I think we shouldn't mix 2 use cases for plans:
- functional and/or subcontracting drawings made by the end user of the part and who, in order to guarantee the functionality of his part, needs to dimension and tolerance (if different from the general cartridge tolerance) the part. This constitutes a " technical contract" sent to the subcontractor who will manufacture the part. The latter is supposed to undertake to respect the tolerances indicated in the plan.
- manufacturing plans, generated by the subcontractor for internal use on its machines. He then indicates to the plan what he wants, according to his own rules, doing the simplest if he deems it sufficient. This implies that he has verified that his manufacturing process, even if he does not quote anything on his fab plan, will guarantee that the dimensions requested by his customer will be maintained. The quality contract will then define whether or not the ratings should be measured according to the level achieved.
Once we have said that it is not uncommon for the two plans to be merged, either because the customer knows what his subcontractor needs and it suits him too (implicit contract), or because the subcontractor directly uses the customer's plan to manufacture because it suits him, or because the customer and the subcontractor are the same entity 
.