[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 77 (Friday, April 19, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17329-17330]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9668]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Commonwealth Edison Company; LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and
2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
[Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its
regulations to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-11 and NPF-18,
issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the licensee), for
operation of the LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2, located in
LaSalle County, Illinois.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated February 20, 1996, for an exemption from certain
requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, ``Requirements for Physical Protection of
Licensed Activities in Nuclear Power Reactors Against Radiological
Sabotage.'' The requested exemption would allow the implementation of a
hand geometry biometric system of site access control in conjunction
with photograph identification badges and would allow the badges to be
taken off site.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.55(a), the licensee is required to establish
and maintain an onsite physical protection system and security
organization.
In 10 CFR 73.55(d), ``Access Requirements,'' it specifies in part
that ``The licensee shall control all points of personnel and vehicle
access into a protected area.'' In 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5), it specifies in
part that ``A numbered picture badge identification system shall be
used for all individuals who are authorized access to protected areas
without escort.'' It further indicates that an individual not employed
by the licensee (e.g., contractors) may be authorized access to
protected areas without an 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 for both employee and contractor
personnel into the LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2, is controlled
through the use of picture badges. Positive identification of personnel
who are authorized and request access into the protected areas is
established by security personnel making a visual comparison of the
individual requesting access and that individual's picture badge. The
picture badges are issued, stored, and retrieved at the entrance/exit
location to the protected area. In accordance with 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5),
contractor personnel are not allowed to take their picture badges off
site. In addition, in accordance with the plant's physical security
plan, the licensee's employees are also not allowed to take their
picture badges off site. The licensee proposes to implement an
alternative unescorted access control system which would eliminate the
need to issue and retrieve picture badges at the entrance/exit location
to the protected area. The proposal would also allow contractors who
have unescorted access to keep their picture badges in their possession
when departing the LaSalle site. In addition, the site security plans
will be revised to allow implementation of the hand geometry system and
to allow employees and contractors with unescorted access to keep their
picture badges in their possession when leaving the LaSalle site.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that the proposed exemption would not increase the
probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and would
not affect facility radiation levels or facility radiological
effluents. Under the proposed system, all individuals with authorized
unescorted access will have the physical characteristics of their hand
(hand geometry) registered with their picture badge number in a
computerized access control system in addition to their picture badges.
Therefore, all authorized individuals must not only have their picture
badges to gain access into the protected area, but must also have their
hand geometry confirmed.
All other access processes, including search function capability
and access revocation, will remain the same. A security officer
responsible for access control will continue to be positioned within a
bullet-resistant structure. The proposed system is only for individuals
with authorized unescorted access and will not be used for individuals
requiring escorts.
The underlying purpose for requiring that individuals not employed
by the licensee must receive and return their picture badges at the
entrance/exit is to provide reasonable assurance that the access badges
could not be compromised or stolen with a resulting risk that an
unauthorized individual could potentially enter the protected area.
Although the proposed exemption will allow individuals to take their
picture badges off site, the proposed measures require not only that
the picture badge be provided for access to the protected area, but
also that verification of the hand geometry registered with the badge
be performed as discussed above. Thus, the proposed system provides an
identity verification process that is equivalent to the existing
process.
The change will not increase the probability or consequences of
accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that
may be released offsite, 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 does involve features located entirely within the restricted
area as
[[Page 17330]]
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 proposed action would be to
deny the requested action. Denial of the requested action would not
significantly enhance the environment in that the proposed action will
result in a process that is equivalent to the existing identification
verification process.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously
considered in connection with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Final
Environmental Statement dated November 1978, related to the operation
of the LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on March 22, 1996, the NRC
staff consulted with the Illinois State official, Mr. Frank Niziolek,
Head, Reactor Safety Section, Division of Engineering, Illinois
Department of Nuclear Safety, regarding the environmental impact of the
proposed action. The State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon the foregoing 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 February 20, 1996, which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L
Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room
located at the Jacobs Memorial Library, Illinois Valley Community
College, Oglesby Illinois 61348.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of April, 1996.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Donna M. Skay,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-9668 Filed 4-18-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
