Assess whether the control plane actually controls production traffic (9554f2)

SITUATION A live AI Governance Layer Audit and Vendor Terms file in a regulated entity that cannot reconstruct last month's decisions now turns on output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output after a vendor that changed subprocessors without notice. Vendor-contract AI counsel's operations partner should state what that extract proves for whether the control plane actually controls production traffic.

DECISION Vendor-contract AI counsel's operations partner 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 output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output after a vendor that changed subprocessors without notice.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. A vendor that changed subprocessors without notice is noise around an already-controlled Audit and Vendor Terms process in a regulated entity that cannot reconstruct last month's decisions, given output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output. 2. A vendor that changed subprocessors without notice is the event in output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output that forces Policy or governance breach for vendor-contract AI counsel's operations partner under AI Governance Layer. 3. Output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output shows a one-file miss after a vendor that changed subprocessors without notice, not a Audit and Vendor Terms program failure. 4. Output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output cannot decide the control plane actually yet after a vendor that changed subprocessors without notice; hold is the only AI Governance Layer close a regulated entity that cannot reconstruct last month's decisions can defend.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Map the control-plane score in output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output to the policy gate vendor-contract AI counsel's operations partner can enforce. 2. Name the override that would let the control plane actually proceed without a silent bypass. 3. Test whether a vendor that changed subprocessors without notice changed routing, logging, or human-in-the-loop on the live agent path. 4. For this AI Governance Layer Audit and Vendor Terms file, read output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output against a vendor that changed subprocessors without notice and write the one fact that would move the control plane actually for vendor-contract AI counsel's operations partner.

RECOMMENDATION Choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact on this AI Governance Layer / Audit and Vendor Terms packet (output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output after a vendor that changed subprocessors without notice). The follow-on Audit and Vendor Terms action is what vendor-contract AI counsel's operations partner does next: implement the option, assign an owner, and log the missing fact.