Art. 77(1) passport scope is not enforced

[LKSNDRTMLKV]

What is not enforced

Reg. (EU) 2023/1542 defines five battery categories, but Art. 77(1) gives a
battery passport to only three of them:

"From 18 February 2027 each LMT battery, each industrial battery with a
capacity greater than 2 kWh and each electric vehicle battery placed on the
market or put into service shall have an electronic record ('battery
passport')."

Nothing in the node reads that scope. Two consequences, in opposite directions:

1. Portable and SLI batteries can carry a battery passport. BatteryType
accepts portable and starting-lighting-ignition, and
mandatory_fields answers Unknown for both — correctly, since the
Commission's data-point guidance does not cover them. But Unknown means the
content gate demands nothing, so such a passport publishes with almost no data
and claims to be a battery passport. The record is not wrong so much as
unclassified: the obligation it appears to discharge does not exist.

2. An industrial battery at or below 2 kWh is held to the full obligation.
The threshold appears nowhere in the passport path — it is modelled only for
Art. 8 recycled content, in dpp-calc's thresholds.rs. So a 1 kWh industrial
battery, which Art. 77(1) exempts entirely, is required to supply all 38
industrial data points before it can be published. Capacity is available on the
record (ratedCapacityKwh), so this is checkable rather than unknowable.

Why it surfaced now

The per-category import templates (#237) made the scope explicit for the first
time: there are three templates because there are three obligations. That raised
the question of what the node does for the other two categories, and for an
industrial battery under the threshold — and the answer is that it does not ask.

Options

• (a) Model Art. 77(1) as a scope predicate — has_passport_obligation(type, capacity_kwh) — and let publish say plainly that a portable battery has no
  passport obligation, rather than passing it silently. Voluntary passports stay
  possible but are named as such.
• (b) Apply the threshold only, leaving portable/SLI as they are: the
  narrower fix, and the one with a concrete wrong behaviour behind it (over-
  demanding on a battery the article exempts).
• (c) Document and leave. Defensible for (1) — no obligation means no
  mandatory content, and a voluntary record is the operator's choice — but not
  for (2), where the node demands data the law does not.

Worth noting the threshold sits on capacity in kWh while nominalCapacityAh
is the required column; ratedCapacityKwh is optional today, so (b) needs a
decision about what to do when it is absent.

[LKSNDRTMLKV]

Half of this is done in #239, engine-side. Recording precisely which half, so the
issue is not closed on a partial fix.

Done. Art. 77(1) is modelled as a predicate (domain::passport_scope) and
reported on POST /dpp/{id}/lint as publishReadiness.passportObligation.
Verified live across all five categories, including the boundary: the article
says greater than 2 kWh, so an industrial battery at exactly 2.0 is outside it.
An undeclared ratedCapacityKwh is treated as in scope — exempting on an unknown
is the error that silently switches off a statutory gate — and the response says
how to leave scope. Point 1 of this issue is closed: a portable or SLI passport
is now named voluntary rather than passing silently.

Two details from the OJ read that the original issue did not have:

• The threshold is energy. The Regulation's only definition of "rated
  capacity" is in ampere-hours and is scoped "for the purposes of this Annex",
  so it does not govern Art. 77(1). The comparison is against ratedCapacityKwh.
• Art. 77(1) carries no rechargeable qualifier, unlike the otherwise
  identical thresholds in Arts. 7 and 8.

Still open, and needs dpp-core. Point 2 — an industrial battery at or below
2 kWh being asked for content the article exempts. check_mandatory_content runs
inside Passport::transition_to on first publish; the engine calls that and
cannot skip it. Measured rather than assumed: such a battery reports
voluntary and still returns 34 blockers.

The engine now states that discrepancy instead of hiding it, and
a_battery_outside_article_77_is_voluntary_and_still_gated pins it — so when
core narrows the gate to the article's scope, that test fails and the note that
admits the over-demand should be removed with it.

The core-side change is to make the gate consult the scope: skip
check_mandatory_content when Art. 77(1) does not reach the record. The
predicate is deliberately a pure function over values core already owns, so it
lifts across rather than needing a rewrite.