deadline this month

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

When utilities report thier y2k compliance at the end of this month, who are we going to be depending upon for the verification? Will there be anyone involved in this process besides NERC?

-- Anonymous, June 05, 1999

Answers

yes, the nrc. anyone familiar with the government's bureaucracies and their preoccupation with excessive 'red tape' and routines would not take this as a good sign.

it certainly does not give me that warm, fuzzy, and safe feeling... apparently i'm not alone. read the statements from the union for concerned scientists.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Failure to Regulate Y2K Safety

David Lochbaum, senior nuclear safety engineer for the Union of Concerned Scientists, explains that the NRC does not clearly draw a line for safety regarding Y2K. Lochbaum says the NRC is not doing its job as a regulator and must be prepared to shutdown a nuclear plant if it is not prepared for Y2K. Lochbaum reveals that one plant relied solely upon vendors to certify that software used at the plant was Y2K compliant. But another plant actually checked the same vendor's certified software and found that it failed Y2K testing. The NRC had accepted readiness statements from *BOTH* plants.

end of text click on: http://www.enviroweb.org/tmia/Y2K.htm#worst

and scroll down to:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Failure to Regulate Y2K Safety

The NRC has no "Answer Keys" (Real Player Video)

-- Anonymous, June 06, 1999


[[this is definitely not warm&fuzzy, very cold & pointy...but addresses your question... we can hope it's not true??]]

..logging onto the NERC public access database at ftp://www.nerc.com/pub/sys/all_updl/docs/ and then selecting the /y2k database, start with "contingency.pdf" - "NERC Year 2000 Contingency Planning Guide Version 1.0" dated 10/23/98 for in-depth assessment of multiple contingencies and potential failures. Next, review "y2k-reporting-changes-1-12-99.pdf" and "y2k-exceptions-instructions.pdf" documents, which outline NERC's information blackout strategy to WITHHOLD DATA FROM DOE AND THE PUBLIC regarding two critical areas: (1) READINESS "EXCEPTIONS" reported to NERC by utilities which are attempting to achieve y2k readiness but do not expect to meet NERC's deadline; and (2) information about non-conforming y2k programs in utilities (definitions included in NERC document, quoted below). In "y2k-reporting-changes-1-12-99.pdf" NERC states that utilities attempting to conform but which will miss the due dates because of "readiness exceptions" will be allowed to report their mission-critical systems as "y2k ready" and will be listed on reports to DOE and the public as "Y2k ready" for the target industry deadlines of May 31, 1999 and June 30, 1999, as long as these utilities report y2k deficiencies to NERC in secret, "confidential" emails. For these utilities, NERC states (in y2k-reporting-changes-1-12-99.pdf) "All identified exceptions will be held in strict confidence and will not be reported to DOE or the public. The exceptions will be reviewed by NERC Y2k project staff for reasonableness and reliability impact on operations into the Year 2000. The NERC Y2k project staff may forward any reliability issues to the NERC Security Coordinator Subcommittee or the NERC Operating Committee for review." These utilities are given explicit follow-up instructions on the confidential Exception Reporting methods in the document entitled "y2k-exceptions-instructions.pdf": "For those organizations for which the above condition is the case [*i.e., utilities which will not be "y2k ready" by June 30, 1999*], an Exception Reporting mechanism has been established by which those organizations can report themselves Y2k Ready [*italics emphasis in original text*] by June 30, 1999 in the NERC Y2k Readiness Assessment with the noted exceptions on this new report . . . . All information provided in the exception list will be handled confidentially by NERC. This information will not be included in the NERC report to the Department of Energy nor will it be released to the public. The information will be used by NERC to evaluate reliability risks associated with Y2." Also, for blatantly NON-CONFORMING utilities, NERC states (in "y2k-reporting-changes-1-12-99.pdf"): . . . beginning in January 1999, any Y2k program meeting any of the criteria listed below will be designated as a Non-Conforming Y2k Program. The Y2k Program Manager will be contacted and provided an opportunity to clarify the reported data. If the issue is not resolved, a letter will be sent from the NERC President to the chief executive of the organization noting the deficiencies. If the issue is not resolved, the status of the program may be reviewed by the NERC Operating Committee or the Board of Trustees. These activities will remain confidential within NERC at least through the first quarter of 1999 and longer, if possible. This information will not be released to the public or reported to DOE. It is essential that reports to NERC focus on those facilities and items that are mission critical to electric operations. Nonmission-critical items that may be completed after the industry target dates should not be the cause of reporting a late completion date. The criteria for a Non-conforming Y2k Program are: 1. Expected to complete Remediation and Testing or Y2k Ready status for mission-critical electrical facilities past industry targets of May 31, 1999 and June 30, 1999, respectively. Reasonable, specific exceptions may be justified for a limited number of facilities, if they do not pose a risk to electric operations into the Year 2000. 2. Reported exceptions are excessive, not reasonably justified, or may pose a risk to electric operations into the Year 2000. 3. Missed Y2k readiness status reports for two consecutive months. 4. No written Y2k plan. 5. Program does not report to executive management. COMMENTS: Combining the above information with the unsettling charts, graphs, and projections from "contingency.pdf" - which is a thorough, statistical analysis that includes worst case projections - a "dark" scenario emerges in which NERC's junk data lulls DOE and the public into a false sense of energy complacency: "Don't worry, be happy." Tick, tick, tick.... Last but not least, also note that NERC's y2k database seems to contain a "y2k bug" -- numerous documents have original 1999 *creation dates* which have not yet occurred, all the way through *creation dates* listed as December 1999. Whooops :-(

quoted from another location//...considering the validity(?) of the above ref'd document... aren't most other discussions & reports kind of...questionable??? ...moot point??? Nobody's verifyin nuthin.

NERC is giving formal permission to the Utilities to lie - and hide facts from the DOE and public??? [In that their reports to NERC will be held in confidence and not reported in public domain.]

Hello?? Have we all gone mad? Isn't this stikingly bizarre?? ANYTHING any utility reports from now on...could be a blantant lie, okayed by NERC???

Have the Christian Broadcasting systems gently covered THIS topic yet?? Like Drew. Would anyone care to inform/educate us that perhaps - the above data is incorrect??

-- Anonymous, June 06, 1999


Moderation questions? read the FAQ