skillstraining template (ver. 2.5 - 10/11/96) for nt … › static › construction ›...

FCCB White Paper Handbook and

Training Manual

Description: FCCB White Paper Handbook and Student GuideCourse Title: Writing FCCB White PapersCourse Code: PTD007692Revision Date: 05/10/99Revision No.: 7Item No.: 07692A

FCCB White Paper Handbook

Blank page

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction...................................................................................................

2. What is the FCCB?........................................................................................

General Change Boundaries..................................................................Facilities Systems Changes...................................................................Equipment Installation Changes............................................................Getting Changes Approved...................................................................

3. FCCB Change Classifications.......................................................................

Classifying Changes.............................................................................Change Classification Exercise.............................................................Equipment Installation Considerations..................................................Cost Considerations..............................................................................

4. FCCB White Paper Guidelines.....................................................................

The White Paper Review Process..........................................................General FCCB Administration Procedures............................................White Paper Elements...........................................................................White Paper Rejection..........................................................................

5. Appendix 1: Environmental, Health, and Safety Issues.............................

6. Appendix 2: FCCB Facility Systems Definitions..........................................

7. Appendix 3: FCCB/ACCB Interrelationships..............................................

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Blank page

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


FCCB Quick Reference

Regularly needed information

Here’s a guide to some of the key information contained in this handbook.

To find information about: see page(s)FCCB change classification matrix 18FCCB facility system levels and definitions 39FCCB administration (who do I talk to, when do WP’s have to be submitted, etc.)

30

Details regarding the information that must be included in each section of a white paper

31

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Blank page

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


1. Introduction

Course goalsThis class on writing Fab Facilities Change Control Board (FCCB) white papers is designed to meet the following goals:

Communicate the process for obtaining the appropriate level of approval(s) for a change to any components within a fabs facilities system or for a change to any fab equipment installation.

Explain the methodology for classifying FCCB-related changes.

Increase the quality and approval rates of white papers when they are presented at the required change control boards.

Define and explain the FCCB white paper template.

Course objectivesAt the completion of the class, you will be able to:

Identify the change control boundaries within the scope of the facilities change control board.

Classify changes to facilities systems and to equipment installations correctly

Identify examples of good and bad white papers, and write a white paper that conforms to the existing standards.

Explain the steps involved with getting a white paper through the approval process, and follow those steps in actual practice.

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Intended audienceThis class is intended for personnel from the following groups:

Fab Engineers and Technicians

Site Material and Services (SMS)

Intel Corporate Install/Qual (IQ)

Facilities Construction Technology (FCT)

Contractors supporting all the organizations listed above

Class outlineThis class is divided into the following sections:

Section Information in the section1: Introduction What you’re now reading2: What is the FCCB Charter and scope of the FCCB; general

change boundaries; general white paper approval process.

3: FCCB Change Classifications General change classifications; assessing the criticality and level of changes for facilities system and equipment installation modifications; examples and exercises.

4: FCCB White Paper Guidelines Rules; procedures; format; samples of good and bad white papers; detailed white paper approval process, flowcharts, and administrative guidelines.

5: Appendices: EHS Issues Facilities Matching FCCB Facility System

Definitions

Supporting information for white papers and associated groups to include in the approval process.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


2. What is the FCCB?

Charter/Scope

Primary purpose

The Fab FCCB is responsible for documenting new systems, and controlling changes in facilities and in fab process equipment installations across the virtual factory. Examples of which include:

Type of change Span of controlChanges to, and differences between, the "utilities" in each factory

Common facility system changes Master specification changes Factory plan-of-record changes

Changes to, and differences between, process equipment installations

Master packages changes Location-specific packages changes

New factory implementations Documentation of new critical systems Facilities matching

ScopeThe fab FCCB is responsible for managing the aspects of CE! listed above for the following structures and processes:*

Fabs, sort, fab C4, bridge buildings, fab support labs, and fab central utilities buildings (CUBs)

Process 854, 856, 858, 860, 802, 1260, and future 12xx processes

*See FCCB Web address for the current factory/process matrix.

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


FCCB ObjectivesThe FCCB attempts to ensure that:

1. Factories that run the same process are designed and operated such that the process "sees" no difference from one factory to the next.

2. The process is duplicated in each factory by understanding and controlling process equipment installation changes.

3. Tool installation costs are reduced by working closely with FCT (Facilities Construction Technology) and IQ (Install/Qual).

4. CE! is maintained "long term" for facilities and equipment installation in the virtual factory.

5. Environmental, health, and safety concerns are addressed in each change.

6. Changes are based on data-driven decisions, not personal preference or emotion.

Items not addressed

Other change control boards (PCCB, OCCB, ACCB, BCCB, etc.) are responsible for other aspects of Copy Exactly! (e.g., equipment recipes, equipment qualification, etc.). These topics are not monitored by the FCCB.

The white paper format discussed in this presentation applies only the FCCB. The other change control boards listed above may have their own white paper standard.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


General Change Boundaries

CE! RulesCopy Exactly! guidelines state that changes to an existing plan-of-record (POR) are only allowed if there are compelling reasons or physical barriers to copying exactly. However, these exceptions must be tested, reviewed, and then approved by the FCCB process to ensure that the proposed changes won’t affect product yield or reliability. Cost, safety, and impact to operations are also included in the FCCB decision. Some examples of a compelling reason to change are:

Improvements in environmental, health, safety, or risk management issues

Code compliance

A particular component is no longer available, at any price

A local site requires additional waste treatment, above and beyond the POR

A substantial cost savings can be realized by Intel without impacting the process

Corrects a known problem and establishes a new POR

Physical and geographical constraints

Compelling does not mean

Once a change is established as compelling, the change is documented using a white paper and it is reviewed through the change control process. Therefore, compelling does not mean:

1. That's the way we do it in __________ (plug in the appropriate Intel site)

2. This is the industry standard

3. Personal preference/bias

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Facilities Systems Changes

Span of controlThe following diagram illustrates the boundaries of facilities systems changes in the FCCB structure. The arrows in the diagram below designate the items that are considered facilities system changes. In general:

Changes to facilities system include both the base building system and the lateral distribution network.

Figure 1 FCCB Utility Change Boundaries

ProcessTool

Raised Floor

Waffle Slab

Lateral

Lateral

SupportPackage

Building System#1

Building System#2

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


Equipment Installation Changes

Span of controlThe following diagram describes the boundaries of equipment installation changes in the FCCB structure. The arrows highlight the items that are considered to be within the "equipment installation" boundary. In general:

Equipment installation changes begin at the take off point from the lateral and continue to the shell of the process tool.

Equipment specific support equipment (e.g., chillers, pumps, etc.) and their connection to the process equipment are included as well.

Figure 2 FCCB Equipment Installation Change Boundaries

ProcessTool

Raised Floor

Waffle Slab

Lateral

SupportPackage

Building System#1

Building System#2

Lateral

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


ConsiderationsItems to consider when making any change are:

If….. Then…. Example(s)It’s a change to the way we want to build future Fabs

This is considered a roadmap change and it requires FSCS (Factory Strategic Capability Segment) and FCCB review.

A new and less expensive water treatment system is found to work extremely well.

The change affects the materials that we use to build new Fabs

This change may require a Facilities Technology Spec change. Contact the FT Spec administrator for more details.

A new filter is found that works well for UPW applications and is less expensive than the POR.

The change affects the operations of the Fab

This change requires review and approval by the MOSCS (Manufacturing and Operations SCS).

Changing building systems from UPS power to standard power which will result in additional fab downtime during a power outage.

The change affects any of the automation systems in the Fab

This change will require review and approval by the ACCB (Automation Change Control Board)

A change that affects the AMHS (automated material handling system) in the Fab.

The change involves a component that affects more than one equipment type

This is considered a global change. Since more than one equipment type is affected, several equipment JETs need to be notified. The FCCB works with the JEM to identify the appropriate equipment JETs.

A new high purity valve for inert gases is found which is less expensive and performs better. This component is present in the installation of 14 different pieces of equipment in the Fab.

The equipment installation change is location specific and is not intended or desired to change the standard installation design.

This is considered a Location Specific Package (LSP) equipment installation change and the LSP is authorized to deviate from the master package.

Fab 15 installs a planarization tool in an area that was originally designed for office space. This requires some unique installation strategies that are not completely standard.

The change is such that existing factories need to retrofit this item

This change needs to have buy-in and funding from all the affected factories.

A safety issue is uncovered with the current installation design of the sulfuric wet bench.

Note: For any of the additional reviews described above (FSCS, MOSCS, etc.), the FCCB will provide guidance on who to contact to enable the WP author to review their change with these organizations.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


Getting Changes Approved

ProceduresGeneral procedures for making any of the changes mentioned in this section are as follows:

Step Action1 Identify the classification of the change in order to determine

the appropriate review process.2 Draft a white paper that details the change.

You may first need to draft a preliminary white paper that explains the change and details the success criteria. This preliminary white paper must be approved by the FCCB before the change may be attempted.

The preliminary white paper becomes the final white paper once the change is made, tested, and results reported back to the FCCB for their final approval.

3 Review the white paper with the appropriate sponsors and pre-FCCB approval bodies and obtain their support/funding for making the changes.

5 Review the white paper with the FCCB (and PCCB if required) for their final OK.

6 Make the changes.7 Update any other documents that are effected on account of

your change.

Continued next page.

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Simplified approval flow

The steps outlined in the previous tables are illustrated in this flowchart:

Remaining itemsThe remainder of this material discusses the rules used for classifying a change, the elements of an FCCB white paper, and discuss the white paper review process in greater detail.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


3. FCCB Change Classifications

Introduction

DefinitionA key element of the FCCB white paper is its "classification". The white paper classification is a number (typically denoted as a roman numeral) that assesses the amount of risk associated with the specified change. The “risk” that we refer to here is risk to the process (i.e., wafer yield or performance) and not risk in the sense of safety or environmental issues. The change classification level becomes the overall "class" of the white paper (e.g., a Class III white paper).

Classification levels

White paper classifications are described below. In addition to assessing the risk of a specific change, the change classification also determines the amount of review and scrutiny the specific white paper requires. In other words, a Class V white paper is reviewed at a relatively low level while a Class III white paper is reviewed at several levels due to its higher risk.

Classification Description General Review ProcessClass I Device or

Performance Change

Reviewed by other CCBs: Not the FCCB.

Class II Device or Performance Change

Reviewed by other CCBs: Not the FCCB.

Class III Significant Risk Reviewed at the appropriate JET, FCCB, and then the affected PCCB(s).

Class IV Moderate Risk Reviewed at the appropriate JET, and then the FCCB.

Class V Low Risk Reviewed at the appropriate JET, and then the FCCB.

Project Team Very Low Risk No review required for change. Document at the project team level

Note: The FCCB is only concerned with reviewing the white papers described in the non-shaded rows

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Classifying Changes

Step 1: System levels

The first step at determing the amount of review a change will need is to identify its criticality. The Fab FCCB separates all the changes it manages into four different criticality "levels" that follow these general guidelines:

Level Short Description Risk AssessmentA Level Items that touch the

waferChanges to A-level systems potentially have the most risk due to their close proximity to the wafer.

B Level Items that provide critical input to the manufacturing process (usually process tools)

Changes to B-level systems carry less risk than A-level since they are one level removed, but the risk is still substantial.

C Level Items that are critical to building system operations, but do not impact the process tools.

Changes to C-level systems typically have very little direct risk to wafers. But problems with a C-level system can still stop a Fab from operating or cause wafer loss.

E Level Items that impact an environmental system

Changes to E-Level systems carry the risk of exceeding a sites chemical or gaseous effluent upper limit, impacting the sites operating permits.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


Step 2: Change degree determination

Once you’ve assessed the level of criticality for your white paper, the next step is to determine the degree of the change the system will be undergoing. This is called the change degree. Four different change degrees have been defined for the FCCB.

Change Degree

Description Example(s)

Change Degree 1

A change in the OUTPUT or PERFORMANCE of a particular system. This would also include items such as the system reliability.

A change in the temperature of the delivered UPW would be a degree 1 change for the UPW system.

Change Degree 2

A change in the DESIGN, or a DIFFERENT MATERIAL in the wetted stream, of a particular system which is not expected to affect the performance or output of the system.

Design example: A rearrangement of the order

of unit operations of the UPW system.

Material example: A lower grade of stainless

steel for high purity Nitrogen system laterials

Change Degree 3

A change in one or more CRITICAL COMPONENTS in a particular system. System controls, software, and monitoring are considered a critical component as well as the valves, fittings, etc.

A different high purity UPW valve which has essentially the same specifications as the prior valve and it is not expected to affect the quality or performance of the UPW system.

Change Degree 4

A change in one or more NON-CRITICAL COMPONENTS in a particular system.

A change in the distribution pump motor for the UPW system (the motor itself is not in the "wetted" stream of the UPW system).

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Determine the change degree

As depicted in the flowchart, the change degree determined by starting at the most critical and working down to the least critical level.

YesChange Degree 1

Change Degree 2

Change Degree 3

Change Degree 4

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Output ofthe system affected?

Change to design or to material inthe wetted stream?

Criticalcomponentaffected?

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


Step 3: Final Classification

The final step in determining the review procedures and approvals for a change compares the level of criticality to the change degree in the following matrix:

LEVELSChange Degree

LEVEL A LEVEL B LEVEL C Level E

1Different Output Class III Class IV Class V Class IV

2Different

Design/MaterialClass III Class V Class V Class IV

3Different Critical

ComponentClass IV Class V Project

TeamClass V

4Different Non-

Critical Component

Class V Project Team

Project Team

Project Team

Multiple changes

In the event of multiple changes, each change must be identified and classified accordingly. However, the overall white paper classification is determined by the "highest" class of all of the changes.

For example, if a modification contains one class III and three class IV changes, the overall classification is III.

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Change Classification Exercise

DirectionsThe following examples contain changes to facilities system that might appear for approval at any FCCB meeting. Read each case study and write the utility level, change degree, and final classification of the change in the space provided to the right of the example.

Example #1Case Study Write your answers here

Changes to the output temperature of the ambient UPW system. Level:

Change Degree:

Final Classification:


Install a different motor on a PCW pump. Level:

Change Degree:



Move the location of a AWN collection tank from the second floor to the first floor.

Level:

Change Degree:


(Continued)

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99



Add a second AWN tank next to an existing tank to increase the capacity of the overall system

Level:

Degree:



Upgrade the software package on a bulk chemical delivery system. Level:

Change Degree:



Add a new valve supplier to the specialty gas delivery system. Level:

Change Degree:


Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Equipment Installation Considerations

CE! RulesIf changes are made to the installation (based on comparison to the Master package), these must be documented in a white paper

CE! begins with the Equipment Master package. Master packages are:

standard installation template for a specific tool type

owned by Intel’s Central Design organization

originally based on the development factory’s reference tool

modified over time (via the FCCB process) to become the standard template to which each Location Specific Package (LSP) is compared

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


Cost Considerations

The FCCB has added cost considerations to its change criteria.

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


4. FCCB White Paper Guidelines

Overview

Purpose and description

Once you’ve determined the correct classification of the change you are making, it’s time to document the elements and get appropriate approval. The White Paper (WP) is the vehicle for documenting and reviewing changes in the FCCB process. It is extremely important that sufficient time and effort be spent by the change owner and/or project team to ensure that the WP is written correctly.

General WP rulesWhite papers must adhere to the following rules:

The white paper must be in the correct format.

The PCCB and other change control boards also use "white papers" but they utilize a different format. Make sure you use the current revision of the FCCB White Paper format.

Although the white paper needs to be succinct and brief enough to read in a short amount of time, all the sections of the white paper must be completed to a level of detail such that someone can read it on their own and have a very good understanding of:

The change being made

The compelling reason forcing this change

The timing of the change

The factories/equipment affected by the change

The groups that reviewed the white paper

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


The White Paper Review Process

The standard process

The review process used to approve a white paper depends directly on the type of white paper and its change classification.

Type Classification ProcedureEquipment installation

Class IV and V white papers

Reviewed initially at the JET and the JIQT, then at the FCCB. Facilities matching WP's (see Appendix 3) are

always reviewed through the FCCB and will be at least class IV (for both A and B level systems). However, if the matching WP contains a change that is a class III change (per the matrix), then the overall classification of the WP will be class III

Class III white paper

Reviewed first at the JET and JIQT, then at the FCCB, then at the affected PCCBs. The FCCB may need to route Class III white

papers to more than one PCCB, which will require more than one PCCB review

Facilities Systems

Class V Reviewed at the project team (or xJET), then sent to the FCCB for approval.

Class IV Reviewed at the project team (or xJET), and then sent to the FCCB for approval.

Class III Reviewed at the project team (or xJET), then the FCCB, and finally on to the appropriate PCCB for approval.

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Stages of approval

As outlined in the process illustrated below, white papers typically move through three stages:

Stage DescriptionPreliminary WP Outlines the plan that will be followed prior to making

a change. This includes the justification for considering the change (compelling reason), experiment(s) that will be run, success criteria, etc.

Approved Preliminary WP

Gives the "authorization" to run the test/experiment. Once the plan is executed and the data compiled and summarized, the final WP is written

Approved Final WP

With the exception of class III white papers, approved FCCB WP’s are issued a registration number for tracking purposes. Once the registration number is assigned, the change(s) can be implemented. Class III white papers must be approved at the

PCCB before being assigned a registration number.

Notes: If data already exists and additional experiments are not needed to support a change, a WP may come into the FCCB as a final WP. However, due to the risk associated with this route, the FCCB may decide that additional data is required. The WP originator is then required to write a preliminary WP that contains the new requirements.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


Procedural notes

Description Additional DetailsCompelling reason to change?

The “reason for change” is the crux of the WP. Without an acceptable reason for change, the WP will not be approved. Sometimes the reason for change is simple and unavoidable: site conditions mandate it, the component is no longer available at any cost, etc. However, most changes are avoidable so there needs to be a compelling reason for the change: Does the “reward” out weight the “risk.” Typically, compelling reasons for change of this type improve performance, save a considerable amount of money, fix a known limitation or problem, improve standardization, reduce construction time, etc. Personal preference/bias do not constitute a compelling reason without additional evidence or data.

Enough Data? The WP author needs to decide if adequate data exists to proceed with a final WP or if more data is required before the final decision is made on the change (preliminary WP). Unfortunately, there is no single formula to use to answer this question. The overall classification of the change can assist in the decision since class III changes involve more risk than class V changes. Therefore, a class III WP requires more data than a class V WP. If it is not entirely clear if enough data exists, the WP author should consult with WP sponsors or FCCB members for further direction.

Gather data; write final WP; return for review.

Its important to compare the data to the success criteria and show that the success criteria was met or exceeded. The WP author should use the preliminary WP and simply add the data in the correct parts of the WP along with the data analysis. Also, the preliminary WP number should be added to the WP on the first page.

Implement! This implies that the final WP is approved, an FCCB horizon number is issued, and the WP author is authorized to enact the subject change.

FCCB approved Class III final WP’s

Since a class III WP is not completely approved until its approved by the PCCB, the horizon number is not issued by the FCCB until it has been reviewed and approved by the PCCB.

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


General FCCB Administration Procedures

Details, details, details

Getting white papers to the FCCB:

White papers must be submitted electronically via e-mail.

During the FCCB review:

The FCCB may issue AR’s (Action Required) for approved white papers. If an item is identified as an FCCB AR, it is issued an owner, an issue date, a due date, and is tracked by the FCCB Administration until closure. Details regarding the FCCB AR Tracking System can be obtained from the FCCB Administrator.

Upon approval, the FCCB Administrator issues your white paper a horizon number.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


White Paper Elements

WP SectionsAn FCCB WP has 22 different sections, each of which asks for a particular piece of information. It is important to address each of the sections in an honest and unbiased fashion. For example, in the "Concerns & Considerations" section, plainly state the risks that are involved (to the wafers) in this change. They may be minor, but any change involves risk. A description of the sections follow.

Sec. Title Description/Key Elements0 None - located at

the top of page 1Note whether this is a preliminary or a final white paper.

1 Horizon Schedule Number

Leave blank until a number is supplied by the FCCB administrator.

2 Title Be descriptive and succinct and ensure that all facilities and/or equipment types are noted. This section will be used for key word searches on the web page.

3A Change Classification

This is the overall classification of the WP. If more than one change is included in the WP, note the highest change classification here (lowest numerical classification).

3B Facilities WPEquipment InstallationBlock Change

Note here whether this is an equipment installation or facilities WP. If a block change is required (an equipment installation modification that changes the footprint of the tool), additional approvals are necessary.

4 Date The date that the WP was written.5 Rev This is the current revision of the WP. If the WP is

modified subsequent to a presentation at a JET or other “public” forum, the revision number must be updated.

6 Originator/Site Identify the author of the WP and state which site or organization they represent.

(continued)

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


WP Sections Continued from previous page.

Sec. Title Description/Key Elements7 Sponsors This is a key part of the WP. Each affected factory

should have a sponsor listed in this section. If you put someone’s name down as a sponsor, its implied that they agree with 100% of your WP. Sending someone a e-mail message asking for inputs and not receiving a reply is not considered “agreement.” For each person listed, also list their site and position. For example, John Nelson, Fab 15, GSS Electrical Engineer.

8A Processes Affected

This section can be somewhat confusing. The purpose of this section is to note which processes are affected and whether the change affects a specific location, all new installations, and/or if retrofits are required. Examples: If a change is requested for Fab 14 only, the box:

Location Specific/P856 is checked. If the change is requested for all future P856 and

P858 factories, and it will be retrofitted in all P856 and P858 factories, the four boxes P856 and P858 / New Installs and Retrofit are checked.

8B Inter-Process Synergy

Does this change result in synergy between P848, P856, and P858? Check the appropriate box (YES, NO, N/A).

8C Synergy Summary If required, explain the plan that is to be followed to attain synergy between all process. If synergy is NOT required, justify the decision.

9 Factories Affected List each of the factories that are affected by this change.

10 Equipment Type or Factory Utilities Affected

List each of the equipment types or facilities system that are affected by this change.

11 Review Forums/ Approval Dates

List each of the review forums that have already approved the WP and the review forums that are planned. If a group has approved the WP, note the date that the approval was granted. If a group has not reviewed or approved the WP yet, leave the date section blank.

(continued)

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99



Sec. Title Description/Key Elements12 Description of

ChangeThis is one of the key sections of the WP. You can either use the table provided or delete the table and explain the change using other means. Make sure that each change is listed separately. Pay close attention to the parenthetical note in this section to ensure that all necessary data is included with the change (e.g., part number, material type, etc.).

13 Reason for Change

This is a very important section. It is imperative that the author discuss the compelling reasons for each change listed in section 12. Ensure that the benefits of the change are quantified. Alternative solutions which were considered and rejected can also be discussed in this section.

14 Additional Impacts

This section details any other impacts that result if this change is implemented (cost, operational expense, etc.). It is important to not simply write “N/A” in each of these sections. Also, see the FCCB Appendix on safety/EHS to determine if there is an environmental or safety impact and if other groups will need to review the WP.

15 Concerns and Considerations

This section is also commonly misunderstood. It is intended to assess all of the potential risks associated with this change in an unbiased and neutral way. Some authors are hesitant to list any concerns in this section because they feel that it suggests a weakness with the change. On the contrary, by listing all of the potential concerns, the audience can be assured that the author has evaluated all possible risks. Any change involves risk, albeit sometimes it is quite small. The author should try and anticipate all of the concerns that could be raised during the WP presentation. Alternative solutions can also be discussed in this section as well.

16 Qualification Plan For each concern listed in section 15, a qualification plan or discussion should be listed in this section. Some concerns require elaborate plans that may involve wafer testing or other experiments. Other concerns may only require some discussion and logical reasoning.

(continued)

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41



Sec. Title Description/Key Elements17 Recovery Plan if

Approach FailsIf the proposed change is unsuccessful, what will be done? Some changes may have the potential to fail several different ways. In this case, each failure mode may have a different recovery plan.

18 Specs, Controlled Documents, Drawings Affected.

List any/all documents that will be changed in support of or resulting from this change. The table is separated into three sections. Note which sections are affected and note the drawing name/number, owner, and the approximate date that it will be changed.

19 Data Summary This section is only completed for final white papers. Use the table provided for your data or add additional tables or text. If the data are extensive, attach an addendum and reference it from this section.

20 Implementation Plan

Explain how, when, and who will implement the change. It is important to note when each factory will make the change and who will “own” the implementation.

21 Follow Up and/or Monitor After Implementation

List everything that must be done after the change is made. Include owners and due dates. This section is typically filled out to gather additional information for future changes or to ensure that the existing change worked out as planned.

22 Supplemental Information

Place any additional or supporting information here.

Additional key notes

All sections of the white paper need to be addressed. Do not delete sections of the white paper that do not apply to the change. If a particular section does not apply to the change, note it as "N/A" and explain why it doesn't apply.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


Special considerations for section 8

Section 8 of a white paper deals with the scope of a change as it impacts the virtual factory. Descriptions and examples of each of the three types of changes are listed below.

Type of change

Description Example

Location specific

Implies change to a subset of the factories for a particular process.

P854 is run by Fabs A, B, and C. If the proposed change is going to be made at only Fab B, then the change is Location Specific for P854. On the other hand, if the proposed change would be made at Fabs A, B, and C, then it is not Location Specific.

New installs

Implies change to all new installations at all of the factories running the noted process.

P856 is run by Fabs D, E, and F. If the proposed change will be implemented at Fabs D, E, and F for all future installations, then the box P856/New Installs would be checked. This column does not address existing installations - see Retrofit below. It should also be noted that if the New Installs box is checked, this implies that a new standard is being proposed - this will likely affect the Master Package for equipment installation WP’s or the Master Spec for utility WP’s.

Retrofit Implies change to existing installations at all of the factories running the noted process, i.e., remove the existing installation and replace it with the new installation. This differs from the New Installs column in that it only affects existing installations and does not address new installations

P854 is run by Fabs A, B, and C. If a change is required on all existing installations at Fabs A, B, and C, then the P854/Retrofit box would be checked.

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


Section 8 flowchart

Does changeaffect all factories

running the process?

Will the changebe used for everynew installation?

No

Yes

Check theLocation Specific Box

Yes Check theNew Install Box

No

Will the change bemade on existing

installations?Yes

Check theRetrofit Box

No

Done!

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


White Paper Rejection

Common reasons for rejection

White papers are rejected for a variety of reasons. Sometimes the FCCB or FJET does agree with a particular change due to technical or strategic reasons. However, the majority of white papers are rejected because they are not written properly. A list of common reasons that white papers are rejected in the FCCB are listed below:

Wrong WP format

Missing key sponsors and/or review groups

Missing approval dates from review groups

Inadequate reason for change (reason not "compelling")

Stakeholders "agree to disagree" on CE! issues (not acceptable in most cases)

Inadequate or missing implementation plan

Additional impacts are not documented properly (cost, etc.)

Concerns/considerations are not fully documented

Qualification plan is missing or inadequate

Wrong revision of the white paper was submitted for review

Affected documents are not listed in the WP

Sponsors have not given any indication that they agree or disagree (no response is not ground for consent).

“Synergy” section not adequately addressed

“Recovery Plan If Approach Fails” section is not adequately addressed. (It is important to document what will be done if the proposed change does not work out as planned.)

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


5. Appendix 1: Environmental, Health, and Safety Issues

Safety guidelinesSome changes that are proposed to the FCCB involve environmental, health, or safety issues that may not directly impact the wafer process but are still important to consider. The additional impacts section of the FCCB white paper has line items which are meant to specifically address these issues. The following guidelines were extracted from the P854 PCCB Handbook to assist WP owners in identifying and addressing potential EHS issues. If in doubt about whether or not an FCCB change has an EHS impact, contact the FCT EHS group for assistance.

Impacts ExamplesEnvironmental Changes in quantities of production material or

water use A chemical substitution or change Change in the quantity or way a production

material or waste is disposed of, drained or exhausted from a process or preventive maintenance.

Safety/Health Ergonomics: change location or position of controls and other areas requiring employee interface

Change after safety engineering approval of equipment or install

Change to the way a production material is stored, handled, or delivered

Changes involving lasers, radiation, RF, UV, electric power or other hazardous energies

Change in exhaust ventilation Changes to PM methods, safety controls, or

protective equipment Change to a more combustible construction

material Change to a method of heating a process material

The potential impacts of any safety change needs review by site or FCT EHS representation site safety or the safety JET.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99


6. Appendix 2: FCCB Facility Systems Definitions

Rev 7 5/18/99 of 41


7. Appendix 3: FCCB/ACCB Interrelationships

ACCB?The ACCB is the Automation Change Control Board. It controls changes to software and hardware in much the same manner as the FCCB. Occasionally facilities or equipment changes interact with elements controlled by the ACCB. A few examples are listed below. When this occurs, approval from the ACCB is also required before the change can move forward.

Automated Material Handling System (AMHS) components:

Lot box and reticle stockers

Lot box openers

Overhead rails

Diffusion/Litho interbay rails

Computer room components and systems

VAX computers/systems

NCR computers/systems

X-terminals in the cleanroom

Station controllers in the cleanroom

Uninterruptable Power Supplies (UPSs) associated with any items listed above.

of 41 Rev 7 5/18/99