Platform
Modules
By sector
By sector
By standard
Blog
News
Events
APP-30
National Qualification and Coordinating Authorities of NATO member nations, and the manufacturers of electronic and electrical components for military use whose Approvals they mutually recognise
APP-30 lets a NATO nation's National Qualification Authority accept another member nation's existing Approval of an electronic or electrical component and its manufacturer, once agreed conditions are verified, without repeating the qualification testing already carried out.
APP-30 is the NATO Allied Procedural Publication that lets National Qualification Authorities (NQA) and National Coordinating Authorities (NCA) of participating NATO member nations mutually accept each other's Qualification Approvals for electronic and electrical components used in military equipment. Rather than a manufacturer repeating testing already performed and approved in its home nation, a second nation can list that same product, and the manufacturer that made it, on its own Qualified Products List (QPL) or Qualified Manufacturers List (QML), provided the requesting nation's qualification system meets the conditions the agreement sets out and both nations use a product specification they both agree is acceptable for the purpose. The current edition is Edition A, Version 1, effective on receipt and promulgated in March 2018, and the nations' agreement to use it is recorded in STANAG 4093, the ratification instrument that gives this publication its force.
The mechanism runs nation to nation, not through NATO itself. Each participating nation operates its own military qualification system, and two nations exchange a Statement of Qualification System and Quality Surveillance and Assessment Services (SQSQSAS) describing that system to each other. The document is explicit that the agreement "is considered to be implemented between two nations when they have their SQSQSAS mutually agreed by each other" - so being a NATO member and ratifying the underlying STANAG is not, on its own, enough for mutual recognition to work between any two specific nations. Its scope is narrow: it relates exclusively to military qualified products, meaning electronic or electrical components as the document defines them, not products or standards in general.
The agreement's own actors are national authorities. The NQA is "the national activity having qualification responsibility for the particular product detail specification or capability approval generic specification involved," and the NCA is the point of contact for "resolving matters involving policy and procedures for mutual acceptance of qualification approvals." A National Quality Assurance Authority (NQAA) often sits alongside them, and in some nations a single agency performs all three functions. It is the manufacturer, though, who carries the ongoing obligations once a product is actually listed: keeping production in conformity with the qualified specification, running the required tests, and maintaining traceability of what it delivers.
For an Approval to be acceptable to another nation, it has to come from a national military qualification system that is either run independently, run as a civil national or international system the military uses as its executive arm under surveillance of a National Supervising Inspectorate, or a combination of the two. That system has to provide for continuing assessment and audit of the manufacturers and test laboratories involved, and for reporting to participating nations on compliance. It must not allow waivers or concessions, either at the Approval stage or for any item later delivered as a qualified product - a stricter line than many quality schemes take, and one worth noting because it leaves no route to ship a qualified product that failed its own qualification testing.
Approval is not a one-time event. The manufacturer has to keep the product and manufacturing process in full conformity with the specification, perform every production-lot acceptance and periodic test the specification requires, and exclude from delivery as qualified product any lot that fails those tests. It must maintain a traceability and recall system that lets a user identify and recover suspect lots, inform its NQA of periodic test failures, and stop or recall deliveries where the qualification rules require it. Any proposed change to the drawings, process or material specifications that are part of the qualification data package has to be reported, with re-qualification carried out before products embodying the change are offered for delivery. A defect analysis service is also required for persistent defects, reporting findings with proposed corrective actions to the national authority, which in turn runs periodic surveillance visits to the manufacturer's plant to confirm all of this continues.
Only a nation's own NCA/NQA can bring a request to another nation's NCA; a submission received directly from a manufacturer in another country is returned to that manufacturer's own NCA/NQA for formal certification and re-submission. The package has to include the product detail specification and any supporting standards or drawings it references, the manufacturer's complete test report with the required certifications, and the current qualification approval certificate or notification letter, submitted in English or French. The acceptor nation confirms the submission is complete and either accepts it for listing on its QPL or explains why it has not. It cannot demand extra product performance or test requirements beyond what the specification and its referenced standards already require, though it may ask for further evidence in exceptional circumstances. A specification adopted this way stays under the unilateral control of the nation that issued it: the adopting nation can suggest changes, but none take effect without a written change notice from the issuing nation.
Data a manufacturer submits under the agreement has to be marked proprietary and stays confined to the participating nations' NCA/NQA and their officially delegated agencies, without the manufacturer's and submitting nation's written consent to release it further. Each nation's NCA/NQA investigates incorrect or doubtful advertising about products or manufacturers processed under the agreement and reports verified cases and corrective action to the other nations; fraudulent marking or certification is prosecuted under that nation's own laws. The document does not name a retention period for qualification records, and sets no fixed cycle for reviewing a QPL listing beyond the ongoing surveillance the national qualification system itself has to run.
APP-30 is a procedural agreement between government authorities, not something a manufacturer implements a management system against directly, so the work it demands happens in the qualification testing, production surveillance and delivery discipline itself, not in software. What ComplyTrain does is hold the evidence trail that discipline produces: the qualification data package and detail specification, production-lot and periodic test records, the traceability and recall register for suspect lots, records of any specification or process change and the re-qualification it triggered, and the defect-analysis reports and corrective-action schedules the agreement calls for. Kept as controlled, versioned documents with an owner and a review history rather than scattered files, this is exactly what a manufacturer's own national surveillance visit, or another nation's review of a mutual-acceptance request, will ask to see.
What ComplyTrain does not do: it does not perform the qualification testing itself, act as a National Qualification or Coordinating Authority, broker the SQSQSAS exchange between two nations' governments, or process a mutual-acceptance request on a manufacturer's behalf. Those stay government-to-government functions carried out by the authorities the document names.
Which tier of qualification and quality assurance a contract requires, and what else sits alongside it, is set by the contract and the customer's quality clause, not by us. See what else is in a typical NATO quality assurance package in the standards explorer, and talk to us about the evidence trail behind it.
Tell us how you need to work with APP-30 and what you need from it. We will come back to you about what ComplyTrain can do.
Thank you. Your list is on its way to your inbox, and we will come back to you on what working with these standards in ComplyTrain involves, usually within one business day.
Not directly. APP-30 binds NATO member nations, who ratify it through STANAG 4093 and then implement mutual acceptance between specific pairs of nations once they exchange and agree each other's SQSQSAS. A manufacturer feels its effect only when a request is made to recognise its Approval in another nation, typically because a customer or a market in that nation calls for it.
STANAG 4093 is the Standardization Agreement recording that NATO nations agree to use APP-30; APP-30 is the publication that sets out the actual terms of that mutual acceptance, the conditions a national qualification system has to meet, and the request procedure. The STANAG is the ratification, APP-30 is the content.
APP-30 describes national government qualification, not third-party or NATO certification. A "certificate or notification letter" is issued by a manufacturer's own National Qualification Authority when qualification succeeds, and a second nation's acceptance of that Approval is also a national government decision. No accredited certification body and no NATO office issues an APP-30 certificate.
Its own nation's NCA submits a request to the second nation's NCA, with a package including the detail specification, the complete test report, and the current approval certificate or notification letter. The acceptor nation checks the submission is complete and either lists the product on its own Qualified Products List or explains why it has not.
The manufacturer has to inform its National Qualification Authority and stop or recall the qualified deliveries as the qualification and quality assurance system's rules require, run a defect analysis to find the underlying cause, and report the findings with proposed corrective actions. No waiver or concession is permitted for products offered for delivery as qualified.
One system for the whole compliance programme. Start with the module you need most.
Collect information the same way every time, and decide in advance what happens next.
Know whether your controls are operating, not just whether a policy says they exist.
Turn the compliance work you already know about into a plan with owners, dependencies and dates.
Know what you can offer, and hold the evidence behind every configuration you offer it in.
Eight built-in reports across every module, scheduled, delivered, and filed where the evidence lives.
The sector news that matters to your organisation - read and rated by AI, and delivered as a scheduled digest in your own language.
AI reads the tender pack and pulls out the requirements, deadlines and rules - then helps you draft the response from your own approved content, with you reviewing every step.
One current register of the suppliers and partners you depend on - each risk-assessed, re-assessing itself on schedule, and wired straight into your risk register.
See every requirement you face - across every standard, plus your own contracts and policies - traced to the documents, evidence and processes that satisfy it.
Identify, score, treat and review your risks in one place - with AI to help anyone run a proper assessment, and a defensible trail behind every decision.
Assign training, prove it was understood, and hold the competence records an auditor asks for.
Draft compliance documents with AI, keep every version under control, and export them beautifully branded - all in one place.
Audits, corrective actions, processes and approvals in one quality system, organised around ISO 9001.
Medical device manufacturers operate under more regulatory pressure than almost any other sector outside pharmaceuticals. The rules govern how you design a device, how you make it, how you track it after it ships, and how you respond when something goes wrong.
Learn how EU dual-use export controls apply to encryption, sensors, and software, how classification works under Annex I, and why sending source code by email can count as an export.
A practical way to turn in-your-head risk management into a register that survives staff turnover and answers the risk questions now showing up in tenders.