Year 2000 Failures Likely

Federal agencies will probably not be able to prevent some of their computers from malfunctioning in the year 2000 because of a coding snafu, General Accounting Office officials told Congress yesterday.

Testifying before the House Government Reform and Oversight Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology, GAO Director of Information Resources Management Joel Willemsen said there is a high probability that it is too late for agencies to fix all the coding in their computers that will cause the computers to think it is 1900 instead of 2000.

Because computer applications developed in the 1960s and 1970s use six digit date codes, when the date hits 01-01-00, the applications will read that as 1900. Some computer systems will simply freeze up or shut down when this happens. Others will continue to function, but the data they work with will be corrupted.

Willemsen said agencies should concentrate on fixing essential computer systems like air traffic control systems, Medicare databases, and national defense systems. GAO has categorized the Year 2000 problem as one of 25 high-risk areas for federal managers.

Earlier this month, the Office of Management and Budget estimated it would cost the federal government $2.3 billion to update all its computer programs to deal with the year 2000 problem. Last year, industry experts estimated the cost at closer to $30 billion.

Rep. Steve Horn, R-Calif., chairman of the subcommittee, questioned the OMB estimate, calling it "way too low."

GAO has released a guide for federal information technology managers to follow as they make Year 2000 fixes. It identifies five steps in the process:

  • Awareness. Define the year 2000 problem and gain executive level support. Establish a year 2000 program team. Ensure that everyone in the organization is aware of the problem.
  • Assessment. Assess the year 2000 impact on the enterprise. Identify core business areas, inventory and analyze systems supporting the core business areas, and prioritize their conversion or replacement. Develop contingency plans to handle data exchange issues, lack of data, and bad data. Identify and secure the necessary resources.
  • Renovation. Convert, replace, or eliminate selected platforms, applications, databases and utilities. Modify interfaces.
  • Validation. Test, verify, and validate converted or replaced platforms, applications, databases, and utilities. Test the performance, functionality, and integration of converted or replaced platforms, applications, databases, utilities and interfaces in an operational environment.
  • Implementation. Implement converted or replaced platforms, applications, databases, utilities and interfaces. Implement data exchange contingency plans, if necessary.
Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.