Brian, Regarding your question of how much acceptance SEMI S2-93 is being taken by the semiconductor industry, I believe that SEMI (the semiconductor industry's trade organization), at http://www.semi.org, would be most qualified to respond.
>From personal observation, SEMI S2-93 is quite well accepted in the U.S. semiconductor industry, most of the SEMATECH members (U.S. consortium of semiconductor device manufacturers) have some sort of requirement in their purchasing specifications regarding SEMI S2. In the last few years, there has even been a growing acceptance of SEMI S2 in Europe and Asia (e.g., Japan and Korea). While SEMI S2 was originally intended as a semiconductor industry guideline to help manufacturers strive towards a 'best design practice' and was never intended to be used as a 'compliance' verification document, some of the authorities having jurisdiction in the pacific northwest region of the U.S. have, however, mandated 'compliance' to SEMI S2 as a condition for equipment startup! Part of the SEMI S2 rewrite effort underway is attempting to address this perceived 'misapplication' of SEMI S2. Regards. Tin In a message dated 98-03-16 06:02:41 EST, [email protected] writes: << Regarding Jeff Collin and Tin Bear's comments on SEMI E33-94 I can confirm that CE marking is acceptible. We supplied some equipment to Intel and had no difficulty whatsoever. In passing SEMI E33-94 is part of a much larger specification SEMI S2-93 can anyone in the group advise me how much acceptance of this standard is being taken by the semiconductor industry. We have had only two cases Intel themselves and a "Japanised version from Hitachi Brian Harlowe * opinions expressed here are personal and in no way reflect the position of VG Scientific >>
