Which bracket checks should support our UR5e fixture proposal?

Yes, same individual tag; the released measurement is before correction, but the restrained tick has no method recorded.

Keep the tick as an unexplained setup observation until its method is established; it cannot supply a measured before-and-after change simply because it sits above the released result.

Does the released measurement identify its supports and drawing revision, Jamie? You may have a usable released failure even if the earlier observation cannot be reconstructed, but its acceptance basis still needs to be clear.

Revision H is stated and the inspection instruction identifies the supports; I have both attached, so the released failure is usable on that basis.

What does the correction entry actually say?

Straightening at the separate bench, operator initials, no duration; final acceptance uses the same inspection instruction as the released failure.

Who does that work in the proposed route?

And keep its labour unresolved if unmeasured; the current proposal cannot make that separate bench disappear by leaving the allowance empty.

I would ask fabrication and inspection to agree one current traveller that follows an identified bracket from incoming fit-up through released inspection, any reviewed correction and final disposition. That is not much paperwork if it is designed around the actual handoffs. The important part is deciding who fills each section before the work starts. Otherwise the same gap survives in a cleaner form: everybody completes their own operation and assumes the next person recorded what happened between them.

Current correction responsibility is not agreed yet, LiamBell; fabrication and inspection will review the traveller and that ownership together, with the estimate showing an unresolved operation rather than zero time.

Please post what they decide. That missing owner matters as much as the missing duration.