View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
NUREG/CR-1856P N L-3662Vol. 1
An Analysis of Evacuation TimeEstimates Around 52 Nuclear PowerPlant Sites
Analysis and Evaluation
Prepared by T. Urbanik II
Texas Transportation Institute
Pacific Northwest Laboratory
Prepared forU.S. Nuclear RegulatoryCommission
NOTICE
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored byan agency of the United States Government. Neither the
United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any oftheir employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, orassumes any legal liablity or responsibility for any thirdparty's use, or the results of such use, of any information,apparatus product or process disclosed in this report, orrepresents that its use by such third party would not infringeprivately owned rights.
Available from
Division ofU.
GPO Sales ProgramTechnical Information and Document ControlS. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, D. C. 20555
Printed copy price: $5.50
and
National Technical Information ServiceSpringfield, Virginia 22161
NUREG/CR-1856PNL-3662Vol. 1
An Analysis of Evacuation TimeEstimates Around 52 Nuclear PowerPlant Sites
Analysis and Evaluation
Manuscript Completed: October 1980Date Published: May 1981
Prepared byT. Urbanik II, TTIA.E. Desrosiers, PNL Project Manager
Texas Transportation InstituteThe Texas AEtM University SystemCollege Station, TX 77843
Pacific Northwest LaboratoryRichland, WA 99352
Prepared forDivision of Emergency PreparednessOffice of Inspection and EnforcementU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20555NRC FIN No. B2311
ABSTRACT
On November 29, 1979, the NRC sent a letter to 52 nuclear power plants requestingevacuation time estimates for 10 sectors within a 10-mile radius of each plant. Therequirements for these evacuation times are contained in NUREG-0654, Rev. 1, andinclude such factors as population density, weather conditions, warning time, responsetime and confirmation time. Fifty responses were received. The analysis of thesefindingsare presented for review.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ........ ...................
Qualitative Analysis ..... .................
Quantitative Analysis ...............
Median Times for 10-Mile Radius ...........
Medians by Rating ...........
Medians by Total Permanent Population . .
Medians by Sector Permanent Population . .
Median Times by Distance ...........
FEMA Assessments ...... ..................
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References ........ .....................
Appendix A--Evaluation Forms for Individual Plants .
Appendix B--Summary of Evacuation Time Estimates for
. . . . . . . . . . 3
• . . . . . . . . . 7
. . . . . . . . . . 13
. . . . . . . . . . 13
. . . . . . . . . . 15
. . . . . . . . . . 18
*. . . . . . . .. . 23
*. . . . . . . .. . 25
*. . . . . . . .. . 27
*. . . . . . . .. . A-1
Individual Plants . B-1
Appendix C--Definitions of Evacuation Time Components ........
Appendix D--Evaluation Forms for FEMA Assessments ..........
Appendix E--Summary of Evacuation Time Estimates for FEMA Assessments
" C-1
" D-1
" E-1
v
LIST OF TABLES
1. Names of Plants Included in the Study ......... ............... 2
2. Evaluation of Evacuation Time Estimate ........ .............. 4
3. Results of Subjective Evaluation ..... ....... ................. 6
4. Evacuation Time Estimates ............. ................... 8
5. Evacuation Time (Hours) Statistics by Component for 10-Mile Radius. 10
6. Median Evacuation Time (Hours) by Rating for 10-Mile Radius ........ 14
7. Median Evacuation Time (Hours) by Total Population Groups for10-Mile Radius .......... ............................ .. 16
8. Median Evacuation Time (Hours) by Sector Permanent Population Groups. 17
9. Median Evacuation Time (Hours) by Sector Permanent Population Groups. 19
10. Median Evacuation Time (Hours) by Distance ..... ............ ... 21
vii
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the findings of evacuation time estimates requested
at 52 nuclear power plants by a November 29, 1979 letter from the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. The letter from Brian Grimes, Director of Emergency
Preparedness Task Group, requested estimates of evacuation times for ten
sectors within a radius of about ten miles. Factors to be considered in the
analysis included population (permanent, transient and special facilities),
weather conditions, warning time, response time, and confirmation time.
Planning for evacuation as a protective measure is not a new concept in
emiergency planning. NUREG-75/111 (I) contained as a planning objective an
analysis of estimates of the time required to carry out evacuation
procedures. The planning objectives also included the development of
evacuation plans for the low population zones (generally about 2 miles).
Subsequently, NUREG-0396 (2) recommended that NUREG-75/111 should be applied
by responsible government officials in larger emergency planning zones
(generally about 10 miles) (2). The requirements of the November 29, 1979
letter referenced above are currently included in NUREG-0654 (3) which is the
current interim guidance. These requirements are currently under review and
revision.
The 50 responses represented in this analysis include only 49 separate
sites as James A. Fitzpatrick and Nine Mile Point plants both occupy the same
site. Two plants did not provide estimates. The names of the 52 plants
included in this study and the dates of the reports submitted are included in
Table 1.
Volume II of this study contains summaries of the evacuation estimates
and maps of the plume emergency planning zones around each reactor.
1
TABLE 1: NAMES OF PLANTS INCLUDED IN STUDY
1.
2.3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
Arkansas (1-31-80)
Beaver Valley (1-31-80)
Big Rock Point (6-1-80)
Browns Ferry (3-20-80)
Brunswick (no response)
Calvert Cliffs (1-29-80)
Cooper (1-31-80)
Crystal River (1-31-80)
Davis Besse (8-13-80)
D. C. Cook (4-1-80)
Diablo Canyon (4-1-80)
Dresden (1-31-80)
Duane Arnold (1-31-80)
Farley (2-4-80)
Fitzpatrick (1-31-80)
Ft. Calhoun (10-2-80)
Ft. St. Vrain (2-80)
Ginna (1-31-80)
Haddam Neck (3-1-80)
Hatch (2-4-80)
Indian Point (1-31-80)
Kewaunee (1-29-80)
LaCrosse (1-31-80)
LaSalle (1-31-80)
Maine Yankee (5-23-80)
McGuire (1-31-80)
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
Millstone (3-1-80)
Monticello (4-10-80)
Nine Mile Point (1-31-80)
North Anna (2-6-80)
Oconee (1-31-80)
Oyster Creek (1-31-80)
Palisades (6-1-80)
Peach Bottom (1-31-80)
Pilgrim (1-31-80)
Point Beach (3-26-80)
Prairie Island (4-10-80)
Quad Cities (1-31-80)
Rancho Seco (1-31-80)
Robinson (no response)
Saint Lucie (7-17-80)
Salem (1-31-80)
San Onofre (1-31-80)
Sequoyah (3-20-80)
Surry (2-6-80)
Three Mile Island (1-31-80.)
Trojan (1-31-80)
Turkey Point (7-17-80)
Vermont Yankee (1-31-80)
Yankee Rowe (1-31-80)
Zimmer (8-18-80)
Zion (1-31-80)
NOTES: Date of report indicated in parentheses. Fitzpatrick andNine Mile Point occupy the same site; estimates are onlyconsidered once in the analyses.
2
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
The first analysis conducted on each evacuation time estimate submittal
was a qualitative assessment of the analysis. The standard for comparison
was the model plan requirements developed in a separate report entitled
"Analysis of Time Required for Evacuation in Emergency Planning Zones Around
Nuclear Power Plants" (4).
The evaluation methology used was a four part (excellent, adequate,
poor, none) subjective scale using the above mentioned criteria. Each of the
items to be discussed subsequently were given a rating as follows. If the
criterion was not addressed, the rating given would be none. If the
criterion is addressed, but given inadequate consideration, a rating of poor
would be assigned. Those submittals providing at least minimum acceptable
consideration of the factor would be given an adequate rating. Finally,
those analyses that are clearly of high quality and completeness would
receive an excellent rating.
Table 2 presents the rating form used which lists the various items
considered in the evaluation. The last criterion considered is an overall
assessment of the evacuation time estimate. The overall rating is not a
simple summation of the individual factor ratings because the importance of
the items considered varies from item to item. Although this analysis
requires professional judgement in determining ratings, the process does
indicate the area or areas where the reviewer considers the plan to be strong
or weak; therefore, a basis exists for resolving weaknesses in plans with
poor ratings. Some analyses for which inadequate documentation existed
received a poor rating based on the inability to adequately rate the
analysis. Table 2 also presents the distribution of ratings by criteria.
3
TABLE 2: EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map 6 30 3 .11
B. Assumptions 11 25 9 5C. Methodology 11 25 10 4
Demand Estimation11 29 2 7
A. Permanent Population 1- 2 1
B. Transient Population 6 23 2 19C. Special Population 8 33 3 6
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network 9 25 3 13B. Capacity of Segment 7 22 3 18
Analysis
A Components Considered 6 34 8 2Adverse Condition Considered 7 25 15 3
Overall 5 28 17 0
NOTE: The above numbers indicate the number of sites receiving the ratingindicated. The two sites not providing estimates are not included.
4
Table 3 indicates the overall rating for each of the study sites. Appendix A
presents the detailed analyses for each site.
It should be noted that plans receiving an excellent overall rating
should not individually be considered as model approaches. Although an
excellent response exceeded the average response, in all cases some portions
of their approach could be improved upon. Taken as a group, however, the
plans rated as excellent represent the state-of-the art in developing
evacuation time estimates.
5
TABLE 3: RESULTS OF SUBJECTIVE EVALUATION
Overall Rating
Excellent Adequate Poor No Response
Diablo Canyon
Indian Point
Pi i grim
Rancho Seco
Trojan
Big Rock Point
Cooper
Crystal River
D. C. Cook
Dresden
Duane Arnold
Fitzpatrick
Ft. St. Vrain
Ginna
Haddam Neck
LaSalle
Maine Yankee
McGuire
Millstone
Monticello
Nine Mile Point
Oyster Creek
Palisades
Peach Bottom
Point Beach
Prairie Island
Quad Cities
St. Lucie
Turkey Point
Vermont Yankee
Yankee Rowe
Zimmer
Zion
Arkansas
Beaver Valley
Browns Ferry
Calvert Cliffs
Davis Besse
Farley
Ft. Calhoun
[latch
Kewaunee
LaCrosse
North Anna
Oconee
Salem*
San Onofre
Sequoyah
Surry
Three Mile Island
Brunswick
Robinson
*See footnote on page A-44.
6
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
The number of plant sites evaluated in the quantitative analysis was 40.
Fitzpatrick and Nine Mile Point were only considered once in the analysis.
The two plants not providing estimates were not considered in the analysis.
Four plants (Browns Ferry, Diablo Canyon, San Onofre and Three Mile Island)
were not considered because the responses were not in a format compatible
with the analysis. It should be noted that although Diablo Canyon received a
an excellent rating, it's response was incompatible with the analysis format
used. Five sites (Davis Besse, Ft. Calhoun, St. Lucie, Turkey Point, and
Zimmer) were not included in the statistical analysis because their responses
were received too late.
Table 4 is the form used to summaarize the results found in each
evacuation time report submitted. The completeness of data varied greatly
among reports. As will subsequently be seen, some evacuation time components
were omitted frequently in the estimates submitted. The individual summaries
are presented in Appendix B.
It must be cautioned that the data submitted was not in the format shown
in Table 4. In some cases adjustments or interpretations had to be made to
put the data in the format shown. Furthermore, the assumptions underlying
the data are not consistent. The following results must be considered as
broad indicators of evacuation times at the various plants.
It is appropriate to note at this point that median rather than mean
values are used for comparisons in this report. The reason for selecting
median values is that in some cases extremely high estimates for a few sites
results in a mean value that is not totally representative of the data.
7
TABLE 4: EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
(D,{- (u- (V- Q- .- .,- .- d)-.LAl CLn Lfl (nQ ww d.4.J 0 0 0 0 L-- -. j-ci• I--
• L- CA U 0 V) . 0 .0 - 0 00. 0. iv F- a) Win W Wi WC U . "- 0-- (u' c "-
V)- - - 0 .- - ,-0 00 40 * ac->r•' u' r-{-.- 0 c • , 4-- •4J ,,1L : L,,• 0 L ,L ,,'al JC> a)-4 4.J a) -: • 0 Ca#.• 4J .r CL LJ QD..- a- r- .-
U 0.L) 0.L.- E L- 0 - 0 0 •0 a0ro E _- -Lo a .- rc.L- 0 4-'L to a •.. 0c. L (.-, c.W
Q- CL) S.=C l a__ : CLa) Q) (Ln '-v id) a) LO ) u 4-J 0 cn.- iL vwvs- ~a)L 0 r- C 'LA i ~ CL O~ 0 rZ oa ~>,•=- F-> ,a 1- 0 s- ,ts (a (a• • • ••- •o L> o , ,
>) CL E E EW a) r- c ~ a)o a) ~ 2-1 uLLJ 0Ls -> mv M > C (u <r0)
0)0 = 0 a- 0 '<CL C-0 C- 0L
WITHIN TWO MILES
WITHIN FIVE MILES
WITHIN TEN MILES
--------------------------------
The mean permanent resident population at 40 sites was 58,000. The
median population was 30,000 with the range being 6000 to 282,000. It should
be noted that eight plants used in the analysis did not report population
estimates and NUREG 0348 (5) population values for 1970 were used.
The evacuation estimates were requested to be provided for 2-, 5-, and
10-mile radii from the plant. The estimates were also requested for 90°
sectors, except for the 2-mile radius in which 180* sectors were specified.
The remainder of the analysis will center around the 10-mile emergency
planning zone. In addition, the effect of distance will. be examined by
looking at the results by distance.
Median Times for 10-Mile Radius
The 40 respondents reported results for a total 138 sectors. Not all
sites had 4 sectors due to a variety of reasons. Some sites did not report
on all sectors due to multistate jurisdictions, some of which did not assist
in the assessment. Some sites being adjacent to water bodies do not have 4
sectors on which to estimate land based evacuation. Those plants considering
water based evacuations had their over-water evacuation times tallied with
special populations so as not to distort land evacuation times.
A total of 109 of the 142 sectors had population data reported. The
mean sector population was 17,000. However, the median population was 5000,
and 75 percent of the sectors had populations less than 15,000. The range in
sector population was 0 to 151,000.
Table 5 presents the results of the analysis of time components for the
10-mile radius evacuation. Appendix C defines the terms used. It should
also be noted that separate estimates have been made for adverse weather
conditions. In most cases, adverse weather conditions resulted in increased
9
TABLE 5: EVACUATION TIME (HOURS) STATISTICS BYCOMPONENT FOR 10-MILE RADIUS
TimeComponent* Minimum 25% Median 75% Maximum #Sectors Mean
NOTIFY 0.3 0.8 1.6 3.0 6.0 116 1.9
PPRNC 0.1 1.0 1.8 4.0 8.3 108 2.7
PPRAC 0.2 1.3 2.8 6.0 16.2 100 4.1
TPRNC 0.4 1.3 3.0 3.5 3.7 11 2.4
TPRAC 0.6 0.8 1.7 4.1 4.2 7 2.4
GPTNC 1.0 2.9 5.0 8.0 21.0 111 5.3
GPTAC 1.3 3.0 5.2 8.8 18.3 91 6.4
CONFIRM 0.6 1.0 2.0 4.0 24.0 75 3.5
SPRNC 0.3 1.3 2.7 4.9 24.0 44 3.7
SPRAC 0.6 2.4 3.2 8.0 10.2 28 4.7
*NOTIFYPPRNCPPRACTPRNC
NOTIFICATION TIMEPERMANENT POPULATIONPERMANENT POPULATIONTRANSIENT POPULATION
RESPONSERESPONSERESPONSE
TIMETIMETIME
NORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSTPRAC = TRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSE TIME
GPTNC = GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME NORMAL CONDITIONSGPTAC = GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ADVERSE CONDITIONSCONFIRM = CONFIRMATION TIMESPRNC = SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME NORMAL CONDITIONSSPRAC = SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME ADVERSE CONDITIONS
SEE APPENDIX C FOR DEFINITION.
10
response time. However, at some sites, the adverse weather alternative was
assumed to occur only in the winter when transient populations would be low
or nonexistent. Therefore, in some cases, adverse weather response time was
estimated to be less than for normal conditions when large transient
populations would be possible. Although this approach is not recommended, it
nevertheless was the approach used by some. The proper approach would have
been to consider other adverse conditions (e.g., rain) under peak demand.
Estimates for total notification time varied from 0.3 hours to a maximum
of 6.0 hours. A few of the studies looked at the interaction between warning
time and response time. A few studies estimated the distribution for warning
and preparation in determining response times. Others added total warning
time plus response time and indicated that the result overestimated the total
time required because some people would begin evacuating before others are
warned.
Further study is warranted in examining the interaction between
components because of the uncertainty concerning the effect on total
evacuation time. Improved notification systems may pose problems at some
sites since they could induce traffic volumes that exceed the capacity of the
roadway system. Thus, even though notification times were greatly reduced,
evacuation times might be largely unaffected or even increase. Such
situations would require careful traffic management in order to avoid massive
traffic jams. One satisfactory solution for these sites might be immediate
(15 minute) notification followed by phased evacuation in combination with an
effective sheltering program.
The median response time for permanent residents was 1.8 hours for
normal conditions and 2.8 hours for adverse conditions (see PPRNC and PPRAC
11
in Table 5). The upper limits were 8.3 and 16.2 hours for normal and adverse
conditions respectively.
The median transient population response time was 3.0 hours for normal
conditions and 1.7 hours for adverse conditions (see TPRNC and TPRAC in Table
5). Transient population response time was a time component in only 11
sectors under normal conditions and 7 sectors under adverse conditions.
Maximum values were estimated at 3.7 hours under normal conditions and 4.2
under adverse conditions. As previously indicated, some estimates for
adverse conditions were less because transient populations were expected to
be smaller under adverse conditions which was assumed to be snow. Other
adverse conditions such as rain were not considered.
The median special population response time was 2.7 hours (44 sectors)
for normal conditions and 3.2 hours (28 sectors) for adverse conditions.
Maximum values were 24 hours for normal conditions and 10.2 hours for adverse
conditions. The lower maximum value for adverse conditions results from an
adverse weather estimate not being made for the site reporting the maximum
normal weather time.
As previously indicated, notification plus response time estimates were
summed to estimate the time required (not including confirmation) to clear
the sector after issuance of a warning. As previously indicated, most
estimates include a simple summation of notification and response time which
may overestimate the required time since some people will leave before all
are notified. The median general population evacuation time was 5.0 hours
(111 sectors) under normal conditions and 5.2 hours (91 sectors) under
adverse conditions. Maximum times were 21.0 hours for normal conditions and
27.0 hours for adverse conditions.
12
Confirmation times ranged from 0.6 hours to 24.0 hours, with the median
being 2.0 hours. Confirmation time estimates were based on many different
assumptions. The effectiveness of confirmation seemed to be questioned by
many. The accuracy of the estimates seems questionable because of the lack
of good data on which to base an estimate.
Medians by Rating
In an earlier section of the report a subjective rating was made and
each of the responses were rated poor, adequate, or excellent. In order to
determine if the results differed by rating, the medians were separately
calculated for each rating class. Fourteen sites (51 sectors) had a poor
rating, 22 sites (73 sectors) had an adequate rating, and 4 sites (15
sectors) had an excellent rating. Table 6 sunmnarizes the evacuation time
means by rating for the various time components. The lower ratings appear to
have generally higher estimates for general population evacuation times.
However, subsequent analysis using the data segregated by rating did not
appear to improve the results observed. The remaining analyses include all
the data including responses receiving a poor rating.
Medians by Total Permanent Population
As indicated earlier, the population distribution while varying from
6000 to 282,000, has a median of only 30,000. A second stratification of the
data, based on total permanent resident population, was therefore made. Five
categories were established as follows:
1. 1 - 20,000
2. 20,000 - 50,000
3. 50,000 - 100,000
13
TABLE 6: MEDIAN EVACUATION TIME (HOURS) BY RATING FOR 10-MILE RADIUS
Rating
Poor Adequate Excellent Overall
# of # of # of # of
Component* Median Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors
NOTIFY 2.0 42 1.8 59 1.5 15 1.6 116
PPRNC 3.0 38 1.5 55 1.4 15 1.8 108
PPRAC 5.0 38 2.0 47 2.1 15 2.8 100
TPRNC 3.0 7 2.3 1 3.1 3 3.0 11
TPRAC 2.7 6 0.8 1 --- -- 1.7 7
GPTNC 6.0 40 5.0 56 4.7 15 5.0 111
GPTAC 7.3 39 4.9 37 4.4 15 5.2 91CONFIRM 2.0 32 2.0 29 2.0 14 .2.0 75SPRNC 2.7 10 1.9 29 7.2 5 2.7 44SPRAC 3.2 9 2.9 14 10.2 5 3.2 28
*NOTIFY = NOTIFICATION TIMEPPRNC = PERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSE TIME NORMAL CONDITION!PPRAC = PERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSE TIME ADVERSE CONDITIO?TPRNC = TRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSE TIME NORMAL CONDITION!TPRAC = TRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSE TIME ADVERSE CONDITIOl6PTNC = GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME NORMAL CONDITIONGPTAC = GENEkAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ADVERSE CONDITIOICONFIRM = CONFIRMATION TIMESPRNC = SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME NORMAL CONDITIONSSPRAC = SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME ADVERSE CONDITIONS
SEE APPENDIX C FOR DEFINITIONS.
SNSSNSSNS
14
4. 100,000 - 200,000
5. 200,000 and up
There were 11 sites in category 1, 15 sites in category 2, 8 sites in cate-
gory 3, 3 sites in category 4, and 3 sites in category 5.
Table 7 summarizes the evacuation time estimates for the five population
groups. No clear trends appear in the data. Several other analyses were
performed including deletion of data receiving a poor rating and use of mean
instead of median values. These additional analyses also did not reveal any
consistent trends.
Because the population density could vary by sector, and since no trends
were found based on total population, it was determined that evacuation time
components should be evaluated based on sector population. The following
section examines the data based on sector population.
Medians by Sector Permanent Population
The sector populations were broken into groups for analysis as follows:
1. 1 - 5,000
2. 5,000 - 10,000
3. 10,000 - 25,000
4. 25,000 - 50,000
5. 50,000 - 100,000
6. 100,000 and up
Not all sites reported sector population so that the number of sectors
analyzed is less than for the total population groups.
Table 8 summarizes the medians by sector population. One trend noted in
the data is that permanent population response time (normal and adverse)
15
TABLE 7: MEDIAN EVACUATION TIME (HOURS) BY TOTAL POPULATIONGROUPS FOR 10-MILE RADIUS
Total Population Total Population Total Population Total Population Total Population Overall1-20,000 20,000-50,000 50,000-100,000 100,000-200,000 200,000 and up
Component* # of # of # of # of # of # ofMedian Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors
NOTIFY 3.0 29 1.1 46 2.0 29 2.6 6 1.4 6 1.6 116
PPRNC 3.0 35 3.0 42 1.3 21 1.9 6 3.5 4 1.8 108
PPRAC 4.3 23 2.0 46 1.7 21 2.8 6 5.6 4 2.8 100
TPRNC 3.5 1 2.3 1 1.5 7 3.4 2 --- - 3.0 11
TPRAC --- -- 0.8 1 1.6 4 4.1 2 --- - 1.7 7
GPTNC 4.0 30 3.7 38 5.7 29 5.8 7 5.0 6 5.0 111
GPTAC 4.4 17 3.8 37 5.1 25 7.3 7 6.0 4 5.2 91
CONFIRM 4.4 16 2.0 31 1.0 21 2.0 4 2.0 3 2.0 75
SPRNC 0.8 10 2.4 20 4.0 7 2.8 1 7.2 6 2.7 44
SPRAC 3.0 5 3.2 13 5.0 5 2.8 1 10.2 4 3.2 28
*NOTIFYPPRNCPPRACTPRNCTPRACGPTNCGPTACCONFIRMSPRNCSPRAC
NOTIFICATION TIMEPERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSEPERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSETRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSETRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSEGENERAL POPULATION EVACUATIONGENERAL POPULATION EVACUATIONCONFIRMATION TIME
TIMETIMETIMETIMETIMETIME
NORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONS
SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME NORMAL CONDITIONSSPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME ADVERSE CONDITIONS
SEE APPENDIX C FOR DEFINITIONS.
TABLE 8: MEDIAN EVACUATION TIME (HOURS) BY SECTORPERMANENT POPULATION GROUPS
Sector Sector Sector sector Sector SectorPopulation Population Population Population Population Population
0-5,000 5,000-10,000 10,000-25,000 25,000-50,000 50,000-100,000 100,000 and up
Component* # of # # of # of # ofMedian Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors
NOTIFY 2.0 44 1.0 18 1.1 17 2.0 9 1.7 2 1.4 6
PPRNC 1.4 43 1.5 14 1.4 13 3.5 8 4.2 2 3.7 4
PPRAC 1.5 38 2.0 12 1.9 14 5.2 8 4.8 2 5.8 4
TPRNC 3.5 1 2.5 2 3.0 5 1.3 2 3.4 1 --- -
TPRAC --- -- 1.7 1 2.3 4 1.5 1 4.1 1 --- -
GPTNC 3.9 42 6.5 17 4.3 14 5.3 8 7.6 2 6.6 6
GPTAC 4.4 34 4.5 11 4.5 13 5.7 7 8.5 2 7.1 4
CONFIRM 2.2 31 2.0 10 1.0 11 3.5 7 2.0 1 2.0 3
SPRNC 0.8 8 1.9 10 2.7 7 4.0 5 3.7 1 7.2 6
SPRAC 2.0 4 3.1 4 3.1 4 5.0 4 4.7 1 10.2 4
I-a
*NOTIFYPPRNCPPRACTPRNCTPRACGPTNCGPTACCONFIRM
NOTIFICATION TIMEPERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSEPERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSETRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSETRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSEGENERAL POPULATION EVACUATIONGENERAL POPULATION EVACUATIONCONFIRMATION TIME
TIMETIMETIMETIMETIMETIME
NORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CUNDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONS
SPRNC = SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME NORMAL CONDITIONSSPRAC = SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME ADVERSE CONDITIONS
SEE APPENDIX C FOR DEFINITIONS.
appears greater for sectors above 25,000 than below 25,000. Another trend is
that special population response time (normal and adverse) appears to
increase with increasing sector populations. In order to further evaluate
these trends, the data was combined into two groups. Table 9 summarizes the
medians with only two sector population groups: above 25,000 and below
25,000. The trend toward increased permanent population response time
appears fairly strong. Figure 1 shows the actual distribution of responses
for the two population groups. The under 25,000 group shows a long tail to
the right distribution typical of the data in general. The over 25,000
population group shows an extremely strong tendency toward its median (and
therefore rmiean value due to the symetrical distribution) value.
It should also be noted in Table 9 that the smaller difference between
the GPTNC for the two groups may be explained in part by a higher transient
population response time for the under 25,000 population group. The special
population response times also continue to show a much larger value for the
over 25,000 population group.
Median Times by Distance
Table 10 summarizes the median evacuation time components for the 2-,
5-, and 10-mile radii from the plants. As would be expected, the times
increase with increasing distance. What is surprising is that permanent
population response time increase is less than proportional to the distance
and that general population evacuation time increase is nearly proportional
to distance for the increase in area from five to ten miles. Further study
of the effect of distance is warranted.
18
TABLE 9: MEDIAN EVACUATION TIME (HOURS) BY SECTORPERMANENT.POPULATION GROUPS
Sector SectorPopulation Population0-25,000 25,000 and up
Component* # of # ofMedian Sectors Median Sectors
NOTIFY 1.3 79 1.5 17
PPRNC 1.4 70 3.7 14
PPRAC 1.9 64 5.5 14
TPRNC 3.1 8 1.5 3
TPRAC 1.7 5 2.8 2.
GPTNC 5.0 73 5.7 16
GPTAC 4.5 58 6.7 13
CONFIRM 2.0 52 2.0 11
SPRNC 1.9 25 6.1 12
SPRAC 3.1 12 5.0 9
*NOTIFYPPRNCPPRACTPRNCTPRACGPTNCGPTACCONFIRM
NOTIFICATION TIMEPERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSEPERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSETRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSETRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSEGENERAL POPULATION EVACUATIONGENERAL POPULATION EVACUATIONCONFIRMATION TIME
TIMETIMETIMETIMETIMETIME
NORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONS
SPRNC = SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME NORMAL CONDITIONSSPRAC = SPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TIME ADVERSE CONDITIONS
SEE APPENDIX C FOR DEFINITIONS.
19
LU
0LU
Z-
0
LUJ,L-,
C>
SECTOR POPULATION LESS THAN 25,000
MEDIAN = 1.4 hoursMEAN = 2.5 hours
0
0 1 4 5 7 8 9 10
PERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSE TIME (HOURS)
SECTOR POPULATION GREATER THAN 25,000
MEDIAN = 3.7 hoursMEAN = 3.7 hours
10-
~Ln 5-
I I
00 1
22
I I I3 4 5
I I I I I6 7 8 9 10
PERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSE TIME (HOURS)
FIGURE 1: PERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSE TIMVEBY SECTOR POPULATION GROUP
20
TABLE 10: MEDIAN EVACUATION TIME (HOURS) BY DISTANCE
Radius = 2 mi. Radius = 5 mi. Radius = 10 mi.
Conlponent* # of # of # ofMedian Sectors Median Sectors Median Sectors
NOTIFY 0.6 48 1.0 109 1.6 116
PPRNC 0.7 45 1.0 103 1.8 108
PPRAC 1.0 44 1.8 97 2.8 100
TPRNC 0.2 3 1.9 7 3.0 11
TPRAC 0.3 2 2.0 4 1.7 7
GPTNC 1.5 45 2.2 100 5.0 111
GPTAC 1.7 37 2.5 83 5.2 91
CONFIRM 0.8 37 1.0 74 2.0 75
SPRNC 1.5 9 2.5 24 2.7 44
SPRAC 2.0 8 2.3 18 3.2 28
*NOTIFYPPRNCPPRACTPRNCTPRACGPTNCGPTACCONFIRMSPRNCSPRAC
NOTIFICATI ON TIMEPERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSEPERMANENT POPULATION RESPONSETRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSETRANSIENT POPULATION RESPONSEGENERAL POPULATION EVACUATIONGENERAL POPULATION EVACUATIONCONFIRMATION TIMESPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE TSPECIAL POPULATION RESPONSE T
TIMETIMETIMETIMETIMETIME
NORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONSNORMAL CONDITIONSADVERSE CONDITIONS
IME NORMAL CONDITIONSIME ADVERSE CONDITIONS
SEE APPENDIX C FOR DEFINITIONS.
21
FEMA ASSESSMENTS
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was requested' by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to make several independent assessments of
evacuation times around reactor sites which are located in proximity to high
population densities. Initially, twelve assessments have been made by three
contractors. Six of theassessments correspond to plant sites evaluated in
this report. The six sites are Beaver Valley, Indian Point, Maine Yankee,
Millstone, Three Mile Island, and Zion.
It should be noted that the evaluation framework prescribed by FEMA was
more general than that required by the NRC. For example, the FEMA
contractors were not required to follow the sector configuration specified by
NRC. The zone configuration used by the FEMA contractors generally
considered political subdivisions, demographic considerations and roadway
locations. One contractor also used a radius of exactly 10 miles in
developing time estimates. This was done to allow comparison of similar
evacuation areas among the sites evaluated.
The principal difference between licensee submittals and the FEMA
assessments is that the licensee submittals represented a much wider range of
techniques. Nevertheless, some licensee submittals were in fact done by two
of the FEMA contractors. The third FEMA contractor also used a subcontractor
that had prepared a licensee estimate.
The methodologies used by the FEMA contractors follows closely the
transportation planning techniques recommended in Reference 4. The primary
difference in the FEMA estimates and the techniques used by many of the
better licensee responses concerns the interaction between the various
evacuation time components.
23
All the FEMA contractors elected to use distributions for the various
time components and combine them statistically. Two things, however, are not
completely clear-cut. First, little empirical data exists for developing the
distributions and that data which does exist is very limited. Second, it is
not completely clear whether using distributions increases or decreases the
evacuation time estimate. The fact that distributions allow some evacuees to
begin moving should reduce total evacution time. Furthermore, one FEMA
contractor concluded that gradual loading of the street system reduced total
evacuation time at one site studied due to the roadway configuration.
However, in some cases gradual loading could increase total evacuation times
due to assumed longer times to prepare and depart, thus underutilizing
roadway capacity.
24
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the analysis of the evacuation time estimates provided by
the various licensees defines the range of times that can reasonably be
expected to occur during evacuations of the emergency planning zones. Given
the variety of methodologies and assumptions used, it is ill-advised to draw
any strong conclusions concerning the factors affecting evacuation time.
For exagiple, the variation in analytical methods may confound the trends
observed for the effect of sector population and evacuation distance on
evacuation times. However, with further refinement and consistent
application of analysis techniques, it will be possible to ascertain the
limiting factors in evacuation times.
25
REFERENCES
1. NUREG 75/111, Guide and Checklist for Development and Evaluation of State
and Local Government Radiological Emergency Response Plans in Support
of Fixed Nuclear Facilities, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Revision 1, December 1974.*
2. NUREG-0396, Planning Basis for the Development of State and Local
Government Radiological Emergency Response Plans in Support of Light
Water Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
December 1978. *
3. NUREG-0654, Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological
Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power
Plants (for Interim Use and Comment), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, January 1980. (Presently available as NUREG-0654, Rev. 1)**
4. Thomas Urbanik, Arthur Desrosiers, Michael K. Lindell, and C. Richard
Schuller, Analysis of Techniques for Estimating Evacuation Times for
Emergency Planning Zones, Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers,
June 1980, BHARC-401/80-017.
5. NUREG-0348, Demographic Statistics Pertaining to Nuclear Power Reactor
Sites, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, October 1979. *
*Available for purchase from the National Technical Information Service,Springfield, VA 22161.
**Available free upon written request to the Division of Technical Informationand Document Control, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
27
APPENDIX A
EVALUATION FORMS FOR INDIVIDUAL PLANTS
A.-i
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Arkansas
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. AssumptionsC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population -
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall -
A- 3
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
geaver Valley
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map _ _ XB. AssumptionsC. Methodology _'---
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population - XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
*Lack of complete documentation makes it difficultaccuracy of the plan. The overall methodology isis no evaluation for 900 sectors.
to assess theexcellent, there
A-4
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Big Rock Point
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions x-C. Methodology --
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient PopulationC. Special Population - -- -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network- X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered -
Overall x
A-5
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Browns Ferry
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. AssumptionsC. Methodology
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population - XB. Transient Population - XC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall x
A-6
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Brunswick*
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area MapB. AssumptionsC. Methodology
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent PopulationB. Transient PopulationC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of NetworkB. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components ConsideredB. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall
*No Response
A-7
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Calvert Cliffs
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map - _
B. Assumptions -
C. Methodology
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population -
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population X-
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered --
Overall X
A-8
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Cooper
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -
B. Assumptions X
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population -
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network --- _-
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered -
Overall *
*Time estimates provided for Nebraska side only.
A-9
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Crystal River
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions - XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population - XB. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network -X
B. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered - --
Overall X
A- 10
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Davis Besse
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X -
B. Transient Population -
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network -
B. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered - -
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall x
A-11
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Donald C. Cook
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population -C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysi s
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered .. X.-
Overall X
A- 12
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Diablo Canyon
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X -
B. Assumptions -
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population X
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment - -
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered _
Overall X
A- 13
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Dresden
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered -
Overall X
A- 14
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Duane Arnold
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions X
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X -
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B, Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A- 15
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Farley
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient PopulationC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A-16
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
iFitzpatrick
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map - -
B. Assumptions T--C. Methodology
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population ---
C. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall X
'Same location as Nine Mile Point.2Adequate methodology, not actually reported.
A-17
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Ft Calhoun
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions - - XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population - XB. Transient Population -X -
C. Special Population - -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network- -
B. Capacity of Segment _.X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XAdverse Condition Considered -
Overall X*
*Note: The rating is based on data submitted for Nebraska side. An estimatewas provided for the Iowa side with little documentation. The Iowarating would be poor for all items.
A-18
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Ft. St. Vrain
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions - XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population X
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment - -
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered -
Overall -
A- 19
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Ginna
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions X
C. Methodology. X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network - -
B. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A-20
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Haddam Neck
I tem Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map - xB. Assumptions -.
C. Methodology -
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent PopulationB. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall -
A-21
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Hatch
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions -
C. Methodology - X.
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population - X
B. Transient Population -
C. Special Population - X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network -
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A-22
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Indian Point
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall -
A-23
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Kewaunee
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population - X-
B. Transient PopulationC. Special Population - -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X -
B. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered - ..-
Overall X
A-24
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
La Crosse
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population X
C. Special Population -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network - - XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered -
Overall X
A-25
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
LaSalle
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A-26
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Maine Yankee
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions - X
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population - -
C. Special Population
Traffic RoutingX
A. Map of Network -
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analys i s
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall - -
Note: Data not reported in detail.
A-27
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
McGui re
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population X
C. Special Population - --
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered - X
B. Adverse Condition Considered - X
Overall X
Note: Results not reported in cummulative format as requested.
A-28
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Millstone
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology -X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient PopulationC. Special Population -X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X•. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A-29
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Monticello
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions -
C. Methodology A
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population XC. Special Population -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall X
Note: Some capacities reported appear high.
A-30
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Nine Mile Point 1
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Ddmand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population XC. Special Population -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
1 Same locatian as Fitzpatrick.
2 Adequate methodology, not actually reported.
A-31
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
North Anna
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient PopulationC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network - -
B. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
5. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X*
*It is not possible to assess the overall validity of the estimates sincethere is no information on assumptions or methodology.
A- 32
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Oconee
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions -
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population -X
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall -X.
A- 33
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Oyster Creek
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population -
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
* Population data considered, but not reported.
A-34
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Palisades
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. AssumptionsC. Methodology _ --
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population - -
C. Special Population - X-
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X -
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered -
Overall X
A- 35
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Peach Bottom
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area MapB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population -
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
*Not reported, although considered in analysis.
A-36
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Pilgrim Station
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population X
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A- 37
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Point Beach
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network -
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered _-
Overall X
A-38
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Prairie Island
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X -
B. Transient PopulationC. Special Population --
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X-
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered --
Overall X
0
A-39
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Quad Cities
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions -
C. Methodology
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population -
C. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X-
B. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered -
Overall X
0
A-40
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Rancho Seco
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population X
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment x-_-
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall X
A- 41
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Robinson*
I I
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -
B. AssumptionsC. Methodology
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population - -
B. Transient PopulationC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of NetworkB. Capacity of Segment - -
Analysis
A. Components ConsideredB. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall
*No Response
A-42
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Saint Lucie
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -
B. Assumptions X
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient PopulationC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment _-_ X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A-43
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE*
Sal em
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
BackgroundI
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions - XC. Methodology -
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X -
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population - -_
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network -
B. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall x
*A revised evacuation time estimate, which was received after the deadline forinclusion in this analysis, has been evaluated and rated excellent.
A-44
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
San Onofre
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map
B. Assumpti'ons ._.L_-C. Methodology -_-
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population - -
C. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered - - -X
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall -
A-45
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Sequoyah
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X -
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network - -
B. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered -- -
Overall X
I A-46
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Surry
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map _ XB. AssumptionsC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population X
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered -
Overall X
*It is not possible to assess the overall validity of thethere is no information on assumptions or methodology.
estimates since
A-47
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Three Mile Island
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map - -.-
B. Assumptions -
C. Methodology - X
Demand EstimationAx
A. Permanent Population - XB. Transient Population -
C. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment - X
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall x
A-48
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Trijan
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions- XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population X
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network - -.-
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered ..X
Overall .,X
A-49
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATL
Turkey Point
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population XC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment -- "-
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall X
A-50
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Vermont Yankee
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map
B. Assumptions -
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population - XB. Transient Population XC. Special Population -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment - -
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall - X
A-51
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Yankee Rowe
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. Assumptions X -
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population - - --B. Transient Population -
C. Special Population - - -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X _7-
B. Capacity of Segment - - -
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered x -
Overall - X
*Not reported, but obviously considered.
A-52
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
I Zimmer
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map X
B. AssumptionsC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population X
B. Transient Population X
C. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network -
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered - X
Overall X
A-53
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Zion
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -
B. Assumptions ..X-C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population -
C. Special Population -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X .B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
A-54
APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATESFOR INDIVIDUAL PLANTS
B-i
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Arkansas
!A
- -- r- -- -- .- - -.- ",(u cU a ) a) F
10) 0) 0) 0 L 01CL m m CL Cc C• -0 (A L 0 0 i- I - _ L- t-
toU wA 0 ) w U) c u C 0 .c • 10 4o0. 0. • •- .- • U) mC 0 A ac U.w 0.- c .u ea
C)4- 0 Ca . 0 0 .CL. ro C >0 >C >0V- 4
Jt4
U 0.- • • 0 0 04 0-..- 0 .4-' Q.- C - Ca,-z; to c : 0 a .4-3 Z 0 •0 0o 0.0 o-o0 o Lo J 0 • 0
W' 4-' O- 0 (- C " _0 Cl -c 0 L ) t .L ) -• L UL E 0 - 0 0 0 E 0 0v) SL L 6 M 0. A U 4- 4-' 0 u 4ý 0 4-S-U -,.- • j .. 0.. - 0.0)a)0 o " .- 0 C' ( 0 4-- -CL) C ' C- C -A • •
a-0 (aC r-. ~ ~ ~- u) c)0 0) ) c: -LA ~I) - - t •4-C- C- CU a a a) G Gi a,) C E CS..uJ cJ c-- (J . J - c-- CA - -• - CA s- t rio a) L. to a)t
-C. rL 0- o L- c ro ( S- v L n ro (AL S O L-> z 0 T;>> a) a- E_ E E a) • c F -c Q) cu -"0 '. ,
>0) a- S. - S- S-> VL S- o> C <~ a)0)0 o ) 0 - 0 -- o0 a) a). 0-
<. . i- = I- < (D C /
WITHIN TWO MILES
N 624' 30 60 90 60S 31 30 60 90 60
WITHIN FIVE MILES
NE 1288 60 60 120 90
SE 5623 60 120 180 90 360
SW 421 60 60 180 90
NW 1023 60 60 120 90
WITHIN TEN MILES
NE 3956 120 60 180 120
SE 19858 120 60 180 120 360
SW 1365 120 60 180 120
NW 2163 120 60 180 120
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Beaver Valley
4I
CL CL t C L4-) W3 0n 0 0A 0 Ul~ (A 0
E 03 . o. 0. C C C
o w) C cU Uc 0) ( U • aO *"Z 0 . 0r- 0 0. Q0 c. cl3U)w 03C jU 03 e0.-) V. 41 . Ua >C0 Cl 0 .IwQ 0 121-~ '04o 0. >.4-'
Ct) &-' o~ 4-30 o ~ o , C 0 *.-- 0 .- >"- C >"- >"
o 0Z . w T &- 4-' 0 ..- M,.- M 4- c.L- C C . Cr- f C- C *- *L0 4-) OV 0 .C 0. -- C .o~ & '1 OC- 0 L
- - 0 - 0 0 0 E 0 0Ct, L0. ' -0 e:o " C - .- '. --0 o 1 4 :0 4-o C.) , o- 000 30 0 4-- L) CrC) - -U) ' ~ '0- CLL 0o :3 Q. ' tL W At w). wo W WO E 0
Alo 13 22 to gE to 0 t0o s s- UVW. a- - & Ls-> toL '> C c~ <3 cu uw3 o V w L- 7 03 03 Q- 0.
________WITHIN TWO MILES
WITHIN FIVE MILES
All 1730A 225 270
WITHIN TEN MILES
All L55591 345 435
- - -- -I
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
-3-g RQckPoint
ID
.0 0) 0) 0) - ai
E ~ ~ ~~ CL C 0 L au 0 0 0 •0 kA In •0 . 0 L, •0 • 0C- CL r d.- ',,n ) r- 4-) (D r- L;.- 'j -- 'o Z o--"
00 r- 0 CL- a € .0 w c w 0 .o 4J -0 4 - > .0.- "
4-10 4- •J 0 - 0 "'- 0 .- > ., > .- r- C - > "0".. 0 r- 4 4-L - .- •4.d Li " u 0 0 a"10 u "0
C)O4- 4-) )~i 4 0 0-4-Z' CL-' 0-L- CL- C C .ceO Cu• "'0 ea a C•' c- 0r"J 0-0 0- 0-0 • 0 0 4-) *0 0
C-) ,'-- aiw Cfl~ ,--- 0 to 4- o "0 41 • o o. 0-C,. 0m c 0_C.) 0=0..)r.0 - - - .,-- .u- ri o - 0 0 0 0 E 0 M0
CA L0- '00 (o0 u o yL U 4-)n 13- 4-1-0 4-J U- 0 4-0 4JI- 0-r -X.) 40 0-A(ii o.- E 0r-(
O-0 C Ls-. -a 0 '0.C to a 0- 0) a) a) 0) wa a) ~ Q)-EO.OJ.O i 4-) r- - = .,) *.n '0 L- (o a) '01 >-. F- e0o - 0 1- u m s LnO L•n S.- - 0 s- > o Z, 0 ->
> 0- EE E 2 CD r- E r- O(D o),0 = u"-LLI0 5.-&- s- > 'oL s- o> v0) d
a)0 o )J0 L- 0 0) 0L 0-
WITHIN TWO MILES
WSW-NE 12 14
WITHIN FIVE MILES
WSW-S 83 76
SSE-NE 37 26
WITHIN TEN MILES
WSW-S 95 75
SSE-NE 71 32
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Browns Ferry
cx)!
•,• ~ ~ u &A- 0" t- - "A"-I-- -
0 0 0 0 0 •C L C C L C L :c0CA 0 ) 0 4 0) 0A LA I- 0"
0. c Lcf o 0 -of c Cmt CV) 4-) 0,U CL UU 0O .0 *.- > 0 *LJIx 02 ' 0 * W .C .4-) C Lo -'j I- 0- -
C 0 Ci a 0 0.- C0 o_4-' "0 CL 0 CL *-(• ' a) a -) 0- O C- 0 " - 0 Cl- 0 "•L 0 C-- 0j E - s- (- 0 u- EO Q 0 L 0(n S-. 4,. eo .e 0 -)-. -C -" C-- C 0 C-- (- o C (- 0' 4 c0 L.) c0 s*
0-~ 0)) s Ua- 0)0) 0S- n0 =- CL 0 a)C 0 0 0-C aL aL ai s-.. (vE v o)- C s*--- (v -u Cv 0- C 0- 0 .- E 0; 0-(aaCL tu L O C'- -o to (- '. LA Co Co > C 0 u --
>-0 Li E-0 Eri E= 0i c) E)0 a) Wo . -)W) OW U C (L i
S L L 0.. es> C- >~ ea s-a). 0, , " O 0 0- 00 0. 0-
WITHIN TWO MILES
All 120 240 600
WITHIN FIVE MILES
All 360 600 600
WITHIN TEN MILES
All 600 840 90 600
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Brunswi ck*_ _
a) w a) a)2,-- c LA (A D D ( "(:"G ~ ~ 0 EA LAu•U • u' ' 0 "Ecl CL C C) -
?). 0 0A CA (A L L 0 0 0 U" ,- 0 "
c- CL a) (n aoC c di o .r- 41a0 (. cc- a~ C 0 C 0 ro- Z; '(C- ~au 4-'0 0- 4-J0 0- a 0 " 0 >.- > C >" >"
, "-.- L) 0 ..- 4-' .,- •) U-J0 ii0 0 l cc:) 0 ;- 4-' a) 4S 4-) 0 0.4-' 0ý. 0a.4-' 0. - C C-- " c (A ,- Cn C" 4- 0 "- 0 0 -.- 0a . 0 .0 0 CL 0v- a0 a e -- 0 ) o 0 0 4 a-, -a CL a D- - 0 C a_ - o C. ro L.) 0.(-.Lt E -3 C - c *---- .,- . ) r c 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 c000 (0 .- m Q. CA u 4J. = -1, 4- 0 4-3 L-" C C- 4 L.) Q-- C, tO " r.
a) 0 o-0 S- 4- C) CE CC .. C~ 5 ~ . - vL (
0- (0L 0 S_ r- ( r L- v ni- 0-0 .- > a) d) 0 "- >>a0 ) 0. CE E 1- a) C- >)• 0)-t) ".) u
1,10 CL S-S -> mO S- 0> C CL~ ClW o a) 0 S.- 0 - a) w) 0. u0
I m 0--- I ~ CL C.r I
WITHIN TWO MILES
WIHIN FIVE MILES
WITHIN TEN MILES
__________ - - - -I-I
!
i-i-i-i-i I
*No Response
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Calvert Cliffs
co
0 E -E
4 a) 0 0 0 0 o • -- 0 •nE CL 0- Cý CL Cz a
LA EA. L) n I U)Li= . - •0 .- -- . 0
rYc- ,- 4-. a). 0) c- •: . c. cu c L;J "0- ,,I 7-XD '0- c" 0 CL I•"-(} •-•• •- "- 0 ",- 0y-0 Of a 0 " M 4- V 4-0"V) 4'J 0'- CL, 4j 0' rL r1- >1 . - C 3. ( .',. .- )( .(-~~~~e i0 roJii _ z ~
Lto -E0 c 0 r- 4- 0 C 0 C- 0 0 0 E 0 0
-) -E> S- 0 o- o--- -L- c ea " 0
________WITHIN TWO MILES15 1 E 15
*N f137 _ 1 23546 { ..8B 57 L - -
15 151 330 [285 570 0 S 6003
WITHIN FIVE MILES
30 30NW 2192 ____60 366 722 -~396 78 6
730 30SW 1431 j0 348 696 300 6.0 3
NE 0 FIV MILES30 30
SE 934 - 160 _ 354 708 384 1 768 0WITHIN TEN MILES
60 60NW 4903 120 456 912 516 1032 12n
60 60SW 6363 120 486 972 546 n1.2 L.n
60 60SE 10260 120 486 972 546 1096 120
N20 40NE 10 2-0 456 912 ý516 1032 2--0
Notes: * Normal (Top)/Adverse (Bottom)
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Cooper
0,
a) a) a) a) a) a
4-) 0 0 0 ",- ._ .- .U ,- Ca--J0 o oI- • I-u C- C•I-uC•L/) a- CL 0 c r- $ o .o
Ln LA 0 V LA)LV) .' 0 0 *0CL -o F-- a) V) a ) r- WQ V J a• r- - - -- U -- "-
C 0 c 0 CL c- 0 - a- w0 a R34-) 1- 4-) s4a +14-)C.) 4-)0 4 4 0 'QCL M " 0 "- 0 .- > '- >-.- r- > >"
c-- C-,- . 0 " .- .Z- .-- . 41 LA'-0 ua 'a 0 ,iJ .0 () 4- .4-) a) Z ) 0 CL -..- a. .--. C C- - C
c_ C• C•A .- Ci A c 4-) 0 0fla - 1) I00 ,-j. 0"C Q0 0- ( 04- 0
L.J E C-- C "-- - U m C 0 C4- 0 0 0 E 0 0L/) sa- CL a ea C V Ln 4-) ~ s-1 4-) 0 4-) C) 4-3 0 4j L) a-.- Qa) s- - aa
a ja oa E 0 4-' a) C- CA *--.rtL ' aL (A)-- > taL 0 L a r L I-ta LnL 0 -> 0 0 .>
>a) 0- s- co =E=a) C E u Q CU) -) E ) s- E~UQj u s a) u 4) a C a) r a)~> aj F=c E E CU a• E- r- a) 0) cu -0J" '. , :2: (
LoJO_ -- s- s- > t s- t > C- a-t < u.
=00 L-- L0 SD U) U(
WITHIN TWO MILES
A-G 5 8
H- R 26 8 7WITHIN FIVE MILES
A- D 308 100
E -G 167 55
N- R 243 80 29
H -M 363 120 29WITHIN TEN MILES
A- D 3045 1015
E - G 455 150 3000 210
N - R 1940 632 15 64 . .......
H - M 1122 366 1 15 52 _
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Crystal River
I00
L) L) 0) 0)
C•F- . C C • *' • . .j.- ..- - -0 0 0 0E ~~C CL) 0. 0. 0 0 Co ' L1) L flu Lm 0fI .0 n L 0
C 0 C- 0 (a. c- 0ý C 0 0C Qf0 'U 4-' -V4-J (0 4-) 104-1V) 410 - 4-'.0 0- 'UDC 0 .- 0 - > >*- .C L-C,) C-,- Z; 0- C *.-ý .4) .L.- j.0 WJ .0- LV L
r- CLn -'0 CIA C 4- - 0- 00 0 00 .0 -0 4-) " 0 "0r - u •i) Q) Eu 0 'U 4 - c - c - 0a C C- 0' ,-) t .o - C)
LLJ E0 r- u C 0 C- 0 0 0 E 0 0-C/i S.-0. 'UU 'u0r . ouU 4-'J = s- 4-)'0 4-)L-) 4-P 0 4JCL) CI- .L Q) s. - 0-u )w o E- o- c: - toC t- 'U C.) C: r-L) c 'U CA ,~'
(D 0)a L ) 4-) a) C- Cu, .- *,u s-L 'uW 'u z '0'uS. 0 o S.- 'U r 'U 'U ) to' u,) s - 0 S.- > 0 0> a) Q E E EU c E C= (u cu" u c.J C- s- s- s- > (as.- 'U > C -< ~ ca. 0Q0 0 a)0 (u ~ 0 .
WITHIN TWO MILES
A-H 0
J-R 0 601 120
WITHIN FIVE MILES
A-D 1522 15 150 210 165 225
E-H 100 15 45 105 60 120
J-M 0 I I 240 360
N-R 60 15 60 120 75 135 240 360
WITHIN TEN MILES
A-D 2940 15 165 345 180 360
E-H 9000 15 165 345 180 360 105 180
J-M 0 1 1 360 480
N-R 60 15 60 120 75 135 360 480
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Davis Besse
I.
4-J • O On O in-n n -d)0 0) 0) 0 F )tECL CL CL C03. (:. 0I. I:. C- C,-t-
-in n inv)l ' inLf .L0 L *o 0 •o 0go. F - a. ) tn a)C c u (C 'A D r-. u F-
a 0 ' 0 . I-0 c 0O -a 0 O ro- + 4-. (0 4) ',) 4-JO CL 4j 0 C 0 -0 > >r, i - > "- > 0 -
Sr- ,- C_) 0 4 j ..4..) U• J u 0 r- O-C) @ ; 4-' (U4-' 4ji 0 CL 4-' 0.-.- 0.4-) CL-- C0 C 0*
L; r C C5; i 9 C 1 1- -- o_, 0 -- 0-0 ::. C LUM ()a u() 0 (a 4j) 0_ -0 0- c a- - 0 C Q- L r-. 'a go- 0
L-.- C .- C *-- C. "S -.u Co 00 c 0 0 0 E 0 0) E ,C-- (u m1L u 4-' S- 4- 0 .4-L) U 4-3 0 +-L 0j 1 ,) L. M-:S-O 0-,,
o) 0 E L•- 0 c C- .0 4- (a r L c CL -C ,- .c .,- E ,-a-a- - r_" I-c-- - CU -c- =c. cu (u w a) a)oj q) E to. ..- E S-.
4JiS- a) u 4-' (v r- c L' .r-- .,-c ( A S- 'aw '- '00>- . I-- #v 0 tu fa r (A to n S.- S..- ,-0 "r-
> 0- EE E r. CE c:o 4)J = - ' .. Ua u"Oua-S- S- S- > 'S.- to> C "Z0
)0 0 a) S 0 S- - 0 0 . 0.
WITHIN TWO MILES
1800 800 40 80 120
WITHIN FIVE MILES
Left 1600 70 140 120
Right 1800 75 150 120
WITHIN TEN MILES
Left 6600 120 240 120
Right 11800 210 420 120
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
D. C. Cook
L) 0i U) U Cn
C3 CL CL CLa r0 ) 0 0(0 0 I Un (AU ' 0~ 0- I• E o. -' - . o. •
ro F- 0 cC r- w (1 -MC"•-U U 0AI l . 0 •*0 =0 0 0C0 C- 4- 0~ (1 CiC 0)1 0 -J >. >*of c:- -- C'-) o _ 4-- a•C0 oo L L- J40 0 - >4-- >-- C > 4- --Lit.- -, 0 *- * .. +-' .*• • *.+J uJO LAJ} 00 U-JV W: ,l
0 ~( c)4- En 04 4- 3 - 0 04 CL~ 04- 0.'a) C; Co Z, 2 0.- 03 0.-, r- * *83 - U" *0LJ E0 C,- . _0 * t c 0 c 0 0. 0 E 0- 0
S- C e"o ra Q. 0 4) S- 4. J 0 4- f- 4-) 0 4-i.. ) -. A-. .i S- n-.)C)0 E- - S.- C r- ,.-o 4- (a c C - oL) c to 0 o1"Q. S- C F-O M UC (01- n ~ =) Ca) (ua) a) Q) E -L S- :- E= -
( ) SU. a) . +'- cU C -C (A 0 -.- (- s- M q, . ' S- adi.a- F->- U•So- o S- ro 00 S- u! UL - o S- > o 0 " >
> z- r- -E C U .a) V ,LJJO.. $-S. $ -S-> to S- 'U > C- Cr- O UCLa)0 ou0 L. 0 S•• U U )L
WITHIN TWO MILES
B-J 210 2302 l--' 2n 1i r, 24.5 27n AT
WITHIN FIVE MILES
BCDE 160 420T9520 15 30 195 345 -84M0-
140 300-GHJ10 20 20 30 t80 260iD2
WITHIN TEN MILES
300 1020BCDE 360 20 35 75 054555FGHJ 300 720
- _l~ 920 2. -45- 34025 19
Note: * Normal (Top)/Adverse (Bottom)
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Diablo Canyon
4-) 0 0) 0) Uu• u• ..-E -
ECL CL CL 0U - 0) LA0 A A L 0 0 0 0 - ~ 0
0. 0. -I- Win W r- a)- a)-C . .- . -- j-C 0 C- 0 a- = 0e 0 M c W 0 0 4-) 'D04--) O .4- 0 .4-
L/ ~ -4-) 0 0- QU C 0 C- 0 > >- C ; >L.) 0 C • .-. •.,- z- z JL. uJ' 0 U 0 t ,LJJ
0 0)) 4.)• . 0)..J .- ) 0.• 0 -4) .- 0-) I.- > - > - • C.5 -'U C" C 4- • 0" 0j0 0, 0 0 CL0 C-L L 0 CL0
r- EU 4.j - -0 0-C *00 0-C0-a 0L 'U -a 0-LLJ •: Cr-. C *.- r--- ..- . U 'U C 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0
Q. . 0 Q'U 0. 0 o 4- D 4. 0 4J (" 4J 0 - S.)- a- -0 0-0)0) ~ .o C (a 0 a- UU aL CS- C ' n U
CL i. i-C -0- 'U.. 0r a - 0) 0) W 0 W) WE WL Q) S- to-Q)0Q) a0) U 4--' ai C -- CLA -~ -*,- LA (aL '0 'UL >
'ULa - 0 S. ro' to L a f.- SnL i-0 S> LA L.>0 W E- ES EW CD E C0- ) 0j = ~ =) -0
A 1.L- S- s- > s-L to> C C't00)0o 4) 0 LO i- -0 0) 0 - 0
WITHIN TWO MILES
QRA-F 5
WITHIN FIVE MILES
RAB 35
COE 28
EF 0
WITHIN TEN MILES
RAB 11763
COE 4965
EF 917
ALL 63489 29785 255 300
Note: This study slected to use a 6-milebetter reflect natural boundaries.not to divide population centers.
rather than a 5-mile radius and 67.5 degree sectors toThe 10-mile radius was expanded up to 12 miles so as
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Dresden
4I.
4) a) cu W) c 0) cu W)
-UOf O Ofl OL, O 0 0 JL G) LA ILt CL c La a ac aLc C E C cU 2 Lo •o 0 o l0 .0 .0 .o .0
Cý 0- c.I *- 0) 0)- ()' 0)- U*L; - *- U4-J0 0 "-)C 0 4-- - . 414 , . C4. 4-, Q•4-) r4j. eO4-) (•4a *
0 4 .JC) -. ( L/ -C Mi L. C - .- - - -> > C " > .G > .1Ofcu4-' (U (V.- 0 (V j 0 C D * 4-) *0 'D WVJ WV 0 WVj WV0 a C' 4j-' " 41 4-'-- 0 CL0 a C a•- a -C a S - a C'0.- c U u• C r a•• - z-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 •0 *0 4- 0 • 0E 0) - C:- 0). 0 M0 4-) 0- U CI a(.. 0.L ( C-L U A (j ro .) aL
U La. C-a C ro : .C -a U 1z 0 0 E 0 0V) 0 t La. U'O.J 4-100 'a- 4-. - 4ý C- 4) J- 4 ) 0-- (.I n- 1 .S- C a- 4I0 o0 830 4- 0 4- C0 cLA aC'240 -C M0 - 0 L
M1 3 UL E Q) &- E L. 4- - E LU) 4- -0 (U L M eo) C tOL. '00M2 7 0 0 L. M t'> 3 6> %-0 > 0 -0 >
>) Z) CL E E =) ) 0. Z U-a-aJ S- 4- a- a. U 1/)
____________ _____ _____WITHIN TWO MILES ___ __
I80 30 830 660 45 20 __ 240
11 580 200 980 750 45 120 _____ __ 360 __
WITHIN FIVE MILES
I, Ill 4280 1430 1280 960 45 20 300
I, VII 760 255 1010 810 45 20 480 60
II, IV 1840 615 980 755 60 20 420 60
II, V 710 240 980 755 60 20 480
II, VI 1690 570 980 750 45 20 480
WITHIN TEN MILES
I, III, VIII 12340 4110 1580 1210 45 20 360 60
I, VII, XII 10840 3560 1010 865 45 20 360 120
II, IV, IX 9410 3140 1280 995 60 20 420 180
II, V, X 3400 1135 980 755 60 20 480 60.II, VI, XI 6870 2290 1050 810 45 20 480 60_1
Note: Evacuation times shown are in some cases less for 10 mile radius than for evacuation of a smallerpart of the same sectors. This is notreasonable, although possible from methodoloqy used.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Duane Arnold
I,
a/) L) a) a/ W atA 0n Ln uL
oJ 0) 0) VLA CCL CL C CL4-) 0) 0 0 0 0 I-- u I-- L/ U I-Ln I-- )
c . 0QL 0 a. c C-e C--V) 4- ) 4- u0/ • o • 0 >-0 • 'a0.-• .m • (U I ) i- 0 .C JLn /) - •. •J . .• •. O;", -)"
Cý c -0L 0 Z; O - •o C • - C • (- 4' -,, ' 'a'O' 04"C) ) 4-'0 4-) 4-0 C0 '- ZC 0 L.- 0L 4) CL- C_ c c
r-- r - ( C• ("• " a "- 0 0- 0 0 0 a *0 0 4-) 0 .00o (U -') "-C a) 0,C eo_ a- a- r,-) t, 0 ,-)
UAJ E~ C. f*--*.L U ( o 0 0 0 E 0 L 0V- s- CL .u) r CL u l 4- - .- s- 4-) 0 t-)L. 4-) 0 4- L) Q-- - a) c. 0-_ ra -)
Q)0 E - L-0 0 C 0 t - 0 4- C C -C c/ ) a. 'L0-Q0- Lc I-a. 'U(a .:3 CL a. ) a0)a) a) L)0 E~- -
NW9) 410 C5 CLn 55 a) 116 6u
(IJ~~0 c 0) a m aLJa s- L> fuL to> CL 0-a. a
00- 0)V aO LV 0)
WITHIN TWO MILES______
NW 129 43} 10 45_ 106 55 11_ASE 198 66 10 42 96 E 52 106 60
WITHIN FIVE MILES
NW 522 174 30 58 119 88 149 60
NE 777 259 40 56 110 96 150l 6n
SE 1002 334 51 69 123, 120 1741 60
SW 1323 441 70 61 1151 131 185 60,
WITHIN TEN MILES
NW 4473 1491 160 138 192 298 352 120
NE 2649 883 107 84 138 191 245 120
SE 1!)1002 ý0334 231 402 420 633 651 120 165 192
SW 3525 1175 149 90 144 23.9 2U.. 1201
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Farley
(- (V (uC~ Cn CA
4J (U 0 0 0
0 o .;= W- t A (uCr (D t-0 - 0 0. c- r 0 I ,0 c,
n -P0 13- -I 0 0- C r 0 - 0-.-- r.-.. 0 .- 4J- . ,--
0 )4,-J 4-1 0-' 4-)- 0 -P 0'- 0-4-)C-" m"'- 0 ) .,- a v t 0 -e 4J 4• 0 "- 0-C 0 -L.. ,Ci" 8 EU C,- C J -• *0- U~ t• 0mA LO. yu rO- UU 41) o- _ 0 o-)L r- - '0)0 E~ r O -~ '00 4- ' C-C0- to) L ) 0 u 4- .- Z 4 0 4J U 4J 0
-.0 s=1- 0 ' 1 rr.. to 0 4-
> o) a - E E E a) ES•~L a- s. .J ( - s-- f- >' ",-,-
w o •0 - 0
WITHIN TWO MILES
E 45 60
W 45 60
WITHIN FIVE MILES
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Fitzpatrick*
Q) ) 0) a)Ln Ln n in
4- u0 0 0 0 0 I-)Fu -i nE. CL a. CL C C
u A L n kA L 0 I *0CL a. u 4A- - - C .- .- r- -- (r-
C 0 C 0 0ý 0 0e C (Y C 0 r o - .' •U 41,1 4-w 0- .- 0 0. CL Cm ' 0 - > ~ > ~ C 'C.. r- - r 0 C .- &.W -- .) LJ0 U 0 .0 •C 0-W 41 -'-w 0 4 -' ,- 0 -0 4-) 0..-'004-) 0C C-- - '
=-u u , C - u' C- 0e.- 0- ( 0 - 0 0- .0 0 4-; *0 0t) - w Q) C. w 0t. G -) CC. 0. O CC a. .L) .u L (3 .L.-
W E C.-- • --- .,-L. U o C 0 C- 0 0 0 E 0 0V) - C .00 Cua to0- tU 4J) S.3 4-) 0 4-3 L) 4-) 0 4j L.) M.- Q0J 1-t .ai 0 o- r- - to 0 4- to C-L) C: r CL.) C o tA inCu1- a- to~ a . a) d) a) a) wO. w E S- ea. SE eo-
QS 78 e0- 0 S- 'o eto- L90 u u'S 1-0 150> 90aT) mN F E ELES ) C C-.) CI m di - a)Sj 37. S-1 1s-> .0 - to> C1 160 < aSo60 1-0 0 10 160) 0
2-~ a-. < - Z - c C.D U3f C/i V
WITHIN TWO MILES
S 10881 60 70 90 .130 150 90
___ ___ __ __ IWITHIN FIVE IILESSw 3733 60 ___ 70 100 130 160 150 - -
SE 2824 60 ___ 70 100 ___ - 130 160 150 - -
WITHIN TEN MILES
SW 35973 60 170 280 230 340 210 130 210
SE 9575 60 90 120 150 180 210
Lake 45
All 43772 60 170 280 230 340 360 130 210* Same location as Nine Mile Point.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Ft. Calhoun
I0cO
C) 0 cu c *
4-' 0) 0 0. 0 0 I-- -- U) 9 ' -E O) c cL CL CLC
U -(A) U) U) (n V) •0 .0 0 ,0.(• 'U I-- *.- CU U) •jr OJC UU CU U--•' u.'.- I- U.."- .)*--
a 0 C 0: c. QI- OC 0 C 0 (0- U- '4i 4-L) 4-).0 - 4-) 0 m- to C 0 0 *•- >. > G- C-" >0 > 0-.-. C- .) 0 . Z .0 b.LLJ "LJ 0o 4(1) ZU-.- 4 '- 0 . -'; D. 4- 0.'C - r- -. cv) 4.3 "0 4-) a 0 "to 'U CL c-.- 0 - o0 0 0..- -" * * 0 ( 0(-)6- C- Co -0 4-) 0.. 0-C 0-0 0-C 0a(-) r0.L-) r'- 0.aL. rL) r - ,- U- a .- -- C 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0V)S- CL t u. Io• M- n U . = s-.,-- L 4-J 0 4-) •-) 41 0 4.• ). 0-Q- -I-,-- - -
)0 E",'- L- O c-", 'U O c4- ' C .) C CL) C 'U *. ' U0-0 cl s- C c 'U :3 CL 0 ) W- a--) 0) s-, 1- a- ( )- _ -(.>) L- u 4- a) r-- C ) *. .-- .,-. -O) > O '-"- >
CL ( oUL 0 -os LA '' 'UL ) LO L> 0 0 u ->0 0 EE ECU a ec: cu~ a) a) '.) cu a) <J Q- L- L> (aL 'o> c c< C L 0 ý
WITHIN TWO MILES ..... _i
G-R 187 62 15 180 10 205
Iowa
WITHIN FIVE MILES
N-R 7382 2077 15 180 42 237
G-M 892 274 15 180 20 215
Iowa
WITHIN TEN MILES
N-R 8317 15 180 56 251 -
G-M 2374 15 180 40 235
Iowa 15 90 20 40 125 145
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Ft. St. Vrain
w
0 LI) 0 LI)
4J a- 0 0 0 0 -LI ' In F-LIE q? - 0- C0. D. -- c C
-- u 0 L • 0 • 0 "0C CL. (o F- .- 0 Ln WC I a) 'AC Ua )J .-- 0 "'--
c 0 0 CL F- D : OC - 0 Qc 0 ro .- ' (0 4-) 14-3S 4-) 0 - 4- ) 0 0- C 0 >- > . LJ "0 ,.1 0
L) 0 C r 4- .- .4- U-JV WV 0 V Vo W4-' Q -) a)4-, 41- • 0 0_- ,-. C 0-4-, 0-. C C - C C
r- (o Co ) • ", C I C - -) • 0"- o"V 0 .- 0o- .. 0 • 4) 0o 0L) to .- a 0' 4-) cl 0 aV 0 C l 0-V l- c 0L) CL L) R3 r,_~) CL-L)LA : C- Cu ',--,-- U 'V C 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0
LA1-- 'VO (oO (uUC 0 4-'3 s - 4Ja 0 4-c-) tJ -' 4-)L) 0- - -10) s- - n- a)a)0 Er - 0 -- C- 0V L a c (tO- C L- . (o "-L-0-0 - L-C -- X: ~ a) 0-W a) a) a Ea - -E s-1
ca . s-x,• I- - 4 (. 3I10 4 0 (a 'V0- 315 (a 1L s2 94> 400>a) Z CL E E3E W cE c 4v o) WV ai - 00LU0- Ll s-s-1- > 'Vo s > Co >' c 0-
0-~~~C 0- -CFL ) C
WITHIN TWO MILES
I 140 64 350 315 5000 126 20194 1 _________ 240 ____
II76~ 35 3000 361 201 641__1 _ __ 120
WITHIN FIVE MILES
I & V 554 252 350 315 4000 360 20 40 420
I & VI 744 338 350 315 4000 180 20 280 480
II & III 374 170 3000 150 20 130 300
II & IV 1802 819 1500 144 20 3161 480 1 1 1 1
WITHIN TEN MILES
I, V, IX 4099 1863 350 315 7000 336 20 184 _ 540 60
I. VI, X 5121 2328 350 315 7000 246 20 274 540 18
II,III,VII 1736 774 3500 282 20 238 540 18
IIIV,VIII 2244 1020 3500 246 20 334 600 1 18_
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Ginna
0
) 0) (A 0i U
W- 0 0 0 0 0 -f 1Vi IE (. . Q. CL a C- -
. 0. " tO• U) V'( VI Ai L0 O.0 *,-- O 0C0 .to-DC/lV '- JU (D - .- I-a .a . 0 a. 0 L - or C 0 M0 4-) 4j .0 4- V "--
C 4. 4) 4) 4 4-.- 0'C C.43 0 _ OO4) O L4J O .C . a ...
O..(3 :-" OCý •.•~~ %n a 4- '0 0*. ~ 0 .0 - *0 04) 4- Qo -a CL~ r- C..)
0tU ro U.) OL
-J E -*."- *.-L U aU•C 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0Lf) La.C (a U toa CL tn 4-'3 : 4-) 0 4J (-) 4-' 0 4J C-) Q- - 0 a) CI .
C, 0 E S- O r- -t C oL) C U- r- a -- , 1 to V1S-0 L.C I-C tOC CL 4) 0. Q)0) 0) a)0)D - E S- ~ E S--a) a) S- 4) U 4-3 0V a C(A *- O to0 tOv rOCL> I> vOL 0t La to (A (aL o 0n L > z) 0 >
>0) ~ C E E EW C)aE C) a)~ = W0 *. uLLJC a- & LS S-> vOL t.O> C -<1 cu Z
o) cu 0 SO L -o 0V (D C. a.
WITHIN TWO MILES45
S 867 237 120 20 39 60 90
N 30 45 go 270 285
WITHIN FIVE MILES
SE 4820 1197 120 20 92 117 60
SW 4820 1198 120 20 92 117 5 12075
NW 0on-- 390 420
75NE 0 390 420
WITHIN TEN MILES
SE 12064 3414 120 20 114 236 135
SW 36803 10868 120 20 312 384 360720105
NW 0 15 550 595105
NE 0 L______ -5- 55059OF158 55 59
Note: All north sectors are Lake Ontario, and time estimates for lake sectors arefor evacuating boaters. Evacuation time shown under Special Population.
* Normal (Top)/Adverse (Bottom)
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Haddam Neck
N)I-
0) ) 0) 0)
cu 0 0 0 0 0 i-' i- -uS 0.- . .. CL C aC
u v) Ln LfUI 0• 4 fl 0 .0 0- * 00. to w .- 0.) cu O,- W" 0C UW " w*c - " - -.
CL 0: c 0 w.I r- Cr 00 eo 4O ~0 -0 4-w4-J 0 4J 0 a- to - 0 - 0 > :; - c >'- > "
C. - - u 0 . Z . • • . -Z .L L 1 0 , -d "
CD4--• 4 4-J 0J Z 4- 0 C.LZ CL'- 0. 4- 0.C *- - Cto a LA LA 43 0- CL 0 .0 4-) C 0 0w w' w- w,--QLC - CLat
EL C'E C~ rý a =S.to C: 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0S- CL tu fu Q. 0 s- 4-D 0 4-" "L) 4-"-0 4-1L 0-- .0"0) 0 E*. o- C- a tO -0 m L C uL C r- u c L L
c-l. to.C (- 'u.C = -Q . o a)0-) 0) . -.) -;' S - .-
0 s-, U -' 0 C CU1 .. . .u '00 c,.- ,0,wto~ s- 0 s to to (as- 4Ato 4As- s-0 s- > 00 ~>>0Q) L 0 E EE EO C aE c: c) 0)j a)0 *)UD
LU- -- s- S.- .. > ea0- t > Ca. .a) 0 0)0 'a 0 L0- a) cu)O
WITHIN TWO MILES
AB 1304 869 0 0 2040 20 67 ,79
CD 1616 1077 407 271 2325 22 73- 96WITHIN FIVE MILES
A 3540 2361 4317 2878 3489 57 178 209
B 4025 2683 0 0 1571 59 165 192
C 2636 1757 0 0 2623 65 124 139D 2635 1757 1872 1248 6290 65 96 109
WITHIN TEN MILES
A 38316 25544, 5992 3995 6169 175 477 593 2401 -i
R. 7982 521 5 500 3877 4 .482 - - 527Z -
C 15890 10593 10866 7444 7384 260 - 495 1 354_A
D 10326 688415054 3369, 8791 2081 281 307
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Hatch
NJ
S Q wa g(A vi Ln L4 •
• -.~ r c r_ O r -co- 00- 0,' 0•' 0 •' •0 "0.0 'U I-- .r'•- 0) 4./I JC GJU).)C .- u*.r- I-- U-• '•" "
a 0 c 0 Q. F- a: c e"0 o c y. -0 ro - U '-'j 04*>C 4-) 0 0. 4--0 0r cU " 0 c0 *- >.- > - - - >'--•r-C•'-C 0 Z -,-- ..-. • .4 L.) L K Lj." 0 u', "0 . "0a) Z)- 4-' di 4-- 4J' 0 0 -' .- 04' ' C C C'U CL/I .- CCI C o''0 o' oC. o0e *0 *0 ý .o .o0. c -U •- C- 4- 0 - 0- 0 0 0 0 I 0 L_0 0.)E-M E6 :, 3: 0.- *.-L. 0 90 0 0 3 0A-E,- 4-- 20 -&) 0 4-)60 L0)0 o r -o C U '-'0 CL 4-L c' , ~ '
EIII FIEuIE
L.0 -c F-0f. 'U.C : a- 0. (V a) ) 0 )) C'. - ~(u0 Q-) 4-' 0 a' C4A .-- *.-t/ o U. (aW 'S.. 'ua)o W
E- 5 4s- 0 51- 'U 270 36> 0 1 0 *>0 aj 0. E E EW cE co _0WO *. ~ UUi.Q &- s- s- > 'Us.- 'u > C- C'L
a)E o- 616 -a 45 9 0 ".- 135 165 3
WITHIN TWO MILES
E-M 6986 30 30 90 560 120 30A-E, M-P 266 430 30 30 6060090 -40
WITHIN FIVE MILES___
E-M 545 - 180 90 1801 1_ _ 270 360 180 - -
A-E, M-P 616 _ _- 45 90_ 120 135. 165 30~ .. 2. -
WITHIN TEN MILES___
E-M 2986 360 180 360 540372 360. ...
A-E, M-P 34 1 2 2240 360' 450 __600 690 240
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Indian Point
l.A)
cu) a) cu )
A ) LC CA -4.UQ 0 0 0 0 LA t
E o o o0 0L 0. C C
CflU C) a)LI 0) C0 a' LA 0
0. C WIl WC W I) U.- --. ( - J -
C 0 C- 0 4- I-- O - 0 C3 C - 0 4,-' •)- ,n4- 4.(i)4-0 0CL'0 0 0 ý 0. 0 >r 4 -.- C0 4-C-f. - 4-) 0 0 C-*O '€- O .4-) Lilt- > " > .€- L" L'
CD )4-) 4-) a)4- 4-) ~ 0 0.4- 0.--! 0.4- 0.z C: CL .J CC0 -O 40- 0• 0-C 0-t) 0 Q- 0tCJ 0" 4) ) 0"L " 0.L
e' o • (U a) a)1 a) I 0 to 0 (- 0 - 1t.- -D CI- C U,. r.. o 0-0 L- .C0L
LiJ E C-- C 0 0 0 0 0 0S- OL0 r0Lo ca0. L/U Z-Sf S- 4-' 0 4-) L.) 4J 0 L-C-) 0-- -L (v -- 00a) 0 E ,- .- 0 -- ro 0 o r- C -) C C L-) C ' .
a_ S- a_. I-C 'C :3 CL a) Gi0 cu ww -S- ~ E .- L0)) U 4-) a) C - CL/ 0 ..- -L/) '0L (D)rL 0
a S- > 0 S.- 'o to a L A 1 rO C•-L S- 0 o > z . ) o " >> ) E- E E c E r- (U a) a ) . ".- -aLJ 0- L- S- .- > eo L. ra > C r- <0. 0j<.
" _ _ _ 0 - -~ < - I-s- 0 CD C C
WITHIN TWO MILES
1 32112 60 200 330 260 390 430 610112191 90 200 330 290 420 120 430 610
WITHIN FIVE MILES
1, 3 48167 60 200 330 260 390 75 430 610
1, 4 44436 60 200 330 260 390 440 620
2, 5 13229 90 200 330 290 420 120 430 610
2, 6 53410 90 220 350 310 440 120 430 610
WITHIN TEN MILES
1, 3, 7 101378 90 200 330 290 320 120 430 1610
1, 4, 8 100002 60 220 340 280 400 430 610
2, 5, 9 32178' 90 200 330 290 320 120 430 610
2, 6, 10 127267 90 220 360 310 450 120 430 610I _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ________ _________
Note: Transients considered under special population category in this study.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Kewaunee
4t:-
a) (D U) E-(A-l I- LAc r - -r. c-4. "u 0 0 0 0 "- CA .0
E a. CL CL CL .0 c c 9). a. tAI- " . I U CA EA) Ac U 0 " . - - .!
c- 0 r- 0. -CL a cr- O ar- of 0 c 4-0 '0• 4-) > .-() 4-) 0 C- 4- 0 Q- eo C 0 .-- 0 .- > > . > -0 > "-wC.,- , c - L) . 4- .4-) U. L _" 0 r-I_ a-"-40 .-'- 04' -
C C *ca .o .to- r-U' ",--u C C 4--",- Ot" Oc0- 0 OV 0 "-) OL- 0L) to ,-- (u ý; ý w a) 0 eat 4-3 0-V " - r- 0- " 0 C L-C-) CL.-) (a 0-C- a0-)LA) E~ -3c C~ *.,-*. U to 0a 0 0 0 E 0 -0)V) s -C to .U 0 ... 3 U. .4-. " , L- 4 o 4-. .) 4.'0 4.. L) 0-,- "-UL . (A-- {%.'
u0 o E s- 0 C-'- O 4- ' c C-) C-- L.) c tot-A ea • •a- - c C - a - .(- = -L j U (D a o 'a 0. E- &- t: - a-)-0) s- v U 4-) a) C' CA , -A (' ;,z- 'o ... , oz >U
0 s-0o (a sC" A•C ) or .ti -s,0 &-.> 0
WITHIN TWO MILES_____-9 75 60 135 15
WITHIN FIVE MILES
w-5 o - 90 - 60 150, w -
6-9 _5 60 15 15
WITHIN TEN MILES
1-5 180 60 240 120
6-9 180 60 240 120
I I
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
LaCrosse
(71
0) 0 0) 0 L n CCL C3 CL CL -r
g (0. 0. ( 0 - -o0 CA U0 0fU U') 0 0 .0 .ý. 0. ' I-- - 0. f • ) C- 0 ) n - , . -r- M 4 "0 -C 0 r- 0 0- c- Ix C 0 ix a r0 ea 41 V ~4J >a~ >4(n) 4-)0 0 - -}O . 0a - 0 . 0- - > 1; > . - C --- .- 0 • O"- - O-1 .,- O 4 4 L• O uO a 0 a0) Q) 4- 4-' 0)4 4-1)4 0 0.4+j 0l.- 0.-0.- C C cl r- rCC0 a)a a )0 CU1 4-' . 0" - av a_ a - r-v CL .0 W .. *u 0LiJ E C - C -- . - L - n 0 " C 0 - O. -OS- to c 0.C-) E O O(10 L- Q. r U (a a - u + z ,- S- 4-' 0 4-)• . 4-)0 4-) U a-,-- -L- (-- 0_a o E.- L. o .,- '00 4-- , a L.) C c c0 _ c to,- -CL0 L -C 0-0 ruC -c Z. 0c) a)) w ) 2 0w0) - E to-> 4--> nL 0 L- r-L - LO (A> 0 " L IV >
> ( 0.- E EW Q c c - ,= 0," '. , vUJ0. L- .S SL > VOL S- a> CL D-0. 0
WITHIN TWO MILES
E 15 15 45 30 60 60
WIThIN FIVE MILES
NE 15 15 45 30 60 60
SE 15 30 75 45 90 60
NW 15 30 75 45 90 60
Sw 15 30 75 45 90 60WITHIN TEN MILES
NE 15 105 165 120 180 120
SE 15 105 225 120 240 90
NW 15 105 225 120 240 120
SW 15 105 225 120 240 120
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
LaSallie
rIM•
( ' CU 0) a) CU
4) 0)0 0 0 0E 0. Q- ci 0. C C E C C
LA (Ln A V) (A 0 0 .0. (U L a) r- a) (A 0) r-- .0 "'- "
C-0 C 0 C r- o O C ao 0 o -4-) - '4-' 44-A 4-'0 0- i-'0 Ci- r C 0 0 .> > > C >" >
,C.,- L 0 C ."- . 4-- • • L- J D z > iv 0 ILL .. L0 ) ' 4 -') 4-- 4- - o0 c_- a--. ,'0. 4-) _. '- C C C C
a- 0 C CA .- rO r- CA r- 4-) 0 -- 0-0 0 .- OU *0 0 4J •0 *0L" co- a)a) (A - a)a) 0 eo 4-' Q- 0 M a-C 0.(C O ) to CL C-0
E. E" C.- C -3 .- - .- L U cc C 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0SL.- 0- C OU (0 ( l 4-) L3 S- - 0 4-') -'0 4-+JL k Q C1., C1 1- C-0
a)0 E . .- o0 C- . 00 '0 CL C C .) C ' I - (A_cl- L_ ' - i- - ,- u _- '- -,- 0) (0 a) 0 )0) E -- E-- ' •
(a; 5-0) U L -) 0) Cr- CIA a). -Ctfl ' S- ' a0) s05- '00-- 5- 0 to ' '05- IA'0n o CA -0 - > C) 0 ->> a• E E C E Ca) W -0 2f-..
LJ.a- 5 - ,- <- > z05- (a> C a) -T,
WITHIN TWO MILES
I 30 10 520 520 120
II 50 15 60
WITHIN FIVE MILES
I, IIl 505 170 520 520 95 20 5 120_
I, VI 245 80 520 520 90 20 10 120
III, IV 215 70 65 20 35 120
II, V 195 65 - 651 20 35 1 1___1120 - -
WITHIN TEN MILES
I,III,VII 4250 1415 1275 1275 135 20 385 540
I.VI.,X 7635 2545 2070 2070 165 20 295 480. 120
II,IV,VIII 1905 635 75 75 85 20 495 -600
II.VIX 2870 935 230 2301 110 20 4 70 600
Note: Transients included in permanent population response time
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Maine Yankee
co
a) ) () 0)C' C C *" ,- .- .'- ..-.
4(u0 0 0 0 0 tU' v-U' F -U - U0• E 0 . o. Do. r r a" C C_0 •*0 ", *0 0 .0
I ' a m 0 .w C- 0 .- c .- -.-- I- • --c 0 Cr- 0 a. r 0"0 ' M 4 0 0 4 M 4 '0 +0
-) 0 0 0 0 ,- 4- 0_ a C) a- m .>0~ > *.- .4-.. 4) U ~ W .0 "~J -
0~ ~~~~~ 4J4- 4-) wJ 4.) -- 0o 0.0 .- 043 0'4J 41 a C+ ) 4J-' 0* 4 a. -- CL -- r- .0 c~ 4-0
E: 0 .- M = 0 ,-) 0 0 o" 0 0 0c c 0 .0 00L)w-0 w~ VU0 Lf(. L-)
E,- 0 S.- 4 .) 0 = - .. ) -- tca0) E 0-.- 0-0(u E - 50 C to o0 4- 'U CL) Ca C0 ')v
1. 0 (u s- o 1 0- G 0 , .c, 0, - -o S. -I( (u s- t-u
CL 0 SL ra m_ ' VU S. t' L S- 0 s.- > 0 T; 0 -- >>0)E 0 EE EW CE Ccu) - *- ~)LL -s- sl S.- > 'UL s- > Co > ~ 0.
a0 0 -a 0- L0- 0) 0)i n V
WITHIN TWO MILES
1 66 78 90 60
2 66 78 84 60
WITHIN FIVE MILES
3 66 90 108 60
4 66 108 132 60
5 66 90 180 60
6 66 102 120 60
WITHIN TEN MILES
7 .66 108 126 60
8 66 120 144 60 72 78
9 66 174 444 60 216 480
10 66 228 270 60 270 312
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
McGui re
(A 0 0) 0_1C; C C -
4Q) 0 0 0 0 .- .0- "E 0 . 0. 0 0 . C C- C-
S( .,- CA L" (/)V) .0 0 .- • .00L -- ",- (.v OJC - OJC L- -- .2) C-- U -J
C,0.C 0 _" I- 0 C 0 -a t,"0 r- w 0 r"4-i 0 4-') 4. .0 a- 41 0 CL 0 ,- 0 >.. >) >. C ,- >,
-- r -- -- ." .4 -' . _- •4) LJ. u.J a 0 L1J _ ..
C C C-. 4 C-•- A CU 0 4.-- 0.- 04-) a o C * C CL) .2 12) Q) 0 go 4- Q *0 CL C 00.L EU z a C 3 - 0--S S- C)1 0 r- 2 35 0 05 50 5MN- 40 oC 0 U 412 S- 4-5 0 46J0 4- 0 +0 L) 75 a_ a) L . CL0)a)E0 E7S- 0 a.- 150 45- (a C C C C 0 (AENE-N 137L 145-6 toC = = 0) 85 Q) (U0a) I-0 - 4L
NNWW 12 4 3 C-a0 5 fa s- 85 0 a) 5)
>0) (1 0.. (1E EM CE CU ) -0 M-U&. -- 1> toL &-M> C a) Qj Cu
WSW-S 1147 0 $- 30 5 45 M0 3
WITHIN TWO MILES
WSW-E 31 ~ 0 15 120 35 0 0 3
ENE0j_24 _ 3525 30 145 60 0 0 75 90 45__________WITHIN FIVE MILES
SSE-E 1731 0 15 30 45 45 60 30
ENE-N 1374 12456 30 55 70 85 100 45
NNW-W 1225 4336 30 55 701 85 100 45
WSW-S 1147 0 15 30 4.5 45 60 30
WITHIN TEN MILES
SSE-E 19697 - 3738 15 45 65 -60 80 160 1051 135
ENE-N 13368 19618 - 15 - 45 65 60 80 45
NNW-W 6496 7159 15 45 65 60 80 45
WSW-S ?5119 663 15 60 80 60 80 60
Note: An apparent error exists as evacuation times are less for 10 mile radius than for 5 mile,, •,A. -,,
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Millstone
ko
0n us u)C e- C- C- . .• " "
4-) 0) 0 0 0 0 I-- U - US j - -0E CL CL OC CL c•-0. c ,--*E O. (U .dJ .f (U - - I-- '-Q AA IAu•u S SU 0 4A 0 0
r- 0 C0 r- I- w~ cC ~00 V4- 4-))(A 4-0 0. 4. 0- Co 0 -- 0 * . .r - >, .
C -- C'-. 0 4-- ..-. • .'. UJ0 LaJ" 0 . , ") 4-4) 4-) 4"4S 4. -S0 .0 - 0 0 CL- 0 "- - 00 z '0 C - • 0 c c
,- - 0-0 0-0 *o 0 0. DA-)"J E r- - C *•r-1- s u r 0 0 0 0 E 0 0
,-- Q. nU 4J 3 0- 0 -" -.s.0- E-. 0 4-J L-) 4- 0 C-) C CL Co .-
o) 0. LC -0. C ~ra ' 0 . 0acC) 0c0 0c L 34) r- -S. IA
4343) 1-D u 41~ a C - l-_ k .- - .- 0 roL s- Wto 1- mOw.. o - 0 S.- fu ro to ul ( L As- 1- 0 S.-> " 0 Z->
>03 c 0. E E EO c E c4 a)~ ao 'a~ "aLd 0l. s- s- s -> toL (a > C. c CI, 0.
0) 0 a)0 - 0 a-,0 a)
WITHIN TWO MILES
N 6087 3044 1096 731 3494 8 90 107
WITHIN FIVE MILES
NW 12660 633C15721 10481 7076 33 227 266
NE 1778 2088c 12242 8161 4618 21 408 484 300
WITHIN TEN MILES
NW ?3669 1183124287 16191 8056 163 466 527
NE 34956 4747E 56742 3782 11405 125 -7- 667
Fischers I. 400 2100 _T 540 622
Plum I. 45 52
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Monticello
0
a) a) 0) a
LA in U')A n0 C CC C w ")
V. 4-0 0 ) 4-) 0 CL 0 0 0 0> . - > IL- "
-- , • .z- 0l :L .. , 4- 0 .0
U~ ~~~~~ -n iin i nn Lr- 0- r0 I- au) i ) i j U J- H " i'(/1 4-)0 -.4) .C00 a_ C "" L.) C. I ~ >
C.,- E.0- ,- 0 C; C.- 0) 0-- s. u t0 C 0 0 0 0 O.0 0
o- s- CL to u r CL LA ) 4- "-:3 s- 4-3 0 0 4 -) L.) 04-) 0 4.- a_. w- *. C C)a)0 -E o - .. C 0t t-) to 0L fu .,Li .LL E C' -C1- L. a- m -c ý =a C CL0 C E00 0 E 0L U Cu. c i U 4-Y a) C-" ' .LA . 0 ,-)L.n (a &- ra a) L :. 0.a)we~s 0* 1.- -" ta - 'a C i C) a i
-- 0 - "a ' c int to t n- s- 0 5-> 0 0 ">>aE 0 EE E a) CE Ca) a) a- L) U0
LLJ a- L.L. L.> toL. to> C a a)aCU a)' 5-D Ca-i a)CL0
WITHIN TWO MILES
NW-ESE 266 10 15 30
SE-WNW 509 15 20 40WITHIN FIVE MILES
NW-NNE 1099 30 40 80
NE-ESE 1766 35 45 90
SE-SSW 4573 45 54 110
SW-WNW 1133 30 40 80WITHIN TEN MILES
NW-NNE 2855 60 80 160
NE-ESE 6609 75 100 200 _
SE-SSW 8890 90 120 240 200
SW-WNW 3620 1 65 85 170 -
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Nine Mile Point
{3O!tU
E0 LD_ ul vi " {",-0 0 0 0I 0 "-
Vf) 4- O CL- 4-) O 0 -CL (-0'- . -- .- .,- •.-a > .
r-- r- u):• .- "•. r- - ,- 0 "- 0"- 0 .-- 00 • • 0 •0 4-) • 0 L L.)4a) 0 ,a)( u ( 1) 0I O C L. CL r-" c-_ "-0 M3 - a I• L-)D ro C>(. 0DLJ E :3 C- C e--• .- .,- U. t0• r- 0 O 0 E Q- C-aS- C . ( a U C U C . t n U) 4- ) S:: ' - 4 -) O 4 -3 . . 4 a O 4 -J U 0l , -- - ( G S -- r o. W3
0-0 S- --- C - O • n • ••- (a n- = O S.- a)"-CU 0) 0) u3 4- tn: s- (0 QI. >; ' ,) ;
a) 1086 70 90 130 150 90
WITHIN FTVE MILES
SW 3733 60 70 100 130 160 150
SE 2824 60 70 100 130 160 150
WITHIN TEN MILES
SW 35973 60 170 280 230 340 210 130 210
SE 9575 60 90 120 150 180 210
lake 45
All 14 3 772 60 170 1280 230 1340 1360 1130_ 210l
Note: Same location as Fitzpatrick
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
North Anna
0,
- - - - ' ' - € • .- "- "
. 0. .- ) r (D LA a)U• 0 c0 .: - •0 . 0r- 0 C 0 0 . Iu 0 w 0 f" 4.-) 0 4."- to .1 J
4- 0 0.m 4 0 . ' C" 0 .- > - > ..- C > -- >
C.'-.- C.-- c) 0 4-) .. .4-) Lu 'a u. -a 0 LI 70 LLJJ) a) 4-) Q -4.J 4-) 0 0..4- ' 0. -- 0 41 a-- c c . r- Ca
C' C Ir- .-- Cc," C 4-' .,- 0 "- 00 0.- 0"V. 00 •0 4- 0 *0
.) a- ) tA cu ) 0 (a 4-) 0 -0 M C- c: . -0 a_.C 0" .) Q. L.) m CLL.) CL L-)
Lr E • C- C -- *L . C- u m r 0 c 0 0 0 E 0 0(AL- 'L t 'u0C tfU 4J = s- 4-J 0 4-)CL.> 4-) 0 4-)" U M .- S.- 0o ..ai 0 E .- Lo a. mU 0 4- 'U CL) c CL Cn LU- 'U (
M.0 C L s- 0 -a. (a= X 0L w) a)) w a)0 E- S- t E - L-
0) S- Hu 41 a) C- C5 r .--- -- m ( S- tu d Z s- u w0C to IUS- 10 o S 0 (a t m0S- . 0S- 0 - 2> 0 0 >
>0 ai E. E E 0) C E C a) a)i aJ-0 .. u~ UV
LLJ l L- s- s- > m s- 'Us> C c~ <. a) ww0o0 W-0 LO 0 - CL OJ
WITHIN TWO MILES
A -H 1721 45 45 61C 90~ 10EJ 6010 0
J 1 1 01010 3C300 42(360 0 0WITIN IVEMILES
A- D 839 90 90 135 180 22d 135 30 45
E - H 278 _ 60 90 150 - 150 21d 240 0 0
J - M 1860 120 180 420 300 54d 720 0 0
N- R 1976 1 120 240 420 360 540 720 0 0
WITHIN TEN MILES
A - D 2966 180 180 260 360 440 260 24 36
F - H 0..4- 10 180 0 270 360, 450 480 30 4-9
J - M 2800 240 180 720 420 9601 1440 0 0
- R 3754 240 240 720 1 480 9601 1440 0 0
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Oconee
(w
0S 06 1 F- 60 F-E •T r- M
U U)E-E 1 24 4 1 00 U0 21 .0C. 0 o 'U W- a J ) =J 0)U) 4 W r u-, ~j.. - . U- 4i-3ES0 -0 1. I4 C 40 Q46C 50 124- 0 04-) (04- >W 4-) 0a 4-8 01 05 0 > -- >4- 90 12 30an: 50 92 C0 r- .4) .4- W0 12 0 0Co 0) 4-) 4-) 04) 4) 4.-' 0 .) 0.- 04' 0 ~ C C~C
I- C CU) *-' CU CC 4- ) CL 0 0 --- 0..0 *04-) M*0 0L) 78 2 -0) W 75.0'a 4- = a- a- r- (j 0. U 0g 0ES C t C.88 0283 U 0 250 E 0
CL 7 U to C67 WU 4 75 2 4j 0 0 .- 500 5WNW-N. ' 4 -C 7 0 5- fa =3 L ) r ) = 30)) 50 - L03W M W Uo CL C - CU) *'- *.-U Gi wU0 'UL E S
>0 d) M E E E5al0 r r- C4) 0U 0C'I *J a) CU1.130 LLI. - S..> to- 'u> CL CL0. 0030 0 4 ý S- 0 L-O 03 3
I C 0- < 1 .2 CS C-0V
_________WITHIN TWO MILES
1N-S 225 44 115 [J 60L_8020
SSW-N 63 j2711 - 20 1 1 60j 70 20
WITHIN FIVE MILES
NNE-E 1961 264 45 180 240 30 210 300
ESE-S 1444 546 35 90 120 3.0
SSW-W 1086 1775 45 90 120 30
WNW-N 500 3923 30 90 120 20
WITHIN TEN MILES___
NNE-E 7822 588 75 210 270 50
ESE-S 23888 3283 60 180 250 50
SSW-W 17495 3670 175 210 270 50 500 590
WNW-N 4279 5483 [75 210 270 50
Note: Data may not be cumulative for evacuation times.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Oyster Creek
wO
0) a) a) a)
4.) O 0 0 0 0 I F- 0 I• L-E 0- CL r_ c C
,,, .0 .0 .o .0
C 0 c 0 0. I- r r-- C l," 0 0-4- 143 to04- '0 4--C10 4-' 0 0-. 4-3 0 0- Co 0 - 0 ' >~ C- c > 0LJ-n:: - L) 0 C _0 .. .-. .- iJ J 0 LiJ ciJC) 4 -) " 4- O 4 )-0 O 0- O4- .-V C c* ".- 4- "- C "
F- ~ C- ~ ~ r '0 C 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0LI) £0- OU • 1•*- . U1 c:-- - .- L-A 0 c -- a 0 0-- 0 ) 0 •0 £ 0 • 070)U0 t 4-3 0- c c£ 0 Cl. - - -C: 6 -) CL UL C 'Li , 0 -
>0) Eo ,--p ., 0- s- . u CE- C c" 0) 0 E OU O.s 0 ea eo0- L u• L 4-- :3 s- 4- 0 4--) 4- 0 4--) C L " s.- 0-
0u 00 E0 s 0 C-'r- r- r- 0) c tn--- L a---- 3--- ----- -- - -- -- r a-
___________ ~~~WITHIN rwo MILES____________r- -u -a)
A L - S- 601 J 30 75 90 135 > 90 120
B 60 102 18 m I 162 :4c I()_WITHIN FIVE MILES
SW 60 30 75 90 135 120 120
NW .60 48 102 108 162WITHIN TEN MILES
NE 120 240 420 360 540 90 120
SE 120 84 186 204 306
SW 120 30 105 150 225 90 120
NW 120 96 204 .216 324 90 120
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Pal isades
U,
0) ) 0D V Q
4..)-) 0- 0 0 - 0 E • 0 o01 0 0. 0 . . C - C C
LU CA LA (AU tA LmU (A 0 0 0 .00. 0. ro U- ~ )U ) ), 0C UU '* --
C 0 a 0 0. I- a 4 -0 af a ro.4-) eu 4 4-)Ln 4-)0 cl. 4-) 0 a- fo 0 - 0 *->~ > >.- >.-
0 4-) 4-) LLJ La 0 a0)4-' 4-) Q) 4-3 4-) 0 0.4-) M..- 0.4-) M..- C -- a -
o C U( .,- t C t rC 4-) "- 0 -- o'0 0- oo0 o 0 0 4-) 0 0ou cu L ) ) 0e 4-) CL 0 m~ a ~ m a -C 0. L) 0L-) ro 0L> -c.
E rC C .-- .-- U_ C fu- 0 a 0 0 0 E 0 0•- (0. t U v . U•,U 4-) ."-" I.. 4'J 0 4-1C-) 4-3 0 4••-.) 0-- -. L. - - 0.0)
0) 0 E S- ._ t 0 4'- V a -L) C r-L) c U. "0.L .0 = I--0. to : 0. C--) .),-) 0) 0I0)• - a - $.- -" E -
a0) - U 4-1 (I C - _ L .- - .- (AU to s- ro0) s-L a)" >. I--• o - o C- ro m S_ (A LA S- o 0 - o - 0 ">
>0 E E~ aS5) c~ ca) a) ; Q) 0 U~ _a UJJ 0. . SI_> l r > C-< (C1 Q.) a)<
0)0C C)~ La S_ .o) 0. 0.
WITHIN TWO MILES
N-SSW 31 11
WITHIN FIVE MILES
ESE-SSW 28 29
N-E 58 135
WITHIN TEN MILES
ESE-SSW 120 124
N-E 158 165
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Peach Bottom
0I
41 0) 0 0 0 0 Ln C CVa- CL M. CL C CL n (A V) LA VtA . 0 0 * .0.• C) CL LA Qj A GJ , O ° H , • *CC 0 C 0 0- I- O C O0 o C 0" 0•4-4J - J -0U 4-)
1/) 4J- O( - 0C 0 -0 c- .,- .- C 0 > "--a- .- 0 C w- . -*_ .4-) L. JO u " ' " 0 "r-0 14-) 4) () 4-) 4-) 0 . 4-1 (0..- L. 4" 0..- - C .- CI o C- 0 r,- t - - 4' • -"- O"D 0.- O0 0 O a .0 4-)I E C -- , ,- fo * - 0 a 0 0 0 E O uV) S CLO (aO u OO toO CL 0 L.3s 41) 0 4-L) U 4J' 4-iL 0ý ( - -L j (v .(a)0 o E .- S-- 0 C-.- t 0 4- (0 - ( _) rC C- C ) uE . --0- 0. S-a C e -0 . 9'-C = =. L a) a) w j oa) ai s- eos- toa(1)0 u-1 U 1 cl) C CU-) t; VLA toL 'u to -to i~ So.. 0 S. eo fa '0 s- 0i L- s 0 .- > u 0> ) 2 0.. E E E Q) a) C (v -•a' = . U -v
IoJ s- s- S.- > eo S. e > a •Lw)0 o J a) - S-V 0) 0) V)
- - - -- L 0-: <c F-~ F- <
WITHIN TWO MILES
NE 60 120
SW 60 120
WITHIN FIVE MILES
N. 120 240
E 120 240
S 120 240
W 120 240
WITHIN TEN MILES
N 180 180 540 360 720
E 180 180 540 360 720
S 180 120 360 300 540
W 180 120 360 300 540
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Pilgrim Station
w) a) 0) a)
-) 0 0 0 0 -U -- f -CL c . a. CL CL a CoLA LA 0 ) Ln 0n -0 .0 _ .
C- 0 C 0 f I-= n C ý 0 o-r- C =0 M 4-) '0 4-)Ln 4-'0 0.- 4-Y 0 C1. I r- 0 0 . > > C• " "w C.- C-.- L) 0 - .- .4- ... . "-•) ,iV uJ-0 0 u.,Loo 0-) 4- 0) Z; 4-) L 0 0) 0.. z-L-:f 0.- C C,- C C
-" C C V I 0 . U -"u C C 0 " 0 " *.- 0 "0 •0 * 0 ) 0 * 00 'UM 4-) CI-t aC -0 M- C W 0-(c -) a.L 'UCL -L)
.J C- -:3 . - S-L . ro C 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0V) La. M U 'UD. 0 i CL) ZL5S 4J) 0 4-) 4-) 4-' 0 -4j () a_ - a_ L. CI 0-C )
a0) 0 E o C Cý CL) C -" - ea -LA(-. Q ) a)- ) a) 0- z -- E -. •-
w)a) W-) 4-) 0) C- CU *-- - U.-e'S uW
WITHIN TWO MILESSE 469E 1173a -T 31
WITHIN FIVE MILES
5748 1437 35 35NNW-NW 2241 897 2959 987 45 32 120 8A 1-55 16- 4 .5,
5T1612 45 45WNW-SW 10938 4160 15014 5005 60 8 l 1 27n I2q 1n 23n 6U
9525 2382 35 35SSW-SE 5619 2248 5210 1737 45 I00 10 -1 3;. 154. 45-. -
WITHIN TEN MILES
9219 2305 35 35NNW-NW ?1414 8566 13054 5018 45 2 1 6 2L5_ 1A7 44n 3iJL At -
= 2466 45 45WNW-SW 35394 4158 5009 8337 6- 119 175 91- 2S9 25. M
14302 3576 35 35SSW-SE 6625 2650 11639 3880 45 79 125 221 335 170 45.
Notes: * Transient includes seasonal (Top) and transient (Bottom)** Normal (Top)/Adverse (Bottom)
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Point Beach
co
LI) LI LI) LA)>-C C C C *- '- 0
4-) 0 0 0 0 FLI) ý_U1E L a. CL. (. C C_ C-U 0'- ' 0l 0I LnL ) A •0 0 *• 0
0. M. F_ a) Ln ) OJC a)fl V 0 (D rz L; 104C_ 0 C_ 0 L. I-- C= C 0 f -C 0 i0-I-) Z.4)-) > >.-40 n-' 4-) 0 CL (0 • 0 0 '_>. >- C, - - -
C-' O ' • .,- L)•-u 0-•- C "-0* 0 ,-.- . .0- " jI:= ui c0 0- • 0 • 0VC1a 4-)) Cý a) 4r-L o*,- 4i - 0 *0F- C"- Cn C •- -C 0 C- 0 0 0 E:0 0 0
{•P ~~S 0 0 0• 0' C1 - a. a)0(• e - .- (.)c 0 u ,S_ rLa Za 0a ELL Z~ Z; = 4-) 0 4-) C) +-'0 4j -)L 0-. 3r J W S_S0 o-10 ~ tao 0 4-- a L) = C L) C '~Ln)'
OJOJLW 4- 0) - CI)W 'a) E~ S_ 'I- ~ Z t-0 L 'r 'LA~ ~L 10 1> 0 .- >
UJO LL 1> SaL 0> C 0)
a) 0 W10 S_0 &_0 a) V CL D
WITHIN TWO MILES25 1LPZ 265 90 1-i* 52 110 5_5 0 -*_
WITHIN FIVE MILES ***
25 15NW-N 33 97 5_* 50 1101 55 120 30--*
40 25SW-WNW 519 150 90* 65 40 75 ( -- *
25 15SSE-SSW 388 110 60* 30 110 55 -120 1_30* -
WITHIN TEN MILES ***60 40
NW-N 1613 447 40* A5 I 10i 2(n An*
140 70SW-WNW 43391500 -* 165 330 _2n _2n i2f----*
120 120SSE-SSW 15738 4610 1200 250 00* 210 450 135 50 240 480 120*
Notes: * Normal (Top)/Adverse (Bottom)•* Total General Population Evacuation Time estimated to be non-cumulative
• Estimates for 5 and 10-mile radius maybe non-cumulative
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Prairie Island
'.0
LA Ln Ln Ln C. ,C- C C C: ' ~ I-I
4. )0 0 0 0 F- 0 -I La)- a CA a) r - 10 4- J") 0. Q 0 0- > C *o C
. •J In In• I/ L/)In .0 .0 "0
0- C. ro C- 0 0) 4j dJ Jn J L UI ~C" 0 C- 0 0. -- D C- 0 rC - 0 o'"' 0"-,V/' 4.J 0 .( -- . 0 . r- O C- 0 "'-- 0 >• .,-- C,- >-- . > "C" ,- C'.- 0 0 C *.. .. -- r.. ."- WV' ,&.J' 0 WV' tJV
Q )-' 4) a )- -)o CL 00 0a- .. -' r- C: - CLC? C• -- C C '- , r- 0- .0 0 0L nS- Q t 0) I no 0 ) 0 0 U ' 0 ! ýS 4 -) . 0 C 4 - ) D .C.- ) 4.- ) + j C LS 0 .- ) C .1 -4- o.
- a) 0 C - C " ,-1- U ,"0 C 0 C- 00 0 0 •0 0 0
,,-, 1-0• . U 4.u , C- C-n *)- o to ' o 0) o - >F-.0 '-1- 00 '0•-- I 0 (' 0- 10 S-> " 0 '>0a) 0. E E a) C: C0 ) 0V * : ~ UbLi , 1. S.. - ,> t ' . 'o > C1 ca_0
0)0 a) 'a 0 S-' a) a) o_ 0.
WITHIN TWO MILES
NW-ESE 238 119 15 20 30 35 40
SE-WNW 111 56 15 20 30 35 40WI1HIN FIVE MILES
NW-NNE 370 185 1 30 40 45 55 80
NE-ESE 610 305 30 40 45 q 5q AQ -
SE-SSW 2302 1151 40 52 55 67J100
SW-WNW 378 189 30 40 45 55 80 0WITHIN TEN MILES
NW-NNE 2153 1077 60 80 75 95 160
NE-ESE 4355 2178 50 65 65 80 13.0
SE-SSW 14016 7008 90 120 105 135 240
SW-WNW 1790 895 60 80 75 95 160
Note: Notification time assumed to be 15 minutes to compute total general population evacuationti me
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Quad Cities
0
"0-~ G 0 0 0 0 I•A' "- ' 'inE ca ca~. CL 0. C o .c c
CA n(n in Lnn 0 .0 0 ~ .0.~~a 0.L - -- W i W n wW r- r- rl4- 4-wC- 0 r- 0 0. - c or 0 C 0 to4 >4-
) 0 cl- - 0 o.- ru C 0 ,- 0 ".- > >" - > -Of r- .- r .- (U 0 C * . *4.. ..- . 41. uJ ' ,j a 0C W 4- 4-, W4J. 4-. 0 0 .4-, a--- 0 .4- .- C r -'- r0 Z
Cr- Ca c t .,- - CiLn C 4-3- -- O• 0 .- o - .0 .0 4-'CO A-a u0 ca 4-J a-0 .CL -0 M-c CL3 r-) u.L to L.L) L.1UILL EJ C- C .--- .-- - r C 0 c 0 0 0 E 0 0
S- C to U ru0 C- nL) 4Ji M 4-3 0 4- L.) 4-) 0 4- L.) Q.. - (V to- ~CUO E -- S- 0 C- ru 0 4- ra r CL C -CL) C in*)t i n0 J W- 0 4-9 _ C- 0i to -'- * ,'-' a) a.- 'O sa- t
o- S-- 0 . co ca ccaL- icc S-L 10 1> U)0~> a).a E E EW Cir-E oa) aZ io . (uL.J0_ I.- &- -> raL S > C- ,L
WU o ) 0 s- 0 L0 W a- O-L ,c : ..- ,
WITHIN TWO MILES
1 45 15 ( 0 35 20 180
145 50 85( 680 75 20 300 --
WITHIN FIVE MILES
I,V 1350 4501 0 105 20 420
IVi 2815 940 30C 240 85 20 4--a-
111111 700 235 881 710 100 20 480-
II,IV 1350 450 851 680 115 20 420 - - -
WITHIN TEN MILES
I,V,IX 5310 1770 0 115 20 540
IVIX 42240 4080 1030C 240 115 20 720 300
II,III,VII 1510 505 885 710 125 20 540
II,IV,VII] 7265 2420 850 680 100 20 480 60
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Rancho Seco
I.-
Clv 0) Q) 0) g) ) cuLn tA (Al - E
Cl) 0 0 0 0A LA CAu L• , • - . 0'-, C • C
•CL- M 0) A , d C Q L o o C .o 0C,' 0 C• - 0 r 0.n r 0~ " 0)U 0.J- LJ'" J-.r- I- U• . - •"
V) 4-'•0 - -0 0. " C0 C ,c-0 ha_- M.I) 4-) 13- ..4-). 0L CC~ ~: ~~ >~ >~
hr•€, - - U 0..-. .• Z; U; t>S L>0 0 ri OL- 0 0 C0o 4-) G)4-) 4J ,=o0 4J .-" 0~- 0.C.- ' C C C1 L
C L C0 0- 0 0 -C 0- 0 C 0. 0-010 E.- £0 0r 4aJ4 ~ CL i Cl C 0 C 'a. C£U I -
0.0.E £. C :30 UaC n u0 J) - a U
TL TO 0L 0 0 0-
R- G J14~ 92234 j35 * 3 6 __38 41 f• * **
H - Q 87 U56 _ Q. _% 40 * 31 6 4- 4346 22Q** **
WIITHIN FIVE MILES
R-C 55 35 _ 35 * 924 a 4459 30 ** **
0- G 35 22 4-_ a) C_ 35 * 9 24 44 4A27 S- **
M-fQ 478306 70 * 912 79t82 98_ ** **
H-L 229 147 55 * 11 28 - 66 83 132 ** **
WITHIN TEN MILES
R-C 303 194 155 35 6 221 270** **
D- G 2491 1594 200 * 20 66 220 266 343 ** **
M - Q 3674 351 200 * 20 64 220 264 652 ** **
H-L 1816 1162 200 * 20 64 r 1 220 264 760 ** **
*
**Preparation time included in warning timeLess time than for the general population
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Robinson *
!"
CU CU a CL) EJC)0 ~tA un tA E
4-3 0 0 0 0 0 CA CA - -c a. oý CL a. c c C
( . I 0- (Afl L (AA• .0 '0 0r *- ' "
1" (4-- ý o- f.-.a > o - 0 •C .Q " . ,,,. oJ• ',c u 0 C> •, -u oL,'LJ - -
C 4-) 4 (v 4J 4-ý 0 041 X. 0. 4- r W c;LJ- (A C CA r- - 4- Z " 0 0 .0 0 0
L) Q) Q) a) 0.. (a Cl0 00 c- CL 0Lc t) k (uj E : C- C -- " rL S- u C- 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0
S- L fu Cu 'a CL V)u 1=S 4-') 4- u~ 4J 0 4-'J (-'o -'.- L a ) ~ CL L -- DQ-.o E Lo•, C -_ (, 0 CL c C (a It/ 'a (A
0-a-L S- -- c a_ eC_ -3 CL a) Q)W (1) Q)(u - -L &-E -Cd) LW U 4-' Q) C - cLA .- S-/ ma (1) 'L. '
ra 0 - 'a 'a 'e I -- L A l.A-L L L.> )>0. ý a- E E E Q) c~ EFc ) =~ Q)J .- ) -0Wa - L- L- L-> raL S- u> c c~ -: a
IV o 1)' L. 0 V 70 w CL 0
WITHIN TWO MILES
WITHIN FIVE MILES
WITHIN TEN MILES
*No Response
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Saint Lucie
0,
d)O 0)• ~ ~~ ~ V)"- • • Ln v) 5 •
4-. - Q) 0 0 0 0 • 0 • 0 • 0 *-,0 O. 00 '--- C C C C.- ) L J 0 . -- - -L.0 Ln
C 0 r0 -0 re C 0~0 c 04- 4)'s'~-V_ +-)Q 0.. o 0 C0 - 0 *.- o - >> C . o >0 - -- 4.3i u -0 0 L0V 04-) 4-) 0J 4-). 4-' 0 L 0.4-) O.*'n4- .- C
- rz Co r- t. c 4.) *- 0 00 0- 0 -- 0 (L0 *0 4- ) LC-) QV- )) W~ ()) 0 a- 4- 0 0 m-C a _-0 aC c~~- CA- ' 0-.) 0ALI. a C' .-.- .- L- r- 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0v) s LO3. to v f ,0ý tu 4-) = - 4-'0 4-'C3 -P-0 4-)L 0- L (u. (n 0 00)0 o . O C. 4- r- uL C S.- ' . ' IN-SSE 300110 12 3 0a) a) .- 0 cv U 4-' 0) C. VL) *.- *r- .- L s- 0 eaL (V>CLL 30ts0 17 Lo0 185> 3 0W>-S 0 a) 1 E8 5 C30) c Z: a)
uJ0 s- s-> tz s- ra > C C"t 0S0 a)-0 31 2 0) 225 30
------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- I __ -- -D -D
WITHIN TWO MILES
N'-SSE j j_ 301 110 1251.~ 30
WITHIN FIVE MILES______
N-NW 30 170 185 30WNW-SW 30 170 185 30 - -
SSW-SE 30 210 225 30 __
WITHIN TEN MILES
N-NW 30 380 395 30
WNW-SW 30 305 320 30
SSW-SE 30 325 340 30
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Sa lem
Ir~
• 0) 0 0 0 0 I-- ' - -E".- 0- 0 ,- - .c c-C c
0 .. 0 -""- .-- 0 .- .0- *, 0.- - -c 0 c 0 0- 0- ct, cJ ry-f M) 4- 'j- j. 0' 4-)C) -0 0l- 4-'0 0 - CL eo r- 0 04- >- -- 4'
.0- .. 4-) •- .4-3. LUJ '• - 0 LLJ• - " "LLJC) - 4- ,) "c" 4- , 0 _-..' 0--.r-4-
4-' ea V) oi 0.. 0- 0 .0 4-' *0 *ý0E r- " .- L C = S- 0 c" 0 r- 0C 0 0 E 0- 0
LI) CL0 eIU u r u, 4-) 4-) 0 4-)C.) 4- 0 4-') -• .- 'Ia s- ol. CL_)E) o- r e0 4-r 'oo c- u r- r_ CL) Ca LA to 0U
CLEa L. c o 0- 0u 0) a)0) -E -0 .0E La) W 4-)- 0 u 1- (a eo. c- :' s- to aC)
C >--- >- ) ro L- 05 L0 ro) 1-0 ro s- S_ >Ljj L s- s- s- > (UL s- Co c~ <) cu
W000 0o 1o 0 0) a) c C- - 0- 0-l:= I-ca- CD! LI)D
WITHIN TWO MILES
E 0 0 0 0 0
SW_8 _ 15 100 1 1 0 0
WITHIN FIVE MILES
NE 468
SE 0
SW 89 15 105 165 120 180 - - _
NW 741 ___ 15 1__ 105 1165 1__ 1_ 120 180_
_________ ________ ____ WITHIN TEN MILES
NE 11451 - - -
SE 1574
SW 3112 30 330 510 360 540
NW 7775 30 330 510 360 540 __ II
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
San Onofre
I
4:-
wJ (u w• (D W 2Ln W, U n-
u0) 0) 0) 0) LA CAE CL C C - a a C
L 0 A0• 0 (A 0 0 •0 0 i , •0 •0
in eai in (Ai .0 c: *- LA a t .0
r- 0 C 0 0. c- W.C 0 aC cý0 to 4-1 a4 41-> -04-40 0. 4-) 0 0. m Q 0 0 *, >" >- C " >
C- C~ ..- .-- L 0 0 Li" { 'm0j 04-1 4-3 0) 4-' 4-) 0 0.4 L .. 13.4-' CL -- C- C- a-Cto- Q- 0 r-V ,-n - tA c- 41• • 0 ",- 0 D 0 0 0" C. 0 •0 41 • 0 •0
0) a)n a) Cin C (a~ *10- 0- r- 0-- CL c0 L- :L *0)', E @ C,- ., - u v a- 0 0 0 0 E 0 0
.- a. C UL EU(. u' -mEZ :- L- 41) 0 4-#'C-) 4- ' 0 4-iL.) 0-- --I. a) a-. , . 0,
0) 0 L.- 10 r (a 0 '4- eU CL) C- r CL) C- LA in L, EQ0-0 to. =-a =. CD a)- . cu ww a) - 1 ~ ~
0.>L 0 .- 0 (-( US- in oU sn- s-o s-> 0 0 Z>>0o) m a.E-0 0 ) ~ w ~ .. ~ U
t±J (. S_> EU EU CU S_~ (U a-C :a)0o c -0) s- 0 1-) Ca- 0
WITHIN TWO MILES
WITHIN FIVE MILES
WITHIN TEN MILES
All 300
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Sequoyah
I
>) rU) U
4-) ) 0 0 0 0 FU ) 0) ''- o o o C• C E C C
I--C 0 0 1 O- U) o0 - .c- '_.- I-- 0..- ca
0 C- cC Q - -0L O r_ l 0 O 4- '0 04-) fO 4-L) '0 4-)
C. z~ C, C -~ .- C.) C 0 C- 0 0 0 JC-aAO . a) Z 4) 0 L ;~--0 "-."- 4-,0 "- L 0 " - 0"a0 "- ", -fa0 CO Lm C CC 4- C o 00 U) "0 0 L0.0.. , .C- - (•,I-0. • •. * O • • (D. 0)-0-- 0 0)0) " - S.- r- c- ,-L0- c--) a) a to 4--0) C_ 0- C ) 0 - O-U c•- O • O.,- , -- .C 0 _=- o .- s- " ro a U)C 0 - 1. -. 0 00 ED
s-C o >C0oU 4):34 -)~ U~ EE-) CE 4-) 0-- a) . L m aoo oa) 0> -0o > LC C_
0)0 0) a 0 S-o . -0 0). 0) 0.. a
_________WITHIN TWO MILESA774 219J 15 30 9 39 r- 0 54.-4 20 -- o0 l
1 & 156014521 L 0 15 30 18 48 n __ 63 93 120 115 135WITHIN FTWE MILES
A 4833 1372 15 30 31 61 76 96 120 115 135
B 1950 553 15 30 I8 48 63 93 120 115 135
C 3341 948 15 30 24 54 69 99 120 115 135
D 3173 1039 15 30 26 56 71 91 120 115 135
WITHIN TEN MILES
A 6840 1941 15 30 88 118 133 163 _18 160 I.9
B 2730 775 15 30 28 58 73 103 1 60
C 8900 2526 15 30 29 59 74 104 180 160 190
D 19020 5398 15 30 82 112 127 157 180 160 I.90..
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Surry
I4•
w0) 0 0) 0)0E- C " C 0 ca_ .r- a
CL -J (A V) i (A L (A 0 0 -0 . .0to CLH r ) CL )C r- U 0)C U- c.. a- U" -
C 0 c 0 01 Of c e o W c 0 'O•4-) U4-) -04-) .J 4-)f) 4-) 0 O- 4-) 0 0- ' C 0 "" 0 >, *- • > >
C..-" C" , - L "{) 0 c *.-4-)Z0 u 0 0 " z0C0Q 04-) 4-) 0) 4-' 4-) 0 ý. 4-) CL.- 0. 4-) 0ý -- c Z
C'U aC~ V7 ' CU C -0 - 0 *- 0 0 * ~to r (A c 0 .-- 0 C -- 0 0 0.•00(a 4-- L a CL r- a- 'a C CLc C C.) L .), r , L : .L.
C0 0 0) uw•. s..,H->J r- 0 e- - 0 _ 0, o0 0 E oV') s> 0. ro ) e C V U -1 : " 4-) 0 4- -E C) U, 1 0. U--..a-
ri
WITHIN TWO MILES___A aH 0 o0 C 0 0 0(a 0 0 0 0 0
J-R I240 30 60 90 0 S. 90 120 60 0 0
WITHIN FIVE MILES
A-0 1074 0 135 195 360 0 0 330 495 70 0 0
E-H 3624 0 90 120 240 0 0 210 330 120 180 240
J-M 664 0 90 120 180 0 0 210 270 120 0 0
N-R 138 0 60 60 120 0 0 120 180 60 0 0
WITHIN TEN MILES
A-0 27940 10000 240 300 540 80 140 540 780 480 240 300
E-H 4736 0 120 240 300 0 0 360 420 240 0 0
J-M 4548 0 240 360 450 0 0 600 690 360 0 0
N-R 5283 0 120 270 36Q0.1 0 0 390 480 240 0 0
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Three Mile Island
4%
>- r- r- r- I- -. . -
4.1 0 0 0 0 w (• I -• ,-3. (n. C. c r- C"U)) (A (flU) 0 0 "0 0 00L. -L ;6 0 a) W U.- - 'o i L- u J-
of 0 C 0 0 - C C 0 C 0 r4-1 ~4-)>.4- +3 4..O 0- C. 0 ,-- 0 >- c >' C U -'cc C•"'" r.- I 0 r I .- . 4) . .- .4-a I+> J0 J0I 0 c -0 W 4-J 4) GJ4." 4J - 1- 0 m 4-A 0.I'- M0.4 , .- , C , .
•- • m I -- ul -,- I •" u• t-4J - 0- o . x .,- 0o "o I 0 - 0 Z r • J m L.oI-t r-G 0U *-~ M U r- 0- c. faV0- 0V 0 4- 0L) ca aiw U)0.- w w 0 ro 4-2 m -0 0- -Cl -0 m r- CL(.) 0-l. U ~ 0LI0"A E ,r- - c=•- "-,- *.-L. U r r- 0 C- 0 0 0 E 0 0S0. toU tC0 U)U +j =. r S ) 0 4-)U 4.P0 4-) w S.- 1-. CL W.0
s- ~ ~ ~ ~ r o.o o• Ln tAC. • U 4a " .s- • o I .- ) - - -, .,- " .OO E- L0 C- uo 4-- 0 CL) C: L- C U- '0 U) &0-0 S... - -r --. fl W J m C w w w w-- - S.- o S-E t-o-wGJ w s U 4-) w ,- C o .-- - --., I - (U >- L '. 0J
to 0 S.- 0 i,. 0 S co s"S I > 0L> 0> 0 EG w CC) =~ wV -
A) 0 I (U-o i0 L---er 14D) 'w
WITHIN TWO MILES
Dauphin 60160 120 120 180County
WITHIN FIVE MILES
Dauphin n 180 240 480 420 660 300 600County" " '
i -.-
WITHIN TEN MILES
Couphnt _ 360 420 12601 780 1620 1440 2880Coun t
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Trojan
'.0
(fl wl C) Q) 0
>1r- 8 ( ' ' •"- "
4- ' 0 0 0 0 I- CLA I- dn j I--- ) F---L n
E m. Q. CL c. c w c c0. 0. r C-).C-)Ol) Cl) ) )" Cl) .0- *)-, *-- t. " ."
m W c" O O- F--"u 0A acJcQ 0 -r r,0 ~c ~0 et54-3 m~- ' 1-0~-
U*) 40 a_ 4-0 L 0 cl 0 0 ' >- C >. >
r--0 . z~- _0, . u- U-0 LZ0 -0 U4 J
C0 4J4~ +J WJ4J 4-' .- 0 04-' 0--- 0. 4-' L.~- c c c aic- o C-l) CA ,- Ccl) L A 0- 0- 0- 00 *0 0 4- •0 *0
,( D uL,- wo ( 0 m 4- CL_ " L_ C_ M- a a 0.c-) 0.._ ,u 0.L.) 0.LEJ E' C'- r "Z -- *,- s- u Co 0 a 0 0 0 E 0 0
V/) s-0 CL U to0 u o CL )nu 4-') = - 4-) 0 4- L.) 4-)'0 +-') u Q-- - J 0) CL a.)
a) E .- s- o C _- "u 0 -- to C)- c -.) c co - )a L..- c F-0-CL ýcU :3Z m. 0L 4) ) w ) Q)0a) - L &.. -E s-5
0) 0) s- 0) u +-' a) C - a CAl .- - .- u COL ilo q roL s- u
CL ~ m-- vL 0 s- co vo toS-LA t~o L S.- .- 0 5> 0 0 >
>. ~ C E E E (D c E c: (V (V = 'a 2ý -)U~U0LiC s-- s- > vOL s- > Cu >' 0- c
Q) W L. 0 L1- -a 0V)iD__ __ __CLZ CLc F- Z F-' V) (A
WITHIN TWO MILES
W-ENE 606 205 J2100 57 41 61 98 118 60
E-WSW 852 227 2100 45 37 56 82 101 60
WITHIN FIVE MILES
WNW-N 3266 1179 2100 120 103 123 223 243 60
NNE-E 1637 623 2400 82 56 71 138 153 60
ESE-S 2245 950 2100 106 52 70 158 176 60
SSW-W 1171 562 1800 43 56 76 99 116 60
WITHIN TEN MILES
WNW-N 54040 1810. 3600 86 255 272 1 341 358 120 220 281
NNE-E 3850 136" 2400 277 82i 12n 359 397 120I
ESE-S 4522 161 2100 103 73 q2 17A- 120
SSW-W 2214 911 2400 66 62 R& 128 147 1L
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Turkey Point
CD
- c - - F V--) , ) - 0) - L,) "ECL C CL CL *-*
4-3 w) 0) 0 - a) 0 I
L n4 ) 0 - 1 0 -a _ m 0) I >) >) I 0 J C1 ) '0 J- 0 C 0 0. I-c D. C 0 . 4-0 LL'4-0 . 4, 'U4- L'
c'- r- 0 " c 0" c0 .0r- 0 ". L U•0 0-Z CL u JV
c u c)- - V-) a )+ - 4 - ' 0 - a - - ' _ 0 C L 0 - 4 - ' Q - c C J CL L * Cu 0..- J u- 0C - 0C 0-) 0-C Eu 0C)0,,) -. m. , ro C o&A 0 . .- 4-)o 0o 4 uo * 0
a)) 0~ E. s- 0 r- f,-L 0 4- 0o a 0- 0 0:() c E 0s00 -- 4 -- 0a[ - m -CL uo ) a a4 - 0 4 )) 0 -aj - s -) s - 0 - 0)0 E" .5 C) c - co.- -U .4- (A C L) Co CL) C >U*.M. uS. 0 S.- ra ea to s- toU (nS.- s.-. L >>0) z 0' E E E C E C-.) a)• a), .. U 7 L-o
Lu J- s--S.- s- (aL. mo> Cc~ - c-a)0o Q)V V-0 V)0)-~~0 - I a- __ __0z - I- ~~C CD
WITHINTWO MILES
N-SSE 30 90 105 60
WITHIN FIVE MILES
N-NW 30 100 115 60
WNW-SW 30 9L 110 60
SSW-SE 30 90 105 60
WITHIN TEN MILES
N-NW 30 255 270 60
WNW-SW 30 365 380 60
SSW-SE 30 90 105 60
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Vermont Yankee
w
(1) a) .0) CLA 0) LA AA EC " - C -'. . - .C-
4-J. a) 0 0 0 0 .A CA a)I- 0A _ I aE L 0L _ oL C C
U S-.A .A0-- 'U .0 0 00 L-n "0'I) Q) cU 0C 42) a) 0~C 0 *- I '
C 0 " 0 CIL 0C n0 (X - 0 '4 4-' 0 4-0 '. 4-• 0 4-0.) - 0 ' - ' 0 C t 0 - " 0 > -. >-- t3 C >•.cc: " - - . ) 0 C **.- 0 .- .0..) UJ0 D J0 0 L0 0C) 0)D- 4- Q) 4-) *.L J L- 0- 4-4) 0-. Q'. O.- C C C
C'0 CU 2 Cu CA 4-) - 0 O0 0- 0V 0 *;0 4-)Eo CW CU a) 0 '4 4-' C1. L r- CL 0- C OL UL 1z 0t. CA
LI) E~ C z 2 = 0)0ý ' z U rt$ 0 0 0 0 E 0 00S- 0. E - LO C :3- &- 4-J 0 4 U 4-) 0 4-C C .) - Q- W-
a) 0 E:= C) - C 0 " o 0 L-) 0"0) " - 0_ 0 .- s ,. C -1.C, CL S- "o- :3 4-r Q) - a) a -• )U) ( 421-. • 2- ) .- 43J '420)
10 S42L 0 S-. .4 ro SoL I~O ' -0 1> -) >>0 CU a- E E SO- CVaE C c) 0u a)- 'a~ Q0
LLJ a. S. L. S-> ro S fu > C C' <) (1)a)0 o J a) 0 a- ) a) a- 0
i) V)
WITHIN TWO MILES
P-E 2060 687 35 69 78T35
F-N 218 35 70 80
WITHIN FIVE MILES
C-F 2240 1160 35 76 9245
G-K 850 460 35 74 84
L-P 500 360 35 18 36 53 81451
Q-B 3400 1640 1200 35 70 85
WITHIN TEN MILES
C-F 3100 23601 15 _ 32 64,67 1E10I67 11094
G-K 1 6800131801 5111 16235
L-P 1150 820 -35 26 52 61 9745
Q-B 1445016106 1200 35 180 18045
Note: Evacuation times only reported for controlling condition, either generalevacuation or special;facilities evacuation
* Normal (Top)/Adverse (Bottom)
population
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Yankee Rowe
wU,
*a) O) 0) cu C)jCA IA 0 (c c 0- 0- C- in
S .0 0 0 i0
0. 0- ro I- - a~~n LAC ' JnGC U' .~- ~ 0 JC L 4 :- 0 )• a)- .c a " ( ) C ) U , " L - , - - '
c 0 C 0 0. - - C r- 0 ,- 0 '4-j 14-j '4- •4-(I •4-) 0. 0,JO 0- a C 0 "- 0 '- > >"- C >" >Cl. 4-.- .) 0 C LLJ •- .LJ0 -CD a) 4- 4-' a) 4 4.) 0 0. 4-' 0--G 0. 4- 0-. C; C .0CC'a r-A - C( Cn 4-' - 0- 0 0 0 -0 .4) *0 *
z"• "• " l - • " 0 "• 0 0 "• 0 c ca 0 4J L C• 0 - L.0l ,"-- 0 w 0) . C 1a) 0 (V -) 0-" 0QC- C.-. 0- L.'.) ,-) ' i 0--) 0..'Ll E r- o r' 0 C 0 0 0 .E Oct L 0 Qa 'ac 8 Au :3J .!2 4-1 0 4-J (.) 4-J 0 4JiLU 0--~ .1Ld) L -
QJ E-- L0 C~ a 4- roa CL) C CL) CL0 A - 0 CAC -0 E to 0 - S- E - S-d cd) Lda z = - d CL (Ao)4 -j 4) 'a) 'd 'a 0 'a0> -'rL 0 to Ma' 'aL CnA 0fl L > 0 -O '>
> cu 2 - E E Ed4) , - E C d) Wj d0 G.. -'LLI0L LL &- S-> 110 'a> c 0-a)0o d)0a SO L~d - 0-" Q
0 0- ~ C -~ D Lfl If
WITHIN TWO MILES
Q-F 9 2790 - 7 134'
G-P 225 go 2790 435 7113WITHIN FIVE MILES
B-E 42 192 2790 13 26415
F-J 315 154 2790 18 3735
K-N 240 114 2790 35 19 3735
P-A 530 114 2790 4- 21 41
WITHIN TEN MILES
B-E 1650 660 2790 35 41 82
45F-J 1400 560 2790 3 37 75
35
K-N 13175 5270 2790 3 55 110
P-A 700 280 2790 32l F64 I
* Normal Conditions Top Figure - Adverse Conditions Bottom Figure
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Zimmer
ul
(• ~~ ~ LA O I- nI- •0-) 0 )0 0) 0 CA CALA L.C• CL M.C C r" _ C "a. " C l• . •
LA I- I 0 " n 0 , i -n - " 0 0I
0. -, 0'.- 1-O {"flr- I A . IJ . IAIA J.0 UJ0l *'- 0.I' L.0It 0 0 ao C C .I C a) Ua- Ia L. aa -- "LA 0 IL 0. r_ W. w C 0c - r .4-3 •3 I •Z• O •
-C a.-. 0 C ". . LA-" L-, ,'0 • I • O.-C ) 4-' 4-3 0)4- 4 -'+ 02 04-' 0 ~ 4-' C_. C 2 J L
L.o a 0" C;; '- '-- 00 0-- - 0 .0 -0 4-'-- 0U.- a) •- .a0)0) 0 e- 4-) O t a rC L r-C C_ L to 0LU 0-.)E* ICU- C .- -* *L U e Ca 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0Ln0 'SU CL0 eov o L U +.)' :3S 4-' 0 4-') U 4-' 0 4-) C-) Qil- Qw S_ 0 - CL 0UCU)0 E- L-0 C.- ra0 '4- (0 C L) a r_) C aA Lna L
0.x M.. :30 = CL 0. 0) 0) 0) 0j ) r; -L s- -E -01 U a'',0) C - C (A .- ° 0 v "S 0)
l . eaL 0 L_ ro t roLS AC .. r uL. S_0 S..> 0 0 >>" • 0- E E E Ci c E a a) •) ' I -) 4 QL .J Q S -. S- -> toL ea C C' ) (>)_
-D -. 0 L
WITHIN TWO MILES
- - I 15 * 60 65E609 185 25 20 -65 1 10 TT s ws
15 60 65W 359 109 80 64 65 _ 115 65
,, :W1THIN FIVE MILES
N 1 510 25 20 80 16-0 185- 8015 100 125
E 1417 431 25 20 8- 10 160 18---5 -
15 100 125s 858 260 80 64 120 1_ - _ 230 120
100 125 1 7W 12461 379 80 64 70 15--5 T 70 180
WITHIN TEN MILES
45 175 235N 12788 3887 475 380 140 265 325 140
45 155 205E 6515 1980 25 20 _ 280 5__ 3
45 155 205S 2303 700 580 189 300 7-1 1 410 455 000
-4 1 580 155 205 -
W 47741451580 189 110 1 1 1. - 6J 6 110
* Prompt (Top)/Without Prompt- Notification System (Bottom)
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Zion
lJ
UI'
Ln Ln Ln
-. a) 0 0 0 0 --7- 0 L ) t- 'L
4- C• C Cl i LA L • 0d)i in cui .0 .0 *- 0u r0
I-- wi• n wc or" u, O)C• U- u .- I- UO•CAC 0 c 0 . i- of C Q 0 Of c cl 0 .O 4- 'V 4-' 10 4 -,
./ 4-' 0 0O" > " >4J L > > --C '-. -..- C0 C . • • . 4J L 0 L 0 0>L i Ci0 ' -I0)4-' .-. ) • JI} - 0 04- Q..,- 0•.4- 0-.- C C .,-- €-
C) ~ u) .(QCC 0~ *- 0-- 4-o 0..-; o -o "0 L 0 'a .0)-- a" LO t"n, t -u .• " 0 "• 0 _0 0 ,- 0 •0 4- •ý 0 0
cu ( Q) 0- 4-) C., 'aL 0CL L- 0 C-. c -~ CL ro C-) (~= E =3 C - ."- " - .i L- (a c 0 0 0 0 E 0 0Ln i ( uI uo t tu CL Ln UJ 4 -3 "3 &- a- 0 C-L cu• _) (-- _Qj • .cu 0 E - - ""- c o 0 ra c (. c c" C in -- co ,IA0-.0. a_ .. s -0 rfC :3 m a) a) a) 0 a) d)w - L. ~E
D u - - - - - ( u u 4-3 C- - c L .- . o -- C a) s-, - t a0)c el- 0 Lo o et$ rU to - LA •L- L > 0 S-0 "C->>) cu 0C E E E a) r- Co) c Z 0 ..: UJ ZL L> raL ro> cu~
-L a_ _-s -:-
WITHIN TWO MILES
j 28700 8735 435 35f 30 20 300 720
WITHIN FIVE MILES
1,11 38355 11750 660 531 30 20 360 720
1,111 4910015640 6140 4915 45 20 360 720
WITHIN TEN MILES
I,II,IV 11870% 3853ý 2709 21700 45 20 11260 720
I,III,V 15000( 4879 3909(31275 60 20 480 1440
APPENDIX C
DEFINITION OF EVACUATION TIME COMPONENTS
C-I
The term "evacuation time" is used by different analysts to represent
different components of the time between detection of an incident and the
completion of an evacuation. For the purpose of this study, evacuation time
is divided into several components. This allows comparison of the same
components among the various sites.
The components of evacuation time are defined as follows:
Notification Time = The time required to get the evacuation notification to
all individuals in the specified area.
Preparation Time = The time required for individuals to prepare to evacuate
the specified area.
Response Time = The time required for all individuals to physically move out
of an area. This time component is shown separately for permanent
residents (PPR) and for transients (TPR). Furthermore, separate
estimates are also possible for normal (NC) and adverse conditions (AC).
The four possible response time components are: PPRNC, PPRAC, TPRNC and
TPRAC.
General Population Evacuation Time = The sum of notification, preparation and
response (both permanent and transient populations) times. Separate
totals would be made for normal (GPTNC) and adverse (GPTAC) weather
conditions. In most cases the total is an arithmetic sum of component
times; in a few cases the total is a statistical sum of component
distributions.
Special Population Respone Time = The time required to evacuate institutions
and the time required by other special conditions that are largely
independent of general population evacuation times. An example of a
special condition is the evacuation time required for recreational
C-3
pleasure boats at sites adjacent to bodies of water. Separate estimates
are possible for normal (SPRNC) and adverse (SPRAC). weather conditions.
In addition to the above evacuation time components, confirmation time
estimates have also been required.
Confirmation Time = The period of time required to verify that the affected
population has departed. It may occur concurrently or subsequent to
evacuation. It is not considered an evacuation time component.
C-4
APPENDIX D
EVALUATION FORMS FOR FEMA ASSESSMENTS
D-1
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Beaver Valley*
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map - X
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population XC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X
B. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered _
Overall X
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
D-3
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Indian Point*
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map XB. Assumptions XC. Methodology -
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient PopulationC. Special Population .
Traffic Routingx
A. Map of Network XB. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered X-B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
D-4
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Maine Yankee*
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -
B. Assumptions XC. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population XC. Special Population -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X -
B. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered X
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall X
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
D-5
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Millstone*
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Backgroundx
A. Area MapB. Assumptions X - -
C. Methodology X -
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population X -
C. Special Population -
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X -
B. Capacity of Segment X
Analysis
A. Components Considered XB. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
D-6
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Three Mile Island*
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map
B. Assumptions _
C. Methodology X
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population XB. Transient Population -X
C. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X -
B. Capacity of Segment -
Analysis
A. Components Considered X -
B. Adverse Condition Considered
Overall X
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
D-7
EVALUATION OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATE
Zion*
Item Excel. Adeq. Poor None
Background
A. Area Map -X
B. Assumptions X
C. Methodology -
Demand Estimation
A. Permanent Population -- -
B. Transient PopulationC. Special Population
Traffic Routing
A. Map of Network X-
B. Capacity of Segment
Analysis
A. Components Considered -
B. Adverse Condition Considered X
Overall X
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
D-8
APPENDIX E
SUMMARY OF EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATESFOR FEMA ASSESSMENTS
E-1
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Beaver Valley*
a 0) 0) w) a) 0) cu(fl ul L E E
4-) 0) 0 0 0 0 FJ nI*u LE M- M M
'LA n 0 " " 0 C- 0 CI -0 -w ' w.- C Wc 0 .n v = .A-- 0 .-- " . * "
C 0 "- 0 a cc: 0 0 ; M 4 M
0 -** -) .- .4J LLI'a Luv 'a 0 UCD a 0) - P a)0J- 4-J - 0 L 04-) M.- 0-P- CL-- C C a C
r- to a LA f Aa 4J0- a0- 0, 0~ .0 .. 0 * .*to(a 4) 0 -r- 0-" C 0C)u Q-Cu M0 0-) 0CL
E C- 7" 'A -- .S- U to* C 0 C 0 0 0 2 0 0CL (- LOU C00 (AU 4-) - 4-) 0 4j1) 4-) 0 4-1 L.) CL-- 0a) (u -~ 00
oo 2 E- $-o C. (a0 ~4- fu CL C C-r-L) C: ' LA '0 UQ-0-L S-C = -0 CL ( :3 : 0- a, )) 0) w a) 0) -j E s- - -E &-
0).. a-) U 4-) r- v~) - S-Lf '01 'o 0 ~ '0)
•-Z (- - Z -- • Ln• tuF-~ L.L 0 L. (a CA S-l ~n0 uL10 L > 0 0 ~>
>- a)E E C)r-E C-aw, Q) ý0j =) Li -ujD0 M S- 1> '01S- f> r- a<
0)- 0 =,v 10 I-D0 0) V,0- 0
WITHIN TWO MILES
WITHIN FIVE MILES
WITHIN TEN MILES
All R4290 20 243 252
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Indian Point*
m
G) a) G) Q) (u a) cu 0)in kA in in E E E
4..- Q) 0 0 0 0 F- I ,- L -a) .- A '1
u Ln (A (A. i l (n 0 * " * * 0 - 0 "0 - F- Q) ifl a in LA ---- F- , -
C L F C" r (Y. 0 t a 0 C,00(a 41 .- "• 0 4-3 0 Z .1 44-JO 0 Q 4-J 0 a- a) 0 . 0> >, C > - >
Ca ~ -L 0 C; >. -4. 0 W, -a. LO LzJ zJ LI-U0) cu.. Z - a).) Z~ Ca- 0L 0-4- CL. --- i- C C *,C C C
F- Ca Cto a r CLA C- 4n 0 0-o0 0- 0-0 0 .0 4.. .'0 0u- aC )) in. aj a) .0 to .. Lj '0 aC C -aO Q-C a t-) CL) U 0-C- Q.L
U ES a-- C- ""--- I-S. - faC C" 0 C 0 0 0 E 0 0V) S-IO. ro , -C o U -w - S- 4-) 0 4-) LL.) +) 4 0 4n- . LL 0 -0) 0 """ 0a-C )
a)0o E~ 0 C. o 0 4- C'V C ML.) C a a L in(00 --. -CL Q). aE (D a)00 ) a)0a) S- - - i~ E -S-S-0 Q-) u- (D C - aCin L n C cC)I-> S- 0 5 u-aS 0Cr fuL inC iL- 0 S- > Q ~
>0Q) Z E. ES SQ) cE aCC) Q)~ a)~ 'a U~ 2--1.1)0- S-- L- > CCL &- o> C a~ < ) a)C
Q) 0 aiD -0 0 -- a c) (D CL 0
________ ____WITHIN TWO MILES
_________ ____WITHIN FIVE MILES
WITHIN TEN MILES
All 28407 510 520
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Mai. ne Yankee*
LA CA Ln ,A E E Ea 0 0 0 0 V) F- 0 a w" 0-" 0E CL CL M C
'a (a 0 i-0."I C U E; - C
0. I " o- -" •-- , r $- .. oJ u" 0c wu" 0 0 *0 - 0 *0
C 0 CL 0 .- D~C w 0 MC MJ 4J 1~- 0 4-)-/) 4-A0 a_ oj 0 -L C 0 - 0 > >
L). 0 C -*- Z-' L>.-a1>0 w-0 0 LuJ alUC (U-Z 4- Cu-" 4r 0 L 0 4 J CL.- '.4-) L -"- C C - C C
to~ r-(A r-( C() C 4- -0- 0 C 0- 0VCý *0 *0. 0 *0o) (u 4-0- - - - () Gotju 4J =L)- 0CL)
0L ," 4 ,- a ,, 0-, Q_ C• u. ro " •",,•(]
S E CWITHN CV 0 CL0 0 0 E 0 0LI) S- L 0. ua (0 CL 0U 4-) : - S- 4-) 0 4-)LU 4J0 +4.jL 0Q.- r; 0-J di S 0- 0; - a
• 0 Epa- -0 o .r ro 0 '4- (0 CL C CFM Cn (A tr-a L00-(1 - _rC F-C a- .M = = 0. a) a)JO (u ( JW -iaj E .- LS t:. E iS-
Wa) LW U- 4) udi C - C (A -~ - ( -- 0 - etda) QdL rUI- o rUL o - c0 1- S.- V) rrL ( (AL S - -0 L-> 0 0 ">
> Q) a E E EO CjaE C ua, OJZ a-D -0Z ~(440 Q-S- S- > toL S- to> C C~ < CLurU
(uo Q) 0 LO S-10 a) 0) CL 0L
WITHIN TWO MILES
WITHIN FIVE MILES
__________WITHIN TEN MILES
All 7874 13701 315 380
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Millstone*
m
Lu l L U) E E EC- C- C- C- , - ., - .• - ,-
41' 0- 0 0 0 0 I-id" tA •" - Cla) . CL 0. 0.L C E C C
u"{--t-, - 0 t • I+ .4if .0' *O• *- *•o .00. 0. ra r- *- (A . C L " u .- ;a 0 C_ 0 0a. F- 1= C w0 =C a x0 M 4-J re- '4-) '4-J4J 0- O 3- +j 0 0L CC 0 - 0 >' >' > : >
0ý a) 4- 4- a) 4- 4-' 0 0.-' 0.- 04-) 0--- - CJ CI *,- cL C L L-_ to C 0 .,- ' CU- 0 a " 0 - 0"0 0 .- 0- .0 0 4-j . 0 .0
u 0 to )0 U)- a) 0 '0 4-' 0- -0 0CL_ 0-O 0Q-C Oa- CL M~ CA.. 0.L)Lu E C"- C" .r- S- U ra C- "0 C- 0 0 0 E 0 0(I) L0c. M 0 M00 C )L C 4-)~ = S 4-' 0 4-$L) 4J0 j CL) 0- C 0i CL- CL. 4-)a) 0 E.-ý L0 Cr.-. fu 0 "4-' ca C- C CL C u r- cca-- L.. -a 0. 0C -a =x - ca. Cu D J a) aiw) Qj-E -i y -E -a)) w0 S..w u 4-) o) C - CU Ln -~U rOL S- MO~ '00aCL - a - 0 S- co ea ru$ Ln S- 0 S-> 0 .3 0 .- >
>0 G Z Q. E E EW a) r- -a) o)~ 2-1 *D CJ0 U 0Li-OL L.~ S S..> eu~ '0 > C r-~ a) a)
0) 0 W-0 L0 L.t a) 4) 0. 0.a- a 0-r =- ý C CD Ln V)
WITHIN TWO MILES
WITHIN FIVE MILES
WITHIN TEN MILES
All 2860J 20 319 204
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
ThreeMile Island*
4 J G 0 ,)1 0. 0 o.
0. - LA •- - 0 0 _ 0 ..t. L -, l-----n w C 1'- .0 -C 0 M Q r ~0 r_ 0Wf0I TW VI4L +S
+j 0J 0- +-)0 0. to C 0 1- 0 .- > -- > >C >~r-C-r-.- U~ 0 4J .4 -.' *4 WJ WD 0L W0 Wu-
41 4)4J 4f) G4V j 4"J 0 L 04-1 0.-- CL4-% CL- C C a~CF- a M CI *'a M C-In r, 4J . 0 .- 01V0 - OV 0 0 *0 4. 0 *
wa (uG kA - 0) (u 0 to 4.. C"0 CL C M v o- C Q-. L C L.) (a 0L) 0L)W I C- FIE 0 0E 0 E 0 0
cA 11,- 0 C- (a0 4- 20 C - 0 2L0CL CL to r- L) C to (A
(1)G S.O. 4) 40) OJ *- S- j0.> 5-> 'aS. 0 . ' 'L i n to E- to> co "0 j
>GJ Zo L. EC. 0 E C) 0J --- > i iLLJO 0aS 'a SE >' to > u
a) 0 WJ 1-0 M- ) d . 0
WITHIN TWO MILES
WITHIN FIVE MILES
WITHIN TEN MILES
All .19550 20 180 202
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES
Zion*
0 CA 0 ,0 E E E
>1 C. C a C "-" ".4- u0 0 0 0 0 I-l t-u Ln V)-u
" E 0 0L 0- 0. 0, . C C0a 0. U L .u u uC a• -U .a) .C- I- U .0-
4 0 4-C 0 a- u, 0 .C- 0.-- > - > ",- >'-
0C- * ,.; .. .. ,- .C -"t 0,, 0 4-" ""tC) 43 - C-L 4J) CL -- CL0 . 4-3 CL -- C' a. " (C "o C a 4 C- 4-) " 0 -0 0-4 - 0a " 0.4-' 04-- 0 C * 0
.o Cv Q -LA 0 4- 4-) a- o- o CL- C C- Qo 0- ro (.-) C *0 -)L&) E a---) C -- - U C C 0 C 0 0 0. E 0 0V. .L a o CL o - J ::= S- - 4-' 0 4-iJ 4-) 0 4-I)U 0- • .- ) - a_, CL 0)
CLC -ý - 0 3-CL ) a a) Ca) Ci (u E'cu Q) -S- u 4-3 a) C r u) .- -. .-- u( ru ro a) M: S---- - r O (v ro 0 SL- (A ( v. .- 0 i.> o "0 >
> c a . E E E C c E C" w Z "a- ,.. U L)"uj 0i S- > (-- fa .-- > C ) < ( a)
Q)0 o u 0 LO 0 1 0.) ( 0 0. 01.
WITHIN TWO MILES
All 220
WITHIN FIVE MILES
All 220
WITHIN TEN MILES
All 24000( 285 350
*Estimate prepared by FEMA contractor.
DISTRIBUTION
OFFSITE
(1) A. A. ChurmD.O.E. Patent Division98005 Cass AvenueArgonne, Ill. 60439
(300) U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionDivision of Technical Information
and Document Control7920 Norfolk AvenueBethesda, MD. 20014
(2) D.O.E. Technical Information Center
(10) S. L. Ramos, ChiefEmergency Preparedness Development BranchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission7920 Norfolk AvenueBethesda, MD. 20014
ONSITE
(30) Pacific Northwest LaboratoryW. A. Glass (1)J. M. Selby (1)T. H. Essig (1)A. E. Desrosier (20)Publishing Coordination (2)Technical Information (5)
NRC FORM 335 1. REPORT NUMBER A$sSigned by DDC)(7-77) U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NUREG/CR-1856, Vol. 1
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET PNL-36624. TITLE AND SUBTITLE (Add Volume No., if Hpropriate) 2. (Leave blank)
An Analysis of Evacuation Time Estimates Around 52 NuclearPower Plant Sites 3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
7. AUTHOR(S) 5. DATE REPORT COMPLETED
MONTH YEAR
Thomas Urbanik II October 19809. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (Include Zip Code) DATE REPORT ISSUED
Texas Transportation Institute Under subcontract to MONTH I YEAR
The Texas A&M University System Pacific Northwest Laboratory May 1981
College Station, TX 77843 Richland, WA 99352 6. (Leave blank)
8. (Leave blank)
12. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (Include Zip Code)
Office of Inspection and Enforcement _oPROJECT/TAK/WORKUNTNO.
Division of Emergency Preparedness 11. CONTRACT NO.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission FIN B2311Washington, DC 20555
13. TYPE OF REPORT PERIOD COVERED (Inclusive dares)
January 1980 - October 1980
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. (Leave blank)
16. ABSTRACT (200 words or less)
On November 29, 1979, the NRC sent a letter to 52 nuclear power plants requestingevacuation time estimates for 10 sectors within a 10-mile radius of each plant. Therequirements for these evacuation times are contained in NUREG-0654, Rev. 1, andinclude such factors as population density, weather conditions, warning time, responsetime and confirmation time. Fifty responses were received. The analysis of thesefindings are presented for review.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS 17a. DESCRIPTORS
17b, IDENTIFIERS/OPEN-ENDED TERMS
18. AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 19. SECURITY CLASS (This report) 21. NO. OF PAGESUncI asrfied
20. tFCUfITY CASSdThis page) 22. PRICEUnlimited unc iassITi le! s
NRC FORM 335 17-77)
UNITED STATESNUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
OFFICIAL BUSINESSPENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAIDU.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Recommended