Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

"While the Port Authority is progressing with its Year 2000 Program, there can be no assurance that full compliance will be achieved in a timely manner."

-- John Ainsworth (ainsje00@wfu.edu), December 04, 1999

Answers

To Port Authority: We don't need no steenking *progress*. We are sick of progress. Progress? If we launched a rocket toward another galaxy it could be said to be making, "progress" on a daily basis. What steenking good is that?

NYC is the trading capital of western civilization, and it all hinges on their massive port's ability to ship and receive. Nothing can move without the Port Authority. Nothing moves through the port, then the entire structure of distributing goods world wide goes down the shitter. It's that simple.

Nothing may move anyway, seeing that maritime shipping is the least prepared sector of all (said Larry Gershwin at the CIA). Maybe the PA should kick back and relax. Who cares if they're compliant?

Now, on the brighter side - there are no nuclear silos in the port. See? There is always a bright side. Honk your horn if you're psyched to party now!

-- paul leblanc (bronyaur@gis.net), December 04, 1999.

More stuff on ports in the Western Hemisphere

Ports September Y2K survey

[edited]

As with the first survey in April 1999, the status of Y2K mission critical work has been segregated into four categories:

1. Needs Assessment  Activities to define the scope of the problem and set up the infrastructure necessary to solve it;

2. Renovation  Activities required to change information processing systems and processes dependent on microcircuits;

3. Validation  Activities to test, verify and validate renovated systems and processes dependent on microcircuits; and,

4. Implementation  those activities required to return a modified system or renovated process to production.

Ports rated the percentage of work done on a scale of 1-to-5. 5 indicates that work is largely completed, 1 indicates that little, if anything, has been done.

U.S. Port Responses ( Respondents May/September 37/33)

(1) Needs Assessment: 4.84 average score, up from 4.5 in May 100% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(2) Renovation: 4.39 average score, up from 4.1 in May 90% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(3) Validation: 4.27 average score, up from 3.8 in May 87% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(4) Implementation: 4.24 average score, up from 3.5 in May 81% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

Canadian Port Responses ( Respondents May/September 8/7)

(1) Needs Assessment: 4.71 average score, up from 4.6 in May 85% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(2) Renovation: 4.57 average score, up from 3.9 in May 100% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(3) Validation: 4.14 average score, up from 3.25 in May 71% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(4) Implementation: 4.42 average score, up from 3.25 in May 100% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

Caribbean/Latin American Port Responses ( Respondents May/September 4/17)

(1) Needs Assessment: 4.62 average score, 4.8 average in May 94% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(2) Renovation: 4.46 average score, up from 4.0 in May 93% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(3) Validation: 4.46 average score, up from 3.0 in May 93% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

(4) Implementation: 4.53 average score, up from 3.3 in May 93% of ports reported that work is largely or close to largely completed.

-- John Ainsworth (ainsje00@wfu.edu), December 04, 1999.

GET IT GOING PAUL !!!!!!

-- the Virginian (1@1.com), December 04, 1999.