ALS was requested by an operator in Egypt to conduct full audits on multiple ESP manufacturing centres to rank the suppliers in order of their ability to support the operator sufficiently. This was a follow-up to 2017 audit, intended to evaluate improvement and identify progress made as a result of the previous audit’s findings. Whereas the 2017 audit evaluated six (6) suppliers, only four (4) of these suppliers were evaluated on this audit. Each of the ESP supply companies / distributors were audited in the same manner and without bias, and each supplier’s capabilities and deficiencies were identified and recorded. The ALS consultant worked with the operator’s audit team to perform each audit over a period of 3 days, and evaluate each of the categories identified below. The results were then summarized, placed into final report and final presentation format, and provided to the operator, with the associated recommendations.

Audited Items

  • Motor manufacturing, assembly & test

  • Protector / Seal manufacturing, assembly & test

  • Pump manufacturing, assembly & test

  • Gas separator manufacturing & assembly

  • Cable splicing (including MLE / pothead where available

  • Remanufactured components, manufacturing & test

  • Dismantle, inspection and failure analysis (DIFA)

  • Order entry, bill of materials, routing

  • General manufacturing processes

  • Health, Safety, and Environmental processes and adherences

Findings and Recommendations

Improvement was noted on three out of the four suppliers evaluated. The only supplier where a decline in performance was observed was the one supplier that was determined to be qualified on the previous audit. However, the results of this audit found this supplier to still be qualified to support the operator, but additional improvement is expected. Furthermore, this audit identified an additional supplier to have improved enough to also become qualified. While the audits of the other two suppliers noted improvement from the previous audit, significant deficiencies were still observed that would increase the operator’s risk, and almost certainly increase costs due to decreased runlives.

It was recommended that the operator only use the services of the two suppliers that the audit found to be qualified, and to focus on continuous improvement. Each of the suppliers were notified of their non-conformances and the other observations that were identified during the audit, with the goal of helping them to improve their services and become qualified.

The audits have been proven to yield positive results, and the operator has elected for follow-up audits be conducted each year with the goal of continuous improvement. The upcoming audits will ensure the currently approved suppliers are still meeting the operator’s standards of excellence, and also re-evaluate the unqualified suppliers to determine if they have implemented processes to allow them to provide adequate support to the operator.