Thank you Bob (or whoever has penned your recent messages). I now get why you believe that business will fail. You stated you encouage these practices:

1) All code is mission critical. I hope you don't follow that practice in your personal life. Some of us at least divide our tasks into "need to get done" and "want to do". We all set priorities; why would you not expect businesses to do the same? Some code is more important to fix than other code and businesses should fix that code first.

2) You manually search every line for date occurrances. Ugh. That is the most boring task I could ever imagine. Now I know why you are the way you are. Automated tools provide a means to quickly go through code and save mindless programming hours. True, tools need input from the programmers, such as "look for Fred as a date" but ignoring their capabilities is just plain stupid when you need to go through 50 M LOC. In 95, my company realized the repetitive nature of the Y2K remediation effort results in high turnover among employees. Tools help alleivate this problem and shorten the project duration.

3) You must only use expansion. Talk about thinking outside the box! Windowing presents a viable solution to remediation. You can not use it for dates that go beyond 100 years but for about 90% of the code, it's a good option, and the best way to go with data storage. It's easy to fix an LOC but to go through every record in a database is time consuming and in most cases not viable.

Thanks Bob (if it was you) for helping understand the reason you believe in TEOTWAWKI. If businesses followed your advice, they most certainly will fail. There isn't enough time and personnel (trained monkeys) to finish the Y2K effot.

By the way, stored nukes don't go "GUSH" (your word not mine). The detonators are a separate mechanism. One would need to go through a manual process to engage the detonator and make the stored weapon go GUSH.

Troll Maria

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), December 24, 1998

Answers

# # # 19981224

Troll Maria:

1.) I didn't say that "all code is mission critical." Companies that elect to remediate only 40% ( hopefully _the_ mission critical ) of their corporate systems, will be laying off much of their staff when they 60% ignored goes blooey. No?! Hmmm.

Personally, I have always approached every system and/or subsystem I've worked on as if they all were mission critical. My code of ethics drives to that end.

2.) I did not say that I recommended "ignoring" automated tools or sticking to line by line inspections. That is what the client elected to do. The customer is always right! ( Even when they're a**holes about what they know they want! ) They pays the money, and they gets what they pays for.

3.) There is no standard utilizing windowing, Troll Maria. Ergo, corruption by virtue of date ambiguity introduced by downstream and into upstream systems is inevitable. I've seen it "discovered" in many of the systems I've been involved with. Haven't you? Or are you only seeing what you and your subordinates _want to see_?

Actually, whatever post you might be referring to sounds like an imposter poster. That's okay. It seems to have shaken you a bit into reality. Your spelling and grammer is atrocious in this post; if it is really _you, Troll Maria.

I've never used the word "GUSH" in any of my posts. The nuke storage facilities are at imminent risk from Y2K failures and falsifying Y2K status from the DoD wonks. If the monitoring and controller systems fail, precipitous leakages will expose populations to radiation poisoning.

I think someone is having fun. That's okay. The fun really begins in January, 1999, as systems begin to meltdown, playing into the hands of government thugs at-the-ready to impose unimaginable repression that all will have fun with.

Regards, Bob Mangus # # #

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@mail.netquest.com), December 24, 1998.

# # # 19981224

Troll Maria:

I stand corrected. I did use the word "Gush" to describe the leakage from storage sites. ( I know detonators in nukes are separate entities. It's the nuclear atorage and/or waste sites. )

Regards, Bob Mangus # # #

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@mail.netquest.com), December 24, 1998.

So you attack my "grammer" (your spelling not mine).

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), December 24, 1998.

Your trivializing a real problem - that of high-level, very corrosive, somewhat flamable (due to outgassing of Hydrogen gasses) liquid radioaactive waste - while arguing over how fast you misspell things.

There is absolutely no way for a nuclear weapon to "gush" anything - the d**m things are designed to dropped from airplanes, shot from cannons and from missiles, and survive reentry heat, pressure, and shock loads. They won't "break" . The danger is that the Russian and other (Ukrainian, Chinese) small nuclear weapons will be stolen - probably by bribing a starving, half-frozen Russian soldier who hasn't been paid in 6 months whose family is living on handouts and waste in an apartment with no heat.

What you may be thinking of is the buried liquid waste tanks in Hanford WA (these are worst offenders). Those are not related to Y2K issues in any fashion, but are potential danger zones if lightening or earthquake strike the area. However, your President has not seen fit to fight the environmentalists to correctly fix the issue, and so he leaves it ignored for Al Gore to fix.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 24, 1998.

Mr. Cook,

Do I understand correctly that their are fuel-rod storage facilities at Hanford and elsewhere that require continually-circulated water to ensure their safety? Do these water pumps require electricity, thereby being reliant on the power supply chain or emergency fuel supplies? I assume that you, if anyone, would know.

Hallyx

"Nuclear reactors are made by fools like me, but only God could make a nuclear reactor that's 93 million miles from the nearest elementary school." ---Anne Herbert

-- Hallyx (Hallyx@aol.com), December 24, 1998.

>>>"The fun really begins in January, 1999, as systems begin to meltdown, playing into the hands of government thugs at-the-ready to impose unimaginable repression that all will have fun with. "

FINALLY!! SOMEONE REALLY GETS IT!!

THANK YOU BOB.

The handwriting is on the wall.

Who will survive?

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 24, 1998.

Hallyx, I thought you might find it interesting, due to your question about nuclear reactors, that a local reactor here in Florida has a "manatee viewing area" in the runoff water from its reactor coolant system. The manatees love to swim in warm water, so in cooler weather (water temps below 70 degrees) the manatees like to swim there. I think the water temp gets somewhere in the 80s. It's interesting, because in a tributary nearby scientists are finding alot of two headed frogs (along with other mutations)in that water, too. Just something to think about.

Jeannie

-- jhollander (hollander@ij.net), December 24, 1998.

No, its not fuel rods (like from a commercial reactor "spent fuel handling pool"). Those are the simple, open-top "swimming pool" like short term storage facilities inside each reactor containment building/fuel handling building.

This is very high level waste liquids mixed together (and regretably, much more dangerous "stuff" ) from various dissolved solids left over from extracting and dissolving reactor material, decay by-products and poisons (decay products, by-products, dissolved fuel material and acids, Pu, U, Th, other transuranics and rare-earth decay products) to make the nuclear weapons in years past. I'd be less worried if it were still encased in the rods, or were solids, or were "simple" chemical mixes of known composition. I'd be happier if it were solid - not liquid. I'd be happier if it were not acidic/corrosive. I'd be happier it were in double walled tanks, not single walled tanks. I'd be happier if the outgasses were not flamable. I'd be happier if they were already processed into solified form (encased in ceramic solids that could not "leak" regardless of the environment conditions. I'd be happier if they were no highly radioactive. This isn't mild low-level wastes already incased in drums. Its some real nasty semi-solid "gunk."

At least though - they are not very phyically "hot" - no cooling is really needed. The tank walls literally "touch" the ground around each tank - dammit - there is no isolating secondary containment - so what little phyical "heat" is being generated is rapidly conducted to the dirt. There is no real way for them to "boil," but outgassing pressure is known to create "burps" of "mud like" material inside each tank.

If you have seen the mud 'baths" at Yellowstone you'll get a mental picture.

These tanks are underground inside the Hanford complex, (perhaps they are others at the DOE Aiken SC site - don't think so), surrounded by fences and lightening rods, monitors, etc. The DOE is very aware of their danger, but can't get envornmentalists' okay to empty, treat (solidify or transport) and better contain these liquids. So they have to let it sit. And rot.

But they are troublesome legacies that are not yet solved.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 24, 1998.

To better answer the other half of your question - these commercial fuel storage pools are typically provided with cooling systems - but they are not needed (the rods are not physically "hot" enough) and are not used during regular operations or even after shutdowns.

The decay heat in the stored rods from commercial plants is enough to raise water temperature a few degrees - but not enough to "boil" the whole pool. Commercial reactor cooldown and fuel pool cooling water circulation is a Y2K distraction from the other, very problems. There are no DOE (military) reactors running now in the US - (USSR, China - Yes?) so it is a non-issue over here.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 24, 1998.

Maria said, "There isn't enough time and personnel (trained monkeys) to finish the Y2K effo(r)t."

Dang, no wonder Maria is upset. She's using trained monkeys to do the work.

That reminds me of the movie about using trained chimps as bomber pilots in an all out nuclear attack. The hypothesis being the chimps would continue on a mission unaware of the danger and without the emotion which their human counterparts would experience and thus perform at a higher level.

That's what I call thinking outside the box! Congrats!

MoVe Immediate

-- MVI (vtoc@aol.com), December 24, 1998.

Thanks, Robert,

Ye giveth (assurance) and ye taketh away (peace-of-mind). Thanks for taking the time to explain that to us in such understandable fashion. You are a treasure on this forum.

Hallyx

"Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants." -- General Omar N. Bradley

-- Hallyx (Hallyx@aol.com), December 24, 1998.

Yes! Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw GA) for Prez!

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), December 24, 1998.

I second the motion! Robert A. Cook P.E. for Prez! Hip, hip! Hooray!

Unfortunately I don't think Mr. Cook wants that much exposure.

I don't blame him.

How about President Of The Logical Forum Posters?!!!

I submit...

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 24, 1998.

"Today's mighty oak is yesterday's nut that held its ground."

A Christmas toast to all independent thinkers of this Forum!

We second ...

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), December 24, 1998.

Leska, I think we already tried one physicist type from Georgia for Prez. If memory serves, it didn't work out. LOL.

But I agree with the assessment of Mr Cooks worth to the forum. Maybe I'm just prejudice though, having entered this world thru the portal of Georgia's capital city.

MoVe Immediate

-- MVI (vtoc@aol.com), December 24, 1998.

I've been lurking for a while, but I've got to speak up now. At the power plant where I'm working, our fuel pool will boil in ~2 weeks (if the cooling pumps were lost). I am not familiar with the pool Mr. Cook is associated with, but his version is certainly not correct for my spent fuel pool. Now that I'm speaking out loud, feel free to ask any questions. I operate the plant, but I'm no I & C tech.

-- nucpwr (nucpwr@hotmail.com), December 24, 1998.

Hanford was origionally (do not correct my mispelling, I don't care I think logically and our spelling is not)Anywho Handford was the pet project of Gov. Dixie Lee Ray. In itself it was a great idea. Unfortunatly this is probably the last place on earth it should even be considered. Nuke plants are clean generators, with little maintenance, yet regulated up the a** so much they are not allowed to make even small mistakes without big fallout (pun intended). Since 5 mile Island they are so strongly regulated that there is little or no possibility of anything going wrong..even with the Y2K Drama people seem to enjoy living. Not one planr here or anywhere in the world will "meltdown" or even go put of control, no matter how dramatically people present their personal nightmare schenerio(sp). Not one person who has the knowledge..real knowledge..not perefial..like being the janitor and presenting themself as having worked in the area for 20 years, will even pretend to fall for the speculation of all these people who say the sh*t will hit the fan and stock up. Senior citizens have fallen for con artests for decades, simply because they did not know any better than to trust what they were told. Now supposidly notmally thinking people are falling for the same con. Just because they do not have a background or understanding of the basics of computing and electronics, they are falling for each peice of caca anyone puts out in a convincing manner. Or even in a ligically unconvincing manner. Who am I to speak? I am a person who knows computing, electronics etc ad nasium from the bottom up backwards and upside down. Do not take me at my word, question me about something and see if I can prove it to you with facts as apposed to opinions. This has gotten so far it has ceased to be funny anymore. Cherri

-- Cherri Stewart (sams@brigadoon.com), December 25, 1998.

OOOps I strayed from the subject I started with. Hanford was a nuke power plant, got closed down and is now a storage area for every tom dick or mary's wasted nuke fuel. We did not need the daen power plant in the first place here, we have too many natural resources for power (hydro) and we hate it. Hanford is now a wasteland in the middle of beautiful country that is considered by those of us who live here as so sacrid that we who live here that we will not defile it. There have been negotionations with Australia to use part of their unlivable outback as a dumping ground instead of us. As for nukes going off from bimbs, have none of you even turned off MTV ot the movie channels long enough to learn that it has been confirmed by the Soviet Union that in their marches with their arsinal that they were empty tubes and the few nukes they had ready for war were so badly made and maintained that rhe silo's have been exploding (not from the nukes, they still need trigger) but from the fuel that is so corrupted that if they even did try to send them all on over to us they would blow up where they sit or withinn minutes of becoming airborn.?? In other words Y2K and Soviet threats of not comprehending the "signals" if they do not work correctly from Y2K is such a big piece of propaganda that it should humiliate you to believe any of it. Do not any of you even have any desire to understand the world around you enough to get off of your self centered butts and think unless you percieve your spoiled rotton existance is threatened? I hope you all do go hoard beans and rice and suffer fright over the bull you listen to. You have earned what you are going through.

-- Cherri Stewart (sams@brigadoon.com), December 25, 1998.

Cherri, explain or define the following terms or statements:

SOC7 SOC1 BLKSIZE IS NOT A MULTIPLE OF LRECL Backward referencing in JCL Instream procedure Housekeeping JOB FAIL JCL ERROR JOB NOT RUN JCL ERROR substitution parameter PMAP thrashing in an MVS environment static vs dynamic link What is the HEX equivalent of 01012000? MVI

-- MVI (vtoc@aol.com), December 25, 1998.

Ok to make it easier LOL

SOC7

SOC1

BLKSIZE IS NOT A MULTIPLE OF LRECL

Backward referencing in JCL

Instream procedure

Housekeeping

JOB FAIL JCL ERROR

JOB NOT RUN JCL ERROR

substitution parameter

PMAP

thrashing in an MVS environment

static vs dynamic link

What is the HEX equivalent of 01012000?

MVI

-- MVI (vtoc@aol.com), December 25, 1998.

Cherri,

I always sigh when I read posts like yours, attacking the perceived "enjoyment" of folks who, based on immutable evidence, are taking precautions and preparing to varying degrees.

Some industries, like those supervised by the NRC, are pretty failsafe it seems (I hope), but I am yet to be convinced as not one nuclear power plant has yet claimed compliance. If this does not happen by July 1st '99, they are due to be shut down. I'll believe that when I see it. My bet is that the deadline will be pushed back to give them more time. It will be interesting to see just what sort of teeth the NRC has.

Anyhow my point is not to focus on your own specialityindustry, and if it's in good shape, extrapolate forward that therefore y2k fears are a bunch of baloney, unfounded, and a scam on the gullibe public to pull down some rice n' beans dollars.

If you really believe this you are being, perhaps fatally, naieve in the extreme.

Do some more real research unclouded by personal experience and get back to us with your findings.

Give us the good news that we are all hoping to hear.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 25, 1998.

Cherri - you've brought up a series of important issues, but I don't follow your logic. They aren't specifically related to each other - which is okay, each item deserves to be addressed if you are worried, frightened, or concerned about it - but I cannot tell from your posting whether you want info or reassurances (which I will never blindly give just to repeat somebody else's propaganda - pro or con) or technical data that you will then evaluate on your own. There are specific and significant problems at Hanford, and residual radiation at other DOE sites dating back to the University of Chicago's first reactor under the stadium? Even in Paris, the Curie's old research building would be determined now to be a radioactive dump site needing recovery and radwaste disposal.

Re-read your letter - and please, ask the questions you want answered so we can address them properly, or state specific facts so we can evaluate them or present other data. Or so we can become more informed.

Boiling fuel pools? Be happy to calculate the issue. Nothing to discuss, everything's simple math.

Which reactor - or if you'd rather not mention it, what size max thermal heat capacity? What power history? What post shutdown cooling process postulated for how long before loss of fuel pool cooling, open or shut reactor vessel, boronated water or pure? What initial level in the fuel pool? What shielding requirement level? What size fuel pool? (If "standard" - okay, which company built the NSSS system? I'll figure it from that.) Include spray down water and emergency injection - or just let it heat up? Include re-condesation or vent to atmosphere? Assume spray-down system operable? Exclude it completely? (Justify either assumption.) What loading percent in the fuel pool? What power history of those rods? What storage history of those rods?

What are outside conditions? Include solar heating of containment? include or exclude affect of outside air on concrete? Include or exclude insulating mass of control building and ground? Include or exclude thermal mass of concrete and shielding? What assumed concrete thermal transfer rate? Include or exclude boundary conditions and thermal circulation?

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 27, 1998.

Cherrie, I gather from your silence that you do not possess even the most rudementary knowledge of OS/MVS (backwards, forward, or sideways) OR you cannot spell the answers. OS/MVS does fall under the category of "computing" and I also may add, the platform on which the bulk of the systems requiring remediation reside.

As in a court of law, If a person lies in one part of their testimony the rest of the testimony may be rejected as well.

MoVe Immediate

-- MVI (vtoc@aol.com), December 27, 1998.

Wow Mr. Cook. You've certainly got a glossary of nuclear power terminology. But speaking relevantly to spent fuel pool boiling, we can skip most of that bull and say that my pool has a heat load of 36 million btu/hr which translates to a heat inertia of 9 degrees F per hour. Make all your calculations and whatnot but my thermometer says a 2 degree rise in temp per hour. I don't even need a calculator to figure a 7 degree ambient loss, which would level out as temp increases. I think you are confusing containment cooling with fuel pool cooling. You certainly qualify for president... if you can't beat them with brains, baffle them with bullshit. Please e-mail me directly to continue this side of the thread. And now back to the year 2000 issue.

-- nucpwr (nucpwr@hotmail.com), December 29, 1998.

Thank you for the numbers - I will be out of town for a bit with the band booster club, and will run the numbers 3rd/4th of Jan.

Yeah, I "talk nuke" - cause answers aren't realistic if you don't. If they are not realistic, based on real data - you have propaganda (advertising) not engineering. And the heat load - like a program and a computer - doesn't care what you advertise, nor what you say, nor what you want to do, nor what you say you want to do, only what you do.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 29, 1998.

huh?

-- nucpwr (nucpwr@hotmail.com), December 29, 1998.