WorkPlan:DC_Rollout_Phase-2 is interpreted under DCOperationsPlanningScheme-E5, has horizon [2025-09-01T00:00Z, 2025-09-15T00:00Z), and concerns already identified Service-A-Operations-System : U.System. The Security Audit scheme remains a separate interpretation source used only through the branch below.
Interpretation boundary: Operations uses DCOperationsPlanningScheme-E5; Security Audit uses SecurityAuditScheme-E4. Their acceptance criteria remain separate; apply the branch in checklist item 7 before proposing any cross-context reuse.
Bridge premise: exact F.17 cells OperationsReadyCell-E3 and SecurityAuditPassedCell-E2 participate in F.9 Bridge OpsAuditReadinessOverlapBridge-E1 under OpsAuditPartialOverlapProfile-E1. The Bridge obtains as partial-overlap: both senses exclude a known blocking security defect, while Operations readiness also requires rollback rehearsal and live monitoring and the audit sense applies its own security criteria.
Rejected verdict transfer: C.2.1 claim AuditPassAsOperationsReadyUse-E1 proposes copying GateDecision=pass from A.21 gate SecurityAuditGate-E2 into an A.15.5 work-entry readiness result, from the audit cell to the Operations cell, by identity transfer and with zero tolerance for omitted readiness conditions. The claim is negative because the two senses do not align on rollback rehearsal or monitoring readiness. A.10 evidence-provenance path OpsAuditTransferEvidencePath-E1 has RelianceDisposition=pass for that negative claim, so the team retains the A.21 audit decision and evaluates Operations readiness separately under A.15.5. The obtaining Bridge remains true. A narrower plan use may cite the audit decision as one readiness input; it still cannot transfer the verdict.
PlanItem content:Deploy Service A, Pen-test A; exact dependency and window claims name their predicates and conditions inside the plan ClaimGraph.
Later local assertions: Exact deployment and audit Work occurrences are identified independently as individuals admitted under U.Work. Separate operations and audit evaluations apply their own targets and produce separately governed verdicts; plan-use assertions state exact local fulfilment and per-context comparison without adding those actual facts to the plan content or creating one cross-context fulfilment relation.