From Rick Cowles' site this morning: "The August 3, 1999 NERC report to DOE is now online at:

NERC's final report to DOE

I haven't had a chance to do much more than a quick scan of part of the document; hopefully will get some time to do so later today. -- Rick Cowles (rcowles@waterw.com), August 03, 1999" (And, this little gem from Bonnie Camp on another thread at the same forum:) Before the NERC to DOE report comes out, you should be aware of this. Go to:

Highlights & Security Coordinator Subcommittee Meeting January 2628, 1999 Houston, Texas

This is the "Highlights" of the MAIN region Security Coordinator Subcommittee Meeting of January 26-28, 1999. Keep that January date in mind. Under the Y2K paragraph you can find, "Also, NERC will inform DOE in July 1999 that: 1) we are ready for Y2K, 2) some known exceptions exist, and 3) we have contingency plans in place." Isn't it nice [a little irony there] that the NERC regions knew the basic message of the July (Aug.3) report to the DOE at least six or seven months before it was going to be given? -- Bonnie Camp (bonniec@mail.odyssey.net), August 02, 1999 Answers Why didn't NERC just "inform" DOE of that in January, then? -- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), August 02, 1999. (Smack on the forehead): "I know how they did it--they called the Psychic Hotline!" -- Ann M. (hismckids@aol.com), August 02, 1999. (Very interesting, this.) :)

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), August 03, 1999

Answers

Sorry for the lousy formatting. Always seems to happen when I cut and past from other forums. I am formatting challenged.

:(

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), August 03, 1999.

FM,

I got the message : )

Hey, so, the NERC can really forecast the future with incredible accuracy, huh?

These people are amazing. Time to put the machine on spin again.

Mike

==================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 03, 1999.

Glad you understood it Mike. (Especially since I appear to be "spelling challenged" on this post too!)

:)

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), August 03, 1999.

[And heeeeere we go. . . Press release time! ]

Electric Co-Ops Prepared to Keep the Lights on Into the Year 2000

WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Status reports on electric power supply and delivery into the Year 2000 indicate that the nation's cooperative electric utilities are on track with the rest of the industry in preparing to keep the lights on when the calendar changes over.

Eighty-six percent of the electric cooperatives participating in the most recent survey of the electric utility industry reported that they had achieved Year 2000 readiness by the June 30 goal set by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Another 13 percent said they would be ready before the end of the year.

Data from 96 percent of 858 electric cooperative distribution systems were compiled as part of a comprehensive assessment of electric distribution readiness contained in Preparing the Electric Power Systems of North America for Transition to the Year 2000: A Status Report and Work Plan, delivered today to DOE by the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC). As requested by DOE, NERC is the official coordinator of Year 2000 readiness, risk assessment, and contingency planning for the electric utility industry. The survey of electric co-ops, fourth in the series begun last year, was conducted by the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA), Arlington, Va., the trade association representing private, consumer-owned cooperative utilities. NERC had asked the electric utility trade associations to participate in a quarterly assessment effort of their member distribution utilities to accelerate the reporting process to DOE.

"Electric cooperatives are on track in testing and fixing their mission-critical systems and in preparing contingency plans as defined by NERC," said Ron Greenhalgh, NRECA chief engineer and chairman of NRECA's in-house Year 2000 Task Group. "Cooperatives that reported plans to achieve readiness later in the year will be surveyed further to track their progress." NERC said in the report that it would continue to update DOE as 1999 draws to a close.

"In order to serve 11 percent of the U.S. population, electric cooperatives own and maintain more than 40 percent of the electric distribution lines in the country, so they are well aware of their critical role in preparing for reliable and sustained operation of their electric systems, which are, after all, owned by their consumers," said Glenn English, NRECA chief executive officer.

"Although no business, utility or otherwise, can make 100-percent guarantees, electric cooperatives are showing themselves diligent in shoring up their service reliability and participating in this voluntary reporting effort," he said.

Electric cooperatives' high response rate throughout the NERC assessment effort indicates they have taken the appropriate steps to minimize disruptions in electric service when the millennium rolls around, according to Greenhalgh.

The electric co-op data submitted by NRECA to NERC concerned the readiness of distribution systems, or delivery of power to the end-use consumer.

Distribution cooperatives had previously indicated overall satisfaction with the readiness efforts of their wholesale power suppliers. Cooperative data on those generation and transmission functions are being handled directly by NERC in its role as coordinator of the various regional electricity grids in North America.

Greenhalgh noted that NERC has pointed out that distribution systems may be the "least sensitive to Y2K anomalies," because most equipment is mechanical, meaning there are few digital controls and relatively few embedded chips.

The nation's nearly 1,000 private, consumer-owned cooperative electric utilities serve more than 32 million people in 46 states. Stated another way, electric cooperatives serve 13 million businesses, homes, schools, churches, farms, irrigation systems, and other establishments in 2,600 of 3,128 counties in the U.S. Visit NRECA's Web site at www.nreca.org

SOURCE National Rural Electric Cooperative Association

CO: National Rural Electric Cooperative Association; United States Department of Energy; North American Electric Reliability Council

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), August 03, 1999.

We are riding into Year 2000 "on a smile and a shoeshine". Out to buy more diesel fuel....

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), August 03, 1999.

Hoffmeister,

What do you think about the NERC's uncanny ability to forcast the future ??????

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 03, 1999.

Apparently you guys haven't checked Gary North or World Net Daily lately.

NERC BASICALLY ADMITS TO LYING:

Gary North's Y2K Links and Forums

Summary and Comments (feel free to mail this page)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Category: Power_Grid Date: 1999-08-03 12:49:57 Subject: NERC Hides Truth from FEMA, Koskinen, and the Public. Surprise, Surprise! Link: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_bresnahan/19990803... Comment: The fundamental feature of every bureaucracy is its secrecy. Through secrecy, the bureaucracy retains operational autonomy while still getting funds from government. This is hardly a new observation. It goes back to Max Weber, who was writing about it 90 years ago.

NERC is something special. It has no legal authority to compel anyone to do anything. It is a power industry bureaucracy that is outside of the U.S. government. It was given authority by the Department of Energy to replace the Department of Energy in handling y2k. This got y2k off the plate of the DoE. It was a way to transfer government responsibility to a private agency. Immediately after NERC agreed, the Secretary of Energy resigned.

Every government bureaucracy wants full cooperation and full information from every agency under its jusisdiction. It wants this from all agencies that in any way affect it. Then it clams up. This is FEMA's dilemma. It is getting stiffed by NERC. FEMA has no legal authority over NERC. Yet FEMA cannot hope to prepare effectively to achieve its goal of providing public safety in 2000 unless it gets the truth about power companies from NERC. Fat chance.

Here is the political truth: in a breakdown of electrical power systems, the public will blame FEMA. FEMA's James Witt will be the fall guy. "Why didn't he do anything?" Congress will ask (if it still exists). But what can he do? NERC can play "find the facts" with Witt until the crisis hits. He is powerless. He has no authority over NERC, any more than NERC has over the power companies. It's a gigantic charade to persuade the public that everything is being taken care of in this, the most important y2k factor for society.

No one is technically responsible in this game of buck-passing, but Witt will take the hit, career-wise, if the power systems fail.

This is from WORLDNETDAILY (Aug. 3).

* * * * * * * * * *

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Power companies have purposely kept federal officials in the dark about their Y2K computer bug troubles, and one government official has expressed serious concern upon learning of the deception.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency is concerned that federal agencies and private industry are not anxious to admit their Y2K problems. When agency heads and private sector executives report to FEMA at Y2K planning sessions, they most often state that "all is well," according to one FEMA official.

"We've been trying to put together exercises here, and it's been somewhat difficult because you can't get too many federal agencies to admit anything's going to go wrong -- especially (the Department of) Energy," said Jerry Connolly, assistant to the director for FEMA's office of Response and Recovery.

He expressed concern to learn that power companies have purposefully covered up information about their Y2K preparations. FEMA has no oversight of privately owned power companies, which would enable it to shut them down if they are not ready for the Y2K rollover.

WorldNetDaily uncovered plans by the North American Electric Reliability Council to hide the truth about power companies and their true Y2K readiness. A spokesman for that organization confirmed the problems and the plans to hide the truth from the Department of Energy. . . .

A recent memorandum from NERC to the nation's power suppliers was provided to WorldNetDaily by a concerned NERC employee. That memorandum tells power companies to cover up information about their Y2K problems and to keep the facts from the Department of Energy.

"All identified (Y2K) exceptions will be held in strict confidence and will not be reported to DOE or the public. The exceptions will be reviewed by NERC Y2K project staff for reasonableness and reliability impact on operations into the Year 2000," the memo said in part.

"It's perfectly true what it says," NERC spokesman Gene Gorzelnik confirmed to WorldNetDaily in an exclusive recorded phone interview. He defended that plan by saying the information being kept from the public and the government would only complicate rather than help the process.

"When we were working on the January report (required each quarter detailing Y2K progress), one of the things that we realized was that there were a number of utilities that weren't going to be making the June 30 target date we had established (to be Y2K ready)," Gorzelnik explained.

NERC decided to let power companies list themselves as Y2K ready in time for the June 30 deadline, even though they were not. They justified this action by permitting the utilities involved to list certain Y2K "exceptions" on a separate report which was not made public or given to the Department of Energy. . . .

Gorzelnik also admitted that power companies will be permitted to claim Y2K readiness if their mission critical systems are ready even though other systems are not ready. Such exceptions are not considered necessary to report to the Department of Energy or to the public he said.

"We felt that to put out raw data, it could very easily be misunderstood," he explained of the need to keep the details from view. NERC does not believe the Department of Energy can understand the information it is hiding about Y2K exceptions.

"One of the concerns was that if it went in to DOE it would become public knowledge and the whole process that we have been working with is one where we want the utilities to be frank with us to tell us exactly what is going on so we can work back and forth and get the problem solved," said Gorzelnik.

"If information was made public then we and the utilities were concerned that the utility itself would be spending so much time answering questions from reporters and their customers that it would divert from the actual job of getting the facility ready for Y2K. That's all that was behind that. They are taking a statement out of context and blowing it up without looking at all of the factors that went into that statement being there in the first place," he complained.

A copy of the memorandum and the admission by Gorzelnik was requested by the Senate Committee on the Year 2000 and by FEMA. Those officials said they would forward a copy to the President's Council on the Year 2000 Conversion. All involved say they plan to look into the admitted deception further to determine a course of action.

Link: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_bresnahan/19990803...

-- (narnia4@usa.net), August 03, 1999.

Electric cooperatives are on track in testing and fixing their mission-critical systems and in preparing contingency plans as defined by NERC," said Ron Greenhalgh,

If I am not mistaken, everybody is "ON TRACK AND TESTING" until the deadline come and goes. Hey Hoff, is this true??? What is the deadline now?? On track and testing is not complete in my book.

-- y2k dave (xsdaa111@hotmail.com), August 03, 1999.

Hmm. Well, since NERC is basing their report on what the utilities are reporting, doesn't seem too far a stretch that the region representatives would know what was to be reported, for their region.

As for WND, please, give me a break. Some "coverup", huh? That "super secret memo" has been on the NERC site since January.

NERC must be truly incompetent. Can't even do a decent coverup. Why, the current report actually lists the utilities with reported exceptions, and also lists the exceptions! Gonna hide this stuff from the DOE, sure enough!

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 03, 1999.

Well, dave:

Eighty-six percent of the electric cooperatives participating in the most recent survey of the electric utility industry reported that they had achieved Year 2000 readiness by the June 30 goal set by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).....

So, are you asking about the others?

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 03, 1999.

Hoffmeister,

Year 2000 readiness = WHAT ?????

Yoru Pal, Ray

-- Ray (ra@totacc.com), August 03, 1999.

I am not a doomer, nor am I a "Polly". I'm a concerned person who thinks anyone who isn't doing at least some food, water, and heat preparations is a fool.

Now. I would like to say that I consider anything reported by WND to be highly suspect. Not wrong, necessarily, just suspect. The reporters there have this strange propensity for quoting "employees" who "wish to remain anonymous". e.g:

A recent memorandum from NERC to the nation's power suppliers was provided to WorldNetDaily by a concerned NERC employee. That memorandum tells power companies to cover up information about their Y2K problems and to keep the facts from the Department of Energy.

Another memorandum from NERC provided to me personally (by an employee who REALLY would like to let us all know his name, but is WAY SCARED of losing his great job) indicates that the employee who provided the above mentioned memo to WND either does not exist, or if he does, he's a damn liar.

JOJ

-- jumpoffjoe (jumpoff@echoweb.net), August 03, 1999.

Well, Ray, you could actually read the report. But, always willing to help:

Y2k Ready  Y2k Ready means a system, component, or application has been determined to be suitable for continued use into the Year 2000. Note that Y2k Ready is not necessarily the same as Y2k Compliant, which requires fully correct date manipulations. The definition of Y2k Ready requires that the primary function(s) of the system, component, or application will continue to be provided reliably into the Year 2000. Although fixing or replacing a deficient system, component, or application to make it Y2k Compliant is one common solution, achieving Y2k Ready status may also be accomplished through remediation. Remediation may include, for example, a software patch to display a correct date to an operator. Remediation could also be procedural, such as providing a highly reliable alternative that allows continuation of the primary function of the system, component, or application. Being Y2k Ready requires verification that each function necessary to reliably produce and deliver electricity is very likely to:

1. Not be impaired by a Y2k failure;

2. Continue performing satisfactorily into the Year 2000; and

3. Be sustainable into the Year 2000.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 03, 1999.

JOJ, Take it from one who KNOWS, I talked to a NERC employee who knows your friend. They said your friend was full of BS and the employee who talked to WND was correct!!

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 03, 1999.

Thank you Hoff, I will now proceed to diligently finish my preparations.

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 03, 1999.

JOJ, sorry, forgot to add that the employeeI know would REALLY would like to let us all know his name, but is WAY SCARED of losing his great job.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 03, 1999.

Just one SMALL point. If the power producers island their plants, which many have said they will do if need be, the co-ops have zero power, zip, nada. Now, how many do they serve? Yep, don't worry, be happy!

-- FLAME AWAY (BLehman202@aol.com), August 03, 1999.

Hoffmeister, to make a very long story short ('cause I can't afford the 7x24x365 full time dedication you seem to have on this forum) you are simply un-believable sir.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), August 03, 1999.

JOJ

I guess you didn't bother to read much of the article... and you don't think of yourself as a Polly?? Uh, yeh, right!... If you bother to read the WorldNetDaily article you will find that they have turned over the "leaked" hardcopy memo along with an audio tape of a named official of the NERC made during an interview... this NERC official confirms the memo... and attempts to defend the NERC's attempt to deceived the DOE...by stating that DOE is incapable of understanding the problems of Y2K on the Electric utilities. SO... read the whole thing again without your natural bias. Joe Farah and his people are all TOP NOTCH PROFESSIONAL Reporters who served in the past with excellent Newspapers and other newsmedia. These people have probably much higher standards than the NY Times or Washington Post... at least at the editorial level. At least WND can't be bought off by big corporations like the NYT and W.Post.

-- R.C. (racambab@hotmail.com), August 04, 1999.

Wow, the famous R.C.!

Tell me, R.C., just why did WND have to turnover a hardcopy of the "leaked" memo, when it has been publicly available on the NERC website since January? Or is NERC just so totally incompetent that they planned a secret "coverup", then told everybody what they were going to do?

Tell me, just how anyone can claim NERC is attempting to deceive the DOE, when the NERC report to the DOE specifically identifies each of the utilities that reported exceptions, per the "leaked" memo?

Truly, some, ummm, un-believable investigative reporting by WND.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 04, 1999.

Hoffmeister,

You said: "Tell me, R.C., just why did WND have to turnover a hardcopy of the "leaked" memo, when it has been publicly available on the NERC website since January?"

MY RESPONSE: EXCUSE ME? And how do YOU KNOW what document was turned over??? HOW DO YOU KNOW?...and please document and verify for our court of public opinion that indeed the document in question was posted on the internet as you assert.

You said: Truly, some, ummm, un-believable investigative reporting by WND.

My Response: Truly spoken by someone who knows nothing about investigative reporting. Remind me not to hire you for any journalistic positions. On second thought, no need...my memory is NOT that bad.

-- R.C. (racambab@mailcity.com), August 04, 1999.

Well, RC, always willing to help.

You asked: MY RESPONSE: EXCUSE ME? And how do YOU KNOW what document was turned over??? HOW DO YOU KNOW?...and please document and verify for our court of public opinion that indeed the document in question was posted on the internet as you assert.

OK.

First, that the document is the same.

The WND story is here

Quote from the story:

"All identified (Y2K) exceptions will be held in strict confidence and will not be reported to DOE or the public. The exceptions will be reviewed by NERC Y2K project staff for reasonableness and reliability impact on operations into the Year 2000," the memo said in part.

Now, the memo from the NERC site, available here.

All identified exceptions will be held in strict confidence and will not be reported to DOE or the public. The exceptions will be reviewed by NERC Y2k project staff for reasonableness and reliability impact on operations into the Year 2000.

Hmmm. Looks like the same memo to me. Wording identical. I guess I'll leave it to "public opinion". But, it certainly appears to use the same wording, and be the same memo.

As to it being publicly available.

Following this link should result in a directory listing of dcouments on the NERC website. The date of the document "y2k-reporting-changes-1-12-99.pdf" is January 14.

As well, if you wish, I can find dated postings both here, and on c.sy.y2k, referencing the same document, long before the WND piece of BS was ever posted.

Need any more? Truly, I bow to your "journalistic" exellence. So just let me know.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 04, 1999.

I just love WND. That organization has the most delicious way of getting the Pollys and the Liberals smokin' from their ears. Almost EVERY attempt to discredit WND comes from one of these two camps. Pretty transparent boys, not to mention 'foolish'.

I personally consider WND to be quite possibly the last bastion of investigative journalism remaining in this country. So far, they've managed to survive EVEN Kaptain Klinton, his side-kick Hitlery and Korporal Kueball, amazing indeed!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), August 06, 1999.

Gee, Will, and here I had you pegged as a National Enquirer type of person.

My mistake.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 06, 1999.

Yup. LOL, Hoff. I have never bought one in my life, although, according to the Men In Black, it is the best source for news.....

Andy Ray has been trying to sell them on his work! He's remained persistant even in the face of rejection. :)

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), August 06, 1999.