Page 1 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

ADAC Supplier PPAP Request and Requirements

December 30, 1899 Submit All PPAP's To: nsoltys@adacautomotive.com 0

Nancy Soltys

Submission D

ue Date:

Submission L

evel:

Attention:

Supplier:

Senior Buyer

616-957-0520 Ext. 5686 PO Box 888375 (if sent U.S. Mail)616-446-2533 Mobile Grand Rapids, MI 49588-8375

###

###

4.5 PPAP RequirementsPPAP’s are requested by and submitted to ADAC Purchasing. Final PPAP date will be established after delivery of ADAC

###

###

(ADAC may require suppliers to use “End Customer Specific” documentation when available/requested).

QE: 0 (616) 957-3800 0

(Check box X as Completed/Submitted) (Submit this completed checklist with PPAP)

Print Date:

Ref. Print:

Previous Part #:

*New

Part #:

1) Design Records: The organization shall have the design record for the saleale product/part, including design records for components or details of the saleable product/print.

CN#: 0

2)

###

###

Supplier Internal Change Notices, Supplier Eng. Change Notices, Etc.

###

###

3) Customer Engineering Approval:

o* Please submit request to ADAC engineering along with sample product for functional evaluation.

All Components/Assemblies/Systems must be included/covered in a Design FMEA. DFMEA will be detailed with specifics (In general FMEA’s are usually longer than 1 page). YC, ACC, YS, etc will be identified in the “Class” column.

CN

#:

Previous Rev.:

*New

Rev.:

Will Identify Prevention (P) & Detection (D) for Current Design Controls.

5) Process Flow Diagram:

###

CC, ACC, SC, etc will be identified in the Flow Diagram.

###

Header will include current Print Date/Revision Level.

###

List all sub-suppliers on the Flow Diagram.6) Process FMEA:

PFMEA will be detailed with specifics (In general FMEA’s are usually longer than 1 page). CC, ACC, SC, etc will be identified in the “Class” column. Will Identify Prevention (P) & Detection (D) for Current Design Controls. Program

:

Description:

7) Control Plan: Control Plans will be detailed with specifics and are linked to the PFMEA & Flow Diagram. CC, ACC, Etc will be identified in the “Special Char. Class” column.

###

###

Header will include current Print Date/Revision Level.

###

DVP&R requirements must be included on Control Plan.

8) Measurement Systems Analysis Studies:

gages, measurement, and test equipment (See MSA reference manual). Checking aids/Gages/Documentation will address each CC, ACC, SC, etc. designated on the print. Gage R&R’s shall be documented/submitted for all checking aids that are relative to the design record/control plan.

The Gage's % R&R shall be 10% or below & NDC (Number of Distinct Categories) must be 5 or greater

Date:

Requested By: Nancy Soltys Submit All PPAP's To: 2929 32nd Street, Unit C

controlled documents. ADAC uses a default of level (3) AIAG format – for all PPAP submissions (See Page 17 PPAP 4th Edition). Use current AIAG reference manuals for appropriate documentation and guidance.

* Any deviation to these requirements will result in a rejection of PPAP unless approved by appropriate ADAC personnel prior to submission.

4.5.1 ADAC PPAP Requirements/Checklists ( 18 PPAP sections required/organized as follows)

Engineering Change Documents (if applicable)

o      Supplier related documents that pertain to product/program changes.

PPAP must include a signed “Request for Functional Approval”. (See Tab – "Functional Approval")…………… "MUST BE SIGNED" by ADAC Engineering prior to and submitted with PPAP Package.

4) Design FMEA (when applicable):

Shall use consistant Severity, Occurrence and Detection Rankings. (See S.O.D.Rankings Tab)……………

Shall use consistant Severity, Occurrence and Detection Rankings. (See S.O.D.Rankings Tab)……………

Reason for PP

AP:

o         Root cause shall be identified when Severity is 9 or 10.

o         Including: Submission Time intervals (Must state specific date of last Submittal).

Complete MSA Studies including: R&R, Linearity, Bias and Stability are required for all new or modified

o         Variable Studies shall utilize 10 parts, 3 operators and 3 trials,o         Attribute Studies shall utilize 50 parts (pre measured), 3 operators and 3 trials,

Page 2 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

0o         Ford Specific Variable R&R's must be reported in ANOVA method.

Page 3 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

9) Dimensional Results: Dimensional results (5 pcs per cav.) shall be submitted to the current print revision level for PPAP. Dimensional results shall include all dimensions (except reference dim.), characteristics, and specifications as noted on the design record and Control Plan.

10)

The organization shall include records of material and performance test results for tests specified on the Design Record or Control Plan. Submit these results on a collection sheet (ie: DVP&R, CFG-1004, CFG-1005).

Supplier will have a copy of all applicable specification requirements available for review.

11) Initial Process Studies:

Capability studies shall be performed and identified for all special characteristic designated by the customer or organization. Where no Special Characteristics have been identified, contact the Program QE for verification on what characteristics require data.

12) Qualified Laboratory Documentation: Lab certifications shall be current. Labs shall be accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 or national equivalent (A2LA, NVAP and ICBO ES) Complete Lab Scope must be included for each lab used.

13) Appearance Approval Report (AAR): (when applicable) AAR’s shall be signed prior to and submitted with PPAP Package.

14) Sample Production Product: 3 samples (per production cavity) shall be submitted with PPAP (use dimensional parts)[Sec 9].

15) Master Samples: Supplier shall identify one of the parts (Layout) measured as the master sample. Shall be representative of PPAP run. One sample for each cavity, mold, tool or pattern, or production process.

16) Checking Aids: ADAC owned gages shall meet the “ADAC Plastics Inc, Gage & Check Fixture Guidelines” (latest revision). Gage Designs must be approved by ADAC personnel prior to kick-off of ADAC/Customer owned gages. Gages layouts, certification, and instructions shall be in this section.

17) Customer Specification Requirements / Records of Compliance:

o IMDS must be submitted and approved each time the product is PPAP’d.

Please submit ISO/TS certifications for all suppliers& Sub-suppliers that pertain to each program. (Current, Non-Expired)

18) A PPAP/PSW is required for each component, assembly and sub-assembly as listed on the Print BOM. Purchase Order must be filled in. Checking Aid Number must be filled in. (If various, please attach list) Weight (kg) = Enter the actual weight in kilograms to four decimal places.

Production Rate must be filled in. Mold/Cavity/Production Process must be filled in. (If various, please attach list)Bulk Material Requirements / Checklist:

For bulk material. Review PPAP 4th edition for each sections requirements.

Comments / Remarks:

Records of Material / Performance Test (DVP&R):

All Material Certification will be for current production lot. (Shall be less than 1 year old at PPAP date)

Plastic Molder/Regrind Certification Letter must be submitted with each PPAP. (See Regrind Certification Tab)………… * GM Specific - A copy of the Trim Transmittal Form must be included for each "Class A" Resin component.

Capability studies shall be performed on a minimum of 100 pieces per cav. (Out of the 300 pc min. production run)o         Ppk and/or Cpk must exceed 1.67. (see attachment for details)o         Ford specific capability studies shall be performed on a minimum of 125 pieces per cav. (Out of the 300 pc min. run)

IMDS Data shall be completed for each component/sub-component or assembly associated with a PPAP request.

o      IMDS shall be submitted within 1 week of receipt of PPAP request and Print to (ADAC's) Customer Code # 1086o      Suppliers shall submit a printed copy of the IMDS submission with PPAP.

PPAP must include a “Request for Packaging Approval”. (See Tab – "Packaging Approval")…………… Supplier shall submit a copy of the Production Label with PPAP.

o         See http://www.adacautomotive.com website for detailed instructions & latest revision.

ADAC requires it's Canadian Suppliers to provide documented proof of compliance to the Partners in Protection (PIP) requirements. For information on how to join PIP, See http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/general/enforcement/partners/join-e.html. ADAC strongly encourages all its domestic suppliers to be in compliance with the Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) and to provided documented proof of compliance if available. All other Foreign Suppliers are subject to a Security Risk Assessment by either ADAC or it's designated 3rd party. Said Assessment shall follow C-TPAT security criteria. See http://www.customs.gov/xp/cgov/home.xml

Part Submission Warrant (PSW): ALL lines shall be filled in (no blank spaces).

Suppler & Buyer codes must be filled in.

Page 4 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

Page 5 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

ADAC Supplier PPAP Request and Requirements

Supplier Code: 0 Feasibility Commitment Return Date: 12/30/1899

Date: 12/30/1899 Part Number: 12/30/1899Supplier: 0 Current Eng. Rev. Level: 0Part Name: 0 Print Number: 12/30/1899

Print Date: 12/30/1899Program: 0 CAD file#: 0

Previous Part#: 0Part Submission Due Date: 12/30/1899 Previous Eng Rev. Level: 0

Feasibility Considerations:

YES NO CONSIDERATION:

Can Engineering Performance Specifications be met as written?

Has material compatibility with matting components been reviewed and confirmed that there are no issues?

Can Product be manufactured to tolerances specified on drawing?

Can Product be manufactured to CAD data provided?

Can Product be manufactured with Cpk's that meet requirements?

Is there adequate capacity to produce the product?

Does the design allow the use of efficient material handling techniques?

Can Product be manufactured without any unusual costs for capital equipment?

Can Product be manufactured without any unusual costs for tooling?

Can Product be manufactured without any unusual Alternative manufacturing methods?

Is statistical process control required on the product?

Is statistical process control presently used on similar products?

All "No" answers shall be supported with attached comments/documents identifying concerns and/or proposed changes.

Conclusion Feasible - Product can be produced as specified with no revisions.

Not Feasible - Design review/changes required to produce product within the specified requirements - (explanation attached).

Comments/Concerns:

(Sign-off by Supplier Personnel)

Team Member/Title/Date:Please complete, sign and return to: Nancy Soltys

Note: 4.0 Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) Return Date: 12/30/1899

Our quality team has considered the following questions, which are not intended to be all-inclusive in performing a feasibility evaluation. The drawings and/or specifications provided have been used as a basis for analyzing the ability to meet all specified requirements. All "No" answers shall be supported with attached comments identifying concerns and/or proposed changes to enable us to meet the specified requirements. Please work with ADAC Engineering to resolve any issues of concerns that prevents the product from being feasible. Production parts may not be shipped without PPAP approval or written deviation. Failure to return this form to ADAC on or before the "Return Date" (listed below) is an automatic acceptance of the part being "Feasible".

Is the product adequately defined (cosmetic, dimensional, performance, application, requirements, etc) to enable a feasibility evaluation?

Where statistical process control is used on similar products, are the processes in control and stable? And are the Cpk's greater than 1.67?

Page 6 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

See ADAC Automotive Supplier Manual Email:

Phone: 616-957-0520 Ext. 5686

nsoltys@adacautomotive.comwww.adacautomotive.com

Page 7 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

ADAC Supplier PPAP Request and Requirements

REQUEST FOR FUNCTIONAL APPROVAL(PER SECTION 3 OF PPAP CHECKSHEET)

SUPPLIER TO COMPLETE:SUPPLER NAME: SUPPLIER MFG. CODE:

0

ADDRESS:0PHONE:

FAX:

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE: DESIGN PROCESS

PART NUMBER(S) AFFECTED: REV. LEVEL: REV. DATE: PLANT(S) AFFECTED:

0 0 12/30/1899 ADAC

0 0 12/30/1899

0 0 12/30/1899

0 0 12/30/1899

0 0 12/30/1899

0 0 12/30/1899

0 0 12/30/1899

ADAC ENGINEERING TO COMPLETE: 0

A PLANT TRYOUT IS: REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED

NAME: DATE:

TRYOUT MATERIAL SHIPPING INSTRUCTIONS: TRYOUT QUANTITY:

TRYOUT RESULTS:

CHANGE IS APPROVED FOR PRODUCTION: Approved by:

CHANGE IS NOT APPROVED FOR PRODUCTION: Rejected by:

COMMENTS/RATIONALE:

* A completed/approved Functional Approval Form is a requirement for each PPAP prior to submission.

Page 8 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

MOLDER/REGRIND CERTIFICATION LETTER(PER SECTION 10 OF PPAP CHECKSHEET)

DATE:

SUPPLER NAME: - SUPPLIER MFG. CODE: 0

PHONE:

FAX:

E MAIL:

CUSTOMER NAME: ADAC Automotive

PART NAME: -

PART NUMBER: -

MATERIAL SUPPLIER:

PRODUCT CODE:

COLOR:

We certify that the above parts provided to your company for PPAP and Product ValidationTesting were produced with % regrind.

Our production parts will be provided at the above stated regrind % or less.We will submit a supplier request for change to ADAC if we require a need to produce product made with higher levels of regrind.

Print Name: Signature:

Title:

Note: This form is to be filled out by the plastic molder.

Page 9 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

REQUEST FOR PACKAGING APPROVALADAC P/N: 0 DATE:

PACKAGING BOM (Components for one carton consist of:) 12/30/1899

PACKAGING P/N DESCRIPTION #/CTN #/PC Rev. Level: 0 Issue Date

Part Name: 0

Customer: ADAC Automotive

Carton Dimensions:

Pallet Dimensions:

Part Weight: Pkg. Tare WT:

Pcs. per Carton: Carton Gross WT: 0

INSTRUCTIONS: Pcs. per Cell: Pcs. Per Pallet: 0

Layers per Carton: Cartons per Layer:

Layers per Pallet: Cartons per Pallet: 0

Pallet Tare WT: Pallet Gross WT: 0

PICTURE # 1 - PART PICTURE # 2 - PACKAGE PICTURE # 3 - PALLET/STACK

0 0

* Note: The responsibility for ensuring component quality from supplier to ADAC Automotive remains with the Supplier, regardless of whether or not this form is approved by ADAC automotive.

*ADAC "APPROVAL" of this request for packaging prior to PPAP, is only required for Class "A" products shipping to/for ADAC. All other products are required to fill out the request and is considered final when PPAP/PSW is approved.

Suppliers wishing to change packaging after PPAP will be required to submit a PCR (Process Change Request) to ADAC.

SUBMITTED BY: (Name/Title/Date) APPROVED BY: (Name/Title/Date)

Reference AIAG FMEA Manual 8-15-05 Page 10 of 15 Reference Document 6-6-08

DESIGN FMEA RANKING CRITERIA

Effect Criteria: Severity of Effect Ranking Ranking Detection Criteria: Likelihood of Detection by Design Control Ranking

10 10 10

9 9 9

Very High Vehicle/item inoperable (loss of primary function).

8 8Remote

8

High

7 7Very Low

7

Moderate

6 6Low

6

Low

5 5Moderate

5

Very Low

4 4 4

Minor

3 3High

3

Very Minor

2 2Very High

2

None No discernible effect.

1 1 1

PROCESS FMEA RANKING CRITERIA

Effect Ranking Ranking Detection Criteria A B C Suggested Range of Detection Methods Ranking

(Customer Effect) (Manufacturing/Assembly Effect)

10 10 X

Cannot detect of is not checked.

10

9 9 X 9

Very High

8 8Remote

X

Control is achieved with visual inspection only.

8

High

7 7Very Low

X 7

Moderate

6 6Low

X X 6

Low

5 5Moderate

X X 5

Very Low

4 4 X X 4

Minor

3 3

High

X X 3

Very Minor

2 2Very High

X X 2

None No discernible effect.

1 1Very High

X 1Inspection Types: A = Error Proofed - B = Gauging - C = Manual Inspection

Suggested DFMEA Severity Evaluation CriteriaSuggested DFMEA Occurrence

Evaluation CriteriaSuggested DFMEA Detection Evaluation Criteria

Probability of Failure

Likely Failure Rates

Hazardous without Warning

Very high severity ranking when a potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation without warning.

Very High: Persistent failures

> 100 per thousand vehicles/items

Absolute Uncertainty

Design Control will not and/or can not detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode; or there is no Design Control.

Hazardous with Warning

Very high severity ranking when a potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation with warning.

50 per thousand vehicles/items

Very Remote

Very remote chance the Design Control will detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

High: Frequent failures

20 per thousand vehicles/items

Remote chance the Design Control will detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

Vehicle/item operable but at a reduced level of performance. Customer very dissatisfied.

10 per thousand vehicles/items

Very low chance the Design Control will detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

Vehicle/item operable but com-fort/convenience item(s) inoperable. Customer dissatisfied.

Moderate: Occasional failures

5 per thousand vehicles/items

Low chance the Design Control will detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

Vehicle/item operable but com-fort/convenience item(s) operable at a reduced level of performance. Customer somewhat dissatisfied.

2 per thousand vehicles/items

Moderate chance the Design Control will detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

Fit & finish/squeak & rattle item does not conform. Defect noticed by most customers (greater than 75%).

1 per thousand vehicles/items

Moderately High

Moderately high chance the Design Control will detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

Fit & finish/squeak & rattle item does not conform. Defect noticed by 50% of customers.

Low: Relatively few failures

0.5 per thousand vehicles/items

High chance the Design Control will detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

Fit & finish/squeak & rattle item does not conform. Defect noticed by discriminating customers (less than 25%).

0.1 per thousand vehicles/items

Very high chance the Design Control will detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

Remote: Failure is unlikely

< 0.01 per thousand vehicles/items

Almost Certain

Design Control will almost certainly detect a potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode.

Critical Characteristic = , CC, YC or equivalent must be designated as 9 or 10. These are required to have a controls in place regardless of RPN.

Significant Characteristic & High Impact = ACC, YS, SC, HI or equivalent will be (Sev. = 5 to 8) & (Occ. = 4 to 10). These are required to have a controls in place regardless of RPN.

NOT a Critical or Significant Characteristics = No specific criteria.

Suggested PFMEA Severity Evaluation Criteria Suggested PFMEA Occurrence Evaluation Criteria

Suggested PFMEA Detection Evaluation Criteria

Criteria: Severity of Effect: This ranking results when a potential failure mode results in a final customer and/or manufacturing/assembly plant defect. The final customer should always be considered first. If both occur, use the higher of the two severity rankings.

Probability of Failure

Likely Failure Rates

Hazardous without Warning

Very high severity ranking when a potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation without warning.

Or may endanger operator (machine or assembly) without warning.

Very High: Persistent failures

> 100 per thousand pieces

Almost Impossible

Absolute certainty of non-detection.

Hazardous with Warning

Very high severity ranking when a potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation with warning.

Or may endanger operator (machine or assembly) with warning.

50 per thousand pieces

Very Remote

Controls will probably not detect.

Control is achieved with indirect or random checks only.

Vehicle/item inoperable (loss of primary function).

Or 100% of product may have to be scrapped, or vehicle/item repaired in repair department with a repair time greater than one hour.

High: Frequent failures

20 per thousand pieces

Controls have poor chance of detection.

Vehicle/item operable but at a reduced level of performance. Customer very dissatisfied.

Or product may have to be sorted and a portion (less than 100%) scrapped, or vehicle/item repaired in repair department with a repair time between half an hour and an hour.

10 per thousand pieces

Controls have poor chance of detection.

Control is achieved with double visual inspection only.

Vehicle/item operable but com-fort/convenience item(s) inoperable. Customer dissatisfied.

Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product may have to be scrapped with no sorting, or vehicle/item repaired in repair department with a repair time less than half an hour.

Moderate: Occasional failures

5 per thousand pieces

Controls may detect.

Control is achieved with charting methods, such as SPC (Statistical Process Control).

Vehicle/item operable but com-fort/convenience item(s) operable at a reduced level of performance. Customer somewhat dissatisfied.

Or 100% of product may have to be reworked, or vehicle/item repaired off line but does not got to repair department.

2 per thousand pieces

Controls many detect.

Control is base on variable gauging after parts have left the station, OR Go/No Go gauging performed on 100% of the parts after parts have left the station.

Fit & finish/squeak & rattle item does not conform. Defect noticed by most customers (greater than 75%).

Or the product may have to be sorted, with no scrap, and a portion (less than 100%) reworked.

1 per thousand pieces

Moderately High

Controls have a good chance to detect.

Error detection in subsequent operations, OR gauging performed on setup and first piece check (for setup causes only).

Fit & finish/squeak & rattle item does not conform. Defect noticed by 50% of customers.

Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product may have to be reworked, with no scrap, on-line but out-of-station.

Low: Relatively few failures

0.5 per thousand pieces

Controls have a good chance to detect.

Error detection in-station, OR error detection in subsequent operations by multiple layers of acceptance: supply, select, install, verify Can not accept discrepant part.

Fit & finish/squeak & rattle item does not conform. Defect noticed by discriminating customers (less than 25%).

Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product may have to be reworked, with no scrap, on-line but in-station.

0.1 per thousand pieces

Controls almost certain to detect.

Error detection in-station (automatic gauging with automatic stop feature). Can not pass discrepant part.

Or slight inconvenience to operation or operator, or no effect.

Remote: Failure is unlikely

< 0.01 per thousand pieces

Controls certain to detect.

Discrepant parts can not be made because item has been error proofed by process/product design.

Reference AIAG FMEA Manual 8-15-05 Page 11 of 15 Reference Document 6-6-08

CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTIONS & CRITERIA GUIDELINES

FMEA Type Classification To Indicate: Criteria Actions RequiredP

RO

DU

CT

Design YC Severity = 9, 10 Highlight for PFMEA team focus

Design YS Highlight for PFMEA team focus

Design BLANK Severity < 5 Not required

PR

OC

ES

S

Process or CC A Critical Characteristic Severity = 9, 10 Special controls necessary

Process ACC Special controls necessary

Process SC Special controls necessary

Process HI High Impact

Process OS Operator Safety Severity = 9, 10 Safety Sign-off

Process BLANK Not a Special Characteristic Other Not required

Acceptable Criteria for Initial Study

Results Interpretation

Index > 1.67 The process currently meets the acceptance criteria.

The process may be acceptable. Contact the authorized customer representative for a review of the study results.

Index < 1.33 The process does not currently meet the acceptance criteria.Contact the authorized customer representative for a reviewof the study results.

AIAG-PPAP 4th Edition - Page 7, 8 & 9. Sec. 2.2.11. Also Statistical Process Control manual Second Edition.

A potential Critical Characteristic (Initiate PFMEA)

A potential Significant Characteristic (Initiate PFMEA)

Severity = 5 - 8 and Occurrence = 4 - 10

Not a potential Critical Characteristic or Significant Characteristic

An ADAC Controlled CharacteristicSeverity = 5 - 8 and Occurrence = 4 - 10

A Significant CharacteristicSeverity = 5 - 8 and Occurrence = 4 - 10

Severity = 5 - 8 and Occurrence = 4 - 10

Emphasis (controls) may be necessary

1.33 < Index < 1.67

Reference AIAG PPAP Manual 4th Edition 3-10-06 Pages 12 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

Retention/Submission Requirements

Requirement: Submission Level:1 2 3 4 5

1 Design Record R S S * R- For proprietary components /details R R R * R- For all other components /details R S S * R

2 Engineering Change Documents, if any R S S * R3 Customer Engineering Approval, if required R R S * R4 Design FMEA R R S * R5 Process Flow Diagrams R R S * R6 Process FMEA R R S * R7 Control Plan R R S * R8 Measurement Systems Analysis Studies R R S * R9 Dimensional Results R S S * R

10 Material / Performance Test Results R S S * R11 Initial Process Studies R R S * R12 Qualified Laboratory Documentation R S S * R13 Appearance Approval Report (AAR), if applicable S S S * R14 Sample Product R S S * R15 Master Samples R R R * R16 Checking Aids R R R * R17 Records of Compliance R R S * R

With Customer Specification Requirements18 Part Submission Warrant (PSW) S S S S R

S S S S R

S =

R =

* = The supplier shall retain at appropriate locations, and submit upon customer request.

=

Note:

Bulk Material Requirements / Checklist (as required)The supplier shall submit to designated customer product approval activity and retain a copy of records or documentation items as appropriate locations, including manufacturing.

The supplier shall retain at appropriate locations, including manufacturing, and make readily available to the customer representative upon request.

Level 5

ADAC requires a Level 5 PPAP for "Annual Revalidation" requirements and expectations. The supplier shall retain up-to-date documentation at appropriate locations, including manufacturing, and make readily available to the customer representative upon request.

All 18 requirements are applicable for all level submissions, the level only states what documentation are required for submission. All retained documentation must be up to date and available for immediate request.

Submit PPAP To: Attn: Nancy Soltys 2929 32nd Street, Unit C PO Box 888375 (if sent U.S. Mail) Grand Rapids, MI 49588-8375

Reference Document 6-6-08

Information Sheet

Submit All PPAP's to Attn of: Nancy Soltys

Supplier: Supplier Code:

Attention:

Submission Level:

Submission Due Date:

*New Part #:

Previous Part #:

Reference Print #: Print Date:

*New Rev.: Previous Rev.:

CN #:

Part Description:

Program:

Reason for PPAP:

Quality Engineer: (616) 957-3800

QE E-mail:

Program Manager/Engineer: (616) 957-3800

Buyer: Buyer Code:(to be used on PSW - Buyer infomration section)

Feasibility Commintment Due Date:

Subcomponents Revision:

Print Date: Current Rev. Level: Current Part Number: Old Rev. Level: Old Part Number:12/30/1899 0 0 0 0

nsoltys@adacautomotive.com

Date:

Submit PPAP To: Attn: Nancy Soltys 2929 32nd Street, Unit C PO Box 888375 (if sent U.S. Mail) Grand Rapids, MI 49588-8375

Reference Document 6-6-08

Page 15 of 15 Control# 486 - Quality Rev O 6-6-08

REVISION HISTORY

Date: Applicable Sheet: Description of Change: Comments:

6/6/2008 486-OPPAP Request

Continuous Improvement

Mary Brewer & Mark TeGrootenhuis

Quality Engineering Continuous Improvement

Continuous Improvement

Nancy Soltys / Mark Good Continuous Improvement

10/23/2007

486-N

Release Revision Level

10/23/2007 Label Requirements Mark TeGrootenhuis Continuous Improvement

10/15/2007 Continuous Improvement

10/15/2007 Packaging Approval Continuous Improvement

10/9/2007 Functional Approval Continuous Improvement

10/9/2007

10/3/2007 PPAP Request Continuous Improvement

9/27/2007 Added a comment section to the doc. Continuous Improvement

9/27/2007 Continuous Improvement

9/25/2007 Revision History Continuous Improvement

Rev. Release:

Requested Change by:Reason for Change:

Header information: Added Nancy's Email and cell phone numbers to the header

Nancy Soltys wanted it added.So suppliers understand that all submissions go through Nancy.

Section #17: Added -IMDS shall be submitted within 1 week of receipt of PPAP request and Print to (ADAC's) Customer Code # 1086

This is so ADAC has time to build IMDS for customer pre-production builds.

Section #17: Suppliers need to submit a printed copy of the IMDS submission with PPAP.

Section #8: Added NDC requirement of 5 or greater to variable R&R

AIAG Requirement per MSA 3rd edition Page: 77

AIAG Requirement per MSA 3rd editionPage: 77

Section #8: Added ANOVA method required for Ford specied programs.

Ford Specific Requirements (3/31/06) page 3, sec 9.

Ford Specific Requirements (3/31/06) page 3, sec 9.

Section #11: Added "(125/Ford)" to verbage for Capability Studies.

Ford Specific Requirements (3/31/06) page 4, sec 11.

Feasibility Commitment

Added lined item in "Considerations" section

For Label Requirements see ADAC Automotive.com

PPAP Level Requirements

Section #17: Added line item for packaging requirements/approval.

To tie in with the requested by Kevin Darby (Packaging Engineer)

Added clarification to the Packaging approval form for requirement of signature for Class A, and Submission requirement for all product.

Requested by Kevin Darby (Packaging Engineer)

Added Part numbers, Rev levels and Rev Dates to the part numbers affected section.

Requested by Nancy Soltys (Purchased Dept.)

PPAP Level Requirements

Changed Annual Validation requirements for suppliers from Level 5 PPAP to Level 4 PPAP.* All annual validation requirements will still have to be fulfilled. Suppliers will have to retain documents and be readily available upon request.

Agreed upon by QE, Purchasing and Supplier Development

Suppliers will still be responsible for the Annual validation requirements (layouts, certifications, etc)

Added ADAC's IMDS code (# 1086) and switched the order of the line items in section 17

Requested by suppliers thru Nancy Soltys (Purchased Dept.)

Feasibility Commitment

Requested by Nancy Soltys (Purchased Dept.)

Feasibility Commitment

Remove requirement for " Can product be manufactured " " " " " less than 10 PPM?"* Also moved around some of the product information (for easier reading)

Requested by Nancy Soltys (Purchased Dept.)

Added this for traceability of changes going forward

Requested by suppliers thru Nancy Soltys (Purchased Dept.)