[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16683-16685]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7920]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-416]


Entergy Operations, Inc.; Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1; 
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 No. NPF-29, issued to Entergy 
Operations, Inc. (the licensee), for operation of the Grand Gulf 
Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS), located in Claiborne County, 
Mississippi.

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 [[Page 16684]] 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 badges, coupled 
with their associated access control cards, are issued and retrieved on 
the occasion of each entry to and exit from the protected areas of the 
Grand Gulf site. Station security personnel are required to maintain 
control of the badges while the individuals are offsite. This practice 
has been in effect at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station since the 
operating license was issued. Security personnel retain each 
identification badge, as well as the associated access control card, 
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 an 
individual picture identification card and an individual 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 and by 
the issuing security officer. Having received the badge, the individual 
proceeds to the access portal, inserts the access control card into the 
card reader, enters a personal identification number (PIN), and passes 
through the turnstile which unlocks if the preset criteria are met. 
Once inside the station, the individual's PIN is not required in order 
to further utilize the access authorization card.
    This present procedure is labor intensive since security personnel 
are required to verify badge issuance, ensure badge retrieval, and 
maintain the badges in orderly storage until the next entry into the 
protected area. The regulations permit employees to remove their badges 
from the site, but 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

    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 existing 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 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 badges coupled with 
their associated access control cards 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 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 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 Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1.

 Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, the staff consulted with the 
Mississippi State official 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 May 27, 1994, 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 Judge George W. Armstrong Library, 220 S. Commerce Street, Natchez, 
Mississippi 39120.

    [[Page 16685]] Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 27th day of 
March 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Paul W. O'Connor,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations.
[FR Doc. 95-7920 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M