Well I guess that I should specifically investigate the machines that perform chemical and mechanical analysis.
Really dig into the documentation of these machines.
Track a few jobs through the system.
Check codes, reports, CMTRs , Heats, find material, find heats…ect ect.ect

On the other hand I will take credit for the A2LA accreditation and use that as the main reason for acceptance (as a calibration Sub), but I will gather up my objective evidence (calibration stickers, calibration reports)

The NDE/QC Checking Documents , procedures, codes , qualifications , certifications , check some reports CARs NCRs find the rejected material back track the documentation…..ect.ect.ect.

I know im rambling but these make good notes for when im at work LOL

That can be any of the above.
If I had to pick one evil of the lot, it would be document control. Revisions tend to be off the cuff on an as needed basis, not to mention a general lack of understanding of Section III, 10cfr50.55a, NQA-1, and the relevant reg guides. One lining procedures, lack of revision control, and a host of other things. Those shops tend to be small in nature with minimal understanding. Be particularly careful of the written practice in light of those requirements.

Next in line would be control of non conforming items. Putting a non conforming item in bubba's desk doesn't cut it.

Then there is implementing procedures, using the right software/process. I once surveyed a shop that was susposed to be doing 10kilogram loads on the microhardness test, but was using 2kg with the wrong indentor. The shop manager told me "it's all the same, doesn't matter". It does matter in the nuclear world regardless of what bubba says about it.

Oh, and make sure they aren't using bubba 2.0 for any software. This was from a shop that was using an electronic recorded for the tensiles. However; there was a slight problem.
They were using the rebar settings for standard weld dogbones. Look closely in the upper left corner of the attached picture.

That btw is another aspect of it. Training records. The technician had no recorded training on the equipment. Thats always a bad sign.

Above all else, remember there just aren't that many operations familar with Section III any more. Much less stamp holders. There is a lot of ground being retread in this day and time because of that.