[CRISP-TEAM] Responses to GAO questions

[Izumi Okutani]

On 2015/05/15 20:38, Mwendwa Kivuva wrote:
> On 14 May 2015 at 18:22, Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:
> 
>> The SLA provides the RIRs with the option to terminate the SLA during its
>> term if the Operator failures to perform and, after going through
>> arbitration, fails to remedy such failure to perform, or not to renew the
>> SLA at the end of its term.
>>
>> With regards to termination, we note that the NTIA contract provides the
>> US government with the same reasons for termination (page 2 of the NTIA
>> contract and sections E.2.g.1.ii and I.67.i of the NTIA contract).
>> Additionally the NTIA contract gives the option to the US government to
>> terminate the NTIA contract for more reasons (sections I.51 and I.52 of the
>> NTIA contract).
>>
>> Based on the above, we believe that the SLA provides fewer reasons for the
>> termination of the SLA than the NTIA contract and thus it would not be
>> easier to terminate and rebid the SLA.
>>
> 
> On previous occasions, we had stated that failure to adhere to the SLA was
> not the only reason for termination of the contract. Is that still the
> position?
> 


I have distinguished "termination within the term of the contract" and "a decision not to renew the contract after its term" as seperate issues.

In terms of the decision not to renew, this can be done without cause, given 6 months prior notice, so this still it indeed our position, consistent with the proposal.
i.e. we can make a decision not to renew for reasons other than failure to adhere to the SLA.


For termination during the term of the SLA, what I have described above is restricting with cause, in case of failure to adhere to the SLA.
This is what the current SLA draft published for community consultation describes, and in my view, it doesn't contradict with our position as we have the ability to chose the IANA operator, for reasons other than the SLA failure at the time of the contract renewal. 

It is infact important to make the distinction on the conditions between termination and renewal, as it would be unstable to allow the contract to terminate without cause during the term of the contract other than failure on the SLA as it adds unpredictabilty on continuity of the operation.

So this is the rationale behind this reply. I hope this clarifies some thinking behind this response and welcome any other thoughts you might have on this, including any concerns.
Thanks for comment Mwendwa. It is a very good an important point to clarify - we need be comfortable on this response as the CRISP Team.

I welcome comments from other CRISP Team members as well.


Izumi