Trenton Times
September 11, 1999
Pg. A1
 

SERIES: Y2K: The millennium computer bug

After `9s' pass quietly, will fears of Y2K fizzle?

By RICH MILLER, Staff Writer

Experts warn of complacency

Now that the overhyped 09/09/99 date for potential computer glitches has passed with few visible problems, does that mean Jan. 1 will be a bust as well?

Skeptics contend Thursday's nonevent shows that fears of risks presented by the year 2000 technology problem have been overblown. But many technology experts say that's like comparing a small apple to a really big orange.

"The quietness of this date doesn't really tell you anything about Y2K,'' said Thomas Barnett, who studies Y2K scenarios for the Naval War College in Newport, R.I. "It's really a very different issue."

"But the public has been told `be scared about this date and that date' and each one passes without anything too serious happening," he added. "If you combine that track record with an impressive amount of readiness work, that's why it's fairly quiet."

As the trigger date for "Y2K" problems draw nearer--now just 111 days off--the majority of Americans are unsure whether the Millennium Bug will be a big deal or a nonevent, or something in between. Observers are divided over whether the public will remain complacent about Y2K or suddenly feel the need to respond, creating panicky reactions by consumers trying to make last-minute preparations.

JUST IN CASE, bankers and grocers are stocking up on cash and food to prepare for late-year stockpiling by consumers. Sociologists say such fears may be easing.

"My feeling is that it seems to be fizzling out, because the consequences of Y2K no longer seem that drastic," said Ted Goertzel, a sociologist at Rutgers-Camden. "I don't think it's going to catch on."

Leading Y2K observers say the most serious threats to the economy and infrastructure have been addressed, but the remaining uncertainties present challenges to public officials seeking to manage a "soft landing" of year 2000 anxieties.

On Thursday, the Plainsboro-based North American Electric Reliability Council conducted a drill in which 15,000 workers at 500 utilities monitored key systems for any problems caused by the arrival of Sept. 9.

"No Y2K problems with the 9/9/99 date occurred, no Y2K problems were reported, and all electric systems transitioned normally into Sept. 9," the NERC reported.

But that doesn't mean all utilities will be fine. Last Wednesday, U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson singled out 28 major utilities that have not completed necessary repairs to avoid potential date recognition problems for computers with two-digit year fields, which may interpret "00" as 1900.

MANY Y2K experts say the 9/9/99 date was overhyped from the start, since it affects a limited number of older mainframe systems that relied on the date as an "end of file" date, not thinking the programs would still be in use when 09/09/99 arrived. But most programmers used 99/99/99. The year 2000 problem, on the other hand, may affect everything from mainframes to tiny processors that run appliances.

But several authors of Y2K-related books, including programming pioneer Ed Yourdon, predicted that date-related problems would begin appearing in 1999. The burst of media attention left some veteran Y2K watchers conflicted.

"I don't recall seeing as much press coverage on any one aspect of the Y2K issue as I've seen on the 9/9/99 nonissue," wrote Patrick Shannon of Sanger & Shannon's Review,which tracks media coverage of the year 2000 issue. "It is simply incredible."

"It will serve to raise awareness about Y2K in general; however, it will also most likely leave many people with the impression that since 9/9/99 did not cause any problems, that 01/01/00 also will be a nonevent," Shannon added.

In fact, even as the deadline approaches, many Y2K activists are becoming discouraged, believing their earnest warnings have been shrugged off.

"There's a core group of people who are very concerned about Y2K," said Barnett. "They're at a certain level of despair. They fear the debate hasn't happened, and people aren't prepared for what may take place."

"I think there is a lot of frustration among people in the Y2K awareness field," said Cathy Moyer of The Cassandra Project, which advocates community preparedness for Y2K risks. "What I find is more and more individuals are looking around and saying 'I don't have a clue what's right and I don't have any way to know what's right, so I'll take some steps to protect myself, just in case.'"

GROCERS and bankers are hoping to head off any widespread stockpiling or cash withdrawals by stepping up their message of Y2K readiness.

Summit Bank of West Windsor, which announced its Y2K compliance last week, is posting a special message from Chairman Joseph Semrod in its 450 branches, as well as in newspaper ads. Regulators are also working to inform the public.

"We do not expect to see failures of mission-critical systems after Jan. 1," said Robert Albanese, New Jersey regional director of the Office of Thrift Supervision.

"Clearly, we have to get the word out about what our institutions are doing," said Albanese. "A recent Gallup Poll shows that 75 percent of people are comfortable with Y2K progress. We've got to work on that other 25 percent and let them know the facts."

Those numbers are problematic because the $42.3 billion in physical cash residing in bank vaults represents about 1.4 percent of the approximately $3 trillion Americans have deposited in checking and savings accounts and certificates of deposit, according to statistics compiled by the Federal Reserve.

Like banks, grocery stores have worked hard to head off Jan. 1 computer glitches, but still worry about panic buying.

"That's probably our biggest concern right now," said Lisa McCue of the Grocery Manufacturer's Association. "About 90 percent of our members have completed their Y2K work. Now we're reaching out to customers to let them know the food industry is ready."

"We think there will be strong demand from consumers who may want a little extra food and beverages at the end of the year," she added. "Our advice is to use common sense and not clear out the milk aisle. There will be isolated shortages if people go crazy."

SOME PUBLIC officials have suggested that the fear of Y2K failures could create more chaos than the computer problems themselves. Barnett of the Naval War College said public officials have to tread carefully with their Y2K messages.

"What we hear from authority figures is the only thing we have to fear is fear itself,'' said Barnett. "That can create its own dynamic, and become a self-fulfilling prophecy."

"I'd be amazed if Y2K doesn't capture the public's imagination at some point,'' he added. "The fact that there's a big chunk of complacent people lends itself to the possibility that a crystallizing event could shift their opinion. If something happens to suggest there may be problems, all that complacency could evaporate pretty quickly."