Engineering Procedure

SAEP-381 17 March 2013

Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee

Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards

Table of Contents

1Scope……………………………………………... 2
2Purpose…………………………………………… 2
3 Conflicts and Deviations………………………… 2
4 Applicable Documents………………………….. 3 5D
efinitions…………………………………………
3
6Violations Definitions……………………………. 4
7Instructions……………………………………….. 5
8 Responsibilities………………………………….. 8
9 Cancelled Quality Notifications……………….. 10

Appendix A - Quality Issues

Reporting Process…… 11 Appendix B -
Contractor’s Internal NCR……………. 12 Appendix C
- Quality Issues Escalation Matrix…….. 13 Appendix
D - Examples of Violations
and Escalation Steps………………... 14
Appendix E - Responsibilities
for Quality Issue Notification………... 16
Appendix F - Index…………………………...………. 17

Previous Issue: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017

Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Page 1 of 17
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-3-8801772

Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.

Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

1 Scope

1. This Procedure establishes instructions for escalation of unresolved quality issues

in Saudi Aramco projects including delinquent quality concern notifications.

2. This SAEP does not apply to:

● Escalation of non-conformities identified by Operation Inspection Division
(OID) during assessments of Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) in operating
facilities.
● Deficiencies noted during internal assessments by the Inspection Department.
● Deficiencies noted during Health Checks conducted by APMID for Asset
Performance Management (APM).

2 Purpose

2.1 The purpose of this SAEP is to:

1. Implement a consistent method for escalating quality issues including

Logbook Entries (LBEs), Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs),
Worksheets (WSs) and Delinquent Worksheets (DWSs), as defined in
Appendix A, “Quality Issues Reporting Process.”

2. Clearly define the corporate process for project quality issue escalation
including its documentation, requirements and definition of violation
categories, systems and procedures.

3. Ensure roles and responsibilities for project quality issue escalation are
well defined and auditable.

2.2 The intent of quality issue notification is to report and record quality or technical
deficiencies, determine the root cause of the problem, record the actions taken to
correct non-conformities, avoid recurrence and enhance overall project quality.

3 Conflicts and Deviations

1. Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Mandatory Saudi
Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing
through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee (IESC).

2. Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Manager,
Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.

Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

4 Applicable Documents

The applicable requirements in the latest edition of the following Saudi Aramco
Engineering Procedures, Schedule “Q” and General Instructions (GIs) shall be
considered an integral part of this procedure.

 Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures

SAEP-301 Instruction for Establishing and Maintaining Saudi
Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi
Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-379 Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP- Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured
1151 Materials and Equipment
 Contract Schedule “Q” Quality
Requirements
 Saudi Aramco General Instruction
GI- Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities
0400.001 Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of
GI-0002.710 Facilities

5 Definitions

ACD: Agreed Completion Date

APM: Asset Performance Management

APMID: Asset Performance Management Integration Division

DWS: DELINQUENT WORKSHEET - Mechanism to escalate unresolved Worksheets

CQP: Contractor Quality Personnel

CQR: Contractor Quality Representative

INCR: Internal Non Conformance Report (Issued by Contractor)

LBE: Logbook Entries (First level of reporting quality deficiency using Manual
Logbook or the Quality Management Information System, QMIS)

Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

MCC: Mechanical Completion Certificate

MPCS: Mechanical Performance and Close-out System

MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements

Non-Conformities Escalation: A structured mechanism to progressively escalate

pending quality and technical deficiencies to the concerned management.

NCR: Non Conformance Report (Issued by Saudi Aramco through SAP QM).

Project Quality Manager (PQM): The Senior Inspection Representative responsible

for coordinating all inspection requirements on behalf of Inspection Department with
SAPMT throughout all project phases, from Project Proposal up to Mechanical
completion.

QMIS: Quality Management Information System (also known as electronic Inspection

Logbook).

Repeat Violation: A non-compliance of the same MSAER, project specifications or

standard drawings in the same activity area, that occurred more than once within
six (6) months.

SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team

SAP QM: Systems, Applications and Products in Data Processing-Quality Module

Technical Deficiencies: Non-compliance to any MSAER or project specifications

Worksheet: Mechanism for reporting major violations or escalating pending valid

NCRs as stipulated in this Procedure.

6 Violations Definitions

MAJOR (If any one of the following applies)

1) Violations of company standards including GIs that put the quality and integrity of
the facility including its workers and equipment at risk.
2) Actions that violate the Corporate values by submitting forged items & counterfeit
materials.

MODERATE (If any one of the following applies)

1) Any violation to MSAER, project specifications and approved IFC drawings that if
the next phase of work (critical path) is continued without correcting the violation,

Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

the structural integrity of the next phase will be jeopardized. Such violation if not
corrected in a timely manner will lead to more severe damage or complexity.
2) Any violation to Schedule Q.
Commentary Note:

Minor violations related to Schedule Q listed in Appendix D are excluded from this
definition.

3) If the violation will be categorized ‘YES’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during

the partial MCC stage.

MINOR (If any one of the following applies)

4) Any violation to SAES, SAMSS, project specifications and approved IFC drawings
but the next phase of work is not dependent on the correction of the violation.
5) If the violation will be categorized as ‘NO’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during
the partial MCC stage.

7 Instructions

7.1 Quality Issues Notification

1. Quality or technical deficiencies shall be reported in a timely manner

through QMIS for LBE, or SAP QM (NCR or WS) depending on the
identified violation as defined in Section 6.

2. Potential non-conforming materials, products or work shall be pro-

actively highlighted through the QMIS to avoid re-work.

3. A letter of concern signed by the PID Superintendent shall be addressed

to the Department Head of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever
MCC/PMCCs are approved in the MPCS without ID signature due to
converted and unresolved ‘YES’ items for other Organizations.
This letter shall be copied to ID and PMT Department Managers.

4. A letter of concern signed by the ID Manager shall also be addressed to

the Manager of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever MCC/PMCCs are
approved in the MPCS system and ID’s ‘YES’ items are converted to
‘NO’ without obtaining ID’s agreement. This letter shall be copied to
Proponent VP, ES VP and PM VP.

5. A letter of concern signed by the ES Chief Engineer shall be addressed

to the Admin Area head of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever a
Facility is commissioned without Inspection Department’s

Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

review/signature on the MCC/PMCC. This letter shall be copied to

Internal Auditing, ES VP and PM VP.
6. Starting a project which excludes ANY Mandatory Saudi Aramco
Engineering Requirement (MSAER), without securing the required
waiver approved by applicable management level authority shall be
issued a Worksheet.

7. Initiators, approvers and other interested parties of quality issue

notifications shall be in accordance with Appendix E, “Table of
Responsibilities for Quality Issue Notification.”

8. Third Delinquent Worksheet (DWS3) shall be copied to Internal

Auditing for their follow-up action.

2. Agreed Completion Date (ACD) for LBEs, NCRs and Worksheets

1. PID PQM, SAPMT Senior Project Engineer or Lead Project Engineer and
the Contractor Quality Representative are responsible for determining the
initial Agreed Completion Date (ACD) for LBEs, NCRs and Worksheets.
2. When no agreement on the ACD of any type/category of Quality
Notification could be reached, the ACD shall be decided mutually by the
next level of authority from ID and PMT, depending on the Quality
Notification category.

3. If an extension of ACD is justified and mutually agreed by ID & PMT

representatives, one-time basis approval of ACD extension is
allowed.
If no agreement of the new ACD is reached by the ID and PMT initiators
and approvers, the ACD shall be established by the next higher signature
level(s) per the below matrix.
Quality Notification Type ID Rep PMT Rep

Contractor’s Internal NCR ID Field Supvr PMT Project Engineer

Logbook Entry (LBE) ID Field Supvr PMT Project Engineer

NCR ID Unit Supervisor PMT Sr. Project

Engineer
Worksheet ID PQM PMT Project Manager

In case a conflict on establishing the ACD continues, the PMT Department

Manager shall make the final decision.

Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

7.3 Handling of Contractor’s Internal

NCR
1. Saudi Aramco strongly encourages all Contractors to take advantage of
all opportunities to enhance their quality management system
implementation and to fully utilize their internal QA/QC system towards
a high project quality delivery.

2. ID shall initiate escalation if a Contractor does not act to correct

quality/technical non compliances within the mutually agreed ACD.

3. To encourage Contractors’ QC Team to implement their internal quality

management system effectively, the Contractors’ recommended
completion date shall be accepted, unless found unreasonable by PMT
project engineer and the ID Field Supervisor.

4. When the Contractor’s QC personnel report and document a quality

non-compliance, ID shall follow the work process per Appendix B,
“Contractor’s Internal NCR.”
5. When an Internal NCR has been issued by the Contractor’s QC, Saudi
Aramco quality notification shall be recorded by PID in the “General
Comments” category of the QMIS, for the purpose of Lessons Learned
collection. The QMIS entry shall be closed when the internal NCR is
completed or when escalated to SA NCR due to non-compliance within
the ACD.

4. Clarifications to Appendix D “Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps”

1. Clearance of “Unavailability of approved Contractor QA Manager or

Contractor QC Manager" in Appendix D shall be based on actual
mobilization at the project site of the approved Contractor QA Manager
or QC Manager and not just submission or approval of resumes’.
Absence of an already approved and mobilized Contractor QA/QC
Manager, due to verified emergency leave could be exempted by the
PQM provided that the leave of absence shall not be more than seven (7)
calendar days without an approved replacement.

2. Clearance of – “Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency > 10% of Plan)”

in Appendix D shall also be based on actual mobilization of the approved
Contractor QC personnel at the project site, and not just submission or
approval of resumes’.

5. Non-Conformities Escalation Process

1. Escalation processes shall be in accordance with Appendix C, “Quality

Issues Escalation Matrix”.

Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

2. Logbook Entries (LBEs) shall be made for deficiencies defined as

Minor.

LBEs shall be made through the QMIS or Manual logbook. (Manual

logbook entry shall be done only in exceptional cases and shall have
prior approval by the relevant Division Head.

3. Repeat of Moderate or Major violation within six (6) months will result
to a Quality Notification starting at the next higher level of Violation
Category and Notification. Repeat of a Minor violation due to
negligence shall be considered as Moderate violation.

4. Repeated Internal Non-Conformance Report (INCR) within six (6)

months shall be, as in Appendix B, “Contractor’s Internal NCR”:

1. Escalated to SA NCR if the Contractor failed to Report the

Repeated INCR

2. Escalated to Violation-after-the-fact Entry in the QMIS if the

contractor has detected and reported the Repeated INCR

5. Valid NCR shall be escalated to a Worksheet (WS) when any of the

following applies:

1. Valid NCR is not corrected or completed on the ACD

(including the extension period, if extension is approved)

2. Valid NCR issued by Inspection Department is not approved

by SAPMT within five (5) working days
6. A Worksheet that was not resolved on or before the ACD, including the
approved extension period (if extension is approved), shall be escalated
to Delinquent Worksheet, after discussing and notifying the relevant
PMT representative.

7. Once the project reaches its MCC stage, all open LBEs, NCRs,
Worksheets and DWS shall be transferred to MPCS. Items required for
start-up or impacting safety are to be marked as ‘YES’ Items. All other
items shall be designated as ‘No’ Items.

8 Responsibilities

1. Project Inspection Division Head

1. Reviews and approves or rejects PMT request to extend ACD for

Worksheets

Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

2. Approves Worksheets issued by the PQM/Sr. Supervisor

3. Initiates issuance of Delinquent Worksheet (DWS1)

4. Reviews and approves or rejects the deletion of SAP notifications

2. Project Quality Manager (PQM) or Senior Supervisor

1. PQM may initiate issuance of Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs) in lieu

of Field Supervisor

2. Initiates issuance of Worksheet (WS)

3. Reviews and may grant one-time approval of ACD extension prior to

escalation of valid NCR

4. Decides cases of violations not clearly defined in Section 6 and not listed
in Appendix D “Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps”

5. Performs quality roles and responsibilities defined in this SAEP,

GI-0400.001 “Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities” and
GI-0002.710 “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of
Facilities”

3. Project Inspector or Field Supervisor

1. Highlights to SAPMT any potential non-conforming material, product or

work through the QMIS to avoid re-work.

2. Reports in a timely manner any quality or technical deficiency through

the QMIS or SAP QM (LBE or NCR) depending on the committed
violations as defined in Section 6 and categorized in Appendix C,
“Quality Issues Escalation Matrix”

3. Field Supervisor may initiate issuance of Non-Conformance Reports

(NCRs) in lieu of Project Quality Manager (PQM)

4. SAPMT

1. Ensures project full compliance with SAEP-302, “Instructions for

Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering
Requirement”

2. Approves valid NCRs initiated by Inspection Department within five (5)

working days

Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

8.4.3 Performs quality roles and responsibilities defined in this SAEP,

GI-0400.001 “Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities” and
GI-0002.710 “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of
Facilities”

9 Cancelled Quality Notifications

Submitted quality notifications in SAP QM shall not be marked for deletion without
proper justification approved by PID Division Head. The approved justification shall
be attached in the quality notification being “marked for deletion”.

Revision Summary
28 January 2012 New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
17 March 2013 Minor revision to provide clarification on selected sections.

Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

Appendix A - Quality Issues Reporting Process

Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

Appendix B – Contractor’s Internal NCR

Contractor’s INCR

PID to Initially record Moderate

Repeat Minor
INCR in the General Or
Comments of QMIS,
No INCR? No
Major
marked as “For Info” w/in 6 months
Violation?

Yes
Yes

One-time
Repeat INCR? Completed on
No No No
w/in 6 Months ACD?
extension
granted?
Yes
Yes Yes

Completed
Reported by
No No on Extension
Contractor?
Date? Yes

Yes

Change QMIS entry

to “Violation-after-the
fact”

Completed on Yes
ACD?

No

One-time
Completed on
Yes Yes
Extension date?
extension
granted?
No
No

Escalate INCR into

SA-NCR, then
Close INCR & QMIS

Follow the
Quality Issue
Close INCR & QMIS
Reporting
Process

Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

Appendix C - Quality Issues Escalation Matrix

Violation 1st ESCALATION STAGES

Type Notification 1 2 3 4 5

Minor LBE NCR WS DWS1 DWS2 DWS3

Moderate NCR WS DWS1 DWS2 DWS3 -

Major WS DWS1 DWS2 DWS3 - -

Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

Appendix D - Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps

ESCALATION MATRIX
Recommended Phase for Violation Category
S/N Sample Violation Proactive Notification

1. Forged Quality Documents Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC Major

Meetings
Procurement and/or Installation of counterfeit materials
classified as inspectable per SAEP-1151 Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC
2. Major
Note: For non-inspectable materials, PQM decides on Meetings
the initial Violation Category
Starting a project which excludes ANY Mandatory
Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER),
3. without securing the required waiver approved by Job X/Kick-off Meetings Major
applicable management level authority.

Unavailability of approved Contractor QA Manager or Job X/Kick-off Meetings/

4. Moderate
Contractor QC Manager Weekly QC Meetings
Commencing of Special Process activity as specified in Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC
5. Moderate
Schedule Q without approved procedures/personnel Meetings
Concrete or Asphalt placement without pre-approval of Kick off Meetings/Weekly
6. Moderate
the batching plant or mix design QC meetings
Kick off Meetings/Weekly
7. Use of non-approved third party service providers Moderate
QC meetings
Starting work without IFC Drawings or not submitting
Kick off Meetings/Weekly Moderate
8. required Quality Documents as per Schedule “Q”
QC meetings Minor
Note: Categorization is PQM discretion
Placing RVL/Inspectable materials and equipment Kick off Meetings/Weekly
9. Moderate
with unapproved source QC meetings
Carrying out modification work on accepted systems Kick off Meetings/Weekly
10. Moderate
(PROCESS-RELATED) without SA approval QC meetings
Preservation and Storage of equipment and materials
classified as ‘Inspectable’ per SAEP-1151 that are not
in accordance with the approved quality plan and Kick off Meetings/Weekly Moderate
11.
schedule “Q” QC meetings Minor
Note: Categorization is PQM Discretion

Contractor’s Internal NCR not resolved at the approved Kick off Meetings /
12. Moderate
completion date Weekly QC meetings
Failure of the Contractor to control and implement the
quality requirements of its batch plants, subcontractors
and other service providers as required per Schedule Kick off Meetings /
13. Q. (e.g., Not assigning his own QC inspectors at the Moderate
Weekly QC meetings
manufacturer and service provider locations per
Schedule Q, and relying only on the In-House QC)

Contractor failure to conduct complete quality system Kick off Meetings /

14. Moderate
audits per Schedule Q requirements Weekly QC meetings

Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

ESCALATION MATRIX
Recommended Phase for Violation Category
S/N Sample Violation Proactive Notification

Contractor failure to conduct the 6-months

Management Review Meetings and submit the Kick off Meetings /
15. results/recommendations to Saudi Aramco at the Moderate
Weekly QC meetings
prescribed time

Insufficient QC Manpower Job X / Kick-off Meetings/

16. Moderate
(Deficiency > 10% of Plan) Weekly QC Meetings
Contractor failure to perform/implement inspection per
17. approved ITP without adequate notification or Kick off Meetings / Moderate
justification (HOLD POINT activities) Weekly QC meetings

Contractor failure to perform/implement inspection per

18. approved ITP without adequate notification or Kick off Meetings / Minor
justification (Witness Point activities) Weekly QC meetings

QC Personnel on part time basis, either routinely

performing non-QC functions or covering QC jobs in a Job X / Kick-off / Weekly
19. Minor
different geographical location without prior approval of QC Meetings
the ID Area Field Supervisor

20. Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency < 10% of Plan) Job X / Kick-off Meetings Minor

Failure to submit, incomplete, poor quality or late

21. submittal of the required weekly or monthly Kick off Meetings / Minor
deliverables as required by Schedule Q Weekly QC meetings

Poor or incomplete quality submittals or

documentations
22. Kick off Meetings / Minor
Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as
MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such as Weekly QC meetings
hydro test package of oil & gas facilities

Poor, late or incomplete submission of the required

weekly or monthly deliverables/documentations as
required by Schedule Q Kick off Meetings /
23. Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as Minor
Weekly QC meetings
MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such
as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities

Failure to submit the required weekly or monthly

deliverables/documentations as required by Schedule
Q Kick off Meetings /
24. Minor
Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as Weekly QC meetings
MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such
as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Legend:
L = e-Log Book entry
N = Non-Conformance Report (Q8 Notification)
W = Worksheet (Q9 Notification)

Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

Appendix E - Table of Responsibilities for Quality Issue Notification

Responsible Initiator / Issuer Approver Recipient / Interested/Copied Parties

Addressed To
NCR  Field Supervisor/  Project Engineer /  PM  Division Head, PID
PQM Sr. Project Representative  Division Head, PM
Engineer
 Project Manager
 Proponent Site Rep.

Worksheet  PQM/ID Sr.  Division Head, PID  Department  General Manager, PM

Supervisor Manager, PM  Sr. Project Engineer
 Department Manager, ID
 Division Head, PM
 Proponent Site Rep.

DWS1  PID Division  Department  General Manager,  Vice President, PM

Head Manager, ID PM  Vice President, ES
 Chief Engineer
 Project Manager
 Dept. Managers, PMT &
Proponent

DWS2  ID Manager  Chief Engineer  Vice President,  Vice President, ES

PM  General Manager, PM
 General Auditor
 Dept. Managers, PMT &
Proponent
 PID Division Head

DWS3  Chief Engineer  Vice President, ES  Sr. Vice  Vice President, PM

President, E&PM  General Manager, PMT
 General Auditor
 Project Manager
 ID Manager
 Dept. Managers, PMT &
Proponent

Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process

Appendix F - Index

1Scope………………………………………………………………………..…………… 2
2Purpose……………………………………………………..…………………………… 2
3Conflicts and Deviations………………………..……………………………………… 2
4Applicable Documents……………………………………………………………..…… 3
5Definitions……………………………………………………………………...………… 3
6Violations Definitions…………………………………………………………………… 4
7Instructions……………………………………………………….……………………… 5
8Responsibilities…………………………………………….…………………………… 8
9Cancelled Quality Notifications………………….…………………………………… 10

Appendix A – Quality Issues Reporting Process………………………………………...

11 Appendix B –
Contractor’s Internal NCR………………………………………………… 12 Appendix C
– Quality Issues Escalation Matrix…………………………………………. 13 Appendix D
– Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps……………….……….…. 14 Appendix
E –Responsibilities For Quality Issue Notification……………….……….…. 16
Appendix F – Index………………………………………………………………………… 17

Page 17 of 17