POL00031275
POL00031275
To: Wendy Powney Copy: Bob King
Jan Gair
Charlie Hooper
Bill Kerr
From: Paul Rich Date: 7 March 1996
SUBJECT: BA/POCL - iT CONCURRENCE
1
Ape
Charlie Hooper raised the question of gaining concurrences at my Cluster
Leaders meeting yesterday (6 March) as a question during Derek
Selwood’s explanation of the Evaluation Phase.
You will recall our meeting on 7 February with Bob King on this subject,
and my note of 9 February covering that. In summary, you were going to
liaise with Alan Shepherd to ensure that my previous understanding with
Duncan Hine (my note of 1 February) about the definition of such iT
concurrence from PO Group was net. There was nothing that was
decided at the more recent Evaluation Board (which Alan Shepherd
attends) that should prevent that.
Bob King has also answered some of Basil’s outstanding queries on
Pathway by his note of 28 February, which I copied to you. I trust this is
OK,
However, there seems to be two outstanding action points which 1 would
be grateful if you could pick up please, liaising with Charlie and Bob
King/ Derek Selwood as necessary:
a) We need assurance from Alan that there still is not problem with
formal concurrence. The EPOSS issue was separately raised as a
potential additional risk (rather than a pre-ITT hurdle) at the
Evaluation Board, and Alan may need some briefing on what we are
now doing about that. You will have seen my TOR for Ian Gair’s
‘task force’ for this, and Charlie will be involved.
b) We agreed that your team would produce a separate report on
supplier's solutions to Bob Peaple so that we could understand the
impact on our IS Strategy (not as a concurrence). Please could you
pick this up too.
I would be grateful for a view on when you think these points could be
reasonably cleared by pnd.mowtasagk, Thanks
PAUL