CONVENTIONAL MACHINING AS A SPECIAL PROCESS
OCTOBER 2015
CONFIRMED
CONFIRMED MINUTES
OCTOBER 20 - 22, 2015
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.
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2015 to THURSDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2015
1.0 OPENING COMMENTS (DAILY) – CLOSED
1.1 Call to Order / Quorum Check
The Conventional Machining as a Special Process (CMSP) Task Group (TG) was called to order at 8:09 a.m., 20-Oct-2015.
It was verified that only SUBSCRIBING 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* / Ken / Abram / Honeywell Aerospace
* / Chuck / Beargie / UTC Aerospace (Goodrich) / Chairperson
David / Day / GE Aviation
* / Philippe / Durand / Airbus Helicopters
* / Vincent / Dutilh / SAFRAN Group
* / Mario / Enriquez / Honeywell Aerospace
Gary / Gunselman / UTC Aerospace (Goodrich)
* / John / Pfeiffer / GE Aviation / Secretary
Romain / Septfons / SAFRAN Group
Mike / Steele / The Boeing Company
Thomas / Stevick / UTC Aerospace (Goodrich)
Tom / Wilson / Bombardier Inc.
Other Members/Participants Present (* Indicates Voting Member)
NAME / COMPANY NAME* / Sean / Carvalho / Strite Precision Machining Ltd
* / Jim / Jensen / Moeller Manufacturing Co.
Cindy / Klingler / Quality Systems Coaching, LLC
* / Marc-André / Lefebvre / Héroux-Devtek Inc.
* / Andre / Mulyono / Absolute Technologies Inc.
David / Osenar / Pako Inc.
Dave / Thompson / DCI Aerotech
PRI Staff Present
Andy / Statham1.2 Reviewed Safety Information
1.3 Reviewed Code of Ethics (Ref: Attendees’ Guide) and Meeting Conduct
1.4 Presented the Antitrust Video
1.5 Reviewed Agenda – The Agenda was reviewed
2.0 REVIEWed DELEGATION STATUS – CLOSED
2.1 Metrics involving Auditors, Staff Engineer and Subscribers:
· Andy’s delegation was discussed and the Task Group was complimentary of his performance by consensus.
· 2 Ballots (AC7126/1 and AC7126/5) are currently in ballot
· 76 Audits are currently scheduled for 2015
· CMSP has sufficient Auditor capacity
· There are no lapsed audits
· 93% of eligible Suppliers are on merit (65 Suppliers). 5 eligible Suppliers have not achieved merit
· On-time accreditation metric is currently favorable
· Audit review cycle time (total) is currently Green (one outlier due to Supplier response)
· Audit review cycle time for the Task Group is currently Yellow due to one outlier which was likely a Failure ballot.
The perennially vacant position of Vice Chairperson was discussed.
2.2 Observation Audits:
The team reviewed several observation audits. The Task Group discussed Observer comments and observations.
· Michael Riley (UTC Goodrich) observed Brad Woodiel on audit 169349 (initial audit)
· John Pfeiffer (GE Aviation) observed John Cammett on audit 164413 (reaccred audit)
· Zeljko Calija (UTC Goodrich) observed Rick Sovich on audit 168406 (initial audit)
Discussion points from the review of Observation Audits:
· Auditor should not ask the Supplier to select the jobs to be audited to reduce the risk that the audited job has been specifically scrubbed in preparation.
3.0 CLOSED NEW BUSINESS AND SUBSCRIBER CLARIFICATIONS – CLOSED
Action Items from Pittsburgh 2014 Meeting:
Andy reviewed Action Items from Pittsburgh 2014 that, due to turnover in the PRI Support Staff, were never transferred to the RAIL. The Task Group discussed each item and those that are not complete will be added to the RAIL.
Audit Effectiveness:
The Task Group discussed the notes collected during Monday’s Nadcap Management Council (NMC) brainstorming session on audit effectiveness to create the required presentation to be given by the Chairperson and the Planning and Ops meeting Tuesday evening.
4.0 OP 1117 AUDITOR CONSISTENCY – CLOSED
The auditor feedback format was reviewed with no comments.
The observation audit schedule was reviewed. All Auditors except Rick Pollack and Arthur Corfe have been observed this year. Rick has audits scheduled in the first part of 2016 in the Massachusetts area. UTC will try to oversee one, if not GE could possibly cover one.
The team briefly reviewed the upcoming audits and made commitments to perform a number of audits through the end of 2015 and into the first quarter of 2016.
ACTION ITEM: Andy Statham will send the current version of the audit schedule worksheet to the Task Group members. (Due Date: 31-Oct-2015)
ACTION ITEM: Andy Statham will contact John regarding observing Rick Scott’s Enginetic audit in December once UTC finalizes their observation commitment. (Due Date: 27-Nov-2015)
Two audits currently under ballot for failure were discussed by the Task Group.
A motion made by John Pfeiffer and seconded by Vincent Dutilh to adjourn the Closed session at 15:26.
5.0 OPENING COMMENTS (DAILY) – OPEN
5.1 Call to Order / Quorum Check
The CMSP TG was called to order at 10:18 a.m., 21-Oct-2015.
5.2 Reviewed Safety Information
5.3 Reviewed Code of Ethics (Ref: Attendees’ Guide) and Meeting Conduct
5.4 Presented the Antitrust Video
5.5 Review Agenda – The Agenda was reviewed
5.6 Approval of Montreal 2015 Meeting Minutes
A motion made by Jim Jensen and seconded by Vincent Dutilh to accept the June 2015 minutes as posted. Motion passed.
6.0 Review Membership Status – OPEN
6.1 Reviewed Requirements of Current Voting Members (VM):
· Andy March, Supplier Voting Member, has left Hunting Dearborn
· Jim Jensen has volunteered and been accepted as the new Supplier Support Committee (SSC) Representative
· Arda Celik,GE Aviation Alternate (ALT) VM has taken a new job within GE. Ertem Aygin (prior ALT VM) will be resuming the role.
· Romain Septfons attended the “new members” presentation run by the Nadcap NDT Group.
6.2 Propose/Vote on any New Task Group Voting Members
A motion made by Chuck Beargie and seconded by John Pfeiffer to accept Marc-Andre Lefebrve from Heroux-Devtek,Inc. as a Supplier Voting Member. Motion passed.
A motion made by Chuck Beargie and seconded by John Pfeiffer to accept Sean Carvalho from Strite Precision Machining, Ltd. as a Supplier Voting Member. Motion passed.
7.0 Staff Report – OPEN
7.1 General Task Group Metrics
Metrics were reviewed without comment.
7.2 Key Procedure and eAuditNet Changes
All Procedures have recently been changed. Task Group members expressed familiarity with the changes and with the document transition matrix. No eAuditNet changes were discussed.
7.3 Reviewed Rolling Action Item List (RAIL)
The RAIL was reviewed and updated. For specific details, please see the current CMSP Rolling Action Item List posted at www.eAuditNet.com, under Public Documents.
ACTION ITEM: Mario Enriquez will initiate updating of the Spanish versions of the AC7126/1 and AC7126/5 Rev B checklists once they pass ballot. (Due Date: 31-Jan-2016)
ACTION ITEM: John Pfeiffer will initiate updating of the Chinese versions of the AC7126/1 and AC7126/5 Rev B checklists once they pass ballot. (Due Date: 31-Jan-2016)
ACTION ITEM: Vincent Dutilh will initiate updating of the French versions of the AC7126/1 and AC7126/5 Rev B checklists once they pass ballot. (Due Date: 31-Jan-2016)
8.0 Reviewed Planning and Operations (P&O), ANd SSC – OPEN
Chuck Beargie provided a review of Tuesday evening’s Planning and Operations meeting.
· The Risk Mitigation process for failed audits has been updated. In particular, the root cause corrective action (RCCA) and response will in the future be handled by the Staff Engineers. The Task Group discussed the burden on Suppliers to respond to the RCCA that can distract from actually solving the issues, but had no suggestions.
· The P&O team reviewed the initial feedback from the Audit Effectiveness discussions/questionnaires. Some observations include:
o Auditors would benefit from access to Subscriber specifications
o Some Suppliers are perceived to be gaming aspects of the audits (e.g. steering job audits)
o Job trackers may be mandated to Task Groups by the NMC as a tool to drive audit breadth
o Stronger emphasis on the pre-audit could be valuable
o Subscriber pre-involvement to help steer job audit selection might reduce gaming
The NMC will consolidate and review the recommendations and likely provide mandates or direction to the Task Groups.
· A new proposal for balloting was discussed. The initial cycle will be shortened to 28 days, similar to the model Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) uses for Aerospace Material Specification (AMS) specifications.
Several Suppliers who had attended, provided a brief overview of the SSC meeting.
· There are a number of open positions for Supplier Task Group Representatives
· The SSC Contract Flow-Down Team is soliciting help from Task Groups regarding Contract Flow-Down. They are interested in specific examples of contract flow-down issues. The CMSP TG Subscribers did not feel this was a significant issue within the commodity.
Chairperson Chuck Beargie presented a short synopsis of Monday’s Auditor Training session for those who were not present.
9.0 Procedure Review – OPEN
The following Procedures were reviewed by Andy Statham, Staff Engineer:
· OP 1115 Delegation of Audit Report Reviewer – Apart from a few snide observations, there were no questions or discussion.
· OP 1109 Supplier Advisories – The Task Group discussed the scope of Supplier Advisories within the context of a failed audit. A Type F Advisory would be issued, but the Risk Mitigation process is separate – the status of the risk mitigation activity is not visible in the Supplier Advisory system.
· OP 1118 Audit Observers – No discussion
10.0 Open New Business Items – OPEN
The lack of a Vice Chairperson was raised by the Staff Engineer. Currently nobody in the Task Group is in a position to take this role on.
Supplier Question #1: Regarding AC7126 10.1, how many workstations/audits are required? Answer: The Supplier must have a procedure detailing the requirements for performing workstation audits. Lacking any customer requirements, the Supplier can set their own scope.
Supplier Question #2: Regarding AC7126 Section 13 – Is an operator allowed to modify Numerical Controll (NC) programs? If all the controlled parameters are manually input, the process could be considered a manual process to which the section does not apply. If any controlled process parameters are contained in the “program”, the section applies.
ACTION ITEM: Andy Statham will add an item to the RAIL to review the interpretation of AC7126 Section 13 during auditor training in Pittsburgh 2016. (Due Date: 31-Oct-2015)
Random Question #1: Are Suppliers required to notify Nadcap of “catastrophic events” such as fires? Answer: Reference PD1100 and OP1107 Section 4.3.2.1.
Suppliers were polled and indicated no issues with the current Checklists except:
· Apparent redundancy between some questions. Please provide feedback to the Task Group
· Interpretation of the section in AC7126 on NC program control in the context of grinding operations. Are NC processes more tightly controlled than manual operations? Much discussion ensued.
The Coatings Task Group forwarded an enquiry regarding the intent of several questions in the Grinding Checklist that CMSP developed for them. After Task Group discussion, Andy provided answers to the Coatings Staff Engineer via e-mail.
· One question relates to procedures for verifying the functionality of process monitoring systems. Answer: Refer to Customer requirements, but at present UTC Goodrich has no requirements for process monitoring during grinding.
· A second question relates to the meaning of “pairing” in the context of cutting tools and suppliers. Answer: “Pairing” refers to the combination of tool and tool supplier. If a given tool is manufactured by two different suppliers, the tools are not considered the same because they come from different pairings.
· Is the grinding process different depending on the nature of the high spots? Answer: Determining the high spot can be influenced by part geometry, but the grinding process is the same – the key is to not exceed the maximum approved infeed rate.
11.0 Checklist and Handbook – Proposed Changes - OPEN
Ballot comments for AC7126/1 Rev B were reviewed by the Task Group. All comments,but one (4.4.1 CAG clarification) were accepted as proposed and documented in eAuditNet.
A motion made by Jim Jensen and seconded by Vincent Dutilh to approve the ballot comments for AC7126/1 Rev B as amended and documented in eAuditNet passed.
Ballot comments for AC7126/5 Rev B were reviewed by the Task Group. All comments, but one (4.4.1 CAG clarification) were accepted as proposed and documented in eAuditNet.
A motion made by Jim Jensen and seconded by Sean Carvalho to approve the ballot comments for AC7126/5 Rev B as amended and documented in eAuditNet passed.
A motion made by John Pfeiffer and seconded by Vincent Dutilh to adjourn the open session at 16:51.
Job Tracker:
It is assumed that there will be a mandate from NMC to implement a job tracker to support enhanced audit effectiveness and the Task Group concurs that it may be a useful tool for CMSP. The Task Group reviewed a draft Job Tracker that had been created in 2011, but not implemented because it was not considered to add value at that time. Several updates were made to the original Job Tracker, to the eventual satisfaction of the members in attendance.
ACTION ITEM: Andy Statham will send the draft Job Tracker to the Auditors and Task Group members for final review. (Due Date: 31-Oct-2015)
Review of AC7126 (Base):
Several issues/opportunities have been raised related to the Base, so the Task Group chose to re-visit that document prior to continuing with the Slash Sheet revisions.
· Applicability of cutting tool questions to grinding-only operations
· Consolidation of questions, where appropriate
· Invoke Audit Tracker
· Prior DCS items
Tool Control
· Procedure questions were evaluated and consolidated. Reference draft AC7126 Rev C
· 7.1.6 – After much discussion as to the practicality of implementing pre-advisement of changes to purchased tools, it was decided that this should remain as a separate question with an “N/A” option added and with updated CAG that the question does not apply if there are no Customer requirements.