My understanding is that they wanted to validate that the additional needle insertions through the vial doesn't damage the seal enough to cause contamination.

Is the seal important if the vial is going to be fully used up ~now? Presumably the needle has to be clean regardless of whether the seal exists at all (e.g., it could be dirty inside the bore and the seal state would be irrelevant), so the seal's purpose is to prevent contamination from the environment when there is no needle present. That kind of contamination takes time to happen and more time to incubate, and if the open lifespan of the vial is only a few hours is that important? Seems like that minor uncertainty is a good trade for swifter execution.

I don’t know much about this issue, but from your comments it sounds like you don’t either. I’m not trying to be mean, but considering it wasn’t an automatic approval from the FDA that would suggest there’s legitimate concern to at least investigate. Be wary of Dunning-Kruger effect, especially when we’re talking about the healthcare of every person on Earth (the ideal scope of these vaccines).

This is a hollow appeal to authority (the FDA is infallible) mixed with an appeal to emotion (fear of death) with no attempt to provide concrete information or to present thinking towards a conclusion.