http://news.excite.com/news/r/000101/17/y2k-usa-nukes2

Seven U.S. nuclear plants see minor Y2K glitches

Updated 5:01 PM ET January 1, 2000

WASHINGTON(Reuters) - Seven U.S. commercial nuclear reactors experienced minor Year 2000 computer-related problems after the New Year's rollover, but none affected safety systems and were quickly fixed, government officials said Saturday.

The seven plants saw malfunctions with computer systems used to support physical plant access control, the monitoring of operating data and the calculation of meteorological data.

"None of the affected systems impacted continued safe operations," according to a statement from John Koskinen, President Clinton's Y2K trouble-shooter.

There are 103 operating nuclear plants in the United States, providing roughly 20 percent of the nation's power.

The plants and their problems follow:

-- Arkansas Nuclear in Russellville, Ark. A personnel entry dosimeter went down after a software fix was not uploaded. It was uploaded and fixed.

-- Indian Point 3 in Buchanan, N.Y. Transmission of atmospheric data to plant failed. Computer was rebooted and fixed.

-- Millstone 2 in Waterford, Conn. Averaging of wind speed at a meteorological tower and averaging of certain radiation monitor readings. Failed programs were reset successfully.

-- Nine Mile Point 1 in Scriba, N.Y. Transmission of meteorological tower data to computers failed. The system was transferred to manual entry and corrected.

-- Palo Verde in Wintersburg, Ariz. A clock in a non-critical monitoring system did not synchronize. System ran fine on internal clock.

-- Pilgrim 1 in Plymouth, Mass. A computer program failed and was fixed in a few minutes in a non-safety system.

-- Monticello in Monticello, Minn. An interface with a plant process computer failed. The system was later fixed.

Carl Paperiello, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said everything went well during the Y2K rollover, with no safety systems challenged by computer problems.

"No critical functions were affected," Paperiello said.

-- Anonymous, January 01, 2000

Answers

Thanks Drew, I'd seen the reports but didn't get all the details. So far, a few more y2k bugs reported in nukes than I expected,although the minor effects of the problems are about what I anticipated based on previous assessments and testing. Also surprising is how quickly and easily many of these problems were fixed (or worked around). A reboot even worked in a couple of cases. Lets see if any more are reported over the next couple of days...

Glad to see none of my plants on the list, so far, ...

Regards,

-- Anonymous, January 01, 2000

Factfinder,
Rebooting computers to correct a problem reminds me of an old joke.

A chemical engineer, an electrical engineer, a mechanical engineer and a computer engineer are driving through the dessert when all of a sudden the engine stops.

The chemical engineer says,"We must have gotten some bad gasoline."

The electrical engineer says,"We need to check the distributor and generator."

The mechanical engineer says,"We need to disassemble the engine to find the problem."

The computer engineer says,"Why don't we all get out of the car and get back in."

-- Anonymous, January 01, 2000

ROFL Scott, great one there! How did your radio broadcast go? And whats your general take on the incidents thus far at the nukes? You know, I must tell you, even though you are an anti-nuke kinda guy, I have really enjoyed your contributions here. You have really done a good job at keeping things Y2K related the last few months. And I guess I do appreciate the fact that you do at least study the subject, and do a decent job at it....Haldecott on the other hand, ...geesh...;)

Regards,

-- Anonymous, January 01, 2000

And not one update to the NRC site. Me thinks there's some rotten stuff in NRC land. The events report and managment report look like minefields around the 29th, then it seems we have no new information on NRC save the happy, happy joy joy press releases.

What gives?

-- Anonymous, January 02, 2000

Thanks Factfinder,

I didn't expect seven problems at US plants on the first day; they were all minor with the exception of locked doors. That could have been a big deal if operators needed to respond quickly during a scram or accident.

I've been concerned with two identifiable problems, spurious control rod movement and EDGs failure coincident with station blackout. But, there is always the unexpected problem (just like TMI's small break LOCA leading to an accident was thought to be non-credible.)

Being guilty of thinking like the engineers in the joke, I expected more acts of sabotage around the country. Nuclear plant security matters are what I research the most. There were lots of bomb threats and some arrest of people with weapons on New Year's Eve.

I did expect localized or even regionalized power problems including reduced voltage and frequency or even outages. A person here in Harrisburg (staffer in the legislature) who knows the most about the testimony given at Y2K Utilty hearings told me that legislators knew they were being lied to and that there was more public relations remediation than Y2k fixes. Those strong words fueled my expectations.

I thought there would be problems in the former Soviet block by now because of assessments by the CIA and other agencies earlier in the year. Ya just can't trust the CIA anymore (lol).

I was on two radio programs for an hour each this week. One lady called in from Arkansas wondering about Nuclear One. I told her about the EDG's troubles there which were most likely repaired. They did have a minor y2k problem

Another caller thought that the government wants acts of terrorism so it can declare marshall law and start the New World Order.

I told the audience I expected two problems at US nuclear plants requiring operator intervention to prevent an accident. I said if I were a betting man I would bet against and accident but that the odds were lower than I liked.

Harrisburg nearly lost its water supply due to ice blocking the intake valve on Dec 30-31. Harrisburg also celebrated 2000 a minute too early when someone triggered the dropping of the strawberry before midnight. The big TV screens in the square showed New Yorker's were still counting-down while the Happy New Year 2000 sign lit up in Harrisburg. The crowd was confused and it was funny to hear half- hearted hooting on those noise-makers. But, soon everyone was in full spirit.

I never expected any missile problems.

The NRC folks who take care of the web page are on vacation. Calling the special Y2K number for Region 1 was was useless because no one answered (Dec. 31). I wanted to know more about the Limerick scram because I had no details. Region 1 returned my call 14 hours later.

NERC's updates "petered-out" during peak interest. I wonder if the FBI asked them to stop posting details. NERC published the method saboteurs used to take down a tower in Oregon. Hypothetically, monitoring NERC updates would allow coordinated efforts by saboteurs to take down the grid by prioritizing targets and work-arounds. Some militia factions were identified by the FBI as the potential threat taking inspiration from the "Turner Diaries." (ref. project Megiddo)

-- Anonymous, January 02, 2000

It's a good thing that people were ready to fix these problems has they happened.

-- Anonymous, January 02, 2000

Scott,

You are not the only person to expect "localized outages" based upon the public statements of politicians. I have NEVER understood the technical basis for their position, or how to reconcile it with my test results and conclusions.

You should call to question the reliability and/or competence of your legislative source. Just as the veracity of the NERC reports were constantly challenged during the past months, legislators and others (Mr. CEO and his sponsors come to mind) should be called to task and their credibility questioned. (Immediately regarding embedded's in utilities and as soon as the situation is clear on other industry business/accounting systems).

-- Anonymous, January 02, 2000

Scott, Thanks for your excellent comments. See my remarks on the nuke y2k problems in the thread above posted by Dan. CL wrote: "You are not the only person to expect "localized outages" based upon the public statements of politicians. I have NEVER understood the technical basis for their position, or how to reconcile it with my test results and conclusions." I am in complete agreement, CL, the most plausible scenario (and not very plausible at that) for severe y2k problems would have been in the generating plants, and quite a number would have had to trip offline to bring any part of the grid down, which would have resulted in way more than a "localized" outage. I always wondered who the heck came up with this nonsense? It was always pretty much a "widespsread outages" or "no outages" kind of event as far a power was concerned, IMHO. Certainly there were no dependencies in the substations and individual retail lines that could lead to "localized" outages.

Regards,

-- Anonymous, January 03, 2000