Back to the single queue
Q-0056 · Population ruling
39 human authority grants run out inside 95 days
Renew the grants, let them lapse and move the decisions they carry to a named alternative, or narrow them and say what is being taken away.
High materialityAssuranceAdministrationGrant expiryOpen
Consequence
51
of a possible 100, from four factors
Rank in this queue
1st
of 2 open items held by Naomi Muller
Records covered
39
One ruling settles all of them, so it enters as one item.
Work held behind it
39
items that cannot move until this is decided
Waiting
0 min
raised 2026-08-17 by Authority register, automated
Why it is ranked where it is
Four factors, scored out of 40, 30, 20 and 10, added to 51.
The commitment it breaches
Is there a window on this, and did it close?
14 / 40
Inside the window, which closes on 2026-09-20.
Measured from: Point scale out of 40: a window already closed scores 40, less than a quarter of the window left scores 28, inside the window scores 14, no window at all scores 0.
The work it holds
How much is stopped behind it?
18 / 30
39 grants, each one a set of decisions that stops being signable on the day it lapses.
Measured from: Point scale out of 30, on the count held behind the item: 1,000 or more scores 30, 100 or more scores 24, 25 or more scores 18, 5 or more scores 12, 1 or more scores 6, nothing held scores 0.
The money at stake
What band does the record itself carry?
15 / 20
No single money figure covers a set of grants with different caps. The band is high because an expiry that nobody renews takes a decision path out of service.
Measured from: Point scale out of 20, on the materiality band: critical 20, high 15, medium 9, low 4.
Whose clock it is
Is the deadline ours, a regulator’s or a court’s?
4 / 10
The date written on the grant itself. An expired grant refuses rather than warns, so the date is the moment the authority stops existing.
Measured from: Point scale out of 10, on whose deadline it is: statutory 10, retention 8, board or committee 6, audit 5, expiry 4, service level 3, no clock 0.
The score is carried mainly by work held behind it, which contributes 18 of the 51 points on this item. All four factors score above zero on this item.
The ranking is a scheme, not a measurement. Four factors are scored out of 40, 30, 20 and 10, and the four scores are added. The ceilings were chosen by us and no one has yet agreed them. What is measured is each factor underneath: the window and whether it closed, the count held behind the item, the band on the record and whose deadline applies.
Nothing is above this item. It is the top of Naomi Muller’s queue.
Directly below · 50
19 boundaries between functions have nobody’s name on them
The whole context, here
Everything the decision needs, so the queue is not a routing table.
What is being asked
Renew the grants, let them lapse and move the decisions they carry to a named alternative, or narrow them and say what is being taken away.
Why it is waiting
An expired grant refuses. That is the design, and it is the right design, but it means an expiry nobody renewed becomes an outage in the decision path rather than a note in a register. The earliest here is AD2-AUTH-H1, held by VP Corporate Real Estate in Administration, which runs out on 2026-09-20. Dated at assembly. The population behind this item has no single date on which it was raised, so the queue uses the moment it was assembled and says so rather than picking one record’s date and presenting it as the item’s.
Kind
Population ruling
One ruling settles a whole set of records.
Money on the record
No figure carried
The source record carries no dollar figure. The money factor is scored from the materiality band instead.
An item is one decision, not one record. Where a page holds a homogeneous population that one ruling settles, the population enters as a single item and states how many records it covers. That is why the number of items is far smaller than the number of things waiting.
The clock on it
Grant expiry
Deadline
2026-09-20
4.9 wk left.
Whose clock
The date written on the grant itself. An expired grant refuses rather than warns, so the date is the moment the authority stops existing.
Measurable against a recorded date.
Measured. The date is stored on the authority grant as the date it expires.
Commitment: Earliest expiry 2026-09-20
Where it came from
The queue holds no work of its own.
Authority Register
/authority · expiring-human
That page counts 39 waiting and places 1 item here. The counts differ because a homogeneous population enters as a single ruling.
How items are formed from that page: One item covering the grants expiring inside the window, since renewal is one review.
The action that page names is: Renew or let lapse a grant that is about to expire. Clearing this item is that same decision.
What the queue will enforce
Checked at submission, not at display.
Authority to sign
Within the cap
The register carries a grant that covers this item at this value. No grant reference is recorded against the item.
Separation of duties
No rule engaged
No separation rule is engaged on this item.
One separation rule blocks and five report. Concentrating decisions on one surface makes that difference load bearing: the queue refuses a self-raised item at the point of submission under SOD-01, and records but does not stop the other five.
Who holds it, and who covers
Naomi Muller · Chief of Staff, Corporate
Addressed to
Naomi Muller
Routing is by remit alone. Nothing about the value of an item changes who receives it, only whether the person who receives it can sign it.
Cover
Not away
The holder is present on the cover board, so this item is not delegated to anyone else.
The cover board Decide it here
The outcome, the reason and the note go in one submission, and the evidence record is written on the way through.
Take the decision as asked. The item closes.
Note written onto the record
What has already been decided on this item
0 decisions on the record
Nothing has been decided on this item yet. The first submission made here will appear in this list with its evidence sequence.
Decisions already on the record were reconstructed from the source rows at assembly and carry no spine sequence. A decision taken here writes one, and the sequence is shown against it.
What this item page is, and what it is not
This page carries the whole of one decision: what is being asked, the four scores that put it where it sits, the clock that applies, the page the row still lives on, and the two rules the queue will check when the submission is made. Deciding it here is the same act as deciding it there. There is no second copy of the work.
The consequence score is ours. The four things underneath it are measured, but the ceilings that turn them into a single number out of 100 were chosen by us and have not been agreed with anyone. Read the factors, not the total, if the two ever disagree.
The authority and separation checks shown above are statements of what will happen at submission. They are enforced by the server when the form is sent, not by hiding controls on this page, so a refusal always names the rule that produced it.