About two weeks ago, there was a discussion thread concerning this statement in the Oct. 27 publication of the NRC Audit of New Brunswick Nuclear Plant:

"The licensee is accepting vendor certifications for embedded components including those in high priority mission critical systems without conducting additional confirmatory testing at the plant site. "

There was input at that time about the danger of doing this, and Rick asked for any references which would emphasize "the necessity of NOT accepting vendor Y2K certification for mission or process critical systems/components."

Oddly enough, in the November, 1998 Audit report of the NRC on the Hope Creek nuclear generating station, you can read:

"The licensee is conducting confirmatory testing of mission critical system Y2K compliance at the plant site, regardless of vendor certifications. The licensee stated that this was necessary because some vendor certifications of Y2K compliance have not been reliable."

It is to be greatly hoped that SOMEONE in the NRC, or in the generating stations themselves, or someone who reads this Forum, or the closed Industry Forum either has or will communicate Hope Creek's discovery to those at New Brunswick! Can anyone reassure me about the sharing of information between utilities? Or should I highlight the pertinent sections of the Audits and send copies to New Brunswick and the NRC? Is each nuclear facility going to go it's own way regardless of the information learned by other facilities? Rick, is there someone you can contact to see if this info has been disseminated to New Brunswick? Or has this already been addressed in the closed Forum?

Sorry to dwell on this point, but if one nuclear facility has discovered vendor certifications are not reliable, and another facility is *relying* on those certifications for mission critical systems, then it's obvious there are going to be problems.

-- Anonymous, December 12, 1998

Answers

For some dumb reason I added the word "New" to Brunswick in the above post, when it shouldn't be there. The Audit I refer to is:

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Post Office Box 10429 Southport, North Carolina 28461

SUBJECT:AUDIT REPORT ON THE YEAR 2000 PROGRAM - BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. MA1813 AND MA1814)

My sincere thanks to Critt Jarvis for picking up on this error, and my apologies for any confusion I may have caused!

-- Anonymous, December 13, 1998

Researching the Brunswick audit is how I came to find this forum. Since the station is in my back yard, I will be happy to expedite communications -- face-to-face if need be.

Any suggestions for an appropriate "best action"? I'd really like to make a good first impression. Our local business/government culture is a little touchy about "outsiders" and public awareness, but I can use CP&L acquaintances to break the ice.

Thanks

-- Anonymous, December 13, 1998

Critt, at the very bottom of the Brunswick Audit report at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/Y2K/Audit/Y2K50324.html#_1_1

is a list of the names and job descriptions of those attending the Audit meeting, including the VP of Brunswick, Operations Project Analyst, etc. Perhaps you could call and see if you could get either a phone interview or appointment to meet with one of these people. I wouldn't worry about making a good impression - I'm sure you'll be polite and non-confrontational. If they get mad at a puzzled, concerned customer, then the problems are with them, not you. You can just tell them that while they may already be aware of the problems with accepting vendor certifications, you'd like some reassurance from them of this, or to understand any reasons they might have for this approach of which you might be unaware. If they understand that you've read the cautions in the Hope Creek audit, they should be willing to address your concerns. This is publicly available knowledge and you are a customer with sincere questions. Also, others have gotten much more cooperation in a phone or face to face session than by e-mail or letters. Perhaps someone else reading here has had actual experience in this and can add some input. Good luck to you!

-- Anonymous, December 14, 1998

I'm on it, thanks.

-- Anonymous, December 17, 1998