SACL Supplier Facility Audit (Summary)

Supplier SACL Support Representative(s) Systems unable to meet SACL requirements

<67
M/S Chopra Auto Tech C Suresh, Sanjeev Kumar, Rajesh Srivatsa (Not Approved)

Supplier Address Audit Date(s) Systems acceptable but require action plan
67-80
PLOT NO.12A, Industrial Park-4, Vill. Begampur, 07.Oct.2015 (Interim Approval)
Industrial Park 4, Haridwar - Audit (Self Certification or SACL Conducted) Systems meet or exceed SACL requirements
Uttarakhand, India >80
SACL conducted (Full Approval)
Post Code 1 - SACL Representative Auditor) 1 - SACL Representative (Telephone & Email)
247663 C Suresh Mr. Sanjeev Kumar - 09536907592 - sanjeev.kumar@satyamauto.in
Country 1 - Supplier Support Representative 1 - Supplier Representative (Telephone & Email)
India Mr. Rohatas Yadav Rohatav Yadav - 09690080829
Product 2 - Supplier Support Representative 2 - Supplier Representative (Telephone & Email)
Sheetmetal products ( Pressing and welding ) Mr. Pundir Mr. Pundir - 0941028904
Part Classification (Code A,B or C) Quality Certificate/Number/Expiry Date Environmental Certificate/Number/Expiry Date
A, B Class parts TS16949 Certified - by Quality Austria - 03208/4 dt. 16.2.15 and valid till 15.2.18 Not exists

MANAGEMENT (15% weighting) PRODUCTION READINESS (25% weighting) Summary of observation

Maximum Points Available: 51 Maximum Points Available: 27
1.0 Quality Management System 6 6.0 Production Readiness 13 Positives :
2.0 Management Responsibility 3 1. Good infrastructure on machineries and equipments.
3.0 Documentation Management 3 2.Top management committement for improvements
4.0 Resource Management 2 3. Shop floor control on processes are good
5.0 Health, Safety & Environment 5 Area for improvement :
1. Control on incoming parts needs singnificant improvement
Total Points: 19 Total Points: 13 2. Material handling is not as per engineering standards. ( ie. Parts are
Section Score: 37.25% Section Score: 48.15% thrown between processes )
QUALITY ASSURANCE & PROCESS CONTROL (30% weighting) MANUFACTURING (30% weighting) 3. Control on gauges calibration to be more vigilant to sustain the
Maximum Points Available: 45 Maximum Points Available: 57 qulaity
7.0 Quality Assurance 8 11.0 Identification & Traceability 4 4. Daily PDCA on Quality to be improved
8.0 Statistical Process Control 3 12.0 Production Control 4 5. PM schedule adherence to be improved
9.0 Control and Monitoring of Measurement Devices 1 13.0 Manufacturing, Monitoring & Measurement 11 6. Control on non-confirming products in the shop floor to be improved
10.0 Control of Non-Conforming Product 4 14.0 Inventory & Storage 5 7. Knowledge on FMEA, Control Plan and PPAP to be improved
15.0 Preventative Maintenance 2 Signature :
Total Points: 16 Total Points: 26
Section Score: 35.56% Section Score: 45.61%
OVERALL AUDIT SCORE

NOT APPROVED
Audit Score: 42% SACL Auditor Supplier Representative
 SACL Supplier Facility Audit (Scoring)
MANAGEMENT
1.0 Quality Management System Number of Total Awarded
1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 Questions Points Points
3 1 1 1 4 6 50.00%
2.0 Management Responsibility Number of Total Awarded
2.01 2.02 2.03 Questions Points Points
1 1 1 3 3 33.33%
3.0 Document Management Number of Total Awarded
3.01 3.02 3.03 Questions Points Points
1 1 1 3 3 33.33%
4.0 Resource Management Number of Total Awarded
4.01 Questions Points Points
2 1 2 66.67%
5.0 Health, Safety & Environment Number of Total Awarded
5.01 5.02 5.03 5.04 5.05 5.06 Questions Points Points
0 0 1 2 1 1 6 5 27.78%
PRODUCTION READINESS
6.0 Production Readiness Number of Total Awarded
6.01 6.02 6.03 6.04 6.05 6.06 6.07 6.08 6.09 Questions Points Points
1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 9 13 48.15%
QUALITY ASSURANCE
7.0 Quality Assurance Number of Total Awarded
7.01 7.02 7.03 7.04 7.05 7.06 Questions Points Points
1 1 1 2 1 2 6 8 44.44%
8.0 Statistical Process Control Number of Total Awarded
8.01 8.02 8.03 8.04 Questions Points Points
1 0 1 1 4 3 25.00%
9.0 Control of Monitoring and measuring Devices Number of Total Awarded
9.01 Questions Points Points
1 1 1 33.33%
10.0 Control of Non-conforming Product Number of Total Awarded
10.01 10.02 10.03 10.04 Questions Points Points
1 1 1 1 4 4 33.33%

MANUFACTURING
11.0 Identification and Traceability Number of Total Awarded
11.01 11.02 11.03 Questions Points Points
1 1 2 3 4 44.44%
12.0 Production Control Number of Total Awarded
12.01 12.02 Questions Points Points
2 2 2 4 66.67%
13.0 Manufacturing, Monitoring and Measurement Number of Total Awarded
13.01 13.02 13.03 13.04 13.05 13.06 13.07 Questions Points Points
1 1 2 2 2 2 1 7 11 52.38%
14.0 Inventory and Storage for Goods Inwards and Despatch Number of Total Awarded
14.01 14.02 14.03 14.04 14.05 Questions Points Points
1 1 1 1 1 5 5 33.33%
15.0 Preventative Maintenance Number of Total Awarded
15.01 15.02 Questions Points Points
1 1 2 2 33.33%
 SACL Supplier Facility Audit
C Suresh, Sanjeev Kumar, Rajesh Srivatsa Actions needed
Audit Category Summary It is observed that the radar chart shows the needs of immeidate actions on the 4 heads
explained in details in the next pages.

Audit Good Standard Poor

Kindly plot an action plan and send back to us within 7 days of after receipt of this audit report
Results
with target date and responsibilities ( Name of the person )

Pl. go thro' the detailed report given below.

Management
100.00

75.00

50.00

25.00

Production
Manufacturing 0.00
Readiness

Quality Assurance
 SACL Supplier Evaluation process on 'Management '
No. Question
Is there a recognised National and/or International
1.01
Quality Management System?
Is a quality policy established, communicated and
1.02
understood throughout the organisation?
Are Key Performance Indicators in place and used
1.03
throughout the business?
Is there a suitable procedure for selection and
1.04 control of sub suppliers and Purchased Product ?
ISO 9001:2008 clause 7.4.1
No. Question
Is there a member of management who is
responsible
a) for establishing, implementing and maintaining
quality systems and processes
2.01
b) reporting on the QMS performance?
c) reporting any need(s) for improvement?
d) promotion of awareness of customer
requirements throughout the organisation?
Does the organisation have a business plan and
review the effectiveness of its QMS ?
a) at planned intervals, to ensure its continuing
suitability , adequacy and effectiveness?
2.02
B) for improvement opportunities and the need for
changes?
Are the records from the management review
maintained
1.0 QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
Evidence Required C Suresh, Sanjeev Kumar, Rajesh Srivatsa Status Observations Action
* Quality Manual
* (3) ISO9001:2008 or TS16949
* Procedures
* (2) ISO9001:2008 or TS16949 certification in next 3 months TS16949 Certified on 16.2.15. Certificate no.
* Process maps
* (0) No Accreditation, Certificate out of date or Scope does not meet 3 03208/4 and valid till 15.2.18
* Certification (scope)
SACL Requirement
* Certification Body
* (3) Evidence of continuous review Quality Policy is available in exhibited in the shop
* (2) Formal Quality Policy is in use and well cultivated floor. However the quality policy is not cultivated in
* Quality Policy
* Quality Operating System * (1) Informal / Incomplete Quality Policy 1 the working personnel.
* (0) No Evidence of Quality Policy in place Not visible in the shop floor and other locations
predominantly.
* (3) Regular revision of targets based on reviews
KRAs are in place. However there is no evidence
* (2) Formal Process in place with performance reported to all
* Data Analysis report in reviewing those KRA on monthly basis. The
personnel, Actions taken against non conforming KPI's action plan for improvements / gap is not evident
* Customer quality targets * (1) Informal/Incomplete KPI's. Not up to dates , Not Visible
* Internal Quality Metrics / KPIs 1 during the audit.
throughout the business, and not assessable to shop floor ; * (0) No 1. No formal customer return analysis.
* Action Plans KPI's in place 2. No. supplier PPM calculation and actions
3. Supplier rating is not calculated
* Documented Procedure
* Organization chart
* Approved supplier list * (3) Evidence of on-going development and rationalisation of It is evident that the approved supplier list is
* Supplier Quality Improvement activities suppliers available. However the NPD parts are not being
updated in the list.
* Heat Treating ; * Painting * (2) Formal system defining responsibilities and methods for
* Plating ; * Purchase Order determining suppliers capabilities 1
PPAP system is not evident for the supplier parts.
* Terms and Conditions * (1) informal or Inadequate system
* Customer contract review * (0) No systems for assessment of supplier capabilities No supplier evaluation report is kept in the plant.
* Part Validation Package
* PPAP Submission
2.0 MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY
Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action
MR Is available for implementing the QMS from
* (3) Scope of responsibility defined Ludhiana Corporate Plant.
* (2) Formal documentation in place - However QMS procedures of critical functions are
* Organisational Chart
* (1) Informal/Inadequate organisational chart 1 not available in the plant for reference.
* (0) No evidence - No dedicated QMS person is available in plant to
carryout the QMS activities
- Business plan is not monitored on monthly basis.
* Business Plan
* (3) Evidence of management review & closure of actions - QA Head's KRAs are not monitored.
* Management Reviews
* (2) Formal business plan in place with regular review - No Management review practice existing to
* Mission Statement
* (1) Informal/Incomplete business plan in place - not reviewed 1 review QMS performance and gap analysis.
* Objectives and monitors - Gap analysis on the business plan is not evident
* (0) No evidence
* Benchmarking Activity as a whole.
 SACL Supplier Evaluation process on 'Management '
* (3) Evidence of regular management review
Is there a strategic plan for cost reduction and a * VA/VE Initiatives * (2) Formal cost reduction/continuous improvement activity in place, - No structured cost saving plan projects and
strategic Lean Thinking/Continuous Improvement * Cost reduction Plan with record of initiatives implemented. review mechanism is being followed. However it is
2.03
plan? * Kaizen activities * (1) Informal/Inadequate cost reduction/continuous improvement 1 observed that efforts are been taken to reduce the
* 6 sigma initiatives activity cost.
* (0) No Evidence

3.0 DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT

No. Question Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action

* (3) Evidence of review & approval, retention periods defined - No document control system existed in the plant.
* Document control procedure
Is there evidence of document control throughout * (2) Formal process in place - Uncontrolled documents are being used in the
3.01
the business as defined by the QMS?
* Quality management system
* (1) Informal/inadequate process 1 shop floor
* Record maintenance system
* (0) No Evidence

* (3) PLM Software is in use across the factory - No evidence in the deployment of customer
Does the organisation have a process to assure standards / requirement in the plant. All
* Customer and Regional * (2) Documented procedure, clearly demonstrated APQP / gateway /
timely review, distribution and implementation of all engineering changes are done from Corporate
3.02
customer engineering standards/specifications and
Standards/Specifications ECN reviews in place 1 office.
* Customer change notifications * (1) Informal/inadequate process - No ECN list is available for past 6 months.
changes?
* (0) No evidence - Needs significant improvement

Has the organization prepared business contingency * (3) Actions documented and controlled
* Contingency plans - No Risk assessment and contigency plan is
plans to satisfy the customer requirements in the * (2) Formal process in place, Contingency plans complete and
* Key equipment identified. available as a awhole
3.03 event of an emergency such as utility interruptions,
* Material and component supplier profiles.
controlled 1 - Documents on press shop is available and done
labour shortages, key equipment failure, and field * (1) Informal/inadequate process by 2014.
* Identification of critical suppliers/services
returns? * (0) No evidence

4.0 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

No. Question Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action

* (3) Identification of future training requirements - Training requirements of staff and workmen is
* Job description recorded.
Is there a suitable procedure for skills management * (2) Formal training procedure defining with evidence of
* Training records - Detailed plan is made on training requirement.
4.01 and is it applied through all areas of the business?
* Personnel Records
implementation 2 - Howver the training topics for each department to
* (1) Informal/Inadequate plans or incomplete documentation be decided based on the functional requirement.
* Training Plan
* (0) No training plans developed - Gap observed in the training plan and actual

5.0 Health, Safety and the Environment

No. Question Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action

* (3) ISO14001 or Equivalent standard certification

* Reduction Plans
Is the supplier actively looking to reduce their effect * (2) Formal auditable policy in place
5.01
on the environment?
* Monitoring
* (1) Informal/Inadequate policy 0 The company is yet to take initaitves on ISO 14001.
* ISO14001 Accreditation
* (0) No Evidence

* (3) OHSAS 18001 or Equivalent standard certification

* Policies
Is there evidence of knowledge of and compliance * (2) Formal auditable policy in place
5.02
with Health and Safety policies
* Interviews with Staff
* (1) Informal/Inadequate policy 0 The company is yet to take initaitves on ISO 18001.
* Last Surveillance audit results and actions
* (0) No Evidence

* (3) Evidence of regular review, Visitors issued with PPE

* (2) Formal process in place with record of PPE issued, compliance
* Records
5.03 Is there a record of PPE issued?
* Staff wearing PPE Issued
demonstrated 1 No evidence of PPEs used in shop floor
* (1) Informal/inadequate policy
* (0) No Evidence
 SACL Supplier Evaluation process on 'Management '
* (3) Evidence of actions taken and closure fully demonstrated
- Accidents are monitored on monthly basis and
* (2) Formal policy in place with full record of accidents
5.04 Does accident monitoring take place ? * Records of Accidents and Actions
* (1) Informal/inadequate policy 2 actions are initiated for the causes
- However the policy is not seen.
* (0) No Evidence

* (3) Evidence of actions taken and closure fully demonstrated

Have risk assessments been carried out throughout - Lack of risk assessment on the overall business.
* (2) Formal policy in place with full record of accidents
5.05
the business ?
* Record of Risk Assessments and Actions
* (1) Informal/inadequate policy 1 - No evidence on the proactive approach on the
risks assosicated.
* (0) No Evidence

* Building infrastructure, workspace and

associated facilities. - House keeping needs to be improved
* (3) Evidence of actions taken and closure fully demonstrated
* Process equipment, both hardware and signifincantly
* (2) Formal %s / Housekeeping policy in place with full record of
software. - Components are handled non engineering way (
5.06 Are overall environmental conditions suitable?
* Supporting services, e.g., transportation,
audits 1 i.e thrown between processes, kept on floor, kept
* (1) Informal/inadequate Housekeeping policy one over another etc., )
communication, etc.
* (0) No Evidence - In adequate material handling system.
* 5s Policy
* Housekeeping Audits

No. Question
Is there a procedure for product
6.01
realisation ?
Is there a process to identify and /
6.02 or comply with statutory and
legislative regulations ?
Are designated key contacts
6.03
identified throughout the business ?
Is there a suitable procedure for
6.04 control of prototype and sample
parts ?
Does the organization have detailed * OEE Measured
6.05
capacity planning documents?
Is PFMEA and Control Plan
6.06
documentation suitable?
Does the Process Flow Diagram
6.07 show receipt of raw material to
despatch?
Is the supplier capable of compiling
6.08
full PPAP documentation ?
Are SACL significant codes
recognised & understood and are
6.09
requirements for parts submissions
understood?
SACL Supplier Evaluation process on 'Production Readiness'
6.0 PRODUCT REALISATION
Evidence Required C Suresh, Sanjeev Kumar, Rajesh Srivatsa Status Observations Action
* APQP
* Customer standards/specifications
* Customer change notifications
* Floor plan ; * Planning documents - No evidence of APQP practice in the shop floor.
* Change management process - APQP sheet of a NPD is not avaialble with the
* Engineering change request. Quality head.
* (3) Documented procedure, clearly demonstrated APQP/gateway reviews in place for - Engineering change process needs to be
* FMEAs/Control Plans ; * Test specification.
all projects. Project management software in use which enables recalculation of critical strengthed.
* Evidence of design and production validation tests conducted for product
activities. - FMEAs and Control plans are not adequately
changes.
* (2) Documented procedure, clearly demonstrated APQP/gateway reviews in place 1 prepared.
* Design and production test report. - Lot of mismatch between FMEA and Control Plant
* (1) Informal, incomplete plan or communication of timing requirements
* Impact studies and inspection check sheet.
* (0) No formal plan/communication of timing requirements
* Quality plan and Design Record, Control Plan, *Operator Instructions, - DFM studies are not evident.
Product Approval records, resources/facilities and any plans to enhance - All NPDs are handled by Ludhiana plant
them. Engineering team.
* Design validation at various stages of design.
* Gantt charts, Action plans, Meeting minutes
* Project Management Software / PLM Software
* Policy Statement No evidence on collecting the legislative and
* (3) Evidence of reviews carried out, all relevant documentation available and pending
* Material data sheets regulatory requirements pertaining to the products.
changes controlled
* Banned substances list IMDS sheet is not available for the material is being
* Legislative Compliance Audit
* (2) Evidence of reviews carried out, all relevant documentation available 1 used in line.
* (1) Informal, incomplete process Review on this subject is not evident in the shop
* IMDS (international Materials database system)
* (0) No evidence of review or documentation floor.
* REACH (Registration Evaluation Authorisation and restriction of Chemicals)
* (3) Key contacts identified - easily contactable with regular proactive communication
Cusomter representative is available.
* (2) Key contacts identified - easily contactable
* Customer Representative for NPD
* (1) Key contacts identified - not easily contactable 3 However communciation needs to be strengthened
with all customer stake holders.
* (0) No key contacts identified
* Prototype Procedure or Process * (3) All parts clearly identified; Full traceability possible; Computerised system;
* Prototype facilities. ; * Prototype records. Manufacture of Prototypes in house off production tooling. - No prototype control mechanism is evident
- No proto control plan is made for the NPD parts
* Prototype control plan. ; * Prototype tooling. * (2) Parts identified; Traceability possible; Manual system; Segregation of prototype
* Prototype test records. product 1 - No. subcontractor management system for proto
parts.
* Subcontractor management. * (1) Inadequate control procedure or informal irregular practices - Identification and traceability is not exist
* Prototype Parts Identification/Traceability/Segregation * (0) No Procedure or system
* Standard production hour scheduling
* (3) Detailed Capacity Plan in place - OEE - Identified bottle necks , first time quality
* How does the supplier calculate their capacity
used to determine capacity. Capacity planning study is evident. However there
* Bottlenecks Identified
* (2) Formal Plan in place - OEE and Bottlenecks not demonstrated 2 is no calcuation of OEE / action plan to eliminate the
* (1) Informal or incomplete Plan in place causes of reduced OEE etc.,
* Shop floor plans vs. Actual
* (0) No Evidence
* Pace Studies ; * Run at Rate
* (3) Evidence and history of continuous updates - FMEA knowledge needs to be improved
* Product Development Teams * (2) Formal cross functional team defined, critical processes and parameters defined significantly.
* APQP Development Teams for process and control optimisation - FMEA - RPN clarity is not OK. Needs training to all
* Control Plans * (1) Informal and irregular use, Team not cross functional, documents used but do not 1 the stake holders.
* PFMEA's link - Control plans are not made inline with PFMEA
* (0) No system or documentation in place incomplete.
* (3) Evidenceand history of continuous updates - Process flow in the shop floor needs to be
* Documentation vs. Floor * (2) Formal plan in place linked to PFMEA and Control plan imporved significantly. Parts are not moving
* Process Flow * (1) Informal or incomplete plan,does not link to PFMEA or Control Plan * (0) No 1 ZIGZAG path. However the PFD and FMEA and CP
are matching.
Evidence
* (3) Full PPAP submissions compiled in line with AIAG requirements - Supplier is having the PPAPs.
- Needs significant improvement needed on the
* (2) PPAP submissions compiled in line with SACL requirements
* Recent PPAP Submission
* (1) ISIR submissions only ; 1 PPAP preparation ( Not Doucments alone )
- Training on PPAPs needs to be provided to the
* (0) No formal part approval process documentation working team
* Control Plan
* FMEA,APQP,Issued pack from SACL * (3) Formal process, Full knowledge and understanding of SACL codes No SACL Supplier Quality Manual is available with
* SQAM Standard______ * (0) No Evidence 2 supplier.
* View Drawings and ask questions
SACL Supplier Evaluation Process on ' Quality Assurance and Process control'
7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE
No. Question Evidence Required C Suresh, Sanjeev Kumar, Rajesh Srivatsa Status Observations Action
* Quality Manual
* laboratory procedures
* qualifications of the laboratory personnel
* (3) Traceable to National Standard, Accredited to ISO 17025
Is the organization's lab / standardsroom scope included in conducting tests Laboratory procedures are not available for all the calibration
* (2) Formal procedure but not accredited
7.01 the quality management system * test of the commodity
* (1) Informal/Inadequate Procedure, Not Accredited 1 requirements.
* traceability Lab not accredited.
* (0) No Evidence
* records
* Compliance to Minimum ISO9001:2008
requirements
* (3) Evidence of compliance to daily line audit
* Internal Audit process * (2) Formal process in place, Knowledge of procedures and
Does the organization have a defined Audit Procedure and - Internal audits are being happened in a regular basis on the
* Records of Process audits instructions demonstrated.
Schedule? process conformance.
7.02 * Line walks * (1) Informal/Inadequate Knowledge of procedures and 1 - Lack of evidence in closing the non conformances
* Audit schedule instructions. Non compliance to daily line audit, no action plan - Audit is not monitored by the QMS section
available
* (0) No evidence
* 8D
* Customer Complaints
* (3) QC Story , Ishikawa, 5 Why methodology used - Supplier is followig kaizen sheets for the recent issue which
* Procedure
* (2) Formal process in place, 8D methodology in place with cross is the top defect.
* Fishbone Diagram.
7.03 Is problem solving methodology suitable?
* Fault Tree Analysis.
functional team involvement, closure demonstrated 1 - The latest complaint is having one page problem solving
* (1) Informal/Inadequate process in place report which doesn't have the detaled root cause analysis.
* Brainstorming. - Not done as a process.
* (0) No evidence
* Design of Experiments.
* Team Minutes.

Are there procedures and processes for the inspection of
7.04
parts and recording of results ?
* Procedure. * (3) Quality Plan for all the parts with frequency. - Inpsection processes are not regular for both incoming parts.
* Incoming inspection. * (2) Formal process in place, clearly demonstrated, relevant test ( ie. Audited Hook spring at BOP stage and found there is no
inspection report )
* Source inspection. certs, inspection plan and incoming verification data available.
* Audits of supplier sites. * (1) Informal/inadequate process in place - Certificates of 2 - Gauges are found in rusty condition
- In process inspections are done as a process.
* Agreement of Inspection with suppliers Conformity only - Specifications are different from control plan and inspection
Direct online suppliers * (0) No evidence reports. ( 142.7 of Side tube assembly )

* (3) Clearly identified locations and good working area

* (2) Adequate working area, packaging is suitable for the
* Storage procedure. - Parts are not as per customer agreed packing standards.
product, layout Suitable;
* Packaging Locations - Parts kept one over other in the weld area.
7.05 Is packaging and storing of product suitable?
* Type of Packing Material
* (1) Inadequate working area, packaging and storage area needs 1 - No traceability tags between processes.
improvement; - No specified storage area
* Cleanliness and Layout
* (0) Unsatisfactory working area, packaging insufficient in all
areas, no consideration for layout;

* Pre Delivery Inspection Procedure * (3) Visual display boards utilised. Actions controlled and
Is there a process for final Pre-Delivery Inspection (PDI) or * Dock Audit Procedure documented with full traceability
Yes. Gauges are not calibrated in the PDI stage. Needs
7.06 Firewll staion or Dock Audit? * Display Boards * (2) Formal process in place. Records kept 2 improvement. PDIR should be inline to SACL's RIS
* Part Identification Instructions * (1) Informal/inadequate process in place
* Defined Part Locations * (0) No evidence
8.0 STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL
No. Question Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action

* (3) Use of SPC and MSA to confirm stability and capability on a

daily basis for critical parameters - No SPC practice in the shop floor
* Procedure '- List of CTQ parameters not available in shop floor.
* (2) Formal process in place, All equipment is capable, with
* Capability studies for parts in production - Process capability study and improvement plan to be
8.01 Does the supplier prove process capability?
* SC's and CC's ( Critical parameters )
statistical evidence available. Visible at point of manufacture, 1 derived.
Actions documented and controlled - Training to personnel on SPC to be organised for effective
controlled
* (1) Informal/inadequate process in place implementation.
* (0) No evidence
SACL Supplier Evaluation Process on ' Quality Assurance and Process control'
* Documentation
* (3) Continuous improvement program and reviews with actions
* Organization Charts
implemented for gaps identified
* CIP reports
* (2) Formal process in place, Good understanding of lean &
Does the supplier have a statistically based Continuous * Posted charts/graphs
8.02
Improvement Process (CIP)? * focus on reduction of product and process
continuous improvement techniques. Clear evidence of 0 No SPC practice in the shop floor
improvements implemented
variation
* (1) Informal/inadequate process in place
* Updated PFMEA
* (0) No Evidence
* Lessons Learned

* (3) 8D or Corrective actions available

Does the organization's reaction plans for unstable or non-
8.03 capable characteristics include containment and 100%
inspection as appropriate?
* Control Plans * (2) Formal process in place, parts segregated/isolated, in use at - Corrective actions reports needs to be improved
significantly.
* Reaction Plans point of origin in line with control plan 1 - Training on problme solving should be provided to all the
* 8D/Corrective Action Reports * (1) Informal/inadequate process in place employees to improve the problem solving capabilities.
* (0) No Evidence

* (3) Customer Engineering approval

* (2) Formal process in place, records of process change dates - Lack of evidence in robust process of Engineering Change
Does the organization maintain records of the effective * Process change management process
8.04
dates of process changes? including sub supplier chain
available 1 approval.
* (1) Informal/inadequate process in place, not up to date ; * (0) - No evidence on process change records
No Evidence
9.0 CONTROL AND MONITORING OF MEASUREMENT DEVICES
No. Question Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action

* Procedures and Documentation

* Calibration Instructions for each type of
equipment
* Test equipment inventory.
* (3) Record retention and computerised control system - Calibration report of all the process controlled equipments,
Are all inspection and test equipment affecting product * Certifications for calibration masters and instruments are being monitored.
* (2) Formal process in place, All equipment is labelled and
quality controlled? their traceability to international national - However, in shop floor non calbirated gauges are found.
identified. Calibrated, fully working, Fit for purpose, Available at
a) identified recognized standard. - Calibrated reports found with non conformance. No action
9.01
b) calibrated * Calibration results records.
point of use, Protected from damage. 1 taken on the non conformance ( eg. , gauges in pipe bending
* (1) Informal/Inadequate process in place found not ok and being accepted for usage )
c) adjusted or readjusted as necessary * Method of control of calibration settings.
* (0) No Evidence, Equipment not labelled or identified. Not - Needs improvement as the NOT OK gauges can allow NOT
d) protected from damage * Calibration status identification.
calibrated or No measuring equipment in place OK parts to flow to customer
* Type, Identifier, Location, Calibration
frequency, method, Gage R&R status,
Acceptance criteria, results, actions
* Gage/Test Equipment Control System

10.0 CONTROL OF NON CONFORMING PRODUCT

No. Question Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action

* (3) Lockable quarantine area and computerised system;

* (2) Formal process in place, clearly demonstrated with
Are there procedures and instructions for the management - No approved procedure is avaialble for controlling the non
* Procedure appropriate corrective action documentation. Parts identified;
of non conforming products? conformance parts.
* Material Review Board with dispositions Traceability proven; Manual system; Segregation of non-
10.01 a) Internal
* Quarantine Area conforming product, notify customers of suspect material either 1 - No separate area for suspected parts
b) Supplier - Suspected parts acceptance process is not evident.
* Log at the customer location or in route? - NOT ok parts can skip to customer.
c) Customer
* (1) Informal/inadequate process in place
* (0) No evidence

* Procedure stating point of return to

* (3) Analysis of defects with documented corrective action
production flow No approved procedure is available for rework.
* (2) Formal Process in place, Reworked away from production
* Flow or repair/rework in the production However one point lession is been made and communicated
10.02 Does the supplier have a documented rework Procedure?
system.
area and validated using production test equipment 1 to employees.
* (1) Informal/inadequate process in place - Lack of evidence of inspection after rework
* Closed loop re-entry into production
* (0) No evidence
system
SACL Supplier Evaluation Process on ' Quality Assurance and Process control'
* Procedure
* Record of authorization with expiration
date.
10.03 Is there a Concession/Deviation process in place? * Inspection results for material shipped
under concession.
* Proper label/identification for material
shipped on authorization
* Procedure
* Records of analysis.
Does the organization have a system established to evaluate * List of returned parts.
10.04
returned parts from their customer's? * Review product/test analysis.
* Warranty Returns
* Serial Production returns
* (3) Sign off from customer
* (2) Formal process in place, Concession/Deviation Procedure
No Process of concession / documentation.
fully controlled and Documented 1 Only verbal communication is in progress.
* (1) Informal/inadequate Process in place
* (0) No Evidence
* (3) 8D and Corrective actions evident, linked to FMEA
The data of customer return parts is not matching with
* (2) Formal process in place , controlled and Documented
* (1) Informal/Inadequate process in place 1 customer data.
No concrete action plan is in place to avoid recurrence.
* (0) No Evidence
 SACL Supplier Evaluation Process on 'Manufacturing'
13.0 IDENTIFICATION AND TRACEABILITY
No. Question Evidence Required C Suresh, Sanjeev Kumar, Rajesh Srivatsa Status Observations Action

* Lot Traceability System * (3) Computerised traceability system;

Is there a suitable material Traceability procedure in - No traceability of the parts being supplied.
* Suitable product identification throughout the facility * (2) Formal process in place, Traceability Proven; Manual system
11.01 place, for control of product from raw material
* Traceability Management for Drawing issue change * (1) Informal/inadequate process 1 - No identification system is existed in the shop floor
through to finished goods ? - No traceability for Drawing issue changes
* (0) No Evidence

No identiciation in the incoming area, inprocess and final

* (3) Computerised system; despatch area.
* (2) Formal process in place, all parts identified; Manual system There is a bright possibility that the OK and NOT OK Parts can
11.02 Is their a suitable material Identification Procedure ? * Suitable product identification throughout the facility
* (1) Informal/inadequate process 1 get mixed-up in the shop floor
* (0) No Evidence - In some cases the defect of operation missing is identified at
SACL receipt staage
* Procedure (3) Evidence of regular review
Are customer requirements part of the identification * Documentation * (2) Formal process is place, compliance demonstrated Parts are idenfieid as per customer requirements ( eg. Side
11.03
procedure ? * Part No * (1) Informal/inadequate process 2 stand bracket green dots. )
* Logo's * (0) No evidence
14.0 PRODUCTION CONTROL
No. Question Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action

* No Faults Forward process

* Documentation
* Complete Standardized Work
* Visual
* Control Plan
- Attempts are evident on providing visual controls in the shop
* Speak to Operator
* (3) Completely controlled thro' visuals floor in all processes - Very good intiative.
* Identification - Pokayoke auidts are been done on regular basis. However No
Do instructions for running the process exist * (2) Formal process in place, inclusive of Standard Operating procedure/work
* Availability of work instructions at the workstation. action taken for Non-working POkayokes.
(operator instructions) for all employees having instruction clearly demonstrated in all areas
12.01
responsibilities for the operation of processes ?
* Are they available in the local language
* (1) Informal/inadequate process, poor detail, incomplete. 2 - Operatros not checking the critical parameter in the line by
* 1st off last off checks or Relevant sampling plan himself. Quality is left to Quality engineer
* (0) No Evidence ( ie. There is no check points for the operatory. Only QA
Do instructions
inspectors are checking the product and non conformance are
a) have the correct content?
not communciated to production team.
b) address stop/start or line down procedures?
c) identify the critical and significant characteristics at the stations
that produce them?
d) take into account the literacy and language of all operators?
e) identify who is authorized to do what?

* (3) Visual aids, master samples clearly controlled in all quality control areas
* Visual * (2) Formal process in place, inclusive of standard operating procedure/work - No master sample and limit sample is available with supplier in
Are visual aids and/or boundary samples required? If
12.02
so, are they available to the operator ?
* Documentation instruction clearly demonstrated in all areas 2 critical stages and maintained well. However the customer
* Boundary Sample calibration * (1) Informal/Inadequate process in place, poor detail, incomplete. ; * (0) No approved limit sample can be made available in the statiions
evidence

No. Question
Are quality requirements effectively monitored
during serial production with the implemented
13.01 inspection, measuring and test equipment?
Is there a suitable procedure for in process test and
inspection status? ISO 9001:2008 clause 7.5.3
Are defined and separate containers/areas available * Visual
13.02
for good, rework, and scrap product ?
13.03 Are process quality checks defined and recorded ?
If there is more than one shift, how does information * Logs
13.04
get passed across shifts ?
Are Mistake Proofing devices well-defined for
purpose and intent? Are Mistake Proofing devices
13.05
checked initially and regularly per an established
procedure ?
For appearance items, does the supplier have
13.06 masters for colour, grain, gloss, texture, etc., as
appropriate?
13.07 Is the Manufacturing Layout suitable?
No. Question
Does packaging and material handling protect parts
from damage and contamination?
14.01
a) during goods inwards processing?
b) during delivery to the intended destination
Is the raw material/finished goods stored in assigned * Documentation vs. Floor
14.02 locations ? Is storage appropriate to prevent damage * Plant Layout
and deterioration ?
SACL Supplier Evaluation Process on 'Manufacturing'
15.0 MANUFACTURING, MONITORING & MEASUREMENT
Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action
* (3) Well equipped test facilities and sophisticated measuring equipment, actions for
* PFMEA
non compliance documented and actioned.
* Control Plan
* (2) Formal process in place, Adequate test facilities and measuring equipment exist,
* Quality History Test facilities are adequate. Calibraiton of all IMTEs needs
calibrated at specified intervals and traceable to national or international standards,
* Effectiveness of controls of avoid quality issues
records can be clearly demonstrated, Test and inspection status fully complete and 1 attention. Rusty gauges are found in BOP area.
* Procedure Intruments are calibrated by extrenal agency
controlled. Results documented.
* Documentation
* (1) Informal/Inadequate process
* Test Reports
* (0) No evidence
No separate avaialble for rework and scrap location at individual
* (3) Computerised control system stations. However a RED bin is available to collect the rejected
* Control Plan
* (2) Formal process in place, Documented procedures used in all areas. Parts identified; piece.
* Containers
Traceability proven; Manual system; Segregation of non-conforming product 1 - Parts traceability is not meeting the requirement.
* (1) Informal/Inadequate process in Place - FIFO isnot followed in incoming area / inprocess.
* Disposition documents - Unidentified parts are available in the shop floor
* (0) No evidence
- Manual system is followed.
* (3) Evidence of control charts in place and actions taken thro; PDCA approach - Process parameters are regularly being checked at shop floor.
* Production vs. Scrap Data * (2) Formal process in place, recording of defined quality checks up to date and - However the process parameter gauges are not in visible
* Requirements vs. Actual Production Report available; targets set and regularly monitored 2 location in welding area. Very difficult to the inspectors to
* Downtime Records * (1) Informal/Inadequate process understand the parameters conformance.
* (0) No evidence
* Procedure * (3) Daily handover meeting
* (2) Formal documented handover
* Interviews * (1) Informal Verbal process 2 No 2nd shift is being practiced in the shop floor.
* Pre-shift/Handover Meetings * (0) No Evidence
* Control Plan * (3) Full interlock Poke-Yoke devices with daily validation
* Devices * (2) Formal process in place, Poke-yoke devices with weekly/monthly validation Pokayoke systems are being monitored on daily.
* Good/Bad Masters * (1) Informal/inadequate use of poke-yoke 2 Non working Pokayokes needs attention in the shop floor.
* PFMEA * (0) No evidence
* (3) Documented renewal schedule
Masters * (2) Formal process in place , masters available - identified and current Internal approved samplesa are available in the shop in critical
Proper storage area with masters * (1) Informal/inadequate process 2 stations
* (0) No evidence
* Layout
* Best practises and 7 wastes identified and actioned. Process flow
* (3) Excellent consideration. Supporting documents in place, everything correctly
with only necessary stock in line. Manufacturing layout needs to be changed to facilitate single
labelled, visual aids in place. Single piece flow etc.
* OEE monitored piece flow. ( eg. pipe welding area )
* (2) Good consideration. Supporting documents in place, everything correctly labelled,
* Layout
visual aids in place. 1 - 5S needs significant improvement.
* Building design flexible and room for expansion. - Visual controls to be changed for ease of viewing
* (1) Inadequate consideration, poor supporting documentation. - No traceability system between processes
* Machine / Cell layout is suitably arranged for standardised work at
* (0) No planning or consideration for the layout of the work area
Takt time.
* Machines / Cells can be moved easily. Services flexible.
14.0 INVENTORY AND STORAGE FOR GOODS INWARDS AND DESPATCH
Evidence Required Look For Status Observations Action
* Procedure * (3) Customer approved packing and storage No customer approved packaging and traceability.
* PFMEA * (2) Specification sheets exist, clearly demonstrated, Equipment is fully working; - Bin details available with QTY but how to pack is not
* Packaging reviews. Calibrated; Fit for purpose; Available; 1 mentioned.
* Proper utilization. * (1) Informal/ inadequate process - Current packing system causing defects like dent, damage,
bend and dimn. Variation etc.,
* (0) No evidence
* (3) Computerised system - clearly identified locations - good consideration for
prevention of damage, good working environment - No raw material is found in rusted condition.
- Unidentified parts are lying in the incoming stores.
* (2) Formal process in place - defined locations - Adequate working environment.
* (1) Informal process, some part locations identified, limited control, inadequate 1 - No FIFO is followed.
* Preservation ( Rust, Dust etc., ) - No evidence between OK and NOT OK material.
working environment. - No separate place for NOT OK material storage
* (0) No part locations identified, Unsatisfactory working environment.

Are there procedures and processes for Part
14.03
identification and Labelling of parts?
Are there procedures and processes for the
14.04 management of part expiry e.g. shelf life and stock
rotation ?
Does the supplier have an adequate system for
controlling stock and material scheduling levels? Is
14.05
there a process to ensure fluctuating customer
requirements can be controlled ?
No. Question
IS there Documented TPM Procedure In Place with
15.01 responsibilities defined ?
Does the supplier have Procedures for the
calibration, maintenance and repair of tooling and
15.02
fixtures ? Including Adequate spares with proper
torage
SACL Supplier Evaluation Process on 'Manufacturing'
* Receiving Inspection Process Controls.
* Process Controls
* FIFO
* MRP System
* Supplier has adequate systems throughout the stores area
* Employees are trained and fully understand procedures
Evidence Required
* Is the Identification and calibration of Machinery and
manufacturing equipment suitable
* instructions for utilisation, maintenance and adjustment
* Preventive Maintenance procedure
* Key equipment list.
* Maintenance records.
* Predictive maintenance examples
a) planned maintenance activities?
b) packaging and preservation of equipment, tooling, gauging?
c) availability of replacement parts for key manufacturing
equipment (Critical Spares)?
d) documenting, evaluating and improving maintenance objectives?
* Tool Management process/Procedure
* Tool room staffed with appropriate personnel
* Tooling Register / Tool life monitoring
* Organization Charts
* Fixture calibration Records
* Customer Notification communications.
* Identification
* Storage environment
* Damage reports ; * Tooling Report
* (3) Computerised system;
* (2) Formal process in place, all parts identified; Manual system
* (1) Informal/inadequate process 1 No proper incoming inspection system.
* (0) No Evidence
* (3) Evidence of FIFO
- No evidence of FIFO.
* (2) Formal process exists, clearly demonstrated 1 - Lack of evidence of the incoming process controls
* (1) Informal process exists but is inadequate/not fully utilised ; * (0) No evidence
* (3) Automatic trigger limits identified
* (2) Formal process in place and demonstrated e.g. buffer stock in place Daily meeting is happending to review the shortage of material.
* (1) Informal/Inadequate process - supplier reacts to fluctuating demand at time of 1 - No computerised system for monitoring the child parts stock.
concern. ; * (0) No Evidence
17.0 Preventative Maintenance
Look For Status Observations Action
* (3) OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness) monitoring - No OEE calcuation / monitoring system evident in the palnt.
* (2) Formal process in place, All equipment is labelled and identified. Process gauges - Key equipments / machineries are not listed.
calibrated, Documented procedures, parameter setting sheet clearly visible on all - PM schedule for equipments / machineries needs focus to
equipment. TPM schedule and asset register. operator TPM 1 cover in the PM / calibration schedule as per the plan.
* (1) Informal/inadequate process in place - Key critical spare list for equipments / machiners are not
evident
* (0) No evidence
* (3) Retention of records clearly defined with timely adherence to calibration / tool
- Lack of evident to get the tool life monitoring system.
change frequency
- Fixtures are calibrated regularly
* (2) Formal process in place, can be clearly demonstrated 1 - Tools / fixtures spare list is not available. Can lead to major
* (1) Informal/Inadequate process exists breakdown.
* (0) No evidence