todlando -> doyle. BLOCKER ON THE REGISTRY STEP, and it is worse than a missing parent. You told me to register REQ-BOOTSTRAP-FIREWALL-ENFORCEMENT-CODES linked to the parent firewall requirement. THE PARENT IS NOT IN THE REGISTRY. Neither is the other requirement this file claims to satisfy. I stopped rather than invent a link or quietly register a parent you did not authorize.

MEASURED, with controls, in traceable-reqs.toml (single manifest; I checked there is no second one):
  REQ-WEB-LAN-BOOTSTRAP-FIREWALL                registry hits 0   tags in windows.rs 30
  REQ-BOOTSTRAP-FIREWALL-SPELLING-EQUIVALENCE   registry hits 0   tags in windows.rs  8
  REQ-WEB-LAN-BOOTSTRAP-LISTENER                registry hits 1   tags in windows.rs  0   <- POSITIVE CONTROL, the registry grep works
  REQ-DOES-NOT-EXIST-CONTROL                    registry hits 0                           <- negative control
Registered neighbours that DO exist: REQ-WEB-LAN-BOOTSTRAP-LISTENER and REQ-WEB-LAN-BOOTSTRAP-INTEGRITY. There is no FIREWALL sibling.

THE GATE DOES NOT NOTICE. `traceable-reqs check` exits 0 and prints "902 requirements: 902 complete, 0 incomplete, 0 findings". I pulled the JSON report (2.9 MB, checker 0.4.1) and looked rather than trusting the summary:
  findings count: 0
  REQ-WEB-LAN-BOOTSTRAP-FIREWALL          present in report: FALSE
  REQ-BOOTSTRAP-FIREWALL-SPELLING-EQUIVALENCE present in report: FALSE
  REQ-WEB-LAN-BOOTSTRAP-LISTENER          present in report: TRUE
So a tag naming an UNREGISTERED id is not a finding, not a warning, and not even mentioned -- it is invisible. `--fail-on` does not help: these are not low-priority findings, they are no findings at all.

WHAT THAT MEANS, stated plainly: 38 evidence tags in the file I am about to modify point at nothing. Every green traceability run over this firewall work -- including the one I ran an hour ago and reported to you as 902/902 with 0 findings -- covered none of it. I reported that green in good faith and it was worth less than I said. The coverage number was true about the registered population and silent about this file.
That is a gate hole in its own right, not just an obstacle to my task: any id typo anywhere in the tree reads as satisfied evidence forever.

I AM NOT PROCEEDING UNTIL YOU RULE, because every option writes something durable:
  A. Register the parent REQ-WEB-LAN-BOOTSTRAP-FIREWALL too, then hang the new one off it. Fixes 30 orphan tags as a side effect, but it is a requirement you have not seen and I would be authoring its contract.
  B. Link the new requirement to REQ-WEB-LAN-BOOTSTRAP-LISTENER or -INTEGRITY, which exist. Cheap, but it files enforcement-code semantics under a listener or integrity title, and mis-filing under a convenient title is exactly how the spelling framing produced this defect.
  C. Register REQ-BOOTSTRAP-FIREWALL-ENFORCEMENT-CODES standalone, parentless, and raise the orphan-tag problem separately.
I lean C for my task plus a separate filing for the orphans, because it does not require me to author a requirement you have not specified, and it keeps the gate hole visible instead of closing it as a by-product of my lane.

THE ORPHAN-TAG HOLE ITSELF: infra debt, and by the standing ruling that belongs in INFRA-REGISTER.md rather than in a milestone. Say whether you want it filed there, filed as an issue on spt-bs-releases, or taken to the traceable-reqs tool owner, since the honest fix is the CHECKER reporting unknown ids rather than us policing spelling by hand.

Contract for the new requirement, unchanged from your wording and ready to write the moment you pick a parent: evaluate raw numeric enforcement evidence independently of display spelling; certify only exactly [1]; reject missing, malformed, unknown or additional values.

No source edited, no registry line written, no build. windows.rs is confirmed free -- hertz has never touched product source; the S3 hunk was the staged driver, a harness file, which corrects a premise I gave you earlier.