This quote is also from my addendum (supplement) to my first report (continued from previous day's quote):
"The big reasons for not having line inspectors witness leak-proof torques at PSD are that the tight spaces make it difficult for an inspector to actually view the witnessing, and that there are too few inspectors at PSD?" Sounds like super-technical statistical QE (Quality Engineering) reasoning, doesn’t it? More accurately, it is the best reason they could fictionalize in order to save PSD the minimal extra costs of the witnessing of these torques, and for our QA Management to avoid "interruption of the lean manufacturing flow," their main goal (not the goal to avoid defects in the product, like you might expect), that might result from a valid inspection regimen that would ensure the 0 AQL (Acceptable Quality Limit) requirement.
The Last Inspector