Nick Filipp PhD, CIH Principal Consultant Environmental & Occupational Risk Management, Inc. (EORM) February 3, 200

1. Semiconductor Industry Association Worker Health Project Primary Prevention Initiative: Exploring Opportunities to Further Minimize Potential Equipment-related Exposures Nick Filipp PhD, CIHPrincipal ConsultantEnvironmental & Occupational Risk Management, Inc. (EORM)February 3, 2005

2. Agenda • Background • Primary Prevention Initiative • Study Team • Study Participants • Study Approach • Results • Conclusions • Potential Opportunities for Improvement • Acknowledgements © 2005 EORM, Inc.

3. Background • In response to negative publicity surrounding lawsuits, SIA commissioned a Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) to evaluate potential for increased cancer risks among fab workers • SAC primary objective: conduct an independent, objective analysis of whether potential semiconductor "clean room" chemical exposures are likely to elevate cancer risk and, based on this analysis, make appropriate recommendations to SIA • SAC concluded: no affirmative evidence of increased risk of cancer for fab population. • SAC also reported: insufficient data exists to conclude whether exposure to chemicals or other hazardous materials has or has not increased cancer risk • SAC provided recommendations for further studies. © 2005 EORM, Inc.

4. Background (cont’d) • SIA outlined various follow-up actions known collectively as the “Worker Health Project” • SIA recommendations included Primary Prevention Initiative (PPI) Tasks • PPI Tasks • Designed to further strengthen ongoing efforts to ensure a safe workplace • Went beyond the SAC's recommendations • Designed to provide member companies with a broader base of knowledge to help enhance their existing worker safety programs. © 2005 EORM, Inc.

5. Primary Prevention Initiative: Exploring Opportunities to Further Minimize Potential Equipment-Related Exposures • The PPI Committee reviewed the broad spectrum of chemical operations in the Fab and selected four 200 mm process areas for evaluation: • Etch • Metal Etch • Polysilicon Etch • Dielectric Etch • Implant • Thin Films - CVD • Metal Deposition • Dielectric Deposition • Thermal Oxidation • Thin Films - Epitaxy • Silicon Epitaxy © 2005 EORM, Inc.

6. Study Objectives: • Identify opportunities for capital equipment suppliers to demonstrate further hazard mitigation through changes to normal operation, preventive and corrective maintenance procedures and tool design • Identify alternatives that might provide opportunities to reduce and/or eliminate the need for administrative controls as the primary means of preventing unsafe exposures © 2005 EORM, Inc.

7. EORM’s Role • PPI Committee retained EORM to perform an assessment of these fab areas to identify further minimization of equipment-related chemical exposures during preventive and corrective maintenance • EORM Project Team: • Nick Filipp, PhD, CIH, Principal Investigator and Principal Consultant • Andrew McIntyre, CIH, Managing Principal • Andrea Sevier, CIH, Senior EHS Consultant • Patrick Tierney, CIH, Principal Consultant © 2005 EORM, Inc.

8. Study Participants • SIA Member Companies • Participating sites selected based on availability of equipment included in the study • Four Member Companies provided access for study objectives • Site EHS personnel provided access to documentation, technical personnel, and equipment © 2005 EORM, Inc.

9. Study Participants (cont) • Capital Equipment Suppliers • Participant Companies • Applied Materials • ASM of America • Axcelis Technologies • Novellus Systems • Tokyo Electron America • Varian Semiconductor Equipment Associates (VSEA) • Two levels of participation • Provided access to documentation, technical personnel, and equipment at their facilities • Provided access to documentation only © 2005 EORM, Inc.

10. Study Approach • Understand Process and Procedures • Identify Potential Chemical Exposures • Process chemicals • Primary process by-products • Secondary process by-products • Maintenance chemicals • Review maintenance manuals and specifications • Review available qualitative and quantitative exposure data • Interview process and maintenance engineering and EHS staff • Observe selected maintenance operations • Ask a lot of questions • Record data on JHA tool © 2005 EORM, Inc.

11. Data Collection Tool © 2005 EORM, Inc.

12. Study Results • For the processes studied there were common considerations with regard to potential for chemical exposure • Potential sources of exposure: • Process chemicals • Reactive species formed during process • Byproducts formed from reactions of various species with: • Each other • Wafer substrate • Materials of construction • Exhaust system components • Secondary byproducts formed when equipment is opened to atmosphere • Maintenance chemicals • Other considerations: • Parts cleaning • Preventive maintenance vs. corrective maintenance © 2005 EORM, Inc.

13. Study Results - Exposure Controls • During normal operation chemical exposure is primarily mitigated by engineering controls supplemented with some administrative controls: • Process contained under reduced pressure • Chambers and process modules equipped for inert purging • Ventilated enclosures for hazardous chemical distribution systems • Continuously welded gas delivery lines • Monitored process exhaust to remove emissions • Interlocks to place equipment in “safe state” • Toxic gas monitoring • Small quantities of chemicals used in each batch • Operator training • Detailed SOPs • PPE • Chemical exposure is well controlled during normal operation • Some instances of low level fugitive emissions © 2005 EORM, Inc.

14. Study Results - Exposure Controls • During maintenance some of the engineering controls in effect during normal operation are by passed or shut down. Supplemental engineering controls and additional administrative controls are implemented: • Facility provided maintenance exhaust • Portable toxic gas detection equipment • Parts engineered for facile removal/replacement • Means to seal contaminated parts upon removal • Exhausted disassembly and dirty parts storage facilities • Dedicated facility vacuum systems or portable HEPA vacuums • Development of detailed procedures for maintenance tasks • Cycle purging of toxic gas lines • Cordoning off and evacuating areas prior to maintenance • Training of maintenance personnel (with regard to chemical hazards) • PPE to prevent dermal contact and inhalation • Project Team noted that end-users have implemented innovative controls or techniques used to minimize exposures © 2005 EORM, Inc.

15. Conclusions • Existing combinations of engineering, administrative, and personal protective equipment controls were effective at maintaining airborne chemical concentrations below occupational exposure limits during normal production operations and during maintenance. • Opportunities were identified to • Reduce reliance on procedural controls and PPE • Reduce low level fugitive emissions © 2005 EORM, Inc.

16. Potential Opportunities for Improvement For Semiconductor Company Consideration: • Provide additional exhaust ventilation flow through the tool, or • Provide portable exhaust ventilation devices for emissions from open tool components • Introduce air into an enclosed tool to allow chemical reactions to take place while the process is still contained • Employ comprehensive approach where QEAs, PPE assessments and IH air sampling is used to validate effectiveness of controls • Provide a higher level of EHS guidance in PM procedural documentation (internal), where appropriate • Include LOTO procedures for all sources of energy in maintenance specifications • Expand channels of communication between suppliers and end users to share innovative EHS practices © 2005 EORM, Inc.

17. Potential Opportunities for Improvement For Equipment Supplier Consideration: • Evaluate feasibility and advisability of designing exhaust ventilation through tool • Enable the introduction of air into the reaction chamber prior to it being opened • Establish a process for communicating new supplier maintenance manuals to MC • Communicate equipment parts cleaning and decontamination procedures to MC • Provide precautionary courses of action when normal process clean steps can not be completed © 2005 EORM, Inc.

18. Acknowledgements • The EORM Project Team would like to acknowledge the fact that EHS professionals from the equipment suppliers and member companies participating in this study have been very active in investigating and researching various health and safety issues and frequently share their experiences through publications, presentations, and specialized classes taught at professional meetings. • The EORM Project Team would also like to gratefully acknowledge the Production, Maintenance, Product Safety, and EHS personnel at the participating companies for providing the opportunity to observe maintenance procedures, review documentation, and ask endless questions. Full EORM Report posted to the SIA Web Page Reference SIA’s President George Scalise Report on Worker Health and Discussion on PPI http://www.sia-online.org/iss_whs.cfm © 2005 EORM, Inc.