It's called a subsidiary conclusion. They mention this in other courses. But it's a conclusion that derives from the premises but still acts as a support, or premise, towards the overarching conclusion.

I thought it was crazy hard, too, but I think it may have been the sheer volume of the work. Looking back at the practice exams, it was the same level of difficulty but, for me, I realized the shift from the diversity of the past exams (containing Logic Games), to working rampantly on the volume of 2 reading comp and 2 LR was more of an endurance issue... Don't be scared of getting the score back. Just remember that it's not too late to take it again in January, especially now that you know what your weaknesses were on test day!