The Globe and Mail - Canada's National Web Site - 10/27/98
theglobeandmail.com
Huge deployment would deal with fallout from computer failures
JEFF SALLOT and JOHN SAUNDERS
Ottawa and Toronto -- JEFF SALLOT in Ottawa
JOHN SAUNDERS in Toronto
The Canadian Armed Forces have been ordered to spend the next 14 months preparing for what could be their biggest peacetime
deployment -- tens of thousands of troops spread across the country and frigates standing by in major ports -- in case computer
problems in 2000 bring civil chaos.
The army is studying everything from the number of flashlights and batteries it will need if power is out for weeks to whether military
air-traffic-control field equipment should be set up at civilian airports.
Logistics officers are plotting where to position vehicles, fuel, tents, cots, ration packs and other supplies. Signals officers are trying
to figure out how to keep high government officials in communication if commercial systems fail.
Rules for the use of force are being drafted should soldiers have to make arrests or back up police dealing with riots and looting.
As police, fire and other civilian emergency services make their own plans, military commanders have been told that meeting the
threat of the Year 2000 bug is their highest priority and will be the focus of all training from January on. Equipment purchases that
do not contribute to the effort are to be postponed.
No one knows whether a common programming flaw -- a seemingly small matter of dealing with dates beyond 1999 -- will cause
cascading failure in the world's computer systems,knocking out in the dead of a Canadian winter machines that run everything from
traffic lights to nuclear reactors. It could turn out to be one of history's great anticlimaxes, but the armed forces are taking no
chances.
The effort is called Operation Abacus, after an ancient Chinese bead-and-string calculator that needs no power and is not
susceptible to glitches. A 24-page "warning order" was sent to military commanders, regional headquarters and reserve units across
the country nearly two months ago.
"There is a potential for disruption of major infrastructure systems . . . that may require Canadian Forces support to civil authorities,"
the order begins. The commanders have been given until mid-November to come up with first drafts of plans that will be refined right
up to Jan. 1, 2000.
The success of the operation depends on "public confidence in the government's ability to manage and provide leadership in dealing
with the year 2000 problem," the order says.
Navy captains have been told their ships may have to be docked to serve as garrisons, power plants, field hospitals and soup
kitchens.
On land, the official worst-case scenario would have 32,000 soldiers, including volunteer reservists, living and working in the field.
So far, the army says it has sought no cabinet order pressing weekend warriors into service. Rumours in reserve circles suggest the
field force could reach more than 60,000, including many non-volunteers, if such an order were issued.
Such talk was not diminished by an article this month on the Year 2000 effort in the Maple Leaf, an official army magazine.
Lieutenant-General Ray Crabbe, a just-retired deputy chief of defence staff, said soldiers need not worry about missing their 1999
Christmas holidays.
"As far as Christmas goes, I don't think you could deploy 60,000 troops away from their homes at Christmas, especially from a
morale point of view," he was quoted as saying. "I'm not sure you can say the same thing for New Year's Eve." Almost everyone
knows about the problem by now.
Traditionally, most computers recorded years in two digits: "98" for 1998, "99" for 1999 and so on. When "00" arrives, some
computers may think it is 1900 or some other base year.
Some may be uncertain of the year or even the day of the week. (Dec. 31, 1999, is a Friday; Jan. 1, 1900, was a Monday. That
does not compute.) They may act strangely or shut down, paralyzing complex systems.
Or maybe not. The Year 2000 problem (Y2K for short) has been called both a death sentence for industrial civilization and a fraud
perpetrated by computer types.
Whatever it is, billions of dollars and millions of hours of work will have been lavished on it before the end of next year. Greying,
out-of-fashion mainframe programmers have found themselves commanding wages as high as $1,000 a day, at least temporarily, in
the rush to fix countless lines of code. If the troops are out in the cold, they will have plenty of company. Police forces have begun
warning their staffs not to plan vacations around the turn of the year.
The RCMP's 16,000 officers have been told to book no time off from Dec. 27, 1999, to March 15, 2000, at least until the scope of the
Y2K problem becomes clearer.
Toronto's 5,000 police officers have been given no-go dates of Dec. 27, 1999, to Jan. 9, 2000, and Vancouver's 1,150 officers have
been given Dec. 29, 1999, to Jan. 14, 2000. Calgary police are considering the same dates as the RCMP, although no order has
gone out.
Montreal's fire department says there will be a Y2K vacation ban but has announced no dates. The Toronto department has no
special ban but says December and January have customarily been no-leave months because of extra fires associated with
candles, fireplaces and space heaters, among other things.
Europe Prepares to Battle the Millennium Bug
October 23, 1998
Over the past several months, CBN News has brought you several reports on the Year 2000 computer problem. It's been said that
this computer glitch is one demon in the bag of popular millennium nightmares that is based, not on a Nostradamus, but on hard
science. Many experts are warning about the dangers of Y2K. George Thomas reports from London on how Europe is preparing for
the millennium bug.
George Thomas, reporter
It's a man-made technological blunder, the likes of which the world has never seen.
The dawn of the Year 2000 may mean that more champagne will be consumed than ever. In less than 14 months, people from
Australia to Hong Kong, from India to Zimbabwe, are preparing to usher in the new century.
And here in Britain, the soon-to-be-completed millennium Dome will be filled with the great and the good. But there will also be
another, rather unwelcome visitor at the celebrations: the millennium computer bug.
In late March, British Prime Minister Tony Blair took the strongest stance of any world leader about the millennium bug. Saying the
computer problem could chew a hole in the British economy, Blair announced plans to train an army of 20,000 "bug busters,"
specially trained computer programmers to tackle the threat.
However, it took the government nearly three months to unveil their first team of "bug busters." While some applaud Blair's efforts,
others say the initiative is too little too late.
"He announced that they were going to spend just 100 million pounds on a problem that is going to cost three to twelve billion in the
public services," says parliament member Nigel Evans. "So already we know there is going to be an enormous deficiency in the
money needed to sort the problem."
Of greatest concernd to some is how far behind the public service sectors are, such as utilities and health care.
"I would like to stand here and give everyone a guarantee, but I can't guarantee that the lights will be on in five minutes any more
than I can in the Year 2000," says Kevin Morton of London Electricity, one of the largest companies providing power to the city.
Morton says they are working hard to ensure all their systems are compliant. "There is always a chance that something will go
wrong," he says. "It's also the kind of thing that we can actually test for completely. We are not going to shut down London to prove
that everything works."
Then there's Britain's health care system, known as the National Health Service or NHS. Experts estimate that 70 percent of the
NHS may complete their testing by 2000, but that still leaves a large percentage unprepared.
"At the current rate of progress, it looks like about 30 percent of the NHS will not be ready for the Year 2000," says Professor Mike
Smith of St. Bartholomew College.
"We had the chief of the National Health Service in the House of Commons two weeks ago, and he was asked the question about
could he give any guarantees that no lives would be lost after the 31st of December, 1999, he could not give that guarantee."
And many believe that lack of assurance should force the NHS to rethink their plan of action.
"You can understand the problem, but believing that it has immediate relevance to the point where you need to stop doing things
that frankly look much more important at the time," says Smith.
While the public service sector scrambles to repair the problem, the banking industry is one of the few areas leading the way in the
private sector.
British banks are said to have spent $1 billion on tackling the computer glitch. John Thirwell is the director for the British Bankers
Association, a trade union that represents more than 300 banks in Britain.
"The main thing is they are going to be working hard to ensure that on the first of January the year 2000, it will be business as usual
for their customers," says Thirwell.
But for Britain's other 400,000 small and medium-sized businesses, research shows they are lagging behind and time is running
out. And what do the English say about all of this?
"It's a worldwide problem," said one Englishman. "We're all in it together."
"I should imagine it would be a major problem, but I thought they solved it," said another.
Then there is the rest of Europe, which is already lagging behind in its Year 2000 computer work. The continent is wrestling with,
not one, but two computer repair jobs of epic proportions.
On January 4, 1999, the New European Monetary Union currency, or the "Euro," will be launched. The euro, which is expected to
replace existing currency, will require extensice reprogramming of most companies' financial computer systems.
Today we live in a worldwide community, connected by a vast, invisible electronic network. A failure in one area could have an
impact in another, and the whole system becomes a house of cards.
Although computer experts cannot predict what exactly will happen at the stroke of midnight on December 31, 1999, one thing they
are sure of, for Britain and the rest of the world, is that the clock is ticking toward a deadline that cannot be moved. cbn.org
Executive Director of the National Guard, Major General Philbin's Testimony
to the Senate Year 2000 Committee
October 2, 1998
Emergency Planning for the Year 2000: Preparation or Panic?
Mr. Chairman, I am Major General Edward J. Philbin, USAF (Ret.), the Executive Director of the National Guard Association of the
United States (NGAUS). I am present to offer opinions on the problems that may arise as a result of non-compliant computers and
computer dependent systems that are unable to transition through midnight, 31 December, 1999 and the role the National Guard
could and probably will play in managing emergencies arising from those problems. My testimony generally reflects the opinions of
the Association and its members, who are the commissioned and warrant officers of the Army and Air National Guard. It should not
be construed as representing the official positions of the Department of Defense or of the National Guard Bureau.
It is increasingly evident that an appreciable part of the nation's infrastructure could be adversely affected in some way, by what is
commonly referred to as the Y2K problem. In general, the National Guard has the capacity to provide Military Support to Civilian
Authorities (MSCA) and can contribute a myriad of human and equipment resources to restore essential operations disrupted by
Y2K generated incidents.
Considering the possibilities of a large scale disruption of governmental, commercial and other routine daily activities, it is certain
that the National Guard will be among the first organizations activated to assist in the revitalization of the nation's computer
dependent infrastructure. As with hurricanes, floods and other incidents requiring a quick reaction by a well-trained and equipped
on-site team, no other organization will be able to respond in support of police, fire fighting and other civilian emergency responders,
to major crisis situations that may be caused by Y2K disruptions as well as the National Guard. The National Guard's practiced
interaction with state and local organizations and its connections to the National Command Authority provide a unique emergency
response capability not found in any other federal or state organization.
The immediate need is to determine what responsibilities the Guard will be expected to assume in the management of the Y2K
related problems, that many analysts have forecast, which have the potential to trigger the destabilization of societal functions. The
National Guard needs to be prepared to assist in maintaining or reestablishing essential stability in the civil sector.
I suggest that the Department of Defense (DoD) must develop a clear concept of how the National Guard will be required to respond
to the spectrum of problems that could be created by a Y2K disruption. The DoD, through the Chief of the National Guard Bureau
(NGB), must now coordinate with the Adjutants General and the Governors to determine the likely, locality specific scenarios that
may arise in a Y2K situation.
The DoD should also assist the Governors and State Emergency Response Coordinators to ensure that the National Guard itself will
not be impaired by the effects of a Y2K incident at a time when it will be most needed.
I suspect that, to date, this has not been a priority effort on the part of the DoD, even though to properly prepare for possible Y2K
disruptions, the OSD must be cognizant of the importance of the National Guard being made fully capable of responding to any
such technical breakdown.
We must be certain that the National Guard will not itself be a victim of any Y2K disruption. All National Guard units in 3,200
locations throughout the nation, must possess computer dependent equipment that is Y2K compliant. Responding to the
consequences of a Y2K disruption will be futile if the National Guard's operations are plagued by the very consequences the Guard
is attempting to manage. It is critical that the Y2K response requirements of the National Guard be fully funded to ensure that it is
able to respond quickly and effectively to the needs of the community. I respectfully request, Mr. Chairman, that this Committee
urge the Senate to provide full funding for Y2K compliance upgrading of National Guard equipment as one of the highest priorities for
such funding, since the Guard will be among the first responders to a Y2K incident together with police, fire- fighting and other
civilian emergency response personnel.
The critical first step in ensuring that the National Guard will be fully prepared for a possible Y2K calamity is the collection and
sharing of information. When I was Commander of the New Jersey Air National Guard, the State Adjutant General, for the first time
requested all of his commanders to conduct a survey to identify all of the Army and Air Guard resources that could be made
available in response to a state emergency. My survey of the New Jersey Air National Guard identified a surprisingly long list of both
mundane and sophisticated equipment which could be useful in responding to a state emergency. I strongly recommend that such a
survey of the available resources of both the Army and Air National Guard of each state and territory be conducted prior to midnight
on 31 December 1999. Equally important, we must determine how the National Guard will interact with the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) and the DoD in response to Y2K induced emergencies. Command and control of multiple agencies
must result in mutual support rather than multiple collisions in addressing emergency situations.
Therefore, a comprehensive study should be conducted on the potential roles of and the interaction between the FEMA, the DoD,
and the National Guard of the various states and territories in response to Y2K induced problems. I applaud the recent inclusion of
the National Guard in the President's Y2K subcommittee on emergency response chaired by FEMA and believe that the
subcommittee, with the DoD, National Guard Bureau (NOB) and the Adjutants General must develop a cohesive strategy that
prepares this country for any event of mass effect leading up to and after midnight, 31 December 1999. Mr. Chairman, let me stress
the need for the Adjutants General to play an important role in the development of this strategy. In most cases, it will be the
Adjutants General who will integrate the planning efforts for their respective states, with those to be developed by the National
Command Authority.
As you are aware, the Quadrennial Defense Review highlighted the role of the National Guard in homeland defense of the United
States. While the Guard stands ready to meet the needs of the citizenry during any Y2K incident, it is important that in preparing for
that eventuality, the National Guard's ability to respond to it's Total Force mission of rapidly expanding our Army and Air Force in
response to a national threat not be denigrated. Funding for current combat readiness resourcing should not be used to enhance the
Guard's ability to respond to a Y2K event. As an example, it is becoming increasingly evident that the current structure of the Active
Duty Army cannot execute the two Major Theater Wars (MTW) strategy without the assistance of the Army National Guard Combat
Divisions and Brigades. This increased dependency on the National Guard requires increased, not decreased combat readiness
resourcing to enable the Guard to accomplish its historic combat mission. Mere reallocation of current funding to Y2K missions will
have a negative effect upon the National Guard's ability to recruit, train and keep our soldiers and airmen combat ready to respond at
a moments notice to a national threat.
The Year 2000 challenges present an emergency scenario unlike any other in our nation's history. Our technological society has
grown extremely dependent upon the continuity of computer driven systems and networks and as a consequence, the nation's
vulnerability has increased appreciably. Any significant disruption of our computer dependent infrastructure could result in a
significant societal disruption. However, with the cooperative interaction of federal and state governments, the military, the private
sector, and with serious advance preparation, the impact of such an event on the American people can be significantly reduced, if
not totally eliminated.
Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to offer the opinion of the National Guard
Association of the United States on the readiness of the National Guard to deal with potential Y2K emergencies. As we have for
over three and a-half centuries, the National Guard of the United States, Army and Air, stands ready to protect the nation against
military threats and local disasters. This concludes my statement subject to your questions.
y2knewswire.com |
