The inspection sheet names a drawing revision but no support arrangement. The fixture sketch shows contacts, not the setup used after release.

I would ask inspection before assuming the missing sketch means an improvised check. The method may be held separately, although that still needs to be identified.

Chloe, could the gauge reference on the inspection sheet lead to that method, or would you start with the person who signed it?

Either can help, Gabriel. I'd follow an explicit gauge reference first if one exists; a signature is not proof the person remembers the historical setup.

There is no gauge reference on this sheet. I have asked inspection about a separate method rather than infer one from the fixture contacts.

Nathan, that's a separate gap to keep visible, though it doesn't prevent inspection from first clarifying the released check Victor is asking about.

Gabriel, the route explicitly puts final inspection after correction. Nathan, I have no incoming measurements in this record set. Neither fact supplies the missing released support condition.

Then the proposal should not call the final result as-welded. It represents a route including correction, even if nobody has yet explained that operation.

Keep the restraint decision open until the measurement and process gaps are addressed; a fixture can hold nominal shape without demonstrating what the released weldment will be.