PRI Nadcap eNewsLetter

1 Nadcap Supplier Support Committee appoints new Chairperson

The Supplier Support Committee

(SSC) is pleased to announce that Thomas Newton of Aircraft X-ray Laboratories Inc. (AXL) has become the new SSC Chairperson. Tom plans to continue to ensure the Nadcap program works for the benefit of Suppliers as well as Subscribers. Tom has taken

over this role from Eric Jacklin of F.M. Callahan &

Son Inc. who has now become the new Past Chair Advisor. Tom became involved with the SSC in 2011.

Recognizing the value in being an active Supplier

Issue Highlights

PRI Update

Nadcap Supplier Support Committee appoints new Chairperson 1 M&I Task Group Meeting in London 1 eAuditNet Enhancement to Make

Nadcap Certificate Easier to Access and Print

2 Nadcap Audit Failure Procedure (NOP-011) Changes 2 The Value of Nadcap

Technical Forum

NDT Q&As from the Nadcap Asia Symposiums

PRI Professional Development eQuaLified Publishes Bodies of Knowledge

7 Upcoming eQuaLearn Training

7 Introducing our new Instructor - Nai Puay Guan

7 in the Nadcap program, Tom volunteered to participate in the Flow Down sub-team in 2011 and was later asked to serve as the Flow Down sub-team lead in 2013. During this time, Tom has worked hard to ensure that Flow Down remains a visible issue within the Nadcap program. In particular, Tom took the lead in creating a standardized Flow Down Checklist which is currently in draft format and being reviewed by industry.

When asked what he intends to do as SSC

Chairperson, Tom explained “My first challenge will relate to the recent Nadcap Supplier Survey. We have a strong team established to review Supplier feedback on the Nadcap program as a whole. However, we are also focusing on how the SSC is doing. Unquestionably, my predecessors have worked hard and effectively to ensure the SSC can support the Suppliers’ needs. This survey will give the Leadership Team direction on the work we still need to do. On other fronts, Flow Down will continue to be a priority, and I’m excited about the renewed energy surrounding the Mentoring Program. I’m looking forward to working with the SSC Leadership Team and the Nadcap Management Council to provide the very best in support, communication and advocacy for the Nadcap Supplier community,”

M&I Task Group Meeting in London In February 2014 the M&I Task Group met face-to-face in London, UK with the other Nadcap commodity Task Groups. The meeting was very productive with resolution to a number of items and development of new checklists. Key topics discussed: ? Nadcap M&I Mandates – Four Nadcap Subscribers close to a structured roll-out mandate ? Edits made to the existing checklists (AC7130

and AC7130/1) and agreed upon. Anticipate another ballot to be issued

significant non-conformances to audit criteria that also apply to the main audit scope, the auditor report reviewer, with concurrence of the Task Group Chair, may ballot Subscriber Task Group Members on withdrawal of accreditation and/or failing other open audits in that commodity

Revised recommended threshold failure criteria in Mode B to reflect current practice (Appendix A). ?Restructured Modes A-E to remove redundant requirements (“Actions by PRI” and “Supplier requirements for re-entry in Nadcap System) from each mode and consolidate these into the “Procedure” portion (Section 4). ?Added clarification to Mode C that AQS may consider NCR’s from a co -joined audit report when considering failure per Mode C. (Section 3.3)

?Added actions required regarding failure of AC7004 audits to Mode A and the Procedure (Section 4.2)

?Added Failure/Risk Mitigation Process to

Section 4.3 of the procedure. Added Appendix B Failure/Risk Mitigation flowchart. This process provides the opportunity for:

–The Supplier to document their action plans for closing findings. –Subscribers to have visibility of the Supplier’s corrective action plan. –Providing visibility of corrective action responses to both auditor and Subscriber customers on finding closure by using the normal Root Cause Corrective Action (RCCA) process. To learn about more details of the changes, please refer to “NOP -011 Audit Failure Process – For use on audits conducted on or after 22-Jun-2014” which is available on eAuditNet under Documents – Resources-Procedures and

Forms – Nadcap Operating Procedures.

in June of 2014 (waiting for any additional changes)

?44 attendees at the M&I Meeting – 3

Subscriber and 3 Supplier members voted in ?Airflow checklist drafted and ready for testing ?Laser Tracker draft checklist completed For details relating to the Nadcap Task Group Meetings, including minutes and the upcoming Supplier Symposium, please visit the Nadcap website at: https://www.360docs.net/doc/529751375.html,/Nadcap

eAuditNet Enhancement to Make Nadcap Certificate Easier to Access and Print

At PRI, we take pride in ensuring our customer’s satisfaction. With the ability to reprint a

certificate for a given audit being ranked as one of the most popular requests by end users, we are pleased to announce the launch of this new

feature in the eAuditNet system. Screenshots are included to demonstrate how to use the new functionality. Click here to access our Supplier guide for reprinting certificates

Nadcap Audit Failure Procedure (NOP-011) Changes

Nadcap Operation Procedure NOP-011 for Audit Failure Process has recently been rewritten. Major changes include the following:

?Added requirement to handle “re -entry” audits as reaccreditation audits for Mode B (Section 3.2.3). Re-entry Audits shall be treated as

“Reaccreditation” audits with respect to Mode B failure criteria ?Added process for “Add Scope” audits to Mode B (Section 3.2.4). Threshold criteria for initial audits shall be used to determine Mode B failure for an “Add Scope” audit. Where the audit report reviewer identifies

Primes and Suppliers work together to develop and pilot audit checklists, as well as conduct regular reviews to ensure ongoing validity of checklist questions, identify common non-conformances and address auditor / supplier training needs. They also oversee the operation of Nadcap, inputting into procedures and monitoring the performance of the program. As well as the management and technical aspects of Nadcap, there is also a body in the organization structure that is dedicated to supporting and representing the supplier base, ensuring that they have a collective voice in the process. The Supplier Support Committee comprises volunteers from Nadcap accredited companies and focuses on non-technical issues that may affect suppliers across the special

process industry and around the world. (There is more information about the SSC on the PRI website under Nadcap – Supplier Support Committee) Expertise

Staff and auditors are recognized as experts in their fields, having typically spent the entire career in the aerospace industry working or consulting for Nadcap subscribers and suppliers. A rigorous initial training, annual conference and training by PRI and Task Groups maintains high auditor standards, as a complement to ongoing metrics used to verify consistently high performance. This gives the suppliers access to significant expertise to help them continually improve quality in their special processes. One Nadcap subscriber has tracked a 78% reduction in special process escapes, validating and evidencing the quality of processes and products through compliance to an industry-wide audit criteria.

Learn more about Nadcap at https://www.360docs.net/doc/529751375.html,

The Value of Nadcap

Approximately 85% of the global aerospace prime contractors require their special process suppliers to obtain Nadcap accreditation. As a result, nearly 5,000 Nadcap audits are conducted around the world each year.

Pre-audit preparation and post-audit non-conformance resolution are time-consuming so for those companies who work towards and achieve Nadcap accredited status, it can be difficult to take a step back and focus on the bigger picture.

It is important to remember, however, that there are many benefits to Nadcap participation beyond compliance to customer requirements. In order for companies to get the most from their

involvement with Nadcap, these opportunities may be explored and utilized as appropriate to the individual organization’s circumstances. Recognition

54% of Nadcap accredited companies report that Nadcap accreditation provides commercial

benefits by improving their attractiveness within aerospace and other critical industries by evidencing their superior quality and ability to comply with customer requirements. All Nadcap accredited companies are listed on the online QML, which is used by purchasing and quality departments to identify the best suppliers

available. This exposure is an obvious benefit from a commercial perspective. Collaboration

Suppliers are not just audited by Nadcap; they have real input into the program as it is an industry-managed program. They are able to become recognized voting members on the

Nadcap Management Council and Task Groups. In these forums, quality and technical experts from

NDT Q&As from the Nadcap Asia Symposiums

Q1. Is it acceptable for an examinee to in a higher position, in the company management structure, than the examiner if they work in a different group or section of the company?- AC7114 Para. 5.3.3

A: The Aerospace Industries Association of

America has clarified this and state the examiner shall not be subordinate to the examinee, within the company structure. Therefore the examiner cannot be in a lower position within the company management structure than the examinee. Q2: With regards to light meters is it acceptable to select the calibration points regardless of the possible range to be used at on the shop floor? For example, if the minimum requirement of UV at the wash station is 100 μW /cm 2, do calibration points need to include 100 μW /cm 2 or less, or is it acceptable if calibration is performed at any 3 points, such as 200, 1500, 5000μW/cm 2? - AC7114/1 Para. 5.13.3

A: The compliance assessment guidance states “no specific points need to be used” so you could chose 200, 1500 and 5000μW/cm 2 or any three points you wish.

Q3: If the candidate was initially certified a long time ago (over 20 years), and because the scope of examination has changed from those used at that time, some of the content and answering format of examination (customer requirements) is has changed. How should the equivalency be verified? - AC7114 Para. 5.3.9

A: The term initial is referring “generally” to what examinations would be given rather than the very first examination that person took, which may have been 20 years ago. So in this context only the specific and practical examinations are required

(unless your customer or procedure requires the general as well) for re-certification and these examinations should meet the same

requirements as defined in NAS410 and your procedure.

Q4: Many periodical test/check/calibration requirements for material and devices specify just “monthly”, “quarterly”, “semi -annually” or “annually”. We are not sure if the definitions of the “monthly”, “quarterly”, “semi -annually” and “annually” are clear. Take “Quarterly” as an example, if a test is done on 2014/1/23, does it expire on 2014/4/22, or 2014/4/30? - AC7114/1 Rev.G: Para. 5.1.1 and others

A: NOP-001 is now released and the latest

revision is has a new section that addresses time periods and what is and what is not acceptable. The revised sections will indicate that a 4 day window is acceptable for a quarterly calibration. Q5: NAS410 Rev. 3 Table III specifies Level 2 or Equivalent Experience as follows.

–Two years of engineering or science study at a technical school, college or university -> 2 years –3-4 year science or engineering undergraduate degree -> 1 year.

Do we need to provide certificates showing two years of study, and do we need to maintain the certificate as qualification records? - AC7114 Rev. G: Para. 5.1.8

If a two year course was taken at a technical school, college or university then a certificate would be provided by that establishment showing successful completion.

The personnel records will need to have a copy of the certificate or qualification on file and the Responsible Level 3 will have followed NAS410 paragraph 8.2 RECORDS.

5 The employer shall maintain personnel

certification records as long as the certification is in effect. The records maintained by the employer shall include, as a minimum:

Extent and documentation of formal education when used to meet qualification requirements. Which is addressed by question 5.2.11 Education When used to meet qualification requirements, do records indicate the extent of and provide documentation of formal education?

So it is not required that a person have a 2 year degree or any other degree but if they do and you use it as part of the qualification, then records are required.

Q6. With regards to timers is it allowed not to take into account the range of use in terms calibration points, if the same timer is used for different processes? For example: Penetrant dwell time is 10 minutes to 2 hours, Emulsifying time is 3 minutes maximum - AC7114/1: Para. 5.15

A: As the check list question stands a single point taken in within the range of use for the timer is acceptable. So if you use the timer from say 10 seconds through to say 2 hours then a single point anywhere in that range is acceptable.

Q7. From which point shall the scan and/or index distances be measured to verify the accuracy? The accuracy depends on the length of the inspection area. Can suppliers determine the length, for which the scan and/or index distances be measured as below?

Example: ± 0.1 inches per 40 inches - AC7114/3: Para. 5.1.4.1

A: The scan / index distance measurements need to cover the working range of the scanning frame. This may also be addressed in your customer’s specifications and these shall also be followed especially if the requirement is tighter than that of the check list. The requirement ensures that you can position the frame / bridge at a specified point and be within +/-0.1 inches. And again remember your customer may have tighter requirements that need to be met.

Q8: If an applicable ultrasonic inspection specification doesn't require a post inspection standardization, can this item be N/A? Boeing BAC5980 doesn’t have such requirement. A: No as this is a base line requirement defined by the check list it shall be complied with even if your customers do not require it.

Q9: Shall a field indicator be calibrated at

outside services using NIST traceable standard? If the calibration can be conducted internally, what is the proper guideline for the field indicator? - AC7114/2 Para. 6.1.3

A: Calibration of the residual field indicator can be carried out internally. You will need a procedure to show how this is to be done, what equipment is required, what frequencies and what the

tolerance is. With regards to equipment you will need a certified magnet of known field strength and a master residual indicator calibrated at the correct frequency and meeting the tolerances required for a master instrument. There are other systems and methods of calibrating these field indicators.

Q10: Currently, etching inspection process is covered by CP commodity, however, we have heard that PRI has a policy to integrate the

etching inspection process to NDI commodity in future. Please show us the current status regarding this item.

A: Pre-penetrant etch is still addressed by

AC7108/2 but there is a collaboration between the NDT and CP Task Groups to generate a new check list that covers Nital etch, Macro etch, Blue etch anodize, local etch & temper etch. This is in the final stages and the groups are trying to generate the final check lists. The expectation is that a check list may be ready for ballot by the end of this year.

Q11: The temperature and humidity in the storage area of X-ray film is specified in section 5.4.1 as temperature 4.4-24 degree-C, humidity 30-60%, is this a requirement? In the description of the section, the word “should” is used, therefore, it is assumed that the enforcement is strong. Please clarify that it is requirement or strong recommendation. AC7114/4 5.4.1 &

5.6.11

A: The AC7114/4 method group has stated that this is a requirement that shall be followed. The ASTM from which this requirement was taken is a guide but the Task Group agreed that this was a requirement that they wanted suppliers to follow as a minimum.

Q12: AC7114/5 has a requirement regarding the traceability of coil diameters, however the manufacturer could only provide the diameter of the probe, not the diameter of the coil. What should we do in this case?

A: The diameter of the probe is acceptable

Q13: Please explain how you review the condition of TAM panel standards [Pratt and Whitney TAM 146040 (PSM-5) panels] for deterioration on an annual basis that is compliance with the to checklist requirement? What evidence needs to be provided to audit for review?

A: The method you use needs to be defined in full in a procedure. Then the measurements need to be recorded in a table that shows if there were

6 any changes in size and it would be a permanent record that needs to be controlled.

Q14: Does the level 3 need to review the calibration certificates for all NDT equipment and instruments? Is it necessary to review the calibration certificates of equipment and instruments calibrated in house?

A: Someone has to review all the certificates whether the calibration is carried out in house or done external. BUT it does not have to be the Level 3, but the person doing the review does need to understand what is required and what they are looking for.

Q15: Is “Wash distance of 30cm” strictly mandatory? For some parts, the liquid penetrant cannot be removed from small hole by the washing from the distance 30cm - AC7114/1 Para. 6.9.6

A: The compliance assessment guidance states: “Wash distance of 12 inches (30 cm) where possible,” so this means that where the operator has to get closer to get into a hole or cavity then this is allowed. If you are being audited then it may be wise to have the operator explain to the auditor what they are about to do so they auditor knows why they are not at 30 cm’s.

Q16: This question is regarding the rings used for the system performance test. ASTM E1444 and AC7114/2 specify two kinds of rings, Ketos Ring and AS5282 Ring. Is there any advantage between them for performing the system performance test? In practice, we found it is easier to see indications on the Ketos ring than the AS5282 ring. - AC7114/2 Para. 6.2

A: There are differences between the two rings, which basically come down to the heat treatment of the metal. Unless you have a customer requirement stating exactly which ring you shall use then I would suggest which ever ring is the easier to obtain you use.

Upcoming eQuaLearn Training

Introducing our new Instructor - Nai Puay Guan

Mr. Nai Puay Guan is a Nadcap Lead Auditor and a Shot Peening & Flap Peening trainer based in Singapore. He holds a Master Degree in Engineering. He has extensive experience in Aerospace Quality and Process Management, Surface Enhancement Technology, Conventional and Non-Conventional Machining. Nai served as Instructor and Examiner of the Singapore Air Force School and was the General Manager of a metal finishing company in Singapore providing aerospace special process services. He has co-authored a book on Shot Peening (2006 & 2009) and is a member of the SAE AMECSE committee. Mr. Nai Puay Guan will be teaching the upcoming eQuaLearn training on Nadcap Checklist Review – Surface Enhancement (in Chinese) in Xi’an on 9 July, 2014.

Tel: + 86 10 6461 9807 Fax: + 86 10 6467 3087 Email: lle@https://www.360docs.net/doc/529751375.html,

PRI Professional Development

eQuaLified Publishes Bodies of Knowledge

eQuaLified has recently published several Bodies of Knowledge. These are documents that

describe the knowledge and experience required to be considered competent for a targeted skill level. They have been approved by the aerospace industry representatives on the eQuaLified

Management Council and will be used to create examinations for qualifying special process aerospace personnel.

The approved Bodies of Knowledge include: Chemical Processing

?PD 6103 CPBoK-001/OP-1: Chemical Processing Etch Operator Level BoK

?PD 6103 CPBoK-001/PL-1 Etch & Etch Inspector – Planner

?PD 6103 CPBoK-001/OW-1 Etch and Etch Inspector – Owner

?PD 6103 CPBoK-002/OP-1: Chemical

Processing Etch Inspector Operator Level BoK Heat Treating

?PD 6103 HTBoK-001/OW-3: Pyrometry Service Out-Sourced Owner Level BoK

?PD 6103 HTBoK-002/OW-3: Pyrometry Service In-House Owner Level BoK

?PD 6103 HTBoK-001/PL-2 Pyrometry Service Out-Sourced Planner

?PD 6103 HTBoK-001/PL-2 Pyrometry Service In-House Planner

These BoKs are available on the Performance Review Institute website (https://www.360docs.net/doc/529751375.html, ) and provide all relevant information needed to prepare for the corresponding examinations which are currently being developed.

For more information, or to get involved, please contact eQuaLified@https://www.360docs.net/doc/529751375.html,

Course Date Venue Nadcap Checklist Review – Surface Enhancement

9 Jul Xi’an Nadcap Checklist Review –

Chemical Processing 20 Aug Dalian

Anodizing – Process Planner 21-22 Aug Dalian Introduction to Pyrometry

15-17 Sep Guiyang

Nadcap Checklist Review – Heat

Treating 17-18 Sep Guiyang

Root Cause Corrective Action

19-20 Sep Guiyang Introduction to Pyrometry

22-24 Sep Kaohsiung

Heat Treating – Process Owner

24-26 Sep Kaohsiung