ML13003A137

Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Appendix C, Dynev Traffic Simulation Model Through Appendix H, Evacuation Regions, Page H-33

ML13003A137
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	11/30/2012
From:	KLD Engineering, PC
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Susquehanna
References
Download: ML13003A137 (96)

Text

APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL The DYNEV traffic simulation model is a macroscopic model that describes the operations of traffic flow in terms of aggregate variables: vehicles, flow rate, mean speed, volume, density, queue length, on each link, for each turn movement, during each Time Interval (simulation time step). The model generates trips from "sources" and from Entry Links and introduces them onto the analysis network at rates specified by the analyst based on the mobilization time distributions. The model simulates the movements of all vehicles on all network links over time until the network is empty. At intervals, the model outputs Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) such as those listed in Table C-1.

Model Features Include:

• Explicit consideration is taken of the variation in density over the time step; an iterative procedure is employed to calculate an average density over the simulation time step for the purpose of computing a mean speed for moving vehicles.

• Multiple turn movements can be serviced on one link; a separate algorithm is used to estimate the number of (fractional) lanes assigned to the vehicles performing each turn movement, based, in part, on the turn percentages provided by the DTRAD model.

" At any point in time, traffic flow on a link is subdivided into two classifications: queued and moving vehicles. The number of vehicles in each classification is computed. Vehicle spillback, stratified by turn movement for each network link, is explicitly considered and quantified. The propagation of stopping waves from link to link is computed within each time step of the simulation. There is no "vertical stacking" of queues on a link.

• Any link can accommodate "source flow" from zones via side streets and parking facilities that are not explicitly represented. This flow represents the evacuating trips that are generated at the source.

• The relation between the number of vehicles occupying the link and its storage capacity is monitored every time step for every link and for every turn movement. If the available storage capacity on a link is exceeded by the demand for service, then the simulator applies a "metering" rate to the entering traffic from both the upstream feeders and source node to ensure that the available storage capacity is not exceeded.

" A "path network" that represents the specified traffic movements from each network link is constructed by the model; this path network is utilized by the DTRAD model.

" A two-way interface with DTRAD: (1) provides link travel times; (2) receives data that translates into link turn percentages.

• Provides MOE to animation software, EVAN

• Calculates ETE statistics Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

All traffic simulation models are data-intensive. Table C-2 outlines the necessary input data elements.

To provide an efficient framework for defining these specifications, the physical highway environment is represented as a network. The unidirectional links of the network represent roadway sections: rural, multi-lane, urban streets or freeways. The nodes of the network generally represent intersections or points along a section where a geometric property changes (e.g. a lane drop, change in grade or free flow speed).

Figure C-1 is an example of a small network representation. The freeway is defined by the sequence of links, (20,21), (21,22), and (22,23). Links (8001, 19) and (3, 8011) are Entry and Exit links, respectively. An arterial extends from node 3 to node 19 and is partially subsumed within a grid network. Note that links (21,22) and (17,19) are grade-separated.

Table C-1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II Vehicles Discharged Vehicles Link, Network, EXit Link Speed Miles/Hours (mph) Link, Network Density Vehicles/Mile/Lane Link Level of Service LOS Link Content Vehicles Network Travel Time Vehicle-hours Network Evacuated Vehicles Vehicles Network, Exit Link Trip Travel Time Vehicle-minutes/trip Network Capacity Utilization Percent Exit Link Attraction Percent of total evacuating vehicles Exit Link Max Queue Vehicles Node, Approach Time of Max Queue Hours:minutes Node, Approach Route Statistics Length (mi); Mean Speed (mph); Travel Route Time (min)

Mean Travel Time Minutes Evacuation Trips; Network Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

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

" Links defined by upstream and downstream node numbers

" Link lengths

" Number of lanes (up to 9) and channelization

• Turn bays (1 to 3 lanes)

" Destination (exit) nodes

• Network topology defined in terms of downstream nodes for each receiving link

• Node Coordinates (X,Y)

• Nuclear Power Plant Coordinates (X,Y)

GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES

• On all entry links and source nodes (origins), by Time Period TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS

" Traffic signals: link-specific, turn movement specific

• Signal control treated as fixed time or actuated

• Location of traffic control points (these are represented as actuated signals)

• Stop and Yield signs

• Right-turn-on-red (RTOR)

• Route diversion specifications

" Turn restrictions

" Lane control (e.g. lane closure, movement-specific)

DRIVER'S AND OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS

• Driver's (vehicle-specific) response mechanisms: free-flow speed, discharge headway

" Bus route designation.

DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT

• Candidate destination nodes for each origin (optional)

" Duration of DTA sessions

• Duration of simulation "burn time"

• Desired number of destination nodes per origin INCIDENTS

• Identify and Schedule of closed lanes

• Identify and Schedule of closed links Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Entry, Exit Nodes are numbered 8xxx Figure C-1. Representative Analysis Network Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

C.1 Methodology C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram It is necessary to define the fundamental diagram describing flow-density and speed-density relationships. Rather than "settling for" a triangular representation, a more realistic representation that includes a "capacity drop", (I-R)Qmax, at the critical density when flow conditions enter the forced flow regime, is developed and calibrated for each link. This representation, shown in Figure C-2, asserts a constant free speed up to a density, kf, and then a linear reduction in speed in the range, kf < k < k, = 45 vpm, the density at capacity. In the flow-density plane, a quadratic relationship is prescribed in the range, kc < k < k, = 95 vpm which roughly represents the "stop-and-go" condition of severe congestion. The value of flow rate, Qs, corresponding to ks, is approximated at 0.7 RQmax. A linear relationship between ks and kj completes the diagram shown in Figure C-2. Table C-3 is a glossary of terms.

The fundamental diagram is applied to moving traffic on every link. The specified calibration values for each link are: (1) Free speed, vf ; (2) Capacity, Qmax; (3) Critical density, k, =

-Qmaxkf=k-45 vpm ; (4) Capacity Drop Factor, R = 0.9 ; (5) Jam density, kj. Then, vc = k-(Vf-Vc).k Setting k=k-kc, thenQ=RQmax- Qmax 2 for 0<k ks=50. It can be Qmax 8333 shown that Q = (0.98 - 0.0056 k) RQmax for ks - k *_ ki, where ks = 50 and k, = 175.

C.1.2 The Simulation Model The simulation model solves a sequence of "unit problems". Each unit problem computes the movement of traffic on a link, for each specified turn movement, over a specified time interval (TI) which serves as the simulation time step for all links. Figure C-3 is a representation of the unit problem in the time-distance plane. Table C-3 is a glossary of terms that are referenced in the following description of the unit problem procedure.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Volume, vph Qmax R Qmax Density, vpm

-o Density, vpm kf k, ks kj Figure C-2. Fundamental Diagrams KID Engineering, P.C.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station c-s C-6 Evacuation Time Estimate I Rev.O0

Distance OQ OM OE

-1 O4k Down Qb Qe L

Mb Up

-* Time El E2 TI Figure C-3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with tj > 0 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

0 Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table C-3. Glossary The maximum number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that can discharge Cap from a link within a time interval.

The number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that enter the link over the time interval. The portion, ETI, can reach the stop-bar within the TI.

The green time: cycle time ratio that services the vehicles of a particular turn movement on a link.

h The mean queue discharge headway, seconds.

k Density in vehicles per lane per mile.

The average density of moving vehicles of a particular movement over a TI, on a link.

L The length of the link in feet.

The queue length in feet of a particular movement, at the [beginning, end] of a b, Le time interval.

The number of lanes, expressed as a floating point number, allocated to service a particular movement on a link.

ILv The mean effective length of a queued vehicle including the vehicle spacing, feet.

M Metering factor (Multiplier): 1.

The number of moving vehicles on the link, of a particular movement, that are M1b, Me moving at the [beginning, end] of the time interval. These vehicles are assumed to be of equal spacing, over the length of link upstream of the queue.

The total number of vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a link over a time interval.

The components of the vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged OM, OE from a link within a time interval: vehicles that were Queued at the beginning of OQ, the TI; vehicles that were Moving within the link at the beginning of the TI; vehicles that Entered the link during the TI.

The percentage, expressed as a fraction, of the total flow on the link that PX executes a particular turn movement, x.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station c-s C-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The number of queued vehicles on the link, of a particular turn movement, at the Qb, Qe [beginning, end] of the time interval.

The maximum flow rate that can be serviced by a link for a particular movement Qmax in the absence of a control device. It is specified by the analyst as an estimate of link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the HCM.

R The factor that is applied to the capacity of a link to represent the "capacity drop" when the flow condition moves into the forced flow regime. The lower capacity at that point is equal to RQmax .

RCap The remaining capacity available to service vehicles of a particular movement after that queue has been completely serviced, within a time interval, expressed as vehicles.

Sx Service rate for movement x, vehicles per hour (vph).

tj Vehicles of a particular turn movement that enter a link over the first tj seconds of a time interval, can reach the stop-bar (in the absence of a queue down-stream) within the same time interval.

TI The time interval, in seconds, which is used as the simulation time step.

v The mean speed of travel, in feet per second (fps) or miles per hour (mph), of moving vehicles on the link.

VQ The mean speed of the last vehicle in a queue that discharges from the link within the TI. This speed differs from the mean speed of moving vehicles, v.

W The width of the intersection in feet. This is the difference between the link length which extends from stop-bar to stop-bar and the block length.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

I0 Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The formulation and the associated logic presented below are designed to solve the unit problem for each sweep over the network (discussed below), for each turn movement serviced on each link that comprises the evacuation network, and for each TI over the duration of the evacuation.

Given= Qb, Mb, L, TI, Eo, LN, G/C , h, Lv, Ro, L, E,M Compute = O, Qe, Me Define O=OQ+OM+OE ; E=E1 +E 2

1. For the first sweep, s = 1, of this TI, get initial estimates of mean density, ko , the R - factor, Ro and entering traffic, Eo , using the values computed for the final sweep of the prior TI.

For each subsequent sweep, s > 1, calculate E = .i Pi Oi + S where Pi, Oi are the relevant turn percentages from feeder link, i, and its total outflow (possibly metered) over this TI; S is the total source flow (possibly metered) during the current TI.

Set iteration counter, n = 0,k = ko , and E = Eo .

2. Calculate v (k) such that k _ 130 using the analytical representations of the fundamental diagram.

Qmax(TI)

Calculate Cap = Q (G/c) LN,in vehicles, this value may be reduced 3600 due to metering SetR=1.0ifG/C<1 orifk<kc; Set R=0.9onlyifG/C=1 and k>kc Calculate queue length, Lb = Qb L LL

3. Calculate tj=TI-_Lv If t 1 <O, settl=El=OE=O ; Else, El=El-.

TI

4. Then E2 =E-El ; t 2 =TI-t 1

5. If Qb > Cap,then OQ = Cap,OM = OE = 0 If tj > 0,then Qe = Qb + Mb + E1 - Cap Else Qe = Qb - Cap End if Calculate Qe and Me using Algorithm A (below)

6. Else (Qb< Cap) 0Q

= Qb, RCap = Cap - OQ

7. If Mb* RCap,then Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

8. If t 1 >0 OM =Mb,OE=min RCap-Mb,t Cap)

- Ž>0 OM = bOETI Q' = El - OE If Q'e > 0,then Calculate Qe, Me with Algorithm A Else Qe = 0, Me = E2 End if Else (t, = 0)

M= ( )-Lb)* Mb and OE = 0 0

Me = Mb - M + E; Qe = 0 End if

9. Else (Mb > RCap)

OE= 0 If tl > 0, then m= RCap, Qe = Mb - OM + E1

.Calculate Qe and Me using Algorithm A

10. Else (t, = 0)

Md = [(T-Lb) Mb]

If Md > RCap, then Om= RCap Qe =Md - OM Apply Algorithm A to calculate Qe and Me Else OM = Md 0

Me =Mb - M+ E and Qe = 0 End if End if End if End if

11. Calculate a new estimate of average density, kn = * [kb + 2 km + ke],

where kb = density at the beginning of the TI ke = density at the end of the TI km = density at the mid-point of the TI All values of density apply only to the moving vehicles.

If Ikn - kn-k1 > E and n < N where N = max number of iterations, and Eis a convergence criterion, then Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

12. set n = n + 1 , and return to step 2 to perform iteration, n, using k = ki.

End if Computation of unit problem is now complete. Check for excessive inflow causing spillback.

(L-W) LN te

13. If Qe + Me > .(L then Me The number of excess vehicles that cause spillback is: SB = Qe +

- (L-W) LN L,

where W is the width of the upstream intersection. To prevent spillback, meter the outflow from the feeder approaches and from the source flow, S, during this TI by the amount, SB. That is, set SB M = 1 -E+S) ->0, where M is the metering factor (over all movements).

This metering factor is assigned appropriately to all feeder links and to the source flow, to be applied during the next network sweep, discussed later.

Algorithm A This analysis addresses the flow environment over a TI during which moving vehicles can join a standing or discharging queue. For the case Qb VQeshown, Qb < Cap, with t, > 0 and a queue of Qe length, Qe, formed by that portion of Mb and E that reaches the stop-bar within the TI, but could v not discharge due to inadequate capacity. That is, Mb Qb+Mb+El > Cap. This queue length, V L3 Qe = Qb + Mb + El - Cap can be extended to Q, by traffic entering the approach during the current TI, traveling at speed, v, and reaching the rear of the til t3 queue within the TI. A portion of the entering TI vehicles, E3 = E will likely join the queue. This analysis calculates t 3 , Q, and Me for the input values of L,TI, v, E, t, Lv, LN, Qe

• When t1 > 0 and Qb - Cap:

Define: Le = Q'e L- From the sketch, L3 =te v(TI - t, - t 3 ) = L - (Q'e v

+ E'33 )

Substituting E3 =TL3 E yields: - vt 3 + t E L- = L - v(TI - t 1 ) - Le . Recognizing that TI TI LN the first two terms on the right hand side cancel, solve for t 3 to obtain:

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-12 KILD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

t3 =

EL]

such that 0_<t 3 _TI-t 1 0 IV TI N If the denominator, v - -v  !] 0,set t3 = TI - t--

t3 +_t_

_t_

Then, Qe= Q +eE - Me=E 1 TI The complete Algorithm A considers all flow scenarios; space limitation precludes its inclusion, here.

C.1.3 Lane Assignment The "unit problem" is solved for each turn movement on each link. Therefore it is necessary to calculate a value, LNx, of allocated lanes for each movement, x. If in fact all lanes are specified by, say, arrows painted on the pavement, either as full lanes or as lanes within a turn bay, then the problem is fully defined. If however there remain un-channelized lanes on a link, then an analysis is undertaken to subdivide the number of these physical lanes into turn movement specific virtual lanes, LNx.

C.2 Implementation C.2.1 Computational Procedure The computational procedure for this model is shown in the form of a flow diagram as Figure C-4. As discussed earlier, the simulation model processes traffic flow for each link independently over TI that the analyst specifies; it is usually 60 seconds or longer. The first step is to execute an algorithm to define the sequence in which the network links are processed so that as many links as possible are processed after their feeder links are processed, within the same network sweep. Since a general network will have many closed loops, it is not possible to guarantee that every link processed will have all of its feeder links processed earlier.

The processing then continues as a succession of time steps of duration, TI, until the simulation is completed. Within each time step, the processing performs a series of "sweeps" over all network links; this is necessary to ensure that the traffic flow is synchronous over the entire network. Specifically, the sweep ensures continuity of flow among all the network links; in the context of this model, this means that the values of E, M, and S are all defined for each link such that they represent the synchronous movement of traffic from each link to all of its outbound links. These sweeps also serve to compute the metering rates that control spillback.

Within each sweep, processing solves the "unit problem" for each turn movement on each link.

With the turn movement percentages for each link provided by the DTRAD model, an algorithm 0

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

allocates the number of lanes to each movement serviced on each link. The timing at a signal, if any, applied at the downstream end of the link, is expressed as a G/C ratio, the signal timing needed to define this ratio is an input requirement for the model. The model also has the capability of representing, with macroscopic fidelity, the actions of actuated signals responding to the time-varying competing demands on the approaches to the intersection.

The solution of the unit problem yields the values of the number of vehicles, 0, that discharge from the link over the time interval and the number of vehicles that remain on the link at the end of the time interval as stratified by queued and moving vehicles: Qe and Me. The procedure considers each movement separately (multi-piping). After all network links are processed for a given network sweep, the updated consistent values of entering flows, E; metering rates, M; and source flows, S are defined so as to satisfy the "no spillback" condition.

The procedure then performs the unit problem solutions for all network links during the following sweep.

Experience has shown that the system converges (i.e. the values of E, M and S "settle down" for all network links) in just two sweeps if the network is entirely under-saturated or in four sweeps in the presence of extensive congestion with link spillback. (The initial sweep over each link uses the final values of E and M, of the prior TI). At the completion of the final sweep for a TI, the procedure computes and stores all measures of effectiveness for each link and turn movement for output purposes. It then 'prepares for the following time interval by defining the values of Qb and Mb for the start of the next TI as being those values of Qe and Me at the end of the prior TI. In this manner, the simulation model processes the traffic flow over time until the end of the run. Note that there is no space-discretization other than the specification of network links.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

0 Figure C-4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C-3)

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD)

The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. Thus, an algorithm was developed to identify an appropriate set of destination nodes for each origin based on its location and on the expected direction of travel. This algorithm also supports the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (O-D matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next.

Figure B-1 depicts the interaction of the simulation model with the DTRAD model in the DYNEV II system. As indicated, DYNEV II performs a succession of DTRAD "sessions"; each such session computes the turn link percentages for each link that remain constant for the session duration,

[To , T12], specified by the analyst. The end product is the assignment of traffic volumes from each origin to paths connecting it with its destinations in such a way as to minimize the network-wide cost function. The output of the DTRAD model is a set of updated link turn percentages which represent this assignment of traffic.

As indicated in Figure B-i, the simulation model supports the DTRAD session by providing it with operational link MOE that are needed by the path choice model and included in the DTRAD cost function. These MOE represent the operational state of the network at a time, T,1 __T 2 , which lies within the session duration, [T0 ,T2 ] . This "burn time", Ti - T0 , is selected by the analyst. For each DTRAD iteration, the simulation model computes the change in network operations over this burn time using the latest set of link turn percentages computed by the DTRAD model. Upon convergence of the DTRAD iterative procedure, the simulation model accepts the latest turn percentages provided by the DTA model, returns to the origin time, To0 , and executes until it arrives at the end of the DTRAD session duration at time, T2 . At this time the next DTA session is launched and the whole process repeats until the end of the DYNEV II run.

Additional details are presented in Appendix B.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station C-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX D Detailed Description of Study Procedure

D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE This appendix describes the activities that were performed to compute Evacuation Time Estimates. The individual steps of this effort are represented as a flow diagram in Figure D-1.

Each numbered step in the description that follows corresponds to the numbered element in the flow diagram.

Step 1 The first activity was to obtain EPZ boundary information and create a GIS base map. The base map extends beyond the Shadow Region which extends approximately 15 miles (radially) from the power plant location. The base map incorporates the local roadway topology, a suitable topographic background and the EPZ boundary.

Step 2 2010 Census block information was obtained in GIS format. This information was used to estimate the resident population within the EPZ and Shadow Region and to define the spatial distribution and demographic characteristics of the population within the study area.

Employee, transient, school and special facility data collected in 2008 for the Combined License Application (COLA) for Bell Bend Nuclear Power Plant and were distributed to Columbia and Luzerne County Emergency Management Agencies for review and updating as necessary.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with PPL Emergency Planners. The purpose of the kickoff meeting was to present an overview of the work effort, identify key agency personnel, and indicate the data requirements for the study. Specific requests for information were presented.

Unique features of the study area were discussed to identify the local concerns that should be addressed by the ETE study.

Step 4 Next, a physical survey of the roadway system in the study area was conducted to determine the geometric properties of the highway sections, the channelization of lanes on each section of roadway, whether there are any turn restrictions or special treatment of traffic at intersections, the type and functioning of traffic control devices, gathering signal timings for pre-timed traffic signals, and to make the necessary observations needed to estimate realistic values of roadway capacity.

Step 5 Data from the 2008 telephone survey of households within the EPZ was reanalyzed to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuation-related demographic information of the EPZ population. This information was used to determine important study factors including the average number of evacuating vehicles used by each household, and the time required to perform pre-evacuation mobilization activities.

Step 6 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station D-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

A computerized representation of the physical roadway system, called a link-node analysis network, was developed using the UNITES software developed by KLD. Once the geometry of the network was completed, the network was calibrated using the information gathered during the road survey (Step 4). Estimates of highway capacity for each link and other link-specific characteristics were introduced to the network description. Traffic signal timings were input accordingly. The link-node analysis network was imported into a GIS map. 2010 Census data were overlaid in the map, and origin centroids where trips would be generated during the evacuation process were assigned to appropriate links.

Step7 The EPZ is subdivided into 27 ERPAs. Based on wind direction and speed, Regions (groupings of ERPA) that may be advised to evacuate, were developed.

The need for evacuation can occur over a range of time-of-day, day-of-week, seasonal and weather-related conditions. Scenarios were developed to capture the variation in evacuation demand, highway capacity and mobilization time, for different time of day, day of the week, time of year, and weather conditions.

Step 8 The input stream for the DYNEV II model, which integrates the dynamic traffic assignment and distribution model, DTRAD, with the evacuation simulation model, was created for a prototype evacuation case - the evacuation of the entire EPZ for a representative scenario.

Step 9 After creating this input stream, the DYNEV II System was executed on the prototype evacuation case to compute evacuating traffic routing patterns consistent with the appropriate NRC guidelines. DYNEV II contains an extensive suite of data diagnostics which check the completeness and consistency of the input data specified. The analyst reviews all warning and error messages produced by the model and then corrects the database to create an input stream that properly executes to completion.

The model assigns destinations to all origin centroids consistent with a (general) radial evacuation of the EPZ and Shadow Region. The analyst may optionally supplement and/or replace these model-assigned destinations, based on professional judgment, after studying the topology of the analysis highway network. The model produces link and network-wide measures of effectiveness as well as estimates of evacuation time.

Step 10 The results generated by the prototype evacuation case are critically examined. The examination includes observing the animated graphics (using the EVAN software which operates on data produced by DYNEV II) and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a labor-intensive activity, requiring the direct participation of skilled engineers who possess the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any problems reflected in the results.

Essentially, the approach is to identify those bottlenecks in the network that represent Susquehanna Steam Electric Station D-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

locations where congested conditions are pronounced and to identify the cause of this congestion. This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to high rates of trip generation, improper routing, a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative flaw in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream. This examination leads to one of two conclusions:

0 The results are satisfactory; or 0 The input stream must be modified accordingly.

This decision requires, of course, the application of the user's judgment and experience based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the model and a comparison of the results of the latest prototype evacuation case iteration with the previous ones. If the results are satisfactory in the opinion of the user, then the process continues with Step 13. Otherwise, proceed to Step 11.

Step 11 There are many "treatments" available-to the user in resolving apparent problems. These treatments range from decisions to reroute the traffic by assigning additional evacuation destinations for one or more sources, imposing turn restrictions where they can produce significant improvements in capacity, changing the control treatment at critical intersections so as to provide improved service for one or more movements, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems. Such "treatments" take the form of modifications to the original prototype evacuation case input stream. All treatments are designed to improve the representation of evacuation behavior.

Step 12 As noted above, the changes to the input stream must be implemented to reflect the modifications undertaken in Step 11. At the completion of this activity, the process returns to Step 9 where the DYNEV II System is again executed.

Step 13 Evacuation of transit-dependent evacuees and special facilities are included in the evacuation analysis. Fixed routing for transit buses and for school buses, ambulances, and other transit vehicles are introduced into the final prototype evacuation case data set. DYNEV II generates route-specific speeds over time for use in the estimation of evacuation times for the transit dependent and special facility population groups.

Step 14 The prototype evacuation case was used as the basis for generating all region and scenario-specific evacuation cases to be simulated. This process was automated through the UNITES user interface. For each specific case, the population to be evacuated, the trip generation distributions, the highway capacity and speeds, and other factors are adjusted to produce a customized case-specific data set.

Step 15 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station D-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

All evacuation cases are executed using the DYNEV II System to compute ETE. Once results were available, quality control procedures were used to assure the results were consistent, dynamic routing was reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks were addressed properly.

Step 16 Once vehicular evacuation results are accepted, average travel speeds for transit and special facility routes were used to compute evacuation time estimates for transit-dependent permanent residents, schools, hospitals, and other special facilities.

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated and graphed. The results were then documented, as required by NUREG/CR-7002.

Step 18 Following the completion of documentation activities, the ETE criteria checklist (see Appendix N) was completed. An appropriate report reference is provided for each criterion provided in the checklist.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station D-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Step 1 Create GIS Base Map I Step 2 I Gather Census Block and Demographic Data for Study Area Il Step 3 F Conduct Kickoff Meeting with Stakeholders I

_Step 4 Field Survey of Roadways within Study Area Step 5 Conduct Telephone Survey and Develop Trip Generation Characteristics

,L Step 6 Analysis Network Freate and Calibrate Link-Node

_TL Step 7 Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 8 Creaeb andDebu DNEV 1 nptt ream 4, Step 16

_ _ _ Step 9 Use DYNEV II Average Speed Output to Compute ETE for Transit and Special Facility Routes Bj" I Execute DYNEV II for P Eva Figure D-1. Flow Diagram of Activities Susquehanna Steam Electric Station D-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX E Special Facility Data

E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA The following tables list facility population information gathered in 2008 and updated in 2009 in support of the SSES/Bell bend COLA and included in the final ETE report, dated January 2011. In 2012, PPL and the offsite agencies reviewed and updated these data as necessary for use in this study.

Special facilities are defined as schools, hospitals and other medical care facilities, and correctional facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for recreational areas and lodging facilities. Employment data is included in the tables for major employers. Each table is grouped by county. The location of the facility is defined by its straight-line distance (miles) and direction (magnetic bearing) from the center point of the plant. Maps of each school, recreational area, lodging facility, and major employer are also provided.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-1 KILD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E-1. Schools within the EPZ ShUlIULK %.1FMK 2 7.6 N School 21 Sunset Lake Rd Shickshinny (570) 256-3649 284 19 Muhlenburg Christian 362 Hunlock-Harveyville 3 9.9 N Academy Rd Hunlock Creek (570) 256-3378 75 15 Northwest Area Middle/High 3 6.7 N School 243 Thorne Hill Rd Shickshinny (570) 542-4126 668 44 Huntington Mills Elementary 4 8.3 NW School 417 Shickshinny Lake Rd Shickshinny (570) 864-3461 308 18 7 4.6 SW Berwick Area Middle School 1100 Evergreen Dr Berwick (570) 759-6400 745 109 7 4.5 SW Salem Elementary School 810 E 10th St Berwick (570) 759-6400 457 75 12 4.5 SW Nescopeck Elementary School 315 Dewey St Nescopeck (570) 759-6426 285 39 Valley Elementary/Middle 15 8.0 SE School 79 Rock Glen Rd Sugarloaf (570) 788-6044 1,109 67 20 9.6 NE K M Smith Elementary School 25 Robert St Nanticoke (570) 735-3740 322 16 21 11.1 NE GNA Educational Center 600 E. Union St Nanticoke (570) 732-2770 324 18 21 11.1 NE GNA Elementary Center 601 Kosciuszko St Nanticoke (570) 735-1320 443 27 Greater Nanticoke High 21 11.2 NE School 425 Kosciuszko St Nanticoke (570) 735-7781 953 47 J F Kennedy Elementary 21 11.1 NE School 513 Kosciuszko St Nanticoke (570) 735-6450 132 7 Pope John Paul II Catholic 21 10.4 NE School 518 S Hanover St Nanticoke (570) 735-7935 320 16 21 9.9 NE The Learning Station School 133 Alden St Nanticoke (570) 735-7998 42 2 Drums Elementary/Middle 22 9.4 SE School 85 S Old Turnpike Rd Drums (570) 788-1991 731 39 Keystone Job Corporation 235 West Foot Hills 22 7.9 SE High School Road Drums (570) 788-1164 600 18 mmMI C YP 7 4.5 WSW Columbia Day Care Program 500 Line St Berwick (S70) 759-6400 75 15 10 4.7 SW Berwick Senior High School 1100 Fowler Ave Berwick (570) 759-6400 910 134 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0

rvUIUICLI] ~LI ~tL ECI I ItI I LdI a11 10 1 5.4 1 SW School 1401 N Market St Berwick (570) 759-6429 218 1 32 Holy Family Consolidated 10 6.0 SW School 728 Washington St Berwick (570) 752-2021 75 12 10 5.4 SW New Story 218 W. 6th St Berwick (570) 752-5002 46 43 Orange Street Elementary 10 6.0 SW School 845 Orange St Berwick (570) 759-6422 440 59 Beaver Main Elementary 2 23 12.5 SW School 245 Beaver Valley Rd I Bloomsburg (570) 784 0309 106 20 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E-2. Colleges within the EPZ 1 15 1 9.8 1 SE I Penn State Hazelton 1 76 University Drive IHazleton I (570) 450-3000 I 1,232 1 210 I 21 1 10.7 1 NE ILuzerne County Community College - 1333 S Prospect Street i Nanticoke 1(800) 377-5222 1,403 3751 SW Luzerne Lounty community Loiiege -

10 5.3 107 South Market Street I Berwick I 377-5222 j 100 j 6 1 E-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0

Table E-3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ 4 10.3 NW bonnam Nursing 477 Bonnieville Rd Stillwater (570) 864-3174 77 70 34 0 36 Center 14 3.8 E Johnson Personal 897 Hobble Rd Wapwallopen (570) 379-3673 18 18 14 4 0 Care Home 20 96 NE Guardian Elder Care 20 9.6 NE Center 147 Old Newport St Nanticoke (570) 735-7300 110 100 64 14 22 21 10.3 NE Mercy Special Care 128 W Washington Nanticoke (570) 735-5000 32 24 10 2 12 Hospital 1 St Northeast 21 10.4 NE Counse Counseling West Washington St Nanticoke (570) 735-7590 17 12 10 2 0 21 10.9 NE Villa Personal Care 50 N. Walnut St Nanticoke (570) 735-8080 76 50 48 2 0 22 10.5 E Butler Valley Manor 463 N. Hunter Hwy Drums (570) 788-4175 37 36 12 4 20 Home Fritzingertown 1162 South Old 22 9.6 SE Senior Living Turnpike Rd Drums (570) 788-4178 168 148 102 6 40 Community I I I Birchwood Nursing 24 10.8 NE 395 East Middle Rd Nanticoke (570) 735-2973 120 110 80 10 20 Hnma WS Berwickand Center Hospital 701 E 16th St 10 4.5 Berwick (5170) 759-5000 268 268 250 10 8 W Retirement Village 11 C AIk.. C.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E-4. Major Employers within the EPZ 7 j 0.0 Station Susquehanna Steam Electric 64aeBv 634 Salem Blvd Je ck,40 Berwick (866) 832-3312 1,460 1 0 1 29.0% 44 424 I 15 9.6 SE Penn State Hazleton 76 University Dr Hazleton (570) 450-3000 210 100.0% 210 10.7 Luzerne County Community 1333 S Prospect St Nanticoke (800) 377-5222 375 100.0% 375 College - Nanticoke 10 4.5 W Berwick Hospital Center 701 E 16th St Berwick (570) 759-5000 600 23.5% 142 10 4.5 W Berwick Retirement Village 801 E 16th St Berwick (570) 759-5400 131 23.5% 31 10 5.7 SW Deluxe Building Systems 499 West Third St Berwick (866) 891-7310 300 23.5% 71 10 6.1 SW Wise Foods, Inc 228 Rasely St Berwick (570) 759-4100 700 23.5% 165 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

0 Table E-5. Parks/Recreational Attractions within the EPZ s 1 .3 N IHidlen New LaKe tampgrouna /45 HunlOCK Harveyville Ha bclnICKsfinny (!/U) ,bb-/I85 4u :u 3 7.0 NNE State Game Lands 224 41° 11' 30" N, 76- 6' 29" W Hunlock N/A 18 9 7 3.5 N State Game Lands 260 410 7' 59" N,76- 12' 0" W Salem N/A 117 59 9 1.6 E Council Cup Campground 212 Ruckle Hill Rd Wapwallopen (570) 379-2566 326 82 14 4.3 W Moyers Grove Campground 309 Moyers Grove Rd Wapwallopen (570) 379-3375 316 79 17 9.2 E Blue Ridge Trail Golf Club 260 Country Club Drive Mountain Top (570) 868-4653 44 22 18 4.8 NE Lily Lake Lily Lake Rd Schickshinny N/A 55 28 22 10.6 E State Sate PLands 187 41r 610" N, 75H49 59" W Butler N/A 33 17 4 6.2 NW Camp Louise 195 Hawk Rd Schickshinny (570) 759-8236 176 8 6 8.4 NW State Game Lands 55 410 6' 29" N, 76- 19' 0" W Fishing Creek N/A 93 47 6 9.5 NW Whispering Pines Camping 1557 N Bendertown Rd Stillwater (570) 925-6810 144 36 7 0.7 NE Susquehanaecetoa RiverlandSre 634 Salem Blvd Berwick (866) 832-3312 159 63 S10 7.1 W Susquehanna River, North Branch SR-3005 Berwick N/A 27 14 22 11.7 E Nescopeck State Park 1137 Honey Hole Road Drums (570) 403-2006 127 50 24 10.3 SW Arnolds Golf Course 490B West 3rd Street Mifflinville (570) 752-7022 4 2 24 11.0 SW State Game Lands 58 40 0" N, 76 0" W Mifflin N/A 45 23 25 9.0 W Rolling Pines Golf Course 355 Golf Course Road Berwick (570) 752-1000 70 35 27 6.4 W Berwick Golf Club 473 Martzville Road Berwick (570) 752-2506 44 22 27 7.2 W Briar Creek Lake Lake Rd Bric (50 38-50 16 132 Two transients per vehicle was used for hunting facilities (adapted from golf course data as both activities are recreational sports). Camp Louise is a children's camp and will be evacuated with 4 buses = 8 passenger car equivalent (see section 8 for more details)

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E-6. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ 15 5.9 SE Best Value Inn 1064 State Route 93 Drums (570) 788-5887 112 56 15 9.5 SE Hampton Inn 1 Top of the 80s Rd Hazleton (570) 454-3449 222 111 15 9.8 SE Fairfield Inn & Suites 1 Woodbine St Hazleton (570) 453-0300 180 90 15 9.9 SE Forest Hill Inn 3 Forest Hill Rd Hazleton (570) 459-2730 52 26 22 10.0 E Econo Lodge Hazleton North 10 Woodmere Dr Drums (570) 788-4121 84 42 Holiday Inn Express Hotel &

22 10.1 SE Suites Drums-Hazleton 1 Corporate Dr Drums (877) 863-4780 220 110 2eso otel 214 N Hunter Hwy Drums (570) 788-2452 10 5 10 5.2 W White Birch Inn B & B 1303 N Market St Berwick (570) 759-8251 6 3 11 8.1 W RedMapleInn 7545 Columbia Blvd Berwick (570) 752-6220 52 1 26 IC 71 "/C7 A "'7-70 1111 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table E-7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E-1. Schools and Colleges within the EPZ (1 of 2)

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-1O KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0

Figure E-2. Schools and Colleges within the EPZ (2 of 2)

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E-3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0

Figure E-4. Major Employers within the EPZ Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E-5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E-6. Lodging within the EPZ Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure E-7. Correctional Facilities within the EPZ Susquehanna Steam Electric Station E-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX F Telephone Survey

F. TELEPHONE SURVEY F.1 Introduction The development of evacuation time estimates for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station EPZ requires the identification of travel patterns, car ownership and household size of the population within the EPZ. Demographic information can be obtained from Census data. The use of this data has several limitations when applied to emergency planning. First, the Census data do not encompass the range of information needed to identify the time required for preliminary activities (mobilization) that must be undertaken prior to evacuating the area.

Secondly, Census data do not contain attitudinal responses needed from the population of the EPZ and consequently may not accurately represent the anticipated behavioral characteristics of the evacuating populace.

These concerns are addressed by conducting a telephone survey of a representative sample of the EPZ population. The survey is designed to elicit information from the public concerning family demographics and estimates of response times to well defined events. The design of the survey includes a limited number of questions of the form "What would you do if ...?" and other questions regarding activities with which the respondent is familiar ("How long does it take you to ...?")

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan Attachment A presents the final survey instrument used in this study. A draft of the instrument was submitted to stakeholders for comment. Comments were received and the survey instrument was modified accordingly, prior to conducting the survey.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. A sample size of approximately 575 completed survey forms yields results with a sampling error of +/-4% at the 95% confidence level. The sample must be drawn from the EPZ population. Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using GIS software. This list is shown in Table F-1. Along with each zip code, an estimate of the population and number of households in each area was determined by overlaying Census data and the EPZ boundary, again using GIS software. The proportional number of desired completed survey interviews for each area was identified, as shown in Table F-1. Note that the average household size computed in Table F-1 was an estimate for sampling purposes and was not used in the ETE study.

The completed survey adhered to the sampling plan.

Table F-1. Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Telephone Survey Sampling Plan Population within Required Zip Code EPZ(2000) Households Sample 17815 913 358 8 17859 557 219 5 17878 160 64 1 17985 358 128 3 18202 561 52 1 18219 1,348 553 12 18222 4,263 1,403 30 18246 1,672 658 14 18249 4,243 1,616 34 18603 19,696 8,145 172 18617 2,728 835 18 18621 2,167 812 17 18622 130 50 1 18631 1,278 535 11 18634 13,223 5,800 123 18635 3,359 1,362 29 18655 5,217 2,057 44 18660 1,914 710 15 18707 3,919 1,466 31 Average Household Size: 2.53 Total Sample Required: 575 KID Engineering, P.C.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-2 F-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

The survey discussed herein was performed in 2008 for the preparation of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station and Bell Bend Nuclear Power Plant combined license application effort.

The EPZ population has increased by about 2 percent (an estimated 1,530 people) between the 2000 and 2010 Census. In the intervening period, the distribution pattern of population within the EPZ has not changed, nor has the nature of the EPZ. Consequently, the use of 2008 telephone survey sampling plan and results can be justified.

F.3 Survey Results The results of the survey fall into two categories. First, the household demographics of the area can be identified. Demographic information includes such factors as household size, automobile ownership, and automobile availability. The distributions of the time to perform certain pre-evacuation activities are the second category of survey results. These data are processed to develop the trip generation distributions used in the evacuation modeling effort, as discussed in Section 5.

A review of the survey instrument reveals that several questions have a "don't know" (DK) or "refused" entry for a response. It is accepted practice in conducting surveys of this type to accept the answers of a respondent who offers a DK response for a few questions or who refuses to answer a few questions. To address the issue of occasional DK/refused responses from a large sample, the practice is to assume that the distribution of these responses is the same as the underlying distribution of the positive responses. In effect, the DK/refused responses are ignored and the distributions are based upon the positive data that is acquired.

F.3.1 Household Demographic Results Household Size Figure F-1 presents the distribution of household size within the EPZ. The average household contains 2.52 people. The estimated household size (2.53 persons) used to determine the survey sample (Table F-i) was drawn from Census data. The close agreement between the average household size obtained from the survey and from the Census is an indication of the reliability of the survey.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

SSES Household Size 50%

40%

.5 30%

0

" 20%

0 10%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+

Household Size Figure F-1. Household Size in the EPZ Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the EPZ is 1.91. It should be noted that approximately 5.4 percent of households do not have access to an automobile. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F-2. Figure F-3 and Figure F-4 present the automobile availability by household size. Note that the majority of households without access to a car are single person households. As expected, nearly all households of 2 or more people have access to at least one vehicle.

SSES Vehicle Availability 50%

40%

0 "o30%

0 "M 20%

0 10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+

Number of Vehicles Figure F-2. Household Vehicle Availability Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-4 F-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 1-5 Person Households M 1Person *2 People .3 People .4 People *5 People 100%

80%

0 60%

0 x 40%

0 20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+

Vehicles Figure F-3. Vehicle Availability - 1 to 5 Person Households Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 6-9+ Person Households S6 People *7 People .8 People *9+ People 100%

80%

60%

= 40%

0 20% i 0% , . . I,_

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+

Vehicles Figure F-4. Vehicle Availability - 6 to 9+ Person Households Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Commuters Figure F-5 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household.

Commuters are defined as household members who travel to work or college on a daily basis.

The data shows an average of 0.92 commuters in each household in the EPZ, and 52% of households have at least one commuter.

SSES Commuters 50%

(A 40%

0 30%

0 10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Number of Commuters Figure F-5. Commuters in Households In the EPZ Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Commuter Travel Modes Figure F-6 presents the mode of travel that commuters use on a daily basis. The vast majority of commuters use their private automobiles to travel to work. The data shows an average of 1.02 employees per vehicle, assuming 2 people per vehicle - on average - for carpools.

SSES Travel Mode to Work 100% 95.2%

80%

60%

E E

o 40%

0 20%

0.0% 0.8% 1.7% 2.3%

0%

Rail Bus Walk/Bike Drive Alone Carpool (2+)

Mode of Travel Figure F-6. Modes of Travel In the EPZ F.3.2 Evacuation Response Several questions were asked to gauge the population's response to an emergency. These are now discussed:

"How many of the vehicles would your household use during an evacuation?"The response is shown in Figure F-7. On average, evacuating households would use 1.30 vehicles.

'Would yourfamily await the return of otherfamily members prior to evacuating the area?"

Of the survey participants who responded, 60 percent said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 40 percent indicated that they would not await the return of other family members.

"Ifyou had a household pet, would you take your pet with you if you were asked to evacuate the area?"Based on the responses to the survey, 54% of households indicated that they would take their pets with them, as shown in Figure F-8, and 9% would not. The remaining 37% either had no pets, were unsure of what they would do, or did not want to answer the question.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Vehicles Used for Evacuation 100%

80%

I 60%

"a 0

40%

0 z

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5 Number of Vehicles Figure F-7. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation Households Evacuating with Pets 100%

80%

fA 60%

0 0 40%

20%

0%

DK/Refused/No Pets Yes No Figure F-8. Households Evacuating with Pets Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

F.3.3 Time Distribution Results The survey asked several questions about the amount of time it takes to perform certain pre-evacuation activities. These activities involve actions taken by residents during the course of their day-to-day lives. Thus, the answers fall within the realm of the responder's experience.

The mobilization distributions provided below are the result of having applied the analysis described in Section 5.4.1 on the component activities of the mobilization.

"How long does it take the commuter to complete preparationfor leaving work?" Figure F-9 presents the cumulative distribution; in all cases, the activity is completed by about 105 minutes. Eighty-seven percent can leave within 35 minutes.

Time to Prepare to Leave Work 100%

80%

0.0 60%

E E 40%

20%

0%

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F-9. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/School "How long would it take the commuter to travel home?" Figure F-10 presents the work to home travel time for the EPZ. About 85 percent of commuters can arrive home within about 30 minutes of leaving work; all within 60 minutes.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Work to Home Travel 100%

80%

12 60%

E 0

U 40%

0 20%

0%

0 15 30 45 ~60 6 Travel Time (m im)

Figure F-10. Work to Home Travel Time Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

"How long would it take the family to pack clothing, secure the house, and load the car?"

Figure F-11 presents the time required to prepare for leaving on an evacuation trip. In many ways this activity mimics a family's preparation for a short holiday or weekend away from home. Hence, the responses represent the experience of the responder in performing similar activities.

The distribution shown in Figure F-11 has a long "tail." About 72 percent of households can be ready to leave home within 45 minutes; the remaining households require up to an additional 90 minutes.

Time to Prepare to Leave Home 100%

80%

60%

0

"- 40%

20%

0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F-11. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

0 Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

"How long would it take you to clear 6 to 8 inches of snow from your driveway?" During adverse, snowy weather conditions, an additional activity must be performed before residents can depart on the evacuation trip. Although snow scenarios assume that the roads and highways have been plowed and are passable (albeit at lower speeds and capacities), it may be necessary to clear a private driveway prior to leaving the home so that the vehicle can access the street. Figure F-12 presents the time distribution for removing 6 to 8 inches of snow from a driveway. The time distribution for clearing the driveway has a long tail; about 90 percent of driveways are passable within 60 minutes. The last driveway is cleared two and a half hours after the start of this activity. Forty percent of respondents answered that they would need less than 15 minutes to render the driveway passable (the first data point plotted is at 15 minutes).

This group includes those who would not clear the snow at all but would drive through the snow on the driveway to access the roadway and begin their evacuation trip.

Time to Remove Snow from Driveway 100%

80%

W-C 60%

1. A 0

M 40%

0 20%

0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 Time (min)

Figure F-12. Time to Clear Driveway of 6-8" of Snow F.4 Conclusions The telephone survey provides valuable, relevant data associated with the EPZ population, which have been used to quantify demographics specific to the EPZ, and "mobilization time" which can influence evacuation time estimates.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

AT-ACHMENT A Telephone Survey Instrument Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Telephone Survey Instrument Hello, my name is and I'm working COL. 1 Unused on a survey being made for [insert marketing firm COL. 2 Unused name] designed to identify local travel patterns COL. 3 Unused in your area. We are conducting the survey to help the county and local municipalities with their evacuation plans for all types of potential events. Your participation in this survey will greatly enhance the county's emergency preparedness program. Sex COL. 8 1 Male 2 Female INTERVIEWER: ASK TO SPEAK TO THE HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD OR THE SPOUSE OF THE HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD.

(Terminate call if not a residence)

DO HOT ASK:

lA. Record area code. To Be Determined COL. 9-11 lB. Record exchange number. To Be Determined COL. 12-14

2. What is your home Zip Code Col. 15-19

3. In total, how many cars, or other vehicles COL.20 are usually available to the household? 1 ONE (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.) 2 TWO 3 THREE 4 FOUR 5 FIVE 6 SIX 7 SEVEN 8 EIGHT 9 NINE OR MORE 0 ZERO (NONE)

X REFUSED

4. How many people usually live in this COL.21 COL.22 household? (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.) 1 ONE 0 TEN 2 TWO 1 ELEVEN 3 THREE 2 TWELVE 4 FOUR 3 THIRTEEN 5 FIVE 4 FOURTEEN 6 SIX 5 FIFTEEN 7 SEVEN 6 SIXTEEN 8 EIGHT 7 SEVENTEEN 9 NINE 8 EIGHTEEN 9 NINETEEN OR MORE X REFUSED Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

5. How many children living in this COL.23 household go to local public, 0 ZERO private, or parochial schools? 1 ONE (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.) 2 TWO 3 THREE 4 FOUR 5 FIVE 6 SIX 7 SEVEN 8 EIGHT 9 NINE OR MORE X REFUSED

6. How many people in the household COL.24 SKIP TO commute to a job, or to college, 0 ZERO Q. 12 at least 4 times a week? 1 ONE Q. 7 2 TWO Q. 7 3 THREE Q. 7 4 FOUR OR MORE Q. 7 5 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED Q. 12 INTERVIEWER: For each person identified in Question 6, ask Questions 7, 8, 9, and 10.

7. Thinking about commuter #1, how does that person usually travel to work or college?

(REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH COMMUTER.)

Commuter #1 Commuter #2 Commuter #3 Commuter #4 COL.25 COL.26 COL.27 COL.28 Rail 1 1 1 1 Bus 2 2 2 2 Walk/Bicycle 3 3 3 3 Driver Car/Van 4 4 4 4 Park & Ride (Car/Rail, Xpressbus) 5 5 5 5 Driver Carpool-2 or more people 6 6 6 6 Passenger Carpool-2 or more people 7 7 7 7 Taxi 8 8 8 8 Refused 9 9 9 9

8. What is the name of the city, town or community in which Commuter #1 works or attends school? (REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH COMMUTER.) (FILL IN ANSWER.)

COMMUTER #1 COMMUTER #2 COMMUTER #3 COMMUTER #4 City/Town State City/Town State City/Town State City/Town State COL.29 COL.30 COL.31 COL.32 COL.33 COL.34 COL.35 COL.36 COL.37 COL.38 COL.39 COL.40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Sii*nrihanna Steam Electric Station F-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

9. How long would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

(REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH COMMUTER.) (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.)

COMMUTER #1 COMMUTER #2 COL.41 COL.42 COL.43 COL.44 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 4 16-20.MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS (SPECIFY ) (SPECIFY )

9 9 0 0 X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED COMMUTER #3 COMMUTER #4 COL.45 COL.46 COL.47 COL.48 1 .5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES - 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS 2 HOURS 8 OVER. 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS (SPECIFY ) (SPECIFY )

9 9 0 0 X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED

10. Approximately how long does it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home? (REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH COMMUTER.)

(DO NOT READ ANSWERS.)

COMMUTER #1 COMMUTER #2 COL. 49 COL.50 COL. 51 COL. 52 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 46 MINUTES AND Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

2 HOURS 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS (SPECIFY ) (SPECIFY )

9 9 0 0 X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED COMMUTER #3 COMMUTER #4 COL. 53 COL. 54 COL. 55 COL. 56 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 9 41-45 MINUTES - HOUR-30 MINUTES 9 41-45-MINUTES.- -HOUR 30--MINUTES 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS (SPECIFY ) (SPECIFY )

9 9 0 0 X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED

11. When the commuters are away from home, is there a vehicle at home that is available for evacuation during any emergency? Col. 57 1 Yes 2 No 3 Don't Know/Refused

12. Would you await the return of family members prior to evacuating the area? Col. 58 1 Yes 2 No

13. How many of the vehicles that are usually available to the household would your family use during an evacuation? COL. 59 (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.) 1 ONE 2 TWO 3 THREE 4 FOUR 5 FIVE 6 SIX 7 SEVEN 8 EIGHT 9 NINE OR MORE 0 ZERO (NONE)

X REFUSED

14. How long would it take the family to pack clothing, secure the house, load the car, and complete preparations prior to evacuating the area? (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.)

COL.60 COL.61 1 LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 1 3 HOURS TO 3 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 15-30 MINUTES 2 3 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 30 MINUTES 3 31-45 MINUTES 3 3 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 45 MINUTES 4 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 4 3 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 5 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 5 4 HOURS TO 4 HOURS 15 MINUTES Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

6 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 4 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 30 MINUTES 7 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 4 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 45 MINUTES 1 TO 5 HOURS 8 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 8 4 HOURS 46 MINUTES 9 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 9 5 HOURS TO 5 HOURS 15 MINUTES 0 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 0 5 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 30 MINUTES x 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES x 5 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 45 MINUTES Y 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS Y 5 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 6 HOURS COL. 62 1 DON'T KNOW

15. How long would it take you to clear 6-8" of snow to move the car from the driveway or curb to begin the evacuation trip? Assume the roads are passable.

(DO NOT READ RESPONSES.)

COL. 63 COL. 64 1 LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 1 MORE THAN 3 HOURS 2 15-30 MINUTES 2 DON'T KNOW 3 31-45 MINUTES 4 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 5 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 6 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 7 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 8 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 9 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 0 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES x 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES Y 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS

16. Would you take household pets with you if you were asked to evacuate the area?

Col. 65 1 Yes 2 No 3 No Pets 4 Don't Know/Refused Thank you very much.

(TELEPHONE NUMBER CALLED)

If requested:

For Additional information contact:

County EMA Phone (In Luzerne County) Luzerne County EMA 570-820-4400 (In Columbia County) PPL 866-832-3312 If there are any questions on who is funding the survey, the response should be:

PPL funded the survey to support and update the evacuation plans of the county and local municipalities. If there are any additional questions please contact PPL at 866-832-3312 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station F-18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN NUREG/CR-7002 indicates that the existing TCPs and ACPs identified by the offsite agencies should be used in the evacuation simulation modeling. The traffic and access control plans for the EPZ were provided by each county.

These plans were reviewed and the TCPs were modeled accordingly.

G.1 Traffic Control Points As discussed in Section 9, traffic control points at intersections (which are controlled) are modeled as actuated signals. If an intersection has a pre-timed signal, stop, or yield control, and the intersection is identified as a traffic control point, the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system. Table K-2 provides the control type and node number for those nodes which are controlled. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a Traffic Control Point, the control type is indicated as a TCP in Table K-2.

Figure G-1 maps the TCPs identified in the emergency plans of Columbia and Luzerne Counties.

The TCPs on major arterials have been identified, by the State Police, as being potential bottlenecks and the State Police will be responsible for the control of these points. Municipal police forces are responsible for traffic flow within their municipality. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation will assist with the clearance of obstacles on main evacuation routes. The Pennsylvania National Guard will provide wreckers and fuel trucks to service vehicles along major evacuation routes; locally, the municipalities will provide these services.

G.2 Access Control Points ACPs are established primarily by state or municipal police. ACPs restrict access into the evacuated region. Only authorized personnel (police, fire, ambulance, National Guard, emergency management) and people who need to enter in order to evacuate their families will be permitted entry.

It is assumed that ACPs will be established within 90 minutes of the advisory to evacuate, to discourage through travelers from using major through routes which traverse the EPZ. As discussed in Section 3.7, external traffic was only considered on two routes which traverse the EPZ - Interstates 80 and 81 - in this analysis. The generation of these external trips ceased at 90 minutes after the advisory to evacuate in the simulation.

PEMA determines the need to restrict river traffic; the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission establishes and operates waterway ACPs as required.

PEMA, through the PennDOT Emergency Preparedness Liaison Officer, can place restrictions on aerial flights in the vicinity of the SSES, if necessary.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station G-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure G-1. Traffic Control Points for the SSES EPZ Susquehanna Steam Electric Station G-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0 0

APPENDIX H Evacuation Regions

H EVACUATION REGIONS This appendix presents the evacuation percentages for each Evacuation Region (Table H-i) and maps of all Evacuation Regions. The percentages presented in Table H-1 are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 5 of Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 2-1.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR-7002.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Table H-1. Percent of ERPA Population Evacuating for Each Region ERPA ERPA 10 11 12 13 114 15 16 17 U8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 I I I ~-4-+-+-~ I 20% j20% 20% 20% 120% j20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%G 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Refer to RO0 ERPA 26 27 6 I 7 Ij I I910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2.3 24 24 25 25 26 27 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%1 ý20M%ý 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

2u% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 205% 20% 20% 20% 20%2 20% 20 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 2D% 20% 20% 20% 2056 20% 2%20%120% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 1 20% 20% 20%

20% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

m 20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

20 20%

20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

2036 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

1 1 -

20% 20% F20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

-4 +-~-~-4-+-~-

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 2-0 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% j 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%j 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Wind ERPA Region Direction To: 1 4 5 6 7 27 R.5 NNE N, NNW, 2o% 2o 0% 20% 20% 20%1 I 20% 20 20% 20%

NE, W, Refer to RO0 WNW, NW R26 ENE, E, ESE 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 22 20% !2 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R27 SE, SSE 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R28 S 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R29 SW WSW 20%

___ 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

5-Mile Ring 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

ERPA(s, Shelter-in-Place Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 S

, 2

~StElacutte Secto~lr oundary I ," - N' Figure H-i. Region R01 Sus2uehanna Steam Electric Station H-4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-2. Region R02 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

0 0 Figure H-3. Region R03 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-4. Region R04 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0 0

0 0 Region ROS Rue 21 3/

I Figure H-S. Region RO5 H-8 KLD Eng~ineering, P.C.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-6. Region R06 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0

Figure H-7. Region R07 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-8. Region R08 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-11 KILD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

0 Figure H-9. Region R09 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-10. Region RIO Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

1& Fu R e S e a 27 BI ,U,t. I.

i2, 5, 10OMile Ringsi *"

• I Sector Boundary I . --- / '

Figure H-11 Region R11 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-12 Region R12 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0

I Figure H-13 Region R13 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-14 Region R14 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-15 Region R15 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-16 Region R16 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

0 0 Figure H-17 Region R17 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-18 Region R18 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-21 KILD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-19 Region R19 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-20 Region R20 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-21 Region R21 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-24 KILD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-22 Region R22 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-23 Region R23 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-24 Region R24 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-25 Region R25 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-26 Region R26 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0 0

Figure H-27 Region R27 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-30 KILD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

H Figure H-28 Region R28 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-31 KILD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-29 Region R29 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0

Figure H-30 Region R30 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station H-33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 0