cnnfn.com
The Newest Year 2000 Problem Is The Media
STOW, MASSACHUSETTS, U.S.A. (NB) -- By Michael Maynard, Newsbytes Columnist At Large. COMMENTARY. Like most
people, I don't know the status of my local power utility's Year 2000 compliance program. I should, but I don't, and I'm on record as
previously stating that everyone should be more proactive in asking for this information. My worst nightmare for 1/1/2000 and the
weeks thereafter is to have really cold weather and no power. Imagine it: no business conducted, no school, no ESPN; what would
we do? I'm sure it is my utility's worst nightmare, too. Power is first on my list of the four problem areas concerning the Year 2000
technology situation in the U.S. and worldwide. All four areas of concern -- power supply, worldwide telecommunications, domestic
and international transportation and governmental entities -- involve complex integration of systems whose failure would have great
impact on all of our lives.
With the exception of most federal agencies and some state governments, I have found little information on the Y2K compliance
status of the companies and agencies in these four areas. This bothers me greatly because I believe all have a public obligation to
tell about their compliance status and to inform about the potential effects of Y2K complications. Perhaps the recent passage of the
Good Samaritan Act, which reduces companies' legal liabilities for freely stating their level of Y2K compliance to other businesses
and consumers, will make these entities less reticent to do so.
The Big Blackout of 1965 was the first time that many Americans, myself included, became aware of the fragility of the North
American power grid system. A failure in a small power station in Buffalo led to the shut down of power throughout the Atlantic
Seaboard. The Big Blackout makes me more concerned about the potential effect of embedded processors on complex systems. It
made me more aware of the "ripple-through" effect: though most parts of a complex system may work properly, one problem in a
strategic area can cause the whole system can go down.
The Big Blackout led to the reform of the power system through the creation of regional power pools to provide backup power, and
the installation of new equipment to monitor the North American power network by region for potential points of failure. While greatly
improved, the power network is still not 100-percent failsafe. So even if utilities like Boston Edison or Massachusetts Electric are
successful in their own compliance efforts, there still might not be power in regions like the Northeast. Recently I checked the Year
2000 compliance statements of 10 Northeast power utility companies, including Massachusetts Electric, Consolidated Edison of
New York, Public Service Energy Group, and Boston Edison. I found that only Boston Edison and Consolidated Edison have made
public statements regarding their Year 2000 programs, and Consolidated Edison's limited statement was primarily focused on its
business systems.
Boston Edison's openness about its Y2K efforts is a breath of fresh air. Jim Ashkar, BostonEd's Y2K program manager, called me
back within 24 hours after leaving him a message. Jim has been their program manager for three years, although Boston Edison has
been working on this issue for much longer. Jim's role involves overseeing compliance efforts for both the power network and internal
business systems. He was very forthright in discussing with me the scope and complexity of Y2K activities in his company,
including those to ensure the Y2K viability of the other utilities in the Northeast. I've managed the compliance efforts of complex Y2K
systems for clients, but nothing close to the scope of what Jim Ashkar handles daily.
Jim sent me a copy of the letter that he sends to customers, vendors and other parties interested in his company's Y2K
compliance. The following are excerpts from the letter. "For more than two years, early appreciation of the potential seriousness of
the Year 2000 problem has prompted Boston Edison to address the situation head on." (Note: this means to state their efforts and
situation honestly with the public, not how long they've have been working on the issue) "Teams in each area of the company have
been working to make the transition as seamless as possible. Work will continue as the company prepares its systems for the next
century. All teams are on target to meet the full program's scheduled completion date of July 1999.
"Electrical transmission and distribution system controls and our customer service systems, including metering and billing are
receiving our highest priority. The process includes thorough assessment, action plans, and compliance testing of important
processor-based systems. Key partners and suppliers are being regularly contacted to assure us that they, too, will be able to
continue to meet our needs during the transition. We have undertaken a $20 million Year 2000 project which will result in the
replacement of most, and changes in the remaining, business systems. In addition to solving the Year 2000 needs, these new
systems expand our business functional capabilities... "... the Boston Edison management team assures you of its commitment to
providing safe, reliable and economic service to our customers consistent with our regulatory and public service obligation. Look for
periodic progress updates."
That is as comprehensive a public compliance statement as I have seen thus far.
Jim also stated his frustration at Boston Edison's inability to get this message out to the public. To date, the major local media --
television, radio and newspapers -- have shown little interest in covering Boston Edison's story or the Y2K issue in general. There
have been a few exceptions, most notably from our local PBS TV and radio stations. A few months ago, Jim Ashkar was asked to
tape an interview with a local TV station. During the interview taping, the reporter asked first about Boston Edison's Y2K efforts,
which Ashkar answered in full. The reporter then asked what calamities might occur on 1/1/2000. Jim answered that BostonEd is
doing everything in its power to ensure that there will be no such calamities and that he didn't believe there would be any problems
concerning its role in the power delivery system. With this response, the reporter indicated this wasn't the kind of story the public
was looking for and ended the interview. Surprisingly, this same station ran the story this weekend using just the answer to the
interviewer's first question as part of a feature in its news broadcast.
I find it troubling that, before getting all the facts, the reporter decided what the public wanted to know -- and had a right to know --
and developed the angle on how the story should be presented.
I maintain that the general media have grossly under- reported the Y2K issue. I have no idea about the compliance status of my
state or local government or public transportation systems. While I have not been active in asking for this information, I might not
know because the local media aren't reporting the information being provided, either.
I believe it was grossly irresponsible for the TV reporter and the reporter's station not to report important information just because it
wasn't sensational or salacious enough. It is the media's role and responsibility to report the news that is in the public's interest as
it occurs, not to prejudge what the news should be. It is not debatable or questionable whether knowing if there will be power
available in 14 months is of public interest.
There may not be great public outcry yet over lack of statements regarding compliance by public entities, but the closer we get to
the date, the more anxious and demanding the public will become. It is imperative to start finding out about the issue now, in order
start making contingency plans and to start putting pressure on these entities for information. Then as information becomes
available, we can individually decide what risks to assume and determine how to implement those plans. I can only hope the various
branches of the media start to understand that.
Enough Yahooism on my part, I'm going to call my local utility and city and state governments this week. I'll let you know the
results in a future column. Michael Maynard is a featured columnist for Newsbytes and president of Azimuth Partners Inc., a
business and technology consultancy in Stow, MA. Azimuth Partners' WWW site is azipart.com . Michael can be
reached via e-mail at mmaynard@azipart.com or via Newsbytes. |
