opening comments – open - performance … · web viewmajor revisions for procedure qualification,...

WELDING OCTOBER 2017

CONFIRMED

CONFIRMED MINUTESOCTOBER 23-25, 2017PITTSBURGH, PA. 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 23 to WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25

1.0 OPENING COMMENTS – OPEN

1.1 Call to Order / Quorum Check

The Welding (WLD) Task Group was called to order at 8.00 a.m., Monday 23-Oct-2017 by Steve Tooley.

Introductions were made and the roster circulated for completion by attendees.

Steve Tooley informed the Task Group that attendees must register in order for their names to appear in the minutes, and that name badges must be prominently displayed.

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

* Carlos Alfaro Eaton Aerospace Group* Oscar Andersson GKN Aerospace Sweden AB

Lenora Bennett BAE Systems* Roy Bollig Raytheon* Alexandre Bourgeois Bombardier* Joakim Carlsson GKN Aerospace Sweden AB* Saeed Cheema Textron Aviation* Craig Clasper Spirit AeroSystems* Gary Coleman The Boeing Company

Chris Davison Spirit AeroSystems* Susan Degenhart Lockheed Martin Corp.

Rodney Deming Parker Hannifin, Corporation, StratoflexAlexander Diskin IAI - Israel Aerospace IndustriesChristian Filion Gulfstream Aerospace Corp.

* Robert Fletcher BAE Systems - MAISteven Garner Eaton Aerospace

* Larry Hamanishi The Boeing Company* Brian Harvey Gulfstream Aerospace Corp.* Les Hellemann GE Aviation Secretary* Rodney Holt Triumph Group* Jerry Hulin GKN Aerospace Filton* Michael Irvin The Boeing Company

Alex Joy GKN Aerospace - Filton* George Kaniamos Lockheed Martin Corp.* Ralph Kropp MTU Aero Engines AG* Holger Krueger Airbus Commercial Aircraft Vice Chairperson* Peter Lang Pratt & Whitney* Mario Leclerc Bombardier


CONFIRMED

* Joe Lundin UTC Aerospace (Goodrich)* Scott Maitland UTC Aerospace (Goodrich)

Tim Nance Rockwell Collins* Eric Przybylowicz Honeywell Aerospace

Rick Skebo Parker Hannifin* Steve Tooley Rolls-Royce Chairperson* Andrew Toth Rolls-Royce

Stanley Trull Honeywell Aerospace* Akie Uchida Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

Other Members/Participants Present (* Indicates Voting Member)

NAME COMPANY NAME

* James Ahlemeyer DucommunMissy Allen PAS Technologies

* Joe Beauchemin Jr LAI InternationalMark Blevins Fluid Conditioning Products, Inc

* Graham Buswell SPS Aerostructures LtdAracely Cruz Kreisler ManufacturingNatalie Cullen Kreisler ManufacturingDavid Emahiser GKN AerospaceRichard Freeman TWI LtdSara Gertz Magellan AerospaceMasato Katagiri MHI AELOlesia Khatizova Shimadzu Europe Gmbh

* Chris Kielb Advance WeldingRichard Kline X-Ray IndustriesKevin Klingelhafer Meyer Tool, Inc.Praveen Krottapalli Esterline, Leach International

* Grant Lilley Meyer Tool, Inc* Angelo Monzo Barnes Aerospace Lansing Division

Bob Olveson VeridamChris Reed DucommunJim Ringer Tech Met IncBeth Robison DucommunPeter Rowe Doncasters GroupDavid Simon Barnes Aerospace

* Jackie Sternot PAKO, Inc* Gigi Streeter Barnes Aerospace

Junji Tsuji IHI corporationJim Tuminello Tech Met IncDr. Frank Walther Tu DortmundUniversity

* Christopher Webb PCC Structurals Inc.* Jack Winteringham Arconic Power and Propulsion

PRI / SAE Staff Present

Gabriel KustraIan Simpson

1.2 Safety Information – OPEN

The participants were notified of the meeting safety requirements.

1.3 Review Code of Ethics (Ref: Attendees’ Guide) and Meeting Conduct – OPEN

The Code of Ethics and Meeting Conduct policies were reviewed.


CONFIRMED

1.4 Present the Antitrust Video – OPEN

The Antitrust policy video was shown.

1.5 Review Agenda – OPEN

Ian Simpson reviewed the agenda for the meeting. New business items were identified for inclusion in section 6.0 (closed meeting) and section 23.0 (open meeting).

1.6 Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes – OPEN

Motion made by Michael Irvin and seconded by Saeed Cheema to accept the June 2017 Nadcap meeting minutes. Motion passed.

1.7 Rolling Action Item List (RAIL) Review – OPEN

The RAIL was reviewed by Ian Simpson. Many of the action items are closed or are included in this meeting for further discussion. There are however 2 action items with due dates prior to this meeting that remain outstanding:

308 – Subscribers to provide the details of Suppliers that they intend to have audited to the new Additive Manufacturing checklist. Some responses have been received, but this remains outstanding for the majority of Subscribers.

312 – North America Subscribers to determine if they are able to provide hands-on training to auditors on Additive Manufacturing.

For specific details, please see the current WLD Rolling Action Item List posted at www.eAuditNet.com, under Public Documents.

1.8 Staff Engineer Communiqué – OPEN

Ian Simpson presented a Nadcap Communiqué to the Task Group.

1.8.1 Auditor Conference was held the weekend prior to the meeting.

1.8.2 The next Nadcap Task Group meeting will be in Madrid, Spain.

1.8.3 A Summary of changes made to General Operating procedures since the last Task Group meeting was presented.

OP 1103 (Definitions) – Revised 30-Aug-2017. Modification to Affirmation ballot definition; added definitions for Approval ballot, Can, Day, Facility, May, Provisional Subscriber, Roster, Shall, Should, Validation; removed definitions of Incident Report, Scope Extension, Spot Audit.

OP 1104 (Audit Scheduling) – Revised 25-Aug-2017. Added allowance to suspend or withdraw accreditation instead of requiring failure when a Supplier does not provide a valid Quality System Certificate; allowance to use exiting checklist revision even though the effectivity date of a new revision has commenced when PRI reschedules; Annex A (Subscriber accreditation option B) completely re-written; removed referenced documents; replaced ‘checklist’ with ‘audit criteria’; changed job title ‘CSR’ to ‘Coordinator’.

OP 1105 (Audit Process) - Revised 23-Aug-2017. Added requirement for self-audit to be uploaded to eAuditNet; exception for uploading 30 days prior (i.e. audit re-scheduled late causing a newer revision of checklist to be required); removed referenced documents.

OP 1123 (Supplier Support Committee) - Revised 16-Jun-2017. Changed review of annual objectives from quarterly to 3 times per year; corrected numbering.

OP 1124 (Allegation Handling and Resolution). Revised 22-Aug-2017. Complete re-write. PRI responsible for investigation and to notify the appropriate body if found valid; Nadcap body to review the allegation once informed.


CONFIRMED

1.8.4 A Summary of changes made to the WLD specific Operating procedures since the last Task Group meeting was presented.

OP 1114 App WLD (WLD specific criteria for Task Group operation). Changes include paragraph alignment to coincide with changes to OP 1114; removal of redundant items on checklist and handbook maintenance; partial removal of delegation requirements due to redundancy.

OP 1114 App WLD and OP 1116 App WLD (WLD specific criteria for Auditor Staffing) were editorially revised per procedure checklist template to remove the referenced documents table and include specific reference to these in the body of the procedure.

2.0 AUDITOR CONFERENCE – CLOSED

The Auditor Conference was conducted at the weekend prior to this meeting, 21-22 October 2017. The Task Group reviewed content and agreed that it had been an effective training session, with good feedback and questions from the auditors. Ian Simpson noted that the feedback he had received from the auditors was positive.

The Task Group was reminded that 2018 will be the first year that the Auditor Conference will be split: June meeting for European and Asian auditors; October meeting for US Auditors. The conference will take this format every other year; hence all even years will take this format. It was also noted that only one day is being allocated, hence all Task Group training will need to be condensed into 8 hours.

From 2019 and odd years thereafter, the Auditor Conference will be combined for all sector auditors and will be in held in October. With the NMC at large meeting being moved permanently to Thursday morning, and the Task Group requiring a 3-day meeting, there is the possibility of not having any meetings on Sunday or Monday. Another option is to start the Task Group meeting on Monday those years, and run through until lunch on Thursday. The Subscribers agreed that the latter would be the best option, and this was therefore added to item 23.0 to discuss in an open meeting.

Based on the review of this year’s conference, items identified by the auditors, previously identified training items, the review of Auditor Consistency per OP 1117, and the reduced time available, the following recommendations were made for next year’s Auditor Conference:

Subscribers to perform specific training on their requirements. Holger Krueger, Jerry Hulin, George Kaniamos, Saeed Cheema, and Bob Fletcher all stated that they would be interested in providing training next year. Ian Simpson also noted that Dag Lindland had requested that he give the training for Pratt and Whitney that had to be deferred at this conference.

Question and Answer session. AWS / ISO update, including update on Additive Manufacturing from the relevant

standards committees for this process (e.g. AWS D20). This would also likely include resistance welding to AWS D17.2 as the intention is for this specification to be revised in early 2018.

Opportunity for Auditor feedback on checklist content etc. Training items resulting from OP1117 analysis. Sanitized data from Supplier feedback. Provision for Face to face meetings with Auditors for annual reviews. Monday afternoon.

Note will require annual auditor reviews (at least of European and Asian auditors to be completed by end May 2018).

Provision for NMC Audit Effectiveness. Handbook training – use of during audit and as part of audit preparation.


CONFIRMED

Preparation for the audit and introduction at the start of the audit (include items such as safety issues, observers).

Possible role play about auditors remaining calm. NCR writing. Revision to AC7110/5 for orbital tube weld assessment.

The timeframe for finalizing the agenda and training material development will also be vastly reduced as all information will need to be ready for the June 2018 meeting.

Ian Simpson was actioned to draft an agenda for the 2018 auditor conferences. Task Group members were reminded that this will need to be finalized at the February 2018 Task Group meeting.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to draft an agenda for the 2018 Auditor Conferences and present at the February 2018 meeting for finalization. (Due Date: 20-Feb-2018)

3.0 AUDITOR EFFECTIVENESS – CLOSED

3.1 Review of OP 1117

The Auditor Consistency procedure (OP 1117) requires the Task Group to review several items as part of the process to monitor and ensure consistency among its Auditors.

The following items were discussed:

3.1.1 Annual Review of Auditors

As previously agreed all auditor annual reviews were completed by the Staff Engineers, reviewed, and agreed by the Task Group Chair, and then sent to all auditors in September 2017. Discussions, where necessary, were conducted with a Staff Engineer. All auditors were given the opportunity to have a face-to face-discussion with a member of the WLD Task Group. No requests for discussions were received.

All completed evaluations have been posted in the Task Group private forum in eAuditNet.

The Task Group agreed that this methodology was how they wished to proceed with annual auditor evaluations in subsequent years.

The Staff Engineer presented a revised format for the annual reviews. The content is very similar to what this Task Group has used in the last several years, and has been developed by PRI to aid consistency among all commodities. This was reviewed by the Task Group. The format was agreed except that it includes an item with respect to it stating NCRs per audit. The Task Group stated that this would give the appearance of there being an NCR quota and requested that this item be removed for welding auditor evaluations. It was also noted that the files in future years may not be filed in the private forum currently used by the Task Group.

There was one comment by an auditor on this year’s reviews. This requested that editorial checklist revisions be issued at least 21 days of them becoming effective. This will ensure the auditor only downloads the revised checklist. The Staff Engineer has already addressed this item within PRI.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to remove the NCRs per audit criterion from the new Annual Auditor evaluation form prior to being used for 2018 WLD auditor evaluations. (Due Date: 31-May-2018)


CONFIRMED

3.1.2 Auditor Performance Data Set Charts

The current Auditor performance data set charts (Non Conformance Reports (NCRs)) per audit day, NCRs per checklist paragraph, red-line, and Auditor Variation) were reviewed by the Task Group.

Also, the NCR per paragraph chart data has been copied onto the modified spreadsheet created by Mario Leclerc was reviewed. At the request of the Task Group, Mario has added a further filter to enable the Task Group to select minor and Major NCRs in their analysis. Mario demonstrated the functionality to the Task Group. Several Task Group members noted that they currently use this as the predominant analysis tool when they are looking at auditor data. The Task Group again commented that this is by far the best method of analyzing auditor effectiveness and suggested that Ian Simpson present this to the other commodities at an SE SWAT meeting, and assuming agreement on its suitability then forward to NMC for consideration as an alternative analysis tool in OP 1117.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to present the auditor consistency tool developed by Mario Leclerc at an SE SWAT meeting to establish if this can be utilized by all commodities as an alternative to the currently required charts in OP 1117. (Due Date: 20-Feb-2018)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to post auditor effectiveness charts in the Task Group Work Area in eAuditNet. (Due Date: 15-Nov-2017)

The Task Group did not identify any improvements that would be required in Task Group documentation (e.g. checklists or handbooks) as a direct result of this analysis.

3.1.3 Auditor Observation Plan

The observation plan for 2017 was developed at the October 2016 Task Group meeting using the prioritization tool that the Task Group has developed. The plan was subsequently modified at both the February and June 2017 meetings to reflect changes based on new information received. As of the June 2017 meeting there were 6 auditors defined as high risk who required observation. To date 5 of these have been observed and the other 1 has an observation planned. Hence the Task Group expects to have met the plan for this item by year end.

At the June 2017 meeting there were 2 new auditors on the plan. Two new auditors have since been hired. None of these new auditors have been observed; one is planned to be observed by year end. It should be noted that the number of audits conducted by the 4 new auditors is very low. The Task Group decided that the new auditors not yet observed will be prioritized in 2018. Ian Simpson explained that per OP 1117, the Task Group will however need to notify NMC if they fail to meet their 2017 observation plan. An identified new auditor on the plan with no planned observation was noted as an auditor auditing in the Asia region. The Task Group reviewed his audits to year end and Eaton noted that they would try and observe if possible. Note that 2 of the new hires are very recent and as such the Task Group believes that they should only be accountable for the 2 new auditors who were hired earlier in 2017. This declaration will be on the Annual NMC report (Ref item 3.1.8).

Task Group members were reminded that to request an observation, they can do this directly in eAuditNet, providing that the audit is at least 14 days in advance of the request. If the audit they wish to observe is scheduled less than 14 days away, then a request to PRI Scheduling Department is required.

See section 3.1.6 for further discussion on the metric associated with audit observations.

The Task Group used the prioritization tool to establish those auditors for observation in 2018. Based on the scoring, there are 5 auditors identified as high risk, and a possible further 8 new auditors who will need to be observed. (This is dependent on all existing trainee auditors being successful, and also if any new auditors are successfully observed in 2017). Any further new


CONFIRMED

auditors will be added for observation as they are hired. The plan currently includes one auditor, not yet observed this year, whose 2017 observation results need to be assessed before the Task Group knows definitely if an observation in 2018 will be required. The plan will be reviewed again at the February 2018 meeting once all 2017 observations have been completed.

It was noted that there are a number of auditors who are not high risk, but have not been observed for a number of years. These auditors will be defined as ‘Routine’ in the Observation plan and should take precedence to those with no annotation.

The Observation plan needs to be revised based on the prioritization tool data. The Staff Engineer was actioned to do this.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to update the Observation plan to incorporate the prioritization scorecard information and post in the Task Group work forum. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

3.1.4 Observation Reports

The Task Group reviewed 8 observations covering 5 auditors. Four of the auditors observed were identified for observation.

With the exception of the following comments, these reviews were deemed acceptable by the Observers.

One report highlighted items for the auditor to improve. As this information was provided prior to the annual auditor reviews, this information has already been provided to this auditor.

Another two observations were submitted after the annual reports and identified a few items for the auditors to improve. These reports cited items such as program and personnel introduction at the start of the audit, safety requirements, performing weld analysis without permission from the supplier, and lack of formal daily debrief information. The Staff Engineer was actioned to contact these auditors with this information. It should be noted that one of these observations had scored the auditor such that required the Staff Engineer to contact that auditor. Hence, some of this information has already been relayed to this auditor. This discussion provided additional information which the Staff Engineer was actioned to provide to this auditor.

One report highlighted the need for training on when a Subscriber’s requirements should be included via the supplemental checklists. The Task Group has however already developed a User number flowchart and training in this was given at the Auditor Conference. The User flowchart, which defines the applicability of ‘U’ (Subscriber specific requirements) numbers in the supplemental checklists, is available in the Handbook for scope completion which is located in eAuditNet via Resources / Documents / Public Documents / Welding / Handbooks and Guides.

The reports identified some items that the Task Group felt would be beneficial to all auditors, and as such additional items were added for items to be included in the Auditor Conference, item 2.0

The Staff Engineer presented Auditor Observer Training, particularly focusing on procedural requirements for observations, and how to handle proprietary information. This was based on a request from the Board of Directors. The presentation is available in eAuditNet via Public Documents / General Documents.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to provide feedback to two auditors based on Observation reports. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

3.1.5 Review of Supplier Feedback

Steve Tooley and Ian Simpson reviewed the Supplier feedback information and provided a summary to the Task Group. It was noted that auditor specific items and generic items that all auditors would benefit from had already been included in auditor annual evaluations and the Auditor Conference respectively.


CONFIRMED

No other additional actions were required by the Task Group.

The next supplier review data will be available shortly after 31-Dec-2017. Steve Tooley and Ian Simpson agreed to review and provide a summary at the February 2018 Task Group meeting.

ACTION ITEM: Steve Tooley and Ian Simpson to review the supplier feedback data and present to the Task Group at the February 2017 meeting. (Due Date: 20-Feb-2018)

3.1.6 Review Dashboard

The dashboard metrics, as required by OP 1117, were reviewed.

Three of the required metrics are green, and one is yellow.

The yellow metric is for the number of Observations completed. To be green for this metric at least 75% of planned observation must have been completed by this Task Group meeting. The metric is red if less than 60% have been performed. At this time, 5 of 8 have been performed meaning the metric is yellow.

It was also noted that we now have 4 new auditors, however 2 of these have been hired very recently. Per item 3.1.3, the Task Group does not consider they should be accountable for the observations of these newer auditors this year.

A brief discussion ensued about the yellow metric and the following comments made:

Of the 6 risk auditors 5 have been observed and the other has an observation planned by the end of the year.

For the 2 new auditors, hired prior to mid-2017, one has an observation planned by the end of the year end. Subscribers were asked if they would have the ability to observe the outstanding new auditor. As this auditor is in the Asia region, although a possibility exists, there was no commitment that this observation could be completed by year end.

If the second new auditor cannot be reviewed by year end, the Task Group will miss the plan by one observation.

Status of plan will be included in the NMC Annual Report (ref 3.1.8), whereby NMC will be notified of the Task Group’s status compared to plan.

ACTION ITEM: Subscriber Voting Members to review Observation plan for 2017 and 2018 and establish if they are able to observe audits. (Due Date: 31-Dec-2017)

3.1.7 Identify Training Needs for Auditors

The review of data defined here, and also from section 2.0, has resulted in a number of training items at the 2017 Auditor Conference. The Task Group has already started to discuss items that are required for the 2018 Auditor Conferences.

3.1.8 NMC Annual Report

The Task Group drafted the Annual NMC review and actioned Steve Tooley to submit this to the NMC. It was noted that the report should be revised to reflect the end of year Observation status before it is submitted. Steve Tooley agreed to revise as necessary and then submit to NMC.

If the new Asian based auditor cannot be observed by the end of 2017, the report will show the Task Group failed to observe one of the new auditors they planned to observe. The report will serve as notification to the NMC on this item.

ACTION ITEM: Steve Tooley to submit WLD’s annual Auditor Effectiveness report to the NMC. (Due Date: 15-Jan-2018)

3.1.9 Actions required by NMC Audit Effectiveness Team


CONFIRMED

There have been no new additional requests from the NMC Audit Effectiveness team specific to auditors at this time. (There are items requiring discussion in the open meeting – see item 21.0).

3.1.10 OP 1117 items not requiring review at this meeting

There are a number of items that OP 1117 requires the Task Group to review on a periodic basis. All of the items were reviewed at the February 2017 Task Group meeting; hence the following items were briefly discussed:

Audit Report Reviewer feedback Communication plan Welding specific appendix to the Observer form Welding specific training Proficiency testing

It was confirmed that none of these items require change at this time. Full review of these will occur at the February 2018 meeting.

3.2 Auditor Status

The Staff Engineer gave an update of new auditor candidates and the status of process restriction removals for current auditors. It was noted that as more and more Suppliers define their audits as containing ITAR / EAR material, the need for unrestricted auditors is becoming more important. The Task Group has hired several auditors this year and is continuing to train new candidates.

Many of the new auditors have many process restrictions imposed, which could pose scheduling difficulties in the future, and as such the Task Group was asked what they would require in order for process restrictions to be removed. The Task Group does not wish to deviate from the process defined in OP 1116 Appendix WLD for removing restrictions, but did agree to allowing auditors to ‘buddy-up’ with training auditors, in order to gain experience prior to ensuing on the formal process restriction process. The Task Group also noted that some theoretical training could be gained via the eQuaLearn program.

Ian Simpson stated that he would determine which auditors were best suited for further training and have them scheduled for theoretical and practical training as appropriate.

Steve Tooley reiterated the need for Task Group participation when auditor interviews are scheduled.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to establish suitable training audits to allow auditors to gain experience in additional welding methods, prior to the formal process restriction being conducted. This should also include providing theoretical training where available. (Due Date: 20-Feb-2018)

4.0 SUPPLIER ADVISORIES – CLOSED

4.1 Review of Advisories since June 2017 Nadcap Meeting.

Four Supplier Advisories have been issued by the WLD Task Group since the June 2017 Task Group meeting, #3013, #3018, #3031 and #3042. These were reviewed by the Task Group.

Note that advisories #3018 and #3042 have subsequently been retracted.

Chemical Processing (CP) issued a Type C advisory, #3019. OP 1109 (Supplier Advisories) requires other commodities to assess if the accreditations they have granted should be suspended or withdrawn as a result of the Type C advisory. The Subscriber Voting Members were notified of the Type C being issued. Subsequently, notifications that the Supplier was appealing, and ultimately that CP had retracted the advisory were made. Based on the advisory retraction, the Task Group agreed that no further actions are required.


CONFIRMED

Four Supplier Advisories were issued by other commodities that could have an effect on the WLD accreditations. These advisories, #3030, #3038, #3039 and #3041 were reviewed. No additional actions were identified.

4.2 Review of Subscriber Advisories.

No Subscriber Advisories were brought up for discussion by the Task Group.

5.0 STAFF ENGINEER DELEGATION – CLOSED

5.1 Review of Staff Engineer Delegation

The Staff Engineer reviewed data for Audit Report Reviewers using delegation oversight form t-frm-07, which includes percentage oversight by the Task Group, percentage of NCRs concurred with by the Task Group, minimum number of audits per year, and other items pertaining to audit completeness. All requirements of OP 1115 were met for the delegated Audit Report Reviewers and the following motions were made:

Motion made by Saeed Cheema and seconded by Bob Fletcher to maintain Ian Simpson’s delegation. Motion Passed.

Motion made by Saeed Cheema and seconded by Bob Fletcher to maintain Gabe Kustra’s delegation. Motion Passed.

Motion made by Saeed Cheema and seconded by Bob Fletcher to maintain Mike Gutridge’s delegation. Motion Passed.

Motion made by Saeed Cheema and seconded by Bob Fletcher to maintain Wayne Canary’s delegation. Motion Passed.

6.0 NEW BUSINESS – CLOSED

6.1 During the hearing of appeal 2017-035, the appeal team suggested that Subscriber Voting Members be reminded of the expectations when voting on a failure ballots. The Staff Engineer therefore re-iterated the requirements of OP 1110 and further noted some key items that reviewers should address before casting their vote.

Subsequent discussion ensued about what evidence is required when a customer notification is required. One view is that provided the supplier simply provides evidence of notification that should be sufficient to allow NCR closure, while another view is that there should at least be evidence of receipt of the notification. After some discussion the following motion was made:

Michael Irvin made a motion to close an NCR when notification has been made to the customer only. Confirmation of notification receipt by customer is not required to be able to close the NCR. Motion was not seconded.

Subsequently the Task Group agreed that they require evidence of notification receipt in these instances.

Michael Irvin also noted that when a specific process is not mandated by a Subscriber and an NCR is found on their hardware, the NCR should be written in a generic manner not specifically citing the Subscriber. Staff Engineers agreed to make any changes as necessary when these situations occur in the future.

7.0 REVIEW MEMBERSHIP STATUS – OPEN

7.1 Confirm Any New Voting Member Applications


CONFIRMED

The following requests for additions or changes to voting membership were received and confirmed by the Task Group Chairperson pending verification of PD 1100 requirements. The Nadcap Membership form, m-frm-01, were completed as necessary.

Subscriber Voting Member: UVM Supplier Voting Member: SVM Alternate: ALT Task Group Chairperson: CHR Vice Chairperson: VCH Secretary: SEC

First Name

Surname Company Position:

(new / updated role)

Meetings Attended(Month/Year)

Alexandre Bourgeois Bombardier New UVM Oct 2016 Oct 2017

George Kaniamos Lockheed Martin

Moved from ALT/UVM to UVM

Oct 2015 Oct 2016

The change in voting status for Lockheed Martin is due to Susan Degenhart changing her position within the company.

The change in voting status for Bombardier is due to Mario Leclerc changing his position within the company.

Russ Cole (Northrop Grumman NCR representative) confirmed that Gary Winters had retired from Northrop Grumman.

PRI will remove voting privileges of Gary Winters, Susan Degenhart, and Mario Leclerc.

ACTION ITEM: PRI to remove voting status of Gary Winters, Susan Degenhart, and Mario Leclerc. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: PRI to make changes to Subscriber Voting status as noted in the table within the minutes. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

Ian Simpson notified the Task Group that the following people had left their positions and that their voting status had already been removed

Brandon Beasley – Parker Aerospace Osawonuyi (Scott) Agbonkonkon – Parker Aerospace

7.2 Review Compliance with Voting Requirements of Present Voting Members

The compliance to voting requirements per PD 1100 was reviewed.

There were no delinquencies with respect to attendance.

The review identified that Gulfstream and Parker Aerospace have both missed the last 2 consecutive letter ballots. PD 1100 requirements have not therefore been met in order to retain membership.


CONFIRMED

Parker Aerospace has lost membership by default as both their UVM and ALT/UVM have left the company. Out of courtesy Steve Tooley stated he would notify Parker’s NMC representative that they do not have any voting status at this time.

Brian Harvey of Gulfstream apologized for missing the last 2 letter ballots and provided commitment to participate on future ballots. As such Steve Tooley agreed to maintain his voting status.

ACTION ITEM: Steve Tooley to notify Parker Aerospace NMC representative that they do not have voting status on the WLD Task Group as a result of both Task Group representatives leaving Parker and that 2 consecutive letter ballots were missed. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

7.3 New Supplier Representatives for Nadcap Management Council (NMC) and Supplier Support Committee (SSC).

At the June 2017 meeting, the Task Group were informed that Mike Schleckman had resigned from the Task Group, and that as Mike represented the Task Group at both NMC and SSC that both of these positions were available for Supplier members. All SVMs were asked to consider if they could take either of these roles and that a decision would be made by the Task Group at this meeting.

Christopher Webb stated he would be available to represent the Task Group at NMC level. No other SVM requested to be considered for this position.

Motion made by Bob Fletcher and seconded by Michael Irvin to approve Christopher Webb to become NMC SVM representing WLD. Motion Passed.

This appointment has to be agreed by the NMC Chair and hence Ian Simpson was actioned to notify the NMC Secretary.

At this time no Suppliers stated they would be available to represent the Task Group at SSC level. This position therefore remains open and will be discussed again at the February 2018 meeting.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to notify the NMC Secretary that Christopher Webb has been approved by the WLD Task Group to represent them at NMC level in order for him to be officially recognized by the NMC Chair for this position. (Due Date: 25-Oct-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to add an agenda item for the February 2018 Task Group meeting to discuss appointment of a SSC representative for the WLD Task group. (Due Date: 15-Nov-2017)

8.0 SUPPLIER SUPPORT COMMITTEE (SSC) REPORT – OPEN

8.1 In the absence of a SSC representative, Ian Simpson presented the SSC report. The report gave information on the SSC role, current activities, the mentoring program, Business Development Tool, and SSC initiatives and events. The SSC provides an avenue for Suppliers to have input and give feedback to the Nadcap program, and provides answers and support for Suppliers who have questions and problems.

The SSC sponsored events at this meeting include keys to a successful audit, eAuditNet supplier tutorial, how to become a Supplier Voting Member (SVM), on-line resources for suppliers, Subscriber update (Honeywell), and how to be compliant for Export Control.

The SSC launched the 2017 Supplier survey. Suppliers are encouraged to take the survey and were able to complete at the meeting. This is an important item as it allows the SSC Leadership Team to identify areas they can work on to help suppliers going forward.

An Auditee Communication kit is now sent to all auditees when an audit is scheduled.


CONFIRMED

9.0 NMC METRICS – OPEN

9.1 Ian Simpson reviewed the NMC metrics, including:

Accreditations Issued/Lapsed, Eligible Merit, On-Time Certification, Staff Cycle Time Initial, Staff Cycle Time Reaccreditation, Task Group Cycle Time Initial, Task Group Cycle Time Reaccreditation, Supplier Cycle Time Initial, Supplier Cycle Time Reaccreditation. All metric charts for the period ending 30-Sepr-17 were green, except Task Group Cycle Time for Reaccreditation, which was yellow. This non-green metric has been previously discussed and the Task Group chose to take no further action.

The Staff Engineer noted that the monthly metrics (May-2017, Jun-2017, Jul-2017, Aug-2017 and Sep-2017) since the last Task Group meeting were reviewed and no red metrics have occurred in this period. The May 2017 metrics were included in this review as they were not available for review at the June 2017 meeting.

10.0 SPECIFICATION CHANGES – OPEN

10.1 Gary Coleman provided an update on the status of American Welding Society (AWS) specifications.

AWS D17.1 – The 2017 revision has been issued. Major revisions for procedure qualification, visual acuity, and welder qualification for tack welding.

AWS D17.2 – A draft has been balloted through TAC with no negative comments. Plan to resolve all comments at the November 2017 AWS meeting, and then resubmit for approval. Expected completion is early 2018. The major revision items are visual acuity testing and personnel training (operators performing testing, metallographic evaluation and visual inspection).

AWS D17.3 - 3rd edition is being worked on. Clause 6.5 is being revised, with sub-clauses being moved and re-numbered, a new clause for repair and rework is being added, revision to qualification limits, establish residual oxide defect levels, exit hole repair, vision acuity, NDT requirements.

The next AWS D17 Committee meeting will be 6-9 Nov 2017 at the FABTECH meeting in Chicago, IL USA.

Holger Krueger presented updates for ISO/TC44/SC14 (Welding in Aerospace) and ISO/TC261/JWG5 (Additive Manufacturing (AM) in Aerospace), which both met at Lockheed Martin’s Littleton facility, 17-19 October 2017.

The following items were noted for ISO/TC44/SC14

ISO 19828 (Visual Inspection Requirements). Published in May 2017.

ISO 24394 (Welder and welding operator qualification test). Periodic review that includes; revision to table that depicts welding positions; additional welding positions introduced; new material group for nickel added; welding operator qualification now specific to welding process and machine type and removed material type and thickness; eyesight correction to be defined in the qualification certificate; new rule for structural welding of castings; new options for eyesight test introduced. The final draft is to be sent on a 3 month ballot.

ISO 11745 (Brazer and brazing operator qualification). Change to eyesight requirement to allow alternative tests. Published in April 2015.

Eyesight requirements for welders, brazers, operators and inspectors. Agreed to 3 alternatives that will be incorporated into next revisions of all specifications.


CONFIRMED

ISO 16338 (Resistance spot and seam welding). Periodic review, including correction for shear force values and clarification of clear annulus size, completed and released January 2017.

ISO 17533 (Welding information on design documents). No changes since issue in 2015.

ISO 17927 (Fusion welding of metallic components in aerospace). Split into 2 parts; Process requirements and acceptance requirements. Process requirements passed initial ballot and are being submitted on a Committee Draft. Acceptance requirements likely to follow basis of AWS D17.1.

Additive Manufacturing (AM). New working group TC 44 SC14 WG 1 convened by Ralph Kropp. Agreed to form a new joint working group. (See below for further details).

Brazing. A standard for brazing of metallic components in aerospace will be the next project for the sub-committee.

Potential new topics include: electron beam welding, laser beam welding, linear and orbital friction welding. Also, potential for a further Additive Manufacturing derivative (wire and powder deposition), but will be a new joint working group.

The following items were noted for ISO/TC44/SC14WG1

A new Joint Working Group was formed, ISO/TC 261 / ASTM F42. The terms of cooperation were agreed at the February 2017 meeting. The newly formed Joint Working Group, ISO/TC261/JWG5 had its first meeting in October 2017. Requests for experts in this process have been made.

The working group plan to work on 3 items; Acceptance testing of powder-bed fusion AM machines for metallic materials for aerospace; Qualification of operators for AM equipment used in aerospace, and Process specification for direct energy deposition.

This meeting discussed preparation for a draft on acceptance of powder bed fusion AM machines for metallic materials for aerospace; discussed a translation of DIN 35224 which was a German standard on this topic; discussions on the measurement of laser beam characteristics.

The next ISO Committee meetings are planned for 13-15 February 2018 at SAFRAN Helicopter Engines in Bordes (near Pau), France. The Welding Group will meet 13-Feb-2017 and the AM Committee will meet 14/15-Feb-2018.

Gary Coleman and Holger Krueger gave permission for the AWS and ISO Committee updates to be posted in eAuditNet. This will be added to the Public Documents section for Welding (Resources / Documents / Public Documents / Welding / Data Folder).

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to post the AWS and ISO Committee update presentations in eAuditNet. (Due Date: 30-Nov-17)

11.0 DISPOSITION OF OP 1114 APPENDIX WLD BALLOT COMMENTS – OPEN

The Task Group reviewed OP 1114 Appendix WLD at the June 2017 meeting, and it was subsequently balloted to the Task Group. One comment was made by Stan Revers but subsequently withdrawn prior to the ballot end date. As there were no items for resolution, the procedure was subsequently balloted to NMC. No ballot comments were received and hence the procedure was approved and issued.

Provision was made to allow time for ballot resolution however based on the above that it no longer required.


CONFIRMED

12.0 DISPOSITION OF OP 1116 APPENDIX WLD BALLOT COMMENTS – OPEN

At the June 2017 Task Group meeting, the Task Group reviewed and provided revisions for this procedure. It was also noted that the higher level document was in the process of being balloted and as such the Staff Engineer directed to incorporate required changes in the appendix once OP 1116 was issued. OP 1116 has however not yet been approved. The Task Group discussed if the changes previously agreed should be balloted or if it is still prudent to wait for OP 1116 to be issued first and the appendix revised to align with the new higher level document. The Task Group decided to ballot this draft now, recognizing that we will need to revise again once the higher level procedure is revised.

There was some further discussion about the proposed deletion of the paragraph that allows Supplier participation in Auditor Candidate interviews. At the June 2017 Task Group meeting, a vote was passed to only allow Subscribers to participate in Auditor Interviews. Some Supplier Voting members requested that this item be brought back for further discussion. The Task Group decided to proceed with the deletion of this paragraph noting that it would be possible to get Subscriber members to allow participation of Suppliers on a case-by-case basis, if required. Any person who does not believe this is an acceptable approach was requested to state this in the formal ballot so that the Task Group can disposition formally.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to ballot OP 1116 Appendix WLD to the Task Group. (Due Date: 31-Dec-2017).

13.0 REVIEW OF TERMS AND DEFINITIONS – OPEN

At the June 2017 Task Group meeting, a sub-team of Dag Lindland and Holger Krueger was established to review the Task Group’s Terms and Definitions document, recognizing that it had been several years since it was last reviewed. A minor revision was proposed by the sub-team, (linear misalignment), which was agreed. The sub-team also suggested that the Task Group discuss mismatch. No change was made but reference to AWS A3.0 was added. Addition of where standard definitions can be obtained was also added, i.e. AWS A3.0 and ISO 6520 for welding, and ISO/ASTM 52900 for Additive Manufacturing. The Staff Engineer was actioned to replace the existing document with the new revision.

This will be posted in eAuditNet at Resources / Documents / Public Documents / Welding / Supplier Information.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to post the revised Terms and Definitions document in eAuditNet. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017).

14.0 AUDITOR ADVISORIES – OPEN

14.1 One Welding Auditor Advisory has been issued since the June 2017 Nadcap Meeting:

WLD-17-006 – Oxidized filler wires, revised procedure

The Task Group was reminded that open advisories are posted in eAuditNet (Resources / Documents / Public Documents / Welding / Auditor Advisories).

15.0 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURE – OPEN

15.1 Richard Freeman gave an update on the status of Additive Manufacturing (AM).

At this time 3 accreditations to AC7110/14 have been issued. Airbus again confirmed it has mandated this process. No other Subscribers have yet mandated.

There has been an open action item since February 2016 for Subscribers to provide details of Suppliers that they would wish to be audited, mandates that are likely to be made and timescales for audits. To date, there has been very little information provided by Subscribers in terms of


CONFIRMED

potential mandates and the number of Suppliers likely to require an audit. From the information provided, the total number of Suppliers identified as likely requiring an audit is approximately ten. It was reiterated that without this information, we do not know if any further auditors are required or when we need them to be qualified by.

At the June 2017 meeting, the original sub-team, with some new additional members, was reconvened to review proposed revision items to the AM checklist. The sub-team provided a draft checklist for review by the Task Group. At this meeting, Richard Freeman presented the sub-team recommendations for the outstanding comments. Some minor revisions were suggested which the sub-team agreed to incorporate and then return to PRI for ballot.

ACTION ITEM: Richard Freemen to incorporate Task Group suggestions into AC7110/14 draft checklist and submit to PRI for formal ballot. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to ballot AC7110/14 to the WLD Task Group. (Due Date: 31-Dec-2017)

At the June 2017 meeting, the Task Group discussed how they would qualify further auditors for this process. Richard Freeman has previously stated that there is a facility in the US who would be willing to provide practical training for auditors; however, they only have laser equipment. Ian Simpson was therefore asked to solicit feedback from an existing qualified AM auditor if training specific to laser would be sufficient to allow qualification in both laser and electron beam equipment. The auditor stated that provided the theoretical training provided gave the details of the process, and the auditor was familiar with electron beam welding, then practical training in laser AM should be sufficient to allow the auditor to be qualified for the entire scope of AC7110/14 (i.e. laser and electron beam equipment). On this basis the Task Group agreed to this approach. Ian Simpson and Richard Freeman agreed to work on solutions to provide theoretical training and hands-on practical training for further auditors to become qualified to audit AC7110/14.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson and Richard Freemen to develop a plan for training (theoretical and practical) for further auditors to become approved for AC7110/14. (Due Date: 31-Dec-2017)

16.0 AUDITOR CONFERENCE SUMMARY – OPEN

16.1 The Auditor Conference was held at the weekend preceding the Task Group meeting. The Staff Engineer presented a summary of the items / discussions that occurred, which included:

General training was predominantly focused on travel security, but also included a brief update on audit effectiveness, and the NMC goals for the next 2 years.

Auditor Consistency including recap of OP 1117 and Supplier feedback comments.

Smart checklists status.

Task Group Administrative issues on, Staffing, Auditor Advisories, Checklist revisions, Handbook revisions, Self-Audits, Job audit selection, Additive Manufacturing status, Captive / Independent labs and alignment of audit scope, protocol for informing suppliers of issues found in job audits, User number flowchart, handling proprietary information, future auditor conference structure.

Rolls Royce and Boeing specific training.

Update on specification revisions (AWS and ISO).

Calibration.

NCR writing re-fresher.

Visual Welding Inspection.


CONFIRMED

Auditor professionalism recap.

NMC Audit Effectiveness: Update on status and an example of a problem that occurred at a welding supplier that demonstrates its importance.

There were technical discussions on oxidized filler entering the weld pool, inspection requirements for Gas Tungsten Arc welds, and the applicability of AWS D17.1 for welders who perform weld repairs on castings.

There were several requests for checklist / handbook revisions. These were discussed in detail in item 22.2.

There were non-technical discussions related to self-audit requirements, timeframe for audit submittal when there are zero NCRs, allowance for modified cycle audit to be changed to standard cycle, job audit selection, applicability of ‘U’ number in audit scope, correct notification protocol when an issue is identified in a job audit, ability for suppliers to complete the self-audit directly into eAuditNet.

17.0 NEW TECHNOLOGIES – OPEN

At the June 2017 meeting, the Task Group briefly discussed welding of thermoplastics / thermoplastic composites. There was minimal interest and it was suggested that if this is to be pursued then we should liaise with and possibly develop a Memorandum of Understanding with the Composites (COMP) Task Group. Subsequent to this Ian Simpson spoke directly with the COMP Staff Engineer, who confirmed that COMP Task Group does not have an interest in pursuing this. The WLD Task Group therefore decided that there was insufficient interest in pursuing development of a checklist on this technology.

The Staff Engineer requested if any other new welding technologies should be considered for checklist development. Areas may include other variants of AM, friction stir welding, linear friction welding, among others.

There was no support to start the development of any additional checklist at this time. It was noted that perhaps direct deposition variants of AM would be the next area to consider. However, until there is sufficient support in both the development of a checklist and any potential mandate, the Task Group decided that this would not be pursued.

18.0 FORUM FOR SUPPLIER ISSUES – OPEN

18.1 Jackie Sternot asked about the expectation for defining shelf-life of flux when the manufacturer does not state an expiration date. The Task Group referred back to the checklist and noted that the question only asks if the flux is within shelf-life. In the situation where a flux does not have a shelf-life, the supplier would therefore be compliant. The Task Group did however develop additional guidance for the handbook to explain what would be expected if for example the supplier rehydrates flux.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to issue the AC7110/1 handbook with revised verbiage to clarify expectations when there is no shelf-life given by the manufacturer of the flux. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

There was some subsequent discussion about diluting flux for special applications. The Task Group agreed that when this is required to achieve, for example a specific viscosity, then this needs to be controlled per a documented procedure.

19.0 CREATE NMC FEEDBACK CHART – OPEN

The Task Group generated the feedback chart for presentation by Steve Tooley at the NMC meeting.


CONFIRMED

20.0 NMC MEETING REPORT – OPEN

20.1 Steve Tooley gave a summary of key items that were discussed in the Planning and Operations meeting and NMC meeting. Key items were:

NMC to implement a new process where Task Groups need to investigate issues when a Subscriber identifies a problem at a Supplier that they believe should have been captured in the Nadcap audit.

Where suppliers are not currently approved for aerospace work, Task Groups will need to define a system to ensure the Nadcap audit meets aerospace requirements. It will become mandatory for suppliers to declare their Subscribers, and any Supplier not currently working to any Subscriber requirements will be noted as such in the Qualified Manufacturer’s List (QML).

Proposed changes to Program Document PD 1100, include description of Nadcap philosophy, requirement to use job tracker, reiteration that proprietary information needs to be made available for review (also to be noted in Supplier Newsletter, and training for Observers on their obligations when this material is witnessed).

SSC sponsored event on how to be compliant with Export Control regulations. This will be posted on eAuditNet, e-mailed to suppliers and included in the Supplier Newsletter.

The Heat Treat (HT) and Material Testing (MTL) commodities are in discussion about what information needs to be captured when HT performs tensile testing at HT Suppliers.

A cross commodity team led by Chemical Processing (CP) presented a proposal for definitions for Calibration / Standardization / Verification. Comments were made and the sub-team asked to consider these and return at a later date with a revised proposal.

Steve Tooley presented data for WLD that demonstrated for audits in Europe and Asia that declared Export Controlled (EC), only 33% of job audits were performed on EC parts. The NMC formed a sub-team led by David Soong to investigate if it is possible to expand on the existing EC questions asked during scheduling to determine if some of the currently ‘EC’ designated suppliers can fall into categories (e.g. EC-NLR) which would allow restricted auditors to perform the audit.

The Conventional Machining as a Special Process (CMSP) Chair asked if it would be possible to implement a system that notifies all commodities that an auditor is qualified for when an issue with an auditor is found. A sub-team was set-up to investigate.

The CP Task Group noted that they are having difficulty holding auditor interviews due to lack of participation. The NMC replied that they are piloting a new metric that will look at Subscriber participation in the program.

21.0 AUDIT EFFECTIVENESS ACTIONS – OPEN

At the June 2017 Planning and Operations meetings, the NMC requested all Task Groups to review the Chemical Processing methodology of requiring the Supplier to provide a map that identifies the location of the processing equipment. In Welding, information of this type could be used to determine if equipment had been moved and if requalification work has been performed as required by specification. The Task Group discussed the merits of this and decided that this is not something they wish to be added to the Welding checklist.

The NMC also requested Task Groups to consider if site tours prior to the audit commencing should be mandated. The Task Group discussed the merits of this and again decided not to implement this in the checklist, citing that this is something an auditor can request if time allows.


CONFIRMED

ACTION ITEM: Steve Tooley to notify the NMC that the WLD Task Group has decided not to implement either a map that defines equipment location or make a site tour mandatory. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

22.0 CHECKLIST ITEMS – OPEN

22.1 Sub-team review of AC7110/5

The sub-team of Les Hellemann, Andy Toth, Saeed Cheema, Christopher Webb, Jim Ahlemeyer, Marco Poletto and Eric Przybylowicz has been reviewing the fusion welding checklist, AC7110/5 primarily to address concerns reported in Supplier Advisory 2885, but also to review in general terms for additional items that may require revision.

The main proposal by the team is for a new Supplement (M) to specifically assess orbital tube welding. Les Hellemann presented the case for this additional supplement. Some minor comments were noted with respect to the proposed questions; however the Task Group was in favor of proceeding with this approach:

Motion made by Steve Tooley and seconded by Gary Coleman to approve moving forward to add supplement M to the /5 checklist. Motion Passed.

The draft included items that have previously been agreed by the Task Group; however some items were discussed further:

Para 11.1. (Welding Restrictions). The Task Group decided to limit this specifically for in-process correction, and developed verbiage that was agreed by all. An NA answer option has also been included and allowance for when an NA answer can be used. Subscribers will need to define their requirements in the handbook so that Auditors and Suppliers can easily identify what is acceptable when they review this question.

New question G.4 (Flow Meter Pressure), was originally proposed, however issues surrounding the need for this were aired. At which point the following motion was made:

Motion made by Bob Fletcher and seconded by Gary Coleman to remove proposed question G.4 from the AC7110/5 checklist. Motion Passed.

The existing sub-team agreed to review the comments made by the Task Group with respect to the new Supplement M and present a final draft at the February 2018 meeting. The following people asked to join the sub-team; Rod Deming, Jackie Sternot, Ralph Kropp, Natalie Cullen, and Gary Coleman.

ACTION ITEM: Sub-team of Les Hellemann, Andy Toth, Saeed Cheema, Christopher Webb, Jim Ahlemeyer, Marco Poletto , Eric Przybylowicz, Rod Deming, Jackie Sternot, Ralph kropp, Natalie Cullen, and Gary Coleman to develop a final draft of AC7110/5 and associated handbook guidance on the new / revised questions for review at the February 2018 Task Group meeting. (Due Date: 20-Feb-2018)

22.2 Checklist revisions identified at Auditor Conference

Per a request from the NMC, based on a survey of Auditors, an item in the Auditor Conference was to specifically identify any checklist questions that Auditors believe were unclear or non-value added.

The following checklist items were identified by Auditors for discussion by the Task Group and were dispositioned as noted:

Handbook revisions to capture changes in AWS D17.1. These were agreed by the Task Group. See item 22.3 for details.


CONFIRMED

Applicability of AWS D17.1 for welder qualification for weld repair of castings. This has been an issue for many years, as this specification is not currently designed for this application. Alternative specifications such as AMS 2694, when flowed by contract are focused on this product type. Gary Coleman stated he would take this item back to the AWS D17 Committee for further discussion. In the meantime, it was suggested that casting Suppliers take exception at contract review when AWS D17.1 for weld repair of castings is flowed down.

In order to prepare better for the audit, Auditors suggested that the Supplier’s procedure must accompany the self-audit. Hence they proposed making the submittal of these mandatory by changing ‘should’ to ‘shall’ in AC7110 para 2.2.1. While the Task Group agreed that this would indeed help the Auditor to prepare for the audit, they noted that the primary reason for the self-audit was for the Supplier to prepare themselves for the audit. The Task Group thus decided not to make any changes to the existing checklist.

The Auditors queried if AC7110 para 3.4.1 and 3.5.2 are duplication of requirements. The Task Group noted that the former is with respect to contract review and the latter with respect to purchasing and thus concluded that they are different. The Task Group however did agree that this should be added to the checklist rolling action item list for review at the next revision of this checklist. This was added to the list during the meeting.

Can main / satellite audit combinations have the checklists revised so that the Auditor only has to complete job audits at the satellite? The Task Group do appreciate that there is redundancy here, however noted that the logistics to revise this process will be significant. On this basis they decided that this cannot be changed at this time.

Would the Task Group consider asking additional questions with respect to weld repair? There was much discussion, mainly surrounding the definitions of repair and the subtle differences that exist among the Subscribers. It was further noted that repair is a specific item that is addressed within Quality Management standards, and as such the Welding Task Group decided that they did not wish to duplicate such requirements in welding checklists.

From the facilitated discussion on calibration, a number of items were suggested that the Auditors would like to see guidance on. These were reviewed by the Task Group, who decided that the best option would be to provide examples of items that are required to be calibrated. The basis for this would be the existing Top 10 NCR information that is already available. This can be split into procedural and compliance items and placed in the appropriate sections of the handbooks.

Would the Task Group consider adding a new column to the debrief log that would allow the Supplier to verify that the Auditor has reviewed the self-audit information. The Task Group decision was that this is not required.

The term ‘Captive Lab’ has been misunderstood by a number of Suppliers as it implies a separate laboratory function is required within the Supplier’s facility. The Task Group agreed and created new verbiage for this term.

For the new self-audit requirement, Auditors are receiving feedback from Suppliers that the process of uploading a handwritten self-audit is labor intensive and not particularly user friendly. This was verified by a number of Suppliers when this was discussed. As such Ian Simpson was tasked with investigating and submitting an eAuditNet enhancement that would alleviate some of these issues. This may for example result in Suppliers having the same functionality as Auditors for completing the audit on line.

The term ‘blind joint’ used in AC7110/1 is not understood by all Suppliers. The Task Group tasked Ian Simpson with providing a definition and / or diagram to include in the handbook to better explain what this is.


CONFIRMED

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to revise handbooks to give examples of calibration issues with respect to procedural and compliance. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to revise handbooks with the new definition of Captive Lab. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to investigate the possibility of Suppliers being able to enter the self-audit directly into eAuditNet, and enter enhancement request if this viable. (Due Date: 31-Dec-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to add definition and / or diagram to the AC7110/1 handbook to describe the term ‘blind joint’. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

22.3 Handbook Revisions

All the handbook changes requested at the June 2017 meeting have been implemented. There have been no additional handbook revisions since this meeting; hence no handbook revisions were reviewed.

The Staff Engineer noted the following items for discussion relating to possible handbook revisions:

AC7110 at para 10.1. Ian Simpson suggested a change to reflect the revision in OP 1105 that requires the self-audit to be uploaded directly in eAuditNet. This was agreed. Per a recommendation from an Auditor, additional verbiage to clarify the required self-audits in main / satellite audit conditions was proposed. This was also agreed.

Additionally in AC7110, Ian Simpson suggested that the presentation that is sent out in advance to Suppliers with initial audits informing them of post audit requirements be added at para 2.2.3. This was also agreed. As a result of incorporation into the handbook, Auditor Advisory WLD-15-004 that was used to initially flow this can be archived. This was agreed.

AC7110/4 at para 11.10/11.10/12.10. Milan Hanyk has requested that the item in parenthesis relating to Subscriber specific requirements be removed as the corresponding requirement had been removed from the checklist based on Honeywell removing this requirement in the Supplemental checklist. This was agreed.

AC7110/5 at para 8.3. The latest revision of AWS D17.1 allows for an alternative approach to the qualification of visual weld inspectors. The Task Group developed additional verbiage to accommodate this revision. Similar verbiage will also need to be added to the handbooks for AC7110/3 and AC7110/6.

It was noted that several Subscribers have additional guidance listed against this question, which may contradict the revision made in AWS D17.1. Some other Subscribers noted that they may take exception to the new allowance made in AWS D17.1. As such all Subscribers were actioned to review the guidance provided against this paragraph and provide any changes to Ian Simpson.

The sub-team working on AC7110/5 for orbital welding have suggested a number of revisions to the existing AC7110/5 handbook with respect to inspection methods and equipment that should be used (this is guidance in the handbook until such time orbital welding can be better assessed via the checklist). These were reviewed and minor changes made.

Andy Toth suggested a change to the AC7110/5 handbook at para 11.8, noting that for manual welding compliance to the welding schedule should be assessed at stable arc conditions. This was agreed.

AC7110/12 at para 3.3 (eyesight), 3.13 and 3.16 (visual inspector qualification) required additional verbiage to recognize the latest revision of AWS D17.1. Verbiage was agreed.


CONFIRMED

As the result of an appeal (ref 2017-022) the Task Group was required to review the information in the handbook as it pertains to tacking parameter definition if a Supplier is only welding class C welds. There was some discussion about whether tack welds need to be qualified regardless of the classification. The consensus was that the default position is that tacks do need to be defined but not necessarily qualified. The checklist question at AC7110/5 J.1 was still considered to be correct, but the Task Group modified intent and acceptable objective evidence. The tack welding supplement is used in many other checklists and these handbook revisions need to be made in all applicable handbooks.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to incorporate the Task Group’s requirements for revision to the AC7110 handbook with respect to the self-audit being uploaded directly in eAudtNet as directed by the latest revision of OP 1105, clarification of what is required for self-audits when satellite audits are performed, and to incorporate the post audit action presentation, and issue. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to archive Auditor Advisory WLD-15-004. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to incorporate the Task Group’s requirements for revision to the AC7110/4 handbook to remove reference to Subscriber requirements, and issue. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to incorporate the Task Group’s revision to the AC7110/5 handbook (and other associated handbooks that utilize the tack welding supplement) to recognize that tack welding only requires the use of a written instruction, and issue. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to incorporate the Task Group’s requirements for revision to the AC7110/5 handbook (and other associated handbooks that reference AWS D17.1) to recognize changes to visual inspector qualification requirements, and issue. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Subscriber Members to review and provide updates to Ian Simpson on changes to the AC7110/5 handbook at para 8.3 based on the revision to AWS D17.1. (Due Date: 31-Dec-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to incorporate the Task Group’s revision to the AC7110/5 handbook for inspection / equipment guidance for orbital welding, that compliance to welding schedules for manual welding should be assessed at stable arc conditions, and issue. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to incorporate the Task Group’s requirements for revision to the AC7110/12 handbook to recognize changes to visual inspector qualification requirements and eyesight requirements, and issue. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

22.4 Checklists Revisions

No revised checklists have been issued since the last Task Group meeting.

In addition to the specific items noted in 22.2, the following items have been submitted and included in the rolling list of items for requests on checklist revision.

Task Group to review the questions in AC7110/14 (Additive Manufacturing) specific to control of the laser and electron-beam and establish if similar questions should be added to AC7110/3 (electron beam welding) and AC7110/6 (laser welding). The Task Group agreed that this review should occur at the next revision of AC7110/3 and AC7110/6.

23.0 NEW BUSINESS ITEMS – OPEN

Ian Simpson notified the Task Group that the main NMC meeting is moving to a permanent time on Thursday morning going forward. While this does not affect agendas for February and June meetings, it does have an effect on October meetings.


CONFIRMED

In 2018 and even years thereafter, split Auditor Conferences will also occur. With a 3-day Task Group meeting, the Task Group wishes to provide Auditor training on Monday, with a 3-day Task Group meeting, Tuesday through Thursday.

In 2019 and odd years thereafter, the Auditor Conference will be per the usual format of Saturday and Sunday, hence in these years the Task Group meeting will run Monday through Thursday lunch.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to notify the PRI meeting coordinator of the Welding Task Group’s Auditor training and Task Group meeting preferences for future October meetings. (Due Date: 30-Nov-2017)

24.0 FEBRUARY 2018 AGENDA – OPEN

Several items from this meeting will require additional time during the February 2018 meeting. Standard items for the February meeting include annual reviews of the Top 10 NCRs and Frequently Asked Questions documents, OP 1110 Mode B failure criteria, and the complete review of all OP 1117 criteria. Based on a split Auditor conference in 2018, there is also a need to finalize the Auditor Conference agenda at this meeting.

ACTION ITEM: Ian Simpson to develop an agenda for the February 2018 meeting based on the items of the October 2017 agenda, include any items that the Task Group includes on an annual basis, inclusion of time to resolve OP 1116 App WLD ballot comments, disposition of AC7110/14 ballot comments and to complete revision to AC7110/5. (Due Date: 15-Nov-2017)

25.0 REVIEW OF ACTION ITEMS – OPEN

25.1 All action items were reviewed for proper assignment and due date.

26.0 REVIEW OF MEETING EFFECTIVENESS – OPEN

26.1 The meeting was considered to be effective in meeting its goals. It was noted that having Registration on the 17th floor was problematic on the first meeting day due to congestion at the elevators.

27.0 NEXT MEETING – OPEN

27.1 As the NMC meeting will be on Thursday, the Task Group requests to meet Tuesday to Thursday. Hence the meeting will be 20-22-Feb-2018 in Madrid, Spain.

ADJOURNMENT – Wednesday 25-Oct-2017 – Meeting was adjourned at 4.15 p.m.

Minutes Prepared by: Les Hellemann, [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:OP1116 App WLD Ian Simpson 31-Dec-2017 (to Task Group

ballot)

mailto:[email protected]