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

Document Number: 7475
SNARF for: Line Item Revision to E90-1224, SPECIFICATION FOR SUBSTRATE TRACKING and E90.1-1224, SPECIFICATION FOR SECS-II PROTOCOL SUBSTRATE TRACKING

Originating Global Technical Committee: Information & Control
Originating TC Chapter: China
Task Force (TF) in which work is to be carried out: GEM300 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.)
In 300mm front-end and advanced back-end fabs, the SEMI E90 standard is widely adopted to track the processing state of individual substrates within equipment. This E90 state serves as the primary basis for subsequent factory decisions, such as proceeding to the next process step or initiating special handling. However, as manufacturing tools grow increasingly complex, particularly those with multiple process modules or stations, the host system requires more granular, substrate-level information. Tracking state changes corresponding to the start and completion of sub-processes within each module has become critical, yet the current E90 Substrate Processing State Model presents certain limitations in meeting this need.
1. In the Substrate Processing Model, the IN PROCESS state indicates that the substrate is undergoing processing, during which one or more of substrate properties are being modified. This implies that once a substrate enters the system, its Process State transitions to IN PROCESS simply due to a change in its Substrate Location property. This state persists until the substrate reaches its destination and all intended property modifications are complete. Consequently, if the substrate is processed across multiple modules, its state remains continuously as IN PROCESS throughout. This prevents the host from determining the precise processing stage within each module. In the event of a failure, this lack of granular state information makes it difficult to initiate appropriate substrate-specific recovery actions.

2. The PROCESSING COMPLETE state is the terminal state for a substrate, serving as a super-state that encompasses the following specific sub-states, which are defined below:


“9.3.1 ABORTED — The process has been aborted during the processing. The substrate will require special treatment.”
“9.3.6 LOST — The terminal state when the substrate has been broken and/or removed from the equipment by an external entity and it no longer exists at the equipment.”

“9.3.8 PROCESSED — All substrate processing has successfully completed. No further processing will be performed by the equipment.”

“9.3.10 REJECTED — The state which the substrate has been processed completely; however, the result of the processing may have a problem. The substrate will require special treatment. This substrate is not required for equipment that is unable to identify rejected substrates.

9.3.11 SKIPPED — As directed by an operator or a host, the substrate was not processed.

9.3.12 STOPPED — The process has been stopped during the processing. The substrate will require special treatment.”

However, the definitions above do not cover one specific scenario: when an unexpected alarm or failure occurs during substrate processing, and engineers subsequently perform a manual recovery or reprocessing. In this case, the substrate has been processed, but its results require special verification. Its status is distinct from PROCESSED due to the intervening abnormality. It also differs from ABORTED or STOPPED, as the process was ultimately completed. Furthermore, it cannot be classified as REJECTED because the processing was manually executed to completion.


b. Estimate effect on industry.
2: Major effect on an industry sector - identify the relevant sector
Sector or Company Information: Frontend and Advanced Backend Manufacturing.

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:
This snarf will discuss the field practicing for E90 substrate tracking in various automation scenarios and improve the E90 Substrate Processing Statt substates model. The proposed modifications include:

1.To define several OPTIONAL substates within the IN PROCESS state to indicate the substrate processing status within each individual process module.
2. Adding a new substate under the PROCESS COMPLETE state to indicated the reworked state.

It will help both equipment makers and factories, which are using E90 to have precise information exchange for substrate state.

Any other changes to address features or defects, or issues with the Style Guide raised by Task Force members during the development and review of the proposed changes related to these line-item topics. Significant changes in scope still require a new SNARF revision in compliance with SEMI Regulations.

b: Expected result of activity
Line-item revision to two or more existing Standards or Safety Guidelines

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


Revision or addition of one or more Subordinate Standards to an existing Primary Standard

For Standards, identify the Standard Subtype below:
Specification

Miscellaneous (describe below):

___________________________________________________________________________
3. Projected Timetable for Completion:

a: General Milestones
a. Activity Start: 12/01/2025b. 1st Draft by: 06/01/2026
c. (Optional) Informational Ballot by: d. Letter Ballot by: 01/01/2027
e. TC Chapter Approval By:06/01/2027

_____________________________________________________________________________
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.)
GEM300 TF North America.
GEM300 TF Korea;
GEM300 TF Taiwan;
GEM300 TF Japan.

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:
will not be issued

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:
Note: Both a: and b: below should be checked for Revision of existing Standard(s) and Safety Guideline(s).

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):
there is no known material patented technology necessary to use or implement the 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:
the incorporation of Copyrighted Item will NOT be required



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

___________________________________________________________________________
7. Comments, Special Circumstances:
None.

__________________________________________________________________________
8. TC Member Review:
took place between (put dates below ) before approval at the TC Chapter Meeting, or

Member Review Start Date; 5/15/2026
Member Review End Date: 5/29/2026

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 GCS06/02/2026
Recorded in TC Minutes06/05/2026

__________________________________________________________________________

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