ML20212C804
| ML20212C804 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1999 |
| From: | Travers W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Coverdell P SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212C808 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9909220158 | |
| Download: ML20212C804 (25) | |
Text
...
g f g% UNITED STATES
.. g 2
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20665-0001
- l September 10, 1999 The Honorable Paul D. Coverdell United States Senator 100 Colony Square, Suite 300 1175 Peachtree Street N. E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30361
Dear Senator Coverdell:
I am responding to your letter to Mr. Dennis Rathbun of August 9,1999. You asked us to review John Sherman's letter of August 2,1999. and reply to you at your Georgia office.
Mr. Sherman is concerned that the Farley Nuclear Plant and other nuclear plants are not yet Year 2000 (Y2K) compliant. He mentioned the following issues associated with nuclear plant Y2K compliance:
(1) Farley's Y2K ready date (not compliant date) is December 16,1999.
(2) It takes 4 to 6 months to shut down a reactor, and the reactor must be cooled the entire time.
(3) The Farley plant and other Y2K non-compliant plants should be shut down right now if items (1) and (2) are correct.
Before I address the Farley Nuclear Plant, I want to explain the difference between the terms "Y2K ready" and "Y2K compliant." "Y2K compliant" generally means that computer systems or applications will accurately process date/ time data from, into, and between the twentieth and twenty-first century (the years 1999 and 2000), and leap-year calculations. "Y2K ready" generally means that a computer system or application is suitable for continued use into the year 2000 even though the computer system, application, or device is not fully Y2K compliant.
In other words, being Y2K ready means Farley Nuclear Plant components would function properly through rollover to the new millennium even though they might not display the correct date on a readout device, chart or recorder. For Y2K ready systems, utilities may have to take additional measures to ensure that the systems, components, and equipment function as intended. For example, plant operators could set a computer clock back to another year to make a system Y2K ready. The system would still function properly through rollover to the new millennium. They would then make the system Y2K compliant at a later date. Most nuclear plant items are now Y2K compliant.
In response to item (1), the Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, is Y2K ready. However, to make the \
second Farley plant (Unit 2) Y2K ready, Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) needs to fix one mere item. SNC needs to modify and test computer software on its system that controls
'2) the Unit 2 steam turbine. The system that controls the steam turbine does not affect plant 1'
safety. The steam turbine tums an attached electrical generator to produce electricity. SNC .
has successfully modified and tested the turbine control computer software on Unit 1, but it needs to wait until the next Unit 2 refueling shutdown later this Fall to modify and test the Unit 2 steam turbine computer software. g e.ss M flu CENTS CDP) 9909220138 990910 PDR ADOCK 05000348 ' /~ ,* IQ' ' Q_ $ \ 7 4' H PDR
. Honorable Paul D. Coverdell Regarding items (2) and (3), SNC completes a routine Farley plant shutdown from full operating power in about 18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />. It takes only a few seconds to manually or automatically shut down a nuclear plant in an emergency. These routine and emergency shutdown times are reasonable averages for all nuclear power plants. SNC plans to shut down Unit 2 for refueling and other maintenance, modify and test the software, and begin producing power again by about December 16,1999. We do not expect the Y2K issue to affect the safety of the Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, or their ability to supply electrical power to the national electric power grid.
Thus, we see no reason to shut down Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. Furthermore, we have undertaken an exhaustive effort to ensure that all nuclear power plants that are not fully ready for Y2K are on track to be Y2K ready before the end of the year.
Enclosed is the latest NRC status report en Y2K activities. We recently completed our onsite Y2K reviews at all 103 U.S. nuclear power plants and have confirmed that there are no Y2K-related problems which affect the performance of safety systems needed to safely shut down the plants. More Y2K information is available on our Web site at http://www.n rc.aov/N R C/Y2 K/Y2K R e a dv.ht ml.
1 1 hope that this information is responsive to Mr. Sherman's concerns. I am happy to give you any more details that you might need.
Sincerely,
. Y
- gWilliam travas 1 Executive Director b for Operations
Enclosure:
NRC Y2K Status Report
- r. -
. 1 UnitedStates '
- 5 L* *
- NuclearRegulatory Commission Status Report on Year 2000 Activities for August 1999 INTRODUCTION This report is the .elghth periodic report on the status of agency Y2K activities. The report covers the period from July 1 through July 31,1999. More detailed Y2K-related information and the previous periodic reports to the Commission can be found on NRC's Y2K website at htto://www.nre.oov/NRC/ NEWS /vear2000.html.
POWER REACTORS By July 1,1999, all 103 operating nuclear power plants reported status of Y2K readiness to the NRC. Regarding NRC's highest priority-the uninterrupted performance of plant safety systems-all nuclear power plants report that their efforts are complete, and that no remaining Y2K-related problems exist that could directly affect the performance of safety systems or the capability for safe shutdown. Sixty-eight'of these plants had also completed the next order of priority as of July 1, stating that all of their computer systems that support plant operation are "Y2K ready."The remaining 35 plants re orted that, to be fully Y2K ready, they still have additional work to complete on a few non-safety computer systems or devices. For about one '
half of those 35 plants, some work remains on systems needed for power generation. Other plants must perform remediation on plant monitoring and administrative systems. Typically, the remaining Y2K work is waiting on a scheduled plant outage in the fall, or delayed while awaiting the delivery of a replacement component. In each case, the licensees with work remaining have provided satisfactory schedules for completing that work.
By July 30, five more plants reported Y2K ready, raising the total to 73. Table 1 (attached) lists those plants for which the licensee has provided written confirmation that the facility is Y2K ready. Table 2 (attached) provides a summary of remaining Y2K work items for those facilities that were not Y2K ready as of July 30,1999. The information in Table 2 has been extracted from the recent licensee response to Generic Letter 98-01, Supplement 1 and, in sonie cases contains an initial staff assessment of the significance of the remaining work. Seventeen plants have work remaining on systems impacting power generation and 13 plants have work remaining on monitoring or administrative systems. Additional staff assessment and updated information 1999.
and will be provided in a NUREG document scheduled to be issued by August 31, The NRC issued a preliminary report on Nuclear Power Plant Y2K Readiness on July 19,1999.
This report integrated the results of the regional on-site reviews with the results of the initial staff review of licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1. This report has been placed on the NRC Web site. Audit reports for all six Headquarters audits of licensees Y2K contingency plans have been made publicly available and have also been posted on the NRC Y2K Web site.
Page 1 of 7 Enclosure
During ourintegrated review of the responses to the GL 98-01 responses and the results of our independent inspection activities, we did not identify any significant inconsistencies or issues that required additional regulatory action. However, because we were not able to complete our
. assessment ' checklist at 14 plants, in large part due to the stage of readiness and program implementation of some of our licensees at the time of the inspection, we planned to conduct follow-up reviews at those 14 plants to provide additional confidence that implementation of their raariiness activities is consistent with NRC-endorsed industry guidance. Follow-up reviews for eight of those plants have since been completed. Review activities are scheduled for the remaining six plants: Beaver Valley Units 1 and 2, Indian Point 2, Three Mile Island 1, Vermont Yankee, and Cooper.'
'Ihe few plants that have Y2K work remaining are continuing to progress toward Y2K readiness.
As of August 1,1999,5 more plants have reported that they are Y2K ready. These plants are Saint Lucie Units 1 and 2, Turkey Point' Units 3 and 4, and Monticello. As a result, only 30 Completion Schedule for Plants With ' Remaining ActMties Related to Y2K 35-D Adminstrothe tems a tems knpocun0 Power Generuuon to-2s-T ..
15- '
M Safety Systems"Y2K Readr as of July 1,1999.
2: 10 -
0 i i 1 1 i i 7/1/99 9/1/99 9/1/99 10/1/99 11/1/99 12/1/99 1/1/00 oate (Month) plants still have Y2K work remaining and 73 plants are reporting Y2K readiness. As depicted in i
the above chart, we expect.this trend to conthiue. Based on the information available, by l November 1,1999, only six plants will have Y2K work remaining.
Of the 6 plants with remaining Y2K work after November 1,1999, two (the DC Cook units) are in an extended plant shutdown (issues not related to Y2K) and have only minor Y2K work-remaining on non-safety plant support systems, which the licensee plans to complete by
'The completion of these reviews will be reflected in the next report.
Page 2 of 7
e '
, December 15,1999.
These two units will remain shutdown during the Y2'K transition. The four
~
other plants (Brunswick Unit 1 Comanche Peak Unit 1, Salem Unit 1, and Farley an outage to complete their Y2K activities. These outages have been scheduled and each -
these licensees has successfully completed the most significant Y2K remediation actM sister units.
M** v.i!! continue to monitor progress at those plants that have ' remaining work to be performed and will independently vedfy completion of these items, including Y2K c plans. By September 30,199g, we will make a final determination whether additio action is warranted to address Y2K readiness issues. At this time, we believe that all licens will be able to operate their plants safely during the transition from 1999 to 2000, and we anticipate the need for the NRC to direct any plant-specific action.
The staff is revising Temporary Instruction (TI) 2515\141 to include the necessary guidan conduct followup reviews of the remaining non-safety items associated with 35 plants whose licensees reported they were not fully Y2K ready on July 1,1999. The schedule for this ef determined by the licensee's projected completion schedule. .
The staff 54,1999.
will attend a workshop sponsored by the North American Electric Reliability Coun on August The purpose of this workshop is to share information concoming Y2K issues. Co-sponsors of the workshop are EPRI, NEl, and others.. At this workshop, the staf will give a presentation on the status of NRC Y2K activities.
FUEL CYCLE FACILITIES ANd MATERIALS LICENSEE 8 The Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) and DOE are working to to provide a single Federal govemment response to an IAEA Y2K Safeguards Questionnaire. i '
NMSS previously responded to an IAEA Y2K Safety Questionnaire for Fuel Cycle Facilities.
NMSS representatives are scheduled to visit Portsmouth gaseous diffusion plant (GDP) 1t '
week of August 16,1999, and Paducsh GDP the week of September 20,1999 to discuss Y2K readiness activities.
NMSS reviewed the third set of responses to Generic Letter 98-03. A summary of the !
responses is attached. The licensee for Allied Signal indicated, in a follow-up discussion, that their facility was Y2K ready by July 1,1999.
A summary of the Y2K readiness status of major fuel cycle facilities follows. This information is based., in large, part on information contained in licensee I certificate holder response to Generic Letter 98-03 and is current as of July 28,1999. -
. i Page 3 of 7 4
e
b e?
ey
. d Se -
Re .
WR nK B
O 0 0 0 9 0 1
y e2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 l hY J
1
/
1 J
1 J
1
/ / 9 J
9 9 u B 0 0 1 1 1 J / J 0
We h N O
J 1
J 7
0 1
7 0
0 2 0 0 9
1 0
J 7
1 0 b y
1 0 0 ( 1 0 0
1 y
d e
e kr R
K t s
t 2 n W Y a e
l f p o s r
e r e
e g e m w w n o e y o c t s e p i
n o r y h r e
c P S t a
r n y t
a l e
e o g h c P d i s e t u r e m r hd e d e
sn n
o e t e e ml yn l a t s w e ta o e h9 do e y r m e s d c l
dt 9 e
eD r
y Sg Cy o t s Ty e
r n i
d pea91t Nr y n se Re t n u n S dl l i y
K bo r m e c i
D r
g n= e i ns1 o3 2t o e m e k cme n a, == ht yhr Yg n t s p s a i s g=
t t e e en e y i r reh Tt s tr s n r n f ob 9 S u o c at di n oi !s m S
g q
e n
y e yb cSI emko ce i
cn 6 s
srm9 rl ae9 Mam sy t e n g t e n a gm otsay r rt s
r eic1 hme n un n ne P y T, ef ew t
ee s n sa l y
eu u f
a g S t
o s iD1 bo R mn S p s e ut ns ngya h r,n 3 eA l o
5cmot mtnto t nuy a oS r nRt iud t s bo r
o He o er u c ne ee n t
d t
sy r i
cl c wbnb e
e yt sf e t
n qAm sm e spr Mco tct u en n e n ewe mom N s sS a C o edpcia s aniiu d Atn r
faclne ufa ur a h o ct 5pne sc ey usqt ndo nu p ce a t
a ot t
n i
s ytosh qye ah l anCas anot a e nSrD u
h cE sec e l anrPmt ot Mac h l
e jdKo t
n a mat T m o s r ns t n 7 s nn ao nhe t
nee o n2 n N sm d8 e edes a m
e nl r aC u r
n yC o o yte t
on c Coo r r o sm u e n c aYo nseR t
f o
t s gr s
a r
olsC os s Hyy yCP l ARot i r iuhs i
4 y na e t a oey rl anhs cogy e ,
8gt n S ie gl M aiyi r ri t yrt s r t r ns v e 9uga e A dc oel t n eda im6r m 9Anr g W au BN A
W W A b a
bt a eu sfe aetchue et wei r m A hoemse eh o w 1 d nrK i i t u a P
L LMoSSO IrMP W CCWO t h
- n aPrY sd2 7 Dte e 9
9 be n2n gK ? h
/
1 9Get nh eeYo t o
3
/ 9eCg N a gl u n n n 2 1
h n s w w b 1 nt si r Sren N pn an o n o w o
r o y i t n u saod I
n n f,s Ps b esd WOur DT N
o N
o k U
n o o k n k n eD o a.. in aP t
RoeD r N N U U YG N ;. ch pG f eacO ep h y .- o hsCa c ed it e 1 7 Sely9 h
t o
C taKinRe t
Nt a b K sRu9 2 s2e eK y1 J9 r o Y t uYt h m W2 b s s s f,s Ps e apn d Y e o e e o o o b t
s ui - f w
Y N Y Y N N N eD o ld Kwfa .
YG N u 2ot s ;i o Yllot t e
w y
ef nn htczi ae t
il e t uiN e y h d d ns ge m
o n
a t
t a
t e
co n or H - l s t o
n n o
p m
ht ec ca po ee g e g n t o st vv n u n a n n aa e
d e
F e im s e p r
o e m
C c e, ishh salaRR n l
i s e m N e r h i
t r
~ hpww S e in e W-l v o c c ,
ig g n g c r e C i r
n e .
CCCC o
E a i S r e E S .
. RRRR NNNN l
o C t
'l n c l e w ^
s e s 4, e m o e e o e n u
))))
n g de it m B u P t ao o y (234 1
(((
s o F ;5 i
T u l
a r s t 6 h S
b t
s r a n Sar g n
s d
e W m m e n l e e doep it C9 .9 .
e i
R X o a e c u me t s f9 t
o A B C F r
G ir no e N N i S UC W i1
l CONTINGENCY PLANNING
- On July'14th NRC conducted a Y2K Tabletop exercise with Baltimore Gas and Electric, the State of Mar / i.d and the counties surrounding the Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant. The .
exercise tested Y2K contingency plan procedures against a number of scenarios, including loss of power and loss of telecommunications. The exercise confirmed that each participant had pd c car.Mdarable amount of tiought into preparing for potential problems during the Y2K transition. Although no maior Y2K contingency plan inconsistencies were identified, there were a numberof valuable observations and lessons from this tabletop. A synopsis of this exercise is on the Y2K web site (under Contingency Planning).
The staffis preparing for ttie full scale Y2K exercise. The exercise is scheduled for October 15 th and will test all aspects of the Y2K contingency plan, including the use of back-up sate j communication systems and the sharing ofinformation using the Y2K earty waming system , j (YEWS). During this exercise the NRC Operations Center and the Regional incident i
Response Centers will be staffed in accordance with the Y2K contingency plan. Approximatelyl 10 licensees will simulate requests for enforcement discretion. In addition, at least two - l licensees (including one fuel cycle facility) will simulate an emergency because of a Y2K problem. The exercise will also involve a simulated Headquarters communication failure and transfer to the Region IV back-up Operations Center. Back-up communication systems between NRC headquarters, the regional incident Response Cerders and the resident inspectors will also be tested. The NRC auditorium will be established as a mock Joint information center (JIC) for the White House information Coordination Center. Joumatisi students from local universities'have been invited to play the role of the press., The NRC J information Coordination Center representative will provide briefings in the auditorium (simulated JIC) on the status of Y2K problems in the nuclear industry.
The staff placed the order for Iridium satellite phones and the phones were shipped to the Regions and Headquarters for inventory control tagging before betrig distributed. NRC's dedicated link from the National Telecommunication Coordinating Network to the Headquarters Operations Cer9er was installed. FEMA recently announced plans to install NAWAS (National Waming System) circuits in all Federal Response Plan signatory Agencies (including NRC) as part of its Y2K preparedness effort. Details of this plan will be discussed at a meeting on August 17 at FEMA Headquarters.
The staff issued an l'nformation notice, IN 99-25, Year 2000 Contingency Planning Activities" to nuclear power plant licensees and fuel cycle facilities providing information conceming the NRC's Y2K contingency plan.
INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS I The staff has assisted the Nuclear Energy Agency in developing a prototype of an intemational Y2K early waming system (YEWS) that would be used by the NRC and other regulators to share information concoming Y2K problems that affect plant operation, telecommunications, or grid reliability. YEWS is a global Intemet-based communications system allowing the rapid transmission of information on Y2K related occurrences affecting nuclear facility operations, local gf.d etability and telecommunications during the Y2K transition period.
Page 5 of 7
.?
The staff plans to place this system on a secure web server at a National Laboratory. A number of countries (most notably Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea) have already agreed to use this system as their primary means of disseminating information about nuclear power plaI i
status during the Y2K transition. The stati has also been working with the President's Council i
c:' t".c Y2K Conversion, the Domestic Interagency Working Group, FEMA, DOE, NERC, and '
the information Coordination Center to ensure that information that the NRC obtains during Y2K transition will be effectively shared with the Executive Office and with appropriate Federal agencies.
Countries in earlier time zones, which will experience any Y2K-related problems before the UN.
does, have been Irfvited to provide information to this system in the quickest possible manner to enable reactor operators in participating countries in later time zones to avoid common-cause i failures. To date, this effort includes mainly Far Eastem countries which operate reactors designed by U.S. vendors, as well as some European countries, Canada ond Mexico. The )
NiiC Office of Intemational Programs is using its bilateral agreement ties to bvite countries outside of the CNRA and intomational nuclear organizations to participate in YEWS. Current Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, several Westem European countries, Canada and Mexico have
' agreed to participate in YEWS. ;
i YEWS is being developed by the NRC in cooperation with the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) and the intemational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Recently, more formal co-ordination ;
channels with the Intemational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were established and the IAEA j
provided comments on the system. Other discussions with the IAEA were focused on the co-existence and co-ordination of YEWS with the IAEA's fax-based emergency notification i system. A video conference with NRC, NEA, and IAEA to discuss YEWS is scheduled for the week of August 9,1999.
The YEWS prototype was first introduced to countries participating in the NEA's Committee on Nuclear Regulatory Agencies (CNRA) in March 1999 following an NEA sponsored intemational Y2K workshop in February 1999, which was also attended by regulators from the former Soviet Union and Central and Eastem Europe. The CNRA members are Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, IAEA, Japan, Netheriands, South Korea, Spa Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and United States.
I The final YEWS model was presented in June. Its design is based on comments received from
. CNRA countries, U.S. reactor operators and utilities, industry groups, the Departments of State and Energy, and intemal NRC peer review. Access to YEWS will be controlled by password.
The system will reside on a secure server hosted by a nationallaboratory in the U.S.
The information received by the NRC through YEWS will be shared with licensees and the Departments of Ensrgy and State, other Federal agencies as part of a coordinated Federal communication plan for the Y2K transition, and the Y2K Information Coordination Center which is being organized by the President's Council on the Year 2000 Conversion.
Page 6 of 7
CON.GRESSIONAL AFFAIRS '
The Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem invited Chairman Dicus to testify at a hearing focusing on the Year 2000 readiness of the electric power and gas industries. Due to the shortage of time before Congress departed for the August recess, the '
CeMttee decided to tum the hearing into its first "cyber hearing." Testimony from the witnesses has been posted on the Web rather than prese,nted in a hearing format. Other witnesses included FERC and NERC.
PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND Y2K COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES ,
An NRC press release titled " Nuclear Power Plants . Report Safety Systems are Y2K Ready".'
was issued on July 7,1999. Also, a summary of lloonsee r6 ports on the status of Y2K
' readiness at nucient power plants was placed on the.NRC Web site.
An NRC press release addressing the " Interim Policy Statement on Enforcement Discretion for Y2K"was 1999.
issued on July 22,1999. The policy was noticed in the Federal Reaister on July 30, The Cable News Network (CNN)' interviewed the staff in the NRC Opera' ting Center on July 7, 1999. The questions centered on the licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1.
The staff participated in a forum on "Y2K, Nuclear Plant Safety, and the Electric Power Grid."
The forum was sponsored by the George Washington University Y2K group and hosted by The .
Washington Post Company. Other participants were David Lochbaum of The Union of Concemed Scientists, Paul Gunter and Mary Olson of the Nuclear information and Resource Service (NIRS), James Davis of the Nuclear Energy institute (NEI) and Paula Gordon of George Washington University. The discussions centered on the quality of NRC Y2K audits and reviews, reliability and availability of electrical power in nuclear power plants, and the petitions for rulemaking filed by NIRS.
As of the end of July, the NRC Web site continues to respond to approximately 3,000 page-requests are:
per week for Year 2000 Iriformation. Currently, the most fr,equently-requested pages NRC Year 2000 Page 34 percent of Y2K requests Y2K Contingency Planning Page 11 percent of Y2K requests Nuclear Reactors Y2K Page 9 percent of Y2K requests Y2K Status of Power Plants 6 percent of Y2K requests Y2K Frequently Asked Questions ,5 percent of Y2K requests NRC Y2K References Page 4 percent of Y2K requests During the month of July, the NRC Year 2000 Page was the 12th most visited page, and the NRC Y2K Contingency Planning Page the 17th most visited page, on the NRC web site. Two PDF files, the Y2K Contingency Plan and the Y2K Status of Power Plants, were the 3rd and 7th most downloaded files, respectively, on the NRC web site.
Page 7 of 7
..~ 1 Table i Plants Reporting Y2K Readiness as of July 30,1999'
. Plant Name NRC '
Plant Name NRC Calvert Cliffs 1 and 2 i Bmidwood 1 and 2 Ill Fitzpatrick I Byron 1 and 2 Ill Ginna I Duesden 2 and 3 Ill Indian Point 2 i Duane Amold ill Indian Point 3 i Fermi 2 111
. Limern' 1 i Kewaunee ill Millstone 2 and 3 I LaSalle 1 and 2 Ill Nine Mile Point 1 and 2 i Monticello ,
til Pilgrim l
, Palisades ill Seabrook i Point Beach 1 and 2 Ill Susquehanna 1 and 2' I Prairie Island 1 and 2 111 Brunswick 2 11 Quad Cities 1 and 2 Ill Catawba 1 and 2 ll Arkansas 1 and 2 IV Crystal River 3 11 Callaway IV j Farley 1 11 Cooper IV Harris 11 Fort Calhoun IV
. Hatch 1 and 2 ll Grand Gulf IV McG;% 1 and 2 11 Palo Verde 1,2 and 3 IV 1 Nortn Anna 1 11 River Bend IV Oconee 1,2 and 3 ll San Onofre 2 and 3 IV Rob!nson 2 11 Waterford 3 IV St. Lucie 1 and 2 11 Washington Nuclear 2 IV Summer il ' Wolf Creek
_ IV Surry 1 and 2 ll Turkey Point 3 and 4 11 Vogtle 1 and 2 11
'The status of this table will be updated in the next report upon the completion of NRC reviews.
T' .-
i ulNld!!ul p n na l1 ! ! l iI -
g h *
~
h I i i i *. 1, l, ;
ni r i !!i,n! I 11, ljli i llii.nl l1tr i ljlr11 i Qi i
I1 bII ! lillli 1111 i lipi i 8 liillal i 3
H ili
! Il !! !!l llipih l!l I l l!l il ti !llI! !lI! !i lf h I I i i ! !
} 1 i i i ! }
1}b 1 hh h h h
- [ ~ . .
l !! i ! !! "
!! iIlI il!t !jlj}!
11.lI!!!
ll ![-lpIj
} i i
15 1il I cri i !l1l1 l illii !!
qij iiii I j n!nem nan iu6
- > 3
,iu,i,il ii
! !' %t sat,
) i i ! ! I h
as u u s n
a t
4 e
iji i .i nli!u li t 1 ilill41ilu<liin li i ii ii il il i! i !11i' !4i '
i li! hi!!n I! I l!! I I!!j!!! hill!!!
ll I 191ll!l!
!!!l!I !!l!IIIll!l N!ll!!
n i i i I
- ?.
II k Ih'i i, n lul
! !! ll!j!n!it o i
!;' ij i I !! ! .I i, i i hI!, I,
~
!ib l r !!ii lp!!!II Iji i
Illlijlil!II! !)l
!s in n!!I'III plu, ll'illil l l'lIi 0 1,in i!a O
p ; 111.$ p m ii
!!B d w[Il! I Il j t!
q
' ll 14 l
iio!w a11a ei a Ji!!!i niin!!
! li ! id s
) i ! ! ! !
I - i _
ln$l9 }> l>. l> !>
e .. * -*
- t K y. c 2 df YaI om pe e e nr9 .e bn wy nK9 a2 !lWdn bd eso hmb h a t eYf fe o er Tee m .lbe his2we it 1 t w eot gr n reyno ape v
dsivtI et t u
oe n de predmla eec sd nut e e
nnl ag ti en ec 4 e A ptsla Fau a soao omnm e ed isn ssI a
ndcde n neet e r
odeK 2 u absn m f d KY SrNoe
) e 2f .
eYo Ae ewdi l _
Dhn aW c du9t c . .
I n oin e 9p9a i
MedNro d1 m orI m
(
hcet ac .
n r i pdl eIh e t
r uel et eis r n
e l de ht e
vpvai s e ca t st t
n Smdit o nnb eeg _
a t nc ahoc sis l
P r
e v
u o da
)" y e wgey mege sn o s
el etone l
ot at n ?.
nt Ae u Wtr r ede let am w
mt o
)yr P e esKi r oy spo o l
e An2y e g r R s r r sl a o n n oI Ytn b t ndve e le K c 2 o l os9. e, n ot o CRoee t a _
c u Y o r s9t c ct ed N 9 "g l
L e eWn sr 2voen 1 Huns e n s t 9 i
y e g/ e i h e9n I' p
io1 t aie t a r eb e0o o3p 1
s ,9r d e dDr1Km.
nn p
y2 r m dyt he h;v ) i nyy dd n ye t
r aibYo o ol eh a 9 daa o nl eeano eee l
9 tls e ut r p e oeleol t l l
r t cme r
einn 9
1 t
r r r eJo R d d pt ao a ect r l
i e o p K K-Rfo ne e amuign mgodoo r Emi l
eey p 2 e22 Ket 2s na s r opcl l c t l c 2 rYY Y n .
fn u elero e enn l
e st t f
l p l a I nbf oh Dieo g n t n oo nn o P l gl oet t u a s e n ai itl t eo ear in s in et e J,
ponm sweMd l
s ic e t u o o gdn r bpnl d t
a h t
i t
e n
iAl g l o e .e wdm r u o Cd oe t e oie n as t t t
S r l p o yH oSem r Tt n .er a ( r y ynes F
o e eAiou r 2adv l c
- ( m t tDq n e ipno t
l
~,
2 o -
e n n umr de e d
e C MmIsI nMrt er Uofoe
~ 2 6 a giv e t l
e 1
- r ra T .
9 9 Kerwt 2oi s Y Y pin n
o 9 9 C
E t
ogm n d se e 9 9 n ;i a l t W / S r pa t 6 m mD o
1
/
2 1
1
/
2 1
m o
r t eWo smng C f
( yi s i r
y r ymt o e tetein
- v. fayso e
t o
ssm hhh e
s C it iti t d I
n s s www p w m de *y)e e t t t nnn .
Reros n aaa y ge i d l l l d i ep 1 a PPP o mta s t k o e - - - w i
t aCa l o 2 R ABC i v _
y
. n a
e s C. l e k ri l
P o ' r-a 2y C.
D'C r Fs - \
- A
_ ~ _
. m m .
r:
Honorable P;ul D. Cov:rdell .
Regarding items (2) and (3), SNC completes a routine Farley plant shutdown from full operating l power in about 18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />. It takes only a few seconds to manually or automatically shut down a t
nuclear plant in an emergency. These routine and emergency shutdown times are reasonable averages for all nuclear power plants. SNC plans to shut down Unit 2 for refueling and other maintenance, modify and test the software, and begin producing power again by about December 16,1999. We do not expect the Y2K issue to affect the safety of the Farley Nuclear l Plant, Units 1 and 2, or their ability to supply electrical power to the national electric power grid.
Thus, we see no reason to shut down Ferley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. Furthermore, we have undertaken an exhaustive effort to ensure that all nuclear power plants that are not fully ready for Y2K are on track to be Y2K ready before the end of the year.
Enclosed is the latest NRC status report on Y2K activities. We recently completed our onsite j Y2K reviews at all 103 U.S. nuclear power plants and have confirmed that there are no '
Y2K-related problems which affect the performance of safety systems needed to safely shut down the plants. More Y2K Information is available on our Website at htto://www.nrc.aov/NRC/Y2K/Y2KReadv.html.
I hope that this information is responsive to Mr. Sherman's concerns. I am happy to give you ,
any more details that you might need.
Sincerely, Original signed by FJMiraglia for/ William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations 4
Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 l l
Enclosure:
NRC Y2K Status Report !
Distribution:
Docket File PDil-1 R/F FMiraglia FCongel NRR Mailroom-O-5-E-7 EDO #G19990410 OCA PNorry MSatorius OGC EDO R/F PUBLIC JBlaha LReyes, Ril OPA !
MKnapp SBurns WKane WTravers BSheron REmch HBerkow MPadovan CHawes SCollins/RZimmerman JWhitaker THarris PSkinner, Ril SECY # CRC-99-0716 l JCalvo JZwolinski i DOCUMENT NAME: G:/PDii-1/Farley/Y2K green ticket rev3.wpd *See Previous Concurrences T0,ecolve a copy of this document,Indcate in the boar 'C' = Copy without attachment / enclosure 'E' = Copy with ettachment! enclosure 'N" = No copy OFFICE PDil-1/PM
- lEl PDil-1/LA' l PDll-1/sC' l DE/D* l PDil/D* l Tech Editor' l NAME MPadovan CHawes REmch RWessman HBerkow BCalure I l DATE 8/30/99 8/30/99 8/25/99 8/25/90 8/25/99 8/23/99 r.m= r a NAME JZwolinski Bsheron sCollins g MrM/// DRathbd DATE 8/25/99 8/30/99 8/30/99 9/ /99 C 9/f /99 '
OFFICIAL RECORD COP
. Honor:bb Paul D. Cov:rd:ll Regarding items (2) and (3), SNC completes a routine Farley plant shutdown from full' operating power in about 18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />. It takes only a few seconds to manually or automatically shut down a nuclear plant in an emergency. These routine and emergency shutdown times,are reasonable averages for all nuclear power plants. SNC plans to shut down Unit 2, modify'and test the software, and begin producing power again by about December 16,1999./We do not expect the Y2K issue to affect the safety of the Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and'2, or their ability to supply electrical power to the national electric power grid. Thus, we pe'e no reason to shut down Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. Furthermore, we have undertaken an exhaustive effort to ensure that all nuclear power plants that are not fully ready for Y2K are on track to be Y2K ready before the end of the year.
Enclosed is the latest NRC status report on Y2K activitiese e recently completed our onsite Y2K reviews at all 103 U.S. nuclear power plants and hafe confirmed that there are no Y2K-related problems which affect the performance of' safety systems needed to safely shut down the plants. More Y2K information is available4n our Website at httD://www.n rc.oov/N R C/Y2 K/Y2 K R eadv.html. '
I hope that this information is responsive to M . Sherman's concerns. I am happy to give you any more details that you might need.
Si cerely, illiam D. Travers Executive Director for Operations Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-3
Enclosure:
NRC Y2K Statu Report
/
. ,,7 Distribution:
Docket File PDll-1 R/F FMiraglia FCongel NRR Mailroom-O-5-E-7 EDO #G199904 0 OCA PNorry MSatorius OGC EDO R/F PUBLIC JBlaha LReyes, Ril OPA MKnapp SBurns WKane WTravers BSheron REmch HBerkow MPadovan CHawes SCollins/RZimmerman JWhitaker THarris PSkinner, Rll SECY # CRC-99-0716 JCalvo JZwolinski DOCUMENT,NAME: G:/PDii-1/Farley/Y2K green ticket rev3.wpd *See Previous Concurrences To receive a ce pr of this dpeumerit, indicate in the bar: *C's Copy without attactwnenvenclosure T = Copy with attactanenvendosure Sl". No copy OFFICE PDil-1/PM lE PDil-1/LA l PDil-1/sC* l DE/D* l PDil/D* l Tech Editor
- l NAME MPadovan W CHawes t'fh N REmch RWessman HBerkow BCalure DATE 813o/99 8/30/99 8/25/99 8/25/99 8/25/99 8/23/99
/ ^ Or n OFFICE , DLPM/D* l 16R(AD l @$ Pl OCA l EDO l NAME / JZwohnski R9 don 5%Ih'ns WTravers DATE/ 8/25/99 8/t d)/99 8/ M /99 8/ /99 8/ /99
/ , OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
!; J o s G
r
. Honor:bb Paul D. Covard:ll Regarding items (2) and (3), SNC completes a routine Farley plant shutdown from full operating power in about 18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />. It takes only a few seconds to manually or automatically shut down a nuclear plant in an emergency. These routine and emergency shutdown times are reasonable averages for all nuclear power plants. SNC plans to shut down Unit 2, modify and test the software, and begin producing power again by about December 16,1999. We do not expect the Y2K issue to affect the safety of the Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, or their ability to supply electrical power to the national electric power grid. Thus, we see no reason to shut down F. My Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. Furthermore, we have undertaken an exhaustive effort W unsure that all nuclear power plants that are not fully ready for Y2K are on track to be Y2K ready before the end of the year.
Enclosed is the latest NRC status report on Y2K activities. We recently completed our onsite Y2K reviews at all 103 U.S. nuclear power plants and have confirmed that there are no Y2K-related problems which affect the performance of safety systems needed to safely shut down the plants. More Y2K information is available on our Website at httD://www.n rc_sov/N R C/Y2 K/Y2 KReadv.html.
I hope that this information is responsive to Mr. Sherman's concerns. I am happy to give you any more details that you might need.
Sincerely, William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364
Enclosure:
NRC Y2K Status Report cc w/ encl: Mr. D. N. Morey, SNC l
Distribution:
Docket File PDil-1 R/F FMiraglia FCongel NRR Mailroom-O-5-E-7 :
EDO #G19990410 OCA PNorry MSatorius OGC .
EDO R/F PUBLIC JBlaha LReyes, Ril OPA I MKnapp SBurns WKane WTravers BSheron REmch HBerkow MPadovan CHawes SCollins/RZimmerman JWhitaker THarris PSkinner, Ril SECY # CRC-99-0716 JCalvo JZwolinski DOCUMENT NAME: G:/PDii-1/Farley/Y2K green ticket rev3.wpd *See Previous Concurrences ,
Ta receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: 'C' = Copy without ettschment/ enclosure "E' = Copy eth attachment / enclosure "N" = No copy 1 OFFICE PDil-1/PM 1E PDil 1/LA l PDil-1/sC' l DE/D' l PDll/D' l Tech Editor' l NAME MPadovanM CHawesf/M REmch RWessman HBerkow BCalure DATE 8/ M/99 8/Ji/99 8/2 6/99 8/,25 /99 8QS /99 8/23/99 OFFICE DLPM/D' l NRR/AD l NRR/D l oCA l EDo l NAME JZwolinski Bsheron sCollins WTravers DATE 8/d25 /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
< )
l
. Honor:ble Paul D. Cov:rd ll 1 l
i Regarding items (2) and (3), SNC normally completes a Farley plant shutdown from full operating power in about 18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />. It takes only a few seconds to manually or automatically shut down a nuclear plant in an emergency. SNC plans to shut down Unit 2, modify and test the software, and begin producing power again bs/ about December 16,1999. We do not expect the Y2K issue to affect the safety of the Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, or their l abJ?y to supply electrical power to the national electric power grid. Thus, we see no reason to shut down Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
Enclosed is the latest NRC status report on Y2K activities. We recently completed our onsite Y2K reviews at all 103 U.S. nuclear power plants and have confirmed that there are no Y2K-related problems which affect the performance of safety systems needed to safely shut down the plants. More Y2K information is available on our Website at httD://www.n rc.oov/N R C/Y2 K/Y2 K R eadv.html.
I hope that this information is responsive to Mr. Sherman's concerns. I am happy to give you any mo.re details that you might need.
i Sincerely, i l
William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 Enclosure. NRC Y2K Status Report cc w/ encl: Mr. D. N. Morey, SNC pjstribution:
Docket File PDll-1 R/F FMiraglia FCongel NRR Mailroom-O-5-E-7 EDO #G19990410 OCA PNorry MSatorius OGC EDO R/F PUBLIC JBlaha LReyes, Ril OPA MKnapp SBurns WKane WTravers BSheron REmch HBerkow MPadovan CHawes SCollins/RZimmerman JWhitaker THarris PSkinner, Ril SECY # CRC-99-0716 JCalvo JZwolinski DOCUMENT NAME: G:/PDii-1/Farley/Y2K green ticket rev3.wpd *See Previous Concurrence T* receive o copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without ettechment/ enclosure "E" = Copy with ettschment/ enclosure 'N" = No copy OFFICE Poll-1/PM .lE PDil-1/LA l P M 4C l DE/D '11 PDll/AA l Tech Editor' l NAME MPadovanW CHawes /']M4 R$rnIS'M RWessm'M HBer$0@/ BCalute DATE 8/3 S/99 ' 8/M /99 8/ M 59 S/% /99 8/JM99 8/23/99
/ MA _
OFFICE DLPM/ W la NRDA[D l NRR/D l oCA l EDo l NAME JZwoIInplIL " . W eMn scoilins wTravers DATE 8/ ff /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
r i .
Honorable Paul D. Coverdell .
i We also see no reason to shut down all other nuclear power plants that are not yet Y2K ready.
[ These plants also normally complete plant shutdowns from full operating power in about 18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />. These pres.ently non-Y2K ready nuclear power plants are scheduled to be Y2K ready before December 1 99. I hope that this information is responsive to Mr. Sherman's concerns. I will be happy to give y,ou any more details that you might need.
Sincerely, i
l William D. Travers i Executive Director of Operations j l
Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 l
cc: Mr. D. N. Morey, SNC ,
i l
Distribution:
Docket File PDil-1 R/F FMi lia FCongel NRR Mailroom j EDO G19990410 OCA PNor MSatorius OGC l
EDO PUBLIC JBlaha LReyes,Ril OPA EDO R/F MKnapp SBurns WKane ;
l DOCUMENT NAME: G:/PDii-1/Farley/Y2K green ticket.
Te receive e copy of this document. Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment .n losure "E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure *N* = No copy OFFICE PDil-1/PM lE PDll-1/LA l PDil-1/sC l PDi\'D\ l Tech Editor lN DLPM/D l NAME MPadovan CHawes RErnch HBer\ow hC JZwolinski DATE 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ \ /99 8/ M /99 8/ /93
\
OFFICE NRR/AD l NRR/D OCA EDO \ l NAME Bsheron SCollins WTravers \ l DATE 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 \
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
^\
NN N
[
J.cO. p a w~pe
. f ACTION l
EDO Principal Correspondence Control j
l FROM DUE: 08/30/99 EDO CONTROL: Gl9990410 DOC DT: 08/09/99 !
FINAL REPLY: !
S:nntor Paul D. Coverdell TO:
Rathbun, OCA FOR SIGNATURE OF : ** GRN ** CRC NO: 99-0716 Travers, EDO DE,SC:' ROUTING:
Y2K COMPLIANCE -- FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT Travers (John M. Sherman)
Knapp l Miraglia l Norry {
Blaha 1 Burns l DATE: 08/17/99 Congel, IRO Satorius, OEDO l ASSIGNED TO: CONTACT: Reyes, RII l
_NRR Collins SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS: i 3]!b N1: /$$)/]); au/ ash W A b 0e w d: d ag u d /f,/99 C
)
Y N$w) tdtrantU ACT]ON Enn gg .
DUE TO NRR DIRECTOR'S OFFE W/d9M # BY 94 2 9~
,1 -
l -.. -
1
r
-i --
OFFICE OF THE' SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET 4
PAPER-NUMBER: CRC-99-0716 LOGGING DATE: Aug 17 99 ACTION OFFICE: EDO
' AUTHOR: PAUL COVERDELL, SEN~
AFFILIATION: .U.S. SENATE-ADDRESSEE: RATHBUN LETTER DATE: Aug- 9'99 FILE CODE: IDR 5 FARLEY
SUBJECT:
FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ACTION: Signature of EDO l DISTRIBUTION: OCA TO ACK SPECIAL HANDLING:
CONSTITUENT: JOHN SHERMAN NOTES:
DATE DUE: Aug 4'99 SIGNATURE: . DATE SIGNED:
AFFILIATION:
EDO --G19990410