Risk adversity dictates to some to have the rifle professionally assessed as the first step, whilst I’m not condoning firing it until the issue is identified I am suggesting a hierarchy of problem solving should start with the ammunition and specifically the brass.
There are many factors in the brass forming process that potentially could contribute to all matter of failures from the combination of the raw ingredients, manufacturing process as well as how the user has handled it.
I find the reply from Remington interesting and freshly honest, It would suggest they know of batches where during the draw out process oven annealing has failed to sufficient soften the brass to keep it adequately workable causing stress points resulting in failures upon firing.
Lithgow’s reply seems to suggest their confident in their manufacturing and QA at this time, this could be because they have had no other issues arise in that model/chambering combination.
If my memory serves me correctly they did have a problem back in mid 2018 with barrels cracking on some 102’s chambered in .223 and promptly issued a desist use and recall notice.
Brass is a complicated drawn out (pun intended) process, over the years I’ve had defect brass in a mired of chamberings With widely differing problems from a number of manufactures, Win, Rem, S&B, PPC, Hornady and even Norma.
Lapua, Peterson, Fed have been ok to date.
It’s interesting an beneficial for those using brass cartridges to know the rudimentary foundations of how their ammunition is manufactured.
https://www.accurateshooter.com/technical-articles/how-cartridge-brass-is-made/