I just found this posted on csy2k and it made quite an impression on me. The author quotes from the disclosure statement located on the CSW site. (CSW Corporation owns and operates America's second largest electric utility system.) The author(Ken Winters) said-"Some minor problems yes. Some required software upgrades, yes, but not a large number of critical systems that would potentially bring down the plant. I think their findings are very typical of what other power companies will find (some will have less digital systems, some more)". Personally, I found this to be quite encouraging as far as having power in January is concerned. Beneath the qoutes is a response from another author (Bradley K Sherman) who raises a good question regarding the lack of "panic" in other countries. I would be interested in hearing comments from any IT people here. In your opinions, is this indeed good news? Could this indeed account for the lack of "panic" in other countries? Thanks for any input.

=====================

http://csw.com/y2k/

[Quote] 1. Power Plants a) At power plants we have found no Y2K issue that would have brought down the plant. b) 50% of power plant controls operate using pneumatic systems where Y2K is not an issue. c) Some Y2K issues we have found in plants affect reporting systems; even where they output an incorrect date, they have led to no equipment failures. d) Some plants use a Digital Control System that required updates.

2. Transmission and Distribution a) The vast majority of T&D is wires, poles, transformers, switches and fuses where Y2K is not an issue b) Under 15% of control systems that operate T&D equipment are micro-processor based and all processed Y2K dates correctly. c) The standard residential meter is not affected. d) 200 older model meters were found to have a date- issue with leap year 2000. These meters have been corrected.

================

BKS wrote:

I wonder what percentage of overall production capacity their 103 generation units represent. Coming from the self-proclaimed second largest utility system in the U.S., this may explain the lack of panic in countries purportedly behind the USA in remediation. Buried in their powerpoint presentation is the statement that their business systems were the biggest problem.

-- CD (not@here.com), July 09, 1999

Answers

Yeah. Self-proclaimed and self-reported. Independent consultant Tava/Beck says otherwise: ``Utilities are scared,'' said Cameron Daley, chief operating officer of Framingham, Massachusetts-based Tava/R.W. Beck, which tested and upgraded systems for more than 100 U.S. utilities. ``The whole grid won't collapse, but there will be outages that could last up to several weeks.''

http://www.aol.com/mynews/business/story.adp/cat=020102&id=19990630080 19182

-- a (a@a.a), July 09, 1999.

If other countries aren't in a state of panic, IMHO, it's because they haven't been pampered silly like those of us in the United States.

Here--if the cable's out--it's an emergency to lots of folks.

Over there they say, "Hey, we've been through worse."

How many people on this forum have actually VISITED other countries, better yet WORKED there for an extended period of time?

Don't get me wrong. I love America and thank God I have the right to live here.

Keep in mind, however, that much of the rest of the world doesn't have what WE have, in terms of "creature comforts" and living space. They're used to it.

So--they may say, and rightfully so--"So What?"

-- been (there@done.that), July 09, 1999.

Don't go 'Norm' on us!

-- Shills (all@around.us), July 09, 1999.

Good post,

'been' I think you are right on.. Losing the power grid is not the end of the world. Nor is losing the cable or the phone. It just isn't a real emergency until people can't get food for an extended period of time. Look at those Kosovo guys. They got bombed for weeks, no power, no food, no weapons, and a hostile armed enemy trying to kill them. Out of 800,000 people about 10000 died?! (1/80th). People survive pretty well when they have to.

Bryce

-- Bryce (bryce@seanet.com), July 09, 1999.

Even if the power plants are fixed, they will not produce power without fuel. This is being ignored in the discussion of the fixes. The numerous points of failure include embedded systems at the wellhead, pipelines, refineries, railroads, natural gas pipelines, petroleum tanker systems, dockside unloading systems etc. etc. Get my drift? If enough is fixed to provide say 70% of the fuel before the rollover, how expensive will it be? 50% higher? Depression anyone, will people who lost their jobs be able to afford gas or electric power even if everything else is fixed? It does not look good.

-- Curly (Curly@notstupid.gom), July 09, 1999.

A couple of other statements from there disclosure.

"Other Y2K activities are on schedule to be completed later this year." I wonder what these are?

"This is an important milestone in CSW's year 2000 readiness project." This is another template word. Check out "milestone" in all these releases.

They are working on it, but they are not yet ready let alone compliant.

-- Mike Lang (webflier@erols.com), July 09, 1999.

Their-get it right Mike.

-- Mike Lang (webflier@erols.com), July 09, 1999.

Bryce,

Look at those Kosovo guys. They got bombed for weeks, no power, no food, no weapons, and a hostile armed enemy trying to kill them. Out of 800,000 people about 10000 died?! (1/80th). People survive pretty well when they have to.

It didn't happen in the middle of winter. If those 800,000 had been treckking through snow and ice instead of mud I bet a whole lot more would have died. Also, NATO/US provided warehouses full of MRE's to the displaced, so they did have food.

People have endured tremendous hardships and survived. I like to think that humans are "infinitely mallable creatures with a real knack for problem solving". That's why I'm still at a 4-6 instead of a 10. People will eventually figure out ways around problems, but it may take a while to do it.

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), July 10, 1999.

At power plants we have found no Y2K issue that would have brought down the plant.

That makes it sound really good, doesn't it.

But compare that with this from the NRC (referring only to nukes):

There are mission critical non-safety-related functions such as digital feedwater controls, moisture separator reheater controls, reactor recirculating coolant controls, and motor generator set controls that are affected by the Y2K concern and have required remediation. These balance-of-plant functions are critical for power generation.

(NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 99-12: YEAR 2000 COMPUTER SYSTEMS READINESS AUDITS )

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), July 10, 1999.

'a':

Why do you not bother to mention that Tava/Beck is in the business of remediating power plants? You quite correctly report that those who are motivated to minimize problems do so. Why bring up Tava/Beck and somehow 'forget' to mention that it is in their self-interest to *maximize* problems? If you'd mentioned this, we could more easily bound the entire issue, yes?

Lane:

Nobody is saying that no y2k issues existed in any power plants. Your quite says some nukes "have required remediation." Yes, this was expected, and the implication is that such remediation has been done. If at this late date they said "will require remediation" there might be more cause for concern. The gist of the post is that issues existed, they were generally minimal, and they were addressed as required. Why make a deliberate effort to imply that they were more significant than they were, and that they haven't been repaired?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), July 10, 1999.

Wellcome back Flint. We all missed you guy!

Flint,

(1) "The gist of the post" not only refers to the fact that many significant systems and sub-systems still remain unfixed with very little time remaining, but also to the additional problem that other countries ('normal'performance of which we need badly) have done very little or nothing at all.

(2) Lane didn't make any such "deliberate attempt to imply that problems are more significant than they are". Lane just pointed out that problems ARE significant and that still remain unfixed in the USA, let alone other countries (which we badly need, I repeat)

(3) Flint, as you probably know, the NERC report revealed that 35 nukes are gonna have to wait till NOVEMBER 1999 for vendors to deliver key fix items. That leaves very little time for installation and no room for testing. Now Flint, you being so thorough in your analyses, does that make you feel comfortable? Flint, just how far away do YOU live from a nuclear power station anyway, huh?

(4) As you surely know Flint, Koskinen the Czar-soon-to-be-hanged is talking about readiness for 3 (three) week power outages. Is he some sort of radical guerrilla that infiltrated the White House while Bill and Monica were busy in affairs of State?

(5) What about the business systems, logistics, fuel supplies for power station here and everywhere else. "Other countries" need power as much as we do by the way. For one, they'll freeze to death, and we can't afford that.

Take care

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), July 10, 1999.

George,

Problem is, nobody (that I've seen at least) can verify Koskinen's talk about about readiness for 3 (three) week power outages.

If I'm wrong, please correct me.

-- looking (for@truth.andleadership), July 10, 1999.

Flint: "There are reports that are so distrubing they had to be classified" - Rep. Fred Thompson, TN

-- a (a@a.a), July 10, 1999.

'Looking' for truth and leadership.

Please go to the thread cover page of this forum (where all the threads are listed, where you clicked on to read this post), go to the very top, click on "New/Recent Answers" and wait. In a few seconds you will get another full, long page of recent answers. Just about the middle of that listing please find

"E-Mail GA State Rep. George Grindley Refers to 3 Week Power Outages"

This is a must, as it leaves on record the Koskinen-office unequivocal message of readiness for three-week power outages. To make a long story short, Koskinen people, in official meetings with State Representatives, say: "Three week power outages will not occur, but please be ready for them". Koskinen himself, officially, confirmed what I've just said.

Take care

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), July 10, 1999.

George:

Here's what Lane's quote says:

"are affected by the Y2K concern and have required remediation"

Now, here's what you say:

"still remain unfixed".

I don't see what Lane quoted as saying what you do, sorry. Lane's quote says they found stuff that required fixing, and did so. Some problems indeed have required remediation. That's what we've been doing for several years now. You may prefer to believe that nukes are still in the assessment stage despite ALL evidence to the contrary, but this doesn't make it true, very fortunately.

Try to keep these things in perspective. If the worst-case scenario is a three-week power outage at some unknown locality, of course it behooves all of us to be prepared to deal with it. After all, it might just be your locality, or mine. If it happens at all (worst cases seldom happen). But there is one *huge* difference between the *possibility* of a 3-week outage somewhere, and the *guarantee* of a 3-week outage *everywhere*. Think insurance, George. We insure against low-probability, high-damage events. Yes, the insurance salesman will spend as long as you let him telling you about all the awful things that might befall you, and he'll gloss over the fact that it almost surely won't happen to you. He's trying to talk you into a *lot* more (very profitable, thank you) coverage than you really need. Insurance is eminently sensible. Excess insurance is just money in his pocket. Don't fall for it, keep you wits about you and be careful to fulfill your own needs, rather than his wants, OK?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), July 10, 1999.

Thanks for the input Flint. But you are "dead" wrong on this one. Literally.

If hurricane Boris hits Miami, I'm okay because I live in Tampa. But if one thousand hurricanes hit Florida, although NONE go through Tampa (where I live), I'm not o.kay. I am toast. TOAST.

Flint, Y2K interdependencies change every single underpinning of insurance paradigms. Your are very intelligent, think about it, and you should eventually get it.

If my neighbors don't prepare, no matter how well I'm prepared, under Y2K circumstances I am TOAST. Same with YOU.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), July 10, 1999.

Ah, George, I guess we can lead a horse's ass to reason, but we can't make it think. Why don't we check back in a year, OK? In the meantime, I sincerely hope our unprepared neighbors don't eat us.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), July 10, 1999.

George.

I can't believe that you didn't enter into this thread if for no better reason than to dismiss me as a Troll. The truth seems to be that Mr. Grindley is somewhat confused, George.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 10, 1999.

Flint,

You are behaving childish and wreckless (or both) and at your age that's dangerous and unproper. You are not making any sense either.

Anita,

you are cute, and I love you (virtually, digitally) and I feel jealous every time that you post right after Flint. I rest my case.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), July 10, 1999.

why would anyone argue about storing supplies for two weeks? y2k will occur in the middle of winter for most!even if just a BITR,there are blizzards,ice storms,etc. possible regards ,eddy

-- eddy (xxx@xxx.com), July 10, 1999.