Revision as of 15:46, 1 July 2018

Text

Attachment 1: Kld TR-633, Rev. 0, LaSalle County Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Cover Through Page 5-21
	ML14128A172
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	04/08/2014
From:	; KLD Engineering, PC
To:	; Exelon Generation Co, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML14128A158	List: ML14128A170; ML14128A172; ML14128A173; ML14128A174; ML14128A175; ML14128A178; ML14128A179; ML14128A180; ML14128A181; RS-14-014, Attachment 1: Kld TR-633, Rev. 0, LaSalle County Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Cover Through Page 5-21; RS-14-014, Attachment 1: Kld TR-633, Rev. 0, LaSalle County Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Page 6-1 Through Page C-15; RS-14-014, Attachment 1: Kld TR-633, Rev. 0, LaSalle County Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Page D-1 Through Page H-24; RS-14-014, Attachment 1: Kld TR-633, Rev. 0, LaSalle County Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Page J-1 Through End; RS-14-014, Attachment 2: Kld TR-631, Rev. 0, Quad Cities Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Cover Through Page 5-21; RS-14-014, Attachment 2: Kld TR-631, Rev. 0, Quad Cities Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Page 10-1 Through Page G-5; RS-14-014, Attachment 2: Kld TR-631, Rev. 0, Quad Cities Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Page 6-1 Through Page 9-3; RS-14-014, Attachment 2: Kld TR-631, Rev. 0, Quad Cities Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Page H-1 Through Page H-39; RS-14-014, Attachment 2: Kld TR-631, Rev. 0, Quad Cities Generating Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Page J-1 Through End; RS-14-014, LaSalle, Units 1 & 2 and Quad Cities, Units 1 & 2, 10 CFR 50, Appendix E - Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis Information;
References
	RS-14-0145 EP-AA-1005, Addendum 2, Rev 01, KLD TR-633, Rev 0
	Download: ML14128A172 (99)
	v • d • e

Attachment 1LaSalle County Generating StationDevelopment of Evacuation Time Estimates

) 'Exelon Generation EP-AA-1005, Addendum 2Revision 01EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES FORLASALLE COUNTYGENERATING STATIONPLUME EXPOSURE PATHWAYEMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE LASALLE COUNTY GENERATING STATIONDevelopment of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Exelon Generation, by:KLD Engineering, P.C.1601 Veterans Memorial

Highway, Suite 340Islandia, NY 11749mailto: kweinisch@kldcompanies.com April 8, 2014Final Report, Rev. 0KLD TR -633 Table of Contents1 INTRODUCTIO N ..................................................................................................................................

1-11.1 Overview of the ETE Process ......................................................................................................

1-21.2 The LaSalle County Generating Station Location

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

1-31.3 Prelim inary Activities

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

1-51.4 Com parison w ith Prior ETE Study ..............................................................................................

1-92 STUDY ESTIM ATES AND ASSUM PTIO NS .............................................................................................

2-12.1 Data Estim ates ...........................................................................................................................

2-12.2 Study M ethodological Assum ptions ..........................................................................................

2-22.3 Study Assum ptions .....................................................................................................................

2-53 DEM AND ESTIM ATION .......................................................................................................................

3-13.1 Perm anent Residents

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

3-23.1.1 Special Facilities

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

3-23.1.2 Illinois National Guard Training Center ..............................................................................

3-33.2 Shadow Population

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

3-83.3 Transient Population

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

3-113.4 Em ployees ................................................................................................................................

3-153.5 M edical Facilities

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

3-193.6 Total Dem and in Addition to Perm anent Population

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

3-193.7 Special Event ............................................................................................................................

3-193.8 Sum m ary of Dem and ...............................................................................................................

3-224 ESTIM ATION OF HIGHW AY CAPACITY

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

4-14.1 Capacity Estim ations on Approaches to Intersections

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

4-24.2 Capacity Estim ation along Sections of Highw ay ........................................................................

4-44.3 Application to the LAS Study Area .............................................................................................

4-64.3.1 Tw o-Lane Roads .................................................................................................................

4-64.3.2 M ulti-Lane Highw ay ...........................................................................................................

4-64.3.3 Freew ays ............................................................................................................................

4-74.3.4 Intersections

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

4-84.4 Sim ulation and Capacity Estim ation .........................................................................................

4-85 ESTIM ATIO N O F TRIP GENERATION TIM E ..........................................................................................

5-15.1 Background

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

5-15.2 Fundam ental Considerations

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

5-35.3 Estim ated Tim e Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ...................................................

5-65.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Tim e Distribution

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

5-115.4.1 Statistical Outliers

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

5-125.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation

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

5-155.4.3 Trip Generation for W aterw ays and Recreational Areas .................................................

5-176 DEM AND ESTIM ATION FO R EVACUATION SCENARIOS

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

6-17 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIM E ESTIM ATES (ETE) ..........................................................

7-1LaSalle County Generating Station i KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation

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

7-17.2 Staged Evacuation

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

7-17.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation

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

7-27.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................

7-37.5 Evacuation Tim e Estim ate (ETE) Results ....................................................................................

7-47.6 Staged Evacuation Results .........................................................................................................

7-57.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ...................................................................................................

7-68 TRANSIT-DEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES

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

8-18.1 Transit Dependent People Dem and Estim ate ............................................................................

8-28.2 School Population

-Transit Dem and .........................................................................................

8-38.3 M edical Facility Dem and ............................................................................................................

8-48.4 Evacuation Tim e Estim ates for Transit Dependent People .......................................................

8-48.5 Special Needs Population

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

8-109 TRAFFIC M ANAGEM ENT STRATEGY

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

9-110 EVACUATION ROUTES ..................................................................................................................

10-1ii SURVEILLANCE OF EVACUATION OPERATIONS

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

11-i12 CONFIRM ATION TIM E ..................................................................................................

....12-113 REFERENCES

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

13-1List of Appendices A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERM S ..............................................................................

A-1B. DYNAM IC TRAFFIC ASSIGNM ENT AND DISTRIBUTION M ODEL ...................................................

B-1C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIM ULATION M ODEL ..........................................................................................

C-1C.1 M ethodology

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

C-5C.1.1 The Fundam ental Diagram ............................................................................................

C-5C.1.2 The Sim ulation M odel ...................................................................................................

C-5C.1.3 Lane Assignm ent ..............................................................................................................

C-12C.2 Im plem entation

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

C-12C.2.1 Com putational Procedure

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

C-12C.2.2 Interfacing w ith Dynam ic Traffic Assignm ent (DTRAD) ..............................................

C-15D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE

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

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

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

F-1F.1 Introduction

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

F-1F.2 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................

F-1F.2.1 Household Dem ographic Results ...........................................................................................

F-2F.2.2 Evacuation Response

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

F-4F.2.3 Tim e Distribution Results .......................................................................................................

F-6F.3 Conclusions

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

F-9LaSalle County Generating Station ii KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .....................................................................................................

G-1G .1 T raffic C o ntro l Po ints ................................................................................................................

G -1G .2 A ccess C o ntro l Po ints ................................................................................................................

G -1H. EVACUATION REGIONS .....................................................................................................................

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

J-1K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETW ORK ............................................................................................

K-1L. Sub-area BO U N D A R IES ......................................................................................................................

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

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

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

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

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

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

M-3M.4 Enhancements in Evacuation Time ..........................................................................................

M-4N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST

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

N-1Note: Appendix I intentionally skippediii KLD Engineering, P.C.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateiiiKLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 List of FiguresFigure 1-1. LA S Locatio n ............................................................................................................................

1-4Figure 1-2. LAS Link-Node Analysis Network ............................................................................................

1-7Figure 2-1. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology

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

2-4Fig u re 3-1 .LA S EPZ ....................................................................................................................................

3-4Figure 3-2. Permanent Resident Population by Sector .............................................................................

3-6Figure 3-3. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................

3-7Figure 3-4. Shadow Population by Sector .................................................................................................

3-9Figure 3-5. Shadow Vehicles by Sector ...................................................................................................

3-10Figure 3-6. Transient Population by Sector .............................................................................................

3-13Figure 3-7. Transient Vehicles by Sector .................................................................................................

3-14Figure 3-8. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................

3-17Figure 3-9. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................

3-18Figure 4-1. Fundamental Diagrams

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

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

5-5Figure 5-2. Evacuation Mobilization Activities

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

5-10Figure 5-3. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution

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

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

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

5-18Figure 5-5. Comparison of Staged and Un-staged Trip Generation Distributions in the2 to 5 M ile R e g io n ....................................................................................................................................

5-2 0Figure 6-1. LA S EPZ Sub-areas

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

6-5Figure 7-1. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology

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

7-14Figure 7-2. LAS Shadow Region ...............................................................................................................

7-15Figure 7-3. Congestion Patterns at 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate

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

7-16Figure 7-4. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour after the Advisory to Evacuate

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

7-17Figure 7-5. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour and 35 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate

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

7-18Figure 7-6. Congestion Patterns at 2 Hours and 10 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate

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

7-19Figure 7-7. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours and 25 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate

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

7-20Figure 7-8. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-21Figure 7-9. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-21Figure 7-10. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-22Figure 7-11. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-22Figure 7-12. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-23Figure 7-13. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-23Figure 7-14. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-24Figure 7-15. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-24Figure 7-16. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-25Figure 7-17. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-25Figure 7-18. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-26Figure 7-19. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-26Figure 7-20. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-27Figure 7-21. Evacuation Time Estimates

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

7-27Figure 8-1. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations

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

8-12Figure 8-2. LAS Transit-Dependent Bus Routes ......................................................................................

8-13Figure 10-1. General Population Reception Communities and Relocation Centers ...............................

10-2Figure 10-2. Major Evacuation Routes ....................................................................................................

10-3LaSalle County Generating Station iv KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Figure B-i. Flow Diagram of Sim ulation-DTRAD Interface

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

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

C-4Figure C-2. Fundam ental Diagram s ...........................................................................................................

C-6Figure C-3. A UNIT Problem Configuration w ith t1 > 0 ..............................................................................

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

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

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

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

D-5Figure E-i. Schools, Preschools and Day Cam ps w ithin the LAS EPZ ........................................................

E-6Figure E-2. M edical Facilities w ithin the LAS EPZ .......................................................................................

E-7Figure E-3. Em ployers w ithin the LAS EPZ .................................................................................................

E-8Figure E-4. Recreation Areas and M ilitary Training Centers w ithin the LAS EPZ ......................................

E-9Figure F-i. Household Size in the EPZ .......................................................................................................

F-2Figure F-2. Household Vehicle Availability

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

F-2Figure F-3. Com m uters in Households in the EPZ .....................................................................................

F-3Figure F-4. Num ber of Vehicles Used for Evacuation

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

F-4Figure F-5. Com m uter Evacuation Response

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

F-5Figure F-6. Tim e Required to Prepare to Leave W ork ...............................................................................

F-6Figure F-7. W ork to Hom e Travel Tim e .....................................................................................................

F-7Figure F-8. Tim e to Prepare Hom e for Evacuation

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

F-8Figure F-9. Tim e to Clear Drivew ay of 6"-8" of Snow ...............................................................................

F-9Figure G-1. Traffic and Access Control Points for the LaSalle County Generating Station ......................

G-2Figure H-1. Region R01 .............................................................................................................................

H-3Figure H-2. Region R02 .............................................................................................................................

H-4Figure H-3. Region R03 .............................................................................................................................

H-5Figure H-4. Region R04 .............................................................................................................................

H-6Figure H-5. Region R05 .............................................................................................................................

H-7Figure H-6. Region R06 .............................................................................................................................

H-8Figure H-7. Region R07 .............................................................................................................................

H-9Figure H-8. Region R08 ...........................................................................................................................

H-IOFigure H-9. Region R09 ...........................................................................................................................

H-1iFigure H-10. Region RiO .........................................................................................................................

H-12Figure H-1l. Region Ri1 .........................................................................................................................

H-13Figure H-12. Region Ri2 .........................................................................................................................

H-14Figure H-13. Region R13 .........................................................................................................................

H-15Figure H-14. Region R14 .........................................................................................................................

H-16Figure H-iS. Region RiS .........................................................................................................................

H-17Figure H-16. Region R16 .........................................................................................................................

H-18Figure H-17. Region Ri7 .........................................................................................................................

H-19Figure H-18. Region R18 .........................................................................................................................

H-20Figure H-19. Region R19 .........................................................................................................................

H-21Figure H-20. Region R20 .........................................................................................................................

H-22Figure H-21. Region R21 .........................................................................................................................

H-23Figure H-22. Region R22 .........................................................................................................................

H-24Figure J-1. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario

1) ....... J-8Figure J-2. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario

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

J-8Figure J-3. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario

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

J-9Figure J-4. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario

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

J-9LaSalle County Generating Station v KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Figure J-5. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Midweek,

Weekend, Evening,G ood W eather (Scenario

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

J-1 0Figure J-6. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario

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

J-10Figure J-7. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario

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

i J-lFigure J-8. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario

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

J-11Figure J-9. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario

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

J-12Figure J-10. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario

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

J-12Figure J-11. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario

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

J-13Figure J-12. ETE and Trip Generation:

Winter, Midweek,

Weekend, Evening,G ood W eather (Scenario

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

J-1 3Figure J-13. ETE and Trip Generation:

Summer, Midweek Weekend,

Evening, Good Weather,Special Eve nt (Scenario 13 ) ......................................................................................................................

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

Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact(S ce n a rio 14 ) ............................................................................................................................................

J-1 4Figure K-1. LaSalle County Generating Station Link-Node Analysis Network ...........................................

K-2Figure K-2. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -G rid 1 ......................................................................................

K-3Figure K-3. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 2 ......................................................................................

K-4Figure K-4. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 3 ......................................................................................

K-5Figure K-5. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -G rid 4 ......................................................................................

K-6Figure K-6. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 5 ......................................................................................

K-7Figure K-7. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 6 ......................................................................................

K-8Figure K-8. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 7 ......................................................................................

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

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

K-21Figure K-1l .Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 10 ................................................................................

K-12Figure K-12. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 11 ...............................................................................

K-13Figure K-13. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 12 ................................................................................

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

K-15Figure K-i5. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork- Grid 14 ................................................................................

K-16Figure K-16. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 15 ................................................................................

K-17Figure K-17. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 16 ................................................................................

K-18Figure K-18. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 17 ................................................................................

K-19Figure K-19. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 18 ................................................................................

K-20Figure K-20. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork- Grid 19 ................................................................................

K-21Figure K-21. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 20 ................................................................................

K-22Figure K-22. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 21 ................................................................................

K-23Figure K-23. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 22 ................................................................................

K-24Figure K-24. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 23 ................................................................................

K-25Figure K-25. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 24 ................................................................................

K-26Figure K-26. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 25 ................................................................................

K-27Figure K-27. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 26 ................................................................................

K-28Figure K-28. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 27 ................................................................................

K-29Figure K-29. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 28 ................................................................................

K-30Figure K-30. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork- Grid 29 ................................................................................

K-31Figure K-31. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 30 ................................................................................

K-32Figure K-32. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork- Grid 31 ................................................................................

K-33Figure K-33. Link-Node Analysis Netw ork -Grid 32 ................................................................................

K-34LaSalle County Generating Station vi KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Figure K-34. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 33 ................................................................................

K-35Figure K-35. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 34 ................................................................................

K-36Figure K-36. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 35 ................................................................................

K-37Figure K-37. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 36 ................................................................................

K-38Figure K-38. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 37 ................................................................................

K-39Figure K-39. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 38 ................................................................................

K-40Figure K-40. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 39 ................................................................................

K-41Figure K-41. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 40 ................................................................................

K-42Figure K-42. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 41 ................................................................................

K-43Figure K-43. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 42 ................................................................................

K-44Figure K-44. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 43 ................................................................................

K-45Figure K-45. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 44 ................................................................................

K-46Figure K-46. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 45 ................................................................................

K-47Figure K-47. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 46 ................................................................................

K-48Figure K-48. Link-Node Analysis Network -Grid 47 ................................................................................

K-49Figure K-49. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 48 ................................................................................

K-50Figure K-50. Link-Node Analysis Network-Grid 49 ............................................................................

K-51LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateviiKLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 List of TablesTable 1-1. Stakeholder Interaction

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

1-1Table 1-2. H ighw ay Characteristics

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

1-5Table 1-3. ETE Study Com parisons

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

1-9Table 2-1. Evacuation Scenario Definitions

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

2-3Table 2-2. M odel Adjustm ent for Adverse W eather .................................................................................

2-6Table 3-1. EPZ Perm anent Resident Population

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

3-5Table 3-2. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Sub-area

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

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

3-8Table 3-4. Sum m ary of Transients and Transient Vehicles

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

3-12Table 3-5. Summary of Non-EPZ Resident Employees and Employee Vehicles

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

3-16Table 3-6. LAS EPZ External Traff ic ..........................................................................................................

3-21Table 3-7. Sum m ary of Population Dem and ...........................................................................................

3-23Table 3-8. Sum m ary of Vehicle Dem and .................................................................................................

3-24Table 5-1. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities

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

5-3Table 5-2. Tim e Distribution for Notifying the Public ...............................................................................

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

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

5-8Table 5-5. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate

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

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

5-9Table 5-7. M apping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................

5-11Table 5-8. Description of the Distributions

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

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

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

5-19Table 5-10. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation

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

5-21Table 6-1. Description of Evacuation Regions ...........................................................................................

6-4Table 6-2. Evacuation Scenario Definitions

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

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

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

6-7Table 6-4. Vehicle Estim ates by Scenario

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

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

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

7-9Table 7-2. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population

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

7-10Table 7-3. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2-Mile Area within the Indicated Region ............................

7-11Table 7-4. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2-Mile Area within the Indicated Region ..........................

7-12Table 7-5. Description of Evacuation Regions .........................................................................................

7-13Table 8-1. Transit-Dependent Population Estim ates ..............................................................................

8-14Table 8-2. School, Preschool, and Day Camp Population Demand Estimates

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

8-15Table 8-3. School, Preschool, and Day Camp Relocation Facilities

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

8-16Table 8-4. M edical Facility Transit Dem and ............................................................................................

8-17Table 8-5. Sum m ary of Transportation Resources

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

8-17Table 8-6. Bus Route Descriptions

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

8-18Table 8-7. School, Preschool, and Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates

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

8-19Table 8-8. School, Preschool, and Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates

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

8-20Table 8-9. School, Preschool, and Day Camp Evacuation Time Estimates

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

8-21Table 8-10. Sum mary of Transit-Dependent Bus Routes ........................................................................

8-22Table 8-11. Transit-Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates

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

8-23Table 8-12. Transit-Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates

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

8-24Table 8-13. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates

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

8-25LaSalle County Generating Station viii KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Table 8-14. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates

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

8-26Table 8-15. M edical Facility Evacuation Tim e Estimates

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

8-26Table 8-16. M edical Facility Evacuation Tim e Estimates

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

8-27Table 8-17. Homebound Special Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates

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

8-27Table 12-i. Estimated Number of Telephone Calls Required for Confirmation of Evacuation

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

12-2Table A-i. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Term s ................................................................................

A-iTable C-i. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................

C-2Table C-2. Input Requirem ents for the DYNEV II M odel ...........................................................................

C-3T a b le C -3 .G lo ssa ry ....................................................................................................................................

C -7Table E-1. Schools w ithin the EPZ .............................................................................................................

E-2Table E-2. Preschools and Day Cam ps w ithin the EPZ ..............................................................................

E-3Table E-3. M edical Facilities w ithin the EPZ ..............................................................................................

E-3Table E-4. Em ployers w ithin the EPZ .........................................................................................................

E-4Table E-5. Recreational Areas w ithin the EPZ ............................................................................................

E-5Table E-6. M ilitary Training Center w ithin the EPZ ...................................................................................

E-5Table H-i. Percent of Sub-area Population Evacuating for Each Region .................................................

H-2Table J-i. Characteristics of the Ten Highest Volume Signalized Intersections

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

J-2Table J-2. Sam ple Sim ulation M odel Input .........................................................................................

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

J-4Table J-4. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes(Reg io n R0 3, Sce nario 1) ............................................................................................................................

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

J-6Table K-i. Evacuation Roadway Network Characteristics

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

K-52Table K-2. Nodes in the Link-Node Analysis Network which are Controlled

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

K-93Table M-1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ...................................

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

M-2Table M -3. ETE Variation w ith Population Change .................................................................................

M -4Table N-1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist

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

N-1LaSalle County Generating Station ix KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThis report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to developEvacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS) located inBrookfield

Township, Illinois.

ETE are part of the required planning basis and provide Exelonand state and local governments with site-specific information needed for Protective Actiondecision-making.

In the performance of this effort, guidance is provided by documents published by FederalGovernmental agencies.

Most important of these are:" Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NUREG/CR-7002, SAND 2010-0061P, "Criteria forDevelopment of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies,"

November 2011. (NRC, 2011a)." Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NUREG/CR-1745, "Analysis of Techniques forEstimating Evacuation Times for Emergency Planning Zones," November, 1980. (NRC,1980a)." Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, "Criteria forPreparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants,"

November 1980. (NRC, 1980b)" Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NUREG/CR-6863, SAND2004-5900, "Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies for Nuclear Power Plants,"

January2005. (NRC, 2005)." Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, AppendixE to Part 50 -Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities, 2011. (NRC, 2011b).Overview of Proiect Activities This project began in November, 2013 and extended over a period of 5 months. The majoractivities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

" Accessed U.S. Census Bureau data files for the year 2010. Studied Geographical Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of LAS, then conducted adetailed field survey of the highway network." Synthesized this information to create an analysis network representing the highwaysystem topology and capacities within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ), plus aShadow Region covering the region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15miles radially from the plant." Analyzed the results of a telephone survey of residents within the EPZ to gather focuseddata needed for this ETE study that were not contained within the census database.

Thesurvey instrument was reviewed and modified by the licensee and offsite responseorganization (ORO) personnel prior to conducting the survey.LaSalle County Generating Station ES-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

" Data pertaining to employment, transients, and special facilities in each county wereprovided by Exelon and by state and county offsite response organizations (OROs)." The traffic demand and trip-generation 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) computedusing the results of the telephone survey of EPZ residents.

" The EPZ is subdivided into 13 Sub-areas.

Following federal guidelines, these existingSub-areas are grouped within circular areas or "keyhole" configurations (circles plusradial sectors) that define a total of 22 Evacuation Regions." The time-varying external circumstances are represented as Evacuation Scenarios, eachdescribed in terms of the following factors:

(1) Season (Summer, Winter);

(2) Day ofWeek (Midweek, Weekend);

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

and (4) Weather (Good,Rain, Snow). One special event scenario

-Seneca Shipyard Days -was considered.

Oneroadway impact scenario was considered wherein a single lane on 1-80 westbound wasclosed from approximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) toapproximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange

-Exit 90- with Illinois State Route 23)." Staged evacuation was considered for those regions wherein the 2 mile radius andsectors downwind to 5 miles were evacuated.

As per NUREG/CR-7002, the Planning Basis for the calculation of ETE is:" A rapidly escalating accident at LAS that quickly assumes the status of GeneralEmergency such that the Advisory to Evacuate is virtually coincident with thesiren alert, and no early protective actions have been implemented.

" While an unlikely accident

scenario, this planning basis will yield ETE, measuredas the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate until the stated percentage ofthe population exits the impacted Region, that represent "upper bound"estimates.

This conservative Planning Basis is applicable for all initiating events.* If the emergency occurs while schools, preschools, and day camps are in session, theETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to relocation centers located outside the EPZ. Parents, relatives, and neighbors are advised to notpick up their children at schools, preschools, or day camps prior to the arrival of thebuses dispatched for that purpose.

The ETE for children at these facilities are calculated separately.

" Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either ride-share withrelatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided as specified in theIllinois Plan for Radiological Accidents.

Those in special facilities will likewise beevacuated with public transit, as needed: bus, wheelchair van, or ambulance, asrequired.

Separate ETE are calculated for the transit-dependent

evacuees, forhomebound special needs population, and for those evacuated from special facilities.

LaSalle County Generating Station ES-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Computation of ETEA total of 308 ETE were computed for the evacuation of the general public. Each ETE quantifies the aggregate evacuation time estimated for the population within one of the 22 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 14Evacuation Scenarios (22 x 14 = 308). Separate ETE are calculated for transit-dependent

evacuees, including schoolchildren for applicable scenarios.

Except for Region R03, which is the evacuation of the entire EPZ, only a portion of the peoplewithin the EPZ would be advised to evacuate.

That is, the Advisory to Evacuate applies only tothose people occupying the specified impacted region. It is assumed that 100 percent of thepeople within the impacted region will evacuate in response to this Advisory.

The peopleoccupying the remainder of the EPZ outside the impacted region may be advised to takeshelter.The computation of ETE assumes that 20% of the population within the EPZ but outside theimpacted region, will elect to "voluntarily" evacuate.

In addition, 20% of the population in theShadow Region will also elect to evacuate.

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

Once 90% of the2-mile region is evacuated, those people beyond 2 miles begin to evacuate.

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

The computational procedure is outlined as follows:" A link-node representation of the highway network is coded. Each link represents aunidirectional length of highway; each node usually represents an intersection or mergepoint. The capacity of each link is estimated based on the field survey observations andon established traffic engineering procedures.

" The evacuation trips are generated at locations called "zonal centroids" located withinthe EPZ and Shadow Region. The trip generation rates vary over time reflecting themobilization

process, and from one location (centroid) to another depending onpopulation density and on whether a centroid is within, or outside, the impacted area." The evacuation model computes the routing patterns for evacuating vehicles that arecompliant with federal guidelines (outbound relative to the location of the plant), andthen simulates the traffic flow movements over space and time. This simulation processestimates the rate that traffic flow exits the impacted region.The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90 percent and 100 percent, respectively, of thepopulation within the impacted region, to evacuate from within the impacted region. Thesestatistics are presented in tabular and graphical formats.

The 90th percentile ETE have beenidentified as the values that should be considered when making protective action decisions LaSalle County Generating Station ES-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 because the 100th percentile ETE are prolonged by those relatively few people who take longerto mobilize.

This is referred to as the "evacuation tail" in Section 4.0 of NUREG/CR-7002.

Traffic Management This study references the comprehensive traffic management plan provided by the IllinoisEmergency Management Agency (IEMA).The ETE simulations discussed in Section 7.3 indicate minimal traffic congestion within the EPZ.As such, no additional traffic control points (TCPs) or access control points (ACPs) are identified as a result of this study. The existing traffic management plans are adequate.

See Section 9 andAppendix G.Selected ResultsA compilation of selected information is presented on the following pages in the form ofFigures and Tables extracted from the body of the report; these are described below." Figure 6-1 displays a map of the LAS EPZ showing the layout of the 13 Sub-areas thatcomprise, in aggregate, the EPZ." Table 3-1 presents the estimates of permanent resident population in each Sub-areabased on the 2010 Census data." Table 6-1 defines each of the 22 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groupsof Sub-areas.

Table 6-2 defines the Evacuation Scenarios.

Tables 7-1 and 7-2 are compilations of ETE. These data are the times needed to clearthe indicated regions of 90 and 100 percent of the population occupying these regions,respectively.

These computed ETE include consideration of mobilization time and ofestimated voluntary evacuations from other regions within the EPZ and from theShadow Region.* Tables 7-3 and 7-4 present ETE for the 2-mile region for un-staged and stagedevacuations for the 90th and 100th percentiles, respectively.

" Table 8-7 presents ETE for the children at schools, preschools and day camps in goodweather." Table 8-11 presents ETE for the transit-dependent population in good weather." Figure H-8 presents an example of an Evacuation Region (Region R08) to be evacuated under the circumstances defined in Table 6-1. Maps of all regions are provided inAppendix H.Conclusions

" General population ETE were computed for 308 unique cases -a combination of 22unique Evacuation Regions and 14 unique Evacuation Scenarios.

Table 7-1 and Table 7-2document these ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles.

These ETE range from 1:15(hr:min) to 2:15 at the 90th percentile.

Inspection of Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 indicates that the ETE for the 100th percentile are 2hours longer on average than those for the 90th percentile, ranging from 3:30 to 4:40.LaSalle County Generating Station ES-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

" Inspection of Table 7-3 and Table 7-4 indicates that a staged evacuation protective action strategy provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2-mile Region. SeeSection 7.6 for additional discussion.

" Comparison of Scenarios 5 and 13 in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 indicates that the SpecialEvent -Seneca Shipyard Days -has no impact on the 90th and 100th percentile ETE. SeeSection 7.5 for additional discussion.

" Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 indicates that events suchas adverse weather or traffic accidents which cause a roadway closure -i.e., one lane on1-80 (see Section 2.2, item 7 for additional information)

-does not have a materialimpact on ETE at the 90th or 100th percentiles.

See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

" Sub-area 10 experiences the most congestion within the EPZ, yet clears relatively quickly.

All traffic congestion (LOS F) within the EPZ clears by 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 35 minutesafter the Advisory to Evacuate.

See Section 7.3 and Figures 7-3 through 7-7." Separate ETE were computed for schools, preschools, and day camps, medical facilities, transit-dependent

persons, and homebound special needs persons.

The average single-wave ETE for this population is at most 45 minutes longer than the general population ETE at the 90th percentile.

See Section 8.* Table 8-5 indicates that there are enough buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances available to evacuate the transit-dependent population within the EPZ in a single wave." The general population ETE at the 100th percentile is sensitive to changes in the basetrip generation time of 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months and 30 minutes.

LAS is a low population site withminimal congestion; therefore, ETE is dictated by trip generation.

See Table M-1.* The general population ETE is not significantly affected by the voluntary evacuation ofvehicles in the Shadow Region. See Table M-2.* A population increase of 124% or more results in 90th percentile ETE changes whichmeet the federal criteria for updating ETE between decennial Censuses.

See SectionM.3.LaSalle County Generating Station ES-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

.0Figure 6-1. LAS EPZ Sub-areas LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-6KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 3-1. EPZ Permanent Resident Population 1 936 1,0602 67 773 704 7484 2,978 3,1245 571 5076 159 10876656958 642 5519 269 30810 5,678 6,29211 2,880 3,04613 638 68717 314 288EPZ Population Growth: 6.00%LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-7KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 6-1. Description of Evacuation RegionsmRegion Description Sub-areSub-areaReinDsrpin1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 17R01 2-Mile RingR02 5-Mile RingR03 Full EPZ--..9 m. 0Region Wind Direction Sub-areaToward: -1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 10 11 13 17N/A N, NNE, NE, ENE, E, ESE Refer to Region R01R04 SE, SSE, SN/ASSWRefer to Region R02RegionWind Direction Toward:Sub-area1 2 1 3 15 1 6 1 7 1 8 10 1 11 1 13 1 17R20 5-Mile Ring [ I IiIlIl IIN/A N, NNE, NE, ENE, E, ESE Refer to Region R01R21 SE, SSE, SN/ASSWRefer to Region R02R22 SW, WSW, W, WNW,R22 NW, NNWW N Sub-area(s)

Shelter-in-PlaceNote: The entire city of Marseilles evacuates when either Sub-area 10 or Sub-area 11 evacuates.

SeeAppendix H (page H-1) for additional information.

ES-8 KID Engineering, P.C.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-8KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 6-2. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scnai Seaon Day of Wee Tim of Da eahrSpca1SummerMidweekMiddayGoodNone2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain NoneSummer Midweek, Evening Good None5 Weekend6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow NoneWinter Midweek, Evening Good None12 WeekendSummer Midweek, Evening Good Seneca Shipyard13 Weekend DaysSingle Lane14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Closure on 1-80Westbound 1 Winter assumes that school is in session (also applies to spring and autumn).

Summer assumes that school is notin session.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-9KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 7-1. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer SummerMidweek Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Midweek MidweekWeekend Weekend WeekendS n i (1) ()34 (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) [1 13 (14)Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening MiddayRegion Good Good Good Good Good Good RoadwayRRain GodioonGod Rain Snow God Rain Snow God Shipyard IpcWeather Weather Rain Weather Weather Weather Weather ImpactDaysEntire 2-Mile Region, 5-Mile Region, and EPZR01 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 1:30 1:30 1:50 1:20 1:20 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20R02 1:30 1:30 1:25 1:30 1:25 1:35 1:35 2:00 1:30 1:30 1:55 1:30 1:25 1:30R03 1:55 2:00 1:55 1:55 1:45 2:00 2:00 2:15 1:55 1:55 2:10 1:50 1:45 2:052-Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 MilesR04 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 1:30 1:30 1:50 1:25 1:25 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20R05 1:30 1:30 1:25 1:30 1:20 1:35 [ 1:35 1 2:00 1:25 1:30 1:55 1:30 1:20 1:305-Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ BoundaryR06 1:55 2:00 1:55 1:55 1:45 2:00 2:00 2:10 1:55 1:55 2:10 1:50 1:45 2:05R07 1:55 1:55 1:55 1:55 1:45 2:00 2:00 2:10 1:55 1:55 2:05 1:50 1:45 1:55R08 1:55 1:55 1:55 1:55 1:45 2:00 2:00 2:10 1:55 1:55 2:05 1:50 1:45 1:55R09 1:35 1:35 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:40 1:45 2:10 1:30 1:30 2:00 1:35 1:30 1:35RIO 1:35 1:35 1:30 1:30 1:25 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:30 2:00 1:35 1:25 1:35R11 1:40 1:40 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:45 1:45 2:10 1:30 1:30 2:00 1:35 1:30 1:40R12 1:35 1:35 1:25 1:30 1:25 1:40 1:40 2:05 1:30 1:30 2:00 1:30 1:25 1:35R13 1:40 1:40 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:45 1:45 2:15 1:35 1:35 2:05 1:35 1:30 1:40R14 1:40 1:40 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:45 1:45 2:15 1:35 1:35 2:05 1:35 1:30 1:40RIS 1:40 1:40 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:45 1:45 2:15 1:35 1:35 2:05 1:35 1:30 1:40R16 1:45 1:45 1:35 1:35 1:35 1:50 1:50 2:15 1:40 1:40 2:10 1:40 1:35 1:45R17 1:55 2:00 1:50 1:55 1:45 2:00 2:00 2:15 1:55 1:55 2:10 1:50 1:45 2:05R18 1:55 2:00 1:50 1:55 1:45 2:00 2:00 2:15 1:55 1:55 2:10 1:50 1:45 2:05R19 1:55 1:55 1:55 1:55 1:45 2:00 2:00 2:15 1:50 1:55 2:10 1:45 1:45 2:05Staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 MilesR20 1:45 1:45 1:40 1:40 1:45 1:45 1:50 2:05 1:45 1:45 2:05 1:45 1:45 1:45R21 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:20 1:35 1:35 1:55 1:30 1:30 1:55 1:35 1:20 1:25R22 1:45 1:45 1:40 1:40 1:45 1:45 1:50 2:05 1:45 1:45 2:05 1:45 1:45 1:45LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-10KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 7-2. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer SummerMdekWeed MdekMdekWeedMidweek Midweek MidweekMiwekWekn Ween idekWeekend Weekend Weekend MiweMidday Midday Evening _____Midday

________

_Mid day _____ Evening Evening MdaRegion Good Ran Good Ran Good Good Ri Snw Good Ri Snw Good Shipyar RoadwayWeather Ran Weather Ran Weather Weather Ri Snw Weather Ri Snw Weather Shpad Impact_______ _______ _______ _______ Entire 2-Mile Region, 5-Mile Region, and EPZ _____ ______________

R01 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 3:30R02 3:35 3:35 3:35 j3:35 j 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:35 3:35 3:35 4:35 3:35 3:35 3:35R03 j 3:40 3:40 3:40 j 3:40 3:40 j 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40__ 3:40 3:40_______ ______ ______ ______ ______2-Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles_____

______________

R04 T 3:35 3:35 [3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 1 3:35 14:35 ] 3:35 [3:35 4:35 [ 3:35 3:35 T 3:35R05 3:35 [3:35 j3:35 3:35 j 3:35 j 3:35 J 3:35 1 4:35 J 3:35 [3:35 4:35 [ 3:35 j 3:35 3:35S-Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary_____

R06 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R07 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40ROB 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R09 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R10 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R11 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R12 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R13 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R14 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R15 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R16 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R17 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40R18 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3.40 3.40R19 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 4:40 3:40 3:40 3:40_______ ______ ______ _______Staged Evacuation Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles ____ ____ ____R20 3:35 3:35 3:35 T 3:35 T 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:35 3:35 3:35 4:35 3:35 3:35 3:35R21 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 4:35 3:35 3:35 4:35 3:35 3:35 3:35R22 3:35 3:35 3:3 3:35__ 3:35__ _____ 3:35 3:35 4:35 3:35 3:35 4:35 3:35 3:35 3:35LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-l1KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 7-3. Time to Clear 90 Percent of Area within the indicated Region -Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer SummerMidweek Midweek MidweekMidweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend weeken dweek MidweekWeekend weekend WeekendMidday Midday Evening Midday _ Midday Evening Evening MiddaySenecaRegion Good Good Good Good Good Good Shipya RoadwayRain Rain FRain Snow 0 Rain SnwShipyard Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather ImpactUn-staged Evacuation Mile and S-Mile RegionR01 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 1:30 1:30 1:50 1:20 1:20 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20R02 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 [ 1:30 1 1:30 1 1:50 1:20 1:20 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20Un-staged Evacuation Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5-MilesR04 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 1:30 1:30 1:50 1:20 1:20 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20RO5 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 1:30 1:30 1 1:50 1:20 1:20 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20Staged Evacuation Mile RegionR20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 1:30 1:30 1:50 1:20 1:20 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20Staged Evacuation Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 MilesR21 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 1:30 1:30 1:50 1:20 1:20 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20R22 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:25 1:15 1:30 1:30 1:50 1:20 1:20 1:45 1:25 1:15 1:20LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-12KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 7-4. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2-Mile Area within the Indicated RegionSummer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer SummerMidweek Midweek MidweekMidweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Weekend weekend dweek MidweekWeekend Weekend WeekendScen rio () (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)(8), (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)] (14)Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Evening MiddayRegion Good Good Good Good Good Good RoadwayRain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow God SeneapRar d waWeather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Shipyard ImpactDaysUn-staged Evacuation Mile and 5-Mile RegionR01 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 f 4:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 3:30R02 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 3:30Un-staged Evacuation Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5-MilesR04 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 3:30ROS 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 3:30Staged Evacuation

-S-Mile RegionR20 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 [ 4:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 3:30Staged Evacuation Mile Ring and Keyhole to 5 MilesR21 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 3:30R22 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 4:30 3:30 3:30 3:30LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-13KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 0Table 8-7. School and Preschool Evacuation Time Estimates

-Good WeatherLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-14KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 8-11. Transit-Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates

-Good WeatherSub-areas 1, 2, and 5 1 1909.0 i 55.0 I 103017.8195103930Sub-area 4 1 90 13.0 55.0 14 30Sub-areas 13 and 17 1 90 12.0 55.0 13 30Sub-areas 10 and 6 1 90 6.1 55.0 7 30Sub-areas 3, 7, and 8 1 90 11.0 55.0 12 30Sub-area 10 1 90 10.3 55.0 11 30Sub-area 11 1 90 10.4 55.0 11 30Maximum ETE:Average ETE:27.5 30 5 10 58 3018.8 21 5 10 47 3024.7 j 27 5 10 40 3015.5 17 5 10 41 3018.520510 1 4230 120.8 23 5 ] 10 J 46 1 30Maximum ETE:Average ElE:LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-15KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Figure H-8. Region R08LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time EstimateES-16KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 1 INTRODUCTION This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to developEvacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the LaSalle County Generating Station (LAS), located inBrookfield

Township, Illinois.

ETE provide state and local governments with site-specific information needed for Protective Action decision-making.

In the performance of this effort, guidance is provided by documents published by FederalGovernmental agencies.

Most important of these are:* Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NUREG/CR-7002, SAND 2010-0061P, "Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies,"

November 2011.(NRC, 2011a)* Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NUREG/CR-1745, "Analysis of Techniques forEstimating Evacuation Times for Emergency Planning Zones," November, 1980.(NRC, 1980a)* Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, "Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans andPreparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants,"

November 1980. (NRC, 1980b)" Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NUREG/CR-6863, SAND2004-5900, "Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies for Nuclear Power Plants,"January 2005. (NRC, 2005)" Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix E to Part 50 -Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production andUtilization Facilities, 2011. (NRC, 2011b)The work effort reported herein was supported and guided by Exelon who contributed suggestions, critiques, and the local knowledge base required.

Table 1-1 presents a summary ofstakeholders and interactions.

Table 1-1. Stakeholder Interaction I.Stkhle Nature of Sta ehode IntracioProvided data (telephone survey, employees, transients, special facilities, transit resources)

Exelon needed for the study. Coordinated information exchange with offsite response organizations.

Reviewed draft report and provided comments.

Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA) Provided existing emergency plans, including traffic and access control points and otherLaSalle County Office of Emergency Management information critical to the ETE study. Engaged inthe ETE development and informed of the studyGrundy County Office of Emergency Management results.LaSalle County Generating Station 1-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 1.1 Overview of the ETE ProcessThe 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 Exelon.b. Conducted bi-weekly conference calls with Exelon to identify issues to beaddressed and resources available.

c. Conducted a detailed field survey of the highway system and of area trafficconditions within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and Shadow Region.d. Obtained demographic data from the 2010 Census and from Exelon.e. Obtained results of a random sample telephone survey of EPZ residents fromExelon.f. Obtained data from Exelon and local offsite response organizations (OROs) toidentify and describe

schools, special facilities, major employers, transient attractions, transportation providers, and other important information.

2. Estimated distributions of Trip Generation times representing the time required byvarious population groups (permanent residents, employees, and transients) to prepare(mobilize) for the evacuation trip. These estimates are primarily based upon therandom sample telephone survey.3. Defined Evacuation Scenarios.

These scenarios reflect the variation in demand, in tripgeneration distribution and in highway capacities, associated with different

seasons, dayof week, time of day and weather conditions.

4. Reviewed the existing traffic management plan to be implemented by local and statepolice in the event of an incident at the plant. Traffic and access control are applied atspecified Traffic Control Points (TCP) and Access Control Points (ACP) located within thestudy area.5. Utilized the 13 existing Sub-areas which generally follow township boundaries andmajor roadways or rivers to define Evacuation Regions.

"Regions" are groups ofcontiguous Sub-areas for which ETE are calculated.

The configurations of these Regionsreflect wind direction and the radial extent of the impacted area. Each Region, otherthan those that approximate circular areas, approximates a "key-hole section" withinthe EPZ as recommended by NUREG/CR-7002.

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.LaSalle County Generating Station 1-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

a. Estimated the evacuation traffic demand, based on the available information derived from Census data, and from data provided by county and state agencies, Exelon and from the telephone survey.b. Applied the procedures specified in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual to thedata acquired during the field survey, to estimate the capacity of all highwaysegments comprising the evacuation routes (TRB, 2010).c. Developed the link-node representation of the evacuation

network, which isused as the basis for the computer analysis that calculates the ETE.d. Calculated the evacuating traffic demand for each Region and for each Scenario.

e. Specified selected candidate destinations for each "origin" (location of each"source" where evacuation trips are generated over the mobilization time) tosupport evacuation travel consistent with outbound movement relative to thelocation of the LAS.8. Executed the DYNEV II model to determine optimal evacuation routing and compute ETEfor all residents, transients and employees

("general population")

with access to privatevehicles.

Generated a complete set of ETE for all specified Regions and Scenarios.

9. Documented ETE in formats in accordance with NUREG/CR-7002.

10. Calculated the ETE for all transit activities including those for special facilities (schools, preschools, day camps and medical facilities),

for the transit-dependent population andfor homebound special needs population.

1.2 The LaSalle County Generating Station LocationThe LAS site is located approximately 3 miles west of Illinois State Highway 170 in Brookfield

Township, LaSalle County, Illinois.

The site is approximately 70 miles southwest of Chicago, IL.The EPZ consists of part of LaSalle and Grundy Counties.

Figure 1-1 shows the location of theLAS site relative to Chicago, as well as the major population centers and roadways in the area.LaSalle County Generating Station 1-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 L~~~~~~ li lhor -M,,ei(4 1 Lakeo,C -n m tik-- -....... ." -..... --'r ...<17) -l a, ,kek- e- I VIv ir- f I .-,,,, \ I\/ rr i11 !<,) I\*LAS-. ., -: / ..e..U g" I "\ .... .2,~~l 5,vll 0ilo MieRngwk319Z1 Figure 1-1. LAS LocationLaSalle County Generating Station 1-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacua~tion Timp Rev. 0 1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.Field Surveys of the Highway NetworkKLD personnel drove the entire highway system within the EPZ and the Shadow Region whichconsists of the area between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles radially from theplant. The characteristics of each section of highway were recorded.

These characteristics areshown in Table 1-2:Table 1-2. Highway Characteristics

Number of lanes 0 Posted speed* Lane width 0 Actual free speed* Shoulder type & width 0 Abutting land use* Interchange geometries 0 Control devices* Lane channelization

& queuing

Intersection configuration (including capacity (including turn bays/lanes) roundabouts where applicable)

Geometrics:

curves, grades (>4%) 0 Traffic signal type* Unusual characteristics:

Narrow bridges, sharp curves, poor pavement, flood warningsigns, inadequate delineations, toll booths, etc.Video and audio recording equipment were used to capture a permanent record of the highwayinfrastructure.

No attempt was made to meticulously measure such attributes as lane widthand shoulder width; estimates of these measures based on visual observation and recordedimages were considered appropriate for the purpose of estimating the capacity of highwaysections.

For example, Exhibit 15-7 in the HCM indicates that a reduction in lane width from 12feet (the "base" value) to 10 feet can reduce free flow speed (FFS) by 1.1 mph -not a materialdifference

-for two-lane highways.

Exhibit 15-30 in the HCM shows little sensitivity for theestimates of Service Volumes at Level of Service (LOS) E (near capacity),

with respect to FFS, fortwo-lane 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 thetraffic control devices observed during the road survey; this information was referenced whilepreparing the input stream for the DYNEV II System.As documented on page 15-5 of the HCM 2010, the capacity of a two-lane highway is 1,700passenger cars per hour in one direction.

For freeway sections, a value of 2,250 vehicles perhour per lane is assigned, as per Exhibit 11-17 of the HCM 2010. The road survey has identified several segments which are characterized by adverse geometrics on two-lane highways whichare reflected in reduced values for both capacity and speed. These estimates are consistent with the service volumes for LOS E presented in HCM Exhibit 15-30. These links may beLaSalle County Generating Station 1-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 identified by reviewing Appendix K. Link capacity is an input to DYNEV II which computes theETE. Further discussion of roadway capacity is provided in Section 4 of this report.Traffic signals are either pre-timed (signal timings are fixed over time and do not change withthe traffic volume on competing approaches),

or are actuated (signal timings vary over timebased on the changing traffic volumes on competing approaches).

Actuated signals requiredetectors 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 thesignal masts and pointed toward the intersection approaches.

If detectors were observed onthe approaches to a signalized intersection during the road survey, detailed signal timings werenot collected as the timings vary with traffic volume. TCPs at locations which have controldevices are represented as actuated signals in the DYNEV II system.If no detectors were observed, the signal control at the intersection was considered pre-timed, and detailed signal timings were gathered for several signal cycles. These signal timings wereinput to the DYNEV II system used to compute ETE, as per NUREG/CR-7002 guidance.

Figure 1-2 presents the link-node analysis network that was constructed to model theevacuation roadway network in the EPZ and Shadow Region. The directional arrows on the linksand the node numbers have been removed from Figure 1-2 to clarify the figure. The detailedfigures provided in Appendix K depict the analysis network with directional arrows shown andnode numbers provided.

The observations made during the field survey were used to calibrate the analysis network.Telephone SurveyThe results of a telephone survey conducted in 2011 were obtained to gather information needed for the evacuation study. Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used and tabulations of data compiled from the survey returns.These data were utilized to develop estimates of vehicle occupancy to estimate the number ofevacuating vehicles during an evacuation and to estimate elements of the mobilization process.This database was also referenced to estimate the number of transit-dependent residents.

Computing the Evacuation Time Estimates The overall study procedure is outlined in Appendix D. Demographic data were obtained fromseveral sources, as detailed later in this report. These data were analyzed and converted intovehicle demand data. The vehicle demand was loaded onto appropriate "source" links of theanalysis network using GIS mapping software.

The DYNEV II system was then used to computeETE for all Regions and Scenarios.

Analytical ToolsThe DYNEV II System that was employed for this study is comprised of several integrated computer models. One of these is the DYNEV (DYnamic Network EVacuation) macroscopic simulation model, a new version of the IDYNEV model that was developed by KLD undercontract with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).LaSalle County Generating Station 1-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Figure 1-2. LAS Link-Node Analysis NetworkLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate1-7KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 DYNEV II consists of four sub-models:

A macroscopic traffic simulation model (for details, see Appendix C)." A Trip Distribution (TD), model that assigns a set of candidate destination (D) nodes foreach "origin" (0) located within the analysis

network, where evacuation trips are"generated" over time. This establishes a set of O-D tables." A Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA), model which assigns trips to paths of travel(routes) which satisfy the O-D tables, over time. The TD and DTA models are integrated to form the DTRAD (Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution) model, as described inAppendix B.* A Myopic Traffic Diversion model which diverts traffic to avoid intense, local congestion, if possible.

Another software product developed by KLD, named UNITES (UNlfied Transportation Engineering System) was used to expedite data entry and to automate the production of outputtables.The dynamics of traffic flow over the network are graphically animated using the softwareproduct, EVAN (EVacuation ANimator),

developed by KILD. EVAN is GIS based, and displaysstatistics 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 onareas 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 isoutlined in Appendix D. Appendix A is a glossary of terms.For the reader interested in an evaluation of the original model, I-DYNEV, the following references are suggested:

" NUREG/CR-4873, PNL-6171, "Benchmark Study of the I-DYNEV Evacuation TimeEstimate Computer Code," 1988. (NRC, 1988a)* NUREG/CR-4874, PNL-6172, "The Sensitivity of Evacuation Time Estimates to Changes inInput Parameters for the I-DYNEV Computer Code," 1988. (NRC, 1988b)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 trafficdemand 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 theplant.DYNEV II provides a detailed description of traffic operations on the evacuation network.

Thisdescription enables the analyst to identify bottlenecks and to develop countermeasures thatare designed to represent the behavioral responses of evacuees.

The effects of thesecountermeasures may then be tested with the model.LaSalle County Generating Station 1-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE StudyTable 1-3 presents a comparison of this ETE study with the previous (1993) study. The ETE inthis study are longer (35 minutes) than in the 1993 study. The major factors contributing to thedifferences between the ETE values obtained in this study and those of the previous study canbe summarized as follows:" An increase in permanent

resident, employee, and transient population.

A decrease in resident vehicle occupancy, which results in more evacuating vehicles andlonger ETE.* Consideration of shadow evacuation which can congest roadways outside the EPZ anddelay the egress of EPZ evacuees, prolonging ETE.* Trip generation rates based on telephone survey results of EPZ residents.

The tripgeneration times in this study are significantly longer than in the previous study.As discussed in Section 7, the 100th percentile ETE is dictated by trip generation timedue to the minimal traffic congestion within the EPZ. Thus, longer trip generation timeresults in longer 100th percentile ETE.Table 1-3. ETE Study Comparisons Toi Previous

-- E Study Cu ,- rrent ET StudyResidentPopulation Basisuata o~talnea wornm iu census oaaa,field survey work, IEMA, IEMD, state andcounty agencies.

Population

= 16,290-rcui. EOIT-ware using 2u0u u03Census blocks; area ratio methodused.Population

= 17,491The vehicle data was derived from theResident demographic data and average number of 2.30 persons/household, 1.26Population Vehicle persons per household and assumed to be evacuating vehicles/household Occupancy one vehicle per household.

Vehicle yielding:

1.83 persons/vehicle occupancy ranges from 2.60 to 2.90persons per vehicle.Employee estimates based onData obtained from 1990 Census data, information provided about majorEmployee field survey work, state and county employers in EPZ, US CensusPopulation agencies.

Longitudinal Employer-Household Employees

= 651 DynamicsI _Employees

= 1,122LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate1-9KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 To-ic Prviu 0T Std Curn tdTransit-Dependent Population Assumed people without vehicles willreceive rides from either neighbors ordesignated public service vehicles.

Estimates based upon U.S. Censusdata and the results of thetelephone survey. A total of 203people who do not have access to avehicle, requiring 7 buses toevacuate.

An additional 12homebound special needs personsrequire special transportation toevacuate (2 buses and 1 ambulance

-are required to evacuate thispopulation).

Data obtained from 1990 Census data, Transient estimates based uponfield survey work, state and countyTransient aece.Bsdodaaaalbesof information provided aboutPopulation agencies.

Based on data available as of transient attractions in EPZ.October 1993. Transients

= 8,244Transients

= 6,192Data obtained from 1990 Census data, Special facility population based onDataobtanedfrom1990Cenus dta, information provided by ExelonSpecial Facilities field survey work, state and county Current Census = 210Population agencies.

Buses Required

= 3Total Population

= 679 Wheelchair e s = 1Wheelchair Buses = 11School population based onData obtained from 1990 Census data, information poied onfield survey work, state and county ifrainpoie yEeoSchool Population fiesu School enrollment

= 3,032School enrollment 2,194 Pr250 land Day Camp enrollment

=250Voluntary evacuation from 20 percent of the population withinwithin EPZ in areas Not Considered.

the EPZ, but not within theoutside region to Evacuation Region (see Figure 2-1)be evacuated Shadow 20% of people outside of the EPZEvacuation Not considered.

within the Shadow Region(see Figure 7-2)Network Size 141 links; 150 nodes 962 links; 799 nodesField surveys conducted in JanuaryRoadway Derived from official Illinois Department 2014. Roads and intersections wereof Transportation maps verified by field video archived.

road survey data collection.

Road capacities based on 2010HCM.Direct evacuation to designated Direct evacuation to designated Relocation Center. Relocation Center.50 percent of transit-dependent Ridesharing Not Considered.

persons will evacuate with aI I neighbor or friend.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate1-10KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0

-I Toi0rviu Std Curen ET tdTrip Generation for Evacuation Residents with commuters returning leavebetween 15 and 105 minutes.Residents without commuters returning leave between 15 and 85 minutes.Employees and transients leave between15 and 45 minutes.Based on residential telephone survey of specific pre-tripmobilization activities:

Residents with commuters returning leave between 15 and 210minutes.Residents without commuters returning leave between 15 and 150minutes.Employees and transients leavebetween 15 and 105 minutes.All times measured from theAdvisory to Evacuate.

Good, Rain, or Snow. The capacityNormal or Adverse.

The capacity and free and Ree ow Spof all ciniWeather flow speed of all links in the network are the netw are ed by 10% inreduced by 20% in adverse conditions.

the eetwora and 20% f nthe event of rain and 20% for snow.Modeling IDYNEV model DYNEV II System -Version 4.0.18.0No specific Event. Increased peak Seneca Shipyard DaysSpecial Events transient population by 50 to 300 percent.

Special Event Population

= 1,500additional transients 22 Regions (central sector wind8 conditions for 10 evacuation zones direction and each adjacent sectorproducing 80 scenarios, technique used) and 14 Scenarios producing 308 unique cases.Evacuation Time ETE reported for 100th percentile for each ETE reported for 90t' and 100thEstimates Evacuation Section.

Results presented by percentile population.

ResultsReporting Scenario.

presented by Region and Scenario.

Evacuation Time Winter, Weekday, Midday,Estimates for the Winter, Daytime, Normal Weather:

3:05 Good Weather:

3:40entire EPZ, 100th Summer, Daytime, Normal Weather:

3:05percentile Summer Weekday, Midday,percetileGood Weather:

3:40LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate1-11KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS This section presents the estimates and assumptions utilized in the development of theevacuation time estimates.

2.1 Data Estimates

1. Population estimates are based upon Census 2010 data.2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within theEPZ are based upon data provided by Exelon and on the US Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics tools (see Section 3.4). Phone calls to individual employers were used to supplement data provided by Exelon.3. Population estimates at special and transient facilities are based on data provided byExelon, state and county agencies, and telephone calls to individual facilities.

4. Roadway capacity estimates are based on field surveys and the application of theHighway Capacity Manual 2010.5. Population mobilization times are based on a statistical analysis of data acquired from arandom sample telephone survey of EPZ residents (see Section 5 and Appendix F).6. The relationship between resident population and evacuating vehicles is developed from the telephone survey. Average values of 2.30 persons per household (SeeAppendix F, Figure F-i) and 1.26 evacuating vehicles per household (Figure F-4) areused. The relationship between persons and vehicles for employees, transients, and thespecial event is as follows:a. Employees:

one employee per vehicle.b. Transients:

varies from 2.00 to 2.30 persons per vehicle depending on the typeof facility, with the exception of Woodsmoke Ranch (seasonal resort).

A vehicleoccupancy of 1.83 (2.30 people per household

-1.26 evacuating vehicles perhousehold) was used for Woodsmoke Ranch due to the residential characteristics of the facility.

See Section 3.3 for additional information.

c. Special Event: Seneca Shipyard Days has an estimated occupancy of 2.30 personsper vehicle (average household size from telephone survey).LaSalle County Generating Station 2-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 2.2 Study Methodological Assumptions

1. ETE are presented for the evacuation of the 90th and 100th percentiles of population foreach Region and for each Scenario.

The percentile ETE is defined as the elapsed timefrom the Advisory to Evacuate issued to a specific Region of the EPZ, to the time thatRegion is clear of the indicated percentile of evacuees.

A Region is defined as a group ofSub-areas that is issued an Advisory to Evacuate.

A scenario is a combination ofcircumstances, including time of day, day of week, season, and weather conditions.

2. The ETE are computed and presented in tabular format and graphically, in a formatcompliant with NUREG/CR-7002.

3. Evacuation movements (paths of travel) are generally outbound relative to the plant tothe extent permitted by the highway network.

All major evacuation routes are used inthe analysis.

4. Regions are defined by the underlying "keyhole" or circular configurations as specified inSection 1.4 of NUREG/CR-7002.

These Regions, as defined, display irregular boundaries reflecting the geography of the Sub-areas included within these underlying configurations.

5. As indicated in Figure 2-2 of NUREG/CR-7002, 100% of people within the impacted"keyhole" evacuate.

20% of those people within the EPZ, not within the impactedkeyhole, will voluntarily evacuate.

20% of those people within the Shadow Region willvoluntarily evacuate.

See Figure 2-1 for a graphical representation of these evacuation percentages.

Sensitivity studies explore the effect on ETE of increasing the percentage of voluntary evacuees in the Shadow Region (see Appendix M).6. A total of 14 "Scenarios" representing different temporal variations (season, time ofday, day of week) and weather conditions are considered.

These Scenarios are outlinedin Table 2-1.7. Scenario 14 considers the closure of a single lane on 1-80 westbound fromapproximately 4 miles west of the junction with Seneca Road (Exit 105) toapproximately 1.5 miles west of the interchange

-Exit 90 -with Illinois State Route 23).8. The models of the I-DYNEV System were recognized as state of the art by the AtomicSafety & Licensing Board (ASLB) in past hearings (NRC, 1988a). The models havecontinuously been refined and extended since those hearings and were independently validated by a consultant retained by the NRC. The new DYNEV II model incorporates the latest technology in traffic simulation and in dynamic traffic assignment.

The DYNEVII System is used to compute ETE in this study.LaSalle County Generating Station 2-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Table 2-1. Evacuation Scenario Definitions S I.ni Seso 2. Day of Wee Tieo ay Wahrpca1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain NoneS Summer Midweek, Evening Good NoneWeekend6WinterMidweekMiddayGoodNone7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None12 Winter Midweek, Evening Good NoneWeekendMidweek, Seneca Shipyard13 Summer Wend Evening Good DyWeekend DaysSingle Lane14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Closure on 1-80Westbound 2 Winter assumes that school is in session (also applies to spring and autumn).

Summer assumes that school is notin session.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate2-3KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 0Figure 2-1. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate2-4KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 2.3 Study Assumptions

1. The Planning Basis Assumption for the calculation of ETE is a rapidly escalating accidentthat requires evacuation, and includes the following:

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

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

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

2. It is assumed that everyone within the group of Sub-areas forming a Region that isissued an Advisory to Evacuate will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord withthe planned routes.3. 49 percent of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter (see Figure F-3); 49percent of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuterbefore beginning their evacuation trip (see Figure F-5), based on the telephone surveyresults.

Therefore 24 percent (49% x 49% = 24%) of EPZ households will await the returnof a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.4. The ETE will also include consideration of "through" (External-External) trips during thetime that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated Region. "Normal" traffic flowis assumed to be present within the EPZ at the start of the emergency.

5. Access Control Points (ACP) will be staffed within approximately 120 minutes following the siren notifications, to divert traffic attempting to enter the EPZ. Earlier activation ofACP locations could delay returning commuters.

It is assumed that no through traffic willenter the EPZ after this 120 minute time period.6. Traffic Control Points (TCP) within the EPZ will be staffed over time, beginning at theAdvisory to Evacuate.

Their number and location will depend on the Region to beevacuated and resources available.

The objectives of these TCP are:a. Facilitate the movements of all (mostly evacuating) vehicles at the location.

b. Discourage inadvertent vehicle movements towards the plant.c. Provide assurance and guidance to any traveler who is unsure of the appropriate actions or routing.d. Act as local surveillance and communications center.e. Provide information to the emergency operations center (EOC) as needed, basedon direct observation or on information provided by travelers.

In calculating ETE, it is assumed that evacuees will drive safely, travel in directions identified in the plans, and obey all control devices and traffic guides.7. Buses will be used to transport those without access to private vehicles:

a. If schools are in session, transport (buses) will evacuate students directly to thedesignated relocation centers.b. Buses, wheelchair buses, and ambulances will evacuate patients at medicalfacilities within the EPZ, as needed.c. Transit-dependent general population will be evacuated to Reception Centers.LaSalle County Generating Station 2-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

d. Schoolchildren, if school is in session, are given priority in assigning transitvehicles.

e. Bus mobilization time is considered in ETE calculations.

f. Analysis of the number of required round-trips

("waves")

of evacuating transitvehicles is presented.

8. Provisions are made for evacuating the transit-dependent portion of the generalpopulation to reception centers by bus, based on the assumption that some of thesepeople will ride-share with family, neighbors, and friends, thus reducing the demand forbuses. We assume that the percentage of people who rideshare is 50 percent.

Thisassumption is based upon reported experience for other emergencies, and on guidancein Section 2.2 of NUREG/CR-7002 (IES, 1981).9. Two types of adverse weather scenarios are considered.

Rain may occur for eitherwinter or summer scenarios; snow occurs in winter scenarios only. It is assumed that therain or snow begins earlier or at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued.No weather-related reduction in the number of transients who may be present in theEPZ is assumed.

It is assumed that roads are passable and that the appropriate agenciesare plowing the roads as they would normally when snowing.Adverse weather scenarios affect roadway capacity and the free flow highway speeds.The factors applied for the ETE study are based on recent research on the effects ofweather on roadway operations; the factors are shown in Table 2-2 (Agarwal, 2005).10. School buses used to transport students are assumed to transport 70 students per busfor elementary schools and 50 students per bus for middle and high schools.

Buses usedto transport children from Girl Scout Camp Pokanoka are assumed to transport 50children per bus. Transit buses used to transport the transit-dependent generalpopulation are assumed to transport 30 people per bus. Buses evacuating patients frommedical facilities can transport 30 ambulatory people per bus; 15 wheelchair boundpersons per wheelchair bus; and 2 bedridden patients per ambulance.

Table 2-2. Model Adjustment for Adverse WeatherRain 90% 90% No EffectSnow 80% 80% Clear driveway before leaving home (See Figure F-9)*Adverse weather capacity and speed values are given as a percentage of good weatherconditions.

Roads are assumed to be passable.

LaSalle County Generating Station 2-6 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 indeveloping an evacuation plan. These estimates consist of three components:

1. An estimate of population within the EPZ, stratified into groups (resident,

employee, transient).

2. An estimate, for each population group, of mean occupancy per evacuating vehicle.

Thisestimate is used to determine the number of evacuating vehicles.

3. An estimate of potential double-counting of vehicles.

Appendix E presents much of the source material for the population estimates.

Our primary source ofpopulation data, the 2010 Census, however, is not adequate for directly estimating some transient groups.Throughout the year, vacationers and tourists enter the EPZ. These non-residents may dwell withinthe EPZ for a short period (e.g. a few days or one or two weeks), or may enter and leave within oneday. 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 double-counting 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 anemployee and once again as a shopper." A visitor who stays at a hotel and spends time at a park, then goes shopping could be countedthree times.Furthermore, the number of vehicles at a location depends on time of day. For example, motelparking lots may be full at dawn and empty at noon. Similarly, parking lots at area parks, which are fullat noon, may be almost empty at dawn. Estimating counts of vehicles by simply adding up thecapacities of different types of parking facilities will tend to overestimate the number of transients andcan lead to ETE that are too conservative.

Analysis of the population characteristics of the LAS EPZ indicates the need to identify three distinctgroups:" Permanent residents

-people who are year round residents of the EPZ." Transients

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

-people who reside outside of the EPZ and commute to businesses within the EPZon a daily basis.Estimates of the population and number of evacuating vehicles for each of the population groups arepresented for each Sub-area and by polar coordinate representation (population rose). The LAS EPZ issubdivided into 13 Sub-areas.

The EPZ is shown in Figure 3-1.LaSalle County Generating Station 3-1 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. The averagehousehold size (2.30 persons/household

-See Figure F-i) and the number of evacuating vehicles perhousehold (1.26 vehicles/household

-See Figure F-4) were adapted from the telephone survey results.Population estimates are based upon Census 2010 data. The estimates are created by cutting thecensus block polygons by the Sub-area and EPZ boundaries.

A ratio of the original area of each censusblock and the updated area (after cutting) is multiplied by the total block population to estimate whatthe population is within the EPZ. This methodology assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 3-1 provides the permanent resident population within the EPZ by Sub-area based on this methodology.

The year 2010 permanent resident population is divided by the average household size and thenmultiplied by the average number of evacuating vehicles per household in order to estimate number ofvehicles.

Permanent resident population and vehicle estimates are presented in Table 3-2. Figure 3-2and Figure 3-3 present the permanent resident population and permanent resident vehicle estimates by sector and distance from LAS. This "rose" was constructed using GIS software.

It can be argued that this estimate of permanent residents overstates,

somewhat, the number ofevacuating

vehicles, especially during the summer. It is certainly reasonable to assert that someportion of the population would be on vacation during the summer and would travel elsewhere.

Arough estimate of this reduction can be obtained as follows:" Assume 50 percent of all households vacation for a two-week period over the summer." Assume these vacations, in aggregate, are uniformly dispersed over 10 weeks, i.e. 10 percent ofthe population is on vacation during each two-week 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 bya lesser amount in the off-season.

Given the uncertainty in this estimate, we elected to apply noreductions in permanent resident population for the summer scenarios to account for residents whomay be out of the area.3.1.1 Special Facilities Several medical facilities are located within the EPZ (see Table E-3). These facilities have permanent residents that are included in the Census; however, the medical facilities are transit dependent (willnot evacuate in personal vehicles) and are addressed in Section 8. As such, these residents areincluded in the EPZ resident population, but no evacuating vehicles are considered for these residents.

The vehicles in Table 3-2 and Figure 3-3 have been adjusted accordingly.

LaSalle County Generating Station 3-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

.3.1.2 Illinois National Guard Training CenterThe Illinois National Guard Training Center (located in Marseilles, 1.6 miles north-northwest of LAS) hasa total of 556 personnel using the site for training at peak times according to data provided by Exelon.It is conservatively assumed that none of these personnel are EPZ residents.

An average occupancy of 2people per vehicle is employed for this site. Thus, a total of 556 persons in 278 vehicles are considered for this facility in this study.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-3KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Figure 3-1. LAS EPZLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-4KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 3-1. EPZ Permanent Resident Population 1 936 1,0602 67 773 704 7484 2,978 3,1245 571 5076 159 1087 665 6958 642 551926930810 5,678 6,29211 2,880 3,04613 638 68717 314 288EPZ Population Growth: 6.00%Table 3-2. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Sub-area201Subae 201 Pouato Seidn Vehicles 0* -11,0605832 77 443 748 4094 3,124 1,7105 507 2826 108 607 695 3808 551 3049 308 17110 6,292 3,44911 3,046 1,66613 687 37817 288 1553-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-5KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 NNWN1,043--0 -' 0NNE-350 "WNWF3641wswF7211ENEEF-227ESE405-j.- 0SSW234-j10 Miles to EPZ Boundary0S480122-jNResident Population Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total0-1 21 211-2 64 852-3 194 2793-4 593 8724-5 831 1,7035 -6 4,073 5,7766-7 4,785 10,5617-8 1,186 11,7478-9 1,768 13,5159 -10 966 14,48110 -EPZ 3,010 17,491Total: 17,491WEInset0 -2 Miles SFigure 3-2. Permanent Resident Population by SectorLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-6KILD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 NNNW575___ NNE_6530WNWF198WF406 0WSWFig16ENEF-28-141-1EESE223---j0ssw0SF264--71Resident VehiclesMiles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total0-1 12 121-2 36 482-3 105 1533-4 324 4774-5 457 9345-6 2,239 3,1736- 7 2,617 5,7907-8 651 6,4418-9 969 7,4109 -10 532 7,94210 -EPZ 1,649 9,591Total: 9,59110 Miles to EPZ BoundaryN000 0 012 000 'I EWInset0 -2 Miles SFigure 3-3. Permanent Resident Vehicles by SectorLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-7KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 3.2 Shadow Population A portion of the population living outside the evacuation area extending to 15 miles radiallyfrom the LAS (in the Shadow Region) may elect to evacuate without having been instructed todo so. Based upon NUREG/CR-7002

guidance, it is assumed that 20 percent of the permanent resident population, based on U.S. Census Bureau data, in this Shadow Region will elect toevacuate.

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

Table 3-3, Figure 3-4, and Figure 3-5 present estimates of the shadow population and vehicles, by sector.Note there is a large jail -the Dwight Correctional Center -within the Shadow Region, in thesoutheast sector. The Census block for this facility indicates a large resident population with nohouseholds assigned.

This block was filtered out and not included as part of the shadowpopulation as jails outside of the EPZ would shelter-in-place.

Table 3-3. Shadow Population and Vehicles by SectorSeco Pouaion Evcatn VeiceN711390NNE 304 167NE 4,918 2,695ENE 2,874 1,578E 1,343 733ESE 246 135SE 1,236 71SSE 133 76S 175 98SSW 550 302SW 15,638 8,565WSW 799 439W 292 160WNW 5,649 3,060NW 16,148 8,782NNW 1,033 568LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-8KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 NNNW 1711 NNEWNW5,649wwSw799ENEZ,14310E82 107 1,4i790 ESESE-.. EPZ Boundary to 11 MilesSSW -.1 SSE~sShadow Population Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative TotalEPZ -11 7,560 7,56011 -12 17,353 24,91312 -13 13,570 38,48313 -14 4,844 43,32714- 15 8,722 52,049Total: 52,049Figure 3-4. Shadow Population by SectorLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-9KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 NNNW F 390I NNEWNW3,060439ENEF1,578EESESSW L.J- SSEF302 S 7F9-8j* .. EPZ Boundary to 11MilesShadow VehiclesMiles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative TotalEPZ -11 4,088 4,08811 -12 9,502 13,59012 -13 7,388 20,97813 -14 2,656 23,63414-15 4,185 27,819Total: 27,819Figure 3-5. Shadow Vehicles by SectorLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-10KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 3.3 Transient Population Transient population groups are defined as those people (who are not permanent residents, nor commuting employees) who enter the EPZ for a specific purpose (boating, camping).

Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at a campground.

Data for thetransient facilities within the EPZ were provided by Exelon. The LAS EPZ has a number offacilities that attract transients, including:

Campgrounds

-950 transients; 475 vehicles; 2.00 people per vehicle* Woodsmoke Ranch -3,416 transients; 1,871 vehicles; 1.83 people per vehicle" Parks and Wildlife Areas -2,470 transients; 1,075 vehicles; 2.30 people per vehicle(NOTE: Local parks are not included; visitors to these facilities are local residents andhave already been counted as permanent residents in Section 3.1.)* Marinas -1,358 transients; 591 vehicles; 2.30 people per vehicle* Seneca Hunt Club -50 transients; 22 vehicles; 2.30 people per vehicleIt is assumed that families will travel to marinas, campgrounds, parks and wildlife areas, andhunting clubs together in a single vehicle.

Thus, the average household size in the EPZ of 2.30persons (Figure F-i) is used as the vehicle occupancy for these facilities.

It is further assumedthat there are 2 people per vehicle at campgrounds.

The Woodsmoke Ranch is a seasonal resort. According to the website for the facility1, "property usage is restricted to 182 overnight stays per year although the park is open year round." Inorder to be included in the decennial census as a permanent

resident, a person must live intheir residence for more than 50% of the year. Thus, population at Woodsmoke Ranch is notincluded in the Census. The average household size of 2.30 and average evacuating vehicles of1.26 per household from the telephone survey was applied to the 1,485 properties atWoodsmoke Ranch.Appendix E, Table E-5 summarizes the transient data that was gathered for the recreational areas within the EPZ.In total, there are 8,244 transients evacuating in 4,034 vehicles, an average of 2.04 transients per vehicle.

Table 3-4 presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by Sub-area. Figure 3-6 and Figure 3-7 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.' http://www.woodsmokeranch.com/ownerinfo.php LaSalle County Generating Station 3-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Table 3-4. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles13,2021,3942 0 03 150 754 0 05 0 06 0 07 0 08 0 09 0 010 4,614 2,44411 278 12113 0 017 0 03-12 KID Engineering, P.C.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-12KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 NNNW0400-0 7 -NNE0 -WNWDo--1ENEF450ILWSW01Ew--ESEL-I--.. 0SSwF-0---10-0SFlo -z-5-1-" SE10 Miles to EPZ BoundaryN000 0 0V00 4500o )0 ETransients Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total0-1 0 01-2 450 4502-3 20 4703-4 0 4704-5 1,198 1,6685-6 2,432 4,1006-7 3,866 7,9667-8 0 7,9668-9 0 7,9669-10 278 8,24410 -EPZ 0 8,244Total: 8,244WInset 2 Miles SFigure 3-6. Transient Population by SectorLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-13KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 NNW-- 0N" 200 --' I -NNE2,067WNWW0wsw~-0SSW-0 -SL- --NTransient VehiclesMiles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total0-1 0 01-2 196 1962-3 9 2053-4 0 2054-5 531 736S -6 1,084 1,8206- 7 2,093 3,9137-8 0 3,9138-9 0 3,9139-10 121 4,03410 -EPZ 0 4,034Total: 4,034WEInset0 -2 Miles SFigure 3-7. Transient Vehicles by Sector3-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-14KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0

3.4 Employees

Employees who work within the EPZ fall into two categories:

" Those who live and work in the EPZ* Those who live outside of the EPZ and commute to jobs within the EPZ.Those of the first category are already counted as part of the permanent residentpopulation.

To avoid double counting, we focus only on those employees commuting fromoutside the EPZ who will evacuate along with the permanent resident population.

Maximum shift employment data were provided by Exelon for the major employers (generally speaking 50 or more employees in accordance with NUREG/CR-7002) in the EPZ. The IEMArequested that major employers listed in the county emergency plans be listed in this study.These employers

-many of which have less than the 50 employees typical of a major employer-are listed in Table E-4 along with the major employers in the EPZ. Phone calls were placed tothese employers to confirm that they were not major employers.

Those employers with lessthan 50 employees typically hire local residents.

As such, employees at these smaller employers are not considered because they are already included in the permanent resident population discussed in Section 3.1.Data obtained from the US Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics OnTheMapCensus analysis tool2 were used to estimate the number of employees commuting into the EPZto avoid double counting.

This tool allows the user to draw a cordon around any area in the USand a report of the number of employees commuting into and out of the cordoned area isproduced.

The tool was used to draw a cordon around the EPZ. The inflow/outflow report forthe EPZ was then used to calculate the percent of employees that work within the EPZ but liveoutside.

This value, 75.6%, was applied to the maximum shift employment to compute thenumber of people commuting into the EPZ to work at peak times.In Table E-4, the Employees (Max Shift) column is multiplied by the percent of employees commuting into the EPZ (75.6%) factor to determine the number of employees who are notresidents of the EPZ. It is conservatively assumed for all major employers that there is 1employee per vehicle as carpooling in the US is minimal.Table 3-5 presents employees commuting into the EPZ and their vehicles by Sub-area.

Figure3-8 and Figure 3-9 present these data by sector.2 http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/

LaSalle County Generating Station 3-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Table 3-5. Summary of Non-EPZ Resident Employees and Employee VehiclesS.bre Emloee Emloe Veice16026022 0 03 0 04 0 05 0 06 0 07 0 08 0 09 53 5310 126 12611 341 34113 0 017 0 0LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-16KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 NNW38]-- 0N126-j-0 -' 0NNEw---WNW[-I--,ENEE-6hIWw-5-0-J~-1Ew-0wsww---, ESEELI-. 0sswSSWS-602--F -iEmployees Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total0-1 602 6021-2 0 6022-3 0 6023-4 0 6024-5 0 6025-6 126 7286-7 38 7667-8 280 1,0468-9 0 1,0469-10 38 1,08410 -EPZ 38 1,122Total: 1,12210 Miles to EPZ BoundaryN0 000 0 00 000 0 EWInset0 -2 Miles SFigure 3-8. Employee Population by SectorLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-17KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 NNW38].- 0N126-j-0 -' 0 --NNE0 '.WNWLIZ-ENEV-5--IW0~ 00WSW 0LI\SwEmployee Vehicles-j01EL-I--!!ESE-- 0SSW0SF602L--I-SE10 Miles to EPZ BoundaryN~ EMiles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total0-1 602 6021-2 0 6022-3 0 6023-4 0 6024- 5 0 6025-6 126 7286 -7 38 7667-8 280 1,0468-9 0 1,0469-10 38 1,08410 -EPZ 381 1,122Total: 1,122WInset0 -2 Miles SFigure 3-9. Employee Vehicles by SectorLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-18KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 3.5 Medical Facilities Data were provided by Exelon and LaSalle County Emergency Management for each of themedical facilities within the EPZ. Table E-3 in Appendix E summarizes the data provided.

Section8 details the evacuation of medical facilities and their patients.

The number and type ofevacuating vehicles that need to be provided depend on the patients' state of health. It isestimated that buses can transport up to 30 people and wheelchair buses, up to 15 people.Ambulances are not needed to evacuate the medical facilities within the LAS EPZ since thereare no bedridden people at these facilities.

3.6 Total Demand in Addition to Permanent Population Vehicles will be traveling through the EPZ (external-external trips) at the time of an accident.

After the Advisory to Evacuate is announced, these through-travelers will also evacuate.

Thesethrough vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes traversing the EPZ 80. It isassumed that this traffic will continue to enter the EPZ during the first 120 minutes following the Advisory to Evacuate.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data was obtained from Federal Highway Administration (HPMS, 2013) to estimate the number of vehicles per hour on the aforementioned routes. TheAADT was multiplied by the K-Factor (TRB, 2010), which is the proportion of the AADT on aroadway 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 invehicles per hour (vph). The DHV is then multiplied by the D-Factor (TRB, 2010), which is theproportion 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 arepresented in Table 3-6, for each of the routes considered.

The DDHV is then multiplied by 2hours (access control points -ACP -are assumed to be activated at 120 minutes after theadvisory to evacuate) to estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysisnetwork.

As indicated, there are 5,516 vehicles entering the EPZ as external-external trips priorto the activation of the ACP and the diversion of this traffic.

This number is reduced by 60% forevening scenarios (Scenarios 5, 12 and 13) as discussed in Section 6.3.7 Special EventOne special event (Scenario

13) is considered for the ETE study -Seneca Shipyard Days -whichoccurs annually in June (summer) over 4 days (Wednesday through Saturday).

The event occursin Seneca, IL (Sub-area 10).Seneca Shipyard Days event personnel indicated the evenings have the peak attendance duringthe event. Event personnel also indicated the total attendance for the event is approximately 5,000 people over all four days. There are at most 2,000 people in attendance during the peak.Event personnel indicated the event draws a lot of transients because the Landing Ship Tankmanufacturing facility that was in Seneca during World War II has people tied to Seneca spreadthroughout the state and country.

It is conservatively assumed that 25% of the people presentLaSalle County Generating Station 3-19 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 during peak times are local residents; thus, there are 1,500 transients present for the eventduring the peak. Assuming that families travel to the event in a single vehicle and using theaverage household size of 2.30 people per household, the 1,500 transients evacuate in 652vehicles.

Temporary road closures on E. Armour Street and Williams Street occur during the festival, butall roadways could be quickly re-opened in the event of an emergency.

It is assumed that theroads would be re-opened by the time transients at the event gather their belongings andreturn to their vehicles to begin their evacuation trip. Vehicles were loaded on local streetsnear the event for this scenario.

There is no public transit for this event. There are no specialtraffic control treatments during this event.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-20KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 3-6. LAS EPZ External Traffic8003 3 1-80 Eastbound 25,783 0.107 0.5 1,379 2,75823 1-80 Westbound 25,783 0.107 0.5 1,379 2,758LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-21KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 3.8 Summary of DemandA summary of population and vehicle demand is provided in Table 3-7 and Table 3-8,respectively.

This summary includes all population groups described in this section.

Additional population groups -transit-dependent, special facility and school population

-are described ingreater detail in Section 8. A total of 41,518 people and 26,231 vehicles are considered in thisstudy.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-22KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 3-7. Summary of Population Demand11,060123,20260200556005,4322 77 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 853 748 14 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 9124 3,124 30 0 0 125 122 0 0 0 3,4015 507 10 0 0 0 114 0 0 0 6316 108 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1137 695 8 0 0 0 337 0 0 0 1,0408 551 8 0 0 15 1,013 0 0 0 1,5879 308 0 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 36110 6,292 55 4,614 126 0 1,696 0 0 0 12,78311 3,046 30 278 341 70 0 0 0 0 3,76513 687 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70017 288 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 298Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,410 0 10,410Illinois National Guard Training Center -see Section 3.1.2.4 Shadow population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 2-1 for additional information.

LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-23KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 3-8. Summary of Vehicle Demand158321,39460200278002,8592 44 With Sub-area 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 443 409 2 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 4864 1,710 2 0 0 16 6 0 0 0 1,7345 282 With Sub-area 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 2886 60 With Sub-area 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 607 380 With Sub-area 3 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 3948 304 With Sub-area 3 0 0 2 44 0 0 0 3509 171 0 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 22410 3,449 4 2,444 126 0 64 0 0 0 6,08711 1,666 2 121 341 10 0 0 0 0 2,14013 378 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38017 155 With Sub-area 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 155Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,564 5,516 11,080Vehicles for medical facilities include wheelchair buses and regular buses. Each bus is represented as two passenger vehicles.

Refer to Section 8 for additional information 6 School buses represented as two passenger vehicles.

Refer to Section 8 for additional information.

7 Illinois National Guard Training Center -see Section 3.1.2.8 Vehicles for shadow population have been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 2-1 for additional information.

LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate3-24KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITYThe ability of the road network to service vehicle demand is a major factor in determining howrapidly an evacuation can be completed.

The capacity of a road is defined as the maximumhourly rate at which persons or vehicles can reasonably be expected to traverse a point oruniform section of a lane of roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway,traffic and control conditions, as stated in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (TRB, 2010).In discussing

capacity, different operating conditions have been assigned alphabetical designations, A through F, to reflect the range of traffic operational characteristics.

Thesedesignations have been termed "Levels of Service" (LOS). For example, LOS A connotesfree-flow and high-speed operating conditions; LOS F represents a forced flow condition.

LOS Edescribes traffic operating at or near capacity.

Another concept, closely associated with capacity, is "Service Volume" (SV). Service volume isdefined as "The maximum hourly rate at which vehicles, bicycles or persons reasonably can beexpected to traverse a point or uniform section of a roadway during an hour under specificassumed conditions while maintaining a designated level of service."

This definition is similar tothat for capacity.

The major distinction is that values of SV vary from one LOS to another, whilecapacity is the service volume at the upper bound of LOS E, only.This distinction is illustrated in Exhibit 11-17 of the HCM 2010. As indicated there, the SV varieswith Free Flow Speed (FFS), and LOS. The SV is calculated by the DYNEV II simulation model,based on the specified link attributes, FFS, capacity, control device and traffic demand.Other factors also influence capacity.

These include, but are not limited to:" Lane width* Shoulder width* Pavement condition

" Horizontal and vertical alignment (curvature and grade)* Percent truck traffic" Control device (and timing, if it is a signal)" Weather conditions (rain, snow, fog, wind speed, ice)These factors are considered during the road survey and in the capacity estimation process;some factors have greater influence on capacity than others. For example, lane and shoulderwidth have only a limited influence on Base Free Flow Speed (BFFS1) according to Exhibit 15-7of the HCM. Consequently, lane and shoulder widths at the narrowest points were observedduring the road survey and these observations were recorded, but no detailed measurements of lane or shoulder width were taken. Horizontal and vertical alignment can influence both FFSand capacity.

The estimated FFS were measured using the survey vehicle's speedometer andobserving local traffic, under free flow conditions.

Capacity is estimated from the procedures of1 A very rough estimate of BFFS might be taken as the posted speed limit plus 10 mph (HCM 2010 Page 15-15)LaSalle County Generating Station 4-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 the 2010 HCM. For example, HCM Exhibit 7-1(b) shows the sensitivity of Service Volume at theupper bound of LOS D to grade (capacity is the Service Volume at the upper bound of LOS E).As discussed in Section 2.3, it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent the prevailing conditions during inclement weather.

Based on limited empirical data, weather conditions suchas rain reduce the values of free speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10percent.

Over the last decade new studies have been made on the effects of rain on trafficcapacity.

These studies indicate a range of effects between 5 and 20 percent depending onwind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.3, we employ a reduction in freespeed and in highway capacity of 10 percent and 20 percent for rain and snow, respectively.

Since congestion arising from evacuation may be significant, estimates of roadway capacitymust be determined with great care. Because of its importance, a brief discussion of the majorfactors 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 orcrossing traffic at the intersection.

Due to these differences, separate estimates of capacitymust be made for each section.

Often, the approach to the intersection is widened by theaddition of one or more lanes (turn pockets or turn bays), to compensate for the lower capacityof 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 At-grade intersections are apt to become the first bottleneck locations under local heavy trafficvolume 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 atcritical intersections will often be provided by traffic control personnel assigned for thatpurpose, whose directions may supersede traffic control devices.

The existing trafficmanagement plans documented in the county emergency plans are extensive and wereadopted without change.The per-lane capacity of an approach to a signalized intersection can be expressed (simplistically) in the following form:Qcap,m ( hm (3600) hm ])xPmwhere:Qcapm Capacity of a single lane of traffic on an approach, which executesmovement, m, upon entering the intersection; vehicles per hour (vph)LaSalle County Generating Station 4-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 hm Mean queue discharge headway of vehicles on this lane that are executing

movement, m; seconds per vehicleG = Mean duration of GREEN time servicing vehicles that are executing

movement, m, for each signal cycle; secondsL = Mean "lost time" for each signal phase servicing

movement, m; secondsC = Duration of each signal cycle; secondsPm = 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 theintersection:

through, left-turn, right-turn, and diagonal.

The turn-movement-specific mean discharge headway hm, depends in a complex way uponmany 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,hm = fm(hsat, F1, F2, ....)where:hsat = Saturation discharge headway for through vehicles; seconds per vehicleF1,F2 = The various known factors influencing hmfM() = Complex function relating hm to the known (or estimated) values of hsat,F1, F2,The estimation of hm for specified values of hsat, F1, F2, ... is undertaken within the DYNEV IIsimulation model by a mathematical model (Lieberman, 1980), (McShane, 1980), (Lieberman, 2012). The resulting values for hm always satisfy the condition:

hm hsatThat is, the turn-movement-specific discharge headways are always greater than, or equal tothe saturation discharge headway for through vehicles.

These headways (or its inverseequivalent, "saturation flow rate"), may be determined by observation or using the procedures of the HCM 2010.The above discussion is necessarily brief given the scope of this ETE report and the complexity of the subject of intersection capacity.

In fact, Chapters 18, 19 and 20 in the HCM 2010 addressthis topic. The factors, F1, F2,..., influencing saturation flow rate are identified in equation (18-5)of the HCM 2010.LaSalle County Generating Station 4-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 The traffic signals within the EPZ and Shadow Region are modeled using representative phasingplans and phase durations obtained as part of the field data collection.

Traffic responsive signalinstallations allow the proportion of green time allocated (Pm) for each approach to eachintersection to be determined by the expected traffic volumes on each approach duringevacuation circumstances.

The amount of green time (G) allocated is subject to maximum andminimum phase duration constraints; 2 seconds of yellow time are indicated for each signalphase and 1 second of all-red time is assigned between signal phases, typically.

If a signal is pre-timed, the yellow and all-red times observed during the road survey are used. A lost time (L) of2.0 seconds is used for each signal phase in the analysis.

4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of HighwayThe capacity of highway sections

-- as distinct from approaches to intersections

-- is a functionof roadway geometrics, traffic composition (e.g. percent heavy trucks and buses in the trafficstream) and, of course, motorist behavior.

There is a fundamental relationship which relatesservice volume (i.e. the number of vehicles serviced within a uniform highway section in a giventime period) to traffic density.

The top curve in Figure 4-1 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 service volumeincreases as demand volume and density increase, until the service volume attains its maximumvalue, which is the capacity of the highway section.

As traffic demand and the resulting highwaydensity increase beyond this "critical" value, the rate at which traffic can be serviced (i.e. theservice volume) can actually decline below capacity

("capacity drop"). Therefore, in order torealistically represent traffic performance during congested conditions (i.e. when demandexceeds capacity),

it is necessary to estimate the service volume, VF, under congested conditions.

The value of VF can be expressed as:VF = R x Capacitywhere:R = Reduction factor which is less than unityLaSalle County Generating Station 4-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 We have employed a value of R=0.90. The advisability of such a capacity reduction factor isbased upon empirical studies that identified a fall-off in the service flow rate when congestion occurs at "bottlenecks" or "choke points" on a freeway system. Zhang and Levinson describe aresearch program that collected data from a computer-based surveillance system (loopdetectors) installed on the Interstate Highway System, at 27 active bottlenecks in the twin citiesmetro area in Minnesota over a 7-week period (Zhang, 2004). When flow breakdown occurs,queues are formed which discharge at lower flow rates than the maximum capacity prior toobserved breakdown.

These queue discharge flow (QDF) rates vary from one location to thenext and also vary by day of week and time of day based upon local circumstances.

The citedreference presents a mean QDF of 2,016 passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl).

This figurecompares with the nominal capacity estimate of 2,250 pcphpl estimated for the ETE andindicated in Appendix K for freeway links. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 whichtranslates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.Since the principal objective of evacuation time estimate 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 thesimulation model.Rural roads, like freeways, are classified as "uninterrupted flow" facilities.

(This is in contrastwith 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 sameeffects as freeways in the event traffic demand exceeds the nominal capacity, resulting inqueuing 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 atintersections 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 roadwaygeometrics.

Sections of roadway with adverse geometrics are characterized by lower free-flow speeds and lane capacity.

Exhibit 15-30 in the Highway Capacity Manual was referenced toestimate saturation flow rates. The impact of narrow lanes and shoulders on free-flow speedand on capacity is not material, particularly when flow is predominantly in one direction as isthe case during an evacuation.

The procedure used here was to estimate "section"

capacity, VE, based on observations madetraveling over each section of the evacuation

network, based on the posted speed limits andtravel behavior of other motorists and by reference to the 2010 HCM. The DYNEV II simulation model determines for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether itscapacity would be limited by the "section-specific" service volume, VE, or by theintersection-specific capacity.

For each link, the model selects the lower value of capacity.

LaSalle County Generating Station 4-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 4.3 Application to the LAS Study AreaAs part of the development of the link-node analysis network for the study area, an estimate ofroadway capacity is required.

The source material for the capacity estimates presented hereinis contained in:2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)Transportation Research BoardNational Research CouncilWashington, D.C. (TRB, 2010)The highway system in the study area consists primarily of three categories of roads and, ofcourse, intersections:

" Two-Lane roads: Local, State" Multi-Lane Highways (at-grade)

" FreewaysEach of these classifications will be discussed.

4.3.1 Two-Lane RoadsRef: HCM Chapter 15 (TRB, 2010)Two lane roads comprise the majority of highways within the EPZ. The per-lane capacity of atwo-lane highway is estimated at 1,700 passenger cars per hour (pc/h). This estimate isessentially independent of the directional distribution of traffic volume except that, forextended distances, the two-way capacity will not exceed 3,200 pc/h. The HCM procedures then estimate Level of Service (LOS) and Average Travel Speed. The DYNEV II simulation modelaccepts the specified value of capacity as input and computes average speed based on thetime-varying demand: capacity relations.

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

" Most sections of two-lane roads within the EPZ are classified as "Class I", with "levelterrain";

some are "rolling terrain".

"Class I1" highways are mostly those within urban and suburban centers.4.3.2 Multi-Lane HighwayRef: HCM Chapter 14 (TRB, 2010)Exhibit 14-2 of the HCM 2010 presents a set of curves that indicate a per-lane capacity rangingfrom approximately 1,900 to 2,200 pc/h, for free-speeds of 45 to 60 mph, respectively.

Basedon observation, the multi-lane highways outside of urban areas within the EPZ service trafficwith free-speeds in this range. The actual time-varying speeds computed by the simulation model reflect the demand: capacity relationship and the impact of control at intersections.

ALaSalle County Generating Station 4-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 conservative estimate of per-lane capacity of 1,900 pc/h is adopted for this study for multi-lane highways outside of urban areas, as shown in Appendix K.4.3.3 FreewaysRef: HCM Chapters 10, 11, 12, 13 (TRB, 2010)Chapter 10 of the HCM 2010 describes a procedure for integrating the results obtained inChapters 11, 12 and 13, which compute capacity and LOS for freeway components.

Chapter 10also presents a discussion of simulation models. The DYNEV II simulation model automatically performs this integration process.Chapter 11 of the HCM 2010 presents procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for "BasicFreeway Segments".

Exhibit 11-17 of the HCM 2010 presents capacity vs. free speed estimates, which are provided below.Free Speed (mph): 55 60 65 70+Per-Lane Capacity (pc/h): 2250 2300 2350 2400The inputs to the simulation model are highway geometrics, free-speeds and capacity based onfield observations.

The simulation logic calculates actual time-varying speeds based on demand:capacity relationships.

A conservative estimate of per-lane capacity of 2,250 pc/h is adopted forthis study for freeways, as shown in Appendix K.Chapter 12 of the HCM 2010 presents procedures for estimating

capacity, speed, density andLOS for freeway weaving sections.

The simulation model contains logic that relates speed todemand volume: capacity ratio. The value of capacity obtained from the computational procedures detailed in Chapter 12 depends on the "Type" and geometrics of the weavingsegment and on the "Volume Ratio" (ratio of weaving volume to total volume).Chapter 13 of the HCM 2010 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 on-ramp orimmediately upstream of an off-ramp; the capacity of the ramp roadway; and the maximumflow rate entering the ramp influence area. In most cases, the freeway capacity is thecontrolling factor. Values of this merge area capacity are presented in Exhibit 13-8 of the HCM2010, and depend on the number of freeway lanes and on the freeway free speed. Rampcapacity is presented in Exhibit 13-10 and is a function of the ramp free flow speed. The DYNEVII simulation model logic simulates the merging operations of the ramp and freeway traffic inaccord with the procedures in Chapter 13 of the HCM 2010. If congestion results from anexcess of demand relative to capacity, then the model allocates service appropriately to thetwo entering traffic streams and produces LOS F conditions (The HCM does not address LOS Fexplicitly).

LaSalle County Generating Station 4-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

4.3.4 Intersections

Ref: HCM Chapters 18, 19, 20, 21 (TRB, 2010)Procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for approaches to intersections are presented inChapter 18 (signalized intersections),

Chapters 19, 20 (un-signalized intersections) and Chapter21 (roundabouts).

The complexity of these computations is indicated by the aggregate lengthof these chapters.

The DYNEV II simulation logic is likewise complex.The simulation model explicitly models intersections:

Stop/yield controlled intersections (both2-way and all-way) and traffic signal controlled intersections.

Where intersections arecontrolled by fixed time controllers, traffic signal timings are set to reflect average (non-evacuation) traffic conditions.

Actuated traffic signal settings respond to the time-varying 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 specificlocations where it is advisable or where existing plans call for overriding existing traffic controlto implement manned control, the model will use actuated signal timings that reflect thepresence of traffic guides. At locations where a special traffic control strategy (continuous left-turns, contra-flow lanes) is used, the strategy is modeled explicitly.

Where applicable, thelocation and type of traffic control for nodes in the evacuation network are noted in AppendixK. The characteristics of the ten highest volume signalized intersections are detailed inAppendix J.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 usingsimulation as an alternative analysis tool is:"The system under study involves a group of different facilities or travel modes withmutual interactions invoking several procedural chapters of the HCM. Alternative toolsare able to analyze these facilities as a single system."This statement succinctly describes the analyses required to determine traffic operations acrossan area encompassing an EPZ operating under evacuation conditions.

The model utilized forthis study, DYNEV II, is further described in Appendix C. It is essential to recognize thatsimulation models do not replicate the methodology and procedures of the HCM -they replacethese procedures by describing the complex interactions of traffic flow and computing Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) detailing the operational performance of traffic over time andby location.

The DYNEV II simulation model includes some HCM 2010 procedures only for thepurpose of estimating capacity.

All simulation models must be calibrated properly with field observations that quantify theperformance parameters applicable to the analysis network.

Two of the most important ofLaSalle County Generating Station 4-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 these are: (1) Free flow speed (FFS); and (2) saturation

headway, hsat. The first of these isestimated by direct observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using theconcepts of the HCM 2010, as described earlier.

These parameters are listed in Appendix K, foreach network link.Volume, vphDropRI --- QsDensity, vpmVfRvc -PlowRegimes I !Imph :Free : Forced:---II II II II II Io II II II II II II Ii UeInsitv.

vpmIVfkopt ksk!iFigure 4-1. Fundamental DiagramsLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate4-9KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIMEFederal Government guidelines (see NUREG/CR-7002) specify that the planner estimate thedistributions of elapsed times associated with mobilization activities undertaken by the publicto prepare for the evacuation trip. The elapsed time associated with each activity isrepresented as a statistical distribution reflecting differences between members of the public.The quantification of these activity-based distributions relies largely on the results of thetelephone survey. We define the sum of these distributions of elapsed times as the TripGeneration Time Distribution.

5.1 Background

In general, an accident at a nuclear power plant is characterized by the following Emergency Classification Levels (see Appendix 1 of NUREG 0654 for details):

1. Unusual Event2. Alert3. 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/CR-7002, that a rapidly escalating accident willbe considered in calculating the Trip Generation Time. We will assume:1. The Advisory to Evacuate will be announced coincident with the siren notification.

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

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

We emphasize that the adoption of this planning basis is not a representation that these eventswill occur within the indicated time frame. Rather, these assumptions are necessary in orderto:1. Establish a temporal framework for estimating the Trip Generation distribution in theformat recommended in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR-6863.

2. Identify temporal points of reference that uniquely define "Clear Time" and ETE.It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various classes of an emergency.

For example, suppose one hour elapses from the siren alert to the Advisory to Evacuate.

In thiscase, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public duringthis one-hour period. As a result, the population within the EPZ will be lower when theAdvisory to Evacuate is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many willengage 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 peopleremaining to evacuate the EPZ after the Advisory to Evacuate, will both be somewhat less thanLaSalle County Generating Station 5-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 the estimates presented in this report. Consequently, the ETE presented in this report arehigher than the actual evacuation time, if this hypothetical situation were to take place.The notification process consists of two events:1. Transmitting information using the alert notification systems available within the EPZ(e.g. sirens, tone alerts, EAS broadcasts, loud speakers).

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

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 340 square miles andis engaged in a wide variety of activities.

It must be anticipated that some time will elapsebetween 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 thatperson is, what that person is doing, and related factors.

Furthermore, some persons who willbe directly involved with the evacuation process may be outside the EPZ at the time theemergency is declared.

These people may be commuters, shoppers and other travelers whoreside 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/CR-6863, the estimated elapsed times for the receipt ofnotification can be expressed as a distribution reflecting the different notification times fordifferent people within, and outside, the EPZ. By using time distributions, it is also possible todistinguish between different population groups and different day-of-week and time-of-day 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 tonealert and/or radio (if available).

Those well outside the EPZ will be notified by telephone, radio,TV and word-of-mouth, 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, butdispersed during the day. In this respect, weekends will differ from weekdays.

As indicated in Section 4.1 of NUREG/CR-7002, the information required to compute tripgeneration times is typically obtained from a telephone survey of EPZ residents.

Such a surveywas conducted in support of this ETE study. Appendix F discusses the survey sampling plan anddocuments the survey instrument and survey results.

The remaining discussion will focus onthe application of the trip generation data obtained from the telephone survey to thedevelopment of the ETE documented in this report.LaSalle County Generating Station 5-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time EstimateRev. 0 5.2 Fundamental Considerations The environment leading up to the time that people begin their evacuation trips consists of asequence of events and activities.

Each event (other than the first) occurs at an instant in timeand 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 moreactivities may take place over the same period of time). Activities conducted in series arefunctionally dependent on the completion of prior activities; activities conducted in parallel arefunctionally independent of one another.

The relevant events associated with the public'spreparation for evacuation are:Event Number12345Event Description Notification Awareness of Situation Depart WorkArrive HomeDepart on Evacuation TripAssociated with each sequence of events are one or more activities, as outlined below:Table 5-1. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities

" "0 " "enc Actvt Distibutio 1-42Receive Notification 12 -)3 Prepare to Leave Work 22,3 -)4 Travel Home 32,4 -5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4N/A Snow Clearance 5These relationships are shown graphically in Figure 5-1.SSAn 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 leavework, 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 asan 'Event Sequence';

the elapsed times to perform an event sequence vary from one person to thenext and are described as statistical distributions on the following pages.An employee who lives outside the EPZ will follow sequence (c) of Figure 5-1. A household LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-3KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 within the EPZ that has one or more commuters at work, and will await their return beforebeginning the evacuation trip will follow the first sequence of Figure 5-1(a). A household withinthe EPZ that has no commuters at work, or that will not await the return of any commuters, willfollow the second sequence of Figure 5-1(a), regardless of day of week or time of day.Households with no commuters on weekends or in the evening/night-time, will follow theapplicable sequence in Figure 5-1(b). Transients will always follow one of the sequences ofFigure 5-1(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 5-1, that the Trip Generation time (i.e. the total elapsed time from Event 1to 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 obtainestimates of the time distributions of all preceding events. For this study, we adopt theconservative posture that all activities will occur in sequence.

In some cases, assuming certain events occur strictly sequential (for instance, commuterreturning home before beginning preparation to leave, or removing snow only after thepreparation 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 manyhouseholds, but that assumption is not made in this study.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-4KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 1 2Af 345Residents Residents MW -w MW WHouseholds waitfor Commuters 11Af2Ada5AdaHouseholds withoutCommuters andhouseholds who do notwait for Commuters W -WW(a) Accident occurs during midweek, at midday; year roundResidents, Transients away fromResidence Residents, Transients atResidence 1Ak245Return to residence, then evacuateW1 2 5Residents at home;transients evacuate directly(b) Accident occurs during weekend or during the evening'1 2 3,5(c) Employees who live outside the EPZACTIVITIES 1 -2 Receive Notification 2 -p- 3 Prepare to Leave Work2, 3 .4 Travel Home2, 4 ..5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate1dActivities Consume TimeEVENTS1. Notification

2. Aware of situation

3. Depart work4. Arrive home5. Depart on evacuation trip#1 Applies for evening and weekends also if commuters are at work.2 Applies throughout the year for transients.

Figure 5-1. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip5-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-5KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5The time distribution of an event is obtained by "summing" the time distributions of all priorcontributing activities.

(This "summing" process is quite different than an algebraic sum since itis performed on distributions

-not scalar numbers).

Time Distribution No. 1, Notification Process:

Activity 1 -> 2Federal regulations (10CFR 50 Appendix E, Item IV.D.3) stipulate,

"[t]he design objective of theprompt public alert and notification system shall be to have the capability to essentially completethe initial alerting and initiate notification of the public within the plume exposure pathway EPZwithin about 15 minutes" (NRC, 2011b) Furthermore, Item 2 of Section B in Appendix 3 ofNUREG/CR-0654/FEMA-REP-1 states that "[sipecial arrangements will be made to assure 100%coverage within 45 minutes of the population who may not have received the initial notification within the entire plume exposure EPZ" (NRC, 1980b). Given the federal regulations and guidance, and the presence of sirens within the EPZ, it is assumed that 100% of the population in the EPZ canbe notified within 45 minutes.

The assumed distribution for notifying the EPZ population isprovided in Table 5-2.Table 5-2. Time Distribution for Notifying the PublicElase Tim Pecn of(Mintes Pouato Noife00%5 7%10 13%15 27%20 47%25 66%30 87%35 92%40 97%45 100%LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-6KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Distribution No. 2, Prepare to Leave Work: Activity 2 --> 3It is reasonable to expect that the vast majority of business enterprises within the EPZ will electto shut down following notification and most employees would leave workquickly.

Commuters, who work outside the EPZ could, in all probability, also leave quickly sincefacilities outside the EPZ would remain open and other personnel would remain. Personnel orfarmers responsible for equipment/livestock would require additional time to secure theirfacility.

The distribution of Activity 2 -> 3 shown in Table 5-3 reflects data obtained by thetelephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2.Table 5-3. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave WorkCumuativElapsed ~ Tim Pecn00%15 81%30 94%45 97%60 97%75 100%NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response.

That is, the sample was reduced insize to include only those households who responded to this question.

The underlying assumption is that thedistribution of this activity for the "Don't know" responders, if the event takes place, would be the same as thoseresponders who provided estimates.

LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-7KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Distribution No. 3. Travel Home: Activity 3 -> 4These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2 and listed in Table 5-4.Table 5-4. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home.6 .6 -00%15 65%30 86%45 92%60 97%75 100%NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" responseDistribution No. 4, Prepare to Leave Home: Activity 2, 4 -> 5These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2 and listed in Table 5-5.Tabl 5-. T Meistiutioeos Ppltont)reaet Evacuate.66 -*00%20 33%40 76%60 89%90 96%120 100%NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response5-8 KLD Engineering, p.c.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-8KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Distribution No. 5, Snow Clearance Time Distribution Inclement weather scenarios involving snowfall must address the time lags associated withsnow clearance.

It is assumed that snow equipment is mobilized and deployed during thesnowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snow-plowing effortsare generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snowaccumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours.Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that the highway system will remain passable

-albeitat a lower capacity

-under the vast majority of snow conditions.

Nevertheless, for the vehiclesto gain access to the highway system, it may be necessary for driveways and employee parkinglots to be cleared to the extent needed to permit vehicles to gain access to the roadways.

These clearance activities take time; this time must be incorporated into the trip generation time distributions.

This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2 and listed in Table 5-6.The data in Table 5-6 are adapted from a survey conducted of households in the Duane ArnoldEnergy Center (DAEC) EPZ in 2012. DAEC is located in Iowa, approximately 170 miles west-northwest of LAS. It is assumed that snowfall and snow removal times are comparable in bothEPZs.Table 5-6. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6%-8" of Snow046%15 60%30 82%45 88%60 96%75 97%90 98%105 98%120 100%NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" responseLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-9KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Mobilization Activities 100%* 80%0CE.N0o 60%aCL,l0.E0-4oo4.r_20%0-Notification

-Prepare to Leave Work-Travel Home-Prepare to Leave Home-Clear Snow0%01530 45 60 75 90Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Acitivty (min)105120Figure 5-2. Evacuation Mobilization Activities LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-10KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution The time distributions for each of the mobilization activities presented herein must becombined to form the appropriate Trip Generation Distributions.

As discussed above, this studyassumes that the stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must becompleted before the current event can occur. For example, if a household awaits the returnof a commuter, the work-to-home trip (Activity 3 -+ 4) must precede Activity 4 -+ 5.To calculate the time distribution of an event that is dependent on two sequential activities, it isnecessary to "sum" the distributions associated with these prior activities.

The distribution summing algorithm is applied repeatedly as shown to form the required distribution.

As anoutcome of this procedure, new time distributions are formed; we assign "letter" designations to these intermediate distributions to describe the procedure.

Table 5-7 presents the summingprocedure to arrive at each designated distribution.

Table 5-7. Mapping Distributions to EventsApl "Sutions Ali T: Distribution a Event D.3Distributions 1 and 2 Distribution A Event 3Distributions A and 3 Distribution B Event 4Distributions B and 4 Distribution C Event 5Distributions 1 and 4 Distribution D Event 5Distributions C and 5 Distribution E Event 5Distributions D and 5 Distribution F Event 5Table 5-8 presents a description of each of the final trip generation distributions achieved after thesumming process is completed.

LaSalle County Generating Station 5-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 Table 5-8. Description of the Distributions Disrbto Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also appliesA 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 hometo begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).D Time distribution of residents without commuters returning home, leaving hometo begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).E Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving hometo begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).Time distribution of residents with no commuters returning home, leaving tobegin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).5.4.1 Statistical OutliersAs already mentioned, some portion of the survey respondents answer "don't know" to somequestions or choose to not respond to a question.

The mobilization activity distributions are basedupon actual responses.

But, it is the nature of surveys that a few numeric responses areinconsistent with the overall pattern of results.

An example would be a case in which for 500responses, almost all of them estimate less than two hours for a given answer, but 3 say "fourhours" and 4 say "six or more hours".These "outliers" must be considered:

are they valid responses, or so atypical that they should bedropped from the sample?In assessing

outliers, there are three alternates to consider:

1) Some responses with very long times may be valid, but reflect the reality that therespondent really needs to be classified in a different population

subgroup, based uponspecial needs;2) Other responses may be unrealistic (6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months to return home from commuting

distance, or 2 days to prepare the home for departure);

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

The issue of course is how to make the decision that a given response or set of responses are to beconsidered "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 orin groups, much of which assumes the data is normally distributed and some of which uses non-LaSalle County Generating Station 5-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 parametric methods to avoid that assumption.

The literature cites that limited work has beendone 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 nooverlap of activities;

2) The individual mobilization activities (prepare to leave work, travel home, prepare home,clear snow) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions arecreated (see Figure 5-1, Table 5-7, Table 5-8);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 tripgeneration patterns for personal vehicles;

4) To eliminate

outliers, a) the mean and standard deviation of the specific activity are estimated from theresponses, b) the median of the same data is estimated, with its position relative to the meannoted,c) the histogram of the data is inspected, andd) all values greater than 3.5 standard deviations are flagged for attention, takingspecial note of whether there are gaps (categories with zero entries) in thehistogram display.In general, only flagged values more than 4 standard deviations from the mean are allowedto be considered

outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected.

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

LaSalle County Generating Station 5-13 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5) As a practical matter, even with outliers eliminated by the above, the resultant histogram, viewed as a cumulative distribution, is not a normal distribution.

A typical situation thatresults is shown below in Figure 5-3.100.0% -90.0%80.0% -E 70.0%C 60.0% /50.0% -2~ 40.0%S30.0%Eu 20.0%10.0%0.0%LA Vi Uý Lq Lq LLA di Lq Lq Lq Ui Lq Lq L LA L-4 -4 r-4 r4 mn en -4 Ln Ln to 60 a) r-4Center of Interval (minutes)

-Cumulative Data --Cumulative NormalFigure 5-3. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution

6) In particular, the cumulative distribution differs from the normal distribution in two keyaspects, both very important in loading a network to estimate evacuation times:)O Most of the real data is to the left of the "normal" curve above, indicating that thenetwork loads faster for the first 80-85% of the vehicles, potentially causing more (andearlier) congestion than otherwise modeled;The last 10-15% 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 thatis used to describe the mobilization activities, not a "normal" curve fit to the data. Onecould consider other distributions, but using the shape of the actual data curve isunambiguous and preserves these important features;

7) With the mobilization activities each modeled according to Steps 1-6, including preserving the features cited in Step 6, the overall (or total) mobilization times are constructed.

LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-14KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 This is done by using the data sets and distributions under different scenarios (e.g. commuterreturning, no commuter returning, no snow or snow in each). In general, these are additive, usingweighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 5-4 presents thecombined trip generation distributions designated A, C, D, E and F. These distributions arepresented on the same time scale. (As discussed

earlier, the use of strictly additive activities is aconservative

approach, because it makes all activities sequential

-preparation for departure follows the return of the commuter; snow clearance follows the preparation for departure, and soforth. In practice, it is reasonable that some of these activities are done in parallel, at least tosome extent -for instance, preparation to depart begins by a household member at home whilethe commuter is still on the road.)The mobilization distributions that result are used in their tabular/graphical form as direct inputsto later computations that lead to the ETE.The DYNEV II simulation model is designed to accept varying rates of vehicle trip generation foreach origin centroid, expressed in the form of histograms.

These histograms, which represent Distributions A, C, D, E and F, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated inTable 5-9 (Distribution B, Arrive Home, omitted for clarity).

The final time period (15) is 600 minutes long. This time period is added to allow the analysisnetwork to clear, in the event congestion persists beyond the trip generation period. Note thatthere are no trips generated during this final time period.5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation As defined in NUREG/CR-7002, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Sub-areas comprising the 2 mile region are advised to evacuate immediately

2. Sub-areas comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised toshelter in-place while the 2 mile region is cleared3. As vehicles evacuate the 2 mile region, sheltered people from 2 to 5 miles downwindcontinue preparation for evacuation

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5 mile region are advised to begin evacuating whenapproximately 90% of those originally within the 2 mile region evacuate across the 2mile region boundary5. Non-compliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadowevacuation percentage of 20%Assumptions

1. The EPZ population in Sub-areas beyond 5 miles will react as does the population in the2 to 5 mile region; that is they will first shelter, then evacuate after the 90th percentile ETE for the 2 mile region2. The population in the shadow region beyond the EPZ boundary, extending toapproximately 15 miles radially from the plant, will react as they do for all non-staged LaSalle County Generating Station 5-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 evacuation scenarios.

That is 20% of these households will elect to evacuate with noshelter delay.3. The transient population will not be expected to stage their evacuation because of thelimited sheltering options available to people who may be at parks, on a beach, or atother venues. Also, notifying the transient population of a staged evacuation wouldprove difficult.

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

Procedure

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

2. Trip generation for the population subject to staged evacuation will be formulated asfollows:a. Identify the 90th percentile evacuation time for the Sub-areas comprising the 2mile region. This value, Tscen*, is obtained from simulation results.

It will becomethe time at which the region being sheltered will be told to evacuate for eachscenario.

b. The resultant trip generation curves for staging are then formed as follows:i. The non-shelter trip generation curve is followed until a maximum of 20%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 non-shelter trip generation curve (if Tscen* is < max trip generation time) or2. by stepping up to 100% (if Tscen* is > max trip generation time)c. Note: This procedure implies that there may be different staged trip generation distributions for different scenarios.

NUREG/CR-7002 uses the statement "approximately 90th percentile" as the time to end staging and begin evacuating.

The value of Tscen* is 1:30 for non-snow scenarios and 1:45 for snow scenarios.

3. Staged trip generation distributions are created for the following population groups:a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters

c. Residents with returning commuters and snow conditions

d. Residents without returning commuters and snow conditions Figure 5-5 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and withoutreturning commuters; the 90th percentile two-mile evacuation time is 90 minutes for goodweather and rain, and 105 minutes for snow scenarios.

At the 90th percentile evacuation time,20% of the population (who normally would have completed their mobilization activities for anun-staged evacuation) advised to shelter has nevertheless departed the area. These people donot 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.

LaSalle County Generating Station 5-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 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 tomeet the balance of the non-staged trip generation distribution.

Following time Tscen*, thebalance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 15 minutes.

AfterTscen*+15, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the un-staged tripgeneration distribution.

Table 5-10 provides the trip generation histograms for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational AreasPage 29 of the Illinois Plan for Radiological Accidents indicates the Illinois Department ofNatural Resources (IDNR) will warn and/or evacuate visitors at the Illini State Park, Marseilles Conservation Area, and LaSalle Fish and Wildlife Area. The IDNR Office of Law Enforcement willclose the Illinois River in the LAS EPZ to recreational boating.As indicated in Table 5-2, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes.

Table 5-9indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 45 minutes.

It is assumed thatthis 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months and 45 minute timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and othertransients to return to their vehicles and begin their evacuation trip.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-17KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Trip Generation Distributions 100.24aU06034a80604020-Employees/Transients

-Residents with Commuters

-Residents with no Commuters

-Res with Comm and Snow -Res no Comm with Snow'00ý0600120 180Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)240300Figure 5-4. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-18KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 5-9. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Un-staged Evacuation Pecn 0f Tota Tis Geeae Wihi Iniae Tim PeriodResidents

~ ~ ~ ~ .Reiet0it-eiet Tim Duato Emlye Trniet Comuer Comtr Sno Comuer SnoPerod (Mn (Dsrbto A) (Dsrbto A) (Dsrbto Q (Dsrbto D) (Dsrbto E) (Distribution F)1155%5%0%2%0%1%2 15 33% 33% 1% 12% 0% 6%3 15 43% 43% 4% 24% 3% 15%4 15 13% 13% 13% 26% 7% 19%5 15 3% 3% 20% 18% 13% 19%6 15 2% 2% 20% 8% 16% 14%7 15 1% 1% 15% 4% 16% 9%8 15 0% 0% 10% 2% 13% 6%9 15 0% 0% 7% 3% 10% 4%10 15 0% 0% 4% 1% 7% 3%11 30 0% 0% 5% 0% 9% 3%12 30 0% 0% 1% 0% 4% 1%13 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%14 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%15 600 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%NOTE:" Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 1-2) using Distributions C and E for good weather and snow, respectively.

Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-19KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Staged and Un-staged Evacuation Trip Generation

-Employees

/ Transients

-Residents with no Commuters

-Res no Comm with Snow-Staged Residents with no Commuters Staged Residents with no Commuters (Snow)-Residents with Commuters

-Res with Comm and Snow-Staged Residents with Commuters

-Staged Residents with Commuters (Snow)100C80400CL600306090120 150 180Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)210240270300Figure 5-5. Comparison of Staged and Un-staged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile RegionLaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-20KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0 Table 5-10. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation 1 15 0% 0% 0% 0%2 15 0% 3% 0% 1%3 15 1% 5% 1% 3%4 15 3% 5% 1% 4%5 15 4% 3% 3% 4%6 15 4% 2% 3% 3%7 15 61% 76% 3% 2%8 15 10% 2% 57% 72%9 15 7% 3% 10% 4%10 15 4% 1% 7% 3%11 30 5% 0% 9% 3%12 30 1% 0% 4% 1%13 30 0% 0% 1% 0%14 30 0% 0% 1% 0%15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%*Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 5-9) is the same for Un-staged and Staged Evacuation.

LaSalle County Generating StationEvacuation Time Estimate5-21KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 0

ML14128A172: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:46, 1 July 2018

Contents

Text

3.4 Employees

4.3.4 Intersections

5.1 Background

Navigation menu

ML14128A172: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:46, 1 July 2018

Text

3.4 Employees

4.3.4 Intersections

5.1 Background

Navigation menu

Search