On the third day of January, when you return from your New Year’s holiday about 16 months from now, what will work in your department and what won’t? Computer experts predict many levels of problems with the Year 2000 changeover.

The most optimistic believe problems will be scattered and fleeting. Others see complete doom and gloom. One recently recommended keeping eight months worth of supplies, equipment, and cash on hand.

How are departments of transportation doing in the battle to get old, two-year digit programming bugs changed to four-digits in time? When you look at the federal government level of readiness, you could easily become discouraged. In a chart published by TechWeb, The Technology News Site on the Internet, Mary Mosquera reports that the U.S. Department of Transportation has 630 total systems. The current estimate is that only 35% of these systems will be compliant by March of next year. She reports that complete compliance will be achieved in 2004. It’s no wonder that a report card of federal agencies, also published by TechWeb, gives the Department of Transportation an F.

Township, city, county, and state highway agencies vary widely in their readiness to face the new millennium. To check on this, Better Roads’ editors e-mailed a questionnaire about compliance to systems chiefs in various offices.

In Mississippi, John Simpson, Information Systems, says that the agency will be compliant before July of 1999. Current steps include adding two newly developed (and compliant) systems, one for accounting and one for transportation asset management. These make up a large part of the agency’s automated business processes. Some smaller systems will be modified to reach compliance. Testing is part of the program. The agency isn’t really querying suppliers about their compliance at this point.

Connecticut DOT’s Thomas J. Perrone, information systems administrator, says their mainframe assessment will be completed shortly. "We have prioritized the systems to be repaired. The critical legacy applications will be completed and compliant by July, 1999. The majority of PCs will be replaced through our NT migration project, and will be compliant."

PC software upgrades will ensure compliance in that area, Perrone reports.

Don’t assume that all recent system or software upgrades will do the trick. For instance, Microsoft’s NT 4.0 operating system is not fully compliant. NT 5.0 will be, or there is a patch, called Service Pack 3, for NT 4.0 that you can download. You also need to install Microsoft Site Server Express 3.0 and Windows NT Year 2000 QFE Fixes. Windows ‘95 also has some problems, if you use specific applications. Windows ‘98 or online upgrades should let you fix those problems. The Microsoft Website includes more information and is a must-visit if you use NT or Windows.

The Connecticut DOT took steps about two years ago to ensure that suppliers are compliant. The department inserted compliance terminology in all agreements with vendors, consultants, and construction contractors.

Perrone says they are currently testing systems with embedded logic. Telephones, security systems, elevators, and heating and air-conditioning systems are compliant.

Louisiana is on much the same track for basic compliance, with a July, 1999, completion date slated. The agency is testing changes, exchanging Y2K information with other agencies and financial institutions, as well as with the Federal Highway Administration. Embedded logic issues in operational systems are being addressed, says Acting Director Dominic Cali.

Leo Lutchansky, information systems managers, ASD/IS, in the Arkansas State Department of Transportation replies that they are in the midst of a Y2K project, managed by the governor’s Office of Budget and Management. "Processes include the typical ones of inventory, assessment, remediation, and testing," he says. "We haven’t entirely completed this process, though we expect to have our critical systems compliant by the time January 1, 2000, rolls around."

Arizona’s DOT will be ready by July 1, 1999, says Katie Underwood Murphey. "It’s imperative to have the support of the user community as you fix, upgrade, or replace various computer systems," she says. "The key to delivering a successful system is to get the user involved in the process."

Smaller agencies, such as counties, rely more on personal computers than mainframes. Many chose to deal with Y2K problems by replacing the computers and software.

"Our systems are already compliant," says IT Manager Tito Olazabal in San Mateo County, California. "Updating of our equipment to a pentium architecture and running tests on new configurations have done it for us."

In Franklin County, Washington, Guy F. Walters says that systems are currently 85% compliant and that the rest will be so by the first quarter of next year. Testing and supplier compliance are part of the program.

You should be well along in your own compliance program at this point. Even so, new software products, insurance, and other helpful tools can make your life easier.

Start by expecting to spend more than you originally planned. Many estimates have doubled or tripled from the first figures. At the federal levels, Y2K readiness is now expected to cost $5 billion, for instance.

The later you started, the more the program will probably cost. Programmers who could repair the two-digit code and insert four digits were relatively inexpensive before businesses and government agencies realized that changes would be needed to turn the century. Today, their time costs much more.

Software products can do some of the work an individual programmer might have done for you, but you need to leave time to test. Managers in companies marketing such software recommend one to three months for testing.

IBM recently launched Year 2000-ready DOS. A study showed that between 120 million and 150 million people still use DOS on their desktops, not including those using Windows 3.1 with its DOS component. Versions of DOS older than 6.0 haven’t been tested for compliance, says Robert Rapuano, DOS development manager. So, IBM engineers created the new version to solve the problem. Costs for the program are low — $59 each for multicopy licenses, $70 on a floppy, and $65 on a CD.

Check your software for any program that does projections, such as budgetary or highway or bridge life-cycle projections. A testing program can be useful if the data must be absolutely dependable.

E-mail is another area to check, albeit a minor one. "You shouldn’t take the vendor’s word for compliance," says one computer engineer. "Instead, test it yourself." The newest versions of Microsoft Exchange Server, Lotus Notes, and cc:Mail are Y2K ready. Earlier versions may not be. IBM’s Profs, Lan-based cc:Mail 6.x, and earlier systems are not compliant.

Testing tools provide essential help on the path to compliance. Cyrano, for example, now sells the Y2K testing tools developed by Digital Equipment. These support Digital’s Alpha, Intel, and VAX-based platforms running Open VMS, Digital Unix, and Windows NT operating systems. The tools don’t come cheap. The Millennium Record sells for $10,000 per server. DateWarp costs $10,000 for two servers per site. The complete Millennium Test package sells for $52,000.

Mercury Interactive has visual testing tools that lets programmers track progress in compliance. The software is designed for AS/400 and mainframe platforms. Its QuickTest 2000 supports Windows 95 and Win NT. This software is sold as part of its WinRunner 2000 Enterprise and Testsuite 2000 Enterprise. The cost of the component is $5,895. WinRunner 2000 costs $11,790.

Peritus Software Services checks code to be sure all date fields have been expanded. Users send the code to the company, where it is checked at the cost of $0.15 per line of code.

Peritus uses its Automate:2000 software. This scans mainframe COBOL code as well as RPG and PL/1 code and finds the date fields and calculations affected by the Y2K problem.

Even if you believe your own agency has no remaining Y2K problems, consider contingency plans. A TechWeb report by Tim Wilson with InternetWeek, says that about 57% of applications will not be repaired before date problems begin to cause failures. Some of these will belong to your suppliers, he says, which means problems for you. If their noncompliance and resulting system crash means you can’t get parts for a critical snow plow in the middle of the winter, for instance, you need to know what you’ll do about it.

Several agencies report that the’ve developed a team to brainstormpossible solutions if and when problems occur. If you try this route, ask yourself what you’d do if the phones didn’t work for an extended period of time, what you’d do if many stop lights shut down or operated incorrectly, how you’d deal with failure of an elevatoror or heating systemto function, or where you would get maps and needed data if electrical power failed and you couldn’t use your compliant computer systems. What would you do without internal communications; without external communications? What would happen if your engineers got irrational data?

There is even a software program that can help you create contingency plans. Called RiskTrak, the Risk Services & Technology program assesses possible problems, their probability, and the likely cost of failures.

Insurance policies also provide some protection and can do more than pay back money that was lost. Many of the policies are tied to using compliance programs and testing specified by the insurance company. Once you do this, costs for failures not caught are covered. Ascent Logic is an engineering company that helps Marsh & McClennan write Y2K policies. They begin with an audit that determines the primary policy and then rank the order of systems to be fixed first. They use quarterly audits to assure changes are on schedule.

Not being able to operate can mean possible lawsuits. If computerized traffic signs don’t work and there are fatal accidents; if a bridge can’t be raised when needed; or traffic can’t be controlled in a tunnel because of computer crashes (including embedded logic systems); your agency could be liable.

California lawmakers tried to pass a bill limiting class-action Y2K lawsuits, but the attempt died in committee. Some version of the bill will probably be passed in California and elsewhere.