Rather than stupid panic threads with no substance we have conformation of problems at this late date. This whole disclosure reads like a worst case scenario. Now for those that suspect I would be hitting upon Chevron, that is not the case. They were the first (oh so long ago) that said they wouldn't be ready by the CDC and the concern they display in this disclosure is pretty much the forum view.  They deserve support.

I think that folks should support  a corporation that operates with reasonable transparency. There are alot that don't. GE's disclosure was disappointing this time around offering little information and referring to its 10 - K.

This is pretty much the start of the last Disclosures for the SEC filings. More corps. are coming up and it will be interesting to see what pops up.

And I can remember when the pollys disputed the start of this disclosure. (BKS?)

"The Year 2000 problem is the result of computer systems and other equipment with
embedded  chips or  processors  using two digits,  rather than four, to define a
specific year and potentially  being unable to process  accurately  certain data
before,  during  or  after  2000."

Time to wake up to the end of the 20th century folks.

 10k Wizard: View Filings

Year 2000 Problem
-----------------
The Year 2000 problem is the result of computer systems and other equipment with
embedded  chips or  processors  using two digits,  rather than four, to define a
specific year and potentially  being unable to process  accurately  certain data
before,  during  or  after  2000.  This  could  result  in  system  failures  or
miscalculations, causing disruptions to various activities and operations.
Chevron has established a  corporate-level  Year 2000 project team to coordinate
the efforts of teams in the company's operating units and corporate  departments
to address the Year 2000 issue in three  major  areas:  information  technology,
embedded systems and supply chain.  Information technology includes the computer
hardware,  systems  and  software  used  throughout  the  company's  facilities.
Embedded systems exist in automated equipment and associated software, which are
used  in  the  company's  exploration  and  production  facilities,  refineries,
transportation operations, chemical plants and other business operations. Supply
chain  includes the third  parties with which  Chevron  conducts  business.  The
company also is monitoring  the Year 2000 efforts of its equity  affiliates  and
joint-venture partners.  Progress reports on the Year 2000 project are presented
regularly to the  company's  senior  management  and  periodically  to the Audit
Committee of the company's Board of Directors.

The company is addressing the Year 2000 issue in three overlapping  phases:  (1)
identification  and assessment of all critical  equipment,  software systems and
business  relationships  that may require  modification or replacement  prior to
2000;  (2)  resolution  of critical  items  through  remediation  and testing of
modifications,  replacement,  or development of alternative  business processes;  and (3) development and testing
of contingency  and business  continuation  plans for critical items to mitigate
any disruptions to the company's operations.

Chevron's  plans called for all critical items to be addressed prior to 2000. By
September  30,  1999  all  three  phases  of  Chevron's   Year  2000  project  -
identification and assessment, remediation and testing, and contingency planning
- were essentially complete. Because of the scope of its operations, the company
believes it is impractical to eliminate all potential Year 2000 problems  before
they arise. As a result, the company expects that for non-mission-critical items
and those  mission-critical  items for which  temporary "work arounds" have been
developed, Year 2000 remedial efforts will continue into the year 2000.
In the normal  course of  business,  the company  has  developed  and  maintains
extensive  contingency plans to respond to equipment  failures,  emergencies and
business  interruptions.  However,  contingency planning for Year 2000 issues is
complicated by the  possibility of multiple and  simultaneous  incidents,  which
could  significantly  impede efforts to respond to emergencies and resume normal
business functions.  Such incidents may be outside of the company's control, for
example, if mission-critical third parties do not successfully address their own
material Year 2000 problems.

The company has enhanced  existing  plans,  where  necessary,  and in some cases
developed  new  plans  specifically  designed  to  mitigate  the  impact  on its
operations of potential  failures  relating to the Year 2000 issue.  These plans
are designed to continue safe operations,  protect the environment,  protect the
company's  assets and enable the resumption of any  interrupted  operations in a
timely and efficient  manner.  The company has dedicated  significant  resources
toward validating that contingency plans developed in individual operating units
are consistent and complementary across the company.  Additionally,  the company
is implementing  plans designed to mitigate the risk of supply outages occurring
in its businesses  that may result from potential  increases in customer  demand
prior to January 1, 2000. In the third quarter  1999,  the company  successfully
completed  a test of its  Corporate  Year 2000  Information  Center,  which will
monitor the Year 2000 status of the  company's  facilities  around the world.  A
variety of potential  Year 2000  scenarios  were  developed.  The company tested
processes and procedures to manage both the  information  flow and its responses
to these different situations.  As part of its contingency planning, the company
will place  emergency  response teams at key locations  around the world in late
December and early January.

The company  utilizes  both  internal  and  external  resources in its Year 2000
efforts.  The cumulative total cost to achieve Year 2000 compliance is currently
estimated at $175 million,  mostly for  expense-type  items, not all of which is
incremental  to the company's  operations.  Approximately  $145 million had been
spent through  September 30, 1999. The majority the future  expenditures will be
incurred  during  the  remainder  of 1999 with some  expenditures  in 2000.  The
foregoing  amounts  include the  company's  share of  expenditures  by its major
affiliates.

As part of the Securities and Exchange  Commission's  reporting  requirements on
the Year 2000  problem,  companies  must  include a  description  of their "most
reasonably  likely  worst-case  scenarios" from potential Year 2000 issues.  For
Chevron,  its business  diversity  is expected to reduce the risk of  widespread
disruptions to its worldwide  operations from Year 2000-related  incidents.  The
company does not expect unusual risks to public safety or to the  environment to
arise from potential Year 2000-related failures. While the company believes that
the impact of any individual Year 2000 failure most likely will be localized and
limited to specific facilities or operations, it is not yet able to fully assess
the likelihood of significant business interruptions occurring in one or more of
its operations around the world. Such  interruptions  could delay  manufacturing
and  delivery  of refined  products  and  chemicals  products  by the company to
customers.  The company could also face  interruptions in its ability to produce
crude oil and natural  gas.  While not  expected,  failures to address  multiple
critical  Year  2000  issues,   including  failures  to  implement   appropriate
contingency plans in a timely manner,  could materially and adversely affect the
company's  results of operations or liquidity in any one period.  The company is
currently  unable to predict the aggregate  financial or other  consequences  of
such potential interruptions.

The  foregoing  disclosure  is  based  on the  company's  current  expectations,
estimates  and  projections,  which  could  ultimately  prove to be  inaccurate.
Because of  uncertainties,  the  actual  effects  of Year 2000  problems  on the
company may be different  from the company's  current  assessment.  Factors that
could affect the company's ability to be Year 2000 compliant by the end of 1999,
many of which are outside its control,  include:  failures to achieve compliance
by customers,  suppliers,  governmental entities and others, and failures by the
company to identify all critical  Year 2000  issues,  or to develop  appropriate
contingency  plans for all Year 2000  issues  that  ultimately  may
arise.  The  foregoing  disclosure  is made  pursuant to the  Federal  Year 2000
Information and Readiness Disclosure Act.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 05, 1999

Answers

Thanks for the info Brian. It is just where I expected most oil corporations would be at this stage in the game. They've probably got most of their office systems fairly well remediated so that they'll still be able to take in money, but they're going to fix on failure for most of the actual production equipment.

The sheeple are really going to freak when they find out that the price of gas will probably exceed $10 a gallon early in the year, and that depending on severity of disruptions, they may not be able to get any gas later in the year. I think we are looking at a very high likelihood that some form of a state of emergency is going to have to be implemented to prevent people from rioting. I wouldn't be suprised to see some kind of government-mandated system for transportation to reserve the gasoline supply for only the most essential employees to get to their jobs. Maybe that is what all of those white busses are for.

I do appreciate as you said that they appear to be making a fairly realistic assessment of their situation, as opposed to so many other companies who have thus far been trying to sugar coat the truth. However, I do not agree with your thought that I should be supportive of this corporation. They have had plenty of time and money to deal with this issue, and they procrastinated and did not fulfill their responsibility to their customers. In the end, most of the costs of their misfortune will be paid by consumers anyway, so I hope this will motivate the people to start giving more serious consideration to alternative energy sources.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), November 05, 1999.

Guys, I was just reading through some 10q's today, do me a fovor and remove Chevron from the Dow ok? Why? Oh, no reason........

-- Alan (GreenSpin@The.Fed), November 05, 1999.

Thanks a load, Brian! Good snag.

I am also impressed by Exxon's semi-transparency.

Anyone without a Polly Brain Filter should be able to draw some heavy conclusions from this document alone.

Remember the Memphis Belle

-- B-17 (flying@fortress.com), November 05, 1999.

Whoops, I meant Chevron :)

-- B-17 (flying@fortress.com), November 05, 1999.

Hawk

It is highly unlikely that my suggestion will change consumers buying patterns but it seems they deserve my support at least.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 05, 1999.

Brian,

I wasn't trying to say that your suggestion would change consumer buying patterns. I was only responding from my personal point of view as to how I feel about the big oil corporations and their complete lack of regard for anything but profit. Prices are going to go through the roof, but as long as consumers can still buy it, they'll pay. I would hope that people would start thinking about alternatives since our supply of oil is running out, but knowing how stupid the sheeple are, they'll wait until it is all dried up and the mega-corporations again provide them with only one choice, an even more expensive solution. That is the way they control us, by making sure that we have only one solution to go with... theirs.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), November 05, 1999.

Brian,

Forgot to ask this question, and I'm just curious. When you say that Chevron deserves your support, are you talking about this 10-Q, or their overall business practices in general?

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), November 05, 1999.

Hawk

I was just refering to the 10 - Q and the fact I might buy gas there. Not being to fond of big institutions as a rule this doesn't mean that they are my friends but it has to take a bit of guts on someones part to approve their disclosure,,,,, or the situation is so bad that the above is a happy face and is part of a legal ass covering.

This would be extremely bad news.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 05, 1999.