C.19.1:3 - Conformance Checklist (CC-BLP)

1. The cheap scale-claim probe names the bearer kind and direct pattern, task family or receiving use, scale predicate, objective vector, comparison basis, feasible evidence, safety boundary, and stakes.
2. The result says no scale claim yet, local analogy or policy, bounded scale comparison, or full Scale-Audit selected; it does not hide the choice of audit depth.
3. A performed comparison uses parity, current editions, explicit uncertainty, material resource and safety accounts, and lawful Pareto or declared policy operations.
4. The evidence method fits the bearer. Compute/data sweeps, seeds, bootstraps, and factorial or Latin-hypercube designs appear only when they answer the actual claim.
5. Non-dominance returns no empirical scale preference. Any generality tie-break is identified as a separately declared local policy.
6. A waiver identifies the policy it overrides, rationale, admitted review System, direct responsibility relation or exact missing governor, and expiry or review window.
7. A live Heuristic Debt entry meets the bounded BLP-4 trigger; ordinary local tactics create no debt record.
8. Prescription architecture and adaptation policy are routed through their direct patterns rather than reported as consequences of BLP.
9. An actual durable audit is exported to G.11; a bounded-use or no-claim exit is not padded into an audit artifact.
10. A narrower specialist bearer names its task family, work target, and the exact scale, waiver, or bounded-use ground relied on.