Plating equipment upgrade (In)

THE SUBJECT OF THE PROCUREMENT Reactor for the electrochemical growth of indium bumps and thin films for the Solstice S8 tool, and a chemical dosing cabinet. The procurement concerns the delivery and integration of an indium electroplating reactor and a chemical dosing cabinet for the Solstice S8 system. The reactor shall enable electrochemical growth of indium bumps and thin films, while the dosing cabinet shall provide controlled supply of chemical additives, both fully compatible with and controlled by the existing system software. The equipment must form a technically interoperable subsystem without requiring modifications to the existing Solstice S8 platform. DIRECT AWARD, Article 40 2(2) of Finnish Procurement act (1397/2016) According to the 40 § section 2(2) of the Act on Public Contracts (1397/2016), only a certain supplier can implement the procurement for a technical reason, or for a reason related to protecting an exclusive right; it shall be a further condition that there are no reasonable alternatives or substitute solutions, and that the absence of competition is not due to an artificial narrowing of the terms and conditions of the procurement.  The direct procurement ground according to item A) applies in this case because MPE Nordic AB is the only supplier from which this procurement can be made in order to achieve the required technical end result. The Solstice S8 system consists of eight modules, into which subassemblies designed and manufactured by the equipment manufacturer can be installed. These enable electrochemical plating and metal film etching on silicon wafers. The indium reactor will be installed in one of the modules of this tool. A separate chemical dosing cabinet is required for additives used in the electrolyte baths. The dosing is controlled via the Solstice S8 system software. This is therefore an integrated system of the separate modules in which the technical compatibility of the modules is based on the interoperability of the manufacturer’s solution. No other supplier can provide a separate device to be incorporated into the system, because it is not technically or legally possible. Consequently, no reasonable alternative or substitute solutions does not exist, and the absence of competition is not the result of an artificial restriction of the procurement conditions. The contracting authority concludes that the procurement can be carried out only by a single supplier for technical reasons, and that the conditions for a direct award pursuant to Section 40, subsection 2, point 2 of the Finnish Procurement Act are fulfilled.