ML20210T211
| ML20210T211 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/29/1999 |
| From: | Rathbun D NRC OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS (OCA) |
| To: | Horn S HOUSE OF REP. |
| References | |
| CCS, NUDOCS 9908190033 | |
| Download: ML20210T211 (3) | |
Text
_
gg Q l
A r*
Ca:o 4
\\
UNITED STATES y
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
5 4
wasmwerow, o.c. asses.esa July 29, 1999
)
1 The Honorable Stephen Hom, Chairman Subcommittee on Govemment Management, Information and Technology Committee on Govemment Reform and Oversight United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515-6143
Dear Mr. Chairman:
In response to a conversation between Laura Gerke of our Office of Congressional Affairs and Matt Ryan of your subcommittee staff, I am writing to clarify the status of embedded chip systems at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
As we reported in our February 1999 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Year 2000 status report, all Year 2000 issues related to our embedded chip systems, telecommunications infrastructure, and building systems have been resolved. We intended to highlight this fact in our report cover letter dated February 9,1999, in whir.h we stated that, "[wJe have....[rleplaced all non-compliant hardware as necessary to address the smbedded chip problem."
As I understand it, the wording of the first paragraph under the heading of
- Embedded Chips" in the body of the report misled you as to the status of our efforts in that area. This paragraph stated that "[w}e have analyzed and identi6ed embedded chip systems at the NRC. Forward date testing of some embedded chip systems is problematic since access is limited to -
embedded chip system controlpmgrams. As a result, both industry and NRC rely on the manufacturer's certiRcation to establish compliance and, where possible and appropriate, in-house testing to confirm compliance." Rather than detailing the status of our efforts, this statement was intended to describe the process we used and the constraints we faced in addressing the problem.
In the second and third paragraphs of the above section we stated:
"In the area of microcomputers andlaserprinters, we han successfully tested ourhardware with available testing software to determine compliance. NRC has replaced all microcomputers that have non-compliant chips.
In the area oflocaland wide eres network computercomponents, one of our
' mission-criticalsystems being replaced covers all of this infrestructure. We previously reported herein that this mission-critical system is now 100 percent complete."
Additionally, and perhaps unfortunately, embedded chip status reporting existed in more ther.
one place because of report headings mandated by OMB. In the areas of
" Telecommunications and Building Systems" we reported as follows:
OC O
9908190033 99072, PDR ORO MtCCO PDR
s
'l
' 'AII afency building systems have been assessed. We have determined that there are four building system categories that could have Year 2000 issues:
Environmental, Fire Protection, Security Access Control and Alarms, and Elevator.
Vendors for these' systems have been contacted and written responses have
)
been received. As of this report we have determined that continued safe operation of systems in the four categories mentioned above will not be affected by the Year 2000 date rollover.
NRC sent letters to its various telecommunications equipment vendors nationwide in order to determine theirprogress in addressing the Year 2000 problem as it relates to theirproducts. AII of the vendors have responded, been contacted by telephone, or had their Intemet site accessed to determine status.
1 We have performed work necessary to ensure that 100 percent of our telecommunications infrastructure is compliant oris not affected by Year 2000 issues."
It is unfortunate that this status was reported under other report headings because the fact that they were embedded chip systems was lost. In fact, the report, taken es a whole, covers every facet of embedded systems within the NRC and documents that we have addressed 100 percent of all Year 2000 issues related to them.
As we have tried to convey in all of our Year 2000 related correspondence and discussions since February 5,1999, the NRC is proud that it has completed its Year 2000 Program to address all Year 2000 issues not only in its mission-critical systems but in g other systems as well.
)
I hope that this letter has clarified the fact that we have completed our work on all known embedded chip issues. If you would like additionalinformation, our Year 2000 Program Manager, Amold E. Levin, can be reached by telephone at 301-415-7458, or by e-mail at (ael1@nrc. gov).
Sincerely,
/
Y$
Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEM DOCUMENT PREPARATION CHECKLIST This check list is to be submitted with each document (or group of Os/As) sent for processing into the CCS.
1.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT (S)jnv. 2/1AAnt) not) 2.
TYPE OF DOCUMENT X CORRESPONDENCE HEARINGS (Os/As) 3.
DOCUMENT CONTROL X SENSITIVE (NRC ONLY)
X NON-SENSITIVE 4.
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE (if applicable)
Congressional Committee Subcommittee 5.
SUBJECT CODES (A)
(B)
(C) 6.
SOURCE OF DOCUMENTS (A) 5520 (DOCUMENT NAME (B)
SCAN (C)
ATTACHMENTS (D)
OTHER 7.
SYSTEM LOG DATES (A)8//7/97 DATA OCA SENT DOCUMENT TO CCS (B)
DATE CCS RECEIVED DOCUMENT (C)
DATE RETURNED TO OCA FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (D)
DATE RESUBMITTED BY OCA TO CCS (E)
DATE ENTERED INTO CCS BY (F)
DATE OCA NOTIFIED THAT DOCUMENT IS IN CCS l
COMMENTS:
1 RELEASE TO PDR I
11/0398 P:\\DISRTLIS.DMS 3