ML12088A228
| ML12088A228 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/2012 |
| From: | Potts L A, Riggs J L Entergy Nuclear Operations |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| SECY RAS | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML12088A225 | List: |
| References | |
| RAS 22094, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01 | |
| Download: ML12088A228 (15) | |
Text
ENT000027 Submitted: March 28, 2012 Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 2 of 15
1.0 PurposeThis
calculation provides technical input to the testimony on contention NYS-16B concerning the population estimate used in the IPEC SAMA analysis. It was prepared at direction of counsel with the following objectives. A. Duplicate Sheppard's commuter calculations.
B. Assess impact of possible double counting between long-distance commuters and business transients. C. Evaluate impact of commuters traveling out of the 50-mile region.
2.0 ConclusionsA. Duplicate Sheppard's commuter calculations. The values in columns 2-4 of Table 1 of Sheppard's Report agree with Entergy's SAMA population estimates in the ENERCON Report (see Section 6.1). The commuters-in values in Table 1 of Sheppard's Report were calculated using the methodology described in Sheppard's Report, except for the following discrepancy (see Section 6.1). Table 1 of Sheppard's Report underestimates the commuters into Union Co., NJ by 3,987 because an incorrect value for the 2000 resident population was used (552,541 instead of 522,541). This caused the growth rate for this county to be underestimated resulting in an underestimate of the 2035 commuters-in. B. Assess impact of possible double counting between long-distance commuters and business transients.
The data for commuters-in from the U.S. Census Bureau, County-to-County Worker Flow Files includes commuters into the 50-mile region from locations all over the country. If accounting for daily commuters was appropriate, it would not be reasonable to assume that people from more than 150 miles away commute into the region on a daily basis. Rather, these people are considered "business travelers." Business travelers have already been included in the "transient population" in the ENERCON Report.Revising the analysis in Sheppard's Report to only count commuters-in from closer to the region (and correcting the Sheppard's Report underestimate for Union Co., NJ) decreased the number of commuters in Sheppard's Report to 964,093 (see Section
6.2).C. Evaluate impact of commuters traveling out of the 50-mile region. Revising the analysis in Sheppard's Report to also account for commuters out of the region (in addition to the changes in B) decreased the net number of commuters into the 50-mile region to 110,663 (see Section 6.3).
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 3 of 15 The revised analysis resulted in a more accurate estimate of the "work day" population distribution within the 50-mile region. The following observations can be made. The four counties closest to IPEC (Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester), where doses would be higher, show a net reduction of over 100,000 commuters. Seven counties in the 50-mile region show a net increase in commuters. Of these seven counties; New York, NY county has a net increase of about 1.4 million commuters; Morris, NJ county has a net increase of about 40,000 commuters; Fairfield, CT and Essex, NJ counties each have a net increase of about 24,000 commuters; and the other three counties (Bergen, Middlesex, and Somerset, NJ) have a combined net increase of about 7,000 commuters.
3.0 Input
and Design Criteria3.1 Dr. Sheppard's Commuter CalculationsDr. Sheppard's commuter calculations are described in Reference 4.1, also known as "Sheppard's Report."Sheppard's Report describes his commuter calculations, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau,County-to-County Worker Flow Files available at http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/commuting/index.html, as follows. "An additional deficiency in the SAMA report population estimates relates to the number of persons who would be present within 50 miles of IPEC during a substantial portion of the day, not because they permanently reside there, nor because they are transient overnight visitors to the area, but because they commute to workplaces that are within the area. Because such workers are part of the population potentially at risk from a severe accident, it is important to include them in the estimate of population in the area. In order to estimate the number of commuters, I use data on county-to-county commuter flows in 2000 made available by the Census Bureau. These data provide, for every county in the US, the estimated number of commuters coming into the county each day from any other individual county in the US. Thus these data can tell us how many commuters can be expected to come to workplaces within a 50 mile radius of IPEC from residential locations outside of this radius. Using these data, I estimated the total commuter flow into the area within 50 miles of IPEC by the following procedure: 1. For every county that is 100 percent within the 50 mile boundary: a. Take 100 percent of the average daily commuter flows into that county that come from counties that are completely outside of the 50 mile boundary. b. Take (100-S) percent of the average daily commuter flows into that county that come from counties that have S percent of their area within the 50 mile boundary.
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 4 of 15 2. For every county that is partially within the 50 mile boundary, where P percent is the percentage of land area in the county located within 50 miles of IPEC: a. Take P percent of the average daily commuter flows into that county that come from counties that are completely outside the 50 mile boundary. b. Take Px(100-S) percent of the average daily commuter flows into that county that come from counties that have S percent of their area within the 50 mile boundary. Just as using the shares of land area within 50 miles of IPEC to adjust resident, transient, and undercounted population in each county was equivalent to assuming population in each county is uniformly distributed over the entire county, the steps outlined above add the assumption that employment locations are also distributed uniformly over the entire land area of each county. Thus, for example, if a county has 25 percent of its land area within 50 miles of IPEC and 100 commuters come into that county from a county that is entirely outside of the 50 mile radius, we count 25 commuters as being present within the area that is being evaluated for SAMA (the other 75 are known to work in the county, but are assumed to be employed outside of the 50 mile radius). If 200 commuters come into this same county from a different county that has 50 percent of its area within 50 miles of IPEC, then 100 of those commuters are counted as already residing within the 50 mile boundary (and thus they are already counted under the resident population total) and the other 100 are counted as persons coming from outside the 50 mile area. Of these, 25 are counted as having employment within the area evaluated for SAMA and the other 75 are counted as having employment farther than 50 miles from IPEC. This procedure provides estimates of the commuter population in 2000 into that portion of each county that is within 50 miles of IPEC. Taking the county population growth rates from 2000 to 2035 used in the original report as a conservative estimate of growth in county employment, we apply those growth rates to total commuter population for each county to obtain the estimates provided in column 6 of Table 1." Note that although it is not stated in Sheppard's Report, the calculations described in Section 6.1 indicate that the following is true. If 400 residents of this county (with 25 percent of its land area within 50 miles of IPEC) stay in the same county to work, 100 are counted as already residing within the 50 mile boundary (and thus they are already counted under the resident population total) and the other 300 are counted as persons residing outside the 50 mile area. Of these, 75 are counted as having employment within the area evaluated for SAMA and the other 225 are counted as having employment farther than 50 miles from IPEC. Table 1 of Sheppard's Report is reproduced below for convenient reference.
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 5 of 15 3.2 U.S. Census Bureau County-to-County Worker Flow FilesAs indicated in Sheppard's Report, these files areavailable at http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/commuting/index.html. The files listed below for states with land area within 50 miles of IPEC (Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania) were downloaded from this website. Files showing the work destinations for people who live in each county of Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania: 2KRESCO_CT.xls 2KRESCO_NJ.xls 2KRESCO_NY.xls 2KRESCO_PA.xls Files showing the origins for people who work in each county of Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania:
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 6 of 15 2KWRKCO_CT.xls 2KWRKCO_NJ.xls 2KWRKCO_NY.xls 2KWRKCO_PA.xls 3.3 Entergy's SAMA Population EstimatesEntergy's SAMA population estimates were developed in the "ENERCON Report," Reference 4.3. Tables 1.1, 2.1, and 2.3 of this document are reproduced below for convenient reference.
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 7 of 15 Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 8 of 15 4.0References 4.1 REPORT OF DR. STEPHEN C. SHEPPARD, PH.D. IN SUPPORT OF CONTENTION NYS-16/16A/16B ("NYS-16B") In re: License Renewal Application Submitted by Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC, and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Docket Nos. 50-247-LR; 50-286-LR ASLBP No. 07-858-03-LR-BD01 DPR-26, DPR-64, December 16, 2011 4.2 U.S. Census Bureau, County-to-County Worker Flow Files available at http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/commuting/index.html , downloaded January 10, 2012 4.3 Site Specific MACCS2 Input Data for Indian Point Energy Center, Revision 1 prepared for Entergy Nuclear Northeast by Enercon Services, Inc., Section 2.3, Page 2-5, Dec. 2009 Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 9 of 15 5.0 Assumptions5.1 Employment locations are distributed uniformly over the entire land area of each county. (Sheppard's Report also uses this assumption.) 5.2 Workers who commute out of a county come from locations distributed uniformly over the entire land area of the county. (Corollary to assumption 5.1.) 5.3 The county population growth rates from 2000 to 2035 used in Reference 4.2 are a conservative estimate of growth in county employment. (Sheppard's Report also
uses this assumption.) 5.4 The county population growth rates from 2000 to 2035 used in Reference 4.2 are a conservative estimate of growth in the number of people commuting out of the county. (Corollary to assumption 5.3.) 5.5 People who live more than 150 miles outside the 50-mile region do not commute into the region on a daily basis. Rather, these people are considered "business travelers." The impact of excluding these business travelers can be approximated by excluding commuters from states other than Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont.
6.0Method of Analysis and Calculations The calculations described below were performed within an Excel spreadsheet entitled "Duplicate Sheppard Analysis Spreadsheet.xlsx." The worksheets mentioned below are within this spreadsheet. 6.1 Duplicate Sheppard's commuter calculations. 6.1.1 Verify that the values in columns 2-4 of Table 1 of Sheppard's Report agree with Entergy's SAMA population estimates in the ENERCON Report. See worksheet "Verify Sheppard Table 1 Input" for calculations.
The values in Column 2 of Table 1 of Sheppard's Report (Pct within 50 mi.) are equal to the (Percent within 50-mile zone) values in Table 1.1 of the ENERCON Report. No discrepancies noted. The values in Column 3 of Table 1 of Sheppard's Report (Resident Pop) are equal to the 2035 permanent population projection in Table 2.1 of the ENERCON Report times the Percent within 50-mile zone values. No discrepancies noted. The values in Column 4 of Table 1 of Sheppard's Report (Transient Pop) are equal to the 2035 total population projection in Table 2.3 of the ENERCON Report times the Percent within 50-mile zone values minus the Resident Pop. No discrepancies noted; only minor rounding differences. 6.1.2 For each of the 28 counties with area in the region, copy the records showing the origins for people who work in each county from the U.S.
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 10 of 15 Census bureau files to a worksheet with the county name, state abbreviation and the words "commute in" such as "Fairfield, CT Commute
In."Worksheets labeled as described above were created by copying the appropriate lines from 2KWRKCO_CT.xls, 2KWRKCO_NJ.xls, 2KWRKCO_NY.xls, and 2KWRKCO_PA.xls. 6.1.3 In each county worksheet from 6.1.2 add a column entitled "Commuters In". For residence counties completely outside the 50 mile region, Commuters In = count (from the U.S. Census bureau file). For residence counties with area inside the 50 mile region, Commuters In = count * (100 - % of residence county within 50 miles)/100.Sum the "Commuters In" column.
The "Commuters In" column in each county worksheet accounts for the percentage of the residence county that is within the 50 mile region (S in Sheppard's Report.) 6.1.4 In worksheet entitled "Section 6.1 Worksheet", calculate the number of commuters into each county in 2000 by taking the Sum of "Commuters In" column in the county worksheet, multiplying by the % within 50 miles and dividing by 100. Column E (2000 Commuters In Calculated) in worksheet "Section 6.1 Worksheet" contains this calculation which accounts for the percentage of the workplace county that is within the 50 mile region (P in Sheppard's
Report.)6.1.5 In the same worksheet (Section 6.1 Worksheet), calculate the county population growth rates from 2000 to 2035 using data from Table 2.1 of the ENERCON Report. Apply those growth rates to calculate the year 2035 commuters-in for each of the counties. Columns F, G, and H in worksheet "Section 6.1 Worksheet" calculate the population growth rate for each county. Column I (2035 Commuters In Calculated) applies those growth rates to the 2000 Commuter-In values to calculate the 2035 commuters-in for each county. 6.1.6 Compare the year 2035 commuters-in values in "Section 6.1 Worksheet" to the commuters-in values in Table 1 of Sheppard's Report. The commuters-in values in Table 1 of Sheppard's Report were reproduced in this calculation, except for the following discrepancy.
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 11 of 15 Sheppard's Report underestimated the commuters into Union Co., NJ by 3,987 because he used an incorrect value for the 2000 resident population (552,541 instead of 522,541). This caused the growth rate for this county to be underestimated resulting in an underestimate of the 2035 commuters-in. 6.2 Assess impact of possible double counting between long-distance commuters and business transients. The calculations described below were performed within an Excel spreadsheet entitled "Rebuttal Commuter Analysis Spreadsheet.xlsx." The worksheets mentioned below are within this spreadsheet. 6.2.1 Commuters originating from within a circle with a radius of 200 miles centered on the IPEC site are within 150 miles of the 50-mile region. This circle includes all or portions of the following states as well as portions of
Canada.Connecticut Maine Massachusetts New Hampshire New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Rhode Island Vermont To simplify the analysis, it was assumed that all commuters from the listed states are counted as commuters-in. This is a conservative assumption since some of the commuters from some of these states are more than 150 miles away from the 50-mile region. The conservatism is mitigated somewhat by the fact that the datasets from the U.S. Census Bureau, County-to-County Worker Flow Files do not account for commuters into the region from Canada. 6.2.2 Copy the spreadsheet used to calculate the commuters into the region in Section 6.1 (Duplicate Sheppard Analysis Spreadsheet.xlsx) to a new spreadsheet entitled "Rebuttal Commuter Analysis Spreadsheet.xlsx."
Delete unnecessary worksheet "Verify Sheppard Table 1 Input" and change the name of "Section 6.1 Worksheet" to "Section 6.2 Worksheet". 6.2.3 Within each of the county worksheets (such as "Fairfield, CT Commute In"), delete line items for commuters coming from states other than those listed in Section 6.2.1. 6.2.4 Compare the year 2035 commuters-in values in worksheet "Section 6.2 Worksheet" to the commuters-in values in Table 1 of Sheppard's Report.
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 12 of 15 These results reflect the population values if the commuters from far away are not included. (They also correct the underestimate in the Sheppard's Report values for Union Co., NJ mentioned in Section 6.1.6. The italicized, underlined values in the following table are the corrected Sheppard's Report values.)The number of commuters-in decreased slightly to 964,093. See the following table. County %within 50 miles SheppardReport Table 1 Commuters SheppardReport Table 1 Total Pop 2000 Commuters InCalculated 2035 Commuters In Revised Revised Total Pop Fairfield, CT 100.0 52,388990,91748,60550,590 989,119 Litchfield, CT 41.5 20,633112,32817,23720,559 112,254 New Haven, CT 32.9 85,165386,45978,06984,924 386,218 Bergen, NJ 100.0 30,8931,152,82623,19028,575 1,150,508 Essex, NJ 100.0 62,809966,29053,50858,571 962,052 Hudson, NJ 100.0 30,913747,24226,37929,931 746,260 Middlesex, NJ 1.8 7,73927,3255,4837,700 27,286 Morris, NJ 80.8 83,176625,31758,80081,682 623,823 Passaic, NJ 100.0 12,135584,72110,32711,686 584,272 Somerset, NJ 4.5 9,16930,9505,7669,112 30,893 Sussex, NJ 93.9 9,762219,4566,3649,621 219,315 Union, NJ 92.9 73,433640,30264,28072,654 639,523 Warren, NJ 0.5 2561,056168255 1,055 Bronx, NY 100.0 6,6831,698,7595,1266,288 1,698,364 Dutchess, NY 88.9 18,957311,09616,41718,716 310,855 Kings, NY 100.0 34,7402,736,07331,31233,257 2,734,590 Nassau, NY 97.9 78,7101,341,06381,88176,794 1,339,147 New York, NY 100.0 154,7931,768,987140,883143,950 1,758,144 Orange, NY 100.0 14,410472,49810,68413,934 472,022 Putnam, NY 100.0 1,251125,1069241,166 125,021 Queens, NY 100.0 47,2693,165,15430,94541,985 3,159,870 Richmond, NY 65.4 37,816480,30525,00237,348 479,837 Rockland, NY 100.0 1,779289,1951,5591,516 288,932 Suffolk, NY 21.3 87,491414,10683,04687,223 413,838 Sullivan, NY 36.3 6,72441,8355,2696,700 41,811 Ulster, NY 58.1 19,466152,36015,49619,411 152,305 Westchester, NY 100.0 8,702953,4407,5217,452 952,190 Pike, PA 18.7 2,50325,1081,1152,492 25,097Total 999,76520,460,274855,357964,093 20,424,6026.3 Evaluate impact of commuters traveling in and out of each county, and each partial county, in the 50-mile region.
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 13 of 15 The calculations described below were performed within an Excel spreadsheet entitled "Rebuttal Commuter Analysis Spreadsheet.xlsx." The worksheets mentioned below are within this spreadsheet. 6.3.1 For each of the 28 counties with area in the region, copy the records showing the work destinations for people who live in each county from the U.S. Census bureau files to a worksheet in Section 6.3 Spreadsheet.xlsx.
Name each worksheet with the county name, state abbreviation and the words "commute out" such as "Fairfield, CT Commute Out." Worksheets labeled as described above were created by copying the appropriate lines from 2KRESCO_CT.xls, 2KRESCO _NJ.xls, 2KRESCO _NY.xls, and 2KRESCO _PA.xls. 6.3.2 In each "Commuters In" county worksheet created in Section 6.1, sum the commuters into the county and subtract the commuters from the county being analyzed. Commuters originating from Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont were retained as commuters. Workers originating from other states were considered "business travelers" and were not counted as commuters. The commuters-in from counties that are only partially within the 50-mile region are not adjusted as was done in Sheppard's Report because that adjustment results in the workers remaining in their residence county. To get an accurate representation of the "work day" population in each county, the commuters are moved to their workplace county in this analysis. The commuters who live and work in the same county are not included in the calculation because there is no net change and these workers have already been included in the permanent population. 6.3.3 In each "Commuters Out" county worksheet, sum the commuters out of the county and subtract the commuters from the county being analyzed. All commuters leaving the county were counted as commuters out of the county. Workers going to places other than Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont are actually "business travelers". But, since the original Entergy population estimates did not consider these business travelers, they are considered here to get a more accurate representation of the "work day" population in each county. The commuters who live and work in the same county are not included in the calculation because there is no net change and these workers have already been included in the permanent population. 6.3.4 In worksheet entitled "Section 6.3 Worksheet", calculate the net number of commuters into each county in 2000 by subtracting the commuters-out for Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 14 of 15 the county from the commuters-in for the county and multiplying by the fraction of the county within the 50-mile region. Column E (2000 Net Commuters In Calculated) in worksheet "Section 6.3 Worksheet" contains this calculation which accounts for the percentage of the workplace county that is within the 50 mile region. 6.3.5 In the same worksheet (Section 6.3 Worksheet), calculate the county population growth rates from 2000 to 2035 using data from Table 2.1 of the ENERCON Report. Apply those growth rates to calculate the year 2035 net commuters-in for each of the counties. Columns F, G, and H in worksheet "Section 6.3 Worksheet" calculate the population growth rate for each county. Column K (2035 Net Commuters In Calculated) applies those growth rates to the 2000 net commuters-in values to calculate the 2035 net commuters-in for each county. 6.3.6 Compare the "2035 Net Commuters In Calculated" values in worksheet "Section 6.3 Worksheet" to the commuters-in values in Table 1 of Sheppard's Report. These results reflect the population values if the commuters and business travelers out of the region are not included. They also assume that commuters-in from far away are not included. (They also correct the underestimate in the Sheppard's Report values for Union Co., NJ mentioned in Section 6.1.6. The italicized, underlined values in the following table are the corrected Sheppard's Report values.) The revised number of commuters decreased to 110,663. See the following table. The revised analysis resulted in a more accurate estimate of the "work day" population distribution within the 50-mile region. The following observations can be made. The four counties closest to IPEC (Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester), where doses would be higher, show a net reduction of over 100,000 commuters. Seven counties in the 50-mile region show a net increase in commuters. Of these seven counties; New York, NY county has a net increase of about 1.4 million commuters; Morris, NJ county has a net increase of about 40,000 commuters; Fairfield, CT and Essex, NJ counties each have a net increase of about 24,000 commuters; and the other three counties (Bergen, Middlesex, and Somerset, NJ) have a combined net increase of about 7,000 commuters.
Rebuttal Commuter Analyses - Region within 50 miles of IPEC Page 15 of 15 County % within 50 miles SheppardReport Table 1 Commuters SheppardReport Table 1 Total Pop 2000 Net Commuters InCalculated 2035 Net Commuters InCalculated Revised Total Pop Fairfield, CT 100.0 52,388990,91722,98523,923 962,452 Litchfield, CT 41.5 20,633112,328-9,849-11,748 79,947 New Haven, CT 32.9 85,165386,459-8,750-9,518 291,776 Bergen, NJ 100.0 30,8931,152,8265,2556,475 1,128,408 Essex, NJ 100.0 62,809966,29022,10124,192 927,673 Hudson, NJ 100.0 30,913747,242-30,716-34,852 681,477 Middlesex, NJ 1.8 7,73927,32591128 19,714 Morris, NJ 80.8 83,176625,31728,92240,178 582,319 Passaic, NJ 100.0 12,135584,721-37,557-42,499 530,087 Somerset, NJ 4.5 9,16930,950458723 22,504 Sussex, NJ 93.9 9,762219,456-30,872-46,672 163,022 Union, NJ 92.9 73,433640,302-9,536-10,779 556,090 Warren, NJ 0.5 2561,056-65-99 701 Bronx, NY 100.0 6,6831,698,759-134,458-164,938 1,527,138 Dutchess, NY 88.9 18,957311,096-12,731-14,515 277,624 Kings, NY 100.0 34,7402,736,073-234,946-249,536 2,451,797 Nassau, NY 97.9 78,7101,341,063-65,769-61,684 1,200,669 New York, NY 100.0 154,7931,768,9871,326,1961,355,065 2,969,259 Orange, NY 100.0 14,410472,498-25,195-32,861 425,227 Putnam, NY 100.0 1,251125,106-24,242-30,570 93,285 Queens, NY 100.0 47,2693,165,154-339,054-460,013 2,657,872 Richmond, NY 65.4 37,816480,305-46,683-69,735 372,754 Rockland, NY 100.0 1,779289,195-31,597-30,721 256,695 Suffolk, NY 21.3 87,491414,106-23,091-24,253 302,362 Sullivan, NY 36.3 6,72441,835-2,155-2,740 32,371 Ulster, NY 58.1 19,466152,360-9,919-12,425 120,469 Westchester, NY100.0 8,702953,440-25,396-25,162 919,576 Pike, PA 18.7 2,50325,108-2,105-4,703 17,902Total 999,76520,460,274301,320110,663 19,571,172