The LHWMP (Trevor Fernandes and Patrick Hoermann) began the process of promoting alternative technology in the dry cleaning industry in 1996. In November 1996, the LHWMP held a meeting of dry cleaners located in King County at the Hazardous Waste Management Unit office in Seattle. The leaders of the two dry cleaning associations and the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) invited dry cleaners registered with the Washington DOE in King County. Ninety-seven dry cleaners were represented at this meeting. At the meeting, the LHWMP explained that the program might be able to offer financial assistance to support the adoption of alternative cleaning technology beyond what is offered by the Voucher Incentive Program (VIP). Only Steve Ritt of LeatherCare expressed interest. In February 1998, the LHWMP again explained the potential for financial assistance being offered to enable substantial alternative technology improvements to the members of the Washington State Korean Dry Cleaners Association at their annual meeting. At least 160 dry cleaning businesses were represented at this meeting. No one expressed interest in competing for a grant for adoption of alternative cleaning technology at that time.

Shops that offer leather garment cleaning have all been contacted by the Audit Team of Public Health of Seattle and King County as a part of a different Priority Industry dry cleaners project (Bill Lawrence and Trevor Fernandes, HLWMP). In King County, 380 dry cleaning shops are known to exist, and 340 cooperated with the Audit Team during their visits. Ninety percent of the shops are in compliance with all or most regulations and adhere to best management practices. Over 200 dry cleaners expressed an interest in the simple, non-competitive VIP vouchers, and over 100 have already been reimbursed. None expressed interest in taking the risk of competing for a grant for the adoption of alternative cleaning technology.

It should be understood why dry cleaners (and other businesses) are hesitant to adopt alternative or innovative technology. Most neighborhood dry cleaners do not have room in their physical plants for more than one machine, and they are usually in debt for the machine they have. If a dry cleaner purchases a new machine, they are dependent upon that machine to work, and work well; their livelihood depends on that machine. If a new machine/technology does not work, the dry cleaner will find it difficult if not impossible to sell the faulty machine. If a dry cleaner goes into debt by purchasing a faulty machine that it cannot sell, that business would most likely not be able to afford to buy another machine. Without a functional machine, the dry cleaner is out of business. Therefore, the majority of dry cleaners wait for a leader to take the chance on new or innovative technology.

Steve Ritt is a recognized leader in the dry cleaning industry in this State. As noted earlier, LeatherCare is the largest leather garment cleaning business in Washington State. Almost all of the dry cleaners in King County with leather services actually send their customers’ leather garments to LeatherCare for cleaning. The few other shops that offer leather garment cleaning only do spot cleaning. For years, Mr. Ritt had researched the alternatives to dry cleaning technology using the solvent, perchloroethylene (perc). Mr. Ritt’s demands for adopting a new technology included: the safety of his employees, the protection of the environment, the ability to clean his customers garments safely and effectively, and still leave his business a viable profit margin. Mr. Ritt’s research led to his development of a technology using a silicone based solvent instead of perc. The technology was based on information and products from at least two suppliers.

In May 2000, an initial inspection of LeatherCare was conducted to confirm their eligibility for the grant, and to discuss improvements in their hazardous materials generation and management practices. The LHWMP explained the application process to Mr. Ritt and provided assistance in completing his application letter. A panel of LHWMP staff reviewed the application based on the grant criteria, and judged this application appropriate for reimbursement in August 2000. It was recommended by the panel that this project be funded to the dollar limits for that application year, $15,000. A follow-up visit was conducted and it was confirmed that the recommended alternative technology had been installed and being properly used. The process from panel approval to payment of the first of six monthly checks took from August 2000 until August 2001. It was a bureaucratic nightmare. Lessons learned include how important it is to test the system first before advertising a grant program to the public. Fortunately, Mr. Ritt is a very patient man. The final check was paid in January 2002.

The public has also benefited from the LHWMP grant supporting demonstration of this new technology using silicone based solvent for the dry cleaning process. These benefits include: elimination of the disposal of hazardous wastes through the County solid waste and wastewater treatment systems, reduction in worker exposure to hazardous materials, and a reduced potential for environmental contamination. Generated waste is captured in inert materials for disposal as solid waste. There are no substantial air emissions or liquid waste. Thus, this grant provides incentives for pollution prevention, safety improvements, and hazardous materials management practices improvements. LeatherCare has shared their experiences with the small quantity generator community and therefore expanded the benefits realized by King County.

LeatherCare has made substantial investment in new and innovative equipment at significant risk to their bottom line. They have participated in this public/private partnership to improve service for the people of King County and to increase protection of their health and the environment.