ML16049A533: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) Created page by program invented by StriderTol |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot change |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:February 19, 2016 | {{#Wiki_filter:February 19, 2016 | ||
Mr. Robin Cook, Security Manager | Mr. Robin Cook, Security Manager | ||
Entergy Operations, Inc. River Bend Station | Entergy Operations, Inc. | ||
River Bend Station | |||
5485 U.S. Highway 61N | 5485 U.S. Highway 61N | ||
St. Francisville, LA 70775 | St. Francisville, LA 70775 | ||
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO FORMAL DISAGREEMENT WITH ADVERSARY CHARACTERISTICS, ATTRIBUTES, OR TACTICS EMPLOYED OR PREPARED AS PART OF A U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | SUBJECT: | ||
RESPONSE TO 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 | FORCE-ON-FORCE EVALUATED EXERCISE - DISPUTED ITEM | ||
05000458/2016201-01 | 05000458/2016201-01 | ||
Thank you for your email dated February 17, 2016. The Division of Security Operations (DSO), Security Performance Evaluation Branch received a | Dear Mr. Cook: | ||
Characteristics, Attributes, or Tactics Employed or Prepared as Part of an NRC Force-on-Force Evaluated Exercise, | Thank you for your email dated February 17, 2016. The Division of Security Operations (DSO), | ||
Security Performance Evaluation Branch received a 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 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission | |||
(NRC) Inspection Procedure 71130.03 Contingency Response - Force-on-Force Testing. | |||
In your email, you dispute a tactic, technique, or procedure (TTP) within scenario 1 developed | In your email, you dispute a tactic, technique, or procedure (TTP) within scenario 1 developed | ||
by the NRC force-on-force inspection team. | by the NRC force-on-force inspection team. | ||
The NRC has carefully reviewed your formal escalation, and concluded that the disputed TTP is | |||
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 | approved for use within the NRC-evaluated scenario for the following reasons: (1) it is within the | ||
and controlled, and (5) it provides a credible and realistic challenge to your | 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. | |||
If you would like to appeal this decision, please provide a written response upon receipt of this | |||
letter with the basis for your appeal, to the Deputy Director, DSO. | |||
Sincerely, | |||
/RA/ | |||
Daniel Cardenas, Branch Chief (Acting) | |||
Security Performance Evaluation Branch | Security Performance Evaluation Branch | ||
Division of Security Operations | |||
Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response | |||
ML16049A533 OFFICE NSIR/DSO NSIR/DSO NSIR/DSO NAME J. Willis L. Pearson D. Cardenas DATE 02/18/16 02/18/16 02/18/16 | ML16049A533 | ||
OFFICE | |||
NSIR/DSO | |||
NSIR/DSO | |||
NSIR/DSO | |||
NAME | |||
J. Willis | |||
L. Pearson | |||
D. Cardenas | |||
DATE | |||
02/18/16 | |||
02/18/16 | |||
02/18/16 | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:27, 10 January 2025
| ML16049A533 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 02/19/2016 |
| From: | Cardenas D NRC/NSIR/DSO/DDSO/SPEB |
| To: | Cook R Entergy Operations |
| Joe Willis | |
| References | |
| Download: ML16049A533 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000458/2016201
Text
February 19, 2016
Mr. Robin Cook, Security Manager
Entergy Operations, Inc.
River Bend Station
5485 U.S. Highway 61N
St. Francisville, LA 70775
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO 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 17, 2016. The Division of Security Operations (DSO),
Security Performance Evaluation Branch received a 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 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) Inspection Procedure 71130.03 Contingency Response - Force-on-Force Testing.
In your email, you dispute a tactic, technique, or procedure (TTP) within scenario 1 developed
by the NRC force-on-force inspection team.
The NRC has carefully reviewed your formal escalation, 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.
If you would like to appeal this decision, please provide a written response upon receipt of this
letter with the basis for your appeal, to the Deputy Director, DSO.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Daniel Cardenas, Branch Chief (Acting)
Security Performance Evaluation Branch
Division of Security Operations
Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response
OFFICE
NSIR/DSO
NSIR/DSO
NSIR/DSO
NAME
J. Willis
L. Pearson
D. Cardenas
DATE
02/18/16
02/18/16
02/18/16