I cant confirm the specific case.... the same code was used as is always used, so i dont see how there could be a bug.. the code was simply rerun with the correct number of minutes used instead of the incorrect number.
the only "bug" is that the training type that was used was the one that was set at the time of the second running, not the type that was set when training was originally run.. because we had no way of knowing what that training type was.