New NRC Y2k information

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Electric Utilities and Y2K : One Thread

The NRC has recently updated it's Y2k website with 3 new entries. Audits for the WNP-2 and Braidwood facilities are now posted, as is a "Y2k instruction" insert for the all site resident inspector inspection manuals.

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/NEWS/year2000.html

-- Anonymous, March 23, 1999

Answers

Rick, thanks so much for the heads up on these postings. The inspection manual link had a blockbuster early on:

"In March 1999, following discussions with members of Congress, the Commission expanded the number of audits to include all nuclear power plant sites."

It goes on to say that because time is short, the audits will not be as complete as previous ones ("reduced in scope") but they're giving the Resident Inspectors and Regional Inspectors the job of spot checking specific compliance criteria.

It would seem that the members of Congress were not happy about accepting audits of only a representative sampling of nuclear power plants.

These spot audits (comprising a lot of document review) are to be completed by June 30 of this year. It was interesting that at the bottom of this document it stated, "One day of training is required for this TI." It was also estimated it would take 40 hours of work to complete the audit checklist. At least there was a number provided for the inspectors to get help with technical questions while performing this audit.

Rick, in your experience, how independent are Resident Inspectors? By this I mean, are they able to divest themselves of the emotional conflict of interest an investigation of the work progress of fellow employees would entail? I realize that inspecting safety systems and protocols also might put them at odds with fellow workers, too, but auditing Y2K progress for the whole plant has the potential to pit them against everyone they work with. I wouldn't want the job, that's for sure. Would it have been more practical to swap resident inspectors for the purposes of these audits, or are these guys tough enough to handle the pressure even if it that means a negative report?

-- Anonymous, March 23, 1999


I live across the Bay, about 12 miles SE, from the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant. I am just outside the "blue" circle, the 10-mile radius of emergency evacuation. Most people are concerned about a reduction of electric power. I'm concerned about my safety!

Am I concerned about WHEN they will shut down the plant? YES!

Is there any reliable info out there? NO! At least none I can find.

So - Should we be concerned about the possibility of an "unsafe" shut down? Should we be buying masks or Iodine pills for all? What type of preparation (beside the normal info put out for nuke emergencies) should we be doing that the average person doesn't need to worry about? (can't dig a shelter, water table in the winter is about 2" below the surface of the ground!) An inexpensive gieger counter?

Or will the plant be SAFELY shut down before 1-1-2000? Do you think "they" (NRC) will be honest with accurate info? I wish I could trust their info.

Most days we can SEE the plant! I sure could use a little peace of mind about this! It's the only thing about Y2K that has the ability to REALLY scare me!

I'd be a happy camper if, when the lights go out, we don't glow "blue"!

Dottie

-- Anonymous, March 24, 1999


In response to Bonnie's comments, Resident Inspectors would not be investigating the work progress of fellow employees. They are employed by the NRC, not by the utility. And if they have qualms about issuing negative reports, they sure hide it well.

-- Anonymous, March 24, 1999

Tom, thanks for the input! I did realize that the Inspectors do not work for the utility, and I should have been more specific about that. What I was referring to is that the Inspectors work *with* other facility employees, as in they interact with them. I perceive the situation may be similar to that of a consultant, or trainer, or anyone who might be onsite for a long term contract. You get to know those you work with and usually make some friends even if you're actually employed by separate entities.

That said, I was glad to see your comment that the Inspectors already do issue negative reports with impunity, regardless. This corresponds with what a friend in the industry related to me quite awhile ago. It's always good to get confirming views which put to rest any nagging doubts. Thanks again, I appreciate your response!

Dottie, I personally have a lot of confidence that nuclear plants in the U.S. are able to perform a safe shutdown in the event of the loss of offsite power. In fact, this happens on a regular basis and you don't even hear about it. Various weather phenomenon can and do interrupt power to locales every year. There are emergency powerdowns done for other technical safety reasons, too, such as a phone line being taken down in a storm. So it's not like this is a procedure which only has the potential to happen over 2000 and has never been dealt with previously.

The Year 2000 problem does create a more widespread risk, in that there is the potential for problems in a larger geographic area than that normally experienced due to local storms, but the procedures for handling a shutdown are the same in either case. I think many of us would feel a lot more comfortable if there was a pre-2000 general shutdown, but certainly those working at the plants are just as concerned about safety (if not more) as is anyone else. The good news about Y2K is that everyone *knows* when it will occur and they can plan for it. It's not a tornado or something which can catch people off guard.

-- Anonymous, March 24, 1999


Good post Rick, I've been busy and missed this. I'll second (third?) Tom's comment about the Resident NRC Inspectors. They come and go as they please, have their own offices, and are not allowed to socialize with plant personnel. Every Inspector I have met has been a great example of integrity and professionalism.

I have reviewed the inspection document (If you want a good overview of what Y2K is all about at a Nuke, read it!). It pulls straight from NEI/NUSMG 97-07, but does a much better job of organizing the high points. The test dates do leave out a few important ones (including dates that I have seen problems with), and the Rollover test dates broken out into Julian and Gregorian don't make a lot of sense, since the date is typically set only one way for any given embedded system device or software application, and you have to verify all date data works properly, regardless of format...but overall, a very good job that will make for a tough audit. One day training for the Inspectors though? Unless they're already into Y2K, they're gonna suffer from info overload....

Regards, FactFinder

-- Anonymous, March 25, 1999



Just want to clarify that the Inspection document I was referring too is the checklist.

Regards, FactFinder

-- Anonymous, March 25, 1999


Moderation questions? read the FAQ