Nuclear Agency Maintains All Plants Y2K Clear

Updated 4:32 AM ET November 17, 1999

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reassured concerned lawmakers Tuesday that the nation's 103 nuclear power plants will see no disruptions as a result of the millennium rollover.

NRC stressed in a letter to Utah Republican Sen. Robert Bennett, chairman of a Senate Y2K select panel, that since Nov. 4, all commercial reactor sites have been completely prepared for the potential Year 2000 computer bug known as Y2K.

"The commission is confident...that the potential for Y2K-related disruptions have been addressed by NRC licensees," the NRC said in the letter.

On Nov. 1, Bennett's Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem, wrote to NRC Chairman Greta Joy Dicus, asking nuclear regulators to provide better information on reactor safety and contingency plans before the new year.

Computer systems which read only the last two digits of a year may experience faults on Jan. 1, 2000, reading the new year as 1900 instead of 2000. Experts fear massive problems when the new year begins if systems are not fixed.

Bennett, in a statement, said he was pleased with the agency's response to the committee's questions.

"The NRC has responded to our concerns in a detailed and candid fashion, and I am increasingly confident that plants will be safe," Bennett said.

"Voluntary measures by the industry, such as increased emergency fuel supply and additional staffing, will provide an additional level of assurance."

NRC was asked to inform the committee on the process it took to independently validate plant Y2K readiness, the availability of emergency fuel supplies, plant shut-down criteria and minimum safety standards.

NRC said there are no requirements that plants have a 30-45 day supply of emergency diesel generator fuel, nor do they believe additional supplies are necessary.

The agency based its assumptions on the reliability of the power grid and past successes at sustaining safety systems during events such as hurricanes, that typically demand a six to seven day supply of diesel fuel.

Some plants are undertaking voluntary efforts to "top off" supplies, increase staffing and conduct additional monitoring and inspection.

Under the existing regulatory framework, the NRC will not shut down any plants unless specific criteria are met, which may include situations in which "systems or components are inoperable due to a Y2K deficiency."

NRC also said it plans no suspension of technical regulations during the millennium rollover, the panel said.

"The nuclear power industry, like many others well-prepared for Y2K, is a closely regulated and highly monitored industry that is intimately familiar with the danger of failure and the safety risks involved," said Bennett.

NRC went to great lengths to demonstrate each reactor's Y2K compliance was reviewed by an independent industry source.

"Industry audits included 56 audits by utility quality assurance departments, 36 cross-utility audits and 46 third-party industry audits," NRC told the Senate panel.

"In short, all reactor sites have received at least one independent industry audit of their Y2K program."

Anti-nuclear groups have said repeatedly that industry preparedness was tainted by the lack of outside reviews.

========================================= End

Yes, I know what your thinking, have we coined a new phrase here "y2k Clear"???

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), November 17, 1999

Answers

I worked briefly (9 months) in writing software for the nuke industry, and I do actually believe that it is fully sorted. They started early, and they get all - and I mean ALL - the resources they need. As I've posted before, all reported nuclear incidents have occurred through human error, either careless negligence or willful stupidity. I just can't picture any complacency in a nuke station around Y2K.

Having said that, I still think most of them will be shut down, "just in case". *That* seems to be the new mantra.

-- Colin MacDonald (roborogerborg@yahoo.com), November 17, 1999.

I'm "Y2K Clear."

Don't live within 150 miles of a reactor

-- no (not@me.now), November 17, 1999.

Yup here's another friend of a friend story. soooo... My colleage who works next door to my desk has an old friend that is working on y2k rem'di on a nuclear power plant. So I asked Jim(not his read name) Jim ask your friend three questions for me would you? Sure he said what? How is his rem'di work going. What is his preception of the other guys nuke plants rem'di going, and what does he think of the rest of the world nuke plants. Here is what he said (make it what you will). His work was going well and would be more than ready by the end of the year. The other plants were working as hard has his was but he could not confirm that, although he was confident that the people he new were doing there jobs. But when it came to the question about other countries nukes he expressed concern about the fix on failure thinking being used in countries outside of North Amr. and he came to this conclusion from a world wide conference of nuke people that he attended. SHI(^*&%&$T.

-- y2k aok (y2k@aok.com), November 17, 1999.

If there are any problems, then the people who makde these promises shoud be the ones cleaning up the radiation, WITHOUT PROTECTIVE GEAR!!!!!! In fact, have them do it naked!! :)

-- Crono (Crono@timesend.com), November 17, 1999.

I'm still trying to get an answer about the reactor in Cuba - same type and age as Chernobyl - 90 miles from our coast. Let that soak in.

-- April (Alwzapril@home.com), November 17, 1999.