Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Wolf Creek Generating Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-482]

Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Wolf Creek Generating

Station; 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 for Facility Operating License No. NPF-42, issued to Wolf

Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the licensee), for operation of

the Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS) located in Coffee County,

Kansas.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

The proposed action would allow implementation of a hand geometry

biometric system of site access control such that photograph

identification badges can be taken off site.

The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's

application dated November 23, 1994, for exemption from certain

requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, ``Requirements for physical protection of

licensed activities in nuclear power plant reactors against

radiological sabotage.''

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.

Paragraph (1) of 10 CFR 73.55(d), ``Access Requirements,''

specifies that ``licensee shall control all points of personnel and

vehicle access into a protected area * * *.'' It is specified in 10 CFR

73.55(d)(5) that ``A numbered picture badge identification system shall

be used for all individuals who are authorized access to protected

areas without escort.'' It 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 of the WCGS is

controlled through the use of a photograph on a combination badge and

keycard. (Hereafter, these are referred to as badges). The security

officers at the entrance station use the photograph on the badge to

visually identify the individual requesting access. The badges for both

licensee employees and contractor personnel who have been granted

unescorted access are issued upon entrance at the entrance/exit

location and are allowed to take badges off site.

The licensee proposes to implement an alternative unescorted access

control system which would allow all individuals with unescorted access

to keep their badges with them when departing the site.

An exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) is required to permit

contractors to take their badges off site instead of returning them

when exiting the site.

The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action.

Under the proposed system, each individual who is authorized to

unescorted entry into protected areas would have the physical

characteristics of their hand (hand geometry) registered with their

badge number in the access control system. When an individual enters

the badge 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 to verify authorization for entry.

Individuals, including licensee employees and contractors, would be

allowed to keep their badges with them when they depart the site.

Based on a Sandia report entitled ``A Performance Evaluation of

Biometric Identification Devices'' (SAND91--0276 UC--906 Unlimited

Release, printed June 1991), and on its experience with the current

photo-identification system, the licensee stated that the false

acceptance rate of the proposed hand geometry system is comparable to

that of the current system. The lecensee stated that the use of the

badges with the hand geometry system would increase the overally level

of access control. 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 off site, would not

enable an unauthorized entry into protected areas. The licensee 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 for WCGS will be revised to

include implementation and testing of the hand geometry access control

system and to allow licensee employees and contractors to take their

badges off site.

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. Badges will continue to be displayed

by all individuals while inside the protected area.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

The change will not increase the probability or consequences of

accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluent that

may be released off site, 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 involves features located entirely [[Page 4930]] 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.

Alternatives 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. 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 related to

the operation of Wolf Creek Generating Station,'' dated June 1982

(NUREG-0878).

Agencies and Persons Consulted

The NRC staff consulted with the State of Kansas 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 the proposed action, see the

licensee's letter dated November 23, 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 rooms located at the Emporia State University, William Allen

White Library, 1200 Commercial Street, Emporia, Kansas 66801, and

Washburn University School of Law Library, Topeka, Kansas 66621.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of January 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Theodore R. Quay,

Director, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects III/

IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95-1815 Filed 1-24-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-M