ML20212D628
| ML20212D628 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/27/1987 |
| From: | Dormer R, Mcguire P, Eric Michel, Roberts R SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212D439 | List: |
| References | |
| OL-5, NUDOCS 8703040158 | |
| Download: ML20212D628 (79) | |
Text
/
.s:
-e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR-REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensina Board
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-5,
)
(EP Exercise)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
)
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF ASSISTANT CHIEF-INSPECTOR RICHARD C. ROBERTS, INSPECTOR RICHARD DORMER, INSPECTOR PHILIP McGUIRE, and DEPUTY INSPECTOR EDWIN J. MICHEL ON BEHALF OF SUFFOLK COUNTY REGARDING CONTENTION EX 40 -- MOBILIZATION, DISPATCH, AND STAFFING OF TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS DURING THE FEBRUARY 13, 1986 SHOREHAM EXERCISE February 27, 1987 3703040158 870227 PDR ADOCK 05000322 PDR
o e
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensino Board
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-5
)
(EP Exercise)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
)
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF ASSISTANT CHIEF INSPECTOR RICHARD C. ROBERTS, INSPECTOR RICHARD DORMER, INSPECTOR PHILIP McGUIRE, AND DEPUTY INSPECTOR EDWIN J. MICHEL ON BEHALF OF SUFFOLK COUNTY REGARDING CONTENTION EX 40 -- MOBILIZATION, DISPATCH, AND STAFFING OF TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS DURING THE FEBRUARY 13, 1986 SHOREHAM EXERCISE 4
I.
Introduction Q.
Please state your names and occupations.
A.
My name is Richard C. Roberts.
I am an Assistant Chief Inspector assigned to the Office of the Chief of Headquarters, County of Suffolk Police Department.
My name is Richard Dormer.
I am an Inspector assigned to the Office of the Chief of District, County of Suffolk Police f
Department.
l
e My name is Philip McGuire.
I am the Executive Officer of the Office of the Chief Inspector, County of Suffolk Police Department.
I hold the rank of Inspector in the Police Department.
My name is Edwin J. Michel.
I am the Commanding Officer of the Communications and Records Bureau, Headquarters Division, County of Suffolk Police Department.
I hold the rank of Deputy Inspector in the Police Department.
Q.
Please summarize your' current duties and responsibili-ties within the Suffolk County Police Department and briefly explain your professional qualifications and backgrounds with respect to the areas of traffic control, traffic routing, traffic impediments and traffic planning.
A.
[ Assistant Chief Roberts]
Briefly stated, as an Assistant Chief Inspector assigned to the Office of the Chief of Headquarters, I assist the Chief of Headquarters in the supervision of Suffolk County Police Department support services units, including Supply and Procurement, Fleet Management, Property Clerk's Office, Personnel Bureau, and Communications and Records Bureau.
Prior to my present position, I was a Deputy Chief Inspector in the Office of the Chief of District.
In that position, my duties included assisting the Chief of District in i
the supervision and coordination of uniformed patrol functions and coordinating the activities of the Suffolk County Highway Patrol _
Bureau, the Precinct patrols, the Marine Bureau and the Special Patrol Bureau.
I am also a former Commanding Officer of the Sixth Precinct of the Suffolk County Police Department, which provides police services to the Shoreham site and the surrounding area, including almost all of the LILCO 10-mile EPZ.
As the Sixth Precinct's Commanding Officer, it was necessary for me to be familiar with the roadways throughout the EPZ, including those involved in LILCO's evacuation plan.
Of course, even before I assumed command of the Sixth Precinct, I had gained considerable i
expertise in the areas of traffic control and planning from the
]
various police duties, responsibilities and positions I had held during my career in law enforcement -- a career which covers more than 30 years.
The statement of my qualifications and experience attached to this testimony as Attachment 1 summarizes my other qualifications and experience.
(Inspector Dormer) As an Inspector assigned to the Office of the Chief of District, I presently have responsibility for the Highway Patrol, the Special Patrol, and the Marine Bureaus.
The i
general organization and structure of the Suffolk County Police i
Department, including these three Bureaus, are briefly discussed later in this testimony.
My qualifications and background in the areas of traffic control, traffic routing, traffic impediments and traffic planning are summarized in the statement of my l
qualifications and experience attached to this testimony as.
Briefly stated, I have extensive experience in all i
these areas.
My practical expertise with traffic-related matters -
began in the period 1963-1965, when I was with the United States Army.
As a military policeman, my duties included escorting and directing military convoys over civilian roadways.
On these traffic details, I became aware of the necessity for and the methodology of safe and proper movement of vehicles.
Thereafter, between 1965 and 1970, I was a police officer assigned to the Second Precinct of the Suffolk County Police Department.
In that capacity, I was regularly involved in traffic matters, including accident response.
My involvement in traffic matters continued when I became a Sergeant assigned to the Fourth Precinct of the Police Department (1970-1972) and later when I was transferred to the Department's Highway Patrol Bureau (1972-1975).
During my initial three years in Highway Patrol, I was heavily involved in traffic planning, control, accident prevention and accident response.
Thereafter, I held various other positions in the Department until January, 1984, when I was promoted to Deputy Inspector and returned to the Highway Patrol Bureau as its Commanding Officer.
My duties in that position included planning for and/or administering traffic control matters for Suffolk County's principal roadways (including the Long Island Expressway, Routes 25 and 25A, the William Floyd Parkway, and the Sunrise Highway) and preparing various types of traffic control and enforcement action plans.
In addition, I was responsible for preparing emergency plans for the removal of serious traffic accidents.
I held the position of Commanding Officer of the Highway Patrol Bureau until July, 1986, when I became an Inspector assigned to the Office of the Chief of District.
In this position, I retain oversight responsibility over the Highway Patrol Bureau.
(Inspector McGuire]
As the Executive Officer, Office of the Chief Inspector, my duties are to assist the Chief Inspector in exercising line and staff command over all personnel and operations in the Police Department.
I am also responsible for overseeing the Department's current and long-range administrative functions, including planning, research and development, and budgetary matters.
In addition, I perform various other administrative and supervisory functions assigned by the Police Commissioner.
I am responsible for keeping the Police Commissioner informed of important matters, and I exercise supervision over the Department's District Commanders.
Attachment 3 to this testimony summarizes my other qualifications and experience.
Briefly stated, during the more than 30 years that I have been in law enforcement, I have performed numerous duties and held many positions which have given me broad experience in the areas of traffic control, traffic routing, traffic impediments, and traffic planning.
Those duties and positions range from my first appointment as a patrol officer in 1956 to my present assignment; in the interim, I served as the Executive Officer of the Department's First Precinct and I was the Commanding Officer of the Special Patrol Bureau, where I exercised command over the Canine, Aviation and Emergency Services Sections.
Presently, in addition to my other duties, I am regularly assigned to District.-. -
-. ~.
Command duty (as are the other members of this panel).
This requires me to stay familiar with traffic control and planning strategies and emergency response techniques.
i
[ Deputy Inspector Michel] I am presently the Commanding I
Officer of the Department's Communications and Records Bureau.
t Prior to my appointment to this position, my experience involved the areas of traffic control, traffic routing, traffic irapediments and traffic planning.
For example, during the more than 23 years that I have been a police officer, I have been in charge of radar and cycle enforcement within the Highway Patrol Bureau (1977-t 1981).
Thereafter, I served as Executive Officer of the Highway i
Patrol Bureau.
In those positions, my areas of responsibility centered around traffic management, control and response.
By way of example, the Highway Patrol Bureau's Expressway Enforcement 4
l Section is responsible for controlling traffic on the major highway on Long Island, the Long Island Expressway.
This roadway is a principal evacuation route relied upon by LILCO's offsite i
emergency plan for Shoreham.
My expertise, however, was not l
limited to the Long Island Expressway and the roadways which adjoin it; other roadways within the Shoreham EPZ and elsewhere I
were also my responsibility.
The statement of my qualifications and experience attached to this testimony as Attachment 4 summarizes other qualifications and experience.
Q.
Please briefly explain the general organization and structure of the Suffolk County Police Department, so that your respective positions within the Department can be placed in perspective.
4 1
A.
The Suffolk County Police Department consists of i
approximately 2600 officers, of whom approximately 1800 are assigned to the Patrol Division.
There are three Div'isions in the Department -- Patrol, Investigation, and Headquarters.
The Patrol Division is responsible for providing day-to-day police service to I
the five western townships of Suffolk County.
These five townships are spread over 540 square miles, with over 1.3 million residents.
The Investigation Division handles investigations of i
major crimes (e.a., homicides, narcotics, arson and other felony offenses).
In addition to the Major Crimes Bureau, the Investigation Division also includes the General Services and Special Services Bureaus.
The Headquarters Division provides r
equipment and logistical support services to the Department and includes the Operations, Communications and Records, and Personnel Bureaus.
An organizational chart of the Suffolk County Police Department is appended to this testimony as Attachment 5.
i Within the Patrol Division, there are six Precinct Commands, f
together with the Highway Patrol Bureau, Marine Bureau and Special l
Patrol Bureau.
The Highway Patrol Bureau has about 125 officers and is charged with patrolling the Long Island Expressway and the Sunrise Highway, and with providing traffic enforcement on i
I !
i'
i selected roadways within the six Precinct Commands.
The Marine l
Bureau has about 65 officers and is assigned responsibility for patrolling selected beaches and the harbors and waterways adjacent to Suffolk County, including the Long Island Sound.
The Special Patrol Bureau has about 90 officers and exercises command over Sections such as the Canine, Aviation, and Emergency Services Sections.
The Special Patrol Bureau also is responsible for performing special services for the Department; its personnel are j
issued special weapons and equipment and are specially trained in emergency preparedness and response.
L I
The Sixth Precinct provides police service to the Shoreham i
plant site and the surrounding area, including almost all of the i
LILCO 10-mile EPZ.
The Sixth Precinct's area of responsibility covers 176 square miles in northern Brookhaven township; more than 225,000 persons reside within this area.
Approximately 250 officers are assigned to the Sixth Precinct, which is divided into 21 patrol sectors.
The other five Precinct Commands are similarly l
divided into patrol sectors and are responsible for providing police service to the rest of the Suffolk County Police District.
i, i
I l
h i
! l u-
II.
Purcoses and Conclusions 4
Q.
What is the purpose of this testimony?
A.
The purpose of this testimony is to address the matters raised in subparts A, B and E of Contention Ex 40 arising out of the Exercise of LILCO's Offsite Emergency Plan for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant (the " Plan"), which was held on February 13, 1986 (hereafter, the " Exercise").
Q.
Are you familiar with LILCO's Plan for Shoreham?
A.
Yes.
In fact, with the exception of Inspector Dormer, we have previously testified before the Licensing Board which had jurisdiction over offsite emergency planning issues for Shoreham.
In that testimony, we, and other officers of the Suffolk County Police Department, provided our opinions about and questioned various aspects of LILCO's Plan, including LILCO's provisions for mobilizing emergency response personnel (Contention 27), its evacuation time estimates (Contentions 65 and 23.H), and its plan for the removal of roadway obstacles and the dispensing of fuel to evacuees (Contention 66).
Egg Monteith et al., ff. Tr. 7381 (Contention 27); Roberts et al., ff. Tr. 2260 (Contentions 65 and 23.H); and Monteith et al., ff. Tr. 6868 (Contention 66).
Q.
What do you understand to have been the purpose of the Exercise?
A.
Under the NRC's regulations, before a license can be issued authorizing operation of a commercial nuclear power plant above 5% power, there must be a FEMA-graded exercise of the offsite emergency plan to determine whether that plan can and will be implemented adequately in the event of an actual emergency.
The exercise results are deemed to be relevant in assessing the adequacy of the plan and the capability of sponsoring and participating organizations to implement the plan in a manner which could protect the public.
The findings of FEMA concerning the results of such an exercise are then to be considered by the NRC in its decision on whether there is reasonable assurance that adequate measures to protect the public health and safety can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency.
In this case, FEMA's conclusions and " findings," based upon its observations and evaluations during the February 13 Exercise, are contained in its Post Exercise Assessment Report (what we call the " FEMA Report").
We understand that LILCO contends that the FEMA findings concerning the Exercise provide a basis for the NRC to conclude that there is reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken to protect the public health and safety in the event of a real accident at the Shoreham plant.
We understand that it is the position of Suffolk County, the State of New York and the Town of Southampton (the
" Governments") that the results of the Exercise cannot be used to make the kind of affirmative finding desired by LILCO; instead, the results of the February 13 Exercise demonstrate that the LILCO o
Plan cannot and will not be implemented properly, appropriately, or effectively by LILCO personnel, and that, therefore, there is no reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a real Shoreham accident.
Q.
Based upon your review of the Exercise results which relate to the issues raised in Contention Ex 40, what have you concluded about LILCO's ability to implement its Plan?
A.
Briefly stated, in our opinion the results of the February 13 Exercise demonstrate that LILCO is unable to mobilize and promptly dispatch its " Traffic Guides" to staff its Traffic Control Posts, as required to implement its Plan.
These Traffic Guides are relied upon by LILCO in its Plan to provide' assistance to the public during an evacuation of the EPZ in the event of an actual radiological emergency at Shoreham.
Indeed, under LILCO's Plan, it is assumed that Traffic Guides will be at their traffic posts, " guiding" motorists and implementing the traffic control strategies prescribed by the Plan, during the evacuation process.
The Exercise proved this assumption wrong and, as a result, precludes a finding that the LILCO Plan, including the protective action of evacuation, could and would be implemented effectively in the event of a Shoreham emergency.,
III.
Contentions Ex 40 A and B Q.
Please state Contention Ex 40.A and B.
A.
The preamble and subparts A and B of Contention Ex 40 state as follows:
The exercise demonstrated a fundamental flaw in the LILCO Plan in that the Plan fails to provide any traffic assistance or guidance for evacuees until long after they are likely to be on the roads attempting to evacuate.
Under the LILCO Plan and the evacuation time estimates used by the LILCO players during the exercise, it is assumed that Traffic Guides will be at their Traffic Control Posts, " guiding" motorists and implementing traffic control strategies to assure that evacuees will follow the evacuation routes prescribed by the Plan, during the entire evacuation process.
- See, e.a., App. A at IV-5 thru -72e and V-2; OPIP 3.6.3.
Indeed, every LILCO EBS message supposedly broadcast every fifteen minutes, beginning with the message simulated at 10:24, stated that LERO Traffic Guides would be in place along evacuation routes to guide evacuees.
However, for the reasons set forth in more detail below, the LILCO Plan fails to comply with CFR S 50.47(b)(10), NUREG 0654 II.J.9 and J.10, LILCO failed to satisfy objectives EOC 7, 11, 16, SA 1, 2,
5, 7, 9, 10, FIELD 9, 11 and the exercise precludes a finding that the protective action of evacuation can and will be implemented in the event of a Shoreham accident.
Specifically:
EX 40.A.
During the exercise and pursuant to the LILCO Plan (Plan, Figs. 3.3.3 and 3.3.4; OPIP 3.3.3; OPIP 3.6.3), the LERO Traffic Guides were not notified of the emergency or required to report to the staging areas until after the declaration of a Site Area Emergency.
That declaration occurred at approximately 8:19, and the Traffic Guides were presumably notified of the emergency beginning shortly thereafter.
By 9:00, only two Traffic Guides had reported to the Riverhead Staging Area (52 Traffic Guides are required under the Plan); only one had reported to the Port Jefferson Staging Area (72 are required under the Plan); and one had reported to the Patchoque Staging Area (41 are required under the Plan).
At 9:40, still only 19 had reported to Riverhead, 10 to Port Jefferson, and 37 to _ _ _
T Patchoque.
Thus, at the time a General Emergency was declared -- 9:39 -- only 40 percent of the LERO Traffic Guides essential to the implementation of evacuation according to the LILCO Plan were mobilized; none were at their posts in the field to perform their duties under the Plan.
EX 40.B.
Pursuant to OPIP 3.6.3 and during the i
exercise, no Traffic Guides were dispatched from the three staging areas until after the evacuation recommendation had been made to the public by simulated EBS message.
And, subsequent to their being dispatched, it took substantial amounts of time before Traffic Guides arrived at their posts and were in a position to perform the functions which the Plan and the evacuation time estimates used during the exercise assume will be performed throughout the entire evacuation process.
Specifically:
(1)
During the exercise, the EBS messages recommending evacuation were simulated at 10:24 (zones A-M, Q, and R) and 11:46 (entire EPZ).
The dispatch of Traffic Guides began at Riverhead at 10:25 and 12:00, 1
and was not completed until shortly after 11:00 and approximately 12:20, respectively.
Traffic Guides at Port Jefferson were dispatched beginning at 10:30; the process was not completed until either 12:20 or 12:49.
Dispatching at Patchogue began at 10:30 and was 4
l completed at approximately 10:59.
4 (ii)
Traffic Guides from the Patchogue Staging Area did not begin arriving at their posts until 11:00, with the last Guide reporting his arrival at 11:40.
From the Port Jefferson Staging Area where i
dispatching was not completed until either 12:20 or 12:49, Traffic Guides took up to 58 minutes to arrive at their posts.
The Riverhead Traffic Guides observed by FEMA did not arrive at their posts until between 11:50 and 12:10.
Egg FEMA Report at 74.
And, other Riverhead Traffic Guides were still not at their posts as of 12:50, even though in at least one case (TCP 26), the Guide had been dispatched at 11:08 -- almost 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> earlier.
Thus, even assuming arauendo that no one would attempt to evacuate prior to the EBS announcement at 10:24, the LILCO Plan, as demonstrated during the exercise, fails to provide any evacuation assistance, or the " guidance" necessary to ensure that evacuees follow the prescribed routes which form the basis of the evacuation time estimates used during the exercise, i
until long after evacuees would be on the road attempting to evacuate.
Indeed, LILCO does not even have the potential capability to provide such assumed I
l ;
assistance and guidance under the Plan as written, since according to the Plan, no Traffic Guides are to be dispatched until after there has been an evacuation order.
r Q.
Contention Ex 40 alleges that the February 13 Exercise i
demonstrated a fundamental flaw in LILCO's Plan in that the Plan fails to provide traffic assistance for evacuees until long after they are likely to be on the roads attempting to evacuate.
Do you agree?
i A.
Yes.
The Exercise results demonstrated serious flaws in ijILCO's-Plan, in that while the Plan and EBS messages used during the Exercise called for Traffic Guides to be in place to assist evacuees, LILCO during the Exercise failed to have such Traffic Guides in place in a timely manner.
Thus, the Exercise demohstratedLILCO'sinabilitytoimplementacriticalelementof its Plan in a timely manner.
l Pursuant to the LILCO Plan, as " implemented" during the Exercise, LILCO's Traffic Guides were not notified of the Shoreham 1
" emergency" or required to-report to their staging areas until after the declaration of a Site Area Emergency.
Plan, Figs. 3.3.3 and 3.3.4; OPIPs 3.3.3 and 3.6.3.
Similarly, they were not l
dispatched from the three staging areas to their assigned Traffic Control Posts ("TCPs") until after LILCO's evacuation l
recommendation had been made to the public by simulated EBS message.
Sgg OPIP 3.6.3.
I 1 w
r
?
A critical assumption under LILCO's Plan is that, in the event of an actual Shoreham emergency, LILCO's Traffic Guides would be able to promptly staff their TCPs to " guide" motorists and implement the traffic control strategies necessary under i
LILCO's Plan to assure that evacuees follow the evacuation routes i
prescribed by LILCO.
- Egg, e.o., Appendix A at IV-5 thru -72e and i
i V-2; OPIP 3.6.3.
This assumption is made clear in the LILCO EBS 4
messages used during the Exercise, which stated, along with the
{
evacuation instruction, that LILCO Traffic Guides were in place to l
guide evacuees.
It is also the basis of the evacuation time l
estimates used during the Exercise.
l I
This assumption was proven wrong during the February 13 i
Exercise, when substantial amounts of time were required first to mobilize, and then to dispatch, LILCO's Traffic Guides.
And, even i
~
after they were dispatched, LILCO's Traffic Guides required substantial additional time to arrive at their posts in the field.
f
- Egg, e.o.,
FEMA Report at 74.
Accordingly, the results of the Exercise demonstrated that the LILCO Plan fails to provide any l
evacuation assistance or " guidance" to evacuees until long after evacuees would be on the roads attempting to evacuate.
Indeed, as the Exercise demonstrated, LILCO's Plan, as written, does not l
appear to have even the potential to provide assistance or I
i guidance to evacuees any earlier than was demonstrated during the Exercise, since, according to the Plan, Traffic Guides are not to be dispatched until after an evacuation order has been issued by f
LILCO.
l I. - -. - - -. - - - - -
a Q.
What purposes does LILCO believe are served by Traffic Guides and what are their assigned duties and responsibilities under LILCO's Plan?
A.
Under the LILCO Plan, LILCO's Traffic Guides are to
" guide" and " encourage" evacuees to adhere to the evacuation routes prescribed by the Plan.
- Sag, e.o., Appendix A at IV-5 thru
-72e and V-2; OPIP 3.6.3.
To accomplish this, they are to use traffic control strategies and techniques such as blocked lanes, barricades, and the channelization of selected sections of LILCO's evacuation network.
Egg Appendix A at IV-5 thru -65.
In addition, LILCO's Traffic Guides are expected to:
Provid(e] vehicular traffic control and direction at key intersections to expedite the traffic flow out of an area during an evacuation; and Relay (
] traffic flow conditions to the Lead Traffic Guide (s], reflecting the effectiveness of the evacuation process.
OPIP 2.1.1, Att. 2 (at page 26).1 1
According to LILCO witness Edward Lieberman, LILCO's Traffic Guides have four primary functions.
First, they can increase the car-carrying capacity of certain roadways (for example, by converting an eastbound lane going toward Shoreham into a westbound lane heading out of the EPZ, thereby increasing roadway capacity for evacuation).
Second, they can assist in routing traffic by using hand and arm movements to help guide motorists.
Third, they can facilitate and " speed up" movement through intersections by determining which lanes of traffic should be allowed through the intersection (" essentially performing the red, green (stoplight] cycle").
Fourth, they can provide " general reenforcement" for evacuees.
Egg deposition of Edward Lieberman (January 9, 1987), at 83.
Q.
In your opinion, do the traffic control strategies and techniques, which under LILCO's Plan are to be implemented by LILCO's Traffic Guides, require the Traffic Guides to be mobilized and dispatched to their Traffic Control Posts prior to an evacuation order?
A.
LILCO's Plan assumes that the Traffic Guides would be mobilized and'in place "at the outset of the evacuation process, or soon thereafter."
Appendix A at V-2.
Furthermore, LILCO's evacuation time estimates, as set forth in the LILCO Plan and as used by the LILCO players during the Exercise, assume that LILCO's Traffic Guides would be at treir TCPs, " guiding" motorists and implementing LILCO's traffic control strategies, during the entire evacuation process.
Ege Appendix A at V-2; OPIP 3.6.3.
- Indeed, every LILCO EBS message supposedly broadcast every 15 minutes during the Exercise, beginning with the message simulated at 10:24
/When LILCO recommended that zones A-M, Q and R be evacuated),
stated that LILCO's Traffic Guides would be in place along evacuation routes.
Thus, it would appear that LILCO itself assumes that its Traffic Guides must be in place at or about the time of an evacuation order, if the traffic control strategies and techniques set forth in the Plan are to be successfully implemented.
Q.
During the February 13 Exercise, were LILCO's Traffic Guides promptly mobilized and dispatched to their field positions?
A.
No.
It took much too long for LILCO's Traffic Guides to be mobilized and dispatched to the field.
And, even after being dispatched, it took substantial time for LILCO's Traffic Guides to arrive at their posts.
As police officers with many years of experience regarding nearly every aspect of traffic control, planning and management, we know how critical prompt response times can be to effective traffic control.
LILCO's personnel were not promptly mobilized, dispatched or equipped, and, as a result, its Traffic Control Posts were not promptly staffed.
In our opinion, therefore, it is necessary to conclude that, in an actual Shoreham emergency, LILCO's Traffic Guides would not.have been available at critical times to provide effective traffic control or to implement LILCO's prescribed traffic control strategies.
Thus, the Exercise results of February 13 -- which revealed that LILCO's Plan calls for the non-timely mobilization and dispatch of Traffic Guides -- demonstrate a serious flaw in the ability of the LILCO Plan to provide the framework for an effective evacuation.
Q.
Are you aware of any specific examples of LILCO's slow response times in mobilizing its Traffic Guides during the Exercise?
A.
Yes, many.
During the Exercise, in accordance with LILCO's Plan (Plan, Figs. 3.3.3 and 3.3.4; OPIPs 3.3.3 and 3.6.3),
LILCO's Traffic Guides were not notified of the " emergency" or required to report to their respective staging area until after the declaration of a Site Area Emergency.
That declaration occurred at approximately 8:19 and the Traffic Guides were notified to report shortly thereafter.
LILCO Admission No. 129.2 By 9:00, however, only five Traffic Guides had reported to the Riverhead Staging Area (52 Traffic Guides are required under the Plan); only one had reported to the Port Jefferson Staging Area (72 are required under the Plan); and only one had reported to the Patchoque Staging Area (41 are required under the Plan).
LILCO Admission Nos. 123, 124 and 125.
Even as late as 9:40, approximately one hour and 20 minutes after they were first told to report to their staging areas, only 50 percent of LILCO's Traffic Guides had reported.
Specifically, only 30 had reported to Riverhead, 15 to Port Jefferson and 41 to Patchoque.
LILCO Admission Nos. 126, 127 and 128.
Thus, at the time a General Emergency was declared -- 9:39 -- fully half of LILCO's Traffic Guides had not even reported to their staging areas; none were at their posts in the field.
See LILCO Admission No. 130.3 2
See LILCO's Response to Suffolk County, State of New York and the Town of Southampton's First Request for Admissions, dated November 17, 1986.
We understand that there is no dispute as to any facts " admitted" by LILCO.
Hereafter, we will cite such admitted facts as "LILCO Admission No.
3 We are aware that, in some cases, the numbers cited in this testimony for when LILCO's Traffic Guides reported and were dispatched differ somewhat from the numbers set forth in Contention Ex 40.
It is our understanding that, during discovery, the Governments were provided data and other information not available to them at the time the contentions were filed with the Licensing Board.
In any event, the thrust of Contention Ex 40 was not changed by these new data, since, in our opinion, such data continue to support the contention's basic proposition:
that the results of the February 13 Exercise demonstrate LILCO's inability to mobilize and promptly dispatch its Traffic Guides to their posts in the field and, consequently, LILCO is unable to carry out effectively the protective action of evacuation. l
Q.
What is the significance, in your opinion, of the slow response times of LILCO's Traffic Guides in reporting to their staging areas during the February 13 Exercise?
A.
Although the order to evacuate was issued by LILCO at 10:24 on the day of the Exercise -- over two hours after the Site Area Emergency was declared at 8:19 -- it is our understanding that in the event of a real Shoreham emergency, an order to evacuate could even more quickly foll,ow the declaration of a Site Area Emergency.
LILCO's response in such a situation, as demonstrated by its performance on February 13, could be severely impaired, since delays by Traffic Guides in reporting to their staging areas would then directly result in delays in dispatching Traffic Guides to their posts in the field.
This, in turn, would restrict LILCO's ability to implement effectively the protective action of evacuation.
Q.
Once LILCO's Traffic Guides finally reported to their staging areas, were they promptly dispatched to assist in the simulated " evacuation" of the EPZ?
A.
No.
Upon arriving at the staging areas, LILCO's Traffic Guides were first required to obtain dosimetry equipment, receive instructions from the Lead Traffic Guides regarding the TCPs to be staffed, pick up their " Traffic Guide Packets" and equipment, review the packets, and then await instructions regarding the staffing of their respective TCPs.
See OPIP 3.6.3, S 5.8.
This process was often time-consuming, with the Traffic Guides at the Riverhead Staging Area, for example, waiting 30 minutes on average just to receive their field kits and be briefed.
FEMA Report at 74.
Q.
When did LILCO actually begin to dispatch its Traffic Guides to their posts in the field?
A.
During the Exercise, no Traffic Guides were dispatched from the three staging areas until after LILCO had simulated an evacuation recommendation to the public at 10:24 (zones A-M, Q and R) and 12:00 (entire EPZ).
LILCO Admission Nos. 64, 97 and 130.4 Even after evacuation was ordered, it took nearly two hours for some Traffic Guides to leave their staging areas for the field.
And, subsequent to their being dispatched, it took substantial amounts of time before Traffic Guides arrived at their posts and l
were in position to perform the functions which the Plan and the evacuation time estimates used during the Exercise assume will be I
performed throughout an evacuation of the EPZ.
4 Even though LILCO had decided as early as 10:10 to issue an evacuation order to zones A-M, O and R, it is our understanding i
that it was not until after 10:24, when LILCO's simulated i
evacuation recommendation was made to the public, that the staging areas were instructed to begin dispatching Traffic Guides.
See LILCO Admission No. 130; deposition of Jay Richard Kessler (February 2, 1987), Ex. 10.
Similarly, despite the fact that l
LILCO decided as early as 11:46 to issue an evacuation order to the remaining zones of the EPZ (zones N, O, P, and S), the Riverhead Staging Area (from which the Traffic Guides for these remaining zones were to be deployed) was not informed of this decision until after 12:00.
See LILCO Admission Nos. 62, 64 and 130.
In our opinion, these delays were unnecessary and ill-advised.
l.
Q.
Please explain what you mean in saying that it took
" substantial amounts of time" for LILCO's' Traf fic Guides to begin arriving at their posts after an evacuation was ordered.
1 A.
During the Exercise, there were two dispatches of Traffic Guides at Riverhead:
one began at 10:25 and the other at 12:00.
The first was not completed until shortly after 11:00 and the second at approximately 12:20.
LILCO Admission Nos. 136 and 137.
Traffic Guides at Port Jefferson were dispatched beginning at about 10:50; the process was not completed until about 12:20.
LILCO Admission Nos. 131 and 132.
Dispatching at Patchogue began at 10:30 and was completed at approximately 10:59.
LILCO Admission Nos. 134 and 135, 1
i Following their dispatch, LILCO's Traffic Guides from the Patchogue Staging Area did not begin arriving at their posts until 11:00, with the last Guide reporting his arrival at 11:40.
LILCO Admission Nos. 138 and 139.
From the Port Jefferson Staging Area, i
i where dispatching was not completed until 12:20, Traffic Guides took up to 58 minutes to arrive at their posts.
LILCO Admission No. 140.
The Riverhead Traffic Guides observed by FEMA did not arrive at their posts until between 11:50 and 12:10.
Egg FEMA Report at 74.
And, other Riverhead Traffic Guides were still not at their posts as of 12:50, even though in at least one case j
(TCP #26), the Traffic Guide had been dispatched at 11:08 --
1 l
j i
almost two hours earlier.
See Attachment 6 to this testimony, which consists of two documents prepared and produced by LILCO:
the Riverhead Traffic Guide Dispatch Log and a LERO message form.
FEMA did not evaluate the timeliness of LILCO's Port Jefferson Traffic Guides in arriving at their posts in the field.
According to FEMA, the individual assigned responsibility for assessing the performance of these Traffic Guides was delayed by i
LILCO's late response to a simulated traffic impediment (an overturned fuel truck).
Egg FEMA Report at 57-58.
However, based on its observation of eight TCPs within the Riverhead Staging Area's jurisdiction, FEMA agreed with us, finding that the time i
between deployment of Traffic Guides from the staging area and their arrival at their posts was excessive, taking between 50 and 70 minutes.5 As a result, FEMA identified the deployment of LILCO's Traffic Guides from the Riverhead Staging Area as a
" Deficiency," which is the most serious of FEMA's classifications.
FEMA Report at 75.6 5
According to FEMA, the Riverhead Traffic Guides were given their TCP assignments between 10:53 and 11:01; they did not arrive at their TCPs, however, until between 11:50 and 12:10 -- two hours l
after the General Emergency had been declared at 9:39.
FEMA Report at 74.
6 A " Deficiency" is defined by FEMA as follows:
I
[A] demonstrated and observed inadequac(y) that would cause a finding that offsite emergency preparedness was not adequate to provide reasonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be taken to protect l
the health and safety of the public living in the vicinity of a nuclear power facility in the event of a radiological emergency.
FEMA Report at 8.
I
4 I
0 During the Exercise, were there any problems caused by LILCO's delay in getting its Traffic Guides to their posts in the field, other than the problems that would have to be expected under LILCO's Plan if Traffic' Guides were not available to implement LILCO's traffic control strategies and techniques?
A.
Yes.
During the February 13 Exercise, two major roadway accidents were simulated.
The first involved a gravel truck and three cars blocking Yaphank-Middle Island Road north of its intersection with Main Street.
The second involved an overturned fuel truck completely blocking. Route 25A east of its intersection with Miller Place Road.
.s Q.
Flease briefly describe the facts relating to the simulated gravel truck traffic impediment.
A.
According to the FEMA Report (at page 36), FEMA informed LILCO of this impediment at 10:40, or about 15 minutes after LILCO first recommended evacuation of the EPZ (zones A-M, Q and R) by simulated EBS message.
The " free play" message used by FEMA to
-input-the gravel truck impediment into the Exercise stated:
l A loaded gravel truck with a broken drive-shaft, which is upright, but turned sideways in the road is blocking the north and south-bound lanes and both shoulders of Yaphank -
Middle Island Road, approximately fifty (50) yards north of the caution light at the "Y"
intersection of Yaphank - Middle Island Road, Main Street and Mill Road (in the vicinity of i
O O
TCP #124).
This is a multiple vehicle acci-dent also involving three passenger cars that are blocking both the north and southbound shoulders of the road.
There are no injuries to any individuals.
A copy of this FEMA " free play" message accompanies this testimony as Attachment 7.
Q.
Does LILCO's Plan call for Traffic Guides to be posted near the scene of the gravel truck impediment?
A.
Yes.
Under LILCO's Plan, 165 Traffic Guides are expected to man 130 traffic posts in the event of an evacuation of the entire EPZ.
Appendix A, Fig. 8 (copy attached as Attachment 8 to this testimony).
Also, attached hereto, as Attachment 9, is a map of the EPZ prepared by LILCO in August, 1985 which depicts all LILCO Traffic Control Posts, by number.
Traffic Control Post
- 124, mentioned in the FEMA message, was just south of the accident scene.
Under LILCO's Plan, it is to be staffed by two Traffic Guides.
Q.
LILCO's EBS message recommending evacuation of zones A-M, O and R (including the area of the gravel truck impediment) was made at 10:24, and FEMA informed LILCO of the impediment at 10:40.
How do those times relate to the time that Traffic Control Post
- 124 was staffed by LILCO's Traffic Guides?
i s'
- 1
O 4
A.
According to LILCO's records, that Traffic Control Post was not staffed until 11:30, over one hour after LILCO had issued its simulated evacuation advisory and 50 minutes after LILCO learned of the simulated impediment.
In our opinion, LILCO's delay in staffing this post, if it were to have occurred during an actual Shoreham emergency, could have seriously impacted LILCO's ability to implement the protective action of evacuation.
i Q.
Please explain.
A.
First, in the event of a real emergency, LILCO relies i
upon its Traffic Guides to inform the Lead Traffic Guides at the staging areas of any impediments or traffic obstructions observed.
Egg, OPIP 2.1.1; OPIP 3.6.3, Att. 1 (page 2 of 2).
The LILCO Traffic Guides at TCP #124 could not have done this for at least 50 minutes (10:40 - 11:30) -- assuming that they could have made it through the traffic likely backed up from the accident to their assigned post in the first place.
Second, given LILCO's delay in staffing TCP #124, LILCO would have had no Traffic Guides in place with which to reroute traffic around the icpediment (assuming, of course, that LILCO was even aware of the impediment which, on the day of the Exercise, it was not, until " prompted" by FEMA at about 12:13).
See our testimony on Contention Ex 41.
i
-. - -. - ~. -. - -
Q.
Was LILCO's staffing of Traffic Guides at the second impediment scene, Miller Place Road and Route 25A, any more satisfactory?
A.
No.
LILCO's response was again unsatisfactory.
This impediment, involving a simulated overturned fuel truck, was announced by FEMA to LILCO at 11:00.
FEMA Report at 36.
The FEMA message announcing the impediment stated as follows:
On Route 25A, approximately 75 yards east of the intersection with Miller Place - Yaphank Road, (in the vicinity of traffic control Post
- 41), a fuel tank-truck has jack-knifed and turned over on its side blocking both eastbound and westbound traffic lanes, as well as both shoulders of the road.
In the course of the accident, the fuel tank was ruptured and is leaking fuel.
There is a possibility that the fuel could ignite causing a fire.
There is no fire at present and there are no iniuries to any individuals.
A copy of this FEMA " free play" message is Attachment 10 to this testimony.
Although LILCO had issued its simulated EBS advisory to evacuate zones A-M, Q and R (including the area of the fuel truck impediment) at 10:24, it was not until 11:45, an hour and twenty minutes later, that TCP #41 was staffed, according to LILCO's records.7 By that time, the simulated impediment had been in 7
See Attachment 11 to this testimony, which has been prepared from documents generated by LILCO during the Exercise (e.a.,
Traffic Guides Dispatch Logs).
existence for 45 minutes.
Q.
Was it important to have TCP #41 staffed at 11:00, when the simulated fuel truck accident occurred?
A.
Yes.
According to LILCO's Plan, the single Traffic Guide who is to staff TCP #41 would have been relied upon to notify LILCO of the impediment, perhaps reroute traffic around the problem, and direct traffic at the scene.
OPIP 3.6.3, Att. 1 (page 2 of 2).
Actually, however, during the Exercise LILCO relied upon the Traffic Guide at TCP #40 to reroute the traffic around the fuel truck impediment.
See deposition of Walter F.
Wilm (January 8, 1987), Ex. 8 (at page 5 of 17).
This Traffic Guide did not arrive at his post until 12:14 -- one hour and fifty minutes after LILCO's initial order to evacuate was issued, and nearly an hour and fifteen minutes after the simulated accident took place.
See Attachment 11.
Thus, the earliest LILCO could-have begun rerouting traffic around the fuel truck impediment was 12:14.
Of course, during the Exercise, rerouting occurred even later than that, since LILCO failed even to respond to the impediment until after it was " prompted" by FEMA at about 12:13.
See our testimony on Contention Ex 41.
Q.
Were LILCO's delays in staffing TCPs 124, 40 and 41 isolated events?
l t
I i
o A.
No.
Based upon our review of LILCO records and documents from the day of the Exercise that were made available to the Governments during discovery, LILCO's staffing of other Traffic Control Posts was equally unsatisfactory.
For example, the following posts were staffed much too late on the day of the Exercise:
'l LILCO EVACUATION ARRIVAL OF NOTICE TO THE TRAFFIC GUIDE (S)
TCP LOCATION PUBLIC AT THEIR POSTS 32 LIE & William Floyd Parkway 10:24 11:25 70 LIE (exit 66 w/b ramp) &
Patchogue-Yaphank Road 10:24 11:25 105 Route 347 & Hallock Avenue 10:24 12:09 26 Sunrise Highway w/b on Ramp 59 &
Wading River Road /Chickester Avenue 10:24 after 12:508 44 North Country Road & Mt. Sinai-Coram Road 10:24 12:29 47 North Country Road & Main Street 10:24 12:25 97 Route 347 & Old Town Road 10:24 12:53 This list is not exhaustive.
See also Attachment 11.
8 to this testimony includes a LERO message form generated at 12:50, which states that certain TCPs in the Riverhead Staging Area had not yet been manned.
The documents provided to the Governments by LILCO concerning the Exercise do not reveal at what times specific TCPs within the Riverhead Staging Area became manned.
We know, however, that the Traffic Guide for TCP #26 was dispatched at about 11:08 and had not arrived at his post by 12:50 -- almost two and one-half hours after LILCO's initial order to evacuate was made.
e Q.
Are all of these major intersections or roadways?
A.
Yes.
In fact, these intersections and roadways are more significant under LILCO's Plan than are the portions of the two roadways " blocked" by the gravel and fuel truck impediments simulated during the Exercise.
Q.
In your opinion, and based upon your review of the FEMA Report and the documents from the Exercise, was LILCO's overall staffing of its Traffic Control Posts on the day of the Exercise adequate?
A.
No.
Even assuming that no one would have attempted to evacuate prior to LILCO's EBS message at 10:24 (an assumption with which we disagree), LILCO, as demonstrated during the Exercise, failed to staff its Traffic Control Points in a timely or effective manner.
As a result, LILCO failed to provide evacuation assistance, or the " guidance" necessary under the LILCO Plan, to ensure that evacuees would follow the evacuation routes prescribed by the Plan, and assumed by LILCO in making evacuation time estimates, until long after evacuees would have been on the roads attempting to evacuate.
i i I
e Moreover, it must be remembered that the mobilization and dispatch of LILCO's Traffic Guides and the staffing of TCPs on the day of the Exercise were carried out under ideal circumstances.
As a pre-announced exercise, LILCO was able to maximize the likelihood of a good and relatively prompt turn-out of its Traffic Guides (and other emergency response personnel).
In addition, the weather on the day of the Exercise was good, and traffic was relatively light.
Based upon our experience as police officers, we certainly believe that the staffing of LILCO's TCPs would have taken far longer during an actual Shoreham emergency, when traffic throughout the EPZ would rather quickly become congested (even prior to the time evacuees begin to evacuate) from pre-evacuation trips necessary to prepare for evacuation.
This same conclusion would hold true if LILCO had l
faced bad weather conditions on the day of the Exercise, or if its personnel had not known ahead of time that they were to be called out to perform on February 13.
Q.
In your opinion, would LILCO's slow response times in staffing its Traffic Control Points have any adverse impacts upon I
LILCO's ability to implement the protective measure of evacuation, other than with respect to problems associated with i
j traffic impediments?
A.
Yes.
Although the LILCO Plan assigns specific evacuation routes and destinations to the EPZ population (see Appendix A at IV-75 thru -165), and LILCO's evacuation time
, 4
,--...--n
,---,-7,...
,,. -. ~ - - - - -, -,,,., - - - -,, - - - -,
e estimates assume that there will be strict adherence to these routes, without deviation (see Appendix A at V-2) -- an assump-tion which, in our opinion, is unrealistic -- without Traffic Guides in place at the outset of the evacuation process, LILCO would find it virtually impossible to " discourage" significant deviation from the evacuation routes prescribed in its Plan.
Q.
Please explain.
i A.
The LILCO Plan calls for LILCO's Traffic Guides to direct traffic in an attempt to " encourage" evacuees to adhere to I
LILCO's prescribed evacuation routes.
To do this, LILCO's Traffic Guides use such techniques as blocked lanes, concurrent continuous flow treatments, and channelization treatments.
See Appendix A, at IV-5 thru -64 for a detailed discussion of these traffic control techniques.
{
For example, LILCO intends to employ channelization i
l treatments on selected sections of the evacuation network in order to increase capacity at intersections where turn movements are significant and traffic demand is high.
Appendix A, at IV-19 and Table IX.
Such channelization treatments involve adding a traffic lane by using roadway shoulders, channelizing existing lanes, closing existing lanes, and/or adding lanes as " turn pockets" to separate through movement traffic from turning l
i traffic.
LILCO's Traffic Guides, using signs, barriers, cones and vehicles, would implement these traffic control techniques.
See Appendix A at IV-19.
In our opinion, the traffic channelization strategies described in the LILCO Plan would likely fail to control traffic flow.
Whatever chance this strategy has of working would be lost if LILCO's Traffic Guides are delayed in getting to their posts.
Channelization strategies could not even be attempted at intersections which are not manned.
Moreover, in some instances the strategies to be implemented for channelization treatments are extremely difficult to imple-ment and require considerable lead time, meaning that even a delayed manning of LILCO's Traffic Control Posts, such as occurred during the Exercise, would make them ineffective.
See Appendix A, Table IX.
The channelization treatment called for under LILCO's Plan between traffic nodes 7 and 30 is an example.
See Appendix A, Table IX, at IV-20.
At that location, LILCO plans to establish two lanes of traffic westbound, while still providing for one lane of traffic eastbound on Route 25A between Echo Avenue and County Road 83, a distance of about 2,000 feet.
Route 25A in this area is a two-lane roadway,.with a limited paved shoulder eastbound and almost no paved shoulder westbound.
Utility poles stand close to the road surface on both sides of the highway, and the westbound shoulder is further impeded by the curbing of a gas station on the north side, just east of County l
t Q
s Road 83.
LILCO's channelization strategy would therefore require extensive set up time (e.o.,
the placement of cones along the 4
entire stretch of roadway), making it impossible to implement this strategy on short notice.
1 Q.
Are there other problems in your opinion that could arise from LILCO's failure, as demonstrated during the Exercise, to staff Traffic Control Posts in a timely manner?
t A.
Yes.
LILCO's Plan recognizes that intersections are characterized by " interrupted" flow conditions.
In an effort to make flow continuous, rather than intermittent -- with a i
i commensurate increase in capacity and a reduction in travel times i
-- the Plan mandates the use of concurrent continuous flow treatments at selected intersections.
See Appendix A, Table V.
Briefly stated, LILCO's proposal is to prescribe traffic movements through such intersections, so that conflicts with l
other traffic movements can be avoided.
In this way, LILCO j
assumes that traffic movement could be kept continuous.
l Of course, LILCO's use of this traffic control strategy, I
like its use of channelization treatments, directly depends upon j
LILCO's Traffic Guides being at their posts so that the traffic flow mandated by LILCO's Plan can be " enforced".
Appendix A at j
IV-9.
In the absence of LILCO Traffic Guides, evacuees would likely travel through intersections in whatever direction they 4
would think best, even if different from that required or assumed I.-.. - _. - _ - _ - -. -
i t
by LILCO's Plan.
Furthermore, any attempt by LILCO's Guides to begin implementing this strategy after an evacuation had begun would almost certainly be unsuccessful.
Even if established at the outset of the evacuation process, LILCO's concurrent continuous flow treatments often ignore conflicting traffic movements which are likely to occur at the intersections which LILCO has selected for this traffic control technique.
Egg Roberts gt al.,
ff. Tr. 2260, at 21-23.
It requires special training and experience to establish and maintain traffic flow, especially through intersections.
We have no reason to believe that LILCO's Traffic Guides have either the training or the experience required.
As a result, it is our opinion that the Exercise' demonstrated that LILCO's proposed use of concurrent continuous flow and channelization treatments would generally fail to control traffic flow in the way sought by LILCO.
- And, without LILCO's Traffic Guides promptly in place prior to the beginning of an evacuation to implement this strategy, there would be no possibility of its success.
Thus, another result of the Exercise was to demonstrate that LILCO's traffic control and i
i flow strategies cannot be implemented.
Blocking the main traffic lanes on limited access highways in order to facilitate access to the highways by traffic from the entrance ramps (see Appendix A, at IV-7 and Fig. 8.2) might help to control traffic flow -- although it would also likely cause congestion on the highways to the rear of the blocked lane (s) and i
on the access routes as well -- but this technique would be of i
9 1
11,mited use if, as was demonstrated during the Exercise, it cannot be implemented by LILCO's Traffic Guides at the very outset of the evacuation process.9 Similarly, techniques such as requiring turn movements and otherwise prescribing traffic flow (agg Appendix A, Table XII) depend upon LILCO's Traffic Guides being able to be in place to enforce the prescribed movements for all evacuating vehicles.
Trying to establish them effectively, after an evacuation is already in progress, would be difficult, if not impossible.
Thus, the Exercise demonstrated LILCO's inability to deter motorists from deviating from LILCO's prescribed evacuation routes.
Q.
Are there other reasons under LILCO's Plan why LILCO's Traffic Guides need to be in place at the outset of the evacuation process?
A.
Yes.
Several of LILCO's prescribed routes and traffic control strategies are so illogical and inappropriate that they will be especially unlikely to be followed by evacuees, parti-cularly if Traffic Guides are late in arriving at their posts, as was demonstrated during the Exercise.
If there is to be any hope that LILCO's routes and strategies would be followed, LILCO's 9
It should be noted that, under LILCO's Plan, LILCO contem-plates that certain traffic control strategies would be necessary only during the early stages of the evacuation process.
- geg, e.a., Appendix A at IV-21 (lane closure on Long Island Expressway to be removed three-and-one-half hours after start of evacuation).
Obviously, therefore, LILCO must intend for these traffic control strategies to be established early on, if not at the outset, of the evacuation process.
e Traffic Guides would have to be at their posts to provide "guld-ance" and instructions to evacuees from the outset and throughout the evacuation process.
Otherwise, certain of LILCO's routes and strategies are likely to be perceived as contrary to the safest and quickest routes out of the EPZ.
There would be confusion, traffic would be slowed, and LILCO's evacuation time estimates would be significantly increased.
For example, at TCP #9 (Route 25 at Ridge Road), LILCO's Traffic Guides are to direct 40 percent of southbound traffic west and 60 percent south; furthermore, they are to " discourage" traffic from proceeding east on Route 25.
Appendix A, Fig.
8, at IV-52; Table XII, at IV-39.
Even with Traffic Guides in place, discouraging traffic from proceeding east at this location would, in all probability, be difficult to implement, since the William Floyd Parkway, a major highway which would be perceived as providing ready access south and out of the EPZ, lies less than one mile to the east.
Without Traffic Guides present, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the evacuation routing prescribed by LILCO's Plan would be followed by evacuees.
Q.
Contention Ex 40 alleges that during the Exercise, LILCO failed to satisfy several Exercise objectives.
Please state those objectives.
i A.
The particul.7r Exercise objectives which, in our opinion, were not satisfied by LILCO as they relate to the allegations set out in Contention Ex 40 (for the reasons discussed in Contention Ex 40 and this testimony) are as follows:
EOC 16 Demonstrate the organizational ability to manage an orderly evacuation of all or part of the 10-mile EPZ including the water portion; SA 2 Demonstrate the ability to mobilize staff and activate the staging areas in a timely manner; SA 9 Demonstrate the ability to dispatch to and direct emergency workers in the field; FIELD 9 Demonstrate a sample of resources necessary to implement an orderly evacuation of all or part of the 10-mile EPZ; and FIELD 11 Demonstrate a sample of resources necessary to control access to an evacuated area (Traffic Guides).
These objectives are also set forth in the FEMA Report (at pages 9-15).
Q.
Please explain why you believe that these objectives were not satisfied by LILCO during the Exercise.
A.
With respect to objectives EOC 16 and FIELD 9, it cannot be concluded, based upon the performance of LILCO's Traffic Guides during the February 13 Exercise in reporting to their staging areas and, thereafter, to their traffic posts, that an " orderly evacuation" could be accomplished under LILCO's Plan.
This is particularly true given LILCO's reliance on its Traffic
- 38
i Guides to provide evacuation assistance to evacuees and to implement the traffic control strategies and techniques set forth in the Plan and relied upon by LILCO to ensure that evacuees follow the Plan's prescribed routes.
Objectives SA 2 and 9 expressly refer to LILCO's ability to mobilize staff and to dispatch emergency personnel to their posts in the field.
For the reasons discussed in this testimony, we 4
conclude that these objectives were not satisfied by LILCO.
Similarly, in our opinion, the Exercise provided no basis for concluding that objective FIELD 11 was satisfied by LILCO.
Controlling access to an evacuated area would have required LILCO's Traffic Guides to be at their traffic posts throughout the simulated evacuation process; even then, given LILCO's failure to staf f all locations necessary to control access to the EPZ (ERR Roberts et al., ff. Tr. 2260, at 65-68 and Att. 12), it is unrealistic to assume that LILCO's Traffic Guides would be able to control access to the EPZ (or whatever area within the EPZ might be evacuated).
IV. Contention Ex 40.E Q.
Please state Contention Ex 40.E.
A.
Contention Ex 40.E states as follows:
1 i
Finally, attempting to dispatch Traffic Guides to those Traffic Control Posts within a 2-mile zone of the plant upon the issuance of an evacuation order, even assuming arouendo that the " dispatch" activities could be accomplished more expeditiously than they were during the exercise, would not correct or even substanti-ally lessen the defect inherent in the LILCO Plan.
(See letter dated June 20, 1986, from John D.
Leonard'to Harold R. Denton (SNRC-1269), Encl. 1 at 16.)
In light of the notification and reporting provisions for Traffic Guides, and the realities that an evacuation order can swiftly follow a Site Area Emergency declaration and evacuation will begin prior to an official evacuation advisory, such an attempted "fix" to the fundamental defect in the LILCO Plan would be ineffective.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in subparts A through E, the LILCO Plan is fundamentally flawed in that it fails to comply with 10 C.F.R. S 50.47(b)(10) and NUREG 0654 S II.J.
The exercise thur precludes a finding of reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a Shoreham emergency.
Q.
Do you agree with Contention Ex 40.E?
A.
Yes.
LILCO's proposed "fix" to the untimely mobilization and dispatch of its Traffic Guides and the manning of TCPs on the day of the Exercise does nothing more than require Traffic Guides who are to be assigned to posts within two miles of Shoreham to be separately prepared (i.e., equipped and briefed) so that they can be dispatched upon the issuance of an evacuation order; other Traffic Guides are to be pre-briefed.
Egg OPIP 3.6.3, SS 5.4.1 and 5.4.3 (Rev. 7).
Even assuming that I
=.
LILCO's Guides could be dispatched promptly upon the issuance of an evacuation order, this proposed "fix" would not correct the flaws inherent in LILCO's Plan.
l 4
LILCO's Plan, as its implementation was demonstrated during j
the Exercise, does not have the capability of getting Traffic i
Guides to their posts to provide assistance to evacuees until 4
sometime after an evacuation order has been made.
Thus, even if i
LILCO's Guides were dispatched more expeditiously than they were t
during the Exercise, they would still not be in place to render assistance to evacuees or to implement LILCO's traffic control strategies until after the evacuation process had begun.
LILCO's l
proposed "fix" does not change this fact.
I Moreover, in our opinion, LILCO's "fix" ignores many
{
intersections outside the two-mile zone that, because of their particular importance to LILCO's evacuation scheme, would at l
least need to be manned early in the evacuation process, if not i
before evacuation began.
Indeed, we would consider the following j
to be but a few examples of critical intersections within the EPZ l
roadway network outside this two-mile zone:
l
}
LIE & William Floyd Parkway; Route 25A & Miller Place-Yaphank Road; LIE Exit 66 w/ bound ramp & Patchogue-Yaphank Road; Route 347 & Hallock Avenue; l
- l. i l
- ~ _ _ _,, _.. _ _ _ _ _... _. _ _ _ _ _.,,. _. _ _ _ _. _. _ _... _. _ _ _ _ _
4 Sunrise Highway w/ bound on Ramp 59 & Wading River Road /Chickester Avenue; North Country Road & Mt. Sinai-Coram Road; North Country Road & Main Street; and.
Route 347 & Old Town Road.
Evacuation traffic flow through these intersections, and others, would need to be kept moving during an emergency at Shoreham; otherwise, LILCO's evacuation time estimates would be significantly lengthened.
For this reason, LILCO's Plan depends upon LILCO's Traffic Guides to implement the various traffic control strategies discussed earlier in this testimony.
LILCO's Guides, however, can only carry out such strategies if they are i
mobilized and dispatched early enough to arrive at and set up their posts prior to or at the time of an evacuation order.
LILCO's Plan, as written, does not have the capability to permit this possibility.
Q.
Does that conclude your testimony?
i i,
A.
Yes.
l I
i l
l i
- i
ATTACHMENTS Statement of Qualifications and Experience of Assistant Chief Inspector Richard C. Roberts Statement of Qualifications and Experience of Inspector Richard Dormer Statement of Qualifications and Experience of Inspector Philip McGuire Statement of Qualifications and Experience of Deputy Inspector Edwin J.
Michel Organizational Chart of the Suffolk County Police Department Riverhead Traffic Guide Dispatch Log and LERO Message Form from Lead Traffic Guide, Riverhead Staging Area to Traffic Control Point Coordinator, EOC (at 12:50)
Gravel Truck Impediment Free Play Message from G. Connolly, EOC Team Leader to Evacuation Route Coordinator at LERO EOC via Exercise Controller LILCO Plan, Appendix A, Flure 8 --
Traffic Control Posts L8 ' ting Map prepared by LI'LCO in August 1985 which depicts LILCO's Traffic Control by number i 0 Fuel Truck Impediment Free Play Message from G. Connolly, EOC Team Leader to Evacuation Route Coordinator at LERO EOC via Exercise Controller 1 Port Jefferson Staging Area Traffic Guide TCP Time Arrival Chart (prepared from LILCO records and documents)
3: o e
A E
r k
4 ATTACHMENT 1
4 i
i l
l, i
5 li i
I 1
i l
r
--,---.-,,-.n_,-
....,,,_,+,-..,,--m,,-m,m-.-,-
,r.m,,,.~,,,,
,,----,n,.-,m.,--w-n--
.e...--
,-n-,-
e-s-
RICHARD C. ROBERTS Suffolk Coudy Police Deparbnen,t Yaphank, New York i
EDUCATION BA Otgrtt, Criminal Justice So Mhampten College, Long 1 stand University Southampton, New York AAS Degree, Police Science Sta.te UnLveAsity Farmingdale, Nw York i
FB1 National Academy Quadico, Virginia Succesafut.ltj completed seveAat in-service training courses, including Crlmlnat investiga.tlan School, Police Supervisor Schoot and execMLue developmeM se.ninars, conducted btj my emptotjer, the New York State Chiefa of Police AssoclMion, c
the FBI Training Division and the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Setvices.
}
EMPLOYMENT l
May I956 to Occembet 1959:
Criminal investigator Olstrlet At.tornetj's Of fice 1
i Coudy of Suffolk, New York Conducte.d investigations at major crimes and indictable offenses, assisted in tria.l pteparMlon and perfon,med 1
relMed investiga.tive activltles.
Januartj 1, 1160.to Januaty 1985:
(
inspector l
Suffolk CouMij Police DepartncM Yaphank, New York As a me.mber of a DeparbneM c:lth 2,600 sworn officers and 300 elvittan enptcyees, have been asalgned to supervisory and manageriat positions vilth ptogtessive levels of re-
[
sponsibitLty.
Petformed du.tles M Squad, Bureau and i
i Olvlslon levels, managing petsonnet engaged in pMrot l
l activltles and the investigation of att classes of calme.
Performed dMies as a Precinct Commander, responsibt.e for
.the perforrance of 235 sworn afficera and othet auxillary b
police personnet. Area o law enforcement activity <f responsibillty included managing 7
n an atta 170 square miles wLth
)
a popatMlon af 235,000.
\\
l
..---..-,,-,,-i._.,,-._,---,.
--w,,_r,_,,,-,,m-,,..m-_,.
-,,__,--.-_.,__..,m,,.._,
,,,_m----
-t-Olydoped skills as a supervisor, planner and adminlettator dating twtMy-six (26) years as a professional law enforce-ment officer.
Participated in deutloping and implementing spectat tactical respones plans for pollcing municipal facilities and in-dastrlat complexes, including the Shoreham Nucitar Power Station and Parr Meadows Race Track.
Coordinated polics and security activltles with facitlty and coMract security groups representing large shopping ceder complexes, industrial sites and government facitLtles.
Also assigned during this period as an inspectot with the OfficeoftheChiefofPattot.
January 1985 to Aprit 1986:
Deputy Chlef inspector Of, flee of Chlef of Olsttlet l
l Assisted the Chlef of Distrlet in the staff supervision and coordination of unLfcrmed patrol functxons, lneluding P.tecinct pattels, Highway Pattol Bureau, Marine. Bureau and the Speclat Patrol Bureau.
Conducted surveys and inspections of subordinate commands and recommended, where appropriate, changes in staffing levels and/or procedures.
Assisted in developing and implementing spectat tactical re-sponse. plans, i
}
Aptll 1986 to PreseMs I
Asalatant Chlef Inspector l
Offlce of Chief of Headquatters i
i Asslot the Chlef of Headquartets in the staff supervision of support services units, <ncluding Suppt.y and Ptocurement, Fleet Managered, Propetty Cleth s Office, Personne.t Buteau and ComunicMlons and Recotds Bureau.
I l
Conduct surveys and inspections of subordinate units and recommend, where appropride, changes in staffing levels and/or procedurts.
J AFFiliATTONSt j
New York State Assoelation of Chlef a of Pollce l
FBI Natlanal Academy Associates Natlanal Shettff a Association Ame4 Lean Society for Industrlat Securlty
0
.O ATTACHMENT 2
m
RESUME OF RICHARD DORMER PERSONAI. DATA:
Born January 19, 1940 Married, 4 children Excellent Health 5'11", 170 lbs.
EDUCATION:
New York Institute of Technology B.S. in Criminal Justice, June 1976 M.B.A. in Management, June 1981 PROFESSIONAL TRAINING:
Certificate of Training from the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control, March 1968 Certificate from the Criminal Justice Center John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Police Management, June 1976 Certificate from the American Academy for Professional Law Enforcement, Inc., and John Jay College of Criminal Justice of the City University of New York in the
" Allocation of Police Resources:
Implica-tions for Reordering Priorities", May 1977 Certificate of Training in Advanced Manage-ment Skills, from State of New York, Depart-ment of State, December 1978 Certificate of Achievement in Criminal Justice Education from the University of Virginia, Division of Continuing Education, June 1979 Graduate, F.B.I. National Academy, Quantico, Virginia, June 1979.
EMPLOYMENT:
Suffolk County Police Department, Yaphank Avenue, Yaphank, New York 11980 July 1963 - October 1963 Police Officer, Fourth Precinct Foot Patrol October 1963 - October 1965 Active Duty U.S. Army, one year Infantry Duty and one year Military Police Duty as a Motor Cycle Officer escorting Military l
Convoys.
October 1965 - January 1970 Police Officer, Second Precinct, performed general police patrol duties which included traffic accident investigating and Sector Car Patrol.
l
s Pge 2 h
l January 1970 - April 1972 Sermeant, Pourth Precinct, supervised a l
Uniformed Patrol Squad of 8 Police Officers who were assigned to general patrol duties.
April 1972 - September 1975 Sermeant, Highway Patrol Bureau, supervised Uniformed Patrol Officers on the Long Island Expressway and other major highways within the Suffolk County Police District with special emphasis on traffic related problems.
i September 1975 - September 1976 Lieutenant, First Precinct, Administrative Officer, worked directly under the Precinct Commander handling training requirements and general administrative duties.
September 1976'- August 1978 Lieutenant, Internal Affairs Section, responsible for the investigation of serious disciplinary incidents involving Suffolk j
County Police Department Officers and.the preparation and presentation of such cases before a Hearing Officer.
August 1978 - September 1979 Detect ive Lieutenant, Commandihg Officer 4
Second Squad, responsible for the management of approximately 40 Detectives and four I
Sergeants who were responsible for the in-vestigation of all serious crimes within the l
area of their respective precinct.
l September 1979 - January 1981 Detective Lieutenant, Commanding Officer i
First Squad, responsible for the management of approximately 55 Detectives and four Sergeants who, were responsible for the in-vestigation of all serious crimes within the respective precinct.
l January 1981 - January 1984 Detective Captain assigned to the Chief of l
Detectives' Office as Executive Officer of the General Service Bureau.
I was respon-sible for the Staff Administration of six I
Detective Squads within the Police District.
These squads investigated all serious crim-inal incidents within the Suffolk County Police District, and reported to the Chief of Detectives through my office.
1 i
i I
s t
- .', t..
i Page 3 4
_f January 1."84 - July 1986 Deputy Inspector:
Commanding Officer of the,,
Highway Patrol Bureau.
I had overall respon.
N siblity for the management of 110 Police Officers, 15 Sergeants, 3 Lieutentats and 1 i
Captain.
TheHighwayPatrolBureauis/Involvede$1u-j sively in the management of traffic related
'i Police activity which it.cludes the following
]
units:
L A.
Driving While' I texicEted (DWI) Enforce-l ment.
A,special unit, which conesutrates exclusively on. arresting 2nd prosecuting j
drunk drivers.
1 i
j B.
Motor Carrier Safety Unit (MSCU) - This I
i unit is involved in the'. enforcement of the laws relating to the trainsportation <of Hazard-l ous Materials within tNe Police District.
r C.
Expressway.Enforcereant Unit - This unit I
concentrates on the sara and cificient move-j ment of traffic on Rt 495 (Long Island Ex-
]
pressway) and Rt 27 (Sunrise Eighway).
D.
Breath Test Section (BSS) - This unit in responsible for administes'ing Breath Tests l
to persons arrested for Driving While Int.oxi-t This unit also conducts L'reath Test l
cated.
Training for Suf folk County Police 'Crfis*Ts i
i and of ficers from other police agencies.
k E.
Motor Cycle IJnit (MCU) - This unit is responsible for the enforcement of the traffic laws within the Police District and conducts escort duty, for funerals, dignitaries, etc.
3 July 1986 - Present Inspector:
Assigned r.o the Chief of District's Office in Police Headquartars.
I am respon-sible for the Staff Administration of the
)
following Bureaus A.
liighway Patrol Buveau B.
Special Patrol Bureau C.
Marine Bureau j
t MEMBERSHIPSt Suffolk County Superior Officers Association Suffolk County Pol (ce Penevolent Association l
Suffolk County Detectives Association New York State Associat.Lon of Chief's of Polico l
Police Holy Name Society P.B.I. National Academy Associates
[
gr -
., =
j n,.
s~
,f^
?,
_l s
\\
( '
e l
- ce
/
i s
e sr 9
e
/
r Y
6' O
F l 6
4*/" -
- s,
\\
'9,
,A 44 ATTACllMENT 3
1 i.-
4 4
4 9
m.
O Q,
b k
e 4
9 44 e
or 4
0 i
f 9
+-
f J
4.
.E' l
L-
I a.
POLICE DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, NEW YORK INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE To,: Con missioner DeWitt C. Treder DATE:21 Nov.,1986 FROM: Inspector Philip McGuire, Executive Officer COPY TO:
Office of the Chief Inspector, Command 2000
)
SUBJECr: Resumd of Service s
Name:
Philip McGuire Date of Birth:
May 15,1934-I Address:
32 Thornhedge Road Bellport, New York 11713 Telephone No.:
(516) 286-0933 s
The undersigned was appointed to the Babylon Town Police Depart-ment on August 1,1956 and served in the capacity of, Patrol Officer. and Desk Officer until the inception of the Suffolk County Police Department
~
on January 1,1960 at which time,he was ass'igned to the First Precinct.
After performing patrol duties and administrative duties at the First Precinct, the undersigned was promoted to Sergeant in October,1963 and assigned to the Second Precinct.
He was assigned to the First Precinct during 1965 and then promoted
- to I.leutenant in January,1969 and performed the duties of a Platoon Com-mander, superviring the activ! ties of'a squad of approximately seventy (70) men.
In May,1972, he was promoted to Captain and assigned as the Execu-tive Officer of the First Precinct, he continued in that assignment af ter having been promoted to Deputy Inspector in January,1974.
l In January,1975, he was assigned as the Executive Officer of the Legal and Inspection Bureau until February,1977 when he was assigned
_ ( as an assistant to the Chief of District.
In February,1979, he was assigned as the Commanding Officer of the Special Patrol Bureau. This assignment entailed the administration and direction of the Emergency Service Section, the Aviation Sectior, the Canine Section, the Crime Scene Section, and the Courts Section.
PDCS. 2042
TO, Commissinner D.C. Tred:r FROM Inspector l'). McGuire Page 2 21 November,1986 In January,1984, he was transferred to the Office of the Chief Inspec. tor as Executive Officer. As Executive Officer, his duties are to assist the Chief Inspector:
- 1. In exercising line and staff command over all personnel and operations in the Police Department;
- 2. In performing management services required to insure the De-partment performs its operations in an efficient and effective manner;
- 3. Overseeing the Department's current and long-range budgetary needs, administrative functions, planning, research, developments and statistics;
- 4. Other administrative services and supervision as the Police Commissioner may assign.
This office is also responsible for keeping the Police Commissioner informed of all important matters. In addition, the supervision of the District Commanders and Police Chaplains are a function of this. office.
In February,1985, he was promoted to Inspector and continued his assignment as Executive Officer in the Office of the Chief Inspector.
The undersigned has attended various schools and seminars dealing with Police Operations, Ethics, Investigations and related subjects given by the F.B.I., New York State, the IACP, New York City Police Depart-ment and.the Suffolk County Police Department.
Respectfully submitted, Philip McGuire j
Inspector l
Executive Officer Office of the Chief Inspector Command 2000 PMcG:jd l
l l
l T
a 6
1 I
ATTACHMENT 4
l.
i 4
l I
l -
l l
I
s COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
+\\'4bi
& CO DsWITT C. TR EDER PETE R F. COH ALA N couserv su scutsva poucs consesseseosesse POLICE DEPARTMENT RESUME EDWIN J. MICHEL, DEPUTY INSPECTOR Prepared November 20, 1986 Commanding officer Communications and Records Bureau Suffolk County Police Department POLICE SERVICE EXPERIENCE 7/22/63 Appointed as Probationary Patrolman - Suffolk County Police Department 9/24/63 Assigned to the Patrol Division, Third Precinct 1/5/70 Promoted to Sergeant, remained assigned to the Third Precinct 9/22/75 Promoted to Lieutenant, assigned to First Precinct 2/21/77 Transferred to Highway Patrol Bureau as O.I.C. of radar and cycle enforcement 1/19/81 Promoted to Captain, assigned to Chief of patrol Division's Office 3/30/81 Transferred to Highway Patrol Bureau as Executive Officer 2/6/84 Designated Commanding Officer of Communications Section 2/18/85 Promoted to Detective Captain, assigned as Executive Officer of General Services Bureau 7/22/85 Designated Executive Officer of Major Crime Bureau 4/21/86 Promoted to Deputy Inspector, assigned as Commanding Officer of Communications and Records Bureau YAPHANK AVENUE,YAPHANK,NEW YORK 11980-(516) 286-5000
November 20, 1986 Page two of two pages EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND June, 1959 Graduated from Islip High School January, 1977 Graduated Magna Cum Laude from New York Institute of Technology Majors in Behavioral Science and Criminal Justice June, 1982 Graduated from the F.B.I. Academy, Quantico, Virginia; accredited by the University of Virginia l
PERSONAL l.
Age:
45 Height:
5'9" Weight:
170 Health:
Excellent i
Marital Status:
Married since July 20, 1963 to June D.
Michel; one child Teri Ann, age 18
- l
~
Resident of Suffolk County and Town of Islip since 1949 l
i i
i
T
-C e
i h-i -
ATTACHMENT 5
L i
i
OFFICE OF Tut LICE C0asallS5304t C0ansaa0190s 0.O.f.eu.fv.
0.o.a.v.vy g
04.
0.De e
y,ga e
- nee, a,,
m,.Cnce.
3 s.l.a.vi(E 5 ta Ci C...
im levist.sGa,t 04 pef.f.t test,etg
. a ta f eet TNB i
- C.,04 l
.e..t e.,.
i on,04 m a..,
C,... eat
.,t oo
,,, C,at n o.0.
13t.
SGCD0e teff ttssteCf mwisissances Ort sa tten$
H te M Clice
- 2'8 StCD04 SIN SEttice 4210
( Cuet8 imiPEC109T Co.. 40 e,.
CoeIs0L It'*I"U P a t,04 pi CDum f 5 t.s t ot.
.oom.
ne.
>=
a e f.ance on us
.t o,0e u,,n.De
.ga,0,
,;nt,,a.
,m t r it0e turtovel a
Ciwot 0880418 unet es t afs043 1
I u Crice rire ris' u CTice rt%e i
i i
i i
...e m
.T
.a.e.<,.l.De
,4,.,m
. 0.... e f N.e.u.e.,.
,f o 04
.t o 04 n.e sCO,.t.e
.l x.
uelf EA C f'018 3219 SECTsoe 77N F380 FIN 3318 7977 c r,.... e.
~. ~..
P...
o A00vaavlet tivehic
.c.-,
f a0t saveseg,g evitflGatsoe Divfloot consesame sue commeaec asse s
tems i
i i
/
I T
/
I T
]
oa a..
..f m..
Pf.850e.s.t t _
C0m.e.tten,eC a.'1081 Ope n.a. tic.es S'.f C88L 88 A108
.t.pf.t.est.
.C...t.
r
- u. e.f.t.t 4,,. _
El
..t
- t. 0. 0
.,m.
n S"
stos im ING PRECtNCT PATROL DIST RIC T Taae%fDef a Ca**I st C tace CotsWWEBIC4
.D.on a sa,m,,t.
F5 tMeet g
- iR11 patial /
seGer(tot e
SOUa0
.Of LIGtolf514C'.O.
'-' 50ma,c
[
SE cts 04 t ecit5 o n.e.,
Cnce n.(
on ee
,t,.
o e u
.o 0e n.
,,,,,,o
,,,,,t PRECINCT PRECthCT PRECINCT
'te te"es N wkts Is'w'Ce COMUAND COMMAND COMMANO Mihir"
- 3 vae'
-- I):
s'ou"ac"E3 s
i 4tN Ued 6tH uen
$2H pit 13H HCh0e IIN 32N MCNoe 3329 pa f mot M CTToe
=
=
IECTs04 u nvett est ostat toett esen sust pemi.
PAT AOL P4f POL 4WE 8GleCV Te M s t ei#g eG WA*e ft eattr(
Sou'#9 t uGe fivt 19uan a0 SG Cf ree De 34 l'e M U4e 8:15 tvatvafs04 Dri' /#t C'53'I
=
EE tte04 usuf Set?
Und W
% 31 2
, _#87
=
Sf C fice SI3e 3730 st C taDe sue tesut C A'ut Ce'W1 C aset
,g
,g g g y,,g g,,,,,,
f euttle sogo a#bDe ggeyegg CDete0L 3Ca ge
=
st ant ey
=
bed St C rice reef ant
" c "" "'
" c "" "
= < n0e i'N
=
" t't.te
'r",i.e
- '*t,e n
,m
. a o..
,, C o e,..L 0....f a E n808Cl#t ef
. n n,..
, tt o.
ump m
u na ' m M&M W
. pat eot t o,,,,
=
attenes
=
unst t e p se tes 0111mef f poset e v te#0attestaf ieteg lef oncietti uset M
HCm W W
W
.af ag 4 e ne g ege 5( C fi e 1758 SE C T'Ois 3He m
ef tentr5 ameo.t e
$s s tes gue6t Aav SECOND F'OURTH
%f w f M in st avitt
=
Unit perf ^
f #a**G PRECINCT
=
t arse u.av Lava 0
=
SopAD
=
PHE c thC T PRECsNCT
=
COMMAND M Citee 42'S Werf 903 STF9~'
49??
lef 08titfief e.s t rice U4e ti Cisco 1M4 COMMAND COMMAND 200 400 400 Stat aael el epsis Pete ten 6 Peopt#f
- 104g Teafem4 C04f eet pe'f pfl0Vf RV U'80 IW Pa te0L P.f 00t ra t e0L gestattutef Deet 5371 pe+f EFFP lit 9 SE thD4
$10 04 SE cts 04 MCiece aFN Its e tt Gia aufhe v'lU4 pnOPt af' 5010e CahRit R
=
fBArmeG g gggpq C#'et Ceest CA.uf 54Fifv MCf tce UIsif 5174 g ne C0e r a0L Cette0L Co* TROL CowwaeD erte pot aevnet eet.CouseTv 0F lurF0tst. se V.
St CT 60m IN H Clace eN
$4Choe SN esernomo gowunesTV
=
yessy G
TON CHART 56 4W'Ct lit,t C.ftWS g a,g ag N E ""
IN
%f"
$E t.t C TIWG h
g St t,t C hyt e 0 u.t.T te Den.tef t Deu.ter 5tCTs01B 438 C.hDE e SECTIOe 210 Sitnee 510 Desti
~
"'I IUI GA ARet e EFFECT8WE DaTS Br ace 31 JULY 85
=
RtlAhue$
C0==ugav
%UI '
PtTf a F C0'estase u.seet Ceests f eenvetoe p e90mp uE nf uCnce one Comoveen I
=
Se et AtStB l
gan,eg Ultif 6333
]
P4fp0L
=
$1 C ff 0e 4310
, e
- e' s
f ATTA.CHMENT 6
a OPIP 3.6.3 Page 54. of 77 Page 1 of 1 TRAFFIC GUIDE DISPATCH LOG Lead Traffic Guide:
k' i r ii 0//3f86 Date:
Staging Area:
21 v'c f/)t* A /
Page M of //
l l
l Traffic Guide's l
j
~
Name I
Assignment I
cot HFA2L 2.G, n ' o 9, pl C' b La 9 Y
20 r 2:I S O 62 ' c bl 1
23 I 2 'l 6 l
l MoLRPO l
'2. 3 l2*!6 l
L A n'(DLC' W l
2,\\
)2 ll]
\\
k' A 9 N 'y.) L '.< G 1
- 2. 2.
I7 t J 1-l l (s /a l N(
l l l 2.
12.'l'7 l
l m.vTs.n op j l
ll
,2.,9 l
=
l l
l l
I j
I l
l l
1 l
l l
1 l
l l
l l
[
l Rev. 5 720.1.88 l
l
l, OPIP'4.1.2 s,., 4...
. ^ *p Page 6 of 7 N.[;5pyy:9f.
Page 1 of 1
- -931 4 YMy.c.
LERO MESSAGE FORM No.
ie.nu ucie Locacion l
name I
cas.7)
From: 4G80 724~'O* NP TlV. $mC. Ah8
$dW.h/li.kfch-b00 To:
t Date/Tima:-
/,2. N Messagei l-t r
~~t'.
a
,% > s i Tc m o i.> s ic. n
-ej n e.u.
i
% / c.n 'io.o l LG. )c. 1)
,i 2L, Io2 l
as===
v Cu C*. U tL ' S.*
I
'. I gj.? pia l
,p Routing for:
l[l Action l_~l Information Response Required:
l[l In Response to Message No.
(Signature)
White copy - Addressee Yellow copy - Originator 5 Rev. 5 Pink copy - Lead Communicator 10003049
p, _
+
~
' 9 C
t 4
ATTACHMENT 7
L i
i 1
'r'-
e-
-vm.-ws-e
-,4---:
<e,-
r
-s---w s
n.--,-
ee
--s---+--
i--
y
= = - --v---
y-er
==-
w-e e
I (f/
THIS IS AN EXERCISE SHOREHAM EXERCISE IMPEDIMENT TO EVACUTION ROUTE MESSAGE Suffolk County, New York Date:
February 13, 1986 Hessage:
Impediment - Patchogue From:
C. Connolly, EOC Team Leader To:
Evacuation Route Coordinator at LERO EOC via Exercise Controller Initiating Event: After EBS message to evacuate has been issued to the public and FEMA field evaluator (C. Sarricks) has notified EOC Team Leader that he/she is in position to evaluate field response.
Message:
A LOADED CRAVEL TRUCK WITH A BROKEN DRIVESHAFT, WHICH IS UPRIGHT, BUT TURNED SIDEWAYS IN THE ROAD IS BLOCKING THE NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND LANES AND BOTH SHOULDERS OF YAPHANK - MIDDLE ISLAND ROAD, AFP20XIMATELY FIFTY (50)
Chit YARDS NORTH OF THE CAUTION LIGHT AT THE "Y" INTERSECTION ~
OF YAPHANK - MIDDLE ISLAND ROAD, MAIN STREET AND MILL ROAD (IN THE VICINITY OF TCP #124). THIS IS A MULTIPLE VEHICLE ACCIDENT ALSO INVOLVING THREE PASSENGER CARS IRAT ARE BLOCKING BOTH THE NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND SHOULDERS OF THE ROAD.
THERE ARE NO INJURIES TO ANY INDIVIDUALS.
THE LERO RESPONDER TO THE SITE OF IRIS IMPEDIMENT SHOULD LOCATE THE FEMA EVALUATOR WHO WILL BE WEARING A COLORED ARM BAND.
THIS IS AN EXERCISE l
10000722
(
~
~
i i
I i
{
b 1
2 I
i I
b y
h ATTACHMENT 8
1 l
)
h 1
I t
3
{
l i
i I
s
s FICURE 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS USTINC I
I I
I i
l i Evacuation i I
I I
l l
Muaber l
Equipeest i Movementa l Novementa I 1 TCP l locatico l
Staging l of Traffic j i
to be I
to be i
i No.
ll l
Area l
Cuides I
i Flashing i Facilitated i Discouraged I l
I l
l Cones l Lights l From i To l From i To I I
I l
i I
i I
I I
I I
i i 1 1 Immer Rocky Point Reed l Sound Beach Blvd.
I Port Jeffereon i 1
1 0
1 0
i NE IV l SE I NE l
f I
I I
I I
I I
I I
lv in i
I I
I I
i 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
i l
1 1
I I
I i
1 l
l 2 i North Country Road l Pheessat Run l Riverhead i
1 1
3 l
1 l-l-
lE lW l
i I
I I
I i
1 1
I I$
1w I
l l
l l
l l
l 1
I I
I I
I
)
i I
I I
I I
l l
1 1
I I
3 I North Country Road i Valentine Road 1 Riverhead i
1 1
3 l
1 iN l SW lN lE I
I I
I i
1 I
I I
I sW Ia l
I I
I I
I I
i 1
I i
1 1
I I
I i
i i
I I
I i
I l
l 4 l North Country Road l Randall Road l Port Jefferson l 1
1 4
'l 1
1 NE lS l SW I NE l
i i
1 1
I I
l l
l lS I Na i
l l
l 1
1 I
l i
I I
I i
H 7
I I
I I
I I
i i
i I
i i
g l5 l North Country Road Woodville Road Fort Jefferson 2
8 2
N lS l All N
i I
l Route 25A I
I i
l l
1N Iz l An I NE I
I I
I I
I I
I Iw Iz i
I I
j.
I I
l i
I I
I I
I i
1 1
~
1 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
4 l 6 I hee 2n l Ridge Road i Port Jefferoon l 1
1 4
1 1
lV lS I All lN l
I I
i i
i l
I iN IS 1An Iw I
I H
I I
i 1
I I
I I
i 1
I 7 Whiskey Roed Ridge Road l Riverhead 1
0 0
N lS An N
I I
I I
I I
l lz IS I An i a I
I i
i i
i i
i l
i I
I I
L i
i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I a i vinian Floyd Parkway l Whiskey Road l Riverhead l
2 I
8 1
2 lN lS IS lV l
1 1
I I
I I
I i
l l
lv iN l
I l
l 1
l l
I l
l l
l l
I i
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
)
l 9 l Middle Country Road i Ridge Road l Riverhead 1
2 l 11 1
4 lN IS l All iN I
I I (Route 25) l l
1 1
l lN lw I An l 3 I
I l
l l
I I
l l
l l
l l
I I
I l
l 1
1 I
I l
l l 10 1 Middle Country Road l Wading River Menor Road 1 Riverhead i
1 1
6 l
2 iN IS i All IN I
l l (Route 25) 1 I
I i
l Ia iS IAH IW l
I I
I i
i l
i I
i i
~
l I
I
'l l
Rev. 5 l
J
6
,n FICt,AE 8 TRAFFIC CONTa0L POSTS LISTINC (coatinued)
I I
i i
i i Erscusttoe i I
ITCP I
I l
Number Equipment i Movements I Novemente i 1
Location l
Stagias I of Traffic l l
to be l
to be i
No.
I I
Aree I
Cuides l
I Flashing l_ Facilitated l DiscoureRed I i
l l
1 l
l Cones I Lishes i From i To i Free i To I 1
I I
I i
i i
i l
I i
I l 11 l Veding River Nanor Road l Crumeen Boulevard i 11verhead l
1 1
6 1
2 1N IS lS lN I
l l
1 1
I I
I Iz IS Iz iN I
l l
I I
l l
l i
I I
I l
1 I
I I
I i
i i
i i
i l
l 12 I toute 25A l Nulee Leading Reed j Riverhead l
1 l
5 l
1 lN I SR I SR l NW l
l l
l I
I I
I
.I l
l l
l l
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I l
l 13 Niddle Country Road i Route 25A (North Coestry I Riverhead i
1 1
8 l
2 lW lE I All l NW l
l l
(Route 25) l Road) l I
l l
lV lE l
I l
l 1
l i
i l
I I
I i
l I
I i
i I
I I
I I
i i
i i
i 14 l Niddle Country Road l Eduardo Avenue l Riverhead I
1 l
8 l
2 lW lS l All IN i
I I (moete 25)
I I
I I
I IN Iz I All Iw I
I I
I I
i 1
1 1
1 I
I I
I i
1 i
i I
i i
i i
I l 15 I Edwards Avenue l River Road 1 Eiverhead i
1 1
3 l
1 iN l$
l All iN l
t I
i i
I i
i iv IS 1 All IW w
I I
I I
I I
I IN Ix l
I
?
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l l
1 4
l l
l l
4 I
I i
l' W
I 16 I Edwards Avenue I LIE, Exit 71 Westbound i Riverhead i
1 1
4 l
1 1N iV l All lN l
l l
l Entrance Reap l
l l
l l
l l
l I
i l
I I
I i
i l
i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i i
I I
e i
i 1
l 17 i Negent prive i Toppiese Path l Riverhead i
1 1
3 l
1 l-1-
1 All Iw l
l I
l l
I I
i i
I i
I I
i i
i i
i i
i i
1 I
i i
i i is I aoute 25 U/s I william riord Parkwer I alve-head 1
I 4
1 1
Ia is Iz Iw I
I I
l s/s on reap i
i i
i i
i i
l i
1 1
I I
I I
I I
l l
l i
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
l Route 25 LIE, Exit 72 W/s os reap l Riverhead 1
6 2
l 19 1
I I
I i
i i
I 1
I I 20 i toute 25 I court street i Riverhead I
1 I
6 1
2 Iw IS l All lV l
1 I
I I
I I
I l
l l All i NE I
I I
I I
i l
I i
l l
I I
l 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 21 1 Route 25 i Peconte Avenue l Riverhead I
1 I
3 1
1 l All I5 l All lV I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
Rev. 5 l
FICURE 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS LISTING (continued) l l
l l
1 l
l Evacuation I i
i l
l I
Number l
Equipment i Movemente l Novemente l l TCP l Iocation i
Staging l of Traffic l l
to be l
te be I
No.
I l
Area l
Cuideo l
l Flashing l Facilitated l Discouraged l 1
l l
l l Cones l Lights i From l To l Froe l To I l
l 4
4 I
I I
I I
I i
i 1 22 i Old Country Road i Osborne Avesse i Riverhead l
1 l 10 l
3 l All lS I All IW l
II1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l All IN I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
1 23 I Reete se i Roemoke Avenue I Riverhead i
2 1
9 I
2 iN IE l All lN I.
4 l
l l Old Country Road l
l l
l 1
IW IE I All IW l
l i
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
j.
1 l
6 6
I I
I I
i i
I l 24 I Fatchogue Monet-Sinal Rd l Horseblock Road i Patchogue 1
1 0
1 0
1N IS I-l-
l l
l l (cR 83) i I
H I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l l
i 1
1 I
i i
1 I
I I
I I
i i
I i
I 25 i Saarise Nigb sy I root Nortehee - Riverhead l Riverhead 1
2 l 10 i
S I NR IW I-I-
1 I
I (mosto 27) i Road i
I l
l l
1 I
I I
s i
I i
l I
I I
I I
I I
i l
i I
I I
I L
l 1
1 1
I de 1 26 l Wading River Road /
l Sunrise Highway W/5 en l Riverhead l
1 1
7 l
2 lN V
l All lN l
l l Chichester Avenue l Ramp Exit $59 l
l l
l l
l*
l l
i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I l
i l
i I
i 1 27 l Vading River Road LIE, Exit 69, W/3 on reap i Riverhead I
1 7
l 2
N i
V All l N
l I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
l l 28 l Center Moriches Road /
l North Street i Riverhead 1
l 0
1 0
iN l8 All iN l
l l
l Wading River Road I
l l
l I
I I
IS IW I
I
.)
1 i
l l
I I
I i
1 I
4 I
I I
I I
I 1
I 29 i Route 25 1 River Road l Riverhead i
1 1
0 1
0 i All l SR l SW l WW l
l l
1 I
I I
I i
i i
I l
l l
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i 1
l
! 30 l Winia Floyd Parkvey i Victory Avenue l Patchogue l
1 1
0 1
0 iN lV l All IN I
I I
I I
I I
IE IW I
I I
i i
i I
I l
I I
i i
I i
i l
I I
i I
1 l
l l
1 1
I I
I 31 i Long Island Erpresswer I willi = riora Parkway l Patchogue 1
4 1 10 1
5 iN IW I-I-
1 l
3 I
I I
I I
i 1(Resp)l(Eryy)I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
la IV l-l-
1 I
i I
l l(sayy)l(anyy) l l
l 1
I l-I I
I I
I I
I i
1 Re. 3
3 1
FICURE 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL FOSTS LISTINO (continued) l I
I i
i avacuation i i
lTCP i n
I l
Number i
Equipment Movemente 1 Movemente l I
Iacetion l
Staging I of Traffic l to be l
to be i
i No.
l l
Area l
Cuidea l
i Flashing i Facilitated i Discouraged I i
l l
I 1 Cones i I,1Ahte i From l To l Froe l To l l
l 4
I I
i a
1 i
I 1
l 32 l Long Island arpressuny l William Floyd Ferkusy l Patchogue i
1 1
4 1
1 1N IW l-1-
l 3
i l
i I
I i
I l(memp)l(Erry)I i
1 1
l l
1 I
I I
I IE IW l-1-
1 I
I I
I I
I i
1(sve. I(unyy)l l
l l
l 1
I I
I i
l nd.) I, I
I l
l l
I 1
I I
I i
i i
l I
i i
i l
i i
l i
I I
I I
I33 l William Floyd Perkvey I longwood Road l Riverhead 3
l 20 7
lN lS l All lW I
I i
'l I
I I
I I
l i
IV is l
I I
H I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 34 I Iongwood Road l Salth Road I tiverhcod l
1 1
0 1
0 lN lI l All lN l
j l
I I
I I
I I
I l
i l
H l
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
l f
I 35 i Middle country Road I tocky Point Road l Patchogue 1
2 l
8 1
3 lN lV l All lN l
tn i
I (moute 25) 1 I
I i
i 1E Is i All lE I
sn-1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l l
1 1
I I
I I
i
.I I
i 1 36 I saith need i Medferd toed i Riverhead I
1 1
0 1
0 lI l8 l All lE l
l l
l 1
I l
i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 37 l acute 25A I aroadway i Port Jefferson I 1
1 4
l 1
l All lE l All lN I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i l
l I
i l
I I
i i
i i
e i
i 3s i neute 254 I tocky Point Road l Port Jefferece i 1
1 7
l 2
IE lS l All lE l
l l
I 1
i l
i IN is I A11 IN I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i 1
1 I
I I
I i
l 39 l Middle country Road l Randall Road l Riverheed i
1 1
0 1
0 iN IW I All lN l
l 1 (aoute 25) i I
I i
1 I
i 1
I l
1 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 40 I
I I
I I
i i
I i
I 1 aoute 25A l North country aced l Port Jefferece l 1
1 0
1 0
l NW IW l NW lE l
t i
I I
I I
I iz
!W I
I i
I I
I I
I I
I l
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
i
_ 1 I
! 41 I toute 25A I Miller Place Itood l Port Jefferece I 1
1 14 1
4 1 All IW l All IN 1
i i
I l
l i
l l
l I
I I
I I
I L
i i
I I
I i
i i
1 l
l l 42 l Lower aseky reine moed i North country moad i Fort Jefferson l 2
1 0
1 0
iN l SW l All lN l
I I
I I
I I
l i
I l All Ia I
l 1
l l
I I
i i
l I
I i
l l
f Rev. 5
PICURE 8 TRAPPIC CONTROL POSTS !.187I110 (continued)
I I
i i
I i Evacustica i t
I i
1 1
Number i
P mipment i Novements l hvemente l i TCP l Location l
Staging i of Traffic I l
to be I
to be l
4 I No.
I I
Area l
Cuides l
1 Flashing l Facilitated i Discourated I l
l l
l I Cones l Lighte l From i To l From 1 To I i
i I
I i
l I
i l
i i
l I 43 1 North Country Road l Pipe Steve Hollow Road l Port Jeffersoo !
2 1
4 ll 1
i All l SU l All l NE I
1 I
l i
I l
l l
l l
l l
l l
I I
L i
I l 44 l North Country Road l Mt. Sinai - Coran Road l Port Jefferson l 1
1 8
l 2
IE iW I All iN I
u I
I I
i l
i i
i i
I i
l I
I i
IAn IE I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I 45 l North Country Road l Crystal Brook Hollow Road l Port Jefferson I 1
1 0
1 0
1E lV I All IE I
I I
i 1
1 I
I IN Is i
I I
I I
i i
i I
I I
I I
I I
i 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I l
l 46 l North Country Road l Oakland Avenue l Port Jefferson l 1
1 0
1 0
l All IW l All lE l
1 1
I I
I I
I l
l I
I l
M l l
l l
l l
1 I
i i
I l
fI 47 l North Country Road l Main Street l Port Jefferson i 1
1 3
1 1
l All IW l All IE I
vi i i
I i
i i
i l
I i
l L
l l
I I
I I
l l
i l 48 ll Main Street (Route 254) l Broadway l Port Jefferson l 1
1 3
l
'1 lE lW l An l E l
1 1
I I
i 1
I is IW I nt is I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i I
l 1
I I
I I
i i
I i
l I
i l 49 l Route 112 l Hallock Avenue l Port Jefferson 1 2
l 15 l
3 I-I-
I An I E I
I I
l l
I I
I I
I I
I l
l 1
4 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 50 l Route U2 I Neoconeet Road l Port Jefferson l 2
1 23 1
5 l All IW l All lE l
)
1 I
l I
l i
I I
I I
I I
l 4
L i
l I
i i
i i
1 l
l 51 1 Terryv111e Road l At Terryv111e Elementary l Port Jefferece I 1
1 0
1 0
l-1-
IAH lN I
I I
I school i
I I
I I
I i
i I
I l
I J
l i
I i
i I
I i
l i
l i
i i
i i
i 1 52 l heconeet Road 1 Jayne Boulevard l Port Jefferson l 2
l 6
l 2
1 All IW l Au I E I
l 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
i ni IN I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
1 I
L i
i i
I I
i 1
1 I
i 53 i Taphank niddle 1 eland Ed.1 Bartlett Road 1 Patchogue i
1 1
3 l
I I
I i
l l
l
' 1 I NR IS l All I NR I
I I
I I
I I
l i
I I
l 1
I I
I I
I i
i l
I I
i l
1 I
i i
i I 34 I Yaphank Middle reland Rd.1 longwood Road l Patehogue l
1 1
3 l
1 l All l SW IAH I NE I
l 1
I i.
I I
I l
l l
l g
I I
I I
l l
1 l
l l
l l
Rev. 5
r.
O PICURE 8 TRAPPIC Camt0L POSTS LISTING (continued)
I I
I I
I I Evacuation i 1
ITCP l
l 1
Number l
Equipment i Movemente l Novemente l l
I4 cation l
Staging I of Traffic l l
to be l
to be INo.
I l
Aree l
Cuides l
l Pleshtag l_Pacilitated l Discouraged l I
I l
l Comes 1 Lights l From i To l Fros l To l l
1 I
i l
i l
i l
I i
I l 55 i Route 25A I Mt. Stasi - Corea Road i Port Jefferson l 1
l 8
l 2
lE IV l All IN I
I i
l l
l l
l lv iS I
l 1
I I
I i
1 1
1 I
l l
1 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
l 34 i Route 25A I Route 83 (Petehogee -
I Port Jefferson i 4
1 34 l
11 lE Iv i All lE l
l l
l Mt. Staat Reed) i I
l l
l1 iS I
i l
l l
l l
l l
I I
i i
I I
I I
i i
1 I
l 57 l Route 25A l Echo Avenue l Port Jefferson l 2
l 12 l
3
,E lv lV l NE l
l l
l l
l l
In lv in II I
I I
I I
I i
1 I
I I
I
)
1 I
i i
i i
i i
i i
l 3
I 58 l Route 83 (Patchogue -
l Camel Road l Port Jefferoon 1 2
1 7
l 2
iN lW l All lN I
l l Mt. Staat Road) l l
l l
l lN IS l
j l
N I
i l
i I
I I
IE IS I
I I
?
l I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i 1
l l
l l
t i
L i
l i
i i
l 59 l Route 83 (Patchogue -
l Route 112 (Port l Port Jeffersos 1 1
1 8
1 2
lE lV l All l1 I
l l Mt. Stasi Road) l Jeffaroon - Patchogue Rd. l l
l l
lE IS l All lN l
l 1
I I
I I
l iN Iv i
i i
l i
l l
I i
1 l
l l
l 1
I I
i i
i I
i i
i l
l 60 1 Old Town Road l Patchogue - Mt. Sinai l Port Jefferson i 1
l 4
l 1
l NE l SW l All I NE I
I I Road (Route 83) i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i 1
l l
'l i
I I
I I
l l
I I
l i
I I
I I
I I
I 61 I toute 83 (Patchogue -
1 Fine Road l Port Jeffernoa I 1
1 7
2 lN lS l All lN l
l l Mt. Stasi Road) l l
l l
l l
l l
l l
1 I
I I
I I
i 1
1 1
I I
l i
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l 62 l v1111am Ployd Parkway l Ramp to v/B Route 25 I Riverhead i
1 l
5 l
1 1N I,$
lN IW l
I IS/s l
l l
l l
l l
l l
l 1
I l
l l
I l
l l
l l
1 1
L 1
i i
l i
I I
i l
l 63 ll Middle Country Road l Route 83 (Patchogue -
l Patchogue 1
2 l 14 l
4 lN lS l All lN l
l l
(Route 25) l Mt. Sinal Road) l l
l l
lE lW l All l E i
i l
I i
l iN Iv is 13 l
l l
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I l
I I
i I
l i
i i
l i
i i
I 64 i Route 83 (Patchogue -
l Mooney Fond Road l Patchogue 1
1 1
0 l
0 iN lS l All lI l
I l
l Mt. Sinal Road) l I
l l
l l
l l All IN I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l l
i hv. 5 l
f
^
FIGURE 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS LISTING (continued) i i
i l
I I Evacuation i I
I I
I i
Number l
Equipment i Novemente l Novenesta l l TCP l location l
Staging I ef Traffic l l
to be I
to be I
i l
No.
l l
l Area l
Cuidea I
i Flashing l_ Facilitated l Discouraged I
.l I
l l
I Conas l Liahta i From i To I From i To l I
I I
I I
i i
i l
i I
I l
65 I h ee 25 I he n2 i Patchogue 1
2 1
7 l
2 lW l SE l An l E I
j l
1 (Middle Country Road) l (Fort Jefferece-Patchogue l l
l l
IE lV l All IW l i
i l
l Road) l l
l l
l l
l l
l t
i i
i i
l i
I I
I I
I I
I l 66 I toute n2 (Port l Grand Smith Road l Patchogue i
2 1
8 l
2 I NW lS l All l SE l
I I Jeffereas - Patchogue 1
l l
l l
lN lS l Au 1 N I
l l
l 1 Road) l I
i 1
1 l
l l
l 1
l l
l l
l l
1 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l 1
1 1
1 l 67 l toute 25 l Nt. Sinai - Corea Road l Patchogue I
1 1
4 l
1 lE lW l All iN l
1 1
I (Middle Country Road) l I
l l
l lN IW l Au l E l
l 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i I
i i
i I
i i
i i
i I
)
l 68 l Route 112 (Port l Granny Road l Patchogue 1
2 1
0 1
0 lN IW l All IN I
l s
l I Jefferson - Fatchogue l
l l
l l
lE lW l Au l E l
?
I I Road) i I
I I
I IE Is I
l i
I u
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I l
l t
i i
i I
I i
i i
i i
I 69 l Mill Road (Coran Road) i Be11 port Avenue l Patchogue l
1 1
0 1
0 l-I-
l All l NW l l
I I
i l
1 I
i 1
I I
I I
L i
i i
i i
i I
i i
i
! 70 l Fatchogue - Taphank Road l LIE, Exit 66 W/B Intrancel Patchogue I
1 l
7 l
2 IN lV lAn lN l
l 1
l l
i l
l l
l 1
l l
1 l
l71
{NorseblockRoad Taphank Ave.
Fatchogue 1
4 1
NE SW Au NE l
l l
t I
i I
I l
l 72 1 Old Cometry Road l LIE, Exit 73, W/5 en ramp ll Riverhead l
1 1
6 l
i l
I i
1 l
l l
l 1
1 I
I I
I I
i i
1 i
i I73 lNorthCountryRoad I wading River - Manorville l Riverhead l
1 1
5 l
2 1 SE IS l All lW l l
l Road f
I l
l l NW lS l
l l
l 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I i
l 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
i g
I 74 I Shore Road l Old Foot Road l Port Jefferson l 1
1 4
l 1
i NE l NW l All i NE I
l l
1 1
I I
I I
I I
i l
l Rev. S l
FICURE 8 1RAFFIC CONTROL POSTS LISTING (continued)
I i
i l
I I Evacuation i I
ITCP l l
l Number i
Equipseat l Movements I Movemente l l
Imcation I
staging l of Traffic I l
to be I
to be l
l No.
I I
Area l
Cuides l
l Flashing l_ Facilitated I Discouraged l l
1 l
l l Conee I M ahts i From 1 To i Fros l To l I
I I
I i
1 I
I I
I I
i I 75 I stu Road l Corse Road & Patchogue - l Patchogue l
1 1
3 1
1 lE IS l All lE l
l l
I*
I Yaphank Road l
l l
l l
l l
l l
l I
I I
i 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
L d
i i
i l 76 l Be11 port Avenue i Facchogue - Yaphank Road i Facchogue l
1 1
0 1
0 1-l~
l All IN l
l l
1 1
I l
'l i
I I A11 I NE I
l I
i 1
I I
I I
i l
i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
L i
i i
! 77 I Fort Jefferson -
l LIE, Exit 64. W/B l Patchogue i
1 1
7 1
2 lN lW l All lN l
I I Fatchogue Road (Route l Entrance Ramp l
l l
l l
1 l
l 1
I lin) l I
I I
I l
l l
l l
l l
t i
I I
l l
l l
1 I
I i
i I
i i
i i
l i
i I
l 78 l Port Jefferson -
l Norseblock Road I Fatchogue 1
2 l
8 l
2 1N IS l All lN I
l Patchogue Road (Route l
I I
l l
l l
lAll.IE l
7 1
1 112) l I
I I
I I
I i
l l
vi 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l 1
1
'l i
l I
i i
I a
i I
l 79 i Patchogue - Mt. Sinai l Cranny Road 1 Patchogue i
1 1
9 1
3 l NE IS l All l NE, i
Road (CR 83)
I l
l l
l N
S N
l l
1 1
I I
I I
I I
n 1
I 80 l Fatchogue - Mt. Sinal l LIE, Exit 63. W/B l Patchogue 1
2 l
0 1
0 lN IW l-l-
l l
l I Road (CR83) l Entrance Ramp l
l l
l lN l3 I
l l
i l
I l
l l
l l
l l
I I
l 5
i i
l 1
I i
i i
I I
I 81 1 North Country Road i Shore Road l Port Jefferson i 2
l 15 1
5 lE I NU l All lE l
l I
I I
i i
i i
!E I sw I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
i I
I I
I I
I I
I i
l 82 l North Country Road l Ravine Drive / Eagle Court l Fort Jefferson i 2
1 0
1 0
1E lV l All l5 l
l 1
l i
I I
I l
l l
l I
l 4
I I
l 83 I North Country Road l Honey Lene l Fort Jefferson.
I I
I I
I I
i ll 1
1 0
1 0
1E lV l All lE l
l l
1 1
I I
l i
I i
1 l
l 1
I I
i 4
I i
I I
i i
! 84 l Sunrise Highuey l North Ocesa Avenue l Patchogue l
1 1
0 l
0 lE lV l-I-
1 I
I (Route 27) l l
l l
l lN lv i
i l
i 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 I
Rev. 5 l
r
_FICUtt 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS LISTING 3.,
1 (continued)
'.*g.
. v, I
i i
i i
i Evaduation i I
p.
1TCP 1
- ')
l l
Number l
Equipment I Movemente l l'6eveneste I fj) location i
No.
l l
Staging I of Traffic l l
to be -
I to be l
- y,*,,
j l
I l
Area
=l Guideo l
l Flashing l Facilitated l Discogynaed 1 1
l l Cones ! Limhts l Free l' To I. Free i To I*
^ &).71 I
I I
.-'L*-
I 4
I i
I I-I.
3 1
I 85 l Immer Rocky Point Road l Woodbull I4ading Road l Port Jeffersea l 1
1 3
l
- 1 lE. IW l A11.1 E. l.',. '* W,#.).
'. ;, L M'*,
I I
I I
I I
I i
1 1
l I
86 I mandall need 1 Route 2M l Port Jefferson l 1
1 7
l 2
1N.
.I E.
li - lW J '
l n
i l
I i
i I
I I
. 1 i YF 'S'?
I I
I I
I I
l l
1 1 All I s-l '.' 4 l. 2. 4 ll 1
l l
1 1
I I
I
-l i All I-N ' 1,'.";, Tj; T a l
l i
I l
1 1
I
-I l'
I I
o f. (-
q j
i l
i l
i I-I-
1 I
l^
I 87 Eduardo Ave.
I Losa Island Impressway l Riverhead i
2 l 10 l
5
- l NE IW l-I. -
l l
! *. ;;./,*$
l Westbound Estrance Ramp l l
1 1
IE lV l
~l I.. *.' '*$
i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
t l
l 4
6 I
I i
1 l
1 I '.*, '.
1.
- 9 I
88 l Whiskey Road l Cana1 Road l Port Jefferoon l 1
1 3
l 1
lE l W-I All y
l l
l l
l l
I l
'l l
I
' l [. h a
l I
.I I
i 1
1 I
.l.
.I i
I l
l 89 I Neoconeet Road l Belle Meade Road l Port Jefferson l 1
1 3
l 1
1N l SW l All. I N
.1
-M.
o i
I (aeute 347) i I
I I
I I NE I sW I I NE l..-
- ~*
'.4 2l.
i l
i l
i l
l I
I l
I i
l i
i i
I
'li i
i I
. Q,*:
1 I
I I..'
. -Ju:
I 90 i Lower Sheep Pasture Road 1 Upper Sheep Pasture Road l Port Jeffereon l 1
1 6
l 2
lI
' $U 1 All l' E. l
.",',U' :
I I
I I
I I
i 1
I
,i I
1 I
I I
I I
I l.
I i
1 1
l I
i i
l i
I l
l l 1.
l Y,.
I 91 I Ecee Imae l Port Jefferees &
l Port Jeffereos l 1
1 6
l 2
1E N
I All
'l l
l Patchogue Rd. (Et. 112)
{
l l
l l S-lN l All lE I
l.$'.
i l
?.
1 I
I I
l l
I l
l i
I
.f d.-
4 f'
1 4
4 4
4 I
I I
I
-M(s.,I I
92 1 Norts tacky Poist l Route 25A l Port Jeffereon l 1
1 6
l 2
lW lV l All lE I
e h
I I I4. ding moed i
I l
l 1
l
,l l
I I
ir l
1 I
I I
l i
I I
I I
l T
i I
I I
I I
I I
l i
I I.-
I 93 l Miller Place - Yaphank l Jonah Road / Radio Avenue l Port Jefferson i 1
1 3
l 1
!E l8 l All lN I
.l l Road l
I l
l l
I I
I All lE I,
j i
I I
i I
i i
i i
I
.I i
+
I I
i l
1 94 I moute 25 i Wading River mellow need I aiverhead I
1 i
o I
o lE l.v i All lE.
l i
i i
I I
I i
l I (Middle Comatry need) i I
I I
l l
l l
l l
i l-1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Rev. S l
i
)
PICURE 8 TRAFFIC Q)NTROL POSTS LISTING (continued) 1 I
I I
I Evacustica l I
{
l l
I Number i
Equipoest i Novemente l Novemente l 1 TCP l facetion i
Staging i of Traffic l l
to be I
to be l
yo, I
l Aree Cuideo i
I Flash.1ag l_ Facilitated I Discouraged l I
I l
l l Comes l Liahte l From l To l Free i To ~l I
I I
I I
I I
a 8
l I
I 95 l Route 25 E/B I Reap to S/B Villiam Floyd l Riverhead I
i I
7 l
2 1-I-
lV lE l
l t
I I
I Parkwor i
I I
I i
I i
I l
l I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
i i
i l
i 1-1 I
I l '
I 96 i Upper Sheep Posture Road i Belle Neede Road l Port Jefferoom 1 1
1 6
l 2
1E l3 l All iE l
I I
I I
I I
I I
i 1
1 I
I I
i i
l 1
1 0
1 0
iE IW l All lE l
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 97 l Neoconeet Road 1 Old Toua Road l Port Jefferece i (Route 347) i I
I I
l i
I I
I I
l l
l 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
i 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I l
l 98 1 Old Toua Road l Sheep Posture Road l Port Jefferson i 2
1 0
1 0
l NE I SW l All i NE I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I l
1 i
l I
i i
i 1
I I
I I
I l
N I 99 l Route 25 U/s i Reap to N/S William Floyd l Riverhead l
1 1
6 3,
2 lE lV IE IN I
l
?
I I
I Parkuey I
i i
l i
i l
i I
3 e
i I
I I
I I
l i
I I
I l
l l
1 I
I I
I i
8 4
I I
i 100 1 Eche Avenue l North Country Road l Port Jeffereon I 1
1 0
1 0
l NE l SW l All I NE l
g l
l 1
6 1
I I
I i
1
,1 I
i 101 I Yepheek Road l Creasy Road l Patchogue 1
1 1
0 1
0 lN IW l All' l I I
I I
I I
i i
i IE Iv i All IN l
i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
1 I
L i
i 1
i i
i i
i i
I I 102 1 Nicolle Road l North Country Reed l Port Jeffereen l 1
1 6
1 2
1E lW l All lE I
I I
I (Route 25A) 1 I
I I
l l
l 1
I I
I I
I 1.
I I
I g
1 I
I I
i 1
I i
i i
l i
1 1
1 1
1 103 I sound me ch soulevard i Northport Avenue &
l Port Jefferoom I 1
l 0
1 0
1-I-
I-I-
1 I
I I New York Avenue l
I l
l l
l l
l l
I I
I I
I i
1 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i i
i i 104 i Rocky Point Road l North Rocky Point I4edias l Port Jefferoom I 1
1 0
1 0
l-1-
l All IN l
l l
1 Road I
i i
i l
i l
l I
4 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
Rev. 3
.l l
l l
FICURE 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS LISTING (continued)
I I
i 1
1 l Evacuation !
l ITCP l l
1 Number i
Equipment i Novemente l Novemente l l
Iocation i
Staging I of Traffic 1 1
to be I
to be l
l No.
I I
Aree l
Cuideo l
I Fleshing l_ Facilitated l DiscoureRed l
.l l
l l
I Comes I Liahte I From l To l From l To i 1
4 4
4 8
i 105 i Neoceneet moed i Mellock Avenue l Port Jefferoom 1 1
1 0
1 0
lI IV I An l NW l 1
8 I
4 8
I l
I (toute 347)
I l
l I
I I
l l
I I
l l
l l
l 1
I l
l l
l l
l 1
1 I
i 4
i i
i i
i i
l i 106 I Lower Rocky Point Road l Detey 14ae l Port Jefferson i 1
1 0
1 0
lE lV l An I E I
j I
I I
i i
i I
IN IW l
l I
i i
i i
i l
I I
I l
l l
1 I
i I
I I
I I
i I 107
, Imwer Rocky Point Road l Colly 14ading Road l Port Jefferson l 1
i 0
1 0
iE IS l All lE l
l l
1 1
I I
I Iw Is I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I IlosiNorthCountryhd I
I I
i i
i i
i i
i i
l Sound Avenue i Riverhead i
1 1
6 l
2 l-I-
l All I NW l i
I I
I I
I I
I I
IAH 1W l
q l
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l e
I i
I i
l i
I 4
i i
i I 109' l Lower Rocky Point Road i Greedview Bouleverd l Port Jefferson l 1
1 0
1 0
Iw l3 lAH IN I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I l
1 I
I I
i 1
1 1
I I
I I
l I
i i
i i
i l
i i
i l
i 1 110. I North Country Road i Sylves Avenue l Port Jefferson l 1
1 0
1 0
lI IW l Au l E I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i l
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l l Port Jefferson - West 1
I i
i l
i I
i i
i i 111 i
i LIE, Esit 70, W/B on resp l Riverhead l
1 1
6 l
2 lw lV l All Iw l
I I Ne= Feen h o I
i l
1 1
i l
i I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
L I
I I
I I
i i
i n2 I amenoke Avon e I niddle moed i Eiverhead l
1 1
6 1
2 1-I I
I I
I I
I 1-1Au Iw I
I I
I I
i i
l I
i i
I i ni I V i
l 1
i i
i i
I 1
1 I
I I 113 I Crystal Brook Hollow Road! Old Poet Road /I. Broadway l Port Jefferson 1
1 0
1 0
iE lV l All lE l
i l
I I
I I
1 I
I I
1 I
Iw Is 1
l l
I I
I I
i l
l
}
l 114 l
1 1
I I
j i
I Sheep Peeture Road
, Consequegue Road Port Jefferoom i 1
0 1
0 lI lW l-I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
1 1
1 i
Rev. 5 l
]
e FICURE 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS LISTING
~
(continued) l 4
i L
i i Evacuation I i
1TCP 1 l
l Number l
Equipment lMovemente l Novemente l-I4catios l
Staging I of Traffic I I
to be I
to be I
No, I
l Area 1
Guides l
l Flashing l Facilitated l Discouraged l l
l 1
l l Cones l LfAhts l Free l To I From i To i l
i I
I I
i i
i i
i i
i i u s I whiskey need I amada11 aoed i Elverhead 1
1 1
0 1
0 lN lW l All IN I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
l i
i i
i i
i i
I i 116 l Sound Avenue l Doctor's Fath l Riverhead I
1 1
4 l
1 1-1-
l All lW l
l i
1 I
I I
l l
l l
1 l
l 8
1 4
I I
I I
I I
I I
l 117 l Echo Avenue
! Miller Place Road l Port Jefferece i 1
1 0
1 0
1 NE I S,5w I All i NE l
l 1
I i
i i
?
Is I s,5w I An iN l
l 1
I I
I I
I I
I 1
l l
1 I
i i
i a
i i
i i
l l 118 l Hallock landtag Road l North Rocky Point l Port Jeffereon l 1
1 0
1 0*
1N IS l All lN l
l l Landing Road 1
I l
l l
I I All l NW l.
I I
I I
I l
i I
I I
H I
i i
l I
I I
I I
l 119 i Canal toed l Nt. Sinai - Coram Road i Port Jefferson 1
1 0
1 0
E lV l All lN I
I I
I -
1 I
I i
N IS lAH 1E l
w I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i i
i i 120 I whiskey toad i Miller Place - Yaphank l Port Jefferson I 1
1 0
1 0
lE l W.S l All lE I
{
{
{ Road N
W,$
I All N
I l
i I
I I
i i
i l 121 1 Nhiskey Road l Rocky Point Road i Port Jefferson l 1
1 0
1 0
lN IS 1 All IN I
I l
a I
I I
I I
i 1
1N IW l An I a l
i I
I I
I I
I l
I I
I I122 I
I I
I I
i l Rocky Fofat Road l Miller Place Yaphank l Port Jefferson i 1
8 l
2
- N S
I All iN I
I I
I no.d i
I I
I I
I IAH I NW i i
i 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
L 4
I I
i i
i 1
i 123 I acute 25 i r.e aartlett moed i Fatehose.
I 2
1 8
1 2
Iz iW I All Iz 1
l I
I (Middle country Road) i I
I i
i iz is i
I I
l 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
l i
l i
i i
I i
i i
i l
I i 124 1 Yaphank - Middle reined i Main Street l Patchogue 2
1 8
l 2
iN lV l All lN l
l I
I need I
i 1..
I l
lN I sa i
l 1
I I
I I
I I
i I
I i
i i
i l
a.r. 3
m FICURE 8 TRAFFIC CONTROL POSTS LISTINC (continued) l I
I I
I I Evacuation i l
lTCP l
1 i
Number l
Equipment l Novemente l Novemente l 1
I4catico l
Staging I of Traffic l l
to be I
to be l
I No.
l l
Aree 1
Cuides l
l Flashing l_ Facilitated l Discouraged I i
l I
l Cones l Lights l F*om i To i From i To l l
4 I
I i
I I
i I
4 4
i l 125 l Route 254 i W1111 = riord rackvey i Riverhead i
2 1 20 1
5 lE IS l All IW I
I i
1 1
1 1
I lW - 1 I
I I
is i All lE I
I I
I I
I I
I l
i 1
i i
i 1
i i
i i
1 l 126 I William Floyd Parkway I LIE, Erit 68, NW ramp l Patchogue 1
2 l
4 1
1 lN lV I-l-
1 I S/n i
I I
I
'l iN l5 l-1-
1 I
I I
I i
1 1
I i
1 127 North Wading River Road
, North Country Road Riverhead 1
7 2
E S
All NW l
I l
I l
B I
l NW lS l
l l
l l
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I128 I
I I
I i
I i
i i
i 1
l Route 254 l Wading River - Manorville i Riverhead l
1 1
3 l
1 1N lS l All lN I
I I
I Rud l
l l
l l
\\
l l
I N
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
f I
i i
i i
i I
1 i
i i
i g
l 129 I Hulse landing Road I Sound Avenue l Riverhead l
1 l
6 l
2 lN l3 lAll IW l
1 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
i i
i i
i i
i I
l 130 i Route 25 l Grand Smith Road l Patchogue l
1 1
0 1
0 lE IW l All lE I
l I
l l (Middle Country Road) l l
l l
l 1E lS l
l l
1 1
I I
i i
i I
I I
I I
l i
I t
i Rev. 5 l
/
. ;. p
-c 5
8 s
w
. a.
+
s
../
j I
e
+
A
./
' /
s s
- )
e, 1
9 ATTACHMENT 9
r s
4
.b f
2
.*'s a
}'
.r O
9-t
,l q
f h
f
~_
7,
>1
,s '
, )<-
ft?t l OVERSIZE sDOCUMENT PAGE PULLED l
SEE APERTURE CARDS NUMBIR OF OVERSIZE PAGES FILMED ON APERTURE CARDS
~,
t APERTURE CARD /HARD COPY AVAILABLE FROM RECORD SERVICES BRANCH,TIDC l
FT5 492-8389 l
i i
v b
l i
/
\\
e 4
=
t*
r.
a
.i 4
b 1
+ 4 i.-s.
'1
.\\
..N.
4.
\\
u s
y
{
s
.4
,,1 3
i7 5
h
't 1
r h
h.
s.
i s
4 E
.b1 5
k.
I 4
y I
5 ATTACHMENT 10 g
s J...
N A
y
\\
-. 3 1
1 s
I I
k' f
s h
\\
\\.
s s
,6 s-6 N
(
c
\\
\\
v -
fp,,
.s
. L' ~
'ig
! A1 1
- h..!
THIS IS AN EXERCISE SHOREHAM EXERCISE IMPEDIMENT TO EVACUTION ROUTE MESSAGE Suffolk County, New York Date:
February 13, 1986 Message:
Impediment - Port Jefferson From:
C. Connolly, EOC Team Leader To:
Evacuation Route Coordinator at LERO EOC via Exercise Controller Initiating Event: After EBS message to evacuate has been issued to the public and FEMA field evaluator (K. Bertram) has notified EOC Team Leader that he/she is in position to evaluate field response.
Message:
ON ROUTE '25A, APPROXIMATELY 75 YARDS EAST OF THE INTER-SECTION WITH MILLER PLACE - YAPHANK ROAD, (IN THE VICINITY OF TRAFFIC CONTROL POST #41), A FUEL TANK-TRUCK HAS JACK-KNIFED AND TURNED OVER ON ITS SIDE BLOCKING BOTH EASTBOUND AND WESTBOUND TRAFFIC LANES, AS WELL AS BOTH SHOULDERS OF THE ROAD. IN THE COURSE OF THE ACCIDENT, THE FUEL TANK WAS RUPTURED AND IS LEAKING FUEL. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE FUEL COULD IGNITE CAUSING A FIRE. THERE IS NO FIRE AT PRESENT AND THERE ARE N_O INJURIES TD ANY INDIVIDUALS.
THE LERO RESPONDER 1D THE SITE OF THIS IMPEDIMENT SHOULD LOCATE THE IIMA EVALUATOR WHO WILL BE WEARING A COLORED ARM BAND.
THIS IS AN EXERCISE 10000723
y^
Q.
ATTACHMENT 11
PORT JEFFERSON STAGING AREAS Time Arrived Guide No.
Location at TCP 1
Lower Rocky Point Road /
12:28 Sound Beach Boulevard 4
North Country Road /
11:44 Randall Road 5
North Country Road-11:50 Route 25A/Woodville Road 6
Route 25A/ Ridge Road 11:44 37 Route 25A/ Broadway 12:01 38 Route 25A/ Rocky Point Road 11:35 40 Route 25A/ North Country Road 12:14 41 Route 25A/ Miller Place Road 11:45 42 Lower Rocky Point Road /
11:58 North Country Road 43 North Country Road /
11:26 Pipe Stave Hollow Road 44 North Country Road /Mt. Sinai -
12:29 Coram Road 45 North Country Road / Crystal 12:14 Brook Hollow Road 46 North Country Road / Oakland Ave.
12:04 i
47 North Country Road / Main Street 12:25 48 Main Street (Route 25A)/ Broadway 12:44 49 Route ll2/Hallock Avenue 12:24
Time Arrived Guide No.
Location at TCP 50 Route 112/Nesconset Road 12:29 51 Terryville Road /At Terryville 13:22 Elementary School 52 Nesconset Road /Jayne Boulevard 12:24 55 Route 25A/Mt. Sinai - Coram Rd.
12:30 56 Route 25A/ Route 83 (Patchogue -
11:42 Mt. Sinai Road) 57 Route 25A/ Echo Avenue 12:00 58 Route 83 (Patchogue - Mt. Sinai 12:45 Road)/ Canal Road 59 Route 83 (Patchogue - Mt. Sinai Not heard Road)/ Route 112 (Port Jefferson
- from,
- Patchogue Road) assuming radio not functioning 60 Old Town Road /Patchogue - Mt.
13:04 Sinai Road (Route 83) 61 Route 83 (Patchogue - Mt.
13:01 Sinai Road)/ Pine Road 74 Shore Road /Old Post Road 15:05 81 North Country Road / Shore 11:40 Road 82 North Country Road / Ravine 11:55 Drive - Engle Court 83 North Country Road / Honey Lane 11:30 l
85 Lower Rocky Point Road /
11:45 Woodhull Landing Road 86 Randall Road / Route 25A 11:36 l i
L
W h
Time Arrived Guide No.
Location at TCP 88 Whiskey Road / Canal Road 12:44 89 Nesconset Road (Route 347)/
13:07 Belle Meade Road 90 Lower Sheep Pasture Road /
13:26 Upper Sheep Pasture Road 91 Rose Lane / Port Jefferson &
12:28 Patchogue Road (Rt. 112) 92 North Rocky Point Landing Road /
12:12 Route 25A 93 Miller Place-Yaphank Road /
12:04 Jonah Road -- Radio Ave.
96 Upper Sheep Pasture Road /
13:04 Belle Meade Road 97 Nesconset Road (Route 347)/
12:53 Old Town Road 98 Old Town Road / Sheep Pasture 13:21 Road 100 Echo Avenue / North Country Road 12:17 102 Nicolls Road / North Country 12:59 Road (Route 25A) 103 Sound Beach Boulevard /Northport 12:26 and New York Avenue 104 Rocky Point Road / North Rocky 12:36 Point Landing Road 105 Nesconset Road (Route 347)/
12:09 Hallock Avenue i
106 Lower Rocky Point Road /
11:38 Daisy Lane 107 Lower Rocky Point Road / Gully 12:13 Landing Road i.
s-c
- ~ - -
--w
-r
- e., -, - -,,,,
v.
-vn n
--w,,
--,e-,
--,,r-
F Time Arrived Guide No.
Location at TCP 109 Lower Rocky Point Road /
11:25 Grandview Boulevard 110 North Country Road / Sylvan 11:29 Avenue 113 Crystal Brook Hollow Road /Old 12:18 Post Road - E. Broadway 114 Sheep Pasture Road /Comsequogue 13:17 Road 117 Echo Avenue / Miller Place Road 12:02 118 Hallock Landing Road / North 12:15 Rocky Point Landing Road 119 Canal Road /Mt. Sinai - Coram Road 12:15 120 Whiskey Road / Miller Place -
11:58 Yaphank Road
'121 Whiskey Road / Rocky Point Road 12:52 122 Rocky Point Road / Miller Place -
12:02 Yaphank Road i
l l
l
_4-l
-. - - - -