|Person / Time|
|From:||Johnson R C|
|To:||Schwartz C J|
Entergy Nuclear Generation Co
|Download: ML110340035 (2)|
March 2, 2011
Christopher Site Vice President Entergy Nuclear Generation Company 1448 SR 333 Russellville, AR 72802
Dear Mr. Schwartz:
On January 21, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed a security baseline inspection at your Arkansas Nuclear One Plant. The inspection covered one or more of the key attributes of the security cornerstone of the NRC's Reactor Oversight Process. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results, which were discussed via telephone on February 10, 2011, with Ms. Donna Jacobs, and other members of your staff.
The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to security and compliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license. The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.
This report documents one finding of very low security significance (i.e., Green as determined by the Physical Protection Significance Determination Process). The deficiency was promptly corrected or compensated for, and the plant was in compliance with applicable physical protection and security requirements within the scope of this inspection before the inspectors left the site. The finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the area of Human Performance, within the area of Work Control, H.3(a) for failure to appropriately plan the implementation of a response position by ensuring that all of its required contingency equipment was readily available.
The NRC is treating this violation as a non-cited violation consistent with Section VI.A.1 of the NRC Enforcement Policy because of the very low security significance of the violation and because it is entered into your corrective actions program. If you disagree with the characterization of any finding in this report, you should provide a response within 30 days of the date of this inspection report, with the basis for your disagreement, to the Director, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response, and the Branch Chief, Security Performance Evaluation Branch. The information you provide will be considered in accordance with Inspection Manual Chapter 0305. The finding was NRC identified.
In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records System of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room). However, because of the security-related concerns contained in the enclosure, and in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, a copy of this letter's enclosure will not be available for public inspection.
In accordance with 10 CFR Paragraph 2.390(b)(1)(ii), the NRC is waiving the affidavit requirements for your response, if any. This practice will ensure that your response will not be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the NRC's document system, ADAMS. If Safeguards Information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, please provide the level of protection described in 10 CFR 73.21. Otherwise, mark your entire response "Security-Related Information-Withhold Under 10 CFR 2.390" and follow the instructions for withholding in 10 CFR 2.390(b)(1).
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely,/RA/ R. Felts for
Robert C. Johnson, Chief Security Performance Evaluation Branch Division of Security Operations Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response Docket Nos.: 50-313, 50-368 License Nos.: DPR-51, NPF-6
Supplemental Information, Table of Security Personnel, Exercise One, and Exercise Two (SAFEGUARDS)