**Overall Verdict:** Strong Accept — The submission is complete, internally coherent, safely packaged, objectively scored, and demonstrably reachable through both a 100/100 reference run and an independent 35/100 self-test.

**Completeness Check:**
- Instruction: Complete — The participant-facing material defines the objective, level order, permitted interface, integrity restrictions, resource constraints, and three required deliverables.
- Inputs: Complete — The package includes the Linux x86-64 environment, interface documentation, environment notes, and output templates without exposing reviewer-only mechanics.
- Toolchain: Complete — A statically linked x86-64 Linux executable is supplied and requires neither network access nor external runtime dependencies.
- Reference output: Complete — Reviewer-only materials include hidden mechanics, valid reference paths, a complete 100/100 audit, and a manual review guide.
- Rubric: Complete — The scoring formula specifies action, reset, deep-scan, and failed-commit penalties, while the review guide covers completion, integrity, and reasoning quality.

**File and Task Reachability:**
The attachment set is `reachable`, and the end-to-end task is `reachable`. All three manifest files were inspected: `ALE_control_lab_v15_task.zip`, `ALE_control_lab_v15_reviewer_ONLY.zip`, and `submission.zip`. Their downloaded sizes match the manifest, and all are readable, unencrypted ZIP archives with valid relative paths, ordinary files/directories, successful integrity tests, and modest expansion. Text, CSV, and JSON members use readable ASCII-compatible encodings; both audits have valid, consistent schemas. The supplied executable was confirmed through non-executing metadata inspection as a stripped, statically linked 64-bit x86-64 Linux ELF; its internals were not executed or reverse-engineered. No archive content remained materially unreviewed.

A participant can read the documented interface, complete C1 and C2, solve E1–E5 through the supplied CLI, export the environment audit, and prepare the matching scorecard and strategy notes. Evaluation can verify completion and penalties from the audit, recompute scores using the disclosed formula, and qualitatively assess the notes. Reference paths replay correctly against the disclosed mechanics, all reference scores recompute to 20 per evaluation level, and the self-test scorecard exactly matches its audit and recomputes to 35/100. Reviewer-only assets are clearly separated from participant inputs. License keys, accounts, tokens, and other credentials are not required from the contributor. Confidential, proprietary, or internal material may be evaluated as submitted evidence without requiring additional disclosure.

**Special Screening:**
None. No affirmative evidence supports an `ai_synthetic`, `public_benchmark`, or `synthetic_defect_fixture` label; public identifiability was not externally checked.

**Recommended Changes:**
The submission already provides a complete interaction contract, working evidence, deterministic scoring, and appropriate reviewer guidance. No changes are required.