**Overall Verdict:** Strong Accept — The revision is complete, coherent, reachable, and supported by a usable source, native protected reference, and objective fidelity rubric.

**Completeness Check:**
- Instruction: Complete — clearly specifies the editable Word deliverable, exact eight-page structure, native-document constraints, and prohibited shortcuts.
- Inputs: Complete — `source.pdf` is a readable, unencrypted, eight-page A4 PDF with extractable text and no embedded page images.
- Toolchain: Complete — the required Windows and Microsoft Word environment is identified and legally obtainable.
- Reference output: Complete — `reference.docx` is a valid, macro-free OOXML document containing native paragraphs, eight tables, sections, fields, headers, footers, borders, and shading. Its text includes the deliberate truncations represented in the source.
- Rubric: Complete — evaluation covers page count, content, geometry, wrapping, typography, table structure, native editability, and prohibited rasterization with measurable tolerances.

**File and Task Reachability:**
The attachment set is `reachable`, and the end-to-end task is `reachable`. All three attachments were inspected: `source.pdf`, `reference.docx`, and `SCM_QA_Plan_Template.pdf`. Downloaded sizes matched the manifest; both PDFs are readable, unencrypted eight-page A4 documents without embedded files, JavaScript, forms, or raster page images. The DOCX package passed integrity checks, and its internal relationships, document parts, native structures, and small fallback drawing package were inspected. A stale, non-required external template relationship does not affect rendering because the document’s styles are embedded. The self-test PDF is visibly less faithful than the source but is correctly separated as difficulty evidence rather than the expected output. No attachment was left unreviewed. Microsoft Word was unavailable for an independent DOCX-to-PDF re-export, which is a reviewer-tooling limitation rather than a submission defect; the supplied evidence still establishes a coherent input-to-output and evaluation path. 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 `ai_synthetic` or `synthetic_defect_fixture`. Public discoverability was not independently checked, so `public_benchmark` is not applied.

**Recommended Changes:**
The submission provides valid source, reference, and difficulty evidence with unusually specific verification requirements. No changes are required.