ML11152A027

License Amendment Request - Cyber Security Plant (TAC Nos. ME4212, ME4213, and ME42214)

ML11152A027
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	08/02/2011
From:	Boska J Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:	Entergy Nuclear Operations
Boska J, NRR/DORL/LPL1-1, 415-2901
References
TAC ME4212, TAC ME4213, TAC ME4214, FOIA/PA-2016-0148
Download: ML11152A027 (45)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 August 2, 2011 Vice President, Operations Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, GSB P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511*0249

SUBJECT:

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 1,2, AND 3 -ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS RE: LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST - CYBER SECURITY PLAN (TAC NOS. ME4212, ME4213, AND ME4214)

Dear Sir or Madam:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 55 to Facility Operating License No.

DPR-5, for the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No.1, Amendment No. 266 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-26 for the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No.2 and Amendment No. 243 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-64 for the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit NO.3. The amendments consist of changes to the Facility Operating Licenses (FOLs) in response to your application dated July 8, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011.

The licensee's application for the proposed amendments to the FOLs includes: (1) the proposed Cyber Security Plan (CSP), (2) an implementation schedule, and (3) a proposed statement to be added to the existing FOL Physical Protection license conditions requiring Entergy to fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved CSP as required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (1 0 CFR) 73.54, "Protection of digital computer and communication systems and networks." A Federal Register notice dated March 27, 2009, issued the final rule that amended 10 CFR Part 73. The regulations in 10 CFR 73.54, establish the requirements for a CSP. This regulation specifically requires each licensee currently licensed to operate a nuclear power plant under Part 50 of this chapter to submit a CSP that satisfies the requirements of the Rule. Each submittal must include a proposed implementation schedule, and implementation of the licensee's CSP must be consistent with the approved schedule. The background for this application is addressed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Notice of Availability, Federal Register Notice, Final Rule 10 CFR Part 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements, published on March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926).

These license amendments are effective as of the date of its issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the licensee on July 8, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, and approved by the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.

V. P. Operations -2 A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is enclosed. A Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next regular biweekly Federal Register notice.

Sincerely, O-L9~

a~~~. ~; Boska, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.50-003, 50-247, and 50-286

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 55 to DPR-5

2. Amendment No. 266 to DPR-26

3. Amendment No. 243 to DPR-64

4. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS. INC.

DOCKET NO.50-003 INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO.1 AMENDMENT TO THE PROVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE (DPR-5)

AND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Amendment No. 55 License No. DPR-5

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for amendment by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee) dated July 8,2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

-2

2. Accordingly, the license is amended as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 3.b) of Facility Operating License No. DPR-5 is hereby amended to read as follows:

3.b) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 55, are hereby incorporated in the license. ENO shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

Further, the following text is added at the end of the existing License Condition 3.d:

"ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission approved cyber security plan (CSP), including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 55."

3. This license amendment is effective as of the date of its issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date. shall be in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the licensee on July 8,2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1. and June 29.

2011, and approved by the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.

FOR/THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~~W~~ Keith I. McConnell. Deputy Director Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs

Attachment:

Changes to the License Date of Issuance: August 2, 2011

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 55 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-5 DOCKET NO.50-003 Replace the following pages of the License with the attached revised pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.

Remove Page Insert Page Page 2 Page 2 Page 3 Page 3

-2 designated location in Westchester County, New York, in accordance with the procedures and limitations described in the application and this license; b) END, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Part 70, to receive and possess up to 1918 kilograms of contained uranium-235 previously received for reactor operation; c) Deleted ENO, pursuant to the Act and Title 10, CFR, Chapter 1, Part 70, "Special Nuclear Material," to receive, possess and use six (6) grams of uranium 235 in fission counters; d) Deleted ENO, pursuant to the Aet and Title 10, CFR, Chapter 1, Part 30, "Licensing of Byproduct Material," to receive, possess and use six hundred (600) curies of Plutonium 210 encapsulated as Po Be neutron star up sources; e) END, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30 and 70, to receive Amdt. 45 and possess, but not to separate, such byproduct and special 1-31-96 materials as were produced by the prior operation of the facility; f) Deleted ENO, pursuant to the Act and Title 10, CFR, Parts 30 and 70, to possess and store the 1140.46 kilograms of special nuclear material and the byproduct materials contained in Core A

3. This license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in Sections 50.54 and 50.59 of Part 50, Section 70.32 of Part 70, Section 40.41 of Part 40, and Section 30.32 of Part 30 of the Commission's regulations; is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and rules, regulations and orders of the Commission now and hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified below:

a) Maximum Power Level ENO is prohibited from taking the reactor to criticality, and the facility shall not be operated at any power level.

b) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 55, are hereby incorporated in the license. END shall maintain the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

c) Records In addition to those otherwise required under this license and applicable regulations, ENO shall keep the following records:

1. Reactor operating records, including power levels Amendment No. 55

-3 and period of operation at each power level.

2. Records showing the radioactivity released or discharged into the air or water beyond the effective control of ENO as measured at or prior to the point of such release or discharge.

3. Records of scrams, including reasons therefor.

4. Records of principal maintenance operations involving substitution or replacement of facility equipment or components and the reasons therefor.

5. Records of radioactivity measurements at on-site and off-site monitoring stations.

6. Records of facility tests and measurements performed pursuant to the requirements of the Technical Specifications.

d) ENG shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the physical security, guard training and qualification, and safeguards contingency plans previously approved by the Commission and all amendments and revisions to such plans made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10'CFR 50.54(p). The plans, which contain Safeguards Information protected under 10 CFR 73.21, are entitled: "Indian Point Station, Units 1 and 2 Physical Security Plan,"

with revisions submitted through July 25, 1989; "Indian Point Station, Units 1 and 2, Security Guard Training and Qualification Plan, '\vith revisions submitted through December 8, 1986; and "Indian Point Station, Units 1 and 2, Safeguards Contingency Plan," '1t'ith revisions submitted through November 7, 1986. ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved physical security, training and qualification, and safeguards contingency plans including amendments made pursuant to provisions of the Miscellaneous Amendments and Search Requirements revisions to 10 CFR 73.55 (51 FR 27817 and 27822), and to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). The combined set of plans 1 for the Indian Point Energy Center, which contain Safeguards Information protected under 10 CFR 73.21, is entitled: "Physical Security, Training and Qualification, and Safeguards Contingency Plan, Revision 0," and was submitted by letter dated October 14, 2004, as supplemented by letter dated May 18, 2006. ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved cyber security plan (CSP),

including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). The ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 55.

1 The Training and Qualification Plan and Safeguards Contingency Plan are Appendices to the Security Plan.

Amendment No. 55

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 ENTERGY NUCLEAR INDIAN POINT 2, LLC ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

DOCKET NO. 50-247 INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO.2 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 266 License No. DPR-26

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for amendment by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee) dated July 8, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

-2

2. Accordingly, the license is amended as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of Facility Operating License No. DPR-26 is hereby amended to read as follows:

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 266, are hereby incorporated in the license. ENO shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

Further, the following text is added at the end of the existing License Condition 2.H:

"ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission approved cyber security plan (CSP), including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 266."

3. This license amendment is effective as of the date of its issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the licensee on July 8,2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, and approved by the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ttn47, /~J~

Nancy L. Salgado, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the License Date of Issuance: August 2; 2011

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 266 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-26 DOCKET NO. 50-247 Replace the following pages of the License with the attached revised pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.

Remove Page Insert Page Page 3 Page 3 Page 5 Page 5

-3 instrumentation and radiation monitoring equipment calibration, and as fission detectors in amounts as required; (4) ENO pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70, Arndt. 42 to receive, possess, and use in amounts as required any 10-17-78 byproduct, source or special nuclear material without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactive apparatus or components; (5) ENO pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30 and 70, to Arndt. 220 possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special 09-06-01 nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of the facility.

C. This amended license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the following Commission regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I: Part 20, Section 30.34 of Part 30, Section 40.41 of Part 40, Sections 50.54 and 50.59 of Part 50, and Section 70.32 of Part 70; is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations, and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified or incorporated below:

(1) Maximum Power Level ENO is authorized to operate the facility at steady state Arndt. 241 reactor core power levels not in excess of 3216 10-27-04 megawatts thermal.

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 266, are hereby incorporated in the license. ENO shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

(3) The following conditions relate to the amendment approving the conversion to Improved Standard Technical Specifications:

1. This amendment authorizes the relocation of certain Technical Specification requirements and detailed information to licensee-controlled documents as described in Table R, "Relocated Technical SpeCifications from the CTS," and Table LA, "Removed Details and Less Restrictive Administrative Changes to the CTS" attached to the NRC staffs Safety Evaluation enclosed with this amendment. The relocation of requirements and detailed information shall be completed on or before the implementation of this amendment.

Amendment No. 266

Indian Point Energy Center, which contain Safeguards Information protected under 10 CFR 73.21, is entitled: "Physical Security, Training and Qualification, and Safeguards Contingency Plan, Revision 0," and was submitted by letter dated October 14, 2004, as supplemented by letter dated May 18,2006. ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission approved cyber security plan (CSP), including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54{p). ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 266.

I. Deleted per Amdt. 133, 7-6-88.

J. Deleted per Arndt. 133, 7-6-88.

K. ENO shall implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved fire protection program as described in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report for the facility and as approved in the Safety Evaluations Reports dated November 30,1977, February 3,1978, January 31,1979, October 31,1980, August 22, 1983, March 30,1984, October 16,1984, September 16,1985, November 13, 1985, March 4,1987, January 12,1989, and March 26, 1996. ENO may make changes to the NRC-approved fire protection program without prior approval of the Commission only if those changes would not adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire.

L. Deleted per Amendment 238 M. Deleted per Amendment 238 N. Mitigation Strategy License Condition The licensee shall develop and maintain strategies for addressing large fires and explosions and that include the following key areas:

(a) Fire fighting response strategy with the following elements:

1. Pre-defined coordinated fire response strategy and guidance

2. Assessment of mutual aid fire fighting assets

3. Designated staging areas for equipment and materials

4. Command and control

5. Training of response personnel (b) Operations to mitigate fuel damage considering the following:

1. Protection and use of personnel assets

2. Communications

3. Minimizing fire spread

4. Procedures for implementing integrated fire response strategy

5. Identification of readily-available pre-staged equipment

6. Training on integrated fire response strategy (c) Actions to minimize release to include consideration of:

1. Water spray scrubbing

2. Dose to onsite responders Amendment No. 266

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 ENTERGY NUCLEAR INDIAN POINT 3, LLC ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

DOCKET NO. 50-286 INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO.3 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 243 License No. DPR-64

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for amendment by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee) dated July 8,2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

~ 2 ~

2. Accordingly, the license is amended as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of Facility Operating License No. DPR-64 is hereby amended to read as follows:

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 243, are hereby incorporated in the license. ENO shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

Further, the following text is added at the end of the existing License Condition 2.G:

"ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission approved cyber security plan (CSP), including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 243."

3. This license amendment is effective as of the date of its issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the licensee on July 8, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, and approved by the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1tJ:  :;{'~

Nancy L:. Salgado, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the License Date of Issuance: August 2, 2011

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 243 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-64 DOCKET NO. 50-286 Replace the following pages of the License with the attached revised pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.

Remove Page Insert Page Page 3 Page 3 Page 4 Page 4

- 3 (4) ENO pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30,40 and 70, Amdt. 203 to receive, possess, and use in amounts as required any 11/27/00 byproduct, source or special nuclear material without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactive apparatus or components; (5) ENO pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30 and 70, to Amdt. 203 possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special 11/27100 nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of the facility.

C. This amended license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the following Commission regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I: Part 20, Section 30.34 of Part 30, Section 40.41 of Part 40, Sections 50.54 and 50.59 of Part 50, and Section 70.32 of Part 70; and is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations, and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified or incorporated below:

(1) Maximum Power Level ENO is authorized to operate the facility at steady state reactor core power levels not in excess of 3216 megawatts thermal (100% of rated power).

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and S, as revised through Amendment No. 243, are hereby incorporated in the License. ENO shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

(3) (DELETED) Amdt. 205 2-27-01 (4) (DELETED) Amdt. 205 2-27-01 D. (DELETED) Amdt.46 2-16-83 E. (DELETED) Amdt.37 5-14-81 F. This amended license is also subject to appropriate conditions by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in its letter of May 2, 1975, to Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., granting a Section 401 certification under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.

Amendment No. 243

-4 G. ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved physical security, training and qualification, and safeguards contingency plans including amendments made pursuant to provisions of the Miscellaneous Amendments and Search Requirements revisions to 10 CFR 73.55 (51 FR 27817 and 27822), and to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and CFR 50.54(p). The combined set of plans 1 for the Indian Point Energy Center, which contain Safeguards Information protected under 10 CFR 73.21, is entitled: "Physical Security, Training and Qualification, and Safeguards Contingency Plan, Revision 0," and was submitted by letter dated October 14, 2004, as supplemented by letter dated May 18, 2006. ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved cyber security plan (CSP), including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 243.

H. ENO shall implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the approved Fire Protection Program as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No.3 and as approved in NRC fire protection safety evaluations (SEs) dated September 21,1973, March 6,1979, May 2, 1980, November 18, 1982, December 30, 1982, February 2, 1984, April 16, 1984, January 7,1987. September 9,1988, October 21,1991, April 20, 1994, January 5, 1995, and supplements thereto, subject to the following provision:

ENO may make changes to the approved Fire Protection Program without prior approval of the Commission only if those changes would not adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire.

I. (DELETED) Amdt. 205 2/27/01 J. (DELETED) Amdt. 205 2/27/01 K. (DELETED) Amdt. 49 5-25-84 L. (DELETED) Amdt. 205 2/27/01 M. (DELETED) Amdt. 205 2/27/01 N. (DELETED) Amdt. 49 5-25-84 The Training and Qualification Plan and Safeguards Contingency Plan are Appendices to the Security Plan.

Amendment No. 243

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 55 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-5.

AMENDMENT NO. 266 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-26 AND AMENDMENT NO. 243 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-64 ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS. INC.

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 1, 2. AND 3 DOCKET NOS.50-003, 50-247, AND 50-286

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated July 8, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML101970047), as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML110601322, ML111020654, and ML11189A206, respectively), Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (IP1, IP2, and IP3) Facility Operating licenses (FOLs) for approval of the licensee's Cyber Security Plan (CSP) and Implementation Schedule for the Indian Point Energy Center, Units 1.

2, and 3 as required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 73.54, "Protection of digital computer and communication systems and networks," (Reference 1). By letter dated April 1, 2011, the licensee supplemented their CSP (ADAMS Accession No. ML111020654), to address: 1) scope of systems in response to the October 21,2010 Commission decision (Reference 5); 2) records retention; and 3) implementation schedule. The licensee submitted a Revision 0 of the CSP incorporating all of the changes and/or additional information.

The supplements dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.

The amendments would approve the CSP and associated implementation schedule, and revise Paragraph 3.d of FOL No. DPR-5 for IP1, Paragraph 2.H of FOL No. DPR-26 for IP2, and Paragraph 2.G of FOL No. DPR-64 for IP3, respectively, to provide license conditions to require the licensee to fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved CSP.

The proposed change is generally consistent with Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, "Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear Power Reactors."

- 2

2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

2.1 General Requirements Consistent with 10 CFR 73.54(a), the licensee must provide high assurance that digital computer and communication systems, and networks are adequately protected against cyber attacks, up to and including the design basis threat (DBT), as described in 10 CFR 73.1. The licensee shall protect digital computer and communication systems and networks associated with: (i) safety related and important-to-safety functions; (ii) security functions; (iii) emergency preparedness functions, including offsite communications; and (iv) support systems and equipment which, if compromised, would adversely impact safety, security, or emergency preparedness (SSEP) functions. The rule specifies that digital computer and communication systems and networks associated with these functions must be protected from cyber attacks that would adversely impact the integrity or confidentiality of data and software; deny access to systems, services, or data; or provide an adverse impact to the operations of systems, networks, and associated equipment.

In the October 21, 2010, Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM)-COMWCO-1 0-0001, the Commission stated that the NRC's cyber security rule at 10 CFR 73.54 should be interpreted to include structures, systems, and components (SSCs) in the balance of plant (BOP) that have a nexus to radiological health and safety. The staff determined that SSCs in the BOP that have a nexus to radiological health and safety are those that could directly or indirectly affect reactivity of a nuclear power plant (NPP), and are therefore within the scope of important-to-safety functions described in 10 CFR 73.54(a)(1).

2.2 Elements of a CSP As stated in 10 CFR 73.54(e), the licensee must establish, implement, and maintain a CSP that satisfies the Cyber Security Program requirements of this regulation. In addition, the CSP must describe how the licensee will implement the requirements of the regulation and must account for the site-specific conditions that affect implementation. One method of complying with this regulation is to describe within the CSP how the licensee will achieve high assurance that all SSEP functions are protected from cyber attacks.

2.3 Regulatory Guide (RG) 5.71 and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6 RG 5.71, "Cyber Security Programs for Nuclear Facilities," (Reference 2) describes a regulatory position that promotes a defensive strategy consisting of a defensive architecture and a set of security controls based on standards provided in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-53, "Recommended Security Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations" and NIST SP 800-82, "Guide to Industrial Control Systems Security," dated September 29,2008. NIST SP 800-53 and NIST SP 800-82 are based on well-understood cyber threats, risks, and vulnerabilities, coupled with equally well understood countermeasures and protective techniques. RG 5.71 divides the above-noted security controls into three broad categories: technical, operational, and management.

RG 5.71 provides a framework to aid in the identification of those digital assets that licensees must protect from cyber attacks. These identified digital assets are referred to as "critical digital

-3 assets" (CDAs). Licensees should address the potential cyber security risks to CDAs by applying the defensive architecture and addressing the collection of security controls identified in RG 5.71. RG 5.71 includes a CSP template that provides one method for preparing an acceptable CSP.

The organization of RG 5.71 reflects the steps necessary to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 73.54. Section C.3 of RG 5.71 describes an acceptable method for implementing the security controls, as detailed in Appendix B, "Technical Controls," and Appendix C, "Operational and Management Controls.". Section C.4 of RG 5.71 discusses the need to maintain the established Cyber Security Program, including comprehensive monitoring of the CDAs and the effectiveness of their security protection measures, ensuring that changes to the CDAs or the environment are controlled, coordinated, and periodically reviewed for continued protection from cyber attacks.

Section C.5 of RG 5.71 provides licensees and applicants with guidance for retaining records associated with their Cyber Security Programs. Appendix A to RG 5.71 provides a template for a generic CSP which licensees may use to comply with the licensing requirements of 10 CFR 73.54. Appendices Band C provide an acceptable set of security controls, which are based on well-understood threats, vulnerabilities, and attacks, coupled with equally well-understood and vetted countermeasures and protective techniques.

NEI 08-09, Revision 6 closely maps with RG 5.71; Appendix A of NEI 08-09, Revision 6 contains a CSP template that is comparable to Appendix A of RG 5.71. Appendix D of NEI 08-09, Revision 6 contains technical cyber security controls that are comparable to Appendix B of RG 5.71. Appendix E of NEI 08-09, Revision 6 contains operational and management cyber security controls that are comparable to Appendix C of RG 5.71.

The NRC staff stated in a letter (

Subject:

NEI 08-09, "Cyber Security Plan Template, Revision 6), dated May 5, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML101190371), that the licensee may use the template in NEI 08-09, Revision 6 (Reference 3), to prepare an acceptable CSP, with the exception of the definition of "cyber attack." The NRC staff subsequently reviewed and approved by letter dated June 7, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML101550052), a definition for "cyber attack" to be used in submissions based on NEI 08-09, Revision 6 (Reference 4). The licensee submitted a CSP for the Indian Point Energy Center, Units 1, 2, and 3 that was based on the template provided in NEI 08-09, Revision 6 and included a definition of cyber attack acceptable to the NRC staff in its letter to the NRC dated July 8,2010. In that letter, the licensee acknowledged it was using the definition of "cyber attack" that was approved by the NRC.

Additionally, the licensee submitted a supplement to their CSP on April 1, 2011, to include information on SSCs in the BOP that, if compromised, could affect NPP reactivity.

RG 5.71 and NEI 08-09, Revision 6 are comparable documents; both are based on essentially the same general approach and same set of technical, operational, and management security controls. The submitted CSP was reviewed against the corresponding sections in RG 5.71.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The NRC staff performed a technical evaluation of the licensee's submittal. The licensee's submittal, with the exceptions of deviations described in Section 3.24, generally conformed to the guidance in NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which was found to be acceptable by the NRC staff and comparable to RG 5.71 to satisfy the requirements contained in 10 CFR 73.54. The staff reviewed the licensee's submittal against the requirements of 10 CFR 73.54 following the

-4 guidance contained in RG 5.71. The staff's evaluation of each section of their submittal is discussed below.

3.1 Scope and Purpose The licensee's CSP establishes a means to achieve high assurance that digital computer and communication systems and networks associated with the following functions are adequately protected against cyber attacks up to and including the DBT:

1. Safety-related and important-to-safety functions;

2. Security functions;

3. Emergency preparedness functions, including offsite communications; and

4. Support systems and equipment which, if compromised, would adversely impact SSEP functions.

The submitted CSP describes achievement of high assurance of adequate protection of systems associated with the above functions from cyber attacks by:

• Implementing and documenting the "baseline" security controls as described in Section 3.1.6 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.3 described in RG 5.71; and

• Implementing and documenting a Cyber Security Program to maintain the established cyber security controls through a comprehensive life cycle approach as described in Section 4 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Appendix A, Section A.2.1 of RG 5.71.

Thus, the licensee's CSP, as originally submitted, is comparable to the CSP in NEI-08-09, Revision 6. However, in its submittal dated April 1, 2011, the licensee clarified its original submission and indicated that the scope of systems includes those BOP SSCs that have an impact on NPP reactivity if compromised. This is in response to and consistent with SRM COMWCO-1 0-0001, "Regulation of Cyber Security at Nuclear Power Plants," October 21, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. IVIL102940009), in which the Commission stated that the NRC's cyber security rule at 10 CFR 73.54 should be interpreted to include SSCs in the BOP that have a nexus to radiological health and safety. The staff determined that this is defined as those systems that have a nexus to radiological health and safety are those that could directly or indirectly affect reactivity of a NPP, and are, therefore, within the scope of important-to-safety functions described in 10 CFR 73.54(a)(1).

The licensee substituted "emergency planning" functions for "emergency preparedness" functions. Paragraph 73.54(a)(1) of 10 CFR required that, "The licensee shall protect digital computer and communication systems and networks associated with ... (iii) Emergency preparedness functions, and (iv) Support systems and equipment which, if compromised, would adversary impact safety, security, or emergency preparedness functions." The requirements of 10 CFR 73.54(a)(1) do not address protection of digital assets, computers or communication systems that provide "emergency planning" functions. The NRC asked for clarification on the use of the term "emergency planning" functions.

The licensee responded by modifying the original statement in Section 2.1 (Scope and Purpose) of the CSP. The updated CSP correctly refers to the need to protect against cyber attack

-5 systems that perform "emergency preparedness" functions. The NRC staff finds that the licensee established adequate measures to implement and document the Cyber Security Program, including baseline security controls.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately establishes the Cyber Security Program, including baseline security controls.

3.2 Analyzing Digital Computer Systems and Networks and Applying Cyber Security Controls The licensee's CSP states that the Cyber Security Program is established, implemented, and maintained as described in Section 3.1 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1 described in RG 5.71 to:

• Analyze digital computer and communications systems and networks; and

• Identify those assets that must be protected against cyber attacks to satisfy 10 CFR 73.54(a).

The submitted CSP describes how the cyber security controls in Appendices D and E of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which are comparable to Appendices Band C in RG 5.71, are addressed to protect CDAs from cyber attacks.

In addition to the term "cyber attacks," the licensee included the term "incidents" in the last paragraph of Section 3.0 of the CSP in stating the types of events ("cyber attacks or incidents")

that the plant would report to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR Part 73, Appendix G. This deviation from NEI 08-09, Revision 6, Appendix A. Section 3.0, expands the reporting criteria the licensee will use for alerting the NRC of adverse cyber events.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately addresses security controls.

3.3 Cyber Security Assessment and Authorization The licensee provided information addressing the creation of a formal, documented, cyber security assessment and authorization policy. This included a description concerning the creation of a formal, documented procedure comparable to Section 3.1.1 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6.

The NRC staff finds that the licensee established adequate measures to define and address the purpose, scope, roles, responsibilities, management commitment, and coordination, and facilitates the implementation of the cyber security assessment and authorization policy.

The NRC staff reviewed the above information and found no deviation from Section 3.1.1 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1.1 and Appendix A, Section A.3.1.1 of RG 5.71.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately established controls to develop, disseminate, and periodically update the cyber security assessment and authorization policy and implementing procedure.

- 6 3.4 Cyber Security Assessment Team (CSAT)

The CSAT responsibilities include conducting the cyber security assessment, documenting key findings during the assessment, and evaluating assumptions and conclusions about cyber security threats. The submitted CSP outlines the requirements, roles and responsibilities of the CSAT comparable to Section 3.1.2 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6. It also describes that the CSAT has the authority to conduct an independent assessment The submitted CSP describes that the CSAT will consist of individuals with knowledge about information and digital systems technology; NPP operations, engineering, and plant technical specifications; and physical security and emergency preparedness systems and programs. The CSA T description in the CSP is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1.2 in RG 5.71.

The submitted CSP lists the roles and responsibilities for the CSAT which included performing and overseeing the cyber security assessment process; documenting key observations; evaluating information about cyber security threats and vulnerabilities; confirming information obtained during tabletop reviews, walk-downs, or electronic validation of CDAs; and identifying potential new cyber security controls.

This section of the CSP submitted by the licensee is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1.2 in RG 5.71 without deviation.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately establishes the requirements, roles and responsibilities of the CSAT.

3.5 Identification of CDAs The submitted CSP states that the licensee will identify and document CDAs and critical systems (CSs), including a general description, the overall function, the overall consequences if a compromise were to occur, and the security functional requirements or specifications as described in Section 3.1.3 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1.3 of RG 5.71.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes the process to identify CDAs.

3.6 Examination of Cyber Security Practices The submitted CSP describes how the CSAT will examine and document the existing cyber security policies, procedures, and practices; existing cyber security controls; detailed descriptions of network and communication architectures (or network/communication architecture drawings); information on security devices; and any other information that may be helpful during the cyber security assessment process as described in Section 3.1.4 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1.2 of RG 5.71. The examinations will include an analysis of the effectiveness of the existing Cyber Security Program and cyber security controls. The CSAT will document the collected cyber security information and the results of their examination of the collected information.

-7 This section of the CSP submitted by the licensee is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1.2 in RG 5.71 without deviation.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes the examination of cyber security practices.

3.7 Tabletop Reviews and Validation Testing The submitted CSP describes tabletop reviews and validation testing, which confirm the direct and indirect connectivity of each COA and identify direct and indirect pathways to COAs. The CSP states that validation testing will be performed electronically or by physical walkdowns. The licensee's plan for tabletop reviews and validation testing is comparable to Section 3.1.5 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1.4 of RG 5.71.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes tabletop reviews and validation testing.

3.8 Mitigation of Vulnerabilities and Application of Cyber Security Controls The submitted CSP describes the use of information collected during the cyber security assessment process (e.g., disposition of cyber security controls, defensive models, defensive strategy measures, site and corporate network architectures) to implement security controls in accordance with Section 3.1.6 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.3 and Appendix A.3.1.6 to RG 5.71. The CSP describes the process that will be applied in cases where security controls cannot be implemented.

The submitted CSP notes that before the licensee can implement security controls on a COA, it will assess the potential for adverse impact in accordance with Section 3.1.6 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.3 of RG 5.71.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes mitigation of vulnerabilities and application of security controls.

3.9 Incorporating the Cyber Security Program into the Physical Protection Program The submitted CSP states that the Cyber Security Program will be reviewed as a component of the PhYSical Security Program in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(m). This is comparable to Section 4.1 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.4 of RG 5.71.

The licensee restated the opening sentence in Section 4.1 of the CSP. The sentence "The Cyber Security Program, which is referenced in the Physical Security Plan, implements the Cyber Security Program requirements of 10 CFR 73.54(b)(3), 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1), and 10 CFR 73.55(c)(6)," from the Section 4.1 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6 was replaced by the licensee with the following: "The Cyber Security Program is incorporated into the IPEC [Indian Point Energy Center] Physical Security Program as required by 10 CFR 73.54(b)(3),

10 CFR 73.55(a)(1), and 10 CFR 73.55(c)(6)." The restatement of the requirements for incorporating the Cyber Security Program within the plant Physical Security Program, does not conflict with the NEI 08-09, Revision 6 guidance.

-8 Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes review of the CSP as a component of the physical security program.

3.10 Cyber Security Controls The submitted CSP describes how the technical, operational and management cyber security controls contained in Appendices D and E of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, that are comparable to Appendices Band C in RG 5.71, are evaluated and dispositioned based on site-specific conditions during all phases of the Cyber Security Program. The CSP describes that many security controls have actions that are required to be performed on specific frequencies and that the frequency of a security control is satisfied if the action is performed within 1.25 times the frequency specified in the control, as applied, and as measured from the previous performance of the action as described in Section 4.2 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6.

The licensee explained in its CSP that the cyber security controls were utilized in the following site-specific programs: baseline assessment; configuration management; engineering design control; training; attack mitigation; incident response; record retention and handling; and review.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes implementation of cyber security controls.

3.11 Defense-in-Depth Protective Strategies The submitted CSP describes the implementation of defensive strategies that ensure the capability to detect, respond to, and recover from a cyber attack. The CSP specifies that the defensive strategies consist of security controls, defense-in-depth measures, and the defensive architecture. The submitted CSP notes that the defensive architecture establishes the logical and physical boundaries to control the data transfer between these boundaries.

The licensee established defense-in-depth strategies by: implementing and documenting a defensive architecture as described in Section 4.3 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.2 in RG 5.71; a physical security program, including physical barriers; the operational and management controls described in Appendix E of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Appendix C to RG 5.71; and the technical controls described in Appendix D of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Appendix B to RG 5.71.

The CSP describes the defense-in-depth architecture as predicated on isolation of CDAs within levels 2, 3, and 4. Furthermore, data flows from lower levels to higher levels are described as being severely curtailed due to the implementation of appropriately configured firewalls, intrusion detection systems, air-gaps, or deterministic one-way isolation devices such as data-diodes or hardware virtual private networks (VPNs). The NRC staff understands that the hardware VPN is a device that has security enhancement features, but is vulnerable to unauthorized intrusions in a like manner as traditional VPN software. Since the licensee proposed these devices as equally effective in isolating CDAs and CSs from cyber attack as other deterministic methods, the NRC staff requested further explanation on the characteristics, features, and effectiveness of the hardware VPN. The licensee responded by removing hardware VPN as an option from the updated CSP that it submitted on April 1, 2011.

- 9 As noted in Section 3.1 above (Scope and Purpose), the licensee substituted "Emergency Plan" functions for "Emergency Preparedness" functions (as defined in 10 CFR 73.54(a)(1>> in references to CDAs and CSs that would be protected via the submitted defense-in-depth architecture. On page 12 of the CSP, the licensee describes the implementation model for the defense-in-depth architecture, and characterizes the several types of CDAs that are protected within the proposed layers. It notes in the third bullet that the "CDAs ... that perform security or support Emergency Plan functions ... " It notes in the fourth bullet that, "CDAs ... that perform or support Emergency Plan Functions ... " The NRC staff requested an explanation of the functions that are comprised under the term "Emergency Plan" and further requested that the licensee explain how the CDAs and CSs that perform "Emergency Preparedness" were protected under the submitted defense-in-depth architecture, as required by 10 CFR 73.54(a)(1}. The licensee responded by removing references to "Emergency Planning" and "Emergency Plan," replacing these terms with "Emergency Preparedness" in the submittal of its updated CSP by letter dated June 29, 2011.

On page 12 of the CSP, third bullet, the licensee characterized systems that were not required to be isolated at level 4, including those, " ... that perform safety monitoring, are within level 3." The term "safety monitoring" adequately describes functions typically performed by data acquisition systems.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes implementation of defense-in-depth protective strategies.

3.12 Ongoing Monitoring and Assessment The submitted CSP describes how ongoing monitoring of cyber security controls to support CDAs is implemented comparable to Appendix E of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Positions CA.1 and CA.2 of RG 5.71. The ongoing monitoring program includes configuration management and change control; cyber security impact analysis of changes and changed environments; ongoing assessments of cyber security controls; effectiveness analysis (to monitor and confirm that the cyber security controls are implemented correctly, operating as intended, and achieving the desired outcome) and vulnerability scans to identify new vulnerabilities that could affect the security posture of CDAs.

This section of the CSP submitted by the licensee is comparable to Regulatory Positions CA.1 and CA.2 of RG 5.71 without deviation.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes ongoing monitoring and assessment.

3.13 Modification of Digital Assets The submitted CSP describes how cyber security controls are established, implemented, and maintained to protect CDAs. These security controls ensure that modifications to CDAs are evaluated before implementation that the cyber security performance objectives are maintained, and that acquired CDAs have cyber security requirements in place to achieve the site's Cyber Security Program objectives. This is comparable to Section 4.5 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Appendices A.4.2.5 and A.4.2.6 of RG 5.71.

- 10 Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes modification of digital assets.

3.14 Attack Mitigation and Incident Response The submitted CSP describes the process to ensure that SSEP functions are not adversely impacted due to cyber attacks in accordance with Section 4.6 of NEI OB-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Appendix C, Section C.B of RG 5.71. The CSP includes a discussion about creating incident response policy and procedures, and addresses training, testing and drills, incident handling, incident monitoring, and incident response assistance. It also describes identification, detection, response, containment, eradication, and recovery activities comparable to Section 4.6 of NEt OB-09, Revision 6.

This section of the CSP submitted by the licensee is comparable to Appendix C, Section C.B of RG 5.71 without deviation.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes attack mitigation and incident response.

3.15 Cyber Security Contingency Plan The submitted CSP describes creation of a Cyber Security Contingency Plan and policy that protects CDAs from the adverse impacts of a cyber attack described in Section 4.7 of NEI OB-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.3.2.7 and Appendix C.9 of RG 5.71.

The licensee describes the Cyber Security Contingency Plan that would include the response to events. The plan includes procedures for (a) operating CDAs in a contingency, (b) roles and responsibilities of responders, (c) processes and procedures for backup and storage of information, (d) logical diagrams of network connectivity, (e) current configuration information, and (f) personnel lists for authorized access to CDAs.

This section of the CSP submitted by the licensee is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.3.2.7 of RG 5.71 without deviation.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes the cyber security contingency plan.

3.16 Cyber Security Training and Awareness The submitted CSP describes a program that establishes the training requirements necessary for the licensee's personnel and contractors to perform their assigned duties and responsibilities in implementing the Cyber Security Program in accordance with Section 4.B of NEI OB-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.3.2.B of RG 5.71.

The CSP states that individuals will be trained with a level of cyber security knowledge commensurate with their assigned responsibilities in order to provide high assurance that individuals are able to perform their job functions in accordance with Appendix E of NEI OB-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.3.2.B of RG 5.71 and describes

- 11 three levels of training: awareness training, technical training. and specialized cyber security training.

Based on the above. the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes the cyber security training and awareness.

3.17 Evaluate and Manage Cyber Risk The submitted CSP describes how cyber risk is evaluated and managed utilizing site programs and procedures comparable to Section 4.9 of NEI 08-09. Revision 6. which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.4 and Appendix C, Section C.13 of RG 5.71. The CSP describes the Threat and Vulnerability Management Program, Risk Mitigation, Operational Experience Program; and the Corrective Action Program and how each will be used to evaluate and manage risk.

This section of the CSP submitted by the licensee is comparable to Regulatory Position C.4 and Appendix C, Section C.13 of RG 5.71 without deviation.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes evaluation and management of cyber risk.

3.18 Policies and Implementing Procedures The CSP describes development and implementation of policies and procedures to meet security control objectives in accordance with Section 4.10 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.5 and Appendix A, Section A.3.3 of RG 5.71. This includes the process to document, review, approve, issue, use, and revise policies and procedures.

The CSP also describes the licensee's procedures to establish specific responsibilities for positions described in Section 4.11 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Appendix C, Section C.1 0.1 0 of RG 5.71.

This section of the CSP submitted by the licensee is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.5, Appendix A, Section A.3.3, and Appendix C, Section C.10.10 of RG 5.71 without deviation.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes cyber security policies and implementing procedures.

3.19 Roles and Responsibilities The submitted CSP describes the roles and responsibilities for the qualified and experienced personnel, including the Cyber Security Program Sponsor, the Cyber Security Program Manager, Cyber Security Specialists, the Cyber Security Incident Response Team (CSIRT), and other positions as needed. The CSIRT initiates in accordance with the Incident Response Plan and initiates emergency action when required to safeguard CDAs from cyber security compromise and to assist with the eventual recovery of compromised systems. Implementing procedures establish roles and responsibilities for each of the cyber security roles in accordance

- 12 with Section 4.11 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.3.1.2, Appendix A, Section A3.1.2, and Appendix C, Section C.10.10 of RG 5.71.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes cyber security roles and responsibilities.

3.20 Cyber Security Program Review The submitted CSP describes how the Cyber Security Program establishes the necessary procedures to implement reviews of applicable program elements in accordance with Section 4.12 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6, which is comparable to Regulatory Position C.4.3 and Appendix A, Section A4.3 of RG 5.71.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes Cyber Security Program review.

3.21 Document Control and Records Retention and Handling The submitted CSP describes that the licensee has established the necessary measures and governing procedures to ensure that sufficient records of items and activities affecting cyber security are developed, reviewed, approved, issued, used, and revised to reflect completed work. The CSP described that superseded portions of certain records will be retained for at least 3 years after the record is superseded, while audit records will be retained for no less than 12 months in accordance with Section 4.13 of NEI 08-09, Revision 6. However, this guidance provided by industry to licensees did not fully comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.54.

In a letter dated February 28,2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML110600204), NEI sent to the NRC proposed language for licensees' use to respond to the generic records retention issue, to which the NRC had no technical objection (

Reference:

Letter from NRC dated March 1, 2011, ADAMS Accession No. ML110490337). The proposed language clarified the requirement by providing examples (without providing an all-inclusive list) of the records and supporting technical documentation that are needed to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 73.54. All records will be retained until the Commission terminates the license, and the licensee shall maintain superseded portions of these records for at least 3 years after the record is superseded, unless otherwise specified by the Commission. By retaining accurate and complete records and technical documentation until the license is terminated, inspectors, auditors, or assessors will have the ability to evaluate incidents, events, and other activities that are related to any of the cyber security elements described, referenced, and contained within the licensee's NRC-approved CSP. It will also allow the licensee to maintain the ability to detect and respond to cyber attacks in a timely manner, in the case of an event. In a letter dated April 1, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML111020654), the licensee responded to the records retention issue using the language proposed by NEI in its letter dated February 28, 2011. Therefore, the staff finds this deviation from NEI 08-09, Revision 6 to be acceptable.

This section of the CSP submitted by the licensee is comparable to Regulatory Position C.5 and Appendix A, Section A5 of RG 5.71 without deviation.

Based on the above, the NRC staff finds that the language the licensee proposes to adopt provides for adequate records retention and will support the licensee's ability to detect and

- 13 respond to cyber attacks. The NRC staff further finds that this section is comparable to Regulatory Position C.5 and Appendix A, Section A.5 of RG 5.71 without deviation. Accordingly, the NRC staff finds that the CSP adequately describes cyber security document control and records retention and handling.

3.22 Implementation Schedule The submitted CSP provides a proposed implementation schedule for the Cyber Security Program. In a letter dated February 28,2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML110600206), NEI sent to the NRC a template for licensees to use to submit their CSP implementation schedules, to which the NRC had no technical objection (

Reference:

Letter from NRC dated March 1, 2011, ADAMS Accession No. ML110070348). These key milestones include:

• Establish the CSAT;

• Identify CSs and CDAs;

• Install a deterministic one-way device between lower level devices and higher level devices;

• Implement the security control "Access Control For Portable And Mobile Devices,"

• Implement observation and identification of obvious cyber related tampering to existing insider mitigation rounds by incorporating the appropriate elements;

• Identify, document, and implement cyber security controls as per "Mitigation of Vulnerabilities and Application of Cyber Security Controls" for CDAs that could adversely impact the design function of phYSical security target set equipment; and

• Commence ongoing monitoring and assessment activities for those target set CDAs whose security controls have been implemented.

In a letter dated April 1,2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML111020654), the licensee provided a revised implementation schedule using the NEI template. The NRC staff considers this April 1, 2011, supplement the approved schedule as required by 10 CFR 73.54.

Based on the provided schedule ensuring timely implementation of those protective measures that provide a higher degree of protection against radiological sabotage, the NRC staff finds the Cyber Security Program implementation schedule is satisfactory.

The NRC staff acknowledges that in its submittal dated July 8, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, the licensee proposed several milestone dates for CSP implementation as regulatory commitments. The NRC staff does not regard the CSP milestone implementation dates as regulatory commitments that can be changed unilaterally by the licensee, particularly in light of the regulatory reqUirement at 10 CFR 73.54, that U[i]mplementation of the licensee's cyber security program must be consistent with the approved schedule." As the NRC staff explained in its letter to all operating reactor licensees dated May 9, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML110980538), the implementation of the plan, including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the licensee and approved by the NRC. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule thus will require prior NRC approval pursuant in 10 CFR 50.90.

- 14 3.23 Revision of the License Conditions In its submittal dated July 8,2010, the licensee proposed to add to the existing license condition related to the respective physical security, training and qualification, and safeguards contingency plans in each license. The following text is added at the end of the existing license condition related to the respective physical security, training and qualification, and safeguards contingency plans in each license:

(1) For IP1 (License Condition 3.d): "ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved cyber security plan (CSP), including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 55."

(2) For IP2 (License Condition 2.H): ""ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved cyber security plan (CSP), including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 266."

(3) For IP3 (License Condition 2.G: "ENO shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved cyber security plan (CSP), including changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). ENO CSP was approved by License Amendment No. 243."

4.0 DIFFERENCES FROM NEI 08-09, REVISION 6 The NRC staff notes the following additional differences between the licensee's submission and NEI 08-09, Revision 6:

• In Section 3.1, "Scope and Purpose," the licensee clarified the definition of important-to-safety functions, consistent with SRM-COMWCO-1 0-0001.

• In Section 3.2, "Analyzing Digital Computer Systems and Networks and Applying Cyber Security Controls," the licensee included the term "incidents" along with "cyber attacks" as reportable events in accordance with 10 CFR 73, Appendix G.

This deviation from NEI 08-09, Revision 6, Appendix A, Section 3.0 expands the reporting criteria the licensee will use for alerting the NRC of adverse cyber events.

• In Section 3.21, "Document Control and Records Retention and Handling," the licensee clarified the definition of records and supporting documentation that will be retained to conform to the requirements of 10 CFR 73.54.

• In Section 3.22, "Implementation Schedule," the licensee submitted a revised implementation schedule, specifying the interim milestones and the final implementation date, including supporting rationale.

The NRC staff 'finds all of these deviations to be acceptable as discussed in the respective sections.

5.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) was notified of the proposed issuance of a license amendments in response to the application by the licensee dated July 8, 2010, as supplemented

- 15 by letters dated February 18, April 1, and June 29, 2011, for the subject facilities in order to implement the CSP (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML111890457) as required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.54, "Protection of digital computer and communication systems and networks. On June 15, 2011 NYSERDA responded by email (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML111730139) to the NRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Regulation (NRR). The response contained comments from the New York State Office of Cyber Security (OCS) following its review of the licensee's CSP, implementation schedule, and the licensee's responses to NRC requests for additional information. The OCS comments were based on a comparison of the licensee's CSP to the New York State Information Security Policy (PS03-002) and Information Classification and Control Policy and Standard (PS08-001). In these comments, OCS stated the PS03-002 and PS08-001 policies and standards are generic documents applicable to State agencies and do not include provisions for industrial facilities such as nuclear power plants.

5.1 Discussion The licensee used the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, "Cyber Security Plan template," which on May 5,2010 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) deemed acceptable for use in meeting the requirements Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 73.54. The NEI 08-09, Revision 6, "Cyber Security Plan template," is similar to the template provided in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide (RG) 5.71. The templates are based on cyber security standards put forth by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which were tailored by experts in cyber security, commercial nuclear power regulation, licensing and plant operations (including representatives from the NRC), the NEI, the nuclear power industry, and the private sector. The tailoring process focused on determining measures necessary to provide high assurance that critical plant functions at a nuclear power plant (NPP) are adequately protected against cyber attacks, up to and including the design basis threat (DBT). As a result, the cyber security policies and standards put forth by the NRC will differ from those developed by New York State. Once the licensee's CSP is approved by the NRC, elements within this plan become a condition of its license. Furthermore, the plan requires the licensee to implement additional or more restrictive security controls if it is determined that further measures are necessary to successfully defend critical plant functions from cyber attacks (see Section C.3.3 Security Controls of RG 5.71).

The assets that fall within the scope of 10 CFR 73.54 include those digital computer and communication systems and networks associated with the following functions: safety and important-to-safety; security; emergency preparedness; and support systems and equipment which, if compromised, would adversely impact safety, security, or emergency preparedness functions. With regards to levels of specificity within the licensee's CSP, 10 CFR 73.54 is a performance-based regulation that focuses on desired, measurable outcomes, rather than prescriptive processes, techniques, or procedures. The level of specificity within the licensee's CSP is sufficient for licensing. Additional specificity will be contained in site-specific policies and procedures, and supporting documentation associated with the implementation of security controls, which will be made available to NRC inspectors during on-site inspections and in the course of performing regulatory oversight activities.

- 16 For reasons specified in the OCS comments, implementation timeframes are a result of a variety of factors. Implementation of the cyber security controls specified within the respective CSPs requires detailed planning and time. The milestone provided in the schedule represents the timeframe necessary for the licensee to determine the most effective approach for establishing the defensive architecture outlined in the CSP without affecting the function of critical plant systems or the performance capability of structures, systems, and components relied upon to mitigate the consequences of postulated accidents. The actual approach taken will vary by licensee. In addition, security control implementation may require a plant outage before modifications to a critical digital asset are performed in an effort to avoid the disruption of critical plant functions, including safety, security, and emergency preparedness. Plant outages can further affect the.implementation timeframe.

During the implementation period, the NRC continues to provide regulatory oversight while establishing its cyber security inspection program. Moreover, the NRC Cyber Assessment Team (CAT) is in place to coordinate with industry on security-related incidents, and to communicate to NPPs the vulnerability information necessary to aid in the development of protective strategies for defending against cyber attacks.

The NRC continuously seeks to improve the level of openness and transparency associated with its regulatory processes. Ensuring appropriate openness explicitly recognizes that the public must be informed about, and have a reasonable opportunity to participate meaningfully in, the NRC's regulatory processes. This openness and transparency is further supported through regular public meetings held by the NRC for the purpose of discussing topics such as cyber security. Information on public meetings is available on the NRC website (http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/meeting-schedule.html).

5.2 NRC Staff Technical Responses Although the responses provided below refer to sections within RG 5.71, the licensee used NEI 08-09 Revision 6 for their CSP. For regulatory consistency, the NRC technical staff has referred to sections within RG 5.71, however, there is in all cases a comparable section in NEI 08-09 Revision 6.

More detailed NRC staff technical responses to OCS comments are provided in Table 1 below.

- 17 Table 1 Detailed Comment Responses Report Topic/Subject NY State Comment Response Page No.

Page 3 Contrast between Licensees are not NYS correctly observes that licensees are not required to "Cyber Security required to submit submit this material for prior approval and that it will be Plan" and "Cyber policies. made available for inspection by NRC staff. This is Security Program" implementing acceptable to the NRC staff because 10 CFR 73.54 is a procedures. site performance-based rule, which affords licensees specific analyses, or necessary flexibility in determining which measures will be other supporting taken to comply with the regulation. The detailed technical technical information documentation resulting from the implementation of the to the NRC for prior licensees' cyber security program is maintained on-site by review and approval the licensee, and is available to the NRC during as part of the CSP. inspections. In other words, the CSP outlines how the Such information will cyber security program will be implemented and the only be made program details will be maintained at the licensee's site.

available for inspection by the NRC staff.

Page 4 Comparison of New York State has The scope of NY State's information security policy is very NRC cyber no existing cyber different from NRC's cyber regulation under 10 CFR security security requirements 73.54, and associated guidance. ICS have different risks.

requirements to applicable to priorities, reliability. and performance requirements than comparable industrial facilities traditional IT systems. The NRC cyber security guidance requirements set such as nuclear (RG 5.71) includes a tailored security control baseline in forth by NY State power plants. As a accordance with guidance outlined in Section 3.3 of NIST OCS result, comparison SP 800-53. to include participation of experts from was made to the industry, NRC. and the private sector. Comparison of RG New York State 5.71, which addresses cyber security at nuclear power information security . plants, with other standards. such as NYS' standards, policies and which were not intended to address industrial situations, standards. will reveal substantial differences. These differences are justified by the difference between commercial or I corporate needs and the needs of nuclear power plants.

Page 4 Principles of PS08-001 states The NRC staff agrees that information must be managed Confidentiality. each information based on confidentiality. integrity and availability and that Integrity. and asset must be appropriate controls must be implemented to secure Availability classified using three information assets. 10 CFR 73.54(a)(2) and RG 5.71 principles Section C.2, Elements of a CSP, state licensees must (confidentiality *  ! protect critical plant systems within the scope of 10 CFR integrity, and 73.54 from cyber attacks that would have the following availability) and, effects:

based on this I classification, certain

• adversely impact the integrity or confidentiality of I controls must be data or software I

implemented to

• deny access to or adversely impact the availability

- 18 secure the of systems, services, or data information asset.

• adversely impact the operation of systems, networks, and associated equipment These three elements align with the principles of confidentiality, integrity, and availability as described by NY State.

Page 4 Frequency of PS08-001 Controls The NRC staff agrees that periodic cyber security program Access Control No.1 and No. 47 reviews are important in the face of changing threats. RG Policies and require that agencies 5.71 Appendix C Section 4 states that continuous and Procedures review all security ongoing monitoring and assessment of the complete Reviews procedures and security life cycle for COAs provides a means to evaluate controls, including and manage cyber risk. This security lifecycle includes the the access control following elements:

policy and

• continuous monitoring and assessment, procedures at least

• configuration management, annually to ensure

• change management, their effectiveness in

• security impact analysis of changes and the face of changing environment, threats. 10 CFR 73.55(m) requires a

• effectiveness analysis, review only every 24

• ongoing assessment of security controls and programs effectiveness, months.

• vulnerability scans/assessments,

• change control, and

• security program review.

Based on a review of NIST, IEEE, OHS, and ISA standards, a multi-disciplinary team of industry, NRC, and private sector experts determined that twenty-four months represents an acceptable frequency for a complete program review, although, as stated above, there are continuous and ongoing monitoring and assessment activities focused on each of the COAs at a licensee's facility.

Furthermore, RG 5.71 states that a complete program review is required at least every 24 months, but also sets conditions for when such reviews would occur on a more frequent basis in Section C.4.3 Cyber Security Program Review.

Page 4 Adequate PS08-001 Control The NRC staff agrees that having more than one person Resources With NO.6 requires with access to a COA (Le., continuity) is an important part Access to COAs agencies to ensure of a CSP. Continuity is addressed by security control that more than one C.9.2 Contingency Plan in Appendix C of RG 5.71, which person has access to states that the licensee must document as part of the the COA to ensure contingency plan the resources (in other words the business continuity. people) needed for a potential crisis situation. In addition, This control could not security control C.9.3 Contingency Plan Testing states

• be readily identified licensees will use realistic test/exercise scenarios and I in the guidance, but environments, including unscheduled system maintenance .

- 19 may be part of the activities, such as responding to COA components and contingency plans system failures, as an opportunity to test or exercise the that are part of the contingency plan. All of these aforementioned controls licensees' detailed require that multiple people have access to all critical cyber security systems to include COAs.

programs.

Page 5 Media Control PS08-001 Control The NRC staff agrees that controlling electronic media is NO.9 requires that critical to maintaining high assurance against cyber electronic storage attacks. Security Control C.1.1 Media Protection Policy media and devices and Procedures, Appendix C of RG 5.71, addresses be issued, owned, control and protection of electronic storage media and controlled, or devices. That security control states that the licensee approved by the must implement procedures for all associated media agency. This protection controls, including procedures for media receipt, includes media used storage, handling, sanitization, removal, use, and disposal.

to record and store These procedures pertain to both digital and non-digital data, but not limited media.

to tapes, hard drives, USB flash drives, memory cards/chips, CDs, and diskettes.

This requirement is not specifically laid out in the media protection processes found in the guidance.

Page 5 Alternate Storage PS08-001 Control The NRC staff agrees that the security of off-site storage Sites No. 10 requires that is important and addresses alternate storage site security agencies ensure the by security control C.9.5 Alternate Storage Site and security of alternate Location for Backups in Appendix C of RG 5.71. The storage sites. The description of this security control can be compared to the guidance does not CP-6 Alternate Storage Site security control in NIST SP clearly provide for the . 800-53, Revision 3.

review and approval of physical/cyber controls at alternate storage sites.

Page 5 Transportation of PS08-001 Control Policies and procedures governing transportation or Storage Media No. 56 requires that storage of information outside of an approved storage executive facility and for transmission of that information are part of management the licensee's detailed cyber security program and will be designate the level of available for NRC inspection on-site at the licensee facility.

management who can give written approval for transportation or storage of

- 20 information outside of an approved storage facility and for transmission of information outside the agency. All such approvals must be documented by designated management. The guidance does not appear to require management review and/or approval of external systems used for storage/transmission.

While this control could not be readily identified in the guidance, it may be part of the licensees' detailed cyber security programs.

Page 5 Media Protection PS08-001 Control The NRC staff agrees that written procedures are No. 13 requires the important to maintaining a cyber security program and creation and outlines the establishment of policies and procedures implementation of governing media protection in security control C.1.1 Media written procedures to Protection Policy and Procedures, Appendix C, of RG keep track of 5.71. Media protection is part of the licensee's detailed individual cyber security program and will be available for NRC documents, files, inspection on-site at the licensee facility.

devices, or media which contain sensitive data and the individuals who have possession of them. This control could not be readily identified in the guidance, but may be part of the licensees' detailed cyber security programs.

Page 5 Environmental PS08-001 Control Because the environmental systems (e.g., HVAC) are not No. 21 requires critical to the proper functioning of any of the safety information systems, they are not addressed specifically by 10 CFR custodians to monitor 73.54 or the RG 5.71. Nonetheless, the security control

• environmental C.5.1 Physical and Environmental Protection Policies and

- 21 protection measures Procedures in Appendix C of RG 5.71 does state that the I I (e.g., HVAC, fire licensees will develop procedures to facilitate the suppression) for implementation of environmental protection policies and problems and correct associated controls. This includes the security control as needed. While C.5.3 Physical and Environmental Protection in that same the guidance section. In addition, continuous monitoring of all security includes controls is addressed in security control C.4.1 Continuous implementation of Monitoring and Assessment in Appendix C of RG 5.71.

environmental protection security controls (e.g.,

temperature, humidity), there is no mention of monitoring those controls to ensure they are functioning properly.

Page 6 Password Guidance indicates The NRC staff agrees that password management must Complexity that the length, balance security and operational considerations.

strength, and However, password management represents a complexity of fundamental difference between IT systems and ICS at a passwords balance nuclear power plant. In some cases, COA passwords are security and hard coded into the system to meet process control operational ease of (timing) requirements.

access within the capabilities of the However, in all cases, COAs are protected by multiple COA. Given that levels of security (defense in depth), physical isolation, these are COAs, a access control, and continuous monitoring. Furthermore, minimum length the RG 5.71 security control 8.4.7 Authenticator should be specified. Management in Appendix 8 provides guidance on Under New York's password complexity and details will be documented in the.

Cyber Security licensees' on-site policies and procedures and made Standard S10-004, available to the NRC for inspections.

User Password Management, the password length minimum is eight characters.

Page 6 Structures, To avoid confusion, The NRC staff agrees that clarity is critical in a document Systems, and the CSPs should be as important as the licensee's CSP and the plans have Components clarified to indicate been clarified to indicate that systems, structures, and (SSCs) that the controls components {SSCs}, are within the scope of 10 CFR apply to both COAs 73.54. This clarification was in response to a letter dated and SSCs. November 26,2010, wherein the NRC notified the North American Reliability Corporation (NERC) of a policy decision to include SSCs within the scope of 10 CFR 73.54. (See htto:/Iobaduows.nrc.oov/docs/ML 1031/ML103140394.odf).

- 22 However, not all SSCs are digital and would not be treated as a CDA. In other words, all SSCs are considered as input to the process to determine if a given device is a CDA. Controls are then applied to all CDAs, but not necessarily all SSCs.

Page 6 Scope of Systems It is the view of New The NRC staff agrees that CDA connectivity and all York State that the potential pathways (wired, wireless, or physical) should be CSPs should be . addressed. 10 CFR 73.54(b)(1) requires licensees to clarified to analyze digital computer and communication systems and encompass all digital networks and identify those assets that must be protected assets within the against cyber attacks. Section C.3.1.4 Review and facilities, not just Validation in RG 5.71 states licensees will "confirm the critical systems, to direct and indirect connectivity of each CDA, and identify ensure the licensees pathways to CDAs." This is to be accomplished by either address as many physical walkdown inspection of each CDA's configuration potential pathways and connections, or an electronic walkdown "if it is for attack as . impractical to trace a communication pathway fully to its possible. ' conclusion by means of a physical walkdown inspection."

Page 6 Training Training should be 10 CFR 73.54(d)(1) requires licensees to ensure that all provided to all appropriate facility personnel are aware of cyber security employees and requirements and receive training necessary to perform contractors, not just their assigned duties and responsibilities. Section C.1 0.2 designated Awareness Training, Appendix C, of RG 5.71 outlines appropriate additional role-based training that should be provided personnel. based on assigned roles and responsibilities, specific requirements identified by the defensive strategy, and CDAs to which personnel have authorized access. In addition, training activities are coordinated, and interdependent, with physical security training.

Page 7 Protection of Non- CSPs should include The NRC staff agrees that all information assets should be Digital Media the protection of managed in accordance with the content contained information assets therein. However, as noted in the NYS comment, the that can be used in a myriad other programs, policies, and procedures extant at cyber attack. all NPPs already address information assets in their Information security various forms. Nonetheless, within the cyber security controls should be program the licensee is required to establish policies and applied to these procedures governing media protection as defined in information assets security control C.1.1 Media Protection Policy and regardless of form or Procedures, Appendix C, of RG 5.71. Security control format. For example, C.1.2 Media Access in this same section goes on to clarify paper documents that these procedures pertain to both digital and non-i containing blueprints digital media. In addition to the protections outlined in RG for the plant should 5.71, all licensee's must also comply with the requirement have confidentiality, of 10 CFR 73.21 and 10 CFR 73.22 for the protection of availability, and Safeguards Information.

integrity controls I

- 23 applied. It is possible that these controls are included in the licensees'

• physical protection programs and were, consequently,

• outside the scope of this review.

Page 7 Licensee Project While it is clear that The NRC agrees that it is in the best interest of the Planning the implementation licensees to ensure that project plans address those items of CSPs and outlined in the comment. Detailed project plans with a programs at the greater level of specificity will be developed by the facilities in question licensees for completion of milestones identified in the represents a large implementation schedules. Any deviation from the and complex implementation schedule requires the licensee to request undertaking, and receive approval from the NRC, under 10 CFR 50.90.

implementation schedules that identify the latest The NRC staff believes that setting deadlines for possible dates for the implementation of the various facets of the CSP is completion of all essential to achieving full implementation in a timely milestones are not fashion. Licensees' implementation schedules also serve indicative of a a practical licensing purpose; the NRC obtains assurance rational approach to from licensees as to when certain cyber security program project management. elements will be in place and the NRC can then schedule Establishing an on-site inspection activities.

implementation schedule that includes reasonable risk, effort, and resource based dates for the completion of individual key intermediate milestones would appear to be essential to managing such an i i i undertaking.

Page Implementation It is our view that full The NRC agrees that full implementation of the cyber 7/S dates implementation of security program should be completed as soon as the CSPs should be possible. The intent of the implementation schedule is to completed sooner , complete a majority of the cyber-significant work by the than the dates end of 2012. The first seven milestones are:

identified in the

• building the Cyber Security Assessment Team current (CSAT),

i implementation

• identifying the Critical Systems (CSs) and Critical

- 24 schedules. These Digital Assets (CDAs),

dates, which are

• isolating Levels 3 & 4 (where the most important three to four years in systems are located),

the future, do not appropriately reflect

• contrOlling portable and mobile devices,

• looking for obvious cyber tampering, the gravity of the cyber security risks

• applying security controls to at least the CDAs, that confront these

• implementation of continuous monitoring of those CDAs and their respective controls.

critical facilities.

The three to four years for full implementation of the cyber security program reflects the complexity of the issues involved. Furthermore, some of the cyber security program elements will require work that can only be accomplished during a shut-down or refueling outage. For multi-unit (multi-reactor) sites this may require several years to fully implement all cyber security program i elements.

Page No Significant In their As stated in 10 CFR 73.54, licensees are required to 8/9 Hazard implementation protect critical plant systems from cyber attacks, up to and Determination schedules, all including the DBT. Isolation of critical plant systems from licensees state that the Internet and corporate IT systems is part of the U[i]solating the plant security defensive architecture and defense-in-depth systems from the strategies described in RG 5.71.

internet, as well as from the corporate Isolating plant systems from the Internet and corporate business systems is business systems will not interfere with the ability of an important engineers in the control room to monitor the core or other milestone in critical safety functions.

defending against external threats. Implementation of a detailed change management plan as While the an alternative control for allowing remote maintenance deployment of the access to CDAs is acceptable, as long as the alternative barriers is critical to control does not adversely impact SSEP functions.

protection from external cyber threats, it also prevents remote access to core monitoring and plant data systems for reactor engineers, plant operations, and other plant staff. This elimination of remote access to reactor i core monitoring systems may require i the development and I

- 25 execution of a detailed change management plan to ensure continued safe operation of the plants." This statement appears to be inconsistent with the NRC's finding that the amendment will not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from i any accident

. previously evaluated; or (3) involve a

• significant reduction in a margin of safety.

Page 9 General It is imperative that The NRC staff agrees that cyber security is a priority, that Recommendations cyber secu rity be plans must be created and implemented at an appropriate made a priority. pace and must be followed and inspected, and that While the creation of transparency should be promoted so long as it does not CSPs is an important jeopardize safety or security.

first step, programs need to be in place Every NPP has its own implementation schedule, but there to ensure that these are unifying elements across the operating fleet's plans are documentation. The intent of the implementation implemented at an schedule is to complete a majority of the cyber-significant appropriate pace, work by the end of 2012 and the final milestone includes and once the completion of all remaining actions that result in the full implemented are implementation of the cyber security program for all followed. In addition, applicable safety, security, and emergency preparedness it is also important for functions.

the licensees to provide transparency While the NRC completes the reviews of the licensee's for their efforts to CSPs, the NRC Oversight and Inspection program is mitigate cyber preparing for on-site inspections.

security vulnerabilities while they are progressing toward full implementation of I i the required CSPs.

- 26 Finally,OCS recommends that the implementation of the CSPs be substantiated by I NRC inspections.

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendment, by incorporation of the NRC-approved CSP and the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule in the licensing basis, involves (1) changes in a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20, (2) changes in record keeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements, and (3) solely related to safeguards matters (protection against sabotage) involving (a) Organizational and Procedural matters, (b) Modifications to systems used for security, and (c). Administrative changes. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in amounts, and no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. On October 12,2010, the Commission published its proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration (75 FR 62596). There were no public comments on that proposed finding within thirty days of publication. While New York State filed a number of comments on the CSPs approximately nine months later, on June 15, 2011, it did not comment on the proposed no significant hazards consideration within thirty days of the publication of the proposed finding in the Federal Register.

The amendments thus meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9), (10), and (12). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.

7.0 CONCLUSION

The NRC staffs review and evaluation of the licensee's CSP was conducted using the staff positions established in the relevant sections of RG 5.71. Based on the NRC staffs review, the NRC finds that the licensee addressed the relevant information necessary to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 73.54, 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1), 10 CFR 73.55(b)(8), and 10 CFR 73.55(m),

as applicable and that the licensee's Cyber Security Program provides high assurance that digital computer and communication systems and networks associated with the following are adequately protected against cyber attacks, up to and including the DBT as described in 10 CFR 73.1. This includes protecting digital computer and communication systems and networks associated with: (i) safety-related and important-to-safety functions; (ii) security functions; (iii) emergency preparedness functions, including offsite communications; and (iv) support systems and equipment which, if compromised, would adversely impact SSEP functions.

The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

- 27 common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

8.0 REFERENCES

1. Section 73.54 of 10 CFR, "Protection of Digital Computer and Communication Systems and Networks," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, March 27, 2009.

2. Regulatory Guide 5.71, "Cyber Security Programs for Nuclear Facilities," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, January 2010. (ADAMS Accession No. ML090340159)

3. Letter from Jack Roe, Nuclear Energy Institute, to Scott Morris, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "NEI 08-09, Revision 6, 'Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear Power Reactors; April 2010,'" April 28, 2010. (ADAMS Accession No. ML101180434)

4. Letter from Richard Correia, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to Jack Roe, Nuclear Energy Institute, "Nuclear Energy Institute 08-09, 'Cyber Security Plan Template, Revision 6,'" May 5, 2010. (ADAMS Accession No. IVIL101190371)

5. SRM-COMWCO-10-0001, "Regulation of Cyber Security at Nuclear Power Plants,"

October 21, 2010. (ADAMS Accession No. ML102940009)

Principal Contributor: J. Green, NSIRICSIRB Date: August 2, 2011

V. P. Operations -2 A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is enclosed. A Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next regular biweekly Federal Register notice.

Sincerely,

/raj John P. Boska, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.50-003, 50-247, and 50-286

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 55 to DPR-5

2. Amendment No. 266 to DPR-26

3. Amendment No. 243 to DPR-64

4. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC LPL1-1 R/F RidsNrrDorl RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 RidsNrrDorlDpr RidsNrrPMlndianPoint RidsNrrLASLittle (paper copy)

RidsNsirDspCsirb RidsNrrDirsltsb RidsRgn1 MailCenter RidsOGCRp RidsAcrsAcnw_MailCTR P. Pederson, NSIR/CSIRB J. Green, NSIRICSIRB M. Grey, Region 1 S. Giebel, FSMEIRDB B. Watson, FSMEIRDB/BC RidsFsmeDwmepRdb ADAMS ACCESSION NO.: ML11152A027 (*) No substantial change in the SE Input Memo **via e-mail OFFICE LPL1-1/PM LPL1-1/LA NRC/NSIRIDSPI OGC NRC/FSME/RDBI LPL 1-1/BC LPL1-lIPM CSIRB/BC BC NAME BVaidya SUttle CErlanger(*) BMizuno BWatson (**) NSalgado JBoska DATE 07/18/11 07/18/11 06/20/11 and 07/28/11 07/28/11 08/01/11 08/01/11 07109/11 OFFICIAL RECORD COpy