L-15-149, Unit 1 - Supplement to Requests to Change Cyber Security Implementation Plan Milestone 8 Completion Date
| ML15127A202 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley, Davis Besse, Perry |
| Issue date: | 05/06/2015 |
| From: | Halnon G FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| L-15-149, TAC MF5557, TAC MF5879, TAC MF5880, TAC MF5892 | |
| Download: ML15127A202 (8) | |
Text
FENOC FrsfFnerg//Urc/a, Op"o,rngCot 341 White Pond Dr.
Akron, Ohio 44320 M a y6 , 2 0 1 5 L-15-149 10 cFR 50.90 ATTN:Document ControlDesk U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001
SUBJECT:
BeaverValleyPowerStation,UnitNos.1 and2 DocketNo.50-334,LicenseNo.DpR-66 DocketNo.50-412, LicenseNo.NpF-73 Davis-Besse NuclearPowerStation DocketNo.50-346,LicenseNo.NpF-3 PerryNuclearPowerPlant,UnitNo. 1 DocketNo.50-440, LicenseNo.NpF-58 han Secu tionPlan MF MF588O.MF MF5557 fn fettersdatedMarch19,2015for the BeaverValleyPowerStation,UnitNos.1 andZ (BVPS),March12,2015for the Davis-Besse NuclearPowerStation(DBNpS),and January9,2015,for the PerryNuclearPowerPlant(PNPP),FirstEnergy Nuclear OperatingCompany(FENOC)requested amendments to the FacilityOperatingLicenses in accordance withTitle10 of the Codeof FederatRegulations (10CFi), Part-Sg, Section50.90,"Application for amendment of license,construction permit,or earlysite permit."The requested amendments proposedto changethe cybersecurity implementation planmilestone 8 completiondate.
The requested amendments weresubmittedin accordance with 10 CFR2.390,"Public inspections, exemptions, requestsfor withholding,"becausesignificant portionsof the amendments containsecurity-refated information. Attachment 1 containsa copyof the Significant HazardsConsideration Analysisfor BVPSthatdoesnotcontainsecurity-relatedinformation, whichmaybe madepublic.Attachment 2 containsa copyof the Significant HazardsConsideration Analysisfor DBNPSthatdoesnot containsecurity-relatedinformation, whichmaybe madepublic.Attachment 3 containsa copyof the Significant HazardsConsideration Analysisfor PNPPthatdoesnotcontainsecurity-relatedinformation, whichmaybe madepublic.
BeaverValleyPowerStation,UnitNos.I andZ Davis-Besse NuclearPowerStation PerryNuclearPowerPlant L-15-149 Page2 Therearenoregulatory commitments containedinthisletter.lf thereareanyquestions or if additional informationis required, pleasecontactMr.Thomas -
A. Lentz,Manager FleetLicensing at (330)315-0810.
Sincerely, GregoryH. Halnon Director- FleetRegulatory Affairs Attachments:
1 Significant HazardsConsideration Analysisfor BeaverValleyPowerStation,Unit Nos.1 and2 2 Significant HazardsConsideration Analysisfor Davis-Besse NuclearPowerStation 3 Significant HazardsConsideration Analysisfor PerryNuclearPowerPlant cc: NRCRegionI Administrator NRCRegionlll Administrator NuclearReactorRegulation projectManager- BVps NuclearReactorRegulation ProjectManager - DBNPSand pNpp NRCResidentInspector - BVpS NRCResidentInspector - DBNPS NRCResidentInspector - pNpp ExecutiveDirector,ohio Emergency Management Agency Stateof Ohio(NRCLiaison)
DirectorBRP/DEP SiteBRP/DEPRepresentative
Attachment1 L-15-',149 Significant HazardsConsideration Analysisfor BeaverValleyPowerStation UnitNos.1 and2 Page1 of 2 FirstEnergy NuclearOperating Companyhasevaluated whetheror nota significant hazardsconsideration is involvedwiththe proposedamendment by focusingon the threestandards setforthin 10 CFR50.92,"lssuance of amendment," as discussed below.
- 1. Doesthe proposedamendment involvea significant increasein the probability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposedamendment extendsthe completion datefor milestone 8 of the CyberSecurityPlan(CSP)implementation schedule.Revisingthe full implementation datefor the CSPdoesnot involvemodifications to anysafety-relatedstructures, systems,or components (SSCs).The implementation schedule providesa timeline for fullyimplementing the CSP. TheCSPdescribes howthe requirements of 10 CFR73.54areto be implemented to identify, evaluate,and mitigatecyberattacksup to and including the designbasiscyber attackthreat;therebyachievinghighassurance thatthe facility'sdigitalcomputer and communications systemsand networksare protectedfromcyberattacks.
The revisionof the CSPlmplementation Schedulewillnot alterpreviously evaluated designbasisaccidentanalysisassumptions, addanyaccident initiators,modifythe functionof the plantsafety-related SSCs,or affecthowany plantsafety-related SSCsare operated, maintained,tested,or inspected.
As the proposedchangedoesnotdirectlyimpactSSCs,andmilestones 1 through7 providesignificant protection againstcyberattacks,the proposed changedoesnot involvea significant increasein the probability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated.
- 2. Doesthe proposedamendment createthe possibility of a newor differentkind of accidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated?
Response: No The proposedchangedoesnot introduce a newmodeof plantoperationor involvea physicalmodification to the plant. Newequipment is not installedwith the proposedamendment, nordoesthe proposedamendment causeexisting equipment to be operatedin a newor differentmanner.The changeto cyber securityimplementation planmilestone 8 is administrative in natureand relieson the significant protection againstcyberattacksthathasbeengainedthroughthe implementation of CSPmilestones 1 through7. Sincethe proposedamendment doesnot involvea changeto the plantdesignor operation, no newsystem interactions are createdby thischange.The proposedchangesdo not resultin
Attachment1 L-15-149 Significant HazardsConsideration Analysisfor BeaverValleyPowerStation Page2 oI 2 any newfailuremodes,andthuscannotinitiatean accidentdifferentfromthose previouslyevaluated Therefore, the proposedchangedoesnotcreatethe possibility of a newor differentkindof accidentfromany previously evaluated.
- 3. Doesthe proposedamendment involvea significant reductionin a marginof safety?
Response: No.
The proposedamendment doesnot affectthe performance of any structures, systemsor components as describedin the designbasisanalyses. The change to milestone8 of the cybersecurityimplementation planis administrative in nature.
The proposedchangedoesnot introduce a newmodeof plantoperationor involvea physicalmodification to the plant.The proposedamendment doesnot introducechangesto limitsestablished in the accidentanalysis.Sincethereis no impactto anySSCs,or any maintenance practice,thereis also or operational no reductionin any marginof safety.
As the proposedchangedoesnotdirectlyimpactSSCs,andmilestones 1 through7 providesignificant protection againstcyberattacks,the proposed changedoesnot involvea significant reductionin a marginof safety.
Basedon the above,FirstEnergy NuclearOperating Companyconcludes thatthe proposedamendment doesnot involvea significant hazardsconsideration under the standardssetforthin 10 CFR50.92(c), and,accordingly, a findingof "no significant hazardsconsideration" is justified.
Attachment2 L-15-149 SignificantHazardsConsideration Analysisfor Davis-Besse NuclearPowerStation Page1 of 2 FirstEnergy NuclearOperating Companyhasevaluated whetheror nota significant hazardsconsideration is involvedwiththe proposedamendment by focusin!on the threestandards setforthin 10 CFR50.92,."lssuance of amendment," as disiussed below.
- 1. Doesthe proposedamendment involvea significantincreasein the probability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated?
Response: No.
Ih" proposedamendment extendsthe completion datefor milestone 8 of the CyberSecurityPlan(CSP)implementation schedule. Revising thefull implementation datefor the CSPdoesnot involvemodifications to anysafety-relatedstructures, systems,or components (SSCs).The implementation scheduleprovidesa timelinefor fullyimplementing the CSP. The CSp describes howthe requirements of 10 CFR 73.54areto be implemented to identify, evaluate,and mitigatecyberattacksup to and including the designbasiscyber attackthreat;therebyachievinghighassurance thatthe facility'sOigitat computer and communications systemsand networksare protectedfromcyberattacks.
The revisionof the CSPlmplementation Scheduiewill notalterpieviously evaluated designbasisaccidentanalysisassumptions, addanyaccideni initiators, modifythe functionof the plantsafety-ielated SSCs,br affecthowany plantsafety-related SSCsare operated,maintained, tested,or inspected As the proposedchangedoesnotdirectlyimpactSSCs,and milestones 1 through7 providesignificant protection againstcyberattacks,the proposed changedoesnot involvea significant increasein the probability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated.
- 2. Doesthe proposedamendment createthe possibilityof a newor differentkind of accidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated?
Response: No The proposedchangedoesnot introduce a newmodeof plantoperationor involvea physicalmodification to the plant.Newequipmentis not installed w1h the proposedamendment, nordoesthe proposedamendment causeexisting equipment to be operatedin a newor differentmanner.The changeto cybei securityimplementation planmilestone 8 is administrativein natureand relieson the significantprole_c]ionagainstcyberattacksthathasbeengainedthroughthe implementation of CSPmilestones 1 through7. Sincethe profosedamendment doesnot involvea changeto the plantdesignor operation, no newsystem interactions are createdby thischange.The proposedchangesdo not resultin
Attachment2 L-15-149 SignificantHazards Consideration Analysisfor Davis-Besse NuclearPowerStation Page2 of 2 any newfailuremodes,andthuscannotinitiatean accidentdifferentfromthose previously evaluated.
Therefore, the proposedchangedoesnotcreatethe possibility of a newor differentkindof accidentfromany previously evaluated.
- 3. Doesthe proposedamendment involvea significantreductionin a marginof safety?
Response: No.
The proposedamendmentdoesnot affectthe performance of any structures, systemsor components as describedin the designbasisanalyses. The change to milestone8 of the cybersecurityimplementation planis administrativein nature.
The proposedchangedoesnot introduce a newmodeof plantoperationor involvea physicalmodification to the plant.The proposedamendment doesnot introduce changesto limitsestablished in the accidentanalysis.Sincethereis no impactto any SSCs,or any maintenance practice, or operational thereis also no reductionin any marginof safety.
As the proposedchangedoesnotdirectlyimpactSSCs,and milestones 1 through7 providesignificant protection againstcyberattacks,the proposed changedoesnot involvea significant reductionin a marginof safety.
Basedon the above,FirstEnergy NuclearOperating Companyconcludes thatthe proposedamendment doesnot involvea significant hazardsconsideration under the standards setforthin 10 CFR50.92(c), and,accordingly,a findingof "no significanthazardsconsideration" is justified.
Attachment 3 L-15-149 SignificantHazardsConsideration Analysisfor PerryNuclearPowerPlant Page1 of 2 FirstEnergy NuclearOperating Companyhasevaluated whetheror nota significant hazardsconsideration is involvedwiththe proposedamendment by focusingon the threestandards setforthin 10 CFR50.92,"lssuance of amendment," as discussed below.
- 1. Doesthe proposedamendment involvea significantincreasein the probability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposedamendment extendsthe completion datefor milestone I of the CyberSecurityPlan(CSP)implementation schedule.Revisingthe full implementation datefor the CSPdoesnot involvemodifications to anysafety-relatedstructures, systems,or components (SSCs).The implementation scheduleprovides a timeline for fullyimplementing the CSP. TheCSPdescribes howthe requirements of 10 CFR73.54areto be implemented to identify, evaluate,and mitigatecyberattacksup to and including the designbasiscyber attackthreat;therebyachieving highassurance thatthefacility'sdigitalcomputer and communications systemsand networksare protectedfromcyberattacks.
The revisionof the CSPlmplementation Schedulewillnot alterpreviously evaluated designbasisaccident analysisassumptions, addanyaccident initiators, modifythefunctionof the plantsafety-related SSCs,or affecthowany plantsafety-related SSCsare operated,maintained, tested,or inspected.
As the proposedchangedoesnotdirectlyimpactSSCs,andmilestones 1 through7 providesignificant protection againstcyberattacks,the proposed changedoesnot involvea significant increasein the probabilityor consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated.
- 2. Doesthe proposedamendment createthe possibility of a newor differentkind of accidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated?
Response: No The proposedchangedoesnot introduce a newmodeof plantoperation or involvea physical modification to the plant.Newequipmentis not installed with the proposedamendment, nordoesthe proposedamendment causeexisting equipment to be operatedin a newor differentmanner.The changeto cyber securityimplementation planmilestone 8 is administrative in natureand relieson the significantprotection againstcyberattacksthathasbeengainedthroughthe implementation of CSPmilestones 1 through7. Sincethe proposedamendment doesnot involvea changeto the plantdesignor operation, no newsystem interactionsare createdby this change.The proposedchangesdo not resultin
Attachment3 L-15-149 SignificantHazardsConsideration Analysisfor PerryNuclearPowerPlant Page2 of 2 any newfailuremodes,andthuscannotinitiatean accidentdifferentfromthose previously evaluated.
Therefore, the proposedchangedoesnotcreatethe possibility of a newor differentkindof accidentfromany previously evaluated.
- 3. poes the proposedamendment involvea significant reductionin a marginof safety?
Response: No.
The proposedamendment doesnotaffectthe performance of anystructures, systemsor components as describedin the designbasisanalyses. Thechange to milestone 8 of the cybersecurityimplementation planis administrative in nature.
The proposedchangedoesnot introduce a newmodeof plantoperation or involvea physicalmodification to the plant.The proposedamendment doesnot introduce changesto limitsestablished in the accidentanalysis.Sincethereis no impactto anySSCs,or any maintenance practice, or operational thereis also no reductionin anymarginof safety.
As the proposedchangedoesnotdirectlyimpactSSCs,andmilestones 1 through7 providesignificantprotectionagainstcyberattacks,the proposed changedoesnotinvolvea significant reductionin a marginof safety.
Basedon the above,FirstEnergy NuclearOperating Companyconciudes thatthe proposedamendment doesnot involvea significant hazardsconsideration under the standards setforthin 10 cFR 50.g2(c), and,accordiingly,a findingof "no significanthazardsconsideration" is justified.