Counterfeit Parts Avoidance and Detection Standards Gap Analysis

Some my colleagues recently expressed interest in a gap analysis I performed concerning counterfeit parts avoidance and detection standards. I initially prepared this gap analysis in 2009 (after the release of AS5553) and recently updated it to include new SAE documents and to remove others that are now obsolete.

Standards Gap Analysis

Here are my observations from this gap analysis …

  • Siginificant coverage in lower level standards for electronic parts
  • Limited coverage in lower level standards for other parts and materials
  • Poor coverage in high level standards for Quality Management Systems (QMS); QMS standards do not require key elements required for a robust counterfeit avoidance program

Standards gaps continue to present industry producers and government users with significant implementation challenges. The presence of requirements in QMS standards and associated certification programs would encourage implementation a robust counterfeit avoidance program throughout the supply chain. Sadly, organizations involved in maintaining key US and international QMS standards have yet to embed these requirements into QMS standards and supplier certification programs.

Updated 3/27/2013 – added Proposed IEC/TS 62668-2

Updated 3/26/2013 – comment about AS5553A superseding IEC/TS 62668-1 was incorrect; IEC does not plan to supersede IEC/TS-62668-1 with AS5553A or otherwise adopt AS5553A; other additional IEC documents are being developed.

Updated 3/8/2013 – gap analysis table updates work in process re ‘authorized distribution’; see proposed ‘AS7777’

One thought on “Counterfeit Parts Avoidance and Detection Standards Gap Analysis

  1. A colleague asks “What’s the basis for AS6081 failing to check the “Risk Mitigation” box?”

    This is a very good question.

    The context of risk mitigation that I used for this gap analysis is discussed in AS5553A paragraph 4.1.3 Purchasing Process, subparagraph ‘d’ …

    “Require a documented risk assessment and risk mitigation plan, specific to the intended application, for each procurement other than from an OCM or authorized supplier.”

    This refers to an end use specific risk assessment represented by the “Risk Assessment” block within Figure B3 that leads to decisions either to modify the assembly design or to procure the part presently used within the assembly design from a supplier other than an OCM or authorized supplier.

    Risk mitigation as described within AS6081, however, does not address end use specific risk assessment; AS6081 uses the term “risk mitigation” in the context of counterfeit detection inspections and tests, not the risk assessment that should occur before choosing to go down that road in the first place.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: