STMicroelectronics
0
Traceability documents for electronic components let buyers confirm what they are buying, which lot it comes from, what evidence supports its supply path, and what checks were done before use.
Suppliers might call material “new,” “original,” or “fully traceable.” These claims are just the starting point for your review. Before placing a purchase order, make sure you know what evidence is needed, what documents are available, and what extra steps are required if records are missing.
Traceability means having a connected set of records, not just a single PDF. It should answer four key questions:
| What exactly is being supplied? | Manufacturer, full MPN, package, grade, quantity, condition, quote and label details |
| Which physical lot is it? | Lot code, date code, receiving-lot ID, photos, packaging labels |
| How did it reach this order? | Supplier records, packing lists, invoices, shipment references, available transfer records |
| What was checked before use? | Receiving inspection, test reports, quarantine records, approval records |
| Traceability | Documented identity, lot history, and supply path | That every electrical parameter was tested |
| Authenticity | Confidence that the part is genuinely what it claims to be | That storage or all performance requirements are acceptable |
| Conformity | A declaration or evidence that material meets stated requirements | Full original-manufacturer provenance |
| Quality | Evidence that requirements for the intended use were met | That material came directly from the original manufacturer |
The quotation is the first traceability record because it defines what the supplier is committing to supply.
No substitution or mixed lot should be considered acceptable unless approved in writing by engineering and quality.
A Certificate of Conformance, sometimes called a Certificate of Compliance, is a declaration that supplied material conforms to stated requirements.
If your customer or quality plan requires original-channel traceability, request documents that connect material to the original component manufacturer or an authorized source.
Original Component Manufacturer → Authorized Distributor → Buyer
Independent distribution may involve previous custody transfers. This does not mean the material is unsuitable, but the supply path must be described accurately.
Lot and date codes help link paperwork to the actual material. They are important for cross-checking, but they do not prove authenticity on their own.
ECIA describes a common four-digit date-code convention as YYWW: the last two digits of the year followed by the week of the year. However, manufacturers can use alternative formats, especially when package space is limited.
Do not reject a component just because the top-side mark is not a four-digit YYWW code. Instead, compare the mark with the manufacturer’s published format and the full package label.
Packaging can help you check if the material matches its stated condition, but it does not prove authenticity on its own.
DigiKey’s part-tracing program demonstrates the type of information that can be linked to physical material: MPN, manufacturer, lot/date code, country of origin, and transaction references such as PO and invoice numbers. See DigiKey’s part-tracing example.
Inspection and testing should address a defined risk. They are especially important for obsolete, allocated, high-value, safety-related, or partly documented material.
Combine testing with source review, document checks, packaging inspection, and a clear acceptance plan.
It is not enough to collect documents. Always compare them before approving the material.
Confirm that the quotation, MPN, package, condition, quantity, and documentation requirements are clear.
Ask for critical records before the material ships, not after.
Compare the proposed CoC, lot/date record, source documents, and label photos against the quote and PO.
| MPN and manufacturer | Exact match; no hidden suffix or package difference |
| Quantity | Quantity by lot adds up to the PO quantity |
| Lot/date code | Documents and labels are consistent; any mix is disclosed |
| Condition and packaging | Match the quotation and agreed format |
| Source statement | Does not claim more traceability than evidence supports |
| Test report | Identifies the correct part, lot, method, sample, and result scope |
If something does not match, ask a clear question. For example: “The CoC covers lot A, but the label photograph shows lot B. Please reconcile the lot, quantity, and document reference before shipment.”
| Low | Standard passive for an internal prototype | Exact MPN, quote, quantity, visual receiving check | Approved-supplier record |
| Medium | Current-production IC for routine manufacturing | CoC if required, lot/date information, packaging check | Incoming inspection, single-lot preference |
| High | Allocated, high-value, or difficult-to-source IC | Label/lot photos, shipment-specific CoC, available source evidence | Pre-shipment approval, defined inspection or test plan |
| Critical | Obsolete part for regulated, safety-related, or high-cost application | Full available source-path evidence, lot-level records, written exception review | Independent testing, engineering/quality approval, quarantine and assembly-level traceability |
Complete original-channel records are not always available for excess inventory, legacy stock, or open-market material.
It is better to keep clear, honest records than to claim “full traceability” when you know some documents are missing or incomplete.
Material must match the exact manufacturer part number, package, and condition stated in this RFQ. Please confirm manufacturer, quantity, packaging format, date code, lot code, and quantity by lot where available—no substitutions, mixed lots, date-code deviations, or repackaging without written approval.
For this order, provide the following before shipment: shipment-specific CoC; available source-path documentation; actual outer-label photos; and required inspection or test evidence identifying the supplied lot. Any unavailable document must be disclosed before shipment for written review by engineering and quality.
On receipt, material remains subject to incoming inspection and document reconciliation. Material that does not match agreed requirements may be quarantined pending disposition.
When submitting an RFQ to Welllinkchips, include the full MPN, manufacturer, quantity, package, application, required delivery date, date-code requirement, and documentation or testing requirements.
Submit an RFQ with these requirements so the sourcing discussion starts with the evidence level your program needs. You can also review Welllinkchips’ Quality Control process.
No. A CoC is a useful supplier declaration when it identifies the shipment and lot. It should still be checked against labels, lot/date-code records, source documents, and inspection or test evidence appropriate to the risk.
A CoC states that supplied material conforms to stated requirements. A Certificate of Analysis usually reports results from specified analyses or tests. Ask what each document covers, which lot it identifies, and whether it contains actual test results or only a declaration.
No. They can be acceptable if disclosed before shipment, technically suitable for the application, kept separate in records, and approved through the quality process.
Sometimes. If original-channel documentation is incomplete, identify the gap, define additional controls, and obtain engineering and quality approval before using the material.
WELL LINK CHIPS GROUP CO.,LIMITED FLAT/RM 1802 BEVERLY HOUSE 93-107 LOCKHART ROAD WANCHAI HK
