A Level 1 PPAP is the lightest of the five PPAP submission levels. The supplier sends only the part submission warrant to the customer. An appearance approval report goes with it when the part has appearance requirements. Every other piece of evidence stays ready on request. Level 2 adds product samples and limited supporting data. Level 3 sends samples and complete data, and it is the default when the customer says nothing. Level 4 sends whatever the customer defines. At Level 5 the data stays at the supplier's plant for the customer to review on site.
We read the AIAG PPAP manual page on 1 November 2026. It lists the fourth edition and names no newer one. The manual is paid, so we describe the levels in our own words and copy none of its tables or forms. The arithmetic in the worked example was run in Node. The customer, not the supplier, sets the level for each part number.
The five levels in one table
PPAP stands for Production Part Approval Process. It is the evidence package that shows a supplier can make a part to every requirement at the quoted rate. The level decides how much of that evidence travels to the customer. It never changes how much evidence must exist.
| Level | What is sent to the customer | Typical use |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Part submission warrant only, plus an appearance report for parts with appearance needs | Simple, low-risk parts from a proven supplier |
| 2 | Warrant with product samples and limited supporting data | Moderate risk, where the customer wants to see parts and key data |
| 3 | Warrant with samples and complete supporting data | The default for most new parts and new suppliers |
| 4 | Warrant and other items the customer defines | A customer with its own list of required documents |
| 5 | Warrant with samples and complete data, reviewed at the supplier's plant | High-risk or safety-related parts, where the customer wants to see the process |
The warrant is a signed statement that the parts meet all drawing and specification requirements, made from production tooling at the production rate. Signing it is a serious act. A supplier that signs without the evidence behind it has made a false declaration.
What a Level 1 PPAP leaves at the supplier
Level 1 sounds like less work, but the evidence still has to exist. At Level 1 the supplier sends the warrant and keeps design records, risk analyses, the control plan, gauge and capability studies, test results, samples and checking aids ready. If a customer audit or a field problem asks for them, "we did not send them" is no defence. The only saving is the effort of packaging and sending.
The 18 elements behind every level
Grouped by what they prove, the 18 elements are these.
| Group | Elements |
|---|---|
| Design and change (3) | Design records, authorised engineering change documents, customer engineering approval |
| Risk and control documents (4) | Design FMEA, process flow diagram, process FMEA, control plan |
| Measurement and capability (5) | Measurement system studies, dimensional results, material and performance test results, initial process studies, qualified laboratory documentation |
| Physical proof (4) | Appearance approval report, sample production parts, master sample, checking aids |
| Declarations (2) | Customer-specific requirements, part submission warrant |
The groups hold 3 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 2 = 18 elements. Not every element applies to every part. A customer-owned design may mean the design FMEA is supplied by the customer, and a part with no visible surface has no appearance report. Each element still gets a status on the checklist: ready, due, not applicable or supplied by someone else.
Who chooses the level, and how
The customer sets the level, usually in its supplier quality manual or on the purchase documents, and it can differ between part numbers. Customers commonly ask for higher levels for new suppliers, safety characteristics, new technology or parts with a history of problems, and lower levels once a supplier has a good record. If nothing is stated, Level 3 is the default. Submitting at a different level from the one requested is a wrong submission. When in doubt, ask in writing and keep the answer in the project file.
Worked example: run at rate and sample size
Two pieces of evidence need arithmetic, whatever the level. The first is the capacity demonstration called run at rate. A supplier will make 360,000 parts a year over 225 working days, on two shifts with 15 productive hours a day.
- Parts per day: 360,000 / 225 = 1,600.
- Required rate per hour: 1,600 / 15 = 106.7 parts.
- For an 8-hour run the target is 106.7 x 8 = 853 good parts.
- The run makes 880 good parts, which is 110.0 an hour.
- Margin: 110.0 / 106.7 - 1 = 3.1 per cent above the required rate.
A 3.1 per cent margin passes but is thin. A customer may reasonably ask what happens when a tool change or a bad coil eats an hour. The second piece is a sample size for a reliability claim. A success-run test with zero failures needs n = ln(1 - confidence) / ln(reliability) parts.
| Claim | Calculation | Parts needed |
|---|---|---|
| 90% reliability at 90% confidence | ln(0.10) / ln(0.90) = 21.85 | 22 |
| 95% reliability at 90% confidence | ln(0.10) / ln(0.95) = 44.89 | 45 |
| 99% reliability at 95% confidence | ln(0.05) / ln(0.99) = 298.07 | 299 |
Run the other way, 30 parts with zero failures show only 92.6 per cent reliability at 90 per cent confidence, which is 0.10 to the power 1/30. A claim of "all 30 parts passed, so the part is reliable" says much less than it sounds.
How to prepare the package without a last-minute scramble
Start the checklist when the programme starts, not when the submission is due. Give every element an owner, a document name, a due date and a status. Book the measurement system studies early, because a failed gauge study delays the dimensional results and the process study that depend on it. Run the significant production run with production tools, operators and gauges, since a run on prototype tooling proves nothing about production. Keep one signed copy of everything, and check that the part number, drawing revision and tooling revision match on every document. Most rejections come from inconsistency, not from a missing skill.
When a new PPAP is needed
The customer's rules decide. Typical triggers are a new part, a change to the design, a change to the process or tooling, and a new source for material or a sub-supplier. Others are a part not produced for a long time and a correction to a problem found on a part already approved. Tell the customer about changes before you ship, not after. A change that skips notification can mean a stop-ship.
The possible decisions
A customer answers a submission with one of three statuses.
- Approved: the supplier may ship production quantities.
- Interim approval: the supplier may ship a limited quantity or time while an agreed action plan closes a gap, such as a dimension not yet capable. The plan needs quantities, dates, containment and owners.
- Rejected: the supplier may not ship until a corrected submission is approved.
Common reasons for rejection are an unsigned or inconsistent warrant and a missing element. Others are a measurement system that fails its study, a capability below the customer's target, and a mismatch between the process flow, the process FMEA and the control plan.
Where to read next
How PPAP fits inside the larger launch process is covered by the free course below. For related industry context, see our MES overview and the Industry 4.0 guide. The AIAG PPAP manual page shows the edition and how to buy it, and the APQP manual page covers the planning process around it.
Practise it free
The free APQP, Control Plan and PPAP course teaches the five APQP phases, the Control Plan, the 18 PPAP elements and five levels, and the warrant. It also covers run at rate and what to do when a submission is rejected. It uses spreadsheet exercises with worked numbers like the ones above.
It is a free course with a verifiable certificate of completion, and anyone can check a certificate on our verification page. EDWartens is not affiliated with AIAG, VDA or IATF. Open the APQP, Control Plan and PPAP course to build a full 18-element checklist for a part of your own.
Practise with us
Internships
Project work you can show
Free internships, 4 weeks each, with a free certificate. Premium is optional.
See all internshipsRoles
Quality and projects
Roles that ask for this skill, 43 open in this country now. Free to see and to apply. We are not a recruitment agency.
See rolesTake the free course
Questions
What is a Level 1 PPAP?
Level 1 is the lightest PPAP submission level. The supplier sends only the part submission warrant, plus an appearance approval report if the part has appearance requirements, and keeps all other evidence ready for the customer on request.
What are the five PPAP levels?
Level 1 sends the warrant only. Level 2 adds samples and limited data. Level 3 sends the warrant, samples and complete data. Level 4 sends the warrant and whatever the customer defines. Level 5 keeps the data at the supplier for on-site review.
Which PPAP level is the default?
Level 3 is the default when the customer does not specify one. It sends the warrant, product samples and complete supporting data. The customer can set a different level for each part number.
Does Level 1 mean less work?
Only less packaging and sending. All 18 elements must still exist and be kept, because the customer can ask for them at any time. Signing the warrant says the evidence is there.
How many elements are in a PPAP?
Eighteen, from design records and FMEAs to the control plan, measurement studies, samples and the part submission warrant. Some may be marked not applicable or supplied by the customer for a given part.
Who decides the PPAP level?
The customer decides, for each part number, and states it in its supplier requirements or purchase documents. Submitting at a different level from the one requested counts as a wrong submission.
Sources
- AIAG: PPAP manual page, fourth edition (read 1 November 2026)
- AIAG: APQP manual page, third edition (read 1 November 2026)
- AIAG: Control Plan manual page, first edition (read 1 November 2026)
- IATF Global Oversight: IATF 16949:2016 and customer specific requirements (read 1 November 2026)
Written by the EDWartens engineering team for general education. Product names are trademarks of their owners; mentioning them does not imply endorsement. Prices and terms of other providers were checked on the date shown and can change.
IATF 16949 Internal Audit Process: Step by Step
QA vs QC in Construction: Who Checks What on Site
What Is Process Capability? Cp, Cpk, Pp and Ppk Worked
What Is an Environmental Management System (EMS)?
ETABS to SAFE: Export a Floor and Check the Foundation
What Is IEC 62443? Plain-English Guide for Engineers