{"operation":"document","citation":"PHMSA Guidance, Potential Computer Problems Related to the Year 2000 (Y2K)","title":"Potential Computer Problems Related to the Year 2000 (Y2K)","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1998-08-07","effective_on":"1998-08-07","summary":"Potential Computer Problems Related to the Year 2000 (Y2K) Document 98-21178.pdf (213.38 KB) RSPA is issuing an advisory bulletin to owners and operators of Hazardous Liquid and Natural Gas Pipelines. The bulletin advises the industry about the potential for Year 2000 (Y2K) computer-related problems. Issued Date: Friday, August 7, 1998","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-potential-computer-problems-related-year-2000-y2k-62d25084.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-potential-computer-problems-related-year-2000-y2k-62d25084.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-potential-computer-problems-related-year-2000-y2k-62d25084","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulatory-compliance/phmsa-guidance/potential-computer-problems-related-year-2000-y2k","body":"Potential Computer Problems Related to the Year 2000 (Y2K)\n\nDocument\n\n 98-21178.pdf (213.38 KB)\n\n        RSPA is issuing an advisory bulletin to owners and operators of Hazardous Liquid and Natural Gas Pipelines. The bulletin advises the industry about the potential for Year 2000 (Y2K) computer-related problems.\n\n          Issued Date: Friday, August 7, 1998\n\n<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\n42478 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 1998 / Notices\nIII. Alternatives\nIt is expected that the scoping meeting\nand written comments will be a major\nsource of candidate alternatives for\nconsideration in the study. The\nfollowing describes the No-Build,\nEnhanced Bus/Transportation Systems\nManagement (TSM), Busway/High\nOccupancy Vehicle (HOV), and\nStreetcar Build Alternatives that are\nsuggested for consideration in the Desire\nCorridor MIS:\n1. No-Build Alternative—Existing and\nplanned transit service and programmed\nnew transportation facilities to the year\n2020;\n2. Enhanced Bus/TSM Alternative—\nChanges in existing bus routes to\nprovide better service and low-cost\ntransportation improvements, such as\nbus prioritization at signalized\nintersections and special bus lanes.\n3. Busway/High Occupancy Vehicle\n(HOV) Alternative—Exclusive lanes for\nbuses and/or carpools to move people\nfaster.\n4. Streetcar Alternative—A new\nDesire streetcar line, possibly following\na historic streetcar alignment through\nthe French Quarter or along Rampart\nStreet/St. Claude Avenue, or on a new\nalignment along the riverfront or\nfollowing existing streets through the\neastern portion of the Corridor.\nBased on public input received during\nscoping, variations of the above\nalternatives and other transportation-\nrelated improvement options, both\ntransit and non-transit, will be\nconsidered for the Desire Corridor.\nIV. Probable Effects\nIssues and impacts to be considered\nduring the study include potential\nchanges to: The physical environment\n(air quality, noise, water quality,\naesthetics, etc.); the social environment\n(land use, development, neighborhoods,\netc.); parklands and historic resources;\ntransportation system performance;\ncapital operating and maintenance\ncosts; financial resources available and\nfinancial impact on the RTA. The entire\nCorridor is listed on the National\nRegister of Historic Places, so potential\nimpacts on standing structures and\nhistoric districts (i.e., noise, vibration,\ntrees, etc.) will be important. Vehicular/\npedestrian circulation, parking and in-\nstreet operation of buses and streetcars\nare key considerations.\nEvaluation criteria will include\nconsideration of the local goals and\nobjectives established for the study,\nmeasures of effectiveness identified\nduring scoping, and criteria established\nby FTA for ‘‘New Start’’ transit projects.\nIssued on: August 4, 1998.\nBlas M. Uribe,\nDeputy Regional Administrator.\n[FR Doc. 98–21185 Filed 8–6–98; 8:45 am]\nBILLING CODE 4910–57–P\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nResearch and Special Programs\nAdministration\nPotential Computer Problems Related\nto the Year 2000 (Y2K)\nAGENCY: Research and Special Programs\nAdministration (RSPA), DOT.\nACTION: Notice; issuance of advisory\nbulletin.\nRSPA is issuing an advisory bulletin\nto owners and operators of Hazardous\nLiquid and Natural Gas Pipelines. The\nbulletin advises the industry about the\npotential for Year 2000 (Y2K) computer-\nrelated problems.\nADDRESSES: This document can be\nviewed on the Office of Pipeline Safety\n(OPS) home page at: http://ops.dot.gov.\nFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:\nRoger Little, (202) 366–4569.\nSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:\nI. Background\nOffice of Pipeline Safety regulations\ndo not require operators to automate\ntheir safety-related functions; however,\nmany pipeline operators rely on\ncomputers for these needs. Some\ncomputer systems may fail in the Year\n2000 because the programs, hardware,\nand data files may misread the digits\n‘‘00’’ as 1900 rather than 2000.\nUntil recently, the computer industry\nwas not focused on the change in the\nmillennium and the two extra digits\nrequired to show the change to the year\n2000. The date fields for most computer\nprograms were designed with six digits:\ntwo each for the year, month, and day;\n‘‘19’’ was implied. In the Year 2000,\nsome computers will record the year\n‘‘00’’ and will interpret it as the year\n‘‘1900.’’ Some hardware may also\ncontain components that do not\nrecognize the new millennium. These\ndate calculations may be embedded in\ncontrollers that operate pipeline\nequipment. There is the possibility that\na Year 2000 (Y2K) problem could cause\nthis equipment to malfunction. In most\ncases, operators must evaluate their\nsystem-by-system operations to\ndetermine if there is a Y2K problem in\ntheir hardware or software. Most\npipeline operators are aware of the\npotential for Y2K computer-related\nproblems and have already taken steps\nto address the issue.\nII. Advisory Bulletin (ADB–98–01 )\nTo: Owners and Operators of\nHazardous Liquid and Natural Gas\nPipelines\nSubject: Potential Failure of Computer\nSystems Controlling Pipeline\nOperations.\nPurpose: Inform system owners and\noperators of the need to evaluate their\ncomputer hardware and software for\npotential problems relating to Year 2000\n(Y2K).\nAdvisory: Recent information has\nidentified a computer problem that may\naffect pipeline operations. Computers\nmay interpret the date ‘‘2000’’ as 1900,\nwhich could result in the shutdown or\ninterruption of any computer operated\nsystem. The Office of Pipeline Safety\nurges all pipeline owners and operators\nwho have not already done so to address\nthis issue because of the risk that it may\ninterfere with their operations.\nThe Office Of Pipeline Safety is\nworking with the Oil and Gas Sector\nWorkgroup of the President’s Council\non Year 2000 Conversion to help assess\nY2K readiness among the oil and gas\nindustries and offer assistance by\ncoordinating outreach activities,\nidentifying points of contact within\ntrade associations, and developing a\nforum for sharing information. Pipeline\noperators who have not implemented a\nplan for assessing their Y2K readiness\nshould do so as soon as possible.\nPipeline industry trade associations\ncan offer assistance on this issue. The\nAmerican Petroleum Institute (API), the\nNatural Gas Council (NGC), and the Gas\nIndustry Standards Board (GISB) have\nagreed to serve as umbrella\norganizations for the oil and gas sector;\nthey will coordinate Y2K information\nfor the industry and workgroup use. The\nPresident’s Council on Y2K has a web\npage at http://www.y2k.gov that\nprovides an update on the Council’s\nactivities and other useful information.\nThe industry is encouraged to seek\nadvice from and share information and\npractical solutions with the three\numbrella organizations and the industry\ntrade association representatives on the\nOil and Gas Y2K Workgroup (listed\nbelow). Contact Roger Little with the\nOffice of Pipeline Safety at (202)-366–\n4569 or your state pipeline safety\norganization if you have questions\nregarding this advisory.\nUmbrella Organizations\nAmerican Petroleum Institute, Kendra\nMartin, Phone: (202) 682–8517, Fax:\n(202) 962–4730, E-mail:\nMARTINK@API.ORG.\nNatural Gas Council, Skip Horvath,\nPhone: (202) 216–5920, Fax: (202)\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nFederal Register / Vol. 63, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 1998 / Notices\n42479\n216–0874, E-mail:\nSKIP.HORVATH@INGAA.ORG\nGas Industry Standards Board, Rae\nMcQuade, Phone: (713) 757–4175,\nFax: (713) 757–2491, E-mail:\nGISB@AOL.COM.\nIndustry Trade Associations\nInterstate Natural Gas Association of\nAmerica, Terry Boss, (202) 216–5930\nAmerican Gas Association, Gary\nGardner, (703) 841–8515\nAmerican Public Gas Association, Bob\nCave, (703) 352–3890\nGas Processors Association, Johnny\nDreyer, 918–493–7047\nAssociation of Oil Pipe Lines, Michele\nJoy, Phone: (202) 408–7970\nAmerican Petroleum Institute, Kendra\nMartin, Phone: (202) 682–8517\nState Pipeline Safety Organizations\nNational Association of Pipeline Safety\nRepresentatives (Call Roger Little at\n(202) 366–4569 if you need the\nnumber of your state pipeline safety\nrepresentative)\nNational Association of Regulatory\nUtility Commissioners (NARUC),\nSally Allbright, (202) 898–2200\nIssued in Washington, D.C., on August 3,\n1998.\nRichard B. Felder,\nAssociate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.\n[FR Doc. 98–21178 Filed 8–6–98; 8:45 am]\nBILLING CODE 4910–60–P\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nSurface Transportation Board\n[STB Docket No. MC–F–20929]\nLaidlaw, Inc., et al.—Control—Dave\nTransportation Services, et al.;\nMerger—Allegheny Valley Transit Inc.\net al.\nAGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.\nACTION: Notice tentatively approving\nfinance application.\nSUMMARY: Laidlaw, Inc. (Laidlaw or\napplicant), has filed an application\nunder 49 U.S.C. 14303 to control 10\nmotor passenger carriers through direct\nor indirect stock ownership and to\nmerge 21 motor passenger carriers into\nLaidlaw Transit, Inc. (Transit), a\nsubsidiary of Laidlaw. Persons wishing\nto oppose the application must follow\nthe rules at 49 CFR part 1182, subpart\nB. The Board has tentatively approved\nthe transaction and, if no opposing\ncomments are timely filed, this notice\nwill be the final Board action.\nDATES: Comments are due by September\n21, 1998. Applicants may reply by\nOctober 6, 1998. If no comments are\nreceived by September 21, 1998, this\nnotice will become effective on that\ndate.\nADDRESSES: Send an original and 10\ncopies of any comments referring to STB\nDocket No. MC–F–20929 to: Surface\nTransportation Board, Office of the\nSecretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K\nStreet, NW, Washington, DC 20423–\n0001. In addition, send one copy of any\ncomments to applicant’s representative:\nMark J. Andrews, Barnes & Thornburg,\nFranklin Tower, Suite 500, 1401 Eye\nStreet, NW, Washington, DC 20005.\nFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:\nJoseph H. Dettmar, (202) 565–1600 [TDD\nfor the hearing impaired: (202) 565–\n1695.]\nSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Laidlaw, a\npublicly-held Canadian noncarrier,\nseeks authority to control 10 motor\ncarrier subsidiaries through direct or\nindirect stock ownership and to merge\n21 motor carriers into Transit.\nApparently, the transactions have\npreviously occurred, but the required\nauthority had not been obtained from\nthe Board or its predecessor, the\nInterstate Commerce Commission (ICC).\nLaidlaw indicates that it is coming\nforward voluntarily to seek nunc pro\ntunc authorization for these\ntransactions.\nLaidlaw initially contends that the\ntransactions may not be subject to Board\njurisdiction, claiming that the\ntransactions will affect regulated\npassenger service only in form rather\nthan substance. See Stone Container\nCorporation—Control Exemption—\nSouthwest Forest Industries Inc.,\nFinance Docket No. 30998 (ICC served\nApr. 1, 1987). We disagree. Laidlaw’s\nprincipal business is motor carrier\ntransit, and its acquisition of control\nand merger of motor carriers is precisely\nthe sort of authority Congress desired to\nregulate by enacting 49 U.S.C. 14303.\nEight of the motor carriers\nsubsidiaries Laidlaw seeks authority to\ncontrol are: (1) Dave Transportation\nServices, Inc. (Dave Transportation)\n(MC–144040), which is authorized to\nprovide charter and special operations\nnationwide except in Hawaii; (2)\nGreyhound Canada Transportation\nCorp. (Greyhound Canada) (MC–\n304126), which is authorized to provide\nnationwide charter and special\noperations as well as limited regular-\nroute service in Michigan, New York\nand Washington near U.S.-Canada\nborder crossings;1 (3) Laidlaw Transit\nLtd. (Limited) (MC–102189), which is\nauthorized to provide nationwide\ncharter and special operations as well as\nlimited regular-route service in\nMichigan near a U.S.-Canada border\ncrossing; (4) Roesch Lines, Inc. (Roesch)\n(MC–119843), which is authorized to\nprovide nationwide charter and special\noperations and intrastate operations in\nCalifornia; (5) Safe Ride Services, Inc.\n(Safe Ride) (MC–246193), which is\nauthorized to provide charter and\nspecial operations nationwide except in\nAlaska and Hawaii; (6) The DAVE\nCompanies Inc. (DAVE) (no federal\nauthority but holds intrastate authority\nin California and Minnesota);2\n(7)Vancom Transportation—Illinois L.P.\n(Vancom) (MC–167816), which is\nauthorized to provide charter and\nspecial operations nationwide except in\nAlaska and Hawaii; and (8) Willett\nMotor Coach Co. (Willett) (MC–16073),\nwhich is authorized to provide charter\nand special operations between the\nChicago, IL area and 14 States and the\nDistrict of Columbia.\nTransit, the ninth carrier subsidiary\n(MC–161299), holds nationwide charter\nand special operations authority as a\nresult of a transaction authorized in\nLaidlaw Transit, Inc. et al.—Control and\nMerger Exemption—National School\nBus Service, Inc, Charterways\nTransportation Limited, Enterprise\nTransit Corp., and MCS Interstate, Inc.,\nSTB Finance Docket No. 33007 (STB\nserved Oct. 25, 1996).\nThe tenth carrier subsidiary, Gray\nLine of Vancouver Holdings Limited\n(Gray Line), proposes to acquire\noperating authority in MC–94107 held\nby Pacific Northwest Bus Company,\nLtd., authorizing nationwide charter and\nspecial operations and regular route\nservice between Seattle-Tacoma\nInternational Airport and nearby U.S.-\nCanada border crossings.\nApplicant further seeks approval for\nthe merger into Transit of the following\nmotor carriers: (1) Allegheny Valley\nTransit, Inc. (MC–172080); (2)\nBlanchard Charter Service, Inc. (MC–\n177427); (3) Cheshire Transportation Co.\n(MC–27518); (4) Hunt’s Bus Co., Inc.\n(MC–212740); (5) Jelco LaCrosse, Inc.\n(MC–165562); (6) Johnson’s Bus, Inc.\n(MC–153441); (7) Mark IV Charter Lines,\nInc. (MC–141743); (8) Mobility, Inc.\n(MC–182217); (9) Palmer Motor Coach\nService, Inc. (MC–106642); (10) Peaslee\nTransportation, Inc. (MC–167553); (11)\nRaleigh Transportation Services, Inc.\n(MC–165041) (Raleigh); (12) Strain’s Bus\nCo., Inc. (MC–148366) ; (13) Timberlane\n1 Apparently, Greyhound Canada is not affiliated\nwith Greyhound Lines, Inc. of Dallas, TX.\n2 Laidlaw maintains that, even though this carrier\nholds only intrastate authority, control of this entity\nfalls within the preemptive provisions of 49 U.S.C.\n14303(f). The provisions of section 14303(f) apply\nto the extent Laidlaw’s control of DAVE is subject\nto our jurisdiction.","truncated":false,"body_characters":14137}