Study results prompt SIA to examine whether fab chemicals imperil workers' health

The semiconductor industry's main U.S. trade association says it will consider conducting an extensive examination of the long-term effects of fab chemicals on employees' health. The decision is a qualified victory for industry critics who assert that chipmakers have ignored strong anecdotal evidence that the everyday use of toxic chipmaking chemicals has caused cancer among fab workers.

The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) will conduct a "preliminary review" in order to determine whether a further "meaningful retrospective" study is possible. The association's decision comes in response to recommendations made by a committee of scientists appointed by SIA early in 2000. The Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) evaluated whether fab workers are at a heightened risk of developing cancer. The committee submitted its findings in October 2001, and SIA released its response March 19.

SIA, which represents 90% of microchip production in the United States, says SAC concluded there is "no affirmative evidence of increased cancer risk among U.S. semiconductor factory workers." However, the committee pointed out that not enough data exist at present to determine whether workers' exposure to chemicals in the fab increases their cancer risk, according to SIA.

SIA should examine whether a retrospective epidemiological study is scientifically feasible, SAC concluded. If it is feasible, then the association should conduct the study to determine the potential occupational health risks to fab workers. The committee also recommended that SIA consider creating a uniform health surveillance program.

The industry association says it will follow several of SAC's recommendations. Primarily, it will conduct the preliminary review to see whether it should proceed with the epidemiological study. SIA says it also will develop common job descriptions and language "for collecting and maintaining relevant data." In addition, the association pledged to assess how to maintain the data and use them for health surveillance.

Furthermore, SIA says it will institute a screening process for new chipmaking materials, require toxicology tests and disclosure from chemical suppliers, and examine process equipment and process design specifications. SIA says these steps go beyond SAC's purview.

"Additional chemical stewardship initiatives were not within the scope of the SAC's charter or recommendations," points out George Scalise, president of SIA.

SIA's decision may not be enough to cool the simmering controversy over the potential health risks of working in fabs, however. Critics such as the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition have argued that the industry has dodged calls to settle the issue by conducting an in-depth study.

Although SIA has touted its annual U.S. government ranking in the top 5% of all U.S. industries in worker safety, critics argue that exposure in the cleanroom to chemicals such as arsine, benzene, and HCl heighten the risk of cancer and miscarriages. Anecdotal evidence suggests that a risk exists, critics say, and some chipmakers are facing lawsuits brought by family members of those who have died of cancer. In the United Kingdom, government regulators are investigating alleged high rates of cancers at a National Semiconductor plant in Greenock, Scotland.

SIA points out that it backed a study in 1989 by UC Davis that resulted in the banning of ethylene-based glycol ethers because they posed a risk to women's reproductive health. The association has called that survey the largest such epidemiological study performed by a private industry.

SIA says the scientific committee was headed by David Wegman, the chairman of the department of work environment at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, College of Engineering. Eight experts in the fields of medicine, epidemiology, and toxicology took part in the study by visiting sites and examining data. The panel included two representatives from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, SIA notes.

Molly Tuttle, SIA's communications director, says the association took five months to review SAC's study and "go back to the board for approval." SIA will take the next few months to "figure out the scope" of the preliminary review, decide on a time line and a budget, and "run those by the board in June." After receiving board approval, the association will proceed with the preliminary study, she says.

Will SIA's response to the criticism quell the criticism? "That's always been there," Tuttle replies, "and we try not to let that drive what we do. We think this is the right thing to do."