Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee. I commend this subcommittee for holding a hearing on the critical issue of the Year 2000 problem, and I welcome this opportunity to discuss the potential impact of the Year 2000 problem on our nation's telecommunications networks.

Today, I would like to: (1) summarize what we know about the Year 2000 problem and how it might affect the nation's telecommunications networks; (2) list what we do not know; and, (3) describe what the FCC has done, and intends to do, to ensure that our nation's critical telecommunications infrastructure still functions at its full capacity and effectiveness on and after January 1, 2000.

We at the FCC are reminded daily of the fact that carriers, manufacturers, licensees, and users of telecommunications services -- many of whom are assembled here today -- have been working on the problem for many years and have invested substantial capital and manpower.

We are also reminded of the many technical and management-oriented challenges that lie ahead. First, the telecommunications network is a tremendously complicated thing and consists of millions of interconnected parts that need to be assessed. Second, there are literally thousands of companies to engage in the wireline telecommunications industry. Third, it will be long and hard work to fix the Year 2000 problem. There are no magic bullets that will automatically fix software affected by the Year 2000 problem, and it is unrealistic to expect that one will be invented between now and the year 2000. There will also be a profound management challenge to deploy technical solutions in a timely fashion without affecting the quality and level of communications service. Fourth, testing is (and will continue to be) a difficult part of the Year 2000 compliance effort. Fifth, we cannot get an extension on the January 1, 2000 deadline.

The subcommittee should know (and it is my understanding) that U.S. telecommunications carriers are very motivated to fix the problem. However, this is a very dynamic process. Simultaneously, the equipment manufacturers have to develop upgrades and patches for their products, the telecommunications carriers have to assess and prepare their systems for change and when technical "fixes" arrive they must install and test the equipment in their networks, and they also have to conduct interoperability tests with other carriers and with their customers.

I have been told that U.S. equipment manufacturers have already tested and fixed most of their products. Manufacturers report that most of their software and hardware products are already Year 2000-ready and have been made available to customers. They have targeted end-of-year 1998 or first quarter 1999 for general availability for all Year 2000-ready products.

The carriers report that the manufacturers' schedules will enable them to meet their compliance objectives. According to information submitted by the carriers to the FCC, the major local and long distance carriers have been working on the Year 2000 problem since 1995 or 1996 and generally plan by late 1998 or early 1999 to have completed internal testing of all systems that are critical to the passage of telecommunications traffic.

The carriers are also cooperating on interoperablility and end-to-end testing. The Telco Year 2000 Forum, which is comprised of eight large regional local exchange carriers, is performing integration testing on Year 2000-ready equipment throughout 1998. The Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS), which is an industry-funded organization whose mission is to advance new telecommunications technologies, will conduct inter-network interoperability testing in January and February 1999.

The real problem with the Year 2000 problem is what we do not know. For example, how serious are the cascade effects? Can we make sure that all the fixed systems work together properly? How long will it take to fix problems that occur in January, 2000?

I want to emphasize that the FCC takes very seriously its responsibility to work closely with the communications industry to ensure that the Y2K challenge is successfully met. The FCC has been aware of the Year 2000 problem for many years. In 1995, we started to examine and fix our internal computer systems. In early 1997, the FCC made a coordinated effort to find out what industry was doing about the problem.

In mid-March of this year, the Commission created its Year 2000 Working Group. In mid-April, at the request of FCC Chairman William Kennard, I agreed to oversee the FCC's Year 2000 efforts and represent the agency on the President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion, which was established on February 4, 1998. I also co-chair with Dennis Fischer of the General Services Administration (GSA) the Council's Working Group on Telecommunications, which met for the first time on April 30, 1998.

We have been encouraged because telecommunications companies have been providing more information on how the Year 2000 problem could affect their systems and services and what they are doing to ensure they are Year 2000 compliant. This is partly in response to pressure from customers, the FCC and the Securities and Exchange Commission, but primarily due to the fact that the companies are making good progress, and are more willing to share the good news.

In conclusion, I believe that it is critical that the U.S. telecommunications community take prompt, comprehensive and effective action to address the Year 2000 problem. Our national well-being is dependent upon the reliability of all the nation's telecommunications networks, and government and industry must work together to ensure that whatever disruptions occur do not lead to widespread outages and failures. To that end, the FCC is committed to taking whatever actions it can to facilitate information sharing and industry compliance efforts.

OPENING STATEMENT OF

FCC COMMISSIONER MICHAEL K. POWELL

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT

OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

INTRODUCTION

Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee. I commend this subcommittee for holding a hearing on the critical issue of the Year 2000 problem, and I welcome this opportunity to discuss the potential impact of the Year 2000 problem on our nation's telecommunications networks.

In the seven months that I have been at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), I have been struck by the fact that almost every sector of our economy and every part of our government depends upon our telecommunications system. Many of the critical programs that the Ways and Means Committee oversees, such as Social Security and Medicare, also depend upon this ubiquitous communications infrastructure and consequently could be seriously affected if the Year 2000 problem interrupts telephone and data networking services.

Today, I would like to: (1) summarize what we know about the Year 2000 problem and how it might affect the nation's telecommunications networks; (2) list what we do not know; and, (3) describe what the FCC has done, and intends to do, to ensure that our nation's critical telecommunications infrastructure still functions at its full capacity and effectiveness on and after January 1, 2000.

My comments today will focus primarily on wireline telecommunications services. However, it is important to note that the FCC is engaged in outreach and assessment initiatives in each of the different subsectors of the communications industry, including terrestrial wireless, radio and television broadcast, cable television, international telecommunications and satellites. Attached to my testimony is an appendix summarizing how each of these different industries may be affected by the Year 2000 problem and what industry and the FCC are doing to address these problems.

WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE YEAR 2000 PROBLEM

The FCC has been monitoring the telecommunications industry's efforts to meet the Year 2000 problem for the past several years, and has developed an understanding of the scope of problem and how it may affect the nation's telecommunications networks. Let me elaborate briefly on some of our observations.

The Year 2000 problem is simple to understand. The cause of the Year 2000 problem is very simple. It is caused by the fact that many computer programs use only two digits to store the year (e.g., the program translates "67" to mean "1967"). At the turn of the century when the date changes from 1999 to 2000, there are concerns that these systems will fail to recognize the millennial change, thereby erroneously assuming "00" to be "1900," not "2000."

The Year 2000 problem has complicated consequences. While the cause is simple, because so many computer and communications systems are interlinked and interdependent, the consequences could be complex, unpredictable, and in some cases very serious. The recent AT&T frame-relay network outage and the failure of PanAmSat's Galaxy IV satellite highlighted how many different systems can be affected by the failure of a single piece of hardware. Fortunately, telecommunications networks are designed to be fault-tolerant and there is no reason to believe that one or two Y2K-related failures could lead to a chain reaction that could disable large parts of the nation's telecommunications networks.

The Year 2000 problem does not affect every computer. After reading some articles on the Year 2000 problem, it would be understandable that one would conclude that every computer chip, every software program, and every computer had a Year 2000 problem. That is not the case. Most devices do not care what time it is and thus are not affected.

Most Year 2000 glitches will be annoying, not disastrous. For those systems that have a Year 2000 problem, it will often be the case that the problem will not disrupt the whole system, it simply will make some features or functions, which are not "mission-critical," difficult or impossible to use.

WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT FIXING THE YEAR 2000 PROBLEM

As part of the FCC's outreach and assessment initiatives, the Commission's Bureaus and offices have been communicating with the various industry players who are individually responsible for ensuring that their networks and systems are Year 2000 compliant. We are reminded daily of the fact that carriers, manufacturers, licensees, and users of telecommunications services -- many of whom are assembled here today -- have been working on the problem for many years and have invested substantial capital and manpower.

We are also reminded of the many technical and management-oriented challenges that lie ahead. First, the telecommunications network is a tremendously complicated thing and consists of millions of interconnected parts. When you make a phone call from here to New York, every element along the established circuit has to work: the telephone itself, the Private Branch Exchange (i.e., switchboard) in your building, the central office switch, the computers that connect your call to its destination, the long-distance trunk lines, as well as the central switch and the telephone on the other end. If any one of those components is affected by the Year 2000 problem, your call might be disrupted.

Second, there are literally thousands of companies to engage in the wireline telecommunications industry. Simply put, there are the major telecommunications carriers like the Bell Operating Companies, GTE, AT&T, MCI and Sprint. But there are also 1,400 small to mid-size telephone companies that serve many rural, insular and underserved parts of the country as well as the U.S. territories and possessions. Telecommunications carriers alone, however, cannot solve the whole problem. For example, manufacturers of central office switches and other customer premises equipment are vital participants in the collective Year 2000 effort. And, finally, we cannot forget about the telecommunications users who have to take action to ensure that their telecommunications equipment -- their telephones, their voice mail systems, their Private Branch Exchanges (PBXs), their local area computer networks -- are all Year 2000 compliant. It will not do much good if all the telephone companies all fix their networks, but then major corporations and governmental organizations cannot call out of their buildings because their internal systems do not work.

Third, it will be long and hard work to fix the Year 2000 problem. There are no magic bullets that will automatically fix software affected by the Year 2000 problem, and it is unrealistic to expect that one will be invented between now and the year 2000. There will also be a profound management challenge to deploy technical solutions in a timely fashion without affecting the quality and level of communications service.

Fourth, testing is (and will continue to be) the hardest part. Most telecommunications companies estimate that testing comprises 50 to 70 percent or more of their Year 2000 efforts. And, testing often uncovers more problems that need to be fixed.

Fifth, we cannot get an extension on this deadline. Time is of the essence with only 564 days left till January 1, 2000.

WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY Y2K EFFORTS

In the last few weeks, public attention has started to focus on the Year 2000 problem. There have been illustrative examples of non-Year 2000 related network failures, such as the AT&T data network incident and the Galaxy IV satellite incident, that have been prominently featured in the general media. These events have hastened public concern about the telecommunications industry's readiness and capacity to implement Year 2000 compliance remedies. Unfortunately, we hear more Year 2000 horror stories than Year 2000 success stories. Horror stories get repeated and reprinted, success stories get filed away and forgotten.

The subcommittee should know (and it is my understanding) that U.S. telecommunications carriers are very motivated to fix the problem. However, this is a dynamic process. Simultaneously, the equipment manufacturers have to develop upgrades and patches for their products, telecommunications carriers have to assess and prepare their systems for change and when technical "fixes" arrive they must install and test the equipment in their networks, and they also have to conduct interoperability tests with other carriers and with their customers.

I have been told that U.S. equipment manufacturers have already tested and fixed most of their products. The major manufacturers have had extensive Year 2000 programs in place for some time, and have been working closely with both local and long distance carriers to develop strategies for Year 2000 readiness. Manufacturers report that most of their software and hardware products are already Year 2000-ready and have been made available to customers. They have targeted end-of-year 1998 or first quarter 1999 for general availability for all Year 2000-ready products.

The carriers report that the manufacturers' schedules will enable them to meet their compliance objectives. According to information submitted by the carriers to the FCC, the major local and long distance carriers have been working on the Year 2000 problem since 1995 or 1996 and generally plan by late 1998 or early 1999 to have completed internal testing of all systems that are critical to the passage of telecommunications traffic.

The carriers are also cooperating on interoperablility and end-to-end testing. The Telco Year 2000 Forum, which is comprised of eight large regional local exchange carriers, is performing integration testing on Year 2000-ready equipment throughout 1998. The Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS), which is an industry-funded organization whose mission is to advance new telecommunications technologies, will conduct inter-network interoperability testing in January and February 1999. According to ATIS, the interoperability tests should encompass network configurations that serve over 90 percent of the country. This type of cooperative industry testing is very important because it is nearly impossible to conduct interoperability and end-to-end tests on the public-switched telephone network. The nation's phone network has to be up and running 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and it involves millions of different elements. The telephone companies cannot disconnect their network and turn the clock ahead to the year 2000 to do a test.

Of course, there are areas of concern to the FCC. For example, although the largest 20 phone companies provide 98% of U.S. phone lines, there are over 1,400 telephone companies, and each one needs to address the Year 2000 problem. The small to mid-size telecommunications carriers have further to go, and the FCC is working with the various trade associations to ensure that these smaller carriers also meet the challenge.

There is also the international dimension to the Year 2000 problem. The United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom are ahead of the rest of the world, but the FCC is concerned that some international telecommunications carriers, especially those in developing countries, are just realizing the seriousness of the problem and have not yet taken the necessary steps to prevent system failures. Because global telecommunications rely upon seamless interconnection of networks, the international dimensions of the Year 2000 problem are especially significant.

On the international front, the FCC is taking an active role in the International Telecommunication Union's ("ITU") Year 2000 Task Force to promote international awareness and provide guidance on Year 2000 readiness. The ITU Year 2000 Task Force is establishing "Y2000 Ambassadors" who will serve as regional coordinators for assistance on Year 2000 problems and activities, and the FCC will assist in the region of the Americas.

WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT'S ROLE

The FCC's role is important, but our power to force carriers, manufacturers, and telecommunications users address the Year 2000 problem is limited. Consequently, we are working to promote an effective public-private partnership.

We believe that the FCC can play an important role by encouraging companies to share information with each other and with their customers. This will increase the sharing of solutions, avoid duplicative testing, help companies spot undetected problems, and reduce customer uncertainty and anxiety. Fortunately, the World Wide Web provides a very powerful tool for information sharing. We have discovered over 2000 Year 2000 Web sites (including the FCC's own Web site at <http://www.fcc.gov/year2000/>, which has received over 10,000 hits to date).

There may also be a significant role to be played by the Administration and Congress with regard to the legal liability issue which has slowed the information flow. Some companies have been reluctant to divulge information due to concerns about liability. Several companies and organizations have developed very useful Web sites and databases, which are not available to the general public because of liability concerns. In addition, antitrust concerns have discouraged some cooperative efforts. I understand that the Justice Department recently released a letter designed to allay antitrust concerns, but uncertainty still exists.

WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW YET

The real problem with the Year 2000 problem is what we do not know.

How serious are the cascade effects? At this point, we just do not know all the ways that the failure of one piece of the network could trigger failures elsewhere in the system.

Can we make sure that all the fixed systems work together properly? It is essential that companies do interoperability testing to make sure that their systems will function on January 1, 2000. But unfortunately, such tests cannot be done until all the individual pieces of the system are fixed.

How long will it take to fix problems that occur in January 2000? If too many problems are overlooked or ignored, there just will not be enough technicians and equipment to fix everything. Unless companies are willing to be off-line for months, they cannot wait until the Year 2000 to fix their problem.

WHAT THE FCC HAS DONE

The FCC has been aware of the Year 2000 problem for many years. In 1995, we started to examine and fix our internal computer systems. In early 1997, the FCC made a coordinated effort to find out what industry was doing about the problem. At that time the responses were: (1) "It is not that serious. . ."; (2) "We are taking care of it. . ."; and, (3) "There not much the FCC can or should do. . ." Prior to 1997, the FCC's individual Bureaus and offices were following the issue.

By late 1997, we were starting to hear increased concern as more companies did more tests and discovered just how pervasive the problem is and realized that they could be vulnerable if their partners, suppliers, and customers were adversely affected by the Year 2000 problem. Earlier this year, many telecommunications users came to the FCC seeking more information on the seriousness of the problem and what the telecommunications companies were doing about it. We determined we could play a valuable role by promoting information dissemination.

In mid-March, the Commission created its Year 2000 Working Group. In mid-April, at the request of FCC Chairman William Kennard, I agreed to oversee the FCC's Year 2000 efforts and represent the agency on the President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion, which was established on February 4, 1998. I also co-chair with Dennis Fischer of the General Services Administration (GSA) the Council's Working Group on Telecommunications, which met for the first time on April 30, 1998.

We have been encouraged because telecommunications companies have been providing more information on how the Year 2000 problem could affect their systems and services and what they are doing to ensure they are Year 2000 compliant. This is partly in response to pressure from customers, the FCC and the Securities and Exchange Commission, but primarily due to the fact that the companies are making good progress, and are more willing to share the good news.

WHAT THE FCC INTENDS TO DO

I want to emphasize that the FCC takes very seriously its responsibility to work closely with the communications industry to ensure that the Y2K challenge is successfully met. As part of the Commission's sector outreach initiative, the FCC is engaged in activities divided into three distinct but interrelated operational modes: (1) outreach and advocacy; (2) monitoring and assessment; and (3) regulatory actions and contingency planning.

The FCC's first operational mode is to encourage private sector compliance efforts and to foster information sharing. Accordingly, we will continue efforts to ensure all companies understand the seriousness of the problem. We have set up a Web site and sent over 200 letters to major companies and organizations in all sectors of the telecommunications industry. Chairman Kennard, myself, the other commissioners, and FCC staff are all mentioning this problem in speeches and in meetings with leaders in the telecommunications industry.

Our second mode is to monitor industry Year 2000 compliance efforts and to assess the pace and extent of the implementation of remedial actions. In June alone, we organized five roundtables with representatives of different sectors of the telecommunications industry to facilitate information sharing and see how the FCC can assist industry efforts to tackle the Year 2000 problem. The Commission is asking the National Reliability and Interoperability Council, a private-sector committee that advises the FCC on technical issues, to take steps to foster industry cooperation on Y2K compliance testing and other related problems.

Finally, if we learn in coming months that some companies are not making enough progress in addressing the Year 2000 problem, we may decide to use our regulatory authority to gather additional information or to accelerate Year 2000 compliance efforts. We have done a thorough review of how we might use our regulatory authority to ensure that companies in all sectors of the telecommunications industry are adequately addressing the Y2K problem and are fully informing their customers about their efforts. Of course, we view regulation as a last resort.

Because we know that not every problem will be fixed and because we cannot anticipate all the consequences of Murphy's Law, we intend to encourage contingency planning by service providers and customers.

CONCLUSION

Without a doubt, it is critical that the U.S. telecommunications community take prompt, comprehensive and effective action to address the Year 2000 problem. Our national well-being is dependent upon the reliability of all the nation's telecommunications networks, and government and industry must work together to ensure that whatever disruptions occur do not lead to widespread outages and failures. To that end, the FCC is committed to taking whatever actions it can to facilitate information sharing and industry compliance efforts.

Once again, I commend the committee for holding this hearing and focusing attention on this critical issue. I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Common Carrier Bureau

Biggest concerns:

• Upgrading network switches (although manufacturers are on schedule to provide fixes).

• Upgrading Customer Premises Equipment (CPE), voice mail systems, Private Branch Exchanges (PBXs), ensuring interoperability with the network.

• Ensuring telephone companies (telcos) cooperate fully with major customers and each other to facilitate Year 2000 interoperability testing.

• Ensuring small telcos have the resources and expertise needed to fix the problem.

• Dealing with billing and other internal systems.

What the FCC is doing:

• Meeting with large and small telcos, telephone trade associations, switch manufacturers, financial interests (banks and clearing houses), and other major users.

• Requesting information from telcos, equipment manufacturers, trade associations, and Bellcore, and encouraging the sharing of Year 2000 information among industry participants.

• Planning interindustry roundtables to facilitate the sharing of solutions to Year 2000 problems and identify barriers to solving Year 2000 problems. Telcos, equipment manufacturers, and users have been invited to participate.

• Assessing possible regulatory actions to facilitate Year 2000 readiness, including requiring detailed information on Year 2000 compliance, if necessary.

• Sharing information with other Federal agencies, and improving the FCC Year 2000 website with updated information and links to other Year 2000 websites.

• Analyzing responses to detailed information requests sent to all local exchange carriers and interexchange carriers, as well as to some smaller carriers and to the major telephone equipment manufacturers, on their Year 2000 efforts. Responses have begun arriving. As of June 11, 1998, nineteen companies had filed responses. These efforts will help develop a clearer picture of the Year 2000-readiness of the telecom sector.

• Meeting with Year 2000 project managers from manufacturers and telcos to impart the Commission's concern and to obtain additional information about their Year 2000 programs.

• Encouraging companies and industry trade associations to make more information about their Year 2000 efforts available to the public through their websites.

• Planning an interindustry roundtable forum for late-June 1998 to facilitate dialogue among manufacturers, carriers and major users on Year 2000 issues.

• Continuing outreach efforts to ensure that all companies understand seriousness of the problem, as well as monitoring to obtain as much information as possible.

• Assessing regulatory actions that could be taken, if necessary, to gather additional information and/or accelerate Year 2000 compliance efforts.

What industry is doing:

• Major telephone companies have been devoting significant resources to ensuring that primary telecommunications networks continue to function on and after January 1, 2000.

• Eight regional telcos have formed the Telco Year 2000 Forum to share information and facilatate intranetwork testing of remediated systems.

• The Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS), funded by exchange and interexchange carriers, is undertaking the development of laboratory tests (now scheduled for January-February 1999) of inter-network interoperability of remediated systems.

• Bellcore is providing expertise, leadership, testing facilities, and technical standards for Year 2000 compliance.

• U.S. Telephone Association sent out an advisory to its members in mid-1997.

Cable Services Bureau

Biggest concerns:

• Power system failures could disrupt cable service, including the cable system's emergency alerting system messages.

• Billing systems could generate faulty data.

• Satellite telecommunications links could be disabled.

What the FCC is doing:

• Sent inquiries to major cable television companies, cable equipment manufacturers and cable trade associations regarding Y2K.

• Posted questions on the internet regarding Year 2000 problems in cable systems to more than 1500 cable engineers and technicians.

• Conferred with CableLabs, the research arm of a consortium of cable companies, which has established an industry task force to address Y2K issues. Will continue this dialogue.

• Trained Cable Services Bureau telephone contact representatives to answer questions from the public and operators regarding Y2K problems and compliance.

• Continued dialogue with cable operators and equipment manufacturers, including informal sessions with multiple system operators (MSOs).

• Scheduled to hold an open forum for the public and the cable industry.

What industry is doing:

• CableLabs has formed a Year 2000 working group that consists of the major cable multiple system operators. These MSOs encompass a significant number of cable subscribers and a large majority of the nation's cable systems. Cable operators who are not members of the Year 2000 Working Group will still benefit from the group's efforts because CableLabs is conducting a nationwide assessment and will share information with all cable operators.

• To our knowledge, the CableLabs group intends to meet every two months to monitor the progress of the industry and to provide the industry with CableLabs' research. In addition, CableLabs will monitor the equipment of cable suppliers to determine Y2K compliance. In September, 1998 in Denver, CableLabs plans to hold a cable vendors conference at which cable equipment suppliers, cable billing systems vendors, and vendors of television commercial insertion equipment are invited to attend and confer on their progress in achieving Y2K compliance.

Mass Media Bureau

Biggest concerns:

• Emergency Alert System may fail just when it is needed most.

• Lack of broadcast news may result in misinformation and mass panic.

• Old transmitters and other systems may be hard to test or fix.

What the FCC is doing:

• Speaking out on Year 2000 issues at National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) convention and other forums.

• Writing to broadcasters and trade associations.

• Meeting with broadcasters and equipment manufacturers.

What industry is doing:

• NAB has created a Web site on Year 2000 issues and assigned a Senior Vice President to work on the issue.

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

Biggest concerns:

• Radios for police, fire, and other emergency services could fail due to Year 2000 problems. Many of these systems are quite old and manufacturers may not be able to provide fixes for all of them.

• Wireless systems could fail, just when they might be needed as backup to wireline telephones.

What the FCC is doing:

• Writing the major wireless companies, equipment manufacturers, and trade associations.

• Meeting with representatives of different part of the wireless industry to assess their efforts.

• Planning future forums on the Year 2000 problem and the wireless industry. The FCC has already held three of these forums.

• Considering options to condition licenses, renewals, and auctions on Year 2000 compliance.

What industry is doing:

• The public response of the wireless industry to the Year 2000 problem has been uneven.

• Major manufacturers and large companies have tested almost all of their products and intend to have fixes available by the end of the year.

• Many users of wireless devices, most notably police and fire departments, are just starting to assess their Year 2000 problems.

International Bureau

Biggest concerns:

• Whether foreign telecommunications companies, especially large segments of the developing world, will be able to provide service on January 1, 2000. This could have a huge impact on international trade, foreign investment, the global economy, and even national security.

• Whether satellite links are Year 2000 compliant.

• In many foreign countries, particularly in Asia and Africa, telecommunications companies are only now becoming aware of the Year 2000 problem, and they lack the resources to fully address it.

What the FCC is doing:

• Writing to international telecommunications companies and satellite and HF service providers.

• Publishing letters in industry publications and ITU publications.

• Working with the International Telecommunications Union to educate and motivate foreign telephone companies.

• Planning roundtable discussions to raise awareness seek solutions, and informally survey progress of industry's efforts to ensure that industry is doing all it can to avoid any disruptions in service. A roundtable with international telecommunications carriers will occur June 29. A roundtable with the satellite industry will be July 14.

• Raising issues with foreign delegates, in tandem with these roundtables, in the context of the FCC's Visitor's Program and Foreign Regulator Workshop.

• Speaking out about the Year 2000 problem at international telecommunications meetings.

• Increasingly international awareness through the ITU Year 2000 Task Force and providing direction on Year 2000 readiness by hosting workshops. FCC is participating in these.

What industry is doing:

• Telecommunications companies are working hard to fix Year 2000 problems.

• Satellite companies have set up "war rooms" to deal with the Year 2000 problems.

• Every U.S. telecommunications company has established an office for Year 2000 compliance.

• Several countries, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia have high-profile efforts under way to tackle the Year 2000 bug, and their telecommunications companies (e.g., British Telecom) are working with foreign partners on the problem.

Compliance and Information Bureau

Biggest concerns:

• Ensuring that internal database systems and equipment used by the Bureau for enforcement purposes is Year 2000 compliant.

• Preparing the National Call Center to collect data and respond to inquiries relating to Year 2000.

What we're doing:

• Checking CIB database software and computers used in the enforcement program, such as mobile and fixed direction finding systems, Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers and the software used to operate these systems.

• Preparing to collect data regarding calls received by the National Call Center and to provide information to the Call Center personnel from other Bureaus and Offices to use in responding to incoming Year 2000 calls.

Office of Engineering and Technology

Biggest concerns:

• Telecommunications equipment testing labs may close down or generate faulty data due to Year 2000 problems

What the FCC is doing:

• Sending letters to testing labs.

• Directing the Network Reliability and Interoperability Council to focus on Year 2000 issues and facilitate Year 2000 testing telecommunications networks.

• Coordinating construction of the FCC's new Year 2000 Web site.

Office of the General Counsel

What the FCC is doing:

• Reaching out to the Communications Bar to increase their awareness of Year 2000 issues and urge them to press telcos to increase their efforts to address the problem.

Office of Plans and Policy

What the FCC is doing:

• Coordinating the FCC's efforts to work with industry on Year 2000 issues.

• Examining whether the Internet will be affected by Year 2000 problems.

• Contacting Internet organizations and Internet equipment vendors.

Office of Inspector General

Biggest Concern:

• The possibility that the Commission's mission-critical systems will not be Year 2000 compliant.

What the FCC is Doing:

• Participating on a Year 2000 task force addressing the Commission's mission-critical information systems and Information Technology infrastructure.

• Participating on a Year 2000 task force monitoring the telecommunications industry.

• Monitoring the activities of other Inspectors General, the Office of Management and Budget, and the General Accounting Office.