California has long lead the nation in quality of life kinds of things, whether they are hot tubs, leisure suits or tofu. Now that a large regional pollution regulator may outlaw a popular dry cleaning solvent called perc, Californians may be able to breathe easier. And the big question is whether the nation will follow this trend. In other words, will all of our communities become healthier places in which to live?

Perc is well know in the environmental business. It is the solvent that for many years has been used to dry clean our clothing. And it is well suited for that purpose. The problem is that perc also leaks into our drinking water and pollutes our air. Perc is believed to represent a cancer threat.

When perc leaks into the ground it often affects underground streams, called aquifers. Often, people obtain drinking water from these same underground streams. And when perc substance is vented into the air, it also represents an inhalation risk .

Many communities have struggled to find a solution to this problem. Since many dry cleaners are small businesses, requiring that new, non-caustic systems be installed would realistically place a lot of mom and pop operations in danger of losing their businesses. But, allowing industries to continue when they represent real health threats is not good public health policy either.

Some States have created special funds designed to address perc releases after they happen. The funds are created through small surcharges on each laundry order. That makes a lot of sense, but it addresses the problem after the harm has already taken place.

Now, California, or at least a large part of it, wants to protect its residents by doing what most regulators have until now not dared to do: make perc illegal altogether. Here is how the proposal by the South Coast Air Quality Management District would work.

The measure would gradually phase out the use of perc by 2019. In its place, dry cleaners could choose from several non-toxic alternatives.

In order to help out the smaller businesses, the District is also proposing up to $2 million in incentives for cleaners that switch to non-toxic alternatives before the rule requires them to do so.

After Jan. 1, 2003, a new garment cleaning business, or an existing dry cleaner adding a machine, would have to choose a non-perc cleaning process. After July 1, 2004, any dry cleaning machine that is replaced - and any machine that is 15 years or older - would have to be replaced with a non-perc machine.

According to the District, the 15-year phase out is considerably longer than the typical eight- to 12-year life of a perc machine. 850 tons of perc would no longer be emitted each year by the approximately 2,200 dry cleaners in the region, if the rule goes forward.

Perc has been associated with elevated rates of lung, cervical, esophagus, bladder and other cancers in dry cleaning workers. And the District asserts that even though dry cleaners have reduced their perc emissions by 80 percent during the last decade due to existing air pollution regulations, they still pose a relatively high cancer risk, in part because they frequently are located close to homes, businesses, schools, restaurants and child-care centers.

There are many new technologies that are available for cleaning clothing that can replace perc. They include wet cleaning, which uses high grade detergents similar to those used in the home. Synthetic replacements of perc are also available, and some studies suggest that thy do not cause cancer.

The alternative that I find to be the most interesting involves CO2, which is soda water. The systems are, as I understand it, completely non- toxic. It would seem me that this is a win-win alternative.

Speaking of win-wins, getting rid of perc seems to me to be the right step. Yes, it will be costly. But these little businesses are often sued due to perc releases and the law suits and cleanups are very expensive as well. Getting rid of perc gets rid of lawsuits and cleanups, and makes all of our environments healthier.

So lets get real about clean water and clean air in our communities. Let's help our local dry cleaners remain in business by providing financial loans and grants available so that they can eliminate perc.

The information provided in this column is written by Stuart Lieberman,a practicing environmental attorney, and is for general information purposes only. It is not legal advice and should not be used in place of legal advice.

Stuart Lieberman, Esq., and IRED.Com, Inc., will not accept any responsibilty for any reliance on the information in this column or any damages whatsoever resulting from reading this column.