dctyke
The relatively recent Routine Technical Instruction requiring crack detection necessitated removal of said nut and bolt. From memory, the last application was about 3 weeks before the accident (Oct 2011). The RTI (and UTI before it) periodicity was changed a number of times and the SI report notes concern was expressed over the increased maintenance burden on RAFAT, compounded by loss of many engineers.
Sorry, I meant to add; did you spot the error in terminology in the report? They called the RTI a Special Technical Instruction (which the MAA call a Service Technical Instruction...). It is neither.
All this became very confusing in the mid-00s as they changed a lot of terms and definitions unnecessarily, which would force anyone taught under the old and perfectly good system to think long and hard about hitherto no-brainers. This was compounded by the long standing POLICY of ignoring the mandated POLICY for independent oversight of SI(T) approvals. I have a fundamental issue with PTs being allowed to both propose and approve these.