“…The EPA shall have clearly identifies boundaries”.
So, from this perspective, should those boundaries be necessarily documented (map with EPA areas)? (We do have those clear boundaries with ESD yellow tape defined on the floor, but not a map in our procedure necessarily, because our factory is constantly changing due our NPI environment.).
From what I read, and in my understanding, there’s no need to document this, since is not stated as so.
“Clearly defined boundaries” refers to the factory floor itself. Although it may be a good idea to create a map of the EPAs, it is not required per ANSI/ESD S20.20.
@AndyN, Also the question was raised based on clause 7.1
“…The ESD control program plan shall identify the areas within the Organization that are a part of the overall ESD control program”
So is it mandatory or what could be something we can do for a constantly changing environment?. Its impossible to have that documented or updated couple of times in a month or two… (anyhow, we always use ESD tape to mark the areas).
I believe you could state in the ESD control plan that EPAs are identified by your ESD yellow tape on the floor. If you move things around, as long as you re-tape the new EPAs, you would be fine. In this way you wouldn’t need to specifically map it out.
Andy is absolutely correct. I would offer that you document your ESD areas in your control plan in general terms and like Andy said, how you will identify them.
Area designations should be a part of your training plan as well.
The essence is that a person needs to be aware that he is entering an EPA. Or other way around that you don’t enter the EPA unless you have your ESD protection in order.
Although ESD20.20 does not explicitly state that this standard must be followed, in actual factories, it is very necessary to establish EPA maps in both EPA areas and non-EPA areas. Especially when training new employees who are joining the company, it is extremely important to clearly define the regional requirements. The determination of the scope for conducting ESD audits is also of great importance! If it is all within the EPA area, then there is no need to establish it!
Totally understand but the context of a rapid prototype and constant layout changes, makes it administratively imposible to handle. That’s why we stick to the standard and have a better approach by having our areas defined by the ESD yellow tape written down instead of a layout itself, which has worked for us in a wonderful way (And training is also aligned with that).
Greetings of the day from India to all the members on this forum platform
As stated by one and all, it is basically a culture and awareness documentation required both physically and in the ESD control plan of the facility though it is not explicitly stated in either of the two standards.
In all walks of our life certain deviations we make to one’s one comfort and better communication understanding for unknown visitors as every person individually cannot be told about such things but by way of some documentation it is always good to develop such necessary culture for the benefit of all and the facility for which such culture would be of prime importance . It is something like caution advertisements spread out by way of different media to reach out to the public.
ESD Control is basically like an insurance policy we take for ourselves, our health , our valuable movable and immovable assets. The awareness on importance of insurance is created publicly on various methodologies to reach out to the public.
Thus , we can conclude that YES that Awareness point of view , it should be made mandatory for the usage ESD caution messages in the right form and at the right locations