HEAT TREAT
OCTOBER 2005
UNCONFIRMED MINUTES
OCTOBER 17-20, 2005
MARRIOTT CITY CENTER
PITTSBURGH, PA
These minutes are not final until confirmed by the Task Group in writing or by vote at a subsequent meeting. Information herein does not constitute a communication or recommendation from the Task Group and shall not be considered as such by any agency.MONDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2005 (User Meeting)
Closed meetings were held on Monday and Thursday. Open meetings were held on Tuesday and Wednesday.
1.0 /OPENING COMMENTS
1.1 /Call to Order/Quorum Check
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Doug Matson. Quorum requirements were met at all times for both Open and Closed meetings.Attendance
An attendance sheet was routed and annotated by attendees. The combined meeting attendance for the four days was as follows:
User Members Present:
Peter Edwards / Airbus (UK)
David Ciosek / Boeing
Michael Coleman / Boeing
Doug Matson / Boeing
Ken Quade / Boeing
William Stewart / Bombardier
Mitch Nelson / Cessna Aircraft
Clyde Herrington / Eaton Aerospace
Marc Taillandier / Eurocopter (France)
Doug Wilson / GE Transportation
Jeff rey Thyssen / GE Transportation
Tom Norris / Goodrich Aerostructures
Nick Brenton / Goodrich Engine Controls System
John Gourley / Honeywell
Mike Shzn / Honeywell
Mike Navaira / Lockheed Martin
Eddy Pham / Northrop Grumman
Andy Snow / Raytheon Aircraft
Susan Margheim / Rockwell Collins
Mark Emerson / Rolls Royce (US)
Phillip Cox / Rolls Royce (UK)
Tom Murphy / Sikorsky Aircraft
Eric Barreau / Snecma Moteurs
Laurent Geerts / SONACA
Robert Faticanti / Textron Systems
Sylvia Baeza / Vought
PRI STAFF:
Jerry Aston, Marcel Cuperman, Laura Fisher
Other participants/members:
(Liangfang) Lillian Guo / Alcoa Fastening Systems
Shweta Kabre / Alcoa Fastening Systems
Larry Phipps / Alcoa Fastening Systems
Aaron Montoya / Alexco
Bob Muto / American Brazing
Susan Cummings / American Brazing
Holley Owsley / Applied Thermal Technologies
Bill Hewitt / Bodycote Heat Treatments Ltd
Bob Lehnen / Bodycote Thermal Processing
Griff Braddock / Braddock Metallurgical
Mark Brown / Braddock Metallurgical
George Gieger / Braddock Metallurgical
Jeff Young / Braddock Metallurgical
Jim Hill / Carpenter Technology
Paul Vegiard / CCPI
Zen Piatuyczka / Chromalloy New York
Johanna Lisa / Continental Heat Treating
Don Lowman / Continental Heat Treating
Trey Cunningham / Crestview Aerospace
Joe Roach / Crestview Aerospace
Andrew Bassett / Doctor Furnace
Zubair Alam / Exactatherm
Richard Borg / Exactatherm
Frank Skelly / General Metal Heat Treatment
Chris Torok / General Metal Heat Treatment
Zeljko Calija / Goodrich Aerospace
Tom Cunningham / Haynes International
Annette O’Connell / Haynes International
Other participants/members: Continued
Tom Mosier / Hi Tecmetal Group
Robert Pagermo / Hi Tecmetal Group
Dave Schalmo / Hi Tecmetal Group
Rich Ward / Hi Tecmetal Group
Sylvain Bisaro / Howmet - Normandy
Yuji Serita / Jamco Corp.
Jim Carpenter / Jasco Heat Treating
Bruce Grimes / LMI Aerospace
Frederikus Jonck / Maycast-Nokes Precision Engr.
Nichelle Bruce / Metal Improvement West
Elena Ritolli / Metallurgical Processing
Stu Sherman / Metallurgical Processing
Chad Haugh / Modern Industries
Shawn Sova / Modern Industries
Kevin Winslow / Modern Industries
Stephen Carey / New Hampshire Ball Bearings
Greg Newton / Newton Heat Treat
Robert Sutton / Newton Heat Treat
Ed Engelhard / Owego Heat Treat
Gary Wallace / Parker Hannifin
Ninan Idiculla / Paulo Products
Jon Steltenpohl / Paulo Products
Bob Akin / Quality Heat Treating
Susanne Moore / Roll Forming
Robert Trudeau / Senior Operations
Shinichi Imahashi / Sogo Spring Manufacturing
Paul Brinker / Solar Atmospheres
Mike Johnson / Solar Atmospheres
Rob Thompson / Steel Treaters
Curtis Proske / Stratoflex
John Rushforth / Tecvac
Robert Hoff / Timken Aerospace
Wayne Newman / Vac-Met
Douglas White / Valley Heat Treat
2.0 / METRICS
The Task Group reviewed the metrics as supplied by PRI.
· Auditor capacity is yellow, below the 30% excess capacity target
· Certificates issued is green, with only one lapsed this period
· Cycles to close initial audits is yellow (3.4 average cycles) as is cycles for reaccreds (3.9)
· Supplier cycle time is green for initials, but red for reaccreds, primarily due to the practice of follow-up audits
· Staff cycle time is green for both initials and reaccredit audits.
· Task Group cycle time is yellow for Initial (and with a procedural 7 day hold, can never improve), red for reaccreds. (the criteria appear to be unreasonable, the red is driven by prime disapprovals)
· Suppliers attaining merit is yellow (74% versus 80% target)
· Cycle time reduction
During discussions on Auditor Capacity, Task Group discussion led to a recommendation to search and hire a Chinese speaking auditor. Auditor training has helped auditors improve on writing NCR’s.
Some thoughts on Metrics:
· It was noted that follow up audits do not stop the clock and are a driver for our time metrics. The option is failure, but we do not think that is the correct response.
· Re-evaluate criteria for task group review and revise NTGOP-001 Appendix 3 accordingly.
· Enlist the help of HT STSTG for supplier response times.
3.0 / CYCLE TIME REDUCTION
The Task Group is focused on total cycle time. The largest concerns are supplier response time, and Task Group response time. Task Group feels that the 7-day requirement should be waived if once the two assigned reviewers have voted. NTGOP-001 Appendix 3 requires 7 days. This will need to be modified. There is a NMC requirement to reduce cycle time so pressure is on Staff Engineers to close audits and reduce cycle time.
4.0 / PRIME BASELINE SLASHSHEET REVIEW
Additional Prime requirements have been proposed by Boeing. Sikorsky, Rolls Royce, and Cessna have responded that they do not have any additional requirements above baseline. Task Group will take another look at common requirements from each prime and review philosophy. The goal was for primes to be more assured that Nadcap covers all their specific requirements. Primes need to submit any additional requirements not covered in the baseline checklist by December 16, 2005.
Page 11 of 11
HEAT TREAT
OCTOBER 2005
5.0 / AS7003 REV C PRESENTATIONAerospace Council approved AS7003 Rev C which would have eliminated the requirement to ballot AS documents through SAE and then withdrew its approval for 45 days. Balloting through SAE Committees is a long and complicated process. Task Groups are concerned that Nadcap is a global institution and should not be responsible to SAE, a U.S. Group. Task Groups do not write the specification; only ensure compliance with the checklists. Primes are encouraged to support the removal of SAE from the process of Nadcap accreditation
6.0 / DELEGATION
The Task Group reviewed concurrence data for the past three months. Jerry Aston (98.4%), Anne Allen (99.2%), John Ewing (100%) and Laura Fisher (99.6%) are all maintaining acceptable concurrence rates and their delegation is continued.
7.0 / NON ACCOUNTABLE AUDIT CYCLE UPDATE
Cycles are influenced by supplier’s choice to communicate with staff engineers via eAuditNet. Suppliers should use email for general communication (clarifications, extensions, updates etc) and not eAuditNet. Mitch Nelson presented reasons why administrative cycles should not be counted to NMC metrics-Sub-team. The Metrics Sub-team will review the input. In general, this only influences the number of cycle metric not total cycle time.
8.0 / HARDNESS CHECKLIST DISCUSSION
A sub-team of HT and MTL has been formed to work on revising the AC7101/5 checklist. The sub-team members for HT are: Mitch Nelson, Sylvia Baeza, D. Lowman and Jerry Aston. The group is requesting feedback from HT auditors on required improvements to the existing checklists
9.0 / REVIEW MERIT INVESTIGATION RESULTS
The number of suppliers who achieve merit has increased but the number of companies attaining merit first time eligible is declining. Task Group would like STSTG to analyze why the percentage of first time merit is declining. The primary reason not to attain merit is repeat findings. However, we have never taken a hard look at first timers only. Also need to review the data for US versus Europe.
The STSTG has been given an action on improving merit. See attached chart.
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2005 (Open Meeting)
10.0 / APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES
Minutes from the July 2005 meeting were accepted as posted.
Page 11 of 11
HEAT TREAT
OCTOBER 2005
11.0 / SUPPLIER TECHNICAL SUB TASK GROUP UPDATEJohanna Lisa reported on the Sub Task Group meeting. Larry Phipps has been approved as Vice Chair of STSTG. The Task Group voted to endorse Larry’s selection. It was again pointed out that there is no formal procedure (NOP or NTGOP) covering STSTG’s. The Heat Treat STSTG is requested to draft an operating procedure.
The following points were discussed
· There has been minimal progress on high priority findings. Only two suppliers have contributed with two more considering.
· The STSTG is willing to take on reduction of non-sustaining corrective actions to improve the merit metric
· STSTG will work with SSC to push not counting “admin” cycles
· Suppliers have concerns about the mandatory “Supplier Feedback Form” since it is shared with the auditors. They are concerned about retribution on future audits. The Task Group recognizes the concern, but it is a general item that STSTG needs to address through SSC.
· Suppliers want to be able to challenge findings and are clearly allowed to do so. The supplier should respond in eAuditNet stating the reason why the finding is not valid along with any objective evidence that supports their case.
· Discussions and question continue on testing requirement imbedded in material specs used to specify heat treat requirements
o Auditors interpret the HT suppliers as material providers. Seller and impose specs for material (including testing) if that spec is called in PO
o Suppliers need to get clarifications from their customers to make the PO specific as to testing
o The Auditor Handbook needs to be re-written to include clarifications regarding this and other items
· The STSTG is being asked by Heat Treating Task Group to document their progress and provide some measure of effectiveness. Staff will assist.
Page 11 of 11
HEAT TREAT
OCTOBER 2005
12.0 / DEBRIEF OF AUDITOR TRAINING· The auditor training and coverage were discussed. All presentations are posted in eAuditNet -under Public Documents-Heat Treating.
o There is inconsistency in how auditors document systemic findings and in particular non-sustaining findings. Also it is not clear whether a witnessed “failure” should be written up as an NCR if the supplier immediately instituted proper non-conforming item procedures, Need to give direction in auditor handbook on these subjects
o Suppliers wanted to know the criteria for supplier participation in training. Generally, the training is for the auditors and we do not want it to become a supplier workshop. However, the supplier point of view is very valuable. In the future, at least the supplier voting members will be invited to participate, when deemed appropriate.
o There was excellent feedback from the auditors on the carburizing and nitriding checklists. There will need to be minor revisions, for example, to remove testing question which are covered in the AC7102 and MTL Checklist.
13.0 / BRAZING BASELINE CHECKLIST
The Brazing baseline checklist is now a working draft. The Task Group needs to review questions removed from the draft to determine if any would go in prime-specific supplements. The draft needs to be balloted ASAP. Doug Wilson and John Gourley will meet with Welding Task Group to finalize which group will handle induction and torch brazing.
14.0 / 8-D UPDATE
The Task Group position is that 8-D is a completely acceptable procedure for root cause analysis, but is not mandatory. This tool may be used to assist suppliers in the root cause analysis, but all responses posted in eAuditNet, must be in compliance with the response guidelines outlined in the eAuditNet Supplier’s Guide.
15.0 / AMEC UPDATE
Doug Matson reported on the following developments
· There is a continuing push to revise ARP1962 on training and then to revise various AMS specs to require it. There is a parallel effort on the ARP for pyrometry personnel.
· Questions on refractometer calibrations are still unresolved
· Note that these meetings are open to all but prime and supplier attendance is generally low. Doug Matson will provide detailed update at all future Task Group meetings.
Page 11 of 11
HEAT TREAT
OCTOBER 2005
16.0 / AMS2750 REV D UPDATEThe new AMS 2750 Rev D has been released. The new revision will go into effect on all audits performed after July 1, 2006. Task Group must have checklist in place by March 31, 2006. Suppliers were reminded that they may need to comply with prime mandates to the Rev D prior to July 1, 2006. On audits prior to July 1, the supplier must tell the auditor at the opening meeting if they have implemented Rev D.
AMS2750 REV D IMPLEMENTATION
The Heat Treating Task Group came to a consensus agreement that Nadcap heat treating audits starting on or after July 1, 2006 would be conducted to the requirements of AMS2750 Rev D.
The Heat Treating Task Group is in the process of modifying the AC7102 checklist to incorporate the AMS2750 Rev D requirements.
The “Pyrometry Reference Guide” is also in the process of being updated to the requirements of AMS2750 Rev D.
17.0 / UPDATE ON INTERIM REVISION AC AND AS CHECKLIST
All interim checklists have been balloted and approved by NMC. All interim AS checklists have been balloted but are on hold until the role of Committee B is resolved. The Heat Treating Baseline checklists are complete and J. Aston will ballot to the Task Group for comment.
The Task Group voted and approved the decision to hold the AS documents until a decision is made on AS7003. We also agreed to re-ballot AC7102 with new AMS2750 Rev D questions.
Auditor/Supplier Handbook Revision
A team was formed to revise the Auditor/Supplier Handbook. The team consists of Mitch Nelson (Chair), Mark Emerson, John Gourley, Phil Cox, Doug Matson, Steve Carey, Steve Hutchinson and Laura Fisher. Task Group would like an auditor to volunteer. The team will build off of the October 2005 training material, the existing handbook plus prime specific requirements.
18.0 / UPDATE ON REPORTING FUNCTION ENHANCEMENTSThere is a future enhancement to track question by specific auditors. Currently, it can only be done by ad hoc programming. Staff will notify the Task Group when the enhancement is available.
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2005 (Open Meeting)
19.0 /
SUPPLIER SUPPORT COMMITTEE
The SSC Minutes will be posted on the PRI website and it is strongly recommended that the Task Group review the Minutes. The SSC Escapes Sub-team reported that the data on escapes can not be reported directly to Prime because of the legal issues. The Escape Team will be sending out a proposal and request feedback from suppliers, Primes, etc. There will also be a mentoring program which SSC is currently developing.
Page 11 of 11