ML20204J247
| ML20204J247 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/24/1999 |
| From: | Travers W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Obey D HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20204J249 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9903300040 | |
| Download: ML20204J247 (10) | |
Text
_ ___
m C "Et g
UNITED STATES s
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 2066H001 March 24, 1999 The Honorable David R. Obey United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515-4907
Dear Congressman Obey:
I am responding to the letter you sent to our Office of Congressional Affairs on January 27,1999, in which you requested information on concerns raised by one of your constituents, Mr. John M. LaForge, about the preparations being made to deal with the i
Year 2000 (Y2K) computer problem at nuclear power facilities. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed Mr. LaForge's concerns and is providing the following information as you requested.
The NRC has been working with licensees of operating power reactors in order to achieve Y2K readiness at all nuclear power plants. The NRC has issued Information Notice 96-70,
" Year 2000 Effect on Computer System Software," December 24,1996; Generic Letter (GL) 98-01, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants,"
May 11,1998; and GL 98 01, Supplement 1, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants," January 14,1999, in Generic Letter (GL) 98-01, the NRC required that all operating nuclear power plant licensees submit written responses regarding their facility-specific Y2K readiness programs in order to obtain confirmation that licensees are addressing the Y2K problem effectively. Alllicensees have responded to GL 98-01 stating that they have adopted plant specific programs that are intended to make the plants Y2K ready by July 1,1999. GL 98-01 also requires a written rosponse, no later than July 1,1999, confirming that these facilities are Y2K ready. Licensees who
/O)'
~7 are not Y2K ready by July 1,1999, must provide a status report and schedule for remaining work to ensure timely Y2K readiness.
Mr. LaForge's first concern focuses on one of a number of initiatives undertaken by the NRC staff to address the Y2K problem, namely the 12 sample audits of licensee Y2K readiness programs. A sample audit approach was determined by the NRC staff to i
be an appropriate means of oversight of licensee Y2K readiness efforts based on the fact
]
that all licensees had committed to the nuclear power industry Y2K readiness guidance
{
(NEl/NUSMG 97-07) in their first response to NRC Generic Letter (GL) 98-01 and the NRC i
staff had not identified any Y2K problems in safety-related actuation systems. The 12 licensee sample included large utilities such as Commonwealth Edison and Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) as well as small single unit licensees such as North Atlantic Energy (Seabrook) and Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation. Because licensee Y2K
/
programs are corporate-wide, many of the NRC staff audits included more than a single j
nuclear power plant site since many utilities own more than one nuclear power plant, in f
Y; PM ORG MM f I C I'~"
'dybP 9903300040 990324 PDR l
300012 19-s1
m.
_ _ _ _ _. _.. ~
Congressman Obey all, a total of 42 of 103 operating nuclear power plant units wea associated with the Y2K
, readiness program audits of 12 utilities. The NRC staff selected a variety of types of L
plants of different ages and locations in this sample in order to obtain the necessary j
assurance that nuclear powerindustry Y2K readiness programs are being effectively l
implemented and that licensees are on schedule to meet the readiness target date of l
July 1,1999, established in GL 98-01. The second response to GL 98-01 requires l
. confirmation of plant readiness by July 1,1999, or a status and schedule for those actions necessary to achieve readiness, in late January, we completed the 12 audits. Based on the results of these audits, we concluded that the audited licensees were effectively addressing the Y2K problem and were undertaking the actions necessary to achieve Y2K readiness per the GL 98-01 target date. We did not identify any issues that would preclude these licensees from achieving readiness. These findings are consistent with those rece tly reported by the Department of Energy in the report prepared by the North American Electric Reliability Council on the status of Y2K readiness of the electric power grid. The NRC staff is not aware of any Y2K problems in nuclear pnwer plant systems that directly impact actuation of safety functions. The majority of commercial nuclear power plants have protection systems that are analog rather than digital. Because Y2K concerns are associated with digital systems, l
analog reactor protection system functions are not impacted by the Y2K problem. Errors such as incorrect dates in print-outs, logs or displays have been identified by licensees in safety-related devices, but the errors do not affect the functions performed by the devices or systems. Most Y2K problems are in balance-of-plant and other systems such as security systems and plant monitoring systems which support day-to-day plant operation but have no direct functions necessary for safe operation of the reactor. These systems are being addressed in the licensee Y2K readiness programs consistent with the industry guidance and GL 98-01 schedule.
We have noted from the completed audits that licensee Y2K contingency planning efforts have not progressed far enough for a complete NRC staff review, and, therefore, additional oversight of this area is planned for the Spring of 1999. The NRC staff currently plans to review the contingency planning efforts of six different licensees from those included in the initial 12 sample Y2K readiness audits, beginning in April 1999 and ending in June 1999. These reviews will focus on the licensee's approach to addressing both internal and external Y2K risks to safe plant operations based on the guidance in NEl/NUSMG 98-07.
In addition to the NRC staff activities addressed above, NRC inspectors will review plant-specific Y2K program implementation activities at all nuclear power plant facilities. The
-inspectors will be using guidance prepared by the NRC headquarters staff who conducted the 12 sample audits.
l-l
Congressman Obey 3
Training in the use of the guidance will be provided. The experienced headquarters staff will be available to the inspectors for support and assistance during the review as necessary. The headquarters staff will also provide oversight of these reviews to ensure consistency among the Y2K program implementation activities.
The second issue raised by Nlr. LaForge concerns the reliability of the backup generators that supply electric power to the plant safety systems upon a loss of all offsite power, particularly as it affectc the cooling of the spent fuel pool. Emergency onsite power is usually provided by diesel generators, which supply electric power to the plant safety systems upon a loss of all offsite power from the external power grid. NRC regulations require that the onsite electric power supplies and onsite electric distribution system shall have sufficient independence, redundancy, and testability to perform their safety functions assuming a single failure. Thus by design, normally a single emergency diesel generator with its dedicated set of safety system equipment is capable of safely shutting down the reactor and maintaining it in a safe condition. The operation and maintenance of the emergency diesel generators and the other safety-related equipment necessary for the safe shutdown of the reactor are controlled by the plant technical specifications (TSs). One of the plant TSs requires the emergency diesel generators to be tested routinely in order to demonstrate their operability and capability of supplying power as needed. This test ensures a high level of readiness and reliability. Contrary to Mr. LaForge's assertion, the staff concludes that onsite power provided by diesel generators is a reliable source of emergency power in the case of loss of offsite power.
Spent fuel pool cooling systems at many operating plants can be supplied electric power directly from the emergency onsite power system. At those plants where the spent fuel cooling system is not directly connected to the emergency onsite power system, the capability exists to connect the cooling system to the emergency power system. At all plants the make-up water supply to the spent fuel pool is provided by a plant safety system.
The scope of the licensees' Y2K program covers the emergency onsite power and other emergency power systems at the plant. NRC audit results to date have verified the licensees' consideration of these systems and have not identified tny associated residual Y2K problems with the emergency power generation system.
Plants are also required to be able to cope with the loss of all ac electrical power to the nuclear plant. This event, called station blackout (SBO), includes the loss of the emergency diesel generators as well as the power from the offsite power grid. The NRC issued 10 CFR 50.63, the SBO rule, in 1988, which requires that nuclear power plants be able to cope with an SBO event for a specified duration. Specifically, the SBO rule required plant-specific coping analyses to ensure that a plant could withstand a totalloss of ac power for a specified duration and to determine appropriate actions to mitigate the effects of a totalloss of ac power. The NRC staff has verified that each nuclear power
t l
l Congressman Obey
-4 plant complies with the SBO rule. Furthermore, each plant must have SBO procedures in place to restore offsite and onsite power as soon as practical in order to supply power to the shutdown safety systems. This requirement is consistent with our defense-in-depth philosophy for maintaining reactor safety. For the Y2K concern, licensee preparations will include contingency plans to ensure prompt response to Y2K-related issues that might arise.
The next issue raised by Mr. LaForge regarded his support of the NIRS petitions for rulemaking. These petitions were published in the FederalRegister on January 25,1999, for public comment in accordance with the NRC procedures for handling petitions for rulemaking. The text of the petitions is accessible through the NRC Web site http://www.nrc. gov /NRC/ NEWS / year 2000.html Also, NRC has received the text of Mr. LaForge's comment on the petition for rulemaking, dated January 13,1999. The NRC staff is currently addressing the petition in accordance with the NRC procedures for handling rulemaking. In view of the time constraints, the staff has sought prompt public input (Federa/ Register: January 25,1999; Volume 64, Number 15, page 3789-3790) in order to make a timely decision on the need for a rule on the issue. We will consider Mr. LaForge's comment as part of the public comments received on the petition.
I trust that the above discussion addresses your request.
Sincerely, tde William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations
)
l l
i l
t I
]
l l
Congrsssman Obsy l plant complies with the SBO rule. Furthermore, each plant must have SBO procedures in l
place to restore offsite and onsite power as soon as practicalin order to supply power to the shutdown safety systems. This requirement is consistent with our defense-in-depth i
philosophy for maintaining reactor safety. For the Y2K concern, licensee preparations will include contingency plans to ensure prompt response to Y2K-related issues that might arise.
The next issue raisoJ by Mr. LaForge regarded his support of the NIRS petitions for rulemaking. These petitions were published in the FederalRegister on January 25,1999, for public comment in accordance with the NRC procedures for handling petitions for rulemaking. The text of the petitions is accessible through the NRC Web site htt p://w ww. n rc. g ov/N R C/N EWS/ yea r2000. ht ml Also, NRC has received the text of Mr. LaForge's comment on the petition for rulemaking, c':ted January 13,1999. The NRC staff is currently addressing the petition in accordance
..m the NRC procedures for handling rulemaking. In view of the time constraints, the staff has sought prompt public input (FederalRegister: January 25,1999; Volume 64, Number 15, page 3789-3790) in order to make a timely decision on the need for a rule on the issue. We will consider Mr. LaForge's comment as part of the public comments received on the petition.
I trust that the above discussion addresses your reque..
Sincerely, 0@restwee W!! Rara D.Tra,...
William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations DISTRIBUTION SCollins RZimmerman BSheron DMatthews LPlisco, Ril BBoger WTravers MKnapp FMiraglia BMallet, Ril JBlaha SBurns FCongel THiltz JGrobe, Rlll JGiitter DSpaulding EMarinos JMauck GGrant, Rlli MChiramal MWaterman RBlough, RI WLanning, RI AHowell, RIV SBozin 99-01PNorry HJMiller, RI LAReyes, Ril KBrockman, RIV JIDyer, Rill EWMerschoff, RIV Central File (w/ original incoming)
NRR Mailroom (GT #G19990050) PUBLIC (w/ incoming)
HICB R/ File EELB R/F
'SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE Document Name: A:\\COBEY-1r.WPD To rective a copy of this document, indicate in the box C=Co >y w/o attachment / enclosure E= Copy with attachment / enclosure N = No copy OFFICE HICB:DRCH*
TECH ED*
C/EELB:DE' D/DE' A/ADT/NRR*
NAME MChiramal:nkw BCalure JCalvo JStrosnider BSheron l
DATE 03/12/99 02/1_9/99 e
03/12/99 03/16/99 03/17/99 EDk O_QAf OFFICE D/NRR*
Nbun NAME SCollins WDTr veus DATE 03/19/99 03/
/99
.k
Congrrssm:n Ob2y.
complies with the SBO rule. Furthermore, each plant must have SBO procedures in place to restore offsite and onsite power as soon as practicalin order to supply power to the shutdown safety systems. This requirement is consistent with our defense-in-depth philosophy for maintaining reactor safety. For the Y2K concern, licensee preparations will include contingency plans to ensure prompt response to Y2K-related issues that might arise.
The next issue raised by Mr. LaForge regarded his support of the NIRS petitions for rulemaking. These petitions were published in the FederalRegister on January 25,1999, for public comment in accordance with the NRC procedures for handling petitions for rulemaking. The text of the petitions is accessible through the NRC Web site htt p ://www.n rc.g ov/N RC/ N EW S/ye a r 2000. html Also, NRC has received the text of Mr. LaForge's comment on the petition for rulemaking, dated January 13,1999. The NRC staff is currently addressing the petition in accordance 1
with the NRC procedures for handling rulemaking. In view of the time constraints, the i
staff has sought prompt public input (FederalReg/ ster: January 25,1999; Volume 64, Number 15, page 3789-3790) in order to make a timely decision on the need for a rule on the issue. We will consider Mr. LaForge's comment as part of the public comments received on the petition.
1 trust that the above discussion addresses your request.
Sincerely, William D. Travers i
Executive Director for Operations DISTRIBUTION w/ attachment SCollins RZimmerman BSheron DMatthews LPlisco, Ril BBoger WTravers MKnapp FMiraglia BMallet, Rll JBlaha SBurns FCongel THiltz JGrobe, Rlli JGiitter DSpaulding EMarinos JMauck GGrant, Rlli MChiramal MWaterman RBlough, RI WLanning, RI AHowell, RIV SBozin 99-01PNorry HJMiller, RI LAReyes, Rll KBrockman, RIV JIDyer, Rlli EWMerschoff, RIV Central File (w/ original incoming)
NRR Mailroom (GT #G19990050) PUBLIC (w/ incoming)
HICB R/ File EELB R/F
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE 4
Document Name: A:\\COBEY-1r.WPD i
To ree'.ive a copy of this document. indicate in the box C=Co3y w/o attachment / enclosure E= Copy w h attachment / enclosure N = No copy OFFICE HICB:DRCH' TECH ED*
C/EELB:DE' D/DE A/4D3/NRR NAME MChiramal:nkw BCalure JCalvo JStros der BS n
DATE 03/12/99 02/19/99 03/12/99 03/ /[ /99 03/ 7 /99 1
OFFICE D/NRR p,
EDO NAME bSCollins WDTravers DATE 03/19/99 03/
/99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY M 3 \\{3
'1
'N Congressman Obsy \\
verified that\\ ach nuclear power plant complies with the SBO rule. Furthermore, each plant must ha SBO procedures in place to restore offsite and onsite power as soon as practical beyond Qe coping period in order to supply power to the shutdown safety systems. This reqtryment is consistent with our defense-in-depth philosophy for maintaining reactor saf ty. For the Y2K concern, licensee preparations will include contingency plans to en re prompt response to Y2K-related issues that might arise.
The next issue raised by Mr. aForge regarded his support of the NIRS petitions for rulemaking. These petitions re published in the FederalRegister on January 25,1999, for public comment in accordanc with the NRC procedures for handling petitions for rulemaking. The text of the petitio s is accessible through the NRC Web site http://www.nrc. gov /NRC/ NEWS / year 2000.html Also, NRC has received the text of Mr. aForge's comment on the petition for rulemaking, dated January 13,1999. The NRC staf 's currently addressing this issue in accordance with the NRC procedures for handling rule aking. In view of the time constraints, the staff has sought prompt public input (Federa Reg / ster; January 25,1999; Volume 64, Number 15, page 3789-3790) in order to mak a timely decision on the need for a rule on the issue. We will consider Mr. LaForge's com ent as part of the public comments l trust that the above discussion addresses your r\\
received on the petition.
ey est.
Sincerely, William D. Travgrs Executive Director for Operations '
DISTRIBUTION w/ attachment SCollins RZimmerman BSheron DMatthews LPlisco, Rii BBoger WTravers MKnapp FMiraglia BMallet, Ril JBlaha SBurns FCongel THiltz JGrobe, Rlli JGlitter DSpaulding EMarinos JMauck GGrant, Rlli MChiramal MWsterman RBlough, RI WLanning, RI AHowell, RIV SBozin 99-01PNorry HJMiller, RI LAReyes, Rll KBrockman, RIV J1Dyar, Rlli EWMerschoff, RIV Central File (w/ original incoming)
NRR Mailroom (GT t/G19990050) PUBLIC (w/ incoming)
HICB R/ File EELB R/F
'SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE Document Name: A:\\COBEY-1r.WPD To rceeive a copy of this document, indicate in the box C=Cooy w/o attachment / enclosure E= Copy with attachment / enclosure N = No copy OFFICE HICB:DRCH TECH ED*
C/EELB:DE F
D/DE A/ADT/NRR n
NAME MChiramal:nkw BCalure JCalvo e/ M c JStrosnider BSheron DATE 03/ lb /99 02/19/99 03//.2 /99 03/
/99 03/
/99 OFFICE D/NRR l
EDO NAME SCollins WDTravers DATE 03/
/99 03/
/99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Tha H:nor: bin David R. Obsy United States House of Representatives
. Washington, DC 20515-4907
Dear Congressman Obey:
I am responding to the letter you sent to our Office of Congressional Affairs on January 27,1999, in which you requested information on a concem raised by one of your constituents about the preparations being made to deal with the Year 2000 (Y2K) computer problem at nuclear power facilities. We at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) have been working with licensees of operating power reactors in order to achieve Y2K readiness at all nuclear power plants. The NRC's aggressive position has been demonstrated in diverse ways, such as promulgation of Information Notice 96-70,
" Year 2000 Effect on Computer System Software ~ December 24,1996; revision of Chapter 7 of the Standard Review Plan, which recommended that back in August 1997 licensees should address Y2K concerns; issuance of Generic Letter (GL) 98-01, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants," May 11,1998; issuance of GL 98-01, Supplement 1, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants," January 14,1999; and conduct of Y2K readiness' audits at 12 nuclear power reactors.
/
The NRC staff has examined your constituent's concerns and has addressed them individually in the enclosure. Please contact me if you hade any other questions or if you need any additional information.
Sincerely, i
Willia D. Travers Exe/utive Director
,for Operations
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION w/ attachment SCollins RZimmerman B, heron DMatthews LPlisco, Ril S
BBoger WTravers MKnapp FMiraglia BMallet, Ril
[AMarinos JBlaha SBurns FCongel THiltz JGrobe, Rlli JGiitter DSpaulding
/
JMauck GGrant, Rlli MChiramal MWaterman RBlough, RI WLanning, Ri AHowell, RIV SBozin 99-01PNorry HJMiller, RI LAReyes, Ril KBrockman, RIV JIDyer, Rlli EWMerschod, RIV Central File (w/ original incoming)
NRR Mailroom (GT #G19990050) PUBLIC (w/ incoming)
HICB R/ File EELB R/F
/
- SEE PREVIOUS COpCURRENCE Document Name: Aj\\COBEY.WPD To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box C=Cooy w/o attachment / enclosure E= Copy with attachment / enclosure N = No cop'r h
A/Abif/
R O
/
OFFICE HICB:DRCH, _
TECH ED' C/EELB:DE F
D/DE y
NAME MChiramal:
BCalure JCalvo
/N JStrosniN BShe r
'J DATE 02/M99 /
02/19/99 02/Z+/99 02/ Fl/99 02/M9 OFFICE D/NRR
_A ED0 NAME h SCol ns WTravers DATE 03/B/99 3/
/99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
qq-ol
\\
~. xw>
ACTION \\
EDO Principal Correspondence Control i
0?/
%Y"^
FROM:
.DUE: no /L, P EDO CONTROL: Gl9990050
~
DOC DT: 01/27/99 FINAL REPLY:
R:prcsontative' David R. Obey
' TO s.
~1 OCA FOR SIGNATURE OF :.
'DESC:-
ROUTING:
PREPARATIONS FOR NUCLEAR REACTORS FOR THE Y2K Travers COMPUTER PROBLEM (John M. LaForge)
Knapp i
Miraglia Norry i
Blaha i
Burns DATE: 02/03/99-Congel, IRO Hiltz, OEDO ASSIGNED TO:
CONTACT:
I NRR Collins
-.SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
bf0Y' HCL ACTION M i[2 f ed a l : d d la u f ' ' # DUE TC
~ Y.
ue u g m / &
S OFFICE BY.__p,x,y/v4_ ____
_f_
yL 127&d Y)2 6 412 W
}
}
.,,y y
-.Dr*
m
_ = _ _
a OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET PAPER NUMBER:
CRC-99-0094-LOGGING DATE: Feb 2 99
. ACTION OFFICE:
EDO AUTHOR:
DAVID OBEY, REP.
AFFILIATION:
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ADDRESSEE:
CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS-
+
~
LETTER DATE:
Jan 27 99 FILE CODE: RD-19 i
SUBJECT:
PREPARATIONS FOR NUCLEAR REACTORS FOR THE Y2K COMPUTER PROBLEM ACTION:
Signature of EDO DISTRIBUTION:
CHAIRMAN SPECIAL HANDLING: OCA TO ACK CONSTITUENT:
JOHN LAFORGE NOTES:
IS DATE DUE:
Feb y7 99 i
SIGNATURE:
DATE SIGN 3D:
AFFILIATION:
1 i
i i
I l
j.
EDO --G19990050
...