Hi Daniel,

Practicing my own preaching, I'm sticking this in your water forum as opposed to sending it back to the list. Call me a rockhead, but I sure wish more people would use this forum to post the water utility information they come accross, as well as for discussion of the issue. The forum format provides such an excellent opportunity for building an online "library" of readily accessible information that it's unfortunate (to say the least), that nearly everyone in y2k world has insisted (and continues to insist), that almost all important ideas, insights, experiences, references, be communicated via email only. (This forum software will facilitate that too. All anyone needs to do is "add an alert," and tell the software how often to send updates of what gets posted here.)

Email's a fantastic tool, but when it comes to dissemination of information to large groups of people, there's more than one dead end - not the least of which is the fact that instead of ending up online, on web pages where others (who've come late to the party), can be referred for "compressed backgrounding," countless excellent items have instead wound up sitting on individual's personal hard drives, gathering dust.

The best example of the exception to the above is the Electric Utilities and Y2K forum. No doubt everyone's familiar with that one, and no doubt anytime anyone utilizing your water site or list wants to do a quick check on what's up with power, they head there to click around. (Interesting that we get very few emails concerning power isn't it? I suspect that's because most y2k-aware people just know Rick's site/forum is the place to go and the place to send people to get up to speed as possible on the electrical situation.)

Or, in other words, it works pretty well. And again: I sure wish people would start utilizing the facility you had the foresight to set up (a long time ago), to help everyone stay abreast of the water situation.

Which reminds me to mention the above sure hasn't been put here to encourage you, Daniel; you know all this stuff or you wouldn't have set this forum up in the first place. I'm putting it here to encourage others to:

A) Think About the larger benefits - the Broder Utility - of using this forum for communication to help people learn and know about one of the most absolutely vital y2k questions there is; and

B) Start using it.

Okay. End of sermon, sales pitch, etc.. On to the reason I'm here. I just got a note from the Y2K Water List. This one:

From : Roleigh Martin List
Date : May 3, 1999

Introductory excerpts provided -- the WSJ online is not accessible to nonpaying members -- URL not provided -- can be searched via paid subscription at http://www.wsj.com

Wall Street Journal Online - April 30, 1999

----------------------------------------------------------------

GAO Says Not Much Is Known
About Readiness of Water Supply
Dow Jones Newswires

WASHINGTON -- The General Accounting Office Friday said "little is known" about the readiness of the nation's drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities to handle the year-2000 computer bug.

[...snip...]

It reminded me of this press release from the U.S. Senate's Special Committee on Y2k:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 27, 1999

SENATE Y2K COMMITTEE: STATES, EPA LACK OVERSIGHT OF WATER UTILITY READINESS

New report says 200 million Americans served by water facilities with "inactive" regulators

WASHINGTON, DC - While most major water utilities are believed to be prepared for the year 2000, a report released today by the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 (Y2K) Technology Problem highlights a lack of information on the preparedness of the nation's 70,000 water utilities, citing slim state-level oversight of Y2K compliance efforts and an insufficient federal regulatory framework for addressing Y2K problems at drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities.

[...snip...]

There's a lot more to the press release, it's located at http://www.senate.gov/~y2k/news/pr042799B.html, it's probably where the Wall Street Journal got its info, and of course, it doesn't cost a dime to read it.

I checked the GAO y2k reports list (http://www.gao.gov/y2kr.htm), but didn't see anything related.

And that's a good example of something that would make a good follow-up post to this one: The question would be, "Anyone know the URL of the GAO report mentioned in the Senate press release?"

It'll be interesting to see if it pops up in my mail and here on this web page (at about the same time).

Until later,
Bill

-- Bill (billdale@lakesnet.net), May 05, 1999