Transcript: Private/Public Coordination For Y2K Preparedness -- Edison Electric & Montgomery County Rep. (USIA)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Transcript: Private/Public Coordination For Y2K Preparedness -- Edison Electric & Montgomery County Rep. (USIA)

23 March 1999

TRANSCRIPT: PRIVATE/PUBLIC COORDINATION FOR Y2K PREPAREDNESS

(WorldNet program with reporters in Tegucigalpa) (7980)

WASHINGTON -- Following is the transcript of a March 22 U.S. Information Agency WorldNet satellite broadcast of "Dialogue."

Reporters in Tegucigalpa questioned Jon Arnold of the Edison Electric Institute and Sonny Siegel of the Montgomery County, Maryland, Y2K program on the extent of private and public coordination to prepare for potential computer problems on January 1, 2000.

(Begin transcript) ... More ...

http://www.usia.gov/current/news/latest/99032319.llt.html?/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml

Recently up. Now need to read it. At first glance, looks like there are some interesting buried comments.

Diane

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

Answers

Question: What kind of prioritization are people recommending for resumption of services in cases of disaster?

Mr. Arnold:

[buried]

Our goal is to make it a non-event, so when you are looking at the consequence management side, as Tony alluded to, it's going to be dealt with very much like a natural disaster, whether it's an ice storm here in the U.S., or a hurricane or a tornado. You know, everyone's greatest fear is that it's one of these things that grips everybody simultaneously across the nation. All the work that is going on has shown that the common component or common failure across the U.S. is not something that is likely. All the testing has shown that we're not in store for that kind of scenario.

[/buried]

Ok, let me see if I understand this man... Testing, testing, one, two, testing... All clear, non-event.

Nope, I don't get it.

~C~

-- Critt Jarvis (critt@critt.com), March 23, 1999.

Well-- my take on this discussion is that the presenters are not spinning a story for the general population. They are talking with peer-level representatives of utilities in Honduras. They seem to have considerable confidence in self-reported compliance/readiness reports by U.S. utilities. This may or may not be an error of judgment, which is not the same as a deliberate whitewash. Maybe there's more between the lines -- if so I'm not seeing it.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), March 23, 1999.

Mr. Arnold: "All the work that is going on has shown that the common component or common failure across the U.S. is not something that is likely. All the testing has shown that we're not in store for that kind of scenario."

From Denton (Texas) Y2K Minutes:

Lovett did a Y2K test back in December, and are publishing the results nowfound that all City functions were Y2K compliant, but all emergency services were compromised because of interoperability dependence on external systems.

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch- msg.tcl?msg_id=000e8R

Hmmmm... Who else is doing interface testing?

- got PSAP?

~C~

-- Critt Jarvis (critt@critt.com), March 24, 1999.

From OG's notes on Senate Y2K Committee Food Supply Hearings in January:

"Bennett: Big problem is source of info on which USDA relies. Gartner assessed 100 major businesses to reach its conclusions re food supply. For 85 of those 100, Gartner looked at SEC filings, press releases, annual reports, etc., i.e., self-reporting. Committee has found that self-reported info tends to be overly optimistic in every circumstance. This is what's found when GAO checks numbers. E.g., Dept of Defense--when GAO checked figures, not what was self-reported. Glickman [Sec of Ag] agreed best face is put on things."

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), March 24, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ