Mung Chiang, Executive Vice President for strategic initiatives and the John A. Edwardson Dean of the College of Engineering, on Dec. 2 provided testimony during a U.S. House of Representatives Science, Space and Technology Committee hearing titled "Ensuring American Leadership in Microelectronics.” Chiang was one of the four invited expert witnesses and the only one from academia.

December 2, 2021
Mung Chiang
Executive Vice President, Purdue University
John A. Edwardson Dean, College of Engineering
Roscoe H. George Distinguished Professor of ECE

Oral Testimony

Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Lucas, and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am Mung Chiang, Executive Vice President for strategic initiatives at Purdue University and the John A. Edwardson Dean of the College of Engineering. In 2021, Purdue’s College of Engineering became the largest engineering school to be ranked among top five in the U.S., with over 15,000 students enrolled. Purdue has over 100 faculty members working in microelectronics and related fields. 

Our digital economy is built on silicon. For the semiconductor industry in the US, we are in the critical years now. It helps to visualize the supply chain in five steps:

• Raw materials and gases needed to make chips.
• Hardware tools that go into the chip factories.
• Design of chips, and the software tools used in such design. American companies continue to lead the world in chip design.
• Manufacturing: taking all of the above into a factory, the physical making of chips goes through many processes. Some factories focus on logic chips while others on memory chips.
• Assembly, Test, and Packaging: Once chips are made, they need to be packaged and integrated into the microelectronic products and eventually find their way into phones, cars, fighter jets, and more.

Much of the discussion these days zooms in on the manufacturing step. There are two very different types of business models:

• Make the chips designed by the same company.
• Make chips designed by other companies: the “foundry” model.

With increasing specialization in the semiconductors industry over the past three decades, many companies have chosen to rely on a foundry model. This in turn enhances the foundry’s benefits of scale and sharpens its ability to deliver cutting edge manufacutring under a service mindset and trust with foundry customers.

Universities have three unique roles to play in this silicon moment:

• One is to help create synergy with companies large and small to bridge fundamental research advances with commercially deployable technologies. Innovation ecosystem works best when we create synergy across major companies in manufacturing and in design, small to medium disrupters with their investors, and researchers and teachers at universities.
• A second role is educating and retraining larger numbers of engineers, technicians, and operators. Ideally, universities can create jobs and knowledge together, and generate both new positions and the talent needed to fill the positions.
• Universities, especially land grand institutions such as Purdue, have an obligation to serve as an economic driver for the state and there is no greater opportunity today than in microelectronics.  Purdue is proud to be a partner with the State of Indiana developing strategies and providing a talent pool.

For the future of chips, the ultimate supply chain is that of human talent.

In just the next five years, at least 42,000 semiconductor engineers need to be trained and ready nationwide. And the number will continue to climb well into the next decade. There is a growing gap between the supply and demand for microelectronics engineers across the spectrum from skilled technicians and operators with associate and bachelor degrees to those with advanced degrees such as Master’s and Ph.D.’s.   

Some specific steps that need to be made include:

• Revise, re-invigorate, and expand microelectronics curricula, with expanded use of hands on training, online learning, and partnership with community college and engagement with industry.
• Scale up such educational programs and substantially increase the number of scholarships for undergraduates and fellowships for graduate students in areas related to semiconductors.
• Fund research and development programs that push the boundaries of science and engineering and facilitate translation of new discoveries into applications.

Action is needed now. Passing USICA and funding the CHIPS Act this month will be a crucial and timely win for the national security, economic security, and job security in our country.

Written Testimony

Introduction

Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Lucas, and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am Mung Chiang, Executive Vice President for strategic initiatives at Purdue University, the John A. Edwardson Dean of the College of Engineering, and the Roscoe H. George Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Purdue University is world renowned for education, research, intellectual capital, facilities, and industrial collaborations. In 2021, Purdue’s College of Engineering became the largest engineering school to be ranked among top five in the U.S., with over 15,000 students enrolled. Purdue has over 100 faculty members working in microelectronics and related fields who currently carry out research with over $110M in federal funds for research and development.  

Here is a summary of the points I will make today: The U.S. must reclaim global leadership in tool development, material processing, manufacturing, and packaging of semiconductors. We need significant support from partnerships across academia, industry, national labs, and government to keep up with the pace of workforce demand for this critical industry. The ongoing discussion on legislation toward these goals has reached a critical point.

State of Semiconductors Industry in the U.S.

Our digital economy is built on silicon: microelectronic chips with up to tens of billions of transistors “printed” on feature sizes as small as one-ten-thousandth of a strand of hair. Innovative technologies, amazingly, continue to extend the life of Moore’s Law: doubling the transistor density every two years, as we have seen throughout the past half-century. 

For the American semiconductor industry, we are currently in the critical years. One constant reminder is the difficulty for all kinds of companies, such as the automakers, to access chip supply and continue their production. To fully understand the picture, it helps to visualize the supply chain in five steps:

• Raw materials and gases needed to make chips: some of these are rare and hard to come by.
• Hardware tools that go into the chip factories: some of these are very specialized and expensive, at over $100M per piece.
• Design of chips, as well as the software tools used in such design: many semiconductor companies have become “fabless,” as they do not fabricate, or manufacture, the chips they design.
• Manufacturing: taking all of the above into a factory, the physical making of chips goes through many processes. Some factories focus on logic chips while others on memory chips.
• Assembly, Test, and Packaging: Once chips are made, they need to be packaged and integrated into the microelectronic products and eventually find their way into phones, cars, fighter jets, and more.

There remains substantial American industry leadership in certain hardware and all software tools, and in many sectors of fabless chip design. However, there is significant dependence on foreign countries for raw materials and gases.

Much of the discussion these days zooms in on the manufacturing step, and to some degree, advanced packaging. There are two very different types of business models for manufacturing:

• Make the chips designed by the same company.
• Make chips designed by other companies: the “foundry” model.

With increasing specialization in the semiconductors industry over the past three decades, many companies have chosen to rely on a foundry model. This enhances the benefits of scale and sharpens the ability to deliver cutting edge technologies, developing the service mindset and trust with foundry customers.

Along the entire semiconductor supply chain, the U.S. is now facing a pivotal moment on 3 P’s: protect, promote, and partner.  Protect through export control, promote through investment, and partner through on-shoring like-minded nations’ technologies to America. An impactful example is the investment by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) in Arizona. Since TSMC’s announcement in May 2020, it has snowballed in scale and triggered an avalanche of strategic moves across the industry and governments.

Demand for chips is exploding, and chip shortages are in the news and are pinching the supply chain of other sectors of the economy. Any nation that aims to control its destiny must lead in semiconductor manufacturing, but today, the U.S. share of global semiconductor fabrication is only 12%, down from 37% in 1990, according to the Semiconductor Industry Association, despite the fact that the U.S. is the largest end-user of semiconductors, accounting for 47% of the global market.

Today, leading edge chip fabs cost more than $10B each, and designing leading edge chips can cost $500M each and require design teams with hundreds of engineers. Leading edge chips make possible the cloud computing and increasingly powerful artificial intelligence (AI) that we access through edge devices such as our smartphones. Applications like these have voracious appetites for computing, data, and communications. To realize the promise of these technologies, the performance of electronic systems must continue to improve at the pace it has for the past 60 years, during which the performance of chips was increased by making transistors smaller and smaller and placing more and more of them on a chip. New ways to increase performance at the leading edge must be found because the limits of making transistors smaller have almost been reached.

The semiconductor industry faces another challenge – one that arises from its success. Chips are becoming the critical, differentiating factor in more and more products, which is creating an urgent need for affordable, custom, product-specific electronics. Electronics used in national defense is one critical example, but an increasing number of commercial companies are also seeing the need for custom electronics that differentiates them from their competitors.

The vast majority of applications do not require custom electronics. In fact, the chip shortages that we hear about today are not at the leading edge, but rather, at so-called, “legacy technology nodes.” Chips are more and more pervasive and are in more and more products, but few companies have the expertise or the ability to afford the custom, product-specific designs that are needed. To fully realize the opportunities we have, new ways to advance performance at the leading edge must be found, but the times also call for the democratization and differentiation of electronics, which will require a fundamental rethinking how electronic systems are designed, packaged, and qualified. We need to unleash U.S. creativity and innovation to make the second half of the “silicon century” even more exciting and impactful than the first half.

Universities have three unique roles to play:

• One is to help create synergy with companies large and small to bridge fundamental research advances with commercially deployable technologies. Innovation ecosystem works best when we create synergy across major companies in manufacturing and in design, small to medium disrupters with their venture capital investors, and researchers and teachers at universities.
• A second role is educating and retraining larger numbers of engineers, technicians, and operators. Ideally, universities can create jobs and knowledge together, and generate both new positions and the talent needed to fill the positions.
• Universities, especially land grand institutions such as Purdue, have an obligation to serve as an economic driver for the state and there is no greater opportunity today than in microelectronics.  Purdue is proud to be a partner with the State of Indiana developing strategies and providing a talent pool to fill the jobs of the future.

Workforce for Semiconductors Industry

For the future of chips, the ultimate supply chain is that of human talent.

In just the next five years, at least 42,000 semiconductor engineers need to be trained and ready nationwide. And the number will continue to climb well into the next decade. The first critical factor in re-shoring and re-energizing the U.S. microelectronics industry is to attract the most talented and energetic young people to careers in semiconductors. Today, there are not enough science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) students in the U.S. The demand for engineers in fields such as artificial intelligence is exploding, and smaller numbers of students are choosing to pursue careers in microelectronics, further leading to a growing gap between the supply and demand for microelectronics engineers. This gap exists across the spectrum from skilled technicians and operators with associate and bachelor degrees to those with advanced degrees such as Master’s and Ph.D.’s. This gap is especially acute in the defense sector where more U.S. citizens are needed.  

Growing U.S. microelectronics manufacturing from its current level (12% of global revenue) and maintaining our strong position in design and software tools (80% of global revenue) will require a much larger workforce. This is a grand challenge that universities, companies, and government must address together in a coordinated way.

Students today are aware of the excitement and opportunities in fields such as machine learning, data science, autonomous systems (which are critically dependent on rapidly advancing electronics), but they tend to view microelectronics as an old, mature, and not very exciting field. We must find ways to make students aware of the opportunities for careers in microelectronics, the need for creative new solutions, and the impact they can have on society. They should understand that they are not entering the tail end of a maturing industry, but the beginning of a new era in electronics. Some specific steps that should be taken now are:

• Revise, re-invigorate, and expand microelectronics curricula for a new era by offering new certificates, minors, and degrees dedicated to semiconductors, both to students and to practicing engineers who need to be constantly upskilled.
• Expand partnerships with community colleges and universities to increase the supply of skilled technicians, augment internships with national labs, and increase funding for these programs from agencies such as NSF, DOD, DOE, and DOL.
• Universities should work with industry to define the types of hands-on training that is necessary for the different types of careers in microelectronics. A plan for online and “virtual hands-on” education should be developed so that students at any university or community college in the U.S. can prepare for careers in semiconductors.
• A strategy for stronger industry engagement in workforce development should be developed.  For example, students studying microelectronics should be able to find internship opportunities as easily as students studying computer science. More courses should be taught with, or taught by practicing microelectronics engineers.

Purdue Is Leading the Way: New Degrees and Online Courses, Defense Workforce Preparation, Hands-on Training, and Nation-wide Partnerships

Aspiring to be the pinnacle of excellence at scale, Purdue confers over 3,000 BS, MS, and PhD engineering degrees every year, while the undergraduate program ranks among the top 10, the graduate program among the top 4, and the online graduate program top 3 in the U.S.

Purdue University’s Elmore Family School of Electrical and Computer Engineering announced two months ago that it is introducing America’s first suite of degrees and credentials dedicated to semiconductors. This includes a new Master’s degree in semiconductors and microelectronics (to be offered both residential and online), an undergraduate minor degree, and several online certificates. Students will learn both the manufacturing and design of chips, as well as the entire supply chain: the chemical engineering of gas reaction, the mechanical engineering of tool development and packaging, the material engineering of new manufacturing materials, and the industrial engineering of supply chain and logistics optimization. Courses will be supplemented with hands-on learning in one of the largest clean rooms in academia, and virtual simulation projects. The first students will be able to enroll starting next spring semester in some of these offerings.

Purdue is also a leader in online education. An example is the nanoHUB, the premier open and free platform for computational research, education, and collaboration in nanotechnology and related fields. Through the nanoHUB site, Purdue offers a rapidly growing collection of courses and simulation tools that run in the cloud. This platform will be expanded to scale up relevant courses for microelectronics and make them available to academic and industrial partners.

Purdue leads SCALE, a 12-university consortium that received a five-year, competitive award from the Department of Defense through Indiana’s NSWC Crane, to educate the next generation of BS, MS, and PhD graduates, especially for defense applications. This microelectronics workforce development initiative blends classroom instruction with hands-on training and introduces students to concepts of secure and trusted microelectronics. A significant research investment through SCALE will not only add to the knowledge base but provide enhanced training for the students and add value for their future employers.  

Purdue is home to the Birck Nanotechnology Center (BNC), an interdisciplinary research infrastructure for 160 affiliated faculty members and their research groups from 36 academic units at Purdue. The 187,000 sf facility includes a 25,000 sq. ft. ISO Class 3-4-5-6 (Class 1-10-100-1000) nanofabrication cleanroom - the Scifres Nanofabrication Laboratory. This is the largest clean room of this quality in a U.S. university. This is the place where quality hands-on training occurs for hundreds of students, a much-needed feature for microelectronics workers. Despite how critical this facility is for training, the upgrading and maintenance is a challenge, equipment is expensive and quickly becomes obsolete. It is imperative to receive more support to maintain competitivity and train the next generation workforce on current, relevant technologies, rather than equipment dated decades ago.

Purdue is also creating workforce development programs with Ivy Tech, a state-wide community college with over 70,000 students, to train technicians and production workers needed in semiconductor foundries, and to create a significant pipeline of students from community colleges to a university degree.

No single university can do everything in semiconductor workforce development. Purdue understands that solutions to workforce problems have to be developed in partnership across sectors to deliver excellence at scale. In a workshop organized by Purdue on November 12, 2021, representatives from industry were joined by representatives from the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Defense, the National Science Foundation, national labs, and academia, to discuss scaling-up educational programs; online and hands-on training; knowledge and skills for technicians, BS, MS, and PhD graduates; special programs for trusted and assured electronics; and funding opportunities for comprehensive workforce development programs. This is just the first event in a series that will bring together the right stakeholders to solve the semiconductors workforce development issues and ensure the U.S. is the rightful leader in the field.

Purdue is also part of the American Semiconductor Academy (ASA), a partnership of 50 American universities and community colleges. The ASA initiative aims to secure America’s global leadership in semiconductor manufacturing by encouraging universities to collaborate with each other through a distributed network across the country with diverse sources of talent, partner with companies to attract and develop talent, and foster innovation to fuel the growth of semiconductor manufacturing in the U.S.

Semiconductor fabs are expensive to build and operate, but they are still fundamentally a manufacturing facility. Various states in the U.S. have maintained their manufacturing DNA in their workforce. The State of Indiana has targeted the semiconductor industry for continued growth and has scaled up their efforts led by Governor Holcomb and Commerce Secretary Chambers. I am honored to serve as the technology advisor to the state, and together we are working to on a strategy to recruit industry and build a workforce to meet their needs and the needs of our nation. 

We also launched the Center for Tech Diplomacy at Purdue (CTDP), an independent think tank at the intersection of technology and U.S. foreign policy. There is a gathering, bipartisan appreciation of the impact of technology on national security, human rights, economic growth, democracy, and liberty. CTDP brings deep engineering expertise and training to policymakers in an understandable and relevant way that demonstrates the inextricable links between technology and policy.

The Moment Is Now

Universities cannot solve alone the R&D and workforce problems that the microelectronics industry faces today. Significant investment from the government is needed on four fronts:

1. scale up the educational programs including hands on training and online learning,
2. substantially increase the number of scholarships for undergraduates and fellowships for graduate students in areas related to the semiconductors supply chain,
3. fund research and development programs that push the boundaries of science, and
4. facilitate translation of new discoveries into applications.

A highly skilled, creative, innovative, and substantially larger microelectronics workforce is a critical factor in the nation’s strategy to re-shore and re-energize U.S. microelectronics. There is a serious gap today in the supply and demand for microelectronics technicians and engineers, and the shortage of talent will grow even larger as we build microelectronics facilities in the hundreds of billions in the U.S. this decade.

Action is needed now. Every day that passes makes the U.S. more vulnerable to risks in the supply chain, gaps in defense technologies, and a dire shortage of qualified workers. Passing the United States Competition and Innovation Act (USICA) this month will be a crucial and timely win for the national security, economic security, and job security in our country.

Excerpts from the Transcript of the ENSURING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN MICROELECTRONICS Hearing of the House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

Thursday, December 2, 2021
Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met at 10:03 a.m., via Zoom
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chairwoman of the Committee, presiding 

Chairwoman Johnson Thank you very much. At this time, I'd like to introduce our witnesses. […] Mr. Baird will introduce. Dr. Chiang. 

Mr. Baird Thank you, Madam Chair. And it's indeed my pleasure to introduce to you an individual from Indiana's Fourth Congressional District and Purdue University. Dr. Mung Chiang currently serves as the Executive Vice President of Purdue University for Strategic Initiatives, the John A. Edwardson Dean College of Engineering, and the Roscoe H. George Distinguished Professor in the Elmore Family School of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Dr. Chiang's research on communication networks received a 2013 Alan T. Waterman Award, the highest honor to scientists and engineers under the age of 40 in the United States. And he has been the recipient of several other awards and distinctions. Most recently, Dr. Chiang founded the Center for Tech Diplomacy at Purdue, which intends to bring engineering expertise to policymakers in a way that demonstrates the inextricable links between technology, technology advancements, and national interests. So, Dr. Chiang, we are very happy to have you here with us today, and we really look forward to your testimony. Thank you. 

Chairwoman Johnson Thank you very much. As our witnesses should know, you will each have 5 minutes for your spoken testimony. Your written testimony will be included in the record for the hearing. When you have completed your spoken testimony, we will begin with questions. Each member will have 5 minutes to question the panel. 

We now will start with Dr. Kelleher, Executive Vice President and General Manager of Technology Development, Intel; Manish Bhatia, Executive Vice President, Global Operations, Micron Technology, Inc.; Michael Witherell, Director, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; and Mung Chiang, Executive Vice President and Dean of Engineering College, Purdue University. 

[…] 

STATEMENT OF MUNG CHIANG 

Mr. Chiang Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Lucas, distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Mung Chiang, the Executive Vice President for Strategic Initiatives at Purdue University and the John A. Edwardson Dean of College of Engineering. And this year Purdue's College of Engineering became the largest engineering school to be ranked among top five in the United States with over 15,000 students enrolled. It also has over 100 faculty members working in microelectronics and related fields. 

Our digital economy is built on silicon. It helps to visualize the supply chain in five steps. First, it's the raw materials and gases needed to make chips. Then there is hardware that goes into chip factories. Third is the design of chips and the software tools used in such design. And American companies continue to lead the world in chip design. Then there's manufacturing, taking all of the above into a factory. The physical making of a chip goes through many processes. Some factories focus on logic chips while others on memory and storage chips. And finally, assembly, test, and packaging. Once chips are made, they need to be packaged and integrated into the market electronic products and eventually find their way into phones, cars, fighter jets, and more. 

Much of the discussion these days zooms in on the manufacturing step. There are two different types of business models. One is to make chips designed by the same company, and the other is to make chips designed by other companies, the foundry model. With increasing specialization in the semiconductors industry over the past 3 decades, many companies have chosen to become “fabless” and rely on the foundry. This in turn enhances the foundry's benefits of scale and sharpens its ability to deliver cutting-edge manufacturing under a service mindset and trust with the foundry customers. 

For the semiconductor industry in the United States, across the whole supply chain, we are in the critical years now. Universities have three unique roles to play in this silicon moment. One is to help create synergy with companies large and small to bridge the fundamental research advances with commercially deployable technologies. The innovation ecosystem works best when we create synergy across major companies in manufacturing and in design, small to medium disruptors with their investors and researchers and teachers at universities. Our second role is educating and retraining large numbers of engineers, technicians, and operators. Ideally, the university can create knowledge and jobs together, generating both new positions and the talent needed to fuel the positions. And third, universities, especially land-grant institutions such as Purdue, have an obligation to serve as an economic driver for the State, and there's no greater opportunity today than in microelectronics. And Purdue is proud to be a partner with the State of Indiana developing strategies and providing a talent pool. And for the future of chips, the ultimate supply chain is that of human talent. In just the next 5 years, at least 42,000 semiconductor engineers need to be trained and ready nationwide. The number will continue to climb well into the next decade. 

There is a growing gap between the supply and demand for microelectronic and semiconductor engineers across the spectrum from associate and bachelor degrees to master's and Ph.D.'s. And some specific steps need to be made, including revising, invigorating, and expanding the microelectronics curricula with expanded use of hands-on training, online learning, partnership with community colleges and engagement with industry, and also to scale up such educational programs and substantially increase the number of scholarships for undergrads and fellowships for graduate students in the United States. 

And third, to fund research development programs that push the boundaries of science and engineering and facilitate the translation of new discoveries into applications. Action is indeed needed now. Passing the USICA and funding the CHIPS Act this month will be a crucial and timely win for the national security, economic security, and job security in our country. Thank you. 

Chairwoman Johnson Thank you very much. At this point we will begin our first round of questions. I'd like each witness to comment. As you all have testified, the United States faces several challenges to maintaining U.S. leadership in microelectronics. They include a lack of domestic manufacturing and packaging capacity, a limited technical workforce, technology transfer challenges, and multiple scientific challenges. Given that the availability of resources may never be enough to fully address all of the many challenges, how should the Federal Government set funding and policy priorities, in particular since this is a Science Committee, how should we prioritize policies and funding to maintain leadership in semiconductor innovation? 

[…] 

Mr. Chiang Well, I want to just echo what my fellow panelists have already mentioned. There is the need to fund and prioritize ideas for the future, and then there is the need to fund the people that are needed today. The ideas for the future, as we mentioned, activities in R&D in areas such as advanced packaging, heterogenous integration, new material and going from two dimensions to three dimensions, are all essential to the continued R&D vibrancy of semiconductors industry in the United States. As to the people that we need today, it will take a grand strategy across government, industry, educational institutions, K-12, and government national labs to work together, in particular, to deploy more online learning for upscaling and retraining of existing workforce, to substantially increase the number of K-12 student pipeline into engineering programs in the country, and to increase the use of hands-on learning, industry internship opportunities to make sure that they are ready for the market. And all of these can be further supplemented by increasing the number of scholarships for undergraduates and fellowships for Ph.D. students in the country. And finally, we do need indeed a diversity in the range of talents, including those who are in community colleges and also inclusivity in the geographic balance. There are many talents throughout the country, and they can all be part of the solution to the workforce shortage problem. 

Mr. Lucas Dr. Chiang, I want to thank you for your comments on the need to build a workforce to meet the demands that will come from a growing domestic semiconductor industry. And I'm--especially appreciated your comments on the need to train technicians and production workers. Like Indiana, which has Ivy Tech. Oklahoma has a remarkable program with CareerTech. Tech schools and training offer a tremendous opportunity to train, reskill, upskill America's workforce. Can you please elaborate on how Purdue is working with Ivy Tech to develop workforce programs focused on skills needed by the semiconductor industry and how that potentially could serve as a model? 

Mr. Chiang Thank you. Indeed, it takes a whole partnership. No university by itself can fulfill the whole spectrum of needs. It takes partnership. And I highlight three partnerships. 

One is, as you mentioned, Purdue University has been partnering with Ivy Tech, which is our statewide community college system with over 70,000 community college students. And we also have started deploying a new set of degrees and credentials, including a dedicated degree at the master level for semiconductor supply chain, from the material and the gases needed to the hardware tools needed, to the manufacturing and the design and eventually to test, assembly, packaging. And third is the use of online learning to share these new spectra of curricula with other learning institutions. Under President Mitch Daniels, Purdue University's leadership, Purdue Global, and Purdue Online for the West Lafayette main campus have rolled out a wide variety of online learning certificate opportunities so that even those who are in the workforce today wanting to upskill or those who are remote learning and not able to attend the university within Indiana will be able to benefit from these results. 

Finally, I will just comment also how the industry and academia can work together even in the education space. It takes more than just recruiting but also actively participating in the design of these curricula and providing hands-on learning internship opportunities and providing workforce training for their own employees through our online degrees. And these cut across the bachelor degree and associate degrees, as well as more advanced degrees, so that it's not just universities generating the supply of talent but truly industry and universities working together to design the curricula and to educate the workforce together. 

[…] 

Mr. Babin Thank you, Madam Chairwoman Johnson and Ranking Member Lucas, and thank you to the witnesses as well for being here with us today. Demand for semiconductors is at an all-time high, which is a trend unlikely to ease off for the foreseeable future in our country's evolving reliance on digital infrastructure. From smartphones to our defense technologies, semiconductors continue to play a critical role in our country, and investing in this industry should be a high priority for us. Texas alone has seen several investments made in the semiconductor industry this year with Samsung announcing just last month a $17 billion investment for a new facility in Taylor, Texas, not in my district but I'm proud to have them in Texas, one of the biggest investments we've seen in many long years, maybe the largest. It's important that we pursue American competitiveness in this industry. 

Now, we recognize the role of partnering with companies abroad which are important players in our supply chain. So, Dr. Chiang, in your written testimony, when evaluating the semiconductor supply chain, you mentioned the three P's: protect, promote, and partner. Recognizing the importance of focusing on these key aspects of the supply chain, would you please elaborate on how the United States can best leverage our valuable taxpayer dollars with our allies to ensure the United States remains a leader in the global market? And how do we continue to encourage investments in the future in domestic growth and in American jobs? 

Mr. Chiang Congressman, for the three P's, usually people are referring to public-private partnership, which is certainly important. Now, I was referring to the three dimensions of protect, promote, and partnership. And on the partnership front, we have to recognize that it helps for the United States to onshore like-minded nations’ private-sector success. For example, Congressman, you just highlighted Samsung for careers investment into Austin in Texas, congratulations. And of course, we saw in May 2020 TSMC, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, one of the largest, the leading-edge manufacturer of semiconductor chips coming to the United States to Arizona. And we have other like-minded nation partners in the design space such as MediaTek, also from Taiwan, and we just mentioned some of the partnership with European countries as well. I think it is of utmost importance to encourage these partners to come to the U.S. shore, to create jobs in America, to produce results and intellectual property in the United States, and also to work with American companies both to create jobs for our students and to help us to train such students. And here at Purdue we're proud to work both with companies such as Intel and SkyWater and other American-headquartered companies, but also with companies such as TSMC and MediaTek. 

Mr. Babin Great, thank you so very much. Dr. Chiang, you also mentioned that the United States is the largest end-user of semiconductors in the global market but yet the U.S. share of semiconductor global fabrication is only 12 percent, a very low number. And, Dr. Kelleher, you highlight the same shocking percentages in your written testimony and going on to highlight the danger of losing our ability to make advanced chips in the United States. So, both of you, if you please would elaborate on what you see as the biggest threat to our semiconductor supply chains. 

[…] 

Mr. Chiang. Thank you, Congressman. I agree with Dr. Kelleher's assessment that indeed we need to make sure that the entire supply chain is secure. That includes gas and materials needed, including rare-earth minerals. That includes the tooling companies. We have companies such as Applied Materials here in the United States, and Tokyo Electron, both work with Purdue and the State of Indiana. And that includes the manufacturing companies, as well as the chip design companies. And even more depressing numbers can be found when it comes to the final step, advanced packaging. We need to onshore or re-shore a lot more on the packaging front as well. Here in the State of Indiana, Governor Eric Holcomb, and the whole team here have been trying to increase the presence of packaging, as well as manufacturing facilities. Some of that is upgrading existing ones in universities such as Purdue's Birck Nanotechnology Center and the nanoHUB virtual learning platform, and new ones. And I would wrap up this brief comment and answer by highlighting the optimism that I have that, as somebody once said, never short on America and the Americans. The ingenuity and the creativity of our universities and companies and government labs is truly second to none. And as long as we continue to look forward to the most innovative R&D ideas and run faster than we have ever run before, then there is no limit as to what American ingenuity can do. 

[…] 

Mr. Bowman I had a question about creating pipelines for young people who want to go into careers in this sector. It was mentioned by a few of the witnesses. I want to focus on- someone mentioned K-12. I want to focus on the high school setting. What should high school science and technology curriculum look like in order to prepare our students for postsecondary opportunities in these spaces? And I'll start with Mr. Bhatia if that's okay. 

[…] 

Mr. Chiang Thank you, Congressman Bowman. And I would just supplement Mr. Bhatia's answer with two more points. One is that universities also have a responsibility to work with K-12. For example, Purdue President Mitch Daniels started three Purdue polytechnic high schools throughout the State of Indiana, and we just graduated the first class of senior students. These are minority serving high schools focusing a lot on STEM capabilities. And second is that there is a mindset of problem-solving at this early age of education. It's not just about how much we cover in the material for high school students, but how much we allow them to uncover for themselves, more about their curiosity and their ability to learn. And that is fundamentally the point of education, especially for engineers. It's ultimately a problem-solving mindset that we can start instilling in their minds at high school age. 

Mr. Bowman Thank you so much. Dr. Chiang and Mr. Bhatia, I would like to follow up with my office to continue this conversation. This is an issue that's near and dear to my heart. And for me it's a priority for us to create pipelines, K to 12 pipelines in historically underserved spaces. I believe it will take our economy to the next level and ensure that no other country can compete with us because we will finally invest in equitable ways across our country. 

Mr. Baird. […] earlier this year I offered an amendment that would've allocated about $600 million to the National Science Foundation to support the R&D funding for basic research. Unfortunately, that didn't pass. But I really have a strong affinity for basic research, and I recognize how difficult it is to determine what basic research is important today that down the road becomes increasingly important or provides information essential to our society. So, Dr. Chiang, I'm going to start with you. And would you mind speaking to the role that basic research and funding for the NSF plays in supporting the development of semiconductors that will be needed for cutting-edge technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and 5G? 

Mr. Chiang. Thank you, Congressman. And thank you very much for your service and leadership in representing our district in Indiana. I would like to echo what you just said, that the National Science Foundation, just like the Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and many other agencies of the U.S. Government, plays a unique and important role in continuing the long tradition of American creativity. 

Now, in particular we need a collection of fundamental research often funded through the National Science Foundation, along with translational research sometimes funded through other agencies who work hand-in-hand together. NSF also funds quite a number of scholarships and fellowships, and we need more American students to be interested in pursuing STEM degrees at undergrad levels. And those with undergrad degrees, say, in engineering, would choose to continue to study for a master or Ph.D. degree. I know that they often are tempted by outstanding offers from the industry, such as leaders like Intel and Micron, but also we do want to incentivize and encourage a much larger number of them to stay on and pursue a graduate degree. And the National Science Foundation plays a critical role. And I hope that there will be many more graduate fellowships to a diverse population in this country in areas related to semiconductors. 

Mr. Baird Thank you. So, would it be fair to say that one of the things I see from this Committee standpoint and from the federal investment or taxpayer dollars invested that some of the basic research that's conducting private industry cannot really justify so we could start the needle moving early on and then industry picks that up? We talk about the public-private partnership. Is that--would you say that's a correct analysis of this situation or… 

Mr. Chiang. Yes, sir. And I'll give one concrete example. There is this so-called valley of death coming from fundamental advances into commercially impactful deployable solutions. And one way to bridge this so-called valley of death is to create and upgrade existing facilities, for example, in semiconductors. We talked about two dimensions. One is the dimension of the feature size, and it's getting smaller and smaller down to 3 nanometers these days. And the other is the size of the wafer. And we are looking at 8 inch or 12 inch. And we have a substantial lack of 200 millimeter or 8 inch wafer production facilities in American universities. By upgrading some of those, including possibly here in the Midwest but in several regional nodes, that will open up a pathway of translation from fundamental research to industry-relevant solutions. 

[…] 

Ms. Wild I appreciate this hearing and the opportunity to elevate an issue that affects workers and businesses in my district, which is Pennsylvania 7th, the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania. My community is home to many, many manufacturers, and I hear regularly from companies in a range of sectors about how the shortage of chips such as has been discussed today is affecting their production and their ability to regularly schedule workers. One auto manufacturer, Mack Trucks, has faced production interruptions this year and unneeded complication. And, by the way, they have plenty of demand. It's not for lack of demand. But it's been a threat to some of their innovative work in spaces like zero-emission heavy-duty trucks, exactly the type of advances we want America to lead in. We know the drivers behind this supply-chain crunch are varied and largely connected to the pandemic, and I was proud to support the CHIPS Act last December. But a year later here we are. We need again to take bipartisan action on this urgent need and provide the appropriations for this law that the Senate has moved, as well as address some specific needs like automotive-grade chips. It's about the American economy, it's about good-paying jobs across industries, and is about our national competitiveness and security. 

So, with that said, my first question is for Dr. Chiang. In your testimony you discuss some specific partnerships on microelectronics in Indiana. We have spent some time in this Committee discussing geographic diversity of innovation. In July the Committee reported out my bipartisan Regional Innovation Act, and we are working to get that enacted as part of a larger competitiveness package. But that bill was technology-neutral. What do you see as the role of the microelectronics in the geographic diversity of innovation? 

Mr. Chiang. Thank you, Congresswoman. Indeed, the time to act is now. There is a sense of urgency, and this is key to our national security, economic security, and job security because many other industries in the digital economy depends on the access to chips. Otherwise, they will be furloughing employees whom they would happily be otherwise paying overtime. And I also highly appreciate, Congresswoman, your highlighting the importance of being inclusive across different communities and diverse in the geographic locations. What we need in education and in R&D is a distributed network of many different parties. Here in the Midwest, for example, in my home State of Indiana, we have an abundance of customers, including automotive and medical, electronics industry. We also have an abundance of a workforce that still retains the manufacturing DNA. These semiconductor fabs, they are fancy, expensive, important factories. They are the factories of the future, and we have the manufacturing DNA in spades in Indiana. And thirdly, if you look around, the drivable 5-hour distance from where I am right now in West Lafayette, Indiana, you will see an extremely high concentration of high caliber universities, as well as community colleges, serving an incredible number of American students. So, I believe that, yes, we should emphasize on the inclusivity and the diversity of geographic locations to make sure that all parts of America get to benefit from and contribute to the resurgence of semiconductors. 

Ms. Wild. Well, you must've read my mind. I-my district is one that is rich in higher education. We have six 4-year colleges with graduate programs. We have two unbelievable community colleges. And one of the things I'm particularly interested in is knowing how universities and community colleges can partner with States and local industries to capitalize on regional strengths so that we can contribute to the domestic microelectronic supply chain. I'd like to know whether you or anybody else on the panel would like to comment on how universities might go about doing that. 

[…] 

Mr. Chiang I concur with Dr. Witherell, that there are facilities such as the Birck Nanotechnology Center, which has the largest and cleanest clean room among all American universities here at Purdue. If we could upgrade it to be producing at the 200 millimeter scale of the wafer and open that up as a hub, a regional hub for other universities, for community colleges, and for industry partners to come together, that would become a very effective bridge for the country and for the region between the workforce I mentioned and the R&D translation dimension of the problem. 

[…] 

Ms. Kim. Well, thank you very much, Chair and Ranking Member, for hosting this hearing, and thank you to our witnesses. I know the Senate and the House is now trying to work on, you know, proceeding with the conference process to, you know, hash out some of the differences between our two chambers. And as we do, I wanted to ask to any panelist what in your opinion are the top two or three areas of focus where the U.S. Government should invest $52 billion that was included in the Senate-passed U.S. Innovation and Competition Act in order to have the greatest sustaining impact to achieve our goal of American innovation and competitiveness in the industry? 

[…] 

Mr. Chiang I will echo that by also highlighting that the ultimate supply chain in semiconductors is the supply chain of human talent. And we need to substantially invest in the human talent pipeline. Otherwise, we'll have hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of public-private partnership and the best facilities throughout the country and yet not adequate number of engineers to staff and operate it. And there is also the need to ensure the connection between policymaking, and the policy implications to domestic and foreign policy is tremendous, and that's why at Purdue we launched this year the Center for Tech Diplomacy at Purdue as a think tank specialized at the intersection between technology and foreign policy. And I believe that the USICA bill and the CHIPS for America Act portion of it will be critical if we could indeed fund and appropriate that as soon as possible. 

Ms. Kim Thank you. Thanks for mentioning that, Dr. Chiang, because I was--during the markup, I was successfully able to put an amendment in the NSF for the Future Act and NISP reauthorization related to STEM education. 

[…] 

Mr. Feenstra Dr. Chiang, in my district, we’re home to Iowa State University, which houses a microelectronics research center, which is doing fantastic work in developing new materials that could transform the speed and efficiency of computing, and increase the production of sustainable agriculture. Universities will be crucial to increasing domestic microelectronics manufacturing to ensure that we have adequate jobs and a skilled workforce that can fill these jobs. How can industry and universities work together to provide support in developing a stronger practice-orientated program, and provide necessary research and education laboratories for these essential infrastructures, and for training that could be appropriately made? 

Mr. Chiang Thank you, Congressman, for the question, and indeed it is essential for universities of this country, and the private sector, to work very closely together, but there are three broad lanes. One is R&D collaboration, one is workforce - not only recruiting, but development together, through internship, through upgrade to facilities, and through online learning. And the third is co-location, economic development that creates knowledge and jobs together, that creates the position to be filled, and the talent that can fill them. And in this regard, here in my home state of Indiana, Governor Holcomb and his team, and Secretary of Commerce in our state, Brad Chambers, have been working very closely with universities such as Purdue to create that economic development engine. And I think that, well, in addition to R&D and workforce, by co-locating physically, factories of the future, along with the workforce of the future, that is the best way to both develop talent and to develop the manufacturing capacity. 

[…] 

Ms. Ross I want to thank the panelists for joining us today. As we’ve been hearing, these pandemic-driven shortages of semiconductors have revealed how dependent the U.S. economy is on foreign suppliers. And it’s not just in semiconductors, it’s in so many other things in our supply chain, but we’ve seen how essential semiconductors are to so much of what we do. I represent the Research Triangle area of North Carolina, and I’ve seen in my area how these shortages have hurt our economy and our innovation ecosystem. And right now I’d like to let you know, if you don’t know, in my district, it’s the home of North Carolina State University, and we’re - it’s a leader in Power America, a public/private partnership between industry - or among industry, government, National Labs, and academia that’s accelerating the commercialization of wide-band semiconductor technology. And after 5 years of Department of Energy funding, Power America now has 60 members, and is completely self-sufficient. It’s also spawning people to leave and go into startups, and so the startup economy is very big in the Research Triangle area. But microelectronic startups often find it difficult to commercialize their products. Even well-funded startups struggle to secure time at fabs and foundries to test their products as they compete with larger companies for access, and right now we need as many people working on this as possible. 

So, Dr. Chiang and Dr. Witherell, how can we grow a semiconductor startup ecosystem here in the United States, and do we have the time for it? 

[…] 

Mr. Chiang Thank you, Dr. Witherell, and thank you, Congresswoman. Indeed, I am confident that Congress and the Cabinet, including Secretary Raimondo, will be very comprehensive in the strategies. And we just talked about, let’s not forget, the legacy nodes that produce a lot of the chips needed, for example, for the automotive industry. We should also not forget the military needs, including workforce. For example, Purdue leads 12 universities working with the DOD in the SCALE Program for DOD semiconductor workforce development. Let’s not forget that we also have small enterprises, including startup companies. But I think there’s a reason why there is a lack of interest compared to other fields, because the time to generate return to the investors tends to be longer for semiconductor companies. Unlike fields such as artificial intelligence or mobile applications, semiconductor chips, especially at the leading nodes, takes hundreds, if not thousands of engineers, and hundreds of millions of dollars to go to mature stage. And most of the investors are not patient enough when there are competing opportunities for their cash resources. 

So, I think part of the solution could be to encourage more of the university/industry collaboration to encourage faculty and students to work with industry leaders, and take their passions, and take their research articles, into the potential translational path so that there’s a larger volume of choices for the investors. And part of that is indeed, back to the CHIPS Act, to restore a free market balance. Not to tip it, but to restore it, so that investors will be more confident that there is a vibrant future for their investment in the semiconductors industry in the U.S. And that’s yet another reason why the CHIPS Act funding will be so important not only to the major players, but also the upcoming small companies. 

Ms. Moore I am going to sound repetitive, I’m sure, because I want to sort of relate to some of the things that I have heard before. Question really for Dr. Kelleher, and maybe - Dr. Chiang. You know, I am from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and, of course, this is a place that we were known at one time to be the machine makers of the world. So I’m wondering, Dr. Chiang, when you talked about workforce development and all that, we start talking about play space strategies to do things, will this funding enable a place like Milwaukee to have a level playing field by providing funding for training and upgrading - because we have a fantastic workforce for generations that was accustomed to manufacturing? Or are we going to just be flyover country, and they’re going to run off to California, or some of these other places? And so I am very, very - you know, I talked to Deputy Director of Commerce Don Graves. He indicated he thought that the Midwest would be a great place to do this kind of work, and I am - I’m wondering, you know, if - you know, because Milwaukee’s a great place. We’ve got a port, we’ve got water, there are deals that could be made with local governments regarding utilities and so on. Is it foolish to even hope that the--a place like Milwaukee could be a site? 

Mr. Chiang Congresswoman - well, let me share the Midwest enthusiasm that you just expressed so well. And indeed, here in the Midwest, whether it’s in Indiana, or Wisconsin, or any other states here in the middle of the country, we have a lot of customers, and I hope companies would want to be closer to their customers. We have a lot of talent, and I’m hoping that the workforce development portion of the NSTC in the CHIPS Act will support a nationwide network that access diverse talents, and is geographically inclusive. 

[…] 

Mr. Beyer Thank you. Going to try to get one more question in for Dr. Chiang. You know, when I talk to my friends at Micron and Intel, they talk about, you know, billions of dollars to get the new plant up. How do we grow the semiconductor startup ecosystem? How do we help the little guys who are developing all the cool chemistry? I’m sure that when Bill Foster was winning his awards 30 years ago, he was probably doing it in a small lab. 

Mr. Chiang Thank you, Congressman, for the question. And as we have already observed throughout this hearing, that the semiconductors industry is a large and diverse one, as is our country, the United States, and there are many different components and opportunities. For example, a startup company in the design of chips today will face a different kind of challenge than those focusing on packaging. And there are states whereby the largest factories will be located, and there are many other states where smaller fabs, legacy node fabs, or packaging centers might be created. But, in general, I would say that as SIA or SRC, these industry consortia, have indicated, that we need to aid restore a free market balance, and CHIPS Act will help to accomplish a big portion of that goal. And second is that we need to encourage more students and faculty to work with industry in order to be the co-founders, or the first set of employees, of these startups. The fundamental root cause, I think, is that most of the investors view the investment into semiconductor startups not as potentially high return as some of the other startup investment opportunities. So, restoring market balance, and increasing the volume of the deal flow would help to tackle those challenges for the startups. 

[…] 

Chairwoman Johnson Thank you very much. I think that is the end of our witnesses. But before we bring this hearing to a close, I want to thank our witnesses for testifying before the Committee today. The record will remain open for 2 weeks for additional statements from the members, and for any additional questions the Committee may ask of the witnesses. The witnesses now are excused, and the hearing is adjourned. 

Whereupon, at 1:28 p.m., the committee was adjourned.