“8D”

The 8 Discipline MethodologyAn example

1D- Define the teamDescription Name Job Title

Team Leader Mr. Z R&D Engineering

Sponsor Mr. J Dir, Quality

Team member Ms. K Customer Quality Engineer

Team member Mr. V Mgr, Hivac Process Engineering

Team Member Ms. S Hivac Process Engineer

Team Member Mr. H Dir, Process Engineering

Team Member Mr. P Dir, R&D

Team Member Mr. C. Customer Acct Mgr

2D- Problem DescriptionProblem DescriptionWHAT Two Device #1382 MN7UA qualification lots were scrapped

due to an incorrect implant recipe which resulted in lower than expected breakdown voltages.

WHERE Issue found at customer site

WHEN 3/10/2011

WHO Customer

MAGNITUDE Process release delayed as qualification lots will need to be reprocessed through factory.

4

3D – Containment Containment Action Yes

NoN/A

Planned CompDate

Actual CompDate

Owner Remarks

LOTS

1 Impacted lots scrapped? Yes 3/10/11 3/10/11 Mr. Z Lot 1234 was scrapped at the customer site where issue was detected

2 Impacted lots that need to be recalled from customer?

No

3 Verified other lots that may be affected? Yes 3/10/11 3/10/11 Mr Z The second impacted lot, 1235, was scrapped at TowerJazz. Lot J23084.1 was not impacted by this issue.

4 Replacement lots needed? Yes 3/10/11 3/10/11 Mr. C Replacement lot 1236 has been started. Second replacement lot will be started in one week to prevent lots from running through the line at the same time.

EQUIPMENT

1 Stop tool / Process? No Recipe issue was found and corrected on all implanters

2 Verify other implant recipes? Yes 3/10/11 3/10/11 Ms. S All implant recipes were validated on all tools

D4 - Root Cause Analysis – 5 Why Why were two of the Device 333 qualification lots scrapped?

– The lots were impacted by an issue which caused lower than expected breakdown voltages at customer test.

Why did the lots have a lower than expected breakdown voltage?– The lots received the incorrect implant dose.

Why was the implant dose incorrect?– A change to the implant was received on 1/27. The change was

implemented on all implanters but one tool, which was accidentally missed.

Why was the one tool missed?– Oversight. Only one hivac engineer was on site the day the change

was implemented. Typically a second engineer would validate the changes, but in this case there was no one present to double check the implementation and one tool was missed.

5

D4 - Escape Root Cause Analysis – 5 Why

6

Why was the recipe error not detected by the system?‒ SUPPLIER has an automated system that validates implant recipes on the

equipment against the defined recipe in the implant work instruction. In this instance the implant recipe was not listed in the implant work instruction so there the validation did not occur.

‒ Why was the implant recipe not listed in the implant work instruction?‒ The process is still in development phase. Recipes are typically transferred to the

implant work instruction when the process moves from development to prototype phase.

7

5D / 6D - Permanent Corrective Action and Verification – Root Cause

Corrective Action Verification (Yield results, related monitors, DOE results, tool performance, etc…)

Potential Risk due to Corrective Action Implementation – Enter N/A if no associated risks

Related Spec/ FMEA

Owner Planned Comp Date

Actual Comp Date/Status

1 Add staffing to enable verification of all recipe/sequence changes through process control technician

Sequence/Recipe Verification Checklist

Delayed Availability of Recipes after Changes

FCD-1448 MR. D. 4/30/2011 Hiring has begun and will completed along with necessary training by 4/30/11

8

5D / 6D - Permanent Corrective Action and Verification – Escape Root Cause

Corrective Action Verification (Yield results, related monitors, DOE results, tool performance, etc…)

Potential Risk due to Corrective Action Implementation – Enter N/A if no associated risks

Related Spec/ FMEA

Owner Planned Comp Date

Actual Comp Date/Status

1 Add DEFINED recipes to implant work instruction

QSI work instruction updated and released

None NPB WI-0502 MR. S. 4/15/2011

7D Preventive Action• Multiple recipe changes are made in the factory on a daily basis. Most are

fairly small in nature and result from changes in the tools over the process kit lifetimes (CMP pad life, Novellus dep time between wet cleans, metal dep changes over the life of the target, etc). Historically TowerJazz has required a double check validation for all recipe changes, with much success, though on rare instances we continue to experience mistakes. To make the system more robust SUPPLIER is adding one process technician to each shift to manage all recipe modifications throughout the factory (implant, diffusion, wet, thin films, etch, photo, cmp). The technicians will validate recipe changes utilizing sequence/recipe verification checklists developed by process engineering. The system will be more robust in that:

– Recipe changes will be the primary responsibility of the technicians. Their job function will be to ensure the recipe changes are correct.

– The technicians will carry a master log listing all the changes made on their shift. These logs will be available for review by process engineering management each day, allowing another level of validation for the changes made.

10

8D

Thank the Team