opening comments - performance review institute · web viewroach ian simpson andy statham louise...

NMC PLANNING & OPERATIONSOCTOBER 2015

CONFIRMED

CONFIRMED MINUTESOCTOBER 20, 2015

PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, USA

These minutes are not final until confirmed by the Management Council in writing or by vote at a subsequent meeting. Information herein does not constitute a communication or recommendation from the Management Council and shall not be considered as such by any agency.

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2015

1.0 OPENING COMMENTS

1.1 Call to Order / Quorum Check

The Nadcap Management Council (NMC) Planning & Operations meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m., 20-Oct-2015.

A quorum was established with the following representatives in attendance:

Subscriber NMC Voting Members Present (* Indicates Voting Member)

NAME COMPANY NAME

* Latch Anguelov SAFRAN Group* David Bale Pratt & Whitney Canada* Michael Bess DCMA* Pascal Blondet Airbus* Richard Blyth Rolls-Royce Vice Chairperson* Craig Bowden BAE Systems – MAI* Jeff Cerre Beechcraft* Russell Cole Northrop Grumman Corp.* Jose Eduardo Freire Embraer S.A.* Martha Hogan-Battisti The Boeing Company* Scott Iby UTC Aerospace (Hamilton

Sundstrand)* Wendy Jiang COMAC* Jason Jolly Cessna Aircraft Company* Karen Kim Sikorsky Aircraft* Bob Koukol Honeywell Aerospace* Jeff Lott The Boeing Company Chairperson* Scott Maitland UTC Aerospace (Goodrich)* Frank Mariot Triumph Group* Robin McGuckin Bombardier Aerospace* Frank McManus Lockheed Martin Corp.* Marc Montreuil Heroux Devtek Inc.* Michael Murray Beechcraft* Scott O’Connor Honeywell Aerospace* Ana Cristina Ottani dos Santos Embraer S.A.* Scott Porterfield Triumph Group* Mark Rechtsteiner GE Aviation* Per Rehndell GKN Aerospace Sweden AB* Victor Schonberger Israel Aerospace Industries* Scott Severson Rockwell Collins* David Soong Pratt & Whitney


CONFIRMED

Supplier NMC Voting Members Present (* indicates NMC Voting Member)

NAME COMPANY NAME

* Tammi Schubert Helicomb Intl* Wilfried Weber PFW Aerospace GmbH

Task Group Chairpersons/Vice Chairpersons Present

NAME COMPANY NAME TASK GROUP

Charles Beargie UTC Aerospace (Goodrich) Conventional Machining as a Special Process

Robin Borrelli The Boeing Company Aerospace Quality SystemsElaine Boswell Rolls-Royce Metallic Materials ManufacturingBrent Clothier Cessna Aircraft Company SealantsKent DeFranco Lockheed Martin Corp. SealantsKaryn Deming UTC Aerospace (Goodrich) Chemical ProcessingRoy Garside Rolls-Royce ElectronicsDan Graves UTC Aerospace (Goodrich) Materials Testing LaboratoriesSimon Gough-Rundle Rolls-Royce Measurement & InspectionManuel Koucouthakis Honeywell Aerospace Elastomer SealsHolger Krueger Airbus WeldingJoel Mohnacky UTC Aerospace (Hamilton

Sundstrand)Coatings

Tom Norris UTC Aerospace (Goodrich) Heat TreatingKeith Panuska Lockheed Martin Corp. CompositesDavid Royce Pratt & Whitney Nondestructive TestingRichard Rumas Honeywell Aerospace ElectronicsMike Schmidt GE Aviation Nonconventional Machining / Surface

EnhancementUdo Schuelke Honeywell Aerospace CoatingsMike Stolze Northrop Grumman Corp. Chemical ProcessingSteve Tooley Rolls-Royce WeldingCyril Vernault SAFRAN Group Heat TreatingPaul Woolley Rolls-Royce Nonconventional Machining / Surface

EnhancementTony Warren Airbus Nondestructive Testing

Other Attendees

NAME COMPANY NAME

Xia Hong Rolls-RoyceScott Meyer UTAS GoodrichKara Warrensford Honeywell Aerospace

PRI Staff Present

Ethan AkinsJerry AstonMark AubeleNigel CookMarcel CupermanBill Dumas


CONFIRMED

Susan FraileyMichael GrahamMike GutridgeRob HoethScott KlavonGabe KustraJim LewisBob LizewskiDavid MarcyjanikJulia MarkardtJustin McCabeBrittany McSorleyMike PlouchaKeith PurnellJustin RauschKellie RoachIan SimpsonAndy StathamLouise StefanakisJon SteffeyJohn TibmaKevin Wetzel

1.2 Jeff Lott noted that this meeting is for members of the NMC, Task Group Chairs, Vice Chairs, and PRI Staff. The following guests of the NMC Chairperson were introduced and acknowledged:

Scott Meyer – UTC Aerospace (Goodrich) Kara Warrensford - Honeywell Xia Hong – Rolls Royce

1.3 Code of Ethics, Anti-Trust & Conflict of Interest

The PRI code of ethics, anti-trust and conflict of interest policy was reviewed.

1.4 The Planning and Ops Agenda was reviewed.

1.5 Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes

Motion made by Russell Cole and seconded by Jason Jolly to confirm the minutes from the previous meeting. Motion passed and the June 2015 NMC Planning & Operations meeting minutes were approved as written.

2.0 RAIL REVIEW – OPEN

The Rolling Action Item List (RAIL) was reviewed. Items #35, #36, #37, #40, were closed.

For specific details, please see the current RAIL embedded on the last page of the minutes.

3.0 PROPOSED CHANGE TO SATELLITE CRITERIA

Scott Meyer presented a proposal (embedded below) regarding potential revisions to satellite audit criteria definitions that has come from the Electronics Task Group.


CONFIRMED

Scott brought up special cases that the Electronics Task Group have dealt with in regards to Suppliers who do not quite fit the standard definitions of main and satellite audits in regards to processing of products. They have proposed that the definitions of main and satellite audits be revised accordingly, or for certain Electronics suppliers to be exempt from the current definitions and procedures.

ACTION ITEM: Susan Frailey to create an SE SWAT Team to address and look into potentially revising the current definitions of main and satellite audit criteria based off information presented from the Electronics Task Group and report back. (Due Date: 24-Feb-2016)

4.0 RISK MITIGATION – OP 1110 PROCESS

Scott Maitland gave a presentation regarding changes that have been made to the Risk Mitigation process and OP1110. For further details please see embedded presentation.

Key topics of discussion were that Staff Engineers would now be reviewing audits in Risk Mitigation with input provided by Subscribers of the Task Group. This review process will mirror what is already established in eAuditNet for audit review, so Subscribers will be assigned via eAuditNet to have access to review Risk Mitigation audits.

Another key topic for discussion occurred regarding Mode A failure audits that go through Risk Mitigation. These audits will go through the Risk Mitigation process with however many nonconformances were documented at the time of the audit being stopped. It is encouraged for Suppliers to continue their audit even after passing the failure threshold but they still have the right to stop their audit at any time. If deemed a Failure Mode A audit, only the findings recorded/documented at that time will be reviewed and closed in Risk Mitigation.

Also it was discussed how Suppliers who may not have identified any Subscriber customers will be treated in Risk Mitigation. It was explained that no matter what the circumstance of the Supplier in regard to the audit that failed, that Supplier will have the option to appeal or enter Risk Mitigation.

The Risk Mitigation procedure, OP1110 is to be balloted for 21 days as a letter ballot, and will be followed by a 14 day affirmation ballot to the NMC if no technical comments need to be addressed. The revised document should be approved and active by the end of January 2016.

5.0 OBSERVATIONS

Bob Lizewski gave a presentation on Audit Observations. For further details, please see embedded presentation below.

Key topics of discussion included an overall summary of the Audit Observations analysis done by Bob Lizewski and the new eAuditNet Dashboard that will be capturing this data going forward. Discussion ensued and several issues were brought forth.


CONFIRMED

Kevin Wetzel brought up a concern for the MTL TG regarding their two-auditor audits and how this information regarding Audit Observations is going to be captured in this dashboard. He asked if there are two different Audit Observation forms sent out per each auditor getting evaluated and if so how is this data being captured.

In addition a discussion occurred regarding partial visits during Audit Observations and how this information is to be captured in the observation feedback form. There has been a request made to allow questions to have an “unable to observe” or “not applicable” answer option to cover these special circumstances.

Finally regarding completion of the observation feedback form within eAuditNet; there has been a request made to investigate if there can be a “pop-up” warning regarding if the observation feedback has not been fully submitted with a complete form.

ACTION ITEM: Bob Lizewski and eAuditNet staff to investigate the following issues in regard to observations: How are 2 auditor audits being captured in the Audit Observation Dashboard in eAuditNet; If the observation feedback form can be revised to include “unable to observe” or “not applicable” answer options to cover partial audit observation visits; and investigate if the observation feedback form submission can have a pop-up warning in eAuditNet if the form is not completed. (Due Date: 24-Feb-2016)

6.0 AUDIT EFFECTIVENESS

The NMC Audit Effectiveness Sub-Team had requested that each Task Group report out on the data gathered from the Task Group visits conducted by NMC with the auditors.

6.1 Conventional Machining as a Special Process (CMSP)

Charles Beargie reported on the findings and data gather by the CMSP Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.2 Coatings (CT)

Udo Schuelke reported on the findings and data gathered by the CT Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.3 Composites (COMP)


CONFIRMED

Keith Panuska reported on the findings and data gathered by the COMP Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.4 Sealants (SLT)

Kent DeFranco reported on the findings and data gathered by the SLT Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.5 Chemical Processing (CP)

Karyn Deming reported on the findings and data gathered by the CP Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.6 Electronics (ETG)

Richard Rumas reported on the findings and data gathered by the ETG Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.7 Fluids (FLU)

Keith Purnell reported on the findings and data gathered by the FLU Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.8 Nonconventional Machining (NM) / Surface Enhancement (SE)


CONFIRMED

Paul Woolley reported on the findings and data gathered by the NMSE Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.9 Nondestructive Testing (NDT)

Dave Royce reported on the findings and data gathered by the NDT Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.10 Heat Treatment (HT)

Tom Norris reported on the finding and data gathered by the HT Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.11 Seals (SEALS)

Manuel Koucouthakis reported on the findings and data gathered by the SEALS Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.12 Welding (WELD)

Steve Tooley reported on the findings and data gathered by the WELD Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.13 Materials Testing (MTL)


CONFIRMED

Dan Graves reported on the findings and data gathered by the MTL Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

6.14 Measurement & Inspection (M&I)

Simon Gough-Rundle reported on the findings and data gathered by the M&I Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

After all commodity report outs were completed Mark Rechtsteiner discussed the next steps that the NMC sub-team will be taking with the information provided by the Task Groups.

ACTION ITEM: Mark Rechtsteiner to bring back data from Task Groups to the NMC Audit Effectiveness sub-team for review, develop next steps to be flowed down accordingly to Task Groups and report back to P&O. (Due Date: 24-Feb-2016)

7.0 OTHER ISSUES / NEW BUSINESS / DISCUSSION

7.1 Auditor Cover Letter Items

Mark Aubele brought attention to the background and history behind the process of auditors providing and attaching cover letters in audits. Originally the content in these cover letters included four specific items that were deemed necessary information for the audit process:

1. A list of key Supplier personnel2. NCRs of special importance3. The general impression of the Supplier by the auditor4. Recommendation for accreditation

Since the initial use of these cover letters; the requirements and expectations of auditors have changed due to various advisories that have been issued and the fact that the commodity checklists have been revised to include most of these items. The discussion that followed determined that the content of these cover letters was deemed necessary only in regards to the auditor’s general impression of the Supplier. It was also noted that this information is generally not given by the auditor due to the fact that the supplier can see the cover letter and/or notes posted by the auditor. The decision was made that the cover letter is no longer required as long as there was not a secure place within eAuditNet for the overall comments of the auditor to be posted for only Subscribers to view. Mark was actioned to look into this and provide an answer at the next Planning and Ops meeting in February 2016.

ACTION ITEM: Mark Aubele to investigate if there can be a secure place within eAuditNet for auditors to provide data and information to Subscriber members only. (Due Date: 24-Feb-2016)

7.2 Jim Lewis presented a proposal in regards to the current balloting process. This proposal was approved by NMC Steering. For more details, please see the attached document.


CONFIRMED

In essence the new proposal mirrors that of the same balloting process SAE International uses to ballot their various standards. The proposal will be incorporated into OP1101-Document Control and balloted accordingly.

7.3 Nigel Cook gave a presentation regarding Supplier Merit and the ability of a supplier to appeal issues in the audit affecting that merit after audit closure and Type P Advisories that have become an issue within the Chemical Processing Task Group. For more details, please see the attached document.

The Chemical Processing Task Group is proposing the NMC revisit the previous Chemical Process Task Group proposal to allow an extended time period, 90 days, for issues addressing loss of merit only.

ACTION ITEM: The NMC Standardization Committee to review and investigate revisiting the previous Chemical Process Task Group proposal to allow an extended time period, 90 days, for issues addressing loss of merit only and present decision at next Planning and Ops Meeting in February 2016. (Due Date: 24-Feb-2016)

7.4 RAIL Review

New action items identified during this meeting were reviewed and added to the RAIL. For more details, please see the attached RAIL below.

7.5 Meeting Feedback

8.0 ADJOURNMENT –20-OCT-2015

Meeting was adjourned at 7:00 P.M.

Minutes Prepared by: Kellie Roach [email protected]

RAIL:

***** 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:

OP 1110 Mike Graham 20-Oct-2015t-frm-01 Mike Graham 20-Oct-2015

mailto:[email protected]