Tier 3 Service Level Agreement: continuously monitored shielding assurance for the EMvelope envelope, with 24/7 anomaly detection, audit-ready evidence and SLA-backed response.
| Rev | Date | Description | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2 | 2026-07-06 | Family navigation extended to documents 005-007 | Current |
| 1.1 | 2026-07-06 | Document-family navigation added; cross-references updated; stable filename convention | Superseded by 1.2 |
| 1.0 | 2026-07-06 | First issue: full Tier 3 variant expanded from the Tier 2 skeleton in AVE-EMV-CS-002 §05, adding monitoring architecture, severity matrix, availability regime, cybersecurity clauses and hardware lifecycle terms | Superseded by 1.1 |
| 0.1 | 2026-07-06 | Origin: Tier 2 draft SLA, AVE-EMV-CS-002 Rev 1.0 §05 | Superseded |
Tiers 1 and 2 verify the shield at intervals. Continuum watches it continuously, converts the EMprint baseline into a live reference, and backs the watching with response commitments. The customer buys three things: earlier detection, tighter response, and a permanent evidence trail for insurers, landlords and regulators.
| Dimension | Tier 2 · Assure | Tier 3 · Continuum |
|---|---|---|
| Detection | Annual survey; deviations found up to 12 months after onset | Continuous joint-impedance array and field probes; anomaly alert within 4 hours of detection, 24/7 |
| P1 response | Remote diagnosis 1 business day; on site 5 business days | Remote diagnosis 4 business hours; on site 3 business days |
| Evidence | Annual certificate and report | Quarterly dashboard, continuous audit trail, monthly open-format data export |
| Included allowance | 8 engineer-days + 1 emergency mobilisation per year | 16 engineer-days + 2 emergency mobilisations per year |
| Hardware | None on site | Monitoring System installed, maintained and refreshed under clauses 04 and 18 |
| Indicative fee | 1.8 to 2.5% of façade contract value per year | 3.5 to 5% per year, plus Monitoring System charge |
Every service level in §04 attaches to a specific link in this chain, so responsibility is never ambiguous. One engineering point matters enough to state up front: the Monitoring System must never itself compromise the shield. The uplink leaves the building as dielectric optical fibre through a waveguide sleeve in the designated penetration bay, and no inbound control path to shield-side electronics is permitted. The watcher must not become the leak.
Joint-impedance test lands wired as a multiplexed 4-wire array; interior and exterior broadband field probes; environmental sensors at gasket-critical joints.
Shield-side acquisition unit; local buffering for 30 days; runs threshold logic so alerts survive uplink loss.
Optical fibre exit via penetration bay; one-way data-diode option for high-security sites; customer provides power and network path per clause 10.
Cloud model holding the EMprint baseline, trend prediction and joint-level fault localisation; retention 7 years minimum.
24/7 monitored alert queue, severity triage per §04, ticketing, quarterly dashboard and monthly data export.
Ownership follows one of two models chosen at signature: Provider-owned (hardware remains Provider property, charged within the annual fee, refreshed at no extra cost in year 5) or Customer-purchased (capitalised by the customer, maintained by Provider, refresh quoted at year 5). Clause 18 sets the exit and buyout mechanics for each.
| Class | Trigger | Alert issued | Remote diagnosis | On site |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | Any zone measured or model-projected below Guaranteed Minima; any critical-zone joint above 3x its Baseline value | ≤ 4 h from detection | ≤ 4 business hours | ≤ 3 business days |
| P2 | Non-critical joint at 2 to 3x Baseline; trend model predicting a Guaranteed Minima breach within 90 days | ≤ 4 h from detection | ≤ 1 business day | ≤ 10 business days |
| P3 | Drift beyond model tolerance without breach risk; single-sensor fault; environmental flag at a gasket-critical joint | Daily digest | ≤ 5 business days | Next scheduled visit |
| S | Monitoring System outage or degraded acquisition exceeding 4 h | ≤ 4 h from detection | ≤ 1 business day | ≤ 2 business days if hardware fault |
| Service level | Target | Measured by |
|---|---|---|
| Monitoring Availability (clause 08) | ≥ 99.0% monthly | Ops-desk uptime log |
| Monthly data export (open formats) | By 5th business day | Delivery timestamp |
| Quarterly compliance dashboard | By 10th business day | Delivery timestamp |
| False-positive analysis | 2 business days | Ticket log |
| Critical security patch application | ≤ 14 days from vendor release | Patch register |
| Annual re-certification survey window | ±30 days of anniversary | Survey date |
| Survey report delivery | 15 business days after survey | Report timestamp |
| Repair supervision attendance (notified ≥10 days ahead) | Agreed date, 95% adherence | Attendance record |
| Gasket-cartridge order fulfilment | 10 business days ex-works | Despatch record |
| Boundary EMF annual report | By anniversary date | Report timestamp |
| Security incident notification | ≤ 24 h from confirmation | Incident register |
| Quarter | Events | Credit calculation | Credit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | All levels met | 0 | €0 |
| Q2 | P1 on-site response missed once; February Availability 98.4% | 2.5% + 2.5% of €75,000 | €3,750 |
| Q3 | Dashboard delivered late; Availability 96.2% in August | 2.5% + 5.0% of €75,000 | €5,625 |
| Q4 | All levels met | 0 | €0 |
| Year | Total credits | Cap check: €9,375 < 20% of €300,000 | €9,375 |
The cap of 20% of annual fees keeps the credit regime a service-quality instrument rather than an insurance policy; genuine loss scenarios route through clause 17 liability and the insurance stack, not through credits.
| Schedule | Contents | Source document |
|---|---|---|
| A | Guaranteed Minima by zone; critical-zone designations; internal EM source assumptions; any X-MAG measured ranges | Site commissioning results |
| B | Fees, rate card, multipliers, mobilisation charges, indexation | AVE-EMV-CS-002 §04 |
| C | Phenomena and exclusions table (physics honesty) | AVE-EMV-RD-001 §02 |
| D | Measurement methods, instruments, calibration cycle, uncertainty budgets, independent-verification procedure | AVE-EMV-RD-001 §10 |
| E | Monitoring System specification, thresholds, false-positive rate, ownership model, depreciation schedule, refresh terms | X-SENSE product file |
| F | Cybersecurity controls, ISO 27001 alignment, insurance limits, personnel screening | To be drafted with CISO input |
| G | Exit and handover procedure, data formats, hardware buyout mechanics, transition support | Clause 18 expansion |
| Risk | Mitigation / required review | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| Cyber liability inside a data centre | A monitoring vendor is an attack surface in the customer's most sensitive facility. Data-diode mode, no inbound control, ISO 27001 programme, cyber insurance at Schedule F limits. CISO-level review on both sides before signature. | High |
| Alert fatigue and false positives | Untuned thresholds destroy credibility fast. Clause 07 tuning regime, contractual false-positive rate in Schedule E, no-charge rectification trigger. | High |
| Model-projected P1s disputed | Trend-predicted breaches invite argument. Schedule D gives monitoring evidential parity only when calibration is current; annual independent verification is the pressure valve. | Medium |
| Hardware obsolescence | Sensors outliving their electronics is the norm. Year 5 refresh baked into both ownership models; test lands are passive and outlive everything. | Medium |
| 24/7 ops-desk economics | A monitored desk needs volume. Until the book passes roughly 10 Tier 3 sites, deliver via a qualified monitoring partner under flow-down SLAs; insource at scale. | Medium |
| Competition-law exposure of parts clauses | Clause 10 wording already frames genuine-parts requirements as objective quality justification with an open certification path; competition counsel must confirm. | High |
| Idea | Sketch |
|---|---|
| DCIM / BMS integration | Publish Continuum alerts as a northbound API (BACnet/REST) into the customer's existing data-centre infrastructure management stack, so P1s land in the NOC queue they already staff. Reduces our ops-desk load and deepens integration lock-in honestly. |
| Insurer data feed | An opt-in, customer-controlled quarterly attestation feed to the site's insurer: continuous shield integrity as an underwriting input, targeting a premium credit that offsets part of the Tier 3 fee. |
| Fleet benchmarking | For multi-site customers, anonymised percentile benchmarking across their own portfolio ("Site 4's north elevation ages 2x faster than fleet median"), turning the dataset into an estate-management tool. |
| Predictive gasket logistics | Let the trend model drive consumable supply: cartridges despatched before the P2 threshold is reached, converting emergency work into scheduled work and smoothing engineer utilisation. |
| Continuum Lite retrofit | A reduced sensor set retrofittable to Tier 1/2 sites at year 2 or 5 surveys, creating an upgrade ladder and reusing survey visits as installation windows. |