SEMI International Standards
Standards New Activity Report Form (SNARF)
Date Prepared: 11/09/2010Revised (if Applicable):

Document Number: 5080
SNARF for: Revision of SEMI F51-0200 - Guide for Elastometric Sealing Technology

Originating Global Technical Committee: Facilities
Originating TC Chapter: North America
Task Force (TF) in which work is to be carried out: SEMI F51 Revision Task Force
Note: If a new task force is needed, also submit a task force organization form (TFOF)

___________________________________________________________________________
1. Rationale:
a. Describe the need or problem addressed by this activity.
(Indicate the customer, what benefits they will receive, and if possible, quantify the impact on the return on investment [ROI] if the Document is implemented.)
SEMI F51, Guide for Elastomeric Sealing Technology, is long overdue for its five year review. To provide standards for o-rings and seals used in Semiconductor Process Equipment this method should be reviewed and updated as necessary so that it can continue to be used for specifying sealing compounds and their applications. Due to the myriad of different chemical and physical properties of both seals and processes updating the standardized approach for specifying sealing compounds and seal configurations is needed. The mis-application of o-rings and seals creates significant costs and downtime.


b. Estimate effect on industry.
4: Slight effect or effect not determinable
Sector or Company Information:

c. Estimate technical difficulty of the activity.
II: Some Difficulty - Disagreements on known requirements exist but developing consensus is possible

___________________________________________________________________________
2. Scope:
a: Describe the technical areas to be covered or addressed by this Document development activity. For Subordinate Standards, list common concepts or criteria that the Subordinate Standard inherits from the Primary Standard, as well as differences from the Primary Standard:
A TaskForce will be formed consisting of manufacturers and end-users to review the existing SEMI F51 and make one of three recommendations on going forward:
Review for current content, approve and reballot as is –or-
Make minor (line item) additions to the document to refresh its contents –or-
Embark on a total rewrite of the document (most likely scenario).

Sealing technology is an area continuing to play and ever increasing role in high yielding manufacturing processes, yet the Microelectronic Industry’s sealing requirements are poorly defined. Complicating the issue is that some seals used were developed for unrelated industries. Thus, the existing parameters that define good sealing characteristics are very different than those required by microelectronics manufacturing; i.e.: cleanliness, particulation seal life.


b: Expected result of activity
Major revision to an existing Standard or Safety Guideline

For a new Subordinate Standard, identify the Primary Standard here:




For Standards, identify the Standard Subtype below:


Miscellaneous (describe below):

___________________________________________________________________________
3. Projected Timetable for Completion:

a: General Milestones
a. Activity Start: 11/01/2010b. 1st Draft by: 04/01/2011
c. (Optional) Informational Ballot by: d. Letter Ballot by: 11/01/2011
e. TC Chapter Approval By:04/01/2012

_____________________________________________________________________________
4. Liaisons with other Global Technical Committees/TC Chapters/Subcommittees/TFs:
a.
List SEMI global technical committees, TC Chapters, subcommittees, or task forces in your or other Regions/Locales that should be kept informed regarding the progress of this activity. (Refer to SEMI Standards organization charts and global technical committee charters and scopes as needed.)
FPD Committee
PV Committee

b. List any planned Type I Liaisons with external nonprofit organizations (e.g., SDO) that should receive Draft Documents from Standards staff for feedback during this activity and be notified when the Letter Ballot is issued (refer to Procedure Manual § 7):


c. Intercommittee Ballots:


Identify the recipient global technical committee(s):

___________________________________________________________________________
5. Safety Considerations:
The resulting document is expected:
NOT to be a Safety Guideline

NOTE FOR "to be a Safety Guideline": When all safety-related information is removed from the Document, the Document is NOT technically sound and complete - Refer to Section 15.1 of the Regulations for special procedures to be followed.

NOTE FOR "NOT to be a Safety Guideline": When all safety-related information is removed from the Document, the Document is still technically sound and complete.

___________________________________________________________________________
6. Intellectual Property Considerations:
a. For a new Standard or Safety Guideline and for any part to be modified or added in a Revision of published Standards and Safety Guidelines:


If "patented technology is intended to be included in the proposed Standard(s) or Safety Guideline(s) " is selected above, then also check one:


b. For Revision, Reapproval, Reinstatement, or Withdrawal of existing Standard(s) and Safety Guideline(s):


c. The body of the Document and any Appendices, Complementary Files, Related Information sections, or Various Materials that may or may not be a part of the Document by reference:



NOTE FORthe use of patented technology or the incorporation of Copyrighted Item(s) is NOT required’: If in the course of developing the Document, it is determined that the use of patented technology or Copyrighted Item(s) is necessary for the Document, the provisions of Regulations § 16 must be followed.

NOTE FORwill incorporate Copyrighted Item’: A copyright release letter must be obtained from the copyright owner prior to publication.

___________________________________________________________________________
7. Comments, Special Circumstances:
Although F51 is long overdue for review, the authors request that SEMI not obsolete it. Rather, give the newly formed TaskForce time to determine its fate. It is one of the many documents that were lost in the transition when Facilities was broken up several years ago.

__________________________________________________________________________
8. TC Member Review:


Member Review Start Date; None.
Member Review End Date: None.

NOTE FOR ‘TC Member Review’ is required by the Regulations for a period of at least two weeks
before approval of a new, or a major revision of an existing, Standard or Safety Guideline. (Refer to Regulations ¶ 8.2.1)
__________________________________________________________________________

9. SNARF Approval Dates:
TC Chapter or GCS11/09/2010
Recorded in TC Minutes

__________________________________________________________________________

10. SNARF Extension Dates:
TC Chapter Extension Granted on
Extension Expires on