[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 183 (Monday, September 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49539-49540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-25081]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366]
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear 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 with respect to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-57 and NPF-
5 issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., et al. (Southern
Nuclear, or the licensee) for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear
Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in Appling County, Georgia.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated July 2, 1997, 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 photo identification badges to be taken
offsite by individuals not employed by the licensee who have been
granted unescorted access into protected and vital areas, in light of
the implementation of a hand geometry biometrics system to control site
access at Hatch.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.55, paragraph (a), Southern Nuclear shall
establish and maintain an onsite physical protection system and
security organization. Regulation 10 CFR 73.55(d), ``Access
Requirements,'' paragraph (1), specifies that the ``licensee shall
control all points of personnel and vehicle access into a protected
area.'' Regulation 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.'' Section
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, unescorted access into protected
areas at the Hatch plant is controlled through the use of a photograph
on a badge/keycard (hereafter referred to as a ``badge''), which is
stored at the access
[[Page 49540]]
point when not in use. The security officers at each entrance station
use the photograph on the badge to visually identify the individual
requesting access. The badges for Southern Nuclear employees and
contractor personnel who have been granted unescorted access are given
to the individuals at the entrance location upon entry and are returned
upon exit. In accordance with 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5), the badges are not
allowed to be taken offsite.
The licensee proposes to implement an alternate unescorted access
control system that would eliminate the need to issue and retrieve
badges at the entry point and would allow all individuals with
unescorted access to keep their badges when departing the site. An
exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) is required to permit contractors to
take their badges offsite instead of returning them when exiting the
site.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
Because the proposed action involves administrative matters within
the protected area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20, the Commission
concludes that this proposed action would result in no significant
radiological impacts. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts,
the proposed action does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and
has no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes
that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the
proposed action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
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 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
operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 dated October
1972, and Unit 2 dated March 1978.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on August 22, 1997, the staff
consulted with the Georgia State official, Mr. James Setser of the
Environmental Protection Division, Georgia Department of Natural
Resources, 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
has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the
proposed exemption. Accordingly, the Commission has concluded that the
proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of
the human environment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the request
for exemption dated July 2, 1997, 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 Burke County Public Library, 412 Fourth
Street, Waynesboro, Georgia.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of September 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Herbert N. Berkow,
Director, Project Directorate II-2, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-25081 Filed 9-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P