Year 2000 Quarterly Congressional Update - September 10, 1998

TESTIMONY OF NORMAN E. D'AMOURS

CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION

ON

THE YEAR 2000 CHALLENGE


BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 17, 1998


 

SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY

Both the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) and credit unions are making good progress toward becoming Y2K compliant; detailed answers to each of the questions posed by the Committee are included in the written statement which follows.

NCUA's Internal Remediation Efforts

NCUA's plan for testing, repairing and verifying our internal systems is on or ahead of schedule. Six of NCUA's seven mission-critical systems are fully Y2K compliant. Repairs to the remaining system will be completed by September 30, three months earlier than the target date.

We have been conducting tests on individual parts of our mission critical systems since December, 1997, and began end-user tests of the entire systems in June, 1998. End-user tests conducted in August ran cleanly, with no errors. KPMG Peat Marwick has reviewed our Y2K verification testing results and recommended providing further documentation of the tests we conducted. KPMG is scheduled to review the revised documentation next week.

Oversight of Y2K Efforts of Credit Unions and Service Providers

In general, credit unions' Y2K conversion efforts are progressing well. For the quarter ending June 30, only 29 federally-insured credit unions' Y2K efforts were unsatisfactory. 895 needed to improve, while the vast majority -- 10,525 -- were deemed to be making satisfactory progress.

NCUA's oversight efforts include quarterly data collection and on site supervisory contacts. Each quarter, each federally insured credit union must submit a progress report on their remediation efforts. NCUA's regional offices will validate the quarterly Y2K data provided by a three percent sample of federally insured credit unions. Each credit union will also have at least one on site contact which focuses on Y2K readiness in both 1998 and 1999. In addition, we have contracted for a review of the Y2K efforts of 20 to 30 large and complex credit unions.

NCUA has taken a total of 122 supervisory actions against 116 federally insured credit unions for Y2K reasons. Of the 52 actions outstanding, 27 are letters from Regional Directors, while 25 are more serious Letters of Understanding or Memos of Understanding. Of course, still more serious sanctions would apply if the credit union continued to ignore our directives. The next major milestone date is September 30, 1998, when renovation of mission critical systems should be substantially complete.

NCUA has also increased oversight of credit union service providers after receiving authority to examine vendors in March of this year. Upon receiving this authority, we arranged reviews of 29 service providers in addition to the ten service providers we had earlier reviewed. When these reviews are completed, we will have covered 80% of credit unions which use outside service providers, representing 74% of the total assets of all federally insured credit unions.

Y2K Readiness of Critical Third Parties

NCUA has advised credit unions of the need to consider the Y2K readiness of local utility and telecommunication providers in order to ensure uninterrupted service to members. The recently introduced "Good Samaritan" Y2K liability limitation legislation may encourage utilities and telecommunications providers to disclose their progress with Y2K remediations. Increased disclosure will allow credit unions to develop more realistic business resumption plans and educate their members about the credit union's response to the potential Y2K threat from third parties.

Y2K Risk to Insurance Fund and Contingency Planning

NCUA believes the major potential systemic Y2K risk to the financial services industry relates to liquidity risks. Thus, we continue to analyze and position the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund's expected cash flows to ensure that ample liquidity will be available. A possible source of liquidity for credit unions will be NCUA's Central Liquidity Facility (CLF). Although Congress has chosen to limit the CLF's borrowing authority, considering the as yet unknown liquidity demands driven by the Y2K situation, Congress should consider removing the limit.

NCUA is also acting to reduce the liquidity risk to individual credit unions. Recently, the agency worked with leadership of the credit union movement to provide credit unions with models for informing members of Y2K progress and establishing liquidity plans. NCUA's examiners also discuss liquidity planning during each supervisory contact.

In conclusion, NCUA appreciates the Committee's attention to this important issue, and remains committed to ensuring a successful transition to the new millenium.

STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN NORMAN E. D'AMOURS

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION

SEPTEMBER 17, 1998

Good morning, Chairman Leach, Congressman LaFalce and members of the Committee. I appreciate this opportunity to update you on NCUA's Y2K efforts, both within the agency and in our oversight of federally insured credit unions. I am happy to report that the agency and credit unions are making good progress toward becoming Y2K compliant; detailed answers to each of the questions posed in your invitation letter are below. Our quarterly report to the House and Senate Banking Committee on our Y2K efforts, which is attached, contains further information.

  1. NCUA's Internal Remediation and Testing Programs

NCUA's plan for testing, repairing and verifying our internal systems is on or ahead of schedule. Six of NCUA's seven mission-critical systems are fully Y2K compliant. The system that is not Y2K compliant -- our Asset Management and Liquidation Center (AMAC) system for tracking accounts in liquidated credit unions -- was originally scheduled for replacement by December 31, 1998. When we received no responses to our Request For Proposal for replacement, we chose to repair AMAC's current system, and testing of these repairs is underway. The repairs will be completed by September 30, three months earlier than the target replacement date.

NCUA's Office of Technology and Information Services (OTIS) has been conducting tests on individual parts of our mission critical systems since December, 1997, and began end-user tests of the entire systems in June, 1998. The June tests revealed several minor problems, which have now been corrected. Further end-user tests in August ran cleanly, with no errors. As Y2K readiness is an continuing and iterative process, OTIS will maintain an ongoing testing capability to test changes to systems and new systems which are being developed.

This summer, we contracted with KPMG Peat Marwick to review our internal Y2K verification testing results and documentation process. KPMG's recommendations centered around providing further documentation of the tests we conducted. KPMG is scheduled to return next week to review the revised documentation.

NCUA also utilizes several systems owned and operated by other agencies. For example, our Office of Human Resources is a customer of the General Services Administration (GSA) for human resources support. GSA is building a new human resources system and has scheduled NCUA for conversion in June, 1999. Our contingency plan, should the new system not be ready as scheduled, is to remain on the old system, which GSA is in the process of making Y2K compliant. Similarly, our Chief Financial Officer uses several programs from the Treasury Department, and we are working with them to assure that these systems are Y2K compliant.

  1. NCUA's Oversight of Credit Unions' Conversion Process

Credit Unions

In general, credit unions' Y2K conversion efforts are progressing well. For the quarter ending June 30, only 29 -- one-quarter of one percent of -- federally-insured credit unions' Y2K efforts were unsatisfactory. 895 credit unions -- 7.8% of federally-insured credit unions -- needed to improve, while the vast majority -- 10,525 or 91.9% of federally-insured credit unions - were deemed to be making satisfactory progress.

Our oversight efforts continue to identify those federally insured credit unions needing additional supervisory attention. A keystone of NCUA's oversight efforts is our quarterly data collection. Every quarter, each federally insured credit union must submit a progress report on their remediation efforts. The credit union's senior management certifies the accuracy of the information, providing continued focus on the issue at the highest levels within the credit union. In addition to the quarterly reports, each credit union will have at least one on site contact which focuses on Y2K readiness in both 1998 and 1999. We have also contracted with PricewaterhouseCoopers (formerly Coopers and Lybrand) for a review of the Y2K efforts of 20 to 30 large and complex credit unions. These reviews should be completed by the end of the year.

NCUA has taken a total of 122 supervisory actions against 116 federally insured credit unions for Y2K reasons. Most of these -70 - have since been removed. Of the 52 actions outstanding, 27 are letters from Regional Directors, while 25 are more serious Letters of Understanding or Memos of Understanding. Regional Director letters lay the groundwork for the more serious actions; if these letters are not heeded, a Letter or Memo of Understanding is put in place. Of course, still more serious sanctions would apply if the credit union continued to ignore our directives.

NCUA's timeline for credit unions' Y2K remediation efforts, adopted by the NCUA Board in January, 1998, establishes the milestone date at which the Agency must consider taking some type of administrative action. If there are mitigating circumstances, regional directors may request a formal waiver of the timeline. However, the Agency also built flexibility into the timeline for earlier intervention. Regional directors may take administrative action with a credit union that is not showing sufficient progress well before the timeline dates. The next major milestone date will be September 30, 1998, when renovation of mission critical systems should be substantially complete; credit unions whose renovations are not substantially complete could face administrative actions. Other upcoming deadlines include substantial completion of testing of mission critical systems by December 31, 1998, completion of validation and testing by June 30, 1999, and substantial implementation of mission critical systems by July 31, 1999.

Service Providers

Enactment of the "Examination Parity and Year 2000 Readiness for Financial Institutions Act, " P.L. 105-164, in March of this year gave NCUA authority to examine credit union service providers. We appreciate the Committee's work on this issue and have made use of this authority. Prior to the enactment of P.L. 105-164, we had negotiated agreements with only 10 of the largest vendors to assess their Y2K readiness. When we received statutory authority, we arranged for reviews of an additional 29 service providers; these reviews, which are being conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers, are scheduled to be completed by the end of the year. Thus far, a total of 15 service providers, representing more than 50% of the credit unions served by outside service providers, have been reviewed, and all were rated satisfactory. When the additional reviews are completed, we will have covered 80% of credit unions which use outside service providers. The credit unions served by these providers represent 74% of the total assets of all federally insured credit unions.

  1. Current Areas of Concern

NCUA remains concerned about vendor readiness, especially among smaller credit union service providers. As noted above, NCUA has contracted with PricewaterhouseCoopers to review additional vendors, and we expect this series of reviews to cover 80% of the credit unions which use outside service providers. Due to the large number of credit union vendors, it is not possible to review every service provider before the end of this year. However, since we will conduct a Y2K review of every federal credit union, we will have the opportunity to review vendor-provided substantive systems, primarily focusing on share and loan systems, on site at the credit union. Where necessary, we will encourage credit unions which are uncertain about the status of their vendor's applications to begin making other arrangements as soon as possible.

As the Year 2000 draws nearer, credit unions which are behind onY2K remediation efforts will have an increasingly more difficult time finding skilled assistance for their conversion efforts. NCUA will continue to work with credit unions to achieve the best solutions. However, we anticipate that at least some credit unions will have to be merged or liquidated for Y2K-related reasons. NCUA intends to approve mergers, where necessary, by mid-1999 to ensure that continuing credit unions have adequate time to adjust to their expanded membership before the date change.

4) Methodology for Ensuring Reliability of Y2K Data

NCUA staff have developed a process to check Y2K information provided by credit unions. Each quarter, NCUA's regional offices will validate Y2K data provided by a three percent sample of federal and state credit unions. Also, all information provided by federal credit unions on their Y2K quarterly reports is subject to review during examinations.

5) Y2K Credit Risk

In general, credit unions do not face credit risk due to business customers' potential Y2K problems. Commercial lending by credit unions is very limited - member business loans account for only 1.25% of the loan volume for federally-insured credit unions as of December 31, 1997. The small number of credit unions with substantial business loan portfolios are primarily involved in agricultural loans, taxi cab medallions or small business loans. Accordingly, the credit risk associated with "corporate" business is not a primary concern for credit unions. Still, our examiners are aware of this issue and will continue to weigh the credit risk threat where there might be a potential problem.

6) Y2K Readiness of Critical Third Parties

NCUA has advised credit unions of the need to consider the Y2K readiness of local utility and telecommunication providers during Y2K remediations in order to ensure uninterrupted service to members. However, many credit unions are having difficulty receiving this information when they have requested it, particularly if they are located in a community served by utility or telecommunications monopolies. The recently introduced "Good Samaritan" Y2K liability limitation legislation may encourage information system providers, particularly utilities and telecommunications providers, to disclose their progress with Y2K remediations. We believe increased disclosure will help credit unions and their members prepare for the date change by allowing development of more realistic business resumption plans and time for credit unions to educate their members about the credit union's response to the potential Y2K threat posed by third parties.

7) Y2K Risk to Insurance Fund and Contingency Planning

NCUA believes the major area of potential systemic Y2K risk to the financial services industry relates to liquidity risks. Thus, we continue to analyze and position the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund's expected cash flows for the last few months of 1999 to ensure that ample liquidity is available to credit unions and the agency. The agency is currently revising its business resumption plan, which will outline agency actions if a systemic crisis erupts. The revision is expected to be complete by December 31, 1998. A possible source of liquidity for credit unions will be NCUA's Central Liquidity Facility (CLF). Although Congress has chosen to limit the CLF's borrowing authority, given the as yet unknown liquidity demands driven by the Y2K situation, Congress should consider removing the limit.

NCUA is also acting to reduce the liquidity risk to individual credit unions. We cooperated with leadership of the credit union movement in the recent release to all credit unions of a model for communicating with members concerning Y2K progress. The focus is to keep credit union members informed and alleviate member concerns. The publication also provides a model for credit union liquidity plans, which suggests actions credit unions can take to address the liquidity issue, such as issuing money orders and travelers checks. NCUA may follow this release with a letter to credit unions on the subject of crisis management and dealing with member inquiries.

Additionally, NCUA's examiners discuss liquidity planning during each supervisory contact in order to ensure that credit union managers have taken appropriate action to address any weakness, such as establishing additional lines of credit. Where credit unions fail to address the liquidity risks of Y2K proactively, formal agreements will be put in place. Examiners will be further monitoring credit unions' liquidity situation throughout the last quarter of 1999 and the first quarter of 2000. In early 1999, the agency plans a letter to all federally insured credit unions addressing liquidity planning. Finally, NCUA may issue a letter addressing credit union operations during December, 1999 and January, 2000.

8) Other Issues

NCUA remains committed to outreach and education efforts on the Y2K remediation process. Because of the large number of credit unions and their relatively small size, group education and outreach is particularly important for the credit union movement. In addition to the examiner-level contacts with individual credit unions, various NCUA Senior Staff and Y2K Supervisory Group Specialists have participated in meetings with a total attendance of approximately 18,000 persons as of June 30, 1998. Our Deputy Director of Examination and Insurance recently took part in a satellite broadcast on testing, which reached 3,000 people nationwide. Also, our "Empowerment 2000" conference for Community Development Credit Unions will feature several sessions specifically addressing the Y2K conversion issues faced by CDCUs. Finally, we forwarded the Y2K customer brochure developed by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council to all credit unions to make available to their members. We believe that these group education activities are an important supplement to the individual Y2K exams and quarterly reports.

The special Year 2000 section of NCUA's web page (www.ncua.gov) is another important communications tool, where the agency's guidance on Y2K issues is assembled in one place. Most importantly, the site provides information on vendors' Y2K plans, target dates and summaries of our vendor reviews. Credit unions have indicated to us that this site has been an important tool in obtaining reliable Y2K information quickly.

9) Y2K Liability for Credit Unions and Their Officers and Directors

The Federal Credit Union Act tasks credit union directors with responsibility for the overall direction and control of a credit union's affairs. Part of this responsibility includes the continued delivery of all critical services unaffected by the Y2K date change. We have issued a letter to credit union supervisory committees reminding them that an important part of their general oversight responsibility involves overseeing efforts to assure Y2K compliance. We have also provided considerable detailed guidance on the steps necessary to assure Y2K compliance. We expect credit union officers, directors and supervisory committee members to take reasonable and prudent actions designed to meet their responsibilities in this area.

Sometimes NCUA is asked about the liability to third parties of credit union officers and directors in the event of Y2K problems. In cases of system failure issues of liability are likely to be fact-specific and dependent on state tort law. It is therefore difficult to offer specific guidance as to the standard of care officials should exercise.

The Federal Credit Union Act does not provide protection from liability for negligence in the performance of duties by officers and directors, including activities related to Y2K conversion. Nonetheless, some state statutes may afford protection to these volunteers. Some credit unions also carry an optional endorsement to their fidelity bond coverage which insures directors and officers against claims of negligence. NCUA believes that if directors and officers carry out their duties in a conscientious manner with the best interests of the credit union in mind they would likely have some measure of protection in the event a claim of breach of duty is made.

In conclusion, Chairman Leach, thank you for allowing NCUA the opportunity to provide the Committee with an update on our Y2K actions. I believe the agency and credit union will be well-prepared to deal with the millenium date change. I appreciate your diligent attention to this important issue, and I am happy to answer any questions.

YEAR 2000 QUARTERLY CONGRESSIONAL UPDATE

SEPTEMBER 10, 1998

AGENCY PROGRESS

  1. Following the same OMB reporting format as last quarter, please provide an updated progress report on the status of internal agency Year 2000 efforts. Please highlight any significant changes, especially schedule slippages, from last quarter in the status of mission critical systems. In the case of any slippages, please explain the cause of slippages and actions instituted to correct the problem and get back on schedule.

Attachment I is an updated version of the last quarterly report in the OMB format, documenting our progress since the last report. Changes from the previous quarter's report are highlighted in bold faced text.

  1. Please report on the results of agency testing to date and the date by which the agency will have completed testing and implementation. Have there been any slippages with established test schedules? Please provide the status of business continuing and contingency planning for all mission critical systems and the full costs associated with implementing each plan. Please provide deadlines for completing these plans and testing them. Have trigger dates for implementing the plans been specified? If so, what are they? Please include in your explanation any accommodation in schedules for early fail dates of mission critical systems.

Our plan for testing, repairing and verifying our internally developed and maintained systems is on or ahead of schedule; there have been no schedule slippages. We expect all internal agency application systems to be fully Y2K ready by September 30, 1998. We have completed two end user tests of our systems in June and August 1998, which confirmed that all but one are now compliant. The Asset Management and Assistance Center (AMAC) system was originally slated to be replaced by December 31, 1998. However, we did not receive any responses to our Request for Proposals and have since chosen to repair the current system. The renovation work is nearly completed and the repaired and verified system will be in production by September 30, 1998. As a result, we are now ahead of our previous schedule, which originally called for replacement of the AMAC system by December 31, 1998.

We had originally planned to convert our General Services Administration (GSA)-supplied Personnel Information Resources System (PIRS) to SAP, our internal enterprise support system. We now plan to remain a customer of GSA for human resources support. GSA is building a new human resources system, Comprehensive Human Resources System (CHRIS), and has scheduled NCUA for conversion from PIRS to CHRIS in June 1999. GSA has notified us that CHRIS will be fully Y2K compliant. Our contingency plan, should CHRIS not be ready as scheduled, is to remain on the PIRS system, which is currently being made Y2K compliant by GSA with testing targeted for the last quarter of 1998 and implementation during January 1999.

Our Chief Financial Officer utilizes several systems owned and operated by the Treasury Department and GSA. We are currently working with these agencies, based on their schedules, to test and validate Y2K compliance of each of their systems.

For our internal systems, we have drafted a Year 2000 Technical Resumption Plan (Y2KTRP). It is a listing of the automated systems - hardware, software, and technical infrastructure - that NCUA uses in the performance of its daily business. The Y2KTRP identifies each agency technical system, product and service; its vendor; and the current Year 2000 compliance status. Furthermore, the Y2KTRP outlines specific steps to follow if a particular system, product, or service is not fully compliant by the Year 2000 or otherwise fails when we enter the new millennium.

We also have a Disaster Recovery Plan, in the event of any disaster, including a Y2K failure, that causes an interruption of service in one of our critical systems.

We have not established "trigger dates" because it is clear that we will have completed all necessary renovation work on internal systems by September 30, 1998. As a result, our Technical Resumption Plan will only be triggered by an actual and unanticipated system failure.

To coordinate internal disaster recovery plans for Year 2000 risks and our regulatory business resumption supervisory responsibility for credit unions, NCUA has established a Year 2000 Task Force made up of key senior office directors. Completion of this planning effort is scheduled for December 31, 1998. Training staff and testing the plan is proposed for completion by June 30, 1999. This planning effort is primarily focused on assisting credit unions to resume operations under emergency conditions and the possibility for handling the administration of increased levels of supervisory actions. The draft plan covers key concerns/risks and planned agency responses to provide the resources necessary to meet our regulatory responsibilities with Federally insured credit unions. The costs of the Year 2000 Business Resumption plans are in process of being developed for the NCUA 1999 Operating Budget. Since most of the identified risks involve the reallocation of existing examiner resources to handle increased supervisory work and or emergency response, a substantive level of additional budget expenditures for this activity is not anticipated.

  1. Please explain in detail the agency's plans for independently verifying compliance of repaired, replaced, and new systems. Include in the explanation the agency's methods (including configuration management methods) for ensuring that once systems are validated as compliant, any further changes to those systems (for regulatory or other reasons) do not result in such systems falling out of compliance.

In order to get an independent assessment of our compliance status, we submitted our test documentation and initial results to a Big Five accounting firm, KPMG Peat Marwick (KPMG). They have conducted an initial review of our test plans, processes, and procedures. KPMG found the "process is considerably further along than we would normally encounter in a large number of our clients." The review found weaknesses in formalizing our Testing Plans and documentation, and provided recommendations to improve these areas during testing conducted in August 1998. We will bring them in again in September after we complete our final test.

We are on schedule to develop a business resumption contingency plan for the agency by December 31, 1998, which we will also have KPMG review. If and when we deploy new hardware or software systems currently planned for 1999, we will again submit our verification testing results and documentation to KPMG for an independent assessment of the compliance status of these systems.

Finally, we have also implemented a configuration management control system to ensure that compliant systems remain compliant. As each system was certified compliant, we moved the source code for the system into our Visual Source Safe repository. No new software will go into production without first being tested for Y2K compliance, then checked into Visual Source Safe.

INDUSTRY PROGRESS

  1. Following the same format as last quarter, please provide an updated progress report for the quarter ending June 30, 1998, showing the Year 2000 status of all financial institutions under the agency's supervision. As before, please provide the numbers of institutions rated satisfactory, needing improvement, and unsatisfactory. For categories of institutions rated as unsatisfactory or needing improvement, please indicate the number of institutions in each category, their asset size, their location by state, the duration of the rating , and the nature and effectiveness of enforcement or other actions taken. Please indicate also whether institution with less than satisfactory ratings last quarter are now rated satisfactory or vice versa.

Credit Union Remediation Status:

Ratings: As indicated in our prior Congressional Update (dated May 15, 1998), the agency had planned to begin categorizing risk based on the three-tiered system developed by other federal financial regulators (satisfactory, needing improvement, or unsatisfactory). After further reviewing our method of collecting the data, through the electronic Eforms completed during each Year 2000 contact, we determined it would be counterproductive to alter our risk ratings (high, medium, or low) to coincide with those developed by other federal financial regulators after our system was already in place. For purposes of this report, however, we will continue to interpret our risk assessment in terms of the rating system used by other federal financial regulators. To reiterate, our interpretation is as follows:

  • Credit unions with an administrative action in place are rated as unsatisfactory;

  • Credit unions rated by our staff as high risk relate to a rating of needing improvement to operations; and,

  • Credit unions rated by our staff as medium or low risk correlate to progressing satisfactorily with regard to Year 2000 issues.

The breakdown of federally insured credit unions' ratings including corporate credit unions, based on the milestone dates established in the NCUA contingency plan is as follows:
Unsatisfactory 29
Needs Improvement 895
Satisfactory 10,525

Our oversight efforts continues to identify those federally insured credit unions needing additional supervisory attention as the renovation phase ends and the testing phase is initiated. Movement from "needs improvement" to "unsatisfactory" is a function of our administrative action process. For an aging of credit unions rated "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory" see Attachment II. In our March, 1998, testimony, we reported 9 credit unions in the unsatisfactory category. Of these 9 credit unions,7 have moved to the needs improvement category. We also have had 27 credit unions move into the unsatisfactory category since our last report, primarily due to the following reasons: (1)inadequate Y2K plan, (2)inadequate due diligence process for risks posed by service providers/software vendors, (3)inadequate test plan, (4)inadequate contingency plan, and (5)inadequate customer awareness program. We have been paying particular attention to small credit unions (under $5 million in assets) rated as "needs improvement" for longer than six months. In late October and early November we will sponsor Empowerment: 2000 workshops to heighten small credit unions' awareness of issues and topics which will insure their viability. Year 2000 issues will be discussed in detail during these workshops.

Similarly, we are also aware of the number of large credit unions (assets exceeding $50 million) which have been rated as "needs improvement" for longer than 6 months. We have developed a tracking program to summarize and monitor their ratings, as well as the frequency of on-site contacts. For example, six of the ten largest federally insured credit unions are federal credit unions; all six of these have had a contact in the last six months. The remaining ten largest are all state charted credit unions, and we are working with the appropriate state supervisory authority to ensure contacts are completed in the near future.

Remediation Progress: Those federally insured credit unions utilizing a computerized recordkeeping system which have not completely implemented all mission critical systems continue to report their progress with Year 2000 remediations each quarter. Credit unions continue to demonstrate good progress with respect to renovating, testing, and implementing mission critical systems. The results of the most recent quarter-end reporting cycle (June 30, 1998) are illustrated below. Remember, some credit unions have multiple mission critical systems, and may report some systems in renovation, some in testing, and some systems as already implemented. Therefore, a credit union may be included in one or more phase of each category listed below.

RENOVATION PHASE
Completion Category Percentage
# of Credit Unions at 6/30/98
6/30/98 % of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
3/31/98 %

of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
12/31/97 %

of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
# of Critical Systems at 6/30/98
6/30/98 % of Systems in Completion Category
3/31/98 % of Systems in Completion Category
12/31/97 % of Systems in Completion Category
0 to 25% 2,796 13.0% 19.3% 38.3% 17,863 12.8% 24.7% 59.3%
26% to 50% 3,316 15.4% 21.6% 24.9% 14,968 10.7% 19.4% 18.2%
51% to 75% 4,412 20.5% 19.3% 17.9% 22,262 16.0% 12.6% 10.0%
76% to 99% 5,583 25.9% 22.3% 14.3% 30,495 21.9% 21.6% 9.3%
Compliant 5,460 25.3% 17.5% 4.6% 53,995 38.7% 21.8% 3.0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 139,583 100% 100% 100%

TESTING PHASE
Completion Category Percentage
# of Credit Unions at 6/30/98
6/30/98 % of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
3/31/98 %

of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
12/31/97 %

of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
# of Critical Systems at 6/30/98
6/30/98 % of Systems in Completion Category
3/31/98 % of Systems in Completion Category
12/31/97 % of Systems in Completion Category
0 to 25% 3,926 28.2% 30.0% 38.9% 27,497 36.2% 41.7% 51.3%
26% to 50% 1,959 14.1% 17.5% 22.8% 7,450 9.8% 15.0% 19.8%
51% to 75% 2,372 17.1% 15.8% 20.0% 9,895 13.0% 10.5% 16.8%
76% to 99% 2,468 17.8% 16.5% 14.0% 9,783 12.9% 12.3% 9.0%
Compliant 3,181 22.9% 20.2% 4.2% 21,292 28.1% 20.5% 3.0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 75,917 100% 100% 100%

IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
Completion Category Percentage
# of Credit Unions at 6/30/98
6/30/98 % of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
3/31/98 %

of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
12/31/97 %

of Credit Unions with Systems in Completion Category
# of Critical Systems at 6/30/98
6/30/98 % of Systems in Completion Category
3/31/98 % of Systems in Completion Category
12/31/97 % of Systems in Completion Category
0 to 25% 1,154 15.2% 15.6% 21.3% 4,579 13.8% 13.0% 22.4%
26% to 50% 561 7.4% 9.0% 13.6% 1,560 4.5% 7.0% 8.9%
51% to 75% 698 9.2% 8.5% 14.6% 1,595 4.6% 4.8% 10.5%
76% to 99% 1,195 15.7% 24.0% 35.1% 4,198 12.2% 23.8% 32.9%
Compliant 4,009 52.4% 42.9% 15.4% 22,349 64.9% 51.5% 25.1%
Total 100% 100% 100% 34,461 100% 100% 100%

The remediation summary tables clearly show credit unions have steadily progressed from the December 1997 cycle to the June 1998 cycle. As more work is completed, the quarterly report trends show a increasing number of credit unions appearing in the higher completion percentage ranges. Please note, there may be some slippage, however, as some systems are tested, re-renovated, and re-tested throughout the process. The next major NCUA milestone date will be September 30, 1998, when mission critical systems should be substantially complete with renovations.

  1. Please outline the agency's plans for implementing the Year 2000 Phase II Workprogram for the second round of Year 2000 exams for the financial institution and service providers. Please explain how the agency will meet the more complex challenges of examining institutions' test results and contingency plans while at the same time facing a more compressed time frame of only about nine months to complete the second round. Include any staffing and other resource allocations or reallocations necessary to meet this need, as well as any assessments indicating that the agency may not have sufficient resources to complete the second round on schedule.

As reported during the last Congressional Update, the agency received examination authority over information system providers in March. Relevant information for each vendor, such as products, test release dates, and general release dates, has been posted to the agency's web page for the general public.

In April, the agency concluded initial Year 2000 reviews of ten large information system providers. We contracted with PricewaterhouseCoopers (then known as Coopers and Lybrand) to perform the reviews, along with our own examiner staff. These first ten were chosen based on the substantial number of credit unions they serve; nearly 55 percent of all federally insured credit unions. Once the reviews were completed, we published a Letter to Credit Unions (98-CU-11) to summarize the results of the reviews. All ten of the initial vendors reviewed were progressing satisfactorily with their Year 2000 remediation efforts.

NCUA has contracted with PricewaterhouseCoopers to conduct 50 additional information system provider/large, complex credit union reviews. In addition to the expertise of the PricewaterhouseCoopers staff, we staff these reviews with at least three NCUA employees, with a majority of NCUA participants being our supervisory examiner group Y2K Specialists. This pattern allows us to increase the experience base of the Specialists, through their participation on several reviews. The expertise and training provided by PricewaterhouseCoopers allows us to leverage our examiners expertise to become the examiner-in-charge of subsequent reviews.

Recently all our Year 2000 field and regional specialists attended Year 2000 testing training sponsored by the FFIEC so they can become trainers in the testing workprogram for our general examination staff. We are in the process of adapting the Testing Program developed by the FFIEC to NCUA needs. The final program should be operational to coincide with the renovation milestone date. In addition to the FFIEC training provided to our regional office and field Y2K Specialists, a vendor conference, held in May, included training on testing methodologies for the supervisory examiner group Y2K Specialists. Finally, specialized Y2K testing training was provided to our general field staff during each regional conference.

The agency has also hired two more Information Systems Officers (for a total of three), working from the Central Office, to assist in managing, monitoring, and tracking our Y2K efforts. NCUA has reallocated budget resources to address Y2K in 1999. NCUA's proposed 1999 budget includes 104,509 hours specifically allocated for Y2K; therefore, we will have sufficient resources to follow-up on all Y2K testing and implementation issues and concerns.

Credit Union Education Efforts

Since our last Congressional Update (May 15, 1998), the agency has issued a Y2K testing paper to provide top-level guidance to all federally insured credit unions. We published Letter to Credit Unions 98-CU-12, transmitting FFIEC guidance papers on Business Resumption Planning and Customer Awareness. We plan to draft letters that specifically address liquidity issues, crisis management, and planning for Year 2000 day one operations for release in early 1999. The agency continues to offer our assistance to various trade organizations by participating in education workshops, and have reached over 18,000 participants. Recently we took part in a Year 2000 satellite broadcast on testing, which reached 3,000 people nationwide.

  1. Please provide an updated progress report on the Year 2000 status of all service providers subject to the agency's supervision including the number rated satisfactory, needing improvement, and unsatisfactory. Please show for any service provider rated less than satisfactory the number of financial institutions dependent on its services and the degree of that dependence. Please indicate also whether service providers with less than satisfactory ratings last quarter are now rated satisfactory or vice versa. Please provide, where available, updated results of examination of software vendors. Finally, please include some analysis of the degree to which service providers or software/hardware vendors are absorbing the costs of Year 2000 remediation or are shifting those costs to the financial institutions they serve.

As stated earlier, the NCUA Board approved 50 additional Year 2000 reviews at select vendors and complex credit unions to be carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers, with NCUA staff assisting. To date, ten reviews (five information system providers and five credit unions) have been completed from this second wave of scheduled reviews. All five information system providers were rated satisfactory by our team of NCUA examiners, and bring the percentage of credit unions served to nearly 53 percent.

Forty additional reviews are scheduled to be completed from late August to early December, including 27 vendor reviews. Once completed, these additional 27 vendor reviews, when added to the 15 already completed, will represent 80 percent of the credit unions serviced by information system providers, and will cover 74 percent of the assets of credit unions insured by the NCUSIF. The results of the reviews will be provided to the client credit unions. A summary of findings will be available on the NCUA vendor website.

  1. Please provide a summary of any Year 2000 findings and recommendations of the agency's Inspector General and how the agency has responded to each.

The agency's Inspector General is currently collecting information to perform a detailed review of our Year 2000 efforts to date, as well as actions we plan to initiate. We anticipate receiving a management letter detailing the findings of the review by the fourth quarter of 1998.

  1. In the area of credit risk, please provide a status report on the number of institutions which successfully met the FFIEC deadline of June 30, 1998, by which institutions were to have in place a due diligence process to control Y2K risks posed by consumers. To the extent possible, please report on the progress of financial institutions toward meeting the next September 30, 1998, deadline for banks to assess individual customer's Y2K preparedness. Finally, please address how the current effort at identifying Y2K credit risk is impacting asset quality ratings for institutions.

As revealed in the May 15, 1998 Congressional Report, credit unions are not heavily involved in commercial lending. Therefore, the credit risk referred to by the FFIEC in its March 17, 1998 Interagency Statement is not uniformly present throughout the credit union movement. Those credit unions with substantial business loan portfolios are primarily involved in agricultural loans, taxi cab medallions, or small business loans. Consequently, the credit risk associated with "corporate business" is not a primary factor for credit unions. Our examiners continue to consider this issue during examinations and special Year 2000 on-site contacts.

  1. As a follow-up to last quarter's reports, please provide a progress report on the success of financial institutions in obtaining Year 2000 readiness data from local utilities and telecommunications providers. In this regard, please include in your answer an assessment as to whether the President's proposed "good Samaritan" legislation, relating to Year 2000 disclosures, would facilitate the kinds of disclosures financial institutions need from third parties such as utilities or telecommunications companies or facilitate the sharing of Year 2000 information among financial institutions themselves.

While credit unions have been made aware of the need to consider local utilities and telecommunications providers during enterprise Year 2000 remediations, often this element has taken a "backseat" to more obvious internal mission critical systems. Furthermore, many credit unions operate in a community served by monopolies of utility companies and telecommunications providers. This makes it difficult for them to receive relevant information to evaluate their ability to provide uninterrupted service to the membership.

The pending "good Samaritan" legislation should provide all information system providers, particularly utilities and telecommunications providers, the necessary comfort level to disclose their progress with Year 2000 remediations, without the threat of potential litigation.

  1. Please provide the agency's latest assessment of the systemic Y2K risk to the nation's banking and financial services industry, including in particular the potential liabilities for the insurance funds. Please describe the latest developments (at the agency or interagency level) in industry-wide testing and contingency planning for the Year 2000. Include in your response any policy deliberations on, or trigger dates established for, regarding agency takeovers of institutions (or actions against service providers) that are not going to be compliant on time.

Liquidity Risks

The agency continues to believe the major area of potential systemic Year 2000 risk to the nation's banking and financial services industry relates to liquidity risks. NCUA continues to analyze and position the National Credit Union Share Insurance fund's expected cash flows towards the end of 1999 to ensure ample liquidity is available to credit unions and the agency. A credit union Y2K task force is developing a model liquidity plan to manage their member perceptions, and will provide some non-cash actions credit unions can take to address this issue. Additionally, examiner staff has been instructed to discuss liquidity planning with credit union officials during each contact to ensure management is aware of potential liquidity concerns, and has taken appropriate steps to address any weaknesses, such as establishing additional lines of credit or limiting share withdrawals by the membership. Formal agreements have been reached in those instances were credit unions are not pro-actively addressing the liquidity risks of the Year 2000.

NCUA's business resumption plan, currently being updated, will outline agency actions if a systemic crisis erupts. In addition, it requires all NCUA examiners to review credit unions' liquidity plans during examinations completed in late 1998 and early 1999. Examiners will be expected to monitor credit unions' liquidity situation throughout the last quarter of 1999 and the first quarter of 2000. Credit unions will be expected to monitor local media for any potential liquidity concerns relating to the financial industry. In early 1999, the agency plans to develop a letter for all federally insured credit unions addressing liquidity planning and crisis management.

In addition to the normal liquidity contingency plans in place, some corporate credit unions are planning for additional Y2K liquidity contingencies by:

  1. Restructuring balance sheets to be more liquid (i.e. have a major portion of securities mature by December 31, 1999);

  1. Obtaining committed lines of credit; and

  1. Marketing Y2K certificates of deposit to coincide with possible Y2K liquidity needs.


NCUSIF Risks

Regions report monthly on the potential share insurance fund risks with a special section relating to Y2K. Implementation milestone dates (July 31, 1999 and September 30, 1999) will trigger any necessary liquidation action. NCUA's business resumption plan includes additional staffing and crisis management teams for large failures before and after the Year 2000.

As each milestone date is reached, examiners will determine if federally insured credit unions have made sufficient progress or whether administrative action is needed to compel credit unions to take specific steps.

We have seen one corporate credit union decide to merge due to Year 2000 concerns. The merging corporate is rated as needs improvement under the prior question regarding the rating of credit unions, however due to its small asset size, the corporate is a low industry risk.

  1. Please provide the agency's latest assessment of the Year 2000 status of the international banking and financial services sector. Please describe what steps the agency is taking in such areas as testing with foreign institutions and payment systems and contingency planning, to protect the US financial system from such risks.

There are very few credit unions which routinely do business in international banking and financial arenas. Where appropriate, our examiners have been instructed to evaluate the credit union's ability to successfully manage this issue, as it relates to the Year 2000, and to develop formal agreed upon actions to correct any weakness noted during routine examinations or Year 2000 contacts.

On the corporate credit union front, regulatory limitations have limited exposure to international banking. To engage in international investments, the NCUA Board must approve corporates for Part Expanded Authorities. To date, only two corporates have that authority, and neither have begun investing in foreign markets.


  1. Please advise the Committees if the agency anticipates a need for new legislation, particularly as it may relate to ensuring Year 2000 compliance at financial institutions or in implementing business continuity or contingency plans at the agency or at financial institutions. Also, please advise the Committees if the agency contemplates taking any action of a regulatory nature which relates to increasing or decreasing non-Y2K related information technology obligations of financial institutions.

With the exception of the pending "good Samaritan" bill, the agency does not anticipate the need for any new legislation relating to the Year 2000, specifically relating to business continuity or contingency planning. The Examination Parity Act, which was passed in March 1998, provides NCUA the needed supervisory authority over information system providers. This was a significant step towards our ability to identify potential concerns with large vendors, and disseminate this information to the client credit unions. As it also gives us an array of enforcement actions to use with vendors who are not making progress, we can resolve issues as they are identified. Our draft business resumption plan includes avenues to pursue if a mass conversion is required from a failing vendor. If a vendor is slow in achieving Y2K readiness, we now have the ability to take enforcement action with the vendor specifically, rather than a multitude of actions with the clients, leveraging NCUA's resources.Status of the National Credit Union Administration's Year 2000 Efforts

September 10, 1998

Note: Changes to the text of the previous report, dated May 15, 1998, are shown in bold face print.

  1. Organizational Responsibilities. Describe how your Department/Agency is organized to track progress in addressing the year 2000 problem. (Provide the information for this item once with the initial report, and update it in future reports only if it changes.)

 

There are two aspects to NCUA's Y2K efforts. The first deals with our internal information systems and related information technology, IT resources, external data interfaces, and certain aspects of the Agency's infrastructure containing embedded computer technology, e.g., fire detection and suppression systems, elevator systems, telephone systems, security systems, and environmental control systems. The second is our regulatory effort to ensure the successful Y2K readiness of the 11,238 natural person credit unions insured by NCUA and the 39 corporate credit unions.

  1. Organization. Describe the responsible organizations for addressing the year 2000 problem within your Department/Agency and provide an organizational chart.

 

The NCUA Board has primary Year 2000 oversight responsibility. Specific oversight coordination has been assigned to the Director of Strategic Planning, an executive level position located in the Central Office in Alexandria, Virginia. This position reports to the Executive Director, who in turn, reports to the NCUA Board of Directors.

The Office of Examination and Insurance is responsible for programs monitoring and supervising the readiness of federally-insured credit unions. The Office of Corporate Credit Unions is responsible for programs monitoring and supervising the readiness of corporate credit unions. The Chief Information Officer (Director of the Office of Technology and Information Services) is responsible for the Y2K readiness of all of NCUA's internal information technology resources. The Director of Administration is responsible for the Y2K readiness of the agency's physical plant facilities.

  1. Internal Accountability. Describe your Agency's processes for assuring internal accountability of the responsible organizations. Include any quantitative measures used to track performance and other methods to determine whether the responsible organizations are performing according to plan.

 

The Director of Strategic Planning is responsible for coordination and oversight for all NCUA Year 2000 programs. Each office provides a monthly Year 2000 update to the Executive Director and the NCUA Board through the Director of Strategic Planning. Monitoring of problems with meeting internal target dates are identified and resolved during this process. The Office of Inspector General is also monitoring target dates and progress and reporting any concerns to the NCUA Board.

Federally insured credit union readiness is monitored in the same manner by the Office of Examination and Insurance and the Office of Corporate Credit Unions which are responsible for the supervision of credit unions and the programs which monitor their readiness. The status of credit union readiness is reported by examiners during their supervision and examination contacts and by specific Year 2000 reporting provided quarterly by all Federally insured credit unions. These status reports are measured against the contingency plan targets for accomplishing various levels of readiness established by the NCUA Board.

  1. Oversight. Describe the management actions taken and by whom when a responsible organization falls behind schedule.

 

The Director of Strategic Planning, in conjunction with the assigned Office Director, is responsible for recognizing schedule adjustments and proposing resolution or action to the NCUA Board. The following actions are examples of the process in place:

Each Office provides monthly Y2K readiness reports to the Executive Director and the NCUA Board. During March, the NCUA Board approved a plan submitted by the Office of Examination and Insurance and the Regional Directors for a one time adjustment to the safety and soundness examination cycle to provide ability for examiners to continue to devote the planned allocation of time for Year 2000 contacts during 1998.

During April, in conjunction with passage of new legislation to permit NCUA to examine credit union information system vendors, the NCUA Board has approved obtaining outside contracted services to assist in Year 2000 readiness reviews to supplement NCUA resources.

  1. Status. Provide a report of the status of agency efforts to address the year 2000 problem which includes:

 

  1. An Agency-Wide Status of the Total Number of Mission-Critical Systems.

 

For the past three years, the Office of Technology and Information Services has been working to modernize the entire NCUA information systems infrastructure. This project included replacing our legacy mainframe host, system software, database, and communications network with a new client/server architecture; replacing all desktop workstations; refurbishing all examiner laptop computers; upgrading to a new operating system platform and office automation suite; and rewriting every custom information system in the agency using the most current tools, techniques, and processes. From the beginning, a key requirement of this modernization process was complete Year 2000 readiness. As a result, we are currently testing all our systems to ensure that agency Y2K readiness standards have been met, with the exception of one system which will be replaced by December 1998.
Total Number of Mission Critical
Number Compliant
Number to be Replaced
Number to be Repaired (Validated)
Number to be Retired
7
6
0*
1
0

*Note: The Asset Management and Assistance Center (AMAC) system was originally slated to be replaced through procurement of an off-the-shelf system, which would then be customized to support the unique functions of AMAC. However, we did not receive any responses to our Request for Proposals and have since chosen to repair the current system. The renovation work is nearly completed and the repaired system is scheduled to be in production by September 30, 1998. As a result, we are now ahead of our previous schedule, which originally called for replacement by December 31, 1998.

  1. The Status of the Mission-Critical Systems Being Repaired.

 
Assessment
Renovation
Validation
Implementation
Milestones
1/31/1998
5/29/1998
6/30/1998
12/31/1998
% Completed
100%
95%
95%
95%

  1. Description of Progress. Provide a narrative description of progress, including the following elements:

 

  1. Status of Mission Critical Systems. Provide a description of progress in fixing mission critical systems.

 

  • SAP R/3 -- Includes the financial and administrative systems.* End-user testing was completed in June 1998. (Compliant; in production.)
  • AMAC -- Asset Management and Assistance Center system, which supports the program needs of the AMAC. (Undergoing repair; scheduled to be in production by September 30, 1998.)
  • AIRES -- Our automated field examination system. Final renovation completed in May 1998. Final end-user testing completed in August 1998. (Repaired; compliant; will be distributed to all users by September 30, 1998.)
  • Call Report -- Final renovation completed in May 1998. Final end-user testing completed in June 1998. (Compliant; in production.)
  • "OSCAR" (not an acronym) -- Collection of all internally developed backoffice application and support systems used to process and report credit union financial, statistical, status and examination data. All applications were successfully tested in June 1998. (Compliant; will be distributed to all users by September 30, 1998.)
  • Office Automation -- Includes all proprietary, third party applications used for word processing, spreadsheets, databases and presentation graphics, and all proprietary, third party operating systems, database engines and related systems software. (Compliant; in production.)

 

  • Telecommunications -- This includes all proprietary, third party hardware and software used for agency data and voice communications. (Compliant; in production.)

 

*Note: Human resources support was included in this system in the last quarterly report. However, it will now be provided to our agency by the PIRS / CHRIS systems through a service bureau arrangement with GSA. GSA expects NCUA to be converted to CHRIS in June 1999. Our contingency plan is to remain with PIRS, which is currently being made Y2K compliant by GSA.

  1. Status of Non-Mission Critical Systems. Provide a description of progress in fixing non-mission critical systems, including measures that demonstrate progress.

 

  • Inventoried all components of IT infrastructure (e.g., hardware, software, database structures and content, and data exchanges).
  • Coordinated with all NCUA offices and inventoried products/services with embedded date technology, e.g., security, fire detection and suppression, environmental (HVAC), elevators, garage doors.
  • Coordinated with all NCUA offices and inventoried third party computerized systems, e.g., Westlaw and Bloomberg.
  • Contracted with outside vendor to obtain written Y2K readiness documentation from all third parties providing products, services, and systems to the agency. We are currently reviewing the responses from our letters sent to vendors and are testing these systems for Y2K compliance. We will continue to work with all our vendors until all externally supplied systems are verified compliant.

 

  1. Data Exchanges. Provide a description of the status of efforts to inventory all data exchanges with outside entities and the method for assuring that those organizations will be or have been contacted, particularly, State governments.

 

The Office of Technology and Information Services has compiled an inventory of all external data exchanges. These interfaces are currently being tested for Y2K readiness as part of our overall agency Y2K testing plan.

NCUA has developed a common shared credit union examination system and credit union call report with state credit union regulatory authorities. Therefore, as changes to these systems occur, they are automatically provided to the state regulatory authorities assuring that both parties have updated systems which are Year 2000 ready.

We have provided educational material through letters to all Federally insured credit unions with regard to Year 2000 readiness. NCUA also has participated in over 130 formal training and educational sessions attended by over 8000 credit union officials since January 1, 1998.

Contingency Planning. Provide a description of contingency planning activities, including any criteria used to decide for which systems contingency plans will be prepared for when plans must be in place.

NCUA has established a Year 2000 Task Force made up of key senior Office Directors under the chairmanship of the Director of Strategic Planning. The task force is currently working to develop NCUA Business Resumption plans. Completion of this planning effort is scheduled for December 31, 1998. Training staff and testing the plan is scheduled for completion by June 30, 1999. This effort is primarily focused on assisting credit unions to resume operations under emergency conditions and handling the administration of increased supervisory actions. The draft plan identifies key concerns/risks and planned agency responses to provide the resources necessary to meet our regulatory responsibilities with Federally insured credit unions.

For our internal systems, we have drafted a Year 2000 Technical Resumption Plan (Y2KTRP). It is a listing of the automated systems - hardware, software, and technical infrastructure - that NCUA uses in the performance of its daily business. The Y2KTRP identifies each agency technical system, product and service; its vendor; and the current Year 2000 compliance status. Furthermore, the Y2KTRP outlines specific steps to follow if a particular system, product, or service is not fully compliant by the Year 2000 or otherwise fails when we enter the new millennium.

We also have a Disaster Recovery Plan, which will be implemented in the event of any disaster, including a Y2K failure, that causes an interruption of service in one of our critical systems.

  1. Other Year 2000 Implications. Provide a description of efforts to address the year 2000 problem in other areas (e.g. facilities, biomedical and laboratory equipment, products using embedded chips, or telecommunications systems).

 

We have inventoried all non-IT components of the agency's physical plant with potential embedded computer technology, e.g., building security, fire detection and suppression, elevator, and environmental control systems. These components are included in our overall Y2K readiness plan.

  1. Problems Affecting Progress. Provide a description of any problems affecting progress, including any problem in acquiring or retaining skilled personnel.

 

Internal program - None.

Credit union program - Field staffing losses and hiring limitations required a one time extension of examination cycle for 1998 - 1999. The Office of Examination and Insurance has had difficulty in hiring senior program officers for Y2K work. These positions have been advertised at a lower grade to attract applicants.

  1. Government-Wide Systems. Provide a description of the status of the year 2000 readiness of each government-wide system operated by the agency (e.g. GSA will report on FTS 2000).

 

We had originally planned to convert our GSA-supplied PIRS human resources system to SAP, our internal enterprise support system. We now plan to remain a customer of GSA for human resources support. GSA is building a new human resources system, CHRIS, and has scheduled NCUA for conversion from PIRS to CHRIS in June 1999. GSA has notified us that CHRIS will be fully Y2K compliant. Our contingency plan, should CHRIS not be ready as scheduled, is to remain on the PIRS system, which is currently being made Y2K compliant by GSA.

Our Chief Financial Officer utilizes several systems owned and operated by the Treasury Department and GSA. We are currently working with these agencies, based on their schedules, to test and validate Y2K compliance of each of their systems.

  1. Verification Efforts. Describe how and to what extent internal performance reports, (i.e., compliance of systems repaired and replaced) are independently verified. Provide a brief description of activities to assure independent verification that systems are fixed and to assure that information is accurate.

 

In order to get an independent assessment of our compliance status, we submitted our test documentation and initial results to a Big Five accounting firm, KPMG Peat Marwick (KPMG). They have conducted an initial review of our test plans, processes and procedures. We will bring them in again in September after we complete our final test.

We are on schedule to develop a business resumption contingency plan for the agency by December 31, 1998, which we will also have KPMG review. If and when we deploy new hardware or software systems currently planned for 1999, we will again submit our verification testing results and documentation to KPMG for an independent assessment of the compliance status of these systems.

Finally, we have also implemented a configuration management control system to ensure that compliant systems remain compliant. As each system was certified compliant, we moved the source code for the system into our Visual Source Safe repository. No new software will go into production without first being tested for Y2K compliance, then checked into Visual Source Safe.

  1. Other Evidence of Progress. Please include any additional information that demonstrates your agency's progress. This could include charts or graphs indicating actual progress against your agency's schedule, lists of mission critical systems with schedules, or any other presentations.

 

We expect all internal agency application systems to be fully Y2K ready by September 30, 1998. Our initial end user test of all systems in June 1998 turned up a handful of minor problems, which we have since corrected. We conducted another test in August, which confirmed that all of our internal systems are now compliant, with the exception of the AMAC system discussed above.

  1. Costs. Report your estimates of Year 2000 information technology costs. Report totals in millions of dollars for FY 1996 through FY 2000. (For amounts under $1 million report to tenths of a million.)

 
Fiscal Year
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Total
Internal Systems
$0.7
$2.2
$0.6
$0.1
$0*