There is a LOT of information in the "Contingency Plan for the Year 2000 Issue in the Nuclear Industry", including charts of telecom readiness-- which do indicate good news in that area. It will be worth any readers time to read the entire Plan from start to finish, even if it is some 60 pages long. Included are internal and external risks for several nuclear areas (medical, generation, etc.) along with assessments of infrastructure status.

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/COMMISSION/SECYS/secy1999-134/y2kcplan.pdf

On page 27, there is information about an upcoming "National Table Top Exercise", which I thought was of interest because it mentions FEMA's role and a meeting to include Vice President Gore, Cabinet Secretaries and the Agency heads:

"Issues identified during this tabletop [already held] will be forwarded for review at a National Table Top Exercise tentatively scheduled for September 18 and 25. On the first Saturday of the National Table Top Exercise, CDRG representatives from participating agencies would exercise their role under the FRP in responding to a simulated disaster caused by a Y2K problem. According to FEMA, the second Saturday would be a four hour tabletop exercise headed by the Vice President and would involve the Cabinet Secretaries and the Agency heads."

"FEMA is also conducting Y2K contingency planning seminars for State and local radiological emergency preparedness (REP) officials in all nine of the REP regions. Utilities and the NRC have been invited to attend and participate in these seminars.."

"The staff is planning two different types of exercises involving utilities. The first exercise is a table top exercise, scheduled on July 14, that would involve NRC, Baltimore Gas and Electric, the State of Maryland, and Calvery, St. Mary's and Dorchester counties. The purpose of this exercise would be to discuss how contingency plans for each organization would be used in response to a number of scenarios, including loss of telecommunications and loss of offsite power. At least one scenario will involve the transfer of the NRC Y2K response lead from Headquarters to Region IV."

"A large scale exercise is tentatively scheduled on October 15. During this exercise, the NRC would test the Y2K contingency plan in its entirety. The headquarters Operations Center, the Regional IRCs and the back-up IRC in Arlington, Texas would be staffed by the same people who have volunteered to staff the centers beginning December 31. There are three major facets of the NRC contingency plan that will be tested:

-Incident Response: The planning basics of the NRC Y2K Contingency Plan assumes that there will be two events involving an NRC licensed facility (caused directly or indirectly by a Y2K problem) that will require an NRC response. An example might be a complete loss of off-site power. In this exercise, two or more nuclear pwoer plant licensees and a gaseous diffusion plant will simuate a relatively significant event (i.e., involving an emergency declaration) that the NRC would be required to respond to.

--The planning basis within the NRC Y2K Contingency Plan also assumes that as many as a dozen nuclear power plant licensees may find themselves in a situation where their technical specifications may require them to shutdown, but where continued operation is in the best interest of public health and safety in a broader sense. An example might be the loss of one out of two offsite power sources to the plant caused by grid instability problems. Thus, several utilities will contact the NRC response team requesting enforcement discretion under the Y2K enforcement discretion guidelines.

--The third facet of the Y2K Contingency Plan, Information Sharing, involves taking advantage of the time zone differences. As discussed in Section IV.E., NRC is supporting NEA in developing a Y2K Early Warning System. We intend to test this system during the October exercise by obtaining simulated information from participating countries and sharing it with our nuclear power plant licensees. We will also be testing our back-up communication equipment during this process."

So, after reading this, we know that the Y2K issue is being taken seriously by our government and that the Vice President and Cabinet, as well as Federal Agency heads are aware of these planning scenarios. I also don't feel the least regret about my personal Y2K risk-management preparations. In comparison to government and NRC contingency plans, my own preps actually seem rather moderate!

-- Anonymous, July 21, 1999

Answers

As usual you do great work.

For awhile now I've been seeing evidence of broad planning and preparations and contingencies for the events to unfold soon. At the same time it seems there's a general hush about this sort of thing.

Those of us who take this seriously take it seriously. Those who don't don't and won't. I agree there is some comfort in knowing some persons and agencies who wield some authority take it seriously. I like having the company. I'm very glad they are doing what they are doing. I also like the idea that all that bitching so many of us have done over the past year(s) may have yielded some results. ;)

I also appreciate the "don't worry" tone of the general Y2K atmosphere these days. The people who haven't understood the potential difficulties are probably better off staying dumb throughout the events. Panic would only add to the difficulties.

One thing though, testing such a big system October 15 seems kinda late in the game to me.

Steve

-- Anonymous, July 21, 1999

Steve, I have to leave the house soon so I don't have time to track down the reference, but if I remember correctly, there was a reason given in the report for the late date of the exercises. It had something to do with waiting until the various infrastructure segments had their satellite communications installed and/or their control center connective links to the federal ICC were in place. I got the impression they had wanted to do earlier exercises but the logistics had to be put together first. For such a major national cooperative undertaking, I also hope there are few problems in implementing it; time is short as we're all aware.

Like you, I'm also glad that a very serious approach to the Y2K problem is being taken. I couldn't help but wonder, though, if this country has ever gone to such lengths on a national and state level outside of a time of war? The don't-worry general atmosphere you mentioned does seem to be in contrast to what appears to be Y2K-war contingency plans (including the California legislature IT people "draft" proposal).

-- Anonymous, July 21, 1999

I saw that CA. IT draft proposal. I'd use the word ominous to describe it, but I'd rather not contribute to alarmism. I prefer to think of it as prudent or a rational approach to potential problems. At least those folks are thinking about what could happen and doing something in a preparatory fashion. (Not unlike some of us eh?)

The IT draft proposal, the Senate report earlier this year, some Navy documents, National Guard documents, Fema measures, etc. all bring to mind some of the truly serious looking equipment on standby during delivery of a baby. We hope and pray there's no trouble and could even be bothered by the presence of that "standby, just-in-case, equipment. After-all it more or less reaffirms our fears by substantiating the dire possibilities. But, gosh!, it sure is good to have that stuff there if the need for it arrises.

No pollyanna, no doom and gloom. Just wide awake, aware of the possibilities, hoping for the very best, and buying some insurance just in case.

Once, more; I am thankful for the "professionals" doing their job, especially the volunteered jobs Rick. I'm also very thankful for people like you Bonnie. You're sorta like a mid-wife in this analogy. I like the idea of "higher ups" playing what if too. Even if we never implement the "stand-by" solutions I take some comfort knowing they are worried too. Awake, aware, and doing something.

Steve

-- Anonymous, July 21, 1999