Feds Issue Final Y2K Report: Some Mission-Critical Computer Systems Not Ready (Federal Computer Week)greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
DECEMBER 15, 1999 . . . 15:41 EST
Feds issue final Y2K report
BY WILLIAM MATTHEWS (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Fair Use: For Educational/Research Purposes Only]
Two mission-critical computer systems run by the Justice Department and six run by the military remain unready for the Year 2000 date change, but the noncompliant systems will not degrade law enforcement or national security, according to the White House.
In its final 1999 report on preparing federal computer systems to operate properly on and after Jan.1, 2000, the Office of Management and the Budget said eight mission-critical computer systems out of 6,167 federal computer systems remain unready.
Of the military systems, only a "wing command and control" system, which is used to communicate with military aircraft, requires a "workaround" to avoid date-change problems. The system was to be replaced by a theater battle management system, but that system is late.
The other five noncompliant military systems either suffer from minor problems, such as a faulty clock display in the M-1A2 tank, or are obsolete. A noncompliant accounting system that keeps track of retirement points earned by military personnel, for example, will be replaced at the end of the year.
The two Justice Department systems are expected to be made Year 2000-ready by the end of the year. They are office automation systems that support the Drug Enforcement Agency and Justice's Tax Division.
OMB said federal computer systems are "99.9 percent" ready for the Year 2000 date change, but administration officials warned that "there will undoubtedly be some Y2K problems that emerge."
However, the computers most likely to malfunction because of the date change are those operatedby state and local agencies, not federal agencies.
States administer several large federal programs, including food stamps, Medicaid and unemployment insurance. Among the 55 states and territories, only 41 have completely prepared for the Year 2000 problem, OMB reported.
Alabama, American Samoa, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands have the greatest number of noncompliant computer systems. Each manages at least three federal programs using noncompliant computer systems.
-- Diane J. Squire (email@example.com), December 16, 1999
"OMB said federal computer systems are "99.9 percent" ready for the Year 2000 date change" Amazing progress in less than 3 years. Now I have to ask, the Social Security Administration started to work on Y2k back in 1989...What took them so long?
-- fatanddumb (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 16, 1999.
snip--< "Two mission-critical computer systems run by the Justice Department and six run by the military remain unready for the Year 2000 date change, but the noncompliant systems will not degrade law enforcement or national security, according to the White House." snip--<
Question: If the failure of these eight admittedly noncompliant systems "will not degrade" anything, why did we, the taxpayers buy them? Incomprehensible.
-- No Polly (email@example.com), December 16, 1999.
"The other five noncompliant military systems either suffer from minor problems, such as a faulty clock display in the M-1A2 tank, or are obsolete."
How in hell can something that is "obsolete" be mission-critical?
-- just wondering (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 16, 1999.
Back in the early 60's I participated in a USN wargame. Late in the game San Francisco was hit by a low yield nuke. The game continued because the hit did not degrade the communications systems. We won the war! (In real life a good rain would degraded the system.) Unfortunately Y2K is not pretend.
-- Ira Kennedy (email@example.com), December 16, 1999.
What they don't tell you is that the .1% is their mainframe. LOL
-- CygnusXI (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 16, 1999.
Has anyone seem anything recently attributed to Joel Williamson of OMB? Is he keeping a very low profile now or is he going along with all these miracles?
-- ghost (fading into email@example.com), December 16, 1999.
I find this development encouraging, for it indicates that the Federal Government has decided to cease manipulating the number of critical systems in its domain. They actually do have integrity.
-- David L (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 16, 1999.