Improve wording, add missing words from @kyhu65867 review for GSA#939

Co-authored-by: Kylie Hunter <kylie.hunter@gsa.gov>

Author: aj-stein-gsa

src/validations/constraints/fedramp-external-constraints.xml

@@ -172,8 +172,8 @@
                 <message>A FedRAMP SSP MUST identify how the system implements each control requirement implemented at the per-statement level, not in other locations allowed for non-FedRAMP use cases.</message>
                 <remarks>
                     <p>NIST maintains OSCAL models that allow implemented requirements for controls to have references to the implementing components in multiple locations to support multiple use cases.</p>
-                    <p>Despite the flexibility of NIST's upstream OSCAL models, FedRAMP only accepts OSCAL-based SSP with the reference in one of those locations, see <code>missing-response-components</code> for more details about this requirement.</p>
-                    <p>A constraint violation with this warning indicates a given SSP uses one of the valid locations for all NIST use cases, not the only one FedRA</p>
+                    <p>Despite the flexibility of NIST's upstream OSCAL models, FedRAMP only accepts OSCAL-based SSPs with the reference in one of those locations, see <code>missing-response-components</code> for more details about this requirement.</p>
+                    <p>A constraint violation with this warning indicates a given SSP uses one of the valid locations for all NIST use cases, but not the only FedRAMP required location.</p>
                 </remarks>
             </expect>        
             <expect id="missing-response-components" target="implemented-requirement/statement" test="count(by-component) ge 1" level="ERROR">