From: Fetterman, Pat [Pat.Fetterman@Infineum.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 12:33 PM
To: Aimin Huang (E-mail); Aung N. Oo (E-mail); Bill Buscher (E-mail);
Bill Larch (E-mail); Bob Campbell (E-mail); Charlie Passut (E-mail);
Dick Patrick (E-mail); Glenn Mazzamaro (E-mail); Greg Shank (E-mail);
Gutzwiller, James; James Matasic (E-mail); Jeff Clark (E-mail); Jim
McGeehan (E-mail); Jim Moritz (E-mail); Jim Rutherford (E-mail); Jim
Wells (E-mail); Joe Franklin (E-mail); Ken Goshorn (E-mail); Mark Cooper
(E-mail); Mark Sutherland (E-mail); Mike Zaiontz (E-mail); Norbert Nann
(E-mail); Redescal Gomez (E-mail); Riccardo Conti (E-mail); Robert
Mainwaring (E-mail); Ron Buck (E-mail); Scott Richards (E-mail); Steve
Kennedy (E-mail); Tom Boschert (E-mail); Warren Totten (E-mail); Wim Van
Dam (E-mail)
Subject: Minutes of March 5, 2002 teleconference.

Unapproved Minutes of the Mack Surveillance Panel
Conference Call
March 5, 2002

Members/Guests Participating:
Bob Campbell; Charlie Passut; Jim Matasic; Greg Shank; Jim Gutzwiller; Jeff
Clark; Jim Moritz; Jim Rutherford; Jim Wells; Joe Franklin; Ken Goshorn;
Mark Cooper; Riccardo Conti; Ron Buck; Scott Richards; Tom Cousineau; Pat
Fetterman

Liner Wear Workshop / Round Robin:
Jeff Clark gave a status update on the round robin results following the
liner wear workshop. He declined to offer specific data, as the RR is still
on-going, but he indicated the data looked very good. Based on the data to
date and Mack's concurrence, Jeff moved that "As of March 6, 2002, only PDI
results should be used to report liner wear".
The motion passed - (9) Yes; (0) no; (0) waive.

Jeff also suggested a revision to the Round Robin procedure to use only one
liner which contains the full range of anticipated wear measurements, rather
than multiple liners. It is anticipated this change should allow quarterly
calibration testing, starting this June.

Ron Buck has designed a template to facilitate liner marking. The template
is attached to this note.

Reference Test Frequency:
Scott Richards indicated that he would like to see an extension to the one
year time limit to 18 months to allow tests with declining demand, like the
T-9, more time to reach the 10 test limit between references. Jeff Clark
indicated that the TMC would be uneasy with such a long time between
references for tests which are in LTMS calibration. Following a discussion,
Wim Van Dam agreed to seek guidance from the ACC via Rick Klein. A follow-on
teleconference was planned for March 18 to review feedback. (N.B.
teleconference now scheduled for March 21)

Jim Moritz asked if we could re-address the reference requirements for the
T-10A test now that industry has some experience with the test. Jeff Clark
indicated that we should look at data from extended life engines to assess
if we can make any changes.
This led to a discussion of stand calibration versus engine calibration,
which in turn, led to a discussion of what defines an "engine". Following a
fairly lengthy exchange among the participants, Jim Moritz moved to: "Remove
the reference interval requirement for an engine and allow a block
replacement. However, replacement of a complete engine with EGR kip will
still require a reference".
The motion passed - (8) yes; (0) no; (1) waive.

Jeff Clark indicated that he had circulated a proposal for an LTMS system
for the T-8E test using the 100% Din shear data, and he moved its
acceptance. The motion passed by a group voice respones with no negatives.
Greg Shank indicated that he did not want to see candidate T-8E results
using the 100% shear value from tests run before January 1, 2001.
Wim Van Dam agreed to contact Rick Klein to request RSI to begin tracking
the 100% Din shear data.

T-10A Sample Handling and MRV Procedure:
The group consensus is to use the "modified" procedure which needs to be
added to the test procedure, and to recommend the T-8E sample handling using
a paint shaker to insure consistant sample handling.
Jeff Clark indicated that we need to issue an information letter, and that
D4485 will need to be modified; and that will require action by the HDEOCP.

EGR Coolers and Exhaust Manifolds:
Ron Buck reported that the EGR cooler supplier finally agreed to accept an
order for May delivery of 50 units, but at a higher cost that originally
quoted. Ken Goshorn indicated that going ot a "production" type cooler is
not an option do to significant differences in the installation/design. Ron
indicated that he will continue work to identify a long term solution to the
cooler supply problem.
Ron also indicated that he expects to have new prototype exhaust manifold
castings in April. These castings should cut repair costs in half.

Any Other Business:
Greg Shank stated that he is still interested in method 5 FTIR oxidation
data at end of test for possible inclusion in a Mack Sepcification, and labs
should keep 75 hour T-10 used oil samples. In response to question regarding
the need to continue monitoring exhaust O2, Greg replied that it is no
longer needed.