opening comments · web viewthe nadcap management council (nmc) standardization committee was...

NMC STANDARDIZATION COMMITTEEOCTOBER 2013

CONFIRMED

CONFIRMED MINUTESOCTOBER 21, 2013

PITTSBURGH, PA USA

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

MONDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2013

1.0 OPENING COMMENTS

1.1 Call to Order / Quorum Check

The Nadcap Management Council (NMC) Standardization Committee was called to order at 7:30 a.m., 21-Oct-13.

The meeting was restricted to Committee members as well as NMC members and invited guests.

Quorum was established with the following representatives in attendance:

NMC Voting Member Present

NAME COMPANY NAME

Latchezar Anguelov SAFRAN Group* Pascal Blondet Airbus* Richard Blyth Rolls-Royce PLC* Robert Bodemuller Ball Aerospace & Technologies* Katie Bradley Lockheed Martin Corporation* Michael Brandt Alcoa, Inc.* Mark Brown Kaman Aerostruct* Christian Buck SAFRAN Group* Robert Cashman Parker Aerospace Group* Tim Crowe Hunting Energy Services* Robert Custer AAA Plating & Inspection Inc.* Suzanna DeMoss 3M* John Haddock BAE Systems Air & Information (MAI)* Eric Jacklin FM Callahon & Son* Robert Koukol Honeywell Aerospace* Frank Mariot Triumph Aerostructures - VAD* Steve McGinn Honeywell Aerospace Committee

Chairperson* Dave Michaud Fountain Plating Co.* Michael Murray Beechcraft Corp* Colby Nicks Textron – Bell Helicopter* Ana Ottani dos Santos Embraer* Fabrizio Quadrini AgustaWestland* Mark Rechsteiner GE Aviation* Per Rehndell GKN Aerospace Sweden AB* Bradley Richwine Raytheon Co* Victor Schonberger Israel Aerospace Industries* David Soong Pratt & Whitney* Michael Schleckman Voss Industries, Inc.* Vitorio Stana Avcorp Industries Inc.* George Winchester Northrop Grumman Corporation* Kevin Ward Goodrich


CONFIRMED

Other Attendees

NAME COMPANY NAME

Mike Baumann The Boeing CompanyAndrew Caliendo Sikorsky AircraftRussell Cole Northrop Grumman CorporationMartha Hogan-Battisti The Boeing CompanyStanley Trull Honeywell Aerospace

PRI Staff Present

Mark AubeleJim BorczykMike GrahamRhonda JosephScott KlavonJim LewisJustin McCabeLouise Stefanakis

1.2 Review of Nadcap Code of Conduct and Meeting Conduct

It was noted that this meeting is restricted to NMC Voting Members only. The following attendees were invited guests of the Chairperson, Steve McGinn:

Mike Baumann, The Boeing Company Andrew Caliendo, Sikorsky Aircraft Russell Cole, Northrop Grumman Corporation Martha Hogan-Battisti, The Boeing Company Stanley Trull, Honeywell Aerospace

The attached presentation addressing Code of Ethics and Conflict of Interest was reviewed. Meeting attendees were reminded of the Code of Conduct and Conflict of Interest documented in the Attendees Guide on page 7 which should guide all in their participation in the meeting.

1.3 Membership

Membership was reviewed and no changes were made.

1.4 Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes– CLOSED

The minutes from June 2013 were approved as written.

Motion made by David Soong and seconded by Frank Mariot to approve the June 2013 meeting minutes as written. Motion Passed.

2.0 RAIL – CLOSED

Mike Graham reviewed the current “open” RAIL items with the team. NMC agreed to close all items recommended for closure in the attached RAIL.


CONFIRMED

3.0 NADCAP AUDITOR CONSISTENCY/EFFECTIVENESS SINGLE MEASURE OF CONSISTENCY – CLOSED

Richard Blyth presented the below attached Auditor Consistency Single Metrics presentation.

For more details, please see the attached presentation. One member asked, How far back are we looking? Response was that it was an annual snap shot. Another concern was whether the numbers agree with the other data sets and how do they work together? Mike Graham stated that we cannot confirm that they do at this time. (We will learn from piloting the new NOP-012 “Auditor Consistency” over the next year). Another member asked how was the weighting chosen? Response was that feedback from the Subscribers is weighted at 40% and Auditor evaluation score is weighted at 60% since this includes feedback from both the Staff Engineer/Reviewer and the Supplier.

Motion made by Richard Blyth and seconded by Steve McGinn to approve the implementation of the new Auditor Consistency Metric. Motion passed unanimously.

4.0 NOP-012 IMPLEMENTATION – CLOSED

Richard Blyth reviewed the following presentation regarding NOP-012 “Auditor Consistency” implementation. The presentation was well received. There is a small concern that the plan may be overly aggressive. It was agreed that we need to give the Task Groups the chance to take this on and monitor feedback during calendar year 2014.

Motion made by Steve McGinn to move forward with the pilot for NOP-012 “Auditor Consistency” implementation. Motion passed unanimously.

ACTION ITEM: Mike Graham and Richard Blyth to notify Auditors of the Auditor Consistency pilot program. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2014)

ACTION ITEM: Mike Graham and Richard Blyth to set up system to monitor Task Group progress toward Auditor Consistency milestones. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2014)

5.0 SMART CHECKLIST – CLOSED

Robert Koukol reviewed the attached “Smart Checklist” presentation. The Smart Checklist “pilot” with WLD and CP is currently waiting on Nadcap Task Group Operating Procedure NTGOP-001 to be released. Once released, the commodity Task Groups(piloting the process) will need to update their Nadcap Task Group Operating Procedure NTGOP-001 Appendices and identify the checklist question requirements.

Several questions were raised:


CONFIRMED

1) Is it a requirement to utilize Smart Checklists?

RESPONSE: Task Groups may elect to utilize this approach but are not required.

2) How will we know which Subscribers will be reviewed during the audit?

RESPONSE: The presenter explained that Chemical Processing (CP) tracks which Subscribers audits have been done with a job tracker. The Smart Checklist initiative does not currently address sampling of jobs.

3) Does “Smart Checklist” show which question will be modified?

RESPONSE: The checklist will grey out any questions that will not be asked.

4) Do we feel that this will result in more or less findings and will it affect merit?

RESPONSE: Chemical Processing (CP) has been doing this process for years and there is no change.

6.0 TIME CYCLE DEFINITIONS TEAM – CLOSED

Mike Gutridge reviewed the attached presentation regarding Time Interval definitions.

Changes to NOP-001 “Nadcap Operating Procedure” are recommended to provide default requirements that apply -unless otherwise directed by the customer or specification. One member expressed concerns regarding whether the time is expressed in calendar days or business days. It was agreed to by the group to have calendar days added to the Time Interval Definition Table. A request was made to Mike Gutridge that when this is sent out to ballot to include examples of each time interval. The group agree to with this request.

Motion made by Steve McGinn to ballot Nadcap Operating Procedure NOP-001 with the proposed changes. Motion passed unanimously.

ACTION ITEM: Mike Gutridge to add Calendar days to the Time Interval Definitions table in Nadcap Operating Procedure NOP-001. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2014)

ACTION ITEM: Mike Gutridge to ballot the Nadcap Operating Procedure NOP-001 that includes the Time Interval Definitions table. Include an example of each time cycle with the ballot. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2014)

7.0 NOP-011 FAILURE/RISK MITIGATION – CLOSED

Kevin Ward presented the following documents to the team, draft of NOP-011 and the ballot comments for Audit Failure Process NOP-011. Several members had a concern regarding when the revisions to Audit Failure Process NOP-011 can be implemented in eAuditNet. Louise Stefanakis stated that eAuditNet can start programming after January 2014 and should take approximately 6 weeks- depending on the requirements. Jim Lewis stated that PRI can release the procedure and give a 90 day notice and that would still give eAuditNet the time to make the


CONFIRMED

programming changes. Effective date for Audit Failure Process NOP-011 will be April 15, 2014. Mike Graham and Kevin Ward to review specific requirements for failure/risk mitigation with eAuditNet Staff.

A comment from Suzanna Demoss that there is a concern that the procedure implies that a 2-5% failure rate is desired. It was agree to that verbiage should be changed in Audit Failure Process NOP-011; 3.2.1 from “The thereshold should be established at a level where 95%-98% of the population (based on Task Group audits for the previous year) fall below that limit.” to “It is suggested that the threshold be established at a level where 95-98% of the population (based on Task Group audits for the previous year) fall below that limit. (Task Groups may select a different threshold based on size and maturity of the supplier population.") The Group agreed that the change to Audit Failure Process NOP-011 3.2.1 is an editorial change and does not require a reballot.

Motion made by Kevin Ward to release the Audit Failure Process NOP-011 as amended above. Motion passed unanimously.

Victor Schonberger expressed concerns regarding whether NMC approval should be required for any changes to NOP-011 Mode B failure criteria. The NMC Standardization Committee agreed that this comment needs to be addressed, but can’t be addressed in the current ballot. A team is appointed to evaluate the current failure criteria and recommend whether future changes will require NMC approval. If so, is there another means of obtaining approval other than a ballot?

ACTION ITEM: Kevin Ward and Mike Graham to meet with eAuditNet Staff (Jon Steffey) to establish requirements for eAuditNet (Due Date: 28-Feb-2014)

ACTION ITEM: Victor Schonberger to develop a sub-team to address requirements for NMC approval of Mode B failure criteria. (Due Date: 28-Feb-2014) (Subteam: John Haddock, Richard Blyth, Pascal Blondet, Kevin Ward, Fabrizio Quadrini, and Victor Schonberger -Lead)

Team Members: Richard Blyth, Pascal Bondet, John Haddock, Kevin Ward and Victor Schonberger (Lead) and Fabrizio Quadrini.

8.0 EXPORT CONTROL – CLOSED

Kevin Ward explains current NMC Initiative for export control. NMC is establishing a team to address export control and ensure an appropriate/practical approach to compliance. . A brainstorming session will be held on Wednesday, October 23, 2014 on how we can meet the needs for ITAR/EAR requirements and which primes would like to be involved. A comment was raised that the team should include suppliers. Kevin Ward would like to keep this topic as an on-going part of the program. The Standardization team that was developed at the June 2013 meeting is on hold pending direction from Kevin Wards team.

9.0 ACTION ITEM REVIEW – CLOSED

All New RAIL items are agreed to and added to the RAIL.

Motion made by Kevin Ward and seconded by Chris Buck to adjourn. Motion Passed

ADJOURNMENT – 21-Oct-2013– Meeting was adjourned at 10:21 a.m.

Minutes Prepared by: Rhonda Joseph [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


CONFIRMED

***** 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:NOP-001 Mike Gutridge 28-Feb-14