Y2K bug may affect Russian reactors

Tuesday, 28 September 1999 3:01 (GMT)

(UPI Focus) Y2K bug may affect Russian reactors By ASHLEY BAKER WASHINGTON, Sept. 27 (UPI) - Aging Chernobyl-style Soviet nuclear power reactors are 100 times more likely to experience core meltdowns than American reactors, a Department of Energy official is expected to tell a Senate committee. While U.S. officials don't expect a nuclear disaster, the Energy Department, which has been reviewing reactor safety in the former Soviet Union, said that some Y2K computer bugs could compromise nuclear safety. In general, the danger from the old Soviet Chernobyl-style RBMK reactors is much greater than from more modern equipment used in the United States, the Department of Energy said. "Risk experts calculate that if no safety upgrades (are) performed, the frequency of a core meltdown accident at an RBMK reactor is approximately 100 times higher than at a typical U.S. nuclear power plant," Ken Baker, principal deputy assistant secretary for the Office of Nonproliferation and National Security, said in written testimony. UPI obtained an advance copy of Baker's testimony, which is to be delivered Tuesday to the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000. Baker emphasized he was not expecting a serious accident, despite the higher risk. He said, "Although some Soviet-designed nuclear power plants continue to be at higher risk of a nuclear accident based on our current information, we conclude that there is not a significantly increased risk of a nuclear accident due to a Y2K event." In 1986, an accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, which relied on a RBMK reactor, sent radioactive clouds across Europe and contaminated vast regions of the Ukraine. But the Energy Department official downplayed the possibility of another Chernobyl-like incident, saying that nuclear plants would automatically shut down before a disaster occurs. A more likely scenario, he said, could involve the failure of several types of old Soviet-style reactors scattered throughout Eastern Europe. Baker is among the U.S. officials are monitoring how the Y2K problem might affect nuclear safety around the world. The Y2K problem stems from an old-style software in which years were denoted by only the last two digits. It is believed that some computers will fail or give inaccurate data when 1999 turns to 2000 and computers read the year as "00," perhaps calculating information as though the year was 1900. One issue of Y2K concern, Baker said, is old Soviet "systems without direct safety impact," such as the plant computer which monitors conditions within the reactor and provides information to the operator. For example, the computer might simply shut down on Jan. 1, because it did not recognize the 2000 date. "Failure of (this) computer is not an immediate safety concern," Baker said, "but regulations require that the plant be shutdown within a few hours, if the computer is not restored to full operation." Baker also said the radiation monitoring system and the ancillary systems that calculate the state of the reactor core in many Soviet- designed reactors have "known Y2K vulnerabilities." The operator of the plant would be required to shut down the reactor if they failed, Baker said. Baker said the consequences of a shutdown in regions with traditionally harsh winters would be severe, citing recent figures showing the extent of the former Soviet Unions reliance upon nuclear power. In 1997, the nuclear power plants in Russia produced 14 percent of the nation's electricity. In the far-western parts of Russia, the share was nearly 25 percent. In 1997, Ukrainian nuclear power plants produced 47 percent of the nation's electricity. The Soviet Union broke up in 1991. But Baker said 68 nuclear reactors and infrastructure left by the Soviets still operate in nine countries: Ukraine, Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Hungary and Bulgaria. A Department of Defense official, also scheduled to testify at the hearing, is expected to emphasize the Clinton administration's position that there will be no nuclear weapons dangers from Russia despite the Y2K problem. "Experts in both Russia and the United States agree that the likelihood of Y2K failures in computer systems associated with our nuclear weapons, supporting command and control and early warning systems is extremely remote," said Edward Warner III, assistant secretary of defense for strategy and threat reduction. While the Department of Defense is less concerned about accidental launch of missiles, Warner said Russia had only recently begun to address problems in key security systems, access control, perimeter monitoring, fire detection and warhead inventory and accountability. Warner said an August revaluation showed "significant progress," after Russian officials admitted in a March report that "there had been no evaluation of computers associated with the physical security and inventory management systems for Y2K vulnerability." Russia has requested $15.5 million to address Y2K problems relating to their nuclear arsenal. Congress has taken no action, but Warner said the Defense Department has reviewed the request and that it "makes sense." To ease tensions about an accidental launch or a failure in one country's early warning system, Russian and U.S. officials have agreed to a joint monitoring center in Colorado Springs. During December and January, officials from both countries will sit "side by side and monitor U.S.-provided information on missile and space launches," Warner said. If needed, Warner said, U.S. leaders, including not only the President Clinton but Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, will have direct voice contact with their Russian counterparts when the new year begins. William K. McHenry, an associate professor at Georgetown and expert in Russian computer systems, also scheduled to testify at the hearing said that he doesn't expect a major nuclear problem, but warned it was important to continue to monitor potential problems. U.S. policy should continue to be directed towards forestalling catastrophic failures that will harm large populations inside and outside of Russia, he said in prepared testimony. McHenry asked rhetorically what Y2K would mean to an already economically decimated Russia. "(Russian) politician Gregory Yavlinsky was heard to remark that Russia's real Y2K problem is Boris Yeltsin," said McHenry, "What impact can potential computer failures have when GDP has declined an estimated 43 percent since 1991? Or when the Russian Unified Electrical System says that it only has 60 percent of the fuel oil it needs for the fall-winter season?" -- Copyright 1999 by United Press International. All rights reserved.

======================================================================

Russia faces two choices: revolution or war

Feel lucky...well do you?

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), September 28, 1999

Answers

U.S. policy should continue to be directed towards forestalling catastrophic failures that will harm large populations inside and outside of Russia, he said in prepared testimony.

U.S. policy is responsible for stopping catastrophic failures in Russia?

Sure. We can put Ko-skin-em in charge. I feel better already.

The consensus for attack still remains.....late December.

Got radiation stopper?

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), September 28, 1999.

Did I dream it or did I read somewhere that the reactor in Cuba is the same type and age of Chernobyl? That's ninety miles from our shores, right? And how is ole Cuba doing anyway?

-- April (Alwzapril@home.com), September 28, 1999.

April, Excellent question. How is Cooba doing? I keep looking across the oceans and forget to look right under our nose.

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), September 28, 1999.

Not to worry, BB, the White House is pushing to allow Castro's chief of terrorism set up shop in DC..... Cooba is doing just great. Don't think we are though.

-- de (delewis@XOUTinetone.net), September 28, 1999.

There are two Russian-designed nuclear reactors in Cuba, in the vicinity of Cienfuegos. Construction on Juragua 1 and 2 units began in 1983. These units are not the RBMK (Chernobyl) type. They are pressurized water reactors, type VVER-440 Model V213. Neither unit has ever come on line. Construction was suspended in 1992 after Russia was no longer able to fund it.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), September 28, 1999.

We better pay closer attention to the nukes

IN OUR OWN BACKYARD !!!

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), September 28, 1999.

Thanks Tom for the information. That is a relief.

Hi De. What is this about Cooba's chief of terrorism? What's the deal?

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), September 28, 1999.

They actually covered this on our local 5 p.m. news! (ABC) I just about fell out of my chair! :-)

Hi De! :-)

-- Gayla (privacy@please.com), September 28, 1999.