Executive Summary of 100 day reportgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
I will see about getting the chart that is with the summary on this thread. This is from a PDF file so it may be a bit off.
*Pages 1-10 from Executive Summary of 100 Day Report*
INVESTIGATING THE YEAR 2000 PROBLEM: THE 100 DAY REPORT SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE YEAR 2000 TECHNOLOGY PROBLEM 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
What will happen when the clock strikes midnight on December 31, 1999? A single, specific answer to that question is still unknown (and, ultimately, unknowable) but the extensive information developed by the Committee and outlined in this report provides an understanding of the size, scope, and nature of the problems that may occur.
There is currently widespread awareness that Y2K involves more than the failure of an individual's personal computer, or an incorrect date in a spreadsheet. Potential Y2K problems increase exponentially upon examination of the multiple layers of computer systems, networks and technologies supporting individuals' everyday lives. It is now widely understood that Y2K could affect the lives of individuals, but exactly in what manner is unknown.
Inherent uncertainty in the outcome of Y2K fuels public concern and makes preparation difficult. Sensationalists continue to fuel rumors of massive Y2K failures and government conspiracies, while some corporations and nations concerned about their image downplay real Y2K problems. The Committee finds that both extremes are counterproductive, and do not accurately reflect what typifies most Y2K problems. The true extent of Y2K failures will match neither the most optimistic nor the most apocalyptic predictions. Rather, Y2K problems will hit sporadically, based on geography, size of organization, and level of preparedness, and will cause more inconveniences than tragedies.
While optimism pervades the domestic Y2K outlook, uncertainty with regard to Y2K's impact dictates that preparation is prudent. Individuals and companies must take charge of their own situation by examining the Y2K readiness of the utilities and services that they depend on, and by preparing accordingly.
In the past 14 months, companies and nations, large and small, have taken the Y2K problem seriously. The increase in worldwide public awareness, remediation, and contingency planning since the Committee's February 1999 report, "Investigating the Impact of the Year 2000 Problem," has been remarkable. However, the Committee's hearings, interviews, and research reveal that many organizations and industries remain unprepared. The Y2K problem still has the potential to be very disruptive, necessitating continued, intensive preparation in the time remaining. Y2K risk management efforts must be increased to avert serious disruptions.
While the Committee has become increasingly confident about U. S. Y2K preparedness, it has become increasingly concerned about international Y2K preparedness. Some of our important trading partners are months behind in addressing the Y2K problem and are not likely to avoid significant disruptions. These disruptions could have adverse economic effects here at home and, in some developing countries, result in requests for humanitarian assistance.
Sectors critical to the safety and wellbeing of Americans, as well as to the economy, have made significant progress in the last eight months; concerns remain in health care, local governments, small business, and education.
Most physicians' offices, many innercity and small rural hospitals, and numerous nursing homes have not fully addressed the Y2K problem. In general, larger firms have grasped how a Y2K failure could severely impact their businesses and are taking steps to remedy the problem. Unfortunately, nearly half of smalland mediumsized businesses across all sectors are taking a waitandsee approach to Y2K.
Many local governments and some public safety answering points used to process 911 calls remain at risk of Y2K disruptions; as of June 1999, only 37% points were compliant. Most school districts, colleges, and universities are not prepared; surveys this summer indicate that less than onethird were Y2K ready.
Many projected Y2K readiness deadlines are dangerously late.
Heightened concern exists with regard to organizations and industries that project readiness dates in the last quarter of 1999. For example, approximately 500 of the 8,000 oil and gas companiesand 30 of the 103 nuclear power plantsproject completion dates after September 30, 1999. Original completion dates were planned in the first quarter to allow plenty of time to complete endtoend testing and to address unexpected anomalies. However, these projected completion dates continue to be deferred. Organizations with late completion dates are not leaving sufficient time to address unexpected problems, which also heightens the importance of adequate contingency planning.
Pandemic selfreporting may result in overly optimistic Y2K projections.
Selfreporting, which is analogous to letting students grade their own tests, offers data of varying reliability. Nonetheless, selfreporting has become the standard in private industry and government, both domestically and internationally. Since its last report, the Committee has seen a trend toward greater use of independent verification, but selfreported surveys are still the most widely utilized tools to measure Y2K readiness and predict success. Y2K disclosures remain inadequate.
The Year 2000 Information Readiness and Disclosure Act (Public Law No. 105271) provided a basic level of protection for Y2K statements made in good faith. The CRASH Protection Act of 1997 (S. 1518, 105 th Congress) pressured the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to require more meaningful Y2K corporate disclosure to shareholders. Despite the SEC rule requiring Y2K disclosure by public corporations, companies are reluctant to report compliance levels, for fear of litigation or ceding competitive advantage. In August 1999, the SEC fined nine investment entities for failure to adequately disclose Y2K readiness information.
National emergency planning for Y2Krelated failures is evolving.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) continues to refine plans to handle Y2Krelated emergencies. However, state and local governments represent the first line of defense in emergency situations, and emergency planning varies widely at these levels.
In addition, organizations are charged with the responsibility of developing adequate contingency plans in the event that Y2Krelated disruptions do occur. Some sectors have achieved greater progress in this regard than others.
Finally, the Administration plans to develop a Y2K Information Coordination Center (ICC) to monitor and address Y2K problems nationwide. It is unclear how the ICC will function, since participation and reporting details essential to its viability and effectiveness are as yet undetermined.
The international Y2K picture is more disturbing. The Y2K preparations in many countries of economic and strategic importance to the U. S. are inadequate. Of greatest concern are Russia, China, Italy, and several oilproducing countries. The Y2K problem has highlighted the economic interdependence of nations. A significant potential exists for the Y2Kinduced problems of other nations to wash up on our shoreswhether in the form of recession, lost jobs, or requests for international assistance.
The Y2K problem highlights cyber vulnerabilities.
Study of the Y2K issue has heightened awareness of vulnerabilities in America's hightech infrastructure. Millions of lines of computer code have been sent overseas for Y2K repair. This creates the possibility that those wishing to commit acts of terrorism or political and corporate espionage could use "trap doors" or "logic bombs".
In the current information age, attacks on American defense and industrial facilities in cyberspace are as real and dangerous as conventional threats to economic prosperity and national security. The Committee recommends the development of a national policy to protect private industry's hightech infrastructure and safeguard the federal government's ability to meet the defense challenges of the next millennium.
Since its establishment in April 1998, the Committee has held nearly 30 hearings, received testimony from more than 150 witnesses, written numerous letters, participated in forums and working group meetings, held multiple "town hall" meetings, and talked to hundreds of experts. Shortly after its inception, the Committee set forth the following critical sectors for study, listed in order of their importance:
· Utilities · Healthcare · Telecommunications · Transportation · Financial Services · General Government · General Business · Litigation
To these original eight sectors, the Committee has added the sectors of international preparedness and personal preparedness. A summary of the Committee's assessments, expectations, and concerns in each of these sectors follows.
The Committee's ratings of these sectors are provided in the table on page 9. The ratings are based on five risk factors preparedness status, data quality, public disclosure, contingency planning, and dependencies.
UTILITIES A prolonged, nationwide blackout will almost certainly not occur; that is, the power grid will work. However,
local and regional outages remain a distinct possibility depending upon the readiness of the 3,000 utilities serving any given area. Further clouding accurate assessment, only 25% of electric utilities routinely disclose Y2K information to the public, making it difficult for individuals and organizations to get detailed information on "their" utilities. While bulk power producers, including nuclear facilities, are generally well prepared, they still must develop comprehensive contingency plans to prepare for unexpected problems.
Oil and gas companies have made notable advances since the Committee's last report, but continued progress remains essential. Nearly 500 companies do not plan to complete repairs until late 1999, which makes disruption possible for some domestic oil and gas billing, production, transportation, and distribution. In addition, the likelihood of disruption in oil imports is high due to the lack of preparedness in key oilproducing countries. Disruptions could ultimately affect gas prices and availability.
The enormous scope and variation in the use of technology in the water industry makes it difficult to generalize. However, our assessment of the water industry is generally positive. The Environmental Protection Agency and professional associations have waged a very aggressive readiness campaign. On the other hand, while a recent survey on the readiness of wastewater facilities expressed a high degree of confidence, it also indicate that much work remains to be done to ensure readiness. A joint study conducted by the major water treatment associations concluded that, while isolated malfunctions in equipment could occur, interruptions in service should be limited in scale and of short duration.
Y2K compliance is mixed in the healthcare industry, which is characterized by extensive decentralization of operations. Some segments, such as pharmaceutical manufacturing, wholesaling and distribution, and largescale hospitals, have invested the managerial and financial resources to remediate and test for most Y2K problems. Conversely, rural and inner city hospitals, nursing homes, and physicians' offices have particularly high Y2K risk exposure due to limited technical/ managerial resources and lack of awareness. The Committee remains concerned about the hundreds of different types of electronic biomedical devices used by all healthcare providers. Most in the medical device industry have identified the Y2K compliance of their products, but endtoend testing within a facility has not been the norm. The difficulty in testing and limited resources available for replacement of devices at some institutions contributes to the Committee's concern and raises serious patient safety questions.
Healthcare is the nation's single largest industry, generating $1.5 trillion annually. The U. S. has 6,000 hospitals, 800,000 doctors in 50,000 offices, and 16,000 nursing homes, as well as 2,000 biomedical equipment manufacturers and numerous
healthcare insurers in the public (Medicare/ Medicaid) and private sectors. All of these entities are highly automated and, thus are highly exposed to Y2K risk. On a positive note, the Health Care Financing Administration, the federal agency that oversees Medicare payments, has made a nationwide effort to ensure that its health claims payments system is Y2K compliant.
The telecommunications industry has spent billions of dollars on Y2K fixes and, in August 1999, reported that 98% of the industry was ready. As a result, carriers project minimal service disruptions domestically. Internationally, however, there could be problems in completing calls to some highrisk countries. International telecommunications carriers are working to develop an international early warning system to share Y2K information.
Still, unpredictable infrastructure failures, sudden changes in consumer behavior, or customer premise equipment and private network problems could adversely impact telecommunications. Increased call volume and ad hoc "testing" could congest networks and erode stability. Full interoperability between compliant and noncompliant elements and their impact on the public switched network remains unknown. The lagging Y2K readiness of small and mediumsized domestic carriers could impact services in rural communities.
Finally, there has been no attempt to assess whether the rush to implement Y2K fixes on a global scale will having a lingering impact on the stability of global communications networks over the next year.
The Committee remains concerned about customer premise equipment the telephone equipment used to route calls within most businesses. Failed customer premise equipment could have a severe impact on business operations if not adequately addressed.
Transportation is the linchpin for justintime inventory management across almost every business sector, from healthcare supplies to food.
The Federal Aviation Administration has successfully completed its effort to make the nation's air traffic control systems ready. Notwithstanding this considerable progress, it appears that some of the nation's 670 domestic airports remain at risk in areas such as jetway security systems and runway lighting. It is likely there will be disruptions resulting in delays at some U. S. airports. The situation with international air traffic control and airports is much more worrisome.
The maritime shipping industry has not moved aggressively toward compliance, leading to the likelihood of disruptions in global trade.
Many public transit systems have also failed to aggressively address the Y2K problem, which makes service disruptions likely for some transit systems. Most transit authorities plan to suspend bus and railcar operations for a brief period around midnight on December 31, 1999, as a safety precaution.
The financial services sector in the U. S. will be prepared for the millennium date change. Automatic teller machines are expected to function correctly, and banks should have adequate cash to meet consumer demand, based on a Federal Reserve estimate that each American household will withdraw an average of $500. Federal regulators have made considerable progress in tracking compliance among banks, thrifts, and credit unions, 99% of which have received satisfactory government ratings. Regulators are encouraging financial institutions to communicate their preparedness to customers in order to reduce the potential for panic.
The securities industry has responded well to its internal Y2K issues and has undertaken expansive testing. However, fund managers and brokers have only recently started to consider the implication of corporate Y2K vulnerability on investment decisions.
The federal government will spend in excess of $8 billion on Y2K. Wholesale failure of federal government services is not likely to occur. In addition, FEMA is now engaged in national emergency planning in the event of major and minor Y2K disruptions. State and local government preparedness remains a concern for the Committee. There is wide variation in the Y2K readiness of the nation's 50 states, 3,066 counties, and 87,000 local jurisdictions. Several states and many local governments lag in Y2K remediation, raising the risk of service disruption. For example, approximately 10 states are not prepared to deliver such critical services as unemployment insurance and other benefit payments. Surveys indicate that 65% of state critical systems were ready as of May 1999, and only 25% of counties reported being ready as of June 1999. Of greatest concern at the local level is the readiness of the 911 Public Safety Answering Points, and the ability to provide adequate response in the face of a potential increase in demand for service due to Y2K problems.
In general, large companies with greater resources have dealt well with the Y2K problem. Very small businesses may survive using manual processes until Y2K problems are remediated. However, many smalland mediumsized businesses are extremely unprepared for Y2K disruptions. One survey shows that 28% of small businesses do not plan to take any action.
The heavilyregulated insurance, investment services, and banking industries are farthest ahead in their efforts; healthcare, oil, education, agriculture, farming, food processing, and the construction industries are lagging behind. The cost to regain lost operational capability for any missioncritical failure will range from $20,000 to $3.5 million, with an av erage of 315 days necessary to regain lost functions.
The prospect of litigation arising from Y2Krelated failures has overshadowed the Committee's information gathering from its inception. Early estimates placed litigation costs as high as $1 trillion. Along with the Senate Committees on Commerce and the Judiciary, the Committee held a hearing to examine the potential Y2K litigation explosion, and assisted in the drafting of legislation to address the issue. Senator Dodd played a key role in the passage and enactment of the Y2K Act (Public Law No. 10637), which is intended to encourage remediation of Y2K problems instead of litigation.
The Committee is greatly concerned about the international Y2K picture. Several countries of strategic and economic importance to the U. S. are severely behind in Y2K remediation efforts. Regions of the world of most concern to the Committee are Eastern Europe, Africa, and parts of Asia and South America. When considering strategic and economic factors, and the status of Y2K remediation efforts within specific countries, the Committee's greatest concerns lie with China, Russia, Italy, and several of the countries from which the U. S. imports oil.
Severe longand shortterm disruptions to supply chains are likely to occur. Such disruptions may cause a lowtomoderate downturn in the economy, particularly in those industries that depend on foreign suppliers. In addition, there may be a request for humanitarian relief from developing countries that have not addressed the Y2K problem.
Communities and individuals should take reasonable steps to prepare for the Year 2000. Consumers are urged to keep copies of financial statements and to ask local banks what efforts are being made toward Y2K compliance. Individuals should research companies' compliance levels before making investment decisions. The Y2K problem has been likened to a winter storm, with the implication that similar preparation is appropriate. With their individual circumstances in mind, Americans should prepare for Y2K based on facts and reasonable predictions about the problem's effects on vital services.
* * * * * * The challenges posed by the Y2K problem are numerous and daunting. The Committee conducted extensive research and held numerous hearings in 1999, but still cannot conclusively determine how extensive Y2K disruptions will be. However, the Committee has no data to suggest that the U. S. will experience nationwide social or economic collapse. Nonetheless, disruptions will occur and in some cases those disruptions will be significant. The international situation will certainly be more tumultuous
-- Brian (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999
It's not pretty, gang. Not pretty at all...
-- pshannon (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
Brian, Thanks. I think this follows the government's current policy of being slightly honest to add to believability then praise the financial sector and place the worry on other countries. Where is there a mention of the trucking industry responsibile for so much of our distribution? OF course I just skimmed. Maybe I missed it. My sister summarized something she saw the other day as saying, "If you don't have food, it's your tough luck." I think that's being said here, too.
-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), September 22, 1999.
"healthcare, oil, education, agriculture, farming, food processing, and the construction industries are lagging behind"
It occurred to me last night as I was putting up some new shelving out in the barn (guess what for...) that the construction industry is the epitome of SME's, from manufacturing of building supplies (especially specialty stuff) through distribution, retail, to actual construction.
A computer-causes financial seizure in the construction industry ALONE virtually guarantees a recession here in the USA. Add in a similar seizure in healthcare (1/8th of the economy, they say): you do the math.
Then there are "oil, agriculture, farming, food processing".
Good luck to all.
-- Brady (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999.
-- Brian (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
Thanks Brian! Folks, get whatever supplies you can and get ready. The stuff will hit the fan in 100 days. There's no doubt about it now. It's a certainty.
-- (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999.
"Healthcare is the nation's single largest industry ..."
completely automated ...
Yep, exactly what we've been telling y'all ...
From the trenches, this is the truth:
The CULL SCYTHE will swing.
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
"The cost to regain lost operational capability for any missioncritical failure will range from $20,000 to $3.5 million, with an av erage of 315 days necessary to regain lost functions."
An average of 315 days? That is a helluva long time to "go manual" While we "work around" these problems.
-- 100 days out (%%%%@%%%.%%%), September 22, 1999.
I can't read this shit! Not ONLY do they insist on Adobe Acrobat, but they have to format each page in 2 columns!!!
-- Roland (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999.
"An average of 315 days? That is a helluva long time to "go manual"
That is supposed to be 3 - 15 days. My mistake.
-- Brian (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem
of the United States Senate
100 Day Report:
September 22, 1999
Table of Contents
General Government Services
Appendix I: Legislative Activities of the 106th Congress
Appendix II: Y2K Letters
Appendix III: Committee Hearings
Appendix IV: Y2K Related Websites
Appendix V: Acronyms used in this report
For the Adobe Acrobat PDF file challenged...
Whenever you have the complete internet PDF code of a document, you can send an e-mail to Adobe for an instant, automatic text conversion...
Send to: firstname.lastname@example.org
The Subject line can be anything, but ONLY one pdf code can be in the body of the message... just the code... no message. Within a couple minutes Adobe will send you back a text coverted copy. Youll miss the graphics, but it allows the Adobe Acrobat challenged to see what its all about.
(If for any reason it doesnt convert, try resending or contact the Adobe web-site folks for help).
Try it, A SEPERATE E-MAIL, for each of the Senate 100 Days report pdf codes listed above.
-- Diane J. Squire (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
Ironically, this is at least as bad as what the Senate reported with three hundred days to go and they still don't claim to know what the impact will be. While that is quite legitimate, the usual inserted claims that Y2K will almost certainly have limited impact on Americans, IN LIGHT OF THAT, are ridiculous as always.
But not so ridiculous as the way the report is (NOT) being reported by the mainstream media.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 22, 1999.
Brian, graphs without text is very misleading. For example, at first glance, the 4 stars the Electric Utilities have recieved are encouraging and even soothing. But if you read the report on the utilities, it's less than encouraging, scary even.
" Progress by the electric industry over the past 15 months has been remarkable. About 99% of the 3,088 electric supply and delivery organizations have participated in NERCs assessment process. Distribution entities, or actual electric utilities, have participated in the NERC process by responding to data gathered by APPA and NRECA and by providing it to the appropriate bulk electric operating entity. NERCs overall survey results are shown in Figure 3. Overall progress in the electric utilities industry has been most impressive, moving from 36% of testing complete as of the Committees last report to 99% complete at the time of this report. However, only about 60% of the companies are using independent review to validate and confirm their results. In addition, fewer than 60% have developed contingency plans, and fewer than 25% have actually tested or exercised these plans. Equally troubling is the fact that only about 24% of the companies are publicly disclosing their reports to NERC. Finally, and most alarming, is the fact that 270 of the 2,012 public power utilities, in-cluding some serving large metropolitan areas, did not participate in APPAs June survey and were, as a result, not included in NERCs August 1999 report."
So in effect, it is a self-reported status by utilities, and very much incomplete at that. And if you take into account the paragraphs where they explain the interconnectedness, that a failure in Main could cause a ripple effect all the way to Florida, those 4 stars mean absolutely nothing.
-- Chris (#$%^&@pond.com), September 22, 1999.
HOW can they say THIS:The Committee finds that both extremes are counterproductive, and do not accurately reflect what typifies most Y2K problems. The true extent of Y2K failures will match neither the most optimistic nor the most apocalyptic predictions. Rather, Y2K problems will hit sporadically, based on geography, size of organization, and level of preparedness, and will cause more inconveniences than tragedies. While optimism pervades the domestic Y2K outlook, uncertainty with regard to Y2K's impact dictates that preparation is prudent. Individuals and companies must take charge of their own situation by examining the Y2K readiness of the utilities and services that they depend on, and by preparing accordingly.
And THIS:Pandemic selfreporting may result in overly optimistic Y2K projections. Selfreporting, which is analogous to letting students grade their own tests, offers data of varying reliability. Nonetheless, selfreporting has become the standard in private industry and government, both domestically and internationally. Since its last report, the Committee has seen a trend toward greater use of independent verification, but selfreported surveys are still the most widely utilized tools to measure Y2K readiness and predict success. Y2K disclosures remain inadequate.
in the same breath???
I am more disgusted with these "people" than ever before. (And I use the quoted term under advisement)
-- Chuck, a night driver (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999.
Take a look at the chart Brian so artfully inserted into this thread. (Major attaboys, Brian!)
Look at the Transportation sector, column 2 "Data Quality"
The definition for this column is:
"Quality and scope of the data that is available for evaluation."
The rating they gave the quality of the information available on the transportation sector is "High Exposure". (except for railroads which is "Above Average exposure")
Now, semantically, I'm confused as to what is meant to convey, (it's sort of like measuring the length of a ladder in degrees Fahrenheit...), however, that rating of "High exposure" when used elswhere in this chart indicates the worst of the 5 status levels. Stranger still, the same sector gets average or better than average ratings for "Transparency and Public disclosure of information".
Huh? So the sector reported alot of info but it didn't mean anything?
Is this saying that the available data on the transportation sector is so bad, that they don't have any idea what the actually Y2K status is? This is a large, scary cannon to have rolling around the deck 100 days out.
After a quick read, this is an startling report. But I've come to wonder about the analytical abilities of the senate staffers. I wish they had better citations so we could judge if any of this is based on old or bogus data.
Mara et. al., I too saw the ABC report on last nites evening news. At the end, the reporter (not PJ), said with a straight face. "But there is no reason to panic." This was after his litany of dire warnings. I cracked up laughing it was so incongruous. The reporter's expression while delivering this last line was priceless. He might as well have placed one finger on his nose and winked.
On with the schitzophrenic Y2K discussion!
"Y2K will not be a problem! Unless it is..."
-- Lewis (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
-- no talking please (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999.
How can anyone read this and not think, immediately, we are TOAST. Bennett & Dodd do not trust the "self-reporting" aspect of this, yet that is what they base their decisions on. Come on...
They estimate $1 trillion in lawsuits. $1 Trillion??? All for an event that hasn't happened and according to the .gov, never will happen? HRUMPHHHHHHH
They are worried about the transportation industry. There will be "delays" at airports. I thought airports were 100% okay? The maritime industry has them *worried*?? We have been lied to since the beginning. But that's really no surprise, is it?
"Potential y2k problems increase exponentially upon the examination of the multiple layers of computer systems..."
WHAT!!! And you tell us this NOW? When 24 months ago you *knew* this would happen. You *knew* the interconnectedness? How can the News Agencies keep spinning with the above statement out there? Are they afraid of something? Did some .gov official threaten to take their 1st borns? Then what...?
It won't be as "optimistic" or as "apocolyptic" as stated... Ahem, the opposite of "optimistic" is pessimistic. I never thought things were going to go "apocolyptic" and now that *they* said it wouldn't, I'm beginning to think it will!
How can we, as individuals, prepare accordingly when our "utilities that we depend upon" will not tell us what their status is? Yes, Sen. Bennett even when "we contact them." For instance, Boston Edison doesn't make one single bit of energy. They only bill us. But do they make sure you understand this? No. They let you think they, themselves, produce electricity. How can we prepare accordingly when no one will tell us anything? Passing the blame, that's what Bennett is doing...I suppose "ultimately" it will be OUR fault, right?
Why didn't the .gov just come out and tell people to prepare if this whole mess is so unmanagable? And I mean "sit down and tell us all!" Not some poppy cock about a winter-damn-storm. Are there really "acceptable casualities" among us? Is this what our .gov has become?
"Y2k problems will hit sporadically...." Depending on geography and the size of companies...!?! It's obvious they "crunched" the numbers. With 100 days remaining do you think they could at least-- at least--tell us "where" they expect problems?
This post has the hairs on the back of my neck standing up. How anyone can spin this into good news is beyond me. I doubt anyone on these boards will even try.
Sigh, this is the longest I've ever posted, I must go lie down now (grin), sorry for ramblin'
Thanks A&L for the info
-- mar (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
Ms. BigDog pointed out to me that you could read portions of this report (cf preparation particularly, also time to recover function to previous levels) as a back-handed rebuke to the White House's three- day storm nonsense.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 22, 1999.
Many thanks.I was going to ask Forum members to post information that I could print out & put up on a wall to remind me that TS will HF.I shall be away from the Forum for at least 6 weeks & have to make alot of critical long term business decisions during that time.
But you have just done it!
Ok,I admit it.It's the Forum that made & keeps me a GI & I need that fix of being scared witless to keep me reverting to la la land.
So thanks again,Brian & to everyone else who posts & critiques information.
Community preparation in action taking place on your screen now!!!!
-- Chris (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999.
Remember folks, this was written by a COMMITTEE.
Do you think that all of the committee members, let alone their staffers who actually wrote this, all agree?
Clearly, the introduction and conclusion were written by someone other than those who wrote the individual assessments of the industries.
If there is a problem with the delivery of oil from foreign countries (a concern which is highlighted multiple times in the executive summary alone), then there will be a problem for our economy as this "washes up on our shores" at a MINIMUM. REMAIN CALM!!!!!! DON'T PANIC!!!!!! REMAIN CALM!!!!!!
-- nothere nothere (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
However, the Committee has no data to suggest that the U. S. will experience nationwide social or economic collapse. Nonetheless, disruptions will occur and in some cases those disruptions will be significant. The international situation will certainly be more tumultuous.
There is is. In a nutshell.
*Very Big Sigh*
Time for a walk and a caffe latte. I cant read the rest of the report right now. The ExecSum is plenty gripping.
-- Diane J. Squire (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999.
i think i'm gonna be sick...
-- sarah (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
A reminder of what Bennett said about self-reporting at the Food Supply Hearings back in February (I think) this year. (Look in the Food Archive under Notes--this will get you notes I took from C-Span--then search for self-reporting.) Bennett said that the GAO had invariably--INVARIABLY, that is, without exception--found that self-reporting was overly optimistic. The Sec of Ag was forced to admit that the best face was always put on things, and it came out that the Ag Dept's take on the food supply was gleaned from round-table discussions--not any kind of objective inspection. I expect the gov could have sent a few inspectors into vital industries but they didn't because it would have told them what they didn't want to know.
As for the section on health, specifically pharmaceuticals, the US part of it may be just fine, I don't know, but because 70-80 percent of ingredients and finished product come from overseas, it doesn't mean diddly squat. For instance, the largest producer of insulin is in Scandinavia; the crucial med I take each day is made in France. These little details make a big difference. I wonder what little details are missing from the other parts of the summary?
-- Old Git (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 22, 1999.
" In addition, the likelihood of disruption in oil imports is high due to the lack of preparedness in key oilproducing countries. Disruptions could ultimately affect gas prices and availability."
This is a recession all by itself. Unfortunately it will not be happening in a vaccum. Oh, man.
-- Deborah (email@example.com), September 22, 1999.
I have compiled the Senate Report (links below), please use the link;
*****Senate 100 Day Report in HTML***** Home Page (TB 2000)
to communicate the report to others. This is a very important document for all folks. Please link it, Email it or print out sections for others to read.
Y2K in Canada and Beyond
Senate Report*****Senate 100 Day Report in HTML***** Home Page (TB 2000)
Executive Summary of 100 day report
Business 100 Day Senate Report Part One
Business 100 Day Senate Report Part Two
Financial Services 100 Day Senate Report
Transportation 100 Day Senate Report
Telecommunications 100 Day Senate Report
Health Care 100 Day Senate Report
Utilities 100 Day report
International 100 Day Senate Report Part One
International 100 Day Senate Report Part Two
Preparedness 100 Day Senate Report
Senate Y2K Committee 100 Day report Senate Report Home Page (PDF)
-- Brian (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 23, 1999.
I found it interesting how the Executive Summary basically gave a thumbs up to the water and wastewater systems. Then when you actually read the details in the report, wastewater treatment appears to be a potential crisis in the making. It was one of the most disturbing parts of the entire report, but you'd never know it from this summary.
And, of course, Peter Jennings will never read that part or report on it...
-- Dog Gone (email@example.com), September 23, 1999.
Thanks folks for your support!
Out of the whole report that is the one piece of information that lept out to me. Of course everyone would want to have it fixed by the rollover, of course the contingency plans for such a thing is note able. Open the pipes at the lowest level and let the raw sewage drain out. If that happened there would be a serious case of NIMBY awareness.
Could be a sanitary nightmare. In the FEMA;
FEMA: Contingency and Consequence Management Planning for Year 2000 Conversion
They use the example of sewage failure in their example of a Y2K emergency. Wonder if they knew something that others didn't.
-- Brian (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 23, 1999.
Toldja SEWAGE BACK-UPS would be a huge nightmare problem!
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (email@example.com), September 23, 1999.