The public account of the lantern fault relies on the fault map, lamp checks and a sealed bag of recovered stone chips. A review of that source and the field notes finds a specific limit: the count can be repeated, but it does not include a warm draft that changes direction just beyond the fourth marker.
Dara Vek checked the fault map, lamp checks and a sealed bag of recovered stone chips 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 comparison covers 62 lamp readings taken at the marked stations; 66 appear in the prior file. No signed correction to either entry was present when this review closed.
Gevra Sol, geology reader assigned to the east crews, said the source register was complete for its stated purpose. The office has not provided a separate measure for whether a new side passage can be surveyed without drawing the east crew into an unmeasured seam, so the public record cannot yet show which account is more representative.
The draft suggests an open connection, but the old map records a collapse in the same direction. The current record does not settle that disagreement. This report does not establish that either side misstated the evidence. It establishes that the published total is narrower than the conclusion being drawn from it.
The docket has returned for review with the exceptions and unresolved objections attached. The entry belongs to the public comment close file at the Lantern Fault below the east water gallery. The crew will hold the face while a remote lamp is lowered beyond the fourth marker. The next file should preserve the original entries and explain any change in method.
