I don't understand what NERC is trying to do. I thought that they learned their lesson after the fixed April 9th drill. Now they are literally telling the utility companies how to answer the general public's concerns and also how to publish compliancy ststements regardless of their status. Just when the Electric Industry was getting such good press about working hard and exhausting every avenue of remediation and testing, along comes this act of stupidity and completely eliminates any and all crediblity that was gained by some of their engineers and technical wizards. I've heard of shooting yourself in the foot but this is just idiotic

Chuck

-- Anonymous, July 06, 1999

Answers

Chuck,

First off, your above comment means nothing, unless people can access the original information that prompted it. I've taken the liberty of copying it from another thread on this forum.

Y2Knewswire URL for NERC story: http://www.y2knewswire.com/19990706dll.htm

Second, Rick will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe NERC is--FIRST-- a trade association. It isn't at all uncommon for members of any trade association to follow a "template" press release format.

("United we stand, etc., etc.")

Third, nothing is an act of stupidity if it achieves the public relations goal. How many people really read "Y2k Newswire?" Most movers and shakers get their news from the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times.

If either of those publications report "something fishy" with regard to NERC's alleged template press releases, watch out.

Now that the Y2k liability issue has been settled in Congress, we actually may see those kinds of stories. After all, what might the utilities say? "So, SUE me?"

-- Anonymous, July 06, 1999

No wonder you're confused, confused.

The WSJ and NY Times are fluff for people who like to read spin. I tend towards Rueters, Dow Jones and Telerate as well as Knight Ridder. Even those sources must be read with a teaspoon of salt or two.

You're correct in that NERC is a trade association, but you're incorrect in assuming that it is being treated as such in regard to Y2K. I agree that it is not unusual for a trade assoc. to publish a party line. And, quite frankly, I were a utility owner and someone offered me a softball like that, I'd probably swing on it. Then I could enjoy the "safety in conformity" legal principle. Unfortunately this ain't your typical party line. This one involves the lives of millions of innocents. I think that's why people here are so outraged at this concept.

The conclusion that I've come to is one of resignation. We couldn't fix all the problems even if John Koskinen himself got on the tube with Slickster and called the Nation to unite to solve the building crisis that is Y2K. Especially in the electric sector. So I say simply this, Hubris Kills and Caveat Emptor.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 1999

Jim -

Now we are all getting confused.

You said "We couldn't fix all the problems...Especially in the electric sector"

Are you saying that, basically, complete remediation of the Electrical Utilities is impossible? And that many bad things will flow from this?

I know we are both looking at the same data (postings from CL, Factfinder, Dan the Power Man, combined with readiness declarations from the Utilities) and yet you seem to be drawing pessimistic conclusions, while I am more upbeat.

[Caveat: further info about the TAVA/RW Beck situation - see Drew Parkhill's thread - may temper my optimism!]

Regards

-- Anonymous, July 06, 1999

Yes unequivocably.

How many Y2K ready utilities are there as of this moment? What percentage of the problems do you think have been missed to date? Are you claiming they've all been fixed? Or that all problems could in fact be fixed?

It's all about systems and failure rates. We live in an imperfect world.

Hubris kills.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 1999

Confused: That is a good handle for you because you haven't been keeping up with current events. Everyone knows NERC is a trade association and that NERC has been bottle feeding the utility companies from day one. I don't have the time to provide you with all the links to demonstrate this fact. The point is this: some of the utility companies were approaching minimal levels of credibility even with the "doomers" and now NERC has once more tossed that into the dumper. Sooner or later this little fiasco will come back to bite them.

By the way, if you're going to offer advice get a name.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 1999

i am so tired of all the subterfuge and innuendo being thrown at us on an almost daily basis.

remember that we are only talking about 'mission critical' the things barely necessary to limp along...

many seem to have 'conveniently' forgotten that even if individual power plants aren't, in fact, 'y2k ready' they may still claim that they *are* y2k ready.

this is a very ugly parody, perpetrated by industry insiders, upon the public who trust and depend on them. they consistently add insult to injury... and that may turn out to be in a very literal sense.

how gullible are we? no matter how ludicrous the statements spewing forth from the spinmeisters, it seems, if they repeat them often enough we start to believe they are true.

this from y2knewswire

This, combined with the now-famous "exceptions list" allows electric utilities to be called "Y2K Ready with exceptions" even though they aren't ready for Y2K, resents a clear pattern: NERC is after a PR victory, not y2k compliance. Readers are reminded of NERC's own words, distributed to power companies before the 4/9/1999 "drill" that said, "Do not make the drill too complex. We want to have a successful and meaningful story for publication..."

_never in human history have so many humans blindly trusted that so many other humans won't screw up._

dr.ed yardeni

-- Anonymous, July 06, 1999

Chill, Chuck!

I've followed NERC's position on this issue for many months.

I also know that Mike Adams, the publisher of Y2k Newswire, has many other businesses. I know their names. I know where he lives.

And, I do have a name. I am "Every Man," and considering the wide range of opinions on Y2k, I am

-- Anonymous, July 07, 1999

Mike Coulter:

Even Factfinder has only found 4 Nuke sites reporting compliancy (readiness?) so far. The other 99 have still not done such reporting. I hope that you are a reserved optimist (preparing for bad possibilities, just in case). BTW, Nostradamus says that in September, an eclipse over Europe will occur (true) and a comet will hit the earth (we couldn't see it earlier, because it is hidden with the sun). So your optimism, concernig Y2K may be warranted, as we won't make it to January!

-- Anonymous, July 07, 1999

Sean,

Ummmm....have a lot at this and let me know if I am being unjustifiably optimistic. [But then of course they could all be lying.]

And I am prepared for an electrical outage, however it is caused. The assumption that optimists do not prepare for problems (whether Y2K- realted or not)is false.

From http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/990707/dc_nuclear_1.html Wednesday July 7, 11:38 am Eastern Time

Company Press Release SOURCE: Nuclear Energy Institute NEI: Nuclear Energy Industry Closes in on Year 2000 Readiness; Fewer Than 60 Non-Safety Computer Items Left to Remediate WASHINGTON, July 7 /PRNewswire/ -- With the new millennium six months away, U.S. nuclear power plants are on the verge of achieving complete Year 2000 readiness.

The electric utilities that own and operate nuclear power plants have only 58, non-safety computer items left to remediate industrywide. Because all of these items have firm completion schedules, the industry is confident that plants will continue generating electricity as reliably on Jan. 1, 2000, as they do today.

Sixty-eight of the nation's 103 operating reactors have completed all remediation -- encompassing safety, operating and site support systems -- and are Y2K ready.

The other 35 reactors have a total of 58 computer items left to remediate. Of the 35 reactors with remediation work remaining, none has outstanding items that affect plant safety. Only 21 are remediating plant operating or support systems, and the other 14 are remediating site support systems that do not affect plant operations.

Examples of systems that will be remediated include plant operating systems that directly control electricity production, such as the digital feedwater system; plant support systems that perform monitoring or backup functions, such as the condensate polisher system; and site support systems that are not tied directly to power plant operations, such as work management systems.

Many of these outstanding items are scheduled for remediation during reactor refuelings, which routinely are scheduled in the fall so that the plants' ability to provide electricity at the most economical rates during hot summer months is not impeded.

``The nuclear energy industry has taken early and thorough action on its Y2K readiness program, and is on track to achieve full Y2K readiness well before the Year 2000 rollover,'' said Ralph Beedle, senior vice president and chief nuclear officer of the Nuclear Energy Institute.

``Most importantly, safety functions will not be affected by Y2K issues. Because of the breadth of plant readiness efforts, we are resolving the last remaining items that would in any way affect general plant operations and site support systems. We will continue in the weeks and months ahead to review and refine contingency plans and to participate in industrywide drills. Our goal is to achieve operations-as-usual across the industry at midnight, Dec. 31.''

During the past two years, the industry has tested approximately 200,000 items potentially susceptible to Y2K issues. Approximately five percent of these, or 10,000 items, needed remediation. As electric utilities wrap up internal remediation activity, they are devoting resources to working with vendors that provide services to the facilities to ensure a problem-free rollover.

The Year 2000 problem, commonly described as the ``millennium bug,'' results from programming that allows years to be recorded as only two digits. Because four digits are required to make the change from 1999 to 2000, concern exists that operations in a host of businesses, industries, governments and other institutions will be disrupted by computer systems that erroneously read the year 2000 as 1900.

The electric utilities that operate nuclear power plants in 31 states reported their Y2K readiness status to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) on July 1. NERC is the coordinating group for regional and national electric reliability issues.

The NRC, in testimony before Congress and in other forums, has said that no Y2K problems have been identified that directly affect the proper functioning of safety systems at nuclear power plants. Additionally, the NRC has voiced its commitment to do what is necessary in its oversight of nuclear power plant readiness efforts for the facilities to safely operate through Jan. 1, 2000, and beyond.

The Nuclear Energy Institute is the nuclear energy industry's Washington- based policy organization. This news release, the industry's Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure and additional information about nuclear energy are available on NEI's Internet site at http://www.nei.org.

-- Anonymous, July 07, 1999

should be "...have a *look* at this..."

(time to mainline some java)

MC

-- Anonymous, July 07, 1999

Mike:

Before you get expend too much energy on Comet Lee, check out the following URL.... http://encke.jpl.nasa.gov/. JPL will give you some facts as to why we shouldn't worry about this comet.

Chuck

-- Anonymous, July 07, 1999

Chuck -

I think you are mixing me up with Sean. I think he is the one worried about Comet Lee.

-- Anonymous, July 07, 1999

Mike:

Mea Culpa:

Sean:

Heads up

Chuck

-- Anonymous, July 07, 1999