AUDIT PLAN

PROCESS / LINE:
CTRL #: AUDIT TEAM
AUDIT TYPE: LEADER:
AUDIT DATE: AUDITOR:
AUDIT TIME: AUDITOR:
OPENING MTG TIME: AUDITOR:
OPENING MTG LOC: AUDITOR:
CLOSING MTG TIME: AUDITOR:
CLOSING MTG LOC:
REPORT ISSUE DATE: AUDITOR MTG TIME:
OPEN ITEM F/U DATE: AUDITOR MTG LOC:

AUDITEE ENG/SUPPORT TOP MANAGEMENT CC

AUDITOR AUDITEE SUPPORT ASSIGNMENT

PQCT, WORK INSTRUCTIONS, QAV OPEN ITEMS

PQCT, QCS, MCS, MASTERS, M&TE, LIMIT SAMPLES

FMEA-PQCT-LINE, PAST PROBLEM, MPR CHECK

SHEETS, FINAL INSPECTION, TPM
TRAINING, HANDLING, IPP & LOT CONTROL, NCM,
QUALITY VERIFICATION

GENERAL PROCESS OVERVIEW

QAV1 EXPECTATIONS QAV2 EXPECTATIONS

1. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED/APPROVED BY DEPT MGMT1. 200PC / 2HR RUN (WHICHEVER IS GREATER)
2. ALL DOCUMENTATION AVAILABLE AT QAV 2. DOCUMENTATION LINESIDE AT MP LEVEL
3. ALL QCS/MCS ITEMS LINKED TO PQCT. 3. PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND FLOW AT M/P LEVEL
4. ALL WI'S COMPLIANT WI REQUIREMENTS 4. MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT IN PLACE/QUALIFIED
5. PROCESS RUNNING AT PLANNED M/P RATE
6. PROCESS MEETS OEE QUALITY RATE TARGET
7. PRODUCTION ASSOCIATES FULLY TRAINED
DRAWING 8. MINIMUM ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS MET
BOM
FMEA / MATRIX
PQCT / FLOW
AUDIT CHECKLIST
HAM MPR
PG 1 Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0
 AUDIT PLAN

AUDIT REPORT
CTRL #: 1/

REPORTED BY: [Associate preparing report] AUDIT SCOPE TIMEStart: Stop: Total: STEP 1 -- AUDIT / REPORT (AUDIT LEADER)

ISSUE DATE: [Date report is issued to auditee] COMPANY / PROCESS: [Company and/or Process being audited] QTYOK: NG: Total: PREPARED BY: VERIFIED BY: APPROVED BY:
1. 200PC / 2HR RUN (WHICHEVER IS

QAV2 REQUIREMENTS
AUDIT TYPE: [Type of audit (i.e. QAV1, QMS, Supplier)] PART NAME: [Part Name from Drawing/PQCT]
2. DOCUMENTATION LINESIDE AT
GREATER) WHO WHEN WHO WHEN WHO WHEN

AUDIT DATE: [Date audit was conducted] PART NUMBER: [Part Number from Drawing/PQCT] 3.
MPPROCESS
LEVEL EQUIPMENT AND FLOW
RESPONSE DUE DATE: [Date all responses are to be returned] MODEL YEAR / TYPE: [Model year and model type of part being audited]
4.
ATMEASUREMENT
M/P LEVEL EQUIPMENT IN
5. PROCESS RUNNING AT PLANNED
PLACE/QUALIFIED
COMPANY DEPARTMENT NAME POSITION AUDIT CRITERIA : [Standard to which audit is conducted (i.e. ISO9001, DWG# / REV, MPR's)] 6.
M/PPROCESS
RATE MEETS OEE QUALITY STEP 2 -- DEVELOP / IMPLEMENT COUNTERMEASURES (AUDITEE)
AUDIT TEAM

7. PRODUCTION
RATE TARGET ASSOCIATES FULLY PREPARED BY: VERIFIED BY: APPROVED BY:
8. MINIMUM ATTENDANCE
TRAINED
RESULTS SUMMARY: [Brief summary of audit findings] WHO WHEN WHO WHEN WHO WHEN
REQUIREMENTS MET
OVERALL JUDGMENT

ACCEPTABLE
CONDITIONAL - CONTINUE WITH CORRECTIVE STEP 3 -- VERIFY EFFECTIVENESS OF C/M'S & CLOSE AUDIT (AUDITOR)
ACTION
UNACCEPTABLE - CONTINUE AFTER CORRECTION
AUDITEE

AUDIT CLOSE DATE VERIFIED BY: APPROVED BY:

ACTION COMPLETE
WHO WHEN (ALL C/M'S COMPLETE/VERIFIED) WHO WHEN WHO WHEN

[Date all C/M's and

[Audit Leader] associated 5P's completed
and verified]

PROCESS NAME /
VERIFICATION OF EFFECTIVENESS
NO. EVALUATION ITEM / CONTROL ITEM JUDGMENT 5P CTRL # JUDGMENT BASIS / CONCERNS CORRECTION WHO WHEN

PART NAME AUDITOR DATE JUDGMENT

"O" - ACCEPTABLE AS-IS; "D " - MINOR: CONTINUE WITH CORRECTIVE ACTION; "X" - MAJOR: CONTINUE AFTER CORRECTIVE ACTION COMPLETE.
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY,
Inc. Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 14
 AUDIT PLAN

AUDIT REPORT
CTRL #: 1/

PROCESS NAME /
VERIFICATION OF EFFECTIVENESS
NO. EVALUATION ITEM / CONTROL ITEM JUDGMENT 5P CTRL # JUDGMENT BASIS / CONCERNS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS (C/A) WHO WHEN

PART NAME AUDITOR DATE JUDGMENT

"O" - ACCEPTABLE AS-IS; "D " - CORRECTION REQUIRED; "X" - CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED.
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY,
Inc. Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 14
 AUDIT PLAN

QAV REPORT
K= QAV # FROM QA.
QAV - 1/

REPORTED BY : A = NAME MODEL TYPE: E = MODEL TYPE STEP 1 -- INITIAL QA SURVEY (QA DEPARTMENT)

DATE: B = CURRENT DATE PART NAME: F = PART NAME PREPARED BY: VERIFIED BY: APPROVED BY:

COMPANY / DEPT. NAME: C = CO. OR DEPT. AUDITED PART NUMBER: G = PART NUMBER WHO WHEN WHO WHEN WHO WHEN

SURVEY DATE: D = DATE BEING SURVEYED Q.A.V. PURPOSE: H = REASON FOR QAV
Co. DEPT. NAME POSITION ISSUE
L = QA SIGNATURES FOR INITIAL AUDIT
STEP 2 -- DEPARTMENT RESPONSE / ACTION PLAN (DEPT. AUDITED)

S RESULTS SUMMARY: PREPARED BY: DEPT MGMT. DEPT SR. MGR.

U
WHO WHEN WHO WHEN WHO WHEN
R
V
SURVEY TEAM
E DOING AUDIT J = SUMMARIZE RESULTS M = AUDITED RESPONSE SIGNATURES
Y
T
E STEP 3 -- CONFIRMATION AUDIT (QA DEPARTMENT)
A CHECK Q.A.V. JUDGMENT QA VERIFIED BY: QA APPROVED BY: DEPT SR. MGR.
M
ACCEPTABLE WHO WHEN WHO WHEN WHO WHEN

CONDITIONAL -- CONTINUE PRODUCTION WITH CORRECTIVE ACTION.

UNACCEPTABLE -- PRODUCE AFTER CORRECTION ACTION COMPLETE. N= QA SIGN. AFTER FOLLOW-UP

PROCESS NAME /
CONFIRMATION AUDIT
No. EVALUATION ITEM / CONTROL ITEM JUDGMENT JUDGMENT BASIS / CONCERNS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS (C/A) WHO WHEN

PART NAME LEADER DATE RESULTS

QUALITY AUDIT TEAM TO COMPLETE THIS SECTION P

O Q
COMPANY OR DEPARTMENT BEING AUDITED
MUST COMPLETE C/A, WHO AND WHEN FOR THIS SECTION IS COMPLETED
COUNTERMEASURES. ONLY AFTER CONFIRMING
C/M AND FOLLOW-UP.

"O" --ACCEPTABLE AS-IS; "P" or "D" -- MINOR CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED; "X" --MAJOR CORRECTION ACTION REQUIRED.
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
Main Evaluation Overall
A
No. Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
M
Category Judgment

PDS, QCSS, QA Matrix, QA Flow, PFMEA,

Source Documents 1
PQCT, QA Maturation Plan, BOM

Critical items on QA Matrix / FMEA

1 Past Problem 1
incorporated into MP documents?

Concerns from previous QAV's and Trial

2 Events addressed and integrated into
process, documentation, training, etc?
CM's from previous internal / external
3 customer complaints remain implemented
and effective as applicable?

2 Documentation General 1 Approved by appropriate authority?

2 Listed in master list?

3 Stored in appropriate network drive?

4
Includes change point identification &
control?

5
Current revision easily visible to associate at
work station?

6 Obsolete precluded from use?

Provide clear details on how to perform each

Work Instructions 7
task (user friendly)?

8
Pictures linked to process step & clearly
communicate requirement?

9
Q-Points, CAP's, A/G-Rank, Insp req's
identified using TGVF color guidelines?

10 Highlight Model type differences?

11
Identify material/components for each
process?

12
Identify required tools/equipment for each
process?

13
PQCT control items requiring 100% visual
confirmation listed on WI's?

14 Written in sequential process order?

15 Specify data collection requirements?

16
Clearly identify verification marking
requirements?

17
Matches PQCT (Process Name/#,
Spec's/Tol/UOM, Tools, Insp/Freq)?

Operation 18
Step-by-Step Set Up Operation Standard
Standards Available?

19
Step-by-Step Start Up Operation Standard
Available?

20
Step-by-Step Change Over Operation
Standard Available?

21
Step-by-Step Abnormal / Recovery
Operation Standard Available?

22
Step-by-Step Shutdown Operation Standard
Available?
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 2
S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
Main Evaluation Overall
A
No. Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
M
Category Judgment

Clearly specify data collection requirements

2 Documents (cont) Quality Records 23
(Qty, Freq, M&TE, Att/Var)?

Specifications / Tolerances / Unit of

24 Measure, Resp Person & Frequencies
match PQCT?

25
All check items listed on and linked to
PQCT?

26 Provide adequate space for data collection?

27 Complete & legible with associate identified?

28
Data in spec or identified and reacted to
appropriately?

29
Stored in designated location which
promotes retrieval & protection?

30
Quality Check Sheets - Include daily
management verification (min)?

31
Machine Check Sheets - start up & ongoing
verification, includes poke yokes?

32
Inspection Results Sheets - defect list
complete & clearly specified?

33
QC Audit Sheets - clearly states
requirements by shift?

34
Change Over Sheets - clear instructions for
each position?

3 Training Plan 1 Training plan & training content established?

2
TGVF created for each position current to
plan?

3
Training of measurement and test equipment
included?

Associate 4 Associates understand function of products?

5
Associates understand the critical features of
the product (Q-Points, A/G-Rank, etc.)?

6
Associates understand the function of their
process including Poke Yokes?

7
Associate performing work as specified on
Operation Standard?

8
Associates understand the use of quality
tools?
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.

9
Associates understand purpose of control
parameters?

Associates understand their role in change

10 points, abnormal handling &
nonconformance?

11
Associates understand the consequences to
the customer of nonconformances?

12
TGVF completed for associate performing
operation?

13 Training Matrix complete & accurate?

14
Temp Associates in compliance with OD
requirements/restrictions?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 3

S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No.
M Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Cart design / use does not create part-to-
4 Handling 1
part, part-to-cart damage?

2
In-process stations suitably prepared to
prevent handling damage?

3
In-process station promotes efficient
work flow?

4
Locator pins and fixtures facilitate loading
and do not create damage to parts?

Clamping does not deflect part to a point that

5 product characteristics do not meet
specifications?

6
Manual operations do not create damage to
parts?

7 Product does not move during processing?

8
Area clean, organized, taped off with
adequate tables, carts, storage space?

9
Cleanliness Standards developed for each
A-Rank position?

10
System in place to address shelf life
concerns where applicable?

IPP, Lot Control &

5 IPP 1 IPP Tags available at work station?
Product Id

2 IPP Tag log available & maintained?

3 IPP tags correctly completed?

Material and Parts Flow / System

Material Flow 4
developed?

5 First in First-out practices utilized / enforced?

Lot CTRL / 6
Lot identification system developed & utilized
PROD ID (scanner/LCS)?

7 Lot size allows identification of suspect lots?

8
Lot Control Sheets - lot information to be
recorded clear for each component?

9 Lot size allows identification of suspect lots?

10
Product identified early in process to
promote traceability?

11
Product properly identified with appropriate
tags?

12
Shipping Log - Includes Date, Shift, Lot #,
Qty, Associate ID?

Change Point 13
Similar parts separated to prevent
Control misassembly?

14
Model Change system exists to prevent
similar parts mixing?

15
Confirmation following model change
occurs?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 4

S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No.
M Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Were machine settings / conditions checked
6 Machine Set Up 1
at the beginning of the run?

2
Poke Yoke / Sensors / Interlocks working
properly?

3 Machine settings & tolerances match PQCT?

4 Machine operating in spec?

5
Gages marked to identify operating range &
easy to read?

6 Machine runs in Auto?

Bowl Feeders 7 Bowl Feeders Covered?

8
Bowl Feeders have visual display to
prevent mixing parts?

9
Bowl Feeder vibration frequency & fill
amount on PQCT?

Load Cells 10 Can the machine insert in manual?

11
W/o insert, load < low spec, and with
small hole, load > high spec?

12 Transducer Calibrated?

Adjustment /
Only Trained associates allowed to adjust
Abnormal 13
equipment settings?
Situations
Does the process stop if an automatic
14 process is not finished? Process
documented for restarting?

15
Downtime Sheet - key downtime issues
listed?

Measuring and MT&E identified with unique id and entered

7 General 1
Test Equipment into calibration system?

2
MT&E in calibration and in normal working
order?

3
MT&E accurate to extent required to assure
product quality?

4
MT&E available as specified on PQCT & at
WI's where measurements occur?

MSA study (including linearity, stability R&R

5 and accuracy) available for equipment listed
on PQCT?
QA equipment function verified with masters
6 or appropriate method at the start of each
shift (min)?

7
Masters identified with unique id and entered
into calibration system?

8
Masters able to control process through
upper and lower limits, OK and NG range?

QA equipment settings are locked,

9 concealed, labeled to prevent or identify
unauthorized adjustment?

10
Equipment stored in a manner / environment
suitable for their usage?

11 Daily/regular inspections established?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 5

S
U
R AUDIT PLAN
V
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No.
M Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Nonconforming Nonconformance tags readily available at the
8 ID & Segregation 1
Product work station?

2
Suspect NG material is identified/tagged &
easily identifiable?

3
Suspect NG material stored in designated
containers (preferably red) /areas?

Nonconformance tag completed; information

4 adequately explains defect & appropriate
action?

5
Nonconforming characteristic is clearly
identified?

Repair instructions, flow handling standards

Repair 7
are developed & approved by Quality?

8 Repair done off line?

9
Repaired product is marked / identified,
including lot control?

Repaired / re-inspected product entered back into

10 processes at point to complete all normal processes (must
go through final inspection) - FIFO maintained?

11
Repair / rework records include part no.,
date, shift & repair associate?

12
Reject and scrap records maintained to track
daily quantities?

13
Evidence of disposition, authority & records
maintained?

Abnormal conditions are clearly visible

Records 14
through RIP or other method?

15
RIP Charts - developed according to KIM
standards?

Part check items, frequency specifications

9 Final Inspection 1
and tolerances clearly defined?

2 Inspection area clean, organized & well lit?

Associates meet minimum training

3 requirements as specified by Organizational
Development?
At visual inspections, masters clearly display
4 requirements and easily viewable to
associate?

5
Cycle time sufficient to allow complete and
thorough quality control checks?

6
Associates understand what each verification
mark represents?

7
Inspection verification marks match
requirements?

8
Packaging requirements are specified and
met?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 6

S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No. Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
M
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.

10 Maintenance General 1 5S Cleaning Sheets developed?

2
Department TPM schedules developed and
maintained?

3
Maintenance PM schedule developed and
maintained?

4
Spare parts identified and maintained for all
critical processes?

5
Is product/process confirmed after
maintenance & prior to restart?

6 Is reconfirmation documented on QCS?

7 Die Maintenance Schedule Developed?

Verification of critical items and combinations

11 Quality Verification Capability 1
completed?

2
Capability level of data meets 1.33Cp/Cpk
requirements?

If capability level of data does not meet

3 requirements, is 100% inspection being
performed?
For cases where process capability does not
4 meet specifications, is there an action plan in
place to resolve the issue?

5
Management of appropriate area reviews
and approves data?

CMM programming verifies parts to drawing

CMM 6
specifications?

Machining/Layout datums and critical

7 dimensions determined/documented and
approved by Honda?

8
CMM programs verified by QA and PMR for
accuracy?

Masters 9 QLVS for all Masters?

10
Masters available and functioning as
specified?

11
Masters Pass/Fail near tolerance
threshold?

Leak Tester Charge, Balance & Detect

Leak Testers 12
times checked periodically?

Validation 13 Trial Results available?

14 MPR Check sheets Completed?

15 Life Test Data Summary available?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 7

S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No. Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
M
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Is control graph suitable for purpose of
SPC 1
process?

2
Do control graph and drawing tolerance
bands agree?

3
Is statistically decided measurement used on
control graph for control line?

4 Is sampling number decided?

5 Is tolerance limit being used for control line?

6 Is control line inside tolerance limits?

In case that control line is above tolerance

7 limit, does 100% inspection done at that
process?

8
Is action taken when dot is above control
line?

9
Is process in control to minimize human
inspection?

10
Is action taken verified to be effective in
correcting abnormal condition?

11
Is record of actions being kept and is person
responsible confirming?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 8

S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No. Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
M
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Is receiving inspection of material
Die Cast Receiving 1 (aluminum/sand) conducted for each
heat/lot?

2
Is there a system to separate different
material types?

Is ratio of virgin material and reused material

Process Control 1
determined/followed?

Is Lot Number, Date, Time, Heat Number and

2 Supplier recorded for each bundle of material
loaded into furnace?

3
Is temperature of molten material
decided/maintained for each heat/lot?

4
Are periodic inspections of material
ingredients performed?

5
Is casting material temperature controlled
before entering mold for each heat/lot?

Are pouring conditions controlled including

6 filling speed, pressure curve, curing time &
clamp pressure?

7
Is die temperature, flame & cooling rate
controlled?

8
Is correct gas and gas content after
degassing confirmed per lot?

Are mold machine alignment confirmed per

Maintenance 1 PM schedule and control parameters
confirmed at New Model, Setup & 1x/sh?

2 Model Type and Cavity number on die?

3
Are die dimensions confirmed at new model
& periodically according to PM schedule?

4
Are dies maintained and repaired according
to PM Schedule?

5
Die lube and coating confirmed according to
schedule?

Are trial and initial part inspections done on

Inspection 1
parts from new dies?

2 Is hardness verified for each batch?

3
Are periodic inspections of die casting and
core measurements performed?

4
Are examinations for sand remaining in parts
performed to standards, if performed?

5
Are mechanical properties tested at New
Model Timing?

Start up Checks include: Temp set point,

Heat Treatment 1 furnace time, belt speed, fans, flame
condition, heat time & energy monitor?

2
Start up Checks include: Quench temps,
concentration, flow, time & delay?

3
Process has alarms for temp, conveyors,
flow, fans and quench?

PM Schd includes: thermocouples,

4 atmosphere controls, alarms, fan bearings &
water jackets?

Shot Blast 1 Shot size and type confirmed?

2 Load size, time, speed & pressure controlled?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 9

 AUDIT PLAN

S
U
R
V
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No.
M Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Air blow / Washing process adequately
Machining General 1
removes coolant & contamination?

Coolant supply and application matches

2 specified requirements and is stable during
production?
Tool life established and verified to assure
3 finished product meets drawing
specifications?
Tool life monitored to assure product
4 compliance to specifications by time/part
count? Traceable to lot control?

5
Tool pre-set list established? Collet/Tool
WI established / effective?

6
Tools numbered/identified by tool room
w/ regrind rules established?

7
Broken tool sensors present and in working
order?

8
BTS programming doesn't create abnormal
concern?

Recovery methods developed to isolate

9 suspect nonconforming material (tool
accountability sheet)?

10
Equipment has a system to prevent
unauthorized machine adjustment?

11
Fixture has model type detection / poke
yoke?

12
Fixturing guarantees part presence &
position?

13
Machine / Fixture ID indicated on each part
for duplicate processes?

Threaded holes must be verified with a

Washing / Drying 14 thread gage, and minor hole diameter
confirmed with a plug gage?
Quality Checks done at the
15 beginning/middle/end of each shift (or as
negotiated during new model)?

16
Is coolant, cutting oil & contamination
removed from part?

17
Are threaded holes and other small features
cleaned w/ dedicated wash nozzles?

Are parts dry and is temp suitable for next

operation?

Are washer/dryer conveyor speeds set &

protected against unauthorized adj?

Fixtures at the correct D/C level?

Do critical inspection point standards exist for

fixtures?

Fixtures confirmed on a schedule based on

historical data?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 10

S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No.
M Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.

Insertion 1 Is it a rule that inserted area must be clean?

2
Are necessary items for insertion conditions
confirmed?

3
Is relationship between insertion amount and
insert load clear according to data?

4
Are insertion conditions appropriate
according to data?

5
Is inspection of + diameter and - diameter
taking place of 100% guarantee?

6 Is surface check being done?

7
Are concentricity and cylindricity measured
when controlling hole diameter?

8
Are appropriate measuring instruments used
to measure holes and jigs?

9
Is tolerance band for controlling insertion
conditions displayed at process?

10
Are insertion conditions controlled in way by
which size rejects may be detected?

11
Are measurements of functioning areas
controlled following insertion?

12
Is pull-out strength of inserted product tested
periodically?

13
Are important processes labeled as such
with signs?

14
Are associates allowed to manually insert
inserts (i.e. repair)? W/I available?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 11

S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No. Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
M
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Start up checks include verification of
Torque 1 process controls including wrenches, alarms,
interlocks?
Electronic torque equipment must meet
2 1.33CpK or be verified by a secondary
process?

3
Are periodic checks of torque wrenches
done?

4
Electronically controlled torque equipment
has visual & audible alarm?

5
Equipment cannot advance part if torque not
achieved? (Required for A/G Rank process)

6
Equipment measures Torque and Angle or
Height?

7
Each assembly linked to its critical data?
(Required for A/G Rank process)

8
Product confirmation done at Beg/Mid/End of
each shift & during abnormal situations?

9
Quality Group confirms product torque 1/wk
(min) & during abnormal situations?

Off-line repair station has same equipment

10 as on-line process? (Required for A/G Rank
process)

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 12

S
U
R
V AUDIT PLAN
E
Y
T
E
A Main Evaluation Overall
No. Sub Item Evaluation Item Objective Evidence
M
Category Judgment
INDIANA PRECISION TECHNOLOGY, Inc.
Are appropriate confirmation items used to
Crimping / Caulking 1
confirm crimp conditions?

2
Is crimp dissection done to check for correct
shape?

3
Are crimp strength and crimp pull-off strength
tested?

4
Is measurement of article to be crimped
controlled?

5
Is tolerance band for crimp determined and
displayed at process?

6 Is actual sample of caulking displayed?

7
Is measurement check of caulking height
performed?

8 Is tensile strength test of caulking performed?

9
Are important processes labeled as such
with signs?

10
Is use of sealing, bonding, and lubrication
agents specified and decided?

11
Are measurements of functioning areas
controlled following insertion?

12
Is pull-out strength of inserted product tested
periodically?

13
Are important processes labeled as such
with signs?

Document #: 09.03.01.01.10 Rev0 PG 13