By Deena Beasley

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The nuclear power industry, aiming to allay public fears of power outages and radiation leaks, has stepped up efforts to make sure plants are not vulnerable to the year 2000 computer bug.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will release next week a report on exactly how ready each of the nation's 103 nuclear power reactors are for the millennium date change. Nuclear reactors account for about 20 percent of all U.S. power generation.

The millennium problem arises because many older computers record dates using only the last two digits of the year. If left uncorrected, such systems could treat the year 2000 as the year 1900, generating errors or system crashes next Jan. 1.

Most U.S. nuclear plants were built in the 1960s and 70s -- before the onset of the present digitalized age, noted Ralph Beedle, chief nuclear officer at the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group.

``All of our plant shutdown systems are analog,'' said Robert Haverkamp, manager of the Y2K project at Southern California Edison Co.'s (AMEX:SCEq - news) San Onofre nuclear power plant in San Clemente, Calif.

Nevertheless, Edison has, over the past 18 months, meticulously tracked down and remedied all plant systems determined to be vulnerable to the date change, he said.

``We will be reporting full readiness to the NRC on June 30,'' Haverkamp said.

But operations-related systems at about 10 of the 103 reactors are not expected to get a clean bill of health until later this year, Beedle said.

The trade group did not identify which plants are not yet up to snuff, but emphasized that all are set to undergo maintenance work after power demand has peaked for the summer.

``Two weeks ago, energy was selling for $1,300 a megawatt hour. If the plants were taken off line now, rates would go up and consumers would not be very happy,'' Beedle said.

Like most nuclear reactors, the two operating units at San Onofre are connected to the regional electricity grid, which brings in the necessary power for cooling the plant and preventing any threat of meltdown.

As part of everyday operations, critical systems at nuclear plants are designed with ``fail safe'' conditions, which automatically shut the plant down if they are not met.

``Even if our worst fears come true and the grid goes down at midnight on December 31 and we have a station blackout, the reactor shuts down safely and we can restart after the clock changes,'' Beedle said.

The North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC), which oversees delivery of electricity in the United States and Canada, said in March the industry had completed more than 75 percent of the required testing and remediation of its systems and nearly all were expected to be up to speed by June 30.

Fewer than 3 percent of all components failed Y2K testing, with most errors occurring in systems, such as schedule logs, that would not cause the lights to go out, NERC said.

As a back up, the NRC requires every nuclear reactor to have on site at least two diesel-powered generators to provide emergency power in case of a failure in the grid connection.

If, for some random reason, those units were also to fail, nuclear operators have established backup contingencies. Edison, for example, has determined two transmission paths, one from San Diego and one from Hoover Dam in Arizona, that could quickly supply the plant with emergency power.

Officials said special attention has been paid to making sure that bureaucratic conditions for plant operations will be met at the time of the date change.

``Plants are shut down on a regular basis for administrative reasons, but we want to eliminate the possibility of having to take a unit off line for relatively unimportant reasons,'' Beedle said.

Some critics, however, have questioned the standard of readiness the nuclear power plant operators are being held to as well as their compliance with the standards.

``There are a number of workarounds that are being done in place of upgrades to a complete rollover from December 31 to January 1,'' said Paul Gunter, director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service's Reactor Watchdog Project.

He also complained that a lot of the compliance standards derived by both the industry and the NRC were determined for economic, rather than safety, reasons.

``A number of the plants already have problems with their design documentation,'' Gunter said. ``Y2K is another straw on this camel's back.''

The nuclear watchdog group has petitioned the NRC to conduct emergency preparedness drills, require additional backup power supplies at nuclear plants and shut down any plants that cannot prove themselves free of the Y2K bug.

-- Mild Mannered Reporter (Clark@super.duper), June 28, 1999

Answers

Hardliner, 8 and counting...

-- (html@guy.com), June 28, 1999.

sorry, 9 and counting...

Fire up zee Luftwafe herr reporter, we have much ground to cover...

-- (html@guy.com), June 28, 1999.

Well I see the NIRS (Nuclear Information and Resource Service) is continuing their propaganda campaign.

Just remember, we are assuming that the remaining 80% of power plants will all be compliant as well - but will achieve this status unaudited and untested and unaccountable - (so far.)

Also - isn't it remarkable that the early 3% figure that Yourdon predicted two+ years ago remains correct now - 6 months prior to the turnover. Seems they have found nothing in two years of remediation to prove him wrong.

Now, what else will he (Yourdon) be proved correct? 80% compliant - seems that is an optimistic value. Unlikely to be more than 50%, and less than 40% of small businesses (probably 60% partially complete, - and of those, about a third will have additional undiscovered "surprizes").

Water, power, government, international trade?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 28, 1999.

I guess the trolls and pollies must be really busy sharpening their claws and fangs or something because none of 3M's positive stories have appeared on the Gary North is a Big Fat Idiot or Debunking Y2K fora. Isn't that odd?

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), June 28, 1999.