[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 154 (Thursday, August 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40863-40865]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-19768]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40864]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-313 and 50-368]
Entergy Operations, Inc.; Arkansas Nuclear One, 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 to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-51 and NPF-6, issued
to Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), for operation of Arkansas
Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2 (ANO-1&2), located in Pope County Arkansas.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated October 24, 1994, for exemption from certain
requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, ``Requirements for physical protection of
licensed activities in nuclear power reactors against radiological
sabotage.'' The exemption would allow implementation of a hand geometry
biometric system for site access control such that picture badges and
access control cards for certain non-employees can be taken offsite.
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.
10 CFR 73.55(d), ``Access Requirements,'' paragraph (1), specifies
that ``licensee shall control all points of personnel and vehicle
access into a protected area.'' 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) specifies that ``A
numbered picture badge identification system shall be used for all
individuals who are authorized access to protected areas without
escort.'' 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) 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, employee and contractor identification/access control
badges are issued and retrieved on the occasion of each entry to and
exit from the protected areas of the Arkansas Nuclear One site. Station
security personnel are required to maintain control of the badges while
the individuals are offsite. Security personnel retain each
identification/access control badge when not in use by the authorized
individual, within appropriately designed storage receptacles inside a
bullet-resistant enclosure. An individual who meets the access
authorization requirements is issued the individual picture
identification/access control card which allows entry into
preauthorized areas of the station. While entering the plant in the
present configuration, an authorized individual is ``screened'' by the
required detection equipment. The individual provides a personal
identification number (PIN) to the issuing guard and is screened again
by the issuing security officer using the picture identification on the
access card. Having received the badge, the individual proceeds to the
access portal, inserts the access control card into the card reader,
and passes through the turnstile which is unlocked by the access card.
Once inside the station, the access card allows entry only to
preauthorized areas and the individual's PIN is no longer required.
This present procedure is labor intensive since security personnel
are required to verify badge issuance, ensure badge retrieval, and
maintain the badge in orderly storage until the next entry into the
protected area. The regulations permit employees to remove their badge
from the site, but an exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) is required to
permit contractors to take their badge offsite instead of returning
them when exiting the site.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the licensee's
application. Under the proposed system, all individuals authorized to
gain unescorted access will have the physical characteristics of their
hand (hand geometry) recorded with their badge number. Since the hand
geometry is unique to each individual and its application in the entry
screening function would preclude unauthorized use of a badge, the
requested exemption would allow employees and contractors to keep their
badges at the time of exiting the protected area. The process of
verifying badge issuance, ensuring badge retrieval, and maintaining
badges could be eliminated while the balance of the access procedure
would remain intact. Firearm, explosive, and metal detection equipment
and provisions for conducting searches will remain as well. The
security officer responsible for the last access control function
(controlling admission to the protected area) will also remain isolated
within a bullet-resistant structure in order to assure his or her
ability to respond or to summon assistance.
Use of a hand geometry biometrics system exceeds the present
verification methodology's capability to discern an individual's
identity. Unlike the photograph identification badge, hand geometry is
nontransferable. During the initial access authorization or
registration process, hand measurements are recorded and the template
is stored for subsequent use in the identity verification process
required for entry into the protected area. Authorized individuals
insert their access authorization card into the card reader and the
biometrics system records an image of the hand geometry. The unique
features of the newly recorded image are then compared to the template
previously stored in the database. Access is ultimately granted based
on the degree to which the characteristics of the image match those of
the ``signature'' template.
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 access process will continue to be under the observation of
security personnel. The system of identification/access control badges
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. Addition
of a hand geometry biometrics system will provide a significant
contribution to effective implementation of the security plan at each
site.
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 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
[[Page 40865]]
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Alternative 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. As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff
considered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application
would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The
environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternate action
are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statements related to
operation of ANO-1&2 dated February 1973 and June 1977 respectively.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on July 26, 1995, the staff
consulted with the Arkansas State official, Don Green of the Arkansas
Department of Health, 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 this proposed action, see the
request for exemption dated October 24, 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 room located at the Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Tech
University, Russellville Arkansas 72801.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 3rd day of August 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
George Kalman,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-19768 Filed 8-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P