An Update on USPAE's Strategic Initiatives

Estimated reading time: 9 minutes

James Will became executive director of the U.S. Partnership for Assured Electronics (USPAE) in May and now provides this update on the group's strategic initiatives. The organization, which is affiliated with IPC, recently transitioned to being a 501(c)(3). It is navigating through a dynamic landscape, working to enhance our microelectronics manufacturing capabilities including PCBs, and adapt to emerging technology trends and market challenges.

Marcy LaRont: Jim, what’s been happening in the past five months since you became executive director of USPAE?

Jim Will: I have had the opportunity to meet with many of our industry alliance partners. In September, our annual meeting in Washington, D.C., was a great event. Dr. John W. Mitchell, president and CEO of IPC, facilitated a session on supply chain assurance and resiliency. We had very passionate discussions amongst the alliance partners on what their needs will be and how they might be addressed. In accordance with the theme, ”Finding Opportunities,” our partners had the opportunity to meet and make valuable connections with commercial investment firms Cerberus Capital Management and Maverick Capital. Investment is a key factor in establishing a commercially viable and resilient electronics supply chain. We were pleased to have facilitated this engagement and look forward to including them in future USPAE events. In his keynote, Anthony Di Stasio, director of Manufacturing Capability Expansion and Investment Prioritization (MCEIP), talked about the MCEIP mission and discussed opportunities with attendees, including the Defense Industrial Base Consortium and Other Transactional Authority (DIBC OTA) white paper best practice. 

LaRont: How many members are in the alliance right now?

Will: We have about 100 and the list is growing. The changes to requirements to join the group have been well received. We have also expanded to include organizations promoting electronics supply chain, assurance, and resiliency.

LaRont: Has the 501(c)(3) status made it easier to appeal to a wider range of organizations?

Will: I think it has. As part of our partner network, we work with many smaller businesses—non-traditional and startups—and prime contractors. A membership-based model makes it more challenging for some industry members to join due to financial constraints. This is one of the strategic updates that we've implemented.

LaRont: What other strategic changes are you working on?

Will: We are taking a more active role in identifying business opportunities for alliance partners in addressing supply chain assurance and resiliency needs, including assembling and leading teams to address government and industry challenges. This may start with position and white papers proposing solutions through a Cornerstone Initiative Request and other RFIs to teaming up on RFP opportunities. USPAE’s neutral and trusted third-party position brings value as an honest broker for program oversight and execution. From the big picture perspective, we are working to expand emphasis to include critical infrastructure and recommend industry-based assurance standards through NDIA and other relationships to drive demand into more assured sources.

LaRont: Obviously, there's a lot of hope attached to this initiative in the domestic market. What is happening with the Printed Circuit Board Market Catalyst (PCBMC) project?

Will: We were excited to hear about the Title 3 funding award from DoD’s MCEIP office to our alliance partner TTM Technologies supporting its new UHDI PCB facility in Syracuse, New York. USPAE is working with stakeholders to promote the success of this and other onshore PCB substrate investments including Calumet Electronics and GreenSource Fabrication. There's a lot of new technology that remains overseas, different material sets and advanced manufacturing approaches that need to be considered, as well as being a means to promote successful designs for high reliability defense applications. Workforce is also a huge success factor. Stay tuned as we work on these needs.

LaRont: It makes sense that something as significant as PCBMC, which depends on government support, must remain fluid as things develop in the market.

Will: Yes. An objective approach is important to promote and address supply chain resiliency. However, the industry needs to continue advocating for H.R. 3249, which has a $40 million-plus planned insertion to cover the Protecting Circuit Boards and Substrate Act.

LaRont: You recently attended the 57th Annual International Symposium on Microelectronics (IMAPS) in Boston. How does this relate to USPAE’s mission?

Will: IMAPS serves an important role and brings significant microelectronics, packaging, advanced packaging, interconnect, and assembly industry expertise. I’m proud to serve as a director and fellow volunteer on the IMAPS executive council. IMAPS and our parent, IPC, work collaboratively to enable the annual Onshoring Workshop, established to support DoD’s packaging and advanced packaging and industry program performers. I had the opportunity to co-chair the inaugural Onshoring Workshop at the 55th IMAPS Annual Symposium in 2022. Keep watch for updates on next year’s workshop, April 28—May 1, 2025, at the Sheraton Pentagon City Hotel.

Building on the onshoring effort with friendshoring, and considering significant investments by the U.S. and our allies to establish more assured and resilient sources, a key success factor is promoting utilization of the microelectronics infrastructure and capabilities. We are expanding our focus to include sectors within critical infrastructure, which grows the demand signal from 2% to 24% relative to just the defense industry. Leveraging IMAPS, USPAE, and IPC’s vast industry network and advisory position is important in this effort. This requires a coalition including industry and government stakeholders responsible for laying out and vetting an action plan to address assured electronics needs for critical infrastructure. This is also where IMAPS, IPC, USPAE, NDIA, and other organizations can engage and pull together the coalition

Another key success factor is the ability to drive demand signal to the U.S. and allied microelectronics infrastructure investments and away from much less assured, potentially compromised, and bargain basement priced alternatives. How do you do that? We need industry-based assurance standards, with government support and engagement. Examples of industry-based assurance standards include IPC-1791, and the government directives and efforts as well, so we are not starting from scratch.

Time is of the essence. We've already experienced compromise from adversaries. There are presidential executive orders to address power grid issues, which is a reactive order. Now, it’s time to be proactive. FBI Director Christopher Wray recently stated 15 of our 16 critical infrastructure sectors were targeted in ransomware attacks from 2021 to 2024 and that that the adversaries will continue to launch critical infrastructure attacks directly and through proxies.

LaRont: That is, indeed, frightening, though not surprising. Were you able to attend many of the IMAPS sessions in Boston?

Will: I was pretty focused on content. There were special sessions on onshoring that were well attended, including sessions on high density interposers and fan-out WLPP, and high density advanced package organic substrate. Steve Dooley from Air Force Research Lab and I facilitated the organic substrate panel that included Calumet, GreenSource, IBM, Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, and DuPont. The symposium event set a record for attendance and the exhibit was sold out.

I also had the opportunity to collaborate with fellow chairs and help organize the Advancements in HiREL and Performance Applications track. The content covered a range of topics, from RF wire bonding to direct write and flexible substrates and copper interconnect.  

This was a globally diverse show that represented the supply chain from materials to packaged components. It was great to see DIB, government-DoD, and non-traditional industry engagements as well.

LaRont: Did it feel like the energy was coalescing around any particular area?

Will: Not that I noticed. We discussed adding more content addressing optics, silicon-photonics, and photonics including packaging around heterogeneous integration of optical and other technologies. That’s certainly an area of interest moving forward as that type of integrated technology components becomes more prevalent and mature.

Page 1 of 2

• Next Page >