I would be very interested in finding out how many of the people in this discussion group are actually testing their systems, or for that fact have completed their testing. OR are you like me and only just started the testing phase (well the corporation I contract to any way).

As has been mentioned elsewhere, most people in these discussion groups are still stuck in the "awareness phase" of the Year 2000 issue. Many people must be watching these discussions in the hope of gaining a little information on what they need to do next or perhaps a glimmer into how they should test their equipment. I know that's what I've been doing for the past few weeks. What we need now is people talking about what they are doing and passing around knowledge and information. So if no one else has, let me start it off.

I am contracted to a power generation and distribution corporation in Western Australia. The Year 2000 Team I belong to are coordinating 34-40 people across the corporation who themselves are spread across many disciplines. These people have gathered and continue to gather information to include in the overall inventory for the corporation.

Currently I am trying to get together a group of engineers and technicians to get down and start sorting out who will test what. At first, only one or two of the group really believed they (NOT ME) had a problem. Now, my colleagues and I have managed to start a few more in the group thinking about the issues involved and how it may/will affect their areas of work.

As we get further into the testing of our embedded systems, our knowledge base will grow. This knowledge we hope to be able to share with others and likewise they with us. As information becomes known I will attempt to post our findings to this group. Can others start doing the same?

Kim Smith

-- Anonymous, February 18, 1998

Answers

Although I'm not involved directly in utility remediation, I' like to concur with Kim and say what a powerful, valuable resource this forum could be for those who are.

In my own case, being acutely conerned with power staying on in my area, I've contacted several key people in my local power structure to get a scope on the situation and to see if there was anything I could do to help. What I found was that it would be very helpful if I could simply provide these people with Internet locations they could utilize to find answers (and share experience) with others working on the same problems they are.

Unfortunately, (with the exception of EPRI's $50,000 per year site), I haven't found many useful places to refer them. That doesn't mean they aren't out there, but they aren't visible to me, and the net result is that I have no useful, affordable places to refer the people who could really use them.

The Legal Issue...
I could write a small book-length post on how stupid and insidiously counter-productive the Fear of Exposure issue seems to be in this potential global catastrophe case, but I'll spare everyone, and just say this instead... If you're the type of person Kim Smith is reaching out to here, but you're reluctant to get involved in the exchange because your company has deemed it wise to filter all communications through the minds of attorneys, please consider the simple alternative of registering for a free, forwarding e-mail account that will allow you to participate annonymously... One such service is Bigfoot. Just click there and open an account. Or simply open your search engine and type in "Free e-mail."

The main thing is to find a way to participate and begin building a library of questions and answers that everyone in your position can add and refer to... Collaborate on.

Rick Cowles has built a fantastic, useful web site here. With the addition of this forum (and this particular forum software which its designer built - beautifully - with working collaboration in mind) he has added another tool that has the potential of becoming one of the Internet's most powerful and important contributions to whatever level of electric remediation is attainable. But if the people actually working with the problem don't use it, that potential will not be realized.

So please... Don't let the lawyers dam up the communication. This is way too important. I hate to think a big part of the electricity-related well being of me and my neighbors may be hinging on whether or not top management and their legal advisors are thinking it may be "safer" if you don't say anything to anyone in any form whatsoever. Think about it... Isn't that a large part of how y2k got to be y2k in the first place? Does anyone believe that taking the same approach that led to the problem will fix the problem?

If you're one of the people who's actually working in the "belly of the electrical beast" you have a contribution to make here. Please find a way to make it. This may sound melodramatic, but the reality appears to be that the foundation of all of our futures is riding on whether or not you succeed. You. Not your company's attorney...

P.S. If you're aware of other genuinely useful sites where working collaboration or electric remediation tools are located, would you please leave their URLs here...

Thank-you

-- Anonymous, February 19, 1998

I agree that Kim's suggestion would be very useful, particularly on a global scale. There are a few industry groups in the U.S. that are starting to talk about exchanging test experiences and data, but by and large, these efforts are coming too slowly to get off the ground in any particular hurry.

I also have another concern. The efforts in the U.S. are most certainly U.S. centric. As far as I'm aware, there is no international effort afoot to share data and experiences. The U.S is only one country. And if the U.S. electric companies don't think they could benefit by exchanging info with their international bretheren, I'm afraid all countries, including we Yanks, miss a powerful opportunity.

Here's hoping your efforts pay off, Kim. Please email me if there's anything I can do in support, including setting up a 'players only' password protected discussion board.

-- Anonymous, February 22, 1998

Players Only Password Protected Discussion Board

Rick you are correct in your saying that this is not just a USA problem. EVERYONE who relies on western (computer) technology has this problem and all on the same grant scale.

Bill Dale has just started a 'Players Only' Y2K discussion group.

He's called it 'Collaborative Scratchpad'. The main purpose of this discussion group is for people who are actually involved in testing for Year 2000 compliance to freely pass around information and test results.

Please use this site to place [and view] any specific information.

The site's address is http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Vines/9261/scratch.html

For the password contact Bill Dale at billdale@lakesnet.net

Lets get this going, we all do not have much time left.

-- Anonymous, February 23, 1998

I am looking for real life examples of Y2K problems and failures in production or in Y2K testing. Those whom we need to convince that there is a real problem are asking us to show them the data - who, what, when, where, why, and how. The questions of how exactly does an embedded chip fail for Y2K and how does it bring down the power company are questions recently asked at a presentation on this subject. We are not engineers, but we are familiar with Y2K problems. Any examples that will illustrate the problem will be appreciated.

Dave Hunter

-- Anonymous, March 12, 1998

This response is reference to Dave Hunter's inquiry about actual test examples on embedded systems: I am presently overseeing the testing and compliance effort of our Non-IT systems for our corporation's Year 2000 effort. We are in the process of contacting our utility and other operations vendors, and reviewing the following:1) their Year 2000 compliance plan and issues; 2) year 2000 test procedures that they may have in place; 3) and any patches or upgrades that they may offer, and 4) any identified failures that they may have documented or that are documented elsewhere.

Although I do not have a written review of the test conducted at the World Trade Center, the test example was presented at a recent Year 2000 forum that my manager and I attended. Recently the facilities and operations group at the World Trade Center, ran year 2000 tests on 2 of their main elevators. They rolled the internal clock, the elevator went up, came down and turned itself off. When they went back into the system to turn the clock back to present time, the embedded chip would not take. What was supposed to be a 2 hour test, turned into a lengthly night run to remove the embedded chip, find a replacement and set the new embedded chip before the work day began. For clarity and details about the test procedures that they used, I would advise contacting the World Trade Center directly.

I have found in my research as project analyst for this project, that the IEEE professional organization has not taken the opportunity to take the stage on the embedded system and year 2000 issue. I am quite surprized, as their English counterpart, the IEE in England, has posted on their web site and is selling a recent publication on the very topic. I have ordered the publication, and it has proved to be very useful, as my colleagues in facilities and operations were looking for this very material. I would advise visiting the IEE web site: www.iee.org.uk. - BW

-- Anonymous, March 17, 1998

The World Trade Center elevator example (below) would be very significant if it was possible to nail down some details. I'll do some investigation and see what I come up with.

-- Anonymous, March 18, 1998