HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 City of Lansing Year 200 Impact Assessment Computer and Communication ServicesCity of La- ins-Ing ,
ye-48- ir 2000-v �-Illmpacl
W
fill A$ I lot
FM
al Rport
Lm
August 10, 1998
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Table of Contents
1.0 Background.........................................................................._..
3
1.1 Objectives...............................................................................
3
1.2 Scope....................................................................................
3
1.3 Approach................................................................................
4
1.4 Industry Standards...................................................................
6
2.0 Findings..........................................................................................
6
2.1 Inventory .................................................................................
6
2.2 Attributes.................................................................................
7
2.3 Analysis Results.......................................................................
8
3.0 Remediation Strategies......................................................................
10
3.1 Repair....................................................................................
10
3.2 Replace..................................................................................
11
3.3 Retire.....................................................................................
11
3.4 Event Horizon........................................................................
12
3.5 Triage....................................................................................
12
4.0 Recommended Strategy for City of Lansing .............................................
12
4.1 Remediation Effort .....................................................................13
4.2 Feasibility................................................................................
14
Attachment A — Inventory Catalogue...........................................................
16
Attachment B Analysis Reports...............................................................
19
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 2
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
1.0 Background
1.1 Objectives
Senior Technology Partners(STP) was contracted in June, 1998 to perform
Year 2000(Y2K) impact analysis and assessment study on the City of
Lansing's(City) application suite. The objectives of this study were to:
• Identify the Impacted Date Items within each application
• Identify the Affected Statements within each application
• Summarize the Application Portfolio in terms of Year 2000 impacted
programs and lines of code
• List Missing Items and Components
• Highlight the statements that need to be reviewed
• Provide application level assessment and recommendations for
remediation
• Provide estimations of effort required to remediate each application
1.2 Scope
The assessment includes the City's operational mainframe software
applications only. IT hardware systems, network systems, desktop
applications and facilities are explicitly excluded from this project. The
applications consist of a Td party suite from SCT and a suite of Inhouse
developed programs. An early analysis of the SCT Fund Accounting System
was to be prepared and presented, in order to accommodate a timely
renovate vs. buy decision required by the City. This analysis included the
Fund Management System, Check Reconciliation and Purchasing
applications. This analysis was completed and reported on in July. It was
also decided by the City IT management team not to include the Payroll and
Personnel SCT applications, since they are already renovated for century
compliance and will be tested for Y2K readiness. Of the Inhouse applications
suite, the Payroll and Retirement Applications were excluded from this
analysis because they are to be replaced by the SCT Payroll & Personnel
project currently underway.
Under guidance from the City management team, STP was to inventory the
software applications, analyze the source code for Year 2000(Y2K) impacts,
report such findings and provide effort estimations required for Y2K
readiness. STP also was to include strategy recommendations for proceeding
with Y2K compliance efforts based on factors such as cost, timing and
current needs.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 3
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
1.3 Approach
Phase I - Resourcing , Project Management and Set-up
Senior Technology Partners provided the resources having the necessary
Y2K project management experience and technical analysis expertise in
order to quickly assess the state of Y2K readiness of the application systems.
The City's IT management and technical personnel were expected to provide
support to the Senior Technology Partners team as needed, primarily
assisting with systems environment technical questions, identifying source
code location and access and providing other site -specific information
relating to operations and priorities. A Senior Technology Partners project
manager was assigned as the primary interface to the IT team for all project
issues and status.
A written project plan was generated, mutually agreed upon and reported on
at biweekly project management meetings. All major tasks and deliverables
are documented within the plan.
STP assisted the City with determining the most efficient and cost effective
approach to acquiring the Y2K analysis tool which supported Unisys COBOL.
Utilizing industry, client and colleague provided information, it was
determined that the COBOL Analyzer 2000 from SEEC Corp. would be best
for the City's study. Negotiations were then conducted to:
• Purchase the software
• Lease the software
• Utilize the State of Michigan MIPSC facilities
• Utilize a reputable Td party source on a lines of code fee
The combination of schedule and cost to complete the analysis guided the
STP recommendation and contract to utilize a 3�d party vendor for a lines of
code fee.
STP also assisted the City with the selection and installation of the CTC
FileSweep tool for performing the mainframe to PC software downloads.
Phase II — Inventory
The first impact analysis stage was to assemble a detailed software
inventory for building the information database necessary to perform a
detailed assessment of a year 2000 project. A complete inventory of
applications purchased from SCT Inc. and all internally developed
operational applications was identified with the assistance of IT staff and all
mainframe source files were catalogued and downloaded to a PC.
Approach steps:
• Categorize software into development systems, 3d party purchased
systems and internal applications(operations, business systems, HR).
Populate a central inventory item repository, and identify author,
application type, version, and compliance status.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 4
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Locate source code for all inventory items and download all program
source code to a workstation PC.
• Load into and analyze all programs with COBOL Analyzer for program
structure and completeness of source program acquisition.
Deliverables include:
• An automated repository of all physical applications, including COBOL
source code, copy libraries, COGEN modules and DASDLs.
• An inventory catalogue listing for all inventory items
• A assemblage of all source code, downloaded from the A14 mainframe in
text format, on a series of diskettes.
Phase III - Impact Analysis
The next stage was a comprehensive analysis of IT applications source code
to determine the functional and processing impacts resulting from the century
date change. The analysis began by loading the source code for all
applications into the "COBOL Analyzer" analysis tool A list of all date related
variable definitions, functions and operations was compiled and reviewed by
the IT staff. Suspect code statements are identified, categorized and
accumulated in internal tables for future reference or modification.
Summaries of lines analyzed and total lines impacted by necessary date -
related changes were then produced.
Approach steps:
• Assemble an affected items inventory. This is a list of all data items found
in programs to be related to the year 2000.
• Assemble an affected statements inventory. For each program, a list of
the impacted logic statements is produced. Program statements are
categorized including declaration, transfer and operational logic. This data is
also summarized by application.
• Report the usage of each copybook by multiple applications.
• Analyze Sorting logic to identify any sorts performed on a date containing
two digit year fields.
• Identify the presence of any hard coded year and/or century values via
the COBOL value clause or through Move statements.
• Manually analyze the source code for date compliant code already in
place for the major applications.
Deliverables include:
• A Year 2000 Impact Analysis report.
• A CD-ROM containing SEEC COBOL Analyzer 2000 datafiles including
the source code inventory and all analysis reports.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 5
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Phase IV - Assessment
The final stage was the assessment of the impact analysis. Once the variable
and statement impacts were identified for each application, STP performed a
decision making process to suggest an overall remediation strategy for the
City. This includes effort estimates, by application, to remediate the code for
Y2K readiness. Recommendations on program logic changes are provided
and a feasibility study is also presented.
1.4 Industry Standards
Industry standards for Y2K assessments, as published prior to and during the
study period, were researched for this project. It should be noted that no two
Y2K projects are the same, but metrics for such projects have been set forth
over time. Initially, the common metric was number of lines of code. The
standard estimate used for complete renovation ranged between $1 - $4 per line
of code with approximately 2% of the lines of code being affected. This estimate
was later revised to $2 - $6. Later, industry analysts were finding these
estimates to be unreliable due to such issues as testing methodologies. Analysts
found that testing was consuming much more time than earlier planned, in most
cases taking at least 50% of the total project resources.
Therefore, for this project, STP is not using any industry standard metrics in this
report. Any Cost or Effort estimates are based upon number of programs and
observed code complexity, balanced with prior project experience.
2.0 Findings
2.1 Inventory
The following section gives an application systems overview and a summary
of the application inventory.
Inventory of the Application System
The City of Lansing system portfolio consists of 20 applications(not including
the Fund Accounting system applications), which form the scope of work for
the Year 2000 renovation. These consist of programs, copybooks, libraries
and data.
Inventory of Application Programs and Lines of Code
Total number of COBOL
programs
479
Total number of ALGOL programs
5
Total number of COGEN
programs
172
Total number of source
programs
656
Total LOC of COBOL programs
668,172
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 6
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Total LOC of ALGOL programs
3,853
Total LOC of COGEN programs
30,648
Total LOC of source proarams
702,673
Inventory of Copybooks
Total number of copybooks
1 2,383
# Copybooks shared across applications
26
A detailed listing of all applications( including Fund Accounting), along with
their associated numbers of files and lines of code is in Attachment A.
2.2 Attributes
• The City's system runs on a Unisys A Series (Model A14).
• The City's applications software consists of Unisys COBOL 74, COGEN
AND ALGOL programs. Of these, approximately 73% of the programs are
Unisys COBOL 74. Details of the various components of the City's
application system are provided below.
The applications cater to a wide range of operational, administrative,
business and revenue collection related functions.
Hardware/Software Configuration
The City of Lansing system hardware/software consist of a Unisys 'A' Series
running the VMCP V 42.1 operating system, Unisys COBOL compiler V 42.1
and Unisys Algol compiler V 42.1. Applications run exclusively on the
mainframe communicating with desktop PCs using Core Technology's CTC
Bridge software for terminal emulation and Unisys Poll Select data
communications protocol.
Operating System Environment Review
The VMCP 42.1 is not year 2000 ready and is currently not supported by
Unisys. It requires an upgrade. Unisys recommends level SSR 45.1, which is
now available and supported through December, 2000.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 7
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Compilers Review
• The Unisys COBOL 74 compiler 42.1 is not year 2000 ready. The version
of the Unisys COBOL 74 compiler that is Year 2000 ready (as stated by
Unisys) is SSR 42.2 or higher.
• The ALGOL compiler 42.1 is not year 2000 ready. The version of the
ALGOL compiler that is Year 2000 ready (as stated by Unisys) is SSR
V42.2 or higher.
2.3 Analysis Results
Below are the summarized, high level results from the analysis of the City of
Lansing Inhouse application suite and the Local Income Tax application.
Analysis details and application code impact summaries can be found in
Attachment B.
• Organization
The City of Lansing System application software suite is well organized
and systematic. Because of its professional organization, the task of
Impact Analysis could be carried out within the time schedule.
Applications Inventory
The City of Lansing System application software suite consisted of 20
applications. A total of 656 programs were present in the City of Lansing
system application programs.
• Year 2000 Compliant Applications
Out of 20 applications, 0 applications are Year 2000 ready. Some of the
applications have century compliant code (e.g. Local Income and
Property Tax), but the usage of this code will have to be further analyzed.
To our knowledge, none of the century compliant code has been tested
for Y2K readiness.
• Year 2000 Impacted Applications
Approximately 89% of the programs across all applications of the City of
Lansing system had date impacted logic. Of these, 77 % of the programs
contain some levels of Year 2000 compliant logic. 9% of the lines of code
have date impact.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 8
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Flnal Report
Year 2000 Impacted statements
Approximately 27% are Declarations, 58% are Data Transfers, 14% are
Computations/Operations and 1 % are Unknowns.
Hard coded Century and/or Years
134 programs across the entire suite of software are found to have the
hard coded century and/or years through value or assignment statements.
Some of these hard coded dates are 2dh century ("19°) dates.
• Sorts on dates and dates -in -key
19 out of 31 sorts are performed on dates and 115 dates -in -key are
defined in the City of Lansing system application programs. Some of the
dates -in -key are just defined but not used.
• Leap Year calculations
The Leap Year calculation algorithm observed in City of Lansing
applications appears to handle Year 2000
• External Interfaces
The analysis team has briefly met with the City's IT team to determine if
there are any external systems interfaces. A few such interfaces were
noted for the income & property tax and telephone book systems.
• Internal Interfaces
Some of the City of Lansing applications have interfaces with other City of
Lansing applications, primarily in the sharing of common database
information.
Remediation Requirement
Out of 20 applications, 19 applications need changes in the procedural
logic to make them Year 2000 compliant and all applications may need
field expansion of some date items in addition to procedural changes.
City of Lansing C&C5 8/10/98 Page 9
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP F"uzal Report
Remediation Strategy
City of Lansing system applications require either a Hybrid (field
expansion + procedural changes) or Procedural change strategy to make
them Year 2000 ready.
3.0 Remediation Strategies
3.1 Repair
A repair strategy is one of the more common strategies for remediating non-
compliant code. It works best in situations where the applications are
relatively small and the source code is well understood. This strategy is also
commonly chosen when the applications are highly customized to a sites
particular needs and it would be difficult to locate a replacement application.
Required elements for this strategy are:
• A team of available COBOL programmers
• A testing / quality assurance team
• Detailed Test planning and execution
• Availability of machine resources
• Coordination with production systems and resources
• Enough time available to complete development and phase out
non -compliant systems.
The risk factor for this strategy is higher due to the fact that it's predominant
efforts of development and test activities are somewhat error prone and
iterative in nature.
There are 2 essential techniques for date related code repair: windowing and
date field expansion. Windowing is a technique which temporarily expands a
date field just before operating on it. It does not change the original date field
definition. This temporary expansion is performed each time a date field is
used in an operational statement within the application code. The date field
expansion technique permanently changes the date field definition to be
century compliant. Then all operations using that field are changed within the
application.
There are advantages and disadvantages associated with each technique.
The advantages with windowing are minimal risk in development and few if
any side effects are experienced. The major disadvantage is performance
impact since more time is required for the extra computations added. The
effects of date field expansion are just the opposite of windowing. They have
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 10
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment,
STP Final Report
minimal performance effect but the changes in field definitions pose
considerable risk with potential side effects. The testing required is also
significantly increased due to the more global impact possibilities.
A repair strategy will probably be the predominant approach taken for the
City of Lansing's Inhouse applications, since it is unlikely that 3`d party
applications closely approximate the custom functionality developed over the
years of use. Furthermore, wherever possible, windowing should be used to
avoid the complexities of code expansion. However, in some cases, such as
Sorting, date field expansion cannot be avoided.
3.2 Replace
A replace strategy calls for the identification of an available Y2K compliant 3`d
party application which meets or exceeds the functional and operational
requirements of the current application. After such has been located, a plan
for insertion and activation of the new application needs to be generated.
The requirements for a replacement plan are:
• Verification of functional capability
• Environmental changes/upgrades
• Training of operators and users
• Support structure setup
The advantages of this strategy are that the City ends up with a more state
of the art system and usually a more functionally robust application. The
disadvantage is a typical increase in total cost of ownership, when the costs
of the new software, training, support and infrastructure changes are
accounted for.
The City of Lansing has already chosen this strategy for all SCT applications
except for Local Income Tax.
3.3 Retire
A retirement strategy involves the elimination of an application through one of
many possible means. Sometimes the function provided simply is not needed
anymore and just needs to be recognized as such. Other means are to move
the function provided into the end user departments themselves or absorb
the function into another application. The major risk with this strategy is the
potential political impacts of eliminating a department responsibility.
The City of Lansing may have possible candidates for application retirement.
The management team should look closely at the real needs of all their
applications and decide if the functionality provided is really worth the cost to
provide such.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 11
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
3.4 Event Horizon
With each individual application where remediation is required, analysis must
be performed to determine the time its function could actually fail at some
time in the future. This "event horizon" could actually be before Jan. 1, 2000.
Certain applications could perform date calculations using dates many
months in advance of the current date. Functions such as financial forecasts
and expiration date calculations are examples of such. These applications
would therefore require date code changes before the year 2000 and should
be prioritized ahead of other applications with less time critical event
horizons. The City of Lansing should determine the event horizon for century
date failure of each of the Inhouse applications and the Local Income Tax
application.
3.6 Triage
After studying the results of this Y2K analysis report, the City management
team will need to go through the process of triage on their application suite.
Triage is the process of prioritizing the order of remediation for all
applications. Factors that need to be considered to establish priorities should
be total effort required, event horizon, and criticality to the overall operation
of City business.
4.0 Recommended Strategy for City of Lansing
The constraint of approximately 12 months to complete the remediation project
will limit the flexibility in the City's strategy. The Process of evaluating the City's
requirements for a "system" replacement, researching the available packaged
software, negotiating a contract, converting and installing can take a very long
time. After an evaluation of the City's current mainframe environment, the
following guidelines are suggested:
Evaluate the feasibility of replacing the City's Income Tax system.
Preliminary research indicates that there is a Y2K ready city income tax
system marketed by Courtland Software. It is installed in approximately 12
Michigan cities. Preliminary estimates of nonrecurring out of pocket expenses
to purchase and install the system are approximately $300,000. The yearly
maintenance fee is $30,000. Preliminary discussions with Muskegon and
Grand Rapids indicated they are satisfied with the product and support.
Based on this initial evaluation, it may benefit the City to quickly assemble a
team to conduct a thorough requirements definition and evaluation of
Courtland's software ability to meet the City's needs.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 12
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Eliminate the nonessential applications.
Preliminary discussions indicate that the following applications may
potentially be retired:
• COGEN training
• User training
• Utilities
• Voter Registration (to be replaced by State application)
Migrate to current Inhouse replacement system.
The potential to migrate the current mainframe services for the Parking
Tickets application to a client/server replacement system should be
determined prior to pursuing renovation of the current application.
Renovate critical, City custom applications.
The remaining applications, due to their high level of priority and unique
functionality, should be renovated for Y2K readiness as soon as possible.
The following depicts the estimated renovation efforts and costs for all City
mainframe applications defined in the scope of this project and a proposed 12
month project plan based on 7 full time programmer/analysts and a full time
project manager.
4.1 Remediation Effort
Below is a table of estimated efforts required to make the individual
applications century date compliant. The efforts are based on the number of
programs comprising the applications, not necessarily the actual number of
lines of code within the programs. The effort given reflects the complete
renovation cycle, including analysis, design, source changes and testing.
Additional overall project effort for project startup, infrastructure
development, baseline setup and testing and project management have
been prorated across the applications.
Preliminary Application Remediation Cost Estimates:
Application
Hours
$ Cost
Income Tax
6005
678,500
Property Systems:
Appraisal
250
28,600
Cash Accounting
1060
120,000
Property Tax
2375
268,300
Property Sales
640
72,400
Stormwater
300
34,000
City of Lansing C&CS
8/10/98
Page 13
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Parking Tickets
2175
245,500
Schedule/Dispatch
50
6,000
Traffic Accident
550
62,600
Voter Registration
900
101,000
Bicycle Registration
110
12,700
Fixed Assets
370
41,900
Telephone Book
300
34,800
St. Trunkline Accounting
200
22,900
Public Notification Letters
120
13,300
Utilities
90
10,200
COGEN Training
340
38,000
Time Accounting
70
7,900
User Training
40
4,700
Tape Library System
16
1,800
Backup
16
1.800
TOTALS
15,977
1,806,900
Notes:
1. Application hours includes prorated effort to establish the project office,
project plan, set-up control environment and software, establish and
run baseline tests, and overall project management.
2. Hardware, software, communications resources and other miscellaneous
costs to be provided by the city:
1. A14 Configuration Management system
2. Dedicated dial -up communications line
3. Date simulation tool
4. A14 upgrades
5. Transportation charges
6. Supplies
4.2 Feasibility
The Year 2000 remediation effort for the City will have a significant impact
both in dollars and human resources consumption. The time constraint of
only 12 months to complete a remediation project and guarantee Y2K
readiness further condenses the impact on the City. The estimates provided
were developed at the high end of potential costs to assist the City with the
planning process. The potential Y2K readiness of some of the applications,
e.g. Income Tax and Property Tax, may reduce the overall effort.
The estimates and project timeline developed by STP are based on known
resource availability, prior experience with actual effort to complete similar
remediation efforts and ability to deliver the services. This statement is
intended to qualify the estimates and validate the feasibility of code
renovation as a solution for the City. The following additional factors would
need to be addressed to ensure the feasibility of the recommended
approach. These factors could represent a significant overall cost to the city,
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 14
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
above the remediation estimates provided above, and should be
investigated in more detail before final project approval:
1. Working environment - the majority of code conversion and unit test
could be performed off site at a conversion factory. This would require
the city to install a dedicated communications line. All system -level
testing would have to be performed on site. Also, City office space,
supplies, etc. would be needed.
2. City hardware resource availability - all coding and testing would
require the use of the City's A14, along with some PC workstations. It
is not known if enough computing resources are available during
working hours of standard City operations. A dedicated processing
region would need to be established for Y2K testing.
3. Certain system software programs will have to be upgraded including
the MCP operating system, COBOL and ALGOL compilers. Other
system programs may need upgrades including COGEN, DARGAL
and Network components.
4. City personnel resources - City personnel would be needed to perform
training of the conversion team in application function and usage.
They would also be needed to assist in test plan formulation and
acceptance testing. They are also needed for system software
upgrade installations mentioned above. Also, they may be needed for
some code design and debug assistance.
5. Configuration management - a configuration management system
needs to be purchased and set up on the mainframe for source code
management and version control for the code conversion and test
development efforts.
The team size(not including City resources) would be approximately 9 STP
people consisting of 7-8 programmer / analysts and a project manager. If
work were to begin on Sept. 1, 1998, the conversion could be finished
approximately one year later. This would leave approximately three months
buffer until the century change occurs.
If the above mentioned factors could be handled and the start date approved
with a few weeks notice, it is STP's opinion that this project could be
successfully completed.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 15
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment A — Inventory Catalogue
SCT Mainframe Application Suite as of: 7/13/98
Total DnLoad
System Name Author Files Files Missing DirSize
Fu
CKR
Src SCT
Lib
FMS
Src SCT
Lib
FMS/Sort
<InlineWFl (on BLUE)
PUR
Src SCT
Lib
subtotal
Payroll System'
PPS Src
Lib
PPS/Sort3 Sort
subtotal
Human Resources System'
HRM Src
Lib
HRM/Sort Sort
subtotal
Payroll Support
SCT Src
Lib
subtotal
Fund Accounting Support
29
29
0
0.571
48
48
0
0.114
208
206
2
8.400
274
273
1
1.010
34
34
0.006
137
137
0
3.800
203
202
1
0.897
933
929
4
14.798
SCT 422 422 0 26.300
631 631 0 2.910
(on PACK) 62 62 0
1115 1115 0 29.210
SCT 76 76 0 1.720
50 50 0 0.235
(on PACK) 33 33 0
159 159 0 1.955
SCT
MGSI
Src SCT
Lib
subtotal
Income Tax System
LIT
Src SCT
Lib
LIT/Sort2
<InlineWFl SCT
subtotal
Total SCT Applications
Notes:
17
17
0
16
16
0
33
33
0
0.000
4
4
0
21
21
0
25
25
0
0.000
228
228
0
6.280
279
279
0
1.300
52
52
0
559
559
0
7.580
2824 2820 4 53.543
1. Being converted to y2k compliant version
2. <InlineWFL> refers to code generated in -line from WFL job streams.
3. Has 10 object -only files
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 16
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment A — Inventory Catalogue
Inhouse Development Mainframe Application Suite as of: 7/13/98
Appl'n
Directory
DnLoad
Directory
Name
Function
Author
Files
Files
Size(MB)
A
Appraisal
INH
21
21
0.90
B
Backup
INH
1
1
0.01
C
Cash Accounting
INH
191
191
5.65
E2
Retirement
INH
155
155
3.05
J
Parking Tickets
INH
325
325
4.19
P
Property Tax
INH
603
598
11.26
QC
Cogen Training
INH
32
32
0.92
QG3
Corns Support
INH
8
8
0.02
QM
Time Accounting Sys
INH
56
56
0.38
QQ
User training .
INH
9
9
0.14
QS
Scheduler/Dispatcher
INH
3
3
0.08
QT3
Tap Library Sys
INH
2
2
0.05
QU
Utilities
INH
63
63
0.52
QW3
Writing
INH
1
1
0.00
R3
Old Real Property
INH
1
1
0.02
S
Property Sales
INH
54
54
0.26
T
Traffic Accident
INH
68
68
0.88
U
Voter Registration
INH
238
238
1.56
W
Stormwater
INH
57
57
0.17
YZ
Payroll
INH
150
150
5.03
ZB
Bicycle Registration
INH
12
12
0.16
ZI
Fixed Asset Inventory
INH
82
82
0.42
ZK
Telephone Book
INH
32
32
0.50
ZP
Public Notif. Letters
INH
12
12
0.26
ZT
St. Trunkline Acct'ng
INH
17
17
0.32
Inhouse
Applications Totals
2,193
2,188
36.76
Notes:
1. Most Cobol source is Cobo174; some is Cobo168 standard.
2. Applications being replaced; no IA required.
3. Not application programs; rather source modules referenced by other app's.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 17
Confidentiat
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment A - Inventory Catalogue
Appl'n ILib/CopyB Lib/CopyB COBOL COBOL ALGOL ALGOL SORT SORT COGEN COGEN DASOL DASDL
m Nae LOCs Files LOCs Files LOCs Files LOCs Files LOCs Files LOCs Files
A
1,481
B
C
31,263
CKR
2,450
FMS
17,566
J
31,848
LIT
25,868
MGSI
826
P
124,603
PUR
14,881
QC
955
QG
342
QM
2,903
QQ
543
QS
94
QT
QU
14,826
QW
39
R
220
S
2,041
T
8,566
U
16,863
W
4,208
ZB
1,099
ZI
5,198
ZK
2,846
ZP
394
ZT
844
TOTAL
312,767
Total LOCs:
Total #Progs:
9
9,103
13
177
1
151
47,149
39
48
9,466
28
384
275
157,524
205
481
231
8,611
10
32
279
136,302
453
410
21
437
2
603
496
57,045
100
304
84,471
136
494
16
24
44
2,606
9
5
1,325
6
1
901
2
613
1
85
353
4
836
1
1
23
20,106
31
47
6,594
21
190
782
2
45
7
1,026
2
66
15
5,408
12
6
3,046
6
9
3,472
8
2,399
556,517
1,091
3,240
916,655
3,722
LOC/Pgrm =
247
1
1 73 34
1 89 3 14,425
1
2
403
1
505
2
214
331
7 9,288
2,555
326
2,280
288
1
79
2 9,019
15 211
2 623
143
765
38 1,690
12
3
15 656
5
9 376 44 30,648 172 13,107
246
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 18
Confidential
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment B — Analysis Reports
Analysis summary reports are presented in this section. These reports were produced
using data from the Cobol Analyst 2000 assessment tool from SEEC Corp. A CD-ROM
disk is available containing the SEEC tool database of information. This information is
in Microsoft Access database format, and thus is required for viewing the information
on the disk.
The Access database information is organized by application with one additional folder
labeled "Global" which contains summary table information for all the applications.
Each application folder will have 1, 2 or 3 Access files, containing information based on
program type (being Algol, Cobol or Cogen). The Global folder database can provide
the following report types consolidating data across all applications:
- Global cross-reference
- Cross-reference by file type
- Affected datastores
- Programs across applications
- Global copybook use
- Global portfolio
- Cost model
The individual application folder databases can provide similar reports, for data on the
individual application.
Some of these summary tables are included in this report and displayed in this
attachment for completeness.
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 19
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Focal Report
Attachment B — Analysis Reports
Application Summary Report
z.
Income Tax Sys (LIT)
ALGOL
1
1
0
Income Tax Sys (LIT)
COBOL
227
225
217
Appraisal (A)
COBOL
13
11
4
Backup (B)
COBOL
1
1
0
Cash Accounting (C)
COBOL
39
39
38
Cash Accounting (C)
COGEN
1
1
1
Parking Tickets (J)
ALGOL
1
1
0
Parking Tickets (J)
COBOL
10
9
7
Parking Tickets (J)
COGEN
79
62
60
Property Tax (P)
COBOL
99
95
67
Property Tax (P)
COGEN
2
2
2
Cogen Trianing (QC)
COGEN
15
7
7
Time Accounting Sys (QM)
COBOL
1
1
1
Time Accounting Sys (QM) JCOGEN
2
1
1
User Training (QQ)
COBOL
2
2
1
Scheduler/Dispatcher (QS)
COBOL
2
2
2
Tap Library Sys (QT)
COGEN
1
1
0
Utilities (QU)
ALGOL
2
1
1
Utilities (QU)
COBOL
3
0
0
Property Sales (S)
COBOL
31
31
13
Traffic Accident (T)
COBOL
21
21
20
Voter Registration (U)
COBOL
2
1
0
Voter Registration (U)
COGEN
38
24
23
Stormwater (M
COGEN
12
10
10
Bicycle Registration (ZB)
COBOL
2
2
1
Bicycle Registration (ZB)
COGEN
3
2
2
Fixed Asset Inventory (ZI)
COGEN
15
13
12
Telephone Book (Zln
COBOL
12
61
2
Telephone Book (ZK)
COGEN
5
11
1
Public Notif. Letters (ZP)
COBOL
6
61
2
St. Trunkline Accounting (ZT)
COBOL
8
81
7
TOTAL: 666 587 602
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 20
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment B - Analysis Reports
Year 2000: Cobol Aaalication Portfolio Summa
Number of Logical Lines
External Objects
Application
# Pgms
Total
Declaration
Transfer
Operations
Files
DMS
SDF
datasets
Forms
APPRAISAL
Affected:
11
1,147
440
663
44
12
0
0
(COBOL)
Total:
13
14,180
9,321
3,617
1,242
21
0
0
BACKUP
Affected:
1
26
16
9
0
1
0
0
(COBOL)
Total:
1
13B
102
31
5
1
0
0
BICYCLE
Affected:
2
227
77
136
14
3
0
0
REGISTRAT
Total:
2
1,824
869
690
265
3
0
0
CASH
Affected:
39
3,849
1,249
2,306
294
34
0
0
ACCOUNTIN
Total:
39
63,306
29,540
25,110
8,656
81
0
0
INCOME
Affected:
226
38,662
9,191
23,784
6,687
91
0
0
TAX
Total:
227
365,634
215,660
116,933
33,041
276
0
0
PARKING
Affected:
9
804
346
378
81
13
0
0
TICKETS
Total:
10
11,114
5,259
4,492
1,363
19
0
0
PROPERTY
Affected:
31
2,376
660
1,167
668
23
0
0
SALES
Total:
31
29,026
18,320
7,727
2,979
50
0
0
PROPERTY
Affected:
96
12,306
4,098
7,210
998
76
0
0
TAX
Total:
99
128,440
61,012
54,145
13,283
177
0
0
PUBLIC
Affected:
6
81
47
31
3
1
0
0
NOTIF.
Total:
6
3,977
2,341
1,258
378
21
0
0
SCHEDULE
Affected:
2
140
82
36
22
1
0
0
R/DISPATC
Total:
2
1,227
641
456
130
1
0
0
ST.
Affected:
8
424
111
276
37
17
0
0
TRUNKLINE
Total:
8
6,794
4,165
2,037
592
27
0
0
TELEPHONE
Affected:
6
362
214
142
6
7
0
0
BOOK
Total:
12
8,487
6,448
1,594
445
30
0
0
TIME
Affected:
1
186
91
63
41
1
0
0
ACCOUNTIN
Total:
1
1,945
522
1,094
329
2
O
O
TRAFFIC
Affected:
21
2,689
661
1,740
388
6
0
0
ACCIDENT
Total:
21
28,721
17,458
9,208
2,055
86
0
0
USER
Affected:
2
166
98
36
23
1
0
0
TRAINING
Total:
2
1,611
744
734
133
3
0
0
UTILITIES
Affected:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(COBOL)
Total:
3
337
142
156
39
0
0
0
VOTER
Affected:
1
72
60
22
0
1
0
0
REGISTRAT
Total:
2
1,411
677
585
149
3
0
0
Affected:
460
63,604
17,330
37,978
8,196
287
0
0
TOTAL
Total:
479
668,172
373,221
229,867
65,084
801
0
0
COBOL Analyst 2000Tm
SEEC, Incorporated • Park West One, Suite 200
City of Lansing C&CS
Confidential
Page 1 of 1 Printed 8/6/96
Pittsburgh, PA 15275 - 41243934= • 4124893-0419 FAX
8/10/98
Page 21
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment B — Analysis Reports
Below is a list of missing components reported from the analysis tool. These items were
not researched in the source inventory, missing from the final analysis report data, but
judged not to significantly impact the results.
Missing Components
Application: C
Component: P65C98LIB
Program
P65C96
Component: P65C99LIB
Program
P65C99
Application: LIT
Component: LITCRT, RDS
Program
DISTI
Component: LITDB
Program
DISTI DISTU 10 IOB
Component: LITLIB
Program
DISTI DISTU
Application: P
Component: PARLDO, P05P98LIB
Program
PMP99
Component: PXPLNI, PXPLN2, PXRADI, P05P98LIB
Program
P05P96
Application: QM
Component: D15QM1, RESART-DS, TIME-LOG-DS, WORKORDER DS
Program
P15QM1
Application: QQ
Component: P15QQILIB
Program
P15QQ1
Application: QU
Component: COMSHELPLIB
Program
COMSHELP
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 22
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment B — Analysis Reports
The following information is a listing of all the date -related search patterns used by the
analysis tool for identifying date -impacted suspect variables within the application
source code.
Date Pattern search strings
DD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=10 DateFormat=DD
DDD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=10 DateFormat=DDDMM Hyphen=BOTH
MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=12 DateFormat=MM
MMM Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=12 DateFormat=MON
YY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=14 DateFormat=YY
CC Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=16 DateFormat=CC
D Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=18 DateFormat=DD
M Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=18 DateFormat=MM
Y Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=18 DateFormat=YY
YE Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=18 DateFormat=YY
YEA Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=18 DateFormat=YY
YR Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=18 DateFormat=YY
C Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=18 DateFormat=C
C Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=18 DateFormat=CC
YYY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=18 DateFormat=CYY
YR Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=18 DateFormat=CYY
CYY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=18 DateFormat=CYY
YYYY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=18 DateFormat=CCYY
CCYY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=18 DateFormat=CCYY
YR Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=18 DateFormat=CCYY
DDMM Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=20 DateFormat=DDMM
MMDD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=20 DateFormat=MMDD
YYMM Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=22 DateFormat=YYMM
MMYY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=22 DateFormat=MMYY
YYDDD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=26 DateFormat=YYDDD
MDY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=26 DateFormat=MMDDYY
DMY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=26 DateFormat=DDMMYY
YMD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=26 DateFormat=YYMMDD
MMDDYY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=26 DateFormat=MMDDYY
YYMMDD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=26 DateFormat=YYMMDD
DDMMYY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=26 DateFormat=DDMMYY
CCYYMMDD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=28 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
CYMD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=28 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
CCYYMMDD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=10 MaxSize=10 Priority=28 DateFormat=CCYYXMMXDD
YMD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=29 DateFormat=YYXMMXDD
YYMMDD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=29 DateFormat=YYXMMXDD
DAY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=30 DateFormat=D
DAY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=30 DateFormat=DD
DAYS Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=30 DateFormat=DD
DAY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=30 DateFormat=DDD
DAYS Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=30 DateFormat=DDD
PERIOD Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=31 DateFormat=W
WEEK Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=31 DateFormat=W
WEEK Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=31 DateFormat=WW
MONTH Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=32 DateFormat=MM
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 23
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment B — Analysis -Reports
Hate Pattern -search -strings cost.
MONTH Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 P.riority=32 DateF.ormat=MON
YEAR Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=36 DateFormat=YY
CENTURY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=34 DateFormat=C
CENTURY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=34 DateFormat=CC
YEAR Hyphen=.BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=34 DateF.ormat=CYY
CENTURY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=34 DateFormat=CCYY
YEAR Hyphen=.BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=.34 .DateF.ormat=CCYY
DATE Hyphen=.BOTH MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 P.riodty=40 DateFormat=YYDDD
JULIAN Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=40 DateFormat=YYDDD
DATE Hyphen=.BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=40 DateFormat=YYMMDD
GREGORIAN Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=40 DateFormat=YYMMDD
DATE Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=40 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
JULIAN Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=40 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
DATE Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=40 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
DY Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=50 DateFormat=DD
DYS Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=50 DateFormat=DDD
MO Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=52 DateF.ormat=MM
MON Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=52 DateFormat=MM
MTH Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=52 DateFormat=MM
MNTH Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=52 DateFormat=MM
MON Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=52 DateFormat=MON
MTH Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=52 DateFormat=MON
MNTH Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=52 DateF.ormat=MON
CENT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=54 DateFormat=C
CEN Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=54 DateFormat=C
CENT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=54 DateFormat=CC
CEN Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=54 DateF.ormat=CC
CENT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=54 DateFormat=CCYY
DT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=56 DateFormat=YYDDD
DAT Hyphen=.BOTH MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=56 DateFormat=YYDDD
DTE Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=56 DateFormat=YYDDD
JUL Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=56 DateFormat=YYDDD
DT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=56 DateFormat=YYMMDD
DAT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=56 DateFormat=YYMMDD
DTE Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=56 DateFormat=YYMMDD
GREG Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=56 DateFormat=YYMMDD
DT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=56 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
.DAT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=56 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
DTE Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=56 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
JUL Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=56 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
DT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=56 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
.DAT Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=56 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
DTE Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=56 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
GREG Hyphen=BOTH MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=56 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
DDD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=.3 MaxSize=3 Priority=60 DateFomaat=DDD
MMM Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=62 DateFormat=MON
YY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=64 DateF.ormat=YY
YR Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=64 DateFormat=YY
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 24
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment B - Analysis Reports
Date Pattern search strings coot,
YYY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=68 DateFormat=CYY
CYY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=68 DateFormat=CYY
YR Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=68 DateFormat=CYY
YYYY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=68 DateFonnat=CCYY
CCYY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=68 DateFormat=CCYY
YR Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=68 DateFormat=CCW
DDMM Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=70 DateFormat=DDMM
MMDD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=7.0 DateFormat=MMDD
YYMM Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=72 DateFormat=YYMM
MMYY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=72 DateFormat=MMYY
YYDDD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=76 DateFormat=YYDDD
MDY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Pdority=76 DateFormat=MMDDYY
DMY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=76 DateFormat=DDMMYY
YMD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=76 DateFormat=YYMMDD
MMDDYY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=76 DateFormat=MMDDYY
YYMMDD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=76 DateFormat=YYMMDD
DDMMYY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=76 DateFonmat=DDMMYY
CCYYMMDD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=78 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
CYMD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=78 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
CCYYMMDD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=10 MaxSize=10 Priority=78 DateFormat=CCYYXMMXDD
YMD Hyphen --EITHER MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 PrioMr-79 DateFormat=YYXMMXDD
YYMMDD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=79 DateFormat=YYXMMXDD
DAY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=80 DateFormat=D
DAY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=80 DateFormat=DD
DAYS Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=80 DateFormat=DD
DAY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=80 DateFormat=DDD
DAYS Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=80 DateFormat=DDD
PERIOD Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=81 DateFormat=W
WEEK Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=81 DateFormat=W
WEEK Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=81 DateFormat=WW
MONTH Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=82 DateFormat=MM
MONTH Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=82 DateFormat=MON
YEAR Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=86 DateFormat=YY
CENTURY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=1 MaxSize=1 Priority=84 DateFormat=C
CENTURY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=84 DateFormat=CC
YEAR Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=84 DateFormat=CYY
CENTURY Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=84 DateFormat=CCYY
YEAR Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=84 DateFormat=CCYY
DATE Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=90 DateFormat=YYDDD
JULIAN Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=5 MaxSize=5 Priority=90 DateFormat=YYDDD
DATE Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Pdority=90 DateFormat=YYMMDD
GREGORIAN Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=90 DateFormat=WMMDD
DATE Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=90 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
JULIAN Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=90 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
DATE Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=B MaxSize=8 Priority=90 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
DYS Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=1.00 DateFormat=DDD
MON Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=102 DateFormat=MM
MTH Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=1.02 DateFormat=MM
MNTH Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority=102 DateFormat=MM
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 25
Confidential
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment B — Analysis Reports
Date Pattern search strings cont.
MON Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=102 DateFormat=MON
MTH Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=102 DateFormat=MON
MNTH Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=3 MaxSize=3 Priority=102 DateFormat=MON
CENT Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=2 MaxSize=2 Priority --I 04 DateFormat=CC
CENT Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=4 MaxSize=4 Priority=104 DateForrnat=CCYY
DT -Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=S MaxSize=S Priority=106 DateFormat=YYDDD
DTE Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=S MaxSize=S Priority=106 DateFormat=YYDDD
JUL Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=S MaxSize=S Priority --I 06 DateFormat=YYDDD
DT Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=1.06 DateFormat=YYMMDD
DTE Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=106 DateFormat=YYMMDD
GREG Hyphen=EITHER .MinSize=6 MaxSize=6 Priority=106 DateFormat=YYMMDD
DT Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=106 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
DTE Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=106 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
JUL Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=7 MaxSize=7 Priority=106 DateFormat=CCYYDDD
DT Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=106 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
DTE Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=106 DateForrnat=CCYYMMDD
GREG Hyphen=EITHER MinSize=8 MaxSize=8 Priority=106 DateFormat=CCYYMMDD
[EXCLUDE -LIST]
UPDATE Hyphen=EITHER
DATA Hyphen=EITHER
COMMON Hyphen=EITHER
HOLIDAY Hyphen=EITHER
MONEY Hyphen=EITHER
COMM Hyphen=EITHER
UPDT Hyphen=EITHER
EDT Hyphen=BOTH
DTL Hyphen=BOTH
ADD Hyphen=BOTH
[FILLER-PARM.S]
Size=1 Value=(0,1) DateFormat=C
.Size=2 Value=(19,20) DateFormat=CC
:Size=4 Value=(1900,2000) DateFormat=CCYY
ISYSTEM-DATES]
CURRENT -DATE DateFormat=MMXDDXYY
EIBDATE DateFormat=YYMMDD
City of Lansing C&CS 8110/98 Page 26
Confidential
1�
Year 2000 Impact Assessment
STP Final Report
Attachment B — Analysis Reports
Fund Accounting System analysis
The following reports were produced for the analysis of
the City's Fund Accounting
system which was performed prior to this report and reported on separately. They are
included here for .completeness.
fund Accounting System
Number
of Logical Lines
Application Program
Declares
Transfers
Operation
CKR Total 18057
8423
7317
2317
Affected 3631
1814
1403
414
FM S Total 277043
152269
92226
32548
Affected 62232
39006
17600
5566
PIER Total 185286
102741
62906
19639
Affected 33.280
20380
10870
2030
M G S I Total 1460
456
706
296
Affected 229
93
110
26
All Programs Total 481846
54800
263889
163155
Affected 99372
61293
29983
8036
% Aff. of total lines 20.6 12.7 6.2 1.7
Application Summary Report
t.???�it•{{'.,T. i �t?i:'.:i•. ??:h., 5".i:.y'i J
?•'�f•ki."?:�}:?Y.=?Y'k?``4::ifi:.W�}tjYQ��:t}i.:f>
?;:�:Y::.',';`.'kt.':'-::1i:.'•h-ii yy>Rti�ititi{i'i??ti74+�9`?..t,✓+r.?=:tijii•:j✓qkt:�i'.,-:?SY;+?j{f,.j��
:4n;{{k,„h,.;!F.!-tti•:?t�.;E. ;.; h;t:(jt•Q'Z;fFF'ffk�:-•?,4%tF
t;!„'�.''�'•`�m�.�x-. °�,X� �aay'.FJ,•:::'{�r,y�,
t
i:Y "rf:•f
E.;:::::tY:i:•f,iiANF:
i";:;;:: .n3:?:?;?Y
�ffk�:i?i�f`F:. f•t;:h''
t-^,.?J
-;k�,4"4-.�P.'��6�`9��st;
ti�::•Y.i'.?:?i•t?+r•ltjiK
'''Y:i-fiff:ifiY�1:.•:
:.:...:.::.;;:=
F::.
a
:i?i,?;';:•:it::tY?j;;:Y{'h`'•'.%H?;.:
fft�kifF:•F
k�v}�.;Mq;.;.
'�-;. ftiF,
�,;` °;._-•,..,%
��v ••+:3
�.i`'.-�'�aY.'','
t:. ?iF?4:i-ffFt.
`OY./q
.:
t??:'�.•:..
•fkFfiF'-F}kr
..:;n. .t
<k'.�f,,:.•f•:fF'r..,f,
y
4^l�ti
3+k✓..`•�r•�•
�'•�+r�11MW
H..
1:� n
.3 ,�•W�y`--}.�f^'Ffr
•?:_.?. fit•
�':+kt��+"�.`---
tR (�' �•'^i•_'Fiti�
`+•F.2k' L,iii
:F
fD��{__+;
TOTAL: 372 368 317
In the FMS application the following programs are missing from the reports at this time due to the fact that the
SEEC tool found syntax errors (according to their logic): AGCYF, CARRYFOR, JEF
City of Lansing C&CS 8/10/98 Page 27
Confidential
City of Lansing
0.
Computer &Communication Services
Year: 2QQ0 Impact Assessment
FYnal Report
by,
Senior Technology Partners
August 10, 1998
* Year 20D0 I*act Asse,ssment
* Project Scope
Assess. the extent ofthe Year, 20QQ
conversion effort that would be. required to
ensure that the� City,. 9-S, mainframe
W 11 11 4k-
applications, are millennium compliant.
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 2
Pro i ect Approach
• Phase I
— Evaluate Acquisition options for the Impact
Assessment(IA) software tools
— Establish the project office, project plan and
management reporting structure
— Set-up the mainframe to PC download* environment for
transfer of source code
• Phase II
— Inventory, categorize and transfer all mainframe
application program source code files to the Year 2000
IA PC workstation
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 3
Proiect Approach continued.
• Phase III
— Develop Y2K date related pattern strings to apply to the
City's applications
— Complete the source code analysis utilizing the selected
IA software tool
— Develop Y2K analysis reports identifying the number
of required code changes
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 4
Proj ect Approach continued
• Phase Iv
— Provide a final Y2K Impact Assessment report
including:
• Findings by application
• Remediation strategies (Repair/Rep-lace/Retire)
based on City's priorities &event horizons
• Estimated effort, cost and timeline to correct the
impacted applications
• Recommend approach based on preliminary market
survey, event horizon and impact on the City's
operations
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 5
Analysis Findings - InventorX
._ _
City of Lansing Application Suite: A14 Source
_
Appl'n Directory Total
Name
Function
Author
Pgrms
LOCs
A
Appraisal
INH
21
10,584
B
,. � � ..�.:....
Backup
_INH
1':
177
C
Cash Accounting
;INH
191
78,659
CKR
Check Reconciliation
SCT
77
12,300
E2
Retirement
;INH
155i
na
FMS
Fund Management
;SCT
516
175,644
J
Parking Tickets.
INH
325i
55,005
LIT
'Local Income Tax
iSCT
559
1627580
P
Property Tax
'INH
6031
1917070
PUR
Purchasing
:SCT
340i
99,846
MGSI
Fund Accnt. Support
:SCT
25=
1,866
QC
Cogen Training
INH
322
17671
QG3
Corns Support
INH
8
342
QM
Time Accounting Sys;
INH .
56
6,463
QQ
User training
INH
9
2011,
QS
Scheduler/Dispatcher;
INH
3
995
S u btotal
21921 '
7991213
8/10/98
City of Lansing Impact Assessment
0
Analysis Findings - Inventory cont.
City of Lansing Application Suite; Al Source
App1' n Directory Total
Name Function Author Pgrms LOCs
QT3
Tap Library Sys
INH
2
1,378
QU
Utilities
INH
63
16,015
QW3
......_
Writing
_ ... _
:INH
1
39
R3
.. __........ _
.Old Real Property
INH
1,
220
S
Property Sales
INH
54
22,147
T
Traffic Accident
INH
68
15,160
U
Voter Registration
INH
238
28,837
W
Stormwater
INH
57
6,763
Y2
Payroll
INH
150
na
ZB
Bicycle Registration
1 INH
12
.2,451
A
Fixed Asset Inventory: INH
82
8,134
ZK
Telephone Book
I INH
32
8,542
ZP
Public Notif. Letters
INH
12
3,440
ZT
St. Trunkline Acct'ng
INH
17
4,316
Subtotal
789
117,442
Grand Total
3,710
916,655
Notes:
1. Most Cobol source is .Cobol74
2. Applications being replaced; no IA required.
_
3. Not application programs; rather source modules referenced by other app's.
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 7
Impact Analysis Results
APPLICATION (Cobol)
Local Income Tax(LIT)
Appraisal (A)
Backup (B)
Cash Accounting (C)
Parking Tickets (J)
Property Tax (P)
Cogen Training (QC)
Time Accounting (QM)
User Training (QQ)
Scheduler/Dispatcher (QS)
Tap Library Sys (QT)
Utilities (QU)
Property Sales (S)
Traffic Accident (T)
Voter Registration (U)
Stormwater ("
Bicycle Registration (ZB)
Fixed Asset Inventory (ZI)
Telephone Book (ZK)
Pub. Notification Letters (ZP)
St. Trunkline Acct. (ZT)
TOTAL:
8/10/98
Total
Impact
Total
Tot. LOC
% of
Pqrms
Pgrms
LOC _
Impact
Tot.LOC
228
226
365,634
38,662
10.5
13
11
14,180
1,147
8.1
1
1
138
25
18.1
40
40
63,306
3,849
6.1
90
72
11,114
804
7.2
101
97
128,440
12,306
9.6
15
7
na
na
na
3
2
1,945
185
9.5
2
2
1,611
156
9.6
2
2
1,227
140
11.4
1
1
na
na
na
5
1
na
na
na
31
31
29,026
2,375
8.1
21
21
28,721
2,689
9.3
40
25
1,411
72
5.1
12
10
na
na
na
5
4
1,824
227
12.4
15
13
na
na
na
17
7
8,487
362
4.2
6
6
31977
81
2.0
8
8
6,794
424
6.2
656
587
668,172
63,504
9.5
City of Lansing
Impact Assessment
Remediation Strategies':
Approach Definition
Repair Apply code changes to the
applications source using a
project development team
Replace Replace existing application.
with a new purchased 3rd
party system or an enhanced.
existing. application
Retire Remove application and
discontinue support
Pros & Cons
+ uses stable environment
+ No retraining requ9.
ired
+ No new software purchase
- Dev. schedule risks
+ Upgrade environment &
appl'n(state of the art}
+ Enhanced functionality
- Additional costs:. software,
environment upgrades,
training and support
+ Budget savings
+ Less software support
- Political issues
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 9
Factors: Influencing Remediation Approach
0 Event Horizon -The actual time when an
application will fail. due to: a century date
calculation error.. Can be befQre !an.. 1, 2QQQ.
• Triage-- The determination of implementation
priority and approach considering the application
0. 0.
event horizon, remediation window and criticality
Market- Availability - Are other options available
in the current marketplace for replacement
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 10
Recommended Strate
Due to the short temediation window of one year, lack of
available replacement packages, investment in current
infrastructure and the technology migration strategy being in
its early stages, the City should:
• Retire applications where feasible
(User Training, Utilities)—IoAW �rQRUs ,
• Replace candidate applications with 3rd party software
systems where available
(Parking Tickets, Income Tax, ' ,Fixed Assets => Monitor II)
PC, - b
• Remediate remaining business critical, applications, and
• Evaluate high return enhancements that could be specified
during remediation. and applied shortly there after
(Possibly enhance current income tax application if replacement
package is not a viable, cost effective solution)
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment I 1
Preliminary pylication Reifi e-diation Cost
Application
Hours
Cost Est.
Income Tax
6005
678,500
Property Tax
4625
523,300
Parking Tickets
2.175
245,500
Schedule/Dispatch
.5,0
62000
Traffic Accident
5�O
62,400
Voter Registration
900.
1011.000
Bicycle Registration
110
12,700
Fixed Assets
370'
41,9900
Telephone Book.
300
34,800
St. Trunkline Accounting
200
22,900
Public Notification Letters
120
13,300
8/10/98 City of Lansing finpact Assessment
12
Prelmi
Application Remediation Cost cont.
Application Hours
Utilities 90
COGEN Training
Time Accounting
User Training
Tape Library System
Backup
TOTALS
Notes:
340
70
.40
16
16
15,977
Cost Est.
10,200
38,000
7,900
4,700
1,800
1,800
1,8Q6,900
1. Application hours includes prorated effort to establish the project office,
develop a project plan, set-up control environment and software,
establish and run baseline tests, and overall project management.
2. Hardware, software and communications resources provided by the city.
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 13
Estimated Proieet Timeline
A. projected project timeline of one year to complete
iemediafion for all of the Cit's} a�p►plications is feasible
based. on:
Utilizing 7-8 pro ram er analysts, 1. full. time project
manager and. Cite resources w-here. needed.
Project. start date set as early as possible. Recommendation
would be: to start by September 1, 1998..
Completion of last appl -cation would be approximately one
year from start: cif* . ro' eet t
A one: year schedule would lease a small buffer period
before we anticipate the first. application would fail
8/10/98 City of Lansing Impact Assessment 14