[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: P2 and the Y2K "Bug"


I would be interested in knowing if anyone has identified a "real" problem
with Y2K.  All of the articles I have read to date, including the CEP
article, are vague in providing actual problems. For example, where would
you need to control a process based on the year and not the second, minute,
or hour ? Can someone give me an actual process control example of where the
assumption of 19XX instead of 20XX matters ?  With all the money being spent
to address this problem, we should be flooded with concrete examples of how
potential upsets and releases were averted.  So far, all i have seen are
urgent cries to spend more money reviewing code and replacing controls for
what is an assumed problem.

> ----------
> From: 	Butner, Robert S[SMTP:butner@battelle.org]
> Reply To: 	Butner, Robert S
> Sent: 	Friday, December 11, 1998 1:35 PM
> To: 	p2tech@great-lakes.net
> Subject: 	RE: P2 and the Y2K "Bug"
> Folks --
> Some time ago, a P2TECH subscriber (I think it was Catherine Dickerson
> from
> PPRC) asked about the potential P2 implications of the "Y2K" bug.  
> I thought it was one of the more interesting questions I'd seen on P2TECH
> in
> some time, but candidly spent little time thinking about it at the time.
> Recently, though, a co-worker and I spent some time looking at material
> specifically related to the relationship between Y2K and the process
> industries, and the potential for unplanned releases due to failure of
> process plant equipment, monitoring equipment, etc.  We've collected a
> number of references and links to online papers on the topic, along with a
> really well done piece from EPA-OW staff, and posted them to the
> ChemAlliance site:
> http://www.chemalliance.org/Columns/Regulatory/Will_the_Y2K_Bug_Put_You_Ou
> t_
> Of_Compliance.htm
> (Yeah, I know it's a ridiculously long URL )
> Though the emphasis of the article is on the impact of potential
> date-related glitches on compliance, I think that technical assistance
> providers working on P2 will find a lot of value in some of the tables.
> These include a list of common pieces of process equipment which are
> likely
> to have embedded microprocessors (and hence be susceptible) and a list of
> "other" Y2K dates (besides Jan 1, 2000) which are likely to lead to
> problems.  So I thought I'd pass this along, as food for thought for those
> of you who are working with the process industries.
> Hope this helps.  Happy Holidays.
> Scott
> Scott Butner (rs_butner@pnl.gov) 
> Senior Research Scientist, Environmental Technology Division
> Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
> 4000 NE 41st Street, Seattle WA   98105
> (206)-528-3290 voice/(206)-528-3552 fax
> http://www.seattle.battelle.org/P2Online/
> http://www.chemalliance.org/