To me, "damp" = wet, since it is not as good as dry. How much less good? I don't know, so that's why I'll err to the safer side.
Sounds like a sensible approach to runway performance. I like that you’re not burrowing down into various documents to justify your approach.
A good working knowledge of the terminology, phraseology, factoring techniques, data sources and SOP’s was much more difficult to maintain in 2015 when this occurred, than it has been historically, because of
A/ ambiguity between source documents and B/ large scale change of methodology
We are probably starting to get to grips with TALPA a bit more now but still, a conservative, sensible, and simple approach from individual pilots as displayed by Intruder above is our best defence.
The reader of this report will finish it unaware that many New Zealand line pilots were concerned about runway performance in NZCH during the runway works at this time and it appears that Air NZ had elected not to use 29 prior to this incident.
Good on the crew for stopping it 5m before and not 5m after.