Nadcap Task Group Chair/Staff Engineer Roundtable

Nadcap Task Group Chair/Staff Engineer Roundtable

NADCAP TASK GROUP CHAIR/STAFF ENGINEER ROUNDTABLE

JUNE 2012

CONFIRMED MINUTES

CONFIRMED MINUTES

JUNE27, 2012

ESTREL HOTEL & CONVENTION CENTER

BERLIN, GERMANY

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.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE27, 2012

The meeting was called to order @ 1:10PM.

The following representatives were in attendance:

Task Group Chairs in Attendance:

Ken / Abram / Honeywell Aerospace
Pascal / Blondet / Airbus
David / Day / GE Aviation
Kent / DeFranco / Lockheed Martin
Kevin / Dowling / Spirit AeroSystems
Phil / Keown / GE Aviation
Manuel / Koucouthakis / Honeywell Aerospace
Ralph / Kropp / MTU Aero Engine
Scott / Meyer / Goodrich Corporation
Tim / Myers / Honeywell
Mitch / Nelson / Cessna Aircraft Company
Tim / Pruitt / Rolls-Royce
Jerry / Satchwell / Rolls-Royce
Angelie / Vincent / Spirit AeroSystems

Other Attendees:

Muriel / Auzanne / Airbus
Karyn / Deming / Goodrich Corporation
Jeff / Kingsley / USAF – AFRL
Alex / Pohoata / Honeywell Aerospace
Richard / Rumas / Honeywell Aerospace
Bobby / Scott / Bombardier
Michael / Walker / Spirit AeroSystems
Kevin / Ward / Goodrich Corporation
Jan / Wigren / Volvo Aero Corp

PRI Staff in Attendance:

Jerry / Aston
Mark / Aubele
John / Barrett
James / Bennett
Rebekah / Braun
Will / Calvert
Nigel / Cook
Marcel / Cuperman
Bill / Dumas
Susan / Frailey
Phil / Ford
Michael / Graham
Rob / Hoeth
Scott / Klavon
Jennifer / Kornrumpf
Jim / Lewis
Bob / Lizewski
Keith / Purnell
Ian / Simpson
Richard / Sovich
Andy / Statham
Kevin / Wetzel

2.0Opening Comments

  1. Code of Ethics & Conflict of Interest

The Nadcap Personal Code of Ethics, Conflict of Interest and the agenda were reviewed.

  1. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes

Motion made to approve the June minutes as written. Motion seconded and passed unanimously. John Barrett reviewed the Agenda for this meeting.

3.0OPEN DISCUSSION

John Barrett asked if there were issues that any Task Group Chairpersons wished to discuss.

  1. Observation Audits
  • Heat Treating has a problem with Suppliers refusing Audits. Their Task Group has been contacting the Supplier directly and not following the protocol of contacting PRI-Scheduling, so an accurate number of refusals are not documented. The Task Group is also concerned with checklist as it mostly evaluates the auditor and only one question is directed towards the audit process. Plus the Supplier’s perception of an Observation audit is a concern.
  • NMSE has few refusals because they state upfront the Observation Audit is directed at the auditor and not the Supplier.
  • Composites would like to improve the checklist and have received a few refusals.
  • It was mentioned that NOP-007 is in the processof being revised to include specific auditing criteria.
  • Welding also has problems with Supplier refusals. They are requesting to investigate whether there is a difference between the number NCRs on Observation Audits verses Non-Observation Audits. Glenn Shultz is researching theoverall NCRs within Nadcap.
  • As an action from the SSC meeting held earlier this week, Eric Jacklinwillbe discussing the purpose of Observation Audits during the October 2012 SSC meeting.
  • Chemical Processing believes more NCRs are written, but cannot back up claim.They feelTask Groups should target problem Suppliers, specifically ones with issues as in not meeting the merit criteria, etc.
  • MTL would like specific commodity feedback. They feel a change to the process would be to allow those Task Group members who are well trained in Task Group Activities be the Observers for these audits.
  1. Work Share Issues at Task Group
  2. NMSE had a meeting scheduled with another Task Group, but the meeting was cancelled which was disruptive to the established agenda. Heat Treating creates sub-teams to attend other Task Groups so the regular the Heat Treating Task Group meeting continues uninterrupted.
  3. AQS stated the more administrative meetings keep getting added,the less time the Task Groups have to conduct their business.It was noted that this meeting was shortened by 1 hour.
  • Welding recently lost their Secretary and is finding that work not getting done. The Coatings Task Group has a Supplier as the Secretary so only the closed portion of the meeting minutes are prepared by PRI Staff. Anothersuggestion was made to try rotating Secretary through the Task Group membership for every Nadcap Meeting.
  • NDT forms Ad-Hoc teams that hold conference calls between Nadcap Meetings to work on issues. They utilize Nadcap meetings tohave the sub-teams report-out on all activities.
  • CP uses their Staff Engineers to remind the Ad-Hoc teams to communicate Task Group activities.
  • HT and COMP has the same small group of people that participate on the current Sub-Teams. They are asking how to get non-participants more involved. NMC has same issue, too and formed the Equitable Contribution Committee to research this across NMC and Task Groups level.
  1. Suggestions for New/Small Task Groups
  • Nonconventional Machining & Surface Enhancement has essentially 2 Groups, NM and SE.There are a limited number of members for each group attending every meeting; approximately 20 companies are in and out of this Task Group. Some of these members also support multiple Task Groups, andwould like to ask for a definition of “Subscriber Support”. CMSP has same issue, plus they are concerned with their succession plan as they are still a growing Commodity with a small number of Subscribers.
  • Elastomer Seals is a small Task Group and has found they get more support outside Nadcap Meetings. Recently they started working on checklist revisions between meetings rather than during.
  • ETG has asmall core membersand relies on the CSR to email reminders of open Action Items to the Task Group.

4.0AUDITOR CONSISTENCY STATUS UPDATE

Mike Graham gave an update regarding the Auditor Consistency Status which will also be reviewed at the Planning and Operations meeting.

It was noted that CP, HT and NDT has agreed on the Standard Data set that will be incorporated into NTGOP-001 and balloted by October 2012. The Initial Auditor Training has received positive feedback from the email that was distributed prior to the June 2012 Nadcap. A pre-ballot of NIP 6-01 will be distributed before the August 2012 official ballot. The target implementation of the Initial Auditor Training is November 2012. Modifications will be needed for the t-frm-01 to add Task Group specific Appendices and define the process for utilizing the feedback data. Eric Jacklin will present the Auditor Observation program to the SSC for buy in during the October 2012 Nadcap meeting. A process for Auditor examinations for new and potentially current auditors is in place to monitor using the Dashboard.

NIP 6-01 was reviewed with the revisions suggested by the Auditor Consistency Team. The wording within the Auditor Contract will need revised plus research will need conducted to review NOP-002 as it was recently balloted.

ACTION ITEM: Mike Graham will emailthe revised NIP 6-01 to the Staff Engineers and Task Group Chairpersons for review prior to the official ballot of the procedure.

5.0Wrap Up & ADJOURNMENT

  1. Feedback

It was agreed that the current length of this meeting was adequate, and will remain for the October 2012 meeting.

  1. Action Item Summary
  1. The meeting was adjourned at 1:58 pm.

Minutes prepared by:

Jennifer

Page 1 of 4

Top View