Post Office Counters Led
Tony Oppenheim,
Finance and Commercial Director,
ICL Pathway Ltd.,
Forest Road,
Feltham,
Middlesex,
TW13 7EJ
26 November, 1999
Dear Tony,
Roll-Out Review
lam writing to confirm the position reached after the recent discussions
between Post Office Counters Limited and ICL Pathway about the Criteria
which were due to be met by 24 November 1999, in relation to Clause 6.1.1 of
the Second Supplementary Agreement (CCN 560 to the Codified Agreement).
Some of the criteria due to be met by 24 November were not, in fact, met. As a
result of this, Post Office Counters Limited would be entitled to issue a notice
to ICL Pathway, suspending the roll-out. At ICL Pathway’s request, and
following our discussions, we have decided not to issue such a notice at
present, in the hope that the work programme due to conclude by 3
December 1999, as discussed at our meeting on 24 November, and refined in
subsequent discussions between John Dicks and Min Burdett., will provide
sufficient assurance that the issues highlighted by the failure of certain of the
criteria are capable of resolution before the roll-out is due to resume on 24
January 2000.
Post Office Counters Limited reserves its right to issue a notice under clause
6.1.1 of the Second Supplementary Agreement if sufficient assurance is not
Post Office Counters Ltd
20-23 Greville Street
London ECIN ess
POL00093313
POL00093313
i
i
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
provided by 3 December. Any decision which we may take on or after
3 December in relation to the clause 6.1.1 provisions will not affect Post Office
Counters Limited’s subsequent rights to suspend roll-out under clauses 6.1.2
and 6.1.3 of the Second Supplementary Agreement.
Yours sincerely,
KEITH BAINES
Head of Horizon Commercial
2
POL-0094705.
POL00093313
POL00093313
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
ICL PATHWAY 002
26/11 '99 FRI 17:52 FAX!
] w2n00-
Keith Baines
Post Office Counters Limited,
20-23 Greville Street,
London ECIN 8SS
26 November 1999 . iC
,
Dear Keith,
ICL Pathway Response to POCL Requirements for Roll-Out decision
Our formal response is attached. It includes a number of Ppostscripts reflecting
events and discussions which have taken place since our meeting on
Wednesday.
Please let me know if there is anything which comes as a surprise, welcome or
otherwise.
Yours sincerely t _
ay as
Roglstered in England no 3013561
Registered Otfice
Se 'rnsbury Severe
London E628 15.
26/11 ‘99 17:53 TX/RX NO. 1474 Pos
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
.
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
ICL PATHWAY 003
26/11 '99 FRI 17:53 FAX
P, Y NSE. OCL ROLL-
DECISION
te 2.3
Differences in the interpretation of some performance measures exist and these need to
be resolved. In particular, there are important differences around the Help Desk.
We agree that the measure for script compliance has not worked out as intended in the
Second Supplemental Agreement and that this too needs to be resolved. Work has been
going on to enable this measure to be applied, and we wish the current implementation
status to be considcred before POCL's proposed alternative measure.
We will continue the weekly measurements of AI408 on a without prejudice basis until at
least 3 December. (The measurement of AI376 continues into January in any event, and
the prime data capture of AI298 is ongoing.)
A Closure Report for AI298 was issued to POCL on 19 November. This contained a
report on the Energis event. In it, ICL Pathway stated that it would continue to evaluate
the benefits of applying a Microsoft NT “hot fix”. The conclusion since writing the report
is that alternative changes made to router settings render the application of the fix an
unnecessary additional risk. ICL Pathway is now satisfied that the problem, even in the
event of another major communication service failure, is very unlikely to recur, On that
basis, we request that the Closure Report be approved.
In order to facilitate the resolution of interpretation differences, we consider that the good
offices of Peter Copping may be required. In the-first instance, we propose that the AI
forum jointly chaired by Keith Baines and Tony Oppenheim be reconvened to determine
what refinements of the definitions in the Second Supplemental Agreement may be
required to meet the underlying objectives and intent. [Meeting since arranged for 30
November.]
We propose that measurement of AI376 be split into two parts, 376a and 376b, such that:
© 376a aligns with the "original" Acceptance Incident relating to System Software and
excluding all Reference Data related issues, and
© 376b becomes a new measure of the Reference Data related issues (the target rate of
resolution to be matched to the actions under Item 6 below).
Generally, those actions set on each party under the AI Rectification Plans and included
in the Acceptance Resolution Timetable need to be completed according to the original
Timetable (for slippages not to occur).
KP/99n0v580.doc
26/11 '99 17:53 TX/RX NO. 1474 POs
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
‘
e
POL-0094705
26/11 '99 FRI 17:53 FAX I”
POL00093313
POL00093313
ICL PATHWAY Moos
Ttem 4
We suggest that Item 4 should be confined to consideration of I operational process.
Aspects relating to software development should be dealt with under Ttem 5.
In line with the AI376 Rectification Plan, ICL Pathway has issued a draft paper putting
forward the operational procedures to be adopted. These need to be reviewed and agreed.
We have been trying to pull forward the review meeting proposed by POCL for 7
December, and would welcome POCL's assistance to facilitate this. [N.B. since fixed for
1 December — thank you.]
Item 5
ICL Pathway is operating under a duty to its shareholders to protect its IPR. The
documentation requested contains such IPR. In addition to the three documents already
provided, ICL Pathway proposes to make one further document (the EPOSS end of day
high level design) available to a small number of nominated permanent employees of
POCL under NDA, viz.:
David Pye
Bruce Talmage
Martin Box
Graeme Seedali
The essence of Item 5 is in the final bullet point. Further to making the documentation
available, we propose a workshop to include attendance beyond the four POCL
individuals above to:
¢ Establish full understanding of existing TIP process flows, checks and business
context;
¢ From an analysis of all problem types identified, establish how (and to what
timescales) they will be prevented and/or trapped.
Item 6
We strongly support the joint work underway through the Reference Data workshops to
identify all problem root causes and the means to deal with them before restart of roll-out.
That will involve actions on both parties. The ICL Pathway position as to responsibilities
is set out in the letter dated 18 November entitled Acceptance Incident 376 from Tony
Oppenheim to Keith Baines.
KP/99nov580.doc
26/11 '99 17:53 TX/RX NO. 1474 POs
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
ICL PATHWAY 005
26/11 '99 FRI 17:54 FAX!
We consider that the scope of the resolution should cover the overall operational integrity
of the Horizon Infrastructure (and not just TIP).
The terms of reference for the work have already been agreed. We therefore wish to
highlight just the following specific points.
¢ To perform "consistency verification", Pathway needs understanding of POCL's
Business Rules;
¢ Pathway will describe the generic assumptions it has made in relation to the
application of reference data;
e Pathway intends to provide impact statements of individual changes to reference data
to enable POCL to authorise them.
¢ POCL to establish a clear authorisation route for each type of reference data.
[Yesterday’s workshop was not encouraging. Specifically, there was no direct
representation from TP. Currently, the volume of reference data changes routinely
exceeds the limits set out in the AIS. To bring these volumes back within specification,
system/process changes will be required between RDS and TP.]
Item 6a
As previously discussed at Delivery meetings, we currently have no agreed procedures
for authorising Reference Data updates into live use. This represents an unacceptable
exposure for both parties.
We request that interim procedures be agreed between POCL Business Service
Management and ICL Pathway Customer Services to be effective from 29 November.
We propose [following further subsequent discussion] that the following principles form
the basis of these interim procedures:
- Generally all Reference Data changes to be at minimum two weeks notice to allow
time for proper checking and joint review (N.B. ICL Pathway will not hold up
implementation of a reference data change which has been properly checked and
reviewed before the two weeks have elapsed);
- A limited number of urgent price changes to be subject to a ‘fast track’ minimum of
two clear working days (a daily limit to be agreed between Andy Radka and Stephen
Muchow);
- Other exceptions to the two week condition to be fast tracked on a case by case basis.
by agreement between Andy Radka and Stephen Muchow;
- POCLto identify a limited number of people fully authorised to sign off reference
data releases into the live estate;
KP/99n0v580.doc
26/11 '99 17:53 TX/RX NO. 1474 POS
POL-0094705
POL00093313
POL00093313
a+
POL-0094705
26/11 '99 FRI 17:54 FAX
POL00093313
POL00093313
ICL PATHWAY moos
- ICL Pathway to provide them with impact statements prior to approval.
Item 7
Item 5 deals with the analysis of all known AI376 problem types and how they will be
prevented and/or trapped.
In all other respects, Item 7 will need to deal with the commercial consequences of Item 5
once Item 5 is fully understood.
Items 8 & 9
ICL's position was stated at the meeting on 22 November by Richard Christou.
Item 9a (Auditor requirements)
We request early visibility of any such so that they can be considered as part of Item 5 (or
Items 4 and 6 as appropriate), Pending such visibility, ICL Pathway can make no
commitments thereto.
KP/99nov580.doc
26/11 '99 17:53 TX/RX NO. 1474 POG
POL-0094705