As a former manager of cleanroom laundries, I certainly agree with Robert Scholler’s observations Controlled Environments, January 2006) that energy costs are a major cost component in the decision to operate an on-premise cleanroom garment facility. However, by far the largest single cost driver is labor, and the associated benefits. In the U.S. this cost component has remained resolutely stuck at around 50% of total cleanroom laundry costs as, ironically, the unskilled labor needed cannot be economically substituted for with automated equipment. If the workers in cleanroom laundries earned more, they could lose their jobs to automatic folding and packaging machinery, as we have witnessed at cleanroom laundries elsewhere around the world.

Scholler’s larger an environment comparable to that in which semiconductors are made is also extremely valid. A corollary is that the laundry industry is ill-equipped to differentiate between various customers’ succeeds in dictating that its garments be processed in a Class 1 environment, then all customers’

We are seeing an increasing trend toward cleanroom “OPLs”: that is, on-premise laundries. We recently completed an assignment with a major medical-device manufacturer who we assisted in the development and start-up of its own OPL.
They will save a significant amount of money, and have cleanroom garments that are more than adequate for their needs, rather than paying, through the face-mask, for a standard that is higher than they will ever require.

The ultimate irony concerning the cost of cleanroom garments is that for many companies a 30% expense reduction is within their control. Our research has shown that at even some of the most sophisticated technology companies, clean-room garment use consistently runs at one third more than it should. There are many reasons for this, but it boils down to the issue of personal choice. When highly educated, well-paid, employees are required to don anonymous, uncomfortable garments, they will often rip open several bagged clean garments in search of the one that they personally believe will be the least onerous to wear. There are ways to address this, and some of those same sophisticated companies are taking steps to address this issue, cognizant that they can only squeeze the laundries so far.

Tony Rutt, Partner,CleanFit Systems LLC,PO Box 10932,Portland,OR 97296.He may be reached at 503-241-8793 or tony.rutt@cleanfitsystems.com