AD/F100/76 - Main Landing Gear Outboard Door

This AD is organised around a small number of technical and procedural concepts drawn directly from the text. Key concepts and their operational meanings under the instrument are:

• Applicability: The AD applies to Model F28 Mark 0070 and Mark 0100 aircraft, all serial numbers, but only when they are fitted with CFRP MLG outboard doors having part number D13312-401 through -410. Applicability expressly includes those door units "held as spares" carrying the same part numbers (Applicability). That means the directive is conditional on equipment fit and extends to stock parts not installed on an aircraft.

• Inspection: The AD mandates an inspection "for cracks in the CFRP outer skin at the countersunk heads of the operating rod bracket attachment bolts" following Part 1, Section 3 of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-52-080 (Requirement 1). The inspection is therefore localised to the CFRP skin region adjacent to the countersunk bolt heads that attach the operating rod bracket.

• Modification by reinforcement plates: Whether cracks are found or not, the AD requires installation of reinforcement plates to the MLG outboard door operating rod bracket attachment in accordance with Part 2, Section 3 of SBF100-52-080 (Requirements 2 and 3). For spare units the modification procedure is specified in Component Service Bulletin D13312-52-09 (Requirement 4). The technical remedy is therefore the reinforcement-plate retrofit.

• Service Bulletin reference and approval: The AD requires compliance with specific Fokker Service Bulletins dated 12 December 2005, but allows "later CAA-NL approved revision" editions; in other words, the mandated procedures may be carried out to a later revision only if that revision has approval from the Netherlands Civil Aviation Authority (CAA-NL) (Requirements 1-4). The AD also contains a cross-reference: "Note: CAA-NL AD NL-2006-001 refers." This indicates liaison with a CAA-NL AD addressing the same issue.

• Compliance timing and operational limits: The AD sets differing compliance windows. The inspection (Requirement 1) must be done within 9 months after 16 March 2006 (Compliance 1). If cracks are found, the modification must be effected "before further flight" (Compliance 2). If no cracks are found at the inspection, the same modification must nevertheless be done within 12 months after 16 March 2006 (Compliance 3). Spare units must be modified within 12 months after 16 March 2006 (Compliance 4). These timing rules create an immediate operational constraint in cases where the inspection reveals cracking.

• Safety rationale: The background documentation states the manufacturer's report of an in-flight detachment and investigation showing broken operating rods and detached brackets which jammed and damaged hydraulic lines. The AD characterises the uncorrected condition as having "the possibility of blocking the proper functioning of the main landing gear" (Background). The link between bracket detachment, jamming, hydraulic damage and gear function is the safety chain the AD intends to break.

• Administrative provenance: The AD is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and carries an effective date (16 March 2006) and a signature by a delegate, David Villiers, dated 2 February 2006. The AD is also labelled AD/F100/76 and shows "3/2006" likely indicating an internal AD numbering and issue month (header data).

These concepts frame the practical compliance obligations: identify affected aeroplanes and spares; perform the inspection within the stated window; if defects are found do not fly until the reinforcement-plate modification is installed; otherwise carry out the reinforcement retrofit within the longer window; and use the specified service bulletins or later CAA-NL approved revisions to perform and document the work.

The AD directly affects a narrow set of parties as defined by the instrument. The primary parties who must act or who bear the costs are:

• Aircraft operators and owners of Fokker F100 (F28 Mk 100) Model F28 Mark 0070 and Mark 0100 aircraft that are fitted with CFRP MLG outboard doors with part numbers D13312-401 through -410. The Applicability provision makes the AD conditional on that equipment fit; operators of aircraft not so fitted are not subject to these specific requirements (Applicability). For affected operators, the AD imposes inspection and modification obligations and specific compliance deadlines.

• Holders of spare MLG outboard door units (parts stock), where those spare units are CFRP and carry part numbers D13312-401 through -410. The AD explicitly includes spare units within its scope and requires modification of those spares in accordance with Component Service Bulletin D13312-52-09 within specified time (Requirement 4; Compliance 4). That means maintenance stock managers, spare-parts warehouses and leasing entities that hold such units must take action even while the parts are not installed.

• Maintenance organisations and MROs performing the inspection and modification works. The AD prescribes the specific Service Bulletin sections to use for inspection and modification, which creates an operational duty for any maintenance provider engaged to carry out the work to follow those instructions and to rely on the applicable CAA-NL approved revision (Requirements 1-4).

• Aircraft certificating authorities and regulators have an indirect role because the AD requires later revisions to be CAA-NL approved before they are used for compliance. The AD also cross-references CAA-NL AD NL-2006-001, indicating that national airworthiness authorities are coordinating on this issue (Note).

• The manufacturer and parts suppliers are implicated because the required remedy is the installation of reinforcement plates described in manufacturer-issued Service Bulletins. Fokker’s Service Bulletin SBF100-52-080 and Component Service Bulletin D13312-52-09 are the reference documents for the practical steps to be carried out (Requirement 1-4). Where operators need parts to perform the modification, parts suppliers will be involved.

Parties not directly named in the AD but practically affected include insurers and lessors who must account for downtime and maintenance costs; flight ops and scheduling teams who must manage aircraft availability during inspections and modifications; and regulatory compliance staff who must record compliance with the AD within the operator’s continuing airworthiness management system.

The AD does not set out exemption processes, appeal rights, or penalties in the text. It also does not list other classes of affected parties such as passengers or cargo interests. The concrete behavioural effects required of affected parties are: perform the specified inspection within the 9-month window, modify affected assemblies if cracks are found before further flight, otherwise perform the retrofit within 12 months, and ensure spare units are modified within 12 months (Compliance 1-4; Requirement 1-4).

The AD establishes specific duties and prescribes methods for performing them. It does not contain express statements of rights such as appeals or exemptions. The operative duties and the conditions under which they arise, taken directly from the instrument, are:

Duties

• Duty to inspect: For affected aeroplanes, perform an inspection "for cracks in the CFRP outer skin at the countersunk heads of the operating rod bracket attachment bolts" using Part 1 of Section 3 of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-52-080 dated 12 December 2005 or a later CAA-NL approved revision. This inspection must be completed "within 9 months after 16 March 2006" (Requirement 1; Compliance 1).

• Duty to modify if cracks are found: If the inspection reveals cracks, the operator must "modify the MLG outboard door operating rod bracket attachment by the installation of reinforcement plates" following Part 2 of Section 3 of SBF100-52-080 or a later CAA-NL approved revision, and do so "before further flight" (Requirement 2; Compliance 2). This creates an immediate operational constraint in cases of detected cracking.

• Duty to modify if no cracks are found: Even where the inspection discovers no cracks, the operator must still carry out the reinforcement-plate modification per Part 2 of Section 3 of SBF100-52-080 or a later CAA-NL approved revision, within 12 months after 16 March 2006 (Requirement 3; Compliance 3). Hence the inspection does not substitute permanently for the modification; it only affects the timing.

• Duty to modify spares: For CFRP MLG outboard door units held as spares, part number D13312-401 through -410, the modification by installation of reinforcement plates must be done according to Section 3 of Fokker Component Service Bulletin D13312-52-09 dated 12 December 2005, or later CAA-NL approved revision, within 12 months after 16 March 2006 (Requirement 4; Compliance 4).

• Duty to use the specified Service Bulletins or later CAA-NL approved revisions: Each action is tied to particular Service Bulletins and their specified sections. The AD permits the use of later revisions only if those later revisions are CAA-NL approved (Requirements 1-4). This constrains practitioners to regulatory-approved documentation.

Rights and omissions in the text

• The AD does not set out any explicit right to defer or seek exemption; nor does it prescribe an internal appeals process. The instrument does not state remedies for parties who disagree with the AD or mechanisms for temporary relief.

• The AD does not specify who bears the cost; it does not provide compensation, cost-sharing, or other financial arrangements. That absence implies costs fall to the operators and parts-holders subject to the AD, according to the common structure of such directives, but the AD itself does not elaborate on cost allocation.

• The AD does not list recordkeeping requirements, though the referenced Service Bulletins would typically contain detailed accomplishment instructions; the AD constrains compliance to the SB procedures but does not itself include documentation obligations.

• Enforcement actions, penalties or sanctions are not detailed in the AD text. The AD does include an effective date and a signature by a CASA delegate, which establishes regulatory authority for the directive (Effective date; signature). Absent explicit procedural rights, any dispute resolution, exemption or certification of alternative means of compliance would need to be pursued under the regulator's general processes rather than within the AD text.

In summary, the AD imposes concrete duties: perform a targeted inspection within nine months, modify before further flight if cracks are found, otherwise carry out the mandatory reinforcement-plate modification within 12 months, and ensure spare units are also modified within 12 months. The AD circumscribes the method by prescribing specific Service Bulletins and requires use of revisions only with CAA-NL approval. It does not set out procedural rights, appeals, penalties, or cost allocations within the instrument itself.

The AD text does not contain an express schedule of penalties, specific enforcement measures, or administrative sanctions. The document does, however, provide material that allows a reader to infer the enforcement mechanism and the points at which regulatory action would be engaged:

• Regulatory provenance and signature: The AD is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, and is signed by David Villiers in the capacity of Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (signature block, 2 February 2006). That signature establishes the AD as an official CASA instrument effective on 16 March 2006 (Effective date; signature). Enforcement of ADs in practice is typically undertaken by the relevant aviation regulator under its statutory powers, but this AD text does not itself recite those statutory powers or penalties.

• Operational enforcement via "before further flight": The AD requires that, if cracks are found, the MLG outboard door operating rod bracket attachment must be modified "before further flight" (Requirement 2; Compliance 2). This creates an immediate operational limitation: an aircraft on which such cracks are found must not fly until the mandated modification is completed. That operational restriction implies that continued operation without compliance would be a breach of airworthiness requirements and therefore subject to regulatory enforcement, although the AD text does not enumerate specific sanctions.

• Compliance windows as enforceable deadlines: The AD sets discrete compliance windows (within 9 months for inspection; within 12 months for the retrofit when no cracks are found; within 12 months for spares). These dates create enforceable timelines against which an operator’s maintenance records and continuing airworthiness management will be inspected or audited. The AD itself does not set out the consequences of non-compliance, but failure to meet AD requirements is generally recorded as an airworthiness non-conformance subject to regulator follow-up.

• Reference to CAA-NL approvals and related ADs: The AD requires that Service Bulletin revisions be "CAA-NL approved" and refers to CAA-NL AD NL-2006-001. This interauthority linkage indicates that compliance and approvals are to be aligned with the Netherlands authority. Enforcement therefore rests on adherence both to this AD and to any complementary decisions or approvals recorded by CAA-NL. The AD does not, however, specify the enforcement modalities arising from CAA-NL actions.

• Absence of penalty clauses: The AD contains no express penalties, infringement notices, monetary fines, or suspension/revocation mechanisms. It does not detail an appeal or exemption process. Therefore, any enforcement steps, sanctions or legal remedies would be found in broader aviation statutes, regulations and CASA enforcement policy, rather than in this instrument.

Practically, the AD imposes regulatory obligations with explicit compliance timing and "before further flight" language where immediate risk is detected. The instrument locates enforcement implicitly in the regulator’s authority to control airworthiness and to prevent flight of an aircraft that does not meet airworthiness directives. The AD text itself does not state penalties nor the procedures by which the regulator will enforce compliance.

The AD explicitly cross-references external regulatory instruments and prescribes the use of manufacturer Service Bulletins only if they are approved by another authority, producing a small network of interaction with other legal and regulatory materials. The AD’s text reveals the following interactions:

• CAA-NL approvals and AD NL-2006-001: The AD requires that the Service Bulletins cited may be used "or later CAA-NL approved revision" (Requirements 1-4). That means that the operative version of the Fokker Service Bulletins for compliance may be a later version, but only if it carries approval from the Netherlands Civil Aviation Authority (CAA-NL). The AD also contains the note "CAA-NL AD NL-2006-001 refers." This creates a requirement to consider CAA-NL’s actions and approvals in evaluating compliance under this AD. Thus, there is an express cross-border regulatory interaction: the Australian AD incorporates, by reference, the CAA-NL approval regime for later service bulletin revisions.

• Manufacturer Service Bulletins as technical standards: The AD anchors its inspection and modification tasks to Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-52-080 and Component Service Bulletin D13312-52-09, both dated 12 December 2005. By doing so, the AD imports the technical content of those bulletins into regulatory obligation. Under the AD, operators are required to comply with the specific sections of those bulletins (Part 1 and Part 2 of Section 3 in SBF100-52-080; Section 3 in D13312-52-09). The AD therefore effectively converts manufacturer maintenance instructions into enforceable regulatory requirements, albeit limited to the steps and timeframes specified.

• Airworthiness regime and CASA authority: Although the AD does not recite the underlying statutory powers, it is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and bears an effective date and delegate signature (Effective date; signature). The AD therefore functions as an instrument within the Australian airworthiness regulatory regime. Any statutory enforcement, penalties or administrative remedies for non-compliance will flow from the wider aviation statute and CASA’s enforcement policies rather than from provisions within the AD.

• Operational limitations and continuing airworthiness: The AD imposes immediate operational constraints in that detected cracks must be addressed "before further flight." This interacts with operational rules concerning airworthiness, continuing airworthiness management, and possibly with air operator certification obligations. The AD does not specify those other rules, but compliance will need to be integrated into the operator’s existing airworthiness management system and other applicable regulations.

• International and parts-handling implications: By requiring modifications to spare parts (spares), the AD interacts with supply-chain arrangements and parts certification processes. Where spare parts are held by third parties, ownership and maintenance responsibilities under aviation contracts and national standards will determine who performs and certifies the modification. The AD itself does not allocate those commercial responsibilities.

• Absence of competing or derogatory law in the text: The AD does not state that it overrides other laws or contain clauses about conflicts. Instead it builds on existing regulatory authority and cross-references CAA-NL approvals. Any conflicts or interpretation questions would be resolved by reference to the broader legislative framework governing CASA's powers and the international airworthiness regime rather than by the AD text.

In short, this AD interacts with at least two other regulatory layers: manufacturer Service Bulletins (as technical standards incorporated by reference) and CAA-NL’s approval processes and AD NL-2006-001. It also sits within Australia’s general airworthiness regulatory framework administered by CASA, which is the issuing authority.

The AD document supplied does not record any amendments to the directive itself. The material that is present and relevant to amendment history is as follows:

• The AD cites Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-52-080 and Fokker Component Service Bulletin D13312-52-09, both dated 12 December 2005. The AD allows compliance with "later CAA-NL approved revision" of those documents (Requirements 1-4). That mechanism anticipates the possibility of later technical revisions to the manufacturer’s instructions but conditions their use on external approval by CAA-NL. The AD does not, in the text provided, itself include amendment entries, revision history, superseding AD numbers, or later Australian updates.

• The AD carries an effective date of 16 March 2006 and a signature block dated 2 February 2006. The header includes the internal reference AD/F100/76 and "3/2006", which likely mark the AD serial number and issue month. No later dates or amendment notices are included in the material provided.

• The AD contains the note "CAA-NL AD NL-2006-001 refers." That suggests that there is a related CAA-NL AD with its own amendment history, but the Australian AD does not incorporate or reproduce CAA-NL’s amendment history within its own text. Any amendments arising from subsequent coordination with CAA-NL would be recorded either in separate CASA instruments or in updated versions of the Service Bulletins once CAA-NL approval is given.

• The absence of an in-text amendment log means that any subsequent changes to the AD after its effective date (for example revocation, extension, or amendment) are not captured in the attached text. Practitioners relying on this instrument should seek the current status of AD/F100/76 from CASA’s official AD database to confirm whether further amendments, cancellations, or superseding ADs exist. The AD as provided gives the original operative requirements and the mechanism for using later CAA-NL approved Service Bulletin revisions, but it does not itself contain a record of post-issue amendments.

Therefore, based solely on the supply text, there is no recorded amendment history for AD/F100/76 within this document. The AD does, however, permit the use of later CAA-NL approved Service Bulletin revisions as a forward-looking mechanism to incorporate later technical changes.

The supplied AD text contains no information about litigation, legal challenges, judicial review, or any court proceedings relating to the AD. It does not disclose any disputes, appeals or enforcement cases brought against operators, maintenance organisations or the regulator in relation to AD/F100/76. The available material therefore records no litigation history.

Given the absence of litigation details in the document, a reader cannot, from this source alone, determine whether any legal proceedings have been commenced, concluded, or are pending with respect to this AD. Any judicial or administrative litigation would need to be identified from external legal records, court databases, or CASA public enforcement disclosures, none of which are included in the supplied text.

The AD does contain a cross-reference to CAA-NL AD NL-2006-001 and requires CAA-NL approval for later Service Bulletin revisions (Note; Requirements 1-4). However, that cross-reference does not, in the provided instrument, include any information about disputes or legal actions in the Netherlands or elsewhere.

In short, the AD as provided shows no litigation history. The document records the regulatory measures and technical requirements only.

The AD contains several features and drafting choices that can produce practical pitfalls for operators, parts holders and maintenance providers if they are not carefully observed. These points arise directly from the text and the way the obligations are structured:

• Applicability is conditional on equipment fit: The AD applies only to Model F28 Mark 0070 and Mark 0100 aircraft "if equipped with Carbon-Fibre Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) Main Landing Gear Doors, Part Number D13312-401 through -410" (Applicability). Operators must therefore confirm the exact part number and material of the outboard door. Misidentifying a door material or part number could lead to unnecessary work or to missed compliance. The AD also includes spare units in the same part-number range (Applicability; Requirement 4).

• Spare parts are in-scope even when not fitted: The AD explicitly covers CFRP MLG Outboard Door units "held as spares" with the specified part numbers (Applicability; Requirement 4). Organisations that manage inventories must identify and modify spare units within the 12-month window, even if the parts are not installed on an aircraft. Failure to do so could leave an unmodified spare that, if later fitted, would reintroduce a non-compliant condition.

• Different compliance windows for inspection versus modification: The inspection for cracks must be performed within 9 months after 16 March 2006 (Compliance 1), whereas the mandated retrofit applies within 12 months if no cracks are found (Compliance 3) and within 12 months for spares (Compliance 4). Operators must keep track of these separate deadlines. Missing the 9-month inspection window does not simply defer the obligation; it could create audit and enforcement exposure. The AD does not provide alternative timing rules.

• Immediate grounding risk when cracks are found: The AD’s "before further flight" rule applies when cracks are detected (Requirement 2; Compliance 2). Practically, that means discovery of cracking during the inspection creates an immediate operational limitation requiring on-the-spot decisions: either carry out the modification immediately (if possible, along with availability of parts and a certified maintenance team), or remove the aircraft from service until the modification is effected. This can have immediate scheduling and commercial consequences.

• Mandatory reliance on specified Service Bulletins and CAA-NL approval: Each action is required to be performed "in accordance with" specific sections of the cited Service Bulletins, or with a later revision only if that revision is "CAA-NL approved" (Requirements 1-4). A common pitfall is assuming an operator may use a later Fokker bulletin revision without checking CAA-NL approval. The AD conditions compliance on CAA-NL approvals, not on internal operator judgement.

• Potential mismatch between technical and administrative records: The AD itself does not set out documentary proof obligations, nor does it narrate the acceptance or certification process after modification. Operators must therefore ensure that the work is documented in maintenance releases and records in a manner that demonstrates compliance with the specific SB sections and, where applicable, that the used revision is CAA-NL approved. Failure to link the action to the prescribed SB sections and the correct revision could create audit exposure.

• No express transitional reliefs or exemptions included: The AD text contains no clauses about deferral, exemptions or alternate methods of compliance. If an operator believes an alternative modification provides an equivalent level of safety, the AD does not specify how to document or obtain acceptance of that alternative within the instrument. Practitioners should therefore be careful not to rely on unstated flexibility.

• Inclusive part-number range: The AD specifies part numbers D13312-401 through -410 inclusive. Errors in parsing the range or overlooking a suffix or dash variant could lead to incorrect identification of affected units. The AD explicitly states the inclusive part-number range and that it includes units held as spares (Applicability; Requirement 4).

• Cross-jurisdiction coordination: The requirement that later revisions be CAA-NL approved suggests that actions taken based on approvals from other authorities without CAA-NL sign-off may not be accepted under this AD. Operators should check both CASA and CAA-NL positions before relying on alternate approvals.

• Lack of penalty language does not equal freedom to delay: Although the AD contains no penalty schedule, the explicit "before further flight" obligation and the fixed compliance dates mean that non-compliance will expose operators to regulator actions under the broader airworthiness regime. The AD should be treated as binding despite its silence on sanctions.

These are concrete procedural and practical "gotchas" in the AD’s structure. They are matters of compliance and operational planning rather than legal interpretation, and they derive directly from the wording and timing provisions in the AD.

Compliance with this AD requires a sequence of verifiable actions tied to the timing windows and the referenced Service Bulletins. The following steps set out a compliance pathway grounded in the AD’s text:

1. Confirm applicability: For each Fokker F100 (F28 Mk 100) Model F28 Mark 0070 and Mark 0100 aircraft in your fleet, confirm whether the MLG outboard doors are CFRP and carry part numbers D13312-401 through -410. Also identify any spare MLG outboard door units held in inventory with those part numbers (Applicability).

2. Schedule and perform the inspection within the 9-month window: Arrange for the inspection "for cracks in the CFRP outer skin at the countersunk heads of the operating rod bracket attachment bolts" using Part 1 of Section 3 of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-52-080 dated 12 December 2005, or a later CAA-NL approved revision. The inspection must be completed within 9 months after 16 March 2006 (Requirement 1; Compliance 1). Ensure maintenance providers are instructed to use the specific SB section and revision.

3. If cracks are found, do not fly: If the inspection identifies cracks, the AD requires modification "by the installation of reinforcement plates" in accordance with Part 2 of Section 3 of SBF100-52-080, or later CAA-NL approved revision, and that modification must be completed "before further flight" (Requirement 2; Compliance 2). This requires immediate logistical planning to secure parts and qualified maintenance personnel so the aircraft can be returned to service lawfully.

4. If no cracks are found, schedule the retrofit within 12 months: Where the inspection is clear, still plan and execute the installation of the reinforcement plates per Part 2, Section 3 of SBF100-52-080, or later CAA-NL approved revision, within 12 months after 16 March 2006 (Requirement 3; Compliance 3). Do not interpret a clean inspection as a permanent exemption: the modification remains mandatory within the 12-month period.

5. Modify spare units within 12 months: For spare CFRP MLG outboard doors part numbers D13312-401 through -410, carry out the reinforcement-plate modification in accordance with Section 3 of Fokker Component Service Bulletin D13312-52-09 dated 12 December 2005, or later CAA-NL approved revision, within 12 months after 16 March 2006 (Requirement 4; Compliance 4). Update parts inventory records to reflect completed modification status.

6. Use only the prescribed SB sections and approved revisions: Include the exact SB revision reference and date in maintenance records. Where using a later revision, ensure that revision is CAA-NL approved as required by the AD (Requirements 1-4). Do not substitute unspecified procedures or unapproved revisions.

7. Document the inspection and modification outcomes: Although the AD does not specify recordkeeping formats, operators should create and keep maintenance records that demonstrate: (a) the inspection was performed within the 9-month window, (b) the inspection findings (presence or absence of cracks), (c) where applicable, that the reinforcement-plate installation was completed, including parts and SB revision used, and (d) work on spare units. Link each record to the AD number (AD/F100/76), the aircraft or part serial number, and the SB section and revision used to demonstrate traceability.

8. Prepare for operational impacts: Where inspections reveal cracking, operations must be prepared to ground the aircraft until the modification is performed, per the AD’s "before further flight" requirement. Plan for parts lead times, maintenance availability and any necessary scheduling adjustments.

9. Coordinate with CAA-NL approvals and CASA: If you plan to use a later revision of a Service Bulletin, confirm CAA-NL approval status for that revision. Keep records of the approval reference to support compliance. Although the AD does not describe how CASA will recognise CAA-NL approvals, the AD’s text requires CAA-NL approved revisions for compliance.

10. Integrate into continuing airworthiness management: Add the AD’s tasks and compliance dates to the operator’s continuing airworthiness program so that inspections, modifications and spare parts work are tracked and available for regulatory audit. Ensure maintenance providers and inventory managers are aware of the scope extending to spares.

These steps are derived strictly from the AD text and the Service Bulletin references cited therein (Requirements 1-4; Compliance 1-4). Because the AD requires specific SB sections and CAA-NL approval for later revisions, operators should not substitute alternative repair methods without prior regulatory acceptance. The AD’s explicit "before further flight" language where cracks are found establishes an immediate no-fly condition until the mandated modification is accomplished and documented.