FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
_FAX TRANSMISSION
BIRD & BIRD
90 Feller Lane
To: ICL London EC4A UP
ae II]
I
Fax No: ‘ I I (
POH-619D ;
From: Hazel Grant Te ‘ 119 London
Client: BA/POCL
Matter: BA/POCL
Account.No; BPOCL-1
Parnes
Date: 16 October 1996 0 Hams
Ge Cam
DM Caythwaite
TM Cook
Number of pages (including this page) : 2 G wet
P smth
Time:
Note: This fax is intended for the named addressee only, It contains information which may be confidential and
DW Byam-caok
which may also be privileged. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised lo receive for the addressee) -
you may not copy of use if, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received it in error ploasc notify us cy
iminediately so that we ean arrange for its retum: Todo so, or if you have any queries, please telephone O17) owas:
415 6000, Dien
M Macdonald:
Message: DM Cstore
Cw Recs
RSW Bary
5) Hubner
Dear fim PD Qainan
HR Sadia
- : DH Aye
Please find attached draft minutes of the CNT meeting held on 10 October. I Ri Wad
should be grateful if you would circulate these to Tony Oppenheim and Warren RR Cham
Spencer. Please note that the minutes are subject to both Pathway’s and the cncseete
> NT onkine
Programme’s.comments. RM Siders
SK Topping
TCE Tether
HEP eanon
VS crook
TRO Asenan
Conmullanls
KT CAmald
SNL chahoo
P}Dann
ECofMice 2004 Avenue Louisa 1050 Besa, Bulgum Telephone {
Hong Kong Office Suite 1306 12/F, Ninc Queen's Réad Central, Hong Kang Telephone
vertB'd
OL quid & dara’ woud 7£:82 SE6T-L50-3T
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
B&B/DRAFT/16 October 1996
NOTES OF CNT MEETING HELD ON 10TH OCTOBER 1996
Present:
Pat Kelsey }
Keith Baines )
John Cook )
Stuart Riley ) BA/POCL Programme
Tony Oppenheim }
Jim Morley ) .
Warren Spencer } Pathway
Hamish Sandison )
Peter Elliott )
Hazel Grant } Bird & Bird
Agenda Comment Agreed
item Points and
Action
Points
1 Minutes of the last Meeting
Tt was agreed that the minutes of the CNT meetings held on 19
September 1996 and 25 September 1996 were accurate and that no
amendments were necessary. Agreed
Minutes dated 25 September 1996
PROGRAMME ACTION POINTS
1. Change Contro! Notes. John Bennctt has signed the CCNs for
Live: Trial and the Operational Trial Structure. The’ CCN in
relation to the change of POCL signatories has not yet been issued.
Tony Oppenheim confirmed that this was not contentious.
1 KBABPOCLIO01\MINUTES\1G0CTOBE.IUG
ver28"d
OL auld 8 dala WOMd @£:82 9661-10-97
verea'd
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
5. Change'to Roll Out Sequence. Pathway’s paper relating to
this was tabled at the PDA on 9 October 1996. Tony Oppenheim
bricfly stated the content of his papcr. The paper contained an
impact statement suggesting that costs would be increased by £2.2
million, The PDA Board were not happy with this potential I
inerease in costs’ and had asked ‘its staff to revisit the whole
question to remove constraints 10 try to limit the cost impact. The
only constraint definitely to be rclained would be to have four tl
‘implementation teams (rather than three). In addition, there might
be a relaxation in the coupling between site surveys, ISDN and post:
office implementation. As a result of this change in the constraints,
Pathway suggested that the change in Roll Out Scquence could
proceed without ‘any financial impact. Tony Oppenheim was Vy,
concerned to eaiure that POCL and DSS agreed this method of Nas
proceeding since the lack of confirmation has‘caused Pathway real
problems. For example, it is causing uncertainty with Pathway’s
Subcontractors, Pat Kelsey agreed to speak with Bruce McNevan
to facilitate confirmation by POCL and DSS of the removal of
constraints.
Tony Oppenhcim confirmed that the start date for Roll Out is to
remain 1 July 1997.
6. Generic Acceptance Criteria. Jim Marley has written to Pat
Kelsey conceming this.
7. Changes to Requirements. Jim Morley has contacted Alan
Fowler conccrning requirements 511 and 906.
Pat Kelsey
The Programme is to redraft service definitions to include a {Sohn Cook
drafting note suggesting the insertion of further requirements. \\
Pathway will then comment on the drafting note.
y 6 pws: el Hes
I dot don
pont
2 KABIBPOCLIO0 \MINUTES\10OCTOBE I
OL Gald. 3 dala WOds Zf£:aZ I66T-LOO-9T
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
8. Liquidated Damages/Guarantees. This subject is no
longer relevant given the I July start date.
ICL PATHWAY ACTION POINTS
1. Agreements to Agree. The list of Agreements to agree has
now been sent by Jim Morlcy to Pat Kelsey. It was agreed that this
would be discussed later in the mecting.
3. Implementation Requirements J
a iv Tv,
3.4 Releases, It was apreed that this would be covered in a Gor TS
discussion of the agreements to agree. Pat Kelsey
3.2 TIP. Pat Kelsey has spoken to Jahn Mcagher concerning
this issue. TIP is subject to several specifications being
discussed between the parties. Tony Oppenheim pointcd
out that the original CAR date was the 30 August.
Although progress has began nade the CAR is still late and
therefore e,may hot be put into release one. Tony
Oppenheim would like the TIP requirement agreed by the
end of October. Pat Kelsey to discuss with collcagucs, Pat Kelsey
33 Requirement 902. Keith Baines has becn working with
POCL to agree benchmark times. At the moment, he is
awaiting a Pathway document on a proposed alternative
method of measuring times, Tony Oppenheim confirmed
that thc paper on measurement would be tabled before the \ \
next_CNT mecting next wock. Keith Baines and Tony
Oppenheim agreed that this is extremely urgent and must
be accurate. Tony Oppenheim pointed out the issue was
the whole process of recording all the transaction times
whereas the Agrccment shows.only a representative few.
There arc two issues arising from this.
3 KARIBPOCLI01\MINUTES\IGOCTOBE.IUG
perra'd =f OL dala 8 dala WOYNS ZE:8Z 366T-190-9T
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
@ First, for services excluding EPOSS, it is
necessary lo agree a representative transaction
time. Account must be taken of porallcl
processing and other counter clerk work and
interruptions.
Gi) EPOSS services. This issue has been discussed
in previous CNT meetings (i:¢ that thé transaction Keith Baines
time is presently y + 5 with no indication of the
definition of y).
It was agreed that’ Keith Baines would deal with this issue with
Tony Oppenheim. The issuc cari now be removed from the agenda
although it should continue to be monitored by CNT.
4.1 Contracting Authorities’ Responsibilities. Tony Oppenhcim
tabled a paper entitled “Top CARs”. Tony Oppenheim emphasiscd
that it would be necessary to galvanisc the process of resolution of
CARs. Some points on the Top CARs list are Pathway’s actions.
However, some Programme members are taking the resolution of
CARs more seriously than others. Further problems are that
difficult items are holding up the resolution of CARs. For
example, while 80% might bc agreed on one CAR with 20%
outslanding , the 20% may be critical. Tony Oppenheim said thet
Pathway has stressed to Programme members that the CARs arc
time critical, however, there are problems in ensuring that DSS and
POCL agree on the resolution of CARs.
The CNT then reviewed thc paper and commented on some of the eo
CARs.: e
bet yt
4.1.1 CAR 933/2. Stuart Rilcy will facilitate agreement. cat yy “4 ant
% ’
Stuart Riley qv ae!
rau oo ye
4 KADBPOCLI00/WMINUTES\OOCTOBE. HIG Ao"
nN au
Wi ew
wer
OL Gala 3 dxia@ WOYS fF:a2 366T-190-ST
’
versa'd
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
4.1.2 TIP, it was agreed would be dealt with as referred to Agreed
above. Host AIP Technical interface was late.
4.1.3 Smart cards. These are to be included in Releasc 2 and are
therefore not contentious, PPD was very late.
4.14 Requirement 895. Pathway will raise a CCN regarding
reports, This hus been agreed at working level.
4.1.5 [Security issue] Release 1 may not implement final
agreement on these.
Tony Oppenheim’s view was that most-CARs-were expected on 31 Pat Kelsey
August and arc one or two months late. Tide, Release T may 20° Ju cett
not have the agreed content or may not be complete. Pat Kelsey t (2 ie je
—
agreed to share the paper with colleagucs. Gesexoset er
et
, Teel,
Stuart Riley pointed out-that some items are awaiting Pathway pot ete auwe
actions and some Programme actions. Tony Oppenheim said that Caveat “le
pit
he had a morc positive view of CARs now compared to one month wer i
ago. a
There then followed discussion of ownership or sponsorship of
CARs. Tony Oppenheim thought that therc was nol enough Pat Kelsey
ownership of CARs. Pat Kelsey agreed to spcak to the people = and Jim
responsible for CARs. Jim Morley agrccd to assist, Morley
Tony Oppenheim pointed out thal there were key individuals
uccessary on both sides to resolve many outstanding issucs. These
kcy individuals were being stretched and therefore targcls were
difficult to hit. It may be necessary to invite a few individuals 1o
the CNT to try to resolve these points.
s KAB\BPOCLW00\MINUTES\MGOCTOBE.HIO
GL Gaia 8 dald@ WONS £6:02 9661-190-9T
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
6. Key Personnel. The previous action dale of 4 October had not
been achieved. It was agreed that this would be actioned by Warren
Warren Spencer before 18 October. Spencer
7, Amendments to Solutions. [t was agreed that the previous
action dated 17 October would be delaycd to the close of business
on 22 October (i.e immicdiatcly before the next set of walk Jim Morley we?
throughs). - 2
5 _ of
a wv
ou
CONTRACT CHANGES v amt X
Hamish Sandison reported thatthe Programme is stil considering = /
internally the suggested changes to Change Control Process.
Hamish Sandison’s paper is not yct finalised but will follow the
broad gist of the minutes of the meeting held on 19 September.
in the minutes of the CNT meeting held on 19°Septcmber it was
suggested that the Change Control Process be presented to the PDA
on 9 October. The Change Control Process Paper was not
presented to the Board on that date since. Peter Crahan wantcd to
deal with internal comments first. As the PDA Board will not meet
again until the cnd of November and the change to the Change
Control Process will need to be agreed beforc 15 November, it was
agreed that this would need to be dealt with outside thc PDA
Board,
6 KAB\BPOCL00 I\MINUTES\O0CTOBE.IUG
reread I
OL dala 8 daId WOY4 ££:82 966T-190-9T
be/8a'd
Acceptance Process. This was an issue raised in the minutes of
the CNT meeting held on 19 September. Pat Kelscy received
internal comments on Jim Morley’s papers but had not had an
opportunity to rcvicw these. Pat Kelsey to discuss the internal
comments with Jim Morley by the end of Friday 11 October.
Actions brought:forward.
Please see above.
Drop Down Process
Hamish Sandison introduced this item by suggesting that it would
be helpful to look back at the last walkthrough and look forward to
the next and come to consensus on the role of the dropdown
process and what would be.classified as successful completion of
the process.
The AUTHORITIES’ Agreement calls for transposition and
extrapolation aimed mainly at devcloping scrvice definitions.
Other points and issues may arise during the drop down process but
are not part of the process, for example, reference to extraneous
referenced documents. The Programme's view was that thc last
walkthrough had been completed successfully. Hamish Sandison
invited Pathway’s view.
Tony Oppenheim responded by saying that there were many issues
outstanding from the last walkthrough. For example, the CARs,
agreements: to agree-and Peter Elliott’s list of actions from. the
walkthroughs, although there was some overlap between these
three areas. Pathway's view was more cautious over the
completion of the last walkthrough.
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
La
LD § ee cere
I ow Se
7 KABIBPOCLIG0!\MINUTES\0OCTOBE.WG
OL duld 8 dMI@ WOYS £F:82 966T-190-ST
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
There are requircments which are now out of date and need to be
sorted out. Of the listed agreements to agree, approximately 75% _
will need to be completed. Some agreements to agrec rcfcr to a
process which needs only guidelines but others arc necessary for
Roll Out or development and therefore nced to be agreed in detail.
Thesc.are necessary, irrespective of whether or not the drap down ‘I
process has been completed.
Pat Kelsey. said that the drop down process was necessary to enable
the Authorities to award a contract based on requirements and .
yoke SPS C-
be Cokie enlon,
ex we Lt
ne He pt ye
solutions without service definitions, The drop down process is to
complete service definitions. Other information may be needed for
the busincss but not to define the Services. Tony Oppenhcim
responded by saying that the Scrvicc definitions needed
clarification Pat Kelsey pointed out that the Service Sinton
should be broad sincc this is a PFI project. = ——~ lee ce. MN
Hamish Sandison and Warren Spencer agrecd that there was 2
difference between the legal consequences of failing to agree drop
down issues and failing to agree other issues. The former yave
Pathway rights of termination and compensation; the latter did not.
Warren Spencer stated that Pathway’s concern was that it could not
hit a moving target. After successful completion of the drop down
process, Pathway would lose its right to walk away and claim
compensation. Without agrecmcnt on the further issues, Tony
Oppenheim would not be able to confirm that the drop down SO
process had been completed on 15 November 1996,
Warren Spencer and Tony Oppenheim argued that the contract
assumed in the drop down process that the agreements to agree
would be completed by the end of the drop down process. If this
is not completed, then the drop down process will be dclaycd. a
Pathway will request a CCN [or a 30 day extension and additional
compensation. In order ‘to progress this, and without the
Programme agrecing Pathway’s legal position, it was agreed that
8 KABIBPOCL'00 \MINUTES\LOOCTOBE. HIG
vev60'd
OL Guld 8 dYId WONS Ppl:8Z 966T-130-ST
besal'd
the Programme could look on a “without prejudice” basis at the list
of essential items for drop down, in Pathway’s vicw, and what
would be nice to have but not necessary.
There then followed a break in the meeting, after which Hamish
Sandison restated the Programmc’s vicw of the contractual
position. Under Clausc 201.7 of the AUTHORITIES’ Agreement,
both partics must usc rcasonable cndeavours to complete the drop
down proccss. Drop down includes clarifying requirements,
transposition and extrapolation, Clause 201.10 refers to clarifying
Tequirements so as to provide agreed mechanisms for completing
any agreements to agree. It is Bird & Bird’s advice that it is not
mecessary To resolve all agreements to agree but only to have
mechanisms in phaeg. This _has been dons. If the agreements to
agree hayc not been agreed by the date set for their agreement, this
would not be a failure to drop down under the AUTHORITIES*
“Agreement. Therefore, Pathway would not have a right to refuse
to complete the drop down proccss, nor any right to compensation
or termination.
Warren Spencer and Tony Oppenheim responded by saying that the
clarification and cxtrapolation must include resolving agreements
to agree. Hamish Sandison and Warren Spencer agreed to disagree
on this point.
There followed a without prejudice discussion concerning the
issues which Pathway now wish to resolve beforc 15 November
1996, Pat Kelsey made an initial point that after the thrce day walk
through in September she had believed that the walkthrough had
been successful Tt appeared that Pathway were going back on this
agreement. Tony Oppenheim did not agree with this analysis.
——
Although the walkthrough had been a success, he had, he said,
sought to make it clear that time was of the essence to ensure that
the action point matters were agreed. No progrcss had apparently
been made over the last two weeks.
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Va
Ne ik bes at!
—«
9 KARWBPOCL OU NMINUTES'100CTOBE.HIG
OL aula 8 dala@ WOYS ve:@2 966T-1I0-91
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
The GNI then considered the list of 24 documentspreparcd by
athway, hese fall into the following categories, x
(Waraerresen wteetine CAemeenre+)
q) Four-scrvice design documents
(2) Two secunty documents
(3) Nine interface documents
(4) Four process document
(5) Two report documents
(6) Three other documents
Some of ‘the documents needed for Release 1 and some for
Relcasc 2. Tony Oppenheim aetded togive Pat Kelscy a document Tday
containing the content list of Release 1. This document was Q; eim
discussed with John Meagher on 9 October.
There followed a discussion on the obligation to deliver Services
where Scrvices were not adequately defined Hamish Sandison
gave his view that it would not.be-possible for the Programme to
tequire delivery of I a specific item if that item had not been
specified. For cxample, if music were required, the Programme TR eae ston y
could not then require Mozart but only music. Warrcn Spencer Peco
‘was not.convinced by this argument. His concern was that therc Yr ox y
was no right to delay due to a failure to agree an agreement to
\N
Bs
Pz
{
agree.
Tuming to the list of Controlled documents, Tony Oppenheim gave
his views as follows:-
qd) BA/POCL reports and receipts - necessary
(2) BA/POCL style guide - this will only be necessary if \
POCL require it.
(€)) Sccurity functional-specification - necessary
(4) SADD - done
(5) TMS API - not necessary
10 KAB\BPOCL\90 I\MINUTES\LOOCTOBE HIG
Pertti 'd
OL quid 3 auld Woas vE:@2 9661-L90-9T
bevet'd
(6)
i)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(iy
(12)
(3)
(4)
(1s)
(16)
a7)
(18)
(9)
(20)
Q1)
(22)
(23)
(24)
Reference Data Application Interface Specification -
necessary
Reference Data Technical Interface Specification -
necessary
Fraud Risk Management Service Design Specification -
neecssary
PPD Counters - necessary
PPD - Help Desk - necessary
BPS Sccurity Statement - done
Information Notc to.accompany Card - necessary
CAPS Access Service High Level Design - necessary
CAPS to PAS /CMS Data Interface Definition - necessary
TIP Technical Interface Specification -:necessary if POCL
requires it
BPS MIS Requirements Catalogue - necessary if POCL
requires it
Service Interface Definition Document - probably
neccessary
POCL APS Generic Rules - necessary
Token Technology Specifications - not necessary
AP Client Specifications - not necessary
Pathway’s Training of User Awareness Bascline
Document - necessary
OBCS Business Process Rules - necessary
DSS Client Interface Specification - OBCS - necessary
OBCS Interface High Level Design - necessary.
Tony Oppenheim would like the status of these documents checked
and those marked as neccssary to be baselined by 15 November.
Further amendments to the base lined documents may be necessary
and agreed between the partics latcr.
The CNT-then reviewed the list of Agreements to Agree-sent by
Jim Morley to Pat Kelscy. Sce the marked up list for thosc
agreements which still remam outstanding. Tony Oppenheim
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
CNT to
ii KAB\BPOCIA00 \MINUTES\100CTOBE.WJG.
oL Guld 8 dala WONS £:82 366T-190-3T
veret'd
pointed out that these may have been agreed “on the ground”,
however a process is needed to document the agreements to agree.
Agreements to agrec may havc been resolved but they will have
becn done so
in the process of meetings, the minutes of which will
have the normal contractual exclusion preventing them from
changing any provision of the Contract other than through Change
Control,
The CNT then reviewed the outstanding list of issues from the
three days of walkthroughs,
qa) DSS Agreements
Lt PAS
Lid
Service Definition (Schedule D1)
This issuc was discussed between Pat Kelsey and
Tony Oppenheim on the telephone. It was agreed
that the Authoritics should know where the
service boundaries arc and which characteristics
arc monitored, If the Authorities decide to
terminate a service then they should receive 6
months of reports. Tony Oppenheim said that he
did not think it would be possible to present six
months of reports since the oumber of reports
accrued within 6 months might be too’ many.
Tony Oppenheim will consider how many reports
he will be able to provide given the number of
transactions completed each month, This will be
reported by Tony Oppenheim to Pat Kelsey
There followed discussion relating to the
temporary closure of post offices, Pat Kelsey has
reccived internal comment on this issue. Tony
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Tony
Oppenheim
at
Cre
Oppenhcim’said that he thought that this raised aa «20
ew-requirement (o_state-that a-payment-from a
wade, Rtiheles
K:AB\BPOCLI001\MINUTES\OOCTORF. HIG
OL Gald 8 dala WOYS PE:A2 966T-LD0-9T
ae
a qey
foreign Post Office during the closure of the Woe
normal Post Office should not be docked as a
foreign encashment. There was no functionality
to cover this at present and therefore, it may need
to go into Release 2. Progress has becn made on
this issue. Both parties still need to resolve points.
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
an
oY ers -
AS AA
gg”
aad
os tt
ea
7u
Pat Kelsey/
Tony
1.1.3 Welsh or Bilingual receipts. Pathway will follow Tony
up the issue of a CCN. Oppenheij . nN
\be
oe
\W
1.1.4 Clarification regarding permanent agent collection
and nominated Post Offices. Pat Kelsey will
consider this internally and respond to Pathway.
Tony Oppenheim pointed this may not be Pat Kelsey
available for Release I
1.1.5 Foreign encashments. Pathway to followup. te Tony it 7 0
(Les fem fer Ee 7. Oppenheim >
che o> Oe on Se wee (ert
bud sett te he ALL cj:
L.1L6 Permanently closed Outlets. Pat Kelscy ce
suggesting a working assumption that would
allow a second alternative post office, which
would not constitute a forcign cncashment. Tony Pat Kelsey
Oppenheim expressed some conccrn.. Pat Kelsey —Tt We ph ‘
is to progress this. \
1.1.7. Contingency payments. This is being discussed
internally and should be resolved by’ the end of
next week. I Pat Kelsey
CoN Fe
Ch .
,
C- Ue ad
we °
13 KAB\BPOCLIOONMINUTES\100CTOBE.WIG. y-
verpt'd OL Glad 8 GM1@ WO SE:8zZ 966T-LIO-9T
verSt'd
13
L138
Inconsistencies between this Schedule and SADD.
Pathway to action. T a a el & ia &
PAS Service Levels (Schedule D8)
121
Filling the “how measured” column and a Change
Control. DSS to action.
DSS Service Definition (Schedule E1)
131
1.3.2,
OL
Internal Service Level Measurement. See
previous discussion
Number of tcmporary tokens active. Pat Kelsey
assumed that customers may need more than one
at one time. Tokens should be valid for one
encashment session. There is a meeting to discuss
this on 16 October 1996,
Message‘on cards. Robin O’Connor has reporicd
that this requirement has been met. Tony
Oppenheim believes that a CCN is.rcquired, Pat:
Kelsey is to check the same.
Audit trail of cards status. Pathway to raise CCN.
End of customer interest. This is being discussed.
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Tony
Oppenhcim
.
Cl i
Pat Kelsey
Tony oO
Oppenheim .
oF
ith sear
Vale (anes rs
Tony
Oppenheim
Tony
14 KABBPOCLI00 WMINUTES\ICOCTOBE. 1G
auld 8 dala woud
SE:82 966T-LD0-9T
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
1.3.6 Royal Mail as Subcontractor. To be added to list of Oppenheim , ye ws
approved Subcontractors. cy CY
(3.7 Third PUN. Pat Kelsey suggesting that these are senttoa Tony oh
central delivery point.. Tony Oppenhcim.will confirm. oR fi AQ
1.3.8 “Unsafe Address”. Re. PUN Delivery. Pat Kelsey saying oe wer
there was no intention to revive this.
1.3.9 Proxy card issue. Pathway to considcring raising CCN. Pe
aT gel
or it
1.3.10 Retention of signed part of Pun. Pathway to consider ‘ony ree
we
raising CCN, ppenheim gat
Es
1.3.41 Validity of temporary token for one encashment or one Tony
encashment session, Scc above, . Oppenheim A
1.3.12 Number f tokens per book. Pat Kelsey to consider. podt ¢ yt
1.3.13 Service Levels for PAS/CMS Helpdesk. Pat Kelsey to - fo)
consider and revert. PatKelsey $ -, CW
Moe
14 CMS Service Levels (Schedule E8). phe
1.4.1 Filling “how measured” column under Change
Control, See above.
. . i
142 Bateh failure. This is covered in a letter dated 18-24. o}
. fo wot
March 1996 to Liam Foley at Pathway. False yal Le +e me) :
rejection of an entire batch will count as one
rejection. This is to be inscrtcd into the John Cook
appropriate Schedules. HO
weer? see “Eat
15 KAB\BPOCLW0\MINUTESUOOCTOBE LUG
ve/ST'd
OL Gala 3 Gala WOYS Se:8e 366T-LI0-9T
veret'd
@
2.1
2.2
POCL Agreement
BES: Service Definition (Schedule D1)
21.1
244
2.15
2.17
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Confirmation of encashments when TIP not
available. This is not a Pathway problem and is
up to POCL to decide.
Agreed
Identification of signing agents. To be discussed
between POCL and DSS.
Pat Kelsey
Requirement 788.. This is a tidying up issue and
not necessary now
Identification of casual agents. This will be-in the
PPD Counters documcnt and therefore is covered
elsewhere,
Internal - Service
comments above.
Level Mcasurement. See
Encashments when nominated Post Office closcs.
See above.
Requirement 798 and 867. Pat Kclscy to pursue.
BES Service Levels (Schedule D8)
2.2.1
“7 eer
OL
Issue of Schedule
relation to. EVP transactions.
B& (Fraud Management).
In
On times for Tony
transactions in Schedule B3, This is a joint action. Oppenheim !
=
va
Con i Ate
16
€ 2)
, ee KAB\BPOCLIO0]\MINUTES100C PORF.H.
O° per
oan S*
. a om 24) ~
ys val Xe
qul@ 8 aig WOYSd
SE:82 966T-190-9T
2.3
2.4
Tony Oppenheim and Pat Kelsey to progress and
discuss at next CNT.
2.2.2 Treatment of Manual/Automated elements: of
transaction times. Scc previous discussion.
APS Service Definition (Schedule £1)
23.1 Definition of “APS Client Service Type”.
2.3.2 Requirement R890 wording revert to Version 5.
This will be removed from the 5:3 Change Control
notes.
2.3.3. Requirement 894. Agreement ovcr management
information. This has been covered in previous
discussions regarding BA/POCL receipts and
reports. Tony Oppenheim and Keith Baines to
deal
EPOSS Service Definition (Schedule F 1)
241 Revision of Rcquiremcnt 836, John Cook
confirmed there was no need to change this
Requirement.
2.4.2 Schedule A6 of the Authorities Agreement,
relating to insertion of wording re. extent of
EPOSS on Scorecard. Tony Oppenheim and
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Kelsey
( ¥
soo Cooks %
A ere
Alan Fowler
Jel
Tony
Oppenheim
Tony 7) ;
a
Oppenheim/ Ut
Keith
Keith Baines agreed-in principle, to draft. Baines
2.4.3 Requirement 693 re. Receipt generation and Pat &
duplicate reccipts. Pat Kelsey is to raise CCN Kelsey Cc
17 KAB\BPOCL(00}\MINUTESILOOCTODE IUG.
OL quid 3 dala wows
SE:B2 966T-L190-3T
24.4
246
247
2.5
2.5.1
26
2.6.1
2.6.2
2.6.3
vevet'd ff
Requirement 818, It was agreed that the wording
of Version 5 was acceptable. As per 2.3.2 above.
A dcfinition is required for refcrenec data systems,
This will havc to bc inserted by CCN.
Requirement 818. Change to internal reporting
structure. Dave Cook at Pathway and John
Plowman at Programme to deal...
Requirement 838. Change from “do not impact”
to “may not impact”. Pathway to deal.
Requirement 80S and 816. EPOSS does not
provide these functions. Pathway to raisc CCN.
EPOSS Service Levels (Schedule F&).
Service Levels and Timing. Discussed above,
POCL Infrastructure Scrvices (Schedule G1)
Definition of POCL Helpdesk. This is being
drafted. Alan Fowler to send draft to Jim Morley.
D
OSR and two bar codes. John Cook to check the
present understanding and paperwork. It appears
thsi may have been already signed off in July.
Inactivity timeout period. POCL.to confirm that
it is happy for Pathway to deal with this.
18
OL qyld 3 dYla@ woud
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Alan
Fowler
“oO
Dave Cook
and John “yy
Plowman ey
Oppenheim ce
Tony
Tony
Oppenheim
Alan Fowler
Pat Kelsey
KAB\BPOCLI00\MINUTES\I0OCTOBE.HIG
9£:82 966T-LI0-9T
2.64
2.65
27
2.71
2.73
2.7.4
2:76
2.7.7
ber@2'd
Need to clarify references to reference data and
TIP. Keith Baines to deal
Record maintenance. Maintain should be changed
to retain. A CCN is required.
OBCS Service Definition (Schedule H1).
Outlets in which OBCS is required to be specified
in the order for OBCS. Pat Kelsey to consider
with Mick Jcavons.
Requirement 898. Change from “POCL Core
day” to “day”. Deal with as 2.3.2.
Requirement 956 re, Order Book recall. Pathway
to deal.
Requirement 899 re. Archiving of Notices.
Pathway to deal
Requirement 900 re. checking of Order Books.
Pathway to deal.
Requirement 901 re. treatment of Counterfeits.
Pathway to deal
‘Transaction times - see discussion above.
19
OL daid 3 dyld WOaSd
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Keith Baines
John
Cooky
Pat Kelsey
Alan
Fowler
Tony
Oppenheim Lo
Tony C ’
Oppenheim
Tony
Oppenheim
Tony
Oppenheim
KAB\BPOCLIGOWMINUTESOOCTOBE UG
9£:82 9661-10-91
perte'd
Change Control
Hamish Sandison provided a table relating to Change Control. This
had not yet been approved by BA/POCL. Hamish Sandison invited
comments on the table of Change Contro! notes. Comments on
both the format and the method of numbering Change Control
notes were invited to be sent to Bird & Bird before the ncxt CNT.
Hamish Sandison suggested that the present numbering which
resulted in each Agreement having its own separate numbering
Own separa numberine
system for Change Control _notcs could be improved. It was
suggested that Change Control become a regular agenda item.
Hamish Sandison suggesied the changes from the three documents
referred to above (the list of Agreements to agree, the Controlled
documents list and the list of issues arising from the walkthrough)
could be incorporated in one omnibus Change Control note.
Bird & Bird will incorporate the information thrown up by thc
three lists in the Change Control table.
The table will be amended to show in the action column the
owners, from both sides, of each item.
Tony Oppenheim pointed out that a further CCN would need to be
included to cover the increase in terminals. Kcith Baines said that
he expected the maximum number of terminals to be up to 41,000
rather than 40,000. In his-opinion, it was likely that this change
would be incorporated in an omnibus change to Schedule A6.
Next Meeting
The next CNT meeting is to be held at Feltham at 2 pm on
Thursday 17 October 1996. The Programme will attend a pre-
mecting at Feltham at 1 pm.
Hamish
Sandison
Hamish
Sandison
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
20 K:ABWBPOCLIOU L\MINUTES\OOCTORF. HIG
OL Guid 8 dyI@ WOYd 9f:82 966T-190-3T
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Minutes of this CNT meeting are to be provided by close of
business on Monday 14 October 1996. It was agreed that the \
Monday 14 October 1996.
—————
minutcs would be issued first and the CCN table would follow. as °
eee
soon as possible thereafter.
7 Any other business
71 Acceptance Crterig papers
Jim Morley had tabled documents in previous CNT meetings
relating to the drafting of Acccptance Critcria Specifications, It
was necessary for Jim Morlcy to obtain agreement in principle to
his documents so that Acccptance Test Specifications could be
drafted. At the moment, Pathway is producing Acceptance
Specifications on the basis set out in Jim Morley’s papers. Jim
Morley either requires agrccment to thc principles so that Pathway
can carry out the sifting of Acecptance Criteria to decide which
ones can be tested or the Programme and Pathway must work
together to sift the Criteria. Tony Oppenheim suggesting that a
meeting should take place so that the process can be agreed and_
specifications already prepared can be discussed.
a
a
Pat Kelscy will consider with colleagues and speak to Jim Morlcy (\ .
on Friday 11 October. Pat Kelsey
re
E
Jim Morley will be able to produce the’ first) Acceptance Ze
Specification for BES on Friday 11 October. Jim Morley v
Jim Morley_
Although Jim Morley is happy with the Acccptance Spccification
there is a problem relating to the assignment of severity Icvels’to
the tests before the tests are carried out, Pathway would like to
have severity levels assigned. However, the problem will be
deciding on the type of failure. A failurc could be severe or non-
severe, Therefore, it is not practical to assign severity levels now.
21 KAB\BFOCLIO0]\MINUTES\WOOCTOBE.HIG
veree*d
oL Guld 8 dala WOYS 9f:82 366T-LIO-3T
verted
as tt
Tony Oppenheim provided the Programme with a paper“on the
pecscntsmethed of dealing with this issuc. Tony Oppenheim
invited comments from thc Programme and Bird & Bird for the
next CNT.
The BES Specification necds to be agreed by the 25 October 1996.
Oe
72 Drop Down
Warren Spencer then discussed an issuc relating to drop down.
Tony Oppenheim had gone through a large subset of the required
items for-Release 1. However, there remained a-subset which will
be outstanding once Release I had been agreed. Hamish Sandison
had said thet Pathway cannot be held liable for [ailurc to meet
something which has n¢ ified. Warren Spencer would
like this confirmed: in writing. Hamish will discuss this with-Pat
Kelsey.
Tony Oppenheim would like confirmation that the Release 1
content-document is correct. This is especially the case since it
docs not deal with the Fraud Risk:’Management Policy or reporting
since these are not agrecd,
Tony Oppenheim then discusscd his concems relating to thc’drop
down process. Oncc the drop down process has become “with
prejudice”, the balance of risk transfers to Pathway. Pathway will
have to pay for the infrastructure and then run the risk that
Agreements to agree arc not resolved which then results in a delay.
There is agrecment at the moment that CAPS will not be on line
and sinart cards will not be available in Release 1. However, this
does not track the Requirement. The problem which concerned
Tony Oppenheim is that the Contract does not plug this hole. Tony
Oppenheim intends to deliver the.remaining functions in Release
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
Bird & Bird
and
Progra
Programme
Hamish
Sandison
Pat we Ke
22 KABUBPUCLIO0 IMINUTES\100CTOBE.IUG
OL ; dald 3 daId WOYS 9£:8Z 9661T-L90-ST
FUJ00058482
FUJ00058482
16-OCT-1996 28:37 FROM BIRD & BIRD TO 901817384124 =P.24/24
ONMTTIOLIOD i WALNNIATONTIOUNN A €z
. ~~ __NO a) { ;
wr? wONeUTULT} ‘
ul YNso1 you TTA Aejap smIp re uoneuyUoS spsou a)
~
TOTAL P, 24:
we