SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Year 2000 (Y2K) Embedded Systems & Infrastructure Problem -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: John Mansfield who wrote (377)5/16/1998 4:31:00 AM
From: John Mansfield  Respond to of 618
 
[HVAC] Discussions about HVAC, Elevators etc at the WTC

To me it seems the elevators at the WTC are no problem. Here is a description of the systems controlling the HVAC in the WTC etc. Lots of computerisation; so they will be doing quite some testing.

Technical but interesting.

John
________

'RonKenyon <ronkenyon@aol.com> wrote in article
<1998051522265200.SAA04238@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> Stephen Poley wrote:
> >>>I know it's a little off the topic you were actually discussing, but I
> >>>can give one concrete example. The lifts in the passenger terminal at
> >>>Amsterdam airport
> < ... >
>
> Did anyone ever track down make-or-break details on the reported NY World
Trade
> Center elevator test? Harlan?
> -- RonKenyon

Here's some of the correspondence:

-----Original Message-----
From: Harlan Smith [SMTP:hwsmith.XOUT@cris.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 1998 3:05 PM
To: 'berengaria.winkler.XOUT@nordstrom.com'
Subject: WTC Elevator Story doesn't check out, so far

Berengaria,

[snip]
Although I do not have a written review of the test conducted at the World
Trade Center, the test example was presented at a recent Year 2000 forum
that my manager and I attended. Recently the facilities and operations
group at the World Trade Center, ran year 2000 tests on 2 of their main
elevators. They rolled the internal clock, the elevator went up, came down
and turned itself off. When they went back into the system to turn the
clock back to present time, the embedded chip would not take. What was
supposed to be a 2 hour test, turned into a lengthy night run to remove the
embedded chip, find a replacement and set the new embedded chip before the
work day began. For clarity and details about the test procedures that they
used, I would advise contacting the World Trade Center directly.

I have found in my research as project analyst for this project, that the
IEEE professional organization has not taken the opportunity to take the
stage on the embedded system and year 2000 issue. I am quite surprized, as
their English counterpart, the IEE in England, has posted on their web site
and is selling a recent publication on the very topic. I have ordered the
publication, and it has proved to be very useful, as my colleagues in
facilities and operations were looking for this very material. I would
advise visiting the IEE web site: www.iee.org.uk. - BW
[end snip]

We have contacted WTC and they say that the incident did not occur and that
they are just now commencing Y2K testing.

Also, there are supposed to be 275 Otis elevators in the WTC and Otis
claims complete compliance.

Now they do have a big control system strapped on the WTC and I rather
suspect it does have problems.

Can you please identify the specific conference and also the speaker who
related this tale?

Harlan Smith

-----Original Message-----
From: berengaria.winkler.XOUT@nordstrom.com
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 1998 7:25 PM
To: hwsmith.XOUT@cris.com
Subject: RE: Elevator Test Example - Resource

Mr. Smith: I apologize for not getting back to you earlier this week; I
have been out of town and subsequently catching up with pressing items.
I have, in addition to your inquiry, received another question about this
very facility test that I heard about at a conference presentation. As I
stated in my initial note at the on-line conference, the information
regarding the World Trade Center Tower elevator test, was presented as an
example at a conference I attended here in Seattle.
Please note, I encourage direct inquiry to the facility and elevator
manufacturer, but for clarification, that I should have stated in my
initial message, I received this information at the Gartner Group Strategic
Forum, "Year 2000: The Landscape is Changing!" - presented by John Bace of
the Gartner Group. In the meeting materials, the following number is given
for inquiries to the Gartner Group Year 2000 client service, (203)316-1255.
You may be able to directly inquire via this number.
We have not as yet tested any of our elevators, but may conduct such tests
-pending the inquiry completion we have with our vendors. If there is any
other information and resources that I may provide, please feel free to
contact me. Thank you , and I hope that this has been helpful as well as
providing some clarification.
Berengaria
Berengaria Winkler
NORDSTROM Year 2000 Project Office
(206)233-5718 Fax: (206)233-6352
Tie Line: 8-891-5718

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harlan Smith [SMTP:hwsmith@cris.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 1998 1:05 PM
> To: 'berengaria.winkler.XOUT@nordstrom.com'
> Subject: WTC Elevator Story doesn't check out, so far
>
> Berengaria,
>
> [snip]
> Although I do not have a written review of the test conducted at the
> World
> Trade Center, the test example was presented at a recent Year 2000
> forum
> that my manager and I attended. Recently the facilities and operations
>
> group at the World Trade Center, ran year 2000 tests on 2 of their
> main
> elevators. They rolled the internal clock, the elevator went up, came
> down
> and turned itself off. When they went back into the system to turn the
>
> clock back to present time, the embedded chip would not take. What was
>
> supposed to be a 2 hour test, turned into a lengthy night run to
> remove the
> embedded chip, find a replacement and set the new embedded chip before
> the
> work day began. For clarity and details about the test procedures that
> they
> used, I would advise contacting the World Trade Center directly.
>
> I have found in my research as project analyst for this project, that
> the
> IEEE professional organization has not taken the opportunity to take
> the
> stage on the embedded system and year 2000 issue. I am quite
> surprized, as
> their English counterpart, the IEE in England, has posted on their web
> site
> and is selling a recent publication on the very topic. I have ordered
> the
> publication, and it has proved to be very useful, as my colleagues in
> facilities and operations were looking for this very material. I would
>
> advise visiting the IEE web site: www.iee.org.uk. - BW
> [end snip]
>
> We have contacted WTC and they say that the indcident did not occur
> and
> that they are just now commencing Y2K testing.
>
> Also, there are supposed to be 275 Otis elevators in the WTC and Otis
> claims complete compliance.
>
> Now they do have a big control system strapped on the WTC and I rather
>
> suspect it does have problems.
>
> Can you please identify the specific conference and also the speaker
> who
> related this tale?
>
> Harlan Smith
Subject: Re: OTIS Elevator and Y2K
From: "Harlan Smith" <hwsmith.nowhere@cris.com>
Date: 1998/04/10
Message-ID: <01bd649b$097f7b60$46969bcf@CRC3.concentric.net>
Newsgroups: comp.software.year-2000,comp.arch.embedded
[More Headers]
[Subscribe to comp.software.year-2000]

Here's some more on WTC

hsq.com

[snip]
HSQ Technology Delivers Operations Control Center to World Trade Center

In May of 1997, HSQ Technology delivered a Building Management and
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) to the Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey for the World Trade Center (WTC) in
New York City.

HSQ's MISER SCADA software and hardware package is located in the
Operations and Control Center (OCC) of the WTC and functions as a complete
Building Management System (BMS), coordinating the operations of the other
building control and monitoring subsystems.

The World Trade Center is a very large complex of five buildings consisting
of two 110 story towers (including 6 sub-grade levels each), two 10 story
buildings, and the Concourse. The towers and Concourse portion of the
Center were completed in 1973. Each tower is 1,350 feet (410 meters) tall,
second in height only to Chicago's Sears Tower.

Design Criteria

In March of 1996, the Port Authority issued a Request for Proposal (RFP)
for the design and implementation of the OCC/BMS project. In the RFP, the
NYNJPA set four main goals:

Provide a central command center to improve the performance and monitoring
of all base building and emergency systems. Provide areas from which to
coordinate emergency response activities. Ensure that no single event
would impair communications, control and monitoring functions. Provide
flexibility for future adaptation to new technology and growth.

HSQ's proposal met the requirements of the RFP which covered previous
experience, systems integration, capabilities and understanding of these
types of applications. HSQ's many years of experience, coupled with our
MISER software and hardware products, allowed us to propose a system that
would meet and exceed the WTC requirements.

The HSQ model 2500/86 Logic Processor is used to monitor base building
alarms and Chiller performance monitoring instruments. The system is
designed to support future plans for energy management.

Project Scope

HSQ Technology was awarded the OCC/BMS design/build project, and the
contract was signed in September of 1996. HSQ's proposal was based on HSQ's
MISER software and Model 2500/86 Logic Processor RTUs. MISER will provide a
central monitoring, control and information access facility for the
following subsystems:

Elevator Monitoring and Control
Escalator Monitoring
Electrical Power Substation Monitoring and Control
Base Building Alarm System
Chiller Performance Monitoring System and HVAC Energy Management System
Communication System
Interface to a Work Order Management Software Package
Interface to Existing Mainframe

Project Implementation

The delivered system consists of two main SCADA servers, 16 workstations,
two system consoles, four printers, two terminal servers, Ethernet
repeaters, hubs and associated LAN hardware, modems, facsimiles, and
audio/visual equipment distributed throughout the different rooms.
Communications between the different systems is via a fiber-based Campus
Area Network (CAN). Originally, the CAN communications network was not part
of this contract. However, the Port Authority has expanded the scope of the
project to include the CAN System to be installed by HSQ. HSQ provided a
100 Mbps fiber optic ring multiplexor and Ethernet communications.

The Operations Control Center

The OCC (Operations Control Center) serves the following functions:

Operations Control

Performs day-to-day and emergency operations.

Emergency Operations

Functions as the communications center.

Tenant Liaison

Manages communications during emergencies.

The MISER SCADA system will interface to the elevator control and
monitoring system. The WTC complex has 240 elevators and 48 Elevator
Machine/Control Rooms. The Port Authority is in the process of upgrading
the elevator controls. In the first stage, MISER will interface to 35
elevators. Other elevators will be added to the MISER system as they are
upgraded. These controls include car leveling, door timing, floor bypass
and emergency operation.

HSQ's SCADA system also monitors all 71 escalators distributed throughout
the complex. The SCADA system monitors the operational state of the
escalator (running or not running), direction of travel, and the presence
of one of eight alarms. No control functions are envisioned at this time.

The WTC complex is served by an electrical distribution system consisting
of 23 substations. Of these, 16 substations are located in the towers, each
tower having 8 substations. Six of these have been upgraded to include
digital devices such as power meters and digital protective relays. HSQ's
MISER SCADA collects, processes and stores digital/analog data from the
power meters, protective relays and other field devices. MISER utilizes the
CAN System to communicate with these devices using SEAbus protocol. In the
future, all substations will be upgraded and MISER will be communicating
with all 23 substations.

The installed MISER system interfaces to approximately 385 alarm sensors
strategically located throughout the building. The interface to the MISER
system is through HSQ 2500/86 Remote Terminal Units (RTUs) that gather all
the sensor data and transfer it to the main control center by means of the
existing shielded twisted pair and via the fiber optic backbone network.
The HSQ RTUs are designed to easily increase the number of alarm points
that can display as the future need increases, and also to provide an
interface for future energy management and control functions.

All alarms display at the individual Operator workstations. Alarms are
color-coded and blink accordingly. By looking at the screen, an operator
can easily identify the type of alarm, date and time that the alarm
occurred, and which device caused the alarm. Alarms can be identified by
priority or group, allowing the operator to easily identify alarms which
have a high priority, markedly simplifying the operator's job. The User can
build alarm displays for specific building functions or physical areas, or
modify existing ones. MISER also provides advanced alarm processing
functions such as historical archiving and reporting. Current alarms and
historical alarm data can be printed or exported to other commercially
available standard software packages for further analysis.

Since awarding the contract to HSQ, the Port Authority has expanded the
scope of the project to include the Chiller Performance Monitoring System.
In addition, there are plans to interface the HVAC Control System with
HSQ's MISER system in the future.
[end snip]


It wouldn't be surprising if there was a Y2k problem lurking somewhere in
all this mess would it?

---
Harlan

Date: 08-May-98 17:43:03 MsgID: MC2-3C6E-C3B5 ToID: 71530,1637
From: Alan Reiss >INTERNET:AReiss.XOUT@PANYNJ.GOV
Subj: Year 2000 - World Trade Center Elevators

Form: Memo
Text: (40 lines follow)
Dear Mr. Harlan Smith:

I was recently given a copy of what looks like a CompuServe forum message
dated 3/24/98, # 10449 concerning y2k tests on the main elevators here. I
do
not what forum you attended where this information was presented but it is
completely false. I was the supervising engineer for the World Trade up
until the terrorist bombing, at which I took on the task of project
director
managing the reconstruction of the subgrade & infrastructure, then took
over
as the manager of the Capital programs for the World Trade Center. I
selected the elevator modernization contractor & the controls currently
being installed.

The original elevators at the WTC installed by Otis used relay logic
controls with some transistor & Diode - Transistor Logic. This stuff was
installed in the late 60's. It is really remarkable how well things work
with "ancient technology". These units used tork time clocks to shift
operation based on the time of day with cams.


In 1994 we began modernizing the 246 elevators at the WTC with
microprocessor controls made by Computerized Elevator Controls. It is a non

proprietary system. The system is called Swift Futura. To date only 7 of
the
46 "main" cars are modernized. They do not have a date function, though we
are preparing to run and certify Y2K compliance tests with our contractor &

consultant this year. The vendor has already told us they are complaint but

we are from Missouri.

There was no test, elevator recall, shutdown etc. We may elevator problems
due to the sway of a 110 story building and what it does to elevators but
we sure don't have the Y2K problem you mentioned.

We are in fact lucky that we are just modernizing systems such as fire
alarms and elevators rather than having done it in the 80's and then put a
system that has a problem. For example most of the HVAC controls are still
pneumatic. they don't care what the calendar sys.

Alan Reiss
General Manager
WTC Operations, Life Safety & Security

Use Proportional Font: true

**Primary Recipient:
[71530,1637]

**CCs to:
Theodore Stam INTERNET:TStam.XOUT@PANYNJ.GOV

But, after all this, there are still questions remaining. Where did John
Bace, Director of Research at Gartner Group report that tale and where did
he get that information? Before this is put fully to bed, I think we need
an input from John Bace.

Harlan
___
Subject:
Re: Electric Utilities vs Fear Mongers
Date:
16 May 1998 02:25:17 EDT
From:
"Harlan Smith" <hwsmith.nowhere@cris.com>
Organization:
Paperless
Newsgroups:
comp.software.year-2000
References:
1 , 2



To: John Mansfield who wrote (377)5/16/1998 10:53:00 AM
From: John Mansfield  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 618
 
[MANUFACTURING] 'Y2K Concerns Move Out of the Data Center and Onto the Factory Floor

The fourth in a series exploring the
global impact of the "Year 2000
Bug" on businesses and consumers
by Ann Howe

As CIOs, programmers and
consultants pour over Y2K problems in
the data center, many continue to
overlook a serious area of concern that
lurks right under their noses -- the
factory floor. Recent research indicates
that the cost of fixing the
manufacturing problems at the
plant-level may be at least half of what
a company spends to fix overall data
center issues.

Machines on the factory floor are very
sensitive to incorrect dates - more so
than was expected. For example, a
modern pharmaceutical plant maintains
83 computer systems with three million
lines of code. Within that code are
120,000 date references with potential
Y2K problems. In addition, the plant
runs 138 automated production
systems with 400 date references plus
200 machines with embedded
software.

Manufacturers, in general, use dates
and calculations to drive many different
business processes from product
tracking and bar coding to scheduling
and monitoring. In addition, the
popularity of just in time delivery
methods and supply chain
methodology have created an
interdependence that traces its
success back to a calendar - the Y2K
culprit! Computers tell manufacturers
when components arrive, when to ship
components and when a product
should be destroyed. Date errors could
cripple a manufacturer's supply chain,
bringing some plants to a screeching
halt.

The problem on the factory floor began
20 years ago when manufacturing
found that computers could streamline
their operations, making a company
more efficient and thus more profitable.
In those early days, off-the-shelf
software was practically non-existent
so each plant developed programs that
suited individual manufacturing
specifications. The result was that
custom software ruled the factory floor.

During this time period, about half of
the software written for manufacturing
was written in Cobol. The remaining
software was written in a variety of
computing languages that might as
well be gibberish. What this means is
that although there are tools currently
to hunt for zero-zero (00) date errors in
Cobol and a few other languages, few
exist for the vast number of so-called
embedded systems.

Embedded systems are chips and
programs (not readily accessible or
even visible) which are integral parts of
control and production equipment.
Many must be decoded and fixed
individually. Repairing devices and
software programs is tricky since it is a
'given' in the industry that new program
errors will be introduced in seven
percent of routine repairs.

Compounding the problem is that many
of these programs can't be fixed
because they are inscribed on silicon
chips. In those cases, manufacturers
are forced to scrap any date driven
plant equipment. The only good news
is that these moves force
manufacturers to purchase
leading-edge products that will improve
their efficiency and overall
competitiveness.

To date, the majority of U.S.
manufacturers haven't even completed
a plantwide assessment to learn the
depth of the Y2K problem. With the
economy booming, manufacturing
plants are running three shifts, seven
days a week. Companies find it difficult
to replicate Year 2000 conditions
before they happen. Because the
factories can't afford to close down, the
solution involves testing during off-peak
hours, over planned shutdown periods
or buying expensive back-up
equipment.

General Motors serves as a good
example of how traumatic the situation
is. With over two billion lines of code,
GM is the world leader in the number of
computerized systems. As part of its
Y2K program, the company is retiring
1,700 obsolete computer systems.
Estimates to eradicate the millennium
bug at GM run between $400 and $550
million.

The severity of the problem at the giant
auto manufacturer was recently
brought to light when the company ran
a test with some of its robotic devices.
Y2K problems caused the robots to
freeze - an act that could shut down
the entire assembly line.

Misguided robots aren't the only Y2K
threat to GM's assembly line. GM, like
its competition, is worried that
suppliers who aren't in compliance for
the Year 2000 will be unable to provide
the company with the necessary
components to build automobiles. To
put pressure on suppliers, GM and
other interested auto manufacturers
formed the Automotive Industry Action
Group. The goal is to get the message
to suppliers that either they become
Y2K compliant or they face losing
some very big customers.

If you have ideas on what you would
like to know about Y2K just send them
to us via the Feedback form at the
bottom of this article. We'll try to
address your concerns in future
installments.

marketspace.altavista.digital.com



To: John Mansfield who wrote (377)5/17/1998 2:33:00 PM
From: John Mansfield  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 618
 
[ENERGY] For newbies on Y2k - Repost of some older posts

'Bradley K. Sherman <bks@netcom.com> wrote in article
<bksEt3zK0.1An@netcom.com>...
> In article <355EF410.480CCC3C@idir.net>, ET <gearsXOUT@idir.net> wrote:
> >electricity, oil production and refining.
>
> If the former is okay the latter will take care of itself.

No.

You are making an unsupported assertion.

Please provide references to facts that support this erroneous assertion.

Information has been presented here that refutes what you have said.

You may have a short memory:

www5.yahoo.com

[snip]
Wednesday October 29 4:51 PM EST

Millennium Computer Bug Could Shut N.Sea Platforms

By Hans De Jongh

ABERDEEN, Scotland (Reuters) - Major oil companies today rang the alarm
bell, warning the so-called millennium computer bug could paralyze the
offshore industry in the North Sea -- one of the world's biggest oil
production areas.

In a worst case scenario, oil platforms would be forced to shut down just
over two years from now simply because automated systems fail to recognize
the year 2000, industry experts told a conference here.

The problem stems from short cuts taken by computer programmers in the
past. To save memory space, they abbreviated dates to their last two
digits, so that 1999 becomes 99. But unfortunately, computers will read
2000 as a meaningless 00 and may crash at the turn of the millennium.

Companies such as Royal Dutch/Shell and British Petroleum said they realize
they are sitting on a time bomb and are racing against the clock to check
millions of microprocessors. But, they fear smaller firms have not yet
fully grasped the threat to the oil industry.

At the "Project 2000 in Oil and Gas" conference, industry suppliers and
service providers were warned that time is running out and urged to act
soon to prevent major upheaval.

"Stop talking about it, but do it," said Ian Smailes, automation project
engineer at Total Oil Marine.

The oil industry faces a gargantuan task to fight the millennium bug,
illustrated by the fact a single offshore oil platform may contain over
10,000 microprocessors. Some are deep below sea level, but all need to be
checked.

To put this into further perspective, there are over a 100 platforms in the
North Sea alone.

A taste of what might happen if computer systems fail to recognize a date
came from New Zealand last year. There an aluminum smelter ground to a halt
for several months because its production system could not deal with a leap
year, said David Trim of Shell's year 2000 team.

He told the conference that a worldwide "commercial meltdown" and "economic
hardship" were real risks if worst came to worst.

"We're talking about something akin to the aftermath of a war," Trim said.

The total costs of getting rid of the millennium bug in Britain have been
estimated at 31 billion pounds, while it might be $1.5 trillion for the
world as whole.

But Trim said these could be small sums compared with the far bigger
investments needed to prop up economies if the problem was not addressed
now.
[end snip]

computerweekly.co.uk

[snip]

Energy industry must act fast to fix millennium bug

Results issued by the Energy Industry Special Interest Group have suggested
a significant number of control systems will fail come the millennium. The
survey, posted by a representative of oil firm Texaco in the US on a year
2000 newsgroup run by Peter de Jager, concentrates on inventory and
assessment at four Alcoa steel-making plants, a North Sea oil platform, and
BP's refinery at Grangemouth, Scotland.

According to the results:

 50% of control systems are at risk at the Alcoa plants;

 1,200 systems have a 12% failure rate at North Sea Expro,
operated by Shell and Exxon; and

 of 94 systems at Grangemouth, 74 have been assessed, with
no supplier found for the other 20. Three systems are expected
to fail, with a possibility of two causing a shutdown.

A spokesman for BP at Grangemouth said the plant, which is used by all
three of BP's businesses - oil, chemicals and exploration - had volunteered
to undertake a pilot study on year 2000 on behalf of the rest of the
company. The study, on one part of the refinery as well as petrochemicals,
complements a "first pass" on inventory at the rest of the refinery, the
spokesman said.

BP expects to spend up to $100m (œ61m) in solving its date bug problems,
the company said. US year 2000 expert Leon Kappelman said the control
system test reflected "just the tip of the iceberg".
[snip]

On the following server, April articles have been replaced with May
articles, so the link is no longer valid

gulfpub.com

[snip]
April 1998 Vol. 219 No. 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Will the millennium bug give your operations the flu?

Don't take the head-in-the-sand approach toward potential computer
strangling of production operations. Time-contingent process controllers
must be evaluated for year 2000 date stamp limitations and their
implications for safety, the environment and operations

..
PROCESS CONTROLLER CONCERNS

Unlike the software of a marketing system, the embedded logic on a silicon
chip is entombed deep in the system and not easily ascertained. Any given
Distributed Control System (DCS) or Process Logic Controller (PLC) computer
board has many chips, and their interdependencies on each other, and on
other system components, make them difficult to analyze and repair.

Methods for analyzing this equipment are only now emerging. Compliance
information coming from manufacturers has been sketchy and sometimes
inaccurate.
In some cases, the chips are no longer made. In others, the
controller is manufactured in such a way that the entire unit must be
replaced. Upgraded chips and new controllers also would have to be tested
to ensure that their insertion will not impact drilling and production
processes negatively. Some studies suggest that there may not be enough
manufacturing capacity to just replace all affected chips in less than two
years.

Few organizations have recognized the full potential for possible failure
in embedded systems. Moreover, the supply of talent qualified to identify
and correct these problems is being consumed quickly by other year 2000
projects. The longer that production managers wait, the less the likelihood
that they will be able to affect the outcome pragmatically.

It is estimated that the average oil and gas firm, starting today, can
expect to remediate less than 30% of the overall potential failure points
in the production environment. This reality shifts the focus of the
solution away from trying to fix the problem, to planning strategies that
would minimize potential damage and mitigate potential safety hazards.
..
On a Friday night less than two years from now, a tsunami will build in the
Pacific and roll westward through all major hydrocarbon producing fields
before reaching Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. We know the exact date, not to mention
the hour, minute and second. We do not know its size. As with all tidal
waves, it is safer to take precautions and move out to sea, where its
arrival may not even be noticed. Disaster strikes those who are unprepared
and caught
near shore. There is little time left to mobilize, so to speak, and move
the world's huge oil and gas fleet to the safety of the sea.
[end snip]

... MORE TO FOLLOW

___

Subject:
- Oil Platform Problems
Date:
17 May 1998 13:33:59 EDT
From:
"Harlan Smith" <hwsmith.nowhere@cris.com>
Organization:
Paperless
Newsgroups:
comp.software.year-2000
References:
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5