POL00028367
POL00028367
< —p for B Le Blaclloom
—> bf Z* hpt Ee reeling mse). .
22 JUL 1999 -ES'
To Bruce McNiven/POCL/POSTOFFICE...
Smith/POCL/POSTOFFICEC
Meagher/POCL/POSTOFFIC!
Baines/POCL/POSTOFFICI
Burdett/POCL/POSTOFFICE\
Holleran/POCL/POSTOFFICE:
cc
Hard Copy To
Hard Copy cc
From Jeff Austi
Date 21/07/99 20:23
Subject Acceptance Board 4 minutes
Please find belated minutes of AB 4 on 8 duly, together with updated versions of the terms of reference
and the guidelines,
Jeff Austin
2 2 2
Abtree doe InbsortOoe Prabpattidor
POL00028367
POL00028367
AB meeting record
an Meeting Record 4
Purpose Acceptance Board — Fourth Meeting
Date/Time Thursday 8 July 1999, 12:00 to 14:00
Place
King Edward Building, London
Attendees John Meagher Horizon Acceptance Manager (chair)
John Dicks ICL Pathway Acceptance Manager
Dave Smith POCL Head of Automation Transformation
Keith Baines Horizon Commercial
Min Burdett POCL Acceptance Manager
Jeff Austin (minutes) I Horizon Acceptance Team Leader
Apologies Bruce MeNiven Horizon Programme Director
Ruth Holleran POCL Business Assurance
Agenda Item 1: Acceptance Board terms of reference
The Acceptance Board terms of reference were accepted.
Agenda item 2: Acceptance guidelines
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
Paragraph 2.1.3 deals with changes to the POCL requirements as set out in the
requirements schedule, which is one of the bases for Acceptance. JD suggested
that there was only one change, dealing with the Data Protection Act. However,
there are two others, dealing with ESNS and OBCS scaling. ACTION: On the
last topic, Pathway to convince POCL that the tests already conducted do
demonstrate that revised OBCS volumes will be supported.
Paragraph 2.1.5 deals with Acceptance. JD pointed out that the extra rollout test
of the LT2 release including the amended user training course is to cover 24 not
25 new outlets. ACTION: Amend text.
Paragraph 2.2.2 fourth bullet point contains the text “agree on the Acceptance
outcome”. JD suggested that as the outcome was mechanistic, there is no
“agreement” as such. However, it was pointed out that the Acceptance outcome
did depend on prior agreement on such matters as Acceptance Incident severity
ratings.
Paragraph 3.7.4 deals with the delays consequent upon a dispute over
Acceptance. JD suggested changing “would inevitably” to “could” and
suggested that the parties should allow for an intensive dispute resolution
session.
Actions
JA
(See 3e)
Abérec
Page I of 3
Date: 22/07/99
POL00028367
POL00028367
AB meeting record
Agenda Item 3: Acceptance scenarios
3a. Second Acceptance Phase. The contract provides for a second Acceptance
Phase of up to three months if Acceptance were not to be achieved on the
current phase. JD advised that Pathway was not currently expecting to have to
exercise this provision and therefore had not drawn up plans for a second phase.
However, if it became necessary, Pathway would prepare plans for this phase
during the latter half of the Operational Trial Review Period. It would not
necessarily be for the full three months.
3b. Resolution timetable. The contract requires agreement on a timetable for the
resolution of any outstanding medium-severity faults as a prior condition of
Acceptance. Therefore, it was suggested that it would be sensible to agree some
principles for this in advance of the Acceptance Board on 18 August. JD
advised that, in general, Pathway would expect to resolve any such faults before
Christmas 1999. It was suggested that Pathway could propose some guidelines,
principles or examples in advance of 18 August. ACTION: Pathway to bring
relevant issues to the meetings on 5/12" August.
3c. Acceptance dispute resolution procedure. The contract provides for a dispute
resolution procedure for Acceptance disputes (e.g. over severity of Acceptance
Incidents). However, the procedure involves several steps and would be
protracted if invoked as prescribed. It was agreed that, in order to minimise the
number of matters subject to dispute, a joint workshop should be organised for
wic 26 July to try to resolve as many current disputes as possible.
ACTION: POCL to prepare a plan accordingly.
3d. I JD also suggested that all the stages of the dispute resolution procedure (except
arbitration) could be concentrated into one day. This was agreed. All of these
stages involve Stuart Sweetman, Richard Christou and Peter Copping.
ACTION: Raise the proposal with Peter Copping.
3e. Acceptance Incident severity assessments. POCL sought agreement from
Pathway that in assessing the severity ratings of incidents, the impact on the
business in a steady state (i.e. with all outlets live) should be used. JD agreed
that this was the appropriate basis.
Agenda Item 4: Acceptance Incidents
4a. POCL were now producing a “Hot List” of Acceptance Incidents where one or
both parties judged the incident to be of High or Medium severity; this enabled
attention to be focused on those incidents.
ACTION: JD agreed to include Pathway’s intended method of resolution of
incidents (how, when, by whom) on their Acceptance Incident Analysis forms.
4b. I ACTION: JD to provide a copy of the Closure Report for the BIT Regression.
JA
JD
JD
Ab4rec Page 2 of 3
Date: 22/07/99
POL00028367
POL00028367
AB meeting record
Agenda Item 5: Any other business
Sa.
5b.
Se.
5d.
Se.
Access to HSH records. POCL again requested access to these records. JD to
clarify the position.
POCL requested that delays, by Pathway, in providing Acceptance Incident
Analysis forms be resolved by returning them within seven days or otherwise as
soon as possible, consistent with the nature of the incident. JD agreed to deal
with the Hot List incidents as the priority but advised that Pathway sometimes
could not identify the evidence for the fault and were thus unable to reply. JM
suggested that POCL should be informed in such cases so that they could assist
and that interim replies would be considered.
iD
JD
POCL would continue to monitor the situation. JA
AI 218 User Training — Cash Account module. POCL were reserving their
position on invoking the dispute resolution procedure. JD advised that the final
Pathway corrective work on this would be completed by 9 July and that Pathway
had now received signed CCNs for all the Cash Account software changes.
Agreed that on-line access to Pathway’s Problem Management System had now
been provided.
Acceptance Reviews hangouts were briefly discussed. It was noted that, in
connection with aspects of the HCI, e.g. POLO, field analysis was being
undertaken for POCL by an external HCI specialist and the findings would be
reported in the next two weeks. iM
Agenda Item 7: Future meetings
Ta.
7b.
The next meeting (AB5) would be in four weeks time (Thursday 5 August).
An Acceptance Management Forum is also arranged for 15'" July; JD to arrange
a substitute.
JD
Jeff Austin
21 July 1999
Abdree
Page 3 of 3 Date: 22/07/99
POL00028367
POL00028367
Horizon Programme
Acceptance Board
Terms of reference
Name: POCL Automation Project Acceptance Board
Purpose
© To formally advise the Contractor of the Acceptance outcome.
© Tosubmit appropriate Acceptance recommendations to the Managing Director of POCL for
endorsement.
© To effect any decisions consequent on Acceptance recommendations as directed.
¢ Toactas an escalation platform for the resolution of disputes over the severity assessment of
individual Acceptance Incidents.
© To act as an escalation platform for Acceptance issues raised at the AMF.
Scope
© Requirements and other obligations of the Contractor as set out in the Agreement dated 24/5/99.
e Release CSR only.
¢ The first and, if appropriate, the Second Acceptance Phase(s).
Key references
POCL Automation Project - Codified Agreement (based on the Letter Agreement and Heads of
Agreement, dated 24 May 1999)
¢ Schedule All Acceptance Procedures (now contains Schedule A7 Acceptance from the Related
Agreements as part 1 and the new Acceptance provisions as part 2.)
© Schedule B9 Timetable
Other contract-controlled documents (CCD)
e Acceptance Specifications and Consolidated Caveats
JABTOR40.doc 20/07/99
POL00028367
POL00028367
Horizon Programme
Meeting frequency and timing
It is expected that the Acceptance Board will meet on a monthly or more frequent basis during
appropriate phases of the Acceptance Phases concluding with the overall Acceptance decision.
The Acceptance Board may be invoked on an ad-hoc basis for escalation purposes in connection
with Acceptance Incidents subject to dispute.
Acceptance Board meeting dates are set out in Annex 1.
Outputs
© Overall Acceptance or failed Acceptance of the Operational Trial System. ,
© Ifappropriate, an agreed schedule for the resolution of outstanding medium-severity
Acceptance Incidents.
¢ Ifappropriate, recommendations for a Second Acceptance Phase.
e Ifappropriate, recommendations for termination of the Agreement.
© Severity assessments of Acceptance Incidents subject to dispute and escalated to the Acceptance
Board.
Inputs (prime)
« Acceptance progress reports.
¢ Numbers and details of outstanding Acceptance Incidents in total and for each Acceptance
Specification
¢ Acceptance Incidents subject to dispute and their associated business impact analyses and
severity assessments.
Inputs (reference)
e Acceptance Test Closure Reports for each Acceptance Specification
« Acceptance Review closure reports for each Acceptance Specification
¢ Other relevant Acceptance material e.g. Joint Audit reports (and reports detailing conformance
with Audit recommendations), issues escalated from the AMF
Core Membership
e Horizon Programme Director (chair)
e Horizon Acceptance Manager
© POCL Head of Automation Transformation
e Horizon Commercial representative
¢ ICL Pathway Acceptance Manager (by invitation)
Version 4.0 Agreed at Acceptance Board meeting on 8 July 1999.
JABTOR40.doc 20/07/99
Bringing Technology to Post Offices and Benefit Payments
POCL - PATHWAY ACCEPTANCE GUIDELINES FOR CORE SYSTEM RELEASE
Reference: I BA/ACC/019
Author: Jeff Austin
Classification: Horizon controlled document
Version: 0.1
Date: 21 July 1999
Status: Draft
Authority: I Acceptance Board
POL00028367
POL00028367
Distribution
Contact Area Issued
Bruce McNiven. Horizon Programme Director v
David Smith — POCL Head of Automation Transformation v
John Meagher Horizon Acceptance Manager v
Ruth Holleran POCL Business Assurance v
Min Burdett POCL Acceptance Manager v
Keith Baines POCL Commercial v
John Dicks ICL Pathway Acceptance Manager v
Horizon Library
POL00028367
POL00028367
Se
POCL Automation Project
0. DOCUMENT CONTROL
0.1. Version History
VersionI Date
0.1 07/07/99 First draft by Jeff Austin; issued to Acceptance Board
meeting on 8/7/99
0.2 21/07/99 Second draft incorporating changes (redlined) in
sections 2.1.5 and 3.7.4 as agreed at the Acceptance
Board meeting on 8 July 1999.
0.2. Referenced Documents
Ref_I_ Document Reference Ver__I_Date
1 Horizon Acceptance Management BA\ACC\004 I v3 tba
Organisation (Annex C - JAB terms
of reference)
2 Related Agreements v8.0 13/11/97
3 Letter Agreement and Heads of - 24/5/99
Agreement
Ppabgd02 2 22/07/1999
POL00028367
POL00028367
POCL Automation Project
Contents
ba]
B
°
0. DOCUMENT CONTROL.
0.1. VERSION HISTORY...
0.2. REFERENCED DOCUMENTS......
1. INTRODUCTION..
1.1 PURPOSE...
1.2 CONTENTS..
2. ACCEPTANCE & RELEASE PROCESS.
2.1, ACCEPTANCE PHASE FOR CSR.
2.2, ACCEPTANCE TIMETABLE,
2.3, TWO WEEKS RE-TEST PERIOD ..
2.4. RELEASE (ROLLOUT) AUTHORISATIO!
3, ACCEPTANCE OUTCOMES.
3.1. OVERVIEW
3.2, ACCEPTANCE
3.3. ACCEPTANCE NOT ACHIEVED ..
3.4, SECOND ACCEPTANCE PHASE..
3.5. TERMINATION ...
3.6. PENALTIES FOR DELAY.
3.7. DISPUTE RESOLUTIO!
3.8. WAIVER
4, OTHER ACCEPTANCE MATTERS
4.1. ACCEPTANCE BOARD MEETINGS
4.2. ATTENDANCE BY PATHWAY.
4.3. CATEGORY B FAULT RESOLI
4.4, VETO GROUND GUIDELINES
4.5, ACCEPTANCE BEYOND CSR.
SSS &© Cem moOUIY AY ADU nh BR BR NN WV
Ppabgd02 3 22/07/1999
POL00028367
POL00028367
POCL Automation Project
1. INTRODUCTION
11 Purpose
1.1.1 This document provides guidance to the Acceptance Board for reaching Acceptance
outcomes in respect of the Core System Release (CSR).
1.2 Contents
1.2.1 Section 2 describes the new Acceptance process
1.2.2 Section 3 describes the different Acceptance outcomes and decisions and the
circumstances in which they may arise.
1.2.2 Section 4 addresses other Acceptance matters such as the preparatory work that needs
to be carried out in advance of the CSR Acceptance phase and the Acceptance
provisions for the system beyond the CSR.
Ppabgd02 4 22/07/1999
POL00028367
POL00028367
POCL Automation Project
2. ACCEPTANCE & RELEASE PROCESS
2.1. Acceptance Phase for CSR
2.1.1 There is now just one Acceptance decision; it is in respect of the Core System. The
Core System (defined in Schedule 5 paragraph 1.1.1) is the set of core POCL services
for POCL Infrastructure, EPOSS, OBCS and APS as defined in the RCD for NR2 (per
CCN 251). The Acceptance Phase is the period of time during which Acceptance of
CSR takes place.
2.1.2 The agreement refers to a set of Acceptance Criteria (i.e. requirements). A set of
requirements for CSR has been produced by ICL Pathway as version 9.4 of Schedule
PAIS. In general, all the BPS and DSS requirements have been removed, but with
some exceptions where, for example, the BPS/DSS requirement contained a “hidden”
POCL requirement, without which the POCL services could not work.
2.1.3 The revised set of requirements is subject to contract. It may be necessary to amend
existing requirements or add new ones. There are examples in the areas of Data
Protection and Security, where POCL’s requirements were not explicitly stated
because of equivalent DSS requirements, which were more stringent; these have now
been removed and in some cases reintroduced during commercial discussions. Other
areas include OBCS scaling and fallback.
2.1.4 The agreement refers to a set of Acceptance Specifications. However, it is not planned
for the Acceptance Specifications to be amended (and re-issued) to reflect the new set
of requirements. Instead, Acceptance is being conducted against the original
Acceptance Specifications and using the revised set of requirements as reference.
2.1.5 The agreement refers to a set of a Acceptance Tests, All the tests as originally planned
for the previous agreement have now been conducted. There are new performance
tests to cover amended requirements for OBCS scaling. There is also an extra rollout
test of the LT2 release and the amended user training course to 24 25 new outlets.
2.2. Acceptance timetable
2.2.1 The contract defines a Core Observation Period (COP) of eight weeks duration
commencing on 31 May 1999. This would therefore end on Sunday 25 July, one week
earlier than under the previous agreement. The significance of the COP is that no new
Acceptance Incidents can be raised thereafter.
2.2.2 The contract also defines an Operational Trial Review Period (OTRP) of three weeks
duration commencing immediately after the COP i.e. on Monday 26 July. Four
Acceptance matters are related to this period:
. Acceptance Incidents must be reported to Pathway within seven days of their
identification and therefore the last date for reporting incidents is 1 August (but
see 2.3.4 below);
. Pathway must decide whether to invoke their right to a two weeks period of re-
testing (see section 2.3) within the OTRP;
Ppabgd02 5 22/07/1999
POL00028367
POL00028367
=
POCL Automation Project
. the parties must agree on a timetable for the resolution of any outstanding
category B faults - this must take place before the Acceptance outcome is
agreed;
. the parties must agree on an Acceptance outcome (see section 3) - this can only
take place at or after the end of the OTRP i.e. on or after 16 August.
2.2.3. The contract states that Release Authorisation must take place by Monday 23 August
(see also 2.4). It follows that agreement on the Acceptance outcome must take place
before Monday 23 August. (The contract also requires that National Rollout
commences on 23 August.) Pragmatically, both the Acceptance outcome and the
Release Authorisation decision must occur (in that sequence) in w/e Monday 16
August.
2.3. Two weeks re-test period
2.3.1 Part 2 paragraph 2.3 of the Acceptance schedule defines a two weeks period, following
the end of the COP, during which Pathway may seek to demonstrate that some or all
outstanding Acceptance Incidents are resolved, by repeating relevant Acceptance
Tests.
2.3.2 POCL are required to permit Pathway to use this provision if they so wish (and if the
Acceptance thresholds have not been met).
2.3.3. This paragraph also provides for POCL to be given sufficient opportunity to review
the results of the tests prior to the end of the OTRP.
2.3.4 Paragraphs 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 together provide for POCL to raise new Acceptance
Incidents after the end of the COP, i.e. during the OTRP, in those cases where the
new faults were caused by (or came to light as a result of) corrective work on earlier
faults that was then subject to a re-test. The extra rollout (para. 2.1.5) is to be
construed as a re-test and since some of its effects may not be observable until after
the end of the COP, this provision may be utilised to raise Acceptance Incidents in
respect of any new faults caused by LT2 and/or the amended user training courses,
observed during the OTRP.
2.4. Release (Rollout) Authorisation
2.4.1 Part 2 section 4 of the Acceptance schedule states that following Acceptance, the
Release Authorisation Board shall decide whether or not to authorise NRO.
Ppabgd02 6 22/07/1999
POL00028367
POL00028367
—SS sy
POCL Automation Project
3. ACCEPTANCE OUTCOMES
3.1. Overview
3.1.1 The role of the Acceptance Board in assessing the outcome of the Operational Trial is
to reach Acceptance outcomes in accordance with the Acceptance provisions in the
Agreement.
3.1.2 The Agreement provides for the following Acceptance outcomes.
e Acceptance achieved (see 3.2)
e Acceptance not achieved (see 3.3)
© Second Acceptance Phase (see 3.4)
¢ Termination of the Agreement (see 3.5)
3.2. Acceptance
3.2.1 Acceptance will be achieved if ( Schedule All Part 2 paragraph 2.1):
e all the Acceptance Tests (including, if relevant, those re-tests during the two
weeks re-test period) have been carried out;
e the COP and the OTRP have expired;
e the Acceptance thresholds have been met;
¢ atimetable for the resolution of all outstanding category B faults has been agreed.
3.2.2 The new Acceptance thresholds are (Schedule All Part 2 paragraph 2.2):
e zero high-severity Acceptance Incidents;
¢ 20 medium-severity Acceptance Incidents in total;
© 10 medium-severity Acceptance Incidents in any one Acceptance Specification.
3.3. Acceptance not achieved
3.2.1 Acceptance will, conversely, not be achieved if:
© one or more of the Acceptance Tests (including, if relevant, those re-tests during
the two weeks re-test period) have not been carried out;
e the COP and/or the OTRP have not expired (i.e. Acceptance cannot be achieved
before 16 August on the current timetable);
e any of the Acceptance thresholds have not been met;
¢ timetable for the resolution of all outstanding category B faults has not been
agreed.
Ppabgd02 7 2210711999
POL00028367
POL00028367
3.4.
3.4.1
3.4.2
3.5.
3.5.1
3.6.
3.6.1
3.7,
3.7.1
3.7.2
3.7.3
POCL Automation Project
Second Acceptance phase
In the event of Acceptance not being achieved, Pathway would be entitled to a three
months period to remedy the faults (Schedule Al1 Part 2 paragraph 3.1).
Following this three months period (or earlier if agreed by both parties), the CSR
would be submitted for a re-run of acceptance testing (Schedule All Part 2 paragraph
3.1). The agreement does not say how long may be allowed for this period of testing;
consequently it would be prudent to agree this at the Acceptance Board meeting.
Termination
The option for POCL to terminate the agreement applies only if the CSR has not
achieved Acceptance by the end of the second Acceptance Phase i.e. by the Final
Deadline for Acceptance (Schedule A11 Part 2 paragraphs 3.4 and 3.2).
Penalties for delay
The penalties for delay set out in Related Agreements Schedule CS apply if the CSR
has not achieved Acceptance by 30 September 1999.
Dispute resolution
There is a specified escalation route for Acceptance disputes:
© onthe Acceptance Specifications (Schedule All Part 2 paragraph 6.1);
¢ whether or not an incident is an Acceptance Incident (also para 6.1);
¢ onthe severity of the Acceptance Incident (also para 6.1);
e whether the CSR should be accepted or not ( Schedule All Part 2 paragraph 2.5) -
the most likely source of a dispute here is over the timetable for resolution of
category B faults.
The escalation route is (Schedule A11 Part 2 section 6):
e reference to the Expert for initial guidance followed by a meeting between
Managing Director of POCL and Commercial Director of ICL;
¢ reference to the Expert for a Decision followed by a meeting between Managing
Director of POCL and Commercial Director of ICL - the Decision is binding
unless POCL veto it on one of six Veto Grounds;
e a further meeting between Managing Director of POCL and Commercial Director
of ICL (to further discuss the veto);
© ameeting between Chief Executives of Post Office and ICL;
¢ arbitration.
The Veto Grounds are ( Schedule A11 Part 2 paragraph 6.8):
Ppabgd02 8 22/07/1999
POL00028367
POL00028367
3.7.4
3.8.
3.8.1
4.
4.1.
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.2,
4.2.1
POCL Automation Project
© materially affects POCL’s ability to settle with clients in a timely and accurate
way;
© materially affects POCL’s ability to transact with sub-postmasters in a timely and
accurate way;
eis likely to materially affect POCL customers in areas covered by SLA;
© materially affects critical operational processes necessary for the running of POCL;
e materially compromises the integrity of Post Office accounting systems;
is likely to lead to the qualification of Post Office Accounts or those of its
subsidiaries.
If there were to be a dispute over whether CSR should be accepted or not, the time for
the dispute resolution process to unfold could weuld-inevitably-delay Acceptance, and
hence Release Authorisation and therefore NRO, well beyond the planned
commencement date for NRO.
Waiver
Schedule A7 in the Related Agreements contained a specific provision for the
Authorities to waive the resolution of an Acceptance Incident and hence deem the
incident resolved. This provision (along with the rest of the schedule) is retained as
Part 1 of the new Acceptance Procedures Schedule.
OTHER ACCEPTANCE MATTERS
Acceptance Board meetings
The principal Acceptance Board meeting is planned for Wednesday 18 August. The
formal approach to the Acceptance outcome / decision is that the Acceptance Board
chairman will convey an Acceptance recommendation to the Managing Director of
POCL for endorsement.
The expectation is that the Release Authorisation Board meeting will be on Thursday
19 August, with NRO commencing on Monday 23 August.
Other Acceptance Board meetings during the Operational Trial Review Period are
planned for 5th and 12th August.
Acceptance Board meetings during the Core Observation Period are planned for 8th
and/or 15th July.
Attendance by Pathway
Pathway are to be invited to Acceptance Board meetings from 8 July onwards.
Ppabgd02 9 22/07/1999
POL00028367
POL00028367
POCL Automation Project
4.3. Category B fault resolution timetable
4.3.1 The principles for the timetable for the resolution of any outstanding category B faults
: are to be established well in advance - at the meeting on 8 July.
4.4. Veto Ground guidelines
4.4.1 Dave Smith has identified a contact for each of the Veto Grounds.
4.5. Acceptance beyond CSR
4.5.1 Unlike the Related Agreements, the contract has no provision for NR2+ (or rather its
equivalent CSR+) to be subject to Acceptance. Therefore, once the Acceptance
outcome on CSR is established, there is no further Acceptance activity under the
contract.
Ppabgd02 10 22/07/1999