Form 21-22a: Fill in questions 19a and 19b on generated PDF

[opticbob]

Summary

• This work is behind a feature toggle (flipper): YES
• (Summarize the changes that have been made to the platform): On the 21-22a PDF fills in the checkboxes for 19a and 19b, the text field for 19b, and corrects the text handling around limitations of consent.
• (If bug, how to reproduce)
• (What is the solution, why is this the solution?)
• (Which team do you work for, does your team own the maintenance of this component?): FAR/ARM, we own this component.
• (If introducing a flipper, what is the success criteria being targeted?)

Related issue(s)

• Include specific 21-22a authorizations (Fields 19a and 19b) in PDF generation va.gov-team#96908
• Link to previous change of the code/bug (if applicable)
• Link to epic if not included in ticket

Testing done

• New code is covered by unit tests
• Describe what the old behavior was prior to the change: The question 19 fields weren't filled in at all and the limitations of consent weren't filled in correctly.
• Describe the steps required to verify your changes are working as expected. Exclusively stating 'Specs run' is NOT acceptable as appropriate testing: Use the staging frontend to create a PDF generation data request and submit it to the backend. You should get a PDF generated and returned to you.
• If this work is behind a flipper:
  • Tests need to be written for both the flipper on and flipper off scenarios. Docs.
  • What is the testing plan for rolling out the feature?

Screenshots

What areas of the site does it impact?

(Describe what parts of the site are impacted andifcode touched other areas): Just the 'representation_management` module.

Acceptance criteria

• I updated unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
• No error nor warning in the console.
• Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
• Documentation has been updated (link to documentation)
• No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
• Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog (if applicable)
• If app impacted requires authentication, did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected
• I added a screenshot of the developed feature

Requested Feedback

(OPTIONAL)What should the reviewers know in addition to the above. Is there anything specific you wish the reviewer to assist with. Do you have any concerns with this PR, why?

[holdenhinkle]

Approved.

[github-actions]

Backend-review-group approval confirmed.