POL00038845
POL00038845
Memorandum
Horizon Programme
To: Michael Trotter From: Eszter Meszaros
Ce: Colin Oudot
John Meagher
Date: 7 May 1998
Subject: Release 2 Baseline related correspondence
Uke,
Further to our conversation this moming see the enclosed correspondence concerning the
Release 2 Baseline.
As you know John Meagher has been out of the office all day, therefore I referred your request
to his Direct Report. Colin Oudot (Head of Product Management) was responsible to broker
and agreement with all involved parties on the Release Contents Description for Pathway
Release 2 (NR2), advised me to forward you the following papers:
© Attachment A: Pathway R2CD - Audit Trail which summarises the RCD Quality
Review process - dated 5 May 1998
¢ Attachment B: John Meagher’s memo to Pat Kelsey handing over the sign-off of
RCD to the Contracts team - dated 15 April 1998
¢ Attachment C: John H. Bennett letter to Peter Crahan 20 March 1998
© Attachment D: Colin Oudot’s memo to Martyn Hughes of 13 March 1998.
If you require any further assistance with this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
redmtrot
Horizon Programme, 3rd Floor Terminal House,
52 Gr , London SWIW 0AB
POL00038845
POL00038845
ATAGINENT *
Pathway Release 2 Contents Description - Audit Trail
DOCUMENT ISSUED COMMENTS
RETURNED
Release 2.0 Contents Description V0.1 20/12/96 - PDA Only 08/01/97 at meeting:
Release 2.0 Contents Description V0.2 03/03/97 - PDA Only 03/03/97 at meeting
Release 2.0 Contents Description V0.3 (Ist version to be 27/03/97 - PDA Only 10/04/98
inclusive)
Release 2.0 Contents Description V0.4 09/04/97 - PDA Only
NK +
Release 2.0 Contents Description V0.5 22/04/97 )
Release 2.0 Contents Description V0.6 01/05/97 ) 14/05/97
Release 2.0 Contents Description V0.7 16/05/97 )
Release 2.0 Contents Description V0.8 20/05/97 )Superceded by advent of
New R2
New Release 2 Contents Description V0.4 (versions 0.1, 0.2 I 07/08/97 20/08/97
& 0.3 were internal to Pathway.)
New Release 2 Contents Description V1.0 26/09/97 - Pathway only _I N/A.
New Release 2 Contents Description V1.1 30/10/97 - Pathway only I N/A.
New Release 2 Contents Description V1.2 16/11/97 21/11/97 -IRO 17
“gating items”
05/12/97 - full list of
sponsor comments
New Release 2 Contents Description V2.0 24/02/97 (Draft) Signed Off with several
caveats 13/03/98
following several
iterations. :
Response from John Bennet to caveated Sign Off letter 20/03/98
POL00038845
POL00038845
3
@ Memorandum
Horizon Programme
rau des? an
To: Pat Kelsey ~
cc. Dave Miller 15 APR 4998
John Cook ~N
John Murray L
Subject:
As you know we have been attempting to agree the RCD for New Release 2 for some time
now, but to date formal agreement remains to be achieved. Whilst we reached agreement
with all parties on the functional content of this release some time ago, we have sought to
apply caveats to this agreement in order to protect our wider interests. It is the content of
some of these caveats which remains to be agreed.
It is clear that the remaining issues are contractual, as opposed to content, in nature and it
is for this reason that I suggested.at today’s pre-checkpoint meeting that the ongoing
resolution of this issue be passed from the checkpoint to the CNT.
John Cook is familiar with the issues and has drafted our most recent response to
Pathway. Iam happy to provide any support you may require. Please indicate your
From:
Date:
File:
Release Contents Definition (RCD) for NR2
acceptance of this proposal or concerns you may have.
fohn Meagher
He Product Assurance Manager
ABCIMEOT
John Meagher :
15 April 1998 .
RCD/Checkpoint
POL00038845
POL00038845
-
20703, °98 FRI 16:52 Fy ICL PATHWAY , @oo:
. AACE MET C
ox
- BENE &
20 HAR i998 4
Mr P. Crahan - * :
Programme Director
BA/POCL Programme
Third Floor
Terminal House acd .
52 Grosvenor Gardens aX y,
sa ‘ (CL
SWIW 0AB :
- 20* March 1998
Tear Chen
Release Contents Description - New Release 2
I refer to Colin Oudot’s memorandum to Martyn Hughes dated 13" March, and
write to inform you that we are unable to agree to’a number of the conditions -
which are primarily contractual rather than technical in nature - set out in that
letter. Since the memorandum clearly states at the top and again in paragraph 10
that its contents are subject to contract and without prejudice, we assume that
removal of these contractual points should not stand in the way of your agreeing
the RCD.
1) EVP
Both Drop Down and CCN105 terms clearly provide for a split release delivery,
with certain functionality deferred from [Old] Release 1 to [Old] Release 2. At
Drop Down, Smart AP was excluded from R1 and at CCN105, both Smart AP
and on-line CAPS facilities were excluded from Ric. On both occasions, the
documentation was silent as to when Soft EVP would be introduced. Since at
Drop Down its specification and associated processes had not yet been agrecd (it
remained an impli nt to Agree), we hold that it was both implicit and
reasonable that Soft EVP could not be delivered in [Old] RL. SSubsequently,
because we understood from the BA that they were much the higher priority, we
offered to bring forward (in release terms) the on-line CAPS facilities into the
first full contractual release. We madc it clear at the time that we could not deal
with Soft EVP in the same release, and this was accepted by the PDA and BA.
The point is that the BA should have no expectations of Soft EVP at NR2. We
have committed, subject only to timely agreement on specification and processcs,
Shb/Mar.98/196 1
\6
per
JH. Bennett -
Managing Director
ICL Pathway Ltd
Forest Road
Feltham
Middx TW137EL.__.
Teli
Fa
Ke patrmay tia *
Ragisteres ti Ergiana no 3011561
Megistered Ortce
20 fnsouy Severe
Loncon (C2 105
POL00038845
POL00038845
ICL PATHWAY
PKL LrDZ PAN
to show “proof of concept” of Soft EVP during Operational Trial so as to provide
confidence that it is in the pipeline for NR2+.
2. Roll-Out Limit
Paragraph 4 seeks to impose a new constraint not comprehended in the contract’
‘The contract provides for roll out [only] against the guarantec, and we would not
do otherwise. The contract provides for a second Acceptance release (as above)
but it does not set a deadline for its introduction. To seek to do so when the
detailed end to end processes for Soft EVP have still to be agreed (they will
involve process changes within the BA domain and possibly changes to.BA and
POCL interface specifications) we hold to be inappropriate,/The contract does
not contemplate an interruption in roll out. Such an interruption would mean that
the implementation and training teams would have to be put on standby,
equipment would go into stock, and the reputation of and confidence in the
Programme would be damaged. We can understand why the Authorities might
wish to introduce such a condition, but it is not acceptable to ICL Pathway
without compensation.
3. Paragraphs 1 and 3 are acceptable, providing (i) it is acknowledged that
matters which are still subject to agreements to agree will not be treated as
exclusions if not delivered in full in NR2, (ii) that Known Problem Register /
entries graded as medium severity incidents (graded by business impact) may
add up to a total of 10 at NR2+ (ie. need not be zero as paragraph I implies) and
Gii) that there is no limit on the number of Known Problem Register entries
graded as low severity incidents.
4. Mobile Configurations (paragraph 6)
The sole requirement expressed in the contract is contained in Schedule A0G
Annex 4. The reference is to “removable counter configurations” (defined as “all
counter configurations which arc designed to be removed and stored away from
the service position”), and the volume limit is set at 250 units. Although there
has been discussion as to possible solutions, nothing has -yet been agreed and
there is no “existing solution” (this remains an Agreement to Agree): We expect
the “Pathway Light” work to produce viable solutions both for mobile.
configurations and for Post Offices where ISDN is not available (not necessarily
the same solution), even if the “Light” concept proves infeasible or unacceptable.
We plan to show “proof of concept” of a mobile configuration during
Operational Trial but, given the volume limit, do not accept that non-availability
or the existence of residual faults at the end of Operational Trial could be deemed
to constitute high severity Acceptance incidents.
5. Carded Casual Agents (paragraph 8)
Carded Casual Agents are a component of the on-line CAPS facilitics which ICL
Pathway offered to bring forward from the second contractual release. As stated
in point 1 above, the inclusion of these facilities in NR2 is not demanded by any
Shb/Mar.98/196 2
@o
C2
(Cl
POL00038845
POL00038845
b I
ICL PATHWAY @oo
CS
existing contractual obligation. Paragraph 8 seeks to impose an arbitrary limit on’
the incidence of Carded Casual Agents fallback before we are obliged to
“fntroduce methods to significantly reduce the related manual activity by POCL
staff”. The fallback process has been the subject of much discussion between the
interested partics and it has not proved possible to agree any better method than,
that currently planned. It would not make sense for us to commit to introduce”
something which has yet to be defined. We will of course monitor actual
experience and will co-operate with POCL if there is a problem.
6. We accept paragraphs 5, 7 and 9 as they stand.
¥,
Ih summary, we can agree some of the conditions you seek as they stand-and f
some with our own caveats. However, we consider that it would be wholly
inappropriate to agree to such terms on an extra-contractual basis. To do so
. Would cither involve us in a collateral agreement or alternatively would have no
meaning whatever,
We request that you approve the NR2 RCD with all references to post office
limits or dates removed so that it can be confinhed by CCN on a “with
Prejudice” basis. While that leaves open the question of timetable and the wider
contractual issues between the parties, in this way we can make progress. I need
to alert you to the fact that, if the Authorities do not approve the NR2 RCD
promptly on this basis, the resulting uncertainty may delay the programme,
Jobn Bennett
Managing Director
cc. David Miller, Mike Coombs, Tony Oppenheim
Jhb/Mar.98/196 3
POL00038845
r = POL00038845
i ATACHIMENT DA
2 COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
ry SUBJECT TO CONTRACT AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE
. . benefits
Memorandum
Use
‘agency
From: Colin Oudot "3 .
To: Martyn Hughes
Date: 13/03/98
CC: Colin Galloway
Paul Wootton
Bill Kerr
Pat Kelsey
Dave Miller
SUBJECT: Release Contents Description V2
1. I can confirm that the Release Contents Description (RCD) for Pathway New Release 2 (NR2)
Version 2.0 dated 24 February 1998 has been approved subject to the following conditions:
. that the approach to Mobile Configurations and “Non ISDN Post Offices” is as
described in paragraphs 6 and 7 below;
. that the approach to fallback transactions for Carded Casual Agents is subject to
review as described in paragraph 8 below;
. that Pathway New Release 2 Plus (NR2+) will deliver the remainder of the
contracted functionality as identified as exclusions in the NR2 RCD (including AP
Smart), plus any Known Problem Register entries remaining at the point of
acceptance of NR2;
° that, in parallel with the live trial of NR2, Pathway demonstrate, to the satisfaction of
the Contracting Authorities, proof of concept of the NR2 exclusions. It is understood
: that timescales will be such that the proof of concept will include the opportunity to
i see those exclusions functioning in a test environment;
i . by 31st July 1998 that Pathway will have an agreed and credible timetable for the
delivery of NR2+
2. On successful conclusion of the live trial of NR2 (and the points above), Pathway will be
given the go ahead to commence national roll-out.
3. In the event that further elements of functionality beyond those already identified in the NR2
RCD are excluded prior to the conclusion of live trial for whatever reason, the Authorities
reserve the right to consider the significance of such further exclusions, and may, at their sole
discretion, conclude that NR2 is not fit for national roll out.
4, The roll out of NR2 will be limited to a maximum of 4,000 Post Offices and in terms of BA
services the rollout of NR2 will be limited to the payment of two benefits only plus a further
two on a pilot basis. For the avoidance of doubt, guarantees on volumes will not apply if the
4000 limit is reached before the introduction of NR2+*.
page 1 07/05/98
RCOSO12 (ISSUED)
POL00038845
POL00038845
10.
Dye
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
SUBJECT TO CONTRACT AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE
If, during the operation of NR2, fraudulent encashments reach a level which cannot be
adequately addressed by the use of “hard EVP” within the current contracted volumes then
all parties will co-operate fully to overcome the problem.
In relation to Mobile Configurations it is recognised that Pathway's current solution to this
requirement may be replaced by “Pathway Light", a proposal for which’is currently being
developed. In this context the Authorities will accept the exclusion of the mobile*
configuration from NR2 so that Pathway can defer development of their solution until April
1998 when their new proposal is due to be put to the Authorities. However, should "Pathway
Light" prove infeasible or unacceptable, the Authorities will still require the existing solution
to be subject to the “Proof of Concept” Acceptance in advance of national roll-out, with the
possibility of high severity Acceptance Incidents if no mobile configuration is provided or if
there are significant faults in this component of the solution.
You will be aware thatthe provision of an agreed solution for Post Offices where ISDN was
not available was the subject of a caveat to the sign off of SADD V4. Agreement to
commence National Rollout will be dependent on a technical solution having been agreed by
the Contracting Authorities for those Post Offices for which ISDN is not availablé, whether
or not this has been affected by the discussions on “Pathway Light”.
The revised RCD wording on fallback transactions for Carded Casual Agents (paragraph
4.1.6.11.1) is accepted on the basis that volumes are expected to be extremely small. If in live
operations, volumes of such fallback transactions exceed 0.1% of all benefit encashment
transactions, Pathway will, without additional charge, introduce methods to significantly
reduce the related manual activity by POCL staff.
In terms of formal contractual acceptance, it is assumed that all parties will agree the position
that the current provisions on contractual acceptance (whereby Pathway Release 1 was
subject to the full acceptance provisions and Pathway Release 2 was subject to an alternative
acceptance threshold appropriate to that release) will be carried forward and translated onto
NR2 and NR2+ as currently defined.
All the above will be subject to contract as part the negotiation of the next replan and
to agreement on Acceptance Conditions. Nothing contained in this letter shall be
deemed or construed to affect the existing contractual obligations or create new
contracual obligations between BA, SSA NI, POCL and Pathway. In addition nothing
contained in this letter shall construe a waiver of any default and the contents of the I
letter are without prejudice to the rights and remedies of BA, SSA NI, POCL and
Pathway, which are hereby expressly reserved.
Colin Oudot
Head of Product Management
page 2 07/05/98
RCDSO12 (ISSUED)
\I