[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 25, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4929-4930]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-1815]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-482]
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Wolf Creek Generating
Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its
regulations for Facility Operating License No. NPF-42, issued to Wolf
Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the licensee), for operation of
the Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS) located in Coffee County,
Kansas.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action would allow implementation of a hand geometry
biometric system of site access control such that photograph
identification badges can be taken off site.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated November 23, 1994, for exemption from certain
requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, ``Requirements for physical protection of
licensed activities in nuclear power plant reactors against
radiological sabotage.''
The Need for the Proposed Action
Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.55, paragraph (a), the licensee shall
establish and maintain an onsite physical protection system and
security organization.
Paragraph (1) of 10 CFR 73.55(d), ``Access Requirements,''
specifies that ``licensee shall control all points of personnel and
vehicle access into a protected area * * *.'' It is specified in 10 CFR
73.55(d)(5) that ``A numbered picture badge identification system shall
be used for all individuals who are authorized access to protected
areas without escort.'' It also states that an individual not employed
by the licensee (i.e., contractors) may be authorized access to
protected areas without escort provided the individual ``receives a
picture badge upon entrance into the protected area which must be
returned upon exit from the protected area * * *.''
Currently, unescorted access into protected areas of the WCGS is
controlled through the use of a photograph on a combination badge and
keycard. (Hereafter, these are referred to as badges). The security
officers at the entrance station use the photograph on the badge to
visually identify the individual requesting access. The badges for both
licensee employees and contractor personnel who have been granted
unescorted access are issued upon entrance at the entrance/exit
location and are allowed to take badges off site.
The licensee proposes to implement an alternative unescorted access
control system which would allow all individuals with unescorted access
to keep their badges with them when departing the site.
An exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) is required to permit
contractors to take their badges off site instead of returning them
when exiting the site.
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action.
Under the proposed system, each individual who is authorized to
unescorted entry into protected areas would have the physical
characteristics of their hand (hand geometry) registered with their
badge number in the access control system. When an individual enters
the badge into the card reader and places the hand on the measuring
surface, the system would record the individual's hand image. The
unique characteristics of the extracted hand image would be compared
with the previously stored template to verify authorization for entry.
Individuals, including licensee employees and contractors, would be
allowed to keep their badges with them when they depart the site.
Based on a Sandia report entitled ``A Performance Evaluation of
Biometric Identification Devices'' (SAND91--0276 UC--906 Unlimited
Release, printed June 1991), and on its experience with the current
photo-identification system, the licensee stated that the false
acceptance rate of the proposed hand geometry system is comparable to
that of the current system. The lecensee stated that the use of the
badges with the hand geometry system would increase the overally level
of access control. Since both the badge and hand geometry would be
necessary for access into the protected area, the proposed system would
provide for a positive verification process. Potential loss of a badge
by an individual, as a result of taking the badge off site, would not
enable an unauthorized entry into protected areas. The licensee will
implement a process for testing the proposed system to ensure continued
overall level of performance equivalent to that specified in the
regulation. The Physical Security Plan for WCGS will be revised to
include implementation and testing of the hand geometry access control
system and to allow licensee employees and contractors to take their
badges off site.
The access process will continue to be under the observation of
security personnel. A numbered picture badge identification system will
continue to be used for all individuals who are authorized access to
protected areas without escorts. Badges will continue to be displayed
by all individuals while inside the protected area.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The change will not increase the probability or consequences of
accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluent that
may be released off site, and there is no significant increase in the
allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action involves features located entirely [[Page 4930]] within the
restricted area as defined in 10 CFR part 20. It does not affect
nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be
evaluated. The principal alternative to the action would be to deny the
request. Such action would not change any current environmental
impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the
alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the ``Final Environmental Statement related to
the operation of Wolf Creek Generating Station,'' dated June 1982
(NUREG-0878).
Agencies and Persons Consulted
The NRC staff consulted with the State of Kansas regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no
comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has
determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated November 23, 1994, which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC and at the local public
document rooms located at the Emporia State University, William Allen
White Library, 1200 Commercial Street, Emporia, Kansas 66801, and
Washburn University School of Law Library, Topeka, Kansas 66621.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of January 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Theodore R. Quay,
Director, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects III/
IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-1815 Filed 1-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
