UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

Document Sample
UNCONFIRMED MINUTES Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                                    ELECTRONICS
                                                                             FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011



                                   UNCONFIRMED MINUTES
                                 FEBRUARY 28 - MARCH 4, 2011
                                HOTEL FIRA PALACE BARCELONA
                                      BARCELONA SPAIN

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, March 1, 2011 to Friday, March 4, 2011

1.0    OPENING COMMENTS

1.1    Call to Order / Quorum Check

       The Electronics Task Group (ETG) was called to order at 11:00 a.m., 01-Mar-11.

       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

        *   Eric            Lacourt            Thales
        *   Nathalie        Lefevre            SAFRAN
        *   Eddie           Lewis              Goodrich
            John            Mastorides         Honeywell Aerospace
        *   Scott           Meyer              Goodrich Corporation
        *   Philippe        Pons               Airbus                               Chairperson
            Norberto        Roiz               EADS-CASA
        *   Richard         Rowe               Honeywell Aerospace
        *   Richard         Rumas              Honeywell Aerospace                  Secretary
        *   Suzanne         Steketee           Ball Aerospace & Technologies
        *   Barbara         Waller             Raytheon Co.
            Steve           Wells              Goodrich Corporation
        *   Dewey           Whittaker          Honeywell Aerospace                  Vice Chairperson
            Grzegorz        Wryk               Goodrich Corporation

       Other Members/Participants Present (* Indicates Voting Member)

            NAME                               COMPANY NAME

        *   Cristiano        Bazzi             Somacis
            Paul             Comer             Graphic Plc
        *   Stephan          Gehrke            Meggitt SA
            Gildas           Gourlaouen        TECHCI
            Jean-Marie       Lemiere           Elvia PCB
            Jean-Francois    Mahe              SELHA
            Pablo            Martinez          North American Interconnect
            Oliver           Moutray           Lyncolec Ltd
            Thomas           Schuabe           SGS
            Hans             Van Eekelen       Fokker Elmo
            Kees             Van der Schoor    Fokker Elmo
                                                   1
                                                                                         ELECTRONICS
                                                                                  FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011


       PRI Staff Present

            James             Bennett
            Bill              Dumas

       Richard Rumas will be the Secretary going forward. Note that there is an open RAIL item related
       to this.

       Scott Meyer will be the Timekeeper.

1.2    Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes / RAIL Review

       Motion made by Scott Meyer and seconded by Suzanne Steketee approve the minutes as written
       from the October 2010 meeting. Motion Passed

       All open RAIL items reviewed. The following RAIL items are of note:

                   PRI Staff did not send out latest drafts, metrics, etc. before the meeting. The only one
                    that would have been sent was the PRI Staff report.
                   Suzanne Steketee to send the checklist excel template to Jim Bennett by 08-Mar-11 to
                    close out this action.
                   Richard Rumas’ action on finalization of AC7121 modifications pushed out to March
                    2011. Formatting to be done and sent out by 25-Mar-11 for pre ballot comments.
                    Ballot hopefully will be sent out 29-Apr-11.
                   AC7119 actions related to completion of Rev. E were pushed out.
                   Formal request to the Nadcap Management Council (NMC) regarding Subscribers
                    involvement in the ETG is not done yet. Still open and pushed back to 31-Mar-11.
                   J-STD-001ES released December 2010, so action item to create slash sheet can be
                    started. Suzanne Steketee and John Mastorides to start this action.
                   AC7120 actions pushed out as well since Rev. B ballot not issued.
                   Standard email template for auditors contacting suppliers prior to the audit is still open.
                    Jim Bennett is still waiting on one auditor to provide what they provide to the supplier.
                    This will allow starting this item in earnest. It was agreed that it would be nice if the
                    NTGOP-001 is updated to capture this.

2.0    SUBSCRIBING USER DISCUSSION – CLOSED

       Audit 138033 – reviewed (AC7120).

       Motion made by Suzanne Steketee and seconded by Barbara Waller to remove questions related
       to max time between soldering and cleaning. Motion Passed

ACTION ITEM: AC7120 sub-team to remove questions related to max time between soldering and
cleaning. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

       Discussed proposed online chat tool from Heat Treat. We will table further discussion due to other
       higher priorities.

       Discussed outsourced processes. ETG will continue to support N/A for conformal coating. A
       checklist could be developed, but this is not a priority now.

       Discussed max NCRs per Audit Days in NOP-011 Mode B, based on 2010 data.

       Motion made by Scott Meyer and seconded by Suzanne Steketee to leave the Mode B numbers
       the same for 2011. Motion Passed


                                                      2
                                                                                       ELECTRONICS
                                                                                FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011

ACTION ITEM: PRI Staff to determine if the number of checklist questions answered N/A during each
audit is readily available to analyze by the Task Group. This can be a sanity check on our Mode B
numbers. (DUE DATE: 04-Mar-11)

      PRI REPORT/RAIL – OPEN

       Bill Dumas is the new ETG Staff Engineer. Future PRI goals are to have Bill become an ETG
       Auditor and a delegated Staff Engineer.

       Following the October 2010 Auditor Conference, one ETG Auditor is no longer auditing for the Task
       Group. ETG will need to fill this position to have four total auditors.

       Metrics, as part of PRI report, were presented by Jim Bennett. Short discussions on observer
       audits and the ETG Newsletter took place. The Newsletter, going forward, will be available before
       each meeting.

       Newsletter ideas: Suzanne Steketee suggested a Space Addendum article (Richard Rumas
       volunteered); Rich Rowe suggested an article on identifying recognized IPC training companies (no
       one volunteered for this); a supplier article that did not make it into last Newsletter will be added
       into this one (IEC Electronics).

ACTION ITEM: Volunteers to complete their newsletter articles. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

ACTION ITEM: Richard Rumas to ask Dave Torp at IPC to be allowed to publish IPC items and updates
going forward on the ETG Newsletter. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

       Also the Task Group discussed the slow process of checklist changes. Philippe brought up his
       opinion that more frequent changes are more desirable than waiting 2 years for a big change.

      METRICS REVIEW 2010 – OPEN

       AC7119, AC7120, AC7121 metrics were reviewed by the Task Group. High hitting NCRs were
       reviewed and questions updated if necessary. All checklist drafts reviewed for existence of
       changes already based on qualified no’s and other issues. Note: AC7120 Question 39.4.3 – N/A
       was added to draft of B. Task Group was not sure why.

ACTION ITEM: AC7120 sub-team to address why N/A was added and if want to keep come up with audit
note to explain when N/A can be used (reference checklist paragraph 39.4.3). (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

ACTION ITEM: Staff Engineer to sanitize data and send out to sub-teams to review and action.
Sanitization so suppliers can participate. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

ACTION ITEM: Sub-team leads to update supplier symposium presentations with this data for the next
meeting in London. (DUE DATE: 11-Jun-11)

       NOP-011 Mode B failure criteria was reviewed for entire Task Group. No changes are being made
       for 2011.

       Question: why are 5 days showing when ETG audits are only 4 days? Possible answer: a satellite
       facility may require an additional day.

5.0    CHECKLIST VISION – OPEN

       Discussion to reiterate with Bill Dumas that the NMC Checklist Vision updates presented at the last
       meeting did not clarify the situation. Bill attempted to clarify to the Task Group his understanding,
       which was appreciated. The checklist revisions will continue as planned, assuming that we are
       currently meeting the checklist vision.

                                                    3
                                                                                       ELECTRONICS
                                                                                FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011

        Bill brought up a suggestion to remove N/A options if they can’t have Compliance Assessment
        Guidance (CAGs) associated with them. The Task Group is already on this route with the current
        updates.

        Dewey Whittaker voiced his concerns over ballot comments submitted after technical discussions
        have already occurred at meetings and teleconference calls. Ballots can be taken at meetings as
        per Nadcap procedure NIP 4-01 – notification needs to be made two weeks in advance of the
        meeting. If future similar issues occur, this is a possible route to solve the issue. This may,
        however, be difficult to do this with more than one checklist per meeting.

        Environmental question consolidation template prepared by Suzanne Steketee and Rich Rowe was
        discussed. The proposed format was accepted in principal for which procedural questions will be
        consolidated but not compliance.

ACTION ITEM: Richard Rowe and Suzanne Steketee to continue action to complete consolidation activity.
(DUE DATE: 4-Jun-11)

ACTION ITEM: Bill Dumas to review all minutes from 2010 to ensure all Action Items identified in the
minutes are on the RAIL. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

6.0     AC7119 – OPEN

        Discuss open ballot comments starting from paragraph 24.2. Resolution of comments were
        captured in the comment tracking spreadsheet.

ACTION ITEM: Bill to add CAGs for all NA’s in the AC7119 checklist. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

ACTION ITEM: Dewey and Bill to review all AC7119 audits to determine if “manual scrubbing” questions in
section 33 (final finishes) are ever answered anything but N/A. If answered nothing but N/A, then the Task
Group will consider removing those questions. (DUE DATE: 31-Dec-11)

ACTION ITEM:. More generally than the previous RAIL item, Dewey and Bill to review all AC7119 audits to
determine questions that have always been answered N/A for possible removal. (DUE DATE: 31-Dec-11)

        Richard Rumas brought up the fact that we are removing some detail in questions that is already in
        existence in the section title. For example: all “immersion tin” verbiage is removed from questions
        in the Immersion Tin section. However, this makes it more difficult in reviewing audit report
        packages as the NCRs only quote the questions, not the section titles. Other Task Group
        members also viewed this as a possible difficulty. An action item will be added to review this at a
        future meeting.

ACTION ITEM: Task Group to discuss in London for Auditor Conference in Pittsburgh. Add this specific
issue to the agenda: ensure auditor writes NCR descriptively enough to allow no reference to the checklist
being necessary. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

ACTION ITEM: Poorly written NCR list that Staff Engineer has already compiled to be added to Auditor
Conference material. PRI Staff to add to Auditor Conference agenda in June and will hand over
information to add to specific training material. (DUE DATE: 03-Mar-11 and 06-Jun-11)

ACTION ITEM: Sub-team to look at, quickly, adding an “if required by customer” question in section 17 and
36 since none exists but the TG feels that one is necessary. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

ACTION ITEM: PRI / SE to change all “must” to “shall” in the document before ballot. (DUE DATE: 03-
Mar-11)

ACTION ITEM: AC7119 sub-team to review AC7119/2 title to ensure it matches with new revision of IPC-
6013. (DUE DATE: 06-Jun-11)

                                                     4
                                                                                          ELECTRONICS
                                                                                   FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011

ACTION ITEM:.AC7119 sub-team to review /1, /2, /3 to ensure questions related to IPC specs are covered
and then can delete from core checklist at next revision (i.e. F). (DUE DATE: 06-Jun-11)

        All AC7119 comments closed.

ACTION ITEM: PRI to do final formatting and ballot to go out for 45-day letter ballot. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-
11)

7.0     AC7121 – OPEN

        As per the discussion and resolution in section 5.0 on environmental (i.e. Facilities) question
        consolidation – the Task Group decision is to defer this type of action to the next revision so that
        Rev. A can get out without further delay.

        Richard Rumas presented on behalf of Labarge their presentation on the pros and cons of Nadcap
        mandating IPC-620 certifications. Labarge was not present. The Task Group was not compelled
        by the argument against changing the current course. The Task Group did bring up a good point
        which may not have been considered: the CIT can issue IPC certificates if the training already
        performed at the supplier meets or exceeds IPC requirements and the testing is done per IPC
        requirements. In other words, the cost impact could be reduced by using the existing training and
        just issuing the test. The Task Group did agree that particular modules may contain requirements
        which may not apply and could add cost (such as the module on crimping which also includes
        IDC). Labarge will have the opportunity to comment on both the pre-ballot and ballot in the future.

ACTION ITEM:. Richard to provide feedback to Labarge on the results of the meeting and discuss further
with them. (DUE DATE: 11-Mar-11)

        Fokker Elmo and NAI were in attendance and allowed to give feedback. Of note:

                   Both suppliers were encouraged to attend IPC meetings in the future to get involved at
                    that level.
                   During NAI’s recent audit, the auditor asked for J-STD-001 and IPC-620 certificates to
                    meet the training requirements questions. The training certificate requirements were
                    specifically discussed at Auditor Conference in 2010 and this was specifically asked to
                    the auditors. Their interpretation of the checklist matched the Task Group’s, so
                    certificates were not required. This is contrary to what happened on the NAI audit.

ACTION ITEM: Add this issue to be discussed at Auditor Conference presentation discussion in London.
J-STD-001 certificates not required and will never be required for AC7121. Also, IPC-620 certificates not
needed currently. (DUE DATE: 06-Jun-11)

                   Auditor Conference topic: Are there any issues with the number of sections and using
                    eAuditNet? Bill brought up issue that each section is on one page in eAuditNet, and
                    for AC7121 there would be 73 pages (since 73 sections in AC7121).

ACTION ITEM: Add this question to Auditor Conference presentation. If a problem, then get PRI staff to
reprogram page breaks in eAuditNet. (DUE DATE: 06-Jun-11)

8.0     AC7120 – OPEN

        No further open comments to be discussed. There was a short discussion on Aerospace Quality
        Systems (AQS) questions that are being removed. Existing RAIL actions on getting the ballot
        ready still apply and the sub-team leader Ed Lewis will be working to close those actions.

ACTION ITEM: AC7120 sub-team and PRI Staff to review before sending out for ballot, after which ballot
to be sent out. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

9.0     MEETING CLOSURE ITEMS – OPEN
                                                      5
                                                                                        ELECTRONICS
                                                                                 FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011


        Paul Comer has now been at two meetings. See motion below. Paul will fill out paperwork for PRI.

        Motion made by Dewey Whittaker and seconded by Richard Rumas to allow Paul to be a Supplier
        Voting Member (SVM). Motion Passed

        John Mastorides of Honeywell Aerospace has now been at two meetings. See motion below.
        John will fill out paperwork for PRI.

        Motion made by Dewey Whittaker and seconded by Scott Meyer to allow John to be an Alternate
        Subscriber Voting Member (AUVM). Motion Passed

ACTION ITEM: PRI to ensure paperwork for Paul Comer and John Mastorides is completed. (DUE DATE:
31-Mar-11)

        Kevin Ward from the NMC Checklist Vision Sub-Team came to speak with the Task Group to
        speak about the topic. The Task Group should consider having a regular NMC update at least
        once per year at a Nadcap meeting. Kevin also mentioned that our concept of Qualified No’s is not
        common (i.e. he has not heard our feedback system using Qualified No’s to update the checklists
        ever used before).

ACTION ITEM: PRI to add agenda item to 1.0 for future meetings: Task Group discussion if any burning
issues that require an NMC rep’s attendance at the ETG meeting during that week. (DUE DATE: 03-Mar-
11)

        Suzanne commented that ETG has cases where a supplier with AS9100 throughout the company
        has separate lines / cells for Nadcap and non-Nadcap work. Kevin Ward replied that this is a new
        scenario and should be considered to be brought up at NMC meetings to go along with our
        concerns that we need other Subscribers to support the ETG (i.e. there is a risk if the PO doesn’t
        have “Nadcap” in it somewhere that the Nadcap line won’t be used, and this may be of concern for
        NMC reps). Kevin offered to help with a presentation if we wanted to bring this up at NMC. Scott
        Meyer has taken note of this and will add it to his action on creating a formal letter to the NMC.

ACTION ITEM: Scott to include separate lines / cells at suppliers for Nadcap and non-Nadcap work in his
formal letter to NMC regarding lack of Subscriber participation on the ETG. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

ACTION ITEM: PRI to find out the status of suppliers being able to print out their own checklists. Where is
PRI in this process? Is the option to put the date and checklist audited available? (DUE DATE: 11-Jun-11)

        Discussed and established agenda using new agenda template.

ACTION ITEM: Suzanne to take a stab at creating a stand-alone Nadcap checklist for conformal coating,
including paralyene (using IPC-CC-830 and J-STD-001). Also, time permitting, she will take a stab at a
Space slash sheet for 8739 conformal coating suppliers. Suzanne to present at London meeting in June
2011 (DUE DATE: 04-Jun-11)

10.0    SUBSCRIBING USER DISCUSSION – CLOSED

        Discussed subcontract facilities and Nadcap flowdown. It depends on the Subscriber – the
        Subscriber needs to flow down Nadcap requirements and is responsible for controlling the supply
        chain. Other issues came up again: multiple lines / cells at one site, including Nadcap and non-
        Nadcap. The root cause is the limited number of Nadcap mandates. This is a concern for
        Subscribers who don’t mandate but accept.

        NMC/Task Group Dashboard discussion: metrics to give snapshot of where the Task Group stands
        in its activities. This is something that is being worked on currently and not deployed yet. Not sure
        who would be responsible to keep this up, most likely PRI Staff.

                                                     6
                                                                                        ELECTRONICS
                                                                                 FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011

        Audit Duration discussion: Looked at s-frm-16 guidelines, which references NIP 7-01. NMC has
        stated that the Task Groups are not allowed to increase the length of an audit. For example:
        adding 5 pages of questions to AC7119 core may add 1 day. This is not allowed. It is allowed,
        however, to create another slash sheet, for example /5, which could add 1 day, but the scope
        would also state an additional accreditation, in this example /5. No resolution on discussion points
        but outgoing Staff Engineer Jim Bennett has a feel of what the Task Group wants to do.

        The group discussed counterfeit part mitigation questions. Suzanne Steketee proposed wording:
        “Is there a procedure that specifies procurement from only original component manufacturer or
        their authorized distributor unless approved by customer? Yes, No, N/A”. N/A only applies if no
        procurement is required. The job audit question would be too difficult to audit at this time so a
        procedure question is the minimum that the Task Group would like to add to checklist AC7120.

        Motion made by Suzanne Steketee and seconded by Barbara Waller to add this question to the
        AC7120 Rev. B draft that will go out for ballot. Philippe Pons had concerns that the Task Group,
        while we have quorum, did not have enough representation at the meeting.

        Motion made by Suzanne Steketee and seconded by Barbara Waller to have the question just
        accepted to replace 4.7 in the current ballot draft. Motion Passed

        Further to discussions on audit #139962, NCR #3, there was discussion about removing job audit
        question 31.5 from AC7120.

        Motion made by Suzanne Steketee and seconded by Barbara Waller to remove question 31.5
        from AC7120. Motion Passed

        Motion made by Richard Rumas and seconded by Scott Meyer to apply the above changes also to
        AC7121. Motion Passed

ACTION ITEM: Richard Rumas to update AC7121 based on above motion. (DUE DATE: 11-Mar-11)

        Philippe Pons would like to join the PB and PBA sub-teams.

ACTION ITEM: PRI Staff to add Philippe to the PB and PBA sub-teams. (DUE DATE: 31-Mar-11)

        Meeting facilitation feedback form was filled out.



          Nadcap Meeting
        Faciliation Feedback 4 March 2011.doc


        Motion made by Scott and seconded by Dewey to adjourn the meeting. Motion Passed

ADJOURNMENT – 04-MAR-11 – Meeting was adjourned at 1:15 p.m.

Minutes Prepared by: Richard Rumas Richard.rumas@honeywell.com

RAIL:


   RAIL items




                                                      7
                                                                      ELECTRONICS
                                                               FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011


                       ***** 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        Who is responsible:                Due date:
revision:




                                            8

				
DOCUMENT INFO