Rick, in the Sept. 18, Powerful Prognostications column by Dick Mills, one of the paragraphs mentioned a change in thought about shutting down the nuclear power plants if they are not completely remediated. Here's the paragraph:

B. I heard Mr. Jared Wermiel of NRC speak at the Infocast Y2K conference in Las Vegas last month. Mr. Wermiel is the NRC's point man for Y2K. What he said was astounding. NRC has been ordered to consider the lack of nuclear power production in 2000 as a threat to the nation, and therefore to work cooperatively with the nuclear plant owners to allow them to keep running.

It would seem that any orders to the NRC regarding this would have to come from a high level of government. What do you know about this turn of events? Prior to reading this, I was under the impression that the nuclear plants would likely be shut down prior to 1/1/2000. Now there's a full-speed-ahead-damn-the-torpedos approach? If so, this a major policy change and next to nothing has been said about it.

What are the risks involved here? If they are going to "allow" the nukes to keep running, has the decision been made that we can't afford to have them off-line?

By the way, I miss your Prognostications columns, but understand the demands on your time. Yours was the first voice I ran across alerting me to the dangers in the utility industry. Many, many thanks!

-- Anonymous, October 16, 1998

Answers

It's kind of interesting. I was at the same conference (I chaired the conference, as a matter of fact), and don't recall Mr. Wermeil saying that. Could be that I was out of the room at the time? Who knows.

Wermeil's remarks or Dick's interpretation aside, let's think about something for a moment. Would you want to be the politician or NRC commissioner who was called to explain such an order were there to be a significant problem at a nuclear facility because of Y2k issues? Not me. That's why I think that this train of thought (if it is in fact true) will ultimately have no impact on NRC's decision to shut any given plant down due to Y2k issues (or let it continue to run).

The NRC's mission in life is ensuring safety of the plants. The entire NRC organization, its commissioners, and its staff could give a fig less whether the plants operate or not - if a particular plant can not demonstrate by all reasonable means that it is ready for Y2k, there continues to be no doubt in my mind that the plant will be shut down. If it is my perception that they are deviating from this mission because of political or industry pressure vis-a-vis Y2k, I assure you that I'll personally fight this battle down on the beltway next year.

I live 25 miles from a three unit nuclear facility, and within the emergency preparedness zone of several others, so I feel I have a real personal stake in this. I'd rather be relying on my own 'power loss' preparations than to have anyone risk a catastrophe at one of these facilities because someone in Washington decided it was "in the national interest" to keep it operating, even knowing that the plant had not certified Y2k readiness.

-- Anonymous, October 16, 1998

Rick, if it comes to battling it out on the beltway, I, for one, would be happy to join you there! Just whistle! I, too, live within spittin' distance of nuke plant.

-- Anonymous, October 17, 1998