ML16053A131
| ML16053A131 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 02/22/2016 |
| From: | Michael Layton Division of Security Operations |
| To: | Cook R Entergy Operations |
| D Cardenas | |
| References | |
| Download: ML16053A131 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000458/2016201
Text
February 22, 2016
Mr. Robin Cook, Security Manager
Entergy Operations, Inc.
River Bend Station
5485 U.S. Highway 61N
St. Francisville, LA 70775
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO YOUR APPEAL OF THE FORMAL DISAGREEMENT WITH
ADVERSARY CHARACTERISTICS, ATTRIBUTES, OR TACTICS EMPLOYED
OR PREPARED AS PART OF A U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
FORCE-ON-FORCE EVALUATED EXERCISE - DISPUTED ITEM 05000458/2016201-01
Dear Mr. Cook:
Thank you for your email dated February 19, 2016. The Division of Security Operations (DSO),
received your appeal to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissions (NRC) initial response,
dated February 19, 2016, related to your Formal Disagreement with Adversary Characteristics,
Attributes, or Tactics Employed or Prepared as Part of an NRC Force-on-Force Evaluated
Exercise, in accordance with Addendum 4 of NRC Inspection Procedure 71130.03
Contingency Response - Force-on-Force Testing.
In your original email dated February 17, 2016, you dispute a tactic, technique, or procedure
(TTP) within scenario 1 developed by the NRC force-on-force inspection team.
The NRC carefully reviewed your appeal to the initial decision, and concluded that the disputed
TTP is approved for use within the NRC-evaluated scenario for the following reasons: (1) it is
within the design basis threat, (2) it is supported by available data, (3) it is within your ability to
provide defense-in-depth, (4) it can be safely performed and controlled, and (5) it provides a
credible and realistic challenge to your sites protective strategy.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Michael Layton, Director
Division of Security Operations
Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response
OFFICE
NSIR/DSO
NSIR/DSO
NAME
D. Cardenas
DPretzello
DATE
02/ 22 /16
02/ 22 /16