For Military or High Rel work I would be strongly tempted to look at EOS/ESD 20.20-2007, except make at least some if not all of the Optional requirements be Required, else you don't have the whole package there to ensure that if any one element fails (ESD training and certification, grounded workstations and shelves, grounded operator, ESD smock, conductive floor, environmental controls, etc.) you will probably not harm the CCAs because the rest of the elements are still in place. It gives you an option to not have to perform containment action if one part of the system fails. For example, if it is discovered that a single bench has a defective ground connection during the monthly testing, but the operators are required to wear ESD shoes and ESD footstraps and check them daily with few or no failures noted, and engage a Continuous Monitor attached to their wrist and the monitors were all working, they all were observed wearing their smocks, the smocks are of the type that have conductive elastic wrist sleeves, the operators are trained to not wear hoodies outside of the smock or orange cat hair sweaters, the humidity was controlled and charted and did not drop below 20% during that timeframe (since the last bench check, which would be a maximum of 30 days), and the last quarterly report shows that the floor tribolectric charge test and the connection from the floor to the building ground passed, and nobody tied two or three giant Mylar balloons filled with helium that said "Happy Retirement, Mabel!" to any operator's benchtop mat connector, then the probability of all the other systems negating any potential issue with the single ungrounded workbench justifies no further containment action is necessary. Pretty much the same with 1686C, I think. But 20.20-2007 with Options is just too risky, although it may make perfect sense for building commercial product. The other factor is whether or not any Class 0 parts are present, military or commercial. If so, then you pretty much have to go with every element, including ionizers, where needed. And no pink poly! Join the effort to do away with pink poly altogether. -----Original Message----- From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Douglas Pauls Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 8:59 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: [TN] ESD standards Good morning all, A quick question. Hypothetically, if you wanted to avoid writing an ESD control program, and use an industry standard, what would that standard be? Doug Pauls Rockwell Collins --------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0 To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 ----------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0 To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 -----------------------------------------------------