ML20212J154
| ML20212J154 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/13/1999 |
| From: | Collins S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Travers W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-1706 GL-98-01, SECY-99-162-C, NUDOCS 9910050050 | |
| Download: ML20212J154 (15) | |
Text
'
[
e%
Reissued on September 13, 1999 due to changes to the y
\\
UNITED STATES Attachment p
]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
wAsHINoToN, D.C. 30eSH001 Q"~C,rAf September 10,'1999 MEMORANDUM TO. William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations FROM:
rector
/ Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
FOLLOWUP ON SECY 99162; POLICY FOR REGULATORY ACTIONS FOR LICENSEES OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS THAT HAVE NOT COMPLETED YEAR 2000 READINESS ACTIVITIES The SRM related to SECY-99-162, dated August 5,1999, approved the policy for staff action for nuclear power plants that have not completed Y2K readiness activities by July 1,1999, subject to comments. Based on discussions with your staff, NRR has revised the proposed policy as attached.
Item 1 of the SRM recommended that clarifications be made to the policy to ensure that regulatory actions, where appropriate, would be taken sufficiently in advance of the Y2K rollover date such that all plants will be in a stable, safe condition during the transition. In addition, the SRM recommended that the policy be updated to reflect receipt and analysis oflicensee responses to Generic Letter 98-01 and its Supplement. The attached policy satisfies item 1 of the SRM.
NUREG-1706, " Year 2000 Readiness in U.S. Nuclear Power Plants," provides a status of nuclear power plant Year 2000 readiness as of September 1,1999, and a description of past and future NRC actions to verify Y2K readiness in operating U.S. reactors. The NUREG combines the results of the staff reviews with the July 1,1999, licensee responses to Generic Letter 98-01, Supplement 1, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants.' Based on information contained in the NUREG, the staff has concluded that safety systems at all 103 nuclear power plants are Y2K ready. The remaining Y2K system deficiencies are in either non-safety systems involving power generation or administrative / support systems
)
not involving power generation. As of September 1, the staff concludes that licensees of 75 l
plants are fully Y2K ready, in addition, the staff projects that 83 of the 103 plants will have j
completed all Y2K program activities by September 30,1999.
[
In SECY-99-162, the staff stated that plants that have not completed Y2K program activities by Q
September 30 would receive additional scrutiny on a case-by-case basis to ensure that no Y2K hi deficiencies remain after November 30,1999. With one exceptiort.(Farley Unit 2), all plants have scheduled their Y2K modifications by November 30,1999. Farley Unit 2 has scheduled Nt modifications to their turbine digital EHC system cuing their fall refueling outage and has g' (w N committed to make these modifications prior to December 16,1999. Considering that the Farley AW licensee has successfully performed similar modifications on Unit 1, the staff has a high level of
-n/
l confidence that this work will be completed on schedule.
Y' p1 9910050050 990913 PDR ORG NRRA r
.p# p
%M j
L
W. Travers '
2-Consistent with the SRM and as a followup to the licensee's GL 98-01 response, the staff is planning additional actions for the 20 plants that are not scheduled to complete their Y2K program activities prior to September 30. Action will be taken in a graded approach depending on the nature of the deficiencies and will be in the form of letters (samples attached to the revised policy) confirming the staffs understanding of (1) those systems having Y2K deficiencies and (2) the licensee's projected completion date. All letters are scheduled to be issued by September 30,1999. In addition, the staff will monitor each licensee's progress to ensure that schedules do not slip. The need for additional action, beyond the letters described above, will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
' As described in NUREG-1706, the staff does not believe that significant plant-specific action directed by NRC will be needed. However, in the unlikely event of a significant schedule delay for a system affecting plant operation, or we receive a report of a Y2K issue involving a system affecting safety or plant operation, the staff is prepared to take appropriate regulatory action.
NRR and OGC have drafted a sample Order, should such regulatory action be necessary where there may be a lack of reasonable assurance of adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security.
j ltem 2 of the SRM, which requested updates of the staffs Y2K website to further increase the public's confidence in Y2K readiness activities, is ongoing. Item 3 of the SRM requested that the monthly reports to the Commission include a summary status of each plant along with the licensee's and staffs intended action for each facility that will not be Y2K ready by September 30. This request was addressed in the August 1999 monthly report and will continue to be updated with each additional monthly report.
Attachment:
Revised Policy CONTACT Richard H. Wessman, NRR i
415-3298
POLICY FOR REGULATORY ACTION FOR LICENSEES OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS THAT DID NOT COMPLETE YEAR 2000 READINESS ACTIVITIES BY JULY.1,1999
- 1. INTRODUCTION
' The staff requirements memorandum (SRM) related to SECY-99-162, dated August 5,1999, approved the proposed policy for staff action for nuclear power plants that have not completed Y2K readiness activities by July 1,1999,' subject to comments. The revised policy in this paper is responsive to the Commission's SRM and will be followed by the NRC staff to determine appropriate regulatory action for licensees of nuclear power plants that did not complete Year 2000 (Y2K) readiness activities, including formulation and implementation of contingency plans, by July 1,1999. This policy supplements the agency's Contingency Plan for the Year 2000 lasue in the Nuclear industry and the Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding Enforcement Discretion for Nuclear Power Plants During the Year 2000 Transition. described in SECYs99-134 and 99-135, respectively.
This policy has been promulgated to ensure that all nuclear power plants will be in a stable, safe condition during the Y2K transition and that any required regulatory action will be taken well in advance of the transition. At this time, the staff believes that all licensees will be able to operate their plants safely during the transition from 1999 to 2000 and does not believe that significant plant-specific action directed by the NRC is likely to be needed.
~ A copy of this policy will be placed on the Commission's Y2K website.
- 2. BACKGROUND Since 1996, the NRC has been working with nuclear power plant licensees to ensure that plant systems are "Y2K-ready" before the year 2000. In Generic Letter (GL) 98-01, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants," the NRC requested all holders of operating licenses for nuclear power plants to: (1) inform the NRC of steps they are taking to ensure that computer systems will function properly by the year 2000; and (2) by July 1,1999, i
provide a status report with a completion schedule for any remaining effort required for Y2K readiness. Alllicensees responded to part (1) of the generic letter, stating that they have adopted an NRC-accepted industry program that examines both safety-related and non-safety-
)
related systems and components, and that the program is being implemented to ensure that plants are Y2K-ready by January 1,2000.
i Supplement 1 to GL 98-01 was issued by the NRC in January 1999, and provided an attemative to part (2) of the generic letter. The attemative request for information, which was voluntary,-
expanded the scope of the reporting requirements to include systems that are necessary for continued plant operation but that are beyond the terms and conditions of the plant's license and NRC regulations. All utilities chose this ophon and reported on plant Y2K readiness for systems within their license and NRC regulations plus all systems required for continued plant operation.
ATTACHMENT September 1999
e 3. REGULATORY BASIS (As previously provided to the Commission in SECY 99-162)
' Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), and the Energy Reorganization
- Act of 1974, the NRC has broad authority to regulate nuclear power facilities as it deems necessary or appropriate in order to protect the public health and safety and the common defense and security. Sections 161b and 1611(3) of the AEA authorize the Commission to issue
)
orders as may be "necessary or desirable to promote the common defense and security or to i
protect health or minimize danger to life or property" and to issue orders "to govem any activity
' authorized pursuant to this Act... in order to protect health and minimize danger to life or property." Section 182 of the AEA requires the Commission to ensure that nuclear facilities operate "in accord with the common defense and security and... provide adequate protection to the health and safety of the public."
Although the possibility is remote, there may be unanticipated Y2K issues at several generating facilities (both non-nuclear and nuclear) whose cumulative effect could adversely affect the overall grid. Hence, if a Y2K deficiency at a nuclear power reactor were to cause the reactor to trip or experience a transient during the Y2K transition, there could be a detrimental effect on the grid. This, in tum, could adversely affect the public health and safety and/or the common defense and security of the United States. To address this concem, the Commission may elect, for a plant with identified Y2K deficiencies, to conduct management meetings with a licensee and/or schedule reactive inspections to evaluate the significance of the Y2K deficiencies.
Licensees may take voluntary actions to restrict or modify plant operations as a result of Y2K deficiencies, similar to voluntary actions taken by licensees in anticipation of severe weather such as hurricanes'. Where there may be a lack of reasonable assurance of adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security, the Commission may order a licensee to take remedial actions, restrict plant operations, and/or shut down the plant in anticipation of the "2K transition.
- 4. REGULATORY POLICY Regulatory action, where appropriate, will be taken sufficiently in advance of the Y2K rollover date (i.e., as soon as September 30, but no later than December 1,1999) to ensure that nuclear power plants will be in a stable, safe condition during the Y2K transition. If, by September 30, it
^
appears that Y2K readiness activities will not be completed in advance of the December 31, 1999 transition, the NRC will take appropriate regulatory action, including issuance of Confirmatory Action Letters or Orders, if warranted. These regulatory actions will be consistent i
~
with the NRC's Contingency Plan for the Year 2000 issue in the Nuclear Industry and the Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding Enforcement Discretion for Nuclear Power Plants During the Year 2000 Transition, j
l
'For example, plants subject to hurricanes, such as Turkey Point on the Florida coast and Brunswick on the North Carolina coast, have procedures that require the units to be shut down in anticipation of hurricane-force winds, even though all regulatory requirements may be met.
7 w
w 3-If the staff concludes that the likelihood of completing remedial actions prior to the Y2K transition is questionable and the consequences of unremediated deficiencies are substantial, regulatory
' action may be taken as determined by the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (or designee) with concurrence from the appropriate regional administrator (or designee). As stated in the Regulatory Basis of this paper, regulatory action may be taken where there may be a lack of reasonable assurance of adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security. Although considered unlikely, the licensee may be ordered to take specific actions, up to and including a plant shutdown, even though all the Commission's rules and regulations may be met.
The Commission will be consulted prior to the 'r9uance of any Order regarding Y2K matters.
Oubsequent to any Y2K-related shutdown, plant startup decisions, including lifting of an Order, will be based on an NRC staff review of the licensee's assessment that all Y2K-related operationalissues necessitating a plant shutdown have been satisfactorily addressed. Any
/
regulatory action (e.g., issuance of Orders and their subsequent liftir,g) will be posted on the NRC Y2K website.
4 LICENSEE RESPONSES TO THE GENERIC LETTER NUREG-1706," Year 2000 Readiness in U.S. Nuclear Power Plank.,' provides a status of nuclear power plant Year 2000 readiness as of September 1,1999, and a description of past and future NRC actions to verify Y2K readiness in operating U.S. reactors. The NUREG combines the results of the staff reviews with the July 1,1999, licensee responses to Generic Letter 98-01, Supplement 1, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants." Based on information contained in the NUREG, the staff has concluded that safety systems at all 103 nuclear power plants are Y2K ready. The remaining Y2K system deficiencies are in either non-safety systems involving power generation or administrative / support systems not involving power generation. As of September 1,1999, the staff concludes that licensees of 75 plants are fully Y2K ready, in addition, the staff projects that 83 of the 103 plants are
' currently scheduled to be fully Y2K ready by September 30,1999. The results of this review, updated to account for licensees which completed Y2K remediation efforts in July and August, are provided in the attached Summary Table (Attachment 1).
4.1 Plants that Completed Y2K Program Activities by July 1,1999 As of July 1,1999, licensees of 68 reactors reported that all Y2K readiness activities were
. completed, including remediation and contingency planning. With the exception of Cooper
. (which has integrated contingency plan and several minor non-safety equipment issues), these plants will not undergo additional Y2K-related inspections. Cooper reported completion of their
~
Y2K program activities on September 2,1999, and will receive a supplemental Tl 2515/141 followup inspection.
4.2 Plants Scheduled to Complete Y2K Program Activities by September 30,1999 As previously stated, staff review of licensee responses to the generic Ictter conclude that 75 plants were fully Y2K ready as of September 1 and that a total of 83 plants are projected to be l
r"
. fully Y2K ready by September 30. Plants scheduled to complete Y2K program activities by September 30 include the following:
Beaver Valley 1 & 2 Clinton Cooper Limonck 2 Oyster Creek Peach Bottom 2
- Vermont Yankee Plants with a projected completion date by September 30,1999, will be monitored by regional staff to ensure that the schedules are maintained. Staff confirmation of the completion of plant-specific items identified by licensees in the generic letter responses will be documented in routine NRC inspection reports. No additional Y2K-oversight is planned unless site-specific issues arise that indicate further scrutiny would be advisable or changes in completion dates delay plant Y2K readiness beyond September 30,1999.
4.3 All Other Plants Consistent with the SRM and as a followup to the licensee's GL 98-01 response, the staff is proposing additional actions for the 20 plants that are not scheduled to complete their Y2K program activities prior to September 30. Action will be taken in a graded approach depending on the nature of the deficiencies and will be in the form of letters confirming the staffs understanding of (1) those systems having Y2K deficiencies and (2) the licensee's projected completion date. Allletters are scheduled to be issued by September 30,1999. In addition, staff will monitor each licensee's progress to ensure that schedules do not slip.
Through agreement with NEl, all licensees are expected to provide a written response documenting final completion of their Y2K program activities. The staff is planing to verify completion of these activities through routine inspection reports. At this time, the staff does not believe that regulatory action, in the form of Orders or Confirmatory Action Letters, will be necessary.
Each of these 20 plants has been examined to identify the systems and components that are not Y2K-ready. While all plants have reported that systems needed for reactor safety and reactor protection are Y2K-ready, each of these plants has Y2K deficiencies in one or both of categories
- B" and "C", below. A detailed breakdown of individual plant status is provided in NUREG-1706.
(A)
Systems affectino safety This category includes plants with systems and components that are not Y2K-ready and whose direct, on-line functioning is required for nuclear safety or reactor protection, including safe reactor shutdown and mitigation of design basis events (for example, systems covered by license conditions, including technical specifications). Plants without completed contingency plans for these systems and components are also included in this category.
5-Based on licensee submittals and NRC audits and inspections, the NRC staff has determined that there are no plants in this cateoorv. Systems required for safe operation and shutdown are Y2K-ready at all 103 operating reactors.
(B)
Systems affectino plant ooerations This category includes plants with systems and components that are not Y2K-ready and have the potential to cause a transient during the Y2K transition. Plants without completed contingency plans for these systems and components are also included in this category.
The following 9 plants are included in this category and will be sent a letter (Attachment 2).
Comanche Peak 1 Diablo Canyon 1 & 2 Farley 2 Peach Bottom 3 Salem 1 South Texas 1 & 2 Three Mile Island 1 In consideration of the importance that the NRC places on making these Y2K remediation efforts sufficiently in advance of the Y2K transition date, licensees will be requested to inform the staff of (1) changes in the Y2K system deficiencies as stated, or (2) any changes in the projected completion schedule. This is to efficiently schedule regionalinspections to verify completion of the Y2K work. Licensees will be requested to submit a letter documenting when the work is complete.
With one exception, all of the above plants are scheduled to complete Y2K remediation efforts by November 30,1999. The one exception, Farley Unit 2, has scheduled a completion date of December 16,1999, as part of their fall refueling outage. Considering that the same modification was successfully completed at Farley Unit 1, the staff has confidence that the licensee will complete the work within the projected schedule.
(C)
Systems not affectino safety or olant operations (support systems)
This category includes plants (not included in the above categories) with other systems and components that are not Y2K-ready and/or have incomplete contingency plans for these systems and components. These systems and components, which are considered administrative or support in nature, would not have the potential to cause a transient during the Y2K transition.
l The following 11 plants are included in this category and,will be sent a letter
- (Attachment 3).
Browns Ferry 2 & 3 Comanche Peak 2 Cook 1 & 2 Hope Creek North Anna 2 Salem 2 Sequoyah 1 & 2 Watts Bar 1
e Licensees of the above plants will not be asked to respond to our letters provided that they agree with both the characterization of the systems and/or components that are not Y2K ready and the projected completion schedule. Routine inspection monitoring will follow licensee onsite activities and will verify completion of these Y2K activities.
Attachments: 1 SummaryTable 2 Sample Letter-Category B 3 Sample Letter-Category C
d Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) Y2K Readiness Status as of September 1,1999 Completion Systems NPP Name Status /Date impacted
- Arkansas 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Beaver Valley 1 and 2 9/30/99 Operations Braidwood 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Browns Ferry 2 and 3 10/31/99 Admin.
Brunswick 1 Y2K Ready Brunswick 2 Y2K Ready Byron 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Callaway Y2K Ready Calvert Cliffs 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Catawba 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Clinton 9/22/99 Operations Comanche Peak 1 11/30/99 Operations Comanche Peak 2 10/30/99 Admin.
Cooper 9/20/99 Operations Crystal River 3 Y2K Ready 1
Davis-Besse Y2K Ready D.C. Cook 1 and 2 10/30/99 Admin.
Diablo Canyon 1 and 2 10/31/99 Operations Dresden 2 and 3 Y2K Ready Duane Arnold Y2K Ready Farley 1 Y2K Ready Farley 2 12/16/99 Operations Fermi 2 Y2K Ready Fitzpatrick Y2K Ready Fort Calhoun Y2K Ready Ginna Y2K Ready Grand Gulf Y2K Ready Harris Y2K Ready
6 Nuclear Power Plant Y22keadiness Status as of September 1,1999 (continued)
Completion Systems NPP Name Status /Date impacted' Hatch 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Hope Creek 10/29/99 Admin.
Indian Point 2 Y2K Ready Indian Point 3 Y2K Ready Kewaunee Y2K Ready LaSalle 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Limerick 1 Y2K Ready Limerick 2 9/30/99 Operations McGuire 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Millstone 2 and 3 Y2K Ready Monticello Y2K Ready Nine Mile Point 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Nodh Anna 1 Y2K Ready North Anna 2 10/29/99 Admin.
Oconee 1,2 and 3 Y2K Ready Oyster Creek 9/30/99 Admin.
1 i
Palisades Y2K Ready Palo Verde 1,2 and 3 Y2K Ready Peach Bottom 2 9/30/99 Operations Peach Bottom 3 10/31/99 Operations Perry Y2K Ready Pilgrim Y2K Ready Point Beach 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Prairie Island 1 and 2 Y2K Ready
)
Quad Cities 1 and 2 Y2K Ready River Bend Y2K Ready Robinson 2 Y2K Ready Salem 1 11/6/99 Operations Salem 2 10/29/99 Admin.
San Onofre 2 and 3 Y2K Ready Seabrook Y2K Ready
~
l Nuclear Power Plant Y2K Readiness Status as of September 1,1999 (continued)
Completion Systems NPP Name Status /Date impacted *
]
Sequoyah 1 and 2 10/31/99 Admin.
South Texas 1 and 2 10/31/99 Operations St. Lucie 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Summer Y2K Ready Surry 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Susquehanna 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Three Mile Island 1 10/21/99 Operations Turkey Point 3 and 4 Y2K Ready Vermont Yankee 9/30/99 Admin.
Vogtle 1 and 2 Y2K Ready Washington Nuclear 2 Y2K Ready Waterford 3 Y2K Ready Watts Bar 10/31/99 Admin.
Wolf Creek Y2K Ready
- Staff review has concluded that safety-related systems for all plants are Y2K ready.
Systems needed for continued plant operations are denoted " Operations" whereas administrative or support systems are denoted " Admin."
v SAMPLE LETTER
[ LICENSEE'S NAME AND ADDRESS]
SUBJECT:
~ [ PLANT NAME(S))-- RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 98-01, " YEAR 2000 READINESS OF COMPUTER SYSTEMS AT NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS" (TAC No.(S))
Dear [LlCENSEE'S NAME]:
In Generic Letter 98-01, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants" and its Supplement 1, we requested utilities to submit plans and schedules for resolving Y2K-related issues. We have received and reviewed alllicensees' corrective plans and schedules. Based on our review of licensee responses and our onsite assessment of licensee Y2K activities as described in NUREG-1706, " Year 2000 Readiness in U.S. Nuclear Power -
Plants," we have' concluded that there are no nuclear plants with Y2K issues involving safety
- systems, increased public awareness and attention to the Y2K issue has resulted'in concern over the ability of nuclear power plants to provide uninterrupted power to the national electric power grid
.during the Y2K transition. In this regard, we are focusing attention beyond those systems l
necessary to maintain safety. Consequently, we are closely monitoring those plants having Y2K deficiencies in systems that could impact plant operation that are not scheduled for remediation prior to September 30,1999,' As you are aware, a Y2K deficiency in certain systems or components might cause a transient during the Y2K transition that could affect the national i
electric power grid.
In your letter of [USE APPLICABLE DATE], for [ LIST APPLICABLE PLANT NAMES] you stated the following:
The [ LIST APPLICABLE PLANT NAMES] will not be Y2K ready until you make changes to the [ LIST SPECIFIC SYSTEMS NEEDING Y2K REMEDIATION]
You intend to make these system changes by [ LIST DATE].
It is our understanding that at least one of the systems or components listed above, which are currently not Y2K ready, may have the potential to cause a transient during the Y2K transition or be important to continued power operation at your facility. The NRC considers it important to complete these Y2K remediation efforts in advance of the Y2K transition date. To efficiently schedule regionalinspections to verify completion of the Y2K work, you are requested to inform the staff of any changes in (1) the scope of the Y2K system deficiencies listed above, or (2) your projected completion schedule. Please submit a letter documenting when work is complete.
We would like to acknowledge the efforts you have completed to date in preparing your plant for the Y2K transition and appreciate your continued cooperation on this important issue.
2-The collection of this information is covered by OMB Clearance 3150-0012 which expires on June 30,2000. We estimate that the effort to collect this information and report back to us by letter will take approximately 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />.
Please contact me at [ PROJECT MANAGER'S TELEPHONE NO.] if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
[ PROJECT MANAGER SIGNATURE BLOCK]
Docket No[s]
cc: See next page j
j l
l l
l l
o.
SAMPLE LETTER
[ LICENSEE'S NAME AND ADDRESS]'
SUBJECT:
[ PLANT NAME(S)]- RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 98-01, ' YEAR 2000 READINESS OF COMPUTER SYSTEMS AT NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS"
. (TAC NO.(S))
Dear [ LICENSEE'S NAME]:
In Generic Letter 98-01, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants" and its Supplement 1, we requested utilities to submit plans and schedules for resolving Y2K related issues. We have received and reviewed alllicensees' corrective plans and schedules. Based on our review of licensee responses and our onsite assessment of licensee Y2K activities as described in NUREG-1706, " Year 2000 Readiness in U.S. Nuclear Power Plants," we have concluded that there are no nuclear plants with Y2K issues involving safety systems.
Increased public awareness and attention to the Y2K issue has resulted in concern over the ability of nuclear power plants to provide uninterrupted power to the national electric power grid during the Y2K transition. In this regard lwe are focusing attention beyond those systems -
necessary to maintain safety. Consequently, we are closely monitoring those plants having Y2K deficiencies in systems that could impact plant operation that are not scheduled for remediation prior to September 30,1999. As you are aware, a Y2K deficiency in certain systems or components might cause a transient during the Y2K transition that could affect the national electric power grid, in your letter of [USE APPLICABLE DATE], for [ LIST APPLICABLE PLANT NAMES] you stated the following:
The [ LIST APPLICABLE PLANT NAMES] will not be Y2K ready until you make changes to the [ LIST SPECIFIC SYSTEMS NEEDING Y2K REMEDIATION]
You intend to make these system changes by [ LIST DATE].
It is our u'nderstanding that the systems and/or components listed above, which are currently not Y2K ready, can be categorized as administrative or support in nature and would not have the potential to cause a transient during the Y2K transition. Regionalinspection activities are being planned to verify completion of these activities. If you agree with both the above characterization of the systems and/or components that are not Y2K ready and the projected completion schedule, you do not need to respond to this letter. However, you are requested to inform the NRC when the work is complete.
We would like to acknowledge the efforts you have completed to date in preparing your plant for the Y2K transition and appreciate your continued cooperation on this important issue.
-h The collection of this information is covered by OMB Clearance 3150-0012 which expires on June 30,2000. We estimate that the effort to collect this information and report back to us by letter will take approximately 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />.
Please contact me at [ PROJECT MANAGER'S TELEPHONE NO.] if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
[ PROJECT MANAGER SIGNATURE BLOCK)
Docket No[s]
cc: See next page
.