A Shortened History of SAE

1. G-19 Counterfeit Electronic Components Committee Standards Development ProgressMarch 2008Phil ZuluetaCQSDI - March 3 & 4, 2008NASA QLF - March 5 & 6, 2008

2. 2008 – Membership more than 90,000 in more than 97 countries, sharing information for advancing the engineering of mobility systems through standards development. 1980 - Membership exceeds 35,000. The SAE 75th Anniversary celebration brings world-wide recognition, becoming more global, diverse and more electronic. 1973 - Headquarters moves to Warrendale, PA. 1916 - Membership, 1,800. American Society of Aeronautic Engineers, Society of Tractor Engineers, the power boating industry and a fledgling aeronautics industry pitch to SAE for oversight of technical standards in their industries. A new organization formed, Society of Automotive Engineers. 1905 - Society of Automobile Engineers born and headquartered in New York City. Initial membership, 30 engineers. A Shortened History of SAE June 1902 - Peter Heldt of The Horseless Agewrote an editorial in which he said, "Now there is a noticeable tendency for automobile manufacturers to follow certain accepted lines of construction, technical questions constantly arise which seek solution from the cooperation of the technical men connected with the industry. These questions could best be dealt with by a technical society. The field of activity for this society would be the purely technical side of automobiles."

3. G-19 Counterfeit Electronic Components Committee • Committee initiated in September 2007. • Convene weekly on “fast-track” course. • Scope • Chartered to address aspects of preventing, detecting, responding to and counteracting the threat of counterfeit electronic components. • Objective • Develop standard(s) suitable for use in aeronautic, space, defense, civil and commercial electronic equipment applications to mitigate the risks of counterfeit electronic components. • Recognized best practices in component management, supplier management, procurement, inspection, test/evaluation methods, and … • Response strategies when suspect or confirmed counterfeit components are detected.

4. Challenges • Craft a document that will have widespread acceptance in all electronic industry segments: Defense, Aerospace, Civil, Commercial, other and the widely varying supply chain. • How does G-19 effort compare or conflict with the GEIA G-12 effort (now complete)? • Agreement on an outline and content • Counterfeit detection method (Process Flow for Authenticity Verification) disclosure • Agreement on a Design, Procurement, Risk Mitigation Process Flow • Securing uniform government agency policies on: • Cooperation with government investigators and enforcement agencies (DCIS, FBI, ICE, …?) • Reporting findings to industry (e.g. GIDEP, ERAI, etc.) • Alerting/communicating findings to suppliers • Disposition of suspect/confirmed counterfeits and the financial implications

5. US Government Members … DSCC GIDEP MDA NASA US AF / NRO (Aerospace Corp.) US Army - AMRDEC US Navy - NAVAIR US Navy - NSWC US Navy - NCIS US Customs and Border Protection Industry Members … Arrow Zeus Electronics BAE Systems Boeing General Dynamics Hi-Rel Laboratories Jabil Circuits Lockheed Martin Maxim Integrated Products Northrop Grumman Orbital Sciences QP Semiconductor Raytheon G-19 Members Participating Industry Associations … • Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) • Best Manufacturing Practices Center of Excellence (BMPCOE) • Electronic Resellers Association International (ERAI) • Government Electronics & Information Technology Association (GEIA) • Independent Distributors of Electronics Association (IDEA)

6. G-19 Statement regarding conflict/overlapwith the GEIA G-12 Committee Document It is recognized that the GEIA G-12 Committee Document has not been finalized as it entered the balloting phase on November 1, 2007. Our understanding is that the G-12 document has been submitted to GEIA members for vote and the ballot will close 29 November 2007. Depending of the ballot results, the G-12 document may be released as soon as December 2007. After reviewing the G-12 draft and comparing it to the developing G-19 document, the following assessment is made: • The G-12 document is a Guidelines document and is “philosophical” in content. Some of the G-12 tenets form the basis of the G-19 document, but the G-19 document will take the next step in standards development by providing a more comprehensive view of the issues. • The G-12 document assumes that the user is associated only with government electronics. Although the G-19 committee includes representatives from government agencies with interests primarily in government electronics, the target user for the G-19 document also includes non-government (medical, civil and commercial) users. As a result, the G-19 committee is also considering the needs of non-government organizations, yet with common interests. As a result, it is expected that all interests and views will be reflected in the final G-19 product and thus have wider application in the electronics industry. • The G-12 document takes a strong stand on the procurement of electronic components from the original component manufacturers (OCM) to guarantee receipt of legitimate product. The G-19 document recognizes that this is not always a practical solution in effective parts management and will detail the risks associated with procurement of components from non-OCM distribution. It will further provide parts authentication practices and methods used in the mitigation of these risks. • The G-19 committee recognizes that there are various reporting practices for suspect counterfeit or confirmed counterfeit components. The G-12 document lists GIDEP (a government/industry program under DSPO) and FBI (domestic enforcement). It is the intent of the G-19 document to provide a comprehensive inclusive listing of services available to users.

7. Document Structure Table of Contents • Scope • References • Terms and Definitions • Counterfeit Item Risk Contributors • Counterfeit Item Risk Mitigation • Counterfeit Item Detection • Counterfeit Part Reporting and Quarantine Appendices A – Contractor/Subtier Supplier Assessment and Requirements Flowdown Resources B – Supplier Assessment and Requirements Flowdown Resources C – Supplier Assessment Audit Questions D – Reporting Suspect Counterfeit Component Findings to Government Investigative and Law Enforcement Agencies E – Example Clauses for Distributors of Electronic Components F – Acronyms and Abbreviations “Counterfeit Parts Control Plan” to be added or supplemented as a separate document

8. Suggested Use of Strong Contract Language “Notwithstanding any other provisions of this agreement, the Subcontractor warrants that all items provided to the Contractor shall be genuine, new and unused unless otherwise specified in writing by the Contractor. Subcontractor further warrants that all items used by the Subcontractor during the performance of work at the [name of organization site here], include all genuine, original, and new components, or are otherwise suitable for the intended purpose. Furthermore, the Subcontractor shall indemnify the Contractor, its agents, and third parties for any financial loss, injury, or property damage resulting directly or indirectly from material, components, or parts that are not genuine, original, and unused, or not otherwise suitable for the intended purpose. This includes, but is not limited to, materials that are defective, suspect, or counterfeit; materials that have been provided under false pretenses; and materials or items that are materially altered, damaged, deteriorated, degraded, or result in product failure. “The Subcontractor’s warranty also extends to labels and/or trademarks or logos affixed, or designed to be affixed, to items supplied or delivered to the Contractor. In addition, because falsification of information or documentation may constitute criminal conduct, the Contractor may reject and retain such information or items, at no cost, and identify, segregate, and report such information or activities to cognizant officials.” DOE G 414.1-3 11-3-04

9. Risk Charts

10. Summary • Last inputs expected for review by early March. • Final edit completion expected end of this month. • The information in this standard, when effectively implemented by users and their suppliers, provides methods to prevent entry, detect, control, report, and disposition counterfeits and satisfy applicable directives.

11. Thank You ! Questions?