ML20212C844
| ML20212C844 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/10/1999 |
| From: | Travers W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Kingston J HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212C850 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-98-01, IEIN-96-070, NUDOCS 9909220173 | |
| Download: ML20212C844 (17) | |
Text
b UA meg l
1 UNITED STATES g
)
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
p WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066 0001
{
September 10, 1999 i
The Honorable Jack Kingston Member, United States
' House of Representatives j.
6605 Abercom St., Suite 102 Savannah,GA 31405
Dear Congressman Kingston:
I am responding to the letter you sent to Dennis K. Rathbun of the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on July 27,1999, in which you requested information on concerns raised by one of your constituents, Ms. Debbie Bodie, regarding the year 2000 (Y2K) readiness of the State of Georgia's nuclear power plants.
By way of background information, I am pleased to tell you that over the past several years, the NRC staff has been working with its licensees to ensure that potential Y2K issues have been identified and corrected in order for plants to function properly during the Y2K transition. The NRC has issued Information Notice (IN) 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 96-70 informed alllicensees of the potential problems that nuclear facility computer systems and I
software might encounter during the transition to the new century. In GL 98-01, reference is made to Nuclear Energy Institute / Nuclear Utilities Software Management Group (NEl/NUSMG) 97-07, " Nuclear Utility Year 2000 Readiness," which describes an approach that all licensees -
have agreed to utilize in addressing the Y2K issues at their facilities. This guidance document (NEl/NUSMG 97-07) came out of a joint effort between NEl and NUSMG. In GL 98-01, the NRC accepted the NEl/NUSMG 9-07 guidance as an appropriate program for nuclear power j
plant readiness and required that all operating U.S. nuclear power plant licensees submit I
written responses regarding their facility-specific Y2K readiness programs. Licensees were required to report their Y2K readiness status by July 1,1999. Licensees that were not ready were requested to provide their schedule for completing their Y2K activities. Supplement 1 to GL 98-01 expanded the scope of the reporting requirements to include the systems that are necessary for continued plant operation and that are not covered by the terms and conditions of the plant's license and NRC regulations.
The NRC has received reports that all 103 operating nuclear power plants (units) have no Y2K-related problems that directly affect the performance of safety systems. As of September 1 1999, licensees for 75 of these plants, including Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant and Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in the State of Georgia, indicated that all of their computer systems that support plant operation are Y2K ready. Licensees for the remaining 28 plants reported that they have additional work to complete on a few non-safety computer systems or
-3 devices to be fully Y2K ready and provided their schedujes for completing the work. Of the 28. \\
g plants, about 15 need work on operational support systems, or systems needed to support TM(o(
T52'"$2P E B T R@i9IE8 E C 4 R-15 24 PDR
7 Honorable J. Kingston power generation. Other plants need work on plant monitoring and administrative systems or systems needed to support administrative functions, such as a data base for spare parts inventories. Typically, the remaining Y2K work that is to be completed is due to the need to wait for a plant outage scheduled in the fall in order to perform the work or the necessity of waitmg for delivery of a replacement component. None of the remaining work affects the ability of a plant to shut down safely, if necessary.
One of a number of initiatives undertaken by the NRC staff to address the Y2K issue was the conduct of 12 sample audits of licensee Y2K readiness programs. The NRC staff determined that this approach was an appropriate means of oversight of licensee Y2K readiness efforts because all licensees had committed to the nuclear power industry Y2K readiness guidance (NEl/NUSMG 97-07) in their first response to NRC GL 98-01 and because the NRC staff had not identified any Y2K problems in safety-related actuation systems. The sample of 12 licensees included large utilities such as Commonwealth Edison and Tennessee Valley Authority, 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 encompassed more than a single nuclear power plant site because many utilities own more than one nuclear power plant. In all,42 of 103 operating nuclear power plant units were associated with the Y2K readiness program audits of 12 utilities.
The NRC staff selected a variety of types of plants of different ages and locations in this sample in order to obtain the necessary assurance that nuclear power industry Y2K readiness programs are being effectively implemented and that licensees would be on schedule to meet the readiness target date of July 1,1999, established in GL 98-01. In late January 1999, the NRC staff completed the 12 audits. On the basis of the audit findings, the staff concluded that the audited licensees were in the process of effectively addressing Y2K issues and were undertaking the actions necessary to achieve Y2K readiness in accordance with the GL 98-01 target date.
In an effort to verify and assess the effectiveness of licensee contingency planning, in May and June 1999, NRC audit teams conducted additional comprehensive audits focused on the area of Y2K contingency planning at six unaudited plants. The audits reviewed internal facility risks, extemal risks, individual component / system contingency planning and integrated contingency planning. The results of these audits, as well as the results of the 12 sample audits, are available at NRC public document rooms and at NRC's Y2K Web site htto /www.nrc.oov/NRC/ NEWS /vear2000.html.
1 In addition to the NRC staff activities previously mentioned, regional NRC inspectors reviewed plant-specific Y2K program implementation and contingency activities at all nuclear power plant facilities, including plants in the State of Georgia. The inspectors used guidance prepared by the NRC Headquarters staff who conducted the 12 sample audits and the 6 contingency planning audits. On the basis of the inspector reviews, the staff found that the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant and Vogtle Electric Generating Plant licensees were implementing Y2K programs in accordance with staff-approved industry guidelines.
Ms. Bodie expressed concem that it would require several months before January 1,2000, to safely cool down a reactor. Under normal conditions, it takes several hours to safely shutdown
-a nuclear power plant by gradually reducing reactor power. However, in an emergency, the i
Honorable J. Kingston _
reactor can be shut down safely within seconds, either automatically or manually. Nuclear power plants employ cooling systems to safely remove heat from the reactor core. Typically, the reactor core can be safely cooled down in about a day. Following a reactor shutdown, decaying fission byproducts continue to produce heat in the core. This heat generation process subsides as time passes and eventually reaches a point at which cooling water is not necessary. At that point, the core will remain cool by simply transferring to the surroundings the small amount of decay heat that remains. The perception that it takes months to cool the core has merit if the reference point is the time when it is no longer necessary to provide cooling water. _However, the cooling systems in place are required to be available and are designed to cool the reactor core in a safe, timely, and controlled manner.
Additionally, every nuclear power plant has redundant backup power sources on site to safely shut down the reactor and keep it in a safe condition in the unlikely event that all external power is lost as a result of the Y2K transition or any other reason. Generally, each plant has at least two diesel generators to provide this backup power to the plant safety systems.
With regard to your constituent's question conceming the electric grid as a whole, nuclear power plant licensees are interacting with the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) to develop electrical grid stability plans for generatic n and transmission. The plants
' have identified grid instability as a factor to be included under extemal risk as part of the Y2K contmgency planning effort. The industry and the NRC recognize the nationalimportance of having available the broadest range of electrical generating capability in order to cope with any unforseen Y2K Impacts should they occur. However, NERC in their report to the Department of Energy, " Preparing the Electric Power Systems of North America For Transition to the Year 2000," dated August 3,1999, states: "The current industry status leads to high confidence that nuclear generation plants will continuo to reliably deliver their share of the nation's electricity needs wellinto the next century."
The NRC will continue to monitor progress at those plants that have remaining work to be performed and will independently verify completion of these items, including Y2K contingency plans that specify procedures for dealing with unexpected events. The staff has developed l
guidance for appropriate regulatory actions to be taken for those facilities that were not Y2K ready by July 1,1999. As stated in the enclosed press releases, by September 30,1999, we will make a final determination whether additional regulatory action is warranted to address Y2K l
' readiness issues. We believe that all licensees will be able to operate their plants safely during the transition from 1999 to 2000 and beyond and do not believe that significant plant-specific achon directed by the NRC to address possible Y2K problems is likely to be needed.
Additional Y2K information on all operating nuclear power plants is available at NRC's Y2K Web site at htto://www.nrc.nov/NRC/ NEWS /vear2000.html. This Web site also identifies Y2K resources, notices, conferences, and other related information.
Honorable J. Kingston The NRC remains committed to its oversight of the nuclear power plant licensee Y2K-readiness
. efforts in order to ensure safe operation of these facilities throughout 1999,2000, and beyond.
Please contact me if you have any additional questions on this matter.
" Sincerely, hY~
illiam D. Trdvers QU ecutive Director O
for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Press Release No.99-168, "NRC Establishes Pol;cy for Regulatory Actions for Nuclear Power P ants That Are Not 'Y2K Ready'"
Press Release No.99-191, "NRC lasues Report Confirming No Y2K Problems Affecting 2.
Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Plants - Updates Y2K Readiness Status" 1
g g
http /www.nrc. gov /OPNgmo/nt:rev/99-168.htm 1
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Public Affairs Washington DC 20555 Telephone: 301/415-8200 - E-mail: opa@nrc. gov No.99-168 August 6,1999 NRC ESTABLISHES POLICY FOR REGULATORY ACTIONS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS THAT ARE NOT "Y2K READY" The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved a policy to guide regulatory actions for nuclear power plant licensees that did not report that their facilities were "Y2K ready" by July 1.
The new policy, which applies to those 35 plants that were not Y2K ready as ofJuly 1, provides for regulatory actions to be taken sufficiently in advance of the December 31 to January 1 transition to assure that nuclear power plants will be in a stable, safe condition during the Y2K rollover date.
Under the new policy, for those plants with a projected Y2K item completion date between July 1 and September 30, (about 13 plants) the NRC will continue to monitor licensees' progress, verify completion ofremaining Y2K-related activities, and document results in NRC inspectin. c ports.
I q
The degree of additional NRC scrutiny for the remaining plants (about 22) will depend on the nature of the work that needs to be completed to be Y2K-ready.
Plants with non-safety, support systems and components that are not Y2K-ready or plants that have incomplete contingency plans for these systems could require additional meetings, audits, or requests for additional information. There are about 10 plants in this category.
- Plants with non-safety systems that affect power operation that are Y2K-ready or those plants that have incomplete contingency plans for these systems will be subject to additional regulatory actions which may include issuance of an order requiring specific actions by the licensee. There are about 12 plantsin this category.
By September 30, NRC will make a final determination whether additional regulatory action is warranted to address Y2K readiness issues. At this time, NRC believes that all licensees will be able to operate their plants safely during the transition from 1999 to 2000, and that NRC-directed plant-specific action will not be needed.
All 103 operating nuclear power plants reported July 1 that their plant safety systems were Y2K-ready and that there were no remaining Y2K-related problems that could directly affect the performance of safety systems or the capability for safe shutdown of the reactor. In addition,68 of these plants reported 1 of 2 8/10/199911:48 AM o
http://www.nrc. gov /OPNgma'nrerce99-168.htm they had completed, as the next order ofpriority, Y2K-readiness work for all of their computer systems 1
that support plant operation. The remaining 35 plants reported that, to be fully Y2K-ready, they still had
{
additional work to complete on a few non-safety computer systems or devices.
i
)
For about one halfof the 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 will be completed during 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 the work.
Current Status ofNuclear Power Plant Y2K Raidiness The plants that have Y2K work remaining are continuing to progress toward Y2K readiness. As of August 1, five more plants have reported that they are Y2K-ready bringing the total to 73 operating nuclear power plants that are fully Y2K-ready. This reduces to 30 the number ofplants that have remaining work on non-safety systems and components to be fully Y2K-ready.
The " Year 2000" or Y2K problem refers to computers' potential inability to recognize dates beginning with January 1,2000, and beyond. It arises from computer programs that use two-digit numbers to represent a calendar year (such as "98" for 1998). For example, computer systerns could read "00" as 1900, rather than 2000, potentially causing computer systems to malfunction. "Y2K-ready" means that i
functions provided by computer systems will be carried out successfully with the coming of the Year 2000.
~
Additional information on the policy can be found in a staffpaper, SECY-99-162, on NRC's Y2K web site at: www.nrc. gov /NRC/ NEWS / year 2000.html.
1 NRC Home Page l News and Information l E-mail i
l l
)
2 of 2 8/10/1999 11:48 AM L
Nuclear R,egulatory Commissio http /www.ntc. gov /OPA/gmo/nrr.rev/99-191.htr
/
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Public Affairs Washington DC 20555 Telephone: 301/415-8200 E-Mail: opa@ nrc. gov News Release Index I News and Information i NRC Home i E-mail No.99-191 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (Tuesday, September 7,1999)
NRC ISSUES REPORT CONFIRMING NO Y2K PROBLEMS AFFECTING SAFETY SYSTEMS OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS - UPDATES Y2K READINESS STATUS The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a report confirming by onsite reviews that at all 103 U.S.
nuclear power plants there are no Y2K-related problems which affect the performance of safety systems needed to safely shut down the plants.
The report, NUREG-1706, " Year 2000 Readiness in U.S. Nuclear Power Plants," integrates the results of NRC's onsite reviews of all nuclear power plants and utilities' July 1 response on Y2K readiness. While al plants report Y2K readiness for safety systems used for shutdown, some plants are completing Y2K readiness activities for systems not required to safely shut down the plants.
The chan that follows depicts the path to timely Y2K readiness based on current information.
l Nuclear Power Plant Y2K Readiness O Administranvesystems 160 -
@ OpentionalsupportSystems 140 -
All safety-related systems Y2K ready
( 100 -
,) 80 -
60 -
40 -
20 -
0
~1/1/99 8/1/99 9/1/99 10/1/99 11/1/99 12/1/99 12/16/99 As depicted by this chart, allplants are expected to befully Y2K readyprior to the transition period.
Typically, for those plants not fully Y2K ready, work will be completed in conjunction with a scheduled 1or4 9/8/1999 6:42 AV
Nuclear R,egulatory Commissi2 http- /www.nrc. gov /OPA/gmo/nrarev/99-191.htr 1
plant outage in the fall or when a replacement component is delivered. The NRC will continue to monitor and verify completion of all Y2K activities.
Most of the earlier NRC onsite reviews oflicensee Y2K programs at the 103 plants provided sutucient information for the staff to conclude that licensee Y2K readiness programs were consistent with acceptable industry guidance.JIowever, the NRC could not complete reviews of licensee programs for 14 plants because reviews were conducted early in April or May and tuese plants had not completed some of their Y2K preparations when NRC was on site.
In follow-up reviews of these 14 plants, the NRC determined that, in only one case, Cooper Nuclear Station, an integrated contingency plan (consistent with industry guidance) had not been completed even though this plant reported July 1 it was Y2K ready. As a result of this determination, the Cooper Station was categorized as "not Y2K ready" as of September 1 as reflected in the attached table on nuclear power plant Y2K readiness and NUREG-1706. Subsequently, on September 2, the licensee notified NRC that it had completed its integrated contingency plan, which the NRC will verify.
In addition, Cooper informed NRC it had disccvered during an audit that three pieces of equipment were evaluated improperly by its contractor. (Typical Y2K programs involve the evaluation of over 2000 items).
One piece of equipment was from an operational support system and the other two were from administrative systems. None of this equipment involved systems needed to safely shut down the plant.
Cooper has notified NRC that it has corrected these deficiencies, reviewed the contractor's work, and determined there are no other deficiencies. The NRC has conducted inquiries to assure that this problem is unique to Cooper and does not affect any other plants. The NRC has no indication that this problem extends to other plants.
In summary, the NRC concludes: (1) that at all 103 plants there are no Y2K concerns that could affect the performance of safety systems, (2) all licensees are following staff-approved industry guidance for achieving Y2K readiness, and (3) the completion schedules for the remaining few non-safety-related Y2K items will be completed before the transition from 1999 to 2000. At this time, the NRC believes that all licensees will be able to operate their plaats safely during the Y2K transition and does not anticipate the need for the NRC to direct any significant plant-specific actions.
The full NUREG report is available on NRC's Y2K website at:
www.nrc.cov/NRC/ NEWS /vear2000.html Thefollowing table provides the Y2K readiness status of U.S. operating nuclearpowerplants. As stated above, these are no Y2K concerns that could affect the performance ofsafety systems. For those plants not alreadyfully Y2K ready, the projected completion date is indicated in the right column.
Table: Nuclear Power Plant Y2K Readiness Status as of September 1,1999 Completion Status /Date l
Plant Name j
lArkansas 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready iBeaver Valley I and 2 l
9/30/99 (Braidwood I and 2 j_
Y2K Ready lBrowns Ferry 2 and 3 10/31/99
- Brunswick 1 Y2K Ready 2 of 4 9/8/1999 6:42 AA
I tiuclear R,egulatory Commissio http /www.ntc. gov /OPA/gmc!nrarev/99-191.htr
/
Brunswick 2 l
Y2K Ready Byron 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready l
Callaway l
Y2K Ready l
Calvert Cliffs 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready i
Catawba 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready Clinton l
9/22S 9 i
Comanche Peak 1 l
11/30/99 I
Comanche Peak 2 l
10/30/99 i
Cooper j
9/20/99 l
Crystal River 3 l
Y2K Ready j
Davis-Besse l
Y2K Ready j
Diablo Canyon 1 and 2 l
10/3199 l
D.C. Cook I and 2 l
10/30/99 Dresden 2 and 3
_J Y2K Ready i
Duane Arnold l
Y2K Ready Farley 1
[
Y2K Ready Farley 2 l
12/16/99 Fermi 2 l
Y2K Ready l
Fitzpatrick l
Y2K Ready i
Fort Calhoun l
Y2K Ready Ginna 1
Y2K Ready i
Grand Gulf l
Y2K Ready Harris l
Y2K Ready Hatch I and 2 l
Y2K Ready Hope Creek l
10/29/99 I
I Indian Point 2 l
Y2K Ready Indian Point 3 l
Y2K Ready Kewaunee l
Y2K Ready LaSalle 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready Limerick 1 l
Y2K Ready Limerick 2 j
9/30/99 1
McGuire 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready l
Millstone 2 and 3 l
Y2K Ready l
Monticello I
Y2K Ready l
Nine Mile Point I and 2 i
Y2K Ready 4
North Anna 1 l
Y2K Ready l
North Anna 2 l
10/29/99 Oconee 1,2 and 3 l
' Y2K Ready Oyster Creek l
9/30/99 l
Palisades l
Y2K Ready l
Palo Verde 1,2 and 3 l
Y2K Ready 3 of 4 9/8/1999 6:42 AM
"CD R.egulatory Commissia httpl/oww.nrc. gov /OPA/gmo/nrarev/99-191.htr i Peach Bottom 2 l
9/30/99 l
Peach Bottom 3 l
Perry l_
10/3169 l
Y2K Ready l
Pilgrim l
Y2K Ready l
Point Beach I and 2 l
Y2K Ready l
Prairie Island I and 2 l
Y2K Ready l
Quad Cities 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready i
River Bend l
Y2K Ready j
P binson 2 l
Y2K Ready s
Salem 1 l
11/6/99 l
Salem 2 l
10/29/99 San Onofre 2 and 3
[
Y2K Ready 1
Seabrook l
Y2K Ready Sequoyah I and 2 l
10/31/99 South Texas 1 and 2 l
10/31/99 St. Lucie 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready Summer l
Y2K Ready Surry 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready i
Susquehanna 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready Three Mile Island 1 l
10/21/99 Turkey Point 3 and 4 l
Y2K. Ready Vermont Yankee j
9/30/99 Vogtle 1 and 2 l
Y2K Ready i
Washington Nuclear 2 i
Y2K Ready Waterford 3 l
Y2K Ready Watts Bar l
l0/31/99 WolfCreek i
Y2K Ready 4 of 4 9/8/19996:42 Alv
e.
l Honorable J. Kingston -
The NRC remains committed to its oversight of the nuclear power plant licensee Y2K-readiness efforts in order to ensure safe operation of these facilities throughout 1999,2000, and beyond.
Please contact me if you have any additional questions on this matter.
Sincerely, Or%>elsigud by Wisam D. Travers William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Press Release No.99-168, "NRC Establishes Policy for Regulatory Actions for Nuclear Power Plants That Are Not 'Y2K Ready'"
2.
Press Release No.99-191, "NRC issues Report Confirming No Y2K Problems Affecting Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Plants - Updates Y2K Readiness Status" DISTRIBUTION: See next page DISK / DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\EElB\\BRYANTUKINGSTONGT.WPD OFFICIAL RECORD COPY n,.o
.www c.cm e ru _.-
.w.cm.m.1--_:
.: er. won. No uam.ho copvm
- See previous concurrences OFC EElB A
TechEd N
C;EElB D:DE ADPT:NRR D.NRR EDOJj NAME ABryant BCalure JACalvo JRStrosnider BWSheron SJCollins s
DATE 8/11/99*
8/10/99*
8/13/99*
8/16 /99*
8/16/99*
8/17/99*
f/ Q /99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
[
OCAbl DRathbun 9/ / t/99
1 DIGIE'BUTION FOR GT # 19990382 DATED:
September 10, 1999
SUBJECT:
Y2K COMPLIANCE / CONTINGENCY PLANS WITH THE STATE OF GEORGIA NPPs (CONGRESSMAN JACK KINGSTON)-
M Knapp /.............................................................O-16 E 1 5 FMiraglia...........................................................O-16E 15 PNorry.............................................................O-16 E 15 JBlaha..............................................................O-16 E 15 FCongel.............................................................T-4D18 THiltz...............................................................O-16E 15 S Bu rn s............................................................... O-4 F 2 0 RZim merm an..................................................
.......O-5E7 SCollins...............................
.O-5 E 7 BSheron..............................................................O-5 E7 RWessman...........................................................O-7 D26 JC alvo.................................................................O -8 H 2 J M a uck................................................................O-9 D4 MChiramal...........
......O-904 SVAthavale...........................................................O-9 D4 ABryant.......................
...O-9D4 WKane..............................................................O-5 E 7 f
RBlough, RI.......................
.................................. Region l l-L WLan ning, R l......................................................... Region I H JM iller, RI............................................................ Region l LAReyes, Ril.......................................................... Regio n l l l
l LPlisco, Ril............................................................. Region il l-BM allet, Ril._............................................................ Region l l j
JGrobe, Rlli......................................................... Region lli l
GGrant, Rill........................................................ Region 111 JIDyer, Rlli.......................................................... Region 111 1
AHowell, RIV........................................................ Region IV EWMerschoff, RIV..................................................... Region IV KBrockman, RIV....................................................... Region IV PLohaus, OS P.........................................................O-3C 10 i
File Center /NUDOCS (w/ original incoming)
...................................T-5C3 PUBLIC (w/ copy of incoming)............................................. T-5C3 1
SBozin (GT 19990382, DE #99-32)...............................
...... O-7D26 JCrutchley (GT 19990382, ElB #99-18)..................................... O-8H2 i
E E l B R/F...............................................................O-8 H 2 NRR Mailroom (GT 19990382)........................................... O-5 E 7 EDO R/F (GT 19990382)................................................. O-16 E 15 1
]
l I
i i
Honorable J. Kingston.
The NRC remains committed to its oversight of the nuclear power plant licensee Y2K-readiness efforts in order to ensure safe operation of these facilities throughout 1999,2000, and eyond.
Please contact me if you have any additional questions on this matter.
/
Sincerely, W:lliam D. Travers Executive Directo for OperationsI
/
Enclosure:
Press Release No.99-168, "NRC Estabfishes Policy for Regulatory Actions for Nuclear Power Plants That Are Not 'Y2K Ready'"
/
/
DISTRIBUTION: See next page DISK / DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\EElB\\BRYANTUKINGSTONGT.WPD OFFICIAL RECORD COPY to on,wc.i. c copy.e.n.cnrn.nu.ncio
. a copy.iin.ri.cnm.nv.irlo.ur. N ivon. No uAax No conviii
- See previous concurrences OFC EElB A
TechEd N
C:EElB /
D.D(
^ lA ADPT:p pqg EDO JACalv,[
Miker BWS n
S (Nhk NAME ABryant BCalure WDTravers DATE 8/11/99*
8/10/99*
8/1)/99*
T([](> /99
[//[/99
[/ M/99
/
/99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
k 4\\;Lo l
l
F Hon:r:ble J. Kingston l i
Additionally, every nuclear power plant has redundant backup power sources on le to safely
{
shut down the reactor and keep it in a safe condition in the unlikely event that all xternal power is lost as a result of the Y2K transition or any other reason. Generally, each pl has at least two diesel generators to provide this backup power to the plant safety systems With regard to your constituent's question concerning the electric grid as a ye le, nuclear power plants are interacting with the North American Electric Reliability Council NERC) to develop electrical grid stability plans for generation and transmission. The plan ave identified grid instability as a factor to be included under external risk as part of the K contingency planning effort. Nuclear plants and the NRC recognize the nationalimportar;ith any unfo of having available the broadest range of electrical generating capability in order to cope W impacts should they occur. However, NERC in their report to t Department of Energy,
" Preparing the Electric Power Systems of North America For ransition to the Year 2000," dated August 3,1999, states as follows: "The current industry st i s leads to high confidence that nuclear generation plants will continue to reliably deliver eir share of the nation's electricity needs wellinto the next century." The NRC regulatory ocus on electrical grid reliability is still related primarily to the challenges on plant safety sy ems.
The NRC will continue to monitor progress at th e plants that have remaining work to be performed and willindependently verify comp ion of these items, including Y2K contingency plans that specify procedures for dealing wi unexpected events. The staff is developing guidance for appropriate regulatory actiop to be taken for those facilities that were not Y2K ready by July 1,1999. As stated in the nclosed press release, by September 30,1999, we will make a final determination whether a itional regulatory action is warranted to address Y2K readiness issues. At this time, we lieve that all licensees will be able to operate their plants safely during the transition from 1p 9 to 2000 and beyond and do not believe that significant plant-specific action directed by he NRC to address possible Y2K problems is likely to be needed.
Additional Y2K informatioryon all operating nuclear power plants is available at NRC's Y2K Web site at htto //www nre cov/NRC/ NEWS /vear2000 html. This Web site also identifies Y2K resources, notices, conferences, arid other related information.
The NRC remains co/mmitted to its oversight of the nuclear power plant licensee Y2K-readiness efforts in order to/nsure safe operation of these facilities throughout 1999,2000, and beyond.
Please contac e if you have any additional questions on this matter.
/
Sincerely,
/
William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations
/
Enclosure:
Press Release No.99-168, "NRC Establishes Policy for Regulatory Actions for Nuclear Power Plants That Are Not 'Y2K Ready'"
DISTRIBUTION: See next page DISK / DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\EElB\\BRYANTUKINGSTONGT.WPD OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l
To temve copy teccate "C" = Copy we attachmenuendosure *A* = Copy with attachment / enclosure *N* a None NO MARK = NO COPY'n
- See arevious concurrences OFC EElB A
TechEd N
C;EElB
/t D:DE ADPT:NRR D.NRR EDO NAME ABryant BCalure JACalvo Of(
JRStrosnider BWSheron SJCollins WDTravers DATE 8/11 S 9*
8/10 S9*
8 //] $9 8/
$9 8/
99 8/
/99 8/
S9 fWi L
Honor:ble J. Kingst:n p Additionally, every nuclear power plant has redundant backup power sources on site to safely shut down the reactor and keep it in a safe condition in the unlikely event thpt'all external power is lost as a result of the Y2K transition or any other reason. Generally, each plant has at least two diesel generators to provide this backup power to the plant safetyp[(st plants are interacting with the North America Electric Reliability Cou cil NERC) to develop e!ectrical grid stability plans for generation and transmission. Th ants have identified grid instability as a factor to be included under external risk as part he Y2K contingency planning effort. Nuclear plants and the NRC recognize the nationalin;portance of having available the broadest range of electrical generating capability in order to" cope with any unforseen Y2K impacts should they occur. However, NERC in their re oft to DOE," Preparing the Electric Power Systems of North America For Transition to th ear 2000," dated September 17,1998, states as follows: " Nuclear generating facilities are pected to be available to supply their share j
of energy needs and all nuclear safety systems are expected to be fully ready for Y2K." The NRC regulatory focus on electrical grid reliabilit[is still related primarily to the challenges on plant safety systems.
The NRC will continue to monitor progr ss at those plants that have remaining work to be performed and will independently ve ' y completion of these items, including Y2K contingency plans that specify procedures for aling with unexpected events. The staff is developing guidance for appropriate regulatofy actions to be taken for those facilities that were not Y2K ready by July 1,1999. As stat /d in the enclosed press release, by September 1999, we will determine the need for issu,g ordem to address Y2K readiness issues, including, if warranted, shutdown of a plant. At tpf time, we believe that alllicensees w'ill be able to operate their plants safely during the transition from 1999 to 2000 and beyond and do not believe that significant plant-specific action dilected by the NRC to address possible Y2K problems is likely to be needed.
Additional Y2pnformation on all operating nuclear power plants is available at NRC's Y2K Web site at htto //www nre cov/NRC/ NEWS /vear2000 html. This Web site also identifies Y2K resources, notices, coriferences, and other related information.
/
The fjRC remains committed to its oversight of the nuclear power plant licensee Y2K-readiness l
efforts in order to ensure safe operation of these facilities throughout 1999,2000, and beyond.
l Ple'ase contact me if you have any additional questions on this matter.
/
Sincerely, l
William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations
Enclosure:
Press Release No.99-168, "NRC Establishes Policy for Regulatory Actions for Nuclear Power Plants That Are Not 'Y2K Ready'"
DISTRIBUTION: See next page DISK / DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\EElB\\BRYANTUKINGSTONGT.WPD
- See previous concurrences n c ainy woc.= c cwv e.nue-w. e-. w. c
,-im n.ce,menvatewe V e Neo NO M ARK = NO COPY'"
h OFC EElB TechEd N
C:EElB D:DE ADPT:NRR D.NRR EDO ABryant h NAME BCalure JACalvo JRStrosnider BWSheron SJCollins WDTravers DATE 8 / h /99 8 /10 /99*
8/
/99 8/
/99 8/
/99 8/
/99 8/
/99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
y 0
3 c
pung
- i. e 4; t
- j..
f l
ECO Principal Correspondence Control FROMt DUE: 18/11/93 EDO CONTROL: G19990382 DOC DT: 07/27/99 FINAL REPLY:
.R:prmentative Jack Kingston TO t.
Rathbun, OCA FOR SIGNATURE OF :
Y2K COMPLIANCE / CONTINGENCY PLANS WITH THE STATE Travers OF GEORGIA NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS (Debbie Bodie)
Knapp i
Miraglia Norry Blaha Burns DATE: 07/30/99 Congel, IRO Lohaus, SP I
ASSIGNED TO:
CONTACT:
Hiltz, OEDO NRR Collins SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
h( '
N1
.wttokuint:,dyMM1 ac,
g glirle; gt uo//gmutttd DUE T0 iiRR !RE.i0hS OFF J
I i
su 9 /ggV
. BV _ r 6 c!
o upg(Z L/htAWl L _'
r-4 o
h 4
i JtN2
[ BG2 <ewr rin+r con =~~
fk.rr,% J.o S D Cr w c-7 m ap
. ww nn.
ro e:
b SrW M hv6 Sm i rw,
YW i
M east-wr rv Ce c.ct'b c A siaccar?ns p
hvini
$R yspL fy~~
Wi7 r,7 pD e
yf 4 Vm renua: E
' YW W;nertrwtr s> WD 71) 6
- '~~r gL f
NW W
/ f j
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET PAPER NUMBER:
CRC-99-0678 LOGGING DATE: Jul 29 99 ACTION OFFICE:
EDO AUTHOR:
JACK KINGSTON, REP AFFILIATION:
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ADDRESSEE:
RATHBUN LETTER DATE:
Jul 27 99 FILE CODE:
SUBJECT:
NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS COMPLIANCE WITH Y2K ISSUE ACTION:
Signature of EDO DISTRIBUTION:
SPECIAL HANDLING: OCA TO ACK CONSTITUENT:
DEBBIE BODIE NOTES:
I DATE DUE:
Aug 11 99 i
SIGNATURE:
DATE SIGNED:
)
AFFILIATION:
i l
EDO --Gl9990382 L