A decision on the east seam should be judged by what happens at the East Seam, four galleries below the old cart rail. The docket is at step 9 of the current review. Its latest entry reads: The first implementation notes have been compared with the promise in the minutes. A rule that looks complete in the chamber can still leave the people who use it carrying an unmeasured cost.
9 soundings recorded before entry were entered this cycle, compared with 8 in the prior file. That comparison matters because the public summary counts entries. The open question is whether the new iron markers reveal movement early enough to keep crews out of a failing face.
The foreman calls the readings a useful warning; the survey office says the marks need a second instrument before they can justify a closure. The current record does not settle that disagreement. The objection deserves a direct answer, but it is not a reason to make the rule permanent before the affected residents can check the method.
Dara Vek checked the soundings book and the crew’s pre-entry inspection cards against the field notes. The method is to start at the shift handoff, where an official total can lose its context; it confirms the entries, but not every interpretation attached to them. The practical evidence is a hairline change in the slate above the second timber brace; any new measure should record that condition beside the total.
The chamber should approve a limited trial with a published end date, a way to record exceptions and a named reviewer. A second surveyor will repeat the readings from the opposite wall. That is the narrowest decision that can be defended from the evidence now available.
