Cost of Federal Y2K Remediation Continues To Grow : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

This from the AP at:

WASHINGTON -- The government raised its estimate Wednesday by $400 million to $6.8 billion for fixing the Year 2000 computer problem among federal agencies, and said costs are expected to rise again.

And with only weeks before its self-imposed deadline of March 31 to have all its most important 6,399 computer systems fixed, it said only four out of five of those systems have been repaired, replaced or never were vulnerable.

So my question is this: The federal government and its various agencies have already missed several such "self-imposed deadlines". How many more such meaningless dates are we going to miss before the public at large begins to suspect that the check really isn't in the mail?

-- Arnie Rimmer (, March 18, 1999


With the general awareness that continues to be, the answer is very easy. At the earliest 31-dec-1999. At the latest.... I would guess, oh..., about 14-jan-2000. Just my $.02

-- (cannot-say@this.time), March 18, 1999.

It really depends, Arnie, on how long the lapdog media continues to put out the government spin.

-- Vic (, March 18, 1999.

Snip from AP article:

" it said only four out of five of those systems have been repaired, replaced or never were vulnerable. "

Arnie, the portion of the statement "never were vulnerable" stands out like a sore thumb. Are they now saying that the original 8500 mission critical systems that were reduced to 6399 in the past 6 months or so contain some systems that were never vulnerable. How many might that be? I think we will see the number of mission critical systems reduced again.


-- Ray (, March 18, 1999.

In this game there is only one real deadline, and it's not March 31.

Deadline derives from line around a prison where a convict would be shot upon crossing.

-- Puddintame (, March 18, 1999.

My bet is that altogether, the Federal Government will spend more on y2k remediation *after* 1/1/00 than before. Any takers?

70,000 non-critical systems cost money too.

-- Flint (, March 18, 1999.

This may seem a dumb question this late in the game, but what is a "system"? The U.S Fedgov has 75,000 "systems": obviously "system" doesn't refer something on the scale of a single p.c., nor does it refer to something on the scale of the IRS. Could someone help me out here with an explanation? I need some concrete examples. Like, as a rough guide, how many "systems" would a guided missle frigate have on it?, or how many systems would Norad use, or would it be counted as a single "system"?? This question's been bugging me for weeks. Ta.

-- humptydumpty (, March 18, 1999.

That being the case, finishing all U.S. government systems will cost an additional $28 billion after 2000 for a total of ~$35 billion.

Add in state and local government systems total remediation costs and you're talking about some real money here.

And guess who's going to pay for it?

-- PNG (, March 18, 1999.


A system could be explained as say Payroll. You would have the time entry. The actual payroll process, the benefits process, the dependents process, and the tax process. Then there would also be the direct deposit, bank fund transfer, transactions between the insurance, 401K, and other benefit providers. This would make up the payroll system. I know this is a simple answer, but you get the idea. As for your q's about NORAD and the like..... I have no idea.

-- (cannot-say@this.time), March 18, 1999.

This raises the question of whether the number of critical systems has been reduced by a process of 'lumping' -- that is, determining that two processes previously categorized as systems really belong to a single, more inclusive system.

Not arguing that the scope of remediation hasn't been reduced by chopping some systems out as being non-critical. But I wonder if any lumping has resulted from determination that two systems are so closely intertwingled that considering they as separate systems isn't really meaningful.

Maybe some IT people have some insight on this?

-- Flint (, March 18, 1999.

Flint, I think it is safe to assume the government folks compiling these statistics will do what ever is necessary to allay the fears of the American prople.

It will be interesting to see how they handle the 70,000 non mission critical systems many of which will require remediation. Do they just stop running them on 1/1/2000. Do they continue to run them and face the prospect of degrading the database. Can this turn into anything but a catastrophe of monumental proportions?


-- Ray (, March 18, 1999.

Some of the DoD systems are single client/server ad hoc reporting applications. Some are huge mainframe legacy systems. The term "system" is a very poor method of measuring progress or work remaining. Legacy systems are being replaced more and more by client/server applications. The thing that worries me about these replacements is that neither disciplined development methodologies nor configuration management/change control is being enforced. I see problems popping up in the future (read soon) because of this deficiency.

It's like the old west of the 60's. Young cowboys whipping out quick and dirty code in an undisciplined environment. History is destined to repeat itself. Or as Yogi said, "It's deja vu all over again".

-- MoVe Immediate (, March 18, 1999.

F.Y.I. -- Diane

MARCH 15, 1999 . . . 18:45 EST

Senate ready to dole out more Y2K money to feds


Although federal agencies have not spent all of the $3.25 billion that Congress earmarked last year to help make Year 2000 fixes to computer systems, the senator in charge of Year 2000 oversight plans to make more available -- just in case.

Sen. Robert Bennett (R-Utah), chairman of the Senate's Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem, said today that thoroughly fixing the millennium bug may take more money because time is limited.

"My own experience with the federal government tells me, yeah, there will be a need for more emergency funding," Bennett said.

He said Congress should be careful not to let agencies fund pet projects under the guise of fixing Year 2000 problems, but he also said Congress should not prevent agencies from obtaining more money if they truly need it.

According to federal budget documents, non-Defense agencies have spent more than half of the $2.25 billion in emergency Year 2000 money Congress set aside last year that was designated for use until the end of fiscal year 2001. Congress also gave the Defense Department $1 billion. President Clinton has requested no additional emergency Year 2000 money.

-- Diane J. Squire (, March 18, 1999.

Rimsey, Me, Kryton, and the cat talked it over. The media will still follow the governments disinformation until such time they can't publish a story.

-- Dave Lister (, March 19, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ