Some people have understandably queried the statement I made in the recent Jeff Rense radio interview concerning Koskinen's warning to individual states that they should be prepared for three-week power outages.

I mentioned Georgia State Senator Grindley as one of the sources for that information, but here's a second source:

NEWS from NIRS NUCLEAR INFORMATION & RESOURCE SERVICE
1424 16th St. NW Suite 404
Washington, DC 20036
202-328-0002 fax 202-462-2183
www.nirs.org nirsnet@nirs.org

August 25, 1999
For Immediate Release
Contact: Mary Olson 202-328-0002

[snip]

"John Koskinen, Head of the President's White House Council on Year 2000 Transition, has been telling state officials that they should assume an electrical outage of three weeks duration as part of their contingency planning. While Koskinen is not asserting that such an outage will occur, shouldn't the nation's nuclear reactor operators also take this as the baseline for their contingency planning?" Said Mary Olson, NIRS Nuclear Y2K Project Coordinator. "Loss of off-site power and loss of back-up power, also called Station Blackout, is the single largest contributor of risk to reactor operation, according to NRC. What makes January 1, 2000 unique is that every reactor system in the country, and indeed, the world will be challenged on the same day."

[snip]

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), December 06, 1999

Answers

John,

Were is the "specific" link to that statement? Having a bit of trouble finding it.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 06, 1999.

This Mary Olsen may be using the same source Georgia State Senator Grindley as the reason for her communications. So we may be left with just one source.

-- David Holladay (davidh@brailleplanet.org), December 06, 1999.

"Said Mary Olson,"

-- (Ladylogic@aol.com), December 06, 1999.

John,

Your thread headline is misleading. Asking the reactor systems to be *ready* for a three week power outage as a contingency plan and saying Koskinen has issued a "warning on three week power outages" is quite different.

However, with that clarification, I still think this is all too little too late. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.

-- Sara Nealy (keithn@aloha.net), December 06, 1999.

Here you go, Diane...:)

http://www.n irs.org/NRCdeniespetitionsAugust25.htm

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), December 06, 1999.

I hate to rely on these people for ANYTHING, particularly as it has to do with Nuke Power. They are even more dogmatic and radical than Mr. Milne on their subject.

C

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), December 06, 1999.

That article had at least three meta-quotes without any attribution at all.

-- (Ladylogic@aol.com), December 06, 1999.

[Easy enough to corroborate all of the quotes above...:)
202-328-0002 fax 202-462-2183
www.nirs.org nirsnet@nirs.org

Contact: Mary Olson 202-328-0002

And for more Koskinen background relating to this topic, this is from the NHNE Y2K Report 27: 5/30/99...]

MIXED GOVERNMENT MESSAGES COULD SPAWN PANIC
(Sources: William Ulrich, COMPUTER WORLD, 5/17/1999; Kerry Brock, THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE YEAR 2000 TECHNOLOGY PROBLEM, 5/25/1999)

According to Y2K analyst, William Ulrich, inconsistent Y2K messages from the White House could create the perception of a cover-up, driving a jittery public to the very behavior the government is trying to prevent.
Case in point: In an April 22 speech to the ASIA-PACIFIC ECONOMIC COOPERATION (APEC) forum, the President's Year 2000 Chairman, John Koskinen, spouted typical government rhetoric, "We expect that our basic infrastructure will hold, that our electric power grids will function, that our telecommunications systems will work effectively and that our banking systems will not have major difficulties." He said that the major problem confronting every country is not so much Y2K itself, but "the risk of overreaction by the public."
However, in the same speech, Koskinen made his strongest Y2K comments to date: "We've told our local governments and state governments that they need to be prepared to handle emergencies on their own, since the federal government can't be everywhere dealing with every problem in light of the large number of problems that we are likely to have."

Ulrich responds, "Ultimately, Koskinen doesn't know what will happen in the early months of 2000. Working phones and electricity don't rule out failures in production, transportation, imports and exports, local government, water or small business. If serious problems do emerge and people are unprepared, then maybe we'll panic....Although corporations are building contingency plans, few individuals and communities are following suit. If the problem is acute, many will be unprepared....If the government wants to avoid panic when problems occur, it should extend its preparation campaign to communities and individuals."

Kerry Brock, Director of Broadcasting at the MEDIA STUDIES CENTER offers these additional examples of government inconsistencies at the May 25 hearing of the Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem:

"The governments' own Y2K Czar, John Koskinen, advises journalists to continually drive toward the facts, though it seems obvious to journalists in the know, [that] Koskinen seems to avoid facts. Always in a calm and low key presentation, he tells us the power industry nationally has done well but he's concerned about local power companies.
He thinks the national telephone systems will work but he is concerned about the 1,400 small telephone companies. He indicates we should not worry but we should worry. These are not facts, but public vallium, and the news media as a whole is not picking up on it. As Jeff Gralnick of CNN told us, 'Journalists are drowning in a sea of conflicting information.'"

"Senator Dodd states: 'The world oil supply faces a series of Y2K risks from the well in the ground to the gas station in your neighborhood.' Koskinen says, 'Although there may be some minor disruptions...the industries are confident...that the supply of natural gas and petroleum...products [will be] uninterrupted.' The Senate Y2K Committee cites a GAO survey that raises major concern over the readiness of America's water utilities. On the other hand, Koskinen reports cautious optimism that water utility services will continue uninterrupted by Y2K issues."

Brock adds her own warning to the government: "If Y2K failures are a fraction of what the government believes they might be, in the post-millennium blame game, journalists will haunt the people responsible for duplicity." (JG)

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), December 06, 1999.

There is a huge difference between the preparedness message(however lowkey) stated by Koskinen which says the same thing that John Hughes of the Office of Emergency Management in NYC namely: The Feds cannot respond to things quickly, nor can they be everywhere at once and the headline of this thread. There is enough going on without adding old fog. Koskinen has *never* said in any presentation since he got the job that any state should prepare for three weeks of outages. Cheers, AGF (who has been at this for a long time)

-- drac (greenspanisgod@frb.giov), December 06, 1999.

John,

It's extremely important that you don't mislead, which is what you've done. There is not warning in ANY of the information that you have. Correct, verified info. is more than damning toward the polly-spin, 3 day storm crap.

-- PJC (paulchri@msn.com), December 06, 1999.

From the article cited (linked here),

"John Koskinen, Head of the Presidents White House Council on Year 2000 Transition, has been telling state officials that they should assume an electrical outage of three weeks duration as part of their contingency planning. While Koskinen is not asserting that such an outage will occur, shouldnt the nations nuclear reactor operators also take this as the baseline for their contingency planning?" Said Mary Olson, NIRS Nuclear Y2K Project Coordinator.

This is very well likely and not misleading in the least.
Koskinen has probably (hopefully) been quietly informing "officials" of the much more brutal realities of Y2K fallout, rather than the milk'honey he's been broadcasting to the general, sappling, public (NB, 'broadcast' is a term used in describing the spreading of fertilizer).

-- faith'nhope (y2kaos@home.com), December 06, 1999.

I read that article in Aug when it came out. So did eveyone else.

-- semper paratus (always@ready.now), December 06, 1999.

Hi John,

Thanks for bring the article over here where I could get a better look at it.

"Sources: William Ulrich, COMPUTER WORLD, 5/17/1999; Kerry Brock, THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE YEAR 2000 TECHNOLOGY PROBLEM, 5/25/1999)"

Now I understand who the two sources are: W. Ulrich, who does what for Computer World?...and Kerry Brock, a member of the Federal(?) Special Committee? I think they are just writer's, much like those of us on this forum.

Furthermore, I found nothing in that article that stated that Koskinen said to prepare for a three week storm. I don't think he will ever say that because I think he means everything he says in that article. I only came upon that realization this morning, after some soul-searching in another thread. If you have some time, please read the posts by me and eve:

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

-- (Ladylogic@aol.com), December 06, 1999.

Hey! Forgive me for getting a little irritable about this!

Firstly, I have never said that "Koskinen is warning people to get ready for a three-week storm." Yet here once again I'm being taken to task for this. If someone else wants to erroneously report that I said this [in this case, he corrected himself quickly] go after him, not me.

Secondly, like it or not, Koskinen is warning state officials to get ready for three week power outages, whether for contingency purposes or not. He's

warning them. That's all he did, and all I reported him doing. A header is just that - a header. It precedes the fuller item below, which clearly states that is is a WARNING for CONTINGENCY purposes.

If anyone has a problem parsing that, Y2K is the least of their problems!

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), December 06, 1999.

Who on earth is the idiot who wrote this?

There is enough going on without adding old fog. Koskinen has *never* said in any presentation since he got the job that any state should prepare for three weeks of outages

Did you even bother to read this? Did you bother to get hold of Marty Olsen before you virtually accused her of lying in her Press Releases?

And here's another pontificating idiot:

It's extremely important that you don't mislead, which is what you've done.

Where have I misled? Because I accurately reported information from a named source which you can't be bothered to check out for yourself directly? Or do you need more than a name, phone number, fax number, and web site address to help you actually reach a source?

Hilariously, I then add an older article for background, and that immediately becomes magically transmuted into the source for my original quote, even while that original item itself is sitting in plain view at the head of the thread!

How on earth do you expect to make it through Y2K if even reading sequential posts accurately stretches your capability?

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), December 06, 1999.

Who cares what Koskinen says? I don't trust any politician as far as I could throw them. They think that it is their job to lie. That's the reason we are all here, because we don't believe them, and we are smart enough to know what is best for ourselves.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 06, 1999.

Err, I would be the first idiot and I don't recall calling Mary Olson anything, but rather stating very clearly that John Koskinen has never told any state or anyone else to prepare for a three week outage. He has been consistent from the the time he began making public statements. I have a healthy scepticism concerning accuracy in reporting. Still do. Cheers, AGF

-- drac (greenspanisgod@frb.giov), December 06, 1999.

John, thanks for finding this article.

Hey folks, why worry about Koskinen? He hasn't been straight up since Day 1, and he's not going to change now. Whether or not he's surreptitiously suggesting to politicians on the state level to prepare for three weeks of outages is NOT critical - each of us already either think that's possible OR NOT. Koskinen's not going to make anyone change camps at this late date. If you haven't made up your mind, there's not much time left, so don't spend too much of it trying to pin down the evaders.

Why not call up your own representatives? I got right through to Grindley. No *$%*** to wade through, no doublespeak to decipher. His bottom line was "whatever you think the worst will be, DOUBLE IT." Direct quote.

No one's going to pin someone like Koskinen down at this point, and he evidently isn't motivated by altruism. We know they lie, we know they cover up, we know they think we are stupid....I'm tired of trying to get the truth out of some of these folks.

Thanks to George Grindley for his honesty, whether he turns out to be right or wrong. Anyone else have any encounters of the third kind to share?

-- Jill D. (jdance@mindspring.com), December 06, 1999.

John.... about the Rense show... you referred to some document where ?? gov't ?? were assuming.. or at least didn't dispute, the possibility of a 70% loss of oil imports and refining capability. Or something like that. Is that a public document? Can you point us there? Thanks

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), December 06, 1999.