You submitted your AS9102 First Article Inspection report and it came back rejected — again. You are not alone. Analysis of FAIR rejection data from aerospace Tier 1 and Tier 2 suppliers shows the same 12 mistakes surface repeatedly, and most are preventable with a structured pre-submission review. This page breaks down each rejection reason, explains why it happens, and tells you exactly how to fix it before your next submission.
A common scenario in aerospace supply: a CNC machine shop delivers a perfect first article part — every dimension in spec, every surface finish correct — but the FAI report is rejected on paperwork alone. The part is fine. The documentation is not.
AS9102 (currently Revision C, published 2023) is the international aerospace standard for First Article Inspection, co-published as AS9102 (SAE, Americas), EN 9102 (AECMA, Europe), and SJAC 9102 (Asia). It defines three forms — Form 1 (Part Number Accountability), Form 2 (Product Accountability), and Form 3 (Characteristic Accountability) — that together must account for every single design characteristic on the drawing, with traceable evidence.
The single most common rejection cause. Form 3 is submitted without a ballooned drawing, or not all drawing callouts are numbered and captured on the form. AS9102 Section 5.2 requires: “Verify that every design characteristic requirement is accounted for, uniquely identified and has inspection results traceable to each unique identifier.”
Rejection rate for this issue alone: approximately 38% of first-time FAIR submissions. Common variants:
The FAIR is prepared against Rev C of a drawing, but the customer’s current released revision is Rev D. All measurement data is against the wrong baseline — full resubmission required. This happens when:
Form 2 lists a material specification, but the attached Certificate of Conformance (CoC) does not include full chemical and mechanical test results, or the lot/heat number on the CoC does not match the material used for the first article part.
AS9102 Form 2 requires: raw material specification, supplier name, heat/lot number, and certification that the material meets the specified chemical and mechanical requirements. Every material on the drawing bill of materials must have a corresponding entry with certification attached.
The special process certifications attached to Form 2 reference a processor whose Nadcap scope has lapsed. Even a one-day expiration invalidates the FAIR for that process.
Special processes include heat treatment, non-destructive testing (NDT), surface treatment (anodize, plating, passivation), welding, and chemical processing. Each must be performed by a Nadcap-accredited facility (or customer-approved equivalent) with a current, in-scope accreditation.
Key Characteristics (KCs) are listed on Form 3 with a single measurement value. AS9102 requires a process capability study — minimum 30 samples, Cpk ≥ 1.33 — for each identified Key Characteristic. A single measurement is not evidence of process capability.
KCs are identified on the drawing with a triangle symbol (per AS9103). They are characteristics whose variation “significantly affects product fit, performance, service life, or manufacturability.” Per AS9102, each KC on Form 3 must be explicitly called out with statistical evidence.
| KC Requirement | AS9102 Expectation | Common Mistake |
|---|---|---|
| Process capability | Cpk ≥ 1.33, minimum 30 samples | Single measurement recorded |
| Identification | Triangle symbol on drawing, flagged on Form 3 | KC not identified on Form 3 |
| 100% inspection alternative | If Cpk cannot be demonstrated, 100% inspection of the KC | Neither Cpk nor 100% inspection performed |
| Record retention | Statistical data retained with FAI package | Data not attached or not traceable |
AS9102 requires that the FAIR be signed and dated by an authorized representative — typically the supplier’s quality engineer or delegated signatory. Each form (Form 1, 2, and 3) must carry the printed name, title, signature, and date of the approving authority.
A single missing or undated signature field is sufficient grounds for complete rejection, regardless of whether all measurements conform. Electronic signatures are acceptable provided they meet the customer’s digital record requirements and leave a traceable audit trail.
A characteristic is measured outside tolerance, recorded faithfully on Form 3 — but no Non-Conformance Report (NCR), deviation, or waiver is attached. AS9102 Section 5.4 requires that every out-of-spec finding has a formal disposition before submission.
The disposition must be one of: (1) use-as-is (with customer approval), (2) rework to conform, or (3) scrap. For aerospace FAI, use-as-is requires explicit customer engineering disposition — the supplier cannot self-approve.
The drawing calls for a functional test (pressure test, torque verification, electrical continuity, leak test, etc.) but the FAI report contains no test results or the test method is not documented. Functional requirements are design characteristics just like dimensions — they must be ballooned, listed on Form 3, and verified with actual test data.
Form 1 requires an index of all sub-tier drawings and suppliers. When a part has sub-assemblies or purchased components, each must be listed with its own part number, revision, supplier, and FAI status. Missing sub-tier documentation is a frequent rejection for assembly-level FAIs.
The inspection results on Form 3 were generated using measurement equipment whose calibration has expired. AS9102 requires all measurement equipment to be calibrated and traceable to national standards (NIST or equivalent). If the calibration due date on any gauge, CMM, micrometer, or optical comparator has passed, the measurements are invalid.
AS9102 Section 4.6 defines specific triggers that require a partial or full re-FAI: change in manufacturing location, change in process (including CNC program changes that affect characteristics), change in tooling, change in material source, or production break of more than 2 years. Suppliers who make these changes without triggering a re-FAI risk lot rejection and potential customer audit findings.
Balloon numbers on the drawing do not match the sequence on Form 3, or numbers are duplicated, skipped, or assigned to the wrong characteristic. This makes it impossible for the customer reviewer to trace a measurement result back to the drawing callout — a fundamental FAI requirement.
Common causes: manual balloon numbering errors, multiple inspectors working on the same drawing without coordination, or drawing revisions that add/remove characteristics without re-balloonning.
| # | Check | Form | Rejection if missed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Every design characteristic ballooned and on Form 3 | Form 3 | ~38% of first-time rejections |
| 2 | Drawing revision matches current released revision | Form 1 | Full resubmission required |
| 3 | Material certs complete with heat/lot traceability | Form 2 | FAIR rejected until certs provided |
| 4 | All special process suppliers Nadcap-accredited (current) | Form 2 | FAIR invalid for that process |
| 5 | Key Characteristics have Cpk ≥ 1.33 (30 pcs min) | Form 3 | KC evidence insufficient |
| 6 | All forms signed, dated, with authorized names | All | Immediate rejection |
| 7 | Every out-of-spec result has attached disposition | Form 3 | Orphan rejects not allowed |
| 8 | Functional test results recorded with method and equipment | Form 3 | Missing verification |
| 9 | Sub-tier supplier index complete | Form 1 | Incomplete BOM |
| 10 | All measurement equipment calibration current | Form 3 | Measurements invalid |
| 11 | No unreported process changes since last FAI | Form 1 | Re-FAI trigger missed |
| 12 | Balloon numbers sequential, no gaps or duplicates | Form 3 | Cross-reference failure |
Missing or unballooned characteristics on Form 3, accounting for approximately 38% of first-time FAIR rejections. Every design characteristic on the drawing — dimensions, tolerances, GD&T callouts, surface finishes, notes, flag notes — must be uniquely ballooned and listed on Form 3 with actual measurement results. A single missed note is sufficient for rejection.
Yes, in practice. AS9102 Section 5.2 states: “Verify that every design characteristic requirement is accounted for, uniquely identified and has inspection results traceable to each unique identifier.” While the standard does not explicitly mandate a physical ballooned drawing, most aerospace customers interpret “uniquely identified” to require a ballooned document (drawing, 3D model, or purchase order) as part of the FAIR package. Check your customer’s specific quality requirements (e.g., Boeing BAC, Airbus AIPS, or Pratt & Whitney ASQR-01) for explicit ballooned drawing requirements.
Cpk ≥ 1.33 based on a minimum sample of 30 consecutive production pieces. If the process cannot demonstrate Cpk ≥ 1.33, AS9102 requires 100% inspection of the Key Characteristic with documented results. A single measurement on one part is not acceptable evidence for a KC. Per AS9103, KCs are identified on the drawing with a triangle symbol and must be explicitly flagged on Form 3.
No. Form 2 requires complete material certification for every material on the drawing BOM: chemical composition, mechanical properties, heat/lot number, and supplier identification. A cert missing any required data element renders the FAI incomplete. Obtain the complete cert from the material supplier before submitting. If the original cert cannot be obtained, the material must be re-tested by an accredited laboratory.
Search the PRI eAuditNet database (the official Nadcap accreditation registry managed by Performance Review Institute). Verify: (1) the supplier is listed, (2) the accreditation scope covers the specific process you need (e.g., heat treatment per AMS 2770, NDT per AC7114, chemical processing), and (3) the accreditation has not expired. Even a one-day lapse invalidates the FAIR for that process. Check before every FAI submission, not just at initial qualification.
AS9102 Section 4.6 defines these triggers for partial or full re-FAI: (1) design characteristic change affecting form, fit, or function; (2) change in manufacturing location; (3) change in process (including CNC program changes that affect characteristics); (4) change in tooling; (5) change in material source; (6) change in inspection method; (7) production break of more than 2 years; (8) completion of corrective action from a prior FAI. When in doubt, assess the change against the standard and notify the customer before proceeding.
Record the actual measurement honestly on Form 3, then immediately open a Non-Conformance Report (NCR). The NCR must have a formal disposition before the FAIR can be submitted: use-as-is (with customer engineering approval), rework to conform, or scrap. You cannot submit an FAIR with an out-of-spec result and no disposition attached — this is one of the 12 most common rejection reasons.
Our quality team prepares AS9102-compliant FAI packages for every aerospace order. We catch these 12 issues before submission so your FAIR gets approved on the first attempt.
Request a Quote