Centre withdrawn 48 hours before the screening test
You are the Assistant Controller for a provincial screening test fixed for Sunday at 09:00. There are 2,400 candidates and three hired centres: A (rated capacity 1,000 seats at 1.5 square metres per candidate), B (800) and C (600). On Thursday afternoon the district fire officer withdraws the safety certificate for Centre C: the rear staircase is blocked by a collapsed boundary wall and cannot be cleared before Sunday. Your engineers say A can be loaded to 1,250 seats and B to 1,000 if seating density is cut to 1.2 square metres per candidate - the legal minimum, which this Commission has never used. A government college (Centre D) with 200 usable seats is 25 km away, has no furniture and needs two clear days to prepare. Question packets have been printed centre by centre and cannot be reprinted. A parents' association has already posted that the test will be postponed, and two candidates have emailed asking for confirmation.
1. How do you dispose of Centre C's 600 candidates, and what single constraint decides the answer?
Read the worked answer
Arithmetic first: A absorbs 250 (1,000 to 1,250); B absorbs 200 (800 to 1,000). That is 450, leaving 150 with no seat. Centre D holds 200 but has no furniture, no staff list and sits 25 km away; it is usable only if the district education officer certifies furniture and invigilators by Saturday 18:00 and you lay on free transport from the old Centre C, so no candidate carries the cost of a last-minute move.
The binding constraint is the paper, not the seats. Packets are printed per centre, so Centre D could only be served from a reserve packet, which is a different question set. Running 150 candidates on a different paper breaks merit comparability and creates a leakage channel into any later sitting. So: if a same-set spare packet exists, move the 150 to D and proceed; if it does not, do not run a mixed-paper sitting - defer the whole test, or hold a documented supplementary sitting for those 150 on the identical paper after the main sitting closes and papers are reconciled. Record the decision in writing with the EDO's confirmation attached.
2. Do you accept the reduced seating density of 1.2 square metres? Set out the conditions you would attach and the risk you refuse to take.
Read the worked answer
1.2 square metres is the legal floor, not a target, and it is the only reason A and B can absorb 450 extra candidates. I would accept it for A and B only on written conditions: (1) the fire officer issues a fresh no-objection certificate naming the increased occupancy, after checking exit widths and the number of usable exits; (2) invigilator ratio is not diluted below one per 30 candidates, with mobile floaters; (3) medical standby, drinking water and separate entry and exit routes are confirmed; (4) the seating plan is signed off by the centre superintendent and filed.
What I would refuse is any density below 1.2 square metres, or any verbal assurance from a landlord that the stairs are 'practically clear'. If the fire officer will not certify, the extra seats do not exist and the plan reverts to relocating the 150 as in the first answer. The practical logic is that in an inquiry the defence is a signed compliance file, not a recollection of a phone call.
3. Centre B has one generator that failed twice during the last cycle. How does this change your Sunday plan?
Read the worked answer
It converts a seating problem into a continuity problem. B is now carrying 1,000 candidates at the legal minimum density, so a power failure is not a comfort issue: it stops the announcement system, the fans in a crowded hall and any biometric or CCTV recording.
Actions: test-load the generator on Saturday with the actual hall load and a measured run of at least two hours; arrange a rented standby set or a second fuel source, whichever the electrician says can be connected safely; confirm fuel for ten hours, not four; brief the superintendent on a scripted announcement and a clock-based timing rule if the public address fails, so no candidate gains time; and record the start and any interruption in the centre log with two witnesses. If the standby cannot be arranged, shift part of B's load to A before Sunday rather than accept a single point of failure for 1,000 candidates. Contingency is decided in advance; on the day it is only executed.