* Forwarded (from: netmail) by Roy J. Tellason using timEd 1.10.y2k.

Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:39:29 -0400
From: Rich Mintz 
Subject: "Computer glitch" causes false dam failure warning

A "computer glitch" at Santee Cooper, the quasi-public agency that operates
dams and power generation facilities in the South Carolina lowcountry,
resulted in the broadcast of a false public warning that the Santee Dam on
Lake Marion had failed.  Apparently, a flood watch went out electronically
at 3:16 AM, and then the sirens and loudspeakers began broadcasting a verbal
warning of dam failure throughout the area about 8:30 AM.  A Santee Cooper
spokesman said, "A computer program kicked in gear that wasn't supposed to
kick in gear," he said. "We're trying to get our arms around what caused
this so it doesn't happen again."  Santee Cooper also noted that not all the
sirens that should have gone off in such a scenario actually went off, which
is a separate problem they are investigating.

The Santee Dam, which is part of the Santee Cooper lake system comprising
Lakes Marion and Moultrie, is just upriver from the city of St. Stephen,
about 50 miles NW of Charleston, in a region supported by fishing and lake
tourism but also increasingly suburbanized. U.S. 52 connects the area to
Moncks Corner and Charleston.  From the article:

>The threat of a dam break is no laughing matter on the Santee. Engineers 
>estimate that the wave from a collapse would hit the U.S. Highway 52 
>bridge in four hours. After eight hours, that bridge would be submerged by 
>a river level 25 feet above normal, and 14-foot floodwaters would have 
>reached St. Stephen. The flood would reach the sea within 48 hours.

From the Charleston (South Carolina) Post & Courier:  
http://www.charleston.net/stories/052303/loc_23dam.shtml.
Detailed lake maps: 
http://www.santeecooper.com/environment/recreation/lakemaps.html
Santee Cooper press release: 
http://www.santeecooper.com/aboutus/newsroom/releases/news_2003_0522.html

Thanks to Wes Singletary for the referral.



Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:49:42 -0400
From: Doug Kellner 
Subject: Ballot scanning problems in New York City

The NYC Board of Elections' system for scanning absentee ballots miscounted
at least 19 ballots in a recent closely contested special election for a
city council seat apparently because the scanner improperly sensed the blank
voting oval.  Because the voters had properly marked another oval, the
computer voided the ballots as overvotes.

  http://www.vote.nyc.ny.us/pdf/documents/boe/
  ReportOnTheScanningOfPaperBallots.pdf

Douglas A. Kellner, Commissioner, Board of Elections in the City of New York
200 Varick Street, New York, New York 10013  Tel. (212) 889-2121

  [This is not the first time I have heard of a blank oval being detected
  as over threshold for a marked oval.  Just one more risk!  PGN]



Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 11:21:33 -0400
From: "Franchi, Robert" 
Subject: No call list preventing 911 notifications

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/149/northwest/Call_blocking_may_be_safety_
risk+.shtml
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/149/northwest/Call_blocking_may_be_safety
_risk+.shtml> 

People who are on the MASS "Do not Call" list were also not included on the
911-emergency notification list (for emergency evacuations etc.).
Apparently, the company that provides the list to the Massachusetts 911
system, Reverse 911, uses commercially available lists that have already had
"Do Not Call" list people removed.

Bob Franchi, FB&RS-Tech FTPS Accounts - Merrimack  (603) 791-5833

---