My thoughts are that it's not dead or illegal if the able to report in 12 hours is changed in negotioations to better accomodate our other clause. That is part of the point I am trying to make. Secondly, could it not also be interpreted that the able to report in 12 hours is "illegal" or "dead" per 117 due to our 3-hour acknowledgment clause? Why is the one more valid than the other in the face of 117?

I don't see either as any more or less valid a contract clause regarding 117. They are contradictory in light of 117. But why does that automatically make the able to report in 12 the survivor/valid?

And yes, I think we can all agree that sd does not get to decide via memo. I am definitely curious about the non response so far from dalpa on this given the gravity of the contract change via memo nature.