There is a huge amount of context in an early whistleblower report [1]. This reported before the FAA did the likelihood that the bolts were not reinstalled and the problems with the documentation.

Per that whistleblower account, the door plug removal was not documented in the official records system ("CMES") but the required work was discussed in an unofficial system ("SAT") including whether or not an official record should be made. Boeing concluded the work could be done without an official record in CMES. Per the discussion on SAT, the official "removal" record was not needed if the operation was treated as an "opening" instead, despite the safety-critical bolts being removed in either case.

The FAA obviously will have problems with the entire system that lets factory workers do safety-critical work without official documentation, standards, or oversight. So they will want to talk to enough people to understand how that system is understood in practice on the factory floor and how it came to be.

Boeing it seems has tried to limit them to talking to people directly involved with the Alaska Air incident work. Hence the current heated pushback feom the FAA.

It may also be that Boeing is playing coy about the relevant discussion in SAT, or about the existence or nonexistence of policy distinguishing between door plug "opening" and "removal". In any case the FAA wants everything and Boeing has been trying to get away with less.

[1] https://leehamnews.com/2024/01/15/unplanned-removal-installa...