U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

61–205 CC WASHINGTON : 1999

THE YEAR 2000 COMPUTER PROBLEM

IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL

JOINT HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT,

INFORMATION, AND TECHNOLOGY

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM

AND THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

SEPTEMBER 15, 1999

Committee on Government Reform

Serial No. 106–54

Committee on Science

Serial No. 106–52

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform and the

Committee on Science

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/reform

(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM

DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York

CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

STEPHEN HORN, California

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia

DAVID M. MCINTOSH, Indiana

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana

JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio

MARSHALL ‘‘MARK’’ SANFORD, South

Carolina

BOB BARR, Georgia

DAN MILLER, Florida

ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas

LEE TERRY, Nebraska

JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois

GREG WALDEN, Oregon

DOUG OSE, California

PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin

HELEN CHENOWETH, Idaho

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California

TOM LANTOS, California

ROBERT E. WISE, JR., West Virginia

MAJOR R. OWENS, New York

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania

PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,

DC

CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts

JIM TURNER, Texas

THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine

HAROLD E. FORD, JR., Tennessee

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois

———

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont

(Independent)

KEVIN BINGER, Staff Director

DANIEL R. MOLL, Deputy Staff Director

DAVID A. KASS, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian

CARLA J. MARTIN, Chief Clerk

PHIL SCHILIRO, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, INFORMATION, AND TECHNOLOGY

STEPHEN HORN, California, Chairman

JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois

THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia

GREG WALDEN, Oregon

DOUG OSE, California

PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin

JIM TURNER, Texas

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania

MAJOR R. OWENS, New York

PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

EX OFFICIO

DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California

J. RUSSELL GEORGE, Staff Director and Chief Counsel

MATTHEW RYAN, Senior Policy Director

BONNIE HEALD, Communications Director/Professional Staff Member

CHIP AHLSWEDE, Clerk

TREY HENDERSON, Minority Counsel

(III)

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE

HON. F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., (R–Wisconsin), Chairman

SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York

LAMAR SMITH, Texas

CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland

CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania

DANA ROHRABACHER, California

JOE BARTON, Texas

KEN CALVERT, California

NICK SMITH, Michigan

ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan*

DAVE WELDON, Florida

GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota

THOMAS W. EWING, Illinois

CHRIS CANNON, Utah

KEVIN BRADY, Texas

MERRILL COOK, Utah

GEORGE R. NETHERCUTT, JR., Washington

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma

MARK GREEN, Wisconsin

STEVEN T. KUYKENDALL, California

GARY G. MILLER, California

JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois

MARSHALL ‘‘MARK’’ SANFORD, South

Carolina

JACK METCALF, Washington

RALPH M. HALL, Texas, RMM**

BART GORDON, Tennessee

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois

JAMES A. BARCIA, Michigan

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas

LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California

LYNN N. RIVERS, Michigan

ZOE LOFGREN, California

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania

SHEILA JACKSON-LEE, Texas

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan

BOB ETHERIDGE, North Carolina

NICK LAMPSON, Texas

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut

MARK UDALL, Colorado

DAVID WU, Oregon

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington

JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania

DENNIS MOORE, Kansas

VACANCY

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY

CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland, Chairwoman

CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania

ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland

GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota*

THOMAS W. EWING, Illinois

CHRIS CANNON, Utah

KEVIN BRADY, Texas

MERRILL COOK, Utah

MARK GREEN, Wisconsin

STEVEN T. KUYKENDALL, California

GARY G. MILLER, California

JAMES A. BARCIA, Michigan**

LYNN N. RIVERS, Michigan

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan

MARK UDALL, Colorado

DAVID WU, Oregon

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts

BART GORDON, Tennessee

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington

EX OFFICIO

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR.,

Wisconsin+

RALPH M. HALL, Texas+

(V)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on September 15, 1999 ..................................................................... 1

Statement of:

Jhirad, David, Senior Advisor, Multilateral and Bilateral Affairs, Department of Energy .............................................................................................. 16

O’Keefe, John, Special Representative for the year 2000, Department

of State ........................................................................................................... 7

Wander, Elyse, senior vice president for planning and public affairs,

Travel Industry Association of America ...................................................... 16

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Horn, Hon. Stephen, a Representative in Congress from the State of

California, prepared statement of ................................................................ 3

Jhirad, David, Senior Advisor, Multilateral and Bilateral Affairs, Department of Energy, information concerning Y2K ............................................ 35

O’Keefe, John, Special Representative for the year 2000, Department

of State, prepared statement of ................................................................... 10

Wander, Elyse, senior vice president for planning and public affairs,

Travel Industry Association of America, prepared statement of .............. 19

(1)

THE YEAR 2000 COMPUTER PROBLEM

IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1999

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON GOVERN- MENT REFORM, SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT MAN- AGEMENT, INFORMATION, AND TECHNOLOGY, JOINT

WITH THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

TECHNOLOGY, Washington, DC.

The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in

room 2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Stephen Horn

(chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology) presiding.

Present from the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology: Representatives Horn, Biggert, Turner,

Ose, and Walden.

Present from the Subcommittee on Technology: Representative

Morella.

Staff present from the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology: Russell George, staff director;

Matthew Ryan, senior policy director; Chip Ahlswede, clerk; Bonnie

Heald, communications director and professional staff member; P.J.

Caceres and Deborah Oppenheim, interns; and Jean Gosa, minority

staff assistant.

Staff present from the Subcommittee on Technology: Jeff Grove,

staff director; Ben Wu, professional staff member; Joe Sullivan,

staff assistant; Trey Henderson, minority counsel; Michael Quear,

professional staff member; and Marty Ralston, staff assistant.

Mr. HORN. This joint hearing of the House Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology and the Committee on Science’s Subcommittee on Technology will come to order.

Over the past several years, these subcommittees have been

prodding the Federal departments and agencies in the executive

branch to prepare their computer systems for the year 2000. In

only 107 days, these systems will be ready for action. The job is unquestionably difficult. The time is running short and the job is not

done.

Millions of Americans are awaiting the coming millennium as a

time for celebrations. Airlines have begun offering millennium vacation specials. Families are beginning to plan how and where they

will usher in the historic new year.

We learned at our hearing with the Federal Aviation Administration last week that 35 countries have not yet provided information

on their airport and airline readiness. This is of great concern.

2

American travelers must have adequate information on destinations that may be vulnerable to widespread failures due to the year

2000 date change, whatever and wherever it is, whether it is domestic or international.

Yesterday, the Department of State released consular information sheets for nearly 200 countries and territories. We received

this information in the evening. Our staff and the staff of the General Accounting Office quickly reviewed a sample of information on

30 countries. In some instances, the information was disturbing.

We found that many countries, including Brazil, China, and

Egypt are at risk of serious year 2000 failures such as the loss of

electricity, health care, and telecommunications.

We found that India faces problems with its ports, as well as its

electric power.

Japan’s health care programs, for example, are lagging behind

other sectors of the Nation’s economy, and the same is true about

the United States.

In addition, we found that several countries face potential banking and financial failures, despite the industry’s best efforts to

overcome this unique and worldwide computer challenge.

We are not here today to take countries to task for their poor

performance in solving their year 2000 computer problems. Rather,

we want to provide the traveling public with information on the potential problems that could occur abroad.

I am delighted with the panel we have this morning, and I think

it is important to note that citizens must make prudent, informed

decisions on when and where to travel over the upcoming holiday

season. To do so, however, requires that the Federal Government

provide timely and reliable information.

Mr. Ose raised the question the other day when the FAA administrator was here that people make their travel plans now and in

October. They don’t wait until Christmas and the holidays in December.

I now yield for an opening statement to the gentleman from

Texas, Mr. Turner.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Stephen Horn follows:]

3

4

5

Mr. TURNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m glad to join you and

Chairwoman Morella today to assess the progress the State Department and others have made in combatting the potential international impact of the Y2K problem.

As we all know, Y2K rollover is a global problem, not just a domestic issue, and, since we live in an interdependent world, lagging

Y2K preparations in other countries can affect the safety of U.S.

citizens abroad, as well as our national political, economic, and security interests.

While the United States has taken the lead in preparation, we

certainly cannot merely afford to hope that the rest of the world

is ready, too.

To this end, I understand the State Department is actively engaged in a Y2K policy formulation with 16 Federal departments

and agencies through the Y2K International Interagency Working

Group, which seeks to preserve regional, political, strategic, military stability; safeguard our economic interests and military bases

abroad to ensure operational readiness; protect our citizens abroad;

and assess other countries’ needs for external assistance in overcoming possible Y2K problems.

Special efforts have been made to help these countries identify

Y2K vulnerabilities and to ensure effective contingency planning.

Overall, significant progress has been made on Y2K remediation

and contingency planning worldwide; however, much remains to be

done.

Yesterday, the State Department released new consular information sheets which informed the American public of potential hazards to their health and safety occasioned by Y2K problems abroad.

Today we will learn how these warnings are prepared, what they

mean, and what remains to be done to safeguard our interests.

Because the protection of U.S. citizens traveling and working

abroad is the highest priority, we need to provide the public with

our very best assessments of Y2K preparedness abroad so they can

make responsible choices.

I look forward to the testimony today, and I again compliment

the chairman and Chairwoman Morella for their focus on this very

critical issue.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HORN. Well, I thank you for your very good opening statement.

I now yield to the co-chairman of the task force on the year 2000,

and the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Technology of the

House Committee on Science, Mrs. Morella, the gentlewoman from

Maryland.

Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Chairman Horn.

I must say you do commence the meetings right on time, and I

appreciate that, and thank you for your leadership, also, in crafting

the plan for today’s hearing. I think it is very important.

As we move ever so closer to the January 1, 2000, deadline, the

American people are demonstrating an increased desire to make

their own determinations about the year 2000 computer problem

impact upon their lives.

Americans want to be individually empowered to choose their

own course of action by being provided with as much Y2K informaVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:21 Feb 23, 2001 Jkt 066426 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HEARINGS\61205 pfrm01 PsN: 61205
6

tion as possible. That’s why I’m very pleased that the State Department has begun preparing country-by-country advisories to warn

Americans living or traveling overseas about possible failures related to the year 2000 technology problem.

Since the warnings detail how visiting Americans could be affected by power outages, water shortages, and other potentially serious Y2K problems in 194 countries, they give Americans, to the

greatest extent possible, the best indication of where and what they

should be doing as we usher in the new millennium.

These reports will allow one to travel to various parts of the

globe with confidence, even though there have previously been complaints about the difficulty in collecting adequate data from foreign

governments about possible computer failures.

I’m pleased that this important hearing on Y2K impact of international travel is being held this morning. And, although I must

leave shortly to the House floor for consideration of my bill authorizing aviation research and development, including safety, I look

forward to the testimony of our distinguished panel on this important issue, and I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HORN. Well, we thank you and we wish you well and success

on the floor. Everybody has been a little tired last night when it

worked at midnight, but good luck.

I now yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois, Mrs. Biggert, who

is the vice chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have no opening statement. I look forward to hearing from the

witnesses.

Mr. HORN. We thank you.

And as to the witnesses, just let me explain the procedure. I

know some of you have been before us before.

We’d like you to summarize your statement, and at least 10 minutes we’ll give you for that. We’ve got a lot of comfort space this

morning, since you’re our only panel, and we want you to make

your case as best you can, and that’s very helpful to all of us.

Sometimes the testimony comes in pretty late in the evening and

it’s hard for all Members to get through it, but the staff stay up

all night and they’ve gone through it. So we’re glad to see you.

As you know, the other thing with this subcommittee is it is a

subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Reform, and

therefore all witnesses are sworn in as to their testimony, so if the

three of you and anybody that is going to advise you during this

hearing would stand up and raise your right hands, we’ll give you

the oath.

We have five people assisting the witnesses and three witnesses.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. HORN. We will assume you are now all confirmed and can

speak with the truth.

We’re going to do this in the order in which they are on the agenda, and the first will be Mr. John O’Keefe, the special representative for the year 2000 for the Department of State.

Welcome.

7

STATEMENT OF JOHN O’KEEFE, SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE

FOR THE YEAR 2000, DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Mr. O’KEEFE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Chairwoman, and members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the Office of the Under Secretary of State for Management on the Y2K

phenomenon and the implications for international travel.

The Department of State takes very seriously its responsibility to

inform U.S. citizens traveling or residing abroad of potential hazards to their safety.

In my testimony today, I will discuss some of our efforts to assess

international Y2K readiness as we approach the millennium. In

particular, I will review the process we used to develop Y2K data

for our revised consular information sheets released on September

14th to the public. I will also report on the results of the September 9, 1999 test of our millennium rollover reporting plan conducted last week.

Our consular information program, including public announcements and publications and dissemination of consular information

sheets, has long served as the Department’s primary means of

alerting the public to potential problems they may encounter in different countries. It stands to reason, therefore, that we use this

program to inform Americans of potential Y2K disruptions abroad.

In January of this year, we began our effort to educate the traveling American public about the potential for year 2000 related disruptions abroad. The Department issued a worldwide year 2000

public announcement. This January, public announcements alerted

traveling Americans to the Y2K phenomenon, in general, and its

potential to disrupt travel.

We issued a followup public announcement in July. The July

public announcement dealt with personal preparedness and apprised the public of measures we are taking at our embassies and

consulates.

Parallel to these announcements, the Department asked our missions abroad in January to engage their host country counterparts

and other local experts to determine Y2K readiness in countries’

key sectors, such as energy, emergency services and telecommunications, and to report their findings.

In June, we combined the information from our posts with data

obtained from public sources and from U.S. Government agencies

to form a national Y2K consular information sheet paragraph for

each country citing the country’s overall preparedness for Y2K and

its risk of potential disruptions.

Our missions then shared the findings and the national paragraphs with host governments, explaining our responsibility to apprise U.S. citizens of potential dangers to their safety.

After receiving feedback from host governments and assessing

additional information, we drafted our final country-specific Y2K

assessments. They were, again, presented to host governments,

many of whom took the Y2K issue more seriously in light of our

findings.

The assessments were also included in our updated consular information sheets.

8

Yesterday, September 14th, the Department issued updated consular information sheets for every country in the world. Each revised consular information sheet contains a section assessing general Y2K risks and preparedness in a specific country.

Our fundamental purpose for releasing this information is to apprise U.S. citizens of potential disruption they may experience due

to the Y2K phenomenon and allow Americans to be better prepared

and to make informed personal decisions about travel on or about

January 1, 2000.

The statements in the consular information sheets represent our

best judgment on potential problems for U.S. citizens living and

traveling abroad. It is not a score card. Please understand that no

one can predict with certainty what will occur on or after January

1st. The information was gathered from a number of open and confidential sources. If you would like more-detailed information on

how we came to these judgments, I would be pleased to provide a

classified briefing on that process.

In addition to these standard tools of the consular information

program, we have raised Y2K awareness with the U.S. public

through an outreach program, including speakers, media interviews, and publications.

Our embassies, consulates, and U.S. regional passport agencies

have supplemented these efforts with town meetings and newsletters.

The Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs will continue to provide the traveling public with updated, global Y2K status assessments on its home page at http://travel.state.gov. This

site also contains Y2K-related links to Websites of other U.S. Government agencies, international organizations, and foreign governments, as well as non-governmental organizations such as the Red

Cross, the GartnerGroup, and Global 2000.

A key factor influencing our ability to support Americans abroad

is the receipt of timely reporting from our overseas hosts.

Last week, on September 9th, the Department tested its ability

to gather, analyze, and disseminate global Y2K information in a

timely and accurate manner. This test of the Department’s millennium rollover reporting plan represented the most comprehensive

worldwide Y2K reporting exercise within the U.S. Government.

Because it was thought the digits 9/9/99 might cause minor computer malfunctions, September 9th represented a good opportunity

to test our system’s analytical capabilities and reporting processes.

Beginning at 4 p.m., Washington time on September 8th, 163

posts transmitted reports via a Web-based application and by cable

to the State Department Information Y2K Center. Within the center, a monitoring group analyzed the raw data to produce status reports. The reporting mechanism focused on the local status of host

country critical sectors, power, transportation, finance, water and

waste water, emergency services, and telecommunications.

The reporting was timely, the processing swift. Our worldwide

reporting found no serious September 9, 1999 problems. The mechanism for managing the information flow functioned well, though

not perfectly.

We will take lessons learned from the exercise to fine-tune our

data-gathering process. This exercise provided a foundation upon

9

which the Department can build to prepare for the January turnover.

We will continue to coordinate our efforts with the Information

Coordinating Center of the President’s Council on Y2K and other

U.S. Government agencies engaged in similar tracking of year 2000

events.

This test also supplemented the work we have already done on

contingency planning for our missions worldwide and the remediation in business continuity work our chief information officer has

completed for the Department’s mission-critical systems.

In summary, I believe our missions abroad and agencies here

have done an extraordinary job in raising awareness among governments of many nations and in working with them to prepare for

the millennium. Our own house is largely in order. We stand ready

to continue our day-to-day operations during the rollover here in

Washington and at our embassies abroad. A Y2K task force will be

on duty, backup communication systems in place, and the means

of reporting events and of receiving instructions tested and functioning.

We continue to work with other nations in preparing, testing,

and coordinating.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the

opportunity to speak to the subcommittee today. I will be happy to

answer questions the Members may have.

Mr. HORN. Thank you very much. We appreciate that testimony.

[The prepared statement of Mr. O’Keefe follows:]

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Mr. HORN. Our next witness is Dr. David Jhirad, the senior advisor, multilateral and bilateral affairs for the Department of Energy.

Dr. Jhirad.

STATEMENT OF DAVID JHIRAD, SENIOR ADVISOR, MULTILATERAL AND BILATERAL AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Mr. JHIRAD. Thank you very much, Chairman Horn and Chairwoman Morella, members of the committee.

As the Department discussed with your staff earlier, we are here

to answer any and all questions about the status of the energy and

electricity sectors worldwide in our position in supporting the State

Department and the International Working Group on Y2K in the

government.

We do not have a formal statement at this time, but the Department would like to volunteer to make a statement for the record

available after the hearing, but we certainly are here to answer

any of the Members’ questions about the energy and electricity sectors and how their vulnerability might affect other infrastructure

areas.

So I’m really here as a resource person to support my colleagues

at the Department of State and to support your committee, and we

will submit a formal statement for the record if you so wish.

Mr. HORN. Well, thank you very much. Actually, the question

and answer dialog is what we prefer, so that’s fine with us.

We now move to Ms. Elyse Wander, who is the senior vice president for planning and public affairs, Travel Industry Association of

America.

Ms. Wander.

STATEMENT OF ELYSE WANDER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT

FOR PLANNING AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, TRAVEL INDUSTRY

ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA

Ms. WANDER. Mr. Chairman, Madam Chairwoman, members of

the committee, good morning. My name is Elyse Wander. I’m the

senior vice president, planning and public affairs, for the Travel Industry Association of America, more commonly known as TIA.

TIA is a nonprofit association representing all components of the

$502 billion U.S. travel industry. Our mission is to promote and facilitate increased travel to and within the United States.

I’m here to testify on the year 2000 computer problem as it relates to travel. Y2K is of great concern to the travel and tourism

industry. I want to assure the members of the committee that the

safety and security of domestic travelers and international visitors

to the United States is the top priority of the U.S. travel industry

today and in year 2000 and beyond.

TIA just yesterday announced a new program aimed at marketing and promoting the United States as the premier travel destination in the world. We hope the emphasis the U.S. travel industry has placed on Y2K readiness will reassure international travelers that the United States will be a safe and secure destination

this millennium holiday and beyond.

I would like to take a few moments to share with you the results

of a recently concluded survey that shows U.S. travelers believe the

17

industry has done a good job to ensure the Y2K problem will not

affect travel in the United States this millennium holiday.

TIA conducted a survey of 1,500 U.S. adults. The results of the

survey have not yet been published. That will happen later this

month, so I have a preview for you.

The findings will show that 24 percent of U.S. adult travelers are

very or somewhat likely to travel for this New Year’s holiday.

Many plan to travel by car, and many will stay in a hotel, motel,

or bed and breakfast.

Three out of five New Year’s travelers plan to use their personal

vehicle.

A third of New Year’s travelers plan to travel by airplane.

Interestingly, those planning to travel by car have a greater fear

that Y2K-related problems will affect their travel than those planning to travel by plane over the new year.

These statistics may suggest that municipal governments and

State governments, State transportation departments, need to do a

better job of communicating that U.S. communities are prepared

for the millennium holiday travelers.

The survey statistics also indicate that the airline industry is

doing a good job in keeping the public informed of its progress and

Y2K readiness.

The airlines have invested a lot of money and manpower to ensure their industry is compliant, and they’ve also done a great job

in issuing periodic reports on their status, one as recently as last

week.

Let’s talk for a moment about travel agents, because they are the

consumer’s preferred means for making airline reservations and obtaining information about air fares and schedules.

More than 100,000 travel agencies that book around 80 percent

of all world travel depend on the computer reservation system companies, or CRS companies. The good news that we’ve obtained is

that neither the large CRS companies nor any major airlines have

reporting significant problems with the year 2000 rollover that they

conducted earlier this year.

Now for a word or two on the lodging industry.

Of likely New Year’s travelers, 44 percent intend to stay at a

hotel, motel, or bed and breakfast, according to the results of the

TIA survey. The American Hotel and Motel Association [AHMA],

has prepared a Y2K compliance guide for its members. AHMA has

also provided the public and its members with links to Y2K status

of products and computer systems, so we see a trend here of the

work being accomplished and the consumers being informed about

where things stand.

TIA’s survey shows that 61 percent of those surveyed said they’re

not at all likely to travel for the New Year holiday; however, only

5 percent claim fear of potential Y2K problems as a reason for not

traveling. And, of all those surveyed, only 7 percent felt that Y2K

would cause major problems for travelers over the New Year’s holiday weekend. Two-fifths of respondents felt that Y2K would cause

some minor problems for New Year’s travelers, while another onefourth felt Y2K would not cause any problems for travelers.

So what does all this tell us? The survey results show that U.S.

travelers believe the travel industry in the United States has done

18

a good job in preparing for January 1, 2000, and the industry has

effectively communicated that the United States will be a marvelous place to usher in the new millennium.

The confidence of our survey’s respondents reflects in great part

on the hard work and dedication of this committee. I want to assure the members of the committee that we will remain vigilant on

this issue, just as I am sure members of the committee will continue to work toward our common goal of safety and security of

United States and worldwide citizens.

Thank you very much for this opportunity to testify before you

today. I’d be happy to supplement my testimony with answers to

any questions you may have.

Mr. HORN. Well, we thank you. That’s a very helpful statement,

and we’re delighted that you have those surveys to show us.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Wander follows:]

19

20

21

22

23

24

Mr. HORN. We are now going to begin the round of questions.

Each Member will be limited to 5 minutes, and we’ll have a second

round or a third or a fourth, but that way it spreads it to everybody

on both sides of the aisle.

So I’ll first yield to the co-chairman of the task force, the gentlewoman from Maryland, Mrs. Morella.

Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m glad I was here

to hear the testimony, since the Defense conference report was

coming up before the FAA research and development bill, and I

find it to be very valuable, because we have been very concerned

about overseas travelers and very concerned about the power industry and energy power grids, and we’ve been very concerned

about the travel agencies and what you say to people when they

come for booking for flights, as well as hotel reservations.

I’m looking at the chart, and, of course, I can remember hearing

that, for instance, Polish Airlines said they weren’t going to fly at

all. Remember when China Airlines said they were going to put all

their executives and their government people in the air? I thought,

‘‘What a way to have a coup in a country.’’ And now to see these

reports, I’m curious, Mr. O’Keefe, what was the process that the

State Department used to collect the data?

Mr. O’KEEFE. Yes, Madam Chairwoman, we used the information

from, as I mentioned, all sources that were available to us.

The first cut was last November/December, when we had a list

of specific questions we asked our embassies to address to the host

government. At the same time, there were other agencies in government which were also doing analysis on Y2K.

As we moved into June, we’ve taken all the information that our

embassies have provided, combined that with other agency information, and especially with open source information—Global 2000,

GartnerGroup, those other organizations that were providing information—as well as international organizations, and distilled it into

paragraphs and presented it to the host government.

There were two points to this. One is that our primary responsibility is to the safety of U.S. citizens who are living or traveling

abroad. We must protect those citizens.

There are two ways to do it. One is, of course, to advise them

of potential hazards, which we have done. The other is to work

with host governments to make sure that those hazards are diminished as much as possible, and that consultation with governments

was as much to get the feedback as to get some action on their part

in terms of transparency, contingency planning, and things like

that.

So, basically, we looked everywhere we could for the information—governments around the world, other sources, our own agencies around town.

Mrs. MORELLA. A major reliance was the self-reporting, though,

wasn’t it?

Mr. O’KEEFE. The self-reporting by?

Mrs. MORELLA. Reporting by the countries.

Mr. O’KEEFE. No, ma’am. I would say that that was——

Mrs. MORELLA. Was there verification? Maybe you—— Mr. O’KEEFE. I would say verification. So, for example, if one of

our embassies was asking questions about—to the host government

25

about particular sectors, they were also instructed to check with

the American Chamber of Commerce and with other organizations

that would rely on various sectors.

So, again, for example, if you ask the telecommunications industry what they thought about the power industry, you would get one

kind of answer, and that would be different both from the Government and what the power industry, itself, might tell you, so there

was a lot of cross checking.

Mrs. MORELLA. When you found that there was a discrepancy

with regard to the sources that you used, as compared to what the

governments had said, how did you handle that? Did you just put

it down as your report or did you in some way get back to them

and say this is what this is going to mean in terms of liabilities

or consequences, or we want to help? Was there a followup?

Mr. O’KEEFE. If there was a discrepancy between what we found

and what the host government found, our first responsibility was,

of course, to our citizens, and so for discrepancies ultimately we

would rely on our own sources of information. And we did have assistance from other agencies in government in helping us sort out

all these mounds of information.

Mrs. MORELLA. You expect they are going to be changing the information that you have from the countries? Will you be updating

at a certain point? Do you have a deadline?

Mr. O’KEEFE. Yes, ma’am. We will be continuously updating it,

and there are some events that are coming up over the next few

months. Mr. Jhirad probably can give you more detail, but there

is an International Energy Agency Contingency Planning Conference coming up in October, which will cover Eastern Europe and

Western Europe, and I believe that there will be a lot of good data

that will come out of that that will help with informing the United

States public.

Mrs. MORELLA. Dr. Jhirad, your area is the one—one of the areas

where we have the greatest amount of concern, particularly when

we know what is happening or not happening in Russia or the

Ukraine.

Have you worked with IAEA of the United Nations, International

Atomic—has that been part of the work you’ve done?

Mr. JHIRAD. Yes. We’ve worked both with the International Energy Agency in Paris, which is the 24 members of the OECD and

includes all of the advanced industrial countries, as well as with

the IAEA on specifically nuclear reactor issues. And, with the

IAEA, we have sponsored a series of regional conferences on the

state of readiness, remediation, and contingency planning in the

major regions of the world.

We are now moving from the information exchange and diagnostic phase to a much more hard-edged contingency planning

phase, and, in fact, we will be having, in—well, about a month

from now, in Prague, a meeting with some of the grid operators

and power plant operators in Russia, Ukraine, Eastern and Central

Europe, because, quite clearly, our concern is about these inter-connected power grids, about the gas transport from Russia into Western Europe, particularly Italy, and also there is the issue of transit

countries, like Ukraine, which is quite vulnerable to Y2K breakdowns in the electric power sector.

26

So these workshops hopefully will give us a little more ground

truth about precisely what contingency plans have been made.

I would just offer that when we had a workshop in Russia in

early July, that very little evidence was presented of either testing

or contingency planning, so there was cause for concern, and we

are now moving to the stage of having the outcome of this meeting

be what specific contingencies could occur, what will be the magnitude, what will be the duration, what kind of area will it affect,

and what are the backup plans. Is there diesel backup to run the

power stations? Is there backup to run the telecommunication systems? Those are the kinds of things that we’d like to get out of this

next series of workshops.

Mrs. MORELLA. Keep us posted.

Ms. Wander, sorry I didn’t get to you.

I just want to mention to the chairman and the members of the

subcommittee, I think we are one of the few legislative bodies that

has been so much involved with Y2K, because, as I’ve traveled to

other countries, they don’t know what we’re talking about, quite

frankly, very hazy.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HORN. Thank you very much.

I now yield to the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Turner, the ranking member. Five minutes for questioning.

Mr. TURNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Dr. Jhirad, I would like to ask you to describe for us, just by way

of background—we always hear a lot of talk about failure in the

energy sector, power grids failing. Educate us a little bit about the

reason for potential failures. What is actually going on in the

power grids that may create problems and give us a sense of what

we should be worried about or what we are worried about?

Mr. JHIRAD. There are two things we should be worried about

with power grids. One major area of vulnerability is what is known

as the supervisory control and data acquisition systems, the SCDA

systems, which take information from the individual power plants

into a kind of central control system—these are essentially the central nervous systems of the power grids—and are then able to dispatch the power plants in a certain order.

So this is really the control function for the whole power grid

that we are concerned about, both with respect to computers in

them that have embedded chips that might not be Y2K compliant,

as well as the software.

If those systems fail, then the grid will have to be manually operated. People will have to get on the phone or radio communication

and give instructions to power plant operators about how they

should operate the plant, so there is a manual backup provision

provided there is a telecommunications system.

If the telecom system goes down because there isn’t power to run

it and there is no backup diesel fuel, then even manual backup becomes tough.

So, one area of concern in a power grid is that central control

system that dispatches the power plants.

The second area refers to the relationship between nuclear plants

and the grid. Most nuclear plants are programmed to shut down

if there is a variation in the grid voltage or the grid frequency, and,

27

sensing a variation, they will shut down, and once they shut down

they will de-link from the grid and you will lose even more power,

so that an initial blackout or brownout could be amplified and

could be made worse by a plant shutting down.

The danger that there might be a serious nuclear accident is considered very minimal. In fact, more the concern is the plant shutting down because the grid is unstable.

So those are the two key areas in power grids to watch very carefully.

Mr. TURNER. So you have no serious concern about any nuclear

disaster at a power plant because of failure of the computer system?

Mr. JHIRAD. That’s the evidence that we’re getting, that we

should not be concerned about a serious power plant accident.

The real concern is whether those power plants can be operated

with either diesel fuel, because those power plants will still need

to have their cooling systems operate, because they’re constantly

producing heat, so it will be important to have enough supplies of

diesel fuels, for example, in Russia and Ukraine to run the plants

should they disconnect.

But that’s the concern more than the probability of a serious reactor accident.

Mr. TURNER. For a country that is not prepared, does not have

contingency plans to operate—address either of the problems you

mentioned. I guess the result could be a brownout or a blackout

that would last for an extended period of time?

Mr. JHIRAD. That’s correct, Congressman Turner. The length of

the blackout, of course, is uncertain, and how long they could last— they would have to bring in auxiliary supplies of fuel—this could

range anything from a few hours to a few days, and it could be

scattered geographically.

But one of the things that we’re trying to get a handle on in

these meetings between now and December is precisely what is the

worst credible case that could happen, how long would the blackout

be, and over what region. That’s the kind of information we haven’t

really received yet.

Mr. TURNER. Are there other potential Y2K problems or potential

disruptions that may occur in the energy sector other than the electrical grids failing? Do we have other types of problems relating to

energy?

Mr. JHIRAD. Yes. There are two other sectors, one is gas and the

gas network. Many of the gas transmission systems are run with

compressors that use power from the power grids. Some of them

generate their own power. But if a power grid goes down, there’s

a chance that the compressors that pump the gas will not work and

the gas will not be pumped.

Now, in the case of gas, there is storage. Many countries have

several days of storage of gas. Germany has 3 months of storage.

So it’s not as critical. Electricity is more critical because it is a justin-time industry; gases have some buffers in the system.

The third area which we are well equipped to deal with is the

oil market, and, again, the probability of any significant disruption—and this is from all the information we get from our own industry and from State oil companies—is considered very minimal.

28

Again, there is plenty of oil in private inventories, in strategic petroleum reserves, in tankers on the high seas, so, again, it is an

industry with a lot of buffers in it, so if there were any Y2K-related

glitches or disruption, the industry feels that measures are available to handle it, but the risk of disruption is considered pretty

low.

Mr. TURNER. We had been told a few weeks ago that there may

be a problem with international shipping that could disrupt the

movement of oil tankers. Are you familiar with that potential problem?

Mr. JHIRAD. Yes, we are, even though we have not been intimately involved with that aspect of it, but certainly members of the

Department have been working with the Coast Guard, which has

the lead in doing port readiness exercises in the United States, and

hopefully some of the major oil exporters would adopt those same

exercises.

Mr. TURNER. Thank you.

Mr. HORN. I now yield 5 minutes for questioning to the vice

chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology, Mrs. Biggert, the gentlewoman from Illinois.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having

this hearing.

Mr. O’Keefe, what means are you using to communicate with

American citizens abroad, and what contingency plans are there in

case the regular telecommunications are disrupted?

I’m thinking not only of those that live abroad, but let’s say

somebody is traveling over there and there is a glitch. Would you

have a way to reach them?

Mr. O’KEEFE. It is a very serious problem. The normal means obviously is the Website that we have and the 800 number that citizens can call in and get information.

Each embassy has been required to develop a contingency plan,

both for its operation and the American citizen services section, so

they have a warden system which tends to be a telephone tree kind

of warden system, often using faxes to hotels.

We’ve asked that they take a look at that warden system and

their means of communication to other citizens and look for backup

means of doing it.

If, in fact, as Dr. Jhirad said, you have a power problem, you are

probably going to have a telecommunications problem eventually,

and, in going over this alternative means, obviously, in a city you

can courier the information around to the hotels.

For those citizens who are spread out in the countryside, there

are ham radio operators, and taking a look at that, and there are—

which is actually more effective—cooperation with the host government in providing use of their emergency radio nets to transmit.

The other means we have, of course, is Voice of America, and so

people who have transistor radios can pick that up, and often people who are sort of way out in the boondocks will have that alternate means of communication.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Well, would you expect that—what would you tell

them if there is a power outage? What kinds of things would be

suggestions for what to do?

29

Mr. O’KEEFE. Well, the warden network would be activated if

there is risk to U.S. citizens and if we felt that U.S. citizens should

leave the country, and the information would be dependent on conditions in the country.

But, for example, if, in fact, we found conditions had deteriorated, that we were recommending that U.S. citizens depart the

country, there would be information about sites where they could

go to get the transportation to move out of the country.

We work very closely with—obviously, with the military on some

of these kinds of evacuations, or with commercial carriers.

Mrs. BIGGERT. I think probably one of the most frustrating

things about traveling is waiting and not knowing how long you

are going to have to wait. So I would imagine that if communication could be improved—they’re working on the power and it probably will be restored within 3 days or something would be helpful.

Would that be the kind of communication that would also be made?

Mr. O’KEEFE. I think that would be appropriate. If there is— hopefully, would be that kind of predictability to it.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Is there an international sector that represents

the greatest potential for failure? Maybe you could answer that or

maybe Dr. Jhirad would know.

Mr. O’KEEFE. Well, I do—as we walk through these issues, the

sector that always looks most vulnerable is the power generation

distribution system, just because of the—it tends to be more technological. Even in a country that doesn’t have a lot of technology,

it’s one sector that does tend to have a certain amount into it as

the telecommunications, but I would say Dr. Jhirad has the toughest sector, and I’m glad he’s here.

Mrs. BIGGERT. OK. Ms. Wander, you said that 24 percent of

American citizens are planning on traveling during this period of

time. Do you have a breakdown about how many are planning

international travel?

Ms. WANDER. No, I don’t, Congresswoman. Consistent with TIA’s

mission, we are interested in bringing visitors to the United States

and pay little attention to the outbound volumes.

Mrs. BIGGERT. I would suppose that the other factor in that

would be to know if travel has decreased, even though people might

say that they’re not concerned about Y2K, if more people are staying home this year, that would be a factor or not.

Ms. WANDER. I can speak domestically, and we’ve taken a look

at advanced bookings, both for the holiday season and early into

the first part of year 2000, and they look about—depending on the

segment, they look about the same as they were for this year, and

in some cases slightly above, so so far we are not seeing a dropoff.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you.

I see my time is up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HORN. We thank you.

And now I turn to the gentleman that started all of this last

week when he asked a question about the travel plans for the individuals not waiting until December or January, but the one’s that

plan now, and that’s why this hearing has resulted, and, of course,

we started with Mr. Ose’s questions to the FAA administrator, so

I’m now delighted to recognize for 5 minutes the gentleman from

California, Mr. Ose, for questioning.

30

Mr. OSE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Just an aside for my colleague from Illinois, the typical amount

of cancellations over the New Year’s holiday for domestic travel

headed outward is about 10 percent, and right now preliminary indications are that the cancellations are running at about a 20 percent level, so it’s about twice the normal level.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for sharing with us the list

of the 35 countries who have not responded to our circular, but I

want to followup, more interestingly, on the information sheets

that were provided this morning.

I don’t mean to be—I don’t mean to diminish the travel we get

from other countries, but, as I look at a map, I’m particularly concerned about countries with whom we do a lot of business or a lot

of travel, and I start with Canada and Mexico.

Travel to Canada, according to this report, looks to be a low risk,

which would be on page three, and Mexico—I saw it here a moment ago—on page nine appears to also be a low risk. Is that consistent with the understanding that each of you have?

Mr. O’KEEFE. Mr. Congressman, yes, sir, that is consistent, and

I would say, in particular, with Canada and Mexico we have both

bilateral and trilateral activities that go on all the time. In fact,

with Canada there are 11 sectors that meet on a regular basis to

do joint contingency planning and also to share information on how

they’ve gone about preparing for the millennium. And with Mexico,

largely the same situation.

Dr. Jhirad mentioned the port exercises that the Coast Guard

had conducted. The Mexicans joined the Coast Guard in New Orleans for the oil exercise, and that’s just one example. There’s been

a lot of work, as I understand, between United States Customs and

Mexican Customs because of the great amount of material that

transits the California border, Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico.

And so it is probably—because they’re our neighbors, they are

two countries where the dialog has been early and often. We started that last December.

Mr. OSE. Let me jump shift then to trading partners with whom

we have a very great amount of commerce—for instance, Japan

and Germany and the growing trade we have, for instance, with

China. Japan and Germany are highly industrialized and, according to the report, have made significant progress, but, for instance,

China remains somewhat problematic at this point.

Can you provide any input on that?

Mr. O’KEEFE. Well, just in general, APEC has finished its leaders’ meeting last week in New Zealand, and in the closing statement it was agreed that all the APEC countries, including China,

would adopt a 100-day program on preparedness for Y2K and regional contingency planning.

The Chinese, as well as other APEC countries, have joined in an

activity which is a tool kit which identifies cross-border dependencies that might be affected by Y2K. It could be strategic minerals

like petroleum, or it could be connected power grids. And the Chinese are participating, as well as the Japanese.

Again, for Japan and Germany there’s a G8 Contingency Planning Conference next week in Berlin, and part of that conference

is a workshop on contingency planning, obviously. The Japanese

31

are leading the energy sector, and Dr. Jhirad has been in contact

with his Japanese colleagues on this.

The United States is doing transportation, Canada is doing telecommunications, and the U.K. is doing federal and regional government.

But, as part of that overall activity, we’ll be working with our fellow G8 members to take a very close look at what next steps and

additional steps we all need to take.

Mr. OSE. Well, let me go back then to the People’s Republic of

China.

This report here on the Consular information sheets indicates

that ‘‘there may be a risk of disruption in the key sectors of finance, telecommunications, medical services, and in the electric

power and infrastructure systems outside of the coastal cities.’’ That’s a fairly large problem area, if you will, and I am most attuned to the consequences.

We do have a lot of, for instance, recreational travel there. We

have a burgeoning commercial sector with China. I’m not sure

what we’re going to be able to accomplish in 100 days, if you will.

Maybe China is different than some of the western countries.

Mr. O’KEEFE. In terms of remediation, 100 days isn’t a lot of

time. In terms of contingency planning, that is a fairly substantial

amount of time, especially in a country where, in terms of human

resources, the number of people you can throw at a problem is very

substantial.

And also I think—and I’m no expert in this, but I believe the

level of technology varies region by region.

You also—and not just China, but any country, one has to try to

think about not simply disruption, but how long a disruption has

to go on before it really affects United States national interest.

So if, in fact—this is for travelers, and travelers really need to

know if they are going to be without power for 24 hours or they

can’t get money from an ATM machine or the local bank has a currency shortage for several days. That does not mean that U.S. national interest and trade would necessarily be affected.

If the lights go out for 24 hours, let’s say in Beijing, that doesn’t

affect United States national interest and it probably will not affect

the Chinese economy.

The hard part about this, frankly, is it is hard to tell what the

duration is going to be, and our objective, just as you have pointed

out, is to work with countries on joint contingency planning and in

trying to make sure that these problems are mitigated as much as

possible.

And, again, the Chinese did join the Coast Guard in Oakland for

the test in Oakland, and they have indicated that they would like

to have further cooperation with port operations, so we’re seeing

them step out and working with us.

Mr. OSE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HORN. Thank you.

Before I turn to Mr. Walden to begin the second round, I want

to exercise my own 5 minutes.

Mr. O’Keefe, I’m just curious. We’ve taken a look at the Website

of the United Kingdom and their travel advisories, and, for example, the State Department reports—you report that, in terms of

32

Ukraine, they may be unprepared for Y2K. However, the United

Kingdom, in its Website, tells its citizens, ‘‘not to travel in the

Ukraine.’’ Are we afraid to issue strong warnings about that, or does the

United Kingdom not really have the picture and we do, or do we

not have the picture?

Mr. O’KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, I’m glad you swore in Mr. Herbert,

who is sitting behind me, because he is here to take the hardest

questions, and so—— Mr. HORN. OK.

Mr. O’KEEFE. But before I turn to Mr. Herbert, who can go over

the travel warning piece, you heard earlier about the conference on

the electric power grid that’s going to occur in October. The

Ukraine is joining in that, and I think we are going to have much

better information at that point.

So, while our judgments and the U.K.’s judgments differ slightly

in terms of specific information about traveling to a place, we will

be updating that information as we move along.

But if you will allow me, I will turn to Mr. Herbert.

Mr. HORN. Please go ahead, and then I’d like Dr. Jhirad to get

into this.

Welcome, Mr. Herbert.

Mr. HERBERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We were aware that the U.K. had a slightly different view than

we did on the Ukraine. I think our consular information sheet does

indicate the potential for failures in a number of sectors in the

Ukraine. We just didn’t determine at this point that a travel warning was quite yet justified.

We do do a travel warning on any country where we do feel it

would be unsafe for Americans to go to. As of yesterday, when we

released this, we weren’t convinced that it was timely to say, ‘‘Do

not go to Ukraine at this time.’’ But certainly we are aware of the

British concerns and our own concerns, and if we reach the same

conclusion we will certainly issue a travel warning.

We do these routinely throughout the year whenever a situation

develops in a country in which we feel it is unsafe for American

citizens to be there, and we will certainly do that on the Ukraine

or any other country between now and January 1st where it is determined that it would be unsafe to be there.

Mr. HORN. Well, I guess we’re safe when the Ukrainian caucus

delegates from this House meet with the Kiev Parliament, and

that’s the end of November, so I guess we’re safe at this point.

Let me ask the gentleman from the Energy Department, in terms

of looking at nuclear reactors, which has been a major interest to

this subcommittee, in terms of the relationships between the ones

in Ukraine and the ones in Russia, is there any problem at all in

terms of the grid? And is that grid between Ukraine and Russia

fairly traditional in the sense of what we have in the United States

between Canada, the United States, and various regions within the

United States? I’m just curious about that.

Mr. JHIRAD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Well, until about December of last year, Ukraine was buying

power from Russia. They have a grid connection. The Russians are

not selling them any power right now because they weren’t paying

33

for it, so that grid is not really functioning in anything remotely

like the United States/Canadian situation right now. The second

point you raised—but that’s an important point if Ukraine has

power problems, the possibility of getting power from Russia.

The second issue you raised is the one of serious concern, which

is that Ukraine already has a lot of power outages. It has very little excess capacity. Unreliability is occurring all the time. So they

don’t have any margin, any reserve margin, any cushion if one of

their nuclear plants has to be taken out of the grid.

The U.S. Government is currently funding a team of utility experts from the Southern California Edison Co. and from Pacific

Northwest Labs to do a solid assessment of what the problems are

in the electric power grid in Ukraine and what the contingencies

could be in terms of real numbers—how long, how serious, and so

forth.

Mr. HORN. In the judgments made by the Department of Energy,

is there any relationship and interaction between Energy and our

own Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or is this strictly done within

the Department of Energy?

Mr. JHIRAD. There has been a lot of interaction with the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission on this. The Department of Energy, with

funds from USAID, has a program to train reactor operators in

Ukraine in some of the mission-critical systems and how to remediate them, and so there has been quite a lot of interaction with

the NRC on that.

Mr. HORN. Is there—well, have people from the Department of

Energy looked at some of the reactors that still exist in Ukraine

and in Russia? Now, as I’m told, there’s a different type of reactor

normally than what we have in the United States—let’s say in Illinois. Is that true, there’s a difference here?

Mr. JHIRAD. Yes, it’s true. And we have looked at that and, in

fact, one of our national labs has produced a report on that, which

we would be very happy to provide the committee.

Mr. HORN. Well, we’d be delighted, and at this point in the

record we’ll put it.

The reason I raised that, just to finish that question, is I don’t

know—I’ll have to ask Mr. George, the staff director, if I’ve still not

received an answer from the NRC on our questions——

[Question asked of staff off the record.]

Mr. HORN. We have an answer now. Well, the issue with us and

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was that they said, ‘‘Well,

we’re only going to look at 10 percent of the U.S. reactors,’’ and we

said, ‘‘How about looking at 100 percent?’’ Then we got into a conversation about how our reactors are different and you don’t have

to worry about them and don’t worry about what goes on in Europe

and so forth. So I’m just curious where the Energy Department

stands. Do we have a total audit of our own reactors, or do we just

let them do 10 percent of it?

Mr. JHIRAD. On the domestic reactor situation, Mr. Chairman, I’d

have to get back to you on that.

Mr. HORN. OK. Well, I’d be interested to know if there is a position you have on when you’re auditing what’s going on in a particular reactor and how much that is done by the Department, as

opposed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

34

Mr. JHIRAD. I can get back to you in writing on that.

Mr. HORN. Fine.

Mr. JHIRAD. I know that it’s largely an NRC responsibility.

Mr. HORN. We’ll save a space in the record, without objection.

[The information referred to follows:]

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Mr. HORN. We now start the second round, and that’s the gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Walden.

Do you have some questions?

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At this point I do not

have any questions.

Mr. HORN. We’ll now yield to the gentleman from Texas, Mr.

Turner, to start the second round. He’s got to make up for a few

absences on his side.

Mr. TURNER. That’s true. Mr. Chairman, I have to go to the floor,

so you’ll have to excuse me.

Mr. HORN. OK. Are they voting? Let me know.

Mr. TURNER. Well, shortly they will be.

Mr. HORN. Yes. OK. I thank the gentleman.

I now ask the co-chairman of the task force, the gentlewoman

from Maryland, Mrs. Morella, for further questioning. She did

leave.

Then we’ll go to Mrs. Biggert, second round, 5 minutes.

Mrs. BIGGERT. I’m still here.

Ms. Wander, you said that your trade industry association represents all segments of the U.S. travel and tourism industry. Is

there any segment of the industry that you’re concerned about due

to Y2K problems?

Ms. WANDER. Based on the inquiries we’ve made of our members,

frankly, no, there’s none that we’re worried about, but we’re very

aware of the fact that our industry depends on so many others, as

I think this morning’s discussion has evidenced.

I would point out, though, that since the survey statistics indicate that most travel plans are predicated on the use of the automobile, our concern lies at the local level around stop lights, automated bridges, electricity availability, and the like. So we would

hope that the efforts at the local level are underway and turn out

to be successful.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Let’s say there is a problem if someone is traveling—and it could be by plane, it could be by train, or it could be

by airlines, and somebody is going from Los Angeles to New York,

or vice versa, and there is a Y2K failure in the town, the place that

they’re going to. Is there a way to—who is going out and disseminating that information to people? How will they find out? Is

there—the airlines or the airports, or——

Ms. WANDER. I would imagine that each of the affected segments—and we hope there are none, but it may happen—would follow two courses of action. One would be to take advantage of all

media available—their Websites, television, radio, and the like—to

alert travelers that there is a problem, and then there’s the immediate difficulty that a traveler who is caught in the middle of a

problem faces, and what we know about our industry’s plans suggests that they would be fully staffed. There’s very little leave that

is going to be allowed for, that they will try to accommodate individual-by-individual to alleviate the problems that might be encountered.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Well, it seems in the international travel we do

have the State Department and consulates that will be notifying

people. Is there anything that the travel industry, itself, would be

46

involved in? They’re the ones that have sold the tickets, or whatever, have planned the trip.

Ms. WANDER. It falls fundamentally, in my view, to the industry

to take those steps to inform travelers. There is no national tourism office. There is no longer a U.S. Travel and Tourism Administration, unhappily. So the industry recognizes that we will need to

be the ones to take care of our passengers and our travelers.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you.

Mr. O’Keefe, in one of the areas that I think is very popular for

travel, particularly at this time to get out of the cold weather, is

the Caribbean. Is this an area that is of concern as far as travel

there? Are most of the countries ready for Y2K, according to—I

know, like, St. Lucia, they say they are somewhat prepared to deal

with the Y2K problem, or St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Would

you recommend—and then certainly St. Kitts and Nevis, which are

still rebuilding from the hurricane. Is this an area that is recommended for travel at this time?

Mr. O’KEEFE. Well, the travel—the consular information sheets

have sort of country-by-country, and so individual travelers should

take a look and make a judgment based on that information.

In terms of overall regional preparedness, I would say that there

is a U.S. Information Agency and State Department-sponsored

gathering of Y2K coordinators for the Caribbean in Miami next

week just to go over this same—this very issue, where we will—

again, it is an information gathering and also information giving

kind of activity.

Perhaps Mr. Herbert, who is the managing director of the Office

of Overseas Citizens Services in our Consular Affairs Bureau could

add to that.

Mr. HERBERT. I would just comment that I think we have a

greater concern about areas that will be involved in a winter situation than we do in the Caribbean. Obviously, inconveniences in the

Caribbean are one thing, lack of heat in a cold climate is something

else. So I’m somewhat reassured that the people in the Caribbean

will be perhaps inconvenienced, but not in a serious way.

Mrs. BIGGERT. So it might be better to go sailing than skiing over

the vacation.

I guess the problem to me probably would be the travel, too,

which is usually the most difficult to that area, but once you get

there how you get back might be the—would you say that that

might be more of a major problem?

Mr. HERBERT. I think in all of this that being able to go and

come is a significant portion of the whole picture, no matter where

you are. If it is cold and you are not adequately heated, you’d want

to get on a plane and leave. But I’ll leave that to the Department

of Transportation, FAA, to address that, which they are doing separately.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HORN. We thank you.

Let me just get on the record, for the average American citizen

that is going to do travel anywhere, you have an 800 number at

the Department of State. How do they know where to access that?

47

Is it in their friendly local telephone book under Federal agencies,

or how many beeps have you got into your 800 line?

Mr. HERBERT. Our primary point of contact with the public is our

Website, and we get 300,000 hits a day on there. We have an 800

number. In times of crisis it’s announced on CNN, et cetera, if you

need information. So if we get into a crisis mode on Y2K, we will

certainly have an 800 number. Normally, we have lots of calls into

our office in the course of a day, lots of people checking out our

Website.

Mr. HORN. Can you give us the 800 number now, for those of us

that occasionally travel?

Mr. HERBERT. It’s only activated when the crisis occurs, and it

is one that is assigned to us. I don’t know what it would be at this

time. I’m sorry.

Mr. HORN. So the average citizen really has no way to know unless it is a crisis, and they are usually military crises. I’ve been in

countries when that has happened, and——

Mr. HERBERT. We have a standard number for emergencies that

people use all the time. That is 202–647–5225. That is into my office, the Office of Overseas Citizens Services.

In terms of——

Mr. HORN. Is that the 300,000 calls a day that come into your

office?

Mr. HERBERT. The 300,000 are hits on our Website.

Mr. HORN. Yes, on the Website.

Mr. HERBERT. Right.

Mr. HORN. OK. What’s the Website number?

Mr. HERBERT. It’s http://travel.state.gov. And our Website has

links to several hundred other Y2K-related Websites, also, so that

a person who comes to our site can access all kinds of information

on Y2K from a multiple number of sources.

Mr. HORN. Well, one of the things that interested me was your

consular information sheets, which provide a very good snapshot,

I think, of the country’s readiness.

In the case of Italy, we know from the public record of newspapers, people traveling there, so forth, that here we have a major

industrial democracy and they’ve often been reported as being terribly behind in their year 2000 efforts. However, your information

sheets report that Italy’s risks are somewhat minimal.

To the contrary, the United Kingdom has been very forthcoming

in reporting its year 2000 readiness; yet, if you read the United

Kingdom’s report, you could be led to believe that the United kingdom poses a greater travel risk than Italy.

So what is the citizen who taps into these Websites—what is to

be made of it all, including the United States, by the way, why,

since the United Kingdom also says about us that if there are—

there might be disruptions in the United States—and these aren’t

political ones. It’s the water supply, small airports, and small

health facilities.

So that’s their picture of us, which we probably ought to say, Ms.

Wander, have we got any lessening of travel between the United

Kingdom and the United States?

Ms. WANDER. Any less?

48

Mr. HORN. Yes. I mean, they’re saying if you turn into their

Website, apparently they say we’ve got a problem, several problems—water supply, small airports, and small health facilities. Do

you agree with that in the State Department about the U.S. situation? Should people not come here or what? Or is that just off base?

Mr. HERBERT. Our office doesn’t—our office has the rest of the

world, not the United States.

Mr. HORN. I know.

Mr. HERBERT. We couldn’t assess on people coming here. They

don’t look to use for that information. I’m sorry.

Mr. HORN. So what about it?

Ms. WANDER. We are not seeing lessening of advanced bookings,

at least in terms of people’s plans right now from the U.K.

Mr. HORN. Yes. Well, I’m interested in the State Department’s

foreign operations, where they’re looking at countries other than

the United States. What’s the best way to get that to your travel

agents, to travel coordinators, travel planners? How do you do

that? And is the State Department doing that? How do you access

that? We’re finding difficulty even finding the number for the 800

situation. We’ll get that, I hope, before the end of the day.

But what do you do? The average citizen says, ‘‘Hey, I’m traveling. I’m spending my $2,000 and I don’t want to be in a situation

where I’m like young students waiting for a lesser price on the

plane and jamming an airport or having some coup take place.’’ That I understand and everybody does. They can read about that

on CNN. But what would you advise State Department to tell? And

how do you get the message to your people?

Ms. WANDER. I’m speculating here just a little bit, but, by way

of suggestion, you know, increasingly Americans are doing a lot of

their own research and a lot of their own bookings for their travel

plans. Travel agents are taking on a different role. They’re not

going to disappear from the face of the earth, but a different role.

What we find is that it’s the Internet, the Internet, the Internet,

and what is going to be necessary in times of crisis or any time

that we, as a Nation, need to put out a warning is that we need

to be able to communicate with people electronically, because that’s

where they’re looking for the information for travel plans.

Mr. HORN. Well, we have an 800 number for Social Security, for

example. There’s about a 7-minute wait, but we check all these because when they come in as witnesses they always say the wonderful things they’re all doing.

Now, it sounds like, with a 202 number, the State Department

does not have an 800 number. Is that incorrect or what?

Mr. HERBERT. We do not have a full-time 800 number, that’s correct, in the Bureau of Consular Affairs for assistance.

Mr. HORN. Yes. Well, wouldn’t it be a good idea for the State Department to easily provide information when people want it? And

why don’t you have an 800 number? I don’t know what it costs, but

they ought to ask the Appropriations Committee. They’re up here

for everything else. They might as well get an 800 number for the

U.S. citizens that are paying the bills.

So what do you think? Are you going to go home and get an 800

number?

Mr. HERBERT. Well, I’ll certainly raise it, sir.

49

Mr. HORN. Thank you.

Mr. HERBERT. I can promise you that.

Let me point out, though, in everyone’s passport, all Americans

who have a passport, the number that I mentioned before, 5225, is

in there as the point of contact, and they can get access to all of

our information there, recorded information, if they want to hear

it. The same consular information sheets are available. We have

auto-fax. So there is a point of contact.

Mr. HORN. So it’s that 202–647–5225 number?

Mr. HERBERT. That’s correct.

Mr. HORN. OK. Well, that’s a start, but it would be nice, since

the taxpayers are paying all your bills, it would be nice if you had

an 800 number to thank them and give them real access through

real data, because the problem here is you have rumors around,

and I know you confront that daily in all of your lives here, but

the way to get at rumors is to get the truth out there and have

people be able to access it.

So I would hope that that’s one of the things that we’ll do in all

agencies. I don’t know where Energy is on that, whether you need

an information flow. But, given the events of recent months, it

might be a good idea. Indeed, it might be a good idea if every agency had their own 800 number so people could be better informed.

And, since this is the subcommittee that has to do with the Freedom of Information Act, we feel very strongly on releasing information and not just locking it up for the scholars to write about 20

years from now or 50 years from now.

So let me just ask you about the American Airlines situation.

They announced recently that they will not operate a full schedule

on New Year’s Eve, but insisted that reduced demand, not year

2000, was the reason. And I’m just curious, in terms of the travel

industry, Ms. Wander, what can you tell us about New Year’s Eve

generally in this country. Is it pretty low? What do you know about

it?

Ms. WANDER. I can’t comment, because I don’t have any information relative to American’s recent statement, nor do I have access

to the proprietary information of any of the companies, but, in our

discussions—and we stay pretty close to our members on this about

what are—what the advanced bookings show—they would not at

this point show a dropoff for this point in the year——

Mr. HORN. Right.

Ms. WANDER [continuing]. Vis-a-vis last year.

Mr. HORN. Generally, what’s your feeling as to when people ordinarily, if they were on a January 1st millennium-type vacation or

something, when would they basically go about thinking of making

an order on that and putting cash up or your credit card or whatever?

Ms. WANDER. Unless it is a mega trip, we’re finding that people

are booking, in general, closer and closer to the dates of departure.

Thirty days out would be very typical for most trips. I would imagine that for something having to do with the millennium, where

there are a lot of trips—cruises and the like—that are already sold

out, that anyone today who still is thinking about doing something

better act within the next 30 to 45 days if they really want to take

50

the trip that they want to have. Waiting 30 days out will, I think,

cause them to be disappointed for the millennium.

Mr. HORN. I just wonder if Mr. Ose or Mr. Walden have some

comments on that, because you’re all the ones that started this, so

go ahead.

Mr. OSE. Well, I’m happy to get in the middle of a fight with you.

I do have some concerns about that. I have siblings who use the

Internet to book their stuff. They are very focused on price and

they negotiate—I mean, they take six stops to get to their ultimate

destination, so I’m aware of the shrinking of the advance planning

portion of travel.

One of the things that you just mentioned having to do with the

cruise ships was of particular interest to me. I don’t know how it

is from a statistical standpoint, but anecdotally I would say that

there’s probably more Americans on cruise ships than there are

any other nationality.

From the travel industry’s standpoint, my first question would

have to do with the perception or the reality of the travel industry’s

readiness for Y2K. I mean, if you’ve got a big boat out on the

water, are you prepared? And then, secondarily, I want to go back

to—I’m sorry, Mr.—— Mr. HERBERT. Kevin Herbert.

Mr. OSE [continuing]. Herbert, and I want to—is this up on your

Website? Is this information—this is the consular information

sheets, so—— Mr. HERBERT. Consular information sheets are up on the

Website.

Mr. OSE. How often are—while she’s getting the answer, how

often are these updated?

Mr. HERBERT. Periodically through—any time there is a change,

we insert the change. Sometimes we have a couple of small

changes and we put them in at once. This is the first time we’ve

done them all at one time.

There is not a day during the year when they are all changed.

This is a unique experience in that we added Y2K and reissued all

of them.

Mr. OSE. You reissued all the advisories.

Mr. HERBERT. They were reissued as of yesterday. Right. And

they all contain for the first time specific Y2K language for each

country.

Mr. OSE. Right. And these are on your Website?

Mr. HERBERT. Yes. The consular information sheets are on the

Website, yes.

Mr. OSE. As far as the updating, I mean, is it a reactive thing,

or is it something that you look at in anticipation of needing to update information periodically?

Mr. HERBERT. Well, any time a situation changes in a given

country that’s of concern to the traveling American public, we will

add it to the consular information sheet. Sometimes there’s a minor

change, some immigration formality changes in some way that we

want to change, or road conditions, we have a report of a certain

area that perhaps is not safe. We will add that.

Sometimes you have a couple of weeks go by before you have a

few things and you put in there and revise it, but anything that’s

51

urgent or important we can do immediately by a public announcement, or we revise the consular information sheets.

Mr. OSE. So on a case-by-case basis the level of urgency is determined? I mean, obviously an earthquake is far more urgent than,

you know, a stop sign has been knocked down kind of thing.

Mr. HERBERT. If we had an earthquake, we’d put out a public announcement immediately to warn people that there is a given circumstance in this country that’s occurring now, and that will be a

public announcement lasting a week or a month or 2 months or

what have you.

If we had an incident where someone was robbed in a certain

area or murdered, and then the next week there was another, and

2 weeks later was another, we would then revise the consular information sheet to say that this particular area in this country

seems to be an unsafe area for Americans and to avoid it.

Of course, every day we get reports of acts like this all over the

world. It’s when we see a trend or an area to specify that we would

put it in the consular information sheet.

Mr. OSE. Of particular—the reason I’m bringing this up, of particular concern to me is the timeliness of that information, because

your State Department is going to hear about these issues far sooner than it will be in the general media, and all of us up here have

a very distinct responsibility. We understand who our masters are,

if you will, and I want to make sure that we get that information

out in a very timely fashion, so I am particularly pleased again to

see these on the Website.

Now, Ms. Wander, I want to go back to the cruise ship——

Mr. HORN. Would the gentleman yield for a 15-second interjection?

Mr. OSE. Certainly.

Mr. HORN. On his very point, as I remember in TWA 800, the

embassy had posted on its bulletin board that you should not really

use that flight if you are embassy personnel, but the average citizen who was over there that went on board, they didn’t have that

information. So the question really is, when people are in a foreign

country and moving on U.S. aircraft, in this case, how are we going

to get that message out? Should people simply check with every

embassy, and would they give them that? Or would they just withhold it for their own personnel and not the taxpayers?

Mr. HERBERT. I think you’re referring to the PanAm 103 crash,

sir.

Mr. HORN. Was it?

Mr. HERBERT. Yes, sir. Since that time, the no double standard

policy has been adopted 100 percent. If we ever have information

on a threat to Americans abroad, official or otherwise, we immediately make that known through a travel advisory—a travel warning, sorry, a public announcement.

That incident that you’re describing I don’t believe could ever

happen again, sir.

Mr. OSE. I would just like to follow on to the chairman’s fundamental point, and that is that there is a threat to Americans, if

there is a chance that they are vulnerable or exposed, it is my objective to get that information out in the public domain.

52

Now let me go back to—no, I’m not going to go back. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired, and I was over time last time.

Mr. HORN. Go ahead.

Mr. OSE. Are you sure?

Mr. HORN. Yes.

Mr. OSE. All right. I want to go back to the cruise ship thing.

These are large pieces of equipment floating in the open seas. Their

captains are maneuvering among sand bars and reefs and islands

and what have you. If they are in the Caribbean, for instance, or

if the South Pacific, the travel industry’s perspective, what information can you share with us as to the readiness of this industry

as it relates to the embedded chips that they use to run the equipment, so to speak?

Ms. WANDER. I can share only, Congressman, the anecdotal information that we’ve collected from our member companies. They

believe that they are ready. We won’t find any information about

Y2K, by the way, on their trade association’s Website. We looked

as recently as last evening. There was nothing on it. So they are

not—we can’t say that they’re doing a good job of communicating

to the consumer, but they do have, again, strong advance bookings.

Of those who are planning to travel over the millennium weekend,

7 percent at least are cruising. That’s always a strong season for

that business, and that will amount to over 2 million U.S. citizens

who will be cruising.

Mr. OSE. 2 billion?

Ms. WANDER. 2 million. Over 2 million. I can only tell you,

though, that, in terms of their readiness, anecdotally, based on

their representations to us, they believe they will be ready.

Mr. OSE. All right, so if I might finalize, then, the airlines, the

domestic airlines, U.S. domestic airlines, are well prepared; the

cruise industry is well prepared; we have anecdotal information

that there are, at least in the airlines, some disparity in bookings

this year versus last, even though the cruise ship industry is still

strong; we have a place where we can go and get official Government information on the status in various countries; and we have

a list of the 35 countries that haven’t yet responded to our circular

request as to the status that they will enjoy accordingly.

Now, my final question—Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your benevolence—these 35 States that have not responded, what’s being done

to followup and actually encourage them to respond?

Mr. O’KEEFE. The FAA has written an instruction to our embassies to go to the host governments to say, ‘‘Please respond to this.’’

Clearly, it is in their self interest to respond, because if they stay

on the list then they will feel the effects in terms of not simply

tourism but business travelers being reluctant to come to those

countries.

Mr. OSE. Actually, this list is only a circular. It does not speak

to whether or not—let’s not mistake this list as saying these people—the people that aren’t on this list are fully compliant or fully

prepared.

Mr. O’KEEFE. Right.

Mr. OSE. Let’s not make that mistake. This is just a list of people

who haven’t responded.

53

Mr. O’KEEFE. That’s right. I think it is to the ICAO self-assessment request, and that yes, there have been a number of countries

that have responded. It doesn’t mean that those who have responded are compliant or it doesn’t answer the question of safety,

which I think the FAA will take up toward the end of this month,

but, nevertheless, if, in fact, a country hasn’t responded, that sends

a message, as well.

Mr. OSE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HORN. You are quite welcome. A good list of questions.

Let me ask Mr. O’Keefe, you’ve looked at all these sheets that

have been put out now by the consulars. What’s the worst case in

the world we have on our hands in terms of Y2K, if you look at

all those sheets? What’s the worst case?

Mr. O’KEEFE. Well, Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned earlier, it

wasn’t a score card and we didn’t really rank order, but I would

describe conditions that might prevail in countries that are experiencing winter, and I would say that, in terms of high risk, what

Dr. Jhirad pointed out, we have countries in eastern Europe with

fragile electric power distribution systems who will be in the grip

of an eastern European winter, and I think that tends to be a highrisk kind of situation.

Mr. HORN. Well, I agree with you. We’ve used that example on

a number of hearings, and I’d just like to ask Dr. Jhirad, you have

the gas coming from Russia into eastern Europe, central Europe,

to some degree, and that’s what is going to keep people warm, and

if it doesn’t come they are going to be freezing. To what degree does

the Department of Energy share that assessment? And are there

any plans with some of those countries, in terms of other types of

heat or energy that can be utilized, because January 1st is a high

point for freezing. I’ve been in Moscow on that day and I well know

what the cold is like.

Mr. JHIRAD. Mr. Chairman, the results of the next meeting with

the Russians, Ukrainians, and central Europeans will be quite critical, because we will get to the heart of this question of what are

the contingency plans if the gas flows into central and even western Europe are interrupted because of, say, a power failure that affects the compressors. How long will that last and what are the

contingency plans to keep people warm when that happens?

And I think that’s exactly the kind of information we will get at

this meeting, and we will clearly make that public as soon as we

have it.

Mr. HORN. Well, we have been told, just in general, when we got

into this a number of months ago, that there are real problems—

and I’m not saying this is the Russian gas problem, but when

you’re dealing with petroleum and gas and et cetera, different

types of energy like that, you have microchips that are often in the

pipeline system, that are in the refiner’s ship—not refiner’s ship,

but the petroleum-carrying ship, and also in the refinery. And I

just wondered to what degree that seems to be a problem, and are

they worried about the microchip aspect of it and how that could

go awry.

Mr. JHIRAD. Mr. Chairman, does your question refer to the situation again in western Europe, or——

54

Mr. HORN. Well, you can refer it. I just wonder is there any other

situation like that in the world, and in terms of just what a computer might do if it misfires and it goes in one direction versus the

one somebody thought it was going. And I don’t know to what degree we’ve been able to help people with expertise of the Department of Energy, so that’s what I’m fishing for, I guess.

Mr. JHIRAD. Yes. When—in the series of workshops that we’ve

had with the International Energy Agency, when we’ve been asked

for specific technical information on how to fix embedded chips, say

in refineries or in pipelines, what we have done is put them in

touch with industry groups here who are working those issues,

whether it is the American Petroleum Institute or the Edison Electric Institute, who are knowledgeable about mission-critical systems, how to fix them, and contingency plans.

So in the Department of Energy, on that we’ve really played

more of a catalytic role, getting those countries in touch with the

people who are fixing the problems.

Mr. HORN. Any comments any of you would like to make after

hearing this dialog and discussion before you leave? Mr. O’Keefe.

Mr. O’KEEFE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to thank you and other Members for allowing us to

appear today, and I would stress once again, especially for Congressman Ose, that the Department of State has as its primary responsibility protection of U.S. citizens, and those citizens are our

masters, as well, so we know exactly why your concern is there and

we do share that concern.

Thank you for your suggestion, Mr. Chairman, about our 800

number.

Mr. HORN. Thank you. I’ll be glad to help get you the money for

that.

All right. Dr. Jhirad.

Mr. JHIRAD. Yes. I would like to thank you again, Mr. Chairman,

very much, for giving us a chance to answer your questions. We

certainly feel that our clients out there are the American public,

and we take very much to heart your statement that any valuable

information should be shared immediately so that they can make

their own decisions, and we will follow that and we will also raise

the issue of an 800 number in the Department.

Mr. HORN. Good.

Ms. Wander, any comments finally?

Ms. WANDER. I’d echo my fellow panelists’ gratitude for your convening the hearing this morning and allowing us the opportunity

to let you know where things stand in our industry and to again

reiterate for the committee the intention of both the Travel Industry Association of America and its component members to remain

vigilant on this issue and not lose sight of the ultimate goal, which

is security and safety for travelers in the United States and worldwide.

Thank you again.

Mr. HORN. Let me ask you, the various travel groups—and I’m

part of the Travel Caucus up here, which is just about everybody— when they go hold a dinner, I think they’ve got to get the biggest

hall in town. But do you, that represent pieces of the travel and

convention industry, do you meet in Washington and share ideas

55

to see if everybody is sort of moving in the same direction, or do

they have a piece of information nobody ever dreamed that they

have and is useful to questions like the ones that have been raised

this morning?

Ms. WANDER. There are meetings held. This is an industry that

loves meetings, because it promotes travel.

Mr. HORN. Right.

Ms. WANDER. Meetings—— Mr. HORN. But just to get from K Street to L Street maybe is

all we’re asking.

Ms. WANDER. We hold meetings all over the United States. In

fact, next month, beginning on October 20th, we will hold our marketing outlook forum, where all of the segments come together and

report in on what’s happening and what they see for the upcoming

year, and there are a number of events, not quite of that magnitude, but like those which we hold in cities that our members

sponsor. So we do stay on top of it, as well as on the telephone and

the computer and so forth.

Mr. HORN. Maybe you can tell our friends in the mother country

of the United Kingdom that they don’t have to worry about our

water supply, our small airports, and small health facilities, whatever they meant by that. Anyhow, that’s what’s on their Website.

I want to thank you all for coming, and I now want to thank the

staff. Staff director for Government Management, Information, and

Technology is Mr. George, who is standing against the wall so he

can take in the whole room; and the gentleman on my left, your

right, is the one that prepared this hearing, Matt Ryan, the senior

policy director for the subcommittee; Bonnie Heald is the next one

against the wall, communications director and professional staff

member; and Chip Ahlswede is the one that moves microphones

and makes sure the place works, so he’s the chief clerk; and then

Mr. Caceres, an intern; and Deborah Oppenheim is another intern

with us. And for Mrs. Morella’s committee, Technology Subcommittee of Science, we have Jeff Grove, the staff director; and

Ben Wu, professional staff member; and Joe Sullivan; staff assistant; and for Mr. Turner’s staff, the democratic staff, we have Trey

Henderson, minority counsel; Jean Gosa, staff assistant; and the

Technology Subcommittee Group would have also Michael Quear,

the professional staff member; Marty Ralston, the staff assistant;

and our court reporter this morning is Mark McCarty.

We thank you all for coming. You’ve all done a fine job, and this

hearing is now adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:47 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned, to

reconvene at the call of the Chair.]

Æ