12/28/98 - 08:30CST
Y2K and Emergency Service Planning and Preparedness; 
A Prospective Perspective
By: C. L. Staten, Executive Director, Emergency Response & Research Institute (ERRI)
There would appear to be a controversy developing about whether or not the so-called
"Y2K," "Year2000," or "Millenium Bug" is a real problem that
will need to be confronted and effectively managed by emergency services and government
agencies. During the past three months we have been reviewing and analyzing other
available studies 1,2,3 concerning this
potential problem, as well as conducting our own research to gauge the possible future
impact of this issue.4 At his time, it is
our considered opinion that, collectively as a community, we have just scratched the
surface in regard to assessing the true implications of this issue.
Our first observation is that there would appear to be essentially six general groups of
people who assess the Y2K problem(s) in the following ways:
1> Those that believe that the entire issue is a "hoax," and that it will
have little or no impact on emergency service operations and/or the communities that they
serve. Therefore, there is no need to prepare or even be concerned about it.
2> Those that believe that there may be potential problems with Y2K, but are reluctant
to discuss it, either out of fear of causing panic in the general population or out of
"embarrassment" that their agency may not be as informed or prepared as it might
be.
3> Those that are willing to admit that if left unfixed, that Y2K may cause at least
"sporadic problems" and outages....but, they believe that nothing of major
magnitude will occur. Most of these people also are of the opinion that the potential
problems can be easily fixed in time.
4> Those that are discussing major "gloom and doom." These people are
predicting a catastrophic effect caused by Y2K, with a general break-down of societal
order...to include possible food and water riots. Many of these people will be armed and
are stocking shelters in rural areas. They plan to depart from urban areas prior to
01-01-2000.
5> Those that believe that Y2K will cause problems, that they are probably inevitable
given the time left to prepare, and that the best thing emergency service
agencies/planners/managers can do is develop comprehensive contingency/business continuity
plans to deal with the aftermath.
6> Those that foresaw the Y2K problem early and have worked diligently, and spent the
money, to resolve all of the potential internal and external issues that may surround it.
In general, these people are those that are reporting that their systems are ready NOW for
Year2000. Unfortunately, there do not appear to be enough people/agencies in this last
group.
Our second observation involves the fact that this could be a "slowly developing
disaster," if it is to be a "disaster" at all. While a
majority of fears revolve around the target date of Jan. 1, 2000, concerns should be
raised about other dates in the upcoming year that may prove significant as well. Various
databases, for instance, may begin to experience errors or corrupted data as soon as Jan.
2nd, 1999. Those that track events or compute, based on annual events may be disrupted as
soon as they attempt to extend their date into the following year (2000).
Other instruments and systems may also fail prior to January, such as the Global
Positioning System (GPS), which is set for a date "roll over" on Aug. 22,
1999.(5) GPS systems are used by the military, aviation, shipping and emergency service
agencies to track the exact locations of their units/assets, and to assist in navigation.
Concerns have also been raised about potential problems in computer-aided dispatch (911)
and communications centers.6 There are a
number of other dates during the
coming year that may also be of concern and provide us with a glimpse of the problems that
may be anticipated.
Our third observation involves the technical scope of the problem. Although Y2K problem
could affect every emergency service agency, from the smallest volunteer fire department
in rural Kansas -- to the largest metropolitan police department in New York City --
experts say the greatest likelihood of trouble is in those departments/agencies that have
mainframe "legacy" systems. Older computer programming, particularly that in
COBOL or similar languages, when memory was at a premium, is most likely to contain faulty
date code that will affect performance or failure of systems. Certainly, personal
computers
(P.C.'s) will be affected by the bug, but most can be easily fixed by software updates or
by a changing of systems bios. Also of concern is the upgrading of the networks that link
the PC's together into workgroups and enable a cooperative sharing of resources. Another
major issue that must be given consideration is that of "embedded" chips, that
may be installed in any number of otherwise mechanical systems... which could fail as a
result of day/date/time issues.
Our fourth observation involves the fact that a large segment of the press/media appear to
be paying a great deal of attention to the negative implications of the Year2000 issue.
Conversely, with a few exceptions like Lubbock, TX and Montgomery County, MD, the official
emergency service and governmental community appears to be avoiding the issue publicly or
minimizing its possible impact. While we would like to think that this is as the result of
leadership confidence in the preparations already underway, or a rational assessment that
Y2K will not be of significant importance, our critical review of the currently
available studies 1,2,3,4,5,6 does not
prove reassuring.
The final observation of this review concerns a seeming lack of discourse,
communications, cooperation, and coordination in regard to the Year2000 issue. To the best
of our knowledge, and we may be wrong, there have been few, if any, articles in the major
emergency service publications in regard to potential Y2K problems. Additionally, a review
of upcoming emergency service conference schedules for 1999 does not reveal Y2K to be a
topic that appears "on the radar screen." Based on this demonstrated lack of
community interest in the overall issue, one must wonder if the computer/technical experts
are completely wrong and the Year2000 bug will have little or no impact on our society as
a whole. Given the current state of affairs, it's either that, or a whole bunch of people
are likely to be very surprised and upset on the morning of Jan. 1, 2000.
CONCLUSION:
While we at ERRI are certainly NOT predicting pandemonium, laying in ammunition, or buying
land in Montana, we are maintaining a skeptical attitude and urging greater efforts toward
emergency service awareness, comprehensive testing and overall preparedness. At this
juncture, our analysis would suggest that even if a majority of emergency service and
government agencies are on track to be "internally" ready for Y2K problems (and
we are not presently sure of that), we don't believe that
essential contingency planning efforts have been completed. These may be needed to
effectively manage "external" problems that may result because of other critical
infrastructure failures.
References:
1. "Emergency Services Sector (ESS)
Initial Assessment For Readiness Report," Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), Dec 16, 1998, published by the U.S. Government. Available on-line at:
http://www.fema.gov/y2k/rpt1216.htm
2. "Half of U.S. Counties
Report Y2K compliance Plans," Vol. 30, No. 23, Dec. 7, 1998, by the National
Association of Counties, Washington, DC Available on-line at:
http://www.naco.org/pubs/cnews/current/y2k.html
3. "International
Association of Emergency Managers-Y2K Survey Results," by IAEM, Dec., 1998,
Available on-line at: http://www.iaem.com/Y2K_Survey_Results/y2k_survey_results.html
4. "Chicago Institute Releases
Preliminary Results of Emergency Service Y2K Survey," Dec 4, 1998, EmergencyNet
News Service. Available on-line at: http://www. emergency.com/y2krslts.htm
5. Civil Protection Magazine, Issue #45, Summer/Autumn 1998, pg. 3, an official
publication of the British Home Office.
6. Y2K:
Facing the Year 2000...Is Your PSAP Prepared for the Century Mark?," A 9-1-1 Magazine
Special Report, by Randall D. Larson, 9-1-1 Magazine, pg. 42, May/June 1998. Available
on-line at: http://www.9-1-1magazine.com/magazine/1998/0598/features/42y2k.html
(c) Copyright-EmergencyNet News Service, 1998. All rights reserved. May be redistributed
to emergency service, government, and military agencies with permission of ERRI.
* To access this and other pertinent articles on Y2K Contingency Planning and Domestic
Preparedness, please feel free to visit: http://www.emergency.com/y2kpage.htm
ERRI welcomes opposing viewpoints or those with other significant information
or perspectives concerning the Y2K issue. Please send your comments, suggestions, or
criticisms to the EmergencyNet News Managing Editor Steve Macko, firenet@emergency.com . Please be sure to include
your name, agency, address, phone number, and e-mail address...we do not answer or respond
to anonymous mail.
Emergency Response & Research Institute
6348 N. Milwaukee Ave. #312, Chicago, IL 60646, USA
(773) 631-3774 - Voice/Messages
(773) 631-4703 - Fax
(773) 631-0517 - Modem/Emergency BBS On-Line Service
http://www.emergency.com - Website
webmaster@emergency.com - E-Mail
Return to the ERRI Y2K
Contingency Planning and Domestic Preparedness Page