[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49640-49641]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-23927]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-323]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power
Plant, Units 1 and 2, 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 Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82,
issued to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the licensee), for
operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (DCPP) located in
San Luis Obispo County, California.
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 offsite.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated May 5, 1995, and supplemental letters dated July 28,
1995, September 14, 1995 and September 19, 1995, 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
[[Page 49641]]
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 DCPP 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 returned upon exit. The badges are stored and are
retrievable at the entrance/exit location. In accordance with 10 CFR
73.55(d)(5), contractor individuals are not allowed to take badges
offsite. In accordance with the plant's physical security plans,
neither licensee employees nor contractors are allowed to take badges
offsite.
The licensee proposes to implement an alternative unescorted access
control system which would eliminate the need to issue and retrieve
badges at the entrance/exit location and would allow all individuals
with unescorted access to keep their badges with them when departing
the site.
An exemption from certain requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) is
required to permit contractors to take their badges offsite 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 for
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 licensee stated that the use of the
badges with the hand geometry system would increase the overall 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 offsite, 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 DCPP 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 offsite.
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 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 Nuclear Generating Station Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2'', dated May
1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on August 23, 1995, the staff
consulted with the California State official, Mr. Steve Hsu of the
Department of Health Services, regarding the environmental impact
statement for 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 May 5, 1995, and supplements dated July 28,
1995, September 14, 1995 and September 19, 1995, which are 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 room located at the California Polytechnic State
University, Robert E. Kennedy Library, Government Documents and Maps
Department, San Luis Obispo, California 93407.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of September 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James C. Stone,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-23927 Filed 9-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
