diff --git a/docs/plans/consequences-2026-10-05.md b/docs/plans/consequences-2026-10-05.md
index 1112a8e43..9ebe85e05 100644
--- a/docs/plans/consequences-2026-10-05.md
+++ b/docs/plans/consequences-2026-10-05.md
@@ -62,4 +62,6 @@ Sweep 8 (22:09 UTC) notes: mixer x8 DECIDED into v3 on the PC rows (the daily 1
 
 Sweep 8a (22:2x UTC) note: `docs/analysis/proving-methods.md` (branch proving-methods e7e0db7, 411 lines) carries its own per-tier table for today, route A, route D and route 3, and a public paragraph; it is the third draft of the proving public line (with proving-v1 440fd59 and ca2-coord 1c8439f), noted under D2 and D8; the route choice is D10.
 | C29 | The litepaper's verifier line now reads "Measured 2.1 ms on one loaded Apple M5 Max core for class v3" and the status says "4.8x inside the gate"; the measurement (ca2-mixer 54bbfcc) is 2.79 ms per warp for x8 on the loaded core (2.1 was the RATIO to v2), worst cold unit 2.94 ms, quiet-core about 1.3 ms by scaling | site/litepaper.html on ca2-coord 8e65696; status 22:20 | the public page; every node operator who reads the gate margin | A ratio printed as milliseconds understates the verifier cost by a third and overstates the gate margin (10 / 2.79 = 3.6x, 3.4x on the worst cold unit, not 4.8x). The number is the one a reviewer will re-run first | The line reads "about 2.8 ms per warp on a loaded M5 Max core (about 1.3 ms quiet, approximate), 2.1x the v2 verifier; worst cold unit 2.9 ms; the 10 ms gate leaves 3.4x" until the quiet-core run lands | coordinator ada8afb62d752b1e2 | sent |
-| C30 | The 5090 mines in the app at 115.4 MH/s (the power sweep, 22:09 to 22:15Z, hash from the app's API) against 136 to 137 MH/s at device time in every bench row tonight, with the cap not binding (draw 316 W under a 431 W cap, SM at 3,051 MHz) | bench-log e304458; read-width and mixer PC rows | every 5090 owner on the app (and every big card: the gap is the app's job loop, not the kernel) | About 15% of a 5090's hash is lost between the kernel and the app, and the sweep entry explains it away as API sampling. M11 measured the 9070 XT at the app's 2^21 job size equal to its 2^24 rate, but no 5090 row exists at 2^21; the 5090 finishes a 2^21 job in about 15 ms, so per-job launch, read-back and template work can cost that much. The STATUS line prints "wall" and "inside jobs" rates and would show it | One measurement on PC 1: `igneum-worker-cuda --bench` on the live pack at --batch-log2 21 and 24 on the 5090, and the 5090's STATUS wall-against-inside gap over 10 minutes; if the job size is the cause, the app's job size for cards over 100 MH/s rises (2^22 or 2^23) in the next cut: a 15% gain for every 5090 owner | repro-bench agent a0b9f574775ef1693 (its PC 1 slot); coordinator | sent |
+| C30 | The 5090 mines in the app at 115.4 MH/s (the power sweep, 22:09 to 22:15Z, hash from the app's API) against 136 to 137 MH/s at device time in every bench row tonight, with the cap not binding (draw 316 W under a 431 W cap, SM at 3,051 MHz) | bench-log e304458; read-width and mixer PC rows | every 5090 owner on the app (and every big card: the gap is the app's job loop, not the kernel) | About 15% of a 5090's hash is lost between the kernel and the app, and the sweep entry explains it away as API sampling. M11 measured the 9070 XT at the app's 2^21 job size equal to its 2^24 rate, but no 5090 row exists at 2^21; the 5090 finishes a 2^21 job in about 15 ms, so per-job launch, read-back and template work can cost that much. The STATUS line prints "wall" and "inside jobs" rates and would show it | One measurement on PC 1: `igneum-worker-cuda --bench` on the live pack at --batch-log2 21 and 24 on the 5090, and the 5090's STATUS wall-against-inside gap over 10 minutes; if the job size is the cause, the app's job size for cards over 100 MH/s rises (2^22 or 2^23) in the next cut: a 15% gain for every 5090 owner | repro-bench agent a0b9f574775ef1693 (its PC 1 slot); coordinator | taken (repro-bench agent: --bench at 2^21 and 2^24 on the 5090 on the genesis pack and the live pack in its PC 1 slot, then PC 2; the STATUS wall-against-inside gap from the 10 minutes before and after its window; the consequence written either way) |
+
+Sweep 9 (22:2x UTC) notes: the devnet at 22:24:31Z reads DAA 136,578, 0.909 blocks/s measured over the stats window and 1.005 DAA/s averaged since the fee-switch plan's 15:40Z read (112,227), so H = 210,000 lands between about 18:50 and 19:35 UTC on 6 October, up to an hour EARLIER than the 19:50Z written in fee-switch-devnet.md, the rollout plan 7a and release-0.3.10.md; the 16:00Z check (D1) keeps about 2.8 hours of margin and stands; the plans' ETA is re-cut in D1 and sent to the coordinator. Gates tonight: G3, G4, G6 green on the final class (x8 + era); G4b added (the Mac app passes --prepare-packs only to non-Metal workers, so every Mac would stop at the first v3 epoch: found by the node agent, the fix with a unit test and a real Metal gate run before the ship); G1 and G2 on the PC 1 job since 22:16.
diff --git a/docs/plans/consequences-decisions.md b/docs/plans/consequences-decisions.md
index 2e102837f..a6a6e5a69 100644
--- a/docs/plans/consequences-decisions.md
+++ b/docs/plans/consequences-decisions.md
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Sibling of `ledger-decisions.md`. Each is a consequence of a measured number tha
 
 | # | By when | One line | What the project lead does |
 |---|---|---|---|
-| D1 | 16:00 UTC, 6 October | The fee switch at H = 210,000 (about 19:50 UTC) darkens every 0.3.10 prover; 0.3.11 must be on every prover first, else H moves | Nothing if the morning check passes; the coordinator holds it. Know it exists |
+| D1 | 16:00 UTC, 6 October | The fee switch at H = 210,000 (about 18:50 to 19:35 UTC by the devnet's rate at 22:24Z, earlier than the plans' 19:50) darkens every 0.3.10 prover; 0.3.11 must be on every prover first, else H moves | Nothing if the morning check passes; the coordinator holds it. Know it exists |
 | D9 | this week | No 12 GB card exists here; every 12 GB number is scaled from the 5090 | Confirm whether the 3060 and 5060 Ti 16 GB that evidence.md says are on order are real; if not, buy one 12 GB card (about £250 to £400) |
 | D2 | before the next site push | The litepaper's "12 GB proves" is false on this build; three drafts of the replacement exist (proving-v1 440fd59, ca2-coord 1c8439f, proving-methods.md section 5) | Pick one; the proving-methods paragraph is recommended |
 | D8 | the same push | "The card mines and proves" and "a visible 1% software fee" are solo-NVIDIA sentences now | Approve the qualified wording |