A part number on a BOM identifies what to buy; it does not establish where the delivered material came from. Before components reach the assembly line, agree how the purchasing channel, delivery documents and physical lot will be connected, and what happens when that connection is incomplete.
This guide covers component authenticity and source verification. For shortage recovery and alternate-part approval, use the separate AVL and shortage decision guide. A source exception and a technically approved alternate are different decisions.
1. Define the permitted purchasing channel before ordering
Start with the original component manufacturer and its current authorized distribution information. Check the exact distributor entity, location or sales channel relevant to the transaction. A familiar trading name, a marketplace listing or a screenshot of an old authorization page is insufficient to establish the status of a particular sale.
Texas Instruments advises customers to purchase TI semiconductors directly from TI or through its authorized distributors. Its anti-counterfeit guidance also explains that markings and labels can resemble authentic products. Apply each manufacturer's own purchasing guidance to its products; do not assume TI's policy represents every manufacturer's support arrangements.
Put the approved source policy in the purchasing baseline. Identify who may approve a source change, which evidence must accompany the request, and whether the product or customer prohibits exceptions. Approval to place an order should not silently become approval to use every delivered lot.
2. Connect the transaction to the material received
On small screens, scroll the table sideways to compare columns.
| Evidence | Question it should answer | Limit to recognize |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer source information | Was this selling channel authorized for the relevant purchase? | Authorization alone does not reconcile the delivered quantity. |
| Purchase order and supplier confirmation | Which exact manufacturer part, package and quantity were ordered? | A buyer's requested part is not proof of what arrived. |
| Delivery and traceability documents | Can the received lot be connected to that transaction? | A distributor's document should not be described as a manufacturer's certificate. |
| Reel, tray or tube identity | Do labels, quantities and recorded identifiers reconcile? | A plausible label or date code does not independently prove authenticity. |
| Receipt and issue records | Which physical containers were held, released and issued? | A document stored against the BOM is not automatically linked to every container. |
Where commercially sensitive documents cannot be shared in full, agree an appropriate controlled review or redaction process. Preserve enough transaction identity to support the agreed traceability claim. Do not replace missing evidence with an unqualified statement that all parts are “original.”
3. Reconcile split deliveries and repacked quantities
Keep separate receipts distinguishable, even when they carry the same part number. Record supplier, receipt reference, container identity, received quantity, inspection status and issue destination at the granularity required by the build. Preserve the parent-to-child relationship when material is repacked or split for line use.
Investigate conflicting labels, inconsistent package identity, unexplained quantity differences or missing transaction links before release. These observations are reasons for review, not a conclusive diagnosis of counterfeiting. A discrepancy may also arise from a documentation or handling error; the record should distinguish the observation from the eventual finding.
Use the PCBA traceability guide to define how a released material lot will connect to work orders or individual boards. Avoid merging an unresolved lot into a verified lot merely because both appear on the same BOM line.
4. Treat an exceptional source as an explicit unresolved risk
If the normal channel cannot meet the requirement, purchasing should submit the proposed source, available chain-of-custody evidence, quantity, delivery need and known gaps. Engineering and quality should determine whether the proposal is permissible and what further work, if any, is appropriate. Relevant customer restrictions remain part of that decision.
Where specialist inspection or laboratory work is proposed, define the methods, sample selection, questions being investigated, limitations and disposition authority before commissioning it. A visual check or a passing board-level functional test does not by itself authenticate every device in a lot. A test report is evidence with a stated scope, not a substitute for an unavailable supply history.
Keep suspected or unresolved material identified and segregated under the applicable nonconforming-material process. Record who may authorize the next action. Follow the manufacturer's published reporting route when appropriate; do not promise that a manufacturer will authenticate material bought outside its supported channel.
5. Calculate usable supply from release status
Hypothetical teaching example: a build needs 500 identical devices. Purchasing receives 400 through the approved channel with reconciled records and another 200 through a proposed exceptional source. The second receipt remains on hold. The warehouse has 600 physical devices, but only 400 are currently released for this build. The shortage is still 100, not zero.
If an authorized plan starts a 380-unit partial build, record the revised build scope and the 20 released devices remaining. Keep the 200 held devices outside available-to-issue stock. Any later disposition must identify the actual lot and its effective authorization; it must not rewrite the earlier partial-build record as though the entire purchase had been released from the start.
6. Include a source-verification packet in the RFQ
- Manufacturer part number, package, required quantity and approved source policy.
- Required transaction, container and lot identifiers, plus the agreed document-review method.
- Rules for customer-supplied material, split containers and repacking.
- Exception owner, mandatory customer approvals, hold status and disposition path.
- Required links from released material to assembly and shipment records.
Ask the supplier to identify what it can actually provide before the order is confirmed. The turnkey BOM preparation guide covers part-definition completeness; this packet adds the evidence needed to evaluate the purchasing and receipt route.
Component source questions
Does a certificate of conformity prove authenticity?
Review who issued it, which transaction and lot it covers, and what it actually declares. A document title alone does not establish a complete material history or independently authenticate every device.
Can an electrically passing PCBA clear a source exception?
A passing assembly test answers the defined functional questions for the tested configuration. Source disposition requires the separately authorized evidence review; the test result should not silently close it.
Should all material with the same part number share one receipt record?
Keep distinct receipts and statuses identifiable. They may be grouped in a planning view, but the underlying transaction and container relationships must remain recoverable at the agreed traceability level.
Source scope: TI's manufacturer guidance supports the purchasing-channel discussion. The evidence matrix, quantity example and handoff checklist are proposed planning tools, not an authentication service or a claim about a completed customer project.