Counterfeit electronics in supply chain put contractors on the hook

In a day-long Senate Armed Services Committee hearing addressing the issue of counterfeit parts in the U.S. military supply chain, top Capitol Hill officials proposed new rules that would hold contractors responsible for fake electronics destined for U.S. weapons systems.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the committee’s ranking Republican, and Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), committee chairman, were among the officials who questioned defense contractors on oversights that allowed the phony parts into the supply chain during the hearing, held Nov. 8. Levin stressed that the counterfeit goods are a “clear and present danger” and a “threat to our troops.”

“There is a flood of counterfeits and it is putting our military men and women at risk and costing us a fortune,” Levin said.

The two senators pledged that they would use the 2012 Defense Authorization Act, which McCain said he hoped would be taken up next week, to modify acquisition rules and make contractors responsible for the costs of replacing the fake parts. The hope is that contractors will implement tougher standards on their suppliers.

McCain said that encouraging small businesses to operate in the U.S. military supply chain has enabled the entry of fraudulent companies and parts.

McCain and Levin’s amendment may also include language for a new Pentagon certification process that would scrutinize the suppliers of components for military systems, Levin said.

A month-long congressional investigation yielded at least 1,800 cases of counterfeit electronics in U.S. weapons, with an estimated 1 million parts suspected of infiltrating the supply chain, according to the Washington Post. Counterfeit parts have resulted in millions of dollars in waste and have cost taxpayers heavily once contractors realize the parts must be replaced, the report said.

Brian Toohey, president of the Semiconductor Industry Association, told the committee that counterfeiting costs U.S. companies $7.5 billion per year and represents 11,000 lost jobs in U.S. industry.

Counterfeit parts have been found on at least 7 Air Force aircraft made by Boeing, Lockheed Martin and L-3, according to committee documents, and the Missile Defense Agency has encountered at least 7 incidents of counterfeit parts on its own systems, MDA Director Lt. Gen. Patrick O’Reilly testified.

O’Reilly said MDA has found 800 fake parts on one missile interceptor system, at a cost of over $2 million to replace them.

James Ives, assistant Pentagon inspector general for investigative operations, told the Associated Press via e-mail that the Pentagon’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service is conducting 225 investigations “involving potentially defective or substandard parts and components,” which could involve counterfeit products.

The Government Accountability Office has also been investigating counterfeit parts in DOD platforms, according to Richard Hillman, GAO managing director, forensic audits and investigative service.

“Counterfeit parts – generally those whose sources knowingly misrepresent the parts’ identity or pedigree – have the potential to seriously disrupt the DOD supply chain, delay missions, affect the integrity of weapon systems, and ultimately endanger the lives of our troops,” Hillman testified in a prepared statement. “Almost anything is at risk of being counterfeited, from fasteners used on aircraft to electronics used on missile guidance systems. There can be many sources of counterfeit parts as DOD draws from a large network of global suppliers.”

Hillman detailed GAO efforts in which the organization created a fictitious company that bought military-grade electronic parts. So far GAO has purchased 13 parts, seven of which have been tested so far and are suspected to be counterfeit.

Featured

Reader comments

Thu, Nov 10, 2011 Robert Maryland

Listen to McCain, the same guy who suddenly wants to take away Tricare from retirees is now pointing his dirty fingers at contractors for something the GOVERNMENT is clearly responsible for in most aspects. If the food chain of hardware is corrupt maybe we should produce those goods in the U.S.A. As for bogus hardware entering our borders, well Mr. McCain, isn't that your role? Perhaps you need to retire. Spent all that time in a POW camp and forgets about the vets... Clearly you forgot your roles and duties to serve and protect. Instead you export our work and import the bad guys electronics.... Oh, I forget contractors are now suddenly responsible for all the electronic JUNK government allows into the U.S. CLASSIC GOVERNMENT FAIL!!!

Thu, Nov 10, 2011

Look, the issue is NOT the contractors. The issue is parts suppliers. Suppliers of 'military standard' parts are sprinkling fakes and chinese generic versions- falling into the practice of botching their parts bins after they count their yield and go through quality control. What I don't get is how on one hand the government is screaming at contractors for "Cost Control" and "Affordability", while not taking into account that alot of that overcost comes from bloated activity around analyzing parts supplied to them by other companies. Suppliers and US parts manufacturers should be under the magnifying glass, not the integrators and engineers.

Thu, Nov 10, 2011

Before pointing fingers at Contractors, the issue is about suppliers to the contractors and not the contractors themselves. Siriously doubt a major defense contractor would place their Government contracts in jepordy. This issue has been coming for years with the Government insistance on use of COTS and trying to drive regulations on Contractors to use parts that are not military grade. This costs the country, the Government and the contractors with the end user being the one to pay the price for OFF THE SHELF "Cost Savings".

Thu, Nov 10, 2011 logicfirst

We must establish certifed American foundries and the regulators must get out of the way, as non-valued added cost drivers. The increased unit cost must be compared to the risk of continued remediation of bad parts and the risk to the reliability of deployed systems.

Thu, Nov 10, 2011

I would be more worried about the manufacture being able to hack into a back up system on the products and seeing or controling DOD assests.

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above