ML17242A096: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 08/31/2017
| issue date = 08/31/2017
| title = Response to Formal Disagreement and Appeal with Adversary Characteristics, Attributes, for Tactics Employed as Part of an NRC-Evaluated Force on Force Exercise - Davis-Besse Disputed Item 05000346/2017201-01 and Disputed Item 05000346/20172
| title = Response to Formal Disagreement and Appeal with Adversary Characteristics, Attributes, for Tactics Employed as Part of an NRC-Evaluated Force on Force Exercise - Davis-Besse Disputed Item 05000346/2017201-01 and Disputed Item 05000346/20172
| author name = Johnson R C
| author name = Johnson R
| author affiliation = NRC/NSIR/DSO/SPEB
| author affiliation = NRC/NSIR/DSO/SPEB
| addressee name = Ellis J D
| addressee name = Ellis J
| addressee affiliation = FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
| addressee affiliation = FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
| docket = 05000346
| docket = 05000346
Line 14: Line 14:
| page count = 3
| page count = 3
}}
}}
See also: [[followed by::IR 05000346/2017201]]
See also: [[see also::IR 05000346/2017201]]


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION  
{{#Wiki_filter:SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION  
  SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION
 
  August 31, 2017  
SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION  
August 31, 2017  
   
   
   
   
   
   
Mr. James D. Ellis Director, Fleet Security Program  
Mr. James D. Ellis  
 
Director, Fleet Security Program  
First Energy Nuclear Operating Company  
First Energy Nuclear Operating Company  
341 White Pond Drive  
341 White Pond Drive  
Mail Stop: A-WAC-B1 Akron, OH  44320  
Mail Stop: A-WAC-B1  
  SUBJECT:  RESPONSE TO FORMAL DISAGREEMENT WITH ADVERSARY CHARACTERISTICS, ATTRIBUTES, OR TACTICS EMPLOYED OR  
Akron, OH  44320  
PREPARED AS PART OF AN NRC-EVALUATED FORCE-ON-FORCE EXERCISE - DISPUTED ITEM 05000346/2017201-01 AND DISPUTED ITEM  
   
SUBJECT:   
RESPONSE TO FORMAL DISAGREEMENT WITH ADVERSARY  
CHARACTERISTICS, ATTRIBUTES, OR TACTICS EMPLOYED OR  
PREPARED AS PART OF AN NRC-EVALUATED FORCE-ON-FORCE  
EXERCISE - DISPUTED ITEM 05000346/2017201-01 AND DISPUTED ITEM  
05000346/2017201-02  
05000346/2017201-02  
   
   
Dear Mr. Ellis,  
Dear Mr. Ellis,  
   
   
Thank you for your e-mail sent by Mr. William Willis, Manager, Site Security, at Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, on August 29, 2017, to the Division of Security Operations (DSO),  
Thank you for your e-mail sent by Mr. William Willis, Manager, Site Security, at Davis-Besse  
Security Performance Evaluation Branch with the two attachments entitled "Formal Disagreement with Adversary Characteristics, Attributes, or Tactics Employed or Prepared as  
Nuclear Power Station, on August 29, 2017, to the Division of Security Operations (DSO),  
Part of an NRC-Evaluated Force-on-Force Exercise" (safeguards encrypted), in accordance  
Security Performance Evaluation Branch with the two attachments entitled Formal  
with Addendum 4 of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Inspection Procedure 71130.03 "Contingency Response - Force-on-Force Testing."
Disagreement with Adversary Characteristics, Attributes, or Tactics Employed or Prepared as  
Part of an NRC-Evaluated Force-on-Force Exercise (safeguards encrypted), in accordance  
with Addendum 4 of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Inspection Procedure  
71130.03 Contingency Response - Force-on-Force Testing.  
In your attachments you dispute tactics, techniques, or procedures (TTP) within Scenario 1 and
Scenario 2 developed by an NRC Force-on-Force inspection team.
The NRC has carefully reviewed both of your formal escalations and concluded that the
disputed TTPs are approved for use within both the NRC-evaluated exercise scenarios for the
following reasons:  (1) it is within the design basis threat; (2) it is supported by available data;
(3) it is within your program requirements 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.
   
   
In your attachments you dispute tactics, techniques, or procedures (TTP) within Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 developed by an NRC Force-on-Force inspection team.  
The enclosure transmitted herewith contains Safeguards Information.  When separated from the
enclosure, this transmittal document is decontrolled.  


SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION
J. Ellis
2
   
   
The NRC has carefully reviewed both of your
formal escalations and concluded that the disputed TTPs are approved for use within both the NRC-evaluated exercise scenarios for the following reasons:  (1) it is within the design basis threat; (2) it is supported by available data;
(3) it is within your program requirements to provide defense-in-depth; (4) it can be safely performed and controlled; and (5) it provides a credible and realistic challenge to your site's protective strategy.
  The enclosure transmitted herewith contains Safeguards Information.  When separated from the enclosure, this transmittal document is decontrolled. 
SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION  
SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION  
J. Ellis 2
If you would like to appeal this decision, provide a written response within 3 days from the date  
SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION
of this letter with the basis of your appeal to the Director, DSO.  
If you would like to appeal this decision, provide a written response within 3 days from the date of this letter with the basis of your appeal to the Director, DSO.  
 
Sincerely,
/RA/
Robert C. Johnson, Chief
Security Performance Evaluation Branch
Division of Security Operations
   
   
Sincerely,
Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response
 
   
   
/RA/ 
Enclosures:  
Robert C. Johnson, Chief
1. NRC Response to Disputed Item  
Security Performance Evaluation Branch  Division of Security Operations  Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response
   05000346/2017201-01  
Enclosures:  
2. NRC Response to Disputed Item  
1. NRC Response to Disputed Item    05000346/2017201-01 2. NRC Response to Disputed Item    05000346/2017201-02  
   05000346/2017201-02  
   
   
   
   
cc w/enclosures:  William Willis, Manager, Site Security   
cc w/enclosures:  William Willis, Manager, Site Security   
 




   ML17242A096  
   ML17242A096  
OFFICE NSIR/DSO/SPEB NSIR/DSO/SPEB NAME J. Berry C. Johnson SIGNATURE  
OFFICE  
  DATE 8 / 29 /2017  8 / 31 /2017
NSIR/DSO/SPEB  
NSIR/DSO/SPEB  
NAME  
J. Berry  
C. Johnson  
SIGNATURE
DATE  
8 / 29 /2017  
  8 / 31 /2017
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 12:31, 8 January 2025

Response to Formal Disagreement and Appeal with Adversary Characteristics, Attributes, for Tactics Employed as Part of an NRC-Evaluated Force on Force Exercise - Davis-Besse Disputed Item 05000346/2017201-01 and Disputed Item 05000346/20172
ML17242A096
Person / Time
Site: Davis Besse Cleveland Electric icon.png
Issue date: 08/31/2017
From: Rachel Johnson
Security Performance Evaluation Branch
To: Ellis J
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
Josh Berry
References
IR 2017201
Download: ML17242A096 (3)
v • d • e


See also: IR 05000346/2017201

Text

SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION

SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION

August 31, 2017

Mr. James D. Ellis

Director, Fleet Security Program

First Energy Nuclear Operating Company

341 White Pond Drive

Mail Stop: A-WAC-B1

Akron, OH 44320

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO FORMAL DISAGREEMENT WITH ADVERSARY

CHARACTERISTICS, ATTRIBUTES, OR TACTICS EMPLOYED OR

PREPARED AS PART OF AN NRC-EVALUATED FORCE-ON-FORCE

EXERCISE - DISPUTED ITEM 05000346/2017201-01 AND DISPUTED ITEM 05000346/2017201-02

Dear Mr. Ellis,

Thank you for your e-mail sent by Mr. William Willis, Manager, Site Security, at Davis-Besse

Nuclear Power Station, on August 29, 2017, to the Division of Security Operations (DSO),

Security Performance Evaluation Branch with the two attachments entitled Formal

Disagreement with Adversary Characteristics, Attributes, or Tactics Employed or Prepared as

Part of an NRC-Evaluated Force-on-Force Exercise (safeguards encrypted), in accordance

with Addendum 4 of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Inspection Procedure

71130.03 Contingency Response - Force-on-Force Testing.

In your attachments you dispute tactics, techniques, or procedures (TTP) within Scenario 1 and

Scenario 2 developed by an NRC Force-on-Force inspection team.

The NRC has carefully reviewed both of your formal escalations and concluded that the

disputed TTPs are approved for use within both the NRC-evaluated exercise scenarios for the

following reasons: (1) it is within the design basis threat; (2) it is supported by available data;

(3) it is within your program requirements 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.

The enclosure transmitted herewith contains Safeguards Information. When separated from the

enclosure, this transmittal document is decontrolled.

SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION

J. Ellis

2

SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION

If you would like to appeal this decision, provide a written response within 3 days from the date

of this letter with the basis of your appeal to the Director, DSO.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Robert C. Johnson, Chief

Security Performance Evaluation Branch

Division of Security Operations

Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response

Enclosures:

1. NRC Response to Disputed Item 05000346/2017201-01

2. NRC Response to Disputed Item 05000346/2017201-02

cc w/enclosures: William Willis, Manager, Site Security

ML17242A096

OFFICE

NSIR/DSO/SPEB

NSIR/DSO/SPEB

NAME

J. Berry

C. Johnson

SIGNATURE

DATE

8 / 29 /2017

8 / 31 /2017

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17242A096&oldid=5114208"