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.

TG Training Mini Tutorial

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 HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

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

Page 2 of 12 HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

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

Page 3 of 12 HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

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 4 of 12 HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

5.0 AS7003 REV C PRESENTATION Aerospace 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.

Merit Chart

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2005 (Open Meeting)

10.0 APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES Minutes from the July 2005 meeting were accepted as posted. HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

11.0 SUPPLIER TECHNICAL SUB TASK GROUP UPDATE Johanna 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. 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.

H:\8d 10-15.ppt

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. HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

16.0 AMS2750 REV D UPDATE The 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 ENHANCEMENTS There 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. HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

Page 9 of 12 HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

20.0 PLANNING AND OPS  Task Groups are charged with increasing the number of suppliers attaining merit.  One task is to identify reasons that suppliers are struggling to meet merit.  There is a concern that auditors are non-consistent on repeat findings and repeats that are not identified by previous auditors.

21.0 AMS2750 REV D PRESENTATION Doug Matson gave a presentation on the new 2750 Rev D.

H:eat \AMS 2750DTraining Oct 2005.ppt

22.0 AMS2750 REV D – NEW CHECKLIST QUESTIONS These were reviewed and will be revised by Pyrometry Sub-team. Revised version will be inserted in AC7102 Rev C and re-balloted to Task Group prior to the January meeting.

23.0 PYROMETRY REFERENCE GUIDE-REVISION The Pyrometry Reference Guide Rewrite Sub-team was formed consisting of Doug Matson, Bob Lehnen, Don Lowman, John Ewing, Phil Cox Bob Faticanti, and Marcel Cuperman.

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2005 (User Meeting)

24.0 LAPSED ACCREDITATION Task Group reviewed those suppliers who will not be reaccredited prior to October 31, 2005. Sixteen audits potentially will expire. The on time accreditation rate at this point looks to be 86.7% for the October quarter. The main reasons were audit scheduled late in quarter or out of quarter and supplier late response. Primes will contact suppliers with late responses. AUDIT REVIEW The Task Group closed 121 audits (77 reaccreditations (of which 49 received 18 month and 4 received 24 month accreditations), 29 initials, 4 follow ups, and 11 failures) between April and July. These were all done using eAuditNet

25.0 AUDIT ALLOCATION The Task Group signed up for audits to be done in next quarter. There are presently 26 voting members. However, two have just become eligible and did not sign up this quarter, At least six members have limitations on their participation, so there are really only 18 reviewers.

At about 225 audits to clear this quarter by 4 hours by 2 members, the average workload for this quarter will still be around 35 hours per month for each member. NMC needs to continue to work the management support issue. HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

26.0 AGENDA FOR JANUARY 2006 MEETING The January 23-27, 2006, meeting will be held at the Crown Plaza Redondo Beach, Los Angeles, California. PRI recommends that reservation be made as early as possible.

Agenda Items will include:  Finalize prime specific questions  AS Balloting Status and comment resolution  Hardness Checklist Sub-team update  Revised Pyrometry Reference Guide  Supplier Support Committee Update  AS7003 Feedback  Supplier Workshop  Auditor advisories shared with suppliers  Auditor/Supplier Handbook Sub-team  Induction Brazing Welding/HT Sub-team update  Fastener Task Group status

The April 2006 meeting will be held in Beijing and the July 2006 meeting in Madrid..

27.0 NEW BUSINESS We have recently had cases where a satellite operation has been added to an existing accreditation. The question was raised whether it was proper for the satellite to get 18 months since it is under the same quality system even though it was an “initial”. The NDT Task Group set the precedent and we will honor by granting 18 months to a satellite if the primary site earns it.

The Task Group approved a revision of NTGOP Appendix III with new reentry after failure criteria. Reminder should be issued to auditors that the Task Group encourages closure of NCR on site as long as all criteria are me. Heat Treating Task Group Newsletter The deadline for new items is 15 November, 2005.

28.0 REQUIREMENTS FOR HT SHOP PAPER PLANNING Doug Matson raised the question of our expectation of the level of detail on shop paper. A spirited discussion ensued on numerous ways to approach this concern. AC7004 and AS9102 give some guidance and seem to imply that all required information (time, temperature, atmosphere, cooling, etc.) for a specific part should be on the planning or easily referenced in a controlled system. Having the operator measure the part, the look up the requirements on the proverbial “yellow sheet on the wall” was not acceptable. Agreement was reached that there needs to be some form of approved planning flowed to the shop floor.

29.0 ADJOURNMENT HEAT TREAT OCTOBER 2005

Minutes Prepared by PRI Staff

ACTION ITEMS:

1. Need to revise Pyrometry Reference Guide to update to AMS 2750D by January 1, 2006 to support PRI Pyrometry training 2. Staff to re-evaluate the 7-day criteria for Task Group Review of audits in ballot 3. Prime need to submit any additional requirement not covered in the baseline checklist by December 16, 2005.-Submit to Doug Matson and Jerry Aston 4. Tom Murphy, John Gourley to revise carburize and nitride checklists based on auditor feedback by November 21, 2005 5. Jerry Aston to ballot baseline checklists for comments by November 30, 2005 6. AMS2750 Rev D checklist needs to be ready by March 31, 2006. 7. Jerry Aston needs to observe an Aluminum audit and Laura Fisher an AQS audit for training prior to January 2006 meeting 8. Team to revise the Auditor-Supplier Handbook by March 31, 2006 9. STSTG to document their progress to NMC and provide some measure of effectiveness

***** For PRI Staff use only: ******

Are procedural/form changes required based on changes/actions approved during this meeting? (select one)

YES* NO

*If yes, the following information is required:

Documents requiring Who is responsible: Due date: revision: NTGOP-001 Appendix 3 Laura Fisher 11-30-05

Page 12 of 12