http://www.sjwater.com/homee2.htm#Y2K

Year 2000 Readiness Program

Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure

The San Jose Water Company ("SJW") has a Year 2000 ("Y2K") readiness program. SJW's Y2K readiness program is based on information received from various industry experts, accounting firms and other sources. A summary of the program is as follows:

1. SJW is seeking to obtain written certifications of Y2K compliance from its software vendors (Accounting System, Telephone System, etc.). SJW generally uses commercially available software packages that are represented to be Y2K compliant, and, in some cases, are certified as to Y2K compliance by independent testers.

2. SJW is exploring Y2K awareness and analysis with other principal vendors, such as its water wholesaler, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and SJW's power providers.

3. SJW is endeavoring to obtain written confirmation of Y2K readiness programs and program achievements from other vendors who may be susceptible to Y2K issues.

4. SJW is attempting to maintain an ongoing internal awareness of Y2K issues within the water industry and the general business community.

5. SJW is planning to monitor new Y2K concerns through the year 2001.

Please note that while these steps are believed to be reasonable in SJW's circumstances, there can be no assurance that San Jose Water Company, or its parent, SJW Corp., will not be affected by some aspect of the Y2K problem.

-- Ann Y Body (annybody@nowhere.dis.org), August 23, 1999

Answers

* * * 19990823 Monday

Note that everything mentioned in this Y2K statement is PASSIVE!

This is the kernel of the problem with corporate/gov't Y2K programs.

The military learned early on that depending on "confirmation letters" is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. They got bit early by false claims. Testing and VIABLE CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT PLANS are the only route to assurance of Y2K compliance.

"Y2K READY" _ONLY_ means that an entity *thinks* it is "READY" to react ( e.g., Fix On Failure; implement alternate actions ) whenever TSHTF. ( The City of Detroit has learned the hard way about inviability of _their_ so-called contingency/consequence plans in the face of failures by their $50M DRMS system! )

"Y2K READY" is a hollow term that means nothing and an unwitting public is willing to accept anyway.

SJW is objectively "DOING" NOTHING about Y2K!

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@hotmail.com), August 23, 1999.

You're right...San Jose H2O hasn't done a damn thing except paper over their A**es with compliance statements. Of course, they are betting that the sum of compliant systems equals Total Compliance...

A water and sewer WIPEOUT couldn't hit a more appropriate place, with the exception of Washington and New York!

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ Just 8 days 'till MARTIAL LAW, hurry yo preps.com), August 23, 1999.

San Jose Water Company... Hotlink...

http:// www.sjwater.com/homee2.htm#Y2K

Gawd!

Isn't it pathetic?

Years ago my town linked their own water supply system up to San Jose's. Before then, the water was great. Now... the taste... is like reconstituted toilet water. Sad.

Santa Clara Valley Water District web-site...

http://www.scvwd.dst.ca.us/

Months ago I contacted them and asked them to list more comprehensive Y2K information on the web-site... for the local communities sake... its something. Whats New...

http:// www.scvwd.dst.ca.us/hottopic/index.cfm

Look down at... Hot Topics... Year 2000 (Y2K)... lame. Latest info is March 1999 Aquafacts Article.

Time for another phone call.

BTW, they DO list lots of GREAT water info resources... around the country... Related Site Links...

http:// www.scvwd.dst.ca.us/otherlnk/index.htm

Got water storage?

Diane

(Thanks Ann Y Body).

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 23, 1999.

Well this makes me feel MUCH better, by the way where can I get the least expensive tanks for water storage? ;}

-- helium (heliumavid@yahoo.com), August 23, 1999.

helium,

First check out the prices at the Beehive (Mormon) survival store over in San Jose (call 411 for the number)... then... "let your finger's do the walking."

;-D

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 23, 1999.

Oh, and if you look on "yellow" page S-14 of...

"Making The Best Of Basics: Family Preparedness Handbook" by James Talmage Stevens

...he lists local emergency products suppliers and their phone numbers.

Beehive... (408) 225-3531.

Diane

Amazon .com book description...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/ obidos/ASIN/1882723252/qid%3D935425722/002-9712947-8713846

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 23, 1999.

Diane: Do you plan on leaving the San Jose area prior to December 1999? With all the latest information coming out, I hope you have plans to be somewhere else.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), August 23, 1999.

Very odd: somebody pointed out the "passive" and "assuming" nature of this utility: but let us take them at their word.

Notice that they are ... planning to monitor ... attempting to maintain an ongoing internal awareness ... endeavoring to obtain written confirmation of Y2K readiness ... exploring Y2K awareness and analysis with other principal vendors ... seeking to obtain written certifications of Y2K compliance from its software vendors ...

NOWHERE are doing any testing, remediation, or inspections of their own systems. This release, sure to be among those cited as "proving compliance" by Washington, does not have a word about testing. Nothing about contingency planning, nothing about audits, nothing about stand-by power supplies, pumps, or chemical treatment facilities.

This whole thing seems written by a former hippie, writing for a group of former hippies (to be blunt) who simply don't don't understand that the ony way to solve a technical problem involving computers and automated processes is to "change the program" then "test the change" then "install the program."

The only way this process (as written) will work is if nothing is wrong at any step in the process, in all vender's, distributor's, and user's systems; and in all corporate programs in use by San Jose.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), August 23, 1999.

See also...

San Jose's Y2K contingency planning

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001I0J

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 23, 1999.

bardou,

I HONESTLY don't know yet. Our town contains (and sits below) a rather "large" local reservoir, but heck... doubt it'll do us much good.

Got buckets... 'n wagons? May "get" rain.

I have a 79-year-old mother who "refuses" to move... she's fine with extended "camping" at home.

Leaving her alone for this doesn't seem like an option. *Sigh*

Choices... choices.

Diane

(Got an offer to bunk up in Wisconson... burr).

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 23, 1999.

I had an interesting afternoon calling around to local agencies asking for their y2k readiness disclosure. Had a lot of "sharp intakes of breath" plus plenty of confusion. At the Dept. of Human Services, it took about ten phone forwards, but I ended up speaking directly with the Inspector General of the department, who said their computer systems were "99 percent" ready, and their contingency planning would be completed in late September. I asked, "including a contingency plan for no telephone or electric utility service?" He said "yes". He referred me to somebody that I will contact tomorrow to get a copy of their most recent monthly report on their y2k readiness program.

Oklahoma City seemed pretty clueless, one person said the water company didn't provide any materials to send out, another try to a different number generated a promise to send one out today.

If I get a disclosure like the one identified above, I'm going to put a flyer out in my neighborhood, "Prepare now for water system failure in January."

-- robert waldrop (rmwj@soonernet.com), August 23, 1999.

It's interesting. I went to a SJWC presentation a few weeks ago for ordinary people interested in SJWC. They downplayed the tech stuff for us totally, though they did not flinch from answering hard questions as far as I could tell, and were even willing to be up front with all perceived and real faults.

No one to my recollection (even me) asked them any Y2k questions (the focus was on a different aspect of SJWC operations, and this is probably why Y2k didn't come up; also, MTBE did not come up, though giardia and friends did.)

Later, I cornered one employee and asked them about their SCADA systems, which they employ to keep track of flows, quantities on hand, quality metrics, etc. via radio, twisted pair, etc. All the answers I got were straightforward, technically accurate (to the best of my limited ability to determine), and non-evasive.

SJWC is listed on the NYSE. They have been in business since 1866 in SJ, and take their business seriously, in my opinion. Their reputation, profit, and probably license to operate would probably go out the window in a flash if they were not at least moderately competent. I'm sure given the limited background I had a glimpse of that SJWC is holding back far more than they are telling on the net regarding Y2K. It may be that they feel that the more they state, the more ammunition they give to doomsayers. That's just a guess, and I don't want to apologize for anyone on this, but just offer my general impressions. I suspect that many local municipalities are taking a similar strategy, although being a different type of organization (ie public entities) the overall competence is obviously subject to variation at a minimum.

Overall SJWC has a very significant reputation for guarding their facilities and land very zealously. I would be moderately surprised if they didn't apply the same zeal to Y2K issues and are merely playing silent in public. Mr. Drysdale's comment (reported in the thread on generic SJ preparedness more recently) seems typical of SJWC, and not an unrealistic or unreasonable (although less than satisfyingly complete in detail) approach. As much as I would prefer total openness and so on wrt Y2k issues from public entities and utilities, one may want to withhold judging a book by its cover, at least in this specific case. I would welcome any comments on this, even if the sentiments differ drastically from mine.

Ann

-- Ann Y Body (annybody@nowhere.dis.org), August 24, 1999.