Pressing Issues

Environment Minister announces actions to reduce the threat from four toxic chemicals.

Ottawa - February 10, 1997 Environment Minister Sergio Marchi today announced that his department will proceed with recommendations to significantly reduce the release of four toxic chemicals into the environment.

A mix of federal regulations under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), national standards and other measures will be used to reduce the release of the toxic substances. The recommendations for action came from representatives of industry, non governmental organizations, provincial governments and other federal departments.

"The need for action in dealing with toxic substances is clear," said Minister Marchi. "The federal government's decision to take action on these substances is based on our commitment to protect human health and the environment."

The four substances targeted for action (tetrachloroethylene, otherwise known as PERC, trichloroethylene, benzidine and dichlorobenzidine) have been assessed and declared toxic under CEPA. They are used in the dry cleaning industry, as degreasing solvents and in the manufacture of dyes and pigments.

Furthermore, as part of the government's campaign to eliminate toxics, Minister Marchi has made scientific investigation of the link between environmental contaminants and effects on hormonal and reproductive systems a priority. "I believe that the world community must, in particular, be co-ordinating its research efforts and sharing its knowledge to guide us in making the right regulatory decisions and policies on endocrine disrupters," added the Minister.

Since the 1970s, Canadian scientists have been at the forefront of wildlife research which uncovered reproductive problems in fish and wildlife produced by endocrine disrupters. In some cases, endocrine disrupters affect the development and reproductive ability of organisms, and there is concern that they could endanger the very survival of some species.

Federal initiatives to manage toxic substances come under the umbrella of CEPA. The government recently introduced a strengthened CEPA into Parliament to improve legislative tools to deal more effectively with emerging problems such as substances which can harm endocrine systems and reproduction. The new CEPA stresses pollution prevention and protection of the environment and the health of Canadians from toxic substances.

For further Information, please contact:

Dr. Kelly Munkittrick, Senior Research Scientist,
Environment Canada.......................................(905) 336-4864
Roger White, Office of the Minister.................(819) 997-1441
James Riordan, Environment Canada ...........(819) 997-1575

|Back to Contents|

Canada's Aim:
Reduce PERC Use By 70%

New environmental regulations by the Canadian federal government will require more than half of that nation's 3,300 drycleaners to upgrade their equipment.

The regulation, intended to be law by next year, is supposed to reduce perc consumption by Canadian cleaners by 70 per cent by 2001.

Perc was one of four substances deemed toxic that are targeted for regulation to reduce releases into the environment in an announcement made by Canadian Environment Minister Sergio Marchi on Feb. 10. A mix of federal regulations under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), national standards and other measures will be used to reduce the release of the substances.

The other three substances are trichloroethylene, benzidine and dichlorobenzidine. Trichloroethylene is used as a degreasing solvent in the automotive, aerospace and electronics industries and benzidine and dichlorobenzidine are used in the making of pigments and dyes.

According to an Environment Canada press release, a consensus was reached among industry representatives, nongovernmental organizations, provincial governments and other federal departments on a mix of federal regulations, national standards and other measures to limit the use of the four substances.

Recommendations for perc include developing technology based regulations to reduce its use in drycleaning, mainly through modernization of equipment. Standards for operator training and waste collection were also recommended.

Vic Vandermolen, executive director of the 1,100member Canadian Fabricare Association, said he is confident the regulations will prove beneficial to the industry. "it has been an industry initiative and an industry impetus to create a level playing field," he said.

The recommendations grew out of discussions that began in October, 1994, among industry members on how to better manage perc use. This led to a final report presented in December, 1995, which is serving as the basis for drafting the new regulations, Vandermolen said.

In 1994, when the discussions began, Canadian cleaners were consuming about 5,500 tons of perc per year in 3,400 drycleaning plants, Vandermolen said. The recommended regulations, which would phase out first and second generation machines, could cut that consumption by 3,200 tons a year, he said.

Essentially, the regulations would ensure that perc drycleaning machines achieve 1,000 pounds of cleaning per gallon of solvent.

Vandennolen said he estimates as many as 2,600 cleaners would need to either replace or upgrade cleaning machines to meet the new requirements.

He also said he anticipates that there will be a federal mandatory training requirement that will certify cleaning plant owners' and operators' knowledge of environmentally safe practices for handling perc. This could include 30 hours of instruction and passing an examination to get a license to operate. Annual inspections could also be required.

Vandermolen said the requirements would definitely have an impact on the number of cleaners in Canada, with some opting to close up shop rather than invest in new equipment. How many would make that choice is unknown.

An article in the February 11 edition of The Toronto Globe and Mail reporting on the federal initiative noted that a 1995 Health Canada study found traces of perc in 1 13 of 836 tested sites in Canada.

In 1992, the town of Manotick, south of 0ttawa, had to provide residents with bottled water and carbon filters after much of its water supply was found unusable because of improper dumping practices by a local drycleaner.

Canadian federal initiatives to manage substances come under the umbrella of the CEPA. 'My government has introduced a stronger CEPA into Parliament to improve legislative tools to deal with emerging problems. 'My new CEPA stresses pollution prevention and protection of the environment and the health of Canadians from toxic substances.

Twenty-five substances have been declared toxic under the CEPA. Five substances are already regulated. Multi-stakeholder consensus is expected in the next several months for 16 others in addition to the four named in the Feb. 10 announcement.

|Back to Contents|

CHARGE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS!!

By Kenney Slatten

At least 23% of an invoice total should be declared, separately at the bottom as an environmental surcharge. Tire companies, oil change companies and a host of other industries do it. Why are we afraid to? My guess is that it falls along the same line of thinking that plagued our industry since the beginning of time. That would be our reservation about raising prices.

When in the world are we going to catch up with the rest of the industries in this country and quit giving away drycleaning services? It continues to puzzle me. There are two approaches to this matter. We can put up a sign in our call office that announces what an "environmental surcharge" is all about. Maybe a company booklet to demonstrate the same thought. Another more popular approach is to build this charge into your garment charge. Considering that few are inclined to go up on their price, you are left to lose money. Personally, I like to announce it, add it on as a separate charge and promote your effort to help clean up the environment. Complete promotion of hangers, hazardous waste, poly bags and the whole nine yards, so to speak.

Think of all your environmental costs, certain area taxes on perc, equipment and ventilation costs, certification costs, another selling point, plus to announce that you are a state (or province) certified drycleaner or have a C.E.D. from a course through IFI. Hazardous waste including waste water haul off, inspections and training would be considered to be safe and legal by someone who does consulting in that area, like me!

As long as all state, provincial and federal agencies charge the drycleaner for this kind of junk, when are we going to do the same? I urge everyone to consider this matter in depth.

Kenney Slatten is an industry consultant and trainer who can assist with your plant operations, offer you on-the-job training and planning analysis, specializing in environmental issues.

|Back to Contents|

SPDA WETCLEANING SEMINAR

Held on April 25 in Regina, this wetcleaning seminar featured everything today's professional drycleaner needs to know to succeed in a competitive marketplace.

Discussions began with current and future regulations as presented by an Industry Canada representative, including an environmental update of our industry, both existing and planned. Ken Adamson from Langley Perisian Cleaners, Hamilton discussed his I year experiment with a dedicated wetcleaning only plant.

Dr. Anne Wilcock from the University of Guelph presented information on fabrics and textiles and the strengths and weaknesses of various cleaning methods. It will assist the participants in predicting "Problem Fabrics" and preventing problems that impact the reputation of quality drycleaners. Colour stability, stretching and shrinkage, and special fabric finishes were some of the topics covered.

Dr. Wilcock has extensive knowledge in the textile industry and is an awardwinning teacher with 20 years experience. Those who attended the seminar certainly came away with a better understanding of problem prevention and of the "wetcleaning!' methodology. |Back to Contents|

EVALUATING YOUR COUPON PROGRAM

Often there is confusion about measuring the value of a direct mail advertising program.

There are many facets of a program to consider when evaluating results. Many are overlooked and a promising promotion may be abandoned or written off prematurely as ineffective. I would like to explore the fact that there is more than meets the eye in measuring a winning promotional plan.

The first and most apparent step in determining if an advertising program was a success is counting coupons. By counting the pieces returned it is easy to create a percentage of return. If you mailed 1,000 pieces and received 50 you have a result of five percent return. Let us use this figure as an average. Next you would determine the cost of mailing and decide if it was cost effective. We need to add the dollar amount of the orders redeemed with the coupon to determine the total income as a result of the mailing.

We spend about $300 to send a direct mail piece, so we can now calculate the income created by our investment. A common result of this calculation would be 50 returns with an average order of $20, or a net return of $1,000.

This seems like a positive return. However, many believe that coupons come back with regular customers who would have come into your store anyway and by giving them a discount, you have simply thrown money away.

This is where many argue the value of a coupon advertising program. I plan to evaluate the effectiveness of this example further and hope to bring new light to the often overlooked aspects of a successful advertising plan.

Regular customers, too
Although it is true that many users of coupons are current customers, there is a plus side here. Customers love to be appreciated and you can solidify your relationship with customers by doing something nice for them from time to time. It is also a fact that you can bring in more business from existing customers much easier than trying to convince someone new to use your service.

Therefore, the customers who bring in a coupon often bring in a $20 order or larger rather than a $10 order. In reality, customers with a coupon will bring in $50 to $100 orders. It is also overlooked that there is much competition out there and they are all fighting to get more customers - including yours.

Keeping your customers
You must always ask yourself, before writing off a promotion as not necessary, what would I do if a competitor were to run a program like one that you have considered. With all of the competitors out there, someone will be anxious to try something that you may not think is a good idea.

The customer in our example may also have come in an additional time than they ordinarily would have. The coupon may have prompted them to look through their closet and find items for cleaning that they might otherwise have worn again before cleaning.

If we can make every one of our customers come to our store more often, business can be increased sizably.

Picking up a bonus
An extra bonus is that when they come to pick up that coupon order they will probably bring in regular priced items during that next visit. Many believe that a large percentage of customers are in our store every week, but those who have reviewed their customer database from a counter computer know this group is only a very small percentage of customers.

The next benefit comes from new customers we gain with our mailing. If the mailing brought in 10 new customers, we can expect to retain about half The more we do to please this new group and reward them with followup offers, the more we retain.

From these newfound customers, we can expect to average $100 per year; some will spend more, others less.

If we retain just five new customers who continue to do business with us for five years, we have gained $500 per year and a lifetime total of $2,500. These returns are conservative and can be remarkable if we repeat them on a continuing basis.

Losing money?
Another argument is that we will lose money on the business created by the coupon since it is at a discount.

This is true, but very short-sighted. Although we are working with a narrow profit margin and could not survive on a discount price on a regular basis, we would miss the whole point if we kept our view this narrow.

The volume created by a coupon program is only a very small percentage of your over-all volume on a given week. If it amounts to 10 percent of your over-all volume, it is blended in with all of the income for the week. It will reduce your over-all price by only a small amount.

To control this you must spread out your program over the entire year, or over a time frame you are comfortable with. This gives you a good mix of regular-priced and discounted work. Since every customer will not use a coupon, you may only discount your week's work by a percent or two.

Perhaps the most important rule before running a coupon program is to be sure that your regular price leaves enough margin to allow you to work the numbers you need.

You must decide where your place in the market is. If you already have a below-market price then you do not have the ability to use these rules to your advantage in an advertising plan. You must first know what you want to earn, then work your price into the program.

|Back to Contents|

A PRICE YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY

The price of ignorance continues to rise. Whether it is charged in bad customer service at the fron counter, poor quality textile care of "not my backyard" resistance to percusing drycleaning stores, the result is a less than flattering perception of the industry in the public's eye. Fortunately, there are people out there doing something to provide solutions.

Even though Neighborhood Cleaners Association International in New York City and International Fabricare Institute in Silver Spring, Maryland, have in-house training schools, it has become apparent that outreach programs are the next level in textile care continuing education. There are a growing number of trainers who are traveling to the cleaner's home-towns and as a result, have redefined training program delivery. New schools are in the works too, at various locations around the country and NCAI has offered training programs to all cleaners nationwide, wherever and whenever a group of drycleaners wants it. And the association has expanded its certified drycleaner self-study program nationwide, making it readily accessible to all textile care personnel at the individual's convenience.

In the end, it will not be regulations, proposed legislation or the battle about perc that have the greatest impact on cleaners. Consumer demands, political pressure and changes in technology wi II weed out those who don't adjust to the demands of the marketplace. Education, training and adaptability are the keys. Those cleaners, trainers and associations who recognize this and understand the need to change will emerge as the textile care community of the 2 1 1 century. The rest willlearn the lesson of evolution extinction happens!

|Back to Contents|

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON PERC AND CANCER

What do the studies prove? What more could be done?

By William E. Fisher

Q. Is perc an animal carcinogen?
A. At high levels of exposure (although not irrationally high) perc has caused a significant elevation of liver cancer in mice, and a much lower elevation of liver cancer in rats. So, yes, the industry is aware that perc is an animal carcinogen.

Q. Does that mean these results apply to humans?
A. A well-done study of the metabolism of perc clearly identified a mechanism that explains the miceratman data - specifically, that a protein (alpha 2uglobulin) that is present in high levels in mice, at low levels in rats, and which is non-existent in man, interacts with perc when it is being metabolized in the body, and it is this interaction that leads to cancer. This study has been previewed and published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and fits with the results found in mice, rats and humans. In light of the scientific data, IFI believes that the traditional "if it causes cancer in animals we'll assume that it causes cancer in humans" assumption is not valid for perc. Moreover, that assumption is a policy decision, not a scientific decision - as it is clearly acknowledged by U.S. EPA and other government/private institutions.

Q Are there other studies on perc?
A. Yes. There have been a number of recent studies which claim to show a possible association between perc and human cancer. Toxicologists representing the perc producers point out a number of flaws in these studies. Additionally, a further "slicing and dicing" of the NIOSH drycleaners workers study claims that for a combination of one type of cancer (esophageal) with a certain number of years of exposure followed by a certain period of latency after exposure there was in increase. However, the overall rate for esophageal cancer and for all cancers in the study of perconly exposed workers was not increased. Again, there are a number of questions that have been raised regarding design flaws with the methodology used in the latest analysis.

Q. So does perc cause cancer in humans?
A. Based on the best available evidence we have seen, IFI believes that perc is unlikely to be a human carcinogen, but at the same time, recognizes that there is no way to beCertain. Because of this, the industry has - as IFI has recommended - continued to reduce emissions and exposures significantly over the past 15 years, while continuing to push for credible scientific studies to resolve these issues.

Q. So was Consumer Repots correct in telling people that they could have a "slightly increased risk of cancer"?
A. In our opinion, a statement like that without any further explanation is irresponsible. Studies of risk communication clearly show that the average person will assume much more from that statement than the scientists/regulator meant and the scientists and regulators are well aware of that misunderstanding.

Q. Would you explain that further?
A. The average person generally believes that the phrase "risk of cancer" means that a substance is known to cause cancer in humans, and that the only issue is how "risky" it is that is, would it take a very high exposure or a very low exposure before you would be likely to get cancer. In fact, however, the real meaning of that phrase is that a substance may or may not be a human carcinogen in the first place, and that the "risk" in fact may be zero at any exposure. Additionally, regulators such as U.S. EPA assume on a policy basis that there is not "threshold" of exposure below which there would be no risk. This policy decision has been made despite the fact that there are substances which have been demonstrated to have just such a threshold.

Q. Is there anything else we should know?
A. Yes. As previously reported by IFI, the International Agency of Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France changed its designation of perc to a "probable human carcinogen" a year ago and rated drycleaning as an occupation as a 44 possible" risk primarily on the basis of the flawed studies mentioned above.

Q. What else can be done?
A. Over the past eight to ten years, IFI has met repeatedly with representatives of the perc producers and their trade association, the Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance, to call for further studies of perc by the producers. The producers have the scientific and toxicological expertise, and have been in the business of doing carcinogenicity testing including on perc for decades. IFI believes that it is time for the producers to step up and resolve the issue. Our industry cannot continue to survive under the barrage of attacks from multiple studies that are not helpful, while no new testing on carcinogenicity has come out from the producers in the past six to eight years. William E. Fisher is Chief Executive 0jf1cer of the International Fabricare Institute in Silverspring, MD.

|Back to Contents|

Pressing Issues is the member newlsetter of the Saskatchewan Professional Drycleaners Association.

Greg Wilchuk	President
Terry Thorsteinson	Vice President
Shane Bancescue	Secretary/Treasurer
Larry Tessier	Past President

Directors

Bob Tefler - North Sask.
Ed Herbert - Central Sask.
Arlene Clarke - South Sask.

Comments, Letters, Advertisements or membership services inquires should be mailed to:

SPDA NEWSLETTER
P.O. Box 3482
Regina, S4P 3J8
|Back to Contents|

Pressing Issues

June 1997

Newsletter of the Saskatchewan Professional Drycleaner's Association

Contents

7th Annual Convention

1997 CONVENTION SUPPORTERS

News Release from Environment Canada

For Immediate Release

Canada's Aim: Reduce PERC Use By 70%