Terms and Conditions

×

By accepting these terms, you agree to the following:

  • You will not distribute this electronic document to unauthorized users
  • You will not make unauthorized copies of this document
  • You acknowledge that this document is protected by copyright
  • Usage is subject to AIAG's terms and conditions

Course Survey

×
Home Expertise Areas Quality Quality Core Tools
Parent Page

APQP Sector Specific Guidance Petition

Improve product development and production with clarity on Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP), Control Plan (CP), and Production Part Approval Process (PPAP).

Experience shows that variation in how APQP, CP, and PPAP are interpreted across non-traditional parts manufacturing companies causes significant waste throughout the supply chain. It’s difficult for suppliers to be best in class when they receive a mix of messages about customer, supplier quality engineer, auditor, and departmental expectations.

Goal


AIAG’s goal is to improve the applicability of APQP/CP/PPAP. We can do this by clarifying requirements for specific sectors or commodities with significant differences in design and manufacturing operations and providing a means for developing, documenting, and distributing these clarifications. Clarifications may include changes in terminology, alternate requirements, or changes in applicability.

Rules for successful sector requirements:

  • Sector clearly defined
  • Broadly applicable across the sector and possibly beyond
  • Sector consensus on agreement to use the revised definitions
  • OEM agreement, as applicable

See methods for proposing clarifications below using the following forms.

 

Petition Details Form (PDF)
Get started by downloading and completing this form. Once you've saved the file to your computer, move on to the next box to finalize your submission.
Download Now
Submit Petition
Provide additional detail and attach your completed Petition Details Form here. Be sure to click the "Submit Petition" button to complete the process. 
Submit now

    Method


    Sectors propose clarifications indexed to the APQP/CP/PPAP requirements through the following process:


    1. The sector identifies and justifies the need for clarification (typically initiated by a few motivated representatives).
    2. The sector completes and submits a petition to AIAG using the Petition Details Form above.
    3. AIAG reviews the petition and works with the author to prepare it for submission.
    4. When all requirements are met, AIAG manages the review and approval process with the appropriate oversight team.
    5. AIAG or another appropriate sector association initiates a call to action for volunteers and forms a team to draft a guidance table (see example below).
    6. The sector team reaches consensus on significant clauses in the APQP/CP/PPAP and develops the guidance table.
    7. The sector team submits the draft guidance table to AIAG for review with the appropriate oversight team.
    8. If the guidance table is rejected, AIAG provides feedback to the sector team.
    9. If the guidance table is approved, it is returned to the sector team for stakeholder review and reconciliation of comments.
    10. After final approval, AIAG announces and posts the guidance table as a free download.
    11. Periodic reviews and revisions are managed by AIAG.

    Example of Completed Sector Specific Guidance Table


    • Sector: Electronics

    • Commodity: Semiconductors

    • Guidance table: Summary of clarifications

     

    APQP Output Reference Alternative(s)
    Links to details/information to support alternative text
    2.1 Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA) DFMEA may follow the PFMEA
    2.1 Design is generally dependent on the process. Therefore, the DFMEA may follow the PFMEA.
    2.3 Design Verification Catalog items without a Customer-specified set of requirements may have a generic verification. 2.3
    2.12 Gages/Testing Equipment Requirements See 3.7 
    3.5 Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA) The PFMEA may precede the DFMEA 2.1
    3.6 Pre-Launch Control Plan (including Error-Proofing Devices) Highly automated systems may not have a hard copy control plan detailing every test. The control plan may refer to the automated controls and general requirements for reaction plans.

    number 24
    4.1 Significant Production Run Evidence of runs of similar products on the same equipment is sufficient.  
    4.3 Preliminary Process Capability Study 100% automated inspection. Evidence of runs of products with equivalent tolerances on the same equipment is sufficient.  
    4.4 Production Part Approval Default is Level 1  
    4.7 Production Control Plan See 3.7 

     

    Detailed explanations of the differences and instructions to address the APQP requirements:


    Detail on differences and instructions to address the APQP requirements:


    • 2.1 - Design is generally dependent on the process. Therefore, the DFMEA may follow the PFMEA.

    • 3.7 - See item number 24 in IATF 16949:2016 – Sanctioned Interpretations


    Note: Final guidance must provide detailed explanations of differences and instructions on how to address applicable APQP requirements.

    Looking for more information?

    Get in touch! Use the button below to email our Quality team. 

    Email us