ML20211A829
| ML20211A829 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1997 |
| From: | Berkow H NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211A833 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9709240405 | |
| Download: ML20211A829 (4) | |
Text
.
7590-01 P UNITED STATES NUCI FAR REGULATORY COMMISSION EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCI FAR PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50 321 AND 50 388 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESRMENT AND FINDING OF NO RIGNIFICANT !MPACT 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 Southem Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., et al.
l (Southem Nuclear, or the licensee) for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in Appling County, Georgia.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT idsriuT. cat lori of Prana==d Ar* lore The pr'oposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated July 2,1997, for exemption from certain requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, "Requironents for Physical Protection of Licensed Activities in Nuclear Power Reactors Against Radiological Sabotage."
The exemption would alhv photo identification badges to be taken offsite by individuals not employed by the licensee who have been granted unescocted access into protected and vital areas, in light of the implementation of a hand geometry biometrics system to control site access at Hatch.
The P--1 for the Prr.r---4 ArE.m Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.55, paragraph (a), Southem 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 9709240405 970915 PDR ADOCK 05000321 F
i 2-personnel and vehicle access into a protected area." Regulation 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) specifes 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 l
l into the protected area which must be retumed 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 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 Southem Nuclear employees and contractor personnel who have been granted unescorted access are given to the individuals at the entrance location upon entry and are retumed 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 altomate 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 retuming them when exiting the site.
Environmentalimoneta of the Prana==d Ar*lan:
Because the proposed action involves administrative matters within the protected area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20, the Commission con,ludes that this proposed action would result in no significant mdiological impacts. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, N
U
3 the proposed action does not affect nonradiological plant emuents and has no other environmentalimpact. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
AM=-Td: to the Pram Adlam As an altemative to the proposed action, the staff concidered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmentalimpactt The environmentalimpacts of the proposed action and the altemative action are similar.
Altamative une of P.anourcea:
This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to operation of the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit i dated October 1972, and Unit 2 dated March 1978.
Aa* and Persons ConneMs+
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 environmentalimpact of the proposed action.
The State official had no comments.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACI Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmentalimpact 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, 21201. Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public
.. _. J
4 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 TiiE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
fp
\\
{/.
rbert N. Berkow, Director Project Directorate 112 Division of Reactor Projects 1/11 ONice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
__