Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!ria!uwovax.uwo.ca!telecom-request From: kaufman@neon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: The Order of Repair Message-ID: Date: 17 Mar 91 16:25:10 GMT Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA Lines: 28 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 212, Message 9 of 10 In article John Higdon writes: > So it breaks down like this: > The cable company had its act together. Its service restoral (while > hardly essential) was first rate. PG&E took three hours to restore > service. PG&E is probably the worst electric utility on the planet so > for them it was probably miraculous. Never mind that the fire was > originally started by primary wires arcing in the trees because PG&E > felt it unnecessary to do any trimming. But wiping up the rear was > Pac*Bell, who was too wimpy to even begin work on its cable until the > next day. Let's see ... the cable company had one "pair" to restore, and was probably lowest on the pole, having been established last. PG&E also had one pair to restore, well maybe four if the pole had the maximum number of house drops. Power is life-critical in that your forced- air furnace won't work unless the fan can be powered and the medicine in your refrigerater will get warm. I don't blame the phone company for not wanting to work while PG&E is on the pole stringing 12KV wires. And how easy is it to put up a new splice box (or two) in the rain with only the truck's spotlight for illumination? Marc Kaufman (kaufman@neon.stanford.edu)