cdn.p-r-i.orgcdn.p-r-i.org/.../2015/03/HTMinutesOct2014CONFIRMED.docx · Web viewCONFIRMED MINUTES....

HEAT TREATINGOCTOBER 2014

CONFIRMED

CONFIRMED MINUTESOCTOBER 20-23, 2014

PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, USA

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 20 to THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2014

1.0 OPENING COMMENTS

Heat Treat Task Group (HTTG) Chair Tom Norris made opening comments and HTTG members introduced themselves.

1.1 Call to Order / Quorum Check

The HTTG meeting was called to order at 8:00 a.m.,

1.1.1 It was verified that only SUBSCRIBER MEMBERS were in attendance during the closed portion of the meeting.

A quorum was established with the following representatives in attendance:

Subscriber Members/Participants Present (* Indicates Voting Member)

NAME COMPANY NAME

Shamim Abbas The Boeing Company* Francesco Acerra Alenia Aermacchi S.p.A.* Pedro Aranda Eaton Aerospace

Nigel Ashby GKN Aerospace* Carolyn Backus The Boeing Company* Bruce Brownfield Lockheed Martin Corporation Secretary* Craig Clasper Spirit AeroSystems* Cedric Colas SAFRAN Group* Michael Corsino Hamilton Sundstrand (UTAS)

Erika Crow Lockheed MartinMike Dame Parker HannifinChris Davison Spirit AeroSystems Inc.

* Martin Day Honeywell Aerospace* Mark Emerson Rolls-Royce* Melissa Facas Pratt & Whitney* Bob Faticanti Textron Systems* Laurent Geerts SONACA

Moses Greasham Spirit AeroSystems Inc.Travis Grohoske GE Aviation

* Peter Hammarbo GKN Aerospace Sweden AB* Gerald Harvey Triumph Group

Brian Harvey Gulfstream AerospaceChristina Heiman Textron Aviation - CessnaLinnie Hook Cessna Aircraft

* Andrew Hopkins BAE Systems Air & Information (MAI)* Dave Isenberg Parker Aerospace Group* Steve Johnson Triumph Group- Triumph Gear Systems* Jeff Koss The Boeing Company


CONFIRMED

Caroline LeClair US Air Force* Marc-André Lefebvre Heroux Devtek Inc.* Hongping Li Commercial Aircraft Company of China

(COMAC)* Will Macias Goodrich (UTAS)* Steven Mackenzie Pratt & Whitney* Doug Matson The Boeing Company

Peter McCallum Bell HelicopterJason Merrell U.S. Air Force

* John Merritt Sikorsky AircraftTim Nance Rockwell Collins

* Tom Norris Goodrich (UTAS) ChairpersonMaria Pawlik Goodrich (UTAS)

* Eddy Pham Northrop Grumman Corporation* Sunder Rajan Raytheon Co.* Alex Richez Airbus SAS

Michael Riley Goodrich (UTAS)Steve Row Goodrich (UTAS)Joe Sebastiani Defense Contract Management AgencyPaul Slater Rockwell Collins Inc.Takahiro Tachibana Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.

* Marc Taillandier Airbus Helicopters* Jeffrey Thyssen GE Aviation* Cyril Vernault SAFRAN Group Vice Chairperson

Other Members/Participants Present (* Indicates Voting Member)

NAME COMPANY NAME

Roy Adkins Specialty Steel TreatingMark Affolter Paulo ProductsZubair Alam ExactathermThomas Allen Aerospace Testing & Pyrometry, Inc.Daniel Antos Canton Drop ForgeAmy Azzano Arrow Gear CompanyWill Babik CCPI, Inc.Andrew Bassett Aerospace Testing & Pyrometry, Inc.Paul Blaisdell Astro Aluminum Treating Co., Inc.Stephen Bogle GeoCorp, Inc.Rick Bowser Universal Stainless

* Griff Braddock Braddock Metallurgical Inc.Wolfgang Casta Shellcast Foundries, Inc.Jeff Cerbie Larson ForgeBhaskar Chatrath Universal StainlessArturo Chavez Tighitco Latinoamerica ChihuahuaTina Corbin Haynes InternationalJoshua Crockett FerrothermMark Cummings B&B Specialties & GS Aerospace

*Robert Cvetichan

Paulo Products Co. (American Brazing Division)

Dante Darancou Materion BrushNathan Durham Ipsen Inc.Gary Eisenman Aero Gear Inc.

* Ed Engelhard Solar Atmospheres Inc.Bill Erzen Pako Inc.


CONFIRMED

Robert Ferry FPM Heat TreatingTrent Fonkhouser Heat Treating Services Unlimited, Inc.

* Dennis Fried Carpenter Technology Corp.Jose Fuentes VAC AERO InternationalChad Funderburk MMS Thermal ProcessingTony Garcia Blanchard Metals ProcessingMichael Gaspers FPM Heat Treating

Susan GeneralovichSolar Atmospheres of Western Pennsylvania

George Gieger Braddock Metallurgical Inc.Jerry Giessinger Scot ForgeRudolf Graf Bohler Schiedetechnik GmbH & Co. KGKevin Grale The Boeing CompanyJim Harlukowicz Wyman Gordon - PADarron Harris Exotic Metals Forming Co.Chuck Hartwig ThermTechBill Heighton ATPMichael Heninger GKN Aerospace

Robert HillSolar Atmospheres of Western Pennsylvania

Dean Houser Applied Thermal TechnologiesNinan Idiculla Paulo - Kansas CityBryan Jagerman Modern IndustriesGwendolyn Jorge PCC Airfoils LLCShahan Karim Heat Treat ProfessionalsAdeel Karim Doctor FurnaceZia Karim Heat Treat Professionals

Keith KingSolar Atmospheres of Western Pennsylvania

Tim Komar ThermTech

John KunkleHowmet Castings and Services, Inc. Dover Casting (AHDC)

Shelly Lawless Meyer Tool, Inc.Dave Leaderer Brinkman Precision

* Jeremy Leetz MMS Thermal ProcessingJames Leonard Carpenter Technology Corporation

* Richard Lewis PCC Structurals Carson CityLi Li Advanced Nitriding Solution

* Johanna Lisa Continental Heat Treating / Quality Heat Treating

Christopher Love Amphenol Aerospace OperationsJohn Ludeman Advanced Heat Treat Corp.Connie Mackey Advanced Heat Treat Corp.Rich Madsen Blanchard Metals ProcessingJim Maloney Timken AerospaceSteve McGinnis PCC Airfoils LLCPatrick McKenna Nevada Heat TreatingMike Moffit Solar AtmospheresMarc Montreuil Heroux-DevtekJoseph Morlino Brinkman PrecisionOveis Nayeri Lisi AerospaceJeff Neer Astro Aluminum Treating Co., Inc.Ken Nelson Continental Heat TreatingJeff Newbold Triumph Thermal SystemsJames Oakes Super Systems


CONFIRMED

John Ochenas GeoCorp, Inc.Jon O'Donnell Heat Treatment AustrailiaDave Osenar Pako Inc.Marcus Owens The Timken CompanyPhil Pacey Canton Drop ForgeRobert Peters R. Peters ConsultingJohn Popovich Furnace Parts LLCG.R. Porterfield Solar Atmospheres of Western

PennsylvaniaJohn Quaglia Bennett Heat TreatingMichael Quann Pacific Metallurgical Inc.Brett Queipo BE AerospaceBarry Rafan Universal Stainless - DunkirkTim Reeser Universal Stainless & Alloy ProductsNeil Revis Heat Treating Services Unlimited, Inc.Brian Reynolds AlcoaSteven Rij Blanchard Metals Processing

* Bill Rogers AlcoaChristine Rogers-Lemeris Triumph Engine Control SystemsGlen Rudd Braddock MetallurgicalFrank Saen Hi-Tech Metal FinishingSal Santangero REPACBob Sartori Accurate BrazingCarol Schmidt ATI-Ladish Forging

* Kevin Seidel Universal Stainless* Dave Shonts Metal Finishing Co.* Jeffrey Sipf Haynes International

Craig Skinner Robert Wooler CompanyAdil Slimani Metatherm SASKlaus Sommerauer BOHLER SchmiedetechnikAbe Stone J.A.Reinhardt & Co., Inc.Barbara Swanson Woodward, Inc.Allison Tackett Specialty Steel TreatingKamlesh Talati Salem Tube Inc.Gregg Temple Winston Heat Treating Inc.Norm Tucker Heat Treatment AustraliaNatia Turmanidze Lisi AerospaceChristopher Webb PCC Structurals Inc.

* Wilfried Weber PFW Aerospace AGBryon White Crane Aerospace & ElectronicsAaron White Modern Industries, Inc.Brian Yazumbek Modern Drop Forge Co.Keith Zawrazky Larson Forgings

PRI Staff Present

Jerry AstonMarcel CupermanRobert HoethBrittany McSorley

1.1.2 Introductions – CLOSED

Tom Norris, the HTTG Chair made opening comments and had attendees make introductions.


CONFIRMED

1.2 Review Code of Ethics and Meeting Conduct – CLOSED

The code of ethics and meeting conduct was briefed to the HTTG.

1.3 Present the Antitrust Video – Video from PRI – CLOSED

Marcel Cuperman briefed the HTTG on the new policy of PRI expressly prohibiting video or audio recording of HTTG meetings unless formal approval is received from all attendees and recorded in the HTTG meeting minutes.

The PRI antitrust video was played for the attendees.

1.4 Review Agenda – CLOSED

The HTTG reviewed the agenda for the week to highlight agenda items, including start time and stop times for each day.

2.0 TASK GROUP TUTORIAL – CLOSED

Marcel Cuperman presented the HTTG Tutorial.

A microphone is available for anyone who would like to use it. Speak clearly, do not dismiss people’s opinions, emotional and off topics should be avoided.

2.1 Review Subscriber Matrix - CLOSED

The HTTG reviewed the current Subscriber Matrix.

3.0 REVIEW DELEGATION STATUS – CLOSED

The HTTG reviewed the t-frm-07 for delegated Staff Engineers.

Motion made by Mark Emerson and seconded by Jeff Thyssen to accept the comments made for Anne Allen by Subscribers during the last quarter without further discussion or action. Motion made by Mark Emerson and seconded by Jeff Thyssen to continue to delegate Anne Allen. Motion passed with none opposed.

Motion made by Jeff Thyssen and seconded by Tom Norris to accept the comments made for Jerry Aston by Subscribers during the last quarter without further discussion or action. Motion made by Jeff Thyssen and seconded by Tom Norris to continue to delegate Jerry Aston. Motion passed with none opposed.

Motion made by Mark Emerson and seconded by Cyril Vernault to accept the comments made for Marcel Cuperman by Subscribers during the last quarter without further discussion or action. Motion made by Mark Emerson and seconded by Cyril Vernault to continue to delegate Marcel Cuperman. Motion passed with none opposed.

Motion made by Mark Emerson and seconded by Gerald Harvey to accept the comments made for Rob Hoeth by Subscribers during the last quarter without further discussion or action. Motion made by Mark Emerson and seconded by Gerald Harvey to continue to delegate Rob Hoeth. Motion passed with none opposed.


CONFIRMED

4.0 AUDITOR CONSISTENCY - CLOSED

4.1 +/-4 NCRs – CLOSED

4.2 Staff Engineers provided data on audits where there had been +/- 4 NCR swing between audits. This information is provided to allow auditors to be highlighted, allowing the HTTG to follow up with these Auditors. The HTTG decided to continue to monitor +/- 4 NCR change since it provides more data. The data presentation resulted in a lengthy discussion about what the data shows and what actions should be taken as a result to improve auditor consistency data. One HTTG member suggested that the HTTG look for patterns in the data and not just look at individual auditors that appear on the +/- 4 list. Also there was discussion that the data seems to indicate that not all of the checklist questions are asked all the time. The HTTG will continue to collect the +/-4 data and it will be monitored by the Auditor Consistency Team (ACT) which will provide reports and recommendations back to the HTTG. Auditor Variation Data – CLOSED

Doug Matson presented auditor consistency data, which consisted of the average NCRs for all auditors combined, and the average number of NCRs by auditor from 2009 through September 2014. The average of all NCRs has not changed significantly since 2009, however the average number of NCRs by auditor shows a significant variation in the number of NCRs written by each auditor. The data also included those suppliers which lost merit (9%) during the last 12 months, and those suppliers that went from merit to failure (1%) during the last 12 months.

Marcel Cuperman presented the (NOP-02) Nadcap Management Council (NMC) Auditor Consistency standard data set. This presentation included average number of NCR’s per audit day by auditor, the number of NCR’s for each checklist question by auditor, and the average of increased NCR’s at the same supplier on the subsequent audits (Redline Report). All of the data presented for auditor consistency will be made available to the NOP-012 Auditor Consistency Team (ACT) for review and recommendations to the HTTG.

4.3 NOP-012 – CLOSED

Cyril Vernault gave a report of the NOP-012 Sub-Team. Currently the metrics for the HTTG are green except for Supplier Feedback. There were 10 audits selected for observation all of which have been completed prior to the October meeting. There was discussion about revised auditor observation form t-frm-01. The HTTG expressed the need for a Heat Treat addendum to the form. Further discussion was table until Thursday. There was discussion about item 21 on the observation form which states “Auditor allowed the Supplier’s Quality System to function and identify nonconformances before NCRs were written for in-process job audits.” The discussion mainly centered on whether the supplier had to write and close an internal corrective action request prior to the end of the audit. If the nonconformance was not closed then Nadcap would have no visibility to the closure of the internal corrective action if the Nadcap auditor did not write an NCR. The HTTG decided that this issue should be addressed by the NOP-012 ACT sub-team.

Carolyn Backus asked to be put back on the Sub-Team. Also, Tom Norris asked to e on the Sub-Team.

Cyril reported that the HTTG metrics are all green except for the Supplier Feedback metric.

There was concern expressed by HTTG members that there was no confirmation feedback the requests to observe audits were approved. The HTTG asked the Chair to relay to the NMC the request to have positive confirmation of observation requests sent to the Subscriber members.


CONFIRMED

5.0 AUDITOR OBSERVATIONS – CLOSED

There were 4 audit observations conducted since the June 2014 meeting which completed the 10 observations planned for 2014. There were eight observation reports reviewed during the HTTG meeting.

There was discussion about item 21 on the observation form which states “Auditor allowed the Supplier’s Quality System to function and identify nonconformances before NCRs were written for in-process job audits.” The discussion mainly centered on whether the supplier had to write and close an internal corrective action request prior to the end of the audit. If the nonconformance was not closed then Nadcap would have no visibility to the closure of the internal corrective action if the Nadcap auditor did not write an NCR. The HTTG decided that this issue should be addressed by the NOP-012 (ACT) Sub-Team.

Audit observation reports will be reviewed each subsequent meeting.

6.0 AUDITOR CONFERENCE – CLOSED

Tom Norris gave an out briefing for the Auditor Conference that was held October 18 and 19. The agenda for the Auditor Conference included a presentation on SAT and Alternate SAT Requirements presented by Cyril Vernault, a presentation on New Requirements for GE Aviation presented by Jeff Thyssen, and a presentation on Auditing of Procedures presented by Doug Matson. The auditors were very engaged in discussion with the HTTG members and Staff Engineers that were present for the Auditor Conference. Auditors pointed out that HT Auditor Advisory 14-004 was issued and the Pyrometry Guide was not updated accordingly so the two documents are in conflict. This information was passed on to the Pyrometry Guide Sub-Team for correction. The auditors had significant discussion regarding the Alternate SAT procedure and question why thermocouples (T/C) have to be verified when they are attached to the furnace when they comply with all the other equipment accuracy tolerances and T/C accuracy tolerances which show the system will meet the SAT accuracy requirements when combined. During the Auditor Conference there was discussion about requiring the supplier self-audit checklist be provided to the auditors prior to the audit. No action was taken on this discussion. Also discussed during the conference was the possibility of adding separate yes/no boxes to each item listed in section 1.1.1 of the checklist and providing opportunities for auditors to write NCR’s for these items.

The auditors also stated that a recent update to eAuditNet resulted in the auditors no longer having access to the audit ballot results. The auditors expressed a desire to see these results as they use comments from Subscriber members and Staff Engineers for self-improvement.

The auditors requested to have an agenda item for the google groups chat during the auditor conference.

Action Item: Add google chat discussion to HTTG March 2015 agenda. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2014)

7.0 LAPSED ACCREDITATION – CLOSED

There were 2 audits with the potential to have lapsed accreditations by the end of October 2014. One supplier had already been given an extension sufficient to close the audit without incurring the lapse of accreditation. One supplier that has been granted an extension by the Staff Engineers will lapse prior to the current audit closure if extension is not granted as the current audit was scheduled out of quarter.

Motion made by Jeff Thyssen and seconded by Mark Emerson to grant an additional 30 day extension to HT audit #157315.. The motion carried with none opposed.


CONFIRMED

8.0 SUBSCRIBER VOTING MEMBER PARTICIPATION – CLOSED

The Staff Engineers presented to the HTTG a chart showing Subscriber Voting Member (UVM) meeting attendance from February 2012 through June 2014 and HTTG ballots October 2013 to October 2014. All Subscriber members are in compliance with the requirements for voting members except for two which did not meet the requirements for Balloting. Tom Norris reviewed this data and decided no action is necessary at this time.

During the meeting there were 2 new voting members approved:

Francesco Accera of Alenia Aermacchi as Subscriber Voting Member Steven Mackenzie of Pratt & Whitney Canada as Subscriber Voting Member

During the meeting there were new members who requested to become Subscribers but with no voting rights as they have not met the attendance requirement.

Peter McCallum of Bell Helicopter – Textron (to replace Thomas Ruglic) Travis Grohoske of GE Aviation

9.0 RISK MITIGATION TEAM REPORT-OUT – CLOSED

When a supplier audit results in failure the risk mitigation process starts. Once the supplier is in Risk Mitigation Subscriber voting members should volunteer to be on the Risk Mitigation Team. If there are no volunteers the HTTG Chair shall appoint a Risk Mitigation Team and appoint a team leader. The team should be formed within two weeks of the audit failure. The team lead is responsible for collating the team responses and posting response to the supplier in eAuditNet.

All Subscribers are encouraged to sign up. Any team member can post comments within 14 days. The Team Leader can allocate NCRs to team members anyway he or she wants. The leader will moderate any discussion in the team, and the team leader will have the final decision as to what response goes into eAuditNet back to the supplier. The goal is to have 100% consensus from the Risk Mitigation team. The procedure NOP-011section 4.3.6 states that Risk Mitigation completion shall never result in accreditation of the audit.

HTTG members stated that the language in the procedure NOP-011 is very confusing.

Shouldn’t the HTTG just look at NCR’s that have potential product impact for purposes of Risk Mitigation?

Some of the HTTG members still think that the Risk Mitigation process is a duplication of effort at the Subscriber level. The Subscribers already have risk mitigation and containment efforts built into their systems and as part of Nadcap this is non value added for the Subscribers.

One HTTG member suggested that those Subscribers that signed up for the audit reviewer allocation is automatically assigned as part of the Risk Mitigation Team if the audit failed. Other HTTG members suggested that this may cause Subscribers to limit the number of audits they agree to review.

If a Subscriber visits a supplier as part of their companies process and have objective evidence of Root Cause Corrective Action (RCCA), is there a way to interject this information into the Risk Mitigation Process instead of doing it a second time? The recommendation would be to provide the information to the Risk Mitigation Team Lead and have it interjected into the Risk Mitigation process in eAuditNet.

Motion made by Gerald Harvey and seconded by Jeff Thyssen to re-task the Risk Mitigation Sub-Team to complete the Risk Mitigation Guide, using the information provided by Mike Corsino and


CONFIRMED

Tom Norris as a starting point and have a Risk Mitigation Guide to present to the HTTG at the next meeting or earlier. Motion carried with none opposed.

Action Item: Add Jeff Thyssen, Gerald Harvey and Steven Mackenzie to the Risk Mitigation Team. (Due Date: 15-Nov-2014)

Action Item: Complete a draft of the Risk Mitigation Guide to present at March 2015 meeting. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

10.0 REVIEW INTERNAL PROCEDURES DURING AUDIT – CLOSED

Doug Matson gave a presentation about Reviewing Procedures during the Nadcap audits. The training was primarily for auditor training but is applicable to suppliers as well since the HTTG still has a significant amount of NCRs written regarding procedures that are inadequate or nonexistent. And it appears that procedures are not always reviewed during every audit contributing to auditor consistency issues. The presentation included several references to in AS9100, AC7004 as well as Prime specifications regarding the requirements for written procedures. The presentation also included references in the HTTG Audit Handbook stressing the need for procedures to be reviewed during the audit, and reminded the suppliers of the responsibility to do a self-audit that includes recording the procedures and paragraphs that satisfy the Nadcap checklist requirements. The presentation included enough references to procedure requirements to remind suppliers and auditors that auditing procedures for existence and adequacy is an essential part of all Nadcap HT audits.

11.0 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION IN AUDITS – CLOSED

One of the Subscriber members to the HTTG expressed concern about proprietary information being reported in eAuditNet as part of NCRs and NCR responses from the suppliers. The HTTG decided that no action should be taken because all of the auditors have non-disclosure agreements with PRI and all the Subscribers have non-disclosure agreements with PRI and all have signed up for the Nadcap PRI Code of Ethics and Antitrust policies. Restricting proprietary information would severely limit the information in eAuditNet and would inhibit the audit review process.

12.0 SUB-TEAM OPERATIONS – CLOSED

Marcel Cuperman gave a general presentation on the operation of sub-teams in the HTTG. The presentation included how and when sub-teams are formed, and that the actions and responsibilities are as directed by the HTTG as a whole. It was mentioned that the HT-STSTG is a standing sub-team of the HTTG. There was a suggestion that the HT-STSTG be requested to work on a standardized “Pyrometry Testing Report Form” that would be available to all Nadcap Heat Treat suppliers to use but not mandatory. The HT-STSTG members were receptive to the idea of a standardized format and agreed to work on a standard form and present back to the HTTG. The forms could also be adapted to other “Calibration Forms” used for heat treating purposes. All standardized forms would only be recommendations and not requirements to suppliers.

Action Item: HT-STSTG to work on a standardized “Pyrometry Testing Report” form, this form could be adapted to other calibration forms used for heat treating purposes and bring back to the HTTG for review. (Due Date: 30-Sept-2015)

13.0 FAILURE ANALYSIS & VCA DATA – CLOSED

The Staff Engineers presented the audit failure data by sector and in total. During the first 3 quarters of 2014 there were a total of 12 failed audits which constitutes approximately a 3.0% failure rate. The average failure rate for the last 3 years has been approximately 4.5%. It should


CONFIRMED

be noted that in previous years there were a significant number of failures in the last 2 quarters of the year.

To date in 2014 there have been 12 Verification of Corrective Action audits (VCA) performed. Of those 12 VCA's 1 resulted in the failure of the main audit.

14.0 APPEALS ANALYSIS – CLOSED

To date in 2014 there have been 9 appeals presented to the HTTG. Of those appeals submitted to the HTTG 4 were accepted 4 were denied and 1 was withdrawn. This is consistent with the appeals presented in previous years

15.0 AC7102/5 MOU DISCUSSION – CLOSED

Tabled until Thursday Closed meeting.

16.0 HT-STSTG MEETING – OPEN

See HT-STSTG minutes posted at http://www.p-r-i.org/nadcap/nadcap-meetings/.

Only Suppliers and Staff Engineers are allowed to participate.

Subscribers are welcome to observe.

17.0 OPENING COMMENTS – OPEN

Opening comments from Tom Norris (Chairperson): Introductions of the HTTG Subscriber and Supplier Member meeting attendees.

The open meeting began with video from PRI about the Nadcap Code of Ethics, Code of Conduct, Conflict of Interest Anti-Trust Policy and ITAR/Export control.

Marcel Cuperman briefed the HTTG on the new policy of PRI expressly prohibiting video or audio recording of HTTG meetings unless formal approval is received from all attendees and recorded in the HTTG meeting minutes.

18.0 JUNE 2014 MEETING MINUTES – OPEN

Motion made by Jeff Thyssen and seconded by Gerald Harvey to accept the June 2014 meeting minutes as written. The motion carried with none opposed.

The minutes from June 2014 were approved as written.

19.0 CLOSED MEETING REPORT OUT – OPEN

Tom Norris gave a debrief on the discussions held during the closed meeting.

Tom highlighted the main items discussed during the closed meeting on Monday, October 20, 2014.

20.0 AUDITOR CONFERENCE REPORT-OUT – OPEN

Tom Norris the HTTG Chair made essentially the same presentation during the open meeting as was presented in the closed meeting, except that auditors and suppliers were not discussed by name. (Reference item 6.0)

http://www.p-r-i.org/nadcap/nadcap-meetings/


CONFIRMED

21.0 RAIL

The Rolling Action Item List (RAIL) was reviewed.

Item # 18 open AWS C-3.14 was completed and is in ballot in committee HTTG will work on checklist based on the draft of the AWS C-3.14

Item # 26 activities continue.

For specific details, please see the current (HTTG) Rolling Action Item List posted at www.eAuditNet.com, under Public Documents/Heat Treating.

22.0 NOP-012 AUDITOR CONSISTECY SUB-TEAM STATUS UPDATE – OPEN

Cyril Vernault gave a report of the NOP-012 Sub-Team. Currently the metrics for the HTTG are green except for Supplier Feedback. There were 10 audits selected for observation all of which have been completed prior to the October meeting. There was discussion about revised auditor observation form t-frm-01. The HTTG expressed the need for a Heat Treat addendum to the form. Further discussion was table until Thursday.

Cyril reported that the HTTG metrics are all green except for the Supplier Feedback metric.

There was concern expressed by HTTG members that there was no confirmation email after the requests to observe audits were approved. The HTTG asked the Chair to relay to the NMC the request to have positive confirmation of observation requests sent to the Subscriber members. The HTTG Chair discussed with NMC the concern regarding confirmation of Subscriber request for observations. This is now an NMC item of responsibility.

There was additional discussion about an appendix to the Auditor Observation form for HTTG. One supplier member suggested adding a question to the Auditor Observation form asking if the auditor demonstrates good listening skills. And, another suggestion was to add something about interpretation of Industry Specifications. This will be referred to the NOP-012 Sub-Team to consider and bring back to the February 2014 Nadcap Meeting.

23.0 AC7102/9 SINTERING CHECKLIST UPDATES – OPEN

The Sintering checklist has completed the HTTG ballot process and will be submitted to the NMC for confirmation during the first or second week of November.

24.0 AC7102/1 –BRAZING CHECKLIST UPDATES – OPEN

Martin Day gave an update on the Brazing Sub-Team status. The AWS committee has approved AWS C3.14 which covers the evaluation of brazed joints.

Action Item: The sub-team was re-tasked to update the Brazing checklist and present the update at the March 2015 Nadcap Meeting. (Due Date: 15-Feb-2015)

25.0 HT-STSTG REPORT OUT – OPEN

Wilfried Weber gave the HT-STSTG meeting debrief. There were approximately 80 supplier personnel present.

See HT-STSTG minutes for meeting details.

26.0 NMC METRICS – OPEN

NMC metric charts for January to May 2014 were presented to the HTTG. HT is rated yellow for Audit Capacity. The goal is 130% and current capacity is 123%. The audit capacity is projected to

http://www.eAuditNet.com/


CONFIRMED

be at 121% by December 2014. Marcel Cuperman gave a live demonstration of NMC metrics in eAuditNet for the HTTG members present. Marcel demonstrated which metrics were available to review on eAuditNet and how to see the metrics from Nadcap as a whole, or see HTTG metrics as a whole or by sector.

27.0 AC7102/7 PROCEDURES – OPEN

The discussion was primarily regarding the fact that AC7102/7 had no questions about the existence, adequacy or compliance with procedures while other checklists have several procedure based questions. The suggestion was that the procedure content is covered in AC7102 and perhaps for this checklist those questions in AC7102 regarding procedures are sufficient. The HTTG agreed to leave AC7102/7 as is for the time being and monitor NCRs and see if issues arise during the audits that would warrant a change to AC7102/7.

28.0 AUDITOR ADVISORIES – OPEN

HT Auditor Advisories issued since the June 2014 Nadcap Meeting were reviewed. The HTTG was reminded that the advisories are posted on eAuditNet for review. These are available on eAuditNet under Resources/Documents/Public Documents/Heat Treat/Auditor Advisories.

There were two advisories written since June 2014 meeting. All advisories issued in 2014 were reviewed at during the meeting. The HT Audit Handbook Sub-Team will decide if these advisories will be added to the HT Audit Handbook Appendix.

Action Item: Complete HTTG Auditor Advisory stating that Round Robin Testing for Hardness testing for Heat Treatment only is not required. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2014)

29.0 WORKSHOP NEW IDEAS – OPEN

The HTTG held an open discussion to request ideas for future supplier workshops. Suppliers and Subscribers were quite interested in this discussion and offered a multitude of suggestions. Most suggestions came from supplier attendees.

Suggestions for workshop topics included:

Purchase Order Flow Down Best Practice for Contract Review Best Practice for Procedure writing Best Practice for Training New Personnel (furnace operators) Rounding ASTM E-29 with Regards to HT Conversion of Hardness Measurements and Reporting Requirements Software Validation Usage Limits for T/C’s and science behind the limit General Discussion about ITAR/EAR Best Practice Best Practice for Logistics for Audit Preparation (office space, internet access etc…) Digital Controlling of HT Cycles; Best Practice for HT Cycle Review and Approval (Ask

HT-STSTG if to take this on).

30.0 AC7102 UPDATE – OPEN

There was significant discussion about updates needed to the core checklist AC7102. There was some discussion about section 1.1.1 and the requirement for the supplier to perform a self-audit prior to the audit and have the checklist available for the auditor to review. The HTTG Subscribers pointed out that completing the audit and recording on the checklist the procedures and sections of the procedure that satisfy are a benefit to both supplier and auditor by preventing distractions and delays to look for procedure references during the audit.


CONFIRMED

There was also discussion about whether or not the suppliers’ internal audit results need to be provided to the auditor. The consensus of the group was no this should not be provided, as all would rather the auditor looked at the suppliers process with a fresh set of eyes without any pre-conceived ideas. It should be noted though that any finding the supplier documents with root cause and corrective action and closes before the Nadcap audit starts and presents to the auditor would not result in an NCR.

The balance of the discussion centered primarily on section 1.1.2 regarding the information that the suppliers are required to send to auditors 30 days prior to the audit. Based on supplier comments it is evident that there is a wide variation in what auditors expect for documents submitted prior to the audit. The HTTG stated that the requirements in section 1.1.2 would be clarified and the HTTG would state: WHAT documentation is required; WHEN the documentation will be required; and HOW the documentation would be delivered (ie email, PDF, paper etc). One supplier asked about what Subscriber documentation should be delivered to the auditor prior to the audit. All Subscribers agreed that no Subscriber documentation should be delivered to the auditors. The auditors must review and Subscriber specifications at the supplier facility.

A HTTG Sub-Team for AC7102 updates was formed consisting of the following members:

Craig Clasper, Mark Emerson, Jeff Thyssen, Johanna Lisa, Eddy Pham, Roy Adkins, Bill Rogers, Jeff Koss, Carolyn Backus, Ed Englehard, Mike Corsino, Tom Norris, Cyril Vernault, Dave Shauns, Jeff Steps, Doug Matson, Gerald Harvey and Marcel Cuperman.

The Sub-Team will also include the suggestions made during the Auditor Conference as well as the items discussed during the open meetings.

Action Item: AC7102 Sub-Team to present draft of AC7102 updates at the March 2015 Nadcap Meeting. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

31.0 EQUALIFIED UPDATE – OPEN

Rhonda Joseph of PRI gave a presentation on eQuaLified. eQuaLified is a program where individuals can get certifications for certain Special Process Skill Sets. eQuaLified has developed several “Bodies of Knowledge” which outline what knowledge one should have to be certified to certain special process operations. With respect to HT eQuaLified has developed several Bodies of Knowledge and examinations that can be taken which would result in certification. The Bodies of Knowledge are not necessarily study materials but rather an outline of what would be required to complete and pass the associated examination. Someone pursing and eQuaLified certifications would use the Body of Knowledge as an outline and obtain study materials or training from another source then take the eQuaLified examination. The certifications gained would not be limited to the current employer but would be portable and belong to the eQuaLified candidate.

32.0 AC7102/3 DRAFT – OPEN

The last meeting the HTTG was tasked to add some questions to the checklist for vacuum carburizing. The sub team had a meeting and came up with draft of Rev D. If the HHTG meeting members agree the checklist it will be sent to HTTG Ballot

Add to the scope that the checklist is a supplement of AC7102.

Section 11 is mandatory for vacuum carburizing.

4 questions added to the current AC7102/3 Checklist.

1. Is there a procedure in place that controls the gas supply?2. Do records indicate procedure is followed compliance with the procedures?3. Does suppliers work instructions specify the controls for gas injection during the process?


CONFIRMED

4. Do records indicate compliance with above requirements?

The HTTG decided to refer the checklist to the Sub-Team and request the team consider adding these questions and any other questions that would be appropriate to the core check list, and to reconcile the checklist with section 11 of AC7102 and present a draft at the Berlin meeting.

Action Item: Update AC7102/3 and present draft at next meeting in Berlin. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

33.0 PROCESSING TOLERANCES IN AC7102 – OPEN

The processing tolerances were inadvertently removed when AC7102 and AC7102/8 were formed. This issue has been referred to the AC7102 Sub-Team which was formed during this meeting.

34.0 AC7102/6 EXPORT CONTROL – OPEN

AC7102/6 job audit checklists lacked the ITAR/EAR designation. A suggestion was made to modify this checklist to match all other HTTG checklists regarding ITAR/EAR.

Motion made by Cyril Vernault and seconded by Tom Norris to add the EC designation to the job audit checklist questions that may refer to ITAR/EAR information. The motions carried with none opposed. Since this is considered an editorial change no ballot is required.

Action Item: Brittany McSorley to make an editorial revision to AC7102/6 to incorporate EC to job audits similar with AC7102. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2014)

35.0 OPENING COMMENTS – OPEN

Opening comments from Tom Norris (Chairperson): Introductions of the HTTG Subscriber and Supplier Member meeting attendees.

36.0 SUPPLIER SUPPORT COMMITTEE (SSC) REPORT OUT – OPEN

The October 2014 SSC report out was presented by Roy Adkins.

The SSC is to help suppliers navigate the Nadcap process, to find help if suppliers feel the need to escalate issues beyond the Staff Engineer. Suppliers have access to mentors if they wish to find help without asking in HTTG meetings or raising red flags, or just need help understanding Nadcap interpretation of general Nadcap requirements. SSC help is available for all commodities. SSC meetings are always held on Tuesday during the Nadcap meetings from 5:00 to 7:00pm.

For more detailed information please reference minutes posted on http://www.p-r-i.org/nadcap/nadcap-meetings/.

37.0 AMEC REPORT OUT – OPEN

An update was presented by Doug Matson. The main task for the AMEC committee is the revision of AS 2759. All slash sheets have gone through the first ballot. Resolution to comments is currently being addressed. The slash sheets are expected to go back to ballot by the end of 2014 or early in 2015.

38.0 FAILURE ANALYSIS & VCA DATA – OPEN

The Staff Engineers presented to the HTTG the total number of audits conducted by sector from Jan 2011 until October 1 of 2014. The total number of audits conducted is trending slightly upward for all sectors. The presentation included failed audits January 2011 – October 1, 2014. For the first three quarters of 2014 there were a total of 741 audits conducted with 22 total failures



CONFIRMED

which is a 3% failure rate overall. The failure rate appears to be steady over the last 3 years. In the first three quarters of 2014 there were a total of 12 VCA's conducted 1 of which resulted in a failure of the main audit.

39.0 PLANNING & OPS REPORT-OUT – OPEN

Tom Norris gave an out brief on the Planning and Ops meeting. There was a lot of discussion at Planning and Ops regarding NOP-011 Risk Mitigation for when a supplier fails an audit the Risk Mitigation Process starts. This is all defined in the NOP-011 procedures, and will remain a main item of attention for the next couple of years until this becomes part of the normal Nadcap culture.

Another major topic of discussion is the NOP-012 Auditor Consistency. The NMC has detailed expectations and requirements for Task Groups to monitor and manage auditor consistency. One of the major points of discussion was the Auditor Observation Process. Suppliers were encouraged to approve requests for auditor observers. This is a positive addition for the HTTG, and with the help of the suppliers the audit observation can be a better tool to improve auditor consistency. There is still concern from the suppliers about the confidentiality of the supplier feedback forms. The suppliers were encouraged to submit frank and honest feedback so that the HTTG can use in conjunction with the observation forms from Subscribers.

For more detailed information please reference minutes posted on http://www.p-r-i.org/nadcap/nadcap-meetings/.

40.0 SUPPLIER VOTING MEMBER PARTICIPATION – OPEN

Supplier balloting activity and meeting attendance data was presented to the HTTG. The data showed that the requirements of NTGOP-001 section 5.2.5 were being met by all the Supplier Voting Members (SVM).

New Approved Supplier Voting Members:

Bob Ferry of FPM Heat Treating as SVM Roy Adkins of Braddock Metallurgical, Inc. as ALT SVM Barry Rafan of Universal Stainless as ALT SVM

There was discussion regarding the number of SVM’s for the HTTG stemming from a discussion at the NMC level about changing the procedure to limit the number of SVM’s. As a result of the NMC concerns expressed and the discussion of possible limiting the number of SVM’s the HTTG has decided to wait to make a decision until the NMC makes a decision about possible procedure limits.

41.0 TOP 10 NCRS- OPEN

Cyril Vernault gave a presentation of the AC7102 (now AC7102 and AC7102/8) checklist questions most often cited in NCRs for Heat Treat audits. The presentation include the reference to the checklist question number, the text of the question and where the NCRs were issued (Job Audits, or procedure audits etc). During the course of the discussion some suppliers mentioned that they are not able to keep Pyrometry providers’ internal procedures on site for review. This will be referred to the AC7102 Sub-Team to update this section of the HT Auditor Handbook. Another section of the handbook (4.2.1) states that furnace records shall be signed and stamped. This will also be referred to the AC7102 Sub-Team for rewording in the HT Auditor Handbook.

42.0 SAT & ALTERNATE SAT – OPEN

Cyril Vernault gave a presentation on SAT and the Alternate SAT methods to the group.



CONFIRMED

43.0 PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM – OPEN

Doug Matson gave a presentation on process control system, what it means with regard to HTTG and how this should be understood by suppliers and auditors to have a more consistent audit process for the HTTG. The main area of concern is required periodic testing that is not part of Pyrometry and job audits.

Can the supplier demonstrate compliance to the requirements of the required periodic testing?

Is there a schedule for all periodic testing that is required and is there objective evidence that the periodic testing met the schedule requirements and the precise method of testing required by the specification?

44.0 OPEN MEETING TABLED SUBJECTS – OPEN

There were no tabled subjects during the open meeting.

45.0 OPEN MEETING QUESTION & ANSWER SESSION – OPEN

There were several questions from suppliers. There were about 25 questions submitted in the anonymous question box. Each of the questions was reviewed during the meeting. Several of the questions were answered during the meeting. And several questions were referred to the AC7102 Sub-Team.

46.0 OPENING COMMENTS – CLOSED

Tom Norris HTTG Chairperson made opening comments for the closed meeting.

46.1 Call to Order/Quorum Check

Tom Norris the Chair verified that only Subscriber Members are in attendance and verified a quorum was present.

47.0 AUDIT ALLOCATION – CLOSED

Audit allocations were made up through February 2015. All audits had at least two reviewers assigned during the meeting.

48.0 NEW BUSINESS – CLOSED

A subscriber member expressed concerns about some audit response posted on eAuditNet for two separate audits. The response was posted by supplier personnel and during HTTG review the subscriber rejected the audit and requested additional information. The additional information provided was different than the proposed corrective action posted originally posted to eAuditNet. Apparently the supplier individual that made the original post did not have the stated corrective actions approved by the company management, and the company management did not wish to implement the originally posted corrective action.


CONFIRMED

The Subscribers expectation is that the corrective action that is posted in eAuditNet is actually what the supplier will be doing. Sometimes audits are closed with draft corrective action responses because of the length of time it takes to go through some of the supplier approval cycle. However, the audits are not closed unless there is positive closed Immediate Corrective Action in place that fixes the immediate problem. The preventative action is what may be accepted as a draft and on subsequent audits the auditors verify the corrective action is implemented, if not a non-sustaining NCR is written. So there is a mechanism in place to ensure corrective actions are implemented appropriately.

48.1 A subscriber member expressed concern regarding the Supplier Feedback form. This topic has been part of the discussion at meeting after meeting within the HTTG and it seems that nothing has changed. The suppliers are afraid to fill out and send the form in for fear that auditors will either see the form or be made aware of the contents of the form in a way that the auditor will know which supplier made the comments. The suppliers are concerned about that there may be reprisals as a result of negative feedback.

The HTTG agreed that the suppliers need to see in a procedure from Nadcap, that the Feedback forms are not available to the auditors in anyway. It was suggested that any information from the forms should only be conveyed to the auditors in such a manner that the identity of the supplier remain anonymous. During the course of discussion the HTTG reviewed NIP 7-03 and NOP-001. It appears in these two procedures that the feedback form is only required when there are zero NCRs written during the audit. And neither procedure addresses the confidentiality of the feedback forms.

Action Item: The HTTG Staff Engineers will discuss this topic at the SE SWAT meeting and convey this concern to the NMC. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2014)

48.2 Jerry Aston discussed with the HTTG the results of a recent Oversight Audit of the HTTG. During this audit the oversight auditor found a completed carburizing audit that was performed by the HTTG auditor at a supplier that did not include the testing requirements as part of the completed job audit. The Oversight auditor wrote an NCR against the HTTG stating that there was confusion among the HTTG members about the requirements. As a result Jerry Aston reviewed the checklist and the requirements with the HTTG members and Staff Engineers to clarify the requirements about including the testing in the completed audit checklist. Jerry will respond to the NCR, that training/review was conducted with the HTTG members and Staff Engineers.

48.3 Another Subscriber expressed concern about audits which resulted in an NCR against a specification recommendation not a requirement. The suppliers were required to provide RCCA for what should have been a void NCR. This involved hardness testing on round material. In one case, the auditor had the supplier place a V anvil in the tester and perform a test on a round piece of material. The auditor then wrote the NCR because the supplier did not go back and re-standardize against a standard test block. One supplier contacted ASTM and received an email reply that this was only a recommendation and should not have resulted in an NCR. There was significant discussion about ASTM’s almost always “recommend”, but there is a checklist question that states “are the standardized test blocks being used appropriately?”

The HTTG suggested that some guidance be added to the HT Auditor Handbook and monitor the future audits for this condition to see if any further action is required. The HTTG also decided an auditor advisory should be issued stating auditors shall not require suppliers to perform tasks that are outside the scope of the accreditation.

Action Item: Doug Matson will draft the auditor advisory about out of scope requests from auditors. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)


CONFIRMED

48.4 The HTTG discussed the issue of cleaning versus cleanliness. A draft of an advisory was reviewed and the HTTG agreed that this issue still requires attention and that there may be more information that could be included in the advisory. Sunder Rajan agreed to take the draft advisory and update it and present the updated version at the next meeting in Berlin.

Action Item: Sunder Rajan will complete auditor advisory concerning cleaning versus cleanliness. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

48.5 There was discussion about some suppliers using High and Low monitoring sensors and also using them as load T/C’s. One of the Subscribers was told that this has been an acceptable practice for some time. There was much discussion on the subject, but no ultimate decision was made.

Action Item: Cyril Vernault will draft a proposed auditor advisory for High and Low Monitoring Sensors and using them as Load Thermocouples and present a draft at the next meeting in Berlin. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

48.6 48.7 A supplier requested clarification regarding ASTM 110-14 which now states that portable hardness testers are intended for use outside of Labs and do not meet the requires of ASTM E10-14 (Brinell) or ASTM E18-14 (Rockwell). This supplier has only portable hardness tester in its Lab and has Nadcap accreditation for both Rockwell and Brinell hardness testing. The question posed to the HTTG was how does this affect supplier accreditation? The HTTG consensus is that this may have a larger impact than just one supplier. And, that supplier must have approval from customers to use portable hardness testers. This opinion is the same that was provided by the Materials Testing Laboratories Task Group (MTL TG). The HTTG decided that there should be an Auditor Advisory issued for this issue.

Action Item: Doug Matson agreed to write the auditory advisor for portable hardness testers. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

48.7 The HTTG discussed calibration stickers and what information is required on the calibration sticker. There was a suggestion that the calibration sticker include the signature of the technician that performed the calibration or the signature of the person that reviewed and approved the calibration report. It was the consensus of the HTTG that the signature was not required.

48.8 There was a discussion about a supplier request to calibrate a secondary standard instrument and secondary standard sensor together as a complete inseparable unit This requested application does not meet the current requirements of AMS 2750. The supplier would have to have Prime customer approval to avoid NCRs if this approach is used. Doug Matson agreed to take this to the AMEC committee for consideration in the next revision of AMS2750.

Action Item: Doug Matson to report back on meeting the sensor requirements of AMS 2750 at the March 2015 meeting. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

48.9 The Staff Engineers requested that when Subscribers Ballot audits please do not place comments when the audit Ballot is “Accept”. The Staff Engineers must acknowledge and respond to all comments. Subscribers were asked to only put comments when the ballot selection is “accept with comments”. This will prevent Staff Engineers following up on comments when the Subscriber didn’t intend to have a response from the Staff Engineers.

48.10 The HTTG was asked about having Subscribers contact information listed in eAuditNet. This is something that would have to come from the NMC. No action was taken.


CONFIRMED

49.0 RAIL REVIEW – CLOSED

The RAIL was reviewed during the closed meeting. There were several actions added to the RAIL. See the RAIL on www.eAuditNet.com Resources/Public Documents/Heat Treating for details.

50.0 CLOSED MEETING TABLED SUBJECTS – CLOSED

50.1 There was a discussion regarding the MOU with MTL. There was significant discussion on this topic and that several questions regarding hardness testing were inadvertently removed from the core checklist when conductivity testing was moved to AC7102/5. There was discussion that many HTTG questions were not adequately addressed by MTL when the supplier holds a AC7101/5 accreditation. The HTTG decided to send this issue to the AC7102 Sub-Team to evaluate what questions if any, regarding hardness testing, should be added to the AC7102 checklist. The Sub-Team will present a draft of the additional questions to add to the checklist at the Berlin meeting.

Action Item: AC7102 Sub-Team to draft revision to AC7102 to include questions regarding hardness testing that were inadvertently removed from the checklist. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

50.2 The NOP-012 Observation Report form was discussed during the Table Subjects meeting, regarding a HTTG appendix to the form. Mike Corsino presented a rough draft of the beginnings of a HTTG appendix to the form. The HTTG referred this to the NOP-012 Sub-Team to create a draft proposal of a HTTG Observation form. The NOP-012 Sub-Team will also monitor and capture action items and or suggestions from the Observation report forms for possible changes to checklist questions, HT Audit Handbook entries and Pyrometry Guide entries. During the discussion of regarding the observation audits the HTTG Chair, Tom Norris, stated that he relayed to the NMC the HTTG concern about not getting positive confirmation of observation requests. The NMC was requested to establish in the procedure positive feedback to the Subscriber when a request to observe an audit is made. This feedback should be delivered in a timely manner to the Subscriber and state whether the request was accepted or denied.

During the open meeting one of the suppliers asked if Nadcap could provide something the supplier HT personnel could share with their leadership team to help get observation requests approved. Many of the supplier personnel involved directly with the Nadcap audit do not have the authority to approve the observation requests and they have difficulty convincing their leadership to approve the request. The HTTG Chair has asked HTTG Staff Engineers to ask the Chair and Vice Chair of the NMC to provide a short letter to explain the benefits to the supplier and Nadcap by allowing the observations to take place.

Action Item: NOP-012 Sub-Team to draft HTTG appendix to Observation form. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

Action Item: NOP-012 Sub-Team to monitor observation forms for potential changes or revisions to checklist questions, Audit Handbook and Pyrometry guide. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

Action Item: Staff Engineers to ask NMC Chair and Vice Chair for short letter regarding benefits of allowing observations to take place. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2015)

50.3 Northrop Grumman and Raytheon requested auditor advisories be written stating that all Northrop and Raytheon parts should be consider ITAR/EAR and protected in accordance with standard Nadcap practices for ITAR/EAR data.

Action Item: Marcel Cuperman to issue Auditor Advisory that Northrop Grumman and Raytheon parts should be considered ITAR/EAR and protected in accordance with standard Nadcap practices for ITAR/EAR data and add all subscribers that have only ITAR to the Audit Handbook. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2014)


CONFIRMED

51.0 FINALIZE MARCH 2015 AGENDA – CLOSED

The agenda for the March 2015 Nadcap meeting was discussed.

It was agreed that the Staff Engineers would create the agenda and forward to the HTTG for approval/modification.

52.0 PRYOMETRY GUIDE SUB-TEAM MEETING– OPEN

The Pyrometry Guide Sub-Team met briefly after the closed meeting so discuss potential changes and updates to the Pyrometry guide. The sub-team will provide an update at the March 2015 meeting in Berlin.

ADJOURNMENT – 23-Oct-2014 – Meeting was adjourned at 1:40 p.m.

Minutes Prepared by: Bruce Brownfield, Lockheed Martin. [email protected]

***** 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 revision: Who is responsible: Due date:AC7102 AC7102 Sub-Team 28-Feb-2014Pyrometry Guide Pyrometry Guide Sub-Team 28-Feb-2014HT Risk Mitigation Guide Risk Mitigation Sub-Team 28-Feb-2014AC7102/1 Brazing Sub-Team 28-Feb-2014AC7102/6 Marcel Cuiperman/Brittany

McSorley30-Nov-2014

HT Audit Handbook HT Audit Handbook Sub-Team 28-Feb-2014

mailto:[email protected]

cdn.p-r-i.orgcdn.p-r-i.org/.../2015/03/HTMinutesOct2014CONFIRMED.docx · Web viewCONFIRMED MINUTES....

Documents

Transcript of cdn.p-r-i.orgcdn.p-r-i.org/.../2015/03/HTMinutesOct2014CONFIRMED.docx · Web viewCONFIRMED MINUTES....