From DOT: http://www.y2ktransport.dot.gov/AARReadiness.asp

Year 2000 Readiness Assessment
January 1999

OVERVIEW: This summary assessment for January 1999 covers the eight U.S. Class 1 freight railroads remaining after the acquisition of Conrail this year. These railroads account for 91% of total U.S. freight railroad revenue, 89% of employees, and 71% of miles operated. Their operations span all states other than Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Alaska and Hawaii.

All segments of the rail industry are very much aware of the critical importance of addressing the potential problems that could affect computer systems with the century change. Railroads and rail suppliers are actively engaged at every level in identifying and preventing these problems.

Our first priority is the safety of our employees, customers, and the public at large. The rail industrys Year 2000 efforts in safety-critical areas address mainframe computer systems, decision support systems, and a variety of components supplied by vendors, including embedded devices. Railroads have received many inquiries about signals and highway grade crossing devices and have good news to deliver in response to these inquiries. Research and testing experience by railroads and rail suppliers shows that the safety-critical aspects of signals and grade crossing devices do not employ date calculations. Because of this they are not subject to the sort of Year 2000 problems that affect some credit cards, telephone systems, and older mainframe computer programs.

We believe that the rail industrys approach will enable it to continue safe, customer-responsive, efficient rail operations before, during, and after the century change.

YEAR 2000 PROJECT ORGANIZATIONS: Each of these large railroads has been actively engaged in a Year 2000 readiness project for several years with defined milestones and accountability. The Chief Executives of each railroad receive regular status reports. Senior management sponsorship and involvement is typical, since electronic information systems play a key role in meeting customer requirements and productivity goals in large-scale railroading today.

YEAR 2000 PROJECT EXPENDITURES: These eight large railroads spent approximately $150 million on their Year 2000 Projects through December, 1998. They expect to spend approximately $225 million in all.

ASSESSMENT (those activities required to define the scope of the problem and set up the infrastructure necessary to solve it): All respondents except two report 100% completion of the assessment phase for mission-critical systems. One of the exceptions reported 96% in January with 100% expected shortly thereafter. The other exception is 100% complete with assessment of core information systems and electronic commerce systems, and is currently completing assessment for other areas.

RENOVATION (those activities required to change information processing systems, including external interfaces, and fix processes dependent on microcircuits): All respondents are currently 100% complete with mission-critical renovation or expect to be 100% complete no later than July. The January status for critical renovation ranges from 75% to 100% with a rough average of 90%.

VALIDATION (those activities required to test, verify, and validate renovated systems, including external interfaces, and processes dependent on microcircuits): The January status for critical system validation ranges from 50% to 100% with a rough average of 85%. All respondents expect to be 100% complete with validation by September, with all but two complete in July or before. (Some of the validation included is date-forwarded testing which will occur after the remediated systems are implemented into production status.)

IMPLEMENTATION (those activities required to return a modified system or renovated process to production): The January status for critical system implementation ranges from 75% to 100% with a rough average of 85%. All respondents except one expect to be 100% complete with implementation in July or before, with the exception 100% complete later in the third quarter.

INFORMATION FOR SPECIFIC RAIL EQUIPMENT:

a. Signaling systems: During widespread testing by both railroads and signal suppliers no century change problems have been discovered that will impact safety or the operation of signals. The event recorders on a few older signals will need to be re-set. Even if the required re-set were not accomplished as planned, it would not impact safety or operations.

b. Interlocking plants: Testing results have been similar to that for signals.

c. Dispatching office systems: Required software upgrades have already been applied or are planned for implementation no later than third quarter 1999 (mostly complete in first or second quarter).

d. Telecommunications systems, both fixed and mobile, internal and commercial: Any required software upgrades or hardware replacements have already been applied or are planned for implementation no later than third quarter 1999 (mostly complete in first or second quarter).

e. Grade crossing signals: The operational components of grade crossing signals have been tested and do not require remediation. Some event recorders will require resetting the date after 1/1/2000; even if the required re-set were not accomplished as planned, it would not impact safety or operations.

f. Tunnel ventilation fans: One railroad has indicated that some remediation is required. This will be completed in first quarter 1999.

g. Draw bridges: No century change implications.

h. Wayside failed-equipment detectors: The operational components have been tested and do not require remediation. Unless remediated, a few of the oldest hot box detectors will print the wrong year on the chart recorder tape, but this is not a safety issue.

i. Automatic equipment identification system readers: Microcomputer hardware and software is being upgraded no later than third quarter 1999 (mostly complete in first or second quarter).

j. Locomotive electronic controls and cab displays? No century change implications.

k. Locomotive event recorders: Some railroads have discovered that remediation is required for some units. Work is underway and is expected to be complete no later than third quarter 1999.

l. Computerized diagnostic tools in locomotives? No century change implications.

m. End-of-train transmitters and receivers? No century change implications. Typically, times are only stored for 8 hours before being over written.

n. Electronically-controlled pneumatic brake systems? No century change implications.

o. In-shop wheel, axle, and bearing inspection equipment and other computerized shop equipment: The operational components have been tested and do not require remediation. Some equipment that logs dates incorrectly on reports requires remediation.

p. Vehicle-borne inspection systems: Some PCs must be powered off on 1/1/2000, powered on, and the internal clocks reset to the proper date. Plans are completed to follow this process where necessary.

CONTINGENCY PLANS: As part of their efforts to address the Year 2000 challenge, these larger railroads are actively pursuing development of contingency plans covering internal problems that may arise as well as external failures that could impact operations.

Year 2000 contingency plans at these railroads are generally based on the foundation of business continuity and disaster recovery plans previously developed. The railroads are investigating the requirement for additional Year 2000 contingency planning through risk assessments in the specific areas with potential century change problems. Areas covered include:

• Provision for remedial action to protect critical facilities from disruption due to loss of power, heat, water, elevators, building access, and fuel shortages.
• Provision for protection and/or contingency plans for major operations infrastructure such as Telecommunications Systems, Dispatching Systems, Signal Systems, and Automatic Equipment Identification Systems.
• Provision for protection of operational supplies/materials based on vendor readiness and risk factor including equipment repair materials, emergency maintenance material, locomotive fuel, and locomotive repair materials.

Railroad contingency planning includes assignment of adequate staff for on-duty status so that any problems arising over the January 1, 2000, weekend can be addressed immediately.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-dejanews.com), April 11, 1999

Off

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-dejanews.com), April 11, 1999.

Thanks Hoff.

-- Parrot (ok@mission.critical), April 11, 1999.

...sounds like more facts Hoff -the gloomers will not be pleased...

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), April 11, 1999.

Well, Hoff, I am glad they are working on it, which is all that this piece says.

-- dave (wootendave@hotmail.com), April 11, 1999.

Dave, I think the main information this link provides is in the assessment of the specific equipment. I've seen alot of speculation regarding different systems used by railroads; this appears to provide some answers.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-dejanews.com), April 11, 1999.

This provides much more specifics than we have been accustomed to. Most importantly, it looks like they will be well along by this summer. Great post.

-- Tomcat (tom@cat.com), April 11, 1999.

Thanks Hoff,

I hope they get their act together - but I for one even now will never travel by rail - how many serious crashes have AMTRAK had this year? I forget, three or four at least - the rail mergers are also very worrying, this at a time when resurces should be going to y2k remediation rather than mergerging of incompatible systems. these mergers have been plagued with problems - quite disastrous for the industry.

As for y2k prole,

"...sounds like more facts Hoff -the gloomers will not be pleased..."

I see you've come up with another cutting, on the edge, precision, laser-like post.

Still waiting for you to say something, anything, which is relevant.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 11, 1999.

Hoffmeister,

That assessment is from January 1999? I'd like to believe what it says, and at the same time I also remember this quote by John Koskinen in a January 1999 USA Today article:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cte068.htm

''We are deeply concerned about the railroads,'' Koskinen says. ''We have no indication that they are going to make it.''

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), April 12, 1999.

Hi Hoff, (Oof, small stuff :) )

I notice that practically nobody's finished. I'm happy to see that 96% have finished assessment (maybe 100% by now). Fixes are planned to be finished by June with testing planned to be finished by September. Very good, just what I was expecting would be said.

I don't see any mention of scheduling or routing systems. That's the part that was taken over last summer, with ads for lots of people showing up in the papers.

I also notice that no mention is made of contingency plans for things other than "critical facilities" -- what happens during power outages along main lines?

-- Dean -- from (almost) Duh Moines (dtmiller@nevia.net), April 12, 1999.

ANDY - U R 1 of us.

-- … (Aliens@meepzork.nationals), April 12, 1999.

What about the rail switches? Did I miss it?

-- SCOTTY (BLehman202@aol.com), April 12, 1999.

"I am not a number, I'm a free man!"

No. 6

The Village

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 12, 1999.

Andy the Idjit said " I for one even now will never travel by rail "

Andy, every time you leave your trailer and jump in you pickup truck, your are statistically far more likely to be killed or injured than by taking a train (or a plane).

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), April 12, 1999.

Y2K Pro: I hate to admit it but that was a good one! (Sorry Andy :)...

-- a (a@a.a), April 12, 1999.

I'll have you know I travel by gentlemans conveyance y2k prole, a bicycle.

Far more dangerous than trying to take a pizza off of Oprah :)

Seriously - Amtrak crashes are so regular they are scary.

Read up on the automation of switches - evrything is automated, crossings, switches, couplings.

My prediction - but you knew this - it ain't gonna be pretty.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 12, 1999.

Although the enroute swithcing systems are covered under "Interlocking Plants", the automated switching systems and automated speed control systems employed in classification yards weren't mentioned. The systems used to help determine a train make-up weren't covered. If the automated switchyards done work, then being able to generate and printout a line-up will allow manual switchyards to still build trains. Systems used to transfer information between different railroads concerning fireght car transfer and tracking weren't mentioned, either.

This article does present some good news, but look for what's missing as well as what's there. The glaring ommissions give me pause for concern. After all, what good is a railroad you can run a train over, if you can't organize a train to run?

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), April 12, 1999.