http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0013HW

somebody link please

-- Taz (Tassie @aol.com), July 07, 1999

Answers

I have a link for you Taz. Get a clue idiot doomer, Y2K is nothing, get a life and move on.

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), July 07, 1999.

Link

-- Don (whytocay@hotmail.com), July 07, 1999.

Dear Y2K,

Did you spend your formative years in a room full of colorful plastic toys?

How do you know "Y2K is nothing?" I know we can get 10+ because I've already been there. And I am scared.

-- Not Again! (Seenit@ww2.com), July 07, 1999.

This needs repeating. Here is the linked thread:

David Lochbaum will be interviewed by CNN today after his presentation.

Scott

Good afternoon. Thank you for this opportunity to present our views on this important safety matter.

My name is David Lochbaum. I have been the Nuclear Safety Engineer for the Union of Concerned Scientists since October 1996. Prior to joining UCS, I worked as a nuclear engineer in the US commercial nuclear power industry for over 17 years.

For more than a quarter century, UCS has been concerned about safety levels at US nuclear power plants because of the inherent dangers of the light water reactors. We are convinced that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is doing an unacceptable job of protecting the American public from the Y2K safety hazard.

What happens if Y2K, or any other problem, triggers an accident at a US nuclear power plant?

The Sandia National Laboratory, in a report released on November 1, 1982, by the US House of Representatives Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations, estimated an accident at the Calvert Cliffs nuclear plant in Maryland while it is running could produce 5,600 fatalities within a year, 23,000 additional cancer deaths after one year, and cost $90 billion (in 1980 dollars).

The Brookhaven National Laboratory, in report released in August 1997 by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, estimated an accident at a plant like Calvert Cliffs after being shut down for 3 = years could produce 29 fatalities within a year, 33,200 additional cancer deaths after one year, and cost $186 billion.

These national laboratory studies illustrate that an accident at a nuclear power plant has extremely grave consequences  whether that plant is running or not.

The worst US nuclear power plant accident occurred at Three Mile Island near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. An equipment problem interrupted the plants feedwater flow. Emergency systems automatically started to compensate for the loss. Unfortunately, operators in the control room relied on a false indication of plant conditions and turned the emergency systems off. Within two hours, the irradiated fuel in the reactor core overheated and partially melted. Nearly 150,000 people evacuated their homes.

Y2K can start any US nuclear power plant down the Three Mile Island pathway. The feedwater system at every nuclear power plant in the United States is Y2K vulnerable. Many of these systems use embedded chips and/or digital controls. All of these systems require the electrical grid to be available. Y2K can directly disable the feedwater system or it can indirectly disable the system by knocking out the electrical grid.

As at Three Mile Island, emergency systems would automatically start upon failure of the feedwater system. These emergency systems can cool the reactor, but only if the operators allow them to function. The computer systems used by the operators to monitor plant conditions during much of their training and virtually all of their daily activities are susceptible to Y2K failures. Deprived of their normal method of monitoring plant conditions, the operators may not be able to get the necessary information from backup sources accurately and timely. Therefore, they might repeat the mistake made at Three Mile Island and turn the emergency systems off.

I realize that this scenario strings together a few "ifs" to paint a gloomy picture. But it is not an inconceivable string of "ifs"  after all, it has already happened once in this country. In addition, this scenario is only one among several Y2K scenarios that start nuclear plants down the road toward an accident. The US has 103 operating nuclear power plants. A Y2K success rate of 75, 85, or even 95 percent will be unacceptable. One hundred percent of the plants must avoid a Y2K-triggered accident.

Unfortunately, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is doing a bad job of ensuring that nuclear power plants will be ready for the new millennium. NRC inspectors conducted audits of Y2K preparations at nuclear power plants. Their very sincere efforts have been a huge waste of time. The inspectors have been told what to examine, but they have not been provided acceptance criteria. Therefore, these audits  which are more precisely termed sightseeing tours  cannot determine if the nuclear plants meet minimum safety standards.

The NRCs Y2K performance really is truly that bad. NRC inspectors went to the Brunswick nuclear plant in North Carolina and learned that the plants owner relied exclusively on certifications by companies supplying its hardware and software. Brunswick did no testing when it had a piece of paper saying that a computer system was Y2K compliant. The NRC inspectors then traveled to the Salem nuclear plant in New Jersey. At Salem, the plant owner tested some of the hardware and software that had been certified to be Y2K compliant. Some of the certified systems flunked the tests.

The NRC knows that some nuclear plant owners are relying heavily on paperwork instead of testing. The NRC has documentation that this paperwork cannot always be trusted. The NRC is not unhappy about this situation. Why? Because in the NRCs eyes, no nuclear plant can be below Y2K minimum standards because there are no standards defined. Everyone passes an NRC test because there is no answer key.

Another troubling sign is the NRCs treatment of three petitions for Y2K expedited rulemaking submitting by the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) last December. The NRC told NIRS that theyd have a response to their petitions by the end of April, then the end of May, and then the end of June. NIRS has yet to receive the NRCs response. The NRCs foot-dragging on this national safety issue is inexcusable.

We urge you to induce the Nuclear Regulatory Commission  an executive branch agency  to establish clearly defined minimum standards for Y2K and ensure that all plants meet or exceed those standards. A 99 percent success rate in avoiding a Y2K-triggered accident means that one nuclear plant somewhere in the United States may be checking Sandia or Brookhavens body count estimates.

-- Scott Portzline (tmia@pipeline.com), July 07, 1999

Answers

UCS not USC.

-- Scott Portzline (tmia@pipeline.com), July 07, 1999.

The NRC's Y2K performance really is truly that bad. NRC inspectors went to the Brunswick nuclear plant in North Carolina and learned that the plant's owner relied exclusively on certifications by companies supplying its hardware and software. Brunswick did no testing when it had a piece of paper saying that a computer system was Y2K compliant. The NRC inspectors then traveled to the Salem nuclear plant in New Jersey. At Salem, the plant owner tested some of the hardware and software that had been certified to be Y2K compliant. Some of the certified systems flunked the tests.

See Us er beware -- Y2K compliance claims could be bogus:

In Florida, the chairman of a governor's Y2K task force said many businesses have complained about the growing number of false Y2K- compliance claims.

"In some cases, we've been told the Y2K lying rate is as high as 50 percent," said Tom McGurk, who is also secretary of the Department of Management Services.

BellSouth Corp., for example, told state officials that more than half of the compliance claims by its vendors turned out to be incorrect when they were independently tested, he said.

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), July 07, 1999.

Do you have a link for this story?

-- Sean Quinn (sean@van.gbmicro.com), July 07, 1999.

lane, lane... you've simply got to stop this negativity. what are you trying to do... confuse us with the facts?

this can't be true... the nrc didn't say it was.

and what does David Lochbaum know?... he has only worked for the nuclear power industry as a nuclear engineer for 17 years.

when are we going to wake up to the fact that we are in danger from the nukes and the nrc is not, i repeat, *NOT* going to do a damn thing about it.

i don't give a damn how many press releases state that they are 'y2k ready'... ready for what?

_never in human history have so many humans blindly trusted that so many other humans won't screw up._

dr.ed yardeni

-- marianne (uranus@nbn.net), July 07, 1999.

-- a (a@a.a), July 07, 1999.

As a longtime luker (since November 1998 when I GI'd) and sometime poster, I encourage everyone on this forum to purchase and read this book. The Logic of Failure - Recognizing and Avoiding Failure in Complex Situations by Dietrich Dorner. It is a book about cognitive pyscology. Doomers will understand the book's relation to Y2K while pollies will see why it is they think the way they do about Y2K.

Now everyone has their assignment. Buy it, read it. It is only about 175 pages long and the case studies can be directly related to Y2K.

After everyone has read it, report back you review. I think it will shed some light as to why people view Y2K so differently i.e. Really bad to bump in the road to a positive for the US economy.

-- MarktheFart (quke@ix.netcom.com), July 07, 1999.

There just aren't any words suitable for print that would describe my feelings about the NRC, or the NERC, or the current government position on just about anything relating to Y2K....come to think of it, the list is endless. I'm forced to simply choose to continue verbally abusing the Pollys, attacking without mercy...just to save my sanity!

Y2K Pro is the epitome of the term "asshole" as defined by Milne! There are others...I shall simply point them out as they appear from time to time. Bill Klinton comes to mind....wish he would post ANYTHING, ANYWHERE on this subject....asshole.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 08, 1999.