PPAP Checking Aids and Customer-Specific Requirements

01How to use this chapter

This chapter separates the uploaded assessment criteria from practical KEVOS implementation guidance. The section titled Source-derived assessment criteria preserves the intent, terminology and checklist detail supplied in the uploaded PPAP Assessment. The surrounding handbook guidance explains how a manufacturing or supplier-quality team can organise evidence, perform a readiness review and spot gaps before formal submission. Where the uploaded source states a numeric threshold, edition reference or customer-specific expectation, it is identified as source-derived rather than presented as a universal rule.

Use the chapter in three passes. First, read the purpose and workflow to understand what the element is meant to prove. Second, work through the source-derived prompts against the actual part number, engineering revision and production process. Third, close the red flags and collect objective evidence before the package is released. For large PPAPs, record the evidence location beside each source prompt so another reviewer can repeat the assessment without relying on verbal explanation.

02Handbook workflow

1. Create a checking-aid registerList every product-specific gage, fixture, model/template or other aid used to accept the submitted product.
2. Trace each aid to the control planThe control plan should identify the checking aid where it is part of the production control method.
3. Control identity and calibrationNumber the aids, maintain calibration where applicable and ensure the calibration status can be traced.
4. Prove measurement adequacyPerform appropriate MSA and correlation studies for the checking aid when required.
5. Maintain the aidInclude checking aids in preventive-maintenance plans where wear, damage or adjustment can affect acceptance.
6. Collect customer-specific requirementsBuild a controlled list from the customer/Organization systems, approver requirements and partner functions such as engineering, laboratory and logistics.
7. Demonstrate compliance or waiverFor each CSR, provide objective evidence of compliance or a controlled waiver; do not rely on an unstated assumption that none apply.

03Evidence package to retain

The assessment is stronger when each conclusion points to a controlled record rather than a statement that the requirement is “covered”. The following evidence set is a practical minimum for this chapter; actual customer and contractual requirements govern the live submission.

• Checking-aid register with unique IDs
• Checking-aid drawings/prints where required
• Calibration status/records
• MSA studies
• Correlation-study evidence where required
• Preventive-maintenance plan
• Control-plan reference
• Duplicate gage/submission evidence where required
• Controlled list of customer-specific requirements
• Compliance evidence for each CSR
• Controlled waiver when no CSR applies or a specific requirement is waived

04Source-derived assessment criteria

• 1.Is submission to customer specific requirements?
• 2.Is there a formal, approved, controlled waiver in place?
• 3.Were prints copies submitted, if required?
• 4.Were duplication gages submitted, if required?
• 5.Were correlation studies conducted, if required?
• 6.Are all Checking Aids numbered and calibrated?
• 7.Are all Checking Aides numbered and included in the Control Plan?
• 8.Are all Checking Aids provided for with preventative maintenance plans?
• 9.Do all Checking Aids have acceptable Measurement Systems Analysis studies?

• 1.A list of “Specific Requirements” along with compliance documentation shall be provided or waiver that none exist.
• 2.Reporting shall take place for those requirements listed on Organization Connect and all others identified by PPAP approver representative plus other process partners. (met. Lab, engineering, logistics, etc.)

05Common red flags

These are practical review signals derived from the relationships and controls repeatedly required by the source. A red flag does not automatically mean the submission must be rejected; it means the condition deserves documented resolution before approval.

• Checking aid is used in production but absent from the control plan
• Aid has no unique identification or calibration status
• MSA has not been performed
• Correlation issue exists between supplier checking aid and customer measurement
• Aid has wear surfaces but no maintenance plan
• Customer-specific requirements are known by email but not listed and controlled
• Package says “N/A” for CSR without evidence or waiver

06Cross-document interfaces

PPAP elements should not be reviewed as isolated files. Check the following interfaces for consistent part identity, revision, characteristic naming, operation numbering and control logic.

07Assessor close-out checklist

• The element is present or a controlled waiver/agreement explains why it is not required.
• The submitted record identifies the correct part number and engineering revision where applicable.
• The evidence is legible, understandable, controlled and traceable to the submitted product/process.
• Special characteristics and known customer concerns are treated consistently across related documents.
• Any nonconformance, temporary control, deviation or interim condition is visible and formally dispositioned.
• Actions have owners, due dates and objective closure evidence where the source expects corrective action.
• The final conclusion can be independently repeated by another reviewer using the package alone.

08Frequently asked questions

09Source and limitations

Primary source: uploaded Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) Assessment / PPAP Submission Assessment, 15 pages, Quality-One. Source sections used on this page: 2.2.16 Checking Aid, 2.2.17 Customer Specific Requirements. Approximate source page coverage: 14-14.

This KEVOS chapter is an educational and assessment aid. It preserves the uploaded document's criteria but does not replace controlled customer-specific requirements, engineering specifications, contractual requirements or an official PPAP/APQP manual. Where the source references “PPAP 4th edition”, AIAG methods, Organization systems or Organization-specific targets, those references are retained as source context rather than silently updated or generalized.