Keep quality planning connected to the evidence the customer approves

APQP plans the work that PPAP must support

Engineering identifies what the part must do. Production develops the route. Quality defines how the team will check the result. APQP connects those activities before launch and keeps unresolved risks visible as the design and process develop.

AIAG's public PPAP description focuses on meeting design and specification requirements during an actual production run at production rates. A complete-looking folder cannot establish that result if its measurements came from another revision or from an unrepresentative process.

The supplier prepares the PSW after checking the supporting evidence. The customer then applies its approval process. Keep supplier declaration, submission and customer disposition as separate statuses; sending the warrant does not by itself authorize shipment.

Read the five phases with the current edition

AIAG's current catalog lists APQP third edition. Its 2024 revision separates Control Plan into a first-edition manual and adds material on sourcing, change management, risk and gated management. The public AIAG implementation course still describes five APQP phases. A program's approval gates and phase numbers need not be the same count.

The phase names below follow the AIAG-oriented sequence shown in the public TopQM AIAG Automotive Days presentation. The questions are our reading guide, not copied AIAG checklists. Teams may overlap activities; they still need evidence before accepting each handoff.

The submission level controls what goes to the customer

The familiar five PPAP levels describe evidence submission and review arrangements. Fideltronik's public 2019 supplier manual reproduces this grouping under AIAG PPAP fourth edition. That dated public copy illustrates the distinction; obtain the current controlled instructions for your own contract.

The customer determines the applicable level and additional requirements. A smaller submitted package does not establish that other applicable work can be omitted. Record which evidence must be sent, retained or reviewed and who accepted that interpretation.

Use the eighteen elements to locate evidence

AM General's publicly available November 2023 supplier manual maps its PPAP requirements to eighteen AIAG elements. The grouped list below identifies those record types. It does not replace applicability decisions, licensed instructions or customer-specific requirements.

Keep design records; authorized engineering changes; customer engineering approval; design FMEA; process flow; process FMEA; control plan; measurement-system studies; dimensional results; material and performance-test results; initial process studies; qualified-laboratory documentation; appearance approval; sample production parts; master sample; checking aids; customer-specific requirements; and the Part Submission Warrant.

For each applicable record, identify the requirement source, owner, revision and actual evidence. An absent result remains open. A signed cover sheet cannot supply the missing measurement.

Carry the same requirement through the handoff

The existing control-plan guide uses a fictional fastener requirement of 8.0 ± 0.5 N m. Keep that teaching assumption unchanged. The guide also calculates a potential two-hour suspect population at 120 units per hour. Neither quantity establishes that a customer approved the part or that the measurement method is capable.

Engineering owns the stated requirement and revision. The process team links the joint to its risk analysis and control plan. Quality attaches the approved measurement method and actual results. The submission owner reconciles those references before requesting a customer disposition.

A change to the tool, route or part revision can leave old evidence attached to the wrong process. Use the existing engineering-change guide to control effectivity and old stock. The approval record must identify which configuration its evidence covers.

1. Confirm the governing requirement

   Engineering records the part, revision, characteristic and customer instruction.

2. Connect the process records

   Production and quality align the route, risk analysis, control plan and measurement method.

3. Attach the actual evidence

   The evidence owner records the run conditions, results, exceptions and unresolved items.

4. Record the customer's disposition

   The submission owner retains the decision, scope, restrictions and required next action.

FAI verifies a different approval task

First article inspection, or FAI, documents verification that a production process has produced an article meeting its applicable design requirements. IAQG's 9102 overview places it in aviation, space and defense, with possible use elsewhere. SAE's public AS9102C scope states that its requirements complement customer and applicable statutory or regulatory requirements.

PPAP addresses a production-part approval process with the required supporting records. FAI is not an interchangeable name for that complete submission. A dimensional inspection report alone does not establish either customer's entire approval requirement.

SAE lists AS9102C as revised in June 2023. Use the applicable revision and contract. Do not reuse a revision-B FAQ as proof of a revision-C obligation, or assume that a customer asking for a first article has requested AIAG PPAP.

Keep certification, customer rules and improvement methods distinct

Automotive teams commonly use APQP and the quality core tools in work governed by IATF 16949 and customer-specific requirements. IATF's public directory separately lists OEM IATF and PPAP requirements, including Ford documents effective June 2026. Determine the actual applicable clauses and customer instructions before declaring conformity.

ISO 9001 addresses a quality management system across sectors. Its public overview does not make the AIAG manual an automatic requirement for every organization. ISO now lists ISO 9001:2026 as published; a supplier must still check its certification and customer transition arrangements rather than infer an immediate contract change from that catalog entry.

APQP is not a phase of Six Sigma. A team can use statistical and problem-solving methods within quality planning, but a DMAIC project does not replace the customer's product and process approval evidence. Keep method selection separate from the approval authority.

Build a checklist from the applicable requirements

An APQP checklist records the required work, responsible owner, due point, evidence and disposition for the actual program. Use the blank handoff record below to find missing decisions. It is an original working aid, not an official AIAG form or a declaration of compliance.

Before the next review, choose one unresolved characteristic. Follow it from the requirement through the process, measurement and submission records. Ask the owner to resolve the first missing reference before collecting more presentation slides.