National Clothesline

I have been in the drycleaning business for 26 years. After two years of involvement in the business, my wife, Betsy, and I became owners in the drycleaning industry. I have worked many hours and cleaned many clothes in those years.

Upon ownership in the business in 1980, we needed to make a decision about drycleaning equipment. Questions were revolving regarding perc as a potential health risk (a possible carcinogen). At that point in time (1980), we decided not to take a chance with perc, remain with Stoddard solvent, and invest in a Hoyt Petromiser Reclaimer. For 24 years, we have prespotted, cleaned in a transfer machine, and dried the clothes in a reclaimer.

In 1985, questions were raised regarding filter disposal. I called my South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, and asked them to test my drain filter and advise of methods of disposal.

The [department’s letter] to me stated that the properly drained filter, such as the one I gave to them for testing, may be disposed of at a sanitary landfill. For the next ten years, I went along my merry way cleaning dirty clothes and providing service for my customers.

Then, in 1995, I became aware of a national effort to set up a national cleanup fund for drycleaners. It was at this time that I began to study the drycleaning industry and recognize we were composed of two separate parts — one petroleum, the other perchloroethylene.

After much research of the solvent mileage of perc vs. petroleum and information gained from equipment suppliers, I argued that the proposed federal law was unfair to the petroleum cleaners. At that time, my argument was based on solvent mileage of perc vs. petroleum. Since that time, I have come to realize that the cost of cleanup of perc vs. petroleum is a major problem when attempting to combine the two into a single cleanup fund. Perc costs a lot more to clean up!

In 1995, South Carolina had a group of drycleaners working hard to follow the Florida model for a state fund and also to have this passed into law for South Carolina drycleaners. I know petroleum cleaners have pollution exposure. I am also aware that cleanup cost could wipe out most cleaners.

However, in 1995, the South Carolina proposed cleanup fund (unlike the Florida law) did not remove any liability from the drycleaner that joined the fund. The $2 per gallon tax was too high for petroleum solvent when compared to the amount of solvent bought by a typical perc cleaner (about 100 gallons, or $1,000 tax a year) vs. a typical petroleum cleaner (about 1,500 gallons or $3,000 tax a year).

The hardworking drycleaners that were trying to put this into effect in South Carolina offered the petroleum drycleaners an opt-out of the South Carolina law for the drycleaners’ cleanup fund. We accepted that offer, and the South Carolina law was passed. The South Carolina law, in my opinion, does not remove liability, and rates all contaminated sites for cleanup (one to more than three hundred thus far).

While I realize petroleum cleaners have some liability problems, I do not think they are as severe as are the perc contamination. Since 1995, I have discovered that most asphalt roads in the United States that are over eight years old had Stoddard solvent. As part of the first stage of the asphalting process, “cut back asphalt” was made into a more liquid form by cutting it back with Stoddard solvent. this is still done across the United States today. Stoddard solvent was sprayed on every asphalt road laid more than eight years ago. Asphalt itself is in the same hydrocarbon family as Stoddard solvent.

The largest purchaser of Stoddard solvent is not the drycleaning industry. That honor goes to the agriculture industry. Stoddard solvent is used with pesticides and sprayed on crops all over the United States. It is sprayed over fields of carrots, parsley, and other vegetables with recommendations of 40 to 60 gallons of Stoddard solvent per acre. Our family of solvents (hydrocarbons) are used in pesticides — Astro Permethrin contains 25 percent Stoddard solvent and Roundup contains Stoddard solvent, also. Promethrin is sprayed at rates up to 1.6 pounds active ingredient per acre to control insects in the forest.

I also discovered that Stoddard solvent refined from crude oil (what we use) is covered by the “Petroleum Exclusion” offered in the EPA Superfund law (CERCLA). This means the joint liability parts of CERCLA do not apply to the solvent refined from crude oil.

As a drycleaner. I purchased $1 million of pollution insurance that costs me $2,000 per year. If a claim is made, I have $1 million of protection from a lawsuit for assessment and for cleanup. Also, I have third-party protection if needed. I have no storage tanks or gravity-fed solvent lines. I hand pump solvent into my machines. I have containment around my whole drycleaning area, and I use a IIIA solvent (142).

I know perc cleaners have a major problem. I feel to force new operators and petroleum operators into a fund when no one knows how much money will be needed to cover the ultimate cost is unfair. Perhaps the answer is a voluntary group of perc cleaners (facing potential sky high cleanup costs) pooling their resources to buy protection, if and when its members are forced to cleanup. The answer is not to make operators that chose to avoid perc for more than 20 years into a fund to cleanup what they did not create, nor benefit for years from the savings in operation costs realized by perc cleaners.

Petroleum was a good alternative solvent in 1978 and I still feel good about it now. We should not be forced into state funds.