Assess whether vendor terms allow customer data in training after an agent

SITUATION After an agent that refunded customers above its limit, reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality is the working evidence for AI committee secretariat in a regulated entity that cannot reconstruct last month's decisions. Decide whether vendor terms allow customer data in training using only what reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality actually supports.

DECISION AI committee secretariat in a regulated entity that cannot reconstruct last month's decisions must choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact using reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality after an agent that refunded customers above its limit.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. AI committee secretariat can defend Policy or governance breach from reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality after an agent that refunded customers above its limit in a AI Governance Layer challenge. 2. AI committee secretariat cannot defend Policy or governance breach from reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality; Model defect is what the extract actually supports after an agent that refunded customers above its limit. 3. An agent that refunded customers above its limit never reached the population in reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality — reopen intake, do not close vendor terms allow customer. 4. Two facts in reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality after an agent that refunded customers above its limit conflict for AI committee secretariat; hold this Control Plane and Scoring file.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Name the override that would let vendor terms allow customer proceed without a silent bypass. 2. Test whether an agent that refunded customers above its limit changed routing, logging, or human-in-the-loop on the live agent path. 3. Score whether the agent action in reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality was in-policy, out-of-policy, or unlogged. 4. For this AI Governance Layer Control Plane and Scoring file, read reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality against an agent that refunded customers above its limit and write the one fact that would move vendor terms allow customer for AI committee secretariat.

RECOMMENDATION Choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact on this AI Governance Layer / Control Plane and Scoring packet (reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality after an agent that refunded customers above its limit). The follow-on Control Plane and Scoring action is what AI committee secretariat does next: implement the option, assign an owner, and log the missing fact.