A review of cooling meter cards and the neighborhood draw schedule finds a gap between the total in the public summary and the conditions recorded at the west cooling channel. The difference does not prove that anyone misstated the file. It shows what the public count leaves out: the discharge channel warms after a long furnace run.
The cooling meter cards and the neighborhood draw schedule lists 74 draws with both a meter mark and a discharge note; the previous window lists 73. Orrik Smelt checked both against contract clauses set beside paid invoices and the work completed. The source was checked against a second copy held by Hessa Cinder. No dated correction to either copy was present when the comparison closed.
Foundry managers count intake volume. Downstream residents want the discharge temperature recorded too. The office has not supplied a separate measure that would settle the disagreement, so the two explanations remain competing accounts.
This report supports a narrower finding: the count is repeatable, but it is not enough to decide how the city assigns cooling water when a shared discharge warms over a work shift.
Anew work docket opens with a named machine, shift and measure. The Year fifth, cooling weeks window 1 file remains open for its scheduled decision. The water office will add a downstream reading to each intake card.
