CUST-WP-0075: gate-house review of railiance-clock requests

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 3775@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: cfacb6a5-ad5b-4f79-ac67-053e3b0d34a3

workplans/ADHOC-2026-10-03.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+---
+id: GH-WP-ADHOC-2026-10-03
+type: workplan
+title: "Ad hoc 2026-10-03 — review of railiance-clock requests"
+domain: infotech
+repo: gate-house
+status: finished
+owner: codex
+topic_slug: infotech
+created: "2026-10-03"
+updated: "2026-10-03"
+---
+
+## Review railiance-clock's three 2026-09-14 requests (RCLK-WP-0002-T01)
+
+```task
+id: GH-WP-ADHOC-2026-10-03-T01
+status: done
+priority: high
+```
+
+Dispatched under CUST-WP-0075. Reviewed railiance-clock@6a9c0db (INTENT.md,
+`docs/identity-and-utc-review.md`, `docs/closeout-review-2026-09-28.md`,
+`specs/sample-profile-v0.1.md`). This was a doctrine review against INTENT § Core
+Rules, `docs/contracts/authority-context.md`, GH-DEC-2026-001/-017 and
+security-layer-model v0.7. Replies went to railiance-clock as hub messages
+`f1d7ba98` (foundation), `7071237a` (identity/UTC) and `817f0672` (sample profile).
+
+Outcome: the `layer: Tooling` declaration conforms to GH-DEC-2026-017.
+railiance-clock is outside the §4 catalog, so the review needs no checker change and
+no declaration entry here. The findings are for other owners: the runtime_identity
+mapping in the receipt (net-kingdom NK-WP-0040), the unnamed trust-distribution
+owner (T02), the consumer no-wall-clock-fallback obligation (T04 consumers), and the
+missing RCLK-WP entry in repo-manager's prefix registry.
+
+Pending, not opened: if a named consumer later depends on the sample API,
+re-declaring railiance-clock as an Engine in the PIP role needs a §4 catalog row.
+That requires a gate-house decision record and a normal workplan, opened at that
+time and not before.