9104-1 Preparing for the Second Ballot

1. 9104-1Preparing for the Second Ballot Atlanta, GA July 20, 2010 Michael C Roberts 9104/1 Team LeadBoeing RMC Summer Meeting Atlanta, GA July 20-21, 2010 1

2. Agenda / Contents • Task & History • Team Activities • Team Recommendations • Other Significant Changes • What Does This Mean To RMC Members • Latest Schedule • Q & A

3. 9104/1 Rewrite Team

4. Original Task Requirements • Complete the Trilogy of 9104-series documents, by revising 9104A • Remove sections made redundant by the release of 9104/2 (Oversight) and 9104/3 (Auditor Training and Qualification) • Address the areas of ICOP concern, by enhancing/revising topics identified in the OPMT FMEA (eg. audit days, multi-site, etc.) • Upgrade to the new ISO and IAF audit docs.

5. History • Project initiated in Melbourne AUS in Apr. ’07 • Team activity at each Spring and Fall IAQG OPMT meeting • Full week face-to-face in Long Beach, Jun. ’08 • Several focus meetings due to controversial topics (eg. audit day table, multi-site, ASRP) • Formal Preliminary Review 8/09 to 11/09 • Formal Ballot initiated 1/10

6. HistoryCONTINUED • Ballot failed in the Americas (3/10) due to controversy over definition of ‘site’ • Ballot failed in Asia (3/10) due to mandatory audit days and a variety of individual concerns. • Ballot stopped in Europe (4/10) due to majority voting ‘disapprove’ due to mandatory (no reductions) requirements of audit day table • Discovered that Europe and Asia have not been following IAF audit day requirements. They fear the consequences and costs of requiring suppliers to meet the new “increased day” requirements. • In total, over 60 pages (over 350 comments) were collected related to the ballot process.

7. HistoryCONTINUED • At the Wash DC IAQG meeting, the OPMT reached an impasse; it was unable to achieve consensus as to what direction would be given to the 9104/1 team to solve the ballot failure issues. • The OPMT Sector Leads brought the issue to the SWG for guidance and direction. Some on SWT questioned whether ISO 9001-basis and ISO/IAF compliance was necessary. • The SWG ordered that a special, ‘non-advocate’ team be commissioned to review the issues, identify and resolve conflicts, and define new requirements that, as a minimum, meet the ISO 17xxx and IAF-MD standards. • The team was given a June 23rd deadline to complete.

8. History CONTINUED The Special Non-Advocate Review Team Facilitators: • Ian Folland & Tim Lee Team Members: • Roger Bennett - International Independent Organization for Certification (IIOC) – IAF MD 1 Convener and IAF MD 5 Co-convener • Reg Blake - Certification Body (CB) representing the Independent Association of Accredited Registrars (IAAR) • Norbert Borzek - German AB - DAkkS – Chair of the IAF Technical Committee . • Patrick Boucheron – Turbomeca, France, OPMT Voting Member • Buddy Cressionnie - IAQG 9100 International Document Representative (IDR) • Randy Dougherty – USA AB - ANAB Director – Chair of the IAF • Michel Jacquaniello – Zodiac Aerospace, France • Kunihiro Tanabe - Japanese AB - JAB • Norikazu Tsuchiya – KHI, Japan, OPMT Voting Member

9. Team Recommendations • The special team recommended retaining the previously developed (first ballot) audit day table [Table 2] and multiple site requirements table [Table 6]. • The team developed new definitions and criteria for ‘sites’. • The team created a detailed 17 page “Recommendations” document and “9104/1 Certification Matrix”

10. Sites – New Organizational Structures These take into consideration the unique organizational structures that exist in the Aviation, Space, and Defense industry today. • Single Site • Multiple Site • Campus • Several Sites • Complex Sites • Tim Lee will present a detailed description for each of these new site structure definitions.

11. Other Significant Changes Unchanged From Previous Ballot Failure • Defines AQMS and ICOP • Updates with the new ISO-17xxx-series and IAF MD-x –series requirements standards • Sets surveillance requirements (# files, # assessments) • Sets CB requirements (OASIS data responsibility, administrator, resolution process, suspension and withdrawal requirements, ASRP and CAAT rules, export and confidentiality rules) • Sets auditing rules (team lead must be AEA and on-site, site-limited to two certification cycles, 8 hour audit day) • Sampling of sites limited to 9120 and in same country

12. Other Significant Changes CONTINUED • Rules for certificate issuance and transfers, loss of certification, scope changes • Rules for adding and auditing multiple AQMS standards • Introduces Auditor Authentication Bodies (AABs) and Training Provider Approval Bodies (TPABs) • Rules for OASIS responsibility and administration • Authority of OPMT and SMS structures • Requirements for OASIS Feedback Process • Rules for organization access, loss notification, T1 data • Rules for confidentiality and conflict of interest

13. What Does This Mean To The RMC • We have been waiting 4 years to complete the Trilogy. • We had to compensate by preparing alternate plans for the implementation of 9100C and 9101D. • Due to the new ‘site’ structures for organizations, new audit planning will be required for each certified organization. • There is a higher level of expectation of auditor competency. • While 9100 focuses on process, 9104/1 adds focus to the ‘central function’ processes. • OASIS changes will be required.

14. Latest Schedule

15. Questions ?