http://www.boston.com/dailynews/342/region/PSE_G_says_Y2K_glitch_didn_t_c:.shtml

Link

PSE&G says Y2K glitch didn't cause bills due at end of 2000

By Associated Press, 12/08/99 13:12

NEWARK, N.J. (AP) The company says a Y2K problem had nothing to do with it, but about 250,000 Public Service Electric & Gas Co. customers are getting bills that say their next meter reading won't happen until the end of next year.

The bills are wrong and will be corrected, the company said. The error was the result of a computer software glitch, but was unrelated to the so-called ''millennium bug'' resulting from the changeover from 1999 to 2000, said Calvin Ledford, who runs the utility's billing operation.

''This had absolutely nothing to do with Y2K at all,'' he said. ''This problem was caused by a flaw in new billing software that we started using when we went to a new bill format in October.''

Tarry Truitt of Ewing was among customers who got notices from the company informing them their next meter reading would be on Dec. 29 or 30 of next year. The problems occurred for customers whose meters were read last Wednesday or Thursday and whose bills were mailed on Thursday or Friday.

''If they don't want me to pay them for an entire year, that's quite all right with me,'' she told The Times of Trenton for Wednesday's editions.

The company has not yet decided whether to individually notify all 250,000 customers who received the erroneous notices. But customers who call the utility are being informed of the correct date for their next scheduled meter reading.

The mishap was the second large-scale computer-generated billing error by the utility this year. In January, 61,000 customers received erroneous bills based on date from 1995 that was being used for a Y2K test on PSE&G's computers.

-- Homer Beanfang (Bats@inbellfry.com), December 08, 1999

Answers

Keep up the good posts Homer -- you're better than Gary North!

So here's my "Texas Two-Step" Y2K public relations plan:

(1) Announce all systems problems are NOT Y2K-related

(2) But on January 1,2 and 3, 2000: Announce all systems problems ARE Y2K-related

(3) On January 4 and beyond, repeat Step 1

Result: Y2K will be a "three-day storm"

-- Richard Greene (Rgreene2@ford.com), December 08, 1999.

Liar! (not related) everyones a liar!

"I shall not tell a lie"

G.washington-circa 1735

-- d----- (dciinc@aol.com), December 08, 1999.

As we used to say when I was a kid, "liar, liar, pants on fire." When is a y2k glitch not a y2k glitch? When it's a y2k glitch of course.

-- Richard (Astral-Acres@webtv.net), December 08, 1999.

Mod 2, rev 3 to above:

< (1) Announce all systems problems are NOT Y2K-related

(2) But on January 1,2 and 3, 2000: Announce all systems problems ARE Y2K-related

(3) On January 4 and beyond, repeat Step 1 >>

---

(2) But on January 1,2 and 3, 2000: Announce all systems problems ARE squirrel-related, sunspot-related, terrorist related, did not-occur-at-all-related, or are the result of routine shutdowns for a maintenance....because the hoarders have all the gasoline and generators.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 08, 1999.

Richard,

ROFL! I love the Texas two-step analogy. Since Y2K *must* be a bump in the road, businesses and agencies will rely on a very strict interpretation of y2k problems. Therefore, only problems caused by an actual error in date handling, directly attributable to the calendar rolling over from 12/31/1999 to 1/1/2000, are considered y2k problems. Billions of dollars have been spent to ramrod new computers and software into place to replace non-compliant technology at the eleventh hour. These systems HAVE to be on-line by 1/1/2000, whether there has been sufficient time to test them or not, because there is no going back to the non-compliant systems in the event of failures. I have been told by one of the forum's pollies that these are y2k timing-related problems, not y2k date-related problems. Only y2k date-related problems will be considered y2k failures. Even if an accumulation of y2k timing-related problems bring us to our knees, those disruptions will be said to be unrelated to y2k.

-- (RUOK@yesiam.com), December 08, 1999.

Come ON people! you're missing the point!! There will NEVER be a Y2K-related failure. Not a SINGLE one. Ever. It's all the fault of: 1) Cyber-terrorists
2) "Timing" issues
3) Data-entry errors
4) "Programmer" errors
5) Third-party vendors
6) _________ (fill in ANY non-Y2K issue here) Jeez folks, the writing is on the wall. Just step back a bit and read it.

-- Dennis (djolson@cherco.net), December 08, 1999.

Would one of the sysops fix the above post please? Gawd I HATE HTML sometimes....

-- Dennis (djolson@cherco.net), December 08, 1999.

Yup, I heard this on the radio on the way home. Gee, I wonder why they have a new billing system. Nothing to do with Y2k. LOL!

Tick... Tock... <:00=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), December 08, 1999.

Did anyone else catch the KEY phrase in the 4th paragraph?

Says "those whose meters were read last Wednesday and Thursday".

This article is dated Dec 8, 99. So, they are talking about Dec. 1 and Dec. 2 as the read dates!

Guess their s/w CAN'T look ahead a month into the New Year, can it? NOPE, NOPE, DEFINITELY NOT A Y2K problem.

Why didn't they just blame it on that rodent-terrorist, Squirrel King?

Or is he still taking time off to bask in the glory of his alliance's triumph over the Mars Lander??

Where are you, S.K? I'm just ONE pelt short of a nice warm Y2K-compliant squirrel coat.

-- profit of doom (doom@helltopay.ca), December 08, 1999.