Introduction to Material Handling Focus

• Why focus on Material Handling and Identification? - The #1

reason supplier impact GM business is their failure to Control
Non-Conforming Material.

• Material Identification - will focus on how suppliers should

identify all Material (GOOD and BAD) on a regular basis.

• Non-conforming Material Handling - this slide walks through the

flow process once a non-conforming event has been identified.

• Audit- this audit MUST be completed above and beyond the QSB &
QSB+ to ensure this Systemic Material Handling issue has been
addressed at all Suppliers

• Non-conforming Material Examples that have impacted GM at

Vehicle Plants and in Warranty
 Material Identification
IDENTIFY STOCK
Identify all parts that are removed
Part removed from the line/process/department
• Tag or Mark each part or container
from the
so parts are clearly identified.
line/process/ Ensure the Tag or Mark is robust
department and must require effort to remove.
• Tagging good stock is just as
important as tagging bad stock to
reduce mishandling.
QUARANTINE “BAD”
STOCK
Quarantine Suspect/Nonconforming
Non-
parts from good parts in all areas of
conforming the Plant or Warehouse to prevent
material mishandling of parts. Place parts in
a locked area or wrap parts with
handling/
caution tape, again so they are
Containment CLEARLY IDENTIFIED.
IDENTIFYING “BAD”
STOCK
Nonconforming parts MUST be
Clearly Identified. (Examples- Tag
parts with red tags, permanently
marker or paint parts Red). Do not
use stickers as they fall off in plant
environments. A LOCK BOX or locked
area is also acceptable for Identifying
BAD parts.
IDENTIFYING
“GOOD” STOCK
Conforming parts need to be identified
with a Green tag if it’s a fully finished
part that is GOOD. Parts that are not
FINISHED also must be identified
with a IN-PROCESS tag stating
where in the process the part was
removed (example: Removed
Operations 10, Ready for Operations
20).
 Nonconforming Material Handling
All Suppliers are responsible for ensuring non-conforming material does not reach the customer.
This helps maximize manufacturing efficiency, and helps ensure end customer satisfaction,
strengthening vehicle sales performance

COMMUNICATE
If ANY GM facility is at
Non- risk of being presented
conforming with non-conforming
material, inform all key
material GM contacts (SQE,SQA)
identified immediately, at ALL
potentially affected
facilities globally
ROBUST CONTAINMENT
IDENTIFYING STOCK
Identify robust
See Material containment process,
Identification slide and obtain appropriate
approvals from GM SQ
and Engineering.

PERMANENT FIX Ensure compliance with the Initiate containment with the Work with key
Complete following material control assistance of the following GM customer
root cause process Audit (Slide 4) and checklists contacts to initiate
and Break containment worksheet. containment at
solution -Point
their facility(s) if
activities. potentially
affected.

CONTAIN AT YOUR CONTAIN AT GM

FACILITY/YOUR TIER FACILITY(S)
ROBUST MATERIAL
CONTROL SUPPLIERS FACILITY(S)

Complete Fast Response

Conforming material NOTE: Provide
Update PFMEA & problem solving at the
daily updates to
Control Plan facility, Read across to flow with robust key GM contacts
other facilities, and put
RECALIBRATE together lesson learnt
processes in place on current issue
status!
CLOSURE
 Special Nonconforming Material Audit
All Tier one suppliers need to be audited to the below Special Audit use the “Look For” section
and using the same scoring as the QSB/QSB+ (Tier one suppliers are expected to conduct this
same audit at their Tier two & three suppliers).

Once audit is completed upload results into a SharePoint Survey by June 30th. If any Gaps
are found the supplier has until August 30th to fix those Gaps, on August 30th all SQE’s will
need to fill out a second SharePoint Survey to address Gap closure (see examples both survey’s
on the next slide).

Current Revise
Struc Supplier Original
Item QSB+ PCPA NSA Requirement Look for Comment audit d
ture score QSB+
score QSB+
Nonconforming Material / Material Sample audit to verify that team members understand what to do with nonconforming / suspect material.
Identification
Confirm that conforming material is handled, stored and identified appropriately.
Team members have standardized
work and understand what to do with Confirm that nonconforming / suspect material is clearly identified and/or segregated. Red, Yellow, Green
non conforming / suspect material. stoplight approach is adhered to for foot printing, containerization, table marking and tagging.

Conforming material is handled, stored Audit that all parts removed from the process are identified, accounted for (FTQ), and reconciled to
and identified appropriately. eliminate mishandling of material.

Non conforming / suspect material is Verify use of Department Containment Worksheets, with potential parts locations by operation identified to
clearly identified and/or segregated for ensure no parts are missed during a containment and all parts are reconciled.
review/disposition (i.e. appropriate
CNC-1 X color coding for foot printing – red, Looks for:
yellow, green). Parts should be physically tagged (no stickers), painted or locked-out upon identification to
ensure a conscious act is required to remove a part from quarantine (i.e. something must be
A containment method is in place to removed from each part before it can be mixed in with production material).
ensure that an effective breakpoint has All quarantined or rejected parts must then reconciled with total shift or daily production quantity
been established. Containment to ensure no parts are misplaced back into system.
activities and results are documented. Any lost parts must be traced immediately and include a reaction process to notify downstream
customers of any risk of loss of control of NC material.
These requirements should be common to parts quarantined or rejected line side as well as
larger quantities or pallets of parts quarantined or rejected in other parts of the plant.
Example of Audit Survey 1 & 2. Both must be
completed by the SQE on SharePoint.
*NOTE: Both audits are located in SharePoint, in the same
location as the current QSB survey.

Survey #1 due June 30th

Directions: Use QSB/QSB+ scoring system (0-4) on questions 1-5 below.

1) Sample audit to verify that team members understand what to do with

nonconforming / suspect material.

2) Confirm that conforming material is handled, stored and identified appropriately.

3) Confirm that nonconforming / suspect material is clearly identified and/or

segregated. Red, Yellow, Green stoplight approach is adhered to for foot
printing, containerization, table marking and tagging.

4) Audit that all parts removed from the process are identified, accounted for
(FTQ), and reconciled to eliminate mishandling of material.

5) Verify use of Department Containment Worksheets, with potential parts locations

by operation identified to ensure no parts are missed during a containment and
all parts are reconciled.

6) How many Gaps did you find during the Audit (0-5)?

Survey #2 due August 30th

1) Are all the Gaps found during the Audit in June closed (Yes or No)
a) If NO how many still OPEN (0-5).
b) Does Supplier have action Items on Open issue (Yes or NO)
c) Do you think Supplier should be given an extension to complete the
open items? (Yes or No).
 Real Examples of Nonconforming Material
handling issues that have impacted GM
Example 1:
Issue Description
A GM Vehicle Assembly Plant found two failed Axel shafts in two different vehicles, prior to shipping to customers.
Root Cause
Both Axel shafts were setup parts off the Suppliers induction hardeners, both parts were intended for the Metrology Lab to
verify part hardness. The parts were not identified and became mishandled which allowed them to ship to the customer.
Result
Both Axel Shafts exceeded the hardness print spec. and resulted in two failed vehicle at the Assembly Plant.
Example 2:
Issue Description
Partially inserted Transmission Oil Cooling (TOC) line becomes disconnected and causes a fluid leak. This failure could
result in a thermal event.
Root Cause
Part was rejected from the Suppliers process by the Error Proofing and was no clearly identified as a nonconforming or
suspect part. The part was then mishandled and shipped to the Assembly Plant.
Result
Because the part was not identified it was mishandled and shipped, which resulted in a RECALL.
Example 3:
Issue Description
A GM Vehicle Assembly Plant received a halfshaft with a loose boot clamp.
Root Cause
The Suppliers error proofing camera rejected the halfshaft due to incorrect housing. The area Team Leader did an
unapproved repair/rework by installing the correct housing onto the halfshaft and then reintroduced the halfshaft back into
the process at the wrong operation, skipping the Boot Clamp operation.
Result
Two failures: 1) Once the part was rejected from the process it was not identified. 2) A unapproved repair/rework was
performed. The part was reintroduced back into the process at the wrong operation because an out of process unapproved
repair was performed with no controls to prevent this failure, which caused the vehicle assembly plant to receive the
defect.