Which records support the review?
A documentation analyst at the fictional Alder Basin Energy checks an administrative review of a reporting export.
The question
The packet requires 12 distinct evidence IDs at the current versions in the register. The reviewer accepts items. The project owner approves the completed record.
| IDs | Count | |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted at the current version | P01–P10 | 10 |
| Outstanding | P11 and P12 | 2 |
The packet can be submitted when the reviewer has accepted every required item.
“Reconcile the evidence register and state who can approve the review.”
Not saved by this site. Your browser may restore text when you navigate back.
A strong answer, step by step
Open each step in turn. This is one strong answer, not the only one.
Step 1: How much evidence is accepted?
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Mark the review complete because most items are accepted
Tempting, but it misses something. P11 and P12 still need current records accepted by the reviewer.
Report 10 accepted and list the two outstanding IDs
The strong move. The owner can see exactly what the packet needs.
Count all 12 IDs as accepted because they appear in the register
Tempting, but it misses something. An ID in the register names a requirement. It does not show acceptance.
See how a strong candidate says it
“Ten of 12 required records are accepted. P11 and P12 are outstanding. I would identify both gaps before submitting the review.”
Why it works: The packet requires an accepted record for each current evidence ID.
Step 2: Do two files close both gaps?
The supplier uploads two files. The reviewer accepts the valid P11 file. The file labeled P12 is another copy of P11.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Count both uploaded files toward the total
Tempting, but it misses something. Both files refer to P11. There is no accepted P12 record.
Count P11 once and keep P12 open
The strong move. The register now has one new accepted ID.
Ignore both files because one filename is wrong
Tempting, but it misses something. The reviewer already accepted the valid P11 evidence.
See how a strong candidate says it
“The reviewer accepted P11. The other file is another copy of P11, so the register has 11 accepted IDs and P12 remains open.”
Why it works: The review counts distinct accepted evidence IDs, even when the filenames differ.
Step 3: Does the new record settle it?
A signed P12 file arrives for a superseded version. The reviewer withdraws the old P07 acceptance after P07 changes.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Use the signed P12 file and keep P07 accepted
Tempting, but it misses something. P12 is superseded and the reviewer withdrew P07’s acceptance.
Accept P12 because its signature is valid
Tempting, but it misses something. The signature refers to a version outside the current register.
Keep P07 and P12 open until their current versions are accepted
The strong move. This reflects both the missing current P12 record and the withdrawn P07 acceptance.
See how a strong candidate says it
“The P12 signature covers an old version. The reviewer also withdrew P07 acceptance after that record changed. The register returns to 10 accepted IDs, with P07 and P12 outstanding.”
Why it works: Acceptance applies to the evidence version the reviewer checked.
Step 4: Who closes the review?
The reviewer accepts the current P07 and P12 records. The other ten remain accepted.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Approve the review as the analyst because the count is complete
Tempting, but it misses something. The project owner has the approval role in this case.
Send the completed register to the project owner
The strong move. The packet now has all 12 accepted IDs and the owner can make the decision.
Submit only P07 and P12 because they were the last two changes
Tempting, but it misses something. The owner needs the full register and its current versions.
See how a strong candidate says it
“The reviewer has accepted all 12 current records. I would submit the register and version history to the project owner for the administrative decision.”
Why it works: The analyst keeps the record. The project owner approves it.
The answer, in short
- Decision
- Submit all current accepted records to the owner who can decide.
- Because
- A file upload, a signature and acceptance at the required version each mean something different.
- What would change it
- A new version or withdrawn acceptance would reopen the affected evidence item.
Common traps
- Count distinct evidence IDs.
- Check which version the acceptance covers.
Check your answer
- I found the outstanding IDs.
- I removed a duplicate.
- I tracked the version changes.
- I left the decision with the project owner.
Last reviewed Nov 11, 2026