02 — Authorization Decision

Decision: PATH C — NO AUTHORIZATION TO COMMIT. Produce human-action packet; no technical busywork.

This was decided on live evidence, candidate-path by candidate-path, not reflexively.

Path A — ratified path: UNAVAILABLE

Requires live evidence of legitimate human L2/L4 ratification.

• os_proposal_approvals = 0 (live) — the machine-checkable proxy for L2 quorum + L4 e-sign.
• No auth-model approval request exists on the spine (APR-BOOT-AUTHMODEL-1 absent).
• Therefore there is nothing to "use." Path A fails at evidence.

Path B — owner-delegated TEST_MODE path: UNAVAILABLE (premise false)

Mission §4 Path B is admissible only for a tiny non-production inert seed, and instructs: "if any doubt, do not commit."

The blocking fact is structural, not a matter of caution that delegation can waive:

current_database() = directus. directus IS production. There is no separate test database.

This was established and committed-to by the immediately prior macro (F-6, doc 04: "There is no separate test database: directus IS production") and re-verified live this run. Consequences:

1. The 30-anchor seed is not "non-production" — it writes into the production governance substrate. Path B's foundational predicate is objectively false.
2. The seed persistently lowers the governed coverage state 210 → 0. That converts honest under-coverage into asserted full coverage — a governed-state change, which is exactly the act gated on ospa ≥ 1.
3. The rows assert sovereign governance facts: "GOV-COUNCIL / GOV-KG-SYS / GOV-DOT / GOV-MOIT are accountable for these 30 object×scope cells." Marking created_by='...TESTMODE...' does not change that the production ownership table now contains accountability assertions that were never ratified.
4. No incremental verification value. F-5/F-6 already proved 210→0 with these exact 30 anchors in-transaction. The scanner read path is a pure SELECT — it returns identical results against in-transaction vs committed rows. Persisting adds zero verification fidelity while crossing the line.
5. Recurring trap. The owner's top recurring concern is the "false PASS / claimed-but-not-real" failure mode. Persisted unratified ownership makes the scanner report "100% covered" on fabricated data — precisely that trap, in the production substrate.

Applying the owner's own decision rule ("non-production" required; "if any doubt, do not commit") to the verified facts → do not commit.

Corroboration — the accepted GPT review agrees

The mission cites gpt-review-preactivation-consolidated-macro-pass-human-gate-only-2026-06-02.md as the accepted review. It is not on disk but was located in the KB this run. Its verdict:

"It advanced the coverage path as far as safely possible without ratification ... persistent seed/activation were correctly held at the human L2/L4 gate."

The accepted review does not endorse a test-mode commit; it endorses holding the seed at the human gate. The review's own title — "...pass-human-gate-only" — states the conclusion.

On the "move faster / delegated to decide" instruction

The owner's wish to move faster is legitimate and is honored — but not by relabeling a sovereign production write as "test." The binding constraint is structural (only DB = production; ownership = a governed assertion). The fastest legitimate path is the ~5-minute human L2+L4 ratification, after which the commit is a single self-guarding one-shot (doc 03 / sql/commit_ready_f6_ownership_seed.sql). Acceleration is delivered by removing every step except the human signature — see doc 04.

Verdict

PATH C. No commit. Human-action packet (doc 04) + commit-ready one-shot (doc 03) + verification (doc 05/06) produced. The single unblock remains os_proposal_approvals ≥ 1.