Posted this on TB2000. Though I would repeat here.

A lot of good, factual information regarding electric utility test results has been provided here by engineers actually involved in the test/remediation program. For the most part, this info (and the summary data reported to NERC) has been ignored or ridiculed due to the lack of independant audits to validate/verify the results. I contend that independant validation/verification has been achieved to a large extent. Large utilities that participated in the EPRI Y2K program have performed isolated, independant testing. The EPRI website database has provided a forum for the utilities to review/discuss best test practices and view test data obtained by other utilities in totally independant tests. For each critical device that I have tested, I have downloaded and stored test procedures/results from other utilities that corroborate my results. In addition, vendor test results are usually also available.

Independant corroboration by technical experts in the same field are of greater value than hiring a consultant to review test results. I doubt I could find a consultant that was as technically knowledgable the vendor design/test engineers and my peers at other utilities.

A final note on independant audits. The NRC performed independant audits of nuclear stations and found positive results. Has this made an impact of public perception of nuclear plant readiness? Based upon the feedback on this forum I would have to say NO. Why should I spend money on a consultant to review my test program? (I can hear the cries "who paid the 'independant auditor' - the utility, they are just another flunky for the utility management paid to put out the same old 'spin'". If you want an independant audit of my test program - you pay for it.

-- cl@sky.com (cl_sky@excite.com), November 17, 1999

-- Anonymous, November 17, 1999

Answers

cl,

Yeah sure, right, they are all getting IV&V. But they won't release the names of the firms doing that for them. Uh huh. Sure. Gotta keep that information secret. Doesn't matter now anyway. Less than 6 weeks to go. They either will make it or they won't, but there isn't a whole lot any of them can do to improve their odds at this point. Can't even order a complex piece of equipment right now and get it before the rollover.

-- Anonymous, November 17, 1999

For the benefit of this forum, I'm going to repeat my answer to the TB 2000 posting here:

I'm a homemaker and an RN--absolutely no experience or interest or knowledge about airports at all. A friend of mine is the director of maintenance at the local airport, in a city of 250,000 people. As soon as anything--from wastebaskets to radar--goes in, he oversees the maintenance. I called him several months ago and asked him about the airport's Y2K compliance. (The job is entirely his.) He assured me that the job was finished, and that everything would work just fine. I started asking him questions about various systems in the airport, and within 2 minutes had asked him about a system which he had completely overlooked. If I, completely ignorant on the subject, can come up with an area which he had missed, don't you think that an outside professional coming into his "plant" would be able to find even more? One of the problems with being so close to the forest is not being able to see the outline map of the trees!

-- Anonymous, November 19, 1999

Ann,

You make an excellent point. What I have come to realize is that when someone in charge of a Y2k project states that everything is just fine what it really means is that they are deluding themselves. As you note, any quality IV&V would pick that up immediately, but there won't be any such intensive look in the few weeks remaining. So things will fail that could have been spotted. Too bad for us all.

-- Anonymous, November 19, 1999

I have found that a very good independant verification on Y2K work is this very forum, along with TB2000. I have posted our company's work on these two forums, and on three occassions in responding to questions raised, I have had cause to re-visit some system or another and retest using a different method. Fortunately, in each case, our original work was correct. But what a great additional source of fault finding we have right here.

Malcolm

-- Anonymous, November 21, 1999

Malcolm,

Once again I salute you. And once again I wish we had hundreds like you posting here. You are quite right. It is vital to do all the work you possibly can AND when some idea tweaks your concern, to go back and recheck. Obviously we can never think of everything in any field or endeavor, but we sure can get some good thoughts and run with them.

-- Anonymous, November 21, 1999