ML13007A079

Kld TR-495, Rev. 2, Beaver Valley Power Station Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Page 2-1 Through 6-10

ML13007A079
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	12/20/2012
From:	KLD Engineering, PC
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-12-441 KLD TR-495, Rev 2
Download: ML13007A079 (73)

Text

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

2.1 Data Estimates 1. Population estimates are based upon U.S. Census 2010 data.2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon data obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies and surveys of major employers in the EPZ.3. Population estimates at special facilities are based on available data from county emergency management offices and from phone calls to specific facilities.

4. Roadway capacity estimates are based on field surveys and the application of the Highway Capacity Manual 2010.5. Population mobilization times are based on a statistical analysis of data acquired from a random 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 2.40 persons per household and 1.23 evacuating vehicles per household are used. The relationship between persons and vehicles for transients and employees is as follows: a. Employees:

1.04 employees per vehicle (telephone survey results) for all major employers.

b. Parks: Vehicle occupancy varies based upon data collection from local transient facilities.

c. Special Events: The Hookstown Fair personnel stated that there were typically 4 persons to a single vehicle. Therefore, the vehicle occupancy of 4 persons was used to estimate the number of vehicles.Beaver Valley Power Station 2-1 KID Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2

2.2 Study

Methodological Assumptions

1. ETE are presented for the evacuation of the 9 0 th and 1 0 0 th percentiles of population for each region and for each scenario.

The percentile ETE is defined as the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate issued to a specific region of the EPZ, to the time that region is clear of the indicated percentile of evacuees.

A region is defined as a group of sub-areas that is issued an Advisory to Evacuate.

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

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

3. Evacuation movements (paths of travel) are generally outbound relative to the plant to the extent permitted by the highway network. All major evacuation routes are used in the analysis.4. Regions are defined by the underlying "keyhole" or circular configurations as specified in Section 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 impacted keyhole, will voluntarily evacuate.

20% of those people within the Shadow Region will voluntarily 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 of day, day of week) and weather conditions are considered.

These scenarios are outlined in Table 2-1.7. Scenario 14 considers the closure of a single lane westbound on Interstate-376 from the interchange with State Highway 18/Frankfort Road (Exit 39) to the interchange with State Highway 51/Constitution Boulevard (Exit 31).8. The models of the I-DYNEV System were recognized as state of the art by the Atomic Safety & Licensing Board (ASLB) in past hearings. (Sources:

Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Hearings on Seabrook and Shoreham; Urbanik 1). The models have continuously been refined and extended since those hearings and were independently validated by a consultant retained by the NRC. The new DYNEV II System incorporates the latest technology in traffic simulation and in dynamic traffic assignment.

The DYNEV II System is used to compute ETE in this study.1 Urbanik, T., et. al. Benchmark Study of the I-DYNEV Evacuation Time Estimate Computer Code. NUREG/CR-4873, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June, 1988.Beaver Valley Power Station 2-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 Table 2-1. Evacuation Scenario Definitions 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Weekend Evening Good None 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Weekend Evening Good None 13 Summer Weekend Midday Good Hookstown Fair Roadway Impact -14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Closure on 1-376 WB 2 Winter assumes that school is in session (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer assumes that school is not in session.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 2-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Figure 2-1. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 2-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

2.3 Study

Assumptions

1. The Planning Basis Assumption for the calculation of ETE is a rapidly escalating accident that 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 after siren 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 is issued an Advisory to Evacuate will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.3. 52 percent of the households in the EPZ have at least I commuter; 48 percent of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip, based on the telephone survey results. Therefore, 25 percent (52% x 48% = 25%) of EPZ households will await the return of a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.4. The ETE will also include consideration of "through" (external-external) trips during the time that such traffic is permitted to enter the evacuated region. "Normal" traffic flow is 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 of ACP locations could delay returning commuters.

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

Their number and location will depend on the region to be evacuated 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, based on 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 plan, and obey all control devices and traffic guides.Beaver Valley Power Station 2-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2

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 the designated host schools.b. It is assumed parents will pick up children at day care centers prior to evacuation.

c. Buses, wheelchair vans and ambulances will evacuate patients at medical facilities and at any senior facilities within the EPZ, as needed.d. Transit-dependent general population will be evacuated to primary care centers (reception centers).e. Schoolchildren, if school is in session, are given priority in assigning transit vehicles.f. Bus mobilization time is considered in ETE calculations.

g. Analysis of the number of required round-trips

("waves")

of evacuating transit vehicles is presented.

h. Transport of transit-dependent evacuees from reception centers to congregate care centers is not considered in this study.8. Provisions are made for evacuating the transit-dependent portion of the general population to reception centers by bus, based on the assumption that some of these people will ride-share with family, neighbors, and friends, thus reducing the demand for buses. We assume that the percentage of people who rideshare is 50 percent. This assumption is based upon reported experience for other emergencies 3 , and on guidance in Section 2.2 of NUREG/CR-7002.

9. Two types of adverse weather scenarios are considered.

Rain may occur for either winter or summer scenarios; snow occurs in winter scenarios only. It is assumed that the rain or snow begins earlier or at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued.No weather-related reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed. It is assumed that roads are passable and that the appropriate agencies are 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 of weather on roadway operations 4; the factors are shown in Table 2-2.3 Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto, THE MISSISSAUGA EVACUATION FINAL REPORT, June 1981. The report indicates that 6,600 people of a transit-dependent population of 8,600 people shared rides with other residents; a ride share rate of 76% (Page 5-10).4 Agarwal, M. et. al. Impacts of Weather on Urban Freeway Traffic Flow Characteristics and Facility Capacity.Proceedings of the 2005 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium, August, 2005. The results of this paper are included as Exhibit 10-15 in the HCM 2010.Beaver Valley Power Station 2-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2

10. School buses used to transport students are assumed to transport 70 students per bus for elementary schools and 50 students per bus for middle and high schools, based on discussions with county offices of emergency management.

Columbiana County uses a bus capacity of 50 students for all their schools. All staff members accompany the students on the buses in Columbiana and Hancock Counties.

Transit buses used to transport the transit-dependent general population are assumed to transport 30 people per bus.Table 2-2. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Rain 90% 90% No Effect Clear driveway before leaving home Snow 80% 80% (See Figure F-13)*Adverse weather capacity and speed values are given as a percentage of good weather conditions.

Roads are assumed to be passable.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 2-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION The estimates of demand, expressed in terms of people and vehicles, constitute a critical element in developing an evacuation plan. These estimates consist of three components:

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

2. An estimate, for each population group, of mean occupancy per evacuating vehicle. This estimate is used to determine the number of evacuating vehicles.3. An estimate of potential double-counting of vehicles.Appendix E presents much of the source material for the population estimates.

Our primary source of population data, the 2010 U.S. 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 within the EPZ for a short period (e.g., a few days or one or two weeks), or may enter and leave within one day. Estimates of the size of these population components must be obtained, so that the associated number of evacuating vehicles can be ascertained.

The potential for 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 an employee, and once again as a shopper." A visitor who stays at a hotel and spends time at a park, then goes shopping could be counted three times.Furthermore, the number of vehicles at a location depends on time of day. For example, motel parking lots may be full at dawn and empty at noon. Similarly, parking lots at area parks, which are full at noon, may be almost empty at dawn. Estimating counts of vehicles by simply adding up the capacities of different types of parking facilities will tend to overestimate the number of transients and can lead to ETE that are too conservative.

Analysis of the population characteristics of the Beaver Valley Power Station EPZ indicates the need to identify three distinct groups: " Permanent residents

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

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

-people who reside outside of the EPZ and commute to businesses within the EPZ on a daily basis.Estimates of the population and number of evacuating vehicles for each of the population groups are presented for each sub-area and by polar coordinate representation (population rose). The Beaver Valley Power Station EPZ is subdivided into 19 sub-areas.

The EPZ is shown in Figure 3-1.Beaver Valley Power Station 3-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2

3.1 Permanent

Residents The primary source for estimating permanent population is the latest U.S. Census data. The average household size (2.40 persons/household

-See Figure F-i) and the number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.23 vehicles/household

-See Figure F-8) were adapted from the telephone survey results.Population estimates are based upon U.S. Census 2010 data. Table 3-1 provides the permanent resident population within the EPZ, by sub-area.The year 2010 permanent resident population is divided by the average household size and then multiplied by the average number of evacuating vehicles per household in order to estimate number of vehicles.

Permanent resident population and vehicle estimates are presented in Table 3-2. Figure 3-2 and Figure 3-3 present the permanent resident population and permanent resident vehicle estimates by sector and distance from Beaver Valley Power Station. This "rose" was constructed using GIS software.It can be argued that this estimate of permanent residents overstates, somewhat, the number of evacuating vehicles, especially during the summer. It is certainly reasonable to assert that some portion of the population would be on vacation during the summer and would travel elsewhere.

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

Given the uncertainty in this estimate, we elected to apply no reductions in permanent resident population for the summer scenarios to account for residents who may be out of the area.Beaver Valley Power Station 3-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 Figure 3-1. BVPS EPZ Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 3-1. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Su-Ae 200 Popuatio 201 Popuatio p-1 4,281 3,680 P-2 1,729 1,542 P-3U 4+,bU/P-4 3,349 3,042 P-5 1,453 1,365 P-6 1,429 1,124 P-7 5,812 6,182 P-8 16,004 15,361 P-9 17,983 17,718 P-10 25,526 22,494 P-11 2,813 2,509 P-12 3,648 3,799 0-1 756 798 0-2 16,328 14,174 0-3 5,386 5,428 0-4 165 156 W-1 6,694 6,173 W-2 2,365 2,109 W-3 1,117 1,166 EPZ Population Growth: -6.46%3-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 3-2. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Sub-Area P-1 3,680 1,883 P-2 1,542 794 P-3 4,607 2,359 P-4 3,042 1,567 P-5 1,365 702 P-6 1,124 582 P-7 6,182 3,179 P-8 15,361 7,884 P-9 17,718 9,101 P-1O 22,494 11,532 P-11 2,509 1,296 P-12 3,799 1,954 0-1 798 413 0-2 14,174 7,293 0-3 5,428 2,792 0-4 156 81 W-1 6,173 3,178 W-2 2,109 1,086 W-3 1,166 599 Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 NNW F2,22, N 1,982--% -' 0-32 NNE 2,770 S WNW I W 15g,1 2 8 80 EN E E ESE 11,89 wsw 2,789 183 SSW _10 Miles to EPZ Boundary S 2,265 1,912 N Resident Population Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total 0-1 368 368 1-2 2,361 2,729 2-3 3,225 5,954 3 -4 2,919 8,873 4-5 3,824 12,697 5-6 8,42S 21,122 6-7 12,897 34,019 7-8 23,584 57,603 8 -9 25,490 83,093 9- 10 22,935 106,028 10 -EPZ 7,399 113,427 Total: 113,427 W E Inset 0 -2 Miles S Figure 3-2. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 NNW-17 N 1,021 NNE ,,- 041 1. 422 WNW W w 8,3 2 WSW.ENE 6 85 414: E' ESE.'4 r E1 ,, 95 SSW 1 042 10 Miles to EPZ Boundary S 992 N Resident Vehicles Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total 0 -1 190 190 1 -2 1,206 1,396 2-3 1,658 3,054 3 -4 1,497 4,551 4 -5 1,972 6,523 5-6 4,332 10,855 6-7 6,639 17,494 7-8 12,115 29,609 8 -9 13,071 42,680 9-10 11,786 54,466 10 -EPZ 3,809 58,275 Totall 58,275 W E Inset 0 -2 Miles S Figure 3-3. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

3.2 Shadow

Population A portion of the population living outside the evacuation area extending to 15 miles radially from the Beaver Valley Power Station (in the Shadow Region) may elect to evacuate without having been instructed to do 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 to evacuate.Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuation vehicles per household, mobilization time) are assumed to be the same as that for the EPZ permanent resident population.

Table 3-3, Figure 3-4, and Figure 3-5 present estimates of the shadow population and vehicles, by sector.Table 3-3. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Seto Poplaio Evcatn Veice N 4,612 2,380 NNE 13,987 7,184 NE 22,022 11,301 ENE 13,100 6,725 E 15,756 8,078 ESE 27,098 13,902 SE 10,094 5,181 SSE 1,167 607 S 1,071 554 SSW 3,907 2,006 SW 8,643 4,450 WSW 1,437 740 W 6,260 3,225 WNW 3,645 1,878 NW 2,517 1,292 NNW 1,646 855 Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-8 KLD Engineering, p.c.3-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 N F4,6172 NNW F1,646 NNE WNW 3,645 w wsw 1,437 ENE 1.254 990 E 2,530 2.062 F15,756ý120 7,586 ESE SE..EPZ Boundary to 11 Miles SSW -L --SSE 3,907 ~S1,6 Shadow Population Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total EPZ -11 36,342 36,342 11- 12 32,611 68,953 12- 13 22,020 90,973 13- 14 22,725 113,698 14- 15 23,264 136,962 Total: 136,962 Figure 3-4. Shadow Population by Sector Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 N NNW F2,380 NNE WNW 1,878 w wsw 740 ENE&14.019 E 3 1,295 1,057 8,7 677 3.892 ESE SE EPZ Boundary toll Miles SSW " SSE F2,006 S60 Shadow Vehicles Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total EPZ- 11 18,660 18,660 11-12 16,751 35,411 12- 13 11,320 46,731 13- 14 11,660 58,391 14- 15 11,967 70,358 Total: 70,358 Figure 3-5. Shadow Vehicles by Sector 3-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

3.3 Transient

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

Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at camping facilities, hotels and motels. The Beaver Valley Power Station EPZ has a number of areas and facilities that attract transients, including: " Lodging Facilities

• Marinas" Parks/Recreational Areas* Campgrounds" Golf Courses" Performing Arts/Conference Centers* Hunting Surveys of lodging facilities within the EPZ were conducted to determine the number of rooms, percentage of occupied rooms at peak times, and the number of people and vehicles per room for each facility.

These data were used to estimate the number of transients and evacuating vehicles at each of these facilities.

A total of 812 transients in 583 vehicles are assigned to lodging facilities in the EPZ.Surveys of marinas within the EPZ were conducted to determine the number of boat slips, parking capacity, average daily attendance, number of vehicles and peak season. These data were used to estimate the number of transients and evacuating vehicles at each of these facilities.

A total of 103 transients and 64 vehicles are assigned to marinas in the EPZ.Surveys of county parks and recreational areas within the EPZ were conducted to determine the number of transients visiting each of those places on a typical day and to determine peak season. A total of 350 transients and 220 vehicles have been assigned to parks and recreational areas within the EPZ.Surveys of state parks and campgrounds within the EPZ were conducted to determine the number of campsites, peak occupancy, and the number of vehicles and people per campsite for each facility.

These data were used to estimate the number of evacuating vehicles for transients at each of these facilities.

A total of 2,098 transients and 1,215 vehicles are assigned to campgrounds in the EPZ.There are ten golf courses within the EPZ. Surveys of golf courses were conducted to determine the number of golfers and vehicles at each facility on a typical peak day, and the number of golfers that travel from outside the area. One golf course, Seven Oaks Country Club, indicated that no golfers travel from outside the area to use their facility.

A total of 1,016 transients and 441 vehicles are assigned to golf courses within the EPZ.Surveys of a performing arts center, conference center and commuter colleges within the EPZ were conducted to determine the number of transients visiting each of those places on a typical day and to determine peak season. Surveys of commuter colleges were conducted to Beaver Valley Power Station 3-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 determine the number of students.

It was determined that commuter colleges have the same travel patterns as transients.

They enter the EPZ to attend classes and leave the same day. A total of 5,970 transients and 2,345 vehicles were assigned to these additional facilities.

The Pennsylvania State Game Lands 173 and 189 (identification numbers provided by the state)are within the EPZ. Based on a telephone conversation with the PGC, there are 2,645,008 licensed hunters in the state. There are a total of 1.46 million acres of game land within the state (1,478 acres of which are within the EPZ) based on data found on the internet.Based on information provided by PGC, the peak hunting season is the day after Thanksgiving to the second week in December -a total of 13 days. It is assumed that each hunter hunts for 7 days of the season, on average, and that these 7 days are uniformly distributed throughout the season. Multiplying the 2,645,008 licensed hunters by 7 days of hunting per season and dividing by a 13 peak day season, results in about 1,424,236 hunters per day, on average. Dividing the 1,424,236 hunters per day, by the 1.46 million acres of state game lands, results in 0.98 hunters per acre per day. Multiplying this result by the 1,478 acres of state game lands, within the EPZ, results in 1,442 hunters in the EPZ. As there are many game lands throughout the state, it is unlikely that people would travel outside of their local area to hunt at a different state game land; therefore, most people hunting in the EPZ are most likely EPZ residents.

However, a conservative transient percentage of 75% obtained from the golf course data is applied. Thus, there are 1,082 transient hunters in the EPZ. These 1,082 transient hunters are apportioned amongst the 2 state game lands within the EPZ by acreage. It is assumed there are 2.40 hunters per vehicle based on household size within the EPZ, which results in a total of 451 transient vehicles assigned to gamelands in the EPZ.Appendix E summarizes the transient data that was estimated for the EPZ. Table E-4 presents the number of transients visiting recreational areas; Table E-5 presents the number of transients visiting golf courses while Table E-6 presents the number of transients at lodging facilities within the EPZ.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.Beaver Valley Power Station 3-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 Table 3-4. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles SubAe Trniet TrninVhce P-1 750 313 P-2 778 324 P-3 155 101 P-4 P-5 P-6 P-7 549 229 P-8 548 325 P-9 3,907 1,640 P-1O 60 30 P-11 304 127 P-12 1,328 723 0-1 0-2 1,594 660 0-3 151 76 0-4 W-1 887 420 W-2 400 339 W-3 20 12 Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-13 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 N NNW F7-78-1-2 -~0 o NNE 300 0 WNW 282 E W ,331 0 WSW 0.. 0 SSW F50--I o S 1,128 454 N Transients Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total 0-1 0 0 1-2 750 750 2-3 58 808 3-4 875 1,683 4-5 0 1,683 5-6 9 11692 6-7 169 1,861 7-8 5,885 7,746 8-9 1,723 9,469 9 -10 1,962 11,431 10 -EPZ 0 11,431 Total: 11,431 W E Inset 0 -2 Miles S Figure 3-6. Transient Population by Sector 3-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 N NNW F-32 4 0-NNE 200 0 WNW F166 I W 980-j 0 ENE E F41 ESE Z Boundary WSW 0 sw T n 35e Transient Vehicles , , 0 SSW -0 20 s F6-5 3 F177T N Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total 0-1 0 0 1-2 313 313 2-3 58 371 3-4 367 738 4-5 1 0 738 5-6 4 742 6-7 63 80S 7-8 2,652 3,457 8-9 839 4,296 9- 10 1,023 5,319 10 -EPZ 0 5,319 Total: 5,319 W E Inset 2 Miles S Figure 3-7. Transient Vehicles by Sector 3-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

3.4 Employees

Employees who work within the EPZ fall into two categories:

S S Those who live and work in the EPZ Those who live outside of the EPZ and commute to jobs within the EPZ.Those of the first category are already counted as part of the permanent resident population.

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

Data provided by FirstEnergy and surveys to individual employers were used to estimate the number of employees commuting into the EPZ for those employers who did not provide data.In Table E-3, the Employees (Max Shift) is multiplied by the percent Non-EPZ factor to determine the number of employees who are not residents of the EPZ. A vehicle occupancy of 1.04 employees per vehicle obtained from the telephone survey (See Figure F-8) was used to determine the number of evacuating employee vehicles for all major employers.

Table 3-5 presents non-EPZ Resident employee and vehicle estimates by sub-area.

Figure 3-8 and Figure 3-9 present these data by sector.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 3-5. Summary of Non-EPZ Resident Employees and Employee Vehicles SubAre Emloee Emloe Vehcle P-1 663 640 P-2 P-3 P-4 313 301 P-S 5__P-6 P-7 P-8 448 433 P-9 723 700 P-1o 371 358 P-11 P-12 0-1 16 16 0-2 108 105 0-3 39 38 0-4 W-1 584 563 W-2 W-3 Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-17 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 NNW-0 N o 0 7- ~NNE 0 " WNW[5-5-1 i w F-692 212 ENE E I 99 ESE-29 29 wsw-0 SSW 0 S E334--SE 10 Miles to EPZ Boundary N 0 185 0 0 0 0 0 18)0 E Employees Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total 0-1 352 352 1-2 311 663 2-3 0 663 3-4 0 663 4-5 313 976 5-6 62 1,038 6-7 129 1,167 7-8 492 1,659 8-9 648 2,307 9-10 686 2,993 10 -EPZ 272 3,265 Total: 3,265 W Inset 0 -2 Miles S Figure 3-8. Employee Population by Sector 3-18 KID Engineering, P.C.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-18 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 N NNW-00 NNE LIE 0 'WNW F5-4-W 668- j 205 wSw-0 SSW SI 0 S wZZ F322 N Employee Vehicles Miles Subtotal by Ring Cumulative Total 0-1 340 340 1-2 300 640 2-3 0 640 3-4 0 640 4-5 301 941 5-6 61 1,002 6-7 125 1,127 7-8 475 1,602 8-9 629 2,231 9 -10 660 2,891 10 -EPZ 263 3,154 Total: 3,1S4 W E Inset 0 -2 Miles S Figure 3-9. Employee Vehicles by Sector 3-19 KLD Engineering, P.C.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-19 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

3.5 Medical

Facilities Data were provided by the counties for each of the medical facilities within the EPZ. Table E-2 in Appendix E summarizes the data gathered.

Section 8 details the evacuation of medical facilities and their patients.

The number and type of evacuating vehicles that need to be provided depend on the patients' state of health. It is estimated that buses can transport up to 30 people; wheelchair vans, up to 4 people; wheelchair buses up to 15 people; and ambulances, up to 2 people.3.6 Total Demand in Addition to Permanent Population Vehicles will be traveling through the study area (external-external trips) at the time of an accident.

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

These through vehicles are assumed to travel on the major routes traversing the study area -US 22 and 1-376. It is assumed that this traffic will continue to enter the study area during the first 120 minutes following the Advisory to Evacuate.Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data was obtained from Federal Highway Administration to estimate the number of vehicles per hour on the aforementioned routes. The AADT was multiplied by the K-Factor, which is the proportion of the AADT on a roadway segment or link during the design hour, resulting in the design hour volume (DHV). The design hour is usually the 3 0 th highest hourly traffic volume of the year, measured in vehicles per hour (vph). The DHV is then multiplied by the D-Factor, which is the proportion of the DHV occurring in the peak direction of travel (also known as the directional split). The resulting values are the directional design hourly volumes (DDHV), and are presented in Table 3-6, for each of the routes considered.

The DDHV is then multiplied by 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> (access control points -ACP -are assumed to be activated at 120 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate) to estimate the total number of external vehicles loaded on the analysis network. As indicated, there are 8,200 vehicles entering the EPZ as external-external trips prior to the activation of the ACP and the diversion of this traffic. This number is reduced to 40% for evening scenarios (scenarios 5 and 12) as discussed in Section 6.3.7 Special Event One special event (scenario

13) is considered for the ETE study -Hookstown Fair. The special event takes place for five days during the second weekend before Labor Day in Hookstown, PA.Data were provided by Hookstown Fair personnel.

Peak attendance at the event on Saturday night in September 2011 was 11,000, where 15% were considered transients, resulting in an additional 1,650 transients.

It was reported that the vehicle occupancy rate for this event was 4 people; resulting in an additional 413 vehicles.

Based upon discussions with Hookstown Fair personnel, vehicles are parked on the fair property.

Vehicles were distributed over two links within the fairgrounds property.

The special event vehicle trips were generated utilizing the same mobilization distributions as transients.

Public transportation is not provided for this event and was not considered in the special event analysis.Beaver Valley Power Station 3-20 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 Table 3-6. BVPS EPZ External Traffic 8892 892 US-22 EB 22,800 0.107 0.5 1,220 2,440 8909 1078 US-22 WB 22,800 0.107 0.5 1,220 2,440 8105 1063 1-376 NB 14,316 0.116 0.5 830 1,660 8425 1136 1-376 SB 14,316 0.116 0.5 830 1,660 Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Washington, D.C., 2011 2 HCM 2010 Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-21 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

3.8 Summary

of Demand A summary of population and vehicle demand is summarized 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 in greater detail in Section 8. A total of 180,096 people and 90,165 vehicles are considered in this study.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-22 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 3-7. Summary of Population Demand P-1 3,680 90 750 663 1,095 ° -6,278 P-2 1,542 38 778 ---2,358 P-3 4,607 113 155 --385 5,260 P-4 3,042 74 -313 3,479 P-5 1,365 33 --1,400 -2,798 P-6 1,124 27 ---1,151 P-7 6,182 151 549 -208 1,473 -8,563 P-8 15,361 375 548 448 864 2,618 --20,214 P-9 17,718 433 3,907 723 156 3,189 --26,126 P-1O 22,494 550 60 371 368 3,589 --27,432 P-11 2,509 61 304 --310 --3,184 P-12 3,799 93 1,328 -5,232 0-1 798 19 ---833 0-2 14,174 346 1,594 108 175 3,138 --19,535 0-3 5,428 133 151 39 99 470 --6,320 0-4 156 4 ------160 W-1 6,173 151 887 584 84 439 --8,318 W-2 2,109 52 400 --1,227 --3,788 W-3 1,166 28 20 -391 --1,605 Shadow ---70 -27,392 -27,462 Region NOTE: Special facilities include medical facilities and Beaver County Jail Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 3-23 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 3-8. Summary of Vehicle Demand Sub Trnst Speia Shado External-

.**.P-1 1,883 6 313 640 - 2,880 P-2 794 2 324 -----1,120 P-3 2,359 8 101 -- 14 --2,482 P-4 1,567 4 -301 -1,874 P-5 702 4 --50 --756 P-6 582 ------582 P-7 3,179 10 229 -22 58 --3,498 P-8 7,884 26 325 433 102 104 --8,874 P-9 9,101 30 1,640 700 12 108 --11,591 P-10 11,532 36 30 358 14 106 --12,076 P-11 1,296 4 127 -- 10 --1,437 P-12 1,954 6 723 -2,685 0-1 413 2 ---431 0-2 7,293 24 660 105 29 142 --8,253 0-3 2,792 8 76 38 13 22 --2,949 0-4 81 -------81 W-1 3,178 16 420 563 13 20 --4,210 W-2 1,086 339 --56 --1,481 W-3 599 12 -625 Shadow 8 -14,072 8,200 22,280 NOTE: Buses represented as two passenger vehicles.

Refer to Section 8 for additional information.

Beaver Valley Power Station 3-24 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY The ability of the road network to service vehicle demand is a major factor in determining how rapidly an evacuation can be completed.

The capacity of a road is defined as the maximum hourly rate at which persons or vehicles can reasonably be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a lane of roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic and control conditions, as stated in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010).In discussing capacity, different operating conditions have been assigned alphabetical designations, A through F, to reflect the range of traffic operational characteristics.

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

LOS E describes traffic operating at or near capacity.Another concept, closely associated with capacity, is "Service Volume" (SV). Service volume is defined as "The maximum hourly rate at which vehicles, bicycles or persons reasonably can be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a roadway during an hour under specific assumed conditions while maintaining a designated level of service." This definition is similar to that for capacity.

The major distinction is that values of SV vary from one LOS to another, while capacity is the 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 varies with Free Flow Speed (FFS), and LOS. The SV is calculated by the DYNEV II simulation model, based on the specified link attributes, FFS, capacity, control device and traffic demand.Other factors also influence capacity.

These include, but are not limited to: " Lane width* Shoulder width* Pavement condition* Horizontal and vertical alignment (curvature and grade)" Percent truck traffic* Control device (and timing, if it is a signal)* Weather conditions (rain, snow, fog, wind speed, ice)These factors are considered during the road survey and in the capacity estimation process;some factors have greater influence on capacity than others. For example, lane and shoulder width have only a limited influence on Base Free Flow Speed (BFFS') according to Exhibit 15-7 of the HCM. Consequently, lane and shoulder widths at the narrowest points were observed during the road survey and these observations were recorded, but no detailed measurements of lane or shoulder width were taken. Horizontal and vertical alignment can influence both FFS and capacity.

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

Capacity is estimated from the procedures of 1 A very rough estimate of BFFS might be taken as the posted speed limit plus 10 mph (HCM 2010 Page 15-15)Beaver Valley Power Station 4-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 the 2010 HCM. For example, HCM Exhibit 7-1(b) shows the sensitivity of Service Volume at the upper 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 such as rain reduce the values of free speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10 percent. Over the last decade new studies have been made on the effects of rain on traffic capacity.

These studies indicate a range of effects between 5 and 20 percent depending on wind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.3, we employ a reduction in free speed 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 capacity must be determined with great care. Because of its importance, a brief discussion of the major factors that influence highway capacity is presented in this section.Rural highways generally consist of: (1) one or more uniform sections with limited access (driveways, parking areas) characterized by "uninterrupted" flow; and (2) approaches to at-grade intersections where flow can be "interrupted" by a control device or by turning or crossing traffic at the intersection.

Due to these differences, separate estimates of capacity must be made for each section. Often, the approach to the intersection is widened by the addition of one or more lanes (turn pockets or turn bays), to compensate for the lower capacity of the approach due to the factors there that can interrupt the flow of traffic. These additional lanes are recorded during the field survey and later entered as input to the DYNEV II system.4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections At-grade intersections are apt to become the first bottleneck locations under local heavy traffic volume conditions.

This characteristic reflects the need to allocate access time to the respective competing traffic streams by exerting some form of control. During evacuation, control at critical intersections will often be provided by traffic control personnel assigned for that purpose, whose directions may supersede traffic control devices. The existing traffic management plans documented in the county emergency plans are extensive and were adopted without change.The per-lane capacity of an approach to a signalized intersection can be expressed (simplistically) in the following form:= (3600 G -L (3600)where: Q-cap,m = Capacity of a single lane of traffic on an approach, which executes Beaver Valley Power Station 4-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 movement, m, upon entering the intersection; vehicles per hour (vph)h m Mean queue discharge headway of vehicles on this lane that are executing movement, m; seconds per vehicle G = Mean duration of GREEN time servicing vehicles that are executing movement, m, for each signal cycle; seconds L = Mean "lost time" for each signal phase servicing movement, m; seconds C = Duration of each signal cycle; seconds P. = Proportion of GREEN time allocated for vehicles executing movement, m, from this lane. This value is specified as part of the control treatment.

m = The movement executed by vehicles after they enter the intersection:

through, left-turn, right-turn, and diagonal.The turn-movement-specific mean discharge headway hm, depends in a complex way upon many factors: roadway geometrics, turn percentages, the extent of conflicting traffic streams, the control treatment, and others. A primary factor is the value of "saturation queue discharge headway", hsat, which applies to through vehicles that are not impeded by other conflicting traffic streams. This value, itself, depends upon many factors including motorist behavior.Formally, we can write, hm = fm(hsat, F1, F 2 ,...)where: hsat = Saturation discharge headway for through vehicles; seconds per vehicle F 1 ,F 2 = The various known factors influencing hm f.() = Complex function relating hm to the known (or estimated) values of hsat, F1, F2,...-The estimation of hm for specified values of hsa. F 1 , F 2 ... is undertaken within the DYNEV II simulation model by a mathematical model 2.The resulting values for hAm always satisfy the condition:

h m >- hsat 2Lieberman, E., "Determining Lateral Deployment of Traffic on an Approach to an Intersection", McShane, W. &Lieberman, E., "Service Rates of Mixed Traffic on the far Left Lane of an Approach".

Both papers appear in Transportation Research Record 772, 1980. Lieberman, E., Xin, W., "Macroscopic Traffic Modeling For Large-Scale Evacuation Planning", presented at the TRB 2012 Annual Meeting, January 22-26, 2012 Beaver Valley Power Station 4-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 That is, the turn-movement-specific discharge headways are always greater than, or equal to the saturation discharge headway for through vehicles.

These headways (or its inverse equivalent, "saturation flow rate"), may be determined by observation or using the procedures of the HCM 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 address this topic. The factors, F 1 , F 2 ,..., influencing saturation flow rate are identified in equation (18-5)of the HCM 2010.The traffic signals within the EPZ and Shadow Region are modeled using representative phasing plans and phase durations obtained as part of the field data collection.

Traffic responsive signal installations allow the proportion of green time allocated (Pm) for each approach to each intersection to be determined by the expected traffic volumes on each approach during evacuation circumstances.

The amount of green time (G) allocated is subject to maximum and minimum phase duration constraints; 2 seconds of yellow time are indicated for each signal phase and 1 second of 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) of 2.0 seconds is used for each signal phase in the analysis.4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway The capacity of highway sections -- as distinct from approaches to intersections

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

There is a fundamental relationship which relates service volume (i.e., the number of vehicles serviced within a uniform highway section in a given time period) to traffic density. The top curve in Figure 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 volume increases as demand volume and density increase, until the service volume attains its maximum value, which is the capacity of the highway section. As traffic demand and the resulting highway density increase beyond this "critical" value, the rate at which traffic can be serviced (i.e., the service volume) can actually decline below capacity ("capacity drop"). Therefore, in order to realistically represent traffic performance during congested conditions (i.e., when demand exceeds capacity), it is necessary to estimate the service volume, VF, under congested conditions.

The value of VF can be expressed as: VF = R x Capacity where: R = Reduction factor which is less than unity Beaver Valley Power Station 4-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 We have employed a value of R=0.90. The advisability of such a capacity reduction factor is based upon empirical studies that identified a fall-off in the service flow rate when congestion occurs at "bottlenecks" or "choke points" on a freeway system. Zhang and Levinson 3 describe a research program that collected data from a computer-based surveillance system (loop detectors) installed on the Interstate Highway System, at 27 active bottlenecks in the twin cities metro area in Minnesota over a 7-week period. When flow breakdown occurs, queues are formed which discharge at lower flow rates than the maximum capacity prior to observed breakdown.

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

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

This figure compares with the nominal capacity estimate of 2,250 pcphpl estimated for the ETE and indicated in Appendix K for freeway links. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 which translates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.Since the principal objective of 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 the simulation model.Rural roads, like freeways, are classified as "uninterrupted flow" facilities. (This is in contrast with urban street systems which have closely spaced signalized intersections and are classified as "interrupted flow" facilities.)

As such, traffic flow along rural roads is subject to the same effects as freeways in the event traffic demand exceeds the nominal capacity, resulting in queuing and lower QDF rates. As a practical matter, rural roads rarely break down at locations away from intersections.

Any breakdowns on rural roads are generally experienced at intersections where other model logic applies, or at lane drops which reduce capacity there.Therefore, the application of a factor of 0.90 is appropriate on rural roads, but rarely, if ever, activated.

The estimated value of capacity is based primarily upon the type of facility and on roadway geometrics.

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

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

The procedure used here was to estimate "section" capacity, VE, based on observations made traveling over each section of the evacuation network, based on the posted speed limits and travel behavior of other motorists and by reference to the 2010 HCM. The DYNEV II simulation model determines for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether its capacity would be limited by the "section-specific" service volume, VE, or by the intersection-specific capacity.

For each link, the model selects the lower value of capacity.3 Lei Zhang and David Levinson, "Some Properties of Flows at Freeway Bottlenecks," Transportation Research Record 1883, 2004.Beaver Valley Power Station 4-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2

4.3 Application

to the Beaver Valley Power Station Study Area As part of the development of the link-node analysis network for the study area, an estimate of roadway capacity is required.

The source material for the capacity estimates presented herein is contained in: 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)Transportation Research Board National Research Council Washington, D.C.The highway system in the study area consists primarily of two categories of roads and, of course, intersections: " One-Lane roads: local, state* Multi-Lane Highways (at-grade)

• Freeways Each of these classifications will be discussed.

4.3.1 One-Lane Roads Ref: HCM Chapter 15 One lane roads comprise the majority of highways within the EPZ. The per-lane capacity of a one-lane highway is estimated at 1700 passenger cars per hour (pc/h). This estimate is essentially independent of the directional distribution of traffic volume except that, for extended distances, the two-way capacity will not exceed 3200 pc/h. The HCM procedures then estimate Level of Service (LOS) and Average Travel Speed. The DYNEV II simulation model accepts the specified value of capacity as input and computes average speed based on the time-varying demand: capacity relations.

Based on the field survey and on expected traffic operations associated with evacuation scenarios: " Most sections of one-lane roads within the EPZ are classified as "Class I", with "level terrain";

some are "rolling terrain".* "Class II" highways are mostly those within urban and suburban centers.4.3.2 Multi-Lane Highway Ref: HCM Chapter 14 Exhibit 14-2 of the HCM 2010 presents a set of curves that indicate a per-lane capacity ranging from approximately 1900 to 2200 pc/h, for free-speeds of 45 to 60 mph, respectively.

Based on observation, the multi-lane highways outside of urban areas within the EPZ service traffic with 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.

A Beaver Valley Power Station 4-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 conservative estimate of per-lane capacity of 1900 pc/h is adopted for this study for multi-lane highways outside of urban areas, as shown in Appendix K.4.3.3 Freeways Ref: HCM Chapters 10, 11, 12, 13 Chapter 10 of the HCM 2010 describes a procedure for integrating the results obtained in Chapters 11, 12 and 13, which compute capacity and LOS for freeway components.

Chapter 10 also presents a discussion of simulation models. The DYNEV II simulation model automatically performs this integration process.Chapter 11 of the HCM 2010 presents procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for "Basic Freeway 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 2400 The inputs to the simulation model are highway geometrics, free-speeds and capacity based on field observations.

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

A conservative estimate of per-lane capacity of 2250 pc/h is adopted for this study for freeways, as shown in Appendix K.Chapter 12 of the HCM 2010 presents procedures for estimating capacity, speed, density and LOS for freeway weaving sections.

The simulation model contains logic that relates speed to demand volume: capacity ratio. The value of capacity obtained from the computational procedures detailed in Chapter 12 depends on the "Type" and geometrics of the weaving segment 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 or immediately upstream of an off-ramp; the capacity of the ramp roadway; and the maximum flow rate entering the ramp influence area. In most cases, the freeway capacity is the controlling factor. Values of this merge area capacity are presented in Exhibit 13-8 of the HCM 2010, and depend on the number of freeway lanes and on the freeway free speed. Ramp capacity is presented in Exhibit 13-10 and is a function of the ramp free flow speed. The DYNEV II simulation model logic simulates the merging operations of the ramp and freeway traffic in accord with the procedures in Chapter 13 of the HCM 2010. If congestion results from an excess of demand relative to capacity, then the model allocates service appropriately to the two entering traffic streams and produces LOS F conditions (The HCM does not address LOS F explicitly).

Beaver Valley Power Station 4-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2

4.3.4 Intersections

Ref: HCM Chapters 18, 19, 20, 21 Procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for approaches to intersections are presented in Chapter 18 (signalized intersections), Chapters 19, 20 (un-signalized intersections) and Chapter 21 (roundabouts).

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

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

stop/yield controlled intersections (both 2-way and all-way) and traffic signal controlled intersections.

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

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

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

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

The DYNEV II simulation model includes some HCM 2010 procedures only for the purpose of estimating capacity.All simulation models must be calibrated properly with field observations that quantify the performance parameters applicable to the analysis network. Two of the most important of Beaver Valley Power Station 4-8 KILD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 these are: (1) Free flow speed (FFS); and (2) saturation headway, hsat. The first of these is estimated by direct observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using the concepts of the HCM 2010, as described earlier. These parameters are listed in Appendix K, for each network link.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 4-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Volume, vph-Capacity Drop Qs Speed, mph Vf Rv, Density, vpm-* Density, vpm kf k 0 pt k .Figure 4-1. Fundamental Diagrams Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 4-10 KL.D Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal Government guidelines (see NUREG CR-7002) specify that the planner estimate the distributions of elapsed times associated with mobilization activities undertaken by the public to prepare for the evacuation trip. The elapsed time associated with each activity is represented as a statistical distribution reflecting differences between members of the public.The quantification of these activity-based distributions relies largely on the results of the telephone survey. We define the sum of these distributions of elapsed times as the Trip Generation Time Distribution.

5.1 Background

In general, an accident at a nuclear power plant is characterized by the following Emergency Classification Levels (see Appendix 1 of NUREG 0654 for details): 1. Unusual Event 2. Alert 3. Site Area Emergency 4. General Emergency At each level, the federal guidelines specify a set of Actions to be undertaken by the Licensee, and by state and local offsite authorities.

As a Planning Basis we will adopt a conservative posture, in accordance with Section 1.2 of NUREG/CR-7002, that a rapidly escalating accident will be 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 siren notification.

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 events will occur within the indicated time frame. Rather, these assumptions are necessary in order to: 1. Establish a temporal framework for estimating the Trip Generation distribution in the format recommended in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR-6863.

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

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

In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public during this one-hour period. As a result, the population within the EPZ will be lower when the Advisory to Evacuate is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an Advisory will be broadcast.

Thus, the time needed to complete the mobilization activities and the number of people remaining to evacuate the EPZ after the Advisory to Evacuate, will both be somewhat less than Beaver Valley Power Station 5-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 the estimates presented in this report. Consequently, the ETE presented in this report are higher than the actual evacuation time, if this hypothetical situation were to take place.The notification process consists of two events: 1. Transmitting information using the alert notification systems available within the EPZ (e.g., sirens, tone alerts, EAS broadcasts, loud speakers).

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

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 330 square miles and is engaged in a wide variety of activities.

It must be anticipated that some time will elapse between the transmission and receipt of the information advising the public of an accident.The amount of elapsed time will vary from one individual to the next depending on where that person is, what that person is doing, and related factors. Furthermore, some persons who will be directly involved with the evacuation process may be outside the EPZ at the time the emergency is declared.

These people may be commuters, shoppers and other travelers who reside within the EPZ and who will return to join the other household members upon receiving notification of an emergency.

As indicated in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR-6863, the estimated elapsed times for the receipt of notification can be expressed as a distribution reflecting the different notification times for different people within, and outside, the EPZ. By using time distributions, it is also possible to distinguish between different population groups and different 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 tone alert 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, but dispersed 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 trip generation times is typically obtained from a telephone survey of EPZ residents.

Such a survey was conducted in support of this ETE study. Appendix F presents the survey sampling plan, survey instrument, and raw survey results. The remaining discussion will focus on the application of the trip generation data obtained from the telephone survey to the development of the ETE documented in this report.Beaver Valley Power Station 5-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2

5.2 Fundamental

Considerations The environment leading up to the time that people begin their evacuation trips consists of a sequence of events and activities.

Each event (other than the first) occurs at an instant in time and is the outcome of an activity.Activities are undertaken over a period of time. Activities may be in "series" (i.e., to undertake an activity implies the completion of all preceding events) or may be in parallel (two or more activities may take place over the same period of time). Activities conducted in series are functionally dependent on the completion of prior activities; activities conducted in parallel are functionally independent of one another. The relevant events associated with the public's preparation for evacuation are: Event Number 1 2 3 4 5 Event Description Notification Awareness of Situation Depart Work Arrive Home Depart on Evacuation Trip Associated with each sequence of events are one or more activities, as outlined below: Table 5-1. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities 1 -ý 2 Receive Notification 1 2 -4 3 Prepare to Leave Work 2 2,3 -4 4 Travel Home 3 2,4 -4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4 N/A Snow Clearance 5 These relationships are shown graphically in Figure 5-1.0 0 An Event is a 'state' that exists at a point in time (e.g., depart work, arrive home)An Activity is a 'process' that takes place over some elapsed time (e.g., prepare to leave work, travel home)As such, a completed Activity changes the 'state' of an individual (e.g., the activity, 'travel home'changes the state from 'depart work' to 'arrive home'). Therefore, an Activity can be described as an 'Event Sequence';

the elapsed times to perform an event sequence vary from one person to the next and are described as statistical distributions on the following pages.An employee who lives outside the EPZ will follow sequence (c) of Figure 5-1. A household Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-3 KID Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 within the EPZ that has one or more commuters at work, and will await their return before beginning the evacuation trip will follow the first sequence of Figure 5-1(a). A household within the EPZ that has no commuters at work, or that will not await the return of any commuters, will follow the second sequence of Figure 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 the.applicable sequence in Figure 5-1(b). Transients will always follow one of the sequences of Figure 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 1 to Event 5) depends on the scenario and will vary from one household to the next.Furthermore, Event 5 depends, in a complicated way, on the time distributions of all activities preceding that event. That is, to estimate the time distribution of Event 5, we must obtain estimates of the time distributions of all preceding events. For this study, we adopt the conservative posture that all activities will occur in sequence.In some cases, assuming certain events occur strictly sequential (for instance, commuter returning home before beginning preparation to leave, or removing snow only after the preparation to leave) can result in rather conservative (that is, longer) estimates of mobilization times. It is reasonable to expect that at least some parts of these events will overlap for many households, but that assumption is not made in this study.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 1 2 Am A 3 4 5-. -------4-- ---*Residents Residents w vw Households wait for Commuters

'1 2 5.~f Aft Households without Commuters and households who do not wait for Commuters Residents, 1 2 4 5 Transients away from * .-....Residence Return to residence, then evacuate Residents, Transients at Residence 1 2 5 Residents at home;transients evacuate directly 1 2 3, 5 ACTIVITIES EVENTS 1 2 Receive Notification 2 -- 3 Prepare to Leave Work 2, 3 -- 4 Travel Home 2, 4 -- 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate Activities Consume Time 1. Notification

2. Aware of situation 3. Depart work 4. Arrive home 5. 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 Trip Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

5.3 Estimated

Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 The time distribution of an event is obtained by "summing" the time distributions of all prior contributing activities. (This "summing" process is quite different than an algebraic sum since it is performed on distributions

-not scalar numbers).Time Distribution No. 1. Notification Process: Activity I -> 2 It is assumed (based on the presence of sirens within the EPZ) that 87 percent of those within the EPZ will be aware of the accident within 30 minutes with the remainder notified within the following 15 minutes. The notification distribution is given below: Table 5-2. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public Elase Tim Pecn of (Minutes)

Pouato Noife 0 0%5 7%10 13%15 27%20 47%25 66%30 87%35 92%40 97%45 100%Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Distribution No. 2. Preoare to Leave Work: Activity 2 -+ 3 It is reasonable to expect that the vast majority of business enterprises within the EPZ will elect to shut down following notification and most employees would leave work quickly. Commuters, who work outside the EPZ could, in all probability, also leave quickly since facilities outside the EPZ would remain open and other personnel would remain. Personnel or farmers responsible for equipment/livestock would require additional time to secure their facility.

The distribution of Activity 2 -> 3 shown in Table 5-3 reflects data obtained by the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2.Table 5-3. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work Cuu.tv Cuuatv......................0 0%35 88%5 39% 40 89%10 58% 45 93%15 69% 50 93%20 78% 55 93%25 79% 60 99%30 86% 75 100%NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response.

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

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

Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Distribution No. 3, Travel Home: Activity 2, 3 --> 4 These 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 Cumulative..Cumulative Elapsed ~ ~ TiePretEasdTm ecn (Mnts) Rtrnn om Mnue) ReunngHm 0 0%40 84%5 13% 45 92%10 29% 50 93%15 42% 55 93%20 59% 60 97%25 65% 75 99%30 77% 90 100%35 80%NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response 5-8 KLD Engineering, p.c.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Distribution No. 4, Prepare to Leave Home: Activity 2.4 -+ 5 These 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.Table 5-5. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate 0 0% 105 92%15 15% 120 96%30 55% 135 98%45 67% 150 98%60 85% 165 98%75 90% 180 100%90 91%NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Distribution No. 5, Snow Clearance Time Distribution Inclement weather scenarios involving snowfall must address the time lags associated with snow clearance.

It is assumed that snow equipment is mobilized and deployed during the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snow-plowing efforts are generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snow accumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours.Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that the highway system will remain passable -albeit at a lower capacity -under the vast majority of snow conditions.

Nevertheless, for the vehicles to gain access to the highway system, it may be necessary for driveways and employee parking lots to be cleared to the extent needed to permit vehicles to gain access to the roadways.These clearance activities take time; this time must be incorporated into the trip generation time distributions.

These data are provided by those households which responded to the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 5-2 and listed in Table 5-6.Note that those respondents (58%) who answered that they would not take time to clear their driveway were assumed to be ready immediately at the start of this activity.

Essentially they would drive through the snow on the driveway to access the roadway and begin their evacuation trip.Table 5-6. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"-8" of Snow 0 58% 105 94%15 63% 120 97%30 77% 135 98%45 83% 150 98%60 89% 165 98%75 92% 180 100%90 94%NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Beaver Valley Power Station 5-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 Mobilization Activities 100%C.2 0 CL E C.2 4-0.CL 4-C 80%60%40%20%-Notification

-Prepare to Leave Work-Travel Home-Prepare Home-Time to Clear Snow 0%0 30 60 90 120 Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Activity (min)150 180 Figure 5-2. Evacuation Mobilization Activities Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

5.4 Calculation

of Trip Generation Time Distribution The time distributions for each of the mobilization activities presented herein must be combined to form the appropriate Trip Generation Distributions.

As discussed above, this study assumes that the stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur. For example, if a household awaits the return of a commuter, the 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 is necessary to "sum" the distributions associated with these prior activities.

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

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

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

Table 5-7. Mapping Distributions to Events Apl "Smig Aloih To Ditibto Obaie EvntDfie Distributions 1 and 2 Distribution A Event 3 Distributions A and 3 Distribution B Event 4 Distributions B and 4 Distribution C Event 5 Distributions 1 and 4 Distribution D Event 5 Distributions C and 5 Distribution E Event 5 Distributions D and 5 Distribution F Event 5 Table 5-8 presents a description of each of the final trip generation distributions achieved after the summing process is completed.

5-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 5-8. Description of the Distributions Disrbto Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also applies A to employees who work within the EPZ who live outside, and to Transients within the EPZ.B Time distribution of commuters arriving home (Event 4).Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).Time distribution of residents without commuters returning home, leaving home to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).E Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home to begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).Time distribution of residents with no commuters returning home, leaving to begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).5.4.1 Statistical Outliers As already mentioned, some portion of the survey respondents answer "don't know" to some questions or choose to not respond to a question.

The mobilization activity distributions are based upon actual responses.

But, it is the nature of surveys that a few numeric responses are inconsistent with the overall pattern of results. An example would be a case in which for 500 responses, almost all of them estimate less than two hours for a given answer, but 3 say "four hours" and 4 say "six or more hours".These "outliers" must be considered:

are they valid responses, or so atypical that they should be dropped from the sample?In assessing outliers, there are three alternates to consider: 1) Some responses with very long times may be valid, but reflect the reality that the respondent really needs to be classified in a different population subgroup, based upon special needs;2) Other responses may be unrealistic (6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> to return home from commuting distance, or 2 days to prepare the home for departure);

3) Some high values are representative and plausible, and one must not cut them as part of the consideration of outliers.The issue of course is how to make the decision that a given response or set of responses are to be considered "outliers" for the component mobilization activities, using a method that objectively quantifies the process.There is considerable statistical literature on the identification and treatment of outliers singly or in groups, much of which assumes the data is normally distributed and some of which uses non-Beaver Valley Power Station 5-13 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 parametric methods to avoid that assumption.

The literature cites that limited work has been done directly on outliers in sample survey responses.

In establishing the overall mobilization time/trip generation distributions, the following principles are used: 1) It is recognized that the overall trip generation distributions are conservative estimates, because they assume a household will do the mobilization activities sequentially, with no overlap of activities;

2) The individual mobilization activities (prepare to leave work, travel home, prepare home, clear snow) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions are created (see Figure 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 trip generation patterns for personal vehicles;4) To eliminate outliers, a) the mean and standard deviation of the specific activity are estimated from the responses, b) the median of the same data is estimated, with its position relative to the mean noted, c) the histogram of the data is inspected, and d) all values greater than 3.5 standard deviations are flagged for attention, taking special note of whether there are gaps (categories with zero entries) in the histogram display.In general, only flagged values more than 4 standard deviations from the mean are allowed to be considered outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected.When flagged values are classified as outliers and dropped, steps "a" to "d" are repeated.Beaver Valley Power Station 5-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2

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

A typical situation that results is shown below in Figure 5-3.100.0% -90.0%80.0%' 70.0%40 60.0%50 50.0%30.0%Q 20.0%10.0%0.0%UL Ui LA LA LA Lq LA Ui LA LA L If! LQ A Lq Lq r-. N r- rN .Pj r- q N- (N N N- oq N.14 Center of Interval (minutes)-Cumulative Data --Cumulative Normal Figure 5-3. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution

6) In particular, the cumulative distribution differs from the normal distribution in two key aspects, both very important in loading a network to estimate evacuation times: Most of the real data is to the left of the "normal" curve above, indicating that the network loads faster for the first 80-85% of the vehicles, potentially causing more (and earlier) 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 that is used to describe the mobilization activities, not a "normal" curve fit to the data. One could consider other distributions, but using the shape of the actual data curve is unambiguous and preserves these important features;7) With the mobilization activities each modeled according to Steps 1-6, including preserving the features cited in Step 6, the overall (or total) mobilization times are constructed.

This is done by using the data sets and distributions under different scenarios (e.g., commuter returning, no commuter returning, no snow or snow in each). In general, these are additive, using Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 5-4 presents the combined trip generation distributions designated A, C, D, E and F. These distributions are presented on the same time scale. (As discussed earlier, the use of strictly additive activities is a conservative approach, because it makes all activities sequential

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

These histograms, which represent Distributions A, C, D, E and F, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 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 analysis network to clear, in the event congestion persists beyond the trip generation period. Note that there are no trips generated during this final time period.5-16 KLD Engineering, p.c.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2

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 to shelter in-place while the 2 mile region is cleared 3. As vehicles evacuate the 2 mile region, sheltered people from 2 to 5 miles downwind continue preparation for evacuation

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

1. The EPZ population in sub-areas beyond 5 miles will react as does the population in the 2 to 5 mile region; that is they will first shelter, then evacuate after the 9 0 th percentile ETE for the 2 mile region 2. The population in the Shadow Region beyond the EPZ boundary, extending to approximately 15 miles radially from the plant, will react as they do for all non-staged evacuation scenarios.

That is 20% of these households will elect to evacuate with no shelter delay.3. The transient population will not be expected to stage their evacuation because of the limited sheltering options available to people who may be at parks, on a beach, or at other venues. Also, notifying the transient population of a staged evacuation would prove difficult.

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

Procedure 1. Trip generation for population groups in the 2 mile region will be as computed based upon the results of the telephone survey and analysis.2. Trip generation for the population subject to staged evacuation will be formulated as follows: a. Identify the 9 0 th percentile evacuation time for the sub-areas comprising the two mile region. This value, Tscen , is obtained from simulation results. It will become the time at which the region being sheltered will be told to evacuate for each scenario.b. The resultant trip generation curves for staging are then formed as follows: i. The non-shelter trip generation curve is followed until a maximum of 20%of the total trips are generated (to account for shelter non-compliance).

Beaver Valley Power Station 5-17 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 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) or 2. by stepping up to 100% (if Tscen* is > max trip generation time)c. Note: This procedure implies that there may be different staged trip generation distributions for different scenarios.

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

The value of Tscen* is 2:00 for non-snow scenarios and 2:45 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 without returning commuters; the 901h percentile two-mile evacuation time is 120 minutes for good weather and 165 minutes for snow scenarios.

At the 9 0 th percentile evacuation time, 20% of the population (who normally would have completed their mobilization activities for an un-staged evacuation) advised to shelter has nevertheless departed the area. These people do not comply with the shelter advisory.

Also included on the plot are the trip generation distributions for these groups as applied to the regions advised to evacuate immediately.

Since the 9 0 th percentile evacuation time occurs before the end of the trip generation time, after the sheltered region is advised to evacuate, the shelter trip generation distribution rises to meet the balance of the non-staged trip generation distribution.

Following time Tscen*, the balance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 30 minutes. After Tscen*+30, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the un-staged trip generation distribution.

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

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Recreational Areas As indicated in Table 5-2, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes. Table 5-9 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />. It is assumed that this 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> timeframe is sufficient time for boaters, campers and other transients to return to their vehicles and begin their evacuation trip Beaver Valley Power Station 5-18 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 Table 5-9. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Un-staged Evacuation 1 15 7%7%0%1%0%1%2 15 32% 32% 0% 9% 0% 5%3 15 35% 35% 3% 23% 2% 15%4 15 14% 14% 8% 26% 5% 18%5 15 6% 6% 15% 16% 10% 15%6 15 5% 5% 17% 11% 12% 12%7 30 1% 1% 29% 6% 26% 14%8 30 0% 0% 15% 4% 18% 8%9 15 0% 0% 4% 1% 6% 3%10 30 0% 0% 5% 2% 9% 4%11 15 0% 0% 1% 1% 3% 1%12 60 0% 0% 3% 0% 7% 4%13 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%14 60 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.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-19 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 100 C.~80 0 4-~60 0.240 0 CL 46-0*0 C 0 Trip Generation Distributions Employees/Tra nsients -Residents with Commuters -Residents with no Commuters-Res with Comm and Snow -Res no Comm with Snow 11/'jjjjI 0 60 1 20 180 240 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)360 300 Figure 5-4. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-20 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 5-10. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation 1 15 0%0%0%0%2 15 0% 2% 0% 1%3 15 1% 5% 0% 3%4 15 1% 5% 1% 4%5 15 3% 3% 2% 3%6 15 4% 2% 3% 2%7 30 5% 1% 5% 3%8 30 73% 78% 4% 2%9 15 4% 1% 1% 0%10 30 5% 2% 72% 77%11 15 1% 1% 3% 1%12 60 3% 0% 7% 4%13 30 0% 0% 1% 0%14 60 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.

Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-21 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 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)100 CL 80 0/ 0000* ýze 00000, 1A I 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)Figure 5-5. Comparison of Staged and Un-staged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 5-22 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 6 DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS An evacuation "case" defines a combination of evacuation region and evacuation scenario.

The definitions of "region" and "scenario" are as follows: Region A grouping of contiguous evacuating sub-areas that forms either a "keyhole" sector-based area, or a circular area within the EPZ, that must be evacuated in response to a radiological emergency.

Scenario A combination of circumstances, including time of day, day of week, season, and weather conditions.

Scenarios define the number of people in each of the affected population groups and their respective mobilization time distributions.

A total of 55 regions were defined which encompass all the groupings of sub-areas considered.

These regions are defined in Table 6-1 and Table 6-2. The sub-area configurations are identified in Figure 6-1. Each keyhole sector-based area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and five adjoining sectors each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees. The central sector coincides with the wind direction.

These sectors extend from 2 miles to 5 miles downwind from the plant (regions R07 through R15) or to the EPZ boundary (regions R16 through R30). Regions R31 through R45 extend from 5 miles to the EPZ boundary.

Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively.

Regions R04, R05 and R06 represent evacuations of only the Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia sub-areas, respectively.

Regions R46 through R55 are identical to regions R07 through R15 and region R02, respectively; however, those sub-areas between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2-mile region (region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 14 scenarios were evaluated for all regions. Thus, there are a total of 55x14=770 evacuation cases. Table 6-3 is a description of all scenarios.

Each combination of region and scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated.

Table 6-4 presents the percentage of each population group assumed to evacuate for each scenario.Table 6-5 presents the vehicle counts for each scenario for an evacuation of region R03 -the entire EPZ.In sub-area P-12, the area defined on the north by the Hanover Township Line, on the east, south and west by the circular area with a radius of 5 miles does not get evacuated in regions that extend 5 miles from the plant. The majority of the population in P-12, which includes all of Hanover Township, will evacuate as a township in regions that extend from 5 miles to the EPZ boundary.In sub-area W-1, the property defined to the north by the Ohio River, on the east by the Pennsylvania State Line and on the south and west by the circular area with a radius of 5 miles, is owned primarily by FirstEnergy.

The 2010 population in this area is approximately 12 people (less than 10% of the total population of sub-area W-1). Although this area is within the 5 mile radius of the plant, it does not evacuate in regions that extend 5 miles from the plant, due to Beaver Valley Power Station 6-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 the low population in this area.Sub-area W-3 will not evacuate from the 5 mile region and downwind to the EPZ boundary when the wind direction from the 12-34 degree sector is included in the keyhole. The population in the area bounded by the Pennsylvania State Line to the east, the EPZ boundary to the south and 214 degrees to the west, is less than 10% of the keyhole population.

The vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 are peak values. These peak values are adjusted depending on the scenario and region being considered using scenario and region specific percentages, such that the average population is considered for each evacuation case. The scenario percentages are presented in Table 6-4, while the regional percentages are provided in Table H-1. The percentages presented in Table 6-4 were determined as follows: The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to the product of 52% (the number of households with at least one commuter) and 48%(the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating).

See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is assumed for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of households with returning commuters will have a commuter at work during those times.Employment is assumed to be at its peak (100%) during the winter, midweek, midday scenarios.

Employment is reduced slightly (96%) for summer, midweek, midday scenarios.

This is based on the assumption that 50% of the employees commuting into the EPZ will be on vacation for a week during the approximate 12 weeks of summer. It is further assumed that those taking vacation will be uniformly dispersed throughout the summer with approximately 4% of employees vacationing each week. It is further assumed that only 10% of the employees are working in the evening and during the weekend.Transient activity is assumed to be at its peak (100%) during summer weekends and less (50%)during the week. As shown in Appendix E, there is a significant amount of lodging and campgrounds offering overnight accommodations in the EPZ; thus, transient activity is assumed to be high during evening hours -50% for summer. Transient activity is significantly reduced in the winter months -50% during the week, and 10% on weekends and in the evening.As noted in the shadow footnote to Table 6-4, the shadow percentages are computed using a base of 20% (see assumption 5 in Section 2.2); to include the employees within the Shadow Region who may choose to evacuate, the voluntary evacuation is multiplied by a scenario-specific proportion of employees to permanent residents in the shadow region. For example, using the values provided in Table 6-5 for scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows: ( 4,931 =20% x + ),3 =22%SX 14,536 + 43,739) =One special event -Hookstown Fair -was considered as scenario 13. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for scenario 13, and 0% for all other scenarios.

Beaver Valley Power Station 6-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 It is assumed that summer school enrollment is approximately 10% of enrollment during the regular school year for summer, midweek, midday scenarios.

School is not in session during weekends and evenings, thus no buses for school children are needed under those circumstances.

As discussed in Section 7, schools are assumed to be in session during the winter season, midweek, midday and 100% of buses will be needed under those circumstances.

Transit buses for the transit-dependent population are set to 100% for all scenarios as it is assumed that the transit-dependent population is present in the EPZ for all scenarios.

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

Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 6-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 6-1. Description of Evacuation Regions lI I I I I II I II I I lI I I I Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 6-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 6-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 6-2. Description of Staged Evacuation Regions I Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 6-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Figure 6-1. BVPS EPZ Sub-Areas Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 6-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 6-3. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scnai Sumeason' dWeek MDday Weathe Nonea 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Weekend Evening Good None 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Weekend Evening Good None 13 Summer Weekend Midday Good Hookstown Fair Roadway Impact- Lane 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Closure on 1-376 WB 2 1 Winter assumes that school is in session (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer assumes that school is not in session.2 1-376 will be reduced to a single lane in the westbound direction from the interchange with State Highway 18/Frankfort Rd (Exit 39) to the interchange with State Highway 151/Constitution Blvd (Exit 31).6-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.Beaver Valley Power Station Evacuation Time Estimate 6-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.Rev. 2 Table 6-4. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios 1 25% 75% 96% 50% 22% 0% 10% 100% 100%2 25% 75% 96% 50% 22% 0% 10% 100% 100%3 2.5% 97.5% 10% 100% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%4 2.5% 97.5% 10% 100% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%5 2.5% 97.5% 10% 50% 20% 0% 0% 100% 40%6 25% 75% 100% 50% 22% 0% 100% 100% 100%7 25% 75% 100% 50% 22% 0% 100% 100% 100%8 25% 75% 100% 50% 22% 0% 100% 100% 100%9 2.5% 97.5% 10% 10% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%10 2.5% 97.5% 10% 10% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%11 2.5% 97.5% 10% 10% 20% 0% 0% 100% 100%12 2.5% 97.5% 10% 10% 20% 0% 0% 100% 40%13 2.5% 97.5% 10% 100% 20% 100% 0% 100% 100%14 25% 75% 96% 50% 22% 0% 10% 100% 100%Resident Households with Commuters

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

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

EPZ employees who live outside the EPZ Transients

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

People who are in the EPZ at the time of an accident for recreational or other (non-employment) purposes.Shadow ......................................................

Residents and employees in the shadow region (outside of the EPZ) who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation.

The basis for the values shown is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees.

Special Events ............................................

Additional vehicles in the EPZ due to the identified special events.School and Transit Buses ............................

Vehicle-equivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing schools and transit-dependent people (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

External Through Traffic .............................

Traffic on interstates/freeways and major arterial roads at the start of the evacuation.

This traffic is stopped by access control 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the evacuation begins.Beaver Valley Power Station 6-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2 Table 6-5. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario 1 14,536 43,739 4,931 1,669 15,262 -75 186 8,200 88,598 2 14,536 43,739 4,931 1,669 15,262 -75 186 8,200 88,598 3 1,454 56,821 514 3,337 14,196 --186 8,200 84,708 4 1,454 56,821 514 3,337 14,196 -186 8,200 84,708 5 1,454 56,821 514 1,669 14,196 --186 3,280 78,120 6 14,536 43,739 5,136 167 15,312 -746 186 8,200 88,022 7 14,536 43,739 5,136 167 15,312 -746 186 8,200 88,022 8 14,536 43,739 5,136 167 15,312 -746 186 8,200 88,022 9 1,454 56,821 514 334 14,196 186 8,200 81,705 10 1,454 56,821 514 334 14,196 186 8,200 81,705 11 1,454 56,821 514 334 14,196 186 8,200 81,705 12 1,454 56,821 514 334 14,196 -186 3,280 76,785 13 1,454 56,821 514 3,337 14,196 413 -186 8,200 85,121 14 14,536 43,739 4,931 1,669 15,262 -75 186 8,200 88,598 Note: Vehicle estimates are for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (region R03)Note: Commuting student vehicles at Community College of Beaver County, Penn State -Beaver Campus, and Kent State University were considered to have the same scenario percent as employees, and are therefore included in the employee totals.Beaver Valley Power Station 6-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 2