deadline to debug

It will be winter in Cambridge, but for passengers aboard the 757 jet chartered by Harvard's Museum of Natural History, the turn of the millennium will come in bright sunshine and it will come twice.

For $44,950, Harvard alumni can go on a transcontinental tour that will take them across the international dateline twice on a January 1, 2000, allowing them a second chance to celebrate the dawn of Y2K. The trip is sold out and promises to exhilarate.

In snowy Cambridge, however, the millennium--in popular parlance, if not technically accurate--may bring more headaches than thrills. The University, tied up in endless wiring and technology, faces a potentially disastrous start to the next millennium, as the so-called Y2K bug threatens the gadgets and infrastructure that keep the University running.

The glitch stems from computer chips and programs that take into account only the last two digits of the year in keeping track of the date. As a result, they recognize the year 2000 as 1900, and the difference could lead to severe problems for Harvard.

The scope of the disaster is potentially endless. Important machinery in University Health Services could shut down, registering that they had never been serviced. Payroll computers could malfunction, leaving Harvard's employees without their paychecks. Keycard locks on dormitories could electronically freeze. Temperature-controlled experiments could be disrupted and priceless specimens and research destroyed.

The University has responded by commissioning a team of Harvard computer programmers that has been working for months to avert disaster, reprogramming, testing and planning for the Y2K bug.

As a result, the most important computer systems at the University appear to be protected.

But with only months remaining until New Year's Day 2000, Harvard can only plan for the calamities other aspects of the problem could bring.

HIGH HURDLES

The most obvious problem with the Y2K glitch, it originally seemed, was with the important computerized records of the University--the "core financials," as administrators term them.

Those include budgets and human resource records. Money, after all, is key.

But according to Harvard Vice President for Finance Elizabeth C. "Beppie" Huidekoper, other concerns--particularly human safety--took precedence.

The Y2K bug posed myriad safety problems. For example, the computers used by the Harvard University Police Department were vulnerable to the glitch, as was the keycard system that is supposed to let Harvard students into their dorms and keep intruders out.

Animals in scientific laboratories were jeopardized. Hazardous materials that need to be deep-frozen looked to pose a safety threat if their cooling systems shut off.

The problem turned out to be so disparate, because of the independence of Harvard's separate schools, that Huidekoper likens it to "putting your arms around an octopus."

"In this decentralized environment, it's really hard," she says.

To these worries, the University had at least 14 billion more to add.

The Harvard Management Company (HMC), which invests the University's endowment, has been testing rigorously to make sure the records of their investments will not be lost as a result of the computer glitch.

And while the bulk of endowment seems to be protected, HMC President Jack R. Meyer says there could be problems with HMC investments in developing markets like India and Colombia, where Y2K preparation has not been sufficient.

"We're a little concerned in some less developed markets that things might not be tested," Meyer says.

The situation could complicate HMC's investments in those markets, making it difficult to trade there, but Meyer adds that the situation is not grave enough for HMC to sell those securities.

BAND-AIDS FOR THE MILLENNIUM

For more than a year, Harvard has been trying to respond to the Y2K bug, setting up a team of experts to address the problem.

The core financials and the systems that looked to threaten human safety have, for the most part, been reprogrammed to be able to deal with the date change. And to test the effect of these corrective measures, the University has turned the clock forward to make sure its important machinery doesn't shut down.

So far, officials say, testing has been successful.

"I'm pretty comfortable with where we are," says Provost Harvey V. Fineberg '67.

The multitude of buildings and schools under the auspices of Harvard University makes it nearly impossible to develop one overarching contingency plan. Instead, representatives within each faculty have begun to examine the situation at their respective schools and come up with plans for dealing with the problem.

Year 2000 Project Coordinators Liz Eagan and Scott Bradner oversee the efforts across the University, and they pass along the Y2K plans and reports to Harvard's administrative deans and vice presidents--the "project sponsors"--for review.

"They've been briefed right along on progress and concerns, and are happy to hear the latest update," Eagan says.

She says the deans and vice presidents should review drafts of the Y2K plans by July.

Eagan and Bradner are expecting to meet with the project sponsors again in September to find out if the plans are "appropriately detailed, complete and have addressed the areas most important to their environment."

In addition, the University's extensive bookkeeping overhaul, known as Project ADAPT, has made the Y2K conversion easier in some respects, since its new methods of keeping track of Harvard's books already took the millennium into account.

As a result, Huidekoper estimates, the University is about 85 percent ready for the year 2000 today and will be 95 percent prepared by September.

She adds, however, that some parts of the University are well ahead of others, and that even in September, some branches will only be 80 percent up to speed.

"YOU CAN'T TEST EVERYTHING"

While the problems posed by, for example, outdated software in the payroll office were predictable enough and could be dealt with, the University is helpless to address any number of remaining problems and can at best come up with plans for dealing with them once they hit.

Huidekoper says the great surprise of the Y2K glitch for Harvard was that its effect on important University functions went well beyond its basic computer software. Computer chips that are not programmed for the millennium control many more functions than officials expected.

"It's less about core systems than about sprinkler systems," Huidekoper says.

Officials are also worried about Y2K problems outside the University, problems that it is powerless to control.

For example, if the date change hits local power companies, Harvard--or even the entire Northeast--could find itself blacked out.

Harvard failed to buy back-up generators early on and, as a result, may well find itself totally in the dark on New Year's Day.

And of course, electricity is more than a luxury for some important areas of the University. A power outage could, for example, destroy important scientific research in Harvard labs.

The only way the University can deal with the problem of outside suppliers is to come up with contingency plans.

Huidekoper says the University will set up a "hotline," which people can call for help with their millennium disasters.

For scientists whose refrigerators break down, she says, "We'll have a SWAT team of people with dry ice."

Mostly, Y2K planners are trying to take advantage of emergency plans that the individual schools have already developed.

"In many areas, as you can imagine, there are already structures in place for emergency response and preparation, so we are recommending that the Y2K coordinators use these as the foundation for their efforts," Eagan says.

Even within the realm of what Harvard could fix, if it had the time, much will escape detection.

Even though the biggest areas of concern have been handled for the most part, smaller areas--scientific labs and desktop computers in particular--remain vulnerable.

Dean R. Gallant, Y2K coordinator for laboratories and research centers, says some researchers have expressed concern over the possibility of corrupted equipment or databases, as well as jeopardized lab subjects.

"But we're confident that animal colonies are in pretty good shape," he says. "They can drift for awhile without power because the building's well-insulated, and we can augment natural airflow with open windows, or heat with steam."

He adds that it is still a bit early in the planning to have all the details ironed out. Researchers will be addressing site-specific lab contingencies more closely over the summer.

Fineberg also says there may be more potential for Y2K-related emergencies in the singular environments of the research centers than in larger, more cohesive areas of the University.

"There is more uncertainty about every last individual laboratory and software program," Fineberg says, adding that the costs of the Y2K bug on even the smaller areas could be devastating.

"If it's the last reagent of its kind on earth, you can't afford to lose it," Fineberg says.

But, as Huidekoper says, "You can't test everything."