Good Morning,

I just was looking at a site www.swrcb.ca.gov/y2k/y2k.html and checked out their discussion forum on y2k. This was what I found (the formatting looks ok as I speak - might be lousy after posting):

From: Michael Gentry [SMTP:MGentry@oit.swrcb.ca.gov] Sent: Monday, April 05, 1999 6:01 PM To: dhall@enteract.com Subject: Year 2000 Advisory

David, Your latest advisory is very helpful - I've posted it on our web site. I am becoming more concerned (that utilities are overlooking potentially non-Y2k compliant embedded systems), 'though I should probably be relieved (that they are not finding any). I received this email this morning:

"We in Missouri have now checked over 200 domestic water systems looking for Y2K embedded system problems. We've found none. From the tone of your web page, you have found water supply problems. Can you identify specific problems? I've talked to EPA and several other states, and their experience is similar to mine."

The California Public Utilities Commission recently sent out a nine page questionnaire to 175 water utilities in California - out of the 160 who replied, only 10 reported that "they have computerized service delivery systems". Is this possible?

Are there any recent examples of systems failing Y2k tests or of non-Y2k compliant devices? Are we making a mountain out of a molehill? Thanks,

Michael

David Hall replied:

Yes, there are some recent examples, but we, and other folks, are finding a lot fewer "embedded systems" problems that we had at first estimated. The majority of problems that will hurt a water utility are in the SCADA or monitoring software/hardware, not (to any great extent) in the outlying equipment. Now, this is a general statement and CANNOT be taken for a specific water system. Unfortunately, I've found that each system is different and uses different equipment in different ways. So without checking THAT specific system, there is no way I can generalize except as follows:

There are fewer Year 2000 impacts in water system microprocessor-based equipment (leaving out the PC hardware/software) than we at first estimated. Water and wastewater treatment systems use FAR fewer computerized equipment items and systems that we at first estimated. (10 out of 160 is very possible) Every water system should check at least its SCADA and monitoring system software (and whatever is connected to those networks) very carefully as problems have been found in many versions of those applications packages, especially the custom-built ones. Every water system should check its administrative software packages and PC hardware as problems have been found in nearly every one checked. (Billing is only important if you wish to remain in business after a month or so and continue to pay employees.)

Are we making a mountain out of a molehill? Yes. And the reason is that within that mountain are several molehills that will fail, maybe 1% to 10% of the total. For the people in the areas served by those few molehills, this is a serious problem. For the rest, no immediate problems. To find the molehills, we have to sift through all of the mountain. I've often said that we will spend more time and resources finding out we do not have problems than actually fixing the problems we find. But there is NO other way to find the real problems.

I recommend that the EPA require a cursory questionnaire be filled out by ALL water systems (with a fine for every day past September 1 1999 it is not filled out) that asks the proper questions and forces the system to at least check its methods of service. This is the minimum I'd do for due diligence (if I was the EPA). If you are interested, I can provide what I feel are the minimum questions and what should be the answers.

Unless I was one of the molehills, I'd feel that there is no big deal either. However, do your workshops ask what each system would do if the electricity shut down or they could not get chemicals for several months? Or if a system upstream screwed up and put wastewater into their intake pipe? Contingency plans for outside influences are important, in this case more important than for internal failures. I'll try to get permission to post some of the problems we've found.

Dave Hall My Opinions Only, Of Course Infrastructure and Embedded Systems Risk Management

snip

Encouraging but still serious concerns are raised (in line with my own) in the last paragraph. I think we won't know for certain until y2k rolls over. To each his own.

Sincerely,

Kristi

-- Kristi (securx@Succeed.Net), June 04, 1999

Answers

Kristi, Kristi, Kristi....by "the time you are certain, after y2k rolls over" you could be sucking on a damp towel! Read the last paragraph AGAIN and then, think "big"! You're scarin' me! I hope you're married to a smart, tough guy.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 04, 1999.

Will,

Your gross (not to mention sexist) assumption as to my preparedness situation is appalling. I guess you have never read my posts before.

-- Kristi (securx@succeed.Net), June 04, 1999.

Sorry Kristi...I'm so sick of "soft sells" Please by all means, accept my apologies for assuming your sex and then address my take on your comments, please!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 04, 1999.

Will,

Apology accepted. Yes I am married to a "smart tough guy". I would have answered back sooner but had to go milk the goat and stop my 3 yr old from playing in the TVP I am storing.

I didn't see this as a soft sell, in fact it sounded like these guys (who probably didn't think that their posts would be read by anyone outside of their industry) have taken their job seriously.

I am actively working with my local water/community services agency and county OES guy, trying to research potential problems and look for solutions to a potential "really bad scenario". In the meantime I collect 55 gal. drums and new trash cans, am working on hand driving a well (our water table is around 20 ft in this area) but not looking good so far at 18 ft) and devising a tool to draw water from my next door neighbor's well if need be (you know, a 4-6" diameter, 2- 3 ft long tube/pipe with a foot valve/clapper on the bottom which can be plunged down 60 ft and drawn back up). Trying to prepare for the worst and hope for the best. Would have a well drilled on my lot but county will no longer issue permits for this neighborhood.

I guess I was disappointed that this (very likely) legitimate information was immediately flamed (and I had a few singed hairs as well). It seems like this has become a knee-jerk reaction for some on this forum. Let's try to keep our minds open (while we prepare like hell).

Sincerely,

Kristi

-- Kristi (securx@Succeed.Net), June 04, 1999.

Kristi, I found a well bucket for a 4" well at Jade Mountain. It consists of a 4' piece of 3" PVC with a 3" to 1.5" reducer on the lower end. A rubber ball bigger than 1.5" is placed in the bottom. To keep the ball in place they put a 1\4" threaded rod all the way through the 3" pipe and cut off the ends flush with the outside. It cost me $45 and is well worth it even though the guy on the phone from Jade Mountain told me that after I saw one I could easily build it myself.

Hope this helps.

Steve

-- Steve (bibleout@tds.net), June 04, 1999.

Steve,

THANK YOU for the info - was trying to do it on my own after reading about one in Lehman's catalog. Seems simple enough.

Kristi

-- Kristi (securx@succeed.net), June 04, 1999.

Thanks Kristi, glad to know it. Your post was not the "soft sell" I was refering to. The post is MORE than alarming. It was your closing comments that concerned me. "To each their own"..."we won't know UNTIL". It has now reached the point where an awful lot of people do not have the time to "thoughtfully contemplate and carefully research" this issue. It is *JUNE 1999*. People will find this forum and be in need of OUR "discoveries". Too many are afraid to slap the reality of all this into delicate minds. We are out of time for pussy- footing around and so are any newbies. But, we don't want anyone to panic....well, it's either NOW or once it has become TOO LATE, make your choices people. We're talking about water here......WATER. There just isn't much "wiggle room" when you're talking about WATER. Now, I too have a goat to milk and two sweet "preemies" to feed until they can be placed back with mama. Good luck and thanks for the post, but let's tell it like it is, OK?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 04, 1999.

Thanks Kristi,

"Unless I was one of the molehills, I'd feel that there is no big deal either. However, do your workshops ask what each system would do if the electricity shut down or they could not get chemicals for several months? Or if a system upstream screwed up and put wastewater into their intake pipe? Contingency plans for outside influences are important, in this case more important than for internal failures."

That gets my attention!

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), June 04, 1999.

California Water Resources Control Board

http:// www.swrcb.ca.gov/y2k/y2k.html

Discharger's Year 2000 Forum

http:// www.swrcb.ca.gov/y2k/html/forum.html

[Virtually no action. They must be communicating in private... one hopes!]

LINKS: YEAR 2000 - Information for Waste Dischargers

http:// www.swrcb.ca.gov/y2k/html/links.html

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), June 04, 1999.

Kristi, thank you for posting this. As we always say, "hope for the best". The "best" means to me: the issue is being taken seriously, problems being looked for and identified, people working together and applying pressure to get this done. I am glad of some evidence that this is happening. Now I hope those contingency plans already in place for earthquakes, are being beefed up.

It's encouraging that embedded systems problems are being found less commonly than expected (in general). The scenarios of futility that strike the "bottomless fear" in people are not just that there will be some problems, but are based on the idea that everywhere will have the same dire problems at once, overwhelming the ability of any area to help any other area.

I hope that California will put out a better awareness campaign, that people should secure a good water supply however they can (which they already know they should, because of earthquakes), especially the desert areas. As with yourself, it can take time to get this together. The Y2K-specific advice is on the OES web site but not many will ever see that.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), June 04, 1999.

Thanks Kristi.

I'm both pleased and worried by this molehill thing. I mean, the LA basin would make for a really, really, really big molehill...

Is it safe to assume that the more complex and large in scale the system the more likely the chance for embedded systems problems?

If a large metropolitan area requires more technology because of the size of the system required then does that mean their chances for becoming a molehill increase?

If there are many molehills that require fixes not initially addressed prior to the rollover then does that mean they are completely unknown and require time to develop a fix? Will spare parts be available?

If there are many molehills which pop op all over the state how does that burden those that fix the problems? How long will people have to wait until the molehill in their backyard is fixed?

Calfornia has some pretty big metropolitan areas but LA concerns me because it's dependent on the aquaduct to bring water into the area and it's tough to dig a well in the city (and who would want to?).

Someone put my mind at ease please : )

Mike ==========================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), June 04, 1999.

BTW Kristi? I'm supposing your suggestion that I was "sexist" had been based upon the "assumption" that I am a man? Perhaps you haven't read any of MY posts before, huh?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 04, 1999.

The LA Dept.of Water & Power recommends prepping for Y2k as you would prep for an earthquake. They have an earthquake survival guide at www.ladwp.com/reserv/safety/survival/quake.htm It contains many good tips for getting prepared, water disinfection, etc.

The state OES page has a water emergency plan in PDF.

As far as individuals go, I've found it's literally a case of 'you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make 'em prep!'

-- flora (***@__._), June 04, 1999.

Ok "Will",

I admit I thought you were a man - the "hope you are married to a smart, tough man" part stuck in my craw - I took it to mean you thought I was a bimbo with her head stuck in the sand. Ironically we are probably pretty much alike, you and I (geez...goats too?!). We just have a different style in how we are trying to help, but both of us WANT to help. Truce? (smile). And, yes I have read a good number of your posts, found them interesting - honestly never thought before about your gender. So neither of us are sexist pigs, now I can sleep tonight.

As you sound much more experienced about goats would you mind emailing me privately so I can ask a few questions? Would be much appreciated and I don't wish to take up any more bandwith here OT then already done. Thanks!

Sincerely,

Kristi

-- Kristi (securx@succeed.net), June 04, 1999.