Who is responsible for completing AS9102 forms?

The organization performing the first article inspection is normally responsible for completing the AS9102 forms. In most aerospace supply chains, that means the supplier or manufacturing organization producing the first article, not the customer. Quality usually coordinates and approves the FAI package, but the data needed to complete it comes from engineering, manufacturing, inspection, purchasing, and sometimes external special process suppliers.

This responsibility is not just clerical. AS9102 forms are quality records. They need to reflect the approved design, the actual build configuration, measured results, material and process evidence, and any applicable customer or purchase order requirements. Who enters the data can vary by site, but the organization submitting the FAI remains accountable for the completeness and accuracy of the package under its own procedures and contract requirements.

Typical responsibility split

In a mature process, responsibilities are usually divided rather than assigned to one person:

• Quality or FAI coordinator: manages the FAI process, verifies required forms and attachments, checks traceability, and often signs or approves the package.
• Engineering or configuration control: confirms drawing revision, model revision, specification requirements, characteristic interpretation, and approved deviations where applicable.
• Manufacturing or operations: confirms the part was built using the intended routing, work instructions, tooling, and controlled process plan.
• Inspection or metrology: records measured results for ballooned characteristics and identifies nonconformances or out-of-tolerance results.
• Purchasing or supplier quality: gathers certificates, special process approvals, outside processing records, and supplier-provided FAI data when flowed down.
• Authorized quality representative: reviews and accepts the completed package according to the organization’s procedure. This does not guarantee customer acceptance.

What about Forms 1, 2, and 3?

AS9102 Form 1 is typically completed from part number, assembly, drawing, revision, and accountability information. Form 2 depends on material, special process, and functional test evidence. Form 3 depends on characteristic-level inspection results. Because those inputs come from different systems and functions, assigning the whole package to one quality inspector without controlled inputs is a common failure mode.

Customer and supplier boundaries

A customer may review, reject, or require resubmission of an AS9102 package, but the customer normally does not complete the supplier’s forms. If a sub-tier supplier performs work that affects the first article, its records may need to be included or flowed into the prime supplier’s package. The submitting organization still has to verify that the sub-tier evidence is complete, current, and traceable.

Some customers impose specific portal, Net-Inspect, template, signature, or attachment requirements. Those requirements can change who performs data entry, but they do not remove the supplier’s accountability for the submitted record unless the contract explicitly defines a different arrangement.

System and recordkeeping dependencies

In brownfield environments, AS9102 data often comes from PLM, ERP, MES, QMS, inspection software, document control systems, and supplier portals. If revision control, characteristic ballooning, routing history, material traceability, or inspection data are not aligned, the FAI package can be formally complete but still weak as objective evidence.

Full system replacement is usually unrealistic just to improve AS9102 execution. In regulated aerospace environments, replacement carries qualification burden, validation cost, downtime risk, integration complexity, and change control overhead. More practical programs usually define ownership, map required data sources, control templates, and validate integrations before relying on automated FAI generation.

Common failure modes

• Forms are filled out by quality after the fact without verified engineering or production inputs.
• Drawing revisions, purchase order requirements, and inspection records do not match.
• Sub-tier certificates or special process evidence are attached but not reviewed for scope and revision.
• Characteristic results are copied from inspection reports without clear traceability to balloon numbers.
• Electronic signatures, approvals, or audit trails are not controlled under the site’s QMS procedure.

The practical answer is that quality usually owns the FAI process, but the organization producing and submitting the first article owns the AS9102 record. Completion should be treated as a controlled, cross-functional process, not as paperwork assigned to the last person before shipment.