ML22140A313: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML22140A313
| number = ML22140A313
| issue date = 03/08/2022
| issue date = 03/08/2022
| title = cusumanov-hv-th30
| title = Cusumanov-hv-th30
| author name =  
| author name =  
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR
Line 15: Line 15:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:The Future of Incident Response:
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
Leveraging Technology NRC Experiences
 
Everything changes Timing matters The NRC made two significant improvements before COVID:
* We transitioned to a scalable incident response program that is more focused on role than location
* All NRC staff desktop computers were replaced with laptops
 
NRC experience with remote incident response
* The NRC operated under maximum telework from March 2020 to November 2021
* During that time, we conducted 14 exercises and responded to one actual event (weather related)
* These were conducted mostly remotely, using Microsoft Teams, SharePoint, OneDrive, and WebEOC, supplemented with existing telephone bridge lines operated by the NRC Headquarters Operations Officers
* We conducted internal workshops, including with staff from headquarters and all four regional offices
 
External benchmarkingmission matters!
We benchmarked our experiences against
* International regulators
* Other U.S. Federal agencies with an incident response mission
* U.S. state and local emergency response organizations
* Commercial entities, including NRClicensed power generators Tolerance for remote response varies with the mission of an organization
 
How did it work for the NRC?
* We accomplished most of our normal, nonincidentresponse mission in a fully virtual environment
* We successfully conducted incident response in a mostly virtual environment
* We recognize that some work must be accomplished in person, including physical tasks, some inspections, security/classified tasks, and some interactions with stakeholders Remote response has advantages but introduces some challenges
 
Advantages of remote response
* Expands the pool of experienced participants regardless of location or time zone
* Allows geographic diversity/redundancy
* Reduces travel time, allowing shorter shifts and enhanced sustainability
* Permits remote collaboration, which is preferable for some tasks such as shared document editing and live collaboration and writing
* Makes it easy to join/monitor different teams
* Accommodates staff with varying communication and work styles
 
Advantages of inperson response
* Gives access to robust and redundant power, communications, and information systems
* Allows access to classified information and communication systems
* Permits facetoface communication, which is richer and improves hightrust conversations and decisionmaking
* Enhances situational awareness
* Makes for more effective training, collaboration, and briefings
 
The future is hybrid response
* Reap the benefits of both remote and inperson response
* Mitigate the challenges of both
* Recognize that some incident response positions are better suited for inperson staffing, some for remote personnel The balance of inperson and remote response will change with the type, complexity, and even stage of an event}}

Latest revision as of 00:44, 18 November 2024

Cusumanov-hv-th30
ML22140A313
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/08/2022
From:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML22140A313 (9)
v • d • e


Text

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML22140A313&oldid=3727978"