ML20210A377

Preliminary Rept on NPP Y2K Readiness

ML20210A377
Person / Time
Issue date:	07/16/1999
From:	Waterman M NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20210A364	List: ML20210A359 ML20210A377
References
NUDOCS 9907220086
Download: ML20210A377 (17)

Text

.--

l.

I l

PRELIMINARY REPORT ON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT l YEAR 2000 READINESS I July 16,1999 l

l

Contact:

Michael E. Waterman Electrical & Instrumentation and Controls Branch Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTAC!iMENT 9907220086 990719 PDR ORG NRRA PDR

)

1 CONTENTS Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. .. . ... . . ii

1.0 INTRODUCTION

. . . .. . . ... .. .. ... . . . .. . . . .. . .1

2.0 BACKGROUND

. . . . . . . . .. .. . .. .. .... . . .. .. . .1 3.0 REVIEW AND INTEGRATION APPROACH . . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. 3 3.1 Site Review Methodology . . ... ... .... , ....... .. ... . .. 3 3.2 integration Process . ..... . ...... .... .. .... .. . .. . . .4 4.0 NRC Y2K REVIEW RESULTS AND FOLLOWUP ACTIONS . , . . . . . . . . . . .. .... 5 l 5.0 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS . . . . ... . . . . .. ... .. . .6 Tables 1 Plants Requiring Tl 2515/141 Followup Reviews .. .. . .. .. . 7 2 Plants With One or More Systems and Components That i Could Affect Plant Operations .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..,... .. .... .. . .8 3 Plants With Systems and Components That Do Not Affect Plant Operations . . . . ........... ... ... .. .. ... 10 4 Plants Reporting Y2K Readiness on July 1,1999 .. .. .. .... . .. .... ... 12 L  !

i l

l l

1 I

l l

i l

L-j

i I

PRELIMINARY REPORT ON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT YEAR 2000 READINESS 1 July 16,1999

{

l Executive Sumniary

This report integrates the results of the staff's onsite Year 2000 (Y2K) readiness reviews of 103 I

nuclear power plants (NPPs) and licensee responses to Generic Letter (GL) 98-01, Supplement i 1, " Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants." The onsite reviews were based on acceptance criteria developed from the staff-accepted industry guidance provided in Nuclear Energy Institute / Nuclear Utilities Software Management Group (NEl/NUSMG) 97-07, " Nuclear Utility Year 2000 Readiness," and NEl/NUSMG 98-07, " Nuclear Utility Year 2000 Readiness Contingency Planning."

On the basic of the staff's onsite reviews of licensee Y2K readiness activities at the 103 operating U.S. NPPs, the staff concludes that the licensees for 89 of the 103 NPPs have followed Y2K programs that are consistent with industry guidance. By August 13,1999, the staff will conduct followup reviews of the remaining 14 plants to verify that licensee Y2K readiness activities are consistent with staff-accepted industry guidance.

Licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, indicate that licensees for 68 nuclear power plants have achieved Y2K readiness as of July 1,1999. Of the remaining 35 operating NPPs, j licensees for 18 plants have yet to achieve Y2K readiness for digital systems or components j that could affect plant operations. None of these systems or components are part of the safety l systems designed to shut down a reactor or activate systems and components required for accident mitigation. Each of these plants has a small number of incomplete items; typically, the licensee is awaiting delivery of a replacement component or a scheduled outage in the fall of l 1999. The staff will verify completion of the remaining activities for all 35 plants as Y2K l readiness activities are completed. All NPPs are expected to be Y2K ready before the transition I from 1999 to 2000.

j i

1 1

1 e

Ii

r 1

) l l l l

l f'

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report integrates the initial Headquarters staff review of licensee responses to GL 98-01, l

Supplement 1, " Year 2000 Reaoiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants," with the I results of regional staff reviews conducted at each NPP site during the April-June 1999 period.

Additional review and followup activities are continuing; a final report is being prepared in the i form of a NUREG and will be issued by August 31,1999. This preliminary report, as well as the final NUREG, will be placed in the Public Document Room (PDR) and on the NRC's Y2K Web site.

Regional staff reviews of licensee Y2K activities were conducted at each NPP site during the l April-June 1999 period following the guidance of Temporary instruction (TI) 2515/141, " Review of Year 2000 (Y2K) Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants." NRC conducted reviews to verify that licensee Y2K programs and processes were being implemented consistent with the industry guidance in NEl/NUSMG 97-07 and NEl/NUSMG 98-07, both of which have been found acceptable by the staff. Additionally, as the NRC reported in Press Release 99-138, issued on July 7,1999, the NRC receive d responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, from licensees of all 103 operating NPPs indicating that there are no Y2K-related problems that directly affect the performance of safety systems. These two sources of information regarding Y2K readiness have been incorporated into in this report.

Section 2.0, " Background," summarizes the nature of the Y2K problem, the history of NRC activities related to resolution of this problem in the nuclear power industry, and the scope of activit'es conducted by the staff to verify that licensees will be Y2K ready before the end of 1999.

Section 3.0, " Review and Integration Approach," describes the methodology used by the NRC staff to perform the 66 NPP onsite reviews of licensee Y2K activities and integrates the results of the site reviews with the responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1. Section 4.0, "NRC Y2K Review Results and Followup Actions," summarizes the results of NRC staff reviews oflicensee Y2K program activities and the licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1. Section 5.0,

" Preliminary Conclusions," describes preliminary staff conclusions regarding Y2K readiness in U.S. NPPS.

2.0 BACKGROUND

The Y2K computer problem pertains to the potential for date-related problems that may occur in a software system or an embedded digital component. These problems include not representing ihe year properly, not recognizing leap years, and improper date-based or time-based calculations. An examp!e of a date-related problem is misreading "00" as the year 1900 rather than 2000, which could cause some computer systems to malfunction. A software system or an embedded component that is determined to be "Y2K compliae!' iccurately processes date and time data (including calculating, comparing, and sequencing data) from, into, and between the years 1999 and 2000. A software system or an embedded component that is determined to be "Y2K ready" performs its functions correctly, although the system c component is not Y2K compliant.

In NPP safety systems and plant operations systems that use software systems or embedded components, the Y2K problern could cause an event such as a plant trip, or could affect systems l

l l

that either report post-shutdown plant status or that support emergency data collection capabilities. Additionally, to the extent that a Y2K deficiency could cause an NPP trip or transient, the resulting ioss of electrical generation could introduce an electrical distribution grid {

instability and a resulting loss of offsite powe Y2K issues can also affect plant support or administrative systems. Most NPP safety systems are analog systems and, consequently, are  ;

not affected by Y2K issues. I Since 1996, the NRC has been working with NPP licensees to ensure that NPP systems are Y2K ready before 2000. To ensure that senior level management at operating U.S. NPPs were aware of the Y2K issue, the NRC issued information Notice (lN) 96-70, " Year 2000 Effect on Computer System Software," on December 24,1996. In IN 96-70, the staff described the potential problems that nuc! ear facility computer systems and software might encounter during j the transition from 1999 to 2000. The NRC sent copies of this information notice to all U.S. NPP l licensees, fuel cycle facility licensees, and nuclear materials licensees.

]

In 1997, the NEl took the lead in developing industry-wide guidance for addressing Y2K issues i in the nuclear power industry and, with cooperation from the Nucl ear Utility Software l Management Group (NUSMG), issued NEl/NUSMG 97-07. Subsequently, NEl and NUSMG issued NEl/NUSMG 98-07. In Generic Letter (GL) 98-01 and its t upplement, the NRC accepted the guidance provided in NEl/NUSMG 97-07 and NEl/NUSMG 98-07 as appropriate methodologies for addre ssing Y2K readiness in NPPs.

In GL 98-01, the NRC requested all holders of operating licenses for NPPs to inform the NRC of steps they were taking to ensure that computer systems will function properly by 2000. All licensees responded to GL 98-01, stating that an NRC-accepted program (NEl/NUSMG 97-07 and NEl/NUSMG 98-07) had been adopted, the program addressed both safety-related and non-safety-related systems and components, and the plants would be Y2K ready by 2000. GL 98-01 also required the licensees to confirm that their plants would be Y2K ready, including contingency planning, no later than July 1,1999. Licensees not Y2K ready by July 1,1999, were required to provide a status report, including completion schedules for work remaining to be done, to confirm their plants wouk ae Y2K ready by 2000.

Beginning in mid-1998, the NRC audited 12 Y2K programs at different NPP sites. The staff did not identify any Y2K issues that would preclude the audited licensees fri achieving Y2K readiness. The information obtained during these audits and from other ncensees and industry groups indicated that significant Y2K problems do not exist in those NPP systems that affect the ability to safely operate and shut down NPPs. However, licensees have discovered Y2K problems in non-safety (but nevertheless important) computer-based systems, such as security computers, control room display systems, engineering software, control systems, radiation monitoring systems, emergency response systems, and communications systems.

The NRC issued Supplement 1 to G' 98-01 in January 1999. The scope of this supplement is broader than the scope of the original GL 98-01. The supplemental request for information, which was voluntary and also due by July 1,1999, expanded the scope of the reporting requirements to include systems that are not addressed by the plant license and NRC regulations but are necessary for continued plant operations.

I?

~

In March 1999, the NRC expanded its scope of Y2K readiness program reviews to include all operating NPP sites. These 66 site reviews, covering 103 NPPs, were completed by June 30, 1999. As described in Section 4.0, the staff evaluated the reviews and is scheduling followup 4 l reviews for selected plants that had not sufficiently completed Y2K readiness preparations at the -

time of the site reviews.

~

During May and June 1999, the staff also conducted six detailed audits of licensee contingency planning activities. In these audits, the staff reviewed approximately 15 to 20 licensee system and component contingency plans, contingency plans for internal facility risks, contingency plans for external risks, and the integrated contingency plan (typically, in the 66 onsite reviews,

' the staff reviewed 6 contingency plans for softw are or components). The acceptance criteria for these audits were the same as the acceptance criteria used in the 66 NPP onsite reviews.

By July 1,1999, the staff had received responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, from licensees for aC 103 operating NPPs. As described in Section 4.0, the staff reviewed these responses and i integrated the results of these reviews with the results of the staffs onsite reviews of licensee l Y2K readiness pugrame j l

3.0 REVIEW AND INTEGRATION APPROACH l

This section describes the methodology used by the NRC staff to conduct Y2K reviews at each I of the 66 NPP sites comprising the 103 operating NPPs and the integration of those review I results with the licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1. l 3.1 Site Review Methodology The NRC conducted reviews at each NPP site. These reviews addressed 452 acceptance criteria (Tl 2515/141, Appendix A) that were based on guidance provided in NEl/NUSMG 97-07 and NEl/NUSMG 98-07. A checklist format was used to ensure that the reviews would be conducted consistently at each NPP site. Additional guidance for completing the checklists was provided to NRC rev; ewers in training sessions and in telephone calls between the reviewers and NRC Headquarters staff.

The checklist is divided into three major areas of Y2K readiness acceptance criteria: (1) planning and initial assersment, (2) detailed assessment, and (3) contingency planning. These three major areas are further subdivided into more specific areas of acceptance criteria, which are snown in the following list:

Planning and Initial Assessment

• Management Planr.!ng

• Documentation

• Implementation Plans

• Initial Assessment l

Detailed Assessment

.- System / Component Detailed Assessment

• ' System / Component Remediation

. System / Component Testing and Validation e System / Component Notification Contingency Planning l

• System / Component Contingency Planning i e Contingency Planning for Internal Facility Risks l

. Contingency Planning for External Risks  !

• Integrated Contingency PM1ing

]

I To review detailed assessmen. ;,ctivities, the staff selected a system or a component from each  ;

of the following six plant system classes:

0

• Reactor Protection System / Engineered Safety Features System 'Hehuting emergency  !

diesel ger erators)

.- Feedwater System / Balance of Plant Systems

• Radiation Monitoring Systems <

• Emergency Notification Systems i e Plent Process Computer Systems

• Plant Security Systems One system or component from each of these system / component classes was reviewed during each NPP onsite review. The one exception to this approach occurred in several of the older

_ plants in which no digital systems or components are used in the reactor protection system or the engineered safety features systems (i.e., there are no potential Y2K vulnerabilities in these systems because the systems use only analog technology). These six classes of plant systems were chosen to ensure that sny system or component could be reviewed by the NRC during the plant onsite review, thereby allowing the staff to assess the full scope of each licensee's Y2K readiness program.

3.2 Integration Process The ' integration process to develop an overall perspective of licensee Y2K readiness involved a three-step process. The first step involved staff onsite reviews of licensee Y2K readiness activities during the April-June *1999 period using the acceptance criteria checklist described in Section 3.1, above. The second step involved a review of licensee GL 98-01, Supplement 1, responses, all of which were received from the licensees by July 1,1999. The final step involved integration of the results of the first two steps to determine licensee Y2K readiness and the need for regulatory followup actions. The results of the third step are discussed in Section 4.0.

. In the first step, the NRC staff reviewed Y2K readiness programs and implementation progress at each of the 66 NPP sites comprising the 103 operating NPPs. Because of the timing of the onsite reviews, the staff expected to identify instances of incomplete Y2K readiness. Each review involved discussions with the licensee's Y2K technical staff and reviews of licensee

documents and work practices. To ensure consistency in the reviews, the staff developed I acceptance criteria in the form of a 452-question checklist, which is described in Section 3.1.

These checkiists were comple'ed by NRC staff reviewers and forwarded to the Headquarters staff for evaluation and integration with the licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1. The (

staff's onsite review activity was documented in routine Resident Inspector repods.

I in the second step, NRC staff reviewed licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1. In I 4 responding to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, licensees provided the expected completion date of their Y2K readiness program and, if the completion date was later than July 1,1999, the licensee's schedule for completing Y2K readiness activities. Licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, are available in the PDR.

In the third step, the NRC staff reviewed the acceptance criteria checklists prepared by the NRC staff reviewers and iategrated the results of these reviews with the licensee responses to GL 98-01. The results of this integration process are provided in the foibwing section.

4.0 NRC Y2K REVIE'N RESULTS AND FOLLOWUP ACTIONS The staf? compared the results of the acceptance criteria checklist assessments from the onsite reviews with the licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, to identify areas requiring additional staff followup actions and reviews. Alllicensees were following the NRC-approved industry guidance ared, at the time of the staffs site review,89 NPPs were sufficiently complete that the Tl 2515/141 reviews vare closed. Even though the Tl was closed, in some cases, (17 NPPs) a licensee had not completed all Y2K activities at the time of the staff's onsite review (some reviews were conducted in April and early May). For example, the licensee may not have completed remediation of a plant system or a component, or may not have completed some aspect of contingency planning activities at thr time of the staff's review. However, the staff found that sufficient work had been com.oleted in related Y2K activity areas such that the staff had a high level of confidence that the unreviewed activities would be completed consistent with industry guidelines. Because the overall implementation progress at the NPP was close to complete, these NPPs will not receive followup reviews.

Fourteen NPPs had not sufficiently completed Y2K _ 'ivities at the time of the site review. The g staff concluded that these licensees were following the industry guidance but that a followup review would be appropriate before cicsing Tl 2515/i41. Table 1 lists the 14 plants that will receive followup reviews by August 13,1999. Licensee responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, reported that 10 of these 14 plants were Y2K ready.

Responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, indicated that licensees for 35 of the 103 operating NPPs have additional work to complete on a few non-safety computer systems er devices in order to be fully Y2K ready. The licensees provided scheduled completion dates for these plants. Tables 2 and 3 list the NPPs that licensees reported were not Y2K ready on July 1, 1999, the latest scheduled completion dates for Y2K,related activities, the systerns requiiing Y2K remediation, and the reason for the delay. Typically, completion of Y2K work after July 1, 1999, is necessary because of a scheduled plant outage in the fad of 1999 or because the licensee is waiting for delivery of a replacement compcaent.

h -

]

~

Of the 35 NPPs that were not Y2K ready on July 1,1999,18 plants have systems or components that could affect plant operations, for example, digital feedwater controls cnd core performance monitoring systems (see Tabie 2). The remaining 17 plants have systems or components that do not affect plant operations, for example, plant simulators and administrative systems that track maintenance activitio (see Table 3). None of the remaining work at the 35 NPPs affects the ability of a plant to shut down safely, if necessary. The staff will verify completion of the remaining Y2K items at each of the 35 NPPs.  ;

Table 4 lists the 68 plants that have been rep ) ted as Y2K ready in the licensee responses to GL-98-01 Supplement 1.

5.0 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS On the basis of the results of the staff's Y2K site revis.vs of the 103 operating NPPs and the licensees' responses to GL 98-01, Supplement 1, the following preliminary conclusions are provided:

1. Alllicensees are following the stafi approved industry guidance of NE!/NUSMG 97-07 and I I

NEl/NUSMG 98-07 to address the Y2K issue. At the time of the staff's iniUal review, licensees for 89 NPPs had implemented Y2K programs consistent with industry guidance.

The staff will conduct followup reviews of the remaining 14 NPPs (see Table 1) to review Y2K-related activities that could not be addressed during the Y2K site reviews conducted by the staff in the April- June 1999 review period.

2. Eighteen NPPs reported systems and/or components that had not been replaced or remediated by July 1,1999, and could affect plant operations (see Table 2). The staff will

. verify completion of the remediation activities for these systems and components as they are completed.

3. Seventeen NPPs reported systems and/or components that had not been replaced or remediated by July 1,1999, and do not affect plant operations but require Y2K remediation (see Table 3). The staff will verify completion of the remediation activities for these systems components as they are completed.  ;

4. As of July 1,1999,68 plants have reported being Y2K ready (see Table 4). Alllicensees are expected to be fully Y2K ready before the transition from 1999 to 2000.

The results of the staff reviews will be incorporated into the staff's final NUREG report of licensee Y2K readiness activities,'which should be issued by August 31,1999.

6-

Table 1 Plants Requiring Tl 2515/141 Followup Reviews NRC l Plant Region Areas to Be Reviewed During Followup j Beaver Valley 1 and 2 1 Detailed Assessment, Contingency Planning Indian Point 2* I Detailed Assessment, Contingency Planning Three Mile Island 1 i Detailed Assessment Vermont Yankee l Detailed Assessment, Contingency Planning Summer

• ll Contingency Planning 1

Prairie Island 1 and 2* Ill Detsiled Assessment, Contingency Planning 1 Arkansas 1 and 2* IV Contingency Planning Cooper

• IV Detailed Assessmer:t, Contingency Planning Grand Gulf

• IV Detailed Assessment, Contingency Plar.ning River Bend

• IV Detailed Assessment, Contingency Planning Waterford* IV Contingency Planning

• Plants reporting Y2K Ready as of July 1,1999 e

c n

a t

p n y ei o a ct l

e cla _

D al a _

r at s o t it n t t t t f n si n n n n g n e yal e e e e n d d d d d o n r n ef n n n n it s

e e i

s n v e e e n e

~ a o p i d p p p p o t

~

e it e len e e e e it d R ia d d a d d d d a e d e r ,

og e e e e i

d t

a t e g g g g g e r a m a d in nt a a a a m g

h e t

u e s t

u t

u t

u t

u e t e

T R O Vte O O O O R I n

t s _

n n 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 _

e o 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 n

o p

i t

ee

/

0 3

/

/

0 3

2 2

/ /

0 3

/

1 3

/

6 1

/

9 2

/

0 3

/

1

/

t / / / / / / /

l pa 9 1 9 1 0 2 0 9 9 m 1 1 1 1 1 o

C s mD o

C -

dn _

no ai t sar me ep t

sO d n

yt n a Sn o

• r e

• el a g

• i t es m m

rP a t a in e

• o t i d ue pl r

o "m t e t s m Mce e mr e mi t t e s y

y s t e

s m rf of e m ot cne eon

• m s y s l o

m me s

y s

m sm l

eA t

R gu y e g o

r t r

et ets g e n s sy t t nd g inl f sy t s n t n o ys n t

s Ol u y y n dn e f

al i

s ir o o

• c y s s a ir s

ho i r ta ic c m ic yt o iC t i u

ee r v df a l

o r

it nm n r oo e lu ma rl dra it n

g n

W q t it ee t n o e t s a ap o o i r

e d c mts it t aa s et _

t s R namss aoeooe nn r o

c ey c lu y

s d r

y l

aisa d d r nlu o

m e

it o

n _

n cs r nepm s i t r i m if h- c o a gdsppt nayss u e ny r o n s -

l m ir t

a ai tr ui s t a o ateseis a m n -

P e r seep r r p g r n mr g o 2

t s t oct inyyo r

m d

w muc r en ic n

t c

e o a yi n m r ic s it a

fo e t i it r neecc c o i

y e an u c cn s r e

e le S oh mnneeg e r s si a n e a peniar f

r y p

l b mps srsggn f e pn n r n e t e h o

a ri l

a o et a n eygt p p _

dt rt _

T tn o eeed n it ei dt n na n ib een e e t n .

amsmme t

r ef r r _

ot a i

r l t s ig ol a u iaml r a o o la D p _

r PAaEEt CS CP M T FSEP C C t c

2 f e

2 f d d a _

n n d a 1 a lu k 1 o t

1 a n c n y e o t a le 1 P y k a l

P la e n e h V

k h a e 2 o t -

ic s l -

c C 2 r k l e

r e w n n y C c c m v s n o a lo e ir it e a t m b le p e n t s

e u r in l o ia r a o im o y B B C C D F H L M S _

o e n c io a

t lp la e la r s t s

omK n t

y n t

n t t i a e2 n l e e t s Y st e r; e d d c yf d e D n n eso n dr r

o c it a p e

e e

e p

j ot t r

penen e

p e

o n

f ia d d gcd d o n e e sn e g n mn o d g iee e g g

t s a a ol p o e a ei d a a m t t g s t t

sn h e e u u nb dn u ye T R R O O Ooi O Sp t

s n n 9 e o 9

n /

0 o) pd i

t ee t 3

/ 9 9 9 9 l

pa 9 9 me ou 9

/ 9 9/ 9

/

9 Cin mD o

1 3

/ /

/

6 1 3

1 2

/

1 3

/ / /

dn t

C 0 1

1 0 0 0 no ac 1 1 1 1 s

mn (s eo t i m m e

st e ya r n t m

t s

Se o s y e y ep s gm i t t

• s s r a

• oO d i

m e

m*

em m y

s int e m

Mtn e t s

t syse r

a m lo k s cy e r a m *

• lame r a s msy t t y

• s oP t l

R e s e m*d et s mn e o tr g y et gs emnt ei n s g

• sy c nc g n t

sng t

seays t s y mrk euc l

o Oef f n i

r o

yi rn s oi r yt s sgs a yr sa r ht i

r t t ynyt so t s or

• t n

i A i i

n loio nt lo sia r ad r rt e ne y pt s xn r o u r u r olp o ere c o n on i

Wld q e

t mo ntois t et t

uv lo eo t

ut s u t

m o oa nisa pn r nt a i

pu n t o R e cr ecnm ciod r c nlu mrepm mi t

no c mpe nC c o o dn oi i omm s

e nur s is s t

a n en o t c a cal f

i cop n l

P m e

a m

t a ai wma t

t anee wnt umr e g s t edia u s cu syq i

i o

t r r s n ina r q t .

r e

c e a _

2 s d d a p ar yin eiet o ef oib bl r e y edma cn r ee l

cr f

v om o ug e ferepne eae ope S r ni a u nn nn p l

b e p

f r r pr e t r cn pel i o

a l cygt u e a i lah rt t rt t laoo t s eu t T nc it ss n it eb ie neen n ef t

r r r g a f gr r o igou iv l amla lae r iee latie lap C DCT DOPSEP PP DPP PSR t c

f e

f 2 a d 1 d n d e lu 2 3 a n e o t 1 a k c

n m m s ls n t a

l a t o t o a I

a h P t o

t o x le Y t B B e i t s 1

T M n m h h m h e o e c c e t e m t s

a a u r r e e la o h e y P P S S T V S

I s ,

n y s, o it -

a n d la l

e o n i

t a lag D a t sin r ic , .

n eisnt,e t

o f i n s n f io d o e g io t n t n o it t nn t t n n t n

o t a

n o

it mda nt n nn ae ec o it o

it t

a n

e -

s a e ia ea r , e oo it i t hc pa mn ia ia e m e

e m d agm laa n gl ot d d m c R

lp e e m t wneil laf ic p ee e

m e

m lp e lp a

e f t p o s t

s ir is e ec vc e e e I

m R Stem i I n ev Dd a R R I m R 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9* s n 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9) 9 e i

o /

1

/

0

/

1

/

5

/

9

/

0* /

1

/

1

/

59 / s e

t l

ee t 3

/

0 3

/

0

/

8 1

/

2 0 2

/

3

/

9

/

8 3

/

0

/

1 7

/

ht t

a pa 1 1 7 (7 n 1 1 1 e h

T mD o

r a

p t

s C n n i e e n t a

os pn t

n d e e mio ot m

e e m m e

ht a t c s t n

C r s n s s o d pe y e y n n s la s s m e d m

aO s e l

i o t n m ee ie v a e t

nm ee t

s t e

sn t t a ms t r n m t s

ms t y

s lp ma i eyser u s o e y s ey e mg r t

l d s m teP e g r is r y g s r e o st yc m at na n f o e p s t en at na n

t u c a etw a etw p

i e l o sk s S ef R m is yc m a m es mfo s a r

f e d t m m mfo o w h es t A g ng t

s d n gt r e ng c -

i n oa s y n o n e t

s s m Wto s s c y oa s e e aan c e i

a aan c e r it n ik r s it v sN i

u t n cu it t

i n w as g mmo a s t

no q e [rnmo osp r

r e

m it o

d o t r o p n r osp r t r

ih lad R f n o e a

w nx ir o fn n n is t P s in ioi n t a g m oe it i ioi n t a

a r o lo it an n -

i m h st k lu b o c ar c st k .

3 e

m e ic sea r c e m n

a f

n r o ic ito f m ise e d

a t

s t

yph is i i ia yph e s m lad l

b la t

a la s t a y hproy c g e r ua hproy c c a T S t n c icg e qr ic g t is ic h ai r i n n o n l h ai r y d lt le u a e lee lo lt le u h n ia l

acc ng o g nn o acc p i r nn 9 eue t en r om m oo r

o eue h 9 h ns eee t

n t i nk ee a ss e h ns eee lt a

/

5 ia acr e sy t

t t iiit la t

t e r r ee t

e t t iiit e 1 ._

SSS P Mt Ms S PP M SSS H /

7 n .

o .

3 e .

e d s n 2 2 2 n a k d d 2 e 2 a n n d lic t

n y e a 2 k a n a r r

P e 1 e 1 a h it l

e e s a e P F h s e

k o n r h 1 w

c o n C a e n s n B- A r y

ic o n a C e o u c w m isv h

tr t

s y

r u q L e o

r o a C. o y r

e e t le B C D D N O P S S T e

- s y

l a -

e t

_ D n e _

r o d n n .

f o n e p

t n it o e a e t n

s d m e a e e c

e g m R a la p

e _

t lp u e O R I m _

9 9* 9 s -

n 9 9) 9 9 e i

o /

9

/

59 /

/

1 s

e l

t ee t 2

/

0 1

/

71 1

0 3

/ ht n

t a pa 1 /

7 1 e

h T )

mD o

( r a

p tsd C

n e in en n u t e

i a ot pn d o e _

m m h o (c t e t n

Cs s o n m y

do ni n e s d e -

at a i o t s

y t

nm ee t

e sr t a -

mpe i d r e ms ey e t

lp m

eO e e g s r t t o a st m u at na c yn e p n e tw s Sa m a a l R me m o m mfo w ng es hP t g et c it n t s s m c sy e ioa Wesf f i

i r

u mys es a i t

v t n aa c s

e t i

e t

nA at q

e t

syt ya dr a t a

r s

mmo r

osp r is h -

o R sp l o t l

PN gis sa et in f n n oin- t a

s i 3 o m indnl u m ist ia k h t

e r o repm o d c r c l

eD t it t a ise yph e s e

b s ne e s is s t a y omr g c hproy c a T S m a yin is t ic y h ai r d narnicn ope a r h

p lt le u acc n

i i

t ygt h eue 9 iat r t lt h ns 9

/

dfeen aamla a

e eee it it it 5

1 RSEP H SSS /

7 n

o e -

4 e s

d n n e a

t 3 ic n t l

h l

a n it o

i P r w 2' P a n y B o m e s c e kr t t e la u a l e

S T W T

e i l

Table 4 Plants Reporting Y2K Readiness on July 1,1999 1

Plant Name NRC Region '

Calvert Cliffs 1 and 2 I Fitzpatrick - I .i l

Ginna I Indian Point 2 I Indian Point 3 I i Limerick 1 l l Millstone 2 and 3 I Nine Mile Point 1 and 2 1 Pilgrim i Seabrook l I Susquehanna 1 and 2 i Brunswick 2 ll l Catawba 1 and 2 11 Crystal River 3 ll Farley 1 11 i Harris ll Hatch 1 and 2 11 McGuire 1 and 2 11 North Anna 1 11 Oconee 1,2 and 3 11 Robinson 2 ll Summer 11 Surry 1 and 2 ll Vogtle 1 and 2 11 Braidwood 1 and 2 Ill Byron 1 and 2 Ill Dresden 2 and 3 Ill Duane Arnold lll Fermi 2 Ill Kewaunee ll1 LaSalle 1 and 2 Ill Palisades lll Point Beach 1 and 2 Ill l

1

I o

O Table 4 Plants Reporting Y2K Readiness on July 1,1999 Prairie Island 1 and 2 Ill Quad Cities 1 and 2 Ill l Arkansas 1 and 2 IV l

Callaway IV Cooper IV Fort Calhoun IV l Grand Gulf IV Palo Verde 1,2 and 3 IV River Bend IV San Onofre 2 and 3 IV l

Waterford 3 IV i Washington Nuclear 2 IV Wolf Creek IV

gr y

DISTRIBUTION FOR MEMORANDUM DATED: July 19,1999 f

t

SUBJECT:

PRELIMINARY REPORT ON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT YEAR 2000 l READINESS M Knapp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .O- 1 6 E 1 5 F M i ra g li a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .O-16E15 PN orry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . ...... ..... .... . . .. .O-16E15 J Blaha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... ........ . . . . . . . . . .O-16E15 TH iltz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .O- 16 E 1 5 FCo ngel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T-4 D 18 J G iitte r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .T-4D18 B H a yde n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .O-2A13 LGerke . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .O- 17A3 AHansen . . . . . . .. ...... ......... ... ..... .......... . . . . . . .O-13E21 C Nolan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .... ..... ............... . . . . . . . . .O-13H 3

- JVogelwede . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ................ ... .. . . . . . T-6F15 S Burns, OGC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .... ....... ..... . .. . . .O-4F20 RZimmerman . . . . . . ...... ... ........ .. . .... .... ........ . 0-5E7 DSpaulding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .O-9 D4 M G a re ri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ .... . . . .O-9D4 BMarcus ... .......... ........... ...... .. ... ......... ... ... ..O-904 MChiramal . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .. . ............ ......... .......... .O-9D4 KM orten se n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .O-9 D4 M G a re ri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ................. ........ .... . . . .O-9D4 WKa ne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .O- 5 E 7 R Blo ug h , R I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . Region I ,

WLanning, RI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... ....... .... . .. .. . . . Region i I H J M iller, RI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Region i ADella G reca , RI . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . Region i i LAReyes , R i l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . ... . . . . . Region ll L Plisco , R i l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...... . . . . . . . Region 11 BM allet, Ri l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Region ll

)

NMerriweather, Ril . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Region 11 JGrobe, Rlli . . . . . . ... ..... ............ .. ...... ..... .... . . Region 111 GGrant, Rill . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... ....... .... ..... . . . . . . . Region lll JDyer, Rlli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Region ll1 DButler, Rlli . . . . . . . ... .. ... . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Region ill BBurgess, RGN lli ... .. . .... ..... ....... .......... .......... . Region ill AHowell, RIV . ........ ...................... .. ..... .. . . . . . . . . Region lV EWMerschoff, RIV .. ... ...... ......... .................... .. . Region lV KBrockman, RIV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Region lV LYandel, RIV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . Region lV C Paulk, RIV . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Region lV PLoh a us, OS P _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .O-3C10 File Center /NUDOCS . . . . . ... ....... ......... . .. . .. . . . . T-5C3 P U BLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . T-5C3 E E l B R/F . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . .O-8H2 L