John Koskinen and Roleigh Martin Discuss the Open Letter to Governor Jesse
Ventura (and more)
By Roleigh Martin August 16, 1999
My Open Letter to Governor Jesse Ventura over the remaining Y2K issues I
consider being poorly addressed by state governments raised some eyebrows in
Washington, D.C. Most noticeably was that of John Koskinen, Chair,
President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion. Mr. Koskinen was so kind as to
grant written permission to reprint his review in my Y2K Tip of the Week
column. His review, my response, and his counter-response follow below.
An ending commentary on Koskinen's visit to Minnesota where we personally
talked over live radio and whether the letter to Governor Ventura stimulated
or was just coincidental to the letter to the 50 state governors by the U.S.
Chemical Safety Board follows. Senator Bennett visited Minnesota via
satellite conferencing and also discussed with me on live radio about these
issues.
First the material to and from John Koskinen.
From: John Koskinen
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 17:39:38 -0400
Roleigh,
Now that's a letter. Thanks for sharing it with me.
Your three major points of focus are important ones. As I was saying
yesterday in Austin, we need to concentrate on areas where everyone agrees
that work needs to be done or where we don't have enough information. And in
the case of water facilities and chemical plants, the most important
information has to be provided at the local level. In both areas, as is often
the case, larger companies seem to be devoting appropriate resources to the
problem -- although that needs to be validated in each community. But our
national surveys only reveal that no one knows how much work is being done by
the smaller organizations. In the case of water, the concern seems to be less
water quality than the ability to provide it at all if systems fail. We're
encouraging every local conversation to probe that issue. While EPA sets
national standards for chemical plants, as the state and local emergency
managers and fire department discussed in Austin yesterday, they are
responsible for inspections and insuring safe operations. After the issue was
reviewed, the community agreed to followup activities.
For pharmaceuticals which is an issue that presents national operational
issues, as you probably know, we had a "roundtable" with the entire supply
system (manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, pharmacists, hospitals,
doctors and patient advocates) here in May. The meeting determined that there
is normally a 90 day supply of finished products in the system, that the
majority of companies were nearing completion of their Y2K work, that
production and the importing of raw materials is being increased in
anticipation of increased demand, that sudden increases in the size of orders
would be investigated before they are filled which is reassuring to druggists
and hospitals who are anxious to avoid hoarding as long as they are satisfied
others are avoiding it as well, that patients should be encouraged to refill
their prescriptions 5-7 days before they run out, that no natural emergency
in the past 30 years disrupted the supply chain for more than a matter of
hours and that the greatest threat to the system is overreaction by the
public and institutional purchasers.
In short, while I think the governors need to provide leadership wherever
possible (I had a good meeting with Governor Levitt in Utah on Friday), we
need more and better discussions in each community across the country. I've
now written to 2000 mayors, personally, urging them to begin or continue
community conversations. I've also written the 9,000 members of the National
Newspaper Alliance (owners and publishers of local and weekly newspapers)
urging them to cover this story in their communities.
Keep in touch.
John
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Date: Sun Jul 11 20:55:58 1999
To: John Koskinen
From: Roleigh Martin
Dear John,
I am deeply appreciative of the time you took to read that long letter to
Jesse Ventura and for your review. May I please have permission to post your
review to my web site?
My only response, and it's basically a response to the pharmaceutical
industry because I've heard them tout this line:
"that no natural emergency in the past 30 years disrupted the supply chain
for more than a matter of hours and that the greatest threat to the system is
overreaction by the public and institutional purchasers."
1. Y2K is not a "natural" emergency; it is a man-made systemic error with no
precedence of the same scope. All precedents are very small in scale, such as
when gasoline went from 99 cents to $1.00, etc.
2. The phrase "the greatest threat to the system is overreaction by the
public and institutional purchasers" -- is an opinion with no basis in fact
because Y2K has not occurred yet. We have no experience with a situation
where X percent of every industry simultaneously will fail or continue
erroneously (where X varies from industry to industry sector, but X is a
significant percentage and will also vary from country to country). My own
opinion (and it's no more an opinion than the quoted opinion) is that the
greatest threat to the system is continuing with JIT (Just in Time) processes
in the face of Y2K -- I think we should be over-producing in 1999 in
essential goods areas to compensate for what has to inevitably be some degree
of shortcomings in 2000, i.e., if we underproduce by 10 percent in 2000 due
to Y2K, the solution is to have overproduced by 10 percent in 1999. With
essential goods, it is too late to react to an underproduction by
over-producing after the fact. Some production cycles have too long of a
multi-level bill of material supply chain to ramp up. (This is especially
true for those drugs where if the dosage is not precise, the effect is not
adequate. I can't name specific drugs however.)
We'll find out who is right in 2000. However, if the phrase "the greatest
threat to the system is overreaction by the public and institutional
purchasers" is wrong, people will die. If on the other hand, over-production
of essential goods occurred in 1999 and it is not needed, nobody will die.
I'm not advocating personal stockpiling being advocated by governments; I am
advocating 24-7 production by the pharmaceutical industry in 1999. They could
warehouse the produced drugs in safe places so that the drugs are not wasted
and 1999 shortages do not occur.
My bet does not ride on somebody's blood. The pharmaceutical industry's bet
rides on somebody's blood. I don't think it's good enough for them to only
stockpile excess raw inventory; that assumes there will not be supply chain
disruptions from the point of processing raw material through production
through delivery and consumption. When an alleged 90 percent of non-patented
pharmaceutical manufacturing takes place abroad, and in light of the surveys
of third world and Europe/Asia readiness, I find this alarming.
Oh well, I'm only one writer and a small fry person. I can only do what I can
do and no more. The record will show that analysts were concerned about the
precariousness of JIT over-reliance in 1999. If a significant number of
people die because of this over-reliance on JIT, the lawyers will have my own
admonitions as well as those of other like-minded writers to crucify those
executives at fault and they will deserve the crucifixion by jury after 2000.
They won't get my pity.
Once again, John, thank you for your review. By the way, my concerns with
water are a very low-cost, calming approach, don't you think? I think most
water systems could be tested 24-48 hours after 1/1/2000 to assure people
that it is being properly filtered. I personally believe that the majority of
water utilities will be delivering water on 1/1/2000; I just don't know if
100 percent of them will be flawlessly filtered. Remember, over 100 people
died due to the Milwaukee incident in 1993. Considering my advice is super
cheap, I'd like to see at least one state (of course, Minnesota) follow this
advice, but better yet multiple states and multiple countries.
Part of the reason the U.S. should be over-cautious rather than
under-cautious is that it sets a good example for other countries where
surely there will be some water utilities that will suffer the Milwaukee
situation. If we advise our citizens to hold off drinking delivered water for
24-48 hours (to use stockpiled water ahead of time), then other nations will
follow suit as well. This is advice that is cheap enough for even third world
countries to adapt.
Last, if you can provide me with a "yes" or "no" on permission to reprint
your review.
Respectfully yours,
Roleigh Martin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
From: John Koskinen
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 09:49:17 -0400
Roleigh,
Thanks for your response and your ongoing thoughtfulness in checking about
further distribution of our discussion. You have my permission to share my
response yesterday with your readers. While I assume others will take issue
with some of what I wrote, discussion and even some disagreements may be the
most important thing we can produce at this time.
All the best.
John
Subsequent to the above, John Koskinen on July 21st, 1999, came to St. Paul,
Minnesota for a Y2K Community Conversation which was carried by Minnesota
Public Radio and can be heard at that MPR web page. MPR held an all day Y2K
event where 50-60 Minnesotans discussed how ready Minnesota was for Y2K.
Senator Robert Bennett, Co-Chair of the U.S. Senate Y2K Special Committee
appeared via satellite conferencing. In the evening, also taped, John
Koskinen answered three questions I wanted asked but were asked by some of my
readers in the audience. (I had no influence on who got to ask questions --
more raised their hands than were selected.)
Unfortunately one of the readers quoted a misquote attributed to me by a
local news journalist -- I had to clear up that misquote on statewide radio.
The misquote had me stockpiling water for six months! This alarmed one of my
readers who did not communicate with me ahead of time -- her question
surprised me. She said "What does Roleigh Martin know that he has gotten a
generator and is stockpiling water and food for six months?" I informed her
and the radio audience of the multiple reasons for the generator and that I
told the reporter I had three containers that could hold enough water for
four families for one week. If we have infrastructure problems then, our
household will take care of three other families. I mentioned that I was
buying extra food not because I had evidence that we would not have food next
year but that the evidence points to possible increases in prices next year
-- that even the Secretary of Agriculture mentioned this possibility in
testimony he presented to the U.S. Senate. I have since found the exact quote
of Agriculture Secretary Glickman:
Glickman said some exporting countries are failing to prepare for the
problem, which could result in short-term disruptions of mostly perishable
fruits and vegetables.
"Should there be a disruption of imports, domestically grown fresh fruits and
vegetables will continue to be available, although with less variety and
possibly at somewhat higher prices than usual," he said.
Nobody disputed my comments. In any event, it allowed Koskinen to focus on
the three questions that concerned me most which were the three main issues
raised in my Open Letter to Governor Ventura. To a large extent Koskinen's
answers were extensions but in the vein of his written answers above. If you
have a sound card you can hear everything that occurred that day
/199907/01_newsroom_y2k/">online.
I also had a chance to ask two of these questions to Senator Bennett whose
responses are also recorded online. His answers, in brief, were that the
state and city government are responsible in those areas and it is up to
individual localities to make sure their areas are up to par and up to
individuals to investigate and find out if the authorities are acting
responsibly. He talked about the need to "stockpile information." The normal
responses the readers of this column are already familiar with.
Beyond the interest of John Koskinen in the letter, even more interesting
from a potential "did it make a difference?" standpoint was what subsequently
happened at the U.S. government's Chemical Safety Board.
During the week of July 22, 1999, the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB)
distributed a letter urging action on Y2K chemical safety issues to all 50
state governors and chief executives of the Northern Mariana Islands, the
District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Accompanying the letter was a copy of the CSB's report to the U.S. Senate on
Year 2000 Issues: Technology Problems and Industrial Safety.
Prior to this letter, the senior Y2K member of the CSB, Gerald Poje, Ph.D.,
had a chance to review my letter to Governor Ventura and he called informing
me that California has a program very similar to what I recommended. He
mentioned that he was working on a letter to the other governors recommending
that they seriously consider doing something similar to what California is
doing. I provided a good description of that program two columns ago.
I do not know whether my letter to Governor Ventura was coincidental and
independent of the CSB's letter writing initiative to the 50 state governors
or whether it was a stimulus. However, I do know that it was a very similar
initiative albeit aimed directly only at one governor, that it was before the
CSB's effort, and that the CSB knew of the open letter to Ventura. However,
as one person commented, it really makes no difference where the credit for
the stimulus for the effort belongs. What counts is will the results make a
beneficial difference?
I certainly hope the California program succeeds and the CSB's letter writing
initiative steers some other states to make a stronger effort. I should
mention that if your state is anywhere like Minnesota that what is likely
going on in contrast to the California Chemical Y2K safety initiative is that
individuals in different state agencies are communicating with "302"
facilities to make sure that they are aware of the Y2K embedded systems
problem and they are assessing and remediating their facilities.
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986
establishes requirements for Federal, State and local governments and
industry regarding emergency planning and "Community Right-to-Know" reporting
on hazardous and toxic chemicals. "302" facilities refers to Section 302
which requires facilities to notify certain government agencies that they are
subject to these requirements within 60 days after they begin to have any of
the listed extremely hazardous chemicals in an amount equal to or in excess
of threshold planning quantities.
In Minnesota, individuals from the Office of Emergency Services and the
Department of Labor (dealing with occupational safety) are asking Y2K
questions of such "302" industries. The main difference between what is going
on in Minnesota (and most likely the other 48 states) versus California is
that the California effort does not assume all the companies will get "A"
grades in their Y2K work and the state's program has "teeth" to shut them
temporarily down over the rollover. Specifically, the California program's
enforcement provision is worded as:
"Compliance and Enforcement Action: The local implementing agencies will
assume responsibility to take appropriate compliance and enforcement actions
as necessary to advert Y2K related chemical emergencies within their
jurisdiction. Such actions may require facility remediation or closure."
The source for the above paragraph is from state documents mailed to me from
a California state employee.
On the other hand, a cynical Minnesota legislator on the Y2K Joint
House-Senate task force doubts if California will shut any facilities
temporarily down and that in practice the Minnesota's approach is achieving
the same results. This remains to be seen. For sure, theoretically,
California's approach has "teeth" -- none of the other states' approaches
theoretically does. Sure they all have "teeth" after the rollover if any
companies cause an accident but to prevent such accidents ahead of time it
looks so far like California is the loner. If you know of any other states
doing something similar to California please inform me.
All in all, it's been interesting seeing what's happened as a result of the
Open Letter to the Governor. As to whether anything beneficial occurs, only
time will tell. |
