SMT Perspectives & Prospects: What I Hope the Next Generation Will Carry Forward
Learning With Leo: Observations from IPC Builds in Paris
As expected, the U.S. Department of Commerce is actively administering the $53 billion of funding in the CHIPS Act. A key committee in this process is the CHIPS Act Industrial Advisory Committee (IAC). IPC Vice President and Chief Technology Officer Matt Kelly offered a printed circuit board and system-wide perspective to the IAC, part of the ongoing advocacy efforts being undertaken by IPC and other organizations, and later answered some questions about what he presented and how it was received.
You recently made a presentation to the CHIPS Act Industrial Advisory Committee. How does this group fit into the CHIPS Act administration?
It’s best to share it straight from the Industrial Advisory Committee at nist.gov1:
“The Industrial Advisory Committee was established by Congress in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act of 2021 (FY 2021 NDAA). The committee will provide advice on the science and technology needs of the nation’s domestic microelectronics industry, the national strategy on microelectronics research, the research and development programs and other advanced microelectronics activities funded through CHIPS for America, and opportunities for new public-private partnerships.
“The committee comprises leaders from a broad range of disciplines in the microelectronics field, including academia, the semiconductor industry, federal laboratories and other areas.”1
Your message to the IAC hinged on two key ideas: getting the Problem Statement right and deciding what the true objective is for the CHIPS Act. Could you walk us through the problem statement?
Certainly. In two key slides from the presentation, I made the point that too much emphasis continues to be placed on semiconductors. While this is absolutely important, it is insufficient.
The U.S. has no substrate capability; this is not a “bring it back” issue. We face a “bring it here for the first time” challenge. From a packaging and assembly perspective, we have limited capacity. If we do not look at it from a holistic standpoint, recognizing we do not have substrate or assembly packaging capabilities, then the new foundries being built in the southwest U.S. right now will actually lengthen the supply chain, not shorten it. Once that silicon is produced, it will board a plane destined for somewhere in Asia or Southeast Asia.
Which brings us to our grand challenge: We need to build an efficient, resilient domestic electronics manufacturing ecosystem for critical systems.
This is an excerpt of our featured Q&A with Matt Kelly which appears in the September 2023 issue of SMT007 Magazine.
- Learn more about the IAC at nist.gov.
