National Clothesline

What was introduced two years ago as an almost complete ban on the use of perc in drycleaning in the city of Philadelphia has become something less, but the city’s drycleaners still face tough regulations.

The original proposal called for perc to be phased out within two years in all drycleaning operations except free-standing plants. At the time, the city said there were eight such plants that would be allowed to continue using perc if the regulations were adopted.

Drycleaners and industry trade associations argued vehemently against the proposal in a series of meetings with local officials who have now scaled back the plan so that only co-residential locations or those located next to “sensitive receptors” such as daycare centers, grade schools and healthcare facilities will be prevented from using perc. They would have until Dec. 31, 2013 to remove perc equipment from their plants.

Cleaners in co-commercial situations — those that share a wall, ceiling or floor with other businesses — would be able to continue using perc but they will have to meet a number of requirements. Primarily they will have to show that the airborne concentration of perc in the adjoining establishment is no more than 40 ppb.

These cleaners would have to obtain operational licenses and conduct quarterly air monitoring to ensure that they remain within the 40 ppb limit. They will also have to meet equipment and maintenance requirements, such as changing door gaskets every two years.

One requirement that may prove difficult for some is that of maintaining a 25-foot buffer between emission points and all openings in nearby occupancies. Co-located facilities would also have to use a vapor barrier around the drycleaning equipment or install a professionally designed exhaust system.

Stand-alone facilities will not escape regulation. They must use at least fourth-generation equipment with a drying sensor and a spill containment system.

The city regulations also set forth a long list of maintenance and record-keeping requirements.

A late addition to the regulations was a complete ban on n-Propyl Bromide (nPB) which is sold in the industry as a replacement for perc under the trade names Fabrisolv and DrySolv. Adam Finkel, a toxicologist who was commissioned by the air board to assist in writing the regulations, urged that nPB not be allowed as a drycleaning solvent.

In his report, Finkel said the goal of the regulation should be to get cleaners to switch to safer alternatives. He does not consider nPB safer.

“In my expert opinion, far from being ‘non hazardous,’ nPB is a potent neurotoxin, and has recently been shown to be a potent animal carcinogen,” Finkel said. “To a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, equal exposures to nPB will harm more residents and workers than would exposures to perc: both are harmful substances, but nPB is the more harmful of the two.”

Finkel said in his report that forbiding nPB in the Philadelphia regulations “is a laudable and forward-thinking improvement to the federal (EPA) drycleaning rule, which will, in my opinion, increase risks to workers and nearby residents by encouraging the substitution of the (federally) unregulated nPB for perc in locales other than Philadelphia.”

The nPB issue, among others, could be addressed at a public hearing this month. Comments and requests for a public hearing on the proposal were being received until Aug. 1. If a hearing is requested it would be held Aug. 12.

The Philadelphia Air Pollution Control Board would then review the comments and the regulation for a vote on Sept. 29. The regulations would go into effect 10 days thereafter.



								National Clothesline


						Perc ban scaled back in Phila. Complete ban on nPB is added to city’s latest regulatory plan What was introduced two years ago as an almost complete ban on the use of perc in drycleaning in the city of Philadelphia has become something less, but the city’s drycleaners still face tough regulations. The original proposal called for perc to be phased out within two years in all drycleaning operations except free-standing plants. At the time, the city said there were eight such plants that would be allowed to continue using perc if the regulations were adopted. Drycleaners and industry trade associations argued vehemently against the proposal in a series of meetings with local officials who have now scaled back the plan so that only co-residential locations or those located next to “sensitive receptors” such as daycare centers, grade schools and healthcare facilities will be prevented from using perc. They would have until Dec. 31, 2013 to remove perc equipment from their plants. Cleaners in co-commercial situations — those that share a wall, ceiling or floor with other businesses — would be able to continue using perc but they will have to meet a number of requirements. Primarily they will have to show that the airborne concentration of perc in the adjoining establishment is no more than 40 ppb. These cleaners would have to obtain operational licenses and conduct quarterly air monitoring to ensure that they remain within the 40 ppb limit. They will also have to meet equipment and maintenance requirements, such as changing door gaskets every two years. One requirement that may prove difficult for some is that of maintaining a 25-foot buffer between emission points and all openings in nearby occupancies. Co-located facilities would also have to use a vapor barrier around the drycleaning equipment or install a professionally designed exhaust system. Stand-alone facilities will not escape regulation. They must use at least fourth-generation equipment with a drying sensor and a spill containment system. The city regulations also set forth a long list of maintenance and record-keeping requirements. A late addition to the regulations was a complete ban on n-Propyl Bromide (nPB) which is sold in the industry as a replacement for perc under the trade names Fabrisolv and DrySolv. Adam Finkel, a toxicologist who was commissioned by the air board to assist in writing the regulations, urged that nPB not be allowed as a drycleaning solvent. In his report, Finkel said the goal of the regulation should be to get cleaners to switch to safer alternatives. He does not consider nPB safer. “In my expert opinion, far from being ‘non hazardous,’ nPB is a potent neurotoxin, and has recently been shown to be a potent animal carcinogen,” Finkel said. “To a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, equal exposures to nPB will harm more residents and workers than would exposures to perc: both are harmful substances, but nPB is the more harmful of the two.” Finkel said in his report that forbiding nPB in the Philadelphia regulations “is a laudable and forward-thinking improvement to the federal (EPA) drycleaning rule, which will, in my opinion, increase risks to workers and nearby residents by encouraging the substitution of the (federally) unregulated nPB for perc in locales other than Philadelphia.” The nPB issue, among others, could be addressed at a public hearing this month. Comments and requests for a public hearing on the proposal were being received until Aug. 1. If a hearing is requested it would be held Aug. 12. The Philadelphia Air Pollution Control Board would then review the comments and the regulation for a vote on Sept. 29. The regulations would go into effect 10 days thereafter.