it will only potentially lead to a reduced fatigue life, not the risk of dramatic or catastrophic failure. It's another example of poor programme execution from a subcontractor, not of a fundamental flaw in the design.
well, technically speaking it is. A reduced life results in the asset having to be amortised over a shorter period with a reduced value at the end of that period, which makes the aircraft more expensive to operate. That makes it a fundamental flaw in the design as potentially it affects the operational cost to the user, which is the result of the actual 'design'.
Most importantly, this can be inspected for and addressed.
it can yes, but the reality as anyone who has dealt with de-lam on flight control surfaces, its often cheaper to bin the part and buy again than to repair a de-lam composite structure.