Lifecycle status codes, decoded across vendors
Two parts on the same BOM carry the status NRND. One is at Texas Instruments, one at NXP. The four letters are identical and the conditions are not: TI applies it when a quality or manufacturability concern is behind it; NXP applies it while stating no discontinuance decision has been made. A sustainment plan that treats the two flags as one input is reading a quality warning and a routine commercial signal as the same event. This page carries each source’s own published definition, quoted, with the link it was read from, for the manufacturers and distributors that appear most often in this publication’s teardowns. Where a source publishes no definition, that is recorded as the finding rather than filled in.
The portable term // Least consistent
NRND is four statements, not one
The acronym is the most portable term in lifecycle management and the least consistent. The same four letters, at four sources, report four different things:
“…we classify a product as NRND… only if there is a potential issue that may affect product quality or our ability to manufacture the product over the long term.”
Reads asA quality or manufacturability concern. Rare and technical. An NRND part in a TI-heavy BOM warrants a closer look than the same flag elsewhere.
“No discontinuance decision has been made, and all minimum longevity commitments will be honored.”
Reads asAn explicit statement that nothing has been decided. The longevity commitment is preserved and the decision deferred, a routine commercial signal.
“…a device is still Active but may become obsolete due to poor market acceptance or a technology or package that is reaching the end of its life cycle.”
Reads asDeclining acceptance or an aging process. The part holds “Active, Not Recommended” at once, where TI and NXP treat NRND as a status that replaces Active.
“…the manufacturer anticipates or has seen a decline in customer sales… it is likely that the device will be discontinued at some time in the future.”
Reads asA commercial trend, as understood by the distributor, not a maker’s technical cause, and no last-time-buy date is implied.
TI’s is the outlier that matters, and NXP’s is its mirror image: one attaches a technical cause and treats the flag as rare, the other explicitly preserves the longevity commitment and defers the decision. The flag alone establishes no schedule.
Same phrase // Two meanings
“End of life” is a live state at NXP
NXP separates the winding-down from the end, across two different codes. An NXP part flagged EOL is still orderable. The flag opens a purchasing window rather than closing one. The terminal state has its own code, NLM.
“The part is being discontinued. Orders can be placed until the last time buy date.”
only then
“NXP no longer accepts orders for the part and will no longer manufacture the part.”
Mouser applies an End-of-Life label of its own and publishes no definition for it, so the two labels share a phrase and cannot be assumed to share a meaning. This is not theoretical for this publication: the TJA1051 orderables already split across Last Time Buy, EOL and Active in the active-parts register, the same part number reporting different points in the sequence depending on the suffix and the source.
Green is not one claim // ADI splits it
“Active” and “Production” are different claims
ADI uses six designators and splits what most vendors merge into a single green cell. A parts database that renders both as one “Active” state is discarding a distinction ADI is publishing.
| Source & code | The published claim | What it does not promise |
|---|---|---|
| ADI · Recommended for new designs | “For new designs, ADI recommends utilization of these products.” | The strongest ADI endorsement, distinct from mere production. |
| ADI · Production | “At least one model within this product family is in production… appropriate for new designs but newer alternatives may exist.” | Family-scoped: a specific orderable inside the family may not be in production. |
| TI · ACTIVE | “This product has been released to the market and is available for purchase. For some products, newer alternatives may be available.” | One code carries both of ADI’s meanings, with the caveat folded in. |
The trap: ADI’s “Production” rests on at least one model in the family, so the code can stay green while the exact orderable you need is not built. Confirm at the orderable, not the family.
Different question // Different fact
The distributor flag answers a different question
DigiKey documents this directly. Its definition of Discontinued By DigiKey spells out that the distributor status and the manufacturer status are separate facts:
“The item has been discontinued by us for whatever reason… The component/product may still be active on the manufacturer’s website. This is one case where you will have to go to the manufacturer’s site to check the status.”
The distributor status reports the distributor’s stocking decision. The manufacturer status reports whether the part is made. DigiKey says so in its own definition, and this is the mechanism behind every entry in the disagreement register where a maker shows a part in production and a distributor shows it gone.
A distributor “obsolete” and a manufacturer “active” are not a contradiction to resolve. They are two facts about two different decisions. Check the maker field for whether the part is made; check the distributor for whether that channel stocks it.
Coverage // Who publishes a definition
Three sources label without defining
Of the nine sources checked for this page, five publish a full definition set, onsemi defines a single status, and three apply a status word with no definition reachable from where the word appears. The word is the whole of the published information.
| Source | Publishes definitions | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| TI | Yes, five statuses | Confirmed |
| ADI | Yes, six designators | Confirmed |
| NXP | Yes, six statuses | Confirmed |
| DigiKey | Yes, five statuses | Dated, published 2020 |
| Renesas | Yes, five groups | Confirmed |
| onsemi | Partial, one status defined (NRFND), no full set | Dated, Help Library article, 2023 |
| ST | No, status shown as a bare word | Confirmed absent on the product page |
| Microchip | No status legend, shown as “Status: In Production”. Publishes an EOL process policy, which is not a definition of its status words | Confirmed absent on the product page |
| Mouser | No, four labels named, none defined | Confirmed absent on the lifecycle page |
An ST product page states “This product is OBSOLETE” and offers a recommended replacement, with no definition and no legend. A Microchip page states “Status: In Production” with no link to what that includes.
The notice // And the code we don’t add
The notification layer has its own vocabulary
The notice that carries a status change is named three ways among these sources. Only ADI names the governing standard on its definitions page.
The general notice of a change to a product, the umbrella term used across most sources.
Issued “in compliance with JESD48A”, with a 12-month last-time-buy, shipment up to 18 months from the PDN date. The only source here naming the standard.
ST refers to its own “end-of-life notification policy (PTN)” for how a change is announced.
On naming a part that ships and is useless. A recurring proposal is to add a status for a part that remains orderable while the platform it depends on is retired. This page does not add one. Every definition above scopes status to manufacture and availability. A part that is made and can be ordered is Active under all nine sources, so a new code would put this publication in conflict with every source it cites. The condition being described is fitness for a purpose, not a position in a manufacturing lifecycle, and a vocabulary problem is not solved by adding vocabulary. It is recorded in plain language instead, naming the dependency and the date, with the status field carrying the manufacturer’s own word.
Definitions are re-read on the same quarterly cadence as the active-parts register; the verified date at the top is the date the source pages were last loaded and quoted. Coverage is incomplete by design: full definition sets for ST, Microchip, Mouser, Renesas and Infineon, and the text of JESD48 itself, are not yet sourced and are not represented above.
FAQ // Frequently asked
Frequently asked questions
Does NRND mean a part is about to be discontinued?
Not at every vendor. NXP states that no discontinuance decision has been made when it applies the flag. DigiKey describes it as a likely future discontinuance with no last-time-buy date set. TI describes it as reflecting a potential quality or manufacturability issue. The flag alone does not establish a schedule.
A distributor shows a part obsolete and the manufacturer shows it active. Which is correct?
Both can be accurate, because they report different facts. DigiKey’s own definition of Discontinued By DigiKey states the product may still be active on the manufacturer’s website and directs the reader to the manufacturer’s site to check. The manufacturer’s field answers whether the part is made; the distributor’s answers whether that channel stocks it.
Is an End of Life flag the same as obsolete?
Not at NXP, where EOL is a state in which orders can still be placed until the last-time-buy date, and the terminal status is a separate code, NLM. Elsewhere the phrase may mean the terminal state, so check the source’s own definition, or its absence.
Why do some vendors publish no definitions?
That is not stated by the vendors. What is verifiable is that ST, Microchip and Mouser display lifecycle labels without a public definition reachable from the page carrying the label.
How long is a last-time-buy window?
It is set per notice, not by a universal rule, and the spread between vendors is wide. ADI publishes a 12-month last-time-buy period and shipment up to 18 months from the date of the PDN, in compliance with JESD48A. Renesas accepts final orders “for 6 to 12 months from the date of the notification.” Microchip commits to no window at all: its EOL policy states it may only be able to give the earliest EOL date, “which could coincide with the date of the EOL notification.” Treat the dates on the specific notice as the only reliable input.
Why not add a status for a part that ships but is useless?
Because every source scopes status to manufacture and availability. A part that is made and orderable is Active under all eight. The condition is fitness for a purpose, not a lifecycle position, and belongs in the analysis of a specific part. This publication records it in plain language, naming the dependency and the date.
Sources // Public, primary
Sources
- TI, Product life cycle (five statuses defined)
- Analog Devices, Product Life Cycle Information (six designators; PDN / JESD48A)
- NXP, Product Lifecycle (NRND, EOL and NLM defined)
- DigiKey, Part Status: Obsolescence Process Explained (2020)
- onsemi, “Active, Not Recommended For New Design” (NRFND) explained
- Mouser, Lifecycle Notifications (labels named, none defined)
- STMicroelectronics, Product longevity
- STMicroelectronics, LSM9DS1 product page (“OBSOLETE”, no legend)
- Microchip, MCP2515 product page (“Status: In Production”, no definition)
- Renesas, Supply Policy & Product Lifecycle (five groups; LTB 6 to 12 months)
- Microchip, End of Life (EOL) Policy (process only, no status definitions)
Read next // Related
Related reading
Method · Definitions
DMSMS vs obsolescence: what the status words feed into
Tools · Standards
AS5553 vs AS6081: which counterfeit-parts standard governs your buy
This decoder covers the status words. What a notice actually obligates, meaning last-time-buy windows and JESD48 mechanics, is a separate planned reference; obsolescence management (IEC 62402) is its own topic.
Every definition is quoted from the named source’s own page and is publisher-reported, not independently audited. Vendor status vocabularies change, so confirm the current definition with the source before citing one in a plan or purchase order.
About the author