category are already counted as part of the permanent resident population. To avoid double counting, we focus only on those employees commuting from outside the EPZ who will evacuate along with the permanent resident population. The 2018 1

http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/ OnTheMap is an interactive map displaying workplace and residential distributions by user-defined geographies at census block level detail. It also reports the work characteristics detail on age, and earnings industry groups.

2 https://www.nccommerce.com/data-tools-reports/labor-market-data-tools/employment-projections Brunswick Nuclear Plant 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

LEHD (Longitudinal EmployerHousehold Dynamics) OriginDestination Employment Statistics (LODES) data3 from OnTheMap website was then used to estimate the percent of employees that work within the EPZ but live outside. This value, 61.4%, was applied to the maximum shift employee values to compute the number of people commuting into the EPZ to work at peak times.

Plant employment data and percent of employees commuting into the EPZ to work at BNP was provided by Duke Energy and supplemented for the census block in Zone 1 where the plant is located. As such, the plant employment data is reflected in the Brunswick County employment subtotal in Table E3.

To estimate the evacuating employee vehicles, a vehicle occupancy of 1.07 employees per vehicle obtained from the demographic survey (See Section F.3.1) was used for all major employers. Table 35 presents the estimates of employees and vehicles commuting into the EPZ by Zone. Figure 38 and Figure 39 present these data by sector.

3.5 Medical Facilities Medical facility data were provided by counties for most of the medical facilities within the EPZ.

Online data and data from the previous ETE study was used for medical facilities in which data could not be provided. Table E3 in Appendix E summarizes the medical facility data within EPZ.

Table 36 presents the capacity and current census of each medical facility in the EPZ for which data was received. As shown in Table 36, 247 people have been identified as living in, or being treated in, these facilities. Since the average number of patients as these facilities fluctuates often, the percent breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound, and bedridden patients from the previous study was used to determine the number of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at the medical facilities within the EPZ for this study for which data was not provided.

Table 36 also presents the transportation requirements for the medical facilities located in the EPZ. The number of ambulance runs is determined by assuming that 2 patients can be accommodated per ambulance trip; the number of wheelchair bus runs assumes 15 wheelchairs per trip; and the number of bus runs estimated assumes 30 ambulatory patients per trip.

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

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

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

3 The LODES data is part of the LEHD data products from the U.S. Census Bureau. This dataset provides detailed spatial distributions of workers employment and residential locations and the relation between the two at the census block level. For detailed information, please refer to this site: https://lehd.ces.census.gov/data/

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Table 37 presents estimates of transitdependent people. Note:

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

• It is reasonable and appropriate to consider that many transitdependent persons will evacuate by ridesharing with neighbors, friends or family. For example, nearly 80 percent of those who evacuated from Mississauga, Ontario who did not use their own cars shared a ride with neighbors or friends. Other documents report that approximately 70 percent of transit dependent persons were evacuated via ride sharing. Based on the results of the demographic survey, 84% of the transit dependent population will rideshare.

The estimated number of bus trips needed to service transitdependent persons is based on an estimate of an average bus occupancy of 30 persons at the conclusion of the bus run. Transit vehicle seating capacities typically equal or exceed 60 children on average (roughly equivalent to 40 adults). If transit vehicle evacuees are two thirds adults and one third children, then the number of adult seats taken by 30 persons is 20 + (2/3 x10) = 27. On this basis, the average load factor anticipated is (27/40) x 100 = 68 percent. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 37 by 50 percent, the demand for service can still be accommodated by the available bus seating capacity.

2 20 10 40 1.5 1.00 3

Table 37 indicates that transportation must be provided for 213 people. Therefore, a total of 8 bus runs are required to transport this population to reception centers. In order to service all of the transit dependent population and have a least one bus drive through each of the Zones, except Zone 13 since it is not connected the roadway system within the rest of the EPZ, picking up transit dependent people, 14 bus runs are used in the ETE calculations (even though only 8 buses are needed from a capacity standpoint). These buses are represented as two vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Where, A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 20,963 . 0106 4.33 0.127 1.47 1 0.609 0.301 0.542 2.34 2 0.609 0.301 1,321 1 0.84 30 8 These calculations are explained as follows:

• The number of households (HH) is computed by dividing the EPZ population by the average household size (44,231 ÷ 2.11) and is 20,963.

• All of the members of HH (4.33) with no vehicles (1.06%) are assumed to need public transit or will rideshare.

• The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (12.7%), who are at home, equal (1.471).

The number of these HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (20,963 x 0.127 x 0.47 x 0.609 x 0.301), as 60.9% of EPZ households have a commuter, 30.1% of which would not return home in the event of an emergency.

The number of persons who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms.

• The members of HH with 2 vehicles that are away (54.2%), who are at home, equal (2.34 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 20,963 x 0.542 x 0.34 x (0.609 x 0.301)2. The number of persons who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms (the last term is squared to represent the probability that neither commuter will return).

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

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

3.7 School Population Demand Table 38 presents the school/daycare population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all schools within the EPZ for the 20202021 school year. This information was provided by the counties. The column in Table 38 entitled Buses Required specifies the number of buses required for each school under the following set of assumptions and estimates:

• No students will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

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

• Bus capacity, expressed in students per bus, is 50 according to the Standard Operating Guideline (SOG) for Brunswick County and New Hanover County Schools.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• According to the Brunswick County Schools REP, staff will accompany students during evacuation.

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

It is recommended that the counties in the EPZ implement a process to confirm individual school transportation needs prior to bus dispatch which may improve bus utilization. In this way, the number of buses dispatched to the schools will reflect the actual number needed. The need for buses would be reduced by any high school students who have evacuated using private automobiles (if permitted by school authorities). Those buses originally allocated to evacuate schoolchildren that are not needed due to children being picked up by their parents, can be gainfully assigned to service other facilities or those persons who do not have access to private vehicles or to ridesharing. In reality, if a subset of Zones, rather than the entire EPZ, is evacuated, less buses would be needed than the total number of buses required shown in Table 38.

Table 103 presents a list of the relocation schools for each school in the EPZ. Students will be transported to these schools where they will be subsequently retrieved by their respective families.

3.8 Special Event A special event can attract large numbers of transients to the EPZ for short periods of time, creating a temporary surge in demand as per Section 2.5.1 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. The county and state emergency management agencies were polled regarding potential special events in the EPZ. The only potential special event (Scenario 11) identified by the county and state agencies (that attracts transients from outside the EPZ) is 4th of July festival in Southport.

Data for this event was preserved from the previous study. According to Duke Energy, approximately 30,000 people attend the festival in 10,000 vehicles. It is estimated that 65% of the attendees are transients. Therefore, this study considers 19,500 transients and 6,500 additional vehicles for the special event (Scenario 11). It was conservatively assumed that the people present for this event are not staying to lodging facilities or are already counted at other transient facilities within the EPZ. The special event vehicle trips were generated utilizing the transit mobilization distribution, see Section 5.

3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population The county emergency management agencies have a combined registration for transit dependent and access and/or functional needs persons. Based on data provided by the counties, there are 426 registered access and/or functional needs people within the New Hanover County portion of the EPZ, 868 people within the Brunswick County portion of the EPZ who require transportation assistance to evacuate. Details on whether or not these people are ambulatory, wheelchairbound or bedridden was not available. It is assumed that the percentage of ambulatory (59.5%), wheelchairbound (30.0%) and bedridden populations (10.5%) are similar to the percentages of medical facilities. Thus these 1,294 people are comprised of 770 ambulatory persons, 388 wheelchairbound persons and 68 bedridden Brunswick Nuclear Plant 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

persons (see Table 39). The number of each vehicle type shown takes into consideration multiple vehicles to reduce the number of stops per vehicle. Buses and wheelchair buses needed to evacuate the access and/or functional needs population are represented as two vehicles in the ETE simulations due to their larger size and more sluggish operating characteristics.

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

These through vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes through the study area.

Although there are no major routes that traverse the EPZ, however, US17 does traverse through the Shadow Region. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the Shadow Region during the first 120 minutes following the Advisory to Evacuate.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data was obtained from North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to estimate the number of vehicles per hour on the aforementioned routes. The AADT was multiplied by the KFactor, which is the proportion of the AADT on a roadway segment or link during the design hour, resulting in the design hour volume (DHV).

The design hour is usually the 30th highest hourly traffic volume of the year, measured in vehicles per hour (vph). The DHV is then multiplied by the DFactor, which is the proportion of the DHV occurring in the peak direction of travel (also known as the directional split). The resulting values are the directional design hourly volumes (DDHV) and are presented in Table 310, for each of the routes considered. The DDHV is then multiplied by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> (Security Road Blocks - SRBs - are assumed to be activated at 120 minutes after the advisory to evacuate) to estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. As indicated, there are 5,564 vehicles entering the EPZ as externalexternal trips prior to the activation of the SRBs and the diversion of this traffic. This number is reduced by 60% for evening scenarios (Scenarios 5 and 10) as discussed in Section 6.

3.11 Background Traffic Section 5 discusses the time needed for the people in the EPZ to mobilize and begin their evacuation trips. As shown in Table 58, there are 14 time periods during which traffic is loaded on to roadways in the study area to model the mobilization time of people in the EPZ. Note, there is no traffic generated during the 15th time period, as this time period is intended to allow traffic that has already begun evacuating to clear the study area boundaries.

This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of Time Period 1. Rather, there is a 45minute initialization time period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from Time Period 1 are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of Time Period 1 depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated (see Section 6). There are 1,789 vehicles on the roadways in the study area at the end of fill time for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R02) under Scenario 3 (summer, weekend, midday, good Brunswick Nuclear Plant 39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

weather) conditions.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

3.12 Summary of Demand A summary of population and vehicle demand is provided in Table 311 and Table 312, respectively. This summary includes all population groups described in this section. A total of 136,908 people and 72,049 vehicles are considered in this study.

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2010 Population 2020 Population 1 2,689 3,475 2 2,774 3,348 3 663 652 4 5,868 7,368 5 5,627 9,734 6 1,148 1,277 7 4,193 4,494 8 1,711 1,888 9 195 124 10 7,841 8,872 11 2,383 2,731 12 0 0 13 158 268 EPZ TOTAL: 35,250 44,231 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 25.48%

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone 2020 Zone 2020 Population Resident Vehicles 1 3,475 2,636 2 3,348 2,445 3 652 476 4 7,368 5,367 5 9,734 7,098 6 1,277 931 7 4,494 3,260 8 1,888 1,374 9 124 91 10 8,872 6,477 11 2,731 1,996 12 0 0 13 268 04 EPZ TOTAL: 44,231 32,151 4

There are no vehicles permitted on Bald Head Island (Zone 13). The 196 resident vehicles for Bald Head Island are included at the Southport ferry terminal (Zone 1) for this study.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Sector 2020 Population Evacuating Vehicles N 1,225 870 NNE 27,298 19,777 NE 4,673 3,411 ENE 0 0 E 0 0 ESE 0 0 SE 0 0 SSE 0 0 S 0 0 SSW 0 0 SW 0 0 WSW 178 130 W 5,610 4,091 WNW 2,434 1,724 NW 1,243 731 NNW 1,874 1,367 TOTAL: 44,535 32,101 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles Zone Transients Transient Vehicles 1 405 825 2 661 277 3 175 60 4 29,808 10,033 5 424 241 6 186 93 7 38 18 8 0 0 9 100 30 10 19,074 6,206 11 7,285 2,539 12 0 0 13 1,238 05 EPZ TOTAL: 59,394 20,322 5

The transient vehicles for Bald Head Island (Zone 13) are included at the Southport ferry terminal (Zone 1) for this study.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ Zone Employees Employee Vehicles 1 638 590 2 141 132 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 8 0 0 9 0 0 10 154 144 11 0 0 12 0 0 13 0 0 EPZ TOTAL: 933 866 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand Wheel Wheel chair Current Ambu chair Bed Bus Bus Zone Facility Name Municipality Capacity Census latory Bound ridden Runs Runs Ambulance BRUNSWICK, NORTH CAROLINA 1 Elmcroft of Southport Southport 96 61 52 9 0 2 1 0 Southport Health & Rehabilitation Southport 60 50 38 7 5 2 1 3 1 Center J Arthur Dosher Memorial Hospital Southport N/A 69 16 39 14 1 3 7 1 & Skilled Nursing Center 6 The Landings of Oak Island Bolivia 80 67 41 19 7 2 2 4 TOTAL: N/A 247 147 74 26 7 7 14 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Percent Survey Average HH Size Survey Percent HH Survey Percent HH Total People Population with Indicated No. of Estimated with Indicated No. of Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring 2018 EPZ Vehicles No. of Vehicles with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 44,231 4.33 1.47 2.34 20,963 1.06% 12.70% 54.20% 60.9% 30.1% 1,321 84% 213 0.5%

Table 38. School and Preschools/Childcare Center Population Demand Estimates Buses Zone School Name Enrollment Required 1 Childcare Network 147 3 1 Southport Baptist Church Preschool 52 2 2 Kids World Academy 29 1 2 Southport Elementary School 588 12 2 L & L Montessori School 51 2 4 Sharon's Childcare 8 1 5 Kids World Academy II 5 1 5 Southport Christian School 120 3 7 South Brunswick High School 1,141 23 7 South Brunswick Middle School 729 15 7 Learn and Play 8 1 10 Carolina Beach After School Program 82 2 10 Carolina Beach Elementary 461 10 10 Island Time DropNPlay 62 2 TOTAL: 3,483 78 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary Population Group Population Vehicles deployed Buses 770 55 Paratransit 388 48 Vehicles Ambulances 136 68 Total: 1,294 171 Table 310. BNP EPZ External Traffic Upstream Downstream NC DOT1 & Hourly External Road Name Direction KFactor2 DFactor2 Node Node AADT Volume Traffic 8028 760 US17 SB 26,000 0.107 0.5 1,391 2,782 8284 284 US17 NB 26,000 0.107 0.5 1,391 2,782 TOTAL 5,564 1

NCDOT Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Mapping Application: https://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=964881960f0549de8c3583bf46ef5ed4 2

HCM 2016 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 311. Summary of Population Demand6 Transit Special Special Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Schools Event Population7 Traffic Total 1 3,475 17 405 638 180 199 13,650 0 0 18,564 2 3,348 16 661 141 0 668 5,850 0 0 10,684 3 652 3 175 0 0 0 0 0 0 830 4 7,368 35 29,808 0 0 8 0 0 0 37,219 5 9,734 47 424 0 0 125 0 0 0 10,330 6 1,277 6 186 0 67 0 0 0 0 1,536 7 4,494 22 38 0 0 1,878 0 0 0 6,432 8 1,888 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,897 9 124 1 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 10 8,872 43 19,074 154 0 605 0 0 0 28,748 11 2,731 13 7,285 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,029 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 268 18 1,238 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,507 Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,907 0 8,907 Total 44,231 213 59,394 933 247 3,483 19,500 8,907 0 136,908 NOTE: Shadow Population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 21 for additional information.

6 Access and Functional Needs Population was not included in Table 3-11 as the spatial distribution of these people is unknown.

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

8 Assumed to evacuate from Zone 1.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand Transit Special Special Shadow External Zone Residents9 Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Schools10 Event Population11 Traffic Total 1 2,636 2 825 590 30 10 4,550 0 0 8,643 2 2,445 2 277 132 0 30 1,950 0 0 4,836 3 476 2 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 538 4 5,367 4 10,033 0 0 2 0 0 0 15,406 5 7,098 4 241 0 0 8 0 0 0 7,351 6 931 2 93 0 12 0 0 0 0 1,038 7 3,260 2 18 0 0 78 0 0 0 3,358 8 1,374 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,376 9 91 2 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 10 6,477 4 6,206 144 0 28 0 0 0 12,859 11 1,996 2 2,539 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,537 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,420 5,564 11,984 Total 32,151 28 20,322 866 42 156 6,500 6,420 5,564 72,049 9

Vehicles for residents on Bald Head Island are located within Zone 1.

10 Buses evacuating children from schools are represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 3.7 and Section 8 for additional information.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 31. Zones Comprising the BNP EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 326 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 327 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY The ability of the road network to service vehicle demand is a major factor in determining how rapidly an evacuation can be completed. The capacity of a road is defined as the maximum hourly rate at which persons or vehicles can reasonably be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a lane of roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic and control conditions, as stated in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016). This section discusses how the capacity of the roadway network was estimated.

In discussing capacity, different operating conditions have been assigned alphabetical designations, A through F, to reflect the range of traffic operational characteristics. These designations have been termed "Levels of Service" (LOS). For example, LOS A connotes freeflow and highspeed operating conditions; LOS F represents a forced flow condition. LOS E describes traffic operating at or near capacity.

Another concept, closely associated with capacity, is Service Volume. Service volume (SV) is defined as The maximum hourly rate at which vehicles, bicycles or persons reasonably can be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a roadway during an hour under specific assumed conditions while maintaining a designated level of service. This definition is similar to that for capacity. The major distinction is that values of SV vary from one LOS to another, while capacity is the SV at the upper bound of LOS E, only.

Thus, in simple terms, a SV is the maximum traffic that can travel on a road and still maintain a certain perceived level of quality to a driver based on the A, B, C, rating system (LOS). Any additional vehicles above the SV would drop the rating to a lower letter grade.

This distinction is illustrated in Exhibit 1237 of the HCM 2016. As indicated there, the SV varies with Free Flow Speed (FFS), and LOS. The SV is calculated by the DYNEV II simulation model, based on the specified link attributes, FFS, capacity, control device and traffic demand.

Other factors also influence capacity. These include, but are not limited to:

Lane width Shoulder width Pavement condition Horizontal and vertical alignment (curvature and grade)

Percent truck traffic Control device (and timing, if it is a signal)

Weather conditions (rain, fog, wind speed)

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Station 41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

As discussed in Section 2.6, it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent the prevailing conditions. Adverse conditions like inclement weather, construction, and other incidents tend to slow traffic down and often, also increase vehicletovehicles separation, thus decreasing the amount of traffic flow. Based on limited empirical data, conditions such as rain reduce the values of freeflow speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10 percent. Over the last decade new studies have been made on the effects of rain on traffic capacity. These studies indicate a range of effects between 5 and 20 percent depending on wind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.6, we employ a reduction in free speed and in highway capacity of 10 percent for rain\light snow.

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Station 42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

3600 3600 where:

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

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

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

Formally, we can write, where:

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Station 44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The value of VF can be expressed as:

where:

R = Reduction factor which is less than unity We have employed a value of R=0.90. The advisability of such a capacity reduction factor is based upon empirical studies that identified a falloff in the service flow rate when congestion occurs at bottlenecks or choke points on a freeway system. Zhang and Levinson3 describe a research program that collected data from a computerbased surveillance system (loop detectors) installed on the Interstate Highway System, at 27 active bottlenecks in the twin cities metro area in Minnesota over a 7week period. When flow breakdown occurs, queues are formed which discharge at lower flow rates than the maximum capacity prior to observed breakdown. These queue discharge flow (QDF) rates vary from one location to the next and vary by day of week and time of day based upon local circumstances. The cited reference presents a mean QDF of 2,016 passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl). This figure compares with the nominal capacity estimate of 2,250 pcphpl estimated for the ETE and indicated in Appendix K for freeway links. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 which translates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.

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

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Station 45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The procedure used here was to estimate "section" capacity, VE, based on observations made traveling over each section of the evacuation network, based on the posted speed limits and travel behavior of other motorists and by reference to the HCM 2016. The DYNEV II simulation model determines for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether its capacity would be limited by the "sectionspecific" service volume, VE, or by the intersectionspecific capacity. For each link, the model selects the lower value of capacity.

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

2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016)

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

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

TwoLane roads: Local, State Multilane Highways (atgrade)

Freeways Each of these classifications will be discussed.

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Station 46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4.3.2 Multilane Highway Ref: HCM Chapter 12 Exhibit 128 of the HCM 2016 presents a set of curves that indicate a perlane capacity ranging from approximately 1,900 to 2,300 pc/h, for freespeeds of 45 to 70 mph, respectively. Based on observation, the multilane highways outside of urban areas within the study area, service traffic with freespeeds in this range. The actual timevarying speeds computed by the simulation model reflect the demand and capacity relationship and the impact of control at intersections. A conservative estimate of perlane capacity of 1,900 pc/h is adopted for this study for multilane highways outside of urban areas, as shown in Appendix K.

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

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

Free Speed (mph): 55 60 65 70+

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

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

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

Chapter 14 of the HCM 2016 presents procedures for estimating capacities of ramps and of "merge" areas. There are three significant factors to the determination of capacity of a ramp freeway junction: The capacity of the freeway immediately downstream of an onramp or immediately upstream of an offramp; the capacity of the ramp roadway; and the maximum flow rate entering the ramp influence area. In most cases, the freeway capacity is the controlling factor. Values of this merge area capacity are presented in Exhibit 1410 of the HCM Brunswick Nuclear Station 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2016 and depend on the number of freeway lanes and on the freeway free speed. Ramp capacity is presented in Exhibit 1412 and is a function of the ramp FFS. The DYNEV II simulation model logic simulates the merging operations of the ramp and freeway traffic in accord with the procedures in Chapter 14 of the HCM 2016. If congestion results from an excess of demand relative to capacity, then the model allocates service appropriately to the two entering traffic streams and produces LOS F conditions (The HCM does not address LOS F explicitly).

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

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

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

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

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

This statement succinctly describes the analyses required to determine traffic operations across an area encompassing a study area operating under evacuation conditions. The model utilized for this study, DYNEV II, is further described in Appendix C. It is essential to recognize that simulation models do not replicate the methodology and procedures of the HCM 2016 - they replace these procedures by describing the complex interactions of traffic flow and computing Brunswick Nuclear Station 48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) detailing the operational performance of traffic over time and by location. The DYNEV II simulation model includes some HCM 2016 procedures only for the purpose of estimating capacity.

All simulation models must be calibrated properly with field observations that quantify the performance parameters applicable to the analysis network. Two of the most important of these are: (1) FFS; and (2) saturation headway, hsat. The first of these is estimated by direct observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using the concepts of the HCM 2016, as described earlier. These parameters are listed in Appendix K, for each network link.

It is important to note that simulation represents a mathematical representation of an assumed set of conditions using the best available knowledge and understanding of traffic flow and available inputs. Simulation should not be assumed to be a prediction of what will happen under any event because a real evacuation can be impacted by an infinite number of things -

many of which will differ from these test cases - and many others cannot be taken into account with the tools available.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Station 49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kopt kj ks Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams Brunswick Nuclear Station 410 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal guidelines (see NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1) specify that the planner estimate the distributions of elapsed times associated with mobilization activities undertaken by the public to prepare for the evacuation trip. The elapsed time associated with each activity is represented as a statistical distribution reflecting differences between members of the public.

The quantification of these activitybased distributions relies largely on the results of the demographic survey. We define the sum of these distributions of elapsed times as the Trip Generation Time Distribution.

5.1 Background

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

1. Unusual Event

2. Alert

3. Site Area Emergency

4. General Emergency At each level, the Federal guidelines specify a set of Actions to be undertaken by the Licensee, and by State and Local offsite authorities. As a Planning Basis, we will adopt a conservative posture, in accordance with Section 1.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, that a rapidly escalating event will be considered in calculating the Trip Generation Time. It is assumed that:

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

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

3. Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) are measured relative to the ATE.

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

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

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

It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various classes of an emergency. For example, suppose one hour elapses from the siren alert to the ATE. In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public during this onehour period. As a result, the population within the EPZ will be lower when the ATE is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an Advisory will be broadcast. Thus, the time needed to complete the mobilization activities and the number of people remaining to evacuate the EPZ after the ATE, will both be somewhat less than the estimates presented in this report. Consequently, the Brunswick Nuclear Plant 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

The notification process consists of two events:

1. Transmitting information using the alert and notification systems available within the EPZ (e.g. sirens, tone alerts, EAS broadcasts, loudspeakers).

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

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 218 square miles and is engaged in a wide variety of activities. It must be anticipated that some time will elapse between the transmission and receipt of the information advising the public of an accident.

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

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

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

As indicated in Section 4.1 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from a demographic survey of EPZ residents. Such a survey was conducted in support of this ETE study. Appendix F discusses the survey sampling plan, records the number of responses obtained, documents the survey instrument utilized, and provides the survey results. The remaining discussion will focus on the application of the trip generation data obtained from the demographic survey to the development of the ETE documented in this report.

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

Activities are undertaken over a period of time. Activities may be in "series" (i.e. to undertake an activity implies the completion of all preceding events) or may be in parallel (two or more Brunswick Nuclear Plant 52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

activities may take place over the same period of time). Activities conducted in series are functionally dependent on the completion of prior activities; activities conducted in parallel are functionally independent of one another. The relevant events associated with the public's preparation for evacuation are:

Event Number Event Description 1 Notification 2 Awareness of Situation 3 Depart Work 4 Arrive Home 5 Depart on Evacuation Trip Associated with each sequence of events are one or more activities, as outlined in Figure 51.

These relationships are shown graphically in Figure 51.

An Event is a state that exists at a point in time (e.g., depart work, arrive home)

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

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

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

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

It is seen from Figure 51, that the Trip Generation time (the total elapsed time from Event 1 to Event 5) depends on the scenario and will vary from one household to the next. Furthermore, Event 5 depends, in a complicated way, on the time distributions of all activities preceding that event. That is, to estimate the time distribution of Event 5, we must obtain estimates of the time distributions of all preceding events. For this study, we adopt the conservative posture that all activities will occur in sequence.

In some cases, assuming certain events occur strictly sequential (for instance, commuter returning home before beginning preparation to leave) can result in rather conservative (that is, longer) estimates of mobilization times. It is reasonable to expect that at least some parts of these events will overlap for many households, but that assumption is not made in this study.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Time Distribution No. 1, Notification Process: Activity 1 2 Federal regulations (10CFR 50 Appendix E, Item IV.D.3) stipulate, [t]he design objective of the prompt public alert and notification system shall be to have the capability to essentially complete the initial alerting and initiate notification of the public within the plume exposure pathway EPZ within about 15 minutes. Furthermore, 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual Part V Section B.1 Bullet 3 states that arrangements will be made to assure 100 percent coverage within 45 minutes of the population who may not have received the initial notification within the entire plume exposure EPZ.

Given the federal regulations and guidance, and the assumed presence of sirens within the EPZ, it is assumed that 100 percent of those within the EPZ will be aware of the accident within 45 minutes. The notification distribution is provided in Table 52.

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

To calculate the time distribution of an event that is dependent on two sequential activities, it is necessary to sum the distributions associated with these prior activities. The distribution summing algorithm is applied repeatedly as shown to form the required distribution. As an outcome of this procedure, new time distributions are formed; we assign letter designations to these intermediate distributions to describe the procedure. Table 56 presents the summing procedure to arrive at each designated distribution.

Table 57 presents a description of each of the final trip generation distributions achieved after the summing process is completed.

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

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

In assessing outliers, there are three alternatives to consider:

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

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

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

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

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

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

1) It is recognized that the overall trip generation distributions are conservative estimates, because they assume a household will do the mobilization activities sequentially, with no overlap of activities; Brunswick Nuclear Plant 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2) The individual mobilization activities (prepare to leave work, travel home, prepare home) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions are created (see Figure 51, Table 56, Table 57);

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

special needs, transit dependent) or lack of realism, because the purpose is to estimate trip generation patterns for personal vehicles;

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

In general, only flagged values more than 3 standard deviations from the mean are allowed to be considered outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected. In some cases, specifically for the distribution for the time to prepare to leave work/college, values more than 3.5 standard deviations from the mean were considered outliers due to reasonable gaps in the histogram.

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

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

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

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

Because these two features are important to preserve, it is the histogram of the data that is used to describe the mobilization activities, not a normal curve fit to the data. One could consider other distributions, but using the shape of the actual data curve is unambiguous and preserves these important features; Brunswick Nuclear Plant 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

This is done by using the data sets and distributions under different scenarios (e.g. commuter returning, no commuter returning). In general, these are additive, using weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 54 presents the combined trip generation distributions for each population group considered. These distributions are presented on the same time scale. (As discussed earlier, the use of strictly additive activities is a conservative approach, because it makes all activities sequential - preparation for departure follows the return of the commuter; and so forth. In practice, it is reasonable that some of these activities are done in parallel, at least to some extent - for instance, preparation to depart begins by a household member at home while the commuter is still on the road.)

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

The DYNEV II simulation model is designed to accept varying rates of vehicle trip generation for each origin centroid, expressed in the form of histograms. These histograms, which represent Distributions A, C, and D properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 58 (Distribution B, Arrive Home, omitted for clarity).

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

5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation As defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, staged evacuation consists of the prompt evacuation of the 2mile region, while those within the 2 to 5mile region shelterinplace. The BNP EPZ does not consider a 5mile evacuation (see Section 6) and will evacuate the population to the EPZ boundary. Thus, this study considers a staged evacuation of the population within the 2mile to EPZ boundary region as discussed below:

1. Zones comprising the 2mile region are advised to evacuate immediately

2. Zones comprising regions extending from 2 miles to the EPZ boundary downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the 2mile region is cleared

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2mile region, sheltered people from 2 miles to the EPZ boundary downwind continue preparation for evacuation

4. The population sheltering in the 2 miletoEPZ boundary region are advised to begin evacuating when approximately 90 percent of those originally within the 2 mile region evacuate across the 2 mile region boundary

5. Noncompliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadow evacuation percentage of 20 percent Brunswick Nuclear Plant 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Assumptions

1. The EPZ population in Zones beyond 2 miles will first shelter, then evacuate after the 90th percentile ETE for the 2mile region

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

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

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

Procedure

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

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

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

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

i. The nonshelter trip generation curve is followed until a maximum of 20 percent of the total trips are generated (to account for shelter non compliance).

ii. No additional trips are generated until time TScen*

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

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

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

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

The value of TScen* is 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 15 minutes on average for all scenarios (see Region R01 in Table 71).

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters Figure 55 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters; the 90th percentile twomile evacuation time is 195 minutes. At the 90th percentile evacuation time, 20% of the population (who normally would have completed their mobilization activities for an unstaged evacuation) advised to shelter has nevertheless departed the area. These people do not comply with the shelter advisory. Also included on the plot are the trip generation distributions for these groups as applied to the regions advised to evacuate immediately.

Since the 90th percentile evacuation time occurs before the end of the trip generation time, after the sheltered region is advised to evacuate, the shelter trip generation distribution rises to meet the balance of the nonstaged trip generation distribution. Following time TScen*, the balance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 15 minutes. After TScen*+15, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the unstaged trip generation distribution.

Table 59 provides the trip generation histograms for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas According to Annex G of the North Carolina Radiological Emergency Preparedness Plan, protective actions within water operational areas will be taken to evacuate people from threatened areas and also to prevent access to these areas. The organizations responsible for these actions are as follows:

1. United States Coast Guard

2. NC Wildlife Commission

3. NC Marine Patrol

4. NC Department of Public Safety

5. NC Division of Parks and Recreation

6. North Carolina State Emergency Response Team (SERT)

7. Brunswick County

8. New Hanover County

9. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

10. Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point

11. NCDOT Ferry System

12. NCNG Training Center at Ft Fisher As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes which is consistent with the FEMA REP Manual. Table 58 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />. It is assumed that this 2hour timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and other transients, including those at short term rentals, to return to their vehicles and begin their evacuation trip.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities Event Sequence Activity Distribution 12 Receive Notification 1 23 Prepare to Leave Work 2 2,3 4 Travel Home 3 2,4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public Elapsed Time Percent of (Minutes) Population Notified 0 0.0%

5 7.1%

10 13.3%

15 26.5%

20 46.9%

25 66.3%

30 86.7%

35 91.8%

40 96.9%

45 100.0%

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 510 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work Cumulative Cumulative Percent Percent Elapsed Time Employees Elapsed Time Employees (Minutes) Leaving Work (Minutes) Leaving Work 0 0.0% 40 93.9%

5 36.9% 45 94.9%

10 55.6% 50 95.3%

15 70.8% 55 95.3%

20 78.6% 60 100.0%

25 81.0%

30 88.1%

35 89.8%

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

Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Elapsed Time Percent (Minutes) Returning Home (Minutes) Returning Home 0 0.0% 35 83.1%

5 4.7% 40 87.1%

10 21.7% 45 94.2%

15 44.4% 50 98.3%

20 62.7% 55 98.6%

25 70.8% 60 100.0%

30 77.3%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Brunswick Nuclear Plant 511 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Ready to (Minutes) Evacuate 0 0.0%

15 3.0%

30 14.8%

45 26.3%

60 45.6%

75 57.8%

90 65.2%

105 68.1%

120 76.3%

135 87.4%

150 89.3%

165 90.4%

180 91.9%

195 94.8%

210 95.2%

225 95.6%

240 97.0%

255 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Table 56. Mapping Distributions to Events Apply Summing Algorithm To: Distribution Obtained Event Defined Distributions 1 and 2 Distribution A Event 3 Distributions A and 3 Distribution B Event 4 Distributions B and 4 Distribution C Event 5 Distributions 1 and 4 Distribution D Event 5 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 512 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 57. Description of the Distributions Distribution Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also applies A to employees who work within the EPZ who live outside, and to Transients within the EPZ.

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

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

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

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

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

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

2 30 69% 69% 0% 9%

3 30 21% 21% 8% 26%

4 15 3% 3% 9% 15%

5 15 1% 1% 12% 10%

6 15 0% 0% 12% 7%

7 15 0% 0% 11% 5%

8 30 0% 0% 17% 15%

9 30 0% 0% 13% 4%

10 30 0% 0% 8% 4%

11 30 0% 0% 3% 1%

12 30 0% 0% 3% 4%

13 30 0% 0% 3% 0%

14 15 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

NOTE:

Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 12) using Distribution C for good weather.

Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period*

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

2 30 0% 2%

3 30 2% 5%

4 15 1% 3%

5 15 3% 2%

6 15 2% 1%

7 15 2% 1%

8 30 4% 3%

9 30 2% 1%

10 30 74% 77%

11 30 3% 1%

12 30 3% 4%

13 30 3% 0%

14 15 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0%

• Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 57. Description of the Distributions Distribution Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also applies A to employees who work within the EPZ who live outside, and to Transients within the EPZ.

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

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

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

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

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

Table 58) is the same for Unstaged and Staged Evacuation.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1 2 3 4 5 Residents Households wait 1

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

5. Depart on evacuation trip Activities Consume Time 1

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

2 Applies throughout the year for transients.

Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip Brunswick Nuclear Plant 515 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Mobilization Activities 100%

80%

60%

Notification Prepare to Leave Work Travel Home 40%

Prepare Home 20%

Percent of Population Completing Mobilization Activity 0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Activity (min)

Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities Brunswick Nuclear Plant 516 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

Cumulative Percentage (%)

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

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

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Brunswick Nuclear Plant 518 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2mile to EPZ Boundary Area Brunswick Nuclear Plant 519 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS An evacuation case defines a combination of Evacuation Region and Evacuation Scenario.

The definitions of Region and Scenario are as follows:

Region A grouping of contiguous evacuating Zones that forms either a keyhole sectorbased area, or a circular area within the EPZ, that must be evacuated in response to a radiological emergency.

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

A total of 35 Regions were defined which encompass all the groupings of zones considered.

These Regions are defined in Table 61 and Table 62. The zone configurations are identified in Figure 61. Each keyhole sectorbased area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and three adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees, as per NUREG/CR 7002, Rev 1 guidance. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. These sectors extend to the EPZ boundary (Regions R02 through R18). Region R01 represents an evacuation of a circular area with a radius of 2 miles. Regions R19 through R34 and R35 are identical to Regions R03 through R18 and R02, respectively; however, those zones between 2 miles and 10 miles (EPZ boundary) are staged until 90% of the 2mile region (Region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 12 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 35x12=420 evacuation cases. Table 63 provides a description of all Scenarios.

Each combination of region and scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated. The population group and vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 and in Appendix E are peak values. These peak values are adjusted depending on the scenario and region being considered, using scenario and regionspecific percentages, such that the average population is considered for each evacuation case. The Scenario percentages are presented in Table 64, while the regional percentages are provided in Table H1.

Table 65 presents the vehicle counts for each scenario for an evacuation of Region R02 - the entire EPZ, based on the scenario percentages in Table 64. The Scenario percentages presented in Table 64 were determined as follows:

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to 42.6%, which is the product of 60.9% (the number of households with at least one commuter) and 69.9% (the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating). See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of households with returning commuters will have a commuter at work during those times.

It can be argued that the estimate of permanent residents overstates, somewhat, the number Brunswick Nuclear Plant 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

Assume half of these vacationers leave the area.

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

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

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

Transient activity is estimated to be at its peak during summer weekends (100%) and less (75%)

during the week due to the beaches that experience less transient activity on weekdays than weekends. As shown in Appendix E, transient activity at lodging and campgrounds offering overnight accommodations when compared to the overall number of transients is about 10%.

In addition, Carolina Beach State Park is open until 10pm and has some transient activity until it closes. As a result, transient activity during evening hours is estimated to be 20% for summer and 15% for winter. Transient activity on winter weekdays and weekends is estimated to be 35% and 65%, respectively, as many of the transient facilities are open and operational, albeit at lower occupancy rates.

As noted in the shadow footnote to Table 64, the shadow percentages are computed using a base of 20% (see assumption 3 in Section 2.2); to include the employees within the shadow region who may choose to evacuate, the voluntary evacuation is multiplied by a scenario specific proportion of employees to permanent residents in the shadow region. For example, using the values provided in Table 65 for Scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows:

831 20% 1 21%

13,682 18,469 One special event - 4th of July Festival in Southport - was considered as Scenario 11. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for Scenario 11, and 0% for all other scenarios.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

For summer, midweek, midday scenarios, it is estimated that summer school enrollment is approximately 10% of the regular school year enrollment. School is not in session during weekends and evenings, thus no buses for school children are needed under those circumstances. As discussed in Section 7, schools are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday and 100% of buses will be needed under those circumstances.

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R01 2Mile Radius x x R02 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R03 NNW, N 328°009° x x x x x R04 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R05 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R06 NE 039°051° x x x x x R07 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R08 E 091°112° x x x x x R09 ESE x x x x R10 SE, SSE x x x x x x R11 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R12 S 180°195° x x x x x x R13 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R14 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R15 W 272°288° x x x x x R16 WNW x x x x R17 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R18 NW 317°327° x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R19 NNW, N 329°009° x x x x x R20 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R21 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R22 NE 039°051° x x x x x R23 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R24 E 091°112° x x x x x R25 ESE x x x x R26 SE, SSE x x x x x x R27 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R28 S 180°195° x x x x x x R29 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R30 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R31 W 272°288° x x x x x R32 WNW x x x x R33 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R34 NW 317°327° x x x x R35 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend 4th of July 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good Festival in Southport Closure of a 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good segment of SR 211 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Households Households With Without External Returning Returning Special Medical School Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Facilities Buses Buses Traffic 1 42.6% 57.4% 96% 75% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

2 42.6% 57.4% 96% 75% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

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

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

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

6 42.6% 57.4% 100% 35% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100%

7 42.6% 57.4% 100% 35% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100%

8 4% 96% 10% 65% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100%

9 4% 96% 10% 65% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100%

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

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

12 42.6% 57.4% 96% 75% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 65. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario Households Households With Without External Total Returning Returning Special Medical School Transit Through Scenario Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Events Facilities Buses Buses Traffic Vehicles 1 13,682 18,469 831 15,242 6,586 42 16 28 5,564 60,460 2 13,682 18,469 831 15,242 6,586 42 16 28 5,564 60,460 3 1,368 30,783 87 20,322 6,438 42 28 5,564 64,632 4 1,368 30,783 87 20,322 6,438 42 28 5,564 64,632 5 1,368 30,783 87 4,064 6,438 42 28 2,226 45,036 6 13,682 18,469 866 7,113 6,593 42 156 28 5,564 52,513 7 13,682 18,469 866 7,113 6,593 42 156 28 5,564 52,513 8 1,368 30,783 87 13,209 6,438 42 28 5,564 57,519 9 1,368 30,783 87 13,209 6,438 42 28 5,564 57,519 10 1,368 30,783 87 3,048 6,438 42 28 2,226 44,020 11 1,368 30,783 87 20,322 6,438 6,500 42 28 5,564 71,132 12 13,682 18,469 831 15,242 6,586 42 16 28 5,564 60,460 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. BNP EPZ Zones Brunswick Nuclear Plant 69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE)

This section presents the ETE results of the computer analyses using the DYNEV II model described in Appendices B, C and D. These results cover 35 regions within the Brunswick Nuclear Plant (BNP) Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and the 12 Evacuation Scenarios discussed in Section 6.

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

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

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

The ETE for the BNP EPZ addresses the issue of shadow evacuees in the manner shown in Figure

71. Within the EPZ, 20 percent of permanent residents located in Zones outside of the evacuation region who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate. Similarly, it is assumed that 20 percent of those people in the Shadow Region will choose to leave the area.

Figure 72 presents the area identified as the Shadow Region. This region extends radially from the plant to cover a region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles. The population and number of evacuating vehicles in the Shadow Region were estimated using the same methodology that was used for permanent residents within the EPZ (see Section 3.1). As discussed in Section 3.2, it is estimated that a total of 44,535 people reside in the Shadow Region; 20 percent of them would evacuate. See Table 65 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

1. Zones comprising the 2mile region are advised to evacuate immediately.

2. Zones comprising regions extending from 2mile to the EPZ boundary downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the 2mile region is cleared.

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2mile region, people from 2mile to the EPZ boundary downwind continue preparation for evacuation while they shelter.

4. The population sheltering in the 2miletoEPZ boundary region is advised to evacuate when approximately 90% of the 2mile region evacuating traffic crosses the 2mile region boundary.

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

See Section 5.4.2 for additional information on staged evacuation. To avoid counting vehicles from outside of the 2mile region that utilize Long Beach Rd SE/SR 133 between SR 211 and SR 87 that could skew the results, this stretch of roadway was considered to be outside of the 2 mile region for the staged evacuation analysis.

7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation Figure 73 through Figure 711 illustrate the patterns of traffic congestion that arise for the case when the entire EPZ (Region R02) is advised to evacuate during the summer, weekend, midday period under good weather conditions (Scenario 3).

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

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Figure 73 shows people starting to mobilize and initial signs of congestion developing within the major transient population centers of Oak Island, Kure Beach and Carolina Beach, just 20 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE). Note that SR211, a primary evacuation route, is already experiencing LOS E in some parts of the EPZ. Congestion begins to develop on SR133 and the Swains Cut Bridge (SR906) as the evacuees leaving Oak Island have only two routing options. Similar to Oak Island, US421 in Carolina Beach a is also congested as this is the only exit route off of the island to the east of BNP.

At one hour and 15 minutes after the ATE, Figure 74 displays significant congestion within the major population centers and transient attractions of Oak Island, Kure Beach, Carolina Beach.

Residents in St. James have begun mobilizing and congestion has developed in St. James. Since evacuees from St. James utilize many of the same evacuation routes as evacuees from Oak Island, these roadways are capacity constrained. As a result, SR211, SR133 and SR 906/Middleton Blvd all exhibit LOS F conditions. Congestion along SR211 extends from the EPZ boundary all the way into Southport. This has encouraged many evacuees in the area to seek alternative routes to the north, primarily along SR133 and SR87. SR87 also exhibits LOS F conditions as vehicles evacuating from Southport, Oak Island, and part of St. James mix with vehicles evacuating from Boiling Spring Lakes leaving this roadway capacity constrained as well.

US 421 leaving Carolina and Kure Beaches is also severely congested as it is the only evacuation route leaving the island and must service the entire evacuating demand on the island. In addition, queues develop as evacuees attempt to access US17 - a primary evacuation route leading to major population centers and reception centers beyond the study area. SR133 north of Southport is experiencing mild traffic condition LOS B or better toward the EPZ boundary.

At this time, 52% of evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and 17% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, as shown in Figure 75, congestion has worsened in St.

James, and persists in Oak Island, Carolina Beach and Kure Beach. Congestion persists along SR 211, US421, SR906/Middleton Blvd, and SR133. SR87 is still experiencing LOS F north of Southport as vehicles from Oak Island and St. James divert northbound on SR133 to SR87 rather than evacuate along SR211, which is severely overloaded and congested. In the Shadow Region, US17 experiences heavy congestion as there is insufficient capacity to process the high demand of evacuating vehicles. Congestion on SR133 has worsened - now operating at LOS D or better - from the intersection with SR87 northbound to the EPZ boundary. At this time, about 84% of evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and 42% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, congestion has cleared in Southport and along SR133 north of Southport, as shown in Figure 76. Congestion still persists on Oak Island, in St. James, and along SR211, SR87, US421 SR906/Middleton Blvd, and SR133 south of SR87.

Congestion is beginning to lessen in Kure and Carolina Beaches. At this time, about 95% of Brunswick Nuclear Plant 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and 59% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, congestion is finally starting to dissipate in Carolina Beach and Kure Beach, as well as in St. James and Oak Island, as shown in Figure 77.

Congested conditions remain on SR211, SR133, SR87, US421, and SR906/Middleton Blvd, as well as along US 17 in the Shadow Region. Although still very overwhelmed, these roadways are slowly processing the evacuation demand. At this time, approximately 99% of evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and 74% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, congestion is fully cleared within New Hanover County portion of the EPZ and Shadow Region. Region R01 (2Mile region) is mostly cleared of congestion with the exception of the western boundary of Zone 2 along SR133. Congestion persists in St. James at the two western exits of that community. Oak Island Drive (and several side roads on the island), SR211, SR906/Middleton Blvd, and SR133 that discharges traffic from Oak Island still exhibit LOS F conditions. See Figure 78. Nearly all evacuees have mobilized at this time and 87% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, congestion is mostly cleared within EPZ except a small portion of St. James and Oak Island. Seafield Dr, Pine Forest Dr, and Members Club Blvd (along with some minor roadways within St. James) are still exhibiting LOS F conditions in St. James.

SR211, SR906/Middleton Blvd, and SR133 that discharges traffic from Oak Island are also all still exhibiting LOS F conditions. See Figure 79. Congestion along US 17 in the Shadow Region has cleared. At this time, all evacuees have mobilized and 94% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 15 minutes after the ATE, congestion has fully cleared on Oak Island, as shown in Figure 710. At this time, the only area with congestion in the EPZ is St. James (potentially due to the number of roundabouts within the community that have a low capacity) and along SR 906/Midway Rd due to vehicles diverting northbound to access US17 to avoid the traffic along SR211. Parts of SR211 exhibit LOS F conditions at the EPZ boundary and in the Shadow Region. At this time, 98% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

Figure 711 shows the last bit of congestion within the EPZ at 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE. The last areas to clear are Seafield Dr and Pine Forest Dr in St. James and SR906/Midway Rd at the intersection with Gilbert Rd. The EPZ finally clears 15 minutes later at 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes after the ATE.

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 712 through Figure 723. These Figures indicate the rate at which traffic flows out of the indicated areas for the case of an evacuation of the full EPZ (Region R02) under the indicated conditions. One figure is presented for each scenario considered.

As indicated in Figure 712 through Figure 723, there is typically a long "tail" to these distributions. Vehicles begin to evacuate an area slowly at first, as people respond to the ATE Brunswick Nuclear Plant 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

at different rates. Then traffic demand builds rapidly (slopes of curves increase). When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand.

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

7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results Table 71 and Table 72 present the ETE values for all 35 Evacuation Regions and all 12 Evacuation Scenarios. Table 73 and Table 74 present the ETE values for the 2Mile region for both staged and unstaged keyhole regions downwind to the EPZ boundary. They are organized as follows:

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

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

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

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

The animation snapshots described above reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (un staged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure 711. Most of the congestion is located beyond the 2Mile region; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R01 (2mile region) generally range between 2:55 (hr:min) and 3:20 for all scenarios excluding the special event.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The 90th percentile ETE for Regions R02 (full EPZ) range between 4:25 and 6:35 for all scenarios excluding the special event.

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R02 (full EPZ) is on average 45 minutes longer for all summer scenarios than winter scenarios, excluding evening scenarios due to the large transient population within the EPZ.

The 90th percentile ETE for Regions R02 and R04 through R08, wherein Zone 4 (Oak Island) evacuates, are on average 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes longer than regions that do not include Zone 4 for nonspecial scenarios. The 90th percentile ETEs are longer when Zones 4 and 5 (St. James) evacuate together than when 4 evacuates without Zone 5.

Similar results can be seen at the 100th percentile ETE with 55minute increases on average for Regions R02 and R04 through R08 than the other regions.

The 100th percentile ETE are dictated by the time to mobilize (and a 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary) for all regions except midday scenarios for Regions R02 and R04 through R08. The large transient population present in Zone 4 overwhelms the roadway system creating congestion and prolonging ETE beyond the trip mobilization time. The congestion created by these vehicles, and therefore prolonged ETE, worsens when Zone 5 evacuates with Zone 4.

Comparison of Scenarios 3 and 11 indicates that the Special Event - 4th of July Festival in Southport - has a significant impact on ETE at both the 90th and 100th percentile for all regions (up to 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> for 90th percentile and up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> for 100th percentile), as shown in Table 71 and Table 72. The additional 6,500 vehicles present for the special event further overwhelm the roadway network and exacerbate congestion. As a result, ETE increases. The results of the special event scenario indicate that events that draw a large number of transients into the EPZ can significantly worsen congestion and impact ETE. If possible, advanced evacuation notification should be given to event attendees to remove them from the traffic stream should an evacuation of the EPZ be deemed necessary later.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 12 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure - closure of a roadway segment of SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way SE does have a material impact on the 90th percentile ETE for some regions. The 90th percentile ETE for keyhole regions with wind from the east (Regions R04 through R11), and an evacuation of the entire EPZ (R02), experience increases up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes. Wind from this direction carries the plume over Zones 4, 5, and 6 which routes traffic onto SR211 westbound. With a segment of this road closed, evacuees are detoured onto Midway Rd SE northbound towards US17. Evacuation regions that do not depend upon SR211 for evacuation are not materially impacted by the roadway closure. The 100th percentile ETE increases by as much as 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 55 minutes for nonstaged cases.

The results of the roadway impact scenario indicate that events such as adverse weather or traffic incidents, which could reduce or eliminate the capacity of SR211 could impact ETE. State and local police could consider traffic management tactics such as using the shoulder of the roadway as a travel lane or rerouting of traffic along other evacuation routes to avoid overwhelming SR211. If flooding is anticipated along SR211, state and local police may Brunswick Nuclear Plant 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

consider alerting the public of new routing patterns to lessen congestion on Midway Rd and SR 133.

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 73 and Table 74 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (un staged) and staged evacuation studies. Note that Regions R19 through R34, and R35 are the same geographic areas as Regions R03 through 18, and R02, respectively. As previously mentioned, Long Beach Rd SE/SR 133 between SR 211 and SR 87 was considered to be outside of the 2mile region for the staged evacuation analysis to avoid counting vehicles from outside of the 2mile region that utilize this section of roadway that could skew the results.

The objective of a staged evacuation strategy is to show that the ETE for the 2mile radius can be significantly reduced (30 minutes or 25%, whichever is less) without significantly impacting the region between 2 miles to the EPZ boundary. When evacuating the entire EPZ (Region R02), the ETE for the 2mile region increase by as much as 25 minutes as shown in Table 73.

This is due to the traffic congestion on SR211 just outside the 2mile region. As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 711, congestion along SR211 persists just outside the 2mile region for about 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and delays the egress of those evacuees from within the 2mile region. When only the 2mile region is evacuated, the additional vehicles evacuating from surrounding Zones are not on the roadways and the 2mile region evacuees are not delayed. Despite the increase in ETE, the change in ETE does not meet the aforementioned criteria to be considered significant.

To determine whether the staged evacuation strategy is worthy of consideration, the ETE for Regions R02 and R03 through R18 are compared to Region R35 and Regions R19 through R34, respectively, in Table 71 and Table 72. A comparison of ETE between these similar regions reveals that staging increases the 90th percentile ETE for those beyond 2 miles by at most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes (see Table 71). Staging increases the 100th percentile ETE beyond the 2 mile region by at most 45 minutes (see Table 72). This extending of ETE is due to the delay in beginning the evacuation trip, experienced by those who shelter, plus the effect of the trip generation spike (significant volume of traffic beginning the evacuation trip at the same time) that follows their eventual ATE, in creating congestion within the EPZ area beyond 2 miles.

In summary, the staged evacuation option provides some benefit to those within 2 miles of BNP, but not enough to warrant a significant change, and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the BNP.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

1. Identify the applicable Scenario:

• Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

• Day of Week Midweek Weekend

• Time of Day Midday Evening

• Weather Condition Good Weather Rain

• Special Event 4th of July Festival in Southport Road Closure (closure of a roadway segment on SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way)

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

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

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (7) and (9) for rain apply.

• The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes that public schools are not in session.

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

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

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

• Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of compass orientation: from N, NNE, NE, Brunswick Nuclear Plant 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

2 Miles (Region R01)

To EPZ Boundary (Regions R02 through R18)

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

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

• The columns of Table 71 and Table 72 are labeled with the Scenario numbers.

Identify the proper column in the selected Table using the Scenario number defined in Step 1.

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

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

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

• Sunday, August 10th at 10:00 PM (Summer, weekend, evening).

• It is raining.

• Win direction is from the northeast (NE).

• Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 2mile radius and downwind to EPZ boundary.

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

• A staged evacuation is not desired.

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

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

2. Enter Table 75 and locate the Region described as Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary for wind direction from the NE (towards the SW) and read Region R06 in the first column of that row.

3. Enter Table 71 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for Scenario 4 and Region R06. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R06; it contains the ETE value of 7:00.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and EPZ R01 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R02 5:30 6:05 5:50 6:25 4:30 4:50 5:15 5:10 5:35 4:25 6:45 6:35 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R03 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:15 3:10 3:25 3:25 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:50 3:20 R04 4:35 4:55 5:15 5:45 3:20 3:40 3:50 4:15 4:35 3:05 5:50 5:10 R05 5:35 6:25 6:20 7:00 4:20 4:45 5:10 5:20 6:00 4:15 6:55 6:50 R06 5:35 6:25 6:20 7:00 4:20 4:45 5:10 5:20 6:00 4:15 6:55 6:50 R07 5:55 6:35 6:30 7:10 4:45 5:10 5:30 5:30 6:10 4:35 7:25 7:25 R08 5:40 6:25 6:15 6:55 4:40 4:55 5:30 5:15 5:55 4:35 7:15 7:00 R09 4:10 4:20 4:15 4:30 3:50 4:00 4:10 4:00 4:10 3:45 6:10 4:35 R10 3:40 3:45 3:25 3:35 3:25 3:45 3:50 3:20 3:30 3:25 5:40 3:50 R11 3:55 4:20 3:55 4:15 3:35 3:50 4:05 3:50 4:00 3:40 5:35 4:35 R12 3:30 3:40 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:40 3:10 3:25 3:20 5:00 3:30 R13 3:55 4:20 4:25 4:45 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:40 4:00 3:10 5:00 3:55 R14 3:55 4:20 4:25 4:50 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:40 4:00 3:10 5:00 3:55 R15 3:10 3:15 2:50 3:05 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:55 2:55 3:10 5:35 3:10 R16 3:10 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:50 2:50 3:05 5:35 3:10 R17 3:10 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:50 2:50 3:05 5:35 3:10 R18 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 710 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:40 5:50 3:40 R20 4:35 4:55 5:15 5:45 4:35 4:30 4:40 4:20 4:40 4:35 5:50 5:10 R21 5:40 6:25 6:20 7:00 5:25 5:20 5:35 5:30 6:00 5:25 7:05 6:50 R22 5:40 6:25 6:20 7:00 5:25 5:20 5:35 5:30 6:00 5:25 7:05 6:50 R23 6:00 6:35 6:30 7:10 5:25 5:30 5:50 5:45 6:10 5:30 7:30 7:25 R24 6:00 6:25 6:15 6:55 5:25 5:30 5:40 5:45 6:05 5:25 7:20 7:10 R25 4:50 5:05 4:45 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:15 5:10 R26 4:25 4:35 4:15 4:30 4:20 4:25 4:35 4:15 4:30 4:20 5:50 4:25 R27 5:00 5:05 4:50 5:05 4:55 4:55 5:00 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:55 5:25 R28 4:20 4:30 4:15 4:25 4:20 4:20 4:30 4:20 4:25 4:20 5:20 4:20 R29 4:25 4:30 4:25 4:50 4:30 4:30 4:35 4:25 4:30 4:35 5:00 4:25 R30 4:25 4:30 4:25 4:50 4:35 4:30 4:40 4:25 4:35 4:35 5:00 4:25 R31 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:45 3:45 5:35 3:45 R32 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 5:35 3:40 R33 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 5:35 3:40 R34 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R35 5:35 6:05 5:55 6:40 5:15 5:20 5:30 5:30 5:50 5:20 6:55 6:45 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 711 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and EPZ R01 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R02 7:05 7:50 7:45 8:45 5:55 5:55 6:40 6:50 7:30 5:55 8:35 9:00 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R03 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R04 5:55 6:00 6:20 6:45 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:05 6:10 R05 6:55 7:45 7:40 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:00 5:55 8:10 8:05 R06 6:55 7:45 7:40 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:00 5:55 8:10 8:05 R07 7:00 7:50 7:45 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:35 6:40 7:10 5:55 8:35 8:55 R08 7:00 7:40 7:45 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:10 5:55 8:35 8:55 R09 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 6:00 R10 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R11 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R12 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:20 5:55 R13 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R14 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R15 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R16 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R17 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R18 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 712 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R20 5:55 6:00 6:20 6:45 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:05 6:10 R21 6:55 7:45 7:50 8:35 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:40 7:00 6:20 8:35 8:25 R22 6:55 7:45 7:50 8:35 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:40 7:00 6:20 8:35 8:25 R23 7:00 7:50 7:50 8:35 6:25 6:25 6:45 6:50 7:10 6:20 8:35 9:10 R24 7:00 7:40 7:45 8:35 6:15 6:25 6:45 6:50 7:10 6:15 8:35 9:10 R25 6:00 6:00 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:50 6:10 R26 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R27 6:10 6:15 5:55 6:20 6:00 5:55 6:10 6:00 6:00 5:55 7:55 6:40 R28 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:40 5:55 R29 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R30 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R31 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R32 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R33 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R34 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R35 7:05 7:50 7:55 8:45 6:25 6:35 6:55 6:50 7:30 6:20 8:40 9:10 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 713 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R01 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R02 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:35 3:35 3:10 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:35 R03 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R04 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:35 R05 3:25 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:30 R06 3:25 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:30 R07 3:30 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:15 3:30 3:30 3:15 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:35 R08 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:15 3:25 3:25 3:15 3:20 3:20 5:55 3:35 R09 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R10 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R11 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R12 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R13 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R14 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R15 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R16 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R17 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R18 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 714 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R20 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R21 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R22 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R23 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R24 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R25 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R26 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R27 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R28 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R29 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R30 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R31 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R32 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R33 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R34 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R35 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R01 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R02 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R03 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R04 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R05 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R06 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R07 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R08 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R09 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R10 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R11 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R12 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R13 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R14 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R15 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R16 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R17 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R18 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R20 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R21 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:55 5:50 R22 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:55 5:50 R23 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 7:10 5:50 R24 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R25 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R26 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R27 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R28 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R29 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R30 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R31 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R32 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R33 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R34 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R35 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 6:20 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R01 2Mile Radius x x R02 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R03 NNW, N 328°009° x x x x x R04 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R05 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R06 NE 039°051° x x x x x R07 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R08 E 091°112° x x x x x R09 ESE x x x x R10 SE, SSE x x x x x x Site Specific ESE, SE, 113°179° x x x x x x x R11 SSE R12 S 180°195° x x x x x x R13 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R14 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R15 W 272°288° x x x x x R16 WNW x x x x R17 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R18 NW 317°327° x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 76. Descriptions of Evacuation Regions Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R19 NNW, N 329°009° x x x x x R20 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R21 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R22 NE 039°051° x x x x x R23 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R24 E 091°112° x x x x x R25 ESE x x x x R26 SE, SSE x x x x x x R27 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R28 S 180°195° x x x x x x R29 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R30 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R31 W 272°288° x x x x x R32 WNW x x x x R33 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R34 NW 317°327° x x x x R35 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Brunswick Nuclear Plant 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 72. BNP Shadow Region Brunswick Nuclear Plant 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 20 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour, 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 726 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 727 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 79. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 728 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 710. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 729 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 711. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 730 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

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

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

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

Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 731 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

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

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 732 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

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

Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

45 40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

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

Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 733 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

45 40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

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

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 8) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

50 45 40 Vehicles Evacuating 35 30 25 (Thousands) 20 15 10 5

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

Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 734 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

50 45 40 Vehicles Evacuating 35 30 25 (Thousands) 20 15 10 5

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

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 10) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

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

Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 735 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good, Special Event (Scenario 11) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

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

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

Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

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

Figure 723. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 736 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES This section details the analyses applied and the results obtained in the form of evacuation time estimates for transit vehicles, buses, ambulances and wheelchair transport vehicles. The demand for transit service reflects the needs of three population groups:

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

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

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

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

Specifically:

• Bus drivers must be alerted

• They must travel to the bus depot

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

During this mobilization period, other mobilization activities are taking place. One of these is the action taken by parents, neighbors, relatives and friends to pick up children from school prior to the arrival of buses, so that they may join their families. Virtually all studies of evacuations have concluded that this bonding process of uniting families is universally prevalent during emergencies and should be anticipated in the planning process. The current public information disseminated to residents of the BNP EPZ indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to a relocation school/pickup locations at emergency were ordered, and that parents should pick schoolchildren up at pickup facilities. As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a rapidly escalating event. Therefore, children are evacuated to relocation schools/pickup facilities. Picking up children at school could add to traffic congestion at the schools, delaying the departure of the buses evacuating schoolchildren, which may have to return in a subsequent wave to the EPZ to evacuate the transitdependent population. This report provides estimates of buses under the assumption that no children will be picked up by their parents (in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1), to present an upper bound estimate of buses required. It is assumed that children at preschools/childcare centers are picked up by parents or guardians unless transportation resources are available to that facility. Nonetheless, the buses required to evacuate all preschools/childcare centers were included in this ETE study to present a conservative estimate of the total buses required.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The procedure for computing transitdependent ETE is to:

• Estimate demand for transit service

• Estimate time to perform all transit functions

• Estimate route travel times to the EPZ boundary and to the Relocation Schools and Evacuation Shelters or Reception Centers Evacuation Time Estimates for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. Figure 81 presents the chronology of events relevant to transit operations. The elapsed time for each activity will now be discussed with reference to Figure 81.

8.1 ETEs for Schools/Preschools/Childcare Centers, Transit Dependent People, and Medical Facilities EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if school is in session at the time of the Advisory to Evacuate [ATE]) as the first priority in the event of an emergency. In the event that the allocation of buses dispatched from the depots to the various facilities and to the bus routes is somewhat inefficient, or if there is a shortfall of available drivers, then there may be a need for some buses to return to the EPZ from the evacuation shelter after completing their first evacuation trip, to complete a second wave of providing transport service to evacuees. For this reason, the ETE for the transitdependent population was calculated for both a one wave transit evacuation and for two waves. Of course, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R02 (the entire EPZ), then there will likely be ample transit resources relative to demand in the impacted Region and this discussion of a second wave would likely not apply. A list of available transportation resources was provided by New Hanover County and was assumed to be the same as the previous study for Brunswick County. The list of available resources is shown in Table 81. Also included in the table is the number of buses needed to evacuate schools, medical facilities, transitdependent population, and access and/or functional needs (discussed below in Section 8.2). These numbers indicate there are sufficient resources available to evacuate everyone in a single wave for schools, transitdependent population, medical facilities, and access and/or functional needs population. It is assumed that there are enough drivers available to man all resources listed in Table 81.

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

School and Preschool/Childcare Centers Evacuation Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization is the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate until the time the buses arrive at the facility to be evacuated. As discussed in item 4 of Section 2.4, it is assumed that for a rapidly escalating radiological emergency with no observable indication before the fact, drivers would likely require 90 minutes to be contacted, to travel to the depot, be briefed, and to travel Brunswick Nuclear Plant 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

to the schools, preschools and childcare centers that will be evacuated. Mobilization time is 10 minutes longer in rain to account for slower travel speeds and reduced roadway capacity.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

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

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The buses servicing the schools/preschools/childcare centers are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the advisory to evacuate - 90 minutes mobilization time plus 15 minutes loading time - in good weather. The UNITES software discussed in Section 1.3 was used to define bus routes along the most likely path from a school/preschool/childcare center being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate relocation school/pickup point. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes from the school to the EPZ boundary. Each bus route is given an identification number and is written to the DYNEV II input stream. DYNEV computes the route length and outputs the average speed for each 5minute interval, for each bus route. The specified bus routes are documented in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). Data provided by DYNEV during the appropriate timeframe depending on the mobilization and loading times (i.e., 90 to 105 minutes after the advisory to evacuate for good weather) were used to compute the average speed for each route, as follows:

60 .

1 .

. 60 .

. . 1 .

The average speed computed (using this methodology) for the buses servicing each of the schools/preschools/childcare centers in the EPZ is shown in Table 82 and Table 83 for school/preschool/childcare center evacuation. The travel time to the EPZ boundary was computed for each bus using the computed average speed and the distance to the EPZ boundary along the most likely route out of the EPZ. The travel time from the EPZ boundary to the relocation school/pickup point was computed assuming an average speed of 45 mph and 40 mph for good weather and rain, respectively. Speeds were reduced in Table 82 and Table 83 to 45 mph (40 mph for rain - 10% decrease) for those calculated bus speeds which exceed 45 mph, as the school bus speed limit for state routes in North Carolina is 45 mph.

Table 82 (good weather) and Table 83 (rain) present the following evacuation time estimates (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for schools/preschools/childcare centers in the EPZ:

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

The evacuation time out of the EPZ can be computed as the sum of times associated with Activities ABC, CD, and DE (For example: 90 min + 15 + 64 = 2:50 for Childcare Network, with good weather). (Here, 64 minutes is the time to travel 14.4 miles at 13.5mph.)

The average singlewave ETE, for schools and day cares, is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 10 minutes (4:50 2:40 =

2:10) less than the 90th percentile ETE for evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R02) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and will not impact protective action decision making.

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

Activity: Travel to Relocation Schools (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the relocation schools/pickup points are measured using GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the relocation school (pickup point). The relocation schools are mapped in Figure 103. For a onewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 45 mph and 40 mph for good weather and rain, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the schools, preschools, and childcare centers.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

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

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

As shown in Table 81, there are sufficient resources for evacuation of schoolchildren in a single wave. In the event there are not enough drivers to staff the buses, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation of schools, preschools, and childcare centers. The travel time from the relocation school back to the EPZ boundary and then back to the school was computed assuming an average speed of 45 mph and 40 mph in good weather and rain, respectively, as buses will be traveling against evacuating traffic. Times and distances are based on averages for all schools in the EPZ for good weather:

• Buses arrive at the pickup facility at 2:50 (see average value in Table 82)

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

• Bus returns to facility: 17 minutes (average distance to pickup facility (3.2 miles) +

average distance to EPZ boundary (9.9 miles) at 45 mph)

• Loading Time: 15 minutes

• Bus completes second wave of service along route: 44 minutes (average distance to EPZ boundary (9.9 miles) at network wide average speed at 3:40 (13.54 mph))

• Bus exits EPZ at time 2:50 + 0:15 + 0:17 + 0:15 + 0:44 = 4:25 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Given the average singlewave ETE for schools is 2:40 (see Table 82); a second wave evacuation would require an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 45 minutes on average. The average twowave ETE of schools is less than the 90th percentile ETE of the full EPZ during a winter, midweek, midday scenario (Scenario 6), which will not impact protective action decision making.

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

A detailed computation of transit dependent population was done and is discussed in Section 3.6. The total number of transit dependent people per Zone was determined using a weighted distribution based on population. See Table 311 for the distribution used. The number of buses required to evacuate this population was determined by the capacity of 30 people per bus and assuming at least one route per Zone (except Zone 12 since it has no population). KLD designed 11 bus routes to service the major evacuation routes in each Zone, for the purposes of this study. Zone 13 was grouped with Zone 1 as that is where they will catch the bus. The pre defined bus routes (as discussed in Section 10) are shown graphically in Figure 102 and described in Table 101. Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along these routes, then proceed out of the EPZ.

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at their designated route. The buses dispatched from the depots to service the transitdependent evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after majority of their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), approximately 75% of the evacuees will have completed their mobilization when the buses will begin their routes, approximately 135 minutes after the ATE for good weather.

Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather - 145 minutes in rain.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

For multiple stops along a pickup route (transitdependent bus routes) estimation of travel time must allow for the delay associated with stopping and starting at each pickup point. The time, t, required for a bus to decelerate at a rate, a, expressed in ft/sec/sec, from a speed, v, expressed in ft/sec, to a stop, is t = v/a. Assuming the same acceleration rate and final speed following the stop yields a total time, T, to service boarding passengers:

2 ,

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

Assigning reasonable estimates:

• B = 50 seconds: a generous value for a single passenger, carrying personal items, to board per stop Brunswick Nuclear Plant 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• v = 25 mph = 37 ft/sec

• a = 4 ft/sec/sec, a moderate average rate Then, P 1 minute per stop. Allowing 30 minutes pickup time per bus run implies 30 stops per run, for good weather. It is assumed that bus acceleration and speed will be less in rain; total loading time is 35 minutes per bus in rain.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

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

Table 84 and Table 85 present the transitdependent population ETEs for each bus route calculated using the above procedures (as discussed under Schools, Preschools, and Childcare Centers Evacuation) for good weather, and rain respectively.

For example, the ETE for the first bus servicing Zone 1 (including Zone 13) is computed as 135 +

23 + 30 = 3:10 for good weather (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 23 minutes is the time to travel 17.5 miles at 44.9 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route starting at 135 minutes.

The average single wave ETE for the transitdependent population does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario.

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

Activity: Travel to Evacuation Shelters/Reception Centers (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the Evacuation Shelters/Reception Centers are measured using GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center. The Evacuation Shelters and Reception Centers are mapped in Figure 103. For a onewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. For a twowave evacuation, the ETE for buses must be considered separately since it could exceed the ETE for the general population. Assumed bus speeds of 45 mph and 40 mph for good weather and rain, respectively, were applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

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

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

The buses assigned to return to the EPZ to perform a second wave evacuation of transit dependent evacuees will be those that have already evacuated transitdependent people who mobilized more quickly. The first wave of transitdependent people departs the bus, and the bus then returns to the EPZ, travels to its route and proceeds to pick up more transit Brunswick Nuclear Plant 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

dependent evacuees along the route. The travel time back to the EPZ is equal to the travel time to the Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center.

The secondwave ETE for the first bus route servicing Zone 1 is computed as follows for good weather:

• Bus arrives at evacuation shelter/reception center at 3:25 in good weather (3:10 to exit EPZ + 15minute travel time to Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center).

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

• Bus returns to EPZ, travels back to the start of route, and completes second route:

15 minutes (equal to travel time to evacuation shelter/reception center) + 48 minutes (17.5 miles @ 45 mph [assumed speed since bus is traveling against traffic]

+ 17.5 miles @ 43 mph [route specific speed output from the model at this time]) =

63 minutes

• Bus completes pickups along route: 30 minutes.

• Bus exits EPZ at time 3:10 + 0:15 + 0:15 + 1:03 + 0:30 = 5:15 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the Advisory to Evacuate.

The ETE for the completion of the second wave for all transitdependent bus routes are provided in Table 84 and Table 85. The average ETE (5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 25 minutes) for a twowave evacuation of the transitdependent population is 35 minutes longer than the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R02) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather conditions (Scenario 6) and could impact protective action decision making. The relocation of transitdependent evacuees from the evacuation shelters/reception centers to congregate care centers, if the counties decide to do so, is not considered in this study.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

As discussed in Section 2.4, it is assumed that the mobilization time for medical facilities average 90 minutes in good weather, 100 minutes in rain. Specially trained medical support staff (working their regular shift) will be on site to assist in the evacuation of patients.

Additional staff (if needed) could be mobilized over this same 90minute timeframe.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

Item 5 of assumption 2.4 discusses transit vehicle loading times for medical facilities. Loading times are assumed to be 1 minute per ambulatory passenger, 5 minutes per wheelchair bound passenger, and 15 minutes per bedridden passenger for buses, wheelchair buses/vans, and ambulances, respectively. Item 3 of Section 2.4 discusses transit vehicle capacities to cap loading times per vehicle type. Loading times were not adjusted for rain for medical facilities.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Bus travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds Brunswick Nuclear Plant 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school, preschool, and childcare center evacuation.

Table 86 and Table 87 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather and rain, respectively. Average speeds output by the model for Scenario 6 (Scenario 7 for rain) Region 2, capped at 45 mph (40 mph for rain), are used to compute travel time to EPZ boundary. The travel time to the EPZ boundary is computed by dividing the distance to the EPZ boundary by the average travel speed. The ETE is the sum of the mobilization time, total passenger loading time, and travel time out of the EPZ. Concurrent loading on multiple buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances at capacity is assumed. All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, the calculation of ETE for the J Arthur Dosher Memorial Hospital with 16 ambulatory residents during good weather is:

1. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the facility location: 90 minutes

b. Load ambulatory patients: 16 people x 1 minute per person = 16 minutes

c. Travel to EPZ boundary: 60 minutes (14.0 miles @ 13.9 mph)

ETE: 90 + 16 + 60 = 166 min. or 2:50 rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

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

The average single wave ETE for medical facilities in the EPZ does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario.

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

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

The following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation using school buses after the schools have been evacuated. Times and distances are based on facilitywide averages:

• Buses arrive at pickup facility at 2:44 (2:40 to exit the EPZ + estimated 4minute travel time average travel time to RC/PP calculated from Table 82)

• Bus discharges passengers (39 minutes - average loading time from Table 86) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 49 minutes.

• Bus returns to EPZ and completes second route: 4 minutes to travel back to the EPZ boundary (equal to the average travel time to reception center for good weather from Table 82) + 16 minutes to travel back to the facility (average distance to EPZ -

12.2 miles from Table 86 @ 45 mph) = 20 minutes.

• Remaining ambulatory patients loaded on bus (maximum): 30 minutes (average from Table 86 capped at 30 passengers per bus).

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• Bus travels to EPZ boundary: 23 minutes (average distance to EPZ boundary (12.2 miles) at 16.06 mph (network wide average speed at 4:25)

• Bus exits EPZ at time 2:44 + 0:49 + 0:20 + 0:30 + 0:23 = 4:50 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Thus, the second wave evacuation requires an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 55 minutes (4:50 - 2:55).

The average ETE for a twowave evacuation of medical facilities is equaled the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario and will not impact protective action decision making.

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population The access and/or functional needs population registered within the EPZ was provided by offsite agencies. Table 88 summarizes the ETE for access and/or functional needs people who would need transportation assistance in the event of an emergency. The table is categorized by type of vehicle required and then broken down by weather condition. The table takes into consideration the deployment of multiple vehicles to reduce the number of stops per vehicle.

Due to the limitations on driving for access and/or functional needs persons, it assumed they will be picked up from their homes. Furthermore, it is conservatively assumed that ambulatory and wheelchair bound access and/or functional needs households are spaced 3 miles apart and bedridden households are spaced 5 miles apart. Van and bus speeds approximate 20 mph between households and ambulance speeds approximate 30 mph. Mobilization times of 135 minutes were used (145 minutes for rain). The last household (HH) is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 45 mph (40 mph for rain), after the last pickup is used to compute travel time.

ETE is computed by summing mobilization time, loading time at first household, travel to subsequent households, loading time at subsequent households, and travel time to EPZ boundary. All ETE are rounded to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, assuming no more than one access and/or functional needs person per HH implies that 770 ambulatory households need to be serviced to gather the ambulatory access and/or functional needs population. While only 26 buses are needed from a capacity perspective, if 55 buses are deployed to service these HH, then each would require at most 14 stops. The following outlines the ETE calculations:

1. Assume 55 buses are deployed, each with about 14 stops, to service a total of 770 HH.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the first pickup location: 135 minutes

b. Load HH members at first pickup: 1 minutes

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

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

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 17 minutes (5 miles at 17.8 mph).

ETE: 135 + 1 + 117 + 13 + 17 = 283 minutes or 4:45 rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The average ETE of a one wave evacuation of the ambulatory access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ is less than the 90th percentile ETE for evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and will not impact protective action decisionmaking.

Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Transportation Wheelchair Resource Buses Buses Ambulances Resources Available Brunswick County 82 11 11 New Hanover County 216 44 0 TOTAL: 298 55 11 Resources Needed Medical Facilities (Table 36): 7 7 14 Schools (Table 38): 78 0 0 Access and/or Functional Needs (Table 39): 55 48 68 TransitDependent Population (Section 3.6): 14 0 0 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 154 55 82 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BRUNSWICK COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Childcare Network 90 15 14.4 13.5 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Southport Baptist Church Preschool 90 15 14.7 13.8 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Kids World Academy II 90 15 14.5 13.5 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Southport Elementary School 90 15 11.5 12.0 57 2:45 6.4 9 2:55 L & L Montessori School 90 15 13.6 9.1 90 3:15 0.9 1 3:20 Sharon's Childcare 90 15 13.5 7.2 112 3:40 0.9 1 3:45 Kids World Academy 90 15 12.9 14.8 52 2:40 0.8 1 2:45 Southport Christian School 90 15 12.6 11.9 63 2:50 0.9 1 2:55 South Brunswick High School 90 15 8.6 10.6 49 2:35 8.1 11 2:50 South Brunswick Middle School 90 15 7.6 8.9 51 2:40 13.2 18 3:00 Learn and Play 90 15 6.2 18.9 20 2:05 0.8 1 2:10 NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Carolina Beach After School Program 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Carolina Beach Elementary 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Island Time DropNPlay 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Maximum for EPZ: 3:40 Maximum: 3:45 Average for EPZ: 2:40 Average: 2:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers Evacuation Time Estimates Rain Travel Time Travel from Dist. To Time Dist. EPZ EPZ Driver Loading EPZ Average to EPZ Bdry to Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE RC/PP RC/PP RC/PP School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BRUNSWICK COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Childcare Network 100 20 14.4 10.7 81 3:25 0.8 1 3:30 Southport Baptist Church Preschool 100 20 14.7 10.9 81 3:25 0.8 1 3:30 Kids World Academy II 100 20 14.5 10.7 81 3:25 0.8 1 3:30 Southport Elementary School 100 20 11.5 10.9 63 3:05 6.4 10 3:15 L & L Montessori School 100 20 13.6 7.9 104 3:45 0.9 1 3:50 Sharon's Childcare 100 20 13.5 5.9 137 4:20 0.9 1 4:25 Kids World Academy 100 20 12.9 13.1 59 3:00 0.8 1 3:05 Southport Christian School 100 20 12.6 9.7 78 3:20 0.9 1 3:25 South Brunswick High School 100 20 8.6 9.0 57 3:00 8.1 12 3:15 South Brunswick Middle School 100 20 7.6 7.9 58 3:00 13.2 20 3:20 Learn and Play 100 20 6.2 18.0 21 2:25 0.8 1 2:30 NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Carolina Beach After School Program 100 20 3.0 7.6 24 2:25 3.3 5 2:30 Carolina Beach Elementary 100 20 3.0 7.6 24 2:25 3.3 5 2:30 Island Time DropNPlay 100 20 3.0 7.6 24 2:25 3.3 5 2:30 Maximum for EPZ: 4:20 Maximum: 4:25 Average for EPZ: 3:10 Average: 3:15 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Route Bus Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to E.S. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Servicing of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) E.S (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Zone 1 1 135 17.5 44.9 23 30 3:10 11.1 15 5 10 63 30 5:15 Zone 2 1 135 16.4 45.0 22 30 3:10 11.1 15 5 10 60 30 5:10 Zone 3 1 135 15.3 8.6 107 30 4:35 14.5 19 5 10 63 30 6:45 Zone 4 2 135 12.8 6.7 114 30 4:40 14.5 19 5 10 54 30 6:40 Zone 5 2 135 8.1 3.9 125 30 4:50 14.5 19 5 10 43 30 6:40 Zone 6 1 135 4.0 40.6 6 30 2:55 15.6 21 5 10 48 30 4:50 Zone 7 1 135 8.5 9.9 51 30 3:40 13.9 19 5 10 67 30 5:55 Zone 8 1 135 4.5 39.5 7 30 2:55 13.9 19 5 10 32 30 4:35 Zone 9 1 135 11.0 45.0 15 30 3:00 11.1 15 5 10 46 30 4:50 Zone 10 2 135 3.6 13.2 16 30 3:05 3.6 5 5 10 16 30 4:15 Zone 11 1 135 6.9 17.9 23 30 3:10 3.6 5 5 10 27 30 4:30 Maximum ETE: 4:50 Maximum ETE: 6:45 Average ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 5:25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Rain OneWave TwoWave Route Route Bus Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to E.S. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Servicing of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) E.S (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Zone 1 1 145 17.5 33.3 32 35 3:35 11.1 17 5 10 67 35 5:50 Zone 2 1 145 16.4 33.5 29 35 3:30 11.1 17 5 10 63 35 5:40 Zone 3 1 145 15.3 7.4 124 35 5:05 14.5 22 5 10 66 35 7:25 Zone 4 2 145 12.8 5.1 149 35 5:30 14.5 22 5 10 60 35 7:45 Zone 5 2 145 8.1 3.3 147 35 5:30 14.5 22 5 10 47 35 7:30 Zone 6 1 145 4.0 39.0 6 35 3:10 15.6 23 5 10 53 35 5:20 Zone 7 1 145 8.5 8.5 60 35 4:00 13.9 21 5 10 91 35 6:45 Zone 8 1 145 4.5 35.8 8 35 3:10 13.9 21 5 10 35 35 5:00 Zone 9 1 145 11.0 40.0 17 35 3:20 11.1 17 5 10 48 35 5:15 Zone 10 2 145 3.6 9.9 22 35 3:25 3.6 5 5 10 17 35 4:40 Zone 11 1 145 6.9 14.0 30 35 3:30 3.6 5 5 10 28 35 4:55 Maximum ETE: 5:30 Maximum ETE: 7:45 Average ETE: 4:00 Average ETE: 6:00 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 86. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 90 1 52 30 13.8 57 3:00 Elmcroft of Southport Wheelchair bound 90 5 9 45 13.8 53 3:10 Ambulatory 90 1 38 30 14.0 58 3:00 Southport Health & 3:05 Wheelchair bound 90 5 7 35 14.0 57 Rehabilitation Center Bedridden 90 15 5 30 14.0 58 3:00 J Arthur Dosher Ambulatory 90 1 16 16 14.0 60 2:50 Memorial Hospital & Wheelchair bound 90 5 39 75 14.0 46 3:35 Skilled Nursing Center Bedridden 90 15 14 30 14.0 58 3:00 Ambulatory 90 1 41 30 7.5 10 2:10 The Landings of Oak Wheelchair bound 90 5 19 75 7.5 21 3:10 Island Bedridden 90 15 7 30 7.5 10 2:10 Maximum ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 2:55 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Rain Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 100 1 52 30 13.8 74 3:25 Elmcroft of Southport Wheelchair bound 100 5 9 45 13.8 67 3:35 Ambulatory 100 1 38 30 14.0 74 3:25 Southport Health &

Wheelchair bound 100 5 7 35 14.0 73 3:30 Rehabilitation Center Bedridden 100 15 5 30 14.0 74 3:25 J Arthur Dosher Ambulatory 100 1 16 16 14.0 79 3:15 Memorial Hospital & Wheelchair bound 100 5 39 75 14.0 54 3:50 Skilled Nursing Center Bedridden 100 15 14 30 14.0 74 3:25 Ambulatory 100 1 41 30 7.5 11 2:25 The Landings of Oak Wheelchair bound 100 5 19 75 7.5 11 3:10 Island Bedridden 100 15 7 30 7.5 11 2:25 Maximum ETE: 3:50 Average ETE: 3:15 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 88. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Total Travel Mobiliza Loading Loading Time to People tion Time at Travel to Time at EPZ Requiring Vehicles Weather Time 1st Stop Subsequent Subsequent Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Stops Conditions (min) (min) Stops (min) Stops (min) (min) (hr:min)

Good 135 117 17 4:45 Buses 770 55 14 1 13 Rain 145 130 24 5:15 Wheelchair Good 135 72 19 4:35 388 48 9 5 40 Buses Rain 145 80 25 4:55 Good 135 10 25 3:20 Ambulances 136 68 2 15 15 Rain 145 11 30 3:40 Maximum ETE: 5:15 Average ETE: 4:25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 817 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(Subsequent Wave)

A B C D E F G Time Event A Advisory to Evacuate B Bus Dispatched from Depot C Bus Arrives at Facility/Pickup Route D Bus Departs for Relocation School or Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Relocation School or Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center G Bus Available for Second Wave Evacuation Service Activity AB Driver Mobilization BC Travel to Facility or to Pickup Route CD Passengers Board the Bus DE Bus Travels Towards Region Boundary EF Bus Travels Towards Relocation School or Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center Outside the EPZ FG Passengers Leave Bus; Driver Takes a Break Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations Brunswick Nuclear Plant 818 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

• A written plan that defines all Traffic Control Point (TCP) and Security Roadblock (SRB) locations, provides necessary details and is documented in a format that is readily understood by those assigned to perform traffic control.

The functions to be performed in the field are:

1. Facilitate evacuating traffic movements that safely expedite travel out of the EPZ.

2. Discourage traffic movements that move evacuating vehicles in a direction which takes them significantly closer to the power plant, or which interferes with the efficient flow of other evacuees.

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

• A driver may be traveling home from work or from another location, to join other family members prior to evacuating.

• An evacuating driver may be travelling to pick up a relative, or other evacuees.

• The driver may be an emergency worker en route to perform an important activity.

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

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

1. The detailed traffic control tactics discussed in the All County Standard Operating Guideline (SOG) for Traffic Control Point and Security Road Block Operations in Support of the Brunswick Nuclear Plant serves as the basis of the traffic management plan, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. The ETE analysis treated all controlled intersections that are existing TCP or SRB locations in the offsite agency plans as being controlled by actuated signals. Appendix K identifies the number of intersections that were modeled as TCP/SRBs.

2. Evacuation simulations were run using DYNEV II to predict traffic congestion during evacuation (See Section 7.3 and Figures 73 through 711). These simulations help to Brunswick Nuclear Plant 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

identify the best routing and critical intersections that experience pronounced congestion during evacuation. Any critical intersections that would benefit from traffic or access control which are not already identified in the existing offsite plans are examined. There are no additional TCPs or SRBs were identified which would benefit the Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE).

3. The TCPs and SRBs defined in the existing SOG and their order of priority are discussed in Appendix G.

4. Application of traffic and access control at some TCPs and SRBs will have a more pronounced influence on expediting traffic movements than at other TCPs and SRBs. For example, TCPs controlling traffic originating from areas in close proximity to the power plant could have a more beneficial effect on minimizing potential exposure to radioactivity than those TCPs located far from the power plant. Key locations for manual traffic control (MTC) were analyzed and their impact to ETE was quantified, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. See Appendix G for more detail.

9.1 Assumptions The ETE calculations documented in Sections 7 and 8 assume that the traffic management plan is implemented during evacuation. The ETE calculations reflect the assumption that all externalexternal trips are interdicted and diverted after 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> have elapsed from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE). All transit vehicles and other responders entering the EPZ to support the evacuation are assumed to be unhindered by personnel manning TCPs and SRBs.

The ETE analysis treated all controlled intersections that are existing TCP/SRB locations in the offsite agency plans as being controlled by actuated signals. In Appendix K, Table K1 identifies those intersections that were modeled with MTC. Study assumptions 1 through 3 in Section 2.5 discuss TCP/SRB staffing schedules and operations.

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

• Routing of transitdependent evacuees (schools, daycares, medical facilities, and residents, employees or transients who do not own or have access to a private vehicle) from the EPZ boundary to evacuation shelters, relocation schools and/or reception centers.

Evacuees will select routes within the EPZ in such a way as to minimize their exposure to risk.

This expectation is met by the DYNEV II model routing traffic away from the location of the plant to the extent practicable. The DTRAD model satisfies this behavior by routing traffic so as to balance traffic demand relative to the available highway capacity to the extent possible.

See Appendices B through D for further discussion. The major evacuation routes for the EPZ are presented in Figure 101. These routes will be used by the general population evacuating in private vehicles, and by the transitdependent population evacuating in buses. Transit dependent evacuees will be routed to evacuation shelters or reception centers. School buses will be routed to relocation schools/pickup points. General population may evacuate to either a reception center, evacuation shelter or some alternate destination (e.g., lodging facility, relatives home, campground) outside the EPZ.

The routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception centers/evacuation shelters is designed to minimize the amount of travel outside the EPZ, from the points where these routes cross the EPZ boundary. The 11 bus routes shown graphically in Figure 102 and described in Table 101, were designed by KLD to service major routes through each Zone. It is assumed that residents will walk to the nearest major roadway and flag down a passing bus, and that they can arrive at the roadway within the 135minute bus mobilization time (good weather).

Schools and medical facilities were routed along the most likely path from the facility being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate relocation school/pickup point. The Brunswick Nuclear Plant (BNP) 2021 Emergency Preparedness Information lists all the schools and major daycares and specifies their relocation school/pickup point. This study does not consider the transport of evacuees from reception centers to congregate care centers if the counties do make the decision to relocate evacuees.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

10.2 Reception Centers According to the BNP 2021 Emergency Preparedness Information, evacuees living in Zones 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 12 and 13 will be directed to North Brunswick High School as their reception center/evacuation shelter. Evacuees living in Zones 3, 4, 5, and 6 will be directed to West Brunswick High School as their reception center/evacuation shelter. Evacuees living in Zones 10 and 11 will be directed to Ashley High School as their reception center/evacuations shelter.

As previously discussed, the BNP 2021 Emergency Preparedness Information lists the school relocation schools/pickup points and reception centers. Table 103 presents a list of the relocation schools/pickup points for each school in the EPZ. It is assumed that all school evacuees will be taken to the appropriate relocation school/pickup point and will be subsequently picked up by parents or guardians.

Figure 103 shows the primary reception centers/evacuation shelters and relocation schools/pickup points for evacuees. Transitdependent evacuees are routed to the nearest reception center/evacuation shelter for each Zone for ETE computations.

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

Zone 1 1 Servicing Zone 1 & Zone 13 17.5 Zone 2 1 Servicing Zone 2 16.4 Zone 3 1 Servicing Zone 3 15.3 Zone 4 2 Servicing Zone 4 12.8 Zone 5 2 Servicing Zone 5 8.1 Zone 6 1 Servicing Zone 6 4.0 Zone 7 1 Servicing Zone 7 8.5 Zone 8 1 Servicing Zone 8 4.5 Zone 9 1 Servicing Zone 9 11.0 Zone 10 2 Servicing Zone 10 3.6 Zone 11 1 Servicing Zone 11 6.9 Total: 14 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 391, 390, 151, 475, 389, 563, 561, 562, 290, 155, 3, 559, 2, 451, Southport Baptist Church 1 557, 6, 549, 9, 10, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 492, 627, 628, Preschool 491, 490 451, 557, 6, 549, 9, 10, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 492, 627, 2 Southport Christian School 628, 491, 490 383, 307, 579, 578, 290, 155, 3, 559, 2, 451, 557, 6, 549, 9, 10, 3 Childcare Network 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 492, 627, 628, 491, 490 Southport Health &

475, 389, 563, 561, 153, 562, 290, 155, 3, 559, 2, 451, 557, 6, 4 Rehabilitation Center 549, 9, 10, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 492, 627, 628, 491, 490 Dosher Memorial Hospital 323, 864, 649, 190, 650, 194, 405, 320, 400, 602, 827, 442, 601, 401, 600, 599, 428, 665, 402, 598, 597, 596, 164, 410, 242, 667, 5 Sharon's Childcare 668, 412, 669, 411, 246, 413, 247, 250, 681, 682, 416, 683, 415, 684, 252, 254 159, 584, 585, 393, 867, 162, 408, 164, 410, 242, 667, 668, 412, 6 Kids World Academy 669, 411, 246, 413, 247, 250, 681, 682, 416, 683, 415, 684, 252, 254 575, 383, 307, 579, 578, 290, 155, 3, 559, 2, 451, 557, 6, 549, 9, 7 Elmcroft of Southport 10, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 492, 627, 628, 491, 490 164, 410, 242, 667, 668, 412, 669, 411, 246, 413, 247, 250, 681, 8 The Landings of Oak Island 682, 416, 683 394, 443, 516, 180, 776, 777, 584, 585, 393, 867, 162, 408, 164, 9 L & L Montessori School 410, 242, 667, 668, 412, 669, 411, 246, 413, 247, 250, 681, 682, 416, 683, 415, 684, 252, 254 396, 564, 565, 449, 566, 308, 151, 475, 389, 563, 561, 153, 156, 10 Southport Elementary School 477, 580, 581, 157, 643, 582, 159, 584, 585, 393, 867, 162, 408, 164, 167 11 South Brunswick Middle School 9, 10, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 18, 19, 498, 21 12 South Brunswick High School 314, 9, 10, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 492, 627, 628, 491, 490 151, 475, 389, 563, 561, 562, 290, 155, 3, 559, 2, 451, 557, 6, 13 Kids World Academy II 549, 9, 10, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 492, 627, 628, 491, 490 14 Learn and Play 888, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 492, 627, 628, 491, 490 528, 148, 571, 570, 569, 149, 391, 390, 151, 475, 389, 563, 561, 15 Zone 1 Transit Route 562, 290, 155, 3, 559, 2, 451, 557, 6, 549, 551, 552, 550, 32, 34, 35, 511, 38, 39, 531, 801, 287 149, 391, 390, 151, 475, 389, 563, 561, 562, 290, 155, 3, 559, 2, 16 Zone 2 Transit Route 451, 557, 6, 549, 551, 552, 550, 32, 34, 35, 511, 38, 39, 531, 801, 287 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 103 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 479, 319, 336, 646, 644, 645, 431, 216, 183, 394, 443, 516, 180, 17 Zone 3 Transit Route 776, 777, 584, 585, 393, 867, 162, 408, 164, 167 183, 778, 893, 317, 186, 187, 648, 647, 323, 864, 649, 190, 650, 18 Zone 4 Transit Route 194, 405, 320, 400, 602, 827, 442, 601, 401, 600, 599, 428, 665, 402, 598, 597, 596, 164, 167 Carolina Beach After School Program 19 300, 76, 366, 83, 84, 85, 87, 89, 90, 797, 91, 92, 800, 95 Carolina Beach Elementary Island Time DropNPlay 439, 828, 829, 830, 852, 831, 832, 833, 827, 442, 601, 401, 600, 20 Zone 5 Transit Route 599, 428, 665, 402, 598, 597, 596, 164, 167 164, 410, 242, 667, 668, 412, 669, 411, 246, 673, 672, 418, 671, 21 Zone 6 Transit Route 670, 417, 272, 674 57, 793, 792, 59, 452, 60, 642, 10, 12, 14, 638, 15, 16, 17, 493, 22 Zone 7 Transit Route 18, 19, 498, 21 23 Zone 10 Transit Route 75, 346, 718, 76, 366, 83, 84, 85, 87, 89, 90, 797, 91, 92, 800, 95 68, 71, 719, 720, 75, 346, 718, 76, 366, 83, 84, 85, 87, 89, 90, 24 Zone 11 Transit Route 797, 91, 92, 800, 95 55, 787, 455, 786, 454, 770, 771, 789, 392, 780, 790, 781, 782, 25 Zone 8 Transit Route 783, 784, 785, 381 26 Zone 9 Transit Route 6, 549, 551, 552, 550, 32, 34, 35, 511, 38, 39, 531, 801, 287 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 104 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 103. Relocation Schools/Pickup Point School Relocation School/Pickup Point South Brunswick High School Brunswick Academy Childcare Network Southport Baptist Church Preschool Kids World Academy II L & L Montessori School Bolivia Elementary School Sharon's Childcare Kids World Academy Southport Christian School Learn and Play South Brunswick Middle School Leland Middle School Carolina Beach After School Program Carolina Beach Elementary Murray Middle School Island Time DropNPlay Southport Elementary School Supply Elementary School Brunswick Nuclear Plant 105 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 101. Major Evacuation Routes Brunswick Nuclear Plant 106 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 102. Transit Dependent Bus Routes Brunswick Nuclear Plant 107 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 103. Evacuation Shelters, Reception Centers and Relocation Schools Brunswick Nuclear Plant 108 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX A Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms

A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms Term Definition Analysis Network A graphical representation of the geometric topology of a physical roadway system, which is comprised of directional links and nodes.

Link A network link represents a specific, onedirectional section of roadway. A link has both physical (length, number of lanes, topology, etc.) and operational (turn movement percentages, service rate, freeflow speed) characteristics.

Measures of Effectiveness Statistics describing traffic operations on a roadway network.

Node A network node generally represents an intersection of network links. A node has control characteristics, i.e., the allocation of service time to each approach link.

Origin A location attached to a network link, within the EPZ or Shadow Region, where trips are generated at a specified rate in vehicles per hour (vph). These trips enter the roadway system to travel to their respective destinations.

Prevailing Roadway and Relates to the physical features of the roadway, the nature (e.g.,

Traffic Conditions composition) of traffic on the roadway and the ambient conditions (weather, visibility, pavement conditions, etc.).

Service Rate Maximum rate at which vehicles, executing a specific turn maneuver, can be discharged from a section of roadway at the prevailing conditions, expressed in vehicles per second (vps) or vehicles per hour (vph).

Service Volume Maximum number of vehicles which can pass over a section of roadway in one direction during a specified time period with operating conditions at a specified Level of Service (The Service Volume at the upper bound of Level of Service, E, equals Capacity).

Service Volume is usually expressed as vehicles per hour (vph).

Signal Cycle Length The total elapsed time to display all signal indications, in sequence.

The cycle length is expressed in seconds.

Signal Interval A single combination of signal indications. The interval duration is expressed in seconds. A signal phase is comprised of a sequence of signal intervals, usually green, yellow, red.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant A1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Term Definition Signal Phase A set of signal indications (and intervals) which services a particular combination of traffic movements on selected approaches to the intersection. The phase duration is expressed in seconds.

Traffic (Trip) Assignment A process of assigning traffic to paths of travel in such a way as to satisfy all trip objectives (i.e., the desire of each vehicle to travel from a specified origin in the network to a specified destination) and to optimize some stated objective or combination of objectives. In general, the objective is stated in terms of minimizing a generalized "cost". For example, "cost" may be expressed in terms of travel time.

Traffic Density The number of vehicles that occupy one lane of a roadway section of specified length at a point in time, expressed as vehicles per mile (vpm).

Traffic (Trip) Distribution A process for determining the destinations of all traffic generated at the origins. The result often takes the form of a Trip Table, which is a matrix of origindestination traffic volumes.

Traffic Simulation A computer model designed to replicate the realworld operation of vehicles on a roadway network, so as to provide statistics describing traffic performance. These statistics are called Measures of Effectiveness.

Traffic Volume The number of vehicles that pass over a section of roadway in one direction, expressed in vehicles per hour (vph). Where applicable, traffic volume may be stratified by turn movement.

Travel Mode Distinguishes between private auto, bus, rail, pedestrian and air travel modes.

Trip Table or Origin A rectangular matrix or table, whose entries contain the number Destination Matrix of trips generated at each specified origin, during a specified time period, that are attracted to (and travel toward) each of its specified destinations. These values are expressed in vehicles per hour (vph) or in vehicles.

Turning Capacity The capacity associated with that component of the traffic stream which executes a specified turn maneuver from an approach at an intersection.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant A2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX B DTRAD: Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution Model

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

To apply the DYNEV II System, the analyst must specify the highway network, link capacity information, the timevarying volume of traffic generated at all origin centroids and, optionally, a set of accessible candidate destination nodes on the periphery of the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) for selected origins. DTRAD calculates the optimal dynamic trip distribution (i.e., trip destinations) and the optimal dynamic trip assignment (i.e., trip routing) of the traffic generated at each origin node traveling to its set of candidate destination nodes, so as to minimize evacuee travel cost.

B.1 Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model The underlying premise is that the selection of destinations and routes is intrinsically coupled in an evacuation scenario. That is, people in vehicles seek to travel out of an area of potential risk as rapidly as possible by selecting the best routes. The model is designed to identify these best routes in a manner that realistically distributes vehicles from origins to destinations and routes them over the highway network, in a consistent and optimal manner, reflecting evacuee behavior.

For each origin, a set of candidate destination nodes is selected by the software logic and by the analyst to reflect the desire by evacuees to travel away from the power plant and to access major highways. The specific destination nodes within this set that are selected by travelers and the selection of the connecting paths of travel, are both determined by DTRAD. This determination is made by a logitbased path choice model in DTRAD, so as to minimize the trip cost, as discussed later.

The traffic loading on the network and the consequent operational traffic environment of the network (density, speed, throughput on each link) vary over time as the evacuation takes place.

The DTRAD model, which is interfaced with the DYNEV simulation model, executes a succession of sessions wherein it computes the optimal routing and selection of destination nodes for the conditions that exist at that time.

B.2 Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. An algorithm was developed to support the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (OD matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next. Another algorithm executes a mapping from the specified Brunswick Nuclear Plant B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

geometric network (linknode analysis network) that represents the physical highway system, to a path network that represents the vehicle [turn] movements. DTRAD computations are performed on the path network: DYNEV simulation model, on the geometric network.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant B2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

where ca is the generalized cost for link a, and , , and are cost coefficients for link travel time, distance, and supplemental cost, respectively. Distance and supplemental costs are defined as invariant properties of the network model, while travel time is a dynamic property dictated by prevailing traffic conditions. The DYNEV simulation model computes travel times on all edges in the network and DTRAD uses that information to constantly update the costs of paths. The route choice decision model in the next simulation iteration uses these updated values to adjust the route choice behavior. This way, traffic demands are dynamically reassigned based on time dependent conditions.

The interaction between the DTRAD traffic assignment and DYNEV II simulation models is depicted in Figure B1. Each round of interaction is called a Traffic Assignment Session (TA session). A TA session is composed of multiple iterations, marked as loop B in the figure.

The supplemental cost is based on the survival distribution (a variation of the exponential distribution). The Inverse Survival Function is a cost term in DTRAD to represent the potential risk of travel toward the plant:

sa = ln (p), 0 p l ; 0 p=

dn = Distance of node, n, from the plant d0 =Distance from the plant where there is zero risk

= Scaling factor The value of do = 10 miles, the outer distance of the EPZ. Note that the supplemental cost, sa, of link, a, is (high, low), if its downstream node, n, is (near, far from) the power plant.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant B3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

B.2.2 Network Equilibrium In 1952, John Wardrop wrote:

Under equilibrium conditions traffic arranges itself in congested networks in such a way that no individual tripmaker can reduce his path costs by switching routes.

The above statement describes the User Equilibrium definition, also called the Selfish Driver Equilibrium. It is a hypothesis that represents a [hopeful] condition that evolves over time as drivers search out alternative routes to identify those routes that minimize their respective costs. It has been found that this equilibrium objective to minimize costs is largely realized by most drivers who routinely take the same trip over the same network at the same time (i.e.,

commuters). Effectively, such drivers learn which routes are best for them over time. Thus, the traffic environment settles down to a nearequilibrium state.

Clearly, since an emergency evacuation is a sudden, unique event, it does not constitute a long term learning experience which can achieve an equilibrium state. Consequently, DTRAD was not designed as an equilibrium solution, but to represent drivers in a new and unfamiliar situation, who respond in a flexible manner to realtime information (either broadcast or observed) in such a way as to minimize their respective costs of travel.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant B4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Start of next DTRAD Session A

Set T0 Clock time.

Archive System State at T0 Define latest Link Turn Percentages Execute Simulation Model from B time, T0 to T1 (burn time)

Provide DTRAD with link MOE at time, T1 Execute DTRAD iteration; Get new Turn Percentages Retrieve System State at T0 ;

Apply new Link Turn Percents DTRAD iteration converges?

No Yes Next iteration Simulate from T0 to T2 (DTA session duration)

Set Clock to T2 B A Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface Brunswick Nuclear Plant B5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

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

Model Features Include:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Provides MOE to animation software, EVacuation Animator (EVAN)

Calculates ETE statistics All traffic simulation models are dataintensive. Table C2 outlines the necessary input data elements.

To provide an efficient framework for defining these specifications, the physical highway environment is represented as a network. The unidirectional links of the network represent Brunswick Nuclear Plant C1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

roadway sections: rural, multilane, urban streets or freeways. The nodes of the network generally represent intersections or points along a section where a geometric property changes (e.g. a lane drop, change in grade or free flow speed).

Figure C1 is an example of a small network representation. The freeway is defined by the sequence of links, (20,21), (21,22), and (22,23). Links (8001, 19) and (3, 8011) are Entry and Exit links, respectively. An arterial extends from node 3 to node 19 and is partially subsumed within a grid network. Note that links (21,22) and (17,19) are gradeseparated.

C.1 Methodology C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram It is necessary to define the fundamental diagram describing flowdensity and speeddensity relationships. Rather than settling for a triangular representation, a more realistic representation that includes a capacity drop, (IR)Qmax, at the critical density when flow conditions enter the forced flow regime, is developed and calibrated for each link. This representation, shown in Figure C2, asserts a constant free speed up to a density, k , and then a linear reduction in speed in the range, k k k 45 vpm, the density at capacity. In the flowdensity plane, a quadratic relationship is prescribed in the range, k k 95 vpm which roughly represents the stopandgo condition of severe congestion. The value of flow rate, Q , corresponding to k , is approximated at 0.7 RQ . A linear relationship between k and k completes the diagram shown in Figure C2. Table C3 is a glossary of terms.

The fundamental diagram is applied to moving traffic on every link. The specified calibration values for each link are: (1) Free speed, v ; (2) Capacity, Q  ; (3) Critical density, k 45 vpm ; (4) Capacity Drop Factor, R = 0.9 ; (5) Jam density, k . Then, v , k k

. Setting k k k , then Q RQ k for 0 k k 50 . It can be shown that Q 0.98 0.0056 k RQ for k k k , where k 50 and k 175.

C.1.2 The Simulation Model The simulation model solves a sequence of unit problems, Each unit problem computes the movement of traffic on a link, for each specified turn movement, over a specified time interval (TI) which serves as the simulation time step for all links. Figure C3 is a representation of the unit problem in the timedistance plane. Table C3 is a glossary of terms that are referenced in the following description of the unit problem procedure.

The formulation and the associated logic presented below are designed to solve the unit problem for each sweep over the network (discussed below), for each turn movement serviced on each link that comprises the evacuation network, and for each TI over the duration of the evacuation.

Given Q , M , L , TI , E , LN , G C , h , L , R , L , E , M Brunswick Nuclear Plant C2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Compute O ,Q ,M Define O O O O ; E E E

1. For the first sweep, s = 1, of this TI, get initial estimates of mean density, k , the R - factor, R and entering traffic, E , using the values computed for the final sweep of the prior TI.

For each subsequent sweep, s 1 , calculate E P O S where P , O are the relevant turn percentages from feeder link, i , and its total outflow (possibly metered) over this TI; S is the total source flow (possibly metered) during the current TI.

Set iteration counter, n = 0, k k , and E E .

2. Calculate v k such that k 130 using the analytical representations of the fundamental diagram.

Q TI G Calculate Cap C LN , in vehicles, this value may be reduced 3600 due to metering Set R 1.0 if G C 1 or if k k ; Set R 0.9 only if G C 1 and k k L

Calculate queue length, L Q LN

3. Calculate t TI . If t 0 , set t E O 0 ; Else, E E .

4. Then E E E ; t TI t

5. If Q Cap , then O Cap , O O 0 If t 0 , then Q Q M E Cap Else Q Q Cap End if Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A below

6. Else Q Cap O Q , RCap Cap O

7. If M RCap , then t Cap

8. If t 0, O M ,O min RCap M , 0 TI Q E O If Q 0 , then Calculate Q , M with Algorithm A Else Brunswick Nuclear Plant C3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Q 0, M E End if Else t 0 O M and O 0 M M O E; Q 0 End if

9. Else M O 0 If t 0 , then O RCap , Q M O E Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A

10. Else t 0 M M If M ,

O RCap Q M O Apply Algorithm A to calculate Q and M Else O M M M O E and Q 0 End if End if End if End if

11. Calculate a new estimate of average density, k k 2k k ,

where k = density at the beginning of the TI k = density at the end of the TI k = density at the midpoint of the TI All values of density apply only to the moving vehicles.

If k k and n N where N max number of iterations, and is a convergence criterion, then

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

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

13. If Q M , then Brunswick Nuclear Plant C4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The number of excess vehicles that cause spillback is: SB Q M ,

where W is the width of the upstream intersection. To prevent spillback, meter the outflow from the feeder approaches and from the source flow, S, during this TI by the amount, SB. That is, set SB M 1 0 , where M is the metering factor over all movements .

E S This metering factor is assigned appropriately to all feeder links and to the source flow, to be applied during the next network sweep, discussed later.

Algorithm A This analysis addresses the flow environment over a TI during which moving vehicles can join a standing or discharging queue. For the case Qb vQ shown, Q Cap, with t 0 and a queue of Qe Qe length, Q , formed by that portion of M and E that reaches the stopbar within the TI, but could v not discharge due to inadequate capacity. That is, Mb Q M E . This queue length, Q v Q M E Cap can be extended to Q by L3 traffic entering the approach during the current TI, traveling at speed, v, and reaching the rear of the t1 t3 queue within the TI. A portion of the entering TI vehicles, E E , will likely join the queue. This analysis calculates t , Q and M for the input values of L, TI, v, E, t, L , LN, Q .

When t 0 and Q Cap:

L L Define: L Q . From the sketch, L v TI t t L Q E .

LN LN Substituting E E yields: vt E L v TI t L . Recognizing that the first two terms on the right hand side cancel, solve for t to obtain:

L t such that 0 t TI t E L v

TI LN If the denominator, v 0, set t TI t .

t t t Then, Q Q E , M E 1 TI TI Brunswick Nuclear Plant C5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The complete Algorithm A considers all flow scenarios; space limitation precludes its inclusion, here.

C.1.3 Lane Assignment The unit problem is solved for each turn movement on each link. Therefore it is necessary to calculate a value, LN , of allocated lanes for each movement, x. If in fact all lanes are specified by, say, arrows painted on the pavement, either as full lanes or as lanes within a turn bay, then the problem is fully defined. If however there remain unchannelized lanes on a link, then an analysis is undertaken to subdivide the number of these physical lanes into turn movement specific virtual lanes, LNx.

C.2 Implementation C.2.1 Computational Procedure The computational procedure for this model is shown in the form of a flow diagram as Figure C4. As discussed earlier, the simulation model processes traffic flow for each link independently over TI that the analyst specifies; it is usually 60 seconds or longer. The first step is to execute an algorithm to define the sequence in which the network links are processed so that as many links as possible are processed after their feeder links are processed, within the same network sweep. Since a general network will have many closed loops, it is not possible to guarantee that every link processed will have all of its feeder links processed earlier.

The processing then continues as a succession of time steps of duration, TI, until the simulation is completed. Within each time step, the processing performs a series of sweeps over all network links; this is necessary to ensure that the traffic flow is synchronous over the entire network. Specifically, the sweep ensures continuity of flow among all the network links; in the context of this model, this means that the values of E, M, and S are all defined for each link such that they represent the synchronous movement of traffic from each link to all of its outbound links. These sweeps also serve to compute the metering rates that control spillback.

Within each sweep, processing solves the unit problem for each turn movement on each link.

With the turn movement percentages for each link provided by the DTRAD model, an algorithm allocates the number of lanes to each movement serviced on each link. The timing at a signal, if any, applied at the downstream end of the link, is expressed as a G/C ratio, the signal timing needed to define this ratio is an input requirement for the model. The model also has the capability of representing, with macroscopic fidelity, the actions of actuated signals responding to the timevarying competing demands on the approaches to the intersection.

The solution of the unit problem yields the values of the number of vehicles, O, that discharge from the link over the time interval and the number of vehicles that remain on the link at the end of the time interval as stratified by queued and moving vehicles: Q and M . The procedure considers each movement separately (multipiping). After all network links are processed for a given network sweep, the updated consistent values of entering flows, E; metering rates, M; and source flows, S are defined so as to satisfy the no spillback condition.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant C6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The procedure then performs the unit problem solutions for all network links during the following sweep.

Experience has shown that the system converges (i.e. the values of E, M and S settle down for all network links) in just two sweeps if the network is entirely undersaturated or in four sweeps in the presence of extensive congestion with link spillback. (The initial sweep over each link uses the final values of E and M, of the prior TI). At the completion of the final sweep for a TI, the procedure computes and stores all measures of effectiveness for each link and turn movement for output purposes. It then prepares for the following time interval by defining the values of Q and M for the start of the next TI as being those values of Q and M at the end of the prior TI. In this manner, the simulation model processes the traffic flow over time until the end of the run. Note that there is no spacediscretization other than the specification of network links.

C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD)

The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. Thus, an algorithm was developed to identify an appropriate set of destination nodes for each origin based on its location and on the expected direction of travel. This algorithm also supports the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (OD matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next.

Figure B1 depicts the interaction of the simulation model with the DTRAD model in the DYNEV II system. As indicated, DYNEV II performs a succession of DTRAD sessions; each such session computes the turn link percentages for each link that remain constant for the session duration, T , T , specified by the analyst. The end product is the assignment of traffic volumes from each origin to paths connecting it with its destinations in such a way as to minimize the networkwide cost function. The output of the DTRAD model is a set of updated link turn percentages which represent this assignment of traffic.

As indicated in Figure B1, the simulation model supports the DTRAD session by providing it with operational link MOE that are needed by the path choice model and included in the DTRAD cost function. These MOE represent the operational state of the network at a time, T T , which lies within the session duration, T , T . This burn time, T T , is selected by the analyst. For each DTRAD iteration, the simulation model computes the change in network operations over this burn time using the latest set of link turn percentages computed by the DTRAD model. Upon convergence of the DTRAD iterative procedure, the simulation model accepts the latest turn percentages provided by the Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) model, returns to the origin time, T , and executes until it arrives at the end of the DTRAD session duration at time, T . At this time the next DTA session is launched and the whole process repeats until the end of the DYNEV II run.

Additional details are presented in Appendix B.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant C7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Mean Travel Time Minutes Evacuation Trips; Network Brunswick Nuclear Plant C8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

Nuclear Power Plant Coordinates (X,Y)

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

Stop and Yield signs Rightturnonred (RTOR)

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

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

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

Duration of DTA sessions Duration of simulation burn time Desired number of destination nodes per origin INCIDENTS Identify and Schedule of closed lanes Identify and Schedule of closed links Brunswick Nuclear Plant C9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

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

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

h The mean queue discharge headway, seconds.

k Density in vehicles per lane per mile.

The average density of moving vehicles of a particular movement over a TI, on a k

link.

L The length of the link in feet.

The queue length in feet of a particular movement, at the [beginning, end] of a L ,L time interval.

The number of lanes, expressed as a floating point number, allocated to service a LN particular movement on a link.

L The mean effective length of a queued vehicle including the vehicle spacing, feet.

M Metering factor (Multiplier): 1.

The number of moving vehicles on the link, of a particular movement, that are M ,M moving at the [beginning, end] of the time interval. These vehicles are assumed to be of equal spacing, over the length of link upstream of the queue.

The total number of vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a O

link over a time interval.

The components of the vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a link within a time interval: vehicles that were Queued at the beginning of O ,O ,O the TI; vehicles that were Moving within the link at the beginning of the TI; vehicles that Entered the link during the TI.

The percentage, expressed as a fraction, of the total flow on the link that P

executes a particular turn movement, x.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant C10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

[beginning, end] of the time interval.

The maximum flow rate that can be serviced by a link for a particular movement Q in the absence of a control device. It is specified by the analyst as an estimate of link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the HCM 2016.

R The factor that is applied to the capacity of a link to represent the capacity drop when the flow condition moves into the forced flow regime. The lower capacity at that point is equal to RQ .

RCap The remaining capacity available to service vehicles of a particular movement after that queue has been completely serviced, within a time interval, expressed as vehicles.

S Service rate for movement x, vehicles per hour (vph).

t Vehicles of a particular turn movement that enter a link over the first t seconds of a time interval, can reach the stopbar (in the absence of a queue down stream) within the same time interval.

TI The time interval, in seconds, which is used as the simulation time step.

v The mean speed of travel, in feet per second (fps) or miles per hour (mph), of moving vehicles on the link.

v The mean speed of the last vehicle in a queue that discharges from the link within the TI. This speed differs from the mean speed of moving vehicles, v.

W The width of the intersection in feet. This is the difference between the link length which extends from stopbar to stopbar and the block length.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant C11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8011 8009 2 3 8104 8107 6 5 8008 8010 8 9 10 8007 8012 12 11 8006 8005 13 14 8014 15 25 8004 16 24 8024 17 8003 23 22 21 20 8002 Entry, Exit Nodes are 19 numbered 8xxx 8001 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network Brunswick Nuclear Plant C12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kc kj ks Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams Distance OQ OM OE Down Qb vQ Qe v

v L

Mb Me Up t1 t2 Time E1 E2 TI Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 Brunswick Nuclear Plant C13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Sequence Network Links Next Timestep, of duration, TI A

Next sweep; Define E, M, S for all B

Links C Next Link D Next Turn Movement, x Get lanes, LNx Service Rate, Sx ; G/Cx Get inputs to Unit Problem:

Q b , Mb , E Solve Unit Problem: Q e , Me , O No D Last Movement ?

Yes No Last Link ? C Yes No B Last Sweep ?

Yes Calc., store all Link MOE Set up next TI :

No A Last Time - step ?

Yes DONE Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3)

Brunswick Nuclear Plant C14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX D Detailed Description of Study Procedure

D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE This appendix describes the activities that were performed to compute Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE). The individual steps of this effort are represented as a flow diagram in Figure D1. Each numbered step in the description that follows corresponds to the numbered element in the flow diagram.

Step 1 The first activity was to verify the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) boundary information and create a Geographical Information System (GIS) base map. The base map extends beyond the Shadow Region which extends approximately 15 miles (radially) from the power plant location.

The base map incorporates the local roadway topology, a suitable topographic background and the EPZ and the Zone boundaries.

Step 2 The 2020 Census block information was obtained in GIS format. This information was used to estimate the permanent resident population within the EPZ and Shadow Region and to define the spatial distribution and demographic characteristics of the population within the study area. Estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon 2018 Workplace Area Characteristic (WAC) data from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool1 extrapolated to 2020 using the shortterm employment projection for the State of North Carolina2. Transient data from previous study at facilities within Brunswick County was reviewed by Brunswick County and confirmed to be still accurate. For facilities in New Hanover County, data from the previous study was used. Several new transient facilities were identified within the EPZ. Data for the new facilities were provided by the EPZ counties, supplemented by internet searches and aerial imagery where data was not provided. Information concerning schools, medical and other types of special facilities within the EPZ was obtained from the counties, the North Carolina Division of Child Development and Early Education3, and the ChildcareCenter4. Online data searching and data from the previous ETE study was used when data was not provided or could not be obtained through online sources.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with major stakeholders (state and county emergency officials, and onsite and offsite Duke Energy personnel). The purpose of the kickoff meeting was to present an overview of the work effort, identify key agency personnel, and indicate the data requirements for the study. Specific requests for information were presented to the state and county emergency officials and the Duke Energy utility managers. Unique features of the study area were discussed to identify the local concerns that should be addressed by the ETE study.

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

2 https://www.nccommerce.com/data-tools-reports/labor-market-data-tools/employment-projections 3 https://ncchildcaresearch.dhhs.state.nc.us/search.asp 4 https://childcarecenter.us/

Brunswick Nuclear Plant D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 4 Next, a physical survey of the roadway system in the study area was conducted to determine any changes to the roadway network since the previous study. This survey included consideration of the geometric properties of the highway sections, the channelization of lanes on each section of roadway, whether there are any turn restrictions or special treatment of traffic at intersections, the type and functioning of traffic control devices, gathering signal timings for pretimed traffic signals (if any exist within the study area), and to make the necessary observations needed to estimate realistic values of roadway capacity. Roadway characteristics were also verified using aerial imagery.

Step 5 An online demographic survey of the households within the EPZ was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic information of the EPZ population. This information was used to determine important study factors including the average number of evacuating vehicles used by each household, and the time required to perform preevacuation mobilization activities.

Step 6 A computerized representation of the physical roadway system, called a linknode analysis network, was updated using the most recent UNITES software (see Section 1.3) developed by KLD. Once the updated geometry of the network was completed, the network was calibrated using the information gathered during the road survey (Step 4) and information obtained from aerial imagery. Estimates of highway capacity for each link and other linkspecific characteristics were introduced to the network description. Traffic signal timings were input accordingly. The linknode analysis network was imported into a GIS map. The 2020 permanent resident population and special facility population estimates (Step 2) were overlaid in the map, and origin centroids where trips would be generated during the evacuation process were assigned to appropriate links.

Step 7 The EPZ is subdivided into 13 Zones. Based on wind direction and speed, Regions (groupings of Zones) that may be advised to evacuate, were developed.

The need for evacuation can occur over a range of timeofday, dayofweek, seasonal and weatherrelated conditions. Scenarios were developed to capture the variation in evacuation demand, highway capacity and mobilization time, for different time of day, day of the week, time of year, and weather conditions.

Step 8 The input stream for the DYNEV II Model, which integrates the dynamic traffic assignment and distribution model, DTRAD, with the evacuation simulation model, was created for a prototype evacuation case - the evacuation of the entire EPZ for a representative scenario.

Step 9 Brunswick Nuclear Plant D2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

After creating this input stream, the DYNEV II Model was executed on the prototype evacuation case to compute evacuating traffic routing patterns consistent with the appropriate NRC guidelines. DYNEV II contains an extensive suite of data diagnostics which check the completeness and consistency of the input data specified. The analyst reviews all warning and error messages produced by the model and then corrects the database to create an input stream that properly executes to completion.

The model assigns destinations to all origin centroids consistent with a (general) radial evacuation of the EPZ and Shadow Region. The analyst may optionally supplement and/or replace these modelassigned destinations, based on professional judgment, after studying the topology of the analysis highway network. The model produces link and networkwide measures of effectiveness as well as estimates of evacuation time.

Step 10 The results generated by the prototype evacuation case are critically examined. The examination includes observing the animated graphics (using the EVAN software - see Section 1.3) and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a laborintensive activity, requiring the direct participation of skilled engineers who possess the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any problems reflected in the results.

Essentially, the approach is to identify those bottlenecks in the network that represent locations where congested conditions are pronounced and to identify the cause of this congestion. This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to high rates of trip generation, improper routing, a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative flaw in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream. This examination leads to one of two conclusions:

The results are satisfactory; or The input stream must be modified accordingly.

This decision requires, of course, the application of the user's judgment and experience based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the model and a comparison of the results of the latest prototype evacuation case iteration with the previous ones. If the results are satisfactory in the opinion of the user, then the process continues with Step 13. Otherwise, proceed to Step 11.

Step 11 There are many "treatments" available to the user in resolving apparent problems. These treatments range from decisions to reroute the traffic by assigning additional evacuation destinations for one or more sources, imposing turn restrictions where they can produce significant improvements in capacity, changing the control treatment at critical intersections so as to provide improved service for one or more movements, adding minor routes (which are paved and traversable) that were not previously modelled by may assist in an evacuation and increase the available roadway network capacity, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant D3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Such "treatments" take the form of modifications to the original prototype evacuation case input stream. All treatments are designed to improve the representation of evacuation behavior.

Step 12 As noted above, the changes to the input stream must be implemented to reflect the modifications undertaken in Step 11. At the completion of this activity, the process returns to Step 9 where the DYNEV II Model is again executed.

Step 13 Evacuation of transitdependent evacuees and special facilities are included in the evacuation analysis. Fixed routing for transit buses, school buses, ambulances, and other transit vehicles are introduced into the final prototype evacuation case data set. DYNEV II generates route specific speeds over time for use in the estimation of evacuation times for the transit dependent and special facility population groups.

Step 14 The prototype evacuation case was used as the basis for generating all region and scenario specific evacuation cases to be simulated. This process was automated through the UNITES user interface. For each specific case, the population to be evacuated, the trip generation distributions, the highway capacity and speeds, and other factors are adjusted to produce a customized casespecific data set.

Step 15 All evacuation cases are executed using the DYNEV II Model to compute ETE. Once results are available, quality control procedures are used to assure the results are consistent, dynamic routing is reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks are addressed properly.

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

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated, and graphed. Traffic management plans are analyzed, and Traffic Control Points (TCP), Security Roadblocks (SRB) are prioritized, if applicable. Additional analysis is conducted to identify the sensitivity of the ETE to changes in some base evacuation conditions and model assumptions. The results are then documented, as required by NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant D4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

A Step 1 Step 10 Create GIS Base Map Examine Prototype Evacuation Case using EVAN and DYNEV II Output Step 2 Gather Census Block and Demographic Data for Results Satisfactory Study Area Step 11 Step 3 Modify Evacuation Destinations and/or Develop Conduct Kickoff Meeting with Stakeholders Traffic Control Treatments Step 4 Step 12 Field Survey of Roadways within Study Area Modify Database to Reflect Changes to Prototype Evacuation Case Step 5 Conduct and Analyze Demographic Survey and Develop Trip Generation Characteristics B

Step 13 Step 6 Establish Transit and Special Facility Evacuation Create and Calibrate LinkNode Analysis Network Routes and Update DYNEV II Database Step 14 Step 7 Generate DYNEV II Input Streams for All Evacuation Cases Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 15 Step 8 Use DYNEVII Average Speed Output to Compute Create and Debug DYNEV II Input Stream ETE for Transit and Special Facility Routes Step 16 Step 9 Use DYNEVII Results to Estimate Transit and Special Facilities Evacuation Time Estimates B Execute DYNEV II for Prototype Evacuation Case Step 17 Documentation A Step 18 Complete ETE Criteria Checklist Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities Brunswick Nuclear Plant D5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX E Facility Data

E. FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of February 2022, for special facilities and transient attractions that are located within the BNP EPZ. Data for the schools and preschools/childcare centers are from the 20202021 school year. Special facilities are defined as schools, preschools/childcare centers, and medical facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for recreational areas (beaches, campgrounds, golf courses, historical sites, parks, marinas, and other recreational areas) and lodging facilities. OnTheMap employment data (see Section 3, Subsection 3.4) is summarized in the table for major employers.

Each table is grouped by county. The location of the facility is defined by its straightline distance (miles) and direction (magnetic bearing) from the center point of the plant. Maps of each school and preschool/childcare center, recreational area (beach, campground, golf course, historical site, park, marina, and other recreational area), lodging facility, and major employer are also provided.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers within the EPZ Distance Direc Enroll Zone (miles) tion School Name Street Address Municipality ment BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC 1 1.8 S Childcare Network 802 E Leonard St Southport 147 1 2.7 S Southport Baptist Church Preschool 200 N Howe St Southport 52 2 2.4 SSW Kids World Academy 713 N Caswell Ave Southport 29 2 2.6 SSW Southport Elementary School 701 W 9th St Southport 588 2 3.8 WSW L&L Montessori School 4150 Vanessa Dr Southport 51 4 6.9 WSW Sharon's Childcare 115 NE 43rd St Oak Island 8 5 2.5 W Kids World Academy II 4833 Gina St Southport 5 5 3.1 WSW Southport Christian School 4457A Flagship Ave SE Southport 120 7 4.1 NNW South Brunswick High School 280 Cougar Rd Southport 1,141 7 4.1 NNW South Brunswick Middle School 100 Cougar Rd Southport 729 7 5.3 NNW Learn and Play 45 E Boiling Spring Rd Southport 8 Brunswick County Subtotal: 2,878 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC 10 8.1 NE Carolina Beach After School Program 400 S 4th St Carolina Beach 82 10 8.1 NE Carolina Beach Elementary 400 S 4th St Carolina Beach 461 10 8.6 NE Island Time DropNPlay 222 Winner Ave Carolina Beach 62 New Hanover County Subtotal: 605 EPZ TOTAL: 3,483 Brunswick Nuclear Plant E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambula Wheel Bed Distance Direc Capa Current tory chair ridden Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality city Census Patients Patients Patients BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC 1 1.2 S Elmcroft of Southport 1125 E Leonard St Southport 96 61 52 9 0 Southport Health &

1 2.0 SSW Rehabilitation Center 630 Fodale Ave Southport 60 50 38 7 5 J Arthur Dosher Memorial 1 2.1 SSW Hospital & Skilled Nursing Center 924 N Howe St Southport N/A 69 16 39 14 6 6.4 W The Landings of Oak Island 2910 Pine Plantation Pkwy Bolivia 80 67 41 19 7 Brunswick County Subtotal: N/A 247 147 74 26 EPZ TOTAL: N/A 247 147 74 26 Table E3. Major Employers1 within the EPZ

% Employee Employees Employees Vehicles Distance Direc Employees Commuting Commuting Commuting Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC Various locations throughout the EPZ 1,180 61.4% 779 722 Brunswick County Subtotal: 1,180 779 722 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC Various locations throughout the EPZ 250 61.4% 154 144 New Hanover County Subtotal: 250 154 144 EPZ TOTAL: 1,430 933 866 1

The major employer locations identified by the Census Bureau are shown in Figure E-3. The locations are represented by circles which increase in size proportional to the number of employees commuting into the EPZ present in each census block. Note, the data for BNP (669 employees during maximum shift) was provided by Duke Energy. The numbers of employees in Brunswick County for the Census block that represents the plant have been adjusted accordingly.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Distance Dir Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC 1 1.5 SW Woodside RV & Trailer Park 1648 N Howe St Southport Campground 180 120 1 2.0 SSE Deep Point Marina & Yacht Club 1301 Ferry Rd Southport Marina 55 26 2 2.9 SSW Freedom Boat Club of Southport NC 606 W West St Southport Marina 8 5 2 2.9 SSW Southport Marina 606 W West St Southport Marina 76 35 2 3.1 SSW Indigo Plantation & Marina 6099 Indigo Plantation Dr Southport Marina 26 12 2 3.6 SW Dutchman Creek Park Fish Factory Rd SE Smithville Park 258 120 Oak Island Par 3 Golf Course at South 2 3.7 SW Harbour2 4188 Vanessa Dr Southport Golf Course Local residents only 2 3.8 SW Safe Harbor South Harbour Village 4909 Fish Factory Rd SE Southport Marina 22 10 3 5.1 SW Oak Island Golf Club 928 Caswell Rd Oak Island Golf Course 175 60 4 7.5 WSW Oak Island Recreation Center 3003 E Oak Island Dr Oak Island Other 49 49 4 Oak Island Beaches3 Beach 29,315 9,772 5 3.9 WSW Oak Island Campground 4125 Long Beach Rd SE Southport Campground 140 100 5 4.2 WSW The Player's Club 3684 Players Club Dr SE Southport Golf Course 8 4 5 5.5 W Reserve Golf Club 4061 Wydmere Dr Southport Golf Course 8 4 5 6.2 WSW Founders Club 3021 Beaver Creek Dr SE Southport Golf Course 8 4 5 6.5 W Members Club 3779 Members Club Blvd SE Southport Golf Course 8 4 5 7.0 WSW St James Marina 2571 Saint James Dr SE Southport Marina 42 20 7 5.6 NNW Lakes Country Club 591 South Shore Dr Southport Golf Course 38 18 9 6.8 NNE Brunswick Town Historical Museum 8884 Saint Philips Rd SE Winnabow Historical Site 100 30 13 5.7 S Bald Head Island Marina 6A Marina Wynd Bald Head Island Marina 334 155 13 6.7 S Bald Head Island Club 301 S Bald Head Wynd Bald Head Island Golf Course 60 38 13 Bald Head Island Beaches4 Bald Head Island Beach 815 379 Brunswick County Subtotal: 31,725 10,965 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC 10 8.1 NE Carolina Beach State Park 1011 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach Park 250 150 10 8.6 NE Carolina Beach State Park & Campground 1011 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach Campground 332 166 2

Local resident usage only. No transients have been considered at this facility to avoid double counting.

3 Transients are dispersed along the entire stretch of Oak Island, Carolina and Kure Beaches.

4 No vehicles are permitted on Bald Head Island. Daily visitors park at the Bald Head Island Ferry parking lot in Southport. The 379 vehicles calculated for Bald Head Island beaches are incorporated within Zone 1 for this study.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dir Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles 10 8.7 NE Carolina Beach Municipal Marina 300 Canal Dr Carolina Beach Marina 156 72 10 8.9 NE Federal Point Yacht Club 910 Basin Rd Carolina Beach Marina 232 165 10 8.9 NE Mona Black Marina 930 St Joseph St Carolina Beach Marina 51 36 10 9.3 NE Otter Creek Landing Yacht Club 206 Lewis Dr Carolina Beach Marina 32 23 10 9.5 NE Harbour Point Yacht Club Green Turtle Ln Carolina Beach Marina 49 23 10 9.6 NE Waterfront Villas & Yacht Club 100 SpencerFarlow Dr Carolina Beach Marina 300 150 10 9.8 NE Carolina Beach Yacht Club and Marina 401 Marina St Carolina Beach Marina 63 30 10 9.9 NE Freedom Boat Club 401 Marina St Carolina Beach Marina 17 8 10 10.0 NE Snows Cut Marina2 401 Marina St Carolina Beach Marina Local residents only 3

10 Carolina Beaches Beach 14,452 4,330 2

11 4.8 E N.C. Aquarium at Fort Fisher 900 Loggerhead Rd Kure Beach Historical Site 450 214 11 5.1 E Fort Fisher State Recreation Area 1000 Loggerhead Rd Kure Beach Park 667 310 11 5.4 E Fort Fisher Historic Site 1610 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach Historical Site 1,000 465 11 Kure Beaches3 Beach 4,317 1,315 New Hanover County Subtotal: 22,368 7,457 EPZ TOTAL: 54,093 18,422 Brunswick Nuclear Plant E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Distance Direc Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC 1 2.0 WSW Hampton Inn 5181 SouthportSupply Rd SE Southport 160 80 1 2.5 SSW River Oaks Motel 512 N Howe St Southport 10 5 2 1.8 SW Wingate Inn 1511 N Howe St Southport 252 84 2 2.9 S Lois Jane's Riverview Inn 106 W Bay St Southport 5 3 2 2.9 S Riverside Motel 103 W Bay St Southport 14 8 4 5.4 SW Oak Island Inn 8101 E Oak Island Dr Oak Island 41 28 4 6.1 WSW Captain's Cove Motel 6401 E Oak Island Dr Oak Island 151 57 4 6.4 WSW Oak Island Extended Stay 5611 E Oak Island Dr Oak Island 31 16 4 8.4 WSW Ocean Crest Motel 1411 E Beach Dr Oak Island 221 111 5 2.4 W Comfort Suites 4963 SouthportSupply Rd SE Southport 210 105 6 6.7 W Holiday Inn 3400 SouthportSupply Rd Bolivia 186 93 13 5.6 S Marsh Harbour Inn 21 Keelson Row Bald Head Island 29 22 Brunswick County Subtotal: 1,310 612 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC 10 7.8 NE Golden Sands Motel 1211 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 460 115 10 8.0 NE Carolina & Kure Beach Rentals 1000 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 539 202 10 8.3 NE Sea and Sun Motel 501 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 20 10 10 8.3 NE Dry Dock Family Motel 300 South Lake Park Carolina Beach 74 35 10 8.4 NE SeaWitch Motel 224 North Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 64 16 10 8.4 NE Russo's Motel 213 Cape Fear Blvd Carolina Beach 61 16 10 8.4 NE Buccaneer Motel 201 Cape Fear Blvd Carolina Beach 72 18 10 8.4 NE Cole's Motel 213 Raleigh Ave Carolina Beach 48 10 10 8.4 NE Courtyard by Marriott 100 Charlotte Ave Carolina Beach 300 144 10 8.5 NE Wanda Inn 4 N Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 20 10 10 8.6 NE Cabana De Mar 222 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 376 152 10 8.7 NE Drifters Reef Motel 701 N Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 140 65 10 8.7 NE Surfside Motor Lodge 234 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 150 51 10 8.7 NE Microtel Inn & Suites 907 N Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 236 59 10 8.8 NE Joy Lee Apts. 317 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 8 4 10 8.8 NE The Savannah Inn 316 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 75 23 10 8.8 NE Dolphin Lane Motel 318 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 150 55 Brunswick Nuclear Plant E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Direc Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles 10 8.9 NE Beach House Inn 412 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 88 22 10 9.1 NE Beacon House 715 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 25 7 10 10.0 NE North Pier Ocean Villas 1800 Canal Dr Carolina Beach 234 39 11 6.5 ENE Hidden Treasure Inn 113 South 4th Ave Kure Beach 15 4 11 6.5 ENE Moran Motel 118 N Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 96 26 11 6.5 ENE Sand Dunes Motel 133 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 156 37 11 6.5 ENE Pier View Apts & Cottages 209 K Ave Kure Beach 20 11 11 6.5 ENE Admiral's Quarters Motel 129 S Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 120 37 11 6.5 ENE South Wind Motel 109 S Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 150 42 11 6.6 ENE By the Pier Motel 122 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 16 14 11 6.6 ENE Seven Seas Inn 130 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 102 23 11 6.7 ENE Kure Keys Motel 310 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 40 8 11 6.8 ENE Darlings by the Sea 329 Atlantic Ave Kure Beach 10 5 11 7.4 ENE Oceaneer Motel 1621 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 126 28 New Hanover County Subtotal: 3,991 1,288 EPZ TOTAL: 5,301 1,900 Brunswick Nuclear Plant E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E1. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E3. Major Employers within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E4. Beaches, Golf Courses and Marinas within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E5. Campgrounds, Historical Sites, Parks and Other Recreational Areas within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX F Demographic Survey

F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY F.1 Introduction The development of ETE for the Brunswick Nuclear Plant (BNP) EPZ requires the identification of travel patterns, car ownership and household size of the population within the EPZ.

Demographic information can be obtained from Census data; however, the use of this data has several limitations when applied to emergency planning. First, the Census data do not encompass the range of information needed to identify the time required for preliminary activities (mobilization) that must be undertaken prior to evacuating the area. Secondly, Census data do not contain attitudinal responses needed from the population of the EPZ and consequently may not accurately represent the anticipated behavioral characteristics of the evacuating populace.

These concerns are addressed by conducting a demographic survey of a representative sample of the EPZ population. The survey is designed to elicit information from the public concerning family demographics and estimates of response times to well defined events. The design of the survey includes a limited number of questions of the form What would you do if ? and other questions regarding activities with which the respondent is familiar (How long does it take you to ?)

F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan Attachment A presents the final survey instrument used in this study. A draft of the instrument was submitted to stakeholders for comment. Comments were received, and the survey instrument was modified accordingly, prior to conducting the survey.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. Since the demographic survey discussed herein was performed in 2021 prior to the release of the 2020 Census data, 2010 Census data was used to develop the sampling plan.

The sample must be drawn from the EPZ population. Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using GIS software. This list is shown in Table F1. Along with each zip code, an estimate of the population and number of households in each area was determined by overlaying 2010 Census data and the EPZ boundary, again using GIS software. The proportional percentage of desired completed survey interviews for each area was identified, as shown in Table F1. Note that the average household size computed in Table F1 was an estimate for sampling purposes and was not used in the ETE study. A sample size of approximately 289 completed survey forms were obtained, and yields results with a sampling error of +/-5.7% at the 95% confidence level based on the 2020 Census data. The number of samples obtained from each zip code is also shown in Table F1. Although the desired number of samples was not obtained, the distribution across each zip code of the surveys obtained was in good agreement with the desired distribution of samples with the majority of the samples coming from zip codes 28461 and 28465.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.3 Survey Results The results of the survey fall into two categories. First, the household demographics of the area can be identified. Demographic information includes such factors as household size, automobile ownership, and automobile availability. The distributions of the time to perform certain pre evacuation activities are the second category of survey results. These data are processed to develop the trip generation distributions used in the evacuation modeling effort, as discussed in Section 5.

A review of the survey instrument reveals that several questions have a dont know (DK) or refused entry for a response. It is accepted practice in conducting surveys of this type to accept the answers of a respondent who offers a DK response for a few questions or who refuses to answer a few questions. To address the issue of occasional DK/refused responses from a large sample, the practice is to assume that the distribution of these responses is the same as the underlying distribution of the positive responses. In effect, the DK/refused responses are ignored, and the distributions are based upon the positive data that is acquired.

F.3.1 Household Demographic Results Household Size Figure F1 presents the distribution of household size within the EPZ. The average household contains 2.45 people. The estimated household size from the 2020 Census data is 2.11 people.

The difference between the Census data and survey data is 13.7%, which exceeds the demographic surveys margin of error of 5.7%. This difference was discussed with Duke Energy and it was decided that the U.S. Census estimate of 2.11 people per household should be used for this study. This results in a more conservative estimate when determining the number of households and evacuating vehicles. A sensitivity study to determine the impact to ETE of using the survey data was conducted and is documented in Appendix M.

Seasonal Residents Very few (3.5%) of the surveyed households indicated they have seasonal residents living in the home. In total, 30% stated that 1 household member is considered a seasonal resident; 50%

have 2 seasonal residents; 10% have 3 seasonal residents and 10% have 4 seasonal residents as shown in Figure F2. Approximately 70% of the seasonal residents live in the home during the summer, 20% during the fall and 10% during the spring.

Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the EPZ is 2.36. It should be noted that less than one percent of households do not have access to an automobile. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F3, Figure F4 and Figure F5 present the automobile availability by household size.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant F2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Ridesharing The majority (84%) of the households surveyed responded that they would share a ride with a neighbor, relative, or friend if a car was not available to them when advised to evacuate in the event of an emergency, as shown in Figure F6.

Commuters Figure F7 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household.

Commuters are defined as household members who travel to work or college on a daily basis.

The data shows an average of 1.09 commuters in each household in the EPZ, and 60.9% of households have at least one commuter.

Impact of COVID19 on Commuters Figure F8 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household that were temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic. Approximately 32% of households indicated someone in their household had a work and/or school commute that was temporarily impacted by the COVID19 pandemic.

Commuter Travel Modes Figure F9 presents the mode of travel that commuters use on a daily basis. The vast majority of commuters use their private automobiles to travel to work. The data shows an average of 1.07 employees per vehicle, assuming 2 people per vehicle - on average - for carpools.

Functional or Transportation Needs Figure F10 presents households that would require assistance during an emergency. Even though a majority of EPZ residents would not require assistance, it is important to note that about 5% of households will. Of those with functional or transportation needs, about 65%

require a bus, 21% require a medical bus/van, 7% require a wheelchair accessible van, and 7%

require an ambulance.

F.3.2 Evacuation Response Several questions were asked to gauge the populations response to an emergency. These are now discussed:

How many of the vehicles would your household use during an evacuation? The response is shown in Figure F11. On average, evacuating households would use 1.54 vehicles.

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

Of the survey participants who responded, approximately 70% said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 30% indicated that they would not await the return of other family members, as shown in Figure F12.

If you had a household pet, would you take your pet with you if you were asked to evacuate the area? Based on the responses to the survey, 74% of households have a family pets or farm animals. Of the households with pets, about 13% of them indicated that they would take their Brunswick Nuclear Plant F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

pets with them to a shelter, about 83% indicated that they would take their pets somewhere else and only 4% would leave their pet at home, as shown in Figure F13. Of the households that would evacuate with their pets, 97% indicated that they have sufficient room in their vehicle to evacuate with their pet(s)/animal(s).

What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have? Based on responses from the survey, about 96% of households have a household pet (dog, cat, bird, reptile, or fish), about 3% of households have farm animals (horse, chicken, goat, pig, etc.), and about 1% have other small pets/animals.

Emergency officials advise you to shelterinplace in an emergency because you are not in the area risk. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information regarding compliance with instructions to shelterinplace. The results indicate that about 92% of households who are advised to shelter in place would do so; the remaining 8% would choose to evacuate the area, as shown in Figure F14. Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20% of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev 1. Thus, the data obtained above is considerably lower than the federal guidance recommendation. A sensitivity study was conducted to estimate the impact of shadow evacuation noncompliance of shelter advisory on ETE - see Appendix M.

Emergency officials advise you to take shelter at home now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas are advised to evacuate now. Would you? This question is designed to elicit information specifically related to the possibility of a staged evacuation. That is, asking a population to shelter in place now and then to evacuate after a specified period of time. Results indicate that about 73% of households would follow instructions and delay the start of evacuation until so advised, while the other 27% would choose to begin evacuating immediately, as shown in Figure F15.

Emergency officials advise you to evacuate due to an emergency. Where would you evacuate to? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the destination of evacuees in case of an evacuation. Approximately 55% of households indicated that they would evacuate to a friend or relatives home, 19% to a hotel, motel or campground, 6% to a second or seasonal home, 2% said they would not evacuate, and the remaining 18% answered other/dont know to this question. No one indicated they would go to a reception center, as shown in Figure F16.

F.3.3 Time Distribution Results The survey asked several questions about the amount of time it takes to perform certain pre evacuation activities. These activities involve actions taken by residents during the course of their daytoday lives. Thus, the answers fall within the realm of the responders experience.

The mobilization distributions provided below are the result of having applied the analysis described in Section 5.4.1 on the component activities of the mobilization.

How long does it take the commuter to complete preparation for leaving work or school?

Figure F17 presents the cumulative distribution; in all cases, the activity is completed by about 60 minutes. Nearly 80% can leave within 20 minutes.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

How long would it take the commuter to travel home? Figure F18 presents the work to home travel time for the EPZ. About 87% of commuters can arrive home within about 40 minutes of leaving work; all within 60 minutes.

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

Figure F19 presents the time required to prepare for leaving on an evacuation trip. In many ways this activity mimics a familys preparation for a short holiday or weekend away from home. Hence, the responses represent the experience of the responder in performing similar activities. Approximately 90% of households can be ready to leave home within 150 minutes; the remaining households require an additional hour and 45 minutes.

F.3.4 Emergency Communications At your place of residence, how reliable is your cell phone signal? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the ability to be notified in case of an evacuation. Approximately 91% of households indicated that they have very reliable signal to receive texts and phone calls, 4% indicated that their signal is reliable for text messages only, about 5% indicated that they do not always receive cell communications at their residence, and no one indicated that they do not have cell service at their residence, as shown in Figure F20.

Emergency management officials in your state may send text messages, similar to AMBER Alerts, with emergency directions for the public during a radiological emergency at the Catawba Nuclear Station. How likely would you be to take action on these directions, if you received the message? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the likelihood of an individual to take action based on emergency management officials guidelines. About 78% of households indicated that they are highly likely to take action on these directions, about 18% indicated likely, about 3% indicated neither likely nor unlikely, about 1% indicated unlikely and no one indicted highly unlikely for them to take action on emergency management officials directions, as shown in Figure F21.

Which of the following emergency communication methods do you think is most likely to alert you at your residence? This question is designed to elicit information regarding the most efficient way to alert residents within the EPZ. Approximately 69% of households indicated that a text message from emergency officials would be most likely to alert them at their residence, about 23% indicated that a siren sounding near their home would be the most likely method, about 6% indicated an alert broadcast on the TV, and about 2% indicated that a phone call/text message from a family member, friend or neighbor, an alert broadcast on the radio, and/or information on Twitter or Facebook would be the most likely way to alert them at their residence, as shown in Figure F22.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table F1. BNP Demographic Survey Sampling Plan EPZ EPZ Households EPZ EPZ Population Households Desired Actual Zip Code Within Zip Code Population (2010) Within Zip Samples Sample (2010) (2020)

Code (2020) 28409 167 61 198 85 2 4 28412 2332 1054 2,755 1,177 22 5 28422 1728 748 2,391 1,022 19 19 28428 6033 2827 6,852 2,928 55 1 28449 1692 797 1,774 758 14 0 28461 16126 7167 23,819 10,179 192 198 28462 0 0 0 0 0 51 28465 6531 3101 8,248 3,525 66 51 28479 641 240 881 376 7 6 Total 35,250 15,995 46,918 20,050 377 289 1

Five samples were obtained from zip code 28462. This zip code intersects with the EPZ boundary, but no one within the zip code lives within the EPZ. Thus, these 5 samples are from outside of the EPZ, but within zip code 28462.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Household Size 60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6+

People Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ Residents per Seasonal Household 60%

50%

Percent of Seasonal Residents 40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

1 2 3 4 Seasonal Residents Size Figure F2. Household with Seasonal Residents Brunswick Nuclear Plant F7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Vehicle Availability 60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F3. Household Vehicle Availability Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 14 Person Households 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households Brunswick Nuclear Plant F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 5+ Person Households 5 People 6 People 9 People 11 People 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5+

Vehicles Figure F5. Vehicle Availability 5+ Person Households Rideshare with Neighbor/Friend 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Yes No Figure F6. Household Ridesharing Preference Brunswick Nuclear Plant F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Commuters Per Household 50%

40%

Percent of Households 30%

20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Commuters Figure F7. Commuters in Households in the EPZ Covid19 Impact to Commuters 80%

70%

60%

Percent of Households 50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

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

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Travel Mode to Work 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

Rail Bus Drive Alone Carpool (2+)

Mode of Travel Figure F9. Modes of Travel in the EPZ Functional or Transportation Needs 70%

60%

Percent of Households 50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Ambulance Other Accessible Vehicle Figure F10. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs Brunswick Nuclear Plant F11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuating Vehicles Per Household 60%

Percent of Households 40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3+

Vehicles Figure F11. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Yes, would await return No, would evacuate Figure F12. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving Brunswick Nuclear Plant F12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals 80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Take with me to a Shelter Take with me to Somewhere Leave Pet at Home Else Figure F13. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals ShelterinPlace Characteristics 100%

Percent of Households 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Shelter Evacuate Figure F14. ShelterinPlace Characteristics Brunswick Nuclear Plant F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Shelter then Evacuate Characteristics 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

Shelter, then Evacuate Evacuate Immediately Figure F15. Shelter then Evacuate Characteristics Evacuation Destinations 60%

50%

Percent of Households 40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Figure F16. Study Area Evacuation Destinations Brunswick Nuclear Plant F14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Prepare to Leave Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F17. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College Time to Commute Home From Work/College 100%

80%

Percent of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Travel Time (min)

Figure F18. Work/College to Home Travel Time Brunswick Nuclear Plant F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

Percent of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F19. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Cell Phone Signal Reliability 100%

90%

80%

Percent of Households 70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Very reliable to Reliable for text I do not always I do not have cell receive texts and messages only receive cell service at my phone calls communications at residence my residence Figure F20. Cell Phone Signal Reliability Brunswick Nuclear Plant F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Likelyhood to Take Action from Text Alerts 90%

80%

70%

Percent of Households 60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Highly Likely Likely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Highly Unlikely unlikely Figure F21. Likelihood to Take Action Based off Emergency Management Officials Guidelines Emergency Communication Preferences 80%

70%

60%

Percent of Households 50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

A siren A text Alert Alert Information Phone sounding near message from Broadcast on Broadcast on on Twitter or call/Text your home Emergency Radio TV Facebook message from Officials family, friend, or neighbor Figure F22. Emergency Communication Alert Brunswick Nuclear Plant F17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ATTACHMENT A Demographic Survey Instrument Brunswick Nuclear Plant F18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Brunswick Nuclear Plant Demographic Survey

• Required Purpose The purpose of this survey is to identify local behavior during emergency situations. The information gathered in this survey will be shared with local emergency planners to enhance emergency response plans in your area. Your responses will greatly contribute to local emergency preparedness.

- ( ) .

-Please do not provide your name or any personal information, and the survey will take less than 5 minutes to complete.

For more information, please see the Brunswick Nuclear Plant Emergency Planning Information website: https://www.duke-energy.com/safety-and-preparedness/nuclear-safety/brunswick

1. 1. What is your gender?

Mark only one oval.

Male Female Decline to State Other:

2. 2. What is your home zip code? *

3. 3A. In total, how many running cars, or other vehicles are usually available to the household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

DECLINE TO STATE

4. 3B. In an emergency, if you could not evacuate yourself, could you get a ride out of the area with a neighbor or friend?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE

5. 4. How many vehicles would your household use during an evacuation?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE OR MORE ZERO (NONE)

I WOULD EVACUATE BY BICYCLE I WOULD EVACUATE BY BUS DECLINE TO STATE

6. 5A. How many people usually live in this household?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE TEN ELEVEN TWELVE THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN NINETEEN OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE

7. 5B. Of these people that live in this household, are any of them seasonal residents?

seasonal residents refers to the residents who do not reside in the household the majority of the year.

Mark only one oval.

Yes No Skip to question 10 Decline to State Skip to question 10 Skip to question 10 Seasonal Population

8. 5C. How many of the household residents are seasonal?

Mark only one oval.

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT NINE TEN ELEVEN TWELVE THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN NINETEEN OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE

9. 5D. What season do the seasonal residents live in this home?

Mark only one oval.

Summer Fall Winter Spring Decline to State

COVID-19

10. 6. How many people in your household have a work and/or school commute that has been temporarily impacted due to the COVID-19 pandemic?

Mark only one oval.

ZERO ONE TWO THREE FOUR OR MORE DECLINE TO STATE Commuters

11. 7. How many people in the household normally (during non-COVID conditions) commute to a job, or to college on a daily basis?

• Mark only one oval.

ZERO Skip to question 56 ONE Skip to question 12 TWO Skip to question 13 THREE Skip to question 14 FOUR OR MORE Skip to question 15 DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 56 Mode of Travel

12. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or more Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone people know Commuter 1

Skip to question 16 Mode of Travel

13. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or more Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Skip to question 18 Mode of Travel

14. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or more Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Skip to question 22

Mode of Travel

15. 8. Thinking about each commuter, how does each person usually travel to work or college?

Mark only one oval per row.

Drive Carpool-2 or more Dont Rail Bus Walk/Bicycle Alone people know Commuter 1

Commuter 2

Commuter 3

Commuter 4

Skip to question 28 Travel Home From Work/College

16. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

17. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 36 Travel Home From Work/College

18. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

19. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

20. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

21. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 38 Travel Home From Work/College

22. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

23. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

24. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

25. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

26. 9-3. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #3 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

27. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 42 Travel Home From Work/College

28. 9-1. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

29. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

30. 9-2. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #2 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

31. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

32. 9-3. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #3 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

33. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

34. 9-4. How much time on average, would it take Commuter #4 to travel home from work or college?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

35. If Over 2 Hours for Question 9-4, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 9-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 48 Preparation to leave Work/College

36. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

37. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 56 Preparation to leave Work/College

38. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

39. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

40. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

41. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 56 Preparation to leave Work/College

42. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

43. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

44. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

45. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

46. 10-3. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #3 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

47. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 56 Preparation to leave Work/College

48. 10-1. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

49. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-1, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-1, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

50. 10-2. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #2 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

51. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-2, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-2, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

52. 10-3. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #3 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

53. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-3, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-3, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

54. 10-4. Approximately how much time would it take Commuter #4 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home?

Mark only one oval.

5 MINUTES OR LESS 6-10 MINUTES 11-15 MINUTES 16-20 MINUTES 21-25 MINUTES 26-30 MINUTES 31-35 MINUTES 36-40 MINUTES 41-45 MINUTES 46-50 MINUTES 51-55 MINUTES 56 - 1 HOUR OVER 1 HOUR, BUT LESS THAN 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS OVER 2 HOURS DECLINE TO STATE

55. If Over 2 Hours for Question 10-4, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 10-4, is under 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

Skip to question 56 Additional Questions

56. 11. If you were advised by local authorities to evacuate, how much time would it take the household to pack clothing, medications, secure the house, load the car, and complete preparations prior to evacuating the area?

Mark only one oval.

LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 15-30 MINUTES 31-45 MINUTES 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 3 HOURS TO 3 HOURS 15 MINUTES 3 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 30 MINUTES 3 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 45 MINUTES 3 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 4 HOURS TO 4 HOURS 15 MINUTES 4 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 30 MINUTES 4 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 45 MINUTES 4 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 5 HOURS TO 5 HOURS 30 MINUTES 5 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 6 HOURS OVER 6 HOURS WILL NOT EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

57. If Over 6 Hours for Question 11, Specify Here leave blank if your answer for Question 11, is under 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

58. 12. Please specify the number of people in your household who require Functional or Transportation needs in an evacuation. If none apply, please leave blank.

Mark only one oval per row.

0 1 2 3 4 More than 4 Bus Medical Bus/Van Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle Ambulance Other

59. Specify "Other" Transportation Need Below

60. 13. Please choose one of the following:

Mark only one oval.

I would await the return of household members to evacuate together.

I would evacuate independently and meet other household members later.

I would evacuate independently because I am the only household member.

Decline to State

61. 14A. If emergency officials advise you to shelter-in-place in an emergency because you are not in the area of risk, would you:

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

62. 14B. If emergency officials advise you to shelter-in-place now in an emergency and possibly evacuate later while people in other areas are advised to evacuate now, would you:

Mark only one oval.

SHELTER-IN-PLACE EVACUATE DECLINE TO STATE

63. 14C. If emergency officials advise you to evacuate due to an emergency, where would you evacuate to?

Mark only one oval.

A RELATIVES OR FRIENDS HOME A RECEPTION CENTER A HOTEL, MOTEL OR CAMPGROUND A SECOND/SEASONAL HOME WOULD NOT EVACUATE DON'T KNOW OTHER (Specify Below)

DECLINE TO STATE

64. Fill in OTHER answers for question 14C Pet Questions

65. 15A. Do you have any pet(s) and/or animal(s)?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO Skip to question 70 DECLINE TO STATE Skip to question 70

Pet Questions

66. 15B. What type of pet(s) and/or animal(s) do you have?

Check all that apply.

DOG CAT BIRD REPTILE HORSE FISH CHICKEN GOAT PIG OTHER SMALL PETS/ANIMALS (Specify Below)

OTHER LARGE PETS/ANIMALS (Specify Below)

Other:

67.

Mark only one oval.

DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

68. 15C. What would you do with your pet(s) and/or animal(s) if you had to evacuate?

Mark only one oval.

TAKE PET WITH ME TO A SHELTER TAKE PET WITH ME SOMEWHERE ELSE LEAVE PET AT HOME DECLINE TO STATE Pet Questions

69. 15D. Do you have sufficient room in your vehicle(s) to evacuate with your pet(s) and/or animal(s)?

Mark only one oval.

YES NO DECLINE TO STATE Other:

Emergency Communications

70. 16A. At your place of residence, how reliable is your cell phone signal?

Mark only one oval.

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

71. 16B. Emergency management officials in your state may send text messages, similar to AMBER Alerts, with emergency directions for the public during a radiological emergency at Brunswick Nuclear Station. How likely would you be to take action on these directions, if you received the message?

Mark only one oval.

HIGHLY LIKELY LIKELY NEITHER LIKELY NOR UNLIKELY UNLIKELY HIGHLY UNLIKELY

72. 16C. Which of the following emergency communication methods do you think is most likely to alert you at your residence?

Mark only one oval.

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

73. Fill in OTHER answers for question 18C Please click "Submit" to record your responses.

Thank you!

This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.

Forms

APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 indicates that the existing Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Security Roadblocks (SRBs) identified by the offsite agencies should be used in the evacuation simulation modeling. The All County Standard Operating Guideline (SOG) for Traffic Control Point and Security Road Block Operations in Support of the Brunswick Nuclear Plant were provided by the offsite response organizations within the EPZ.

These plans were reviewed, and the TCPs were modeled accordingly. An analysis of the TCP and SRB locations was performed, and it was determined to model the ETE simulations with existing TCPs and SRBs that were provided in the approved county and state emergency plans, with no additional TCPs or SRBs.

G.1 Manual Traffic Control TCPs and SRBs are forms of manual traffic control (MTC). As discussed in Section 9, MTC at intersections (which are controlled) are modeled as actuated signals. If an intersection has a pre timed signal, stop, or yield control, and the intersection is identified as a traffic control point (or SRB), the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system, in accordance with Section 3.3 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. MTCs at existing actuated traffic signalized intersections were essentially left alone. Table K1 provides the control type and node number for those nodes which are controlled. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a TCP/SRB, the control type is indicated as TCP/SRB in Table K1. These MTC points, as shown in the all counties SOGs, are mapped as blue dots (TCPs) and red dots (SRBs) in Figure G1. No additional locations for MTC are suggested in this study.

It is assumed that the SRBs will be established within 120 minutes of the advisory to evacuate (ATE) to discourage through travelers from using major through routes which traverse the EPZ.

As discussed in Section 3.10, external traffic was considered on US17 in this analysis.

G.2 Analysis of Key TCP/SRB Locations As discussed in Section 5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, MTC at intersections could benefit from the ETE analysis. The MTC locations contained within the traffic management plans were analyzed to determine key locations where MTC would be most useful and can be readily implemented. As previously mentioned, signalized intersections that were actuated based on field data collection were essentially left as actuated traffic signals in the model, with modifications to green time allocation as needed. Other controlled intersections (pretimed signals, stop signs and yield signs) were changed to actuated traffic signals to represent the MTC that would be implemented according to the traffic management plans.

Table G1 shows a list of the controlled intersections that were identified as MTC points in the Traffic Management Plans (TMPs) that were not previously actuated signals, including the type of control that currently exists at each location. To determine the impact of MTC at these locations, a summer, weekend, midday, good weather scenario (Scenario 3) evacuation of the Brunswick Nuclear Plant G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

entire EPZ (R02) were simulated wherein these intersections were left as is (without MTC/no MTC). The results are shown in Table G2. The ETE significantly increased - 55 minutes at the 90th percentile and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 35 minutes at the 100th percentile - when compared to the base case wherein these controlled intersections were modeled as actuated signals (with MTC).

The evacuation animations were compared in the two cases to determine the critical intersections causing the significant change in ETE. Six of the 29 intersections listed in Table G1 appeared to be more critical than the rest since the congestion surrounding these intersections was significantly worse in the nonMTC animation. These intersections are listed as Priority 1 in Table G1. These six intersections were reverted to MTC locations and a summer, weekend, midday, good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R02) was simulated again.

Table G2 displays the results of this case as well labeled as Priority 1 MTC Locations Only.

When comparing the ETE to the base case with MTC, the 90th percentile ETE remained the same, and the 100th percentile ETE increased by 10 minutes - not a significant change. When comparing to the case without MTC (No MTC), the 90th and 100th percentile decreased by 55 minutes and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 25 minutes, respectively. As a result, these intersections were determined to be the most critical (first priority) with the remainder of the intersections listed in Table G1 as Priority 2 locations for MTC.

Figure G2 shows the congestion patterns of the case wherein all TCPs/SRBs (MTC) is implemented (1), wherein no MTC is implemented (2), and when MTC is implemented at the six priority 1 intersections only (3) at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE. The patterns of congestion are similar between the All MTC (1) case and the Priority 1 MTC Only (3) case and both of these cases are significantly better than the No MTC (2) case.

The 6 critical (Priority 1) intersections are focused along US 17/US 17 Business - the primary evacuation route for the Brunswick County portion of the EPZ. MTC allows more vehicles to be processed in the same amount of time than a stop sign - essentially increasing the capacity of these intersections. As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 711, SR 87, US 17, US 17 Business and Danford Rd near Boliva experience heavy congestion throughout the evacuation. According to the simulation results, approximately 25% of vehicles evacuate the EPZ along these roads which lead directly toward the six critical intersections. The increased capacity provided by the MTC allows vehicles to evacuate more quickly. When these intersections are left as stop signs, less vehicles can be processed, and congestion worsens prolonging ETE.

The rest of the TCPs/SRBs are in either less congested locations or in location with heavy competing movements. When heavy traffic persists in competing directions, MTC provides little to no benefit since both approaches need equal amounts of green time. Although there is no reduction in ETE when the remaining TCPs/SRBs are implemented, TCPs and Roadblocks can be beneficial in the reduction of localized congestion and driver confusion and can be extremely helpful for fixed point surveillance, amongst other things. Should there be a shortfall of personnel to staff the TCPs and Roadblocks, the list of locations provided in Table G1 could be considered as key locations when implementing the TMP in the priority order shown.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations TCP/SRB # Intersection Node # Previous Control Priority B36 US 17 and SR 87 25 Stop Sign 1 B45 US 17 and US 17 Business 280 Stop Sign 1 B09 US 17 Business B13 484 Stop Sign 1 and Danford Rd B24 US 17 Business B12 254 Stop Sign 1 and Midway Rd US 17 Business B40 258 Stop Sign 1 and Galloway Rd B44 US 17 and Mill Creek Rd 494 Stop Sign 1 B25 SR 87 and Fifty Lakes Dr 10 Stop Sign 2 B30 SR 87 and Funston Rd 21 Stop Sign 2 B26 SR 133 and Fifty Lakes Dr 34 Stop Sign 2 B35 SR 133 and Daws Creek Rd 43 Stop Sign 2 NH2 US 421 and Ocean Blvd 75 Stop Sign 2 NH3 Dow Rd and Ocean Blvd 78 Stop Sign 2 NH5 Dow Rd and Atlanta Ave 80 Stop Sign 2 B34 Gilbert Rd and Clemmons Rd 272 Stop Sign 2 B43 US 17 and Randolphville Rd 279 Stop Sign 2 B03 SR 87 and Danford Rd 493 Stop Sign 2 B23 B05 SR 87 and Mill Creek Rd 498 Stop Sign 2 NH4 US 421 and Loggerhead Rd 505 Stop Sign 2 NH7 Dow Rd and State Park Rd 509 Stop Sign 2 B01 SR 87 and Power Plant Rd 559 Stop Sign 2 Funston Rd and Boiling Spring B28 782 Stop Sign 2 Rd Funston Rd and Daws Creek B14 785 Stop Sign 2 Rd River Rd and NH10 Halyburton 798 Stop Sign 2 Memorial Pkwy NH14 US 421 and St Vincent Dr 800 Yield 2 B33 SR 211 and Clemmons Rd 803 Stop Sign 2 Clemmons Rd and Old B11 809 Stop Sign 2 Lennon Rd Brunswick Nuclear Plant G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table G2. ETE with No MTC and Priority MTC - Scenario 1 Region R02 Priority 1 Base No MTC Case (with MTC Locations All MTC)

Only 90th Percentile ETE 5:50 6:45 5:50 100th Percentile ETE 7:45 9:20 7:55 Brunswick Nuclear Plant G4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G1. Traffic Control Points and Security Road Blocks for the BNP Site Brunswick Nuclear Plant G5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G2. Comparison of Congestion Patterns at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE Brunswick Nuclear Plant G6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX H Evacuation Regions

H EVACUATION REGIONS This appendix presents the evacuation percentages for each Evacuation Region (Table H1 and Table H2) and maps of all Evacuation Regions (Figure H1 through Figure H35). The percentages presented in Table H1 and Table H2 are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 3 of Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 21.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions Radial Regions Site PAR Zone Region Description Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R01 2Mile Radius 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

All Zones in R02 Full EPZ the EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Site PAR Zone Region From: Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R03 NNW, N 328°009° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R04 NNE 010°021° 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R05 Site Specific NNE 022°038° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R06 NE 039°051° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R07 ENE 052°090° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R08 E 091°112° 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R09 ESE 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R10 SE, SSE 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Site Specific ESE, R11 SE, SSE 113°179° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R12 S 180°195° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R13 SSW, SW 196°236° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R14 WSW1 237°271° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

R15 W 272°288° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R16 WNW 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R17 Site Specific WNW 289°316° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R18 NW 317°327° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate 1

Wind Direction from SW is included within 237°-271° in BNP Protective Action Recommendations (PAR) but excluded from R14 and R30.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H2. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Staged Regions Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Site PAR Zone Region From: Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R19 NNW, N 329°009° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R20 NNE 010°021° 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R21 Site Specific NNE 022°038° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R22 NE 039°051° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R23 ENE 052°090° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R24 E 091°112° 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R25 ESE 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R26 SE, SSE 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Site Specific ESE, R27 SE, SSE 113°179° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R28 S 180°195° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R29 SSW, SW 196°236° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R30 WSW1 237°271° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

R31 W 272°288° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R32 WNW 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R33 Site Specific WNW 289°316° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R34 NW 317°327° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

All Zones in R35 Full EPZ the EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H1. Region R01 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H2. Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H3. Region R03 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H4. Region R04 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H5. Region R05 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H7. Region R07 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H10. Region R10 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H12. Region R12 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H13. Region R13 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H16. Region R16 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H17. Region R17 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H18. Region R18 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H19. Region R19 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H20. Region R20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H22. Region R22 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H23. Region R23 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H24. Region R24 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H25. Region R25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H26. Region R26 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H27. Region R27 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H28. Region R28 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H29. Region R29 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H30. Region R30 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H31. Region R31 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H32. Region R32 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H33. Region R33 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H34. Region R34 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H35. Region R35 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX J Representative Inputs to and Outputs from the DYNEV II System

J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM This appendix presents data input to and output from the DYNEV II System.

Table J1 provides source (vehicle loading) and destination information for several roadway segments (links) in the analysis network. There are a total of 221 source links (origins) in the model. The source links are shown as centroid points in Figure J1. On average, evacuees travel a straightline distance of 5.87 miles to exit the network.

Table J2 provides network-wide statistics (average travel time, average delay time1, average speed and number of vehicles) for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R02) for each scenario. As expected, Scenarios 2, 4, 7, and 9, which are rain scenarios, exhibit slower average speeds, higher delays, and longer average travel times than comparable good weather scenarios.

Table J3 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes -

NC211, SR87, and SR133 - for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R02) under Scenario 1 conditions. As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figures 73 through 711 most of these routes are congested for most of the evacuation. As such, the average speeds along these routes are comparably slower (and travel times longer) at the peak of congestion between 2 and 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />.

Table J4 provides the number of vehicles discharged and the cumulative percent of total vehicles discharged for each link exiting the analysis network, for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R02) under Scenario 1 conditions. Refer to Appendix K for a map showing the geographic location of each link.

Figure J2 through Figure J13 plot the trip generation time versus the ETE for each of the 12 Scenarios considered. The distance between the trip generation and ETE curves is the travel time. Plots of trip generation versus ETE are indicative of the level of traffic congestion during evacuation. For low population density sites, the curves are close together, indicating short travel times and minimal traffic congestion. For higher population density sites, the curves are farther apart indicating longer travel times and the presence of traffic congestion. As seen in Figure J2 through Figure J13, the curves are spatially separated as a result of the traffic congestion in the EPZ, which was discussed in detail in Section 7.3.

1 Computed as the difference of the average travel time and the average ideal travel time under free flow conditions.

Catawba Nuclear Station J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Entering Link Upstream Downstream Network Directional Destination Destination Number Node Node on this Link Preference Nodes Capacity 8028 3,800 125 183 778 4 SW 8460 1,700 8284 3,800 8028 3,800 534 575 383 108 S 8460 1,700 8284 3,800 8028 3,800 136 199 653 468 W 8460 1,700 8284 3,800 8028 3,800 109 164 167 64 W 8460 1,700 8284 3,800 8028 3,800 341 408 164 70 W 8460 1,700 8284 3,800 8458 1,700 788 782 783 138 N 8028 3,800 8460 1,700 8398 2,850 271 345 347 142 NE 8397 2,850 8398 2,850 713 720 75 823 NE 8397 2,850 8028 3,800 194 282 283 124 NW 8460 1,700 8284 3,800 8028 3,800 425 484 637 46 NW 8460 1,700 8284 3,800 Catawba Nuclear Station J2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R02)

Scenario 1 2 3 4 5 6 NetworkWide Average 4.8 5.8 5.4 6.2 3.5 3.7 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 3.4 4.4 4.0 4.8 2.1 2.3 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 12.4 10.4 11.1 9.6 17.3 16.2 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 62,984 63,093 67,417 67,524 46,340 54,597 Exiting Network Scenario 7 8 9 10 11 12 NetworkWide Average 4.6 4.8 5.6 3.3 6.0 5.7 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 3.2 3.4 4.2 1.9 4.6 4.3 Delay Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 13.0 12.5 10.8 18.2 10.0 10.5 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 54,738 59,829 59,955 45,177 74,587 62,537 Exiting Network Catawba Nuclear Station J3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R02, Scenario 1)

Elapsed Time (hours) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Travel Route Length Speed Time Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Name (miles) (mph) (min) Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time NC211 13.8 28.4 29.1 13.0 63.3 13.6 60.6 20.3 40.7 21.2 39.0 30.1 27.4 26.0 31.7 26.0 31.7 SR87 12.6 15.1 50.0 7.2 104.7 13.4 56.6 16.7 45.3 14.4 52.5 36.5 20.7 59.2 12.8 59.2 12.8 SR133 11.6 54.1 12.9 47.4 14.7 55.3 12.6 48.1 14.5 49.5 14.1 59.4 11.7 59.4 11.7 59.4 11.7 Catawba Nuclear Station J4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R02, Scenario 1 Elapsed Time (hours)

Upstream Downstream 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Road Name Node Node Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time US17 1,574 3,814 5,965 8,252 10,673 13,094 13,696 13,696 27 28 Northbound 20.6% 19.2% 18.2% 18.4% 19.8% 21.9% 21.8% 21.8%

SR132 1,418 3,621 6,101 8,558 9,927 10,048 10,048 10,048 120 398 Northbound 18.6% 18.2% 18.6% 19.1% 18.4% 16.8% 16.0% 16.0%

River Road 59 435 833 1,002 1,065 1,089 1,089 1,089 126 468 Northbound 0.8% 2.2% 2.5% 2.2% 2.0% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7%

US17 2,878 5,832 8,789 11,986 14,828 17,569 19,512 19,512 175 284 Southbound 37.7% 29.4% 26.8% 26.7% 27.5% 29.4% 31.1% 31.1%

NC211 622 1,914 2,841 3,549 4,041 4,542 4,987 4,987 176 460 Westbound 8.2% 9.6% 8.7% 7.9% 7.5% 7.6% 7.9% 7.9%

US421 952 3,145 5,538 7,620 9,097 9,229 9,229 9,229 397 815 Northbound 12.5% 15.9% 16.9% 17.0% 16.9% 15.4% 14.7% 14.7%

SR133 123 1,085 2,744 3,933 4,222 4,270 4,270 4,270 458 873 Northbound 1.6% 5.5% 8.4% 8.8% 7.8% 7.1% 6.8% 6.8%

Catawba Nuclear Station J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins Catawba Nuclear Station J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 1)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Catawba Nuclear Station J7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Catawba Nuclear Station J8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 5)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

Catawba Nuclear Station J9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 8)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 8)

Catawba Nuclear Station J10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 9)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 9)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 10)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

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

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 10)

Catawba Nuclear Station J11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good, Special Event (Scenario 11)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 11)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 Elapsed Time (h:mm)

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12)

Catawba Nuclear Station J12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX K Evacuation Roadway Network

K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK As discussed in Section 1.3, a linknode analysis network was constructed to model the roadway network within the study area. Figure K1 provides an overview of the linknode analysis network. The figure has been divided up into 41 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K42) which show each of the links and nodes in the network.

The analysis network was calibrated using the observations made during the field surveys conducted in December 2020.

Table K1 summarizes the number of nodes by the type of control (stop sign, yield sign, actuated signal, traffic control point or security roadblock [TCP/SRB], uncontrolled).

Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control Number of Control Type Nodes Uncontrolled Intersection 655 Actuated Signal 43 Stop Sign 108 TCP/SRB 52 Yield Sign 19 Total: 877 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K1. BNP LinkNode Analysis Network Brunswick Nuclear Plant K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 Brunswick Nuclear Plant K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX L Zone Boundaries

L. ZONE BOUNDARIES Zone 1 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by Sunny Point Access Road and the southern border of the Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal; on the east by the Cape Fear River (border centered in the Cape Fear River) to the N.C. Baptist Assembly east shore (eastern tip of Oak Island); on the south along a line from the N.C. Baptist Assembly east shore north along the western side of Battery Island to Southport/Supply Road/North Howe Street (NC 211), then west along Southport/Supply Road/North Howe Street (NC 211); and on the west to Oakview Dr. (SR 1549).

The western boundary follows Oakview Dr. to Pineview Dr. to Clearview Dr.

and continues northeast from the end of Clearview Dr. to the intersection of NC 87 (George II Highway), NC 133 (River Rd) and the Sunny Point Access Road.

This zone includes those portions of Southport NORTH of Howe Street along with Snow Marsh Island and Battery Island.

Zone 2 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north and east by Southport/Supply Road (NC 211) and North Howe Street (NC 87/211) to the end of the road in Southport; on the south along the north shore of the Intracoastal Waterway; west by Long Beach Road (NC 133). This zone includes those portions of Southport SOUTH of Howe Street.

Zone 3 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: The northern boundary follows the north shore of the Intracoastal Waterway from Long Beach Road (NC 133) to the end of Southport/Supply Road (NC 211) in Southport; then south along the western side of Battery Island to the N.C. Baptist Assembly east shore (eastern tip of Oak Island). The zone boundary moves around the N.C. Baptist Assembly east shore (eastern end of Oak Island) to meet the Atlantic Ocean. The southern border is the Atlantic Ocean coastline (Caswell Beach) to the intersection of Long Beach Rd/Country Club Dr. (NC 133) and Jones Street. The western boundary moves north on Long Beach Rd/Country Club Dr. (NC 133). This zone includes those portions of Oak Island EAST of Long Beach Rd/Country Club Dr. (NC 133) along Caswell Beach Road - Community of Caswell Beach and the N.C. Baptist Assembly.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev.0

Zone 4 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: The northern boundary follows the north shore of the Intracoastal Waterway from the western end of Sheep Island to NC 133 (Long Beach Road). The eastern boundary follows NC 133 (Long Beach Road) to the coast (at Jones Street) on the Atlantic Ocean.

The southern boundary follows the coast on the Atlantic Ocean to Lockwood Folly Inlet on the west. The boundary turns north toward the western end of Sheep Island. This zone includes those portions of Oak Island WEST of NC 133 (Long Beach Road) and the Town of Oak Island (formerly communities of Long Beach and Yaupon Beach).

Zone 5 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by Southport/Supply Road (NC 211); and on the east by the Long Beach Road (NC 133) to the Intracoastal Waterway. The southern boundary follows the north shore of the Intracoastal Waterway west to the intersection of Sunset Harbor Road (SR 1112) and Lockwood Folly Rd SE. The zone boundary turns north on Sunset Harbor Road (SR 1112) to intersect with Southport/Supply Road (NC 211).

Zone 6 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by the southern Bolivia town limits and by SR 1513 (Danford Road); on the east by NC 87 (George II Hwy) to the intersection of NC 87 (George II Hwy), NC 133 (River Rd) and the Sunny Point Access Road. The eastern boundary continues southwest from the intersection of NC 87 (George II Hwy), NC 133 (River Rd) and the Sunny Point Access Road to the end of Clearview Rd. The southern boundary is Southport/Supply Road (NC 211) moving west to the intersection of Clemmons Rd SE (SR 1505). Zone boundary on the west is along Clemmons Rd SE (SR 1505) and (SR 1504). Boundary line moves north along a line from the intersection of Clemmons Rd SE (SR 1504/1505) and Gilbert Rd SE (SR 1501) to the end of Albright Rd SE (SR 1508). Boundary follows Albright Rd (SE SR 1508) and Midway Rd SE (SR 1500) and Old Ocean Hwy (US 17) to the southern Bolivia town limit. Zone includes Boiling Spring Lakes SOUTHWEST of NC 87.

Zone 7 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by Funston Road (SR 1518); on the east by the Sunny Point Railroad and NC 133; and on the west by NC 87. Zone includes Boiling Spring Lakes BETWEEN NC 87 and the Sunny Point Railroad.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev.0

Zone 8 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by a line extending east from the intersection of Funston Road (SR 1518) and Daws Creek Road (SR 1521) along Daws Creek Road (SR 1521) to NC 133 about one mile south of Pinelevel; on the east and south by NC 133 to the intersection of NC 133 and the Sunny Point Railroad; and on the west by the Sunny Point Railroad. The zone includes Girl Scout Camp Pretty Pond.

Zone 9 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by a line extending east from the intersection of Daws Creek Road (SR 1521) and NC 133 to the Brunswick/New Hanover county line (centered in the Cape Fear River) just south of Campbell Island. The zone is bordered on the east by the Brunswick/New Hanover county line (centered in the Cape Fear River) moving south to the north end of Snow Marsh Island and the southern boundary of Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal. The zone boundary moves west following the southern boundary of Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal to the intersection with NC 133 and NC 87, and is bordered on the west by NC 133. The zone includes the Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal, Orton Plantation and Old Brunswick Town.

Zone 10 County: New Hanover Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north along a line from the New Hanover/Brunswick county line intersection (centered in the Cape Fear River) along Sedgley Dr. to West Telfair Circle.

Along West Telfair Circle to Telfair Drive and Telfair Court. From Telfair Court to Ocracoke Drive, extending east across US 421 South Seabreeze Rd to the coast on the Atlantic Ocean. The eastern boundary moves south along the Atlantic Ocean coast to Ocean Boulevard. The boundary moves west along Ocean Boulevard to the intersection of the New Hanover/Brunswick county line (centered in the Cape Fear River). The New Hanover/Brunswick county line (centered in the Cape Fear River) forms the western boundary of this zone. The zone includes Sea Breeze, Carolina Beach, and Carolina Beach State Park.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant L3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev.0

Zone 11 County: New Hanover Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north along a line from the New Hanover/Brunswick county line intersection (centered in the Cape Fear River) along Ocean Boulevard across US 421 to the coast on the Atlantic Ocean. The eastern boundary moves south along the Atlantic Ocean coast to the New Hanover/Brunswick county line (Corncake Inlet area). The boundary turns northwest toward the Fort Fisher/Southport ferry landing and continues out into the Cape Fear River to intersect the New Hanover/Brunswick county line. The New Hanover/ Brunswick county line (centered in the Cape Fear River) forms the western boundary of this zone. The zone includes Kure Beach, Fort Fisher and Federal Point.

Zone 12 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: The northern boundary is along a line from the intersection of the New Hanover/Brunswick county line (centered in the Cape Fear River north of Snow Marsh) moving southeast to the Fort Fisher/Southport ferry landing and following the New Hanover/Brunswick county line out to the coast on the Atlantic Ocean (Corncake Inlet area). The eastern boundary moves south along the Atlantic Ocean coast to a point east of the end of Cape Creek. The southern boundary turns west along Cape Creek to the mouth of Cape and Bay creeks and across the Cape Fear River to the northern shore of Oak Island at the N.C. Baptist Assembly Grounds. The western boundary moves north centered in the Cape Fear River to the intersection of the New Hanover/Brunswick county line (north of Snow Marsh). The zone includes Zeke and Striking islands.

Zone 13 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: This zone is comprised of Bald Head Island. The northern border is from the mouth of Cape and Bay Creeks along Cape Creek with the boundary extending to the east to meet the Atlantic Ocean once Cape Creek ends. The eastern boundary then moves along the coast with the Atlantic Ocean on the east and south and then northwest until it meets the Cape Fear River. The boundary then moves across the Cape Fear River to the southern shore of Oak Island at the N.C. Baptist Assembly grounds. It turns north along the eastern end of Oak Island, northern shore of Oak Island and back across the Cape Fear River to the mouth of Cape and Bay creeks.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant L4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev.0

APPENDIX M Evacuation Sensitivity Studies

M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES This appendix presents the results of a series of sensitivity analyses. These analyses are designed to identify the sensitivity of the Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE to changes in some base evacuation conditions.

M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times A sensitivity study was performed to determine whether changes in the estimated trip generation time have an effect on the ETE for the entire EPZ. Specifically, if the tail of the mobilization distribution were truncated (i.e., if those who responded most slowly to the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE), could be persuaded to respond much more rapidly), or if the tail were elongated (i.e. spreading out the departure of evacuees to limit the demand during peak times), how would the ETE be affected? The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 2; a summer, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. Table M1 presents the results of this study.

If evacuees mobilize in one less hour, the 90th percentile ETE is decreased by 10 minutes and the 100th percentile ETE remains unchanged. If evacuees take an additional hour to mobilize, the 90th percentile ETE increases by 5 minutes, while the 100th percentile remains unchanged.

As discussed in Section 7.3, congestion exists within the EPZ for over 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> after the ATE. As such, the ETE for the 90th and 100th percentile ETE are not affected by the trip generation time, but by the time needed to clear the congestion within the EPZ.

M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the percentage of people who decide to relocate from the Shadow Region. The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 2; a summer, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. The movement of people in the Shadow Region has the potential to impede vehicles evacuating from an Evacuation Region within the EPZ. Refer to Sections 3.2 and 7.1 for additional information on population within the Shadow Region.

Table M2 presents the ETE for each of the cases considered. The results show that eliminating the shadow evacuation (0) does not impact the 90th and 100th percentile ETEs. The ETE showed no changes in the 90th percentile ETE and the 100th percentile ETE when increasing the shadow evacuation to 40% from the base assumption of 20%. Tripling the shadow percentage from 20% to 60% increases the ETE by 5 minutes for the 90th and 100th percentiles - not a significant change.

Quadrupling (80%) the Shadow Region increases the ETE by 15 minutes at the 90th percentile and has no impact on the 100th percentile ETE. A full evacuation of the Shadow Region (100%)

increases the 90th and 100th percentile ETE by 35 minutes and 30 minutes, respectively - a significant change.

Note that the demographic survey results presented in Appendix F indicate that 8% of households would elect to evacuate if advised to shelter, which differs from the base assumption of 20% non Brunswick Nuclear Plant M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

compliance suggested in the NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. A sensitivity study was run using 8% shadow evacuation and the results indicate there is no impact to the ETE.

For most cases, congestion within the EPZ is so severe that it dictates the 90th and 100th percentile ETE regardless of the percentage of shadow evacuees. Only for a full shadow evacuation are the results significant. This is likely due to the EPZs proximity to Wilmington. If all of those within the portion of Wilmington that is in the Shadow Region were to evacuate, those evacuating from Carolina Beach and Kure Beach would not be able to evacuate as quickly, prolonging ETE.

M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to changes in the permanent resident population within the study area (EPZ plus Shadow Region). As population in the study area changes over time, the time required to evacuate the public may increase, decrease, or remain the same. Since the ETE is related to the demand to capacity ratio present within the study area, changes in population will cause the demand side of the equation to change and could impact ETE.

As per the NRCs response to the Emergency Planning Frequently Asked Question (EPFAQ) 2013001, the ETE population sensitivity study must be conducted to determine what percentage increase in permanent resident population causes an increase in the 90th percentile ETE of 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. The sensitivity study must use the scenario with the longest 90th percentile ETE (excluding the roadway impact scenario and the special event scenario if it is a one day per year special event).

Thus, the sensitivity study was conducted using the following planning assumptions:

1. The percent change in population within the study area was increased by up to 16%.

Changes in population were applied to permanent residents only (as per federal guidance), in both the EPZ and the Shadow Region.

2. The transportation infrastructure remained fixed (as presented in Appendix K); the presence of future proposed roadway changes and/or highway capacity improvements were not considered.

3. The study was performed for the 2Mile Region (R01) and the full EPZ (R02).

4. The scenario (excluding roadway impact and special event) which yielded the highest 90th percentile ETE was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 4 - Summer, Weekend, Midday with Rain).

Table M3 presents the results of the sensitivity study.Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, Section 5.4, require licensees to provide an updated ETE analysis to the NRC when a population increase within the EPZ causes the longest 90th percentile ETE values (for the 2Mile Region or full EPZ) to increase by 25% or 30 minutes, whichever is less. All base ETE values for the 2Mile Region (R01) and the full EPZ (R02) are greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; 25 percent of these base ETE is always greater than 30 minutes.

Therefore, 30 minutes is the lesser and is the criterion for updating ETE.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Those percent population changes which result in a 90th percentile ETE change greater than or equal to 30 minutes are highlighted in red in Table M3 - a 15% or greater increase in the full EPZ population. Duke Energy will have to estimate the EPZ population on an annual basis. If the EPZ population increases by 15% or more, an updated ETE analysis will be needed.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant M3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

M.4 Effect of NC211 Widening A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE due to the widening of NC 211. Based on data obtained from the North Carolina Department of Transportation1 website, a 7milelong segment of NC211 will be widened from two lanes to four lanes (two lanes in each direction between NC87 and NC906. The project will also consist of the construction of two interchanges at NC906 and NC133 with on and off ramps. The widened roadway will have reduced conflict intersections with limited left turn movements similar to portions of US17 and US421. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2022 and is slated to complete in fall 2026.

The linknode analysis network (shown in Appendix K) was revised at each of the nodes and links in the network to represent the roadway changes that are included as part of this project.

Since construction plans could not be obtained, the reduced conflict intersections were not modeled, and left turns were allowed. In addition, the roadway configurations at the two new intersections were assumed based on nearby intersection configurations and traffic engineering experience.

A case wherein the entire EPZ (Region R02) was evacuated under a summer, midweek, midday, good weather conditions (Scenario 1) was simulated. Table M4 presents the results of the sensitivity study. The results show that the project has little to no impact on the 90th and 100th percentile ETEs. The additional capacity along NC211 between NC87 and NC906 provided by the widening allows vehicles to reach the intersection of NC211 and NC906 more expeditiously. Unfortunately, the capacity of these roadways downstream of the interchange is the same as the base case - a single lane in each direction, and vehicles are processed at the same, slower rate as before. As a result, the ETE for the full EPZ remains about the same.

M.5 Effect of Changes in Average Household Size As discussed in Appendix F, the average household size obtained from the survey contains 2.45 people. The estimated household size from the 2020 Census data is 2.11 people. The difference between the Census data and survey data is 13.7%, which exceeds the demographic surveys margin of error of 5.7%. This difference was discussed with Duke Energy and it was decided that the U.S. Census estimate of 2.11 people per household should be used for this study. This results in a more conservative estimate when determining the number of households and evacuating vehicles. A sensitivity study was performed to determine how sensitive the ETE is to changes in the average household size. It should be noted that only resident and shadow vehicles were changed for this sensitivity study. The case considered was Scenario 1, Regions R01 and R02; a summer, midweek, midday, with good weather evacuation of the 2mile region and entire EPZ. Table M5 presents the results of this study.

Increasing the average household size (decreasing the total number evacuating vehicles) to 2.45 people per household has little impact on 2mile region ETE at both the 90th and 100th percentile (decreasing ETE by 5 minutes at most). Increasing the average household size has material impact 1 https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/nc-211-widening/Pages/default.aspx Brunswick Nuclear Plant M4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

on full EPZ at both 90th and 100th percentile with decreases of 25 minutes and 40 minutes, respectively.

ETE is computed based on the relationship of supply and demand. When demand exceeds supply, congestion develops. As discussed in Section 7, there is significant congestion when the entire EPZ evacuates. If the evacuation demand decreases by about 5,000 vehicles, like the case wherein the average household size is 2.45 people per household, there is less pressure on the roadway system and congestion is reduced. As a result, ETE decreases.

M.6 Enhancements in Evacuation Time This appendix documents sensitivity studies on critical variables that could potentially impact ETE.

Possible improvements to ETE are further discussed below:

Reducing or prolonging the trip generation time an hour has little to no impact to the 90th or 100th percentile ETE since congestion within the EPZ dictates ETE (Section M.1).

Nonetheless, public outreach could be considered to inform people within the EPZ to mobilize quicker.

Increasing the percent shadow evacuation has minor to significant impacts on ETE (Section M.2). As such, public outreach could be considered to inform those people within the EPZ (and potentially beyond the EPZ) that if they are not advised to evacuate, they should not.

Population growth results in more evacuating vehicles which could significantly increase ETE (Section M.3). Public outreach to inform people within the EPZ to evacuate as a family in a single vehicle would reduce the number of evacuating vehicles and could reduce ETE or offset the impact of population growth.

Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study Trip Generation Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Period 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 4 Hours 45 Minutes 5:20 7:05 5 Hours 45 Minutes (Base) 5:30 7:05 6 Hours 45 Minutes 5:35 7:05 Brunswick Nuclear Plant M5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Percent Evacuating Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Shadow Shadow Evacuation Vehicles2 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 0 0 5:30 7:05 8 2,634 5:30 7:05 20 (Base) 6,586 5:30 7:05 40 13,172 5:30 7:05 60 19,758 5:35 7:10 80 26,345 5:50 7:10 100 32,931 6:10 7:40 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change EPZ and 20% Shadow Population Change Base Permanent Resident 13% 14% 15% 16%

Population 53,138 60,046 60,557 61,109 61,640 ETE for 90th Percentile Population Change Region Base 13% 14% 15% 16%

2MILE 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:25 3:25 FULL EPZ 6:25 6:45 6:45 6:55 6:55 ETE for 100th Percentile Population Change Region Base 13% 14% 15% 16%

2MILE 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:45 FULL EPZ 8:45 9:05 9:05 9:05 9:05 Table M4. Evacuation Time Estimates for Roadway Project Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Roadway Project 90th Percentile 100th Percentile NC211 Widening 5:25 7:05 Base Case 5:30 7:05 2

The Evacuating Shadow Vehicles, in Table M-2, represent the residents and employees who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis, for the base values shown, is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees. See Section 6 for further discussion.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant M6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table M5. ETE Results for Change in Average Household Size Base (Average Average HH EPZ and 20% HH Size of 2.11 Size of 2.45 Shadow people per people per Resident household) household Vehicles 38,737 33,382 ETE for 90th Percentile 2MILE 3:20 3:15 FULL EPZ 5:30 5:05 th ETE for 100 Percentile 2MILE 5:50 5:45 FULL EPZ 7:05 6:25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant M7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX N ETE Criteria Checklist

N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 1.0 Introduction

a. The emergency planning zone (EPZ) and surrounding area is Yes Section 1.2 described.

b. A map is included that identifies primary features of the site Yes Figures 11, 31, 61 including major roadways, significant topographical features, boundaries of counties, and population centers within the EPZ.

c. A comparison of the current and previous ETE is provided Yes Section 1.4, Table 13 including information similar to that identified in Table 11, ETE Comparison.

1.1 Approach

a. The general approach is described in the report as outlined Yes Section 1.1, Section 1.3, Appendix D in Section 1.1, Approach.

1.2 Assumptions

a. Assumptions consistent with Table 12, General Yes Section 2 Assumptions, of NUREG/CR7002 are provided and include the basis to support use.

1.3 Scenario Development

a. The scenarios in Table 13, Evacuation Scenarios, are Yes Table 21, Section 6, Table 63 developed for the ETE analysis. A reason is provided for use of other scenarios or for not evaluating specific scenarios.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 1.4 Evacuation Planning Areas

a. A map of the EPZ with emergency response planning areas Yes Figure 31, Figure 61 (ERPAs) is included.

1.4.1 Keyhole Evacuation

a. A table similar to Table 14 Evacuation Areas for a Keyhole Yes Table 61, Table 75, Table H1 Evacuation, is provided identifying the ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

1.4.2 Staged Evacuation

a. The approach used in development of a staged evacuation is Yes Section 7.2 discussed.

b. A table similar to Table 15, Evacuation Areas for a Staged Yes Table 73, Table 74 Evacuation, is provided for staged evacuations identifying the ERPAs considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction.

2.0 Demand Estimation

a. Demand estimation is developed for the four population Yes Section 3 groups (permanent residents of the EPZ, transients, special facilities, and schools).

2.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. The U.S. Census is the source of the population values, or Yes Section 3.1 another credible source is provided.

b. The availability date of the census data is provided. Yes Section 3.1

c. Population values are adjusted as necessary for growth to Yes Section 3.1 reflect population estimates to the year of the ETE.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. A sector diagram, similar to Figure 21, Population by Yes Figure 32 Sector, is included showing the population distribution for permanent residents.

2.1.1 Permanent Residents with Vehicles

a. The persons per vehicle value is between 1 and 3 or Yes Section 3.1, Appendix F justification is provided for other values.

2.1.2 Transient Population

a. A list of facilities that attract transient populations is Yes Section 3.3, Table E4, Table E5 included, and peak and average attendance for these facilities is listed. The source of information used to develop attendance values is provided.

b. Major employers are listed. Yes Section 3.4, Table E3

c. The average population during the season is used, itemized Yes Table 34, Table 35 and Appendix E and totaled for each scenario. itemize the peak transient population and employee estimates. These estimates are multiplied by the scenario specific percentages provided in Table 64 to estimate average transient population by scenario - see Table 65.

d. The percentage of permanent residents assumed to be at Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 facilities is estimated.

e. The number of people per vehicle is provided. Numbers may Yes Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 vary by scenario, and if so, reasons for the variation are discussed.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

f. A sector diagram is included, similar to Figure 21, Yes Figure 36 (transients) and Figure 38 Population by Sector, is included showing the population (employees) distribution for the transient population.

2.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. The methodology (e.g., surveys, registration programs) used Yes Section 3.6 to determine the number of transit dependent residents is discussed.

b. The State and local evacuation plans for transit dependent Yes Section 8.1 residents are used in the analysis.

c. The methodology used to determine the number of people Yes Section 3.9 with disabilities and those with access and functional needs who may need assistance and do not reside in special facilities is provided. Data from local/county registration programs are used in the estimate.

d. Capacities are provided for all types of transportation Yes Item 3 of Section 2.4 resources. Bus seating capacity of 50 percent is used or justification is provided for higher values.

e. An estimate of the transit dependent population is provided. Yes Section 3.6, Table 37, Table 39

f. A summary table showing the total number of buses, Yes Table 39, Table 81 ambulances, or other transport assumed available to support evacuation is provided. The quantification of resources is detailed enough to ensure that double counting has not occurred.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 2.3 Special Facility Residents

a. Special facilities, including the type of facility, location, and Yes Table E2 lists all medical facilities by average population, are listed. Special facility staff is facility name, location, and average included in the total special facility population. population. Staff estimates were not provided.

b. The method of obtaining special facility data is discussed. Yes Section 3.5

c. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles assumed Yes Table 36 available to support the evacuation of the facility is provided.

d. The logistics for mobilizing specially trained staff (e.g., Yes Section 8.1 - under Evacuation of medical support or security support for prisons, jails, and Medical Facilities other correctional facilities) are discussed when appropriate.

2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student Yes Table 38, Table E1, Section 3.7 population, and transportation resources required to support the evacuation, is provided. The source of this information should be identified.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle schools Yes Section 3.7 are based on 100 percent of the school capacity.

c. The estimate of high school students who will use personal Yes Section 3.7 vehicle to evacuate is provided and a basis for the values used is given.

d. The need for return trips is identified. Yes Section 8.1 Brunswick Nuclear Plant N5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 2.5 Other Demand Estimate Considerations 2.5.1 Special Events

a. A complete list of special events is provided including Yes Section 3.8 information on the population, estimated duration, and season of the event.

b. The special event that encompasses the peak transient Yes Section 3.8 population is analyzed in the ETE.

c. The percentage of permanent residents attending the event Yes Section 3.8 is estimated.

2.5.2 Shadow Evacuation

a. A shadow evacuation of 20 percent is included consistent Yes Item 3 of Section 2.2, Figure 21 and with the approach outlined in Section 2.5.2, Shadow Figure 71, Section 3.2 Evacuation.

b. Population estimates for the shadow evacuation in the Yes Section 3.2, Table 33, Figure 34 shadow region beyond the EPZ are provided by sector.

c. The loading of the shadow evacuation onto the roadway Yes Section 5 - Table 58 (footnote) network is consistent with the trip generation time generated for the permanent resident population.

2.5.3 Background and Pass Through Traffic

a. The volume of background traffic and passthrough traffic is Yes Section 3.10 and Section 3.11 based on the average daytime traffic. Values may be reduced for nighttime scenarios.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. The method of reducing background and passthrough traffic Yes Section 2.2 - Assumptions 10 and 12 is described. Section 2.5 Section 3.10 and Section 3.11 Table 64 - External Through Traffic footnote

c. Passthrough traffic is assumed to have stopped entering the Yes Section 2.5 EPZ about two (2) hours after the initial notification.

2.6 Summary of Demand Estimation

a. A summary table is provided that identifies the total Yes Table 311, Table 312, and Table 65 populations and total vehicles used in the analysis for permanent residents, transients, transit dependent residents, special facilities, schools, shadow population, and passthrough demand in each scenario.

3.0 Roadway Capacity

a. The method(s) used to assess roadway capacity is discussed. Yes Section 4 3.1 Roadway Characteristics

a. The process for gathering roadway characteristic data is Yes Section 1.3, Appendix D described including the types of information gathered and how it is used in the analysis.

b. Legible maps are provided that identify nodes and links of Yes Appendix K the modeled roadway network similar to Figure A1, Roadway Network Identifying Nodes and Links, and Figure A2, Grid Map Showing Detailed Nodes and Links.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 3.2 Model Approach

a. The approach used to calculate the roadway capacity for the Yes Section 4 transportation network is described in detail, and the description identifies factors that are expressly used in the modeling.

b. Route assignment follows expected evacuation routes and Yes Appendix B and Appendix C traffic volumes.

c. A basis is provided for static route choices if used to assign N/A Static route choices are not used to evacuation routes. assign evacuation routes. Dynamic traffic assignment is used.

d. Dynamic traffic assignment models are described including Yes Appendix B and Appendix C calibration of the route assignment.

3.3 Intersection Control

a. A list that includes the total numbers of intersections Yes Table K1 modeled that are unsignalized, signalized, or manned by response personnel is provided.

b. The use of signal cycle timing, including adjustments for Yes Section 4, Appendix G manned traffic control, is discussed.

3.4 Adverse Weather

a. The adverse weather conditions are identified. Yes Assumption 2 and 3 of Section 2.6

b. The speed and capacity reduction factors identified in Table Yes Table 22 31, Weather Capacity Factors, are used or a basis is provided for other values, as applicable to the model.

c. The calibration and adjustment of driver behavior models for N/A Driver behavior is not adjusted for adverse weather conditions are described, if applicable. adverse weather conditions.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. The effect of adverse weather on mobilization is considered Yes Table 22 and assumptions for snow removal on streets and driveways are identified, when applicable.

4.0 Development of Evacuation Times 4.1 Traffic Simulation Models

a. General information about the traffic simulation model used Yes Section 1.3, Table 13, Appendix B, in the analysis is provided. Appendix C

b. If a traffic simulation model is not used to perform the ETE N/A Not applicable since a traffic simulation calculation, sufficient detail is provided to validate the model was used.

analytical approach used.

4.2 Traffic Simulation Model Input

a. Traffic simulation model assumptions and a representative Yes Section 2, Appendix J set of model inputs are provided.

b. The number of origin nodes and method for distributing Yes Appendix J, Appendix C vehicles among the origin nodes are described.

c. A glossary of terms is provided for the key performance Yes Appendix A measures and parameters used in the analysis.

4.3 Trip Generation Time

a. The process used to develop trip generation times is Yes Section 5 identified.

b. When surveys are used, the scope of the survey, area of the Yes Appendix F survey, number of participants, and statistical relevance are provided.

c. Data used to develop trip generation times are summarized. Yes Appendix F, Section 5 Brunswick Nuclear Plant N9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

d. The trip generation time for each population group is Yes Section 5 developed from sitespecific information.

e. The methods used to reduce uncertainty when developing Yes Appendix F trip generation times are discussed, if applicable.

4.3.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. Permanent residents are assumed to evacuate from their Yes Section 5 discusses trip generation for homes but are not assumed to be at home at all times. Trip households with and without returning generation time includes the assumption that a percentage commuters.

of residents will need to return home before evacuating. Table 64 presents the percentage of households with returning commuters and the percentage of households either without returning commuters or with no commuters.

Appendix F presents the percent households who will await the return of commuters.

Section 2.3, Assumption 3

b. The trip generation time accounts for the time and method Yes Section 5 to notify transients at various locations.

c. The trip generation time accounts for transients potentially Yes Section 5, Figure 51 returning to hotels before evacuating.

d. The effect of public transportation resources used during Yes Section 3.8 special events where a large number of transients are expected is considered.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.3.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. If available, existing and approved plans and bus routes are N/A Established bus routes do not exist.

used in the ETE analysis. Section 8.1 under Evacuation for TransitDependent Population

b. The means of evacuating ambulatory and nonambulatory Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation for residents are discussed. TransitDependent Population, Section 8.2

c. Logistical details, such as the time to obtain buses, brief Yes Section 8.1, Figure 81 drivers and initiate the bus route are used in the analysis.

d. The estimated time for transit dependent residents to Yes Section 8.1 under Evacuation for prepare and then travel to a bus pickup point, including the TransitDependent Population expected means of travel to the pickup point, is described.

e. The number of bus stops and time needed to load Yes Section 8.1, Table 84, Table 85 passengers are discussed.

f. A map of bus routes is included. Yes Figure 102

g. The trip generation time for nonambulatory persons Yes Section 8.2 including the time to mobilize ambulances or special vehicles, time to drive to the home of residents, time to load, and time to drive out of the EPZ, is provided.

h. Information is provided to support analysis of return trips, if Yes Section 8.1 and 8.2 necessary.

4.3.3 Special Facilities

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 86, provided. Table 87 Brunswick Nuclear Plant N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. The logistics of evacuating wheelchair and bed bound Yes Section 8.1, Table 86, Table 87 residents are discussed.

c. Time for loading of residents is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 86, Table 87

d. Information is provided that indicates whether the Yes Section 8.1 evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

e. Discussion is provided on whether special facility residents Yes Section 8.1 are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

f. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1 elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.3.4 Schools

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times is Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82, provided. Table 83

b. Time for loading of students is provided. Yes Section 2.4, Section 8.1, Table 82, Table 83

c. Information is provided that indicates whether the Yes Section 8.1 evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

d. If used, reception centers should be identified. A discussion Yes Section 8.1, Table 103 is provided on whether students are expected to pass through the reception center before being evacuated to their final destination.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

e. Supporting information is provided to quantify the time Yes Section 8.1, Table 82, Table 83 elements for each trip, including destinations if return trips are needed.

4.4 Stochastic Model Runs

a. The number of simulation runs needed to produce average N/A DYNEV does not rely on simulation results is discussed. averages or random seeds for statistical

b. If one run of a single random seed is used to produce each N/A confidence. For DYNEV/DTRAD, it is a ETE result, the report includes a sensitivity study on the 90 mesoscopic simulation and uses percent and 100 percent ETE using 10 different random dynamic traffic assignment model to seeds for evacuation of the full EPZ under Summer, obtain the "average" (stable) network Midweek, Daytime, Normal Weather conditions. workflow distribution. This is different from microscopic simulation, which is montecarlo random sampling by nature relying on different seeds to establish statistical confidence. Refer to Appendix B for more details.

4.5 Model Boundaries

a. The method used to establish the simulation model Yes Section 4.5 boundaries is discussed.

b. Significant capacity reductions or population centers that Yes Section 4.5 may influence the ETE and that are located beyond the evacuation area or shadow region are identified and included in the model, if needed.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA) 4.6 Traffic Simulation Model Output

a. A discussion of whether the traffic simulation model used Yes Appendix B must be in equilibration prior to calculating the ETE is provided.

b. The minimum following model outputs for evacuation of the Yes 1. Appendix J, Table J2 entire EPZ are provided to support review: 2. Table J2

1. Evacuee average travel distance and time. 3. Table J4

2. Evacuee average delay time. 4. None and 0%. 100 percent ETE is

3. Number of vehicles arriving at each destination node. based on the time the last

4. Total number and percentage of evacuee vehicles not vehicle exits the evacuation exiting the EPZ. zone

5. A plot that provides both the mobilization curve and 5. Figures J2 through J13 (one evacuation curve identifying the cumulative percentage plot for each scenario of evacuees who have mobilized and exited the EPZ. considered)

6. Average speed for each major evacuation route that exits 6. Table J3 the EPZ.

c. Color coded roadway maps are provided for various times Yes Figure 73 through Figure 711 (e.g., at 2, 4, 6 hrs.) during a full EPZ evacuation scenario, identifying areas where congestion exists.

4.7 Evacuation Time Estimates for the General Public

a. The ETE includes the time to evacuate 90 percent and 100 Yes Table 71 and Table 72 percent of the total permanent resident and transient population.

b. Termination criteria for the 100 percent ETE are discussed, if N/A 100 percent ETE is based on the time not based on the time the last vehicle exits the evacuation the last vehicle exits the evacuation zone. zone.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

c. The ETE for 100 percent of the general public includes all Yes Section 5.4.1 - truncating survey data members of the general public. Any reductions or truncated to eliminate statistical outliers data is explained. Table 72 - 100th percentile ETE for general population

d. Tables are provided for the 90 and 100 percent ETEs similar Yes Table 73 and Table 74 to Table 43, ETEs for a Staged Evacuation, and Table 44, ETEs for a Keyhole Evacuation.

e. ETEs are provided for the 100 percent evacuation of special Yes Section 8 facilities, transit dependent, and school populations.

5.0 Other Considerations 5.1 Development of Traffic Control Plans

a. Information that responsible authorities have approved the Yes Section 9, Appendix G traffic control plan used in the analysis are discussed.

b. Adjustments or additions to the traffic control plan that Yes Section 9, Appendix G affect the ETE is provided.

5.2 Enhancements in Evacuation Time

a. The results of assessments for enhancing evacuations are Yes Appendix M provided.

5.3 State and Local Review

a. A list of agencies contacted is provided and the extent of Yes Table 11 interaction with these agencies is discussed.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Addressed in ETE NRC Review Criteria Comments Analysis (Yes/No/NA)

b. Information is provided on any unresolved issues that may Yes Results of the ETE study were formally affect the ETE. presented to state and local agencies at the final project meeting. Comments on the draft report were provided and were addressed in the final report.

There are no unresolved issues.

5.4 Reviews and Updates

a. The criteria for when an updated ETE analysis is required to Yes Appendix M, Section M.3 be performed and submitted to the NRC is discussed.

5.4.1 Extreme Conditions

a. The updated ETE analysis reflects the impact of EPZ N/A This ETE is being updated as a result of conditions not adequately reflected in the scenario the availability of US Census Bureau variations. decennial census data.

5.5 Reception Centers and Congregate Care Center

a. A map of congregate care centers and reception centers is Yes Figure 103 provided.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 RA-22-0262 ENCLOSURE 1: Brunswick 2022 Evacuation Time Estimate Report

Addendum to Brunswick Nuclear Plant Development of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Duke Energy, by:

KLD Engineering, P.C.

1601 Veterans Memorial Highway, Suite 340 Islandia, NY 11749 email: rcohen@kldcompanies.com September 12, 2022 Draft Report, Rev. 0 KLD TR - 1286

This addendum contains excerpts from the 2022 Brunswick Nuclear Plant Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Study (KLD TR1237), dated June 8, 2022. This report is to be used for emergency management decision making and was requested by local emergency management personnel. The section headings presented in this document have been provided by local emergency management personnel and generally correspond with the sections of the ETE study but may not match exactly. The pages contained within each section are extracted directly from the ETE study, and the page numbers, therefore, are not sequentially numbered.

Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Brunswick Nuclear Plant Location ....................................................................................... 13 1.3 Preliminary Activities ................................................................................................................. 13 1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study .............................................................................................. 16 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................ 21 2.1 Data Estimates Assumptions...................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Methodological Assumptions .................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times .......................................................................................... 23 2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions ................................................................................................ 23 2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions .................................................................................... 25 2.6 Scenarios and Regions ............................................................................................................... 25 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Permanent Residents ................................................................................................................. 32 3.2 Shadow Population .................................................................................................................... 33 3.3 Transient Population .................................................................................................................. 33 3.4 Employees .................................................................................................................................. 34 3.5 Medical Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 35 3.6 Transit Dependent Population ................................................................................................... 35 3.7 School Population Demand........................................................................................................ 37 3.8 Special Event .............................................................................................................................. 38 3.9 Access and/or Functional Needs Population ............................................................................. 38 3.10 External Traffic ........................................................................................................................... 39 3.11 Background Traffic ..................................................................................................................... 39 3.12 Summary of Demand ............................................................................................................... 311 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY ............................................................................................... 41 4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections .............................................................. 42 4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway ........................................................................ 44 4.3 Application to the BNP Study Area ............................................................................................ 46 4.3.1 TwoLane Roads ................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2 Multilane Highway ............................................................................................................. 47 4.3.3 Freeways ............................................................................................................................ 47 4.3.4 Intersections ...................................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation .......................................................................................... 48 4.5 Boundary Conditions .................................................................................................................. 49 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME.......................................................................................... 51 5.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 51 5.2 Fundamental Considerations ..................................................................................................... 52 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ................................................... 54 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution ...................................................................... 54 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers .............................................................................................................. 55 5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation ................................................................................... 57 5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas ................................................... 59 Brunswick Nuclear Plant i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS ..................................................................... 61 7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) .......................................................... 71 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation ......................................................................... 71 7.2 Staged Evacuation ...................................................................................................................... 72 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation ..................................................................... 72 7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................ 74 7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results .................................................................................... 75 7.6 Staged Evacuation Results ......................................................................................................... 77 7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ................................................................................................... 78 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES ................................. 81 8.1 ETEs for Schools/Preschools/Childcare Centers, Transit Dependent People, and Medical Facilities.................................................................................................................................................. 82 8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population ................................................................. 89 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ................................................................................................... 91 9.1 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 92 9.2 Additional Considerations .......................................................................................................... 92 10 EVACUATION ROUTES ...................................................................................................................... 101 10.1 Evacuation Routes.................................................................................................................... 101 10.2 Reception Centers .................................................................................................................... 102 A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS .................................................................................. A1 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL ......................................................... B1 B.1 Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model .................................................... B1 B.2 Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD .............................................................. B1 B.2.1 DTRAD Description ............................................................................................................. B2 B.2.2 Network Equilibrium .......................................................................................................... B4 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL ............................................................................................... C1 C.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. C2 C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram ................................................................................................. C2 C.1.2 The Simulation Model ........................................................................................................ C2 C.1.3 Lane Assignment ................................................................................................................ C6 C.2 Implementation ......................................................................................................................... C6 C.2.1 Computational Procedure .................................................................................................. C6 C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD) ..................................................... C7 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE .............................................................................. D1 E. FACILITY DATA.................................................................................................................................... E1 F. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY ..................................................................................................................... F1 F.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... F1 F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan ....................................................................................... F1 F.3 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ F2 F.3.1 Household Demographic Results ....................................................................................... F2 F.3.2 Evacuation Response ......................................................................................................... F3 F.3.3 Time Distribution Results ................................................................................................... F4 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.3.4 Emergency Communications ............................................................................................. F5 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Manual Traffic Control .............................................................................................................. G1 G.2 Analysis of Key TCP/SRB Locations ........................................................................................... G1 H EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. ZONE BOUNDARIES ............................................................................................................................ L1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ............................................................................................. M1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................ M1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate ................. M1 M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population ......................................................................... M2 M.4 Effect of NC211 Widening....................................................................................................... M4 M.5 Effect of Changes in Average Household Size .......................................................................... M4 M.6 Enhancements in Evacuation Time .......................................................................................... M5 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped List of Figures Figure 11. BNP Location .......................................................................................................................... 112 Figure 12. BNP LinkNode Analysis Network ......................................................................................... 113 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ....................................................................................... 28 Figure 31. Zones Comprising the BNP EPZ .............................................................................................. 319 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................ 320 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................ 321 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................ 322 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................... 323 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector.............................................................................................. 324 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................. 325 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................. 326 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 327 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 410 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip ............................................................ 515 Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities ........................................................................................ 516 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution ................................................... 517 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 518 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2mile to EPZ Boundary Area ......................................................................................................................................... 519 Figure 61. BNP EPZ Zones ......................................................................................................................... 69 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation ............................................................................................................ 720 Figure 72. BNP Shadow Region ............................................................................................................... 721 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 20 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ..................................... 722 Brunswick Nuclear Plant iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour, 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................ 723 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................ 724 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ........................ 725 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ....................... 726 Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ....................... 727 Figure 79. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ....................... 728 Figure 710. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................... 729 Figure 711. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................... 730 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R02 .................................................... 731 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R02 .................................................... 731 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R02 .................................................... 732 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R02 .................................................... 732 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R02 .................................................... 733 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R02 .................................................... 733 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R02 .................................................... 734 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R02 .................................................... 734 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R02 .................................................... 735 Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R02 .................................................. 735 Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R02 ................................................... 736 Figure 723. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R02 ................................................... 736 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ...................................................................... 818 Figure 101. Major Evacuation Routes ..................................................................................................... 106 Figure 102. Transit Dependent Bus Routes ............................................................................................ 107 Figure 103. Evacuation Shelters, Reception Centers and Relocation Schools........................................ 108 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B5 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ......................................................................................... C12 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ......................................................................................................... C13 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 ............................................................................ C13 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) .................................................... C14 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers within the EPZ ..................................................... E8 Figure E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................. E9 Figure E3. Major Employers within the EPZ............................................................................................ E10 Figure E4. Beaches, Golf Courses and Marinas within the EPZ .............................................................. E11 Figure E5. Campgrounds, Historical Sites, Parks and Other Recreational Areas within the EPZ ............ E12 Figure E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E13 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ....................................................................................................... F7 Figure F2. Household with Seasonal Residents ....................................................................................... F7 Figure F3. Household Vehicle Availability ................................................................................................ F8 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 1 to 4 Person Households ...................................................................... F8 Figure F5. Vehicle Availability 5+ Person Households ........................................................................... F9 Figure F6. Household Ridesharing Preference......................................................................................... F9 Figure F7. Commuters in Households in the EPZ ................................................................................... F10 Figure F8. Impact to Commuters due to the COVID19 Pandemic ......................................................... F10 Figure F9. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ................................................................................................... F11 Figure F10. Households with Functional or Transportation Needs ....................................................... F11 Figure F11. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation ........................................................................... F12 Brunswick Nuclear Plant iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure F12. Percent of Households that Await Returning Commuter Before Leaving .......................... F12 Figure F13. Households Evacuating with Pets/Animals ......................................................................... F13 Figure F14. ShelterinPlace Characteristics ........................................................................................... F13 Figure F15. Shelter then Evacuate Characteristics ................................................................................. F14 Figure F16. Study Area Evacuation Destinations .................................................................................... F14 Figure F17. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/College .............................................................. F15 Figure F18. Work/College to Home Travel Time .................................................................................... F15 Figure F19. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation ................................................................................ F16 Figure F20. Cell Phone Signal Reliability ................................................................................................. F16 Figure F21. Likelihood to Take Action Based off Emergency Management Officials Guidelines ........... F17 Figure F22. Emergency Communication Alert ........................................................................................ F17 Figure G1. Traffic Control Points and Security Road Blocks for the BNP Site .......................................... G5 Figure G2. Comparison of Congestion Patterns at 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE ..................... G6 Figure H1. Region R01.............................................................................................................................. H4 Figure H2. Region R02.............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H3. Region R03.............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H4. Region R04.............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H5. Region R05.............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H6. Region R06.............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H7. Region R07............................................................................................................................ H10 Figure H8. Region R08............................................................................................................................ H11 Figure H9. Region R09............................................................................................................................ H12 Figure H10. Region R10.......................................................................................................................... H13 Figure H11. Region R11.......................................................................................................................... H14 Figure H12. Region R12.......................................................................................................................... H15 Figure H13. Region R13.......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H14. Region R14.......................................................................................................................... H17 Figure H15. Region R15.......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H16. Region R16.......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure H17. Region R17.......................................................................................................................... H20 Figure H18. Region R18.......................................................................................................................... H21 Figure H19. Region R19.......................................................................................................................... H22 Figure H20. Region R20.......................................................................................................................... H23 Figure H21. Region R21.......................................................................................................................... H24 Figure H22. Region R22.......................................................................................................................... H25 Figure H23. Region R23.......................................................................................................................... H26 Figure H24. Region R24.......................................................................................................................... H27 Figure H25. Region R25.......................................................................................................................... H28 Figure H26. Region R26.......................................................................................................................... H29 Figure H27. Region R27.......................................................................................................................... H30 Figure H28. Region R28.......................................................................................................................... H31 Figure H29. Region R29.......................................................................................................................... H32 Figure H30. Region R30.......................................................................................................................... H33 Figure H31. Region R31.......................................................................................................................... H34 Figure H32. Region R32.......................................................................................................................... H35 Figure H33. Region R33.......................................................................................................................... H36 Figure H34. Region R34.......................................................................................................................... H37 Brunswick Nuclear Plant v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H35. Region R35.......................................................................................................................... H38 Figure J1. Network Sources/Origins.......................................................................................................... J6 Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) .............. J7 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) ............................... J7 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3).............. J8 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) .............................. J8 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5)

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

................................................................................................................................................................. J11 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Special Event (Scenario 11) ............................................................................................................................................ J12 Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12) ............................................................................................................................................ J12 Figure K1. BNP LinkNode Analysis Network ............................................................................................ K2 Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 ..................................................................................... K3 Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 ..................................................................................... K4 Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 ..................................................................................... K5 Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 ..................................................................................... K6 Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 ..................................................................................... K7 Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 ..................................................................................... K8 Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 ..................................................................................... K9 Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 ................................................................................... K10 Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 ................................................................................. K11 Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 ............................................................................... K12 Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 ............................................................................... K13 Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 ............................................................................... K14 Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 ............................................................................... K15 Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 ............................................................................... K16 Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 ............................................................................... K17 Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 ............................................................................... K18 Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 ............................................................................... K19 Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 ............................................................................... K20 Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 ............................................................................... K21 Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 ............................................................................... K22 Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 ............................................................................... K23 Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 ............................................................................... K24 Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 ............................................................................... K25 Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 ............................................................................... K26 Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 ............................................................................... K27 Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 ............................................................................... K28 Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 ............................................................................... K29 Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 ............................................................................... K30 Brunswick Nuclear Plant vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 ............................................................................... K31 Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 ............................................................................... K32 Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 ............................................................................... K33 Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 ............................................................................... K34 Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 ............................................................................... K35 Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 ............................................................................... K36 Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 ............................................................................... K37 Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 ............................................................................... K38 Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 ............................................................................... K39 Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 ............................................................................... K40 Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 ............................................................................... K41 Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 ............................................................................... K42 Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ............................................................................... K43 Brunswick Nuclear Plant vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

List of Tables Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction ........................................................................................................... 17 Table 12. Highway Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 17 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons ............................................................................................................ 18 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 26 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 27 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ...................................................................................... 311 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone ......................................................... 311 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ............................................................................ 312 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ...................................................................... 312 Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ ............................ 313 Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand ............................................................................................. 314 Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates .............................................................................. 315 Table 38. School and Preschools/Childcare Center Population Demand Estimates ............................. 315 Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary ............................................................. 316 Table 310. BNP EPZ External Traffic ....................................................................................................... 316 Table 311. Summary of Population Demand ......................................................................................... 317 Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand................................................................................................ 318 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities .............................................................................. 510 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 510 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................. 511 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home ................................................................ 511 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate ..................................................... 512 Table 56. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 512 Table 57. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 513 Table 58. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation .................... 513 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ......................... 514 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions........................................................................................... 64 Table 62. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions ............................................................................... 65 Table 63. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 66 Table 64. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................ 67 Table 65. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario.................................................................................................. 68 Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ......................... 710 Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ....................... 712 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region ............................ 714 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region .......................... 716 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions......................................................................................... 718 Table 76. Descriptions of Evacuation Regions ........................................................................................ 719 Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................. 810 Table 82. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ..... 811 Table 83. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ...................... 812 Table 84. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather .......................................... 813 Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ........................................................... 814 Table 86. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ............................................... 815 Table 87. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ................................................................ 816 Table 88. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates ............................. 817 Brunswick Nuclear Plant viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 101. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 102 Table 102. Bus Route Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 103 Table 103. Relocation Schools/Pickup Point.......................................................................................... 105 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C8 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ........................................................................... C9 Table C3. Glossary ..................................................................................................................................C10 Table E1. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers within the EPZ ....................................................... E2 Table E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ............................................................................................... E3 Table E3. Major Employers within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E3 Table E4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ............................................................................................ E4 Table E5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ............................................................................................... E6 Table F1. BNP Demographic Survey Sampling Plan ................................................................................. F6 Table G1. List of Key Manual Traffic Control Locations ........................................................................... G3 Table G2. ETE with No MTC and Priority MTC - Scenario 1 Region R02 ................................................ G4 Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions ............................................................... H2 Table H2. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Staged Regions ................................................... H3 Table J1. Sample Simulation Model Input ............................................................................................... J2 Table J2. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ (Region R02) ........................... J3 Table J3. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R02, Scenario 1) ................................................................................................................................................. J4 Table J4. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R02, Scenario 1 ......................... J5 Table K1. Summary of Nodes by the Type of Control ............................................................................... K1 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ....................................... M5 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study .................................................... M6 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change ................................................................................. M6 Table M4. Evacuation Time Estimates for Roadway Project .................................................................. M6 Table M5. ETE Results for Change in Average Household Size............................................................... M7 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist ................................................................................................. N1 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ix KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Brunswick Nuclear Plant (BNP) located in Brunswick County, North Carolina. ETE provide Duke Energy and offsite response organizations (OROs) with sitespecific information needed for protective action decisionmaking.

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

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

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

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

December 2019.

Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR6863, January 2005.

Project Activities This project began in December 2020 and extended over a period of 16 months. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Conduced a virtual kickoff meeting with Duke Energy personnel and emergency management personnel representing state and county governments.

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

Studied Geographical Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of the BNP, then conducted a detailed field survey of the highway network.

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

Conducted a randomsample online demographic survey of residents within the EPZ, to gather focused data needed for this ETE study that were not contained within the census database. The survey instrument was reviewed and modified by the licensee and ORO personnel prior to the survey.

The data gathered for the 2018 ETE study were reviewed and updated accordingly by the offsite response organizations (OROs). Special facility data was requested from the OROs at the kickoff meeting. If updated information was not provided and data could not be obtained from online sources, the data gathered in the 2018 ETE study was utilized.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Estimated the number of employees commuting into the EPZ are based upon 2018 Workplace Area Characteristic (WAC) data from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool2.

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

Following federal guidelines, the EPZ is subdivided into 13 Zones. These Zones are then grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 35 Evacuation Regions.

The timevarying external circumstances are represented as Evacuation Scenarios, each described in terms of the following factors: (1) Season (Summer, Winter); (2) Day of Week (Midweek, Weekend); (3) Time of Day (Midday, Evening); and (4) Weather (Good, Rain). One special event scenario involving the 4th of July Festival in Southport was considered. A roadway impact scenario was considered wherein a roadway segment of SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way SE - was closed for the duration of the evacuation.

Staged evacuation was considered for those regions wherein the 2mile radius and sectors downwind to the EPZ boundary were evacuated.

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

A rapidly escalating event at the BNP wherein evacuation is ordered promptly, and no early protective actions have been implemented.

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

If the event occurs while schools are in session, the ETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to relocation schools or pickup points as stated in the public information. Parents, relatives, and neighbors are advised to not pick up their children at school prior to the arrival of the buses dispatched for that purpose. The ETE for schoolchildren are calculated separately.

Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either rideshare with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided by the counties in the EPZ. Those in special facilities will likewise be evacuated with public transit, as needed:

bus, van, wheelchair vehicle, or ambulance, as required. Separate ETE are calculated for the transitdependent evacuees, for access and/or functional needs population, and for those evacuated from special facilities.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Computation of ETE A total of 420 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 35 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 12 Evacuation Scenarios (35 x 12 = 420). Separate ETE are calculated for transitdependent evacuees, including schoolchildren for applicable scenarios.

Except for Region R02, 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 (ATE) 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 the ATE. The people occupying the remainder of the EPZ outside the impacted region may be advised to take shelter.

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

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

The computational procedure is outlined as follows:

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

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

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

The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90 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 90th percentile ETE have been Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Traffic Management This study references the existing traffic management plan within the EPZ provided by offsite response organizations within the EPZ. Nearly all of the traffic signals in the study area are actuated signals which will adapt their timing to the changing traffic patterns during evacuation. Based on the ETE simulations, a group of six intersections with manual traffic control (MTC) has been identified as the most critical (first priority) that can be significantly impact ETEs. Refer to Section 9 and in Appendix G.

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

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

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

Table 61 and Table 62 define each of the 35 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of Zone.

Table 63 lists the Evacuation Scenarios.

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

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

Table 82 present ETE for the schoolchildren in good weather.

Table 84 present ETE for the transitdependent population in good weather.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Conclusions General population ETE were computed for 420 unique cases - a combination of 35 unique Evacuation Regions and 12 unique Evacuation Scenarios. Table 71 and Table 72 document these ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles. These ETE range from 2:55 (hr:min) to 7:30 at the 90th percentile.

Inspection of Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the ETE for the 100th percentile are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile. 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 712 through 723.

The 90th percentile ETE for Regions R02 and R04 through R08, wherein Zone 4 (Oak Island) evacuates, are on average 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes longer than regions that do not include Zone 4 for nonspecial scenarios. The 90th percentile ETEs are longer when Zones 4 and 5 (St. James) evacuate together than when 4 evacuates without Zone 5.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicates that a staged evacuation would be beneficial for evacuating the resident population within the 2mile region of BNP, but not enough to warrant a significant change, and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the BNP. See section 7.6 for further explanation.

Comparison of Scenarios 3 (summer, weekend, midday) and 11 (summer, weekend, midday) in Table 71 indicates that the special event has a significant effect on ETE at the 90th and 100th percentile for all regions. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 12 in Table 71 indicates that the closure of a roadway segment on SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way has a material impact on 90th percentile ETE for some regions. The ETE for keyhole regions with wind from east (Regions R04 through R11), and an evacuation of the entire EPZ (R02), experience increases up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes.

See Section 7.5.

Separate ETE were computed for schools, medical facilities, transitdependent persons, and access and/or functional needs persons. The average singlewave ETE for these facilities are less than or equaled to the general population ETE at the 90th percentile.

See Section 8.

Table 81 indicates that there are enough buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances available to evacuate the transitdependent population within the EPZ in a single wave.

See Sections 8.1 and 8.2.

Six TCP/SRB locations were determined to be the most critical for an evacuation of the entire EPZ. These intersections are focused along US 17/US 17 Business and should be Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

considered as priority locations in the event of a shortfall of TCP personnel. See Appendix G.

The general population ETE at the 90th percentile is insensitive to reductions in the base trip generation time of 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes due to the traffic congestion within the EPZ. See Table M1.

The general population ETE is relatively insensitive to the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region (tripling the shadow evacuation percentage increases the 100th percentile ETE by 5 minutes), unless the entire Shadow Region evacuates. See Table M2.

A population increase of 15% or more results in ETE changes which meet the NRC criteria for updating ETE between decennial Censuses. See Section M.3.

The widening of NC211 between NC87 and NC906 does not provide a significant benefit to an evacuation of the entire EPZ.

Increasing the average household size to 2.45 people per household (obtained from the survey) can have a significant impact on the ETE for the full EPZ. Reducing the vehicular demand on the capacity constrained roadway network can reduce congestion and, therefore, decrease ETE. See Section M.5.

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2010 Population 2020 Population 1 2,689 3,475 2 2,774 3,348 3 663 652 4 5,868 7,368 5 5,627 9,734 6 1,148 1,277 7 4,193 4,494 8 1,711 1,888 9 195 124 10 7,841 8,872 11 2,383 2,731 12 0 0 13 158 268 TOTAL 35,250 44,231 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 25.48%

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R01 2Mile Radius x x R02 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R03 NNW, N 328°009° x x x x x R04 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R05 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R06 NE 039°051° x x x x x R07 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R08 E 091°112° x x x x x R09 ESE x x x x R10 SE, SSE x x x x x x R11 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R12 S 180°195° x x x x x x R13 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R14 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R15 W 272°288° x x x x x R16 WNW x x x x R17 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R18 NW 317°327° x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R19 NNW, N 329°009° x x x x x R20 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R21 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R22 NE 039°051° x x x x x R23 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R24 E 091°112° x x x x x R25 ESE x x x x R26 SE, SSE x x x x x x R27 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R28 S 180°195° x x x x x x R29 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R30 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R31 W 272°288° x x x x x R32 WNW x x x x R33 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R34 NW 317°327° x x x x R35 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season3 Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend 4th of July 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good Festival in Southport Closure of a 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good segment of SR 211 3

Winter assumes that school is in session (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer assumes that regular school is not in session.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and EPZ R01 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R02 5:30 6:05 5:50 6:25 4:30 4:50 5:15 5:10 5:35 4:25 6:45 6:35 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R03 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:15 3:10 3:25 3:25 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:50 3:20 R04 4:35 4:55 5:15 5:45 3:20 3:40 3:50 4:15 4:35 3:05 5:50 5:10 R05 5:35 6:25 6:20 7:00 4:20 4:45 5:10 5:20 6:00 4:15 6:55 6:50 R06 5:35 6:25 6:20 7:00 4:20 4:45 5:10 5:20 6:00 4:15 6:55 6:50 R07 5:55 6:35 6:30 7:10 4:45 5:10 5:30 5:30 6:10 4:35 7:25 7:25 R08 5:40 6:25 6:15 6:55 4:40 4:55 5:30 5:15 5:55 4:35 7:15 7:00 R09 4:10 4:20 4:15 4:30 3:50 4:00 4:10 4:00 4:10 3:45 6:10 4:35 R10 3:40 3:45 3:25 3:35 3:25 3:45 3:50 3:20 3:30 3:25 5:40 3:50 R11 3:55 4:20 3:55 4:15 3:35 3:50 4:05 3:50 4:00 3:40 5:35 4:35 R12 3:30 3:40 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:40 3:10 3:25 3:20 5:00 3:30 R13 3:55 4:20 4:25 4:45 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:40 4:00 3:10 5:00 3:55 R14 3:55 4:20 4:25 4:50 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:40 4:00 3:10 5:00 3:55 R15 3:10 3:15 2:50 3:05 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:55 2:55 3:10 5:35 3:10 R16 3:10 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:50 2:50 3:05 5:35 3:10 R17 3:10 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:50 2:50 3:05 5:35 3:10 R18 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:40 5:50 3:40 R20 4:35 4:55 5:15 5:45 4:35 4:30 4:40 4:20 4:40 4:35 5:50 5:10 R21 5:40 6:25 6:20 7:00 5:25 5:20 5:35 5:30 6:00 5:25 7:05 6:50 R22 5:40 6:25 6:20 7:00 5:25 5:20 5:35 5:30 6:00 5:25 7:05 6:50 R23 6:00 6:35 6:30 7:10 5:25 5:30 5:50 5:45 6:10 5:30 7:30 7:25 R24 6:00 6:25 6:15 6:55 5:25 5:30 5:40 5:45 6:05 5:25 7:20 7:10 R25 4:50 5:05 4:45 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:15 5:10 R26 4:25 4:35 4:15 4:30 4:20 4:25 4:35 4:15 4:30 4:20 5:50 4:25 R27 5:00 5:05 4:50 5:05 4:55 4:55 5:00 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:55 5:25 R28 4:20 4:30 4:15 4:25 4:20 4:20 4:30 4:20 4:25 4:20 5:20 4:20 R29 4:25 4:30 4:25 4:50 4:30 4:30 4:35 4:25 4:30 4:35 5:00 4:25 R30 4:25 4:30 4:25 4:50 4:35 4:30 4:40 4:25 4:35 4:35 5:00 4:25 R31 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:45 3:45 5:35 3:45 R32 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 5:35 3:40 R33 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 5:35 3:40 R34 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R35 5:35 6:05 5:55 6:40 5:15 5:20 5:30 5:30 5:50 5:20 6:55 6:45 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and EPZ R01 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R02 7:05 7:50 7:45 8:45 5:55 5:55 6:40 6:50 7:30 5:55 8:35 9:00 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R03 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R04 5:55 6:00 6:20 6:45 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:05 6:10 R05 6:55 7:45 7:40 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:00 5:55 8:10 8:05 R06 6:55 7:45 7:40 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:00 5:55 8:10 8:05 R07 7:00 7:50 7:45 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:35 6:40 7:10 5:55 8:35 8:55 R08 7:00 7:40 7:45 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:10 5:55 8:35 8:55 R09 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 6:00 R10 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R11 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R12 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:20 5:55 R13 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R14 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R15 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R16 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R17 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R18 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R20 5:55 6:00 6:20 6:45 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:05 6:10 R21 6:55 7:45 7:50 8:35 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:40 7:00 6:20 8:35 8:25 R22 6:55 7:45 7:50 8:35 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:40 7:00 6:20 8:35 8:25 R23 7:00 7:50 7:50 8:35 6:25 6:25 6:45 6:50 7:10 6:20 8:35 9:10 R24 7:00 7:40 7:45 8:35 6:15 6:25 6:45 6:50 7:10 6:15 8:35 9:10 R25 6:00 6:00 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:50 6:10 R26 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R27 6:10 6:15 5:55 6:20 6:00 5:55 6:10 6:00 6:00 5:55 7:55 6:40 R28 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:40 5:55 R29 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R30 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R31 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R32 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R33 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R34 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R35 7:05 7:50 7:55 8:45 6:25 6:35 6:55 6:50 7:30 6:20 8:40 9:10 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R01 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R02 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:35 3:35 3:10 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:35 R03 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R04 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:35 R05 3:25 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:30 R06 3:25 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:30 R07 3:30 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:15 3:30 3:30 3:15 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:35 R08 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:15 3:25 3:25 3:15 3:20 3:20 5:55 3:35 R09 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R10 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R11 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R12 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R13 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R14 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R15 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R16 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R17 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R18 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R20 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R21 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R22 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R23 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R24 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R25 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R26 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R27 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R28 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R29 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R30 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R31 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R32 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R33 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R34 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R35 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R01 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R02 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R03 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R04 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R05 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R06 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R07 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R08 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R09 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R10 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R11 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R12 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R13 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R14 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R15 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R16 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R17 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R18 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R20 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R21 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:55 5:50 R22 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:55 5:50 R23 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 7:10 5:50 R24 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R25 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R26 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R27 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R28 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R29 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R30 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R31 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R32 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R33 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R34 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R35 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 6:20 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BRUNSWICK COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Childcare Network 90 15 14.4 13.5 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Southport Baptist Church Preschool 90 15 14.7 13.8 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Kids World Academy II 90 15 14.5 13.5 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Southport Elementary School 90 15 11.5 12.0 57 2:45 6.4 9 2:55 L & L Montessori School 90 15 13.6 9.1 90 3:15 0.9 1 3:20 Sharon's Childcare 90 15 13.5 7.2 112 3:40 0.9 1 3:45 Kids World Academy 90 15 12.9 14.8 52 2:40 0.8 1 2:45 Southport Christian School 90 15 12.6 11.9 63 2:50 0.9 1 2:55 South Brunswick High School 90 15 8.6 10.6 49 2:35 8.1 11 2:50 South Brunswick Middle School 90 15 7.6 8.9 51 2:40 13.2 18 3:00 Learn and Play 90 15 6.2 18.9 20 2:05 0.8 1 2:10 NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Carolina Beach After School Program 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Carolina Beach Elementary 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Island Time DropNPlay 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Maximum for EPZ: 3:40 Maximum: 3:45 Average for EPZ: 2:40 Average: 2:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Route Bus Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to E.S. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Servicing of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) E.S (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Zone 1 1 135 17.5 44.9 23 30 3:10 11.1 15 5 10 63 30 5:15 Zone 2 1 135 16.4 45.0 22 30 3:10 11.1 15 5 10 60 30 5:10 Zone 3 1 135 15.3 8.6 107 30 4:35 14.5 19 5 10 63 30 6:45 Zone 4 2 135 12.8 6.7 114 30 4:40 14.5 19 5 10 54 30 6:40 Zone 5 2 135 8.1 3.9 125 30 4:50 14.5 19 5 10 43 30 6:40 Zone 6 1 135 4.0 40.6 6 30 2:55 15.6 21 5 10 48 30 4:50 Zone 7 1 135 8.5 9.9 51 30 3:40 13.9 19 5 10 67 30 5:55 Zone 8 1 135 4.5 39.5 7 30 2:55 13.9 19 5 10 32 30 4:35 Zone 9 1 135 11.0 45.0 15 30 3:00 11.1 15 5 10 46 30 4:50 Zone 10 2 135 3.6 13.2 16 30 3:05 3.6 5 5 10 16 30 4:15 Zone 11 1 135 6.9 17.9 23 30 3:10 3.6 5 5 10 27 30 4:30 Maximum ETE: 4:50 Maximum ETE: 6:45 Average ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 5:25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. BNP Zones Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Brunswick Nuclear Plant ES21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SECTION 2 Data and Assumptions

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

2.1 Data Estimates Assumptions

1. Permanent resident population estimates are based upon 2020 U.S. Census population from the Census Bureau website1. (See Section 3.1).

2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon 2018 Workplace Area Characteristic (WAC) data from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool2 extrapolated to 2020 using the shortterm employment projection for the State of North Carolina3. The number of NonEPZ Employees was calculated within the EPZ by Census block using the work area profile and GIS inflow/outflow analysis (see Section 3.4).

3. Population estimates at transient and special facilities are based upon data provided by county emergency management agencies within EPZ, the ChildcareCenter4, the North Carolina Division of Child Development and Early Education5 and the 2017 ETE study, supplemented by internet searches where data was missing.

4. The relationship between permanent resident population and evacuating vehicles is based on the 2020 Census and the results of the demographic survey. Values of 2.11 persons per household and 1.54 evacuating vehicles per household will be used for the permanent resident population.

5. Where data cannot be obtained for recreational facilities, aerial imagery is used to count parking spaces and it is assumed that during peak times, parking lots at these facilities are full.

6. The data from 2012 ETE study is used for lodging facilities to estimate the number of transients at these facilities.

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

8. Employee vehicle occupancies is based on the results of the demographic survey. 1.07 employees per vehicle is used in the study. In addition, it is assumed there are two people per carpool, on average.

9. The maximum bus speed assumed within the EPZ is 45 mph based on North Carolina state laws for buses and average posted speed limits on roadways within the EPZ.

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

1 www.census.gov 2

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

3 https://www.nccommerce.com/data-tools-reports/labor-market-data-tools/employment-projections 4

https://childcarecenter.us/

5 https://ncchildcaresearch.dhhs.state.nc.us/search.asp Brunswick Nuclear Plant 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2.2 Methodological Assumptions

1. The Planning Assumption for the calculation of ETE is a rapidly escalating accident that requires evacuation, and includes the following6 (as per NRC guidance):

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

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

c. The ETE are measured relative to the ATE.

2. The centerpoint of the plant will be located at the center of the containment building 33°57'29.60"N and 78°00'34.46"W.

3. As indicated in Figure 21, as per NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1, 100% of people within the impacted keyhole evacuate. 20% of those people within the EPZ, not within the impacted keyhole, will voluntarily evacuate. 20% of those people within the Shadow Region (the area beyond the EPZ boundary out to 15 miles radially from BNP) will voluntarily evacuate.

4. The DYNEV II model is used to compute ETE in this study.

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

6. The existing EPZ and Zone boundaries are used. (See Figure 31.)

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

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

9. ETE are presented for the evacuation of the 90th and 100th percentiles of population for each Region and for each Scenario. The percentile ETE is defined as the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE) issued to a specific Region of the EPZ, to the time that Region is clear of the indicated percentile of evacuees. A Region is defined as a group of zones that is issued an Advisory to Evacuate. A scenario is a combination of circumstances, including time of day, day of week, season, and weather conditions.

10. This study does not assume that roadways are empty at the start of the first time period. Rather, there is a 45minute initialization period (often referred to as fill time in traffic simulation) wherein the traffic volumes from the first time period are loaded onto roadways in the study area. The amount of initialization/fill traffic that is on the roadways in the study area at the start of the first time period depends on the scenario and the region being evacuated. See Section 3.11.

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

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

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

See Section 5.1 for more detail.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

11. To account for boundary conditions beyond the study area, this study assumes a 25%

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

12. The ETE also includes consideration of through (ExternalExternal) trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region. See Section 3.10.

2.3 Assumptions on Mobilization Times

1. Trip generation time (also known as mobilization time, or the time required by evacuees to prepare for the evacuation) are based upon the results of the demographic survey (See Section 5 and Appendix F). It is assumed that stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur.

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

3. Commuter percentages (and percentage of residents awaiting the return of a commuter) are based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, 60.9% of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter; 69.9% of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip. Therefore, 42.6 percent (60.9% x 69.9% = 42.6%) of EPZ households will await the return of a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.

2.4 Transit Dependent Assumptions

1. The percentage of transitdependent people who will rideshare with a neighbor or friend will be based on the results of the demographic survey. According to the survey results, approximately 84% of the transitdependent population will rideshare.

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

a. Schools and childcare facilities

i. If schools are in session, buses will evacuate students, including children at preschools and childcare centers, directly to the designated relocation schools (pickup points).

ii. It is assumed staff will accompany students on buses.

iii. It is assumed that parents will not pick up children at preschools and childcare facilities prior to evacuation7.

iv. Schoolchildren, if school is in session, are given priority in assigning 7

According to the BNP 2021 Emergency Preparedness Information, for Preschools and Childcare Centers, children will be transported directly to Relocation Schools (Pickup Points).

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

transit vehicles.

b. Medical Facilities

i. Buses, shuttle buses, trollies, paratransit vehicles and ambulances will evacuate patients at medical facilities and at any senior facilities within EPZ, as needed.

ii. The percent breakdown of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients from the 2017 study will be used to determine the number of ambulatory, wheelchair bound and bedridden patients at the medical facilities wherein data was not provided.

c. Transitdependent permanent residents

i. Transitdependent general population are evacuated to reception centers.

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

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

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

e. Transport of transitdependent evacuees from reception centers/relocation schools (pickup points) to congregate care centers is not considered in this study.

3. Transit vehicle capacities:

a. School buses = the study assumes an average 50 students per bus according to the Standard Operating Guideline (SOG) for Brunswick County and New Hanover County schools.

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

c. Basic Life Support (BLS) (ambulances) = 2 bedridden persons

d. Paratransit = 15 wheelchair bound and/or persons.

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

a. School buses will arrive at schools, preschools, and childcare centers to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

b. Transit dependent buses are mobilized within 135 minutes of the ATE, which is the time it takes approximately 75% of residents with no commuters to complete their mobilization. If necessary, multiple waves of buses will be utilized to gather transit dependent people who mobilize more slowly.

c. Vehicles will arrive at hospitals and medical facilities to be evacuated within 90 minutes of the ATE.

5. Transit Vehicle loading times:

a. School buses will be loaded in 15 minutes.

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

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

6. It is assumed that drivers are available for transit dependent and special facility vehicles.

2.5 Traffic and Access Control Assumptions

1. Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Security Road Blocks (SRBs) as defined in the approved county and state emergency plans are considered in the ETE analysis, as per NRC guidance. See Appendix G.

2. TCP and SRB will be staffed within approximately 120 minutes after the ATE, as per NRC guidance. It is assumed that no through traffic will enter the EPZ after this 120minute time period.

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

2.6 Scenarios and Regions

1. A total of 12 Scenarios representing different temporal variations (season, time of day, day of week) and weather conditions are considered. Scenarios to be considered are defined in Table 21:

a. Fourth of July in Southport is considered as the special event (single or multiday event that attracts a significant population into the EPZ; recommended by NRC guidance) for Scenario 11.

b. As per NRC guidance, one segment of one of the highest volume roadways was set to be out of service for the roadway impact scenario. This study will consider the closure of a roadway segment of SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way SE for the roadway impact scenario - Scenario 12.

2. One type of adverse weather scenario is considered. Rain may occur for either winter or summer scenarios. It is assumed that the rain begins earlier or at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued. No weatherrelated reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed.

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

Transportation research indicates capacity and speed reductions of about 10% for rain.

In accordance with Table 31 of Revision 1 to NUREG/CR7002, this study assumes a 10%

reduction in speed and capacity for rain, as shown in Table 22.

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

5. It is also assumed that mobilization and loading times for transit vehicles are slightly longer in adverse weather. It is assumed that mobilization times are 10 minutes longer in rain. It is assumed that loading times are 5 minutes longer in rain. Refer to Table 22.

6. Regions are defined by the underlying keyhole or circular configurations as specified in Section 1.4 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1. These Regions, as defined, display irregular Brunswick Nuclear Plant 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

boundaries reflecting the geography of the Zones included within these underlying configurations. All 16 cardinal and intercardinal wind direction keyhole configurations are considered. Regions to be considered are defined in Table 61. It is assumed that everyone within the group of Zones forming a Region that is issued an ATE will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.

7. Due to the irregular shapes of the Zones, there are instances where a small portion of a Zone (a sliver) is within the keyhole and the population within that small portion is low (less than 500 people or 10% of the Zone population, whichever is less). Under those circumstances, the Zone would not be included in the Region so as to not evacuate large numbers of people outside of the keyhole for a small number of people that are actually in the keyhole, unless otherwise stated in the PAR document.

8. Staged evacuation is considered as defined in NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1 - those people beyond 2 and 10 miles will shelterinplace until 90% of the 2Mile Region has evacuated, then they will evacuate. See Regions R19 through R35 in Table 61.

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend 4th of July 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good Festival in Southport Closure of a 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good segment of SR 211 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Highway Free Flow Mobilization Time for Mobilization Time for Loading Time for Scenario Capacity* Speed* General Population Transit Vehicles Transit Vehicles Rain 90% 90% No Effect 10 Minute Increase 5 Minute Increase

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Brunswick Nuclear Plant 28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SECTION 3 Summary of Demand

3.12 Summary of Demand A summary of population and vehicle demand is provided in Table 311 and Table 312, respectively. This summary includes all population groups described in this section. A total of 136,908 people and 72,049 vehicles are considered in this study.

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2010 Population 2020 Population 1 2,689 3,475 2 2,774 3,348 3 663 652 4 5,868 7,368 5 5,627 9,734 6 1,148 1,277 7 4,193 4,494 8 1,711 1,888 9 195 124 10 7,841 8,872 11 2,383 2,731 12 0 0 13 158 268 EPZ TOTAL: 35,250 44,231 EPZ Population Growth (20102020): 25.48%

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone 2020 Zone 2020 Population Resident Vehicles 1 3,475 2,636 2 3,348 2,445 3 652 476 4 7,368 5,367 5 9,734 7,098 6 1,277 931 7 4,494 3,260 8 1,888 1,374 9 124 91 10 8,872 6,477 11 2,731 1,996 12 0 0 13 268 04 EPZ TOTAL: 44,231 32,151 4

There are no vehicles permitted on Bald Head Island (Zone 13). The 196 resident vehicles for Bald Head Island are included at the Southport ferry terminal (Zone 1) for this study.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Sector 2020 Population Evacuating Vehicles N 1,225 870 NNE 27,298 19,777 NE 4,673 3,411 ENE 0 0 E 0 0 ESE 0 0 SE 0 0 SSE 0 0 S 0 0 SSW 0 0 SW 0 0 WSW 178 130 W 5,610 4,091 WNW 2,434 1,724 NW 1,243 731 NNW 1,874 1,367 TOTAL: 44,535 32,101 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles Zone Transients Transient Vehicles 1 405 825 2 661 277 3 175 60 4 29,808 10,033 5 424 241 6 186 93 7 38 18 8 0 0 9 100 30 10 19,074 6,206 11 7,285 2,539 12 0 0 13 1,238 05 EPZ TOTAL: 59,394 20,322 5

The transient vehicles for Bald Head Island (Zone 13) are included at the Southport ferry terminal (Zone 1) for this study.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 35. Summary of Employees and Employee Vehicles Commuting into the EPZ Zone Employees Employee Vehicles 1 638 590 2 141 132 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 8 0 0 9 0 0 10 154 144 11 0 0 12 0 0 13 0 0 EPZ TOTAL: 933 866 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 36. Medical Facility Transit Demand Wheel Wheel chair Current Ambu chair Bed Bus Bus Zone Facility Name Municipality Capacity Census latory Bound ridden Runs Runs Ambulance BRUNSWICK, NORTH CAROLINA 1 Elmcroft of Southport Southport 96 61 52 9 0 2 1 0 Southport Health & Rehabilitation Southport 60 50 38 7 5 2 1 3 1 Center J Arthur Dosher Memorial Hospital Southport N/A 69 16 39 14 1 3 7 1 & Skilled Nursing Center 6 The Landings of Oak Island Bolivia 80 67 41 19 7 2 2 4 TOTAL: N/A 247 147 74 26 7 7 14 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 37. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Percent Survey Average HH Size Survey Percent HH Survey Percent HH Total People Population with Indicated No. of Estimated with Indicated No. of Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring 2018 EPZ Vehicles No. of Vehicles with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 44,231 4.33 1.47 2.34 20,963 1.06% 12.70% 54.20% 60.9% 30.1% 1,321 84% 213 0.5%

Table 38. School and Preschools/Childcare Center Population Demand Estimates Buses Zone School Name Enrollment Required 1 Childcare Network 147 3 1 Southport Baptist Church Preschool 52 2 2 Kids World Academy 29 1 2 Southport Elementary School 588 12 2 L & L Montessori School 51 2 4 Sharon's Childcare 8 1 5 Kids World Academy II 5 1 5 Southport Christian School 120 3 7 South Brunswick High School 1,141 23 7 South Brunswick Middle School 729 15 7 Learn and Play 8 1 10 Carolina Beach After School Program 82 2 10 Carolina Beach Elementary 461 10 10 Island Time DropNPlay 62 2 TOTAL: 3,483 78 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 39. Access and/or Functional Needs Demand Summary Population Group Population Vehicles deployed Buses 770 55 Paratransit 388 48 Vehicles Ambulances 136 68 Total: 1,294 171 Table 310. BNP EPZ External Traffic Upstream Downstream NC DOT1 & Hourly External Road Name Direction KFactor2 DFactor2 Node Node AADT Volume Traffic 8028 760 US17 SB 26,000 0.107 0.5 1,391 2,782 8284 284 US17 NB 26,000 0.107 0.5 1,391 2,782 TOTAL 5,564 1

NCDOT Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Mapping Application: https://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=964881960f0549de8c3583bf46ef5ed4 2

HCM 2016 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 311. Summary of Population Demand6 Transit Special Special Shadow External Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Schools Event Population7 Traffic Total 1 3,475 17 405 638 180 199 13,650 0 0 18,564 2 3,348 16 661 141 0 668 5,850 0 0 10,684 3 652 3 175 0 0 0 0 0 0 830 4 7,368 35 29,808 0 0 8 0 0 0 37,219 5 9,734 47 424 0 0 125 0 0 0 10,330 6 1,277 6 186 0 67 0 0 0 0 1,536 7 4,494 22 38 0 0 1,878 0 0 0 6,432 8 1,888 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,897 9 124 1 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 10 8,872 43 19,074 154 0 605 0 0 0 28,748 11 2,731 13 7,285 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,029 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 268 18 1,238 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,507 Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,907 0 8,907 Total 44,231 213 59,394 933 247 3,483 19,500 8,907 0 136,908 NOTE: Shadow Population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 21 for additional information.

6 Access and Functional Needs Population was not included in Table 3-11 as the spatial distribution of these people is unknown.

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

8 Assumed to evacuate from Zone 1.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 312. Summary of Vehicle Demand Transit Special Special Shadow External Zone Residents9 Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Schools10 Event Population11 Traffic Total 1 2,636 2 825 590 30 10 4,550 0 0 8,643 2 2,445 2 277 132 0 30 1,950 0 0 4,836 3 476 2 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 538 4 5,367 4 10,033 0 0 2 0 0 0 15,406 5 7,098 4 241 0 0 8 0 0 0 7,351 6 931 2 93 0 12 0 0 0 0 1,038 7 3,260 2 18 0 0 78 0 0 0 3,358 8 1,374 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,376 9 91 2 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 10 6,477 4 6,206 144 0 28 0 0 0 12,859 11 1,996 2 2,539 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,537 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,420 5,564 11,984 Total 32,151 28 20,322 866 42 156 6,500 6,420 5,564 72,049 9

Vehicles for residents on Bald Head Island are located within Zone 1.

10 Buses evacuating children from schools are represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 3.7 and Section 8 for additional information.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 31. Zones Comprising the BNP EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 321 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 322 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 323 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 324 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 325 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 326 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Brunswick Nuclear Plant 327 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SECTION 6 Evacuation Regions

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R01 2Mile Radius x x R02 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R03 NNW, N 328°009° x x x x x R04 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R05 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R06 NE 039°051° x x x x x R07 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R08 E 091°112° x x x x x R09 ESE x x x x R10 SE, SSE x x x x x x R11 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R12 S 180°195° x x x x x x R13 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R14 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R15 W 272°288° x x x x x R16 WNW x x x x R17 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R18 NW 317°327° x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 62. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R19 NNW, N 329°009° x x x x x R20 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R21 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R22 NE 039°051° x x x x x R23 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R24 E 091°112° x x x x x R25 ESE x x x x R26 SE, SSE x x x x x x R27 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R28 S 180°195° x x x x x x R29 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R30 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R31 W 272°288° x x x x x R32 WNW x x x x R33 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R34 NW 317°327° x x x x R35 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 63. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 10 Winter Evening Good None Weekend 4th of July 11 Summer Weekend Midday Good Festival in Southport Closure of a 12 Summer Midweek Midday Good segment of SR 211 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 64. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Households Households With Without External Returning Returning Special Medical School Transit Through Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Event Facilities Buses Buses Traffic 1 42.6% 57.4% 96% 75% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

2 42.6% 57.4% 96% 75% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

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

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

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

6 42.6% 57.4% 100% 35% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100%

7 42.6% 57.4% 100% 35% 21% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100%

8 4% 96% 10% 65% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100%

9 4% 96% 10% 65% 20% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100%

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

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

12 42.6% 57.4% 96% 75% 21% 0% 100% 10% 100% 100%

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 65. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario Households Households With Without External Total Returning Returning Special Medical School Transit Through Scenario Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Events Facilities Buses Buses Traffic Vehicles 1 13,682 18,469 831 15,242 6,586 42 16 28 5,564 60,460 2 13,682 18,469 831 15,242 6,586 42 16 28 5,564 60,460 3 1,368 30,783 87 20,322 6,438 42 28 5,564 64,632 4 1,368 30,783 87 20,322 6,438 42 28 5,564 64,632 5 1,368 30,783 87 4,064 6,438 42 28 2,226 45,036 6 13,682 18,469 866 7,113 6,593 42 156 28 5,564 52,513 7 13,682 18,469 866 7,113 6,593 42 156 28 5,564 52,513 8 1,368 30,783 87 13,209 6,438 42 28 5,564 57,519 9 1,368 30,783 87 13,209 6,438 42 28 5,564 57,519 10 1,368 30,783 87 3,048 6,438 42 28 2,226 44,020 11 1,368 30,783 87 20,322 6,438 6,500 42 28 5,564 71,132 12 13,682 18,469 831 15,242 6,586 42 16 28 5,564 60,460 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SECTION 7 General Population ETE

7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE)

This section presents the ETE results of the computer analyses using the DYNEV II model described in Appendices B, C and D. These results cover 35 regions within the Brunswick Nuclear Plant (BNP) Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and the 12 Evacuation Scenarios discussed in Section 6.

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

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

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

The ETE for the BNP EPZ addresses the issue of shadow evacuees in the manner shown in Figure

71. Within the EPZ, 20 percent of permanent residents located in Zones outside of the evacuation region who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate. Similarly, it is assumed that 20 percent of those people in the Shadow Region will choose to leave the area.

Figure 72 presents the area identified as the Shadow Region. This region extends radially from the plant to cover a region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles. The population and number of evacuating vehicles in the Shadow Region were estimated using the same methodology that was used for permanent residents within the EPZ (see Section 3.1). As discussed in Section 3.2, it is estimated that a total of 44,535 people reside in the Shadow Region; 20 percent of them would evacuate. See Table 65 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

1. Zones comprising the 2mile region are advised to evacuate immediately.

2. Zones comprising regions extending from 2mile to the EPZ boundary downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the 2mile region is cleared.

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2mile region, people from 2mile to the EPZ boundary downwind continue preparation for evacuation while they shelter.

4. The population sheltering in the 2miletoEPZ boundary region is advised to evacuate when approximately 90% of the 2mile region evacuating traffic crosses the 2mile region boundary.

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

See Section 5.4.2 for additional information on staged evacuation. To avoid counting vehicles from outside of the 2mile region that utilize Long Beach Rd SE/SR 133 between SR 211 and SR 87 that could skew the results, this stretch of roadway was considered to be outside of the 2 mile region for the staged evacuation analysis.

7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation Figure 73 through Figure 711 illustrate the patterns of traffic congestion that arise for the case when the entire EPZ (Region R02) is advised to evacuate during the summer, weekend, midday period under good weather conditions (Scenario 3).

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

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

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

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

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

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Figure 73 shows people starting to mobilize and initial signs of congestion developing within the major transient population centers of Oak Island, Kure Beach and Carolina Beach, just 20 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE). Note that SR211, a primary evacuation route, is already experiencing LOS E in some parts of the EPZ. Congestion begins to develop on SR133 and the Swains Cut Bridge (SR906) as the evacuees leaving Oak Island have only two routing options. Similar to Oak Island, US421 in Carolina Beach a is also congested as this is the only exit route off of the island to the east of BNP.

At one hour and 15 minutes after the ATE, Figure 74 displays significant congestion within the major population centers and transient attractions of Oak Island, Kure Beach, Carolina Beach.

Residents in St. James have begun mobilizing and congestion has developed in St. James. Since evacuees from St. James utilize many of the same evacuation routes as evacuees from Oak Island, these roadways are capacity constrained. As a result, SR211, SR133 and SR 906/Middleton Blvd all exhibit LOS F conditions. Congestion along SR211 extends from the EPZ boundary all the way into Southport. This has encouraged many evacuees in the area to seek alternative routes to the north, primarily along SR133 and SR87. SR87 also exhibits LOS F conditions as vehicles evacuating from Southport, Oak Island, and part of St. James mix with vehicles evacuating from Boiling Spring Lakes leaving this roadway capacity constrained as well.

US 421 leaving Carolina and Kure Beaches is also severely congested as it is the only evacuation route leaving the island and must service the entire evacuating demand on the island. In addition, queues develop as evacuees attempt to access US17 - a primary evacuation route leading to major population centers and reception centers beyond the study area. SR133 north of Southport is experiencing mild traffic condition LOS B or better toward the EPZ boundary.

At this time, 52% of evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and 17% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, as shown in Figure 75, congestion has worsened in St.

James, and persists in Oak Island, Carolina Beach and Kure Beach. Congestion persists along SR 211, US421, SR906/Middleton Blvd, and SR133. SR87 is still experiencing LOS F north of Southport as vehicles from Oak Island and St. James divert northbound on SR133 to SR87 rather than evacuate along SR211, which is severely overloaded and congested. In the Shadow Region, US17 experiences heavy congestion as there is insufficient capacity to process the high demand of evacuating vehicles. Congestion on SR133 has worsened - now operating at LOS D or better - from the intersection with SR87 northbound to the EPZ boundary. At this time, about 84% of evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and 42% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, congestion has cleared in Southport and along SR133 north of Southport, as shown in Figure 76. Congestion still persists on Oak Island, in St. James, and along SR211, SR87, US421 SR906/Middleton Blvd, and SR133 south of SR87.

Congestion is beginning to lessen in Kure and Carolina Beaches. At this time, about 95% of Brunswick Nuclear Plant 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and 59% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, congestion is finally starting to dissipate in Carolina Beach and Kure Beach, as well as in St. James and Oak Island, as shown in Figure 77.

Congested conditions remain on SR211, SR133, SR87, US421, and SR906/Middleton Blvd, as well as along US 17 in the Shadow Region. Although still very overwhelmed, these roadways are slowly processing the evacuation demand. At this time, approximately 99% of evacuees have begun their evacuation trip and 74% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, congestion is fully cleared within New Hanover County portion of the EPZ and Shadow Region. Region R01 (2Mile region) is mostly cleared of congestion with the exception of the western boundary of Zone 2 along SR133. Congestion persists in St. James at the two western exits of that community. Oak Island Drive (and several side roads on the island), SR211, SR906/Middleton Blvd, and SR133 that discharges traffic from Oak Island still exhibit LOS F conditions. See Figure 78. Nearly all evacuees have mobilized at this time and 87% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE, congestion is mostly cleared within EPZ except a small portion of St. James and Oak Island. Seafield Dr, Pine Forest Dr, and Members Club Blvd (along with some minor roadways within St. James) are still exhibiting LOS F conditions in St. James.

SR211, SR906/Middleton Blvd, and SR133 that discharges traffic from Oak Island are also all still exhibiting LOS F conditions. See Figure 79. Congestion along US 17 in the Shadow Region has cleared. At this time, all evacuees have mobilized and 94% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

At 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 15 minutes after the ATE, congestion has fully cleared on Oak Island, as shown in Figure 710. At this time, the only area with congestion in the EPZ is St. James (potentially due to the number of roundabouts within the community that have a low capacity) and along SR 906/Midway Rd due to vehicles diverting northbound to access US17 to avoid the traffic along SR211. Parts of SR211 exhibit LOS F conditions at the EPZ boundary and in the Shadow Region. At this time, 98% of evacuees have successfully evacuated the EPZ.

Figure 711 shows the last bit of congestion within the EPZ at 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 30 minutes after the ATE. The last areas to clear are Seafield Dr and Pine Forest Dr in St. James and SR906/Midway Rd at the intersection with Gilbert Rd. The EPZ finally clears 15 minutes later at 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and 45 minutes after the ATE.

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 712 through Figure 723. These Figures indicate the rate at which traffic flows out of the indicated areas for the case of an evacuation of the full EPZ (Region R02) under the indicated conditions. One figure is presented for each scenario considered.

As indicated in Figure 712 through Figure 723, there is typically a long "tail" to these distributions. Vehicles begin to evacuate an area slowly at first, as people respond to the ATE Brunswick Nuclear Plant 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

at different rates. Then traffic demand builds rapidly (slopes of curves increase). When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand.

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

7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results Table 71 and Table 72 present the ETE values for all 35 Evacuation Regions and all 12 Evacuation Scenarios. Table 73 and Table 74 present the ETE values for the 2Mile region for both staged and unstaged keyhole regions downwind to the EPZ boundary. They are organized as follows:

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

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

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

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

The animation snapshots described above reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (un staged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure 711. Most of the congestion is located beyond the 2Mile region; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R01 (2mile region) generally range between 2:55 (hr:min) and 3:20 for all scenarios excluding the special event.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The 90th percentile ETE for Regions R02 (full EPZ) range between 4:25 and 6:35 for all scenarios excluding the special event.

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R02 (full EPZ) is on average 45 minutes longer for all summer scenarios than winter scenarios, excluding evening scenarios due to the large transient population within the EPZ.

The 90th percentile ETE for Regions R02 and R04 through R08, wherein Zone 4 (Oak Island) evacuates, are on average 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 50 minutes longer than regions that do not include Zone 4 for nonspecial scenarios. The 90th percentile ETEs are longer when Zones 4 and 5 (St. James) evacuate together than when 4 evacuates without Zone 5.

Similar results can be seen at the 100th percentile ETE with 55minute increases on average for Regions R02 and R04 through R08 than the other regions.

The 100th percentile ETE are dictated by the time to mobilize (and a 10minute travel time to the EPZ boundary) for all regions except midday scenarios for Regions R02 and R04 through R08. The large transient population present in Zone 4 overwhelms the roadway system creating congestion and prolonging ETE beyond the trip mobilization time. The congestion created by these vehicles, and therefore prolonged ETE, worsens when Zone 5 evacuates with Zone 4.

Comparison of Scenarios 3 and 11 indicates that the Special Event - 4th of July Festival in Southport - has a significant impact on ETE at both the 90th and 100th percentile for all regions (up to 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> for 90th percentile and up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> for 100th percentile), as shown in Table 71 and Table 72. The additional 6,500 vehicles present for the special event further overwhelm the roadway network and exacerbate congestion. As a result, ETE increases. The results of the special event scenario indicate that events that draw a large number of transients into the EPZ can significantly worsen congestion and impact ETE. If possible, advanced evacuation notification should be given to event attendees to remove them from the traffic stream should an evacuation of the EPZ be deemed necessary later.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 12 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure - closure of a roadway segment of SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way SE does have a material impact on the 90th percentile ETE for some regions. The 90th percentile ETE for keyhole regions with wind from the east (Regions R04 through R11), and an evacuation of the entire EPZ (R02), experience increases up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes. Wind from this direction carries the plume over Zones 4, 5, and 6 which routes traffic onto SR211 westbound. With a segment of this road closed, evacuees are detoured onto Midway Rd SE northbound towards US17. Evacuation regions that do not depend upon SR211 for evacuation are not materially impacted by the roadway closure. The 100th percentile ETE increases by as much as 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 55 minutes for nonstaged cases.

The results of the roadway impact scenario indicate that events such as adverse weather or traffic incidents, which could reduce or eliminate the capacity of SR211 could impact ETE. State and local police could consider traffic management tactics such as using the shoulder of the roadway as a travel lane or rerouting of traffic along other evacuation routes to avoid overwhelming SR211. If flooding is anticipated along SR211, state and local police may Brunswick Nuclear Plant 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

consider alerting the public of new routing patterns to lessen congestion on Midway Rd and SR 133.

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 73 and Table 74 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (un staged) and staged evacuation studies. Note that Regions R19 through R34, and R35 are the same geographic areas as Regions R03 through 18, and R02, respectively. As previously mentioned, Long Beach Rd SE/SR 133 between SR 211 and SR 87 was considered to be outside of the 2mile region for the staged evacuation analysis to avoid counting vehicles from outside of the 2mile region that utilize this section of roadway that could skew the results.

The objective of a staged evacuation strategy is to show that the ETE for the 2mile radius can be significantly reduced (30 minutes or 25%, whichever is less) without significantly impacting the region between 2 miles to the EPZ boundary. When evacuating the entire EPZ (Region R02), the ETE for the 2mile region increase by as much as 25 minutes as shown in Table 73.

This is due to the traffic congestion on SR211 just outside the 2mile region. As shown in Figure 73 through Figure 711, congestion along SR211 persists just outside the 2mile region for about 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and delays the egress of those evacuees from within the 2mile region. When only the 2mile region is evacuated, the additional vehicles evacuating from surrounding Zones are not on the roadways and the 2mile region evacuees are not delayed. Despite the increase in ETE, the change in ETE does not meet the aforementioned criteria to be considered significant.

To determine whether the staged evacuation strategy is worthy of consideration, the ETE for Regions R02 and R03 through R18 are compared to Region R35 and Regions R19 through R34, respectively, in Table 71 and Table 72. A comparison of ETE between these similar regions reveals that staging increases the 90th percentile ETE for those beyond 2 miles by at most 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes (see Table 71). Staging increases the 100th percentile ETE beyond the 2 mile region by at most 45 minutes (see Table 72). This extending of ETE is due to the delay in beginning the evacuation trip, experienced by those who shelter, plus the effect of the trip generation spike (significant volume of traffic beginning the evacuation trip at the same time) that follows their eventual ATE, in creating congestion within the EPZ area beyond 2 miles.

In summary, the staged evacuation option provides some benefit to those within 2 miles of BNP, but not enough to warrant a significant change, and adversely impacts many evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the BNP.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

1. Identify the applicable Scenario:

• Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

• Day of Week Midweek Weekend

• Time of Day Midday Evening

• Weather Condition Good Weather Rain

• Special Event 4th of July Festival in Southport Road Closure (closure of a roadway segment on SR211 from the intersection at Clemmons Rd SE to the intersection of Palmetto Creek Way)

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

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

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (7) and (9) for rain apply.

• The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes that public schools are not in session.

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

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

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

• Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of compass orientation: from N, NNE, NE, Brunswick Nuclear Plant 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

2 Miles (Region R01)

To EPZ Boundary (Regions R02 through R18)

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

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

• The columns of Table 71 and Table 72 are labeled with the Scenario numbers.

Identify the proper column in the selected Table using the Scenario number defined in Step 1.

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

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

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

• Sunday, August 10th at 10:00 PM (Summer, weekend, evening).

• It is raining.

• Win direction is from the northeast (NE).

• Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 2mile radius and downwind to EPZ boundary.

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

• A staged evacuation is not desired.

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

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

2. Enter Table 75 and locate the Region described as Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary for wind direction from the NE (towards the SW) and read Region R06 in the first column of that row.

3. Enter Table 71 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for Scenario 4 and Region R06. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R06; it contains the ETE value of 7:00.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and EPZ R01 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R02 5:30 6:05 5:50 6:25 4:30 4:50 5:15 5:10 5:35 4:25 6:45 6:35 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R03 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:15 3:10 3:25 3:25 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:50 3:20 R04 4:35 4:55 5:15 5:45 3:20 3:40 3:50 4:15 4:35 3:05 5:50 5:10 R05 5:35 6:25 6:20 7:00 4:20 4:45 5:10 5:20 6:00 4:15 6:55 6:50 R06 5:35 6:25 6:20 7:00 4:20 4:45 5:10 5:20 6:00 4:15 6:55 6:50 R07 5:55 6:35 6:30 7:10 4:45 5:10 5:30 5:30 6:10 4:35 7:25 7:25 R08 5:40 6:25 6:15 6:55 4:40 4:55 5:30 5:15 5:55 4:35 7:15 7:00 R09 4:10 4:20 4:15 4:30 3:50 4:00 4:10 4:00 4:10 3:45 6:10 4:35 R10 3:40 3:45 3:25 3:35 3:25 3:45 3:50 3:20 3:30 3:25 5:40 3:50 R11 3:55 4:20 3:55 4:15 3:35 3:50 4:05 3:50 4:00 3:40 5:35 4:35 R12 3:30 3:40 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:35 3:40 3:10 3:25 3:20 5:00 3:30 R13 3:55 4:20 4:25 4:45 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:40 4:00 3:10 5:00 3:55 R14 3:55 4:20 4:25 4:50 3:05 3:20 3:25 3:40 4:00 3:10 5:00 3:55 R15 3:10 3:15 2:50 3:05 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:55 2:55 3:10 5:35 3:10 R16 3:10 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:50 2:50 3:05 5:35 3:10 R17 3:10 3:10 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:20 3:20 2:50 2:50 3:05 5:35 3:10 R18 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 710 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:40 5:50 3:40 R20 4:35 4:55 5:15 5:45 4:35 4:30 4:40 4:20 4:40 4:35 5:50 5:10 R21 5:40 6:25 6:20 7:00 5:25 5:20 5:35 5:30 6:00 5:25 7:05 6:50 R22 5:40 6:25 6:20 7:00 5:25 5:20 5:35 5:30 6:00 5:25 7:05 6:50 R23 6:00 6:35 6:30 7:10 5:25 5:30 5:50 5:45 6:10 5:30 7:30 7:25 R24 6:00 6:25 6:15 6:55 5:25 5:30 5:40 5:45 6:05 5:25 7:20 7:10 R25 4:50 5:05 4:45 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:55 4:50 4:55 4:55 6:15 5:10 R26 4:25 4:35 4:15 4:30 4:20 4:25 4:35 4:15 4:30 4:20 5:50 4:25 R27 5:00 5:05 4:50 5:05 4:55 4:55 5:00 4:55 4:55 4:55 5:55 5:25 R28 4:20 4:30 4:15 4:25 4:20 4:20 4:30 4:20 4:25 4:20 5:20 4:20 R29 4:25 4:30 4:25 4:50 4:30 4:30 4:35 4:25 4:30 4:35 5:00 4:25 R30 4:25 4:30 4:25 4:50 4:35 4:30 4:40 4:25 4:35 4:35 5:00 4:25 R31 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:45 3:45 5:35 3:45 R32 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 5:35 3:40 R33 3:40 3:40 3:35 3:40 3:45 3:45 3:45 3:40 3:40 3:45 5:35 3:40 R34 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R35 5:35 6:05 5:55 6:40 5:15 5:20 5:30 5:30 5:50 5:20 6:55 6:45 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 711 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Entire 2Mile Region and EPZ R01 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R02 7:05 7:50 7:45 8:45 5:55 5:55 6:40 6:50 7:30 5:55 8:35 9:00 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R03 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R04 5:55 6:00 6:20 6:45 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:05 6:10 R05 6:55 7:45 7:40 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:00 5:55 8:10 8:05 R06 6:55 7:45 7:40 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:00 5:55 8:10 8:05 R07 7:00 7:50 7:45 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:35 6:40 7:10 5:55 8:35 8:55 R08 7:00 7:40 7:45 8:35 5:55 5:55 6:25 6:40 7:10 5:55 8:35 8:55 R09 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 6:00 R10 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R11 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R12 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:20 5:55 R13 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R14 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R15 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:55 5:55 R16 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R17 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R18 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 712 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R20 5:55 6:00 6:20 6:45 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:05 6:10 R21 6:55 7:45 7:50 8:35 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:40 7:00 6:20 8:35 8:25 R22 6:55 7:45 7:50 8:35 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:40 7:00 6:20 8:35 8:25 R23 7:00 7:50 7:50 8:35 6:25 6:25 6:45 6:50 7:10 6:20 8:35 9:10 R24 7:00 7:40 7:45 8:35 6:15 6:25 6:45 6:50 7:10 6:15 8:35 9:10 R25 6:00 6:00 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:50 6:10 R26 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:35 5:55 R27 6:10 6:15 5:55 6:20 6:00 5:55 6:10 6:00 6:00 5:55 7:55 6:40 R28 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:40 5:55 R29 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R30 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R31 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 7:00 5:55 R32 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R33 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 5:55 6:50 5:55 R34 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R35 7:05 7:50 7:55 8:45 6:25 6:35 6:55 6:50 7:30 6:20 8:40 9:10 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 713 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R01 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R02 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:35 3:35 3:10 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:35 R03 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R04 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:35 R05 3:25 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:30 R06 3:25 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:30 R07 3:30 3:35 3:20 3:25 3:15 3:30 3:30 3:15 3:20 3:20 6:00 3:35 R08 3:35 3:35 3:20 3:20 3:15 3:25 3:25 3:15 3:20 3:20 5:55 3:35 R09 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R10 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R11 3:20 3:25 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:05 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R12 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R13 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:05 3:10 5:55 3:20 R14 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R15 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R16 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R17 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R18 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 714 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R20 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R21 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R22 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R23 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R24 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R25 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R26 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R27 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R28 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R29 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R30 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R31 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R32 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R33 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R34 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 R35 3:20 3:20 2:55 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:20 3:00 3:00 3:10 5:55 3:20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R01 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R02 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R03 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R04 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R05 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R06 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R07 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R08 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R09 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R10 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R11 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R12 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R13 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R14 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R15 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R16 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R17 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R18 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good Special Roadway Rain Rain Rain Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Event Impact Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R19 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R20 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R21 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:55 5:50 R22 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:55 5:50 R23 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 7:10 5:50 R24 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R25 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R26 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R27 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R28 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R29 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R30 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R31 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R32 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R33 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R34 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 R35 5:50 5:50 5:45 5:45 5:45 5:50 6:20 5:45 5:45 5:45 6:50 5:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R01 2Mile Radius x x R02 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R03 NNW, N 328°009° x x x x x R04 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R05 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R06 NE 039°051° x x x x x R07 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R08 E 091°112° x x x x x R09 ESE x x x x R10 SE, SSE x x x x x x Site Specific ESE, SE, 113°179° x x x x x x x R11 SSE R12 S 180°195° x x x x x x R13 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R14 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R15 W 272°288° x x x x x R16 WNW x x x x R17 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R18 NW 317°327° x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 76. Descriptions of Evacuation Regions Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: Site PAR Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R19 NNW, N 329°009° x x x x x R20 NNE 010°021° x x x x x x R21 Site Specific NNE 022°038° x x x x x x x R22 NE 039°051° x x x x x R23 ENE 052°090° x x x x x x R24 E 091°112° x x x x x R25 ESE x x x x R26 SE, SSE x x x x x x R27 Site Specific ESE, SE, SSE 113°179° x x x x x x x R28 S 180°195° x x x x x x R29 SSW, SW 196°236° x x x x x x R30 WSW 237°271° x x x x x x R31 W 272°288° x x x x x R32 WNW x x x x R33 Site Specific WNW 289°316° x x x x x R34 NW 317°327° x x x x R35 Full EPZ ALL ZONES IN EPZ x x x x x x x x x x x x x ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Brunswick Nuclear Plant 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SECTION 8 Transit Dependent and AFN Population

8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES This section details the analyses applied and the results obtained in the form of evacuation time estimates for transit vehicles, buses, ambulances and wheelchair transport vehicles. The demand for transit service reflects the needs of three population groups:

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

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

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

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

Specifically:

• Bus drivers must be alerted

• They must travel to the bus depot

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

During this mobilization period, other mobilization activities are taking place. One of these is the action taken by parents, neighbors, relatives and friends to pick up children from school prior to the arrival of buses, so that they may join their families. Virtually all studies of evacuations have concluded that this bonding process of uniting families is universally prevalent during emergencies and should be anticipated in the planning process. The current public information disseminated to residents of the BNP EPZ indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to a relocation school/pickup locations at emergency were ordered, and that parents should pick schoolchildren up at pickup facilities. As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a rapidly escalating event. Therefore, children are evacuated to relocation schools/pickup facilities. Picking up children at school could add to traffic congestion at the schools, delaying the departure of the buses evacuating schoolchildren, which may have to return in a subsequent wave to the EPZ to evacuate the transitdependent population. This report provides estimates of buses under the assumption that no children will be picked up by their parents (in accordance with NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1), to present an upper bound estimate of buses required. It is assumed that children at preschools/childcare centers are picked up by parents or guardians unless transportation resources are available to that facility. Nonetheless, the buses required to evacuate all preschools/childcare centers were included in this ETE study to present a conservative estimate of the total buses required.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The procedure for computing transitdependent ETE is to:

• Estimate demand for transit service

• Estimate time to perform all transit functions

• Estimate route travel times to the EPZ boundary and to the Relocation Schools and Evacuation Shelters or Reception Centers Evacuation Time Estimates for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. Figure 81 presents the chronology of events relevant to transit operations. The elapsed time for each activity will now be discussed with reference to Figure 81.

8.1 ETEs for Schools/Preschools/Childcare Centers, Transit Dependent People, and Medical Facilities EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if school is in session at the time of the Advisory to Evacuate [ATE]) as the first priority in the event of an emergency. In the event that the allocation of buses dispatched from the depots to the various facilities and to the bus routes is somewhat inefficient, or if there is a shortfall of available drivers, then there may be a need for some buses to return to the EPZ from the evacuation shelter after completing their first evacuation trip, to complete a second wave of providing transport service to evacuees. For this reason, the ETE for the transitdependent population was calculated for both a one wave transit evacuation and for two waves. Of course, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R02 (the entire EPZ), then there will likely be ample transit resources relative to demand in the impacted Region and this discussion of a second wave would likely not apply. A list of available transportation resources was provided by New Hanover County and was assumed to be the same as the previous study for Brunswick County. The list of available resources is shown in Table 81. Also included in the table is the number of buses needed to evacuate schools, medical facilities, transitdependent population, and access and/or functional needs (discussed below in Section 8.2). These numbers indicate there are sufficient resources available to evacuate everyone in a single wave for schools, transitdependent population, medical facilities, and access and/or functional needs population. It is assumed that there are enough drivers available to man all resources listed in Table 81.

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

School and Preschool/Childcare Centers Evacuation Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization is the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate until the time the buses arrive at the facility to be evacuated. As discussed in item 4 of Section 2.4, it is assumed that for a rapidly escalating radiological emergency with no observable indication before the fact, drivers would likely require 90 minutes to be contacted, to travel to the depot, be briefed, and to travel Brunswick Nuclear Plant 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

to the schools, preschools and childcare centers that will be evacuated. Mobilization time is 10 minutes longer in rain to account for slower travel speeds and reduced roadway capacity.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

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

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The buses servicing the schools/preschools/childcare centers are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the advisory to evacuate - 90 minutes mobilization time plus 15 minutes loading time - in good weather. The UNITES software discussed in Section 1.3 was used to define bus routes along the most likely path from a school/preschool/childcare center being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate relocation school/pickup point. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes from the school to the EPZ boundary. Each bus route is given an identification number and is written to the DYNEV II input stream. DYNEV computes the route length and outputs the average speed for each 5minute interval, for each bus route. The specified bus routes are documented in Table 102 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). Data provided by DYNEV during the appropriate timeframe depending on the mobilization and loading times (i.e., 90 to 105 minutes after the advisory to evacuate for good weather) were used to compute the average speed for each route, as follows:

60 .

1 .

. 60 .

. . 1 .

The average speed computed (using this methodology) for the buses servicing each of the schools/preschools/childcare centers in the EPZ is shown in Table 82 and Table 83 for school/preschool/childcare center evacuation. The travel time to the EPZ boundary was computed for each bus using the computed average speed and the distance to the EPZ boundary along the most likely route out of the EPZ. The travel time from the EPZ boundary to the relocation school/pickup point was computed assuming an average speed of 45 mph and 40 mph for good weather and rain, respectively. Speeds were reduced in Table 82 and Table 83 to 45 mph (40 mph for rain - 10% decrease) for those calculated bus speeds which exceed 45 mph, as the school bus speed limit for state routes in North Carolina is 45 mph.

Table 82 (good weather) and Table 83 (rain) present the following evacuation time estimates (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for schools/preschools/childcare centers in the EPZ:

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

The evacuation time out of the EPZ can be computed as the sum of times associated with Activities ABC, CD, and DE (For example: 90 min + 15 + 64 = 2:50 for Childcare Network, with good weather). (Here, 64 minutes is the time to travel 14.4 miles at 13.5mph.)

The average singlewave ETE, for schools and day cares, is 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 10 minutes (4:50 2:40 =

2:10) less than the 90th percentile ETE for evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R02) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and will not impact protective action decision making.

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

Activity: Travel to Relocation Schools (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the relocation schools/pickup points are measured using GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the relocation school (pickup point). The relocation schools are mapped in Figure 103. For a onewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. Assumed bus speeds of 45 mph and 40 mph for good weather and rain, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the schools, preschools, and childcare centers.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

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

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

As shown in Table 81, there are sufficient resources for evacuation of schoolchildren in a single wave. In the event there are not enough drivers to staff the buses, the following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation of schools, preschools, and childcare centers. The travel time from the relocation school back to the EPZ boundary and then back to the school was computed assuming an average speed of 45 mph and 40 mph in good weather and rain, respectively, as buses will be traveling against evacuating traffic. Times and distances are based on averages for all schools in the EPZ for good weather:

• Buses arrive at the pickup facility at 2:50 (see average value in Table 82)

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

• Bus returns to facility: 17 minutes (average distance to pickup facility (3.2 miles) +

average distance to EPZ boundary (9.9 miles) at 45 mph)

• Loading Time: 15 minutes

• Bus completes second wave of service along route: 44 minutes (average distance to EPZ boundary (9.9 miles) at network wide average speed at 3:40 (13.54 mph))

• Bus exits EPZ at time 2:50 + 0:15 + 0:17 + 0:15 + 0:44 = 4:25 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Given the average singlewave ETE for schools is 2:40 (see Table 82); a second wave evacuation would require an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 45 minutes on average. The average twowave ETE of schools is less than the 90th percentile ETE of the full EPZ during a winter, midweek, midday scenario (Scenario 6), which will not impact protective action decision making.

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

A detailed computation of transit dependent population was done and is discussed in Section 3.6. The total number of transit dependent people per Zone was determined using a weighted distribution based on population. See Table 311 for the distribution used. The number of buses required to evacuate this population was determined by the capacity of 30 people per bus and assuming at least one route per Zone (except Zone 12 since it has no population). KLD designed 11 bus routes to service the major evacuation routes in each Zone, for the purposes of this study. Zone 13 was grouped with Zone 1 as that is where they will catch the bus. The pre defined bus routes (as discussed in Section 10) are shown graphically in Figure 102 and described in Table 101. Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along these routes, then proceed out of the EPZ.

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization time is the elapsed time from the ATE until the time the buses arrive at their designated route. The buses dispatched from the depots to service the transitdependent evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after majority of their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), approximately 75% of the evacuees will have completed their mobilization when the buses will begin their routes, approximately 135 minutes after the ATE for good weather.

Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather - 145 minutes in rain.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

For multiple stops along a pickup route (transitdependent bus routes) estimation of travel time must allow for the delay associated with stopping and starting at each pickup point. The time, t, required for a bus to decelerate at a rate, a, expressed in ft/sec/sec, from a speed, v, expressed in ft/sec, to a stop, is t = v/a. Assuming the same acceleration rate and final speed following the stop yields a total time, T, to service boarding passengers:

2 ,

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

Assigning reasonable estimates:

• B = 50 seconds: a generous value for a single passenger, carrying personal items, to board per stop Brunswick Nuclear Plant 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• v = 25 mph = 37 ft/sec

• a = 4 ft/sec/sec, a moderate average rate Then, P 1 minute per stop. Allowing 30 minutes pickup time per bus run implies 30 stops per run, for good weather. It is assumed that bus acceleration and speed will be less in rain; total loading time is 35 minutes per bus in rain.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

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

Table 84 and Table 85 present the transitdependent population ETEs for each bus route calculated using the above procedures (as discussed under Schools, Preschools, and Childcare Centers Evacuation) for good weather, and rain respectively.

For example, the ETE for the first bus servicing Zone 1 (including Zone 13) is computed as 135 +

23 + 30 = 3:10 for good weather (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 23 minutes is the time to travel 17.5 miles at 44.9 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route starting at 135 minutes.

The average single wave ETE for the transitdependent population does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario.

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

Activity: Travel to Evacuation Shelters/Reception Centers (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the Evacuation Shelters/Reception Centers are measured using GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center. The Evacuation Shelters and Reception Centers are mapped in Figure 103. For a onewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ does not contribute to the ETE. For a twowave evacuation, the ETE for buses must be considered separately since it could exceed the ETE for the general population. Assumed bus speeds of 45 mph and 40 mph for good weather and rain, respectively, were applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

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

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

The buses assigned to return to the EPZ to perform a second wave evacuation of transit dependent evacuees will be those that have already evacuated transitdependent people who mobilized more quickly. The first wave of transitdependent people departs the bus, and the bus then returns to the EPZ, travels to its route and proceeds to pick up more transit Brunswick Nuclear Plant 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

dependent evacuees along the route. The travel time back to the EPZ is equal to the travel time to the Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center.

The secondwave ETE for the first bus route servicing Zone 1 is computed as follows for good weather:

• Bus arrives at evacuation shelter/reception center at 3:25 in good weather (3:10 to exit EPZ + 15minute travel time to Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center).

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

• Bus returns to EPZ, travels back to the start of route, and completes second route:

15 minutes (equal to travel time to evacuation shelter/reception center) + 48 minutes (17.5 miles @ 45 mph [assumed speed since bus is traveling against traffic]

+ 17.5 miles @ 43 mph [route specific speed output from the model at this time]) =

63 minutes

• Bus completes pickups along route: 30 minutes.

• Bus exits EPZ at time 3:10 + 0:15 + 0:15 + 1:03 + 0:30 = 5:15 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the Advisory to Evacuate.

The ETE for the completion of the second wave for all transitdependent bus routes are provided in Table 84 and Table 85. The average ETE (5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 25 minutes) for a twowave evacuation of the transitdependent population is 35 minutes longer than the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R02) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather conditions (Scenario 6) and could impact protective action decision making. The relocation of transitdependent evacuees from the evacuation shelters/reception centers to congregate care centers, if the counties decide to do so, is not considered in this study.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

As discussed in Section 2.4, it is assumed that the mobilization time for medical facilities average 90 minutes in good weather, 100 minutes in rain. Specially trained medical support staff (working their regular shift) will be on site to assist in the evacuation of patients.

Additional staff (if needed) could be mobilized over this same 90minute timeframe.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

Item 5 of assumption 2.4 discusses transit vehicle loading times for medical facilities. Loading times are assumed to be 1 minute per ambulatory passenger, 5 minutes per wheelchair bound passenger, and 15 minutes per bedridden passenger for buses, wheelchair buses/vans, and ambulances, respectively. Item 3 of Section 2.4 discusses transit vehicle capacities to cap loading times per vehicle type. Loading times were not adjusted for rain for medical facilities.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Bus travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds Brunswick Nuclear Plant 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school, preschool, and childcare center evacuation.

Table 86 and Table 87 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather and rain, respectively. Average speeds output by the model for Scenario 6 (Scenario 7 for rain) Region 2, capped at 45 mph (40 mph for rain), are used to compute travel time to EPZ boundary. The travel time to the EPZ boundary is computed by dividing the distance to the EPZ boundary by the average travel speed. The ETE is the sum of the mobilization time, total passenger loading time, and travel time out of the EPZ. Concurrent loading on multiple buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances at capacity is assumed. All ETE are rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, the calculation of ETE for the J Arthur Dosher Memorial Hospital with 16 ambulatory residents during good weather is:

1. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the facility location: 90 minutes

b. Load ambulatory patients: 16 people x 1 minute per person = 16 minutes

c. Travel to EPZ boundary: 60 minutes (14.0 miles @ 13.9 mph)

ETE: 90 + 16 + 60 = 166 min. or 2:50 rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

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

The average single wave ETE for medical facilities in the EPZ does not exceed the 90th percentile ETE for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario.

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

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

The following representative ETE is provided to estimate the additional time needed for a second wave evacuation using school buses after the schools have been evacuated. Times and distances are based on facilitywide averages:

• Buses arrive at pickup facility at 2:44 (2:40 to exit the EPZ + estimated 4minute travel time average travel time to RC/PP calculated from Table 82)

• Bus discharges passengers (39 minutes - average loading time from Table 86) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 49 minutes.

• Bus returns to EPZ and completes second route: 4 minutes to travel back to the EPZ boundary (equal to the average travel time to reception center for good weather from Table 82) + 16 minutes to travel back to the facility (average distance to EPZ -

12.2 miles from Table 86 @ 45 mph) = 20 minutes.

• Remaining ambulatory patients loaded on bus (maximum): 30 minutes (average from Table 86 capped at 30 passengers per bus).

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

• Bus travels to EPZ boundary: 23 minutes (average distance to EPZ boundary (12.2 miles) at 16.06 mph (network wide average speed at 4:25)

• Bus exits EPZ at time 2:44 + 0:49 + 0:20 + 0:30 + 0:23 = 4:50 (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes) after the ATE.

Thus, the second wave evacuation requires an additional 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 55 minutes (4:50 - 2:55).

The average ETE for a twowave evacuation of medical facilities is equaled the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile for the general population for a winter, midweek, midday, good weather scenario and will not impact protective action decision making.

8.2 ETE for Access and/or Functional Needs Population The access and/or functional needs population registered within the EPZ was provided by offsite agencies. Table 88 summarizes the ETE for access and/or functional needs people who would need transportation assistance in the event of an emergency. The table is categorized by type of vehicle required and then broken down by weather condition. The table takes into consideration the deployment of multiple vehicles to reduce the number of stops per vehicle.

Due to the limitations on driving for access and/or functional needs persons, it assumed they will be picked up from their homes. Furthermore, it is conservatively assumed that ambulatory and wheelchair bound access and/or functional needs households are spaced 3 miles apart and bedridden households are spaced 5 miles apart. Van and bus speeds approximate 20 mph between households and ambulance speeds approximate 30 mph. Mobilization times of 135 minutes were used (145 minutes for rain). The last household (HH) is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 45 mph (40 mph for rain), after the last pickup is used to compute travel time.

ETE is computed by summing mobilization time, loading time at first household, travel to subsequent households, loading time at subsequent households, and travel time to EPZ boundary. All ETE are rounded to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, assuming no more than one access and/or functional needs person per HH implies that 770 ambulatory households need to be serviced to gather the ambulatory access and/or functional needs population. While only 26 buses are needed from a capacity perspective, if 55 buses are deployed to service these HH, then each would require at most 14 stops. The following outlines the ETE calculations:

1. Assume 55 buses are deployed, each with about 14 stops, to service a total of 770 HH.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the first pickup location: 135 minutes

b. Load HH members at first pickup: 1 minutes

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

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

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 17 minutes (5 miles at 17.8 mph).

ETE: 135 + 1 + 117 + 13 + 17 = 283 minutes or 4:45 rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The average ETE of a one wave evacuation of the ambulatory access and/or functional needs population within the EPZ is less than the 90th percentile ETE for evacuation of the general population in the entire EPZ (Region R03) under winter, midweek, midday, good weather (Scenario 6) conditions and will not impact protective action decisionmaking.

Table 81. Summary of Transportation Resources Transportation Wheelchair Resource Buses Buses Ambulances Resources Available Brunswick County 82 11 11 New Hanover County 216 44 0 TOTAL: 298 55 11 Resources Needed Medical Facilities (Table 36): 7 7 14 Schools (Table 38): 78 0 0 Access and/or Functional Needs (Table 39): 55 48 68 TransitDependent Population (Section 3.6): 14 0 0 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 154 55 82 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

BRUNSWICK COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Childcare Network 90 15 14.4 13.5 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Southport Baptist Church Preschool 90 15 14.7 13.8 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Kids World Academy II 90 15 14.5 13.5 64 2:50 0.8 1 2:55 Southport Elementary School 90 15 11.5 12.0 57 2:45 6.4 9 2:55 L & L Montessori School 90 15 13.6 9.1 90 3:15 0.9 1 3:20 Sharon's Childcare 90 15 13.5 7.2 112 3:40 0.9 1 3:45 Kids World Academy 90 15 12.9 14.8 52 2:40 0.8 1 2:45 Southport Christian School 90 15 12.6 11.9 63 2:50 0.9 1 2:55 South Brunswick High School 90 15 8.6 10.6 49 2:35 8.1 11 2:50 South Brunswick Middle School 90 15 7.6 8.9 51 2:40 13.2 18 3:00 Learn and Play 90 15 6.2 18.9 20 2:05 0.8 1 2:10 NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Carolina Beach After School Program 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Carolina Beach Elementary 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Island Time DropNPlay 90 15 3.0 9.3 19 2:05 3.3 4 2:10 Maximum for EPZ: 3:40 Maximum: 3:45 Average for EPZ: 2:40 Average: 2:50 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 83. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers Evacuation Time Estimates Rain Travel Time Travel from Dist. To Time Dist. EPZ EPZ Driver Loading EPZ Average to EPZ Bdry to Bdry to ETA to Mobilization Time Bdry Speed Bdry ETE RC/PP RC/PP RC/PP School Time (min) (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

BRUNSWICK COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Childcare Network 100 20 14.4 10.7 81 3:25 0.8 1 3:30 Southport Baptist Church Preschool 100 20 14.7 10.9 81 3:25 0.8 1 3:30 Kids World Academy II 100 20 14.5 10.7 81 3:25 0.8 1 3:30 Southport Elementary School 100 20 11.5 10.9 63 3:05 6.4 10 3:15 L & L Montessori School 100 20 13.6 7.9 104 3:45 0.9 1 3:50 Sharon's Childcare 100 20 13.5 5.9 137 4:20 0.9 1 4:25 Kids World Academy 100 20 12.9 13.1 59 3:00 0.8 1 3:05 Southport Christian School 100 20 12.6 9.7 78 3:20 0.9 1 3:25 South Brunswick High School 100 20 8.6 9.0 57 3:00 8.1 12 3:15 South Brunswick Middle School 100 20 7.6 7.9 58 3:00 13.2 20 3:20 Learn and Play 100 20 6.2 18.0 21 2:25 0.8 1 2:30 NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS/CHILDCARE CENTERS Carolina Beach After School Program 100 20 3.0 7.6 24 2:25 3.3 5 2:30 Carolina Beach Elementary 100 20 3.0 7.6 24 2:25 3.3 5 2:30 Island Time DropNPlay 100 20 3.0 7.6 24 2:25 3.3 5 2:30 Maximum for EPZ: 4:20 Maximum: 4:25 Average for EPZ: 3:10 Average: 3:15 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 84. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Route Bus Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to E.S. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Servicing of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) E.S (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Zone 1 1 135 17.5 44.9 23 30 3:10 11.1 15 5 10 63 30 5:15 Zone 2 1 135 16.4 45.0 22 30 3:10 11.1 15 5 10 60 30 5:10 Zone 3 1 135 15.3 8.6 107 30 4:35 14.5 19 5 10 63 30 6:45 Zone 4 2 135 12.8 6.7 114 30 4:40 14.5 19 5 10 54 30 6:40 Zone 5 2 135 8.1 3.9 125 30 4:50 14.5 19 5 10 43 30 6:40 Zone 6 1 135 4.0 40.6 6 30 2:55 15.6 21 5 10 48 30 4:50 Zone 7 1 135 8.5 9.9 51 30 3:40 13.9 19 5 10 67 30 5:55 Zone 8 1 135 4.5 39.5 7 30 2:55 13.9 19 5 10 32 30 4:35 Zone 9 1 135 11.0 45.0 15 30 3:00 11.1 15 5 10 46 30 4:50 Zone 10 2 135 3.6 13.2 16 30 3:05 3.6 5 5 10 16 30 4:15 Zone 11 1 135 6.9 17.9 23 30 3:10 3.6 5 5 10 27 30 4:30 Maximum ETE: 4:50 Maximum ETE: 6:45 Average ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 5:25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 85. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Rain OneWave TwoWave Route Route Bus Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Travel Driver Travel Pickup Route Number Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to E.S. Time to Unload Rest Time Time ETE Servicing of Buses (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) E.S (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min)

Zone 1 1 145 17.5 33.3 32 35 3:35 11.1 17 5 10 67 35 5:50 Zone 2 1 145 16.4 33.5 29 35 3:30 11.1 17 5 10 63 35 5:40 Zone 3 1 145 15.3 7.4 124 35 5:05 14.5 22 5 10 66 35 7:25 Zone 4 2 145 12.8 5.1 149 35 5:30 14.5 22 5 10 60 35 7:45 Zone 5 2 145 8.1 3.3 147 35 5:30 14.5 22 5 10 47 35 7:30 Zone 6 1 145 4.0 39.0 6 35 3:10 15.6 23 5 10 53 35 5:20 Zone 7 1 145 8.5 8.5 60 35 4:00 13.9 21 5 10 91 35 6:45 Zone 8 1 145 4.5 35.8 8 35 3:10 13.9 21 5 10 35 35 5:00 Zone 9 1 145 11.0 40.0 17 35 3:20 11.1 17 5 10 48 35 5:15 Zone 10 2 145 3.6 9.9 22 35 3:25 3.6 5 5 10 17 35 4:40 Zone 11 1 145 6.9 14.0 30 35 3:30 3.6 5 5 10 28 35 4:55 Maximum ETE: 5:30 Maximum ETE: 7:45 Average ETE: 4:00 Average ETE: 6:00 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 86. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 90 1 52 30 13.8 57 3:00 Elmcroft of Southport Wheelchair bound 90 5 9 45 13.8 53 3:10 Ambulatory 90 1 38 30 14.0 58 3:00 Southport Health & 3:05 Wheelchair bound 90 5 7 35 14.0 57 Rehabilitation Center Bedridden 90 15 5 30 14.0 58 3:00 J Arthur Dosher Ambulatory 90 1 16 16 14.0 60 2:50 Memorial Hospital & Wheelchair bound 90 5 39 75 14.0 46 3:35 Skilled Nursing Center Bedridden 90 15 14 30 14.0 58 3:00 Ambulatory 90 1 41 30 7.5 10 2:10 The Landings of Oak Wheelchair bound 90 5 19 75 7.5 21 3:10 Island Bedridden 90 15 7 30 7.5 10 2:10 Maximum ETE: 3:35 Average ETE: 2:55 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 87. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Rain Travel Loading Time to Rate Total EPZ Mobilization (min per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 100 1 52 30 13.8 74 3:25 Elmcroft of Southport Wheelchair bound 100 5 9 45 13.8 67 3:35 Ambulatory 100 1 38 30 14.0 74 3:25 Southport Health &

Wheelchair bound 100 5 7 35 14.0 73 3:30 Rehabilitation Center Bedridden 100 15 5 30 14.0 74 3:25 J Arthur Dosher Ambulatory 100 1 16 16 14.0 79 3:15 Memorial Hospital & Wheelchair bound 100 5 39 75 14.0 54 3:50 Skilled Nursing Center Bedridden 100 15 14 30 14.0 74 3:25 Ambulatory 100 1 41 30 7.5 11 2:25 The Landings of Oak Wheelchair bound 100 5 19 75 7.5 11 3:10 Island Bedridden 100 15 7 30 7.5 11 2:25 Maximum ETE: 3:50 Average ETE: 3:15 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table 88. Access and/or Functional Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Total Travel Mobiliza Loading Loading Time to People tion Time at Travel to Time at EPZ Requiring Vehicles Weather Time 1st Stop Subsequent Subsequent Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Stops Conditions (min) (min) Stops (min) Stops (min) (min) (hr:min)

Good 135 117 17 4:45 Buses 770 55 14 1 13 Rain 145 130 24 5:15 Wheelchair Good 135 72 19 4:35 388 48 9 5 40 Buses Rain 145 80 25 4:55 Good 135 10 25 3:20 Ambulances 136 68 2 15 15 Rain 145 11 30 3:40 Maximum ETE: 5:15 Average ETE: 4:25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 817 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

(Subsequent Wave)

A B C D E F G Time Event A Advisory to Evacuate B Bus Dispatched from Depot C Bus Arrives at Facility/Pickup Route D Bus Departs for Relocation School or Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Relocation School or Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center G Bus Available for Second Wave Evacuation Service Activity AB Driver Mobilization BC Travel to Facility or to Pickup Route CD Passengers Board the Bus DE Bus Travels Towards Region Boundary EF Bus Travels Towards Relocation School or Evacuation Shelter/Reception Center Outside the EPZ FG Passengers Leave Bus; Driver Takes a Break Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations Brunswick Nuclear Plant 818 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX E Facility Data

E. FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of February 2022, for special facilities and transient attractions that are located within the BNP EPZ. Data for the schools and preschools/childcare centers are from the 20202021 school year. Special facilities are defined as schools, preschools/childcare centers, and medical facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for recreational areas (beaches, campgrounds, golf courses, historical sites, parks, marinas, and other recreational areas) and lodging facilities. OnTheMap employment data (see Section 3, Subsection 3.4) is summarized in the table for major employers.

Each table is grouped by county. The location of the facility is defined by its straightline distance (miles) and direction (magnetic bearing) from the center point of the plant. Maps of each school and preschool/childcare center, recreational area (beach, campground, golf course, historical site, park, marina, and other recreational area), lodging facility, and major employer are also provided.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E1. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers within the EPZ Distance Direc Enroll Zone (miles) tion School Name Street Address Municipality ment BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC 1 1.8 S Childcare Network 802 E Leonard St Southport 147 1 2.7 S Southport Baptist Church Preschool 200 N Howe St Southport 52 2 2.4 SSW Kids World Academy 713 N Caswell Ave Southport 29 2 2.6 SSW Southport Elementary School 701 W 9th St Southport 588 2 3.8 WSW L&L Montessori School 4150 Vanessa Dr Southport 51 4 6.9 WSW Sharon's Childcare 115 NE 43rd St Oak Island 8 5 2.5 W Kids World Academy II 4833 Gina St Southport 5 5 3.1 WSW Southport Christian School 4457A Flagship Ave SE Southport 120 7 4.1 NNW South Brunswick High School 280 Cougar Rd Southport 1,141 7 4.1 NNW South Brunswick Middle School 100 Cougar Rd Southport 729 7 5.3 NNW Learn and Play 45 E Boiling Spring Rd Southport 8 Brunswick County Subtotal: 2,878 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC 10 8.1 NE Carolina Beach After School Program 400 S 4th St Carolina Beach 82 10 8.1 NE Carolina Beach Elementary 400 S 4th St Carolina Beach 461 10 8.6 NE Island Time DropNPlay 222 Winner Ave Carolina Beach 62 New Hanover County Subtotal: 605 EPZ TOTAL: 3,483 Brunswick Nuclear Plant E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambula Wheel Bed Distance Direc Capa Current tory chair ridden Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality city Census Patients Patients Patients BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC 1 1.2 S Elmcroft of Southport 1125 E Leonard St Southport 96 61 52 9 0 Southport Health &

1 2.0 SSW Rehabilitation Center 630 Fodale Ave Southport 60 50 38 7 5 J Arthur Dosher Memorial 1 2.1 SSW Hospital & Skilled Nursing Center 924 N Howe St Southport N/A 69 16 39 14 6 6.4 W The Landings of Oak Island 2910 Pine Plantation Pkwy Bolivia 80 67 41 19 7 Brunswick County Subtotal: N/A 247 147 74 26 EPZ TOTAL: N/A 247 147 74 26 Table E3. Major Employers1 within the EPZ

% Employee Employees Employees Vehicles Distance Direc Employees Commuting Commuting Commuting Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality (Max Shift) into the EPZ into the EPZ into the EPZ BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC Various locations throughout the EPZ 1,180 61.4% 779 722 Brunswick County Subtotal: 1,180 779 722 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC Various locations throughout the EPZ 250 61.4% 154 144 New Hanover County Subtotal: 250 154 144 EPZ TOTAL: 1,430 933 866 1

The major employer locations identified by the Census Bureau are shown in Figure E-3. The locations are represented by circles which increase in size proportional to the number of employees commuting into the EPZ present in each census block. Note, the data for BNP (669 employees during maximum shift) was provided by Duke Energy. The numbers of employees in Brunswick County for the Census block that represents the plant have been adjusted accordingly.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E4. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Distance Dir Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC 1 1.5 SW Woodside RV & Trailer Park 1648 N Howe St Southport Campground 180 120 1 2.0 SSE Deep Point Marina & Yacht Club 1301 Ferry Rd Southport Marina 55 26 2 2.9 SSW Freedom Boat Club of Southport NC 606 W West St Southport Marina 8 5 2 2.9 SSW Southport Marina 606 W West St Southport Marina 76 35 2 3.1 SSW Indigo Plantation & Marina 6099 Indigo Plantation Dr Southport Marina 26 12 2 3.6 SW Dutchman Creek Park Fish Factory Rd SE Smithville Park 258 120 Oak Island Par 3 Golf Course at South 2 3.7 SW Harbour2 4188 Vanessa Dr Southport Golf Course Local residents only 2 3.8 SW Safe Harbor South Harbour Village 4909 Fish Factory Rd SE Southport Marina 22 10 3 5.1 SW Oak Island Golf Club 928 Caswell Rd Oak Island Golf Course 175 60 4 7.5 WSW Oak Island Recreation Center 3003 E Oak Island Dr Oak Island Other 49 49 4 Oak Island Beaches3 Beach 29,315 9,772 5 3.9 WSW Oak Island Campground 4125 Long Beach Rd SE Southport Campground 140 100 5 4.2 WSW The Player's Club 3684 Players Club Dr SE Southport Golf Course 8 4 5 5.5 W Reserve Golf Club 4061 Wydmere Dr Southport Golf Course 8 4 5 6.2 WSW Founders Club 3021 Beaver Creek Dr SE Southport Golf Course 8 4 5 6.5 W Members Club 3779 Members Club Blvd SE Southport Golf Course 8 4 5 7.0 WSW St James Marina 2571 Saint James Dr SE Southport Marina 42 20 7 5.6 NNW Lakes Country Club 591 South Shore Dr Southport Golf Course 38 18 9 6.8 NNE Brunswick Town Historical Museum 8884 Saint Philips Rd SE Winnabow Historical Site 100 30 13 5.7 S Bald Head Island Marina 6A Marina Wynd Bald Head Island Marina 334 155 13 6.7 S Bald Head Island Club 301 S Bald Head Wynd Bald Head Island Golf Course 60 38 13 Bald Head Island Beaches4 Bald Head Island Beach 815 379 Brunswick County Subtotal: 31,725 10,965 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC 10 8.1 NE Carolina Beach State Park 1011 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach Park 250 150 10 8.6 NE Carolina Beach State Park & Campground 1011 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach Campground 332 166 2

Local resident usage only. No transients have been considered at this facility to avoid double counting.

3 Transients are dispersed along the entire stretch of Oak Island, Carolina and Kure Beaches.

4 No vehicles are permitted on Bald Head Island. Daily visitors park at the Bald Head Island Ferry parking lot in Southport. The 379 vehicles calculated for Bald Head Island beaches are incorporated within Zone 1 for this study.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Dir Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Facility Type Transients Vehicles 10 8.7 NE Carolina Beach Municipal Marina 300 Canal Dr Carolina Beach Marina 156 72 10 8.9 NE Federal Point Yacht Club 910 Basin Rd Carolina Beach Marina 232 165 10 8.9 NE Mona Black Marina 930 St Joseph St Carolina Beach Marina 51 36 10 9.3 NE Otter Creek Landing Yacht Club 206 Lewis Dr Carolina Beach Marina 32 23 10 9.5 NE Harbour Point Yacht Club Green Turtle Ln Carolina Beach Marina 49 23 10 9.6 NE Waterfront Villas & Yacht Club 100 SpencerFarlow Dr Carolina Beach Marina 300 150 10 9.8 NE Carolina Beach Yacht Club and Marina 401 Marina St Carolina Beach Marina 63 30 10 9.9 NE Freedom Boat Club 401 Marina St Carolina Beach Marina 17 8 10 10.0 NE Snows Cut Marina2 401 Marina St Carolina Beach Marina Local residents only 3

10 Carolina Beaches Beach 14,452 4,330 2

11 4.8 E N.C. Aquarium at Fort Fisher 900 Loggerhead Rd Kure Beach Historical Site 450 214 11 5.1 E Fort Fisher State Recreation Area 1000 Loggerhead Rd Kure Beach Park 667 310 11 5.4 E Fort Fisher Historic Site 1610 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach Historical Site 1,000 465 11 Kure Beaches3 Beach 4,317 1,315 New Hanover County Subtotal: 22,368 7,457 EPZ TOTAL: 54,093 18,422 Brunswick Nuclear Plant E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E5. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Distance Direc Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC 1 2.0 WSW Hampton Inn 5181 SouthportSupply Rd SE Southport 160 80 1 2.5 SSW River Oaks Motel 512 N Howe St Southport 10 5 2 1.8 SW Wingate Inn 1511 N Howe St Southport 252 84 2 2.9 S Lois Jane's Riverview Inn 106 W Bay St Southport 5 3 2 2.9 S Riverside Motel 103 W Bay St Southport 14 8 4 5.4 SW Oak Island Inn 8101 E Oak Island Dr Oak Island 41 28 4 6.1 WSW Captain's Cove Motel 6401 E Oak Island Dr Oak Island 151 57 4 6.4 WSW Oak Island Extended Stay 5611 E Oak Island Dr Oak Island 31 16 4 8.4 WSW Ocean Crest Motel 1411 E Beach Dr Oak Island 221 111 5 2.4 W Comfort Suites 4963 SouthportSupply Rd SE Southport 210 105 6 6.7 W Holiday Inn 3400 SouthportSupply Rd Bolivia 186 93 13 5.6 S Marsh Harbour Inn 21 Keelson Row Bald Head Island 29 22 Brunswick County Subtotal: 1,310 612 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC 10 7.8 NE Golden Sands Motel 1211 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 460 115 10 8.0 NE Carolina & Kure Beach Rentals 1000 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 539 202 10 8.3 NE Sea and Sun Motel 501 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 20 10 10 8.3 NE Dry Dock Family Motel 300 South Lake Park Carolina Beach 74 35 10 8.4 NE SeaWitch Motel 224 North Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 64 16 10 8.4 NE Russo's Motel 213 Cape Fear Blvd Carolina Beach 61 16 10 8.4 NE Buccaneer Motel 201 Cape Fear Blvd Carolina Beach 72 18 10 8.4 NE Cole's Motel 213 Raleigh Ave Carolina Beach 48 10 10 8.4 NE Courtyard by Marriott 100 Charlotte Ave Carolina Beach 300 144 10 8.5 NE Wanda Inn 4 N Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 20 10 10 8.6 NE Cabana De Mar 222 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 376 152 10 8.7 NE Drifters Reef Motel 701 N Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 140 65 10 8.7 NE Surfside Motor Lodge 234 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 150 51 10 8.7 NE Microtel Inn & Suites 907 N Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 236 59 10 8.8 NE Joy Lee Apts. 317 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 8 4 10 8.8 NE The Savannah Inn 316 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 75 23 10 8.8 NE Dolphin Lane Motel 318 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 150 55 Brunswick Nuclear Plant E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distance Direc Zone (miles) tion Facility Name Street Address Municipality Transients Vehicles 10 8.9 NE Beach House Inn 412 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 88 22 10 9.1 NE Beacon House 715 Carolina Beach Ave N Carolina Beach 25 7 10 10.0 NE North Pier Ocean Villas 1800 Canal Dr Carolina Beach 234 39 11 6.5 ENE Hidden Treasure Inn 113 South 4th Ave Kure Beach 15 4 11 6.5 ENE Moran Motel 118 N Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 96 26 11 6.5 ENE Sand Dunes Motel 133 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 156 37 11 6.5 ENE Pier View Apts & Cottages 209 K Ave Kure Beach 20 11 11 6.5 ENE Admiral's Quarters Motel 129 S Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 120 37 11 6.5 ENE South Wind Motel 109 S Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 150 42 11 6.6 ENE By the Pier Motel 122 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 16 14 11 6.6 ENE Seven Seas Inn 130 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 102 23 11 6.7 ENE Kure Keys Motel 310 Fort Fisher Blvd Kure Beach 40 8 11 6.8 ENE Darlings by the Sea 329 Atlantic Ave Kure Beach 10 5 11 7.4 ENE Oceaneer Motel 1621 S Lake Park Blvd Carolina Beach 126 28 New Hanover County Subtotal: 3,991 1,288 EPZ TOTAL: 5,301 1,900 Brunswick Nuclear Plant E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E1. Schools and Preschools/Childcare Centers within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E2. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E3. Major Employers within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E4. Beaches, Golf Courses and Marinas within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E5. Campgrounds, Historical Sites, Parks and Other Recreational Areas within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant E13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX H Evacuation Regions

H EVACUATION REGIONS This appendix presents the evacuation percentages for each Evacuation Region (Table H1 and Table H2) and maps of all Evacuation Regions (Figure H1 through Figure H35). The percentages presented in Table H1 and Table H2 are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 3 of Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 21.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002, Rev. 1.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions Radial Regions Site PAR Zone Region Description Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R01 2Mile Radius 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

All Zones in R02 Full EPZ the EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Site PAR Zone Region From: Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R03 NNW, N 328°009° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R04 NNE 010°021° 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R05 Site Specific NNE 022°038° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R06 NE 039°051° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R07 ENE 052°090° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R08 E 091°112° 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R09 ESE 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R10 SE, SSE 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Site Specific ESE, R11 SE, SSE 113°179° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R12 S 180°195° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R13 SSW, SW 196°236° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R14 WSW1 237°271° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

R15 W 272°288° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R16 WNW 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R17 Site Specific WNW 289°316° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R18 NW 317°327° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate 1

Wind Direction from SW is included within 237°-271° in BNP Protective Action Recommendations (PAR) but excluded from R14 and R30.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H2. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Staged Regions Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to EPZ Boundary Wind Direction Site PAR Zone Region From: Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R19 NNW, N 329°009° 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R20 NNE 010°021° 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R21 Site Specific NNE 022°038° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

R22 NE 039°051° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R23 ENE 052°090° 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R24 E 091°112° 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R25 ESE 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R26 SE, SSE 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Site Specific ESE, R27 SE, SSE 113°179° 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R28 S 180°195° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R29 SSW, SW 196°236° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R30 WSW1 237°271° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20%

R31 W 272°288° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R32 WNW 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R33 Site Specific WNW 289°316° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100% 100%

R34 NW 317°327° 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100% 100%

All Zones in R35 Full EPZ the EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, then Evacuate Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H1. Region R01 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H2. Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H3. Region R03 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H4. Region R04 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H5. Region R05 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H6. Region R06 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H7. Region R07 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H8. Region R08 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H9. Region R09 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H10. Region R10 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H11. Region R11 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H12. Region R12 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H13. Region R13 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H14. Region R14 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H15. Region R15 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H16. Region R16 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H17. Region R17 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H18. Region R18 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H19. Region R19 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H20. Region R20 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H21. Region R21 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H22. Region R22 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H23. Region R23 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H24. Region R24 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H25. Region R25 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H26. Region R26 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H27. Region R27 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H28. Region R28 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H29. Region R29 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H30. Region R30 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H31. Region R31 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H32. Region R32 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H33. Region R33 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H34. Region R34 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H35. Region R35 Brunswick Nuclear Plant H38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX L Zone Boundaries

L. ZONE BOUNDARIES Zone 1 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by Sunny Point Access Road and the southern border of the Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal; on the east by the Cape Fear River (border centered in the Cape Fear River) to the N.C. Baptist Assembly east shore (eastern tip of Oak Island); on the south along a line from the N.C. Baptist Assembly east shore north along the western side of Battery Island to Southport/Supply Road/North Howe Street (NC 211), then west along Southport/Supply Road/North Howe Street (NC 211); and on the west to Oakview Dr. (SR 1549).

The western boundary follows Oakview Dr. to Pineview Dr. to Clearview Dr.

and continues northeast from the end of Clearview Dr. to the intersection of NC 87 (George II Highway), NC 133 (River Rd) and the Sunny Point Access Road.

This zone includes those portions of Southport NORTH of Howe Street along with Snow Marsh Island and Battery Island.

Zone 2 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north and east by Southport/Supply Road (NC 211) and North Howe Street (NC 87/211) to the end of the road in Southport; on the south along the north shore of the Intracoastal Waterway; west by Long Beach Road (NC 133). This zone includes those portions of Southport SOUTH of Howe Street.

Zone 3 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: The northern boundary follows the north shore of the Intracoastal Waterway from Long Beach Road (NC 133) to the end of Southport/Supply Road (NC 211) in Southport; then south along the western side of Battery Island to the N.C. Baptist Assembly east shore (eastern tip of Oak Island). The zone boundary moves around the N.C. Baptist Assembly east shore (eastern end of Oak Island) to meet the Atlantic Ocean. The southern border is the Atlantic Ocean coastline (Caswell Beach) to the intersection of Long Beach Rd/Country Club Dr. (NC 133) and Jones Street. The western boundary moves north on Long Beach Rd/Country Club Dr. (NC 133). This zone includes those portions of Oak Island EAST of Long Beach Rd/Country Club Dr. (NC 133) along Caswell Beach Road - Community of Caswell Beach and the N.C. Baptist Assembly.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev.0

Zone 4 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: The northern boundary follows the north shore of the Intracoastal Waterway from the western end of Sheep Island to NC 133 (Long Beach Road). The eastern boundary follows NC 133 (Long Beach Road) to the coast (at Jones Street) on the Atlantic Ocean.

The southern boundary follows the coast on the Atlantic Ocean to Lockwood Folly Inlet on the west. The boundary turns north toward the western end of Sheep Island. This zone includes those portions of Oak Island WEST of NC 133 (Long Beach Road) and the Town of Oak Island (formerly communities of Long Beach and Yaupon Beach).

Zone 5 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by Southport/Supply Road (NC 211); and on the east by the Long Beach Road (NC 133) to the Intracoastal Waterway. The southern boundary follows the north shore of the Intracoastal Waterway west to the intersection of Sunset Harbor Road (SR 1112) and Lockwood Folly Rd SE. The zone boundary turns north on Sunset Harbor Road (SR 1112) to intersect with Southport/Supply Road (NC 211).

Zone 6 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by the southern Bolivia town limits and by SR 1513 (Danford Road); on the east by NC 87 (George II Hwy) to the intersection of NC 87 (George II Hwy), NC 133 (River Rd) and the Sunny Point Access Road. The eastern boundary continues southwest from the intersection of NC 87 (George II Hwy), NC 133 (River Rd) and the Sunny Point Access Road to the end of Clearview Rd. The southern boundary is Southport/Supply Road (NC 211) moving west to the intersection of Clemmons Rd SE (SR 1505). Zone boundary on the west is along Clemmons Rd SE (SR 1505) and (SR 1504). Boundary line moves north along a line from the intersection of Clemmons Rd SE (SR 1504/1505) and Gilbert Rd SE (SR 1501) to the end of Albright Rd SE (SR 1508). Boundary follows Albright Rd (SE SR 1508) and Midway Rd SE (SR 1500) and Old Ocean Hwy (US 17) to the southern Bolivia town limit. Zone includes Boiling Spring Lakes SOUTHWEST of NC 87.

Zone 7 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by Funston Road (SR 1518); on the east by the Sunny Point Railroad and NC 133; and on the west by NC 87. Zone includes Boiling Spring Lakes BETWEEN NC 87 and the Sunny Point Railroad.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev.0

Zone 8 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by a line extending east from the intersection of Funston Road (SR 1518) and Daws Creek Road (SR 1521) along Daws Creek Road (SR 1521) to NC 133 about one mile south of Pinelevel; on the east and south by NC 133 to the intersection of NC 133 and the Sunny Point Railroad; and on the west by the Sunny Point Railroad. The zone includes Girl Scout Camp Pretty Pond.

Zone 9 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north by a line extending east from the intersection of Daws Creek Road (SR 1521) and NC 133 to the Brunswick/New Hanover county line (centered in the Cape Fear River) just south of Campbell Island. The zone is bordered on the east by the Brunswick/New Hanover county line (centered in the Cape Fear River) moving south to the north end of Snow Marsh Island and the southern boundary of Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal. The zone boundary moves west following the southern boundary of Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal to the intersection with NC 133 and NC 87, and is bordered on the west by NC 133. The zone includes the Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal, Orton Plantation and Old Brunswick Town.

Zone 10 County: New Hanover Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north along a line from the New Hanover/Brunswick county line intersection (centered in the Cape Fear River) along Sedgley Dr. to West Telfair Circle.

Along West Telfair Circle to Telfair Drive and Telfair Court. From Telfair Court to Ocracoke Drive, extending east across US 421 South Seabreeze Rd to the coast on the Atlantic Ocean. The eastern boundary moves south along the Atlantic Ocean coast to Ocean Boulevard. The boundary moves west along Ocean Boulevard to the intersection of the New Hanover/Brunswick county line (centered in the Cape Fear River). The New Hanover/Brunswick county line (centered in the Cape Fear River) forms the western boundary of this zone. The zone includes Sea Breeze, Carolina Beach, and Carolina Beach State Park.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant L3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev.0

Zone 11 County: New Hanover Defined as the area within the following boundary: Bordered on the north along a line from the New Hanover/Brunswick county line intersection (centered in the Cape Fear River) along Ocean Boulevard across US 421 to the coast on the Atlantic Ocean. The eastern boundary moves south along the Atlantic Ocean coast to the New Hanover/Brunswick county line (Corncake Inlet area). The boundary turns northwest toward the Fort Fisher/Southport ferry landing and continues out into the Cape Fear River to intersect the New Hanover/Brunswick county line. The New Hanover/ Brunswick county line (centered in the Cape Fear River) forms the western boundary of this zone. The zone includes Kure Beach, Fort Fisher and Federal Point.

Zone 12 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: The northern boundary is along a line from the intersection of the New Hanover/Brunswick county line (centered in the Cape Fear River north of Snow Marsh) moving southeast to the Fort Fisher/Southport ferry landing and following the New Hanover/Brunswick county line out to the coast on the Atlantic Ocean (Corncake Inlet area). The eastern boundary moves south along the Atlantic Ocean coast to a point east of the end of Cape Creek. The southern boundary turns west along Cape Creek to the mouth of Cape and Bay creeks and across the Cape Fear River to the northern shore of Oak Island at the N.C. Baptist Assembly Grounds. The western boundary moves north centered in the Cape Fear River to the intersection of the New Hanover/Brunswick county line (north of Snow Marsh). The zone includes Zeke and Striking islands.

Zone 13 County: Brunswick Defined as the area within the following boundary: This zone is comprised of Bald Head Island. The northern border is from the mouth of Cape and Bay Creeks along Cape Creek with the boundary extending to the east to meet the Atlantic Ocean once Cape Creek ends. The eastern boundary then moves along the coast with the Atlantic Ocean on the east and south and then northwest until it meets the Cape Fear River. The boundary then moves across the Cape Fear River to the southern shore of Oak Island at the N.C. Baptist Assembly grounds. It turns north along the eastern end of Oak Island, northern shore of Oak Island and back across the Cape Fear River to the mouth of Cape and Bay creeks.

Brunswick Nuclear Plant L4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev.0

MAPS Figure 31. Zones Comprising the BNP EPZ Brunswick Nuclear Plant 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 61. BNP EPZ Zones Brunswick Nuclear Plant 69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 72. BNP Shadow Region Brunswick Nuclear Plant 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 20 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour, 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 726 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 5 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 727 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 79. Congestion Patterns at 6 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 728 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 710. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 15 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 729 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure 711. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Brunswick Nuclear Plant 730 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

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

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

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

Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 731 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

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

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (h:mm)

Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 732 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

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

Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

45 40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

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

Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 733 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

45 40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

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

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 8) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

50 45 40 Vehicles Evacuating 35 30 25 (Thousands) 20 15 10 5

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

Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 734 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

50 45 40 Vehicles Evacuating 35 30 25 (Thousands) 20 15 10 5

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

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 10) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

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

Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 735 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good, Special Event (Scenario 11) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

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

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

Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R02 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 12) 2Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

60 50 Vehicles Evacuating 40 30 (Thousands) 20 10 0

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

Figure 723. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R02 Brunswick Nuclear Plant 736 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0