Click on the title below and you will be linked to the appropriate

Table of Contents worksheet. To get back to the Table of Contents, use the
worksheet tab keys at the bottom or click on the back key at the
top.
Appendix Reference Revision
1 APQP Open Issues Appendix_8 4/27/2007
2 APQP Timing Plan Appendix_9 4/27/2007
3 APQP Contact List Appendix_21 6/9/2006
4 AIAG APQP Checklists Appendix_11 11/3/2008
5 Program Review - Paper & Electronic Appendix_6_1 11/21/2008
6 Program Review - Express Appendix_6_1 3/12/2008
All Run@Rate Forms (R@R forms not included in the
7 APQP forms due to size) Appendix_15 2/20/2008
8 Delphi PFMEA Severity Rankings QFP Training Website 9/6/2005
9 Delphi PFMEA Occurrence Rankings QFP Training Website 9/6/2005
10 Delphi PFMEA Detection Rankings QFP Training Website 9/6/2005
 APQP Open Issues
Supplier/Mfg
Location: Part Number(s):
Supplier Contact: Program(s):
Delphi SQE Contact: Part Name:

Assigned Forecast
Issue Issue Issues Date/Status Completion
No. Origin/Date Description and/or Sketch Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Progress Key:

Issue Identified Action Plan Proposed Action Plan Implemented Issue Resolved
 APQP Timing Plan
Supplier Duns: Part Number(s):
Supplier/Mfg Location: (CL) (CL) (CL)

PPAP Date:

Supplier Contact: Description:

Supplier Telephone:
Tool Supplier
AQE/SQE Contact: (If applicable):
AQE/SQE Telephone: MY/Program: SOP Date:

Program Event Start Finish Status Comments

Planned Actual
(mm/dd/yy) (mm/dd/yy) Planned Actual
1) Submit Team Feasibility Commitment Form
2) Source Selection by Delphi P.O. Issued
3) Initiate APQP Activity
4) Develop Product Quality Timing Plan
5) Complete Preliminary Process Flow Diagram
6) Complete Preliminary Listing of Special Product and Process Characteristics
7) Design FMEA- Develop or Obtain Copy
8) Design Review
9) Review Specifications:Engineering, Material, Drawing
10) Review Subcontractor APQP Status
11) Complete Facility & Layout
12) Complete Machinery & Equipment , Tooling Design & Build
13) Prototype Builds
14) Gage Reviews- Design, Build, R&R
15) Submit Team Feasibility Commitment Form - Design
16) Review Quality Systems-Procedures and Operator Work Instructions
17) Complete Final Production Process Flow Chart
18) Complete Process FMEA
19) Complete Pre-Launch Control Plan
20) Define Packaging Specifications
21) Complete PPAP Production Run, Capability Studies, Production Control Plan
22) Submit Supplier PPAP
23) Conduct Run @ Rate
24) Complete Early Production Containment Plan
Potential Issues exists (comments must be noted)
 Supplier Quality APQP Project Contact List

Supplier Code Manufacturing Address

Supplier Name

Contacts Name and Title Mailing Address and E-Mail Address Contact Numbers

Sales Contact

Product Engineer

Quality Resident

Program Manager
in Sales Office

Program Manager
in Manufacturing Facility

APQP Contact

Quality Manager

Quality Engineer

1st Shift Contact

2nd Shift Contact

3rd Shift Contact

PRR Response
Responsibility

Delphi Engineering

Delphi Buyer

Delphi SQE
 A-1 DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
1 Was the DFMEA prepared using the Chrysler,
Ford and General Motors Potential Failure Mode
and Effects Analysis (FMEA) reference manual,
and applicable customer specific requirements?

2 Have historical campaign and warranty data been

reviewed?
3 Have best practices and lessons learned from
similar part DFMEAs been considered?
4 Does the DFMEA identify Special Characteristics?

5 Have pass-through characteristics (glossary) been

identified and reviewed with affected suppliers for
FMEA alignment and appropriate controls in the
supply base?

6 Have special characteristics designated by the

customer or organization been reviewed with
affected suppliers to assure FMEA alignment?

7 Have design characteristics that affect high risk

priority failure modes been identified?

8 Have appropriate corrective actions been assigned

to high risk priority numbers?
9 Have appropriate corrective actions been assigned
to high severity numbers?
10 Have risk priorities been revised when corrective
actions have been completed and verified?

Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1

Prepared By:
 A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
A. General
1 Does the design require:
a - New materials?
b - Special tooling?
c - New technology or process?
2 Has assembly build variation analysis been
considered?
3 Has Design of Experiments been considered?

4 Is there a plan for prototypes in place?

5 Has a DFMEA been completed?

6 Has a DFMA (Design for Manufacturability and

Assembly) been completed?
7 Have service and maintenance issues been
considered?
8 Has the Design Verification Plan been considered?

9 If yes, was it completed by a cross functional

team?
10 Are all specified tests, methods, equipment and
acceptance criteria clearly defined and
understood?
11 Have Special Characteristics been selected?

12 Is bill of material complete?

13 Are Special Characteristics properly documented?

Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 3
 A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST - CONTINUED

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
B. Engineering Drawings
14 Are reference dimensions identified to minimize
inspection layout time?
15 Are sufficient control points and datum surfaces
identified to design functional gages?
16 Are tolerances compatible with accepted
manufacturing standards?
17 Can existing and available inspection technology
measure all design requirements?
18 Is the customer designated engineering change
management process used to manage engineering
changes?

C. Engineering Performance Specifications

19 Have special characteristics been identified?
20 Are test parameters sufficient to address required
use conditions, i.e., production validation and end
use?

21 Have parts manufactured at minimum and

maximum specifications been tested as required?
22 Will all product testing be done in-house?

23 If not, is it done by an approved supplier?

24 Is the specified in-process performance test

sampling size and/or frequency consistent with
manufacturing volumes?
25 Has customer approval been obtained, e.g., for
testing and documentation, as required?

Revision Date:
Pg. 2 of 3
 A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST - CONTINUED

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
D. Material Specification
26 Are special material characteristics identified?

27 Where the organization is design responsible, are

specified materials, heat treat and surface
treatments compatible with the durability
requirements in the identified environment?

28 Where required, are the material suppliers on the

customer approved list?
29 Has the organization developed and implemented
a process to control incoming material quality?

30 Have material characteristics requiring inspection

been identified?
If so,
a - Will characteristics be checked in-house?
b - If checked in-house, is test equipment available?

c - If checked in-house, are competent people

available to assure accurate testing?
31 Will outside laboratories be used?

a - Does the organization have a process in place to

assure laboratory competency such as accreditation?
NOTE: Competency needs to be assured,
regardless of the organization's relationship with
the laboratory.

32 Have the following material requirements been

considered:
a - Handling, including environmental aspects?
b - Storage, including environmental aspects?

c - Have the materials/substance composition been

reported in accordance with customer requirements
e.g., IMDS?

d - Have polymeric parts been identified/marked per

customer requirements?

Revision Date:
Pg. 3 of 3

Prepared By:
 A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
1 Does the design require:
a - New materials?
b - Quick change?
c - Volume fluctuations?
d - Mistake proofing?
2 Have lists been prepared identifying: (Include all
suppliers)

a - New equipment?
b - New tooling?
c - New test equipment (including checking aids)?

3 Have acceptance criteria been agreed upon for:

(Include all suppliers)

a - New equipment?
b - New tooling?
c - New test equipment (including checking aids)?
4 Will a preliminary capability study be conducted
at the tooling and/or equipment manufacturer?
5 Has test equipment feasibility and accuracy been
established?
6 Is a preventative maintenance plan complete for
equipment and tooling?

Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 2
 A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST - CONTINUED

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
7 Are setup instructions for new equipment and
tooling complete and understandable?
8 Will capable gages be available to run preliminary
process capability studies at the equipment
supplier's facility?

9 Will preliminary process capability studies be run

at the processing plant?
10 Have process characteristics that affect special
product characteristics been identified?
11 Were special product characteristics used in
determining acceptance criteria?

12 Does the manufacturing equipment have sufficient

capacity to handle forecasted production and
service volumes?
13 Is testing capacity sufficient to provide adequate
testing?
14 Has the measurement equipment been verified and
documented showing qualification for the required
scope of measurement and testing?

Revision Date:
Pg. 2 of 2

Prepared By:
 A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
1 Is customer assistance or approval required for the
development of the control plan?

2 Has the organization identified who will be the

quality liaison with the customer?
3 Has the organization identified who will be the
quality liaison with its suppliers?
4 Has the quality management system been reviewed
and approved per customer specific requirements?
5 Are there sufficient personnel identified to cover:
a - Control plan requirements?
b - Layout inspection?
c - Engineering performance testing?
d - Problem reaction and resolution analysis?
6 Is there a documented training program that:
a - Includes all employees?
b - Lists whose been trained?
c - Provides a training schedule?
7 Has training been completed for:
a - Statistical Process Control?
b - Capability studies?
c - Problem solving?
d - Mistake proofing?
e - Reaction plans?
f - Other topics as identified?
8 Is each operation provided with process
instructions that are keyed to the control plan?

Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 4
 A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST - CONTINUED

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
9 Are standard operator instructions accessible at
each work station?
10 Do operator instructions include pictures and
diagrams?
11 Were operator/team leaders involved in developing
standard operator instructions?
12 Do inspection instructions include:
a - Easily understood engineering performance
specifications?
b - Test frequencies?
c - Sample sizes?
d - Reaction plans?
e - Documentation requirements?
13 Are visual aids:
a - Appropriate, easily understood and legible?

b - Available?
c - Accessible?
d - Approved?

e - Dated and current?

14 Is there a procedure to implement, maintain, and
establish reaction plans, for issues such as out of
control conditions based on statistical process
control?

15 Is there an identified problem solving process that

includes root cause analysis?
16 Are the latest drawings and specifications
available for the operator, in particular at the
points of the inspection?

a - Have engineering tests (dimensional, material,

appearance, and performance) been completed and
documented as required in accordance with customer
requirements?

Revision Date:
Pg. 2 of 4
 A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST - CONTINUED

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
17 Are the current forms/logs available for
appropriate personnel to record inspection results?

18 Are the following available and placed at the

appropriate points of the operation?
a - Monitoring and measurement devices?
b - Gage instructions?
c - Reference samples?
d - Inspection logs?
19 Have provisions been made to certify and calibrate
gages and test equipment at a defined frequency
that is appropriate?
20 Have required measurement system capability
studies been:
a - Completed?
b - Accepted?
21 Have initial process capability studies been
conducted per customer requirements?
22 Are layout inspection equipment and facilities
adequate to provide initial and ongoing layout of
all details and components in accordance with
customer requirements?

23 Is there a documented procedure for controlling

incoming material that may include, for example,
the following items:
a - Characteristics to be inspected?
b - Frequency of inspection?
c - Sample size?
d - Designated location for approved product?
e - Disposition of nonconforming products?
24 Have sample production parts been provided per
customer requirements?

Revision Date:
Pg. 3 of 4
 A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST - CONTINUED

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
25 Is there a procedure to identify, segregate, and
control nonconforming products to prevent
shipment?
26 Are rework/repair procedures available to assure
conforming product?
27 Is there a procedure to requalify
repaired/reworked material?
28 Has a master sample, if required, been retained as
part of the part approval process?
29 Is there an appropriate lot traceability procedure?
30 Are periodic audits of outgoing products planned
and implemented?
31 Are periodic assessments of the quality system
planned and implemented?
32 Has the customer approved the packaging and the
packaging specification?

Revision Date:
Pg. 4 of 4

Prepared By:
 A-5 FLOOR PLAN CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
1 Have lean concepts been applied in considering
material flow?
2 Does the floor plan identify all required process
and inspection points?
3 Have clearly marked areas for all material, tools,
and equipment at each operation been considered?
4 Has sufficient space been allocated for all
equipment?
5 Are process and inspection areas:
a - Of adequate size?

b - Properly lighted?

6 Do inspection areas contain necessary equipment

and record storage?
7 Are there adequate:

a - Staging areas?

b - Impound areas?

8 Are inspection points located to prevent shipment

of nonconforming products?

9 Are there controls for each process to eliminate

contamination or inappropriate mixing of
product?
10 Is material protected from overhead or air
handling systems contamination?

11 Have facilities been provided for final product

audit?
12 Are facilities adequate to control movement of
nonconforming incoming material?

Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1

Prepared By:
 A-6 PROCESS FLOW CHART CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
1 Does the floor chart illustrate the entire process
from receiving through shipping, including outside
processes and services?

2 In the development of the process flow chart, was

the DFMEA used, if available, to identify specific
characteristics that may be critical?
3 Is the flow chart keyed to product and process
checks in the control plan and PFMEA?
4 Does the flow chart describe how the product will
move, i.e., roller conveyor, slide containers, etc.?
5 Has the pull system/optimization been considered
for this process?
6 Have provisions been made to identify and inspect
reworked product before being used?
7 Are material controls for movement and staging of
product including appropriate identification
properly defined and implemented? The controls
should address incoming supplier product as well
as subcontracted processes?

Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1

Prepared By:
 A-7 PROCESS FMEA CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
1 Was the Process FMEA prepared by a cross
functional team? Has the team taken into account
all customer specific requirements, including
FMEA methodologies as shown in the current
edition of FMEA?

2 Have all operations including subcontracted, or

outsourced processes and services been
considered?

3 Have all operations affecting customer

requirements including fit, function, durability,
governmental regulations and safety been
identified and listed sequentially?
4 Were similar part/process FMEA's considered?

5 Have historical campaign and warranty data been

reviewed and used in the analysis?
6 Have you applied the appropriate controls to
address all of the identified failure modes?
7 Were severity, detection and occurrence revised
when corrective action was completed?
8 Do the effects consider the customer in terms of the
subsequent operation, assembly, and product?
9 Were customer plant problems used as an aid in
developing PFMEA?
10 Have the causes been described in terms of
something that can be corrected or controlled?
11 Have provisions been made to control the cause of
the failure mode prior to subsequent or the next
operation?

Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1

Prepared By:
 A-8 CONTROL PLAN CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required Person Due

Responsible Date
1 Was the control plan developed according to the
methodology described in Chapter 6 of this APQP
manual?
2 Have all the controls identified in the PFMEA been
included in the control plan?

3 Are all special product/process characteristics

included in the control plan?
4 Were DFMEA and PFMEA used to prepare the
control plan?
5 Are material specifications requiring inspection
identified?
6 Does the control plan address incoming
(material/components) through
processing/assembly including packaging?

7 Are engineering performance testing and

dimensional requirements identified?
8 Are gages and test equipment available as required
by the control plan?
9 If required, has the customer approved the control
plan?
10 Are the gage methodology and compatibility
appropriate to meet customer requirements?
11 Have measurement systems analysis been
completed in accordance with customer
requirements?

12 Are sample sizes based upon industry standards,

statistical sampling plan tables, or other statistical
process control methods or techniques?

Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1

Prepared By:
Meeting Plan Checklist

AQE Input
Utilize Program Review Form -or -
Utlize Express Program Review Form
PPAP Requirements
R@R Timing and Requirements
Delphi's Customer Specific Requirements
Introduction/Instructions to all Delphi Supplier Websites.

Engineering Input
Latest part prints and specifications
Program Timing / Critical Characteristics
Technical Documents including sub-component drawings.
Program Information such as estimated annual usage, PPAP dates, SOP dates, etc.
Pilot and Prototype requirements and timing.
Key/Critical characteristics for PPAP

Buyer Input (from quote)

Packaging plan
Quoted Tool Capacity
Estimated Annual Volume

Supplier Input
Supplier Scorecard, be prepared to discuss
Updated supplier information (Supplier Profile) including contact list.
Program Timing including tooling, PPAP, R@R
Supplier issues/concerns caused by Delphi Delphi.
Supplier issues/concerns not associated with Delphi.
Questions/concerns needing to be addressed by Delphi

Other Potential Supplier Input

Information on the manufacturing facility (Location, Capacity, etc.)
Preliminary Process Flow Diagram (PFD)
Preliminary Control Plan
Preliminary Timing Charts
Manufacturing Site Organizational chart
Subcontractors/Sub-Tier Mgt
Capability studies on similar parts.
Major disruptions, Problem Cases, PPM/Total Defects Reduction Plan
Tooling / Equipment Plans
Checking Fixture Plan
Prototype Plan
On-Going Product Assurance Testing
Preliminary PFMEA
Proof of Delphi required quality certifications or transition plans
(Should be posted in Supplier Profile)
Description of Operator Training program
Plan for communication between technical support and manufacturing plant.
Completed Team Feasibility Commitment
Error Proofing/ Poke-Yoke Techniques

Page 19 Last Revised: 8/22/07

 DELPHI PROGRAM REVIEW SUMMARY
Link to AIAG Web Site
Date of Review: New Risk Level of Product(s)
Supplier : (Determine upon completion of Program Review)

Supplier Duns: Sub-Tier Supplier **:

** List if sub-tier supplier contributes more than 50% of manufacturing, controls a key process or directly affects a key product characteristic. A separate program review
may be required for this supplier. Reference Team Feasibility document on RFQ.
Supplier/Mfg Location:
Critical process sub-tiers for heat treating, coating and plating must comply with the AIAG assessment requirements stated in CQ9, 11 and 12. Including qualified auditors
to complete the assessments. See Section K

PART NUMBER DESCRIPTION MODEL DELPHI PLATFORM HIGH VOLUME

YEAR START OF SCENARIO
PRODUCTION (Vehicles)
1
2
3
4
5
6

CHECK IF IN ATTENDANCE
DELPHI CONTACTS
TITLE NAME PHONE EMAIL
AQE
SQE
BUYER
PROGRAM MGR
PPAP COORDINATOR
COMPONENT ENGINEER
PRODUCT ENGINEER
RESPONSE TEAM

SUPPLIER CONTACTS
NAME PHONE EMAIL
PRESIDENT
QUALITY MANAGER
KEY CONTACT
PPAP CONTACT
QUALITY CONTACT
RUN@RATE CONTACT

Highlight first column in color to indicate activity requirements.

LEGEND: COMPLETE (Ctrl-g) OPEN WITH RECOVERY PLAN (Ctrl-y) NO PLAN OR PLAN DOES NOT MEET PROGRAM TIMING (Ctrl-r)

Product Application Forecast Actual

Does the supplier have working knowledge of the Issues Completion Completion
A following items? Description and/or Sketch Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
1 Intended use of product.
2 End use application of product.
3 Latest Prints and Specifications, Traceability
4 Source restrictions specified by engineering.

Design Review
Identify characteristics that will require controls. (KPC's, KCC's, Forecast Actual
CQC's, QCI's) Ideally, a six sigma capability is the goal. Note gaps Issues Completion Completion
B between desired and actual, with action plans to close. Description and/or Sketch Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
Critical dimensions and interfaces of product
1 KPC's, KCC's, CQC's, QCI's, Pass-Through Characteristic/Feature
2 Fit & Function, Safety Compliance
3 Part Packaging Specification
4 Part Labeling requirements

Page 20
 Note: Shipping Container Pkg & Labeling requirements (Suppliers must
comply with requirements. Communicate to suppliers that they should contact (SQ can note date that this Delphi
their Delphi PC&L rep. if they have questions or need assistance. Information PC&L requirement was reinforced with
can also be found on the Delphi Supplier the supplier).

Forecast Actual
Program Information Completion Completion
C List information required below Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
1 Platform
2 Model Year
3 Delphi Estimated Annual Volume
4 Supplier PPAP Due Date
5 Delphi SOP
6 Delphi Manufacturing Site
7 Supplier Quoted Tool Capacity (5 days)

Forecast Actual
Product Requirements & Timing Completion Completion
D Record the following if applicable. Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
1 Prototype requirements.
2 Pre-Production Requirements
3 Other Product Requirements

Supplier Tooling Requirements Forecast Actual

Develop a program review for the tooling supplier on critical Completion Completion
E components. Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
1 Supplier Tooling Completion Dates
2 Tooling Supplier Name (if different)

Supplier Gage Review Forecast Actual

Mutual Agreement on gage concept proposal. Completion Completion
F Certify Gage to product design record. Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
1 Development and Approval of Gage Design Plan
2 Gage Evaluation including Measurement System Analysis (MSA)
3 Gaging Completion Dates

Product Measurement Plan Forecast Actual

Have acceptable measurement methods been confirmed and Completion Completion
G correlated? Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress

Has Delphi received the suppliers plan for dimensional layout and
measurement of the component? (Should include the measurement
1.1 methods, layout, datums, tools, equipment and fixtures (if applicable))
Has engineering reviewed and approved the supplier plan for
1.2 dimensional layout and measurement?

Has the Delphi Receiving Facility, reviewed and approved the supplier
plan for dimensional layout and measurement?
1.3 (Applicable for sites with a Receiving Inspection)
Not applicable: The supplier has received dimensional accreditation
1.4 by the using division.

Forecast Actual
Capability Assessment Guidelines Completion Completion
H List Characteristic(s) to be used in capability study. Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
1.1 KPC / QCI (note details in column)
1.2 KPC / QCI (note details in column)
1.3 KPC / QCI (note details in column)
2 Capability Study Parameters
3 Can your process meet Ppk =/> 1.33? Goal is 2.0
4 Can your process meet Cpk =/> 1.67?

Measurement System Analysis Guidelines Forecast Actual

Add equipment used for Capability Assessment Completion Completion
I and MSA requirements Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
Measurement Equipment #1
1 & Methodology
Measurement Equipment #2
2 & Methodology

Page 21
 Measurement Equipment #3
3 & Methodology
Measurement Equipment #4
4 & Methodology
Measurement Equipment #5
5 & Methodology

Measurement Equipment #6
6 & Methodology

Forecast Actual
Design Responsible Suppliers Completion Completion
J List all issues/requirements if the supplier is design responsible. Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
Was a Design Failure Modes & Effects Analysis (DFMEA) initiated by
1 the supplier?
2 Has the Delphi PDT reviewed the DFMEA?
Are DFMEA open items addressed on an action plan and
3 communicated to Delphi's PDT?

Special Process Forecast Actual

For Suppliers and Sub-Suppliers with CQI-9, 11 or 12 requirements, Completion Completion
K complete the following: Audit Completion Date Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
1 CQI 9 Heat Treatment assessment is required:
2 CQI 11 Plating assessment is required:
3 CQI 12 Coating assessment is required:

PPAP Guidelines
The link below will take you to the Delphi SUPPLIER PPAP Forecast Actual
SUBMISSION CHECKLIST. Utilize the Checklist for PPAP Completion Completion
L discussions. List potential issues below for tracking purposes. Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress

Link to SUPPLIER PPAP SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

CHECKLIST
(Use attached link or worksheet version provided.) https://delphi.portal.covisint.com/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=114313&name=DLFE-103457.xls
1
2
3
4
5
First Time Quality (FTQ) Improvement Process
Forecast Actual
Completion Completion
M Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress

FTQ Improvement Process Initiation

Review Delphi's FTQ procedure and training presentations as
1 required.
FTQ Improvement Process Documentation
Review the use of Gate Charts / Step Down Charts / Alarm Charts
2 (Appendix 31_2 & 57_3)

Check procedure or methods in place to comprehend FTQ

3 documentation and improvement.
Determine if preliminary data from supplier accurately depicts FTQ
4 results.
Run@Rate Requirements
The link below will take you to the Delphi R@R Plan. Utilize the R@R Forecast Actual
Plan for discussions. List potential issues below for tracking Completion Completion
N purposes. Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
Link to Run@Rate Plan
(Use attached link or worksheet version provided.)
Run@Rate Plan https://delphi.portal.covisint.com/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=114313&name=DLFE-103455.xls
Run@Rate Worksheet https://delphi.portal.covisint.com/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=114313&name=DLFE-103455.xls
1
2
3
4
5

Page 22
 WEBSITE INFORMATION Forecast Actual
Determine the suppliers access and working knowledge of each Completion Completion
O Delphi database below. Details Responsibility Date Action Plan Date Progress
1 Capability to access/update the following:
1.1 Supplier Profiles (Discuss Red/Yellow/Green status)
1.2 Supplier Suggestions Program (SSP/SCR)
1.3 Supplier Scorecard (Updated copy if current supplier)
1.4 Problem Solver
1.5 Customer Specific Requirements / Quality Expectations
1.6 Additional Forms & Procedures available on the website
Registered to the Delphi Supplier Website
2 Mainly used for electronic PPAP submissions
2.1 Initial electronic PPAP submissions
2.2 SSP/SCR required PPAP submissions

Page 23
The following instructions are intended to help the AQE/SQE in performing the Program Review. Take a moment to review the
Instructions. The intent of the program review is to engage the supplier in conversations about various aspects of the current
program/parts and determine areas of concern that will need further action.

The form is protected/locked so that users can tab through fields. To allow attachments (such as program rosters) and/or
and/or additional information into any open field within the form, the form can be unprotected. The password is "unlock".
This will allow each user to customize the program review to fit their needs while continuing to use a common form and process.

We will start the instructions with definitions and acronyms:

KPC Key Product Characteristics

Most important product features or material properties for meeting customer requirements.
The two kinds of KPCs are 1) safety and compliance, and 2) fit and function. KPCs may be attributes (present or not).
It is required to target variable KPCs at nominal and reduce variation continuously because these characteristics are optimized at the nominal
specification and have a loss function associated with deviating from nominal.

KCC Key Process Control Characteristic

Most important process characteristics that have a direct effect on the KPCs.
Suppliers may designate additional process characteristics as KCCs.

QCI Quality / Customer Interface

A feature or property of a product that is contacted directly by the customer and has an immediate impact on their satisfaction
if not within limits. Or, a characteristic that does not meet the KPC criteria, but is deemed critical to the final product or its manufacturability.

QCC Quality Control Characteristic

Most important process characteristics that have a direct effect on the QCI's. Suppliers may designate additional process characteristics as QCI's.

PPAP Product Part approval process.

Pass-Through Characteristic
Is a characteristic/feature where an anomoly only declares itself under certain conditions such as environmental stimulation and cannot be tested
in Delphi's operations (i.e. soft tie rods, stepper motor with step loss and steering hose with incorrect rubber component.

Page 24 Last Revised: 8/22/07

The first part of the Program Review is an informational list used by Delphi and the Supplier for better communication.
Fill in the following information as thoroughly as possible:
Date of Review
Supplier -include both the facility name and parent name where applicable
Supplier Duns Code -this is in reference to the manufacturing site producing the product.
Supplier/Mfg Location
Part Numbers
PPAP Date
Description
Platform
Model Year
SOP Date
Supplier Contacts: -List key supplier contacts
Key Contact
PPAP Contact
Quality Contact
Run@Rate Contact
Delphi Contacts -List key Delphi contacts
AQE
SQE
Buyer
Program Manager
PPAP Coordinator
Component Engineer
Product Engineer
Response Team
New Risk Level of Product -Once the review has been completed, evaluate the program risk based on your findings.

Sections A through M are used to track the progress of the supplier through various aspects of building a new product. Each section
focuses on a specific area and is as comprehensive as possible.

The first columns will be used to color code each line item. Green indicates completed, Yellow indicates Open with recovery plan,
Red indicates the suppliers process will not meet Delphi requirements.
The formatting for these three colors has been automated. Go to the cell you want to change, then hit the following key:
for red use "Ctrl-r" for yellow use "Ctrl-y" for green us "Ctrl-g" this coding will also show up in black/white copies with patterns for each color.
.
The columns represented in each section are used to promote communication between Delphi and the supplier. It also determines responsibility,
forecasts completion dates, action plans, actual completion dates and progress. Each block is expandable to add information as necessary.

The following gives an explanation of each section:

Section A Product Application Review how the product will be used at Delphi and the customer, etc.
Section B Design Review Review prints/specs/ QCI/KPC, and pass-through characteristic/feature, packaging and labeling requirements.

Page 25 Last Revised: 8/22/07

Section C Program Information
Section D Product Requirements & Timing
Section E Supplier Tooling Requirements
Section F Supplier Gage Review
Section G Product Measurement Plan
Section H Capability Assessment Guidelines
Section I Measurement Systems Analysis Guidelines
Section J Design Responsible Suppliers
Section K Special Process
Section L PPAP Guidelines
Section M First Time Quality (FTQ) Improvement Process
Section N Run@Rate Requirements
Section O Website Information
Review with supplier so they understand the final product and it's requirements.
# of parts required, type of product (saleable vs non-saleable) to be recorded.
Tooling completion and possible roadblocks should be discussed.
Evaluate and approve gage designs.
Consider the measurement req't and techniques that will be used for dimensional layout on the component prior to ppap.
Determine based on the print requirements, customer requirements. Detail this section well.
Based on the item listed in section H, detail equipment and methodologies that will be used.
If your supplier is responsible for the design, this section should be discussed.
Evidence of conformance to required CQI assessment required here.
Hyperlink to Delphi's PPAP checklist
Training and or evidence of conformance is reviewed in this section.
Hyperlink to Delphi's R@R plan
Lists all websites and programs the supplier will need in working with Delphi.
Page 26 Last Revised: 8/22/07
 "Express" Program Review
Section A: Supplier Program Review
Part Number:
Delphi Information (From Roster Database & Request for Sourcing): Family Parent Part No. (if any):
1 Delphi Start Of Production Date Prod. Mfg. Loc.:

2 Year:
3 Volume Annual Usage:
4 Information Peak Weekly Usage:

5 Type of Build:
6 Parts required Date:
7
Forecasted Quantity:
8
Builds PML
9 Build when PPAP is required:

10 Supplier PPAP Due Date

11 PPAP Level Required 3
12 Comments

Section B: Supplier Commitments (Supplier complete):

13 Supplier First Parts Promise Date
14 Estimated PPAP package delivery
15 Supplier Quoted 5 Day Capacity
(vs. Peak Usage in question #4)

16 The supplier is responsible to register and use the Delphi Supplier Websites and must be capable to update and access the following:
Supplier Profiles
Supplier Suggestion Program (SSP / SCR)
Problem Solver
Customer Specific Requirements/ Quality Expectations
IMDS system (reportable Chemicals)

Page 27 Last Revised: 8/22/07

 17 The Supplier agrees to and understands the following:
1. The only authorization to implement Delphi engineering changes (including marked up prints) must be issued by the Delphi Buyer.
2. No change, of any kind, shall be made in material content, processing methods, testing methods, or location of manufacture without the
prior written approval of Delphi Corporation.
Agreed by:
Authorized representative Date
18 Supplier Comments/ Concerns:

Section C: Run @ Rate :

19 Is Part Commodity Exempt? Y/N Letter Location:
20 Exemption Calc. (highest # 15 / # 4) (if less than 40%, may exempt Run @ Rate)
21 Approving Supplier Quality Manager Date:

22 Comments:

For Semiconductors Run at Rate is exempt. To ensure commitments are met a CAPACITY STUDY is required.

"Express" Program Review

Page 28 Last Revised: 8/22/07

 SPDP Express Form
Instructions
PRINT IN PORTRAIT MODE
SPDP Express forms should be filled in, transmitted, and stored electronically. For E&S - They should
be stored in T:\PURCHASING\SUPL_DEV\AQE\RISK
l ASSESSMENTS\EXPRESS\"COMMODITY"\"SUPPLIER NAME"\"PART #"
Please use the part number as the first part of the filename and put a zero in front of 9 million part
numbers (to achieve 8 digits and proper sort order by Windows Explorer).

l
The tab key can be used to move to the next available field in the form to enter data. Similarly,
shift_tab will move to the previous available field.

For filling in the SPDP Express form:

Section A: Volume Information and Scheduled Builds (lines 1 to 10) should be filled in by the Product
l Engineer or the Program Team Leader. Line 11 will be filled in by the AQE Analyst.

Section B should be filled in by the Supplier (lines 13 to 18). Enter the Supplier Name in the
l appropriate cell and enter the name and date of the authorized Supplier Representative who is filling in
the form.

Section C should be filled in by the AQE. If the part commodity is exempt (see Express form for
criteria), it should be listed in the Commodity Exemption letter signed by the Supplier Quality Manager.
l This is expected to be one letter listing all exempted commodities and stored in one location for
reference by all of Supplier Quality.

Page 29 Last Revised: 8/22/07

 DELPHI Supplier Quality FMEA SEVERITY RANKINGS
Note #1: Any Failure Mode affecting the Vehicle Assembly Plant MUST be ranked an 8 or higher.
Note #2: Any Failure Mode affecting a Delphi Plant MUST be ranked 5 or higher.
Select from the categories below, using the highest applicable ranking.
Ranking Effect End Customer
10 Hazardous- Potential failure mode affects
without warning safe vehicle operation and/or
involves noncompliance with
government regulation without
warning.
9 Hazardous-with Potential failure mode affects
warning safe vehicle operation and/or
involves noncompliance with
government regulation with
warning.
8 Very High Vehicle/item inoperable (loss
of primary function); failure
mode may cause customer
walk home, field return, or
durability issue.
7 High Vehicle/item operable but at a
reduced level of performance.
Customer very dissatisfied.
Failure mode may cause
vehicle repairs at Dealer.
Includes Noise issues
(squeak/rattle).
6 Moderate Vehicle/item operable but
comfort/convenience item(s))
inoperable/not performing to
customer expectation (e.g..
Noise)
5 Low Vehicle/item operable but
comfort/convenience item(s)
operable at a reduced level of
performance.
4 Very Low Fit and finish item does not
conform. Defect noticed by
most customers.
3 Minor Fit and finish item does not
conform. Defect noticed by
average customers.
2 Very M inor Fit and finish item does not
conform. Defect noticed by
discriminating customers.
1 None No effect.
Vehicle Assembly Plant
Potential failure mode may
cause unsafe condition for
plant personnel without
warning.
Potential failure mode may
cause unsafe condition for
plant personnel with warning.
Potential failure mode may
cause a spill/major disruption,
repair, assembly difficulty,
rework, or sorting at the
Vehicle Assembly Plant
See Note #1
See Note #1
See Note #1
See Note #1
See Note #1
See Note #1
See Note #1
Delphi Plant Supplier Plant
Potential failure mode may Potential failure mode may
cause unsafe condition for cause unsafe condition for
plant personnel without plant personnel without
warning. warning.
Potential failure mode may Potential failure mode may
cause unsafe condition for cause unsafe condition for
plant personnel with warning. plant personnel with warning.
Potential failure mode may
cause a spill/major disruption
at a Delphi Plant.
Potential failure mode may
cause repair, assembly
difficulty, rework, sorting at a
Delphi plant.
Potential failure mode may
cause special handling of
components at Delphi-S.
Potential failure mode may
cause inconvenience to Delphi
prior to assembly.
See Note #2
See Note #2
See Note #2
See Note #2
 DELPHI Supplier Quality FMEA OCCURRENCE EVALUATION RANKINGS
Sample calculation to determine Ppk value from a likely failure rate of 5 per thousand pieces (see FMEA third Appendix I).

Probability Likely Failure Rates Ppk Ranking

Very High: Persistent Failures

100 per thousand pieces < 0.55 10

50 per thousand pieces > 0.55 9

High: Frequent Failures

20 per thousand pieces > 0.78 8

10 per thousand pieces > 0.86 7

Moderate: Occasional Failures 5 per thousand pieces > 0.94 6

2 per thousand pieces >1.00 5

1 per thousand pieces >1.10 4

Low: Relatively Few Failures

0.5 per thousand pieces >1.20 3

0.1 per thousand pieces > 1.30 2

Remote: Failure is unlikely

< 0.001 per thousand pieces * > 1.67 1

Note: Identical to Manual except for Ranking of 1. Manual allows for .01 per thousand (10 PPM)
 DELPHI Supplier Quality FMEA Detection Rankings
Ranking Effect PFMEA

10 Absolute Uncertainty Cannot detect or is not checked.

9 Very Remote Control is achieved with indirect or random checks only.

8 Remote Control is achieved with visual inspection only.

7 Very Low Control is achieved with double visual inspection only.

6 Low Control is achieved with charting methods, such as SPC

(Statistical Process Control) OR gauging performed on setup and
first-piece check. *

5 Moderate Control is based on variable or attribute gauging performed

100% of the parts after parts have left the station.

4 Moderately High Error detection in subsequent operation. *

3 High Error detection in-station, or error detection in subsequent

operations by multiple layers of acceptance: supply, select,
install, verify. Cannot accept discrepant part.

2 Very High Error detection in-station (automatic gauging with automatic stop
feature). Cannot pass discrepant part.

1 Almost Certain Discrepant parts cannot be made because item has been error-
proofed by process/product design.

* Note: Identical to Manual except for Rankings of 6 and 4. Words OR gauging performed on setup and first piece check
moved from a detection of 4 to a detection of 6