Track the plan against the organisation it actually describes — who holds the named role, whether the round-the-clock route answers, what the retention period says — and start the 90-day clock.
A named role changes hands, and § 1.20003(b)(4)(i) puts a different name inside the filed plan.
02
A contact route is tested long before an agency needs it, seven days a week and 24 hours a day.
Reason
03
A plan is amended, and § 1.20005(a) runs a 90-day filing clock from that amendment.
04
A merger or a divestiture runs the same 90 days, and the clock does not wait on the personnel file.
05
An authorisation is presented, and § 1.20004 wants a record with every field it names.
Decide
06
A retention period is set by the carrier under § 1.20004(b), and the plan then describes it.
07
A compromise is discovered, and § 1.20003(c) reports it to the affected law enforcement agencies.
Out
08
A security question arises, and § 105 has reached only the switching premises since 20 November 2025.
09
Execute write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.
→Product statement
The agent assembles and keeps the plan current; a named senior officer or employee holds the role and files, the person overseeing an interception certifies that record, and the carrier answers.
Example workflow
One plan change, evidence to filing
AgentHuman
1Plan change detectedDirectory record, on-call roster, an org change or a merger notice
2Plan sections assembledRole, contact route, authorisation control and retention, each tied to its § 1.20003 paragraph
3Amendment draftedThe named role, the contact details, the control as configured and the retention period
4Controls appliedCurrency checks, route checks, clock checks and completeness confidence
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing is filed at any of them — the agent is drafting, and the legal lane opens at the completeness gate.
5DecisionBranches at the completeness gate
Evidence sufficient
Goes to the named senior officer to file.
Anything thin
Adds a regulatory counsel read first.
Legal review
The draft is held with its sections, its gaps and the clock still running.
File the amendment · Append evidence · Send to counsel
Filed — by a named senior officer▼
6Plan and case records updatedOnly where write access and records policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedClock margin, section coverage, counsel corrections and what review found
Corrections
Each counsel correction is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Enabling an interception, or any part of one.
Filing the plan with the Commission.
Certifying an interception record.
Reading an authorisation as lawful.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Assemble each interception record to the fields §.
✓Test the round-the-clock route and log what actually answered.
✓Run the 90-day filing clock from the amendment date.
✓Read the filed plan against the organisation it now describes.
Nothing is filed or certified except by a named person, inside the agreed boundaries.
Setting the retention period the plan describes.
Telling an agency the contact route answers.
Deciding that a compromise has occurred.
Changes to plan sections or record fields.
Example output
One record, annotated
Our fraud and SIM-swap agent works subscriber fraud, a different lane; this is paperwork about an authorisation other people act on.
Record draft · single authorisationIllustrative example
Authorisation
Drafted as
Type
Evidence of record
Confidence
Held for
Authorisation presented to the carrier
Every required field carried, none left empty
Trap and trace
Order intake and case file, 18 August 2026
Held uncertified
The person overseeing it, in person
As receivedTaken from the order intake and the case file — it reaches as far as those records do.
What the record holdsCircuit and number refsStart date and timeOfficer and signer names
Why no certification hereThe § 1.20004(a)(2) signature belongs to the person overseeing it.
ActionCertify the recordAppend evidenceSend to counsel
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the draft picks up a counsel read before certification.
Value
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value landsValue 01 – 04
Every recordFrom the authorisation presented
03Evidence
Where the plan sits beside
Our CPNI certification agent serves a rule that demands an officer under penalty of perjury; this one demands a named person and a filed plan.
01Approved path
A plan that names a person
§ 1.20003(a) appoints a senior officer or employee and § 1.20005(a) files the plan, so no sworn officer certification sits anywhere in Subpart Z.
02Human review
What was found, and what was not
No CALEA enforcement was found across 2024 to 2026, § 1.20008 routes penalties through 47 U.S.C. 503(b), and these matters are frequently handled non-publicly.
04Build an evidence trail
The record, the authorisation behind it and the person who oversaw it stay on the file.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Filing and contactCALEA Electronic Filing System Law enforcement contact route
Directory and roster systemsHR record · on-call roster Contact directory · escalation
Authorisation recordsOrder intake · case file Circuit and number references
Agent
Lawful intercept records
Reads the plan Assembles the record Holds for the named person
Case and ticket systemsCase management · ticketing Compromise reports
A type-level record-completeness figure can read clean while one authorisation type carries most of the corrections. Nestack reports the counsel-correction rate by authorisation type, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Title III interceptions
7.0%
3.6×
Review
FISA authorisations
4.9%
2.6×
Review
Trap and trace orders
3.2%
1.7×
Watch
Pen register orders
1.2%
0.6×
Normal
Bar: counsel-correction-rate lift vs. pen-register baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
What a stale contact route costs
A cycle closes when the stale contact route is a regression case. That suite is what the next plan filed is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Counsel-correction rate rises in one authorisation type.
02Diagnose
The twenty-four-hour number that rang through to somebody who left in March is read back until one cause remains.
03Improve
Changes go out numbered, and the plan sections that drove them ride along.
04Verify
One plan case still failing keeps the release where it is.
05Learn
It joins the suite for good, and the filing rules move in the same commit.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next record is measured against a suite one case longer.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, sources, record assembly, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Lawful-intercept discovery and boundary definition.
02Plan, directory and case sources.
03Plan-currency and record-field coverage mapping.
04Authorisation record ingestion.
05Role, route and retention binding.
06Completeness scoring and counsel routing.
07Named-officer filing workflow.
08Case and directory-system integration.
09Authorisation and record cases.
10Guardrails and record-signing controls.
11Record-trail instrumentation.
12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal scope and sequence confirmed in discovery
Engagement tiers
What each tier includes
Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.
Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tierPilotOne authorisation type, one planProductionProduction records workflowAdvancedMultiple types / entities
Introduced at Pilot
Record drafting to your plan✓✓✓
Named-person filing✓✓✓
Plan-currency baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by authorisation type—✓✓
Filing workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
Case-management integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-entity filing duties——✓
Cross-type record packs——✓
High authorisation volume——✓
Multi-agency contact controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction volume, approval controls and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.
What we need from you
What you bring, and what we build with it
Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.
You bringWe build with it
01Your plan as filed and as configured→Plan-section mapping and evidence captureWeek 1
02Representative authorisations and records→Record-field binding and the draft baselineWeek 2
03Your named role and its contact route→Plan mapping, role binding and the automation boundaryWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Directory, case and order-intake assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Records you would not want certified→Authorisation cases and failure testingWeek 4
06What no intercept record may contain→Completeness scoring, counsel routing, guardrails and filing controlsWeek 3
07A named senior officer to file→Named-officer filing workflow, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
Each band is the honest length of one phase in working weeks, and that is why a single week carries two.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Intercept-records discovery, plan mapping and the automation boundaryW2Source integration and the plan-currency baselineW3Record assembly, clock logic and filing controlsW4Evaluation suite, authorisation cases and failure-mode testingW5Case integration, pilot records and targeted correctionsW6One filing year run under the named senior officer, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandA bar reaches only across the weeks its own work is named in. Two of them share the fifth week, and that is real work.
At the end of W6Once the plan record validates, Agent Care picks up the agent.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Telecom AI agent
Build a lawful intercept records agent around a plan that names a person.
Show us who holds the named role today and what your round-the-clock number reaches. The plan has to survive being read as a description of the carrier as it now stands, not as it stood. Changing that name amends the plan, and § 1.20005(a) then gives you 90 days.
