ML20085B084
| ML20085B084 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1995 |
| From: | Mckee P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20085B091 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9506140347 | |
| Download: ML20085B084 (6) | |
Text
. - _ _ - _
7590-01 UNITED STATES NVCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NORTH ATLANTIC ENERGY SERVICE CORPORATION SEABROOK STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-443 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from Facility Operating License No. NPF-86, issued to North Atlantic Energy Service Corporation (the licensee or North Atlantic),
for operation of the Seabrook Station, Unit No.1 (Seabrook) located in Rockingham County, New Hampshire.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:
Thi's Environmental Assessment has been prepared to address potential environmental issues related to North Atlantic's request for exemption dated October 17, 1994, as supplemented by letters dated February 13, 1995, April 26, 1995, and May 12, 1995. The proposed action would exempt North Atlantic from certain requirements of 10 CFR 73.55. The proposed action would allow North Atlantic to eliminate issuing and retrieving photograph identification badges at the entrance and exit location to the Seabrook protected area upon implementation of a biometric (hand geometry) system of site access control.
North Atlantic would be authorized to permit all individuals with unescorted access, including North Atlantic employees, contractor personnel, NRC employees, and others to retain their badges when leaving the Seabrook protected area.
9506140347 950531 PDR ADOCK 05000443 F
- The Need for the Prooosed Action
The requirements for the establishment and maintenance of a physical i
protection system against theft of special nuclear material and against radiological sabot. age at certain sites where special nuclear material is used are prescribed in 10 CFR Part 73. Facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 50 are included in the scope of 10 CFR Part 73.
Paragraph 73.55(a) specifies the general performance objectives and requirements of an onsite physical protection system and security organization, and paragraphs 73.55(b) through 73.55(h) specify minimum specific requirements for the onsite physical protection system and security organization. Access requirements are specist d in 73.55(d).
Paragraph 73.55(d)(1) requires that licensees control all points of personnel and vehicle access into a protected area, and 73.55(d)(5) requires a numbered picture badge identification system to be used for all individuals who are authorized access to protected areas without escort.
Paragraph 73.55(d)(5) also states that an individual not employed by the licensee 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 area of Seabrook is controlled through the use of a numbered picture badge and an attached but separate keycard (containing encoded information to relate the keycard to the badged individual) which is used to actuate the entrance turnstile for access into the protected area and certain other specific areas authorized within the protected area. The badges and keycards for all individuals who have been granted unescorted access, including North Atlantic employees, contractor personnel, NRC employees, and others, are stored by security personnel at the
t
. entrance to the protected area whenever they are not being used by the authorized individuals. Security personnel stationed at the entrance to the protected area use the photograph on the badge to visually verify the identity of an individual requesting access. After verification, the badge and keycard are issued to the individual to allow entrance to the protected area. The badge and keycard are retrieved when the individual is exiting the protected area.
In accordance with the Seabrook Physical Security Plan and Safeguards Contingency Plan, no individual is allowed to retain a badge and keycard when leaving the protected area.
North Atlantic proposes to implement an alternative unescorted access control system which would eliminate the need to issue and retrieve badges and keycards al. the protected area entrance / exit location and, instead, would allow all individuals with unescorted access to retain their badges and keycards when leaving the protected area.
An exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) is required to permit individuals who are not North Atlantic employees to take their numbered picture badges from the protected area.
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action.
~
Under the proposed system, each individual who is authorized for unescorted entry into the protected area would have the physical characteristics of their hand (hand geometry) registered with their badge number and keycard in the access control system. When an individual inserts the keycard 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 associated with j
l h-
+7
1
)
1 that badge and keycard to verify authorization for. entry. All individuals authorized for unescorted access would be allowed to retain their badge and keycard when leaving the pratected area.
Based on San,dia Lat oratory report, SAND 91--0276 UC--906, A Performance Evaluation of Blonetric Edentification Devices, (Unlimited Release, Printed June 1991), and on North Atlantic's experience with the current photo-identification system, North Atlantic demonstrated that the proposed hand geometry system would provide enhanced site access control. Since the badge, keycard, and hand geometry would be necessary for access into the protected area, the proposed system would provide for a positive verification process.
Loss of either a picture badge, keycard or both badge and keycard outside the-i protected area would not enable an unauthorized entry into the protected area.
North Atlantic 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 and Safeguards Contingency Plan for Seabrook will be revised to include implementation and testing of the hand geometry access control system and to allow badges and keycards to be taken from the protected area.
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, and picture badges will continue to be displayed by all individuals while inside the protected area.
1 L
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed exemption and concludes that there will be no changes to Seabrook or the environment
y
- as a result of this action. The proposed exemption does not in any way affect the manner by which the facility is operated or change the facility itself.
i Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the proposed action would result in no radiological or, nonradiological environmental impact.
~
Alternatives to the Pronosed Action:
Since the Commission has concluded there is no 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 for the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy, on May 17, 1995 the NRC staff I
consulted with the Massachusetts State official, Mr. James Muckerheid of the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. On May 18, 1995 the NRC staff consulted with the New Hampshire State official, Mr. George Iverscn of the New Hampshire Emergency Management Agency. The State officials 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 l
1 1 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 North Atlantic's letters dated October 17, 1994, February 13, 1995, April 26, 1995, and May 12,1995,'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 Exeter Public Library, Founders Park, Exeter, NH 03833.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of May 1995.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0tMISSION Phillip F. McKee, Director Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
,