# Potential Computer Problems Related to the Year 2000 (Y2K)

- **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)

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

<<<PAGE 1>>>

42478 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 1998 / Notices
III. Alternatives
It is expected that the scoping meeting
and written comments will be a major
source of candidate alternatives for
consideration in the study. The
following describes the No-Build,
Enhanced Bus/Transportation Systems
Management (TSM), Busway/High
Occupancy Vehicle (HOV), and
Streetcar Build Alternatives that are
suggested for consideration in the Desire
Corridor MIS:
1. No-Build Alternative—Existing and
planned transit service and programmed
new transportation facilities to the year
2020;
2. Enhanced Bus/TSM Alternative—
Changes in existing bus routes to
provide better service and low-cost
transportation improvements, such as
bus prioritization at signalized
intersections and special bus lanes.
3. Busway/High Occupancy Vehicle
(HOV) Alternative—Exclusive lanes for
buses and/or carpools to move people
faster.
4. Streetcar Alternative—A new
Desire streetcar line, possibly following
a historic streetcar alignment through
the French Quarter or along Rampart
Street/St. Claude Avenue, or on a new
alignment along the riverfront or
following existing streets through the
eastern portion of the Corridor.
Based on public input received during
scoping, variations of the above
alternatives and other transportation-
related improvement options, both
transit and non-transit, will be
considered for the Desire Corridor.
IV. Probable Effects
Issues and impacts to be considered
during the study include potential
changes to: The physical environment
(air quality, noise, water quality,
aesthetics, etc.); the social environment
(land use, development, neighborhoods,
etc.); parklands and historic resources;
transportation system performance;
capital operating and maintenance
costs; financial resources available and
financial impact on the RTA. The entire
Corridor is listed on the National
Register of Historic Places, so potential
impacts on standing structures and
historic districts (i.e., noise, vibration,
trees, etc.) will be important. Vehicular/
pedestrian circulation, parking and in-
street operation of buses and streetcars
are key considerations.
Evaluation criteria will include
consideration of the local goals and
objectives established for the study,
measures of effectiveness identified
during scoping, and criteria established
by FTA for ‘‘New Start’’ transit projects.
Issued on: August 4, 1998.
Blas M. Uribe,
Deputy Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98–21185 Filed 8–6–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–57–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programs
Administration
Potential Computer Problems Related
to the Year 2000 (Y2K)
AGENCY: Research and Special Programs
Administration (RSPA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of advisory
bulletin.
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.
ADDRESSES: This document can be
viewed on the Office of Pipeline Safety
(OPS) home page at: http://ops.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roger Little, (202) 366–4569.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Office of Pipeline Safety regulations
do not require operators to automate
their safety-related functions; however,
many pipeline operators rely on
computers for these needs. Some
computer systems may fail in the Year
2000 because the programs, hardware,
and data files may misread the digits
‘‘00’’ as 1900 rather than 2000.
Until recently, the computer industry
was not focused on the change in the
millennium and the two extra digits
required to show the change to the year
2000. The date fields for most computer
programs were designed with six digits:
two each for the year, month, and day;
‘‘19’’ was implied. In the Year 2000,
some computers will record the year
‘‘00’’ and will interpret it as the year
‘‘1900.’’ Some hardware may also
contain components that do not
recognize the new millennium. These
date calculations may be embedded in
controllers that operate pipeline
equipment. There is the possibility that
a Year 2000 (Y2K) problem could cause
this equipment to malfunction. In most
cases, operators must evaluate their
system-by-system operations to
determine if there is a Y2K problem in
their hardware or software. Most
pipeline operators are aware of the
potential for Y2K computer-related
problems and have already taken steps
to address the issue.
II. Advisory Bulletin (ADB–98–01 )
To: Owners and Operators of
Hazardous Liquid and Natural Gas
Pipelines
Subject: Potential Failure of Computer
Systems Controlling Pipeline
Operations.
Purpose: Inform system owners and
operators of the need to evaluate their
computer hardware and software for
potential problems relating to Year 2000
(Y2K).
Advisory: Recent information has
identified a computer problem that may
affect pipeline operations. Computers
may interpret the date ‘‘2000’’ as 1900,
which could result in the shutdown or
interruption of any computer operated
system. The Office of Pipeline Safety
urges all pipeline owners and operators
who have not already done so to address
this issue because of the risk that it may
interfere with their operations.
The Office Of Pipeline Safety is
working with the Oil and Gas Sector
Workgroup of the President’s Council
on Year 2000 Conversion to help assess
Y2K readiness among the oil and gas
industries and offer assistance by
coordinating outreach activities,
identifying points of contact within
trade associations, and developing a
forum for sharing information. Pipeline
operators who have not implemented a
plan for assessing their Y2K readiness
should do so as soon as possible.
Pipeline industry trade associations
can offer assistance on this issue. The
American Petroleum Institute (API), the
Natural Gas Council (NGC), and the Gas
Industry Standards Board (GISB) have
agreed to serve as umbrella
organizations for the oil and gas sector;
they will coordinate Y2K information
for the industry and workgroup use. The
President’s Council on Y2K has a web
page at http://www.y2k.gov that
provides an update on the Council’s
activities and other useful information.
The industry is encouraged to seek
advice from and share information and
practical solutions with the three
umbrella organizations and the industry
trade association representatives on the
Oil and Gas Y2K Workgroup (listed
below). Contact Roger Little with the
Office of Pipeline Safety at (202)-366–
4569 or your state pipeline safety
organization if you have questions
regarding this advisory.
Umbrella Organizations
American Petroleum Institute, Kendra
Martin, Phone: (202) 682–8517, Fax:
(202) 962–4730, E-mail:
MARTINK@API.ORG.
Natural Gas Council, Skip Horvath,
Phone: (202) 216–5920, Fax: (202)

<<<PAGE 2>>>

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 1998 / Notices
42479
216–0874, E-mail:
SKIP.HORVATH@INGAA.ORG
Gas Industry Standards Board, Rae
McQuade, Phone: (713) 757–4175,
Fax: (713) 757–2491, E-mail:
GISB@AOL.COM.
Industry Trade Associations
Interstate Natural Gas Association of
America, Terry Boss, (202) 216–5930
American Gas Association, Gary
Gardner, (703) 841–8515
American Public Gas Association, Bob
Cave, (703) 352–3890
Gas Processors Association, Johnny
Dreyer, 918–493–7047
Association of Oil Pipe Lines, Michele
Joy, Phone: (202) 408–7970
American Petroleum Institute, Kendra
Martin, Phone: (202) 682–8517
State Pipeline Safety Organizations
National Association of Pipeline Safety
Representatives (Call Roger Little at
(202) 366–4569 if you need the
number of your state pipeline safety
representative)
National Association of Regulatory
Utility Commissioners (NARUC),
Sally Allbright, (202) 898–2200
Issued in Washington, D.C., on August 3,
1998.
Richard B. Felder,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 98–21178 Filed 8–6–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Docket No. MC–F–20929]
Laidlaw, Inc., et al.—Control—Dave
Transportation Services, et al.;
Merger—Allegheny Valley Transit Inc.
et al.
AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.
ACTION: Notice tentatively approving
finance application.
SUMMARY: Laidlaw, Inc. (Laidlaw or
applicant), has filed an application
under 49 U.S.C. 14303 to control 10
motor passenger carriers through direct
or indirect stock ownership and to
merge 21 motor passenger carriers into
Laidlaw Transit, Inc. (Transit), a
subsidiary of Laidlaw. Persons wishing
to oppose the application must follow
the rules at 49 CFR part 1182, subpart
B. The Board has tentatively approved
the transaction and, if no opposing
comments are timely filed, this notice
will be the final Board action.
DATES: Comments are due by September
21, 1998. Applicants may reply by
October 6, 1998. If no comments are
received by September 21, 1998, this
notice will become effective on that
date.
ADDRESSES: Send an original and 10
copies of any comments referring to STB
Docket No. MC–F–20929 to: Surface
Transportation Board, Office of the
Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20423–
0001. In addition, send one copy of any
comments to applicant’s representative:
Mark J. Andrews, Barnes & Thornburg,
Franklin Tower, Suite 500, 1401 Eye
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph H. Dettmar, (202) 565–1600 [TDD
for the hearing impaired: (202) 565–
1695.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Laidlaw, a
publicly-held Canadian noncarrier,
seeks authority to control 10 motor
carrier subsidiaries through direct or
indirect stock ownership and to merge
21 motor carriers into Transit.
Apparently, the transactions have
previously occurred, but the required
authority had not been obtained from
the Board or its predecessor, the
Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC).
Laidlaw indicates that it is coming
forward voluntarily to seek nunc pro
tunc authorization for these
transactions.
Laidlaw initially contends that the
transactions may not be subject to Board
jurisdiction, claiming that the
transactions will affect regulated
passenger service only in form rather
than substance. See Stone Container
Corporation—Control Exemption—
Southwest Forest Industries Inc.,
Finance Docket No. 30998 (ICC served
Apr. 1, 1987). We disagree. Laidlaw’s
principal business is motor carrier
transit, and its acquisition of control
and merger of motor carriers is precisely
the sort of authority Congress desired to
regulate by enacting 49 U.S.C. 14303.
Eight of the motor carriers
subsidiaries Laidlaw seeks authority to
control are: (1) Dave Transportation
Services, Inc. (Dave Transportation)
(MC–144040), which is authorized to
provide charter and special operations
nationwide except in Hawaii; (2)
Greyhound Canada Transportation
Corp. (Greyhound Canada) (MC–
304126), which is authorized to provide
nationwide charter and special
operations as well as limited regular-
route service in Michigan, New York
and Washington near U.S.-Canada
border crossings;1 (3) Laidlaw Transit
Ltd. (Limited) (MC–102189), which is
authorized to provide nationwide
charter and special operations as well as
limited regular-route service in
Michigan near a U.S.-Canada border
crossing; (4) Roesch Lines, Inc. (Roesch)
(MC–119843), which is authorized to
provide nationwide charter and special
operations and intrastate operations in
California; (5) Safe Ride Services, Inc.
(Safe Ride) (MC–246193), which is
authorized to provide charter and
special operations nationwide except in
Alaska and Hawaii; (6) The DAVE
Companies Inc. (DAVE) (no federal
authority but holds intrastate authority
in California and Minnesota);2
(7)Vancom Transportation—Illinois L.P.
(Vancom) (MC–167816), which is
authorized to provide charter and
special operations nationwide except in
Alaska and Hawaii; and (8) Willett
Motor Coach Co. (Willett) (MC–16073),
which is authorized to provide charter
and special operations between the
Chicago, IL area and 14 States and the
District of Columbia.
Transit, the ninth carrier subsidiary
(MC–161299), holds nationwide charter
and special operations authority as a
result of a transaction authorized in
Laidlaw Transit, Inc. et al.—Control and
Merger Exemption—National School
Bus Service, Inc, Charterways
Transportation Limited, Enterprise
Transit Corp., and MCS Interstate, Inc.,
STB Finance Docket No. 33007 (STB
served Oct. 25, 1996).
The tenth carrier subsidiary, Gray
Line of Vancouver Holdings Limited
(Gray Line), proposes to acquire
operating authority in MC–94107 held
by Pacific Northwest Bus Company,
Ltd., authorizing nationwide charter and
special operations and regular route
service between Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport and nearby U.S.-
Canada border crossings.
Applicant further seeks approval for
the merger into Transit of the following
motor carriers: (1) Allegheny Valley
Transit, Inc. (MC–172080); (2)
Blanchard Charter Service, Inc. (MC–
177427); (3) Cheshire Transportation Co.
(MC–27518); (4) Hunt’s Bus Co., Inc.
(MC–212740); (5) Jelco LaCrosse, Inc.
(MC–165562); (6) Johnson’s Bus, Inc.
(MC–153441); (7) Mark IV Charter Lines,
Inc. (MC–141743); (8) Mobility, Inc.
(MC–182217); (9) Palmer Motor Coach
Service, Inc. (MC–106642); (10) Peaslee
Transportation, Inc. (MC–167553); (11)
Raleigh Transportation Services, Inc.
(MC–165041) (Raleigh); (12) Strain’s Bus
Co., Inc. (MC–148366) ; (13) Timberlane
1 Apparently, Greyhound Canada is not affiliated
with Greyhound Lines, Inc. of Dallas, TX.
2 Laidlaw maintains that, even though this carrier
holds only intrastate authority, control of this entity
falls within the preemptive provisions of 49 U.S.C.
14303(f). The provisions of section 14303(f) apply
to the extent Laidlaw’s control of DAVE is subject
to our jurisdiction.
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 14137