United States
Environmental Protection
Washington, D.C. 20460
April 1977
Clean Water
and the
Cane Sugar

   This booklet is about the cane sugar industry and water pollution. It is
     intended  to help you understand how this industry—and all other
industries—are affected by a  law passed by  Congress to  reduce and
eventually eliminate water pollution.
  There are approximately 20,000 men and women employed in the mills
and refineries of the cane sugar industry—about 8,000 in mills and 12,000 in
refineries. The  29 cane sugar refineries discharge approximately 276
million gallons of waste water  daily, while the  74 raw cane sugar mills
currently discharge approximately  1.13 billion gallons of waste water daily.
  This booklet describes what these plants must do to keep  their wastes
from polluting the Nation's waters.
  In  non-technical language, this booklet explains that:

• The technology exists to reduce water pollution from cane sugar plants to
safe levels.

• Applying that technology costs money—but the majority of cane sugar
plants can afford to make the necessary investments to control pollution.

• Such pollution control investments  will  not unduly affect the financial
condition of the plants, or the price consumers  pay for the sugar.

  This booklet also describes why a  few cane sugar plants may not be
able to comply with pollution control standards and, unfortunately, may
have to shut down, with the subsequent loss of jobs.
  In  brief, this booklet discusses  the facts of life  about water pollution
—how it affects all of us, why  it  must  be controlled, and what the law
requires the cane sugar industry to do as its part of the national program to
clean up our Nation's waterways.


The Problem

You and millions of other
Americans have probably seen
the warning  signs:  "No Fishing,"
"No Boating," "Beach Closed," or
"Danger, Do Not Drink the
Water." The  signs are there
because the water is polluted with
raw or poorly treated human
wastes, with runoff from city
streets, farmlands,  animal
feedlots, and mines; with leaks
and spills from ships. And with
waste from industries—
including the cane  sugar
  Each year, some 402 million
tons of pollutants from human
activities enter the  Nation's
waters. That's almost two tons for
every man, woman, and child in
the United States. The pollutants
include bacteria, viruses, organic
materials, animal fats, oil, acids,
metals, pesticides,  a myriad of
other chemicals, and hot water
from power  plants  and industrial
  Not only do the pollutants make
our waters unsightly, but without
expensive purification they can
make the water unfit for drinking,
for irrigation, and for industrial
use. They contaminate fish and
shellfish, making them
unpalatable  or actually unsafe to
eat. Some pollutants endanger
reproduction, causing
deformities and even death in
various life forms.
  It is impossible to put a precise
price tag on the cost of water
pollution. But there is no doubt
that water pollution exacts a
heavy toll. It's estimated that dirty
water costs  the American people
at least $13  billion a year—in
water purification bills, in damage

to fishery resources, in lost
  In short, water pollution is a
major national problem.
  How did so many of our
waterways become open sewers?
For many years we thought the
waste products of human
activities dumped in our
waterways would decompose and
disappear harmlessly. But we
learned otherwise. We learned
that we had overburdened the
capacity of water to cleanse itself,
to assimilate the sewage
discharges from increasing
numbers of people and  the
increasing wastes discharged
from industry, agriculture, and
  Finally, after more than two
decades of generally ineffective
attempts to control water
pollution, we realized that a
completely new approach was
To Solve the Problem

In response to widespread
public concern about the sad
condition of the Nation's
waterways, Congress, building
upon the experiences of earlier
water pollution control laws,
enacted the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972. It brought
dramatic changes.
  What the 1972 law says, in
essence, is that nobody—no city
or town,  no industry, no
government agency, no
individual—has a right to pollute
our water. The free use of our
waterways as dumping grounds
for our wastes is no longer
permitted. From now on, under
the 1972 law, we must safeguard
our waterways, even if it means
fundamental changes in the way
we manufacture products,
produce farm crops, and carry
on the economic life of our
  Congress declared that the
objective of the 1972 law is "to
restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and
biological integrity of the
Nation's water."
  The 1972 law has two goals:
First, whenever possible by July
1983, achieve water quality that's
clean enough for recreational
use, and clean enough to protect
fish, shellfish, and wildlife.
Second, by 1985, no more
discharges of pollutants into our
  To achieve these goals the law
set in motion a new national
system of uniform controls on
the discharge of pollutants, to be
carried out by the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) in cooperation
with State and local

• The law requires EPA to
establish national "effluent
limitations" for industrial
plants—including cane sugar
plants. An "effluent limitation" is
simply the maximum amount of
a pollutant that anyone may
discharge into a water body.

• By July 1,  1977, the law
requires existing industries to
reduce their pollutant discharges
to the level attainable by using
the "best practicable" water
pollution control technology
(BPT). BPT  is determined by
averaging the pollution control

effectiveness achieved by the
best plants in the industry.

• By July, 1983, the law requires
existing industries to reduce
their pollutant discharges still
more—to the level attainable by
using the "best available"
pollution control technology
(BAT). BAT is based on the best
pollution control procedures
economically achievable.  If it is
technologically and
economically feasible to do so,
industries must completely
eliminate pollutant discharges
by July 1, 1983.

• The law requires new
industrial plants to limit pollutant
discharges to the level attainable
by meeting national "standards
of performance" immediately,
without waiting for 1977 or 1983.
These new plant standards may
require greater reduction  of
pollutant discharges than the
1977 and 1983 standards  for
existing plants, or zero
discharge where applicable.

• The law requires industrial
facilities that send their wastes
to municipal treatment
plants—as some cane sugar
plants do—to make sure the
wastes can be adequately
treated by the municipal plant
and will  not damage it. In some
industries, discharges to
municipal plants may thus have
to be "pre-treated." That  is, the
portion of the industrial waste
that would not be adequately
treated or would damage the
municipal plant must be
removed from the waste water
before it enters the municipal
• The law does not tell any
industry what technology it must
use. The law requires only that
industries limit pollutant
discharges to levels prescribed
by law.

• The law also says that if
meeting the 1977 and 1983
requirements is not good
enough to achieve water quality
standards, even tougher controls
may be imposed on dischargers.

• And while the law requires
industries to meet the national
discharge standards set for 1977,
1983, and for new plants, the law
also allows a State or community
to impose stricter requirements
if it wishes. The national
standards are thus minimum
requirements that all industries
must meet.

  Setting limits on industrial
discharges is only the first step
in controlling water pollution, of
course. The next step is to make
sure those limits are met. This
law provides the mechanism to
do that.

The key to applying the effluent
limits to industries—including
the cane sugar industry—is the
national permit system created
by the 1972  law. (The technical
name is the "National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System,"
or NPDES.)
  Under the law, it is illegal for
any industry to discharge any
pollutant into the Nation's waters
without a permit from EPA or
from a State that has an EPA-

approved permit program. Every
industrial plant that discharges
pollutants to a waterway must,
therefore, apply for a permit.
Essentially, all have done so.
  When-issued,  the permit
regulates what may be
discharged, and the amount of
each identified pollutant from a
plant. The discharger must
monitor its wastes and report on
such pollutant discharges. The
discharger must comply with all
applicable national effluent
limits and with any State or local
requirements that may be
imposed. If the  plant cannot
comply immediately, the permit
contains  a compliance schedule
of firm dates by which the
pollutants will be reduced or
  The permit, in essence, is a
contract between a company
and the government.

  This combination of national
effluent standards and limits,
applied to specific sources of
water pollution by individual
permits, with substantial
penalties for failure to comply,
constitutes the first effective
nationwide system of water
pollution control.
  Now, what does this mean to
the cane sugar industry?
The Cane Sugar Industry's
Pollution Problems

Both segments of the cane sugar
industry's operations—milling
and refining—may give rise to
pollution. There are pollution
problems unique to each
segment, and others common to
both. The first step in applying


8        the 1972 law to the cane sugar
         industry was to identify these
         problems and determine how to
         solve them.
           The Environmental Protection
         Agency conducted an exhaustive
         review of available literature on
         the industry, reviewed
         applications to the Corps of
         Engineers for permission to
         discharge effluents into public
         waters,  and made on-site
         inspections of various factories
         and refineries in operation.
         Personal and telephone
         interviews were conducted, and
         the results of a voluntary
         questionnaire of the industry
         were closely studied. In addition,
         information from samplings of
         selected plants were taken to
         verify the accumulated data.
         Finally,  a contractor's study was
         prepared under EPA supervision
         to provide a basis for evaluating
         the potential economic impact of
         effluent limitations guidelines
         and standards of performance
         established by EPA.
           With this broad base of data,
         EPA was able to identify the raw
         waste characteristics, including
         analyses of the source and
         volume  of water used in the
         process employed, and plants
         were grouped in
         subcategorizations to better
         evaluate particular problems of
         waste water. The constituents of
         waste water which should be
         subject to the effluent limitations
         guidelines were identified.
         Existing control and treatment
         technologies were identified
         along with the problems,
         limitations, and reliability of
         each, and the costs and time
         required to implement them were
         also defined.
From all this emerged the
following facts:

• The 74 raw cane sugar mills
discharge approximately 1.13
billion gallons of waste water
daily. The 29 cane sugar
refineries  discharge
approximately 276 million
gallons of waste water.

• The waste water from cane
sugar refineries contains 3.5-8.5
pounds of oxygen-robbing
organic materials and about 18
pounds of suspended solids per
ton of raw sugar melted, while
the waste water from cane sugar
mills contains 4.2-21 pounds of
organic matter and 35-200
pounds of suspended solids per
ton of sugar cane processed.

• A major pollutant in both cane
sugar milling and refining is
organic material. The
measurement of these oxygen-
consuming pollutants in water is
called "biochemical oxygen
demand," or BOD. (This is
usually expressed in terms of the
amount of biochemical oxygen
demand in five days, or BODS.)
When dumped untreated into a
stream or river, the organic
material is decomposed by
micro-organisms which consume
oxygen in the water, eventually
depleting the oxygen content to
the extent that aquatic animal
and plant survival is menaced.
Even when all the oxygen in a
body of water has been used, the
decay of organic matter
continues, producing noxious
gases, such as hydrogen sulfide
and methane.

 • Another major pollutant from

the cane sugar industry is
suspended solids, both organic
and inorganic. Among the
inorganics are silt, sand, and
clay. The organic components
include such things as bagasse,
boiler ash, and so forth. These
pollutants are collectively called
"total suspended solids," or TSS.
Suspended solids discolor and
cloud water, impairing
photosynthesis in aquatic plants.
If pollutants containing organic
matter settle on the bottom, they
become sludge beds that further
deplete the water's oxygen
content, and create gases toxic
to aquatic life. In addition to
esthetic and ecological
considerations, suspended solids
in water from streams used by
industry can interfere with many
industrial processes. They can
cause foaming in boilers,
damage equipment, and impose
high purification costs on
industries that need water to
make their products.

  There are two key points to
keep in mind: Raw wastes from
cane sugar mills and refineries
contain unacceptable amounts of
organic materials and suspended
solids. Therefore, the wastes
must be treated before they can
be discharged into a water body.


The  cane sugar industry can
successfully control these two
major water pollutants.

• Other identified pollutants in
cane sugar industry wastes
include coliform bacteria,
nitrogen, phosphorus, dissolved
solids, and heat.
• Another consideration is the
acid or alkali content of liquid
wastes. This is called the "pH" of
the mixture. (Pure distilled water
has a pH of about 7, a strong acid
solution has a pH of 1, and a
strong  alkali solution has a pH of
14.) Extremes of pH or rapid pH
changes can create stress
conditions on aquatic life, or  kill
it outright. Even moderate
changes from "acceptable"
criteria limits of pH are
deleterious to some species.  In
general, however, the pH of
wastes from cane sugar plants
can be easily adjusted where

• In raw cane sugar milling, the
reduction of waste waters or
waste water pollutants can be
effected by such in-plant control
measures as recirculation of
barometric condenser cooling
water through  cooling towers,
ponds, or canals; dry hauling of
filter mud; recirculation of cane
wash water; and reducing the
amount of sucrose in barometric
condenser cooling water.

• For the cane sugar refineries,
waste water or waste water
pollutants can be reduced by in-
plant control measures such  as
recirculation of barometric
condenser cooling water, dry
hauling of filter mud, recovery of
floor drainage, and reduction of
sucrose entrainment in
barometric condenser cooling
water.  A primary portion of in-
plant control is to prevent
sugar loss.

• Finally, the EPA study
determined that the process
waste waters from cane sugar

10       refining contain sufficiently low
         concentrations of water
         pollutants to allow them to be
         discharged to publicly owned
         treatment plants. Moreover,
         where such treatment plants are
         available, there should be no
         problem in introducing cane
         sugar milling waste waters
         directly into them.
           In sum, the water pollution
         problems of the cane sugar
         industry were identified, and it
         was determined that water
         pollution from the industry can
         be controlled by use of
         machinery and methods already
         in use. In other words, the
         technology to do the job already
          The Law and the Industry

          Having assembled these facts,
          EPA's next step was to prepare
          standards for cane sugar mills
          and refineries under the 1972
          law. Many factors were
          considered: the age and size of
          the facilities, the quality and
          nature of raw materials used, raw
          waste characteristics, existing
          control and treatment
          technologies, with their
          attendant problems, limitations,
          and reliability of each. The
          energy requirements and costs of
          each control and treatment
          technology were also studied.
            For the purposes of developing
          these guidelines, the cane sugar
          refining segment was divided
          into two subcategories—liquid
          cane sugar refining and
          crystalline cane sugar refining.
          The cane sugar milling segment
          was divided into five
          subcategories determined
          primarily by differences in waste
water characteristics due to
different harvesting methods and
conditions, manufacturing
processes, and treatment
technology. The subcategories
are I (comprised of factories
located within the state of
Louisiana); II (factories located
in Florida and Texas);  III
(factories located  on the Hilo-
Hamakua Coast of the Island of
Hawaii); IV (factories located in
Hawaii other than those in
subcategory III); V (factories
located on the Island of Puerto
  The proposed regulations were
issued December  7,1973 for
cane sugar refineries, and
February 27,1975 for cane sugar
mills. They were sent to the
industry and other interested
organizations for review and
comment. When the comments
were received, EPA carefully
analyzed them and made
appropriate changes in the
  On March 20,1974, EPA issued
the final standards for carte sugar
refining the industry must meet
to comply with the requirements
of the 1972 law. Similar final
standards will be issued for the
milling segment.

In brief, the regulation:

• Establishes the  limits to be met
by July 1,1977 through the best
practicable control technology
currently available.

• States the limits to be met by
July 1,1983, using the best
available technology
economically achievable.

• Establishes the  requirement
that all  new cane sugar mills and

refineries, at the time they are
built, must meet the standards
that existing plants must meet by
July 1, 1983, and, wherever
possible, should have zero
discharge of pollutants.

• Identifies the major cane sugar
industry pollutants, and
establishes maximum limitations
for BOD and TSS that cane sugar
plants can discharge during any
one day on an average over a 30-
day period.

• Requires that the pH (acidity or
alkalinity) of cane sugar industry
plant  discharges be within the
range of 6.0 to 9.0.

• Explores the costs of attaining
the required effluent  reductions.

• States that waste waters from
cane sugar mills and refineries
are not harmful to municipal
treatment plants.

• Allows flexibility in applying
pollution controls to  meet the
1977 standards in special cases.

• Does nof tell cane sugar plants
what technology to use to meet
the regulations. The standards
require cane sugar mills and
refineries to limit pollutant
discharges to levels  found
attainable by using best
practicable control technology.

  What does all this  mean—to
cane sugar companies, to those
of you who work in cane sugar
mills and refineries,  and to the
Impact of the Guidelines

  Let's consider some questions
you may very well be asking
yourself at this point about the
impact of pollution control on the
cane sugar industry.

1. Can cane sugar mills and
refineries meet the 1977
limitations? That is,
technologically, can they reduce
their discharges of pollutants to
the levels required by 1977?

  The answer is yes. All existing
cane sugar mills and cane sugar

12       refineries can meet the 1977
         standards. While there is no
         single treatment process
         (impoundment, waste
         stabilization, irrigation, or—in
         refineries—biological treatment)
         which is universally applicable in
         achieving reduction of pollutants
         in waste waters, the technologies
         already exist which  can be
         applied to any given plant to
         meet the guidelines limitations.
         Raw cane sugar milling plants in
         Subcategories II and IV are
         currently achieving  zero
         discharge. Other mills in
         Subcategories I and V are
         meeting or doing better than
         BPT. In addition, urban
         refineries, representing
         approximately three-fourths of
         all American cane sugar refinery
         production,  discharge process
         water and in some cases
         barometric condenser cooling
         water directly to municipal
         sewage treatment plants. Many
         refineries are currently attaining

         2. Can cane sugar plants meet
         the 1983 limitations? That is,
         technologically, can they reduce
         their pollutant discharges to the
         levels required by 1983?

            Again, the answer is yes,
          although some development
          work may possibly  be required in
          some cases. Five refineries are
          presently achieving zero
          discharge of pollutants to
          navigable waters, two discharge
          all process waste waters to
          municipal treatment systems,
         and ten or more currently
         discharge all wastes except
         barometric condenser cooling
         water to municipal systems.
Many cane sugar mills are
already attaining BAT in
Subcategories I, II, IV, and V.

3. Can new plants meet the new
source performance standards?
  Yes. In all five categories of raw
cane sugar milling, where new
plant construction is likely, and
in raw cane sugar refining, new
plants, using the best available
control technology, can meet the
required  standards.

4. Can the cane sugar industry
afford to meet the 1977 water
pollution control requirements?
  The answer is yes. It's
estimated that meeting the 1977
standards will cost the cane
sugar milling segment $9.8-10.4
million, with annual operating
costs estimated at $2.8-4.03
million. It is estimated that
meeting the 1977 standards will
cost the cane sugar refining
segment approximately $5.9
million, representing
approximately 2 percent of the
total investment needed to build
a typical  refinery.

5. Can the cane sugar industry
afford to meet the 1983 water
pollution control requirements?
   /es, in most cases. The total
capital cost to the cane sugar
refining segment in meeting the
1983 guidelines is estimated at
approximately $17 million. This is
approximately 3.5 percent of the
total investment needed to build
the typical refinery. To  meet the
1983 standards should  cost the
milling segment an investment of
$11.6-14.2 million, with estimated
total annual costs of $2.9-4.3
  So far, we've talked about cane

sugar mills and refineries that
can—technologically and
financially—meet the 1977 and
1983 standards. Now a tougher

6. What about cane sugar plants
that cannot financially meet the
1977 standards? What will
happen to them?
  The 1977 standards will
probably cause one plant closure
in the cane sugar milling
segment. However, the economic
analysis of cane sugar refining
indicates that three to five plants
will close by the time of
implementation of the 1977
standards, or  due to  the
incremental costs of meeting
both 1977 and 1983 standards.
Two to three of these plant
closures are in Puerto Rico
where lost production can be
absorbed by other Puerto Rican
refineries which have unused
capacity. EPA is very much
aware of the impact these
closures will have on the men
and women employed  by the
plants. It will mean relocating to
another job in the cane sugar
industry, perhaps involving a
move to another community.
Some people  may find it
necessary to enter a totally new
career, or accept early
retirement. But to lower the 1977
standards any further to prevent
these closures would mean
continuing discharges of raw
wastes into our public waters, a
practice no longer
environmentally tolerable. It
should be noted that the  *
regulation will create new jobs in
construction and maintenance of
new pollution control facilities.
  In sum, if a plant can only
operate by polluting our public
waterways, it must close down
for the benefit of us all.

7.  What about the 1983
standards? Will any more cane
sugar mills and refineries have to
close because of those
  Unfortunately, one raw cane
sugar processing plant in
Louisiana may have to close due
to the costs of meeting the 1983
standards. This closure would
affect no  more than 300
  There should be very good
chances for re-employment in
Louisiana. Some small mills may
decide to consolidate into larger
ones, creating new jobs. Also, the
general economic development
along the Mississippi River
suggests the creation of new jobs
within the general area.
  Closing cane sugar plants
could definitely affect farmers. At
current price levels, the loss of
sugar cane as a crop would
greatly reduce farm income.
However, alternative uses of land
in Louisiana could include
soybean and pasture. While
these crops would produce a
smaller farm income, reducing
the economic base of the
community, that base would at
least not be eliminated.

8. How will the 1977 and 1983
standards affect consumers?
What impact will they have on the
price of cane sugar?
   It is generally thought
that the cost of pollution
control will not be  passed
on to the consumer. The
household consumption of sugar
remains relatively stable and


industrial users appear to be
very price-conscious. If substitute
sweeteners continue to be
available, it is unlikely that
there will be any significant
price increases. Any price
adjustments that might include
incremental cost of pollution
control would most likely be
intertwined with the economics of
the entire domestic sugar
industry, which includes both
cane and beet sugar. It is also felt
that any losses in U.S. production
due to pollution control would
not influence world prices
of sugar.

9. What about the productive
capacity that will be lost if some
cane sugar plants do shut down?
  Based on consideration of
excess capacity in various plants,
the possibility of new plants in
some regions, and the availability
of imported sugar and substitute
sweeteners, the overall supply of
sugar would probably not be
affected in the event of actual
plant closings.
  Thus, water pollution control
requirements for the cane sugar
industry will have no long-range
repercussions in terms of
supplies of sugar, or industry
growth. The standards will have a
negligible effect on the Nation's
balance of trade with other
countries or exports of cane

   In summary, with just a few
exceptions, the cane sugar
industry can meet the water
pollution control requirements
mandated by the 1972 law. The
result will be cleaner water for all
of us to enjoy and less waste for
the cane sugar industry.
Some Final Words

  The effluent guidelines for the
cane sugar and other industries
are only part of the
comprehensive program set in
motion by the 1972 law. Among
other things, municipal treatment
plants must meet certain
discharge standards by 1977 and
1983. The law increased Federal
aid to local governments to help
build sewage treatment facilities,
and established planning
procedures for State and local
governments to control water
pollution from all sources more
effectively, in cooperation with
the Federal Government. The law
also streamlined and
strengthened the enforcement
provisions of the water pollution
control program.
  Some water quality control
problems are so complex that
they cannot be solved by using
technology alone. For this reason
the Act included an areawide
waste treatment management
planning process under Section
208. This areawide planning
brings together several  aspects
of water pollution control,
including treatment of municipal
and industrial wastes, the issuing
of discharge permits to industry,
and the ways of dealing with
"nonpoint" sources of pollution
such as stormwater runoff, in a
comprehensive approach.
Emphasis is placed upon
planning by local governments.
  To help pay for this cleanup,
Congress set up a construction
grants program in which the
Federal Government will pay up
to 75 percent of construction
costs for treatment plants. The
funding for this program is

16       expected to rival the Federal
         highway program in magnitude.
         In fact, costs from the beginning
         of the program through 1982 are
         expected to total $50 billion, or
         an average of $5 billion per
         year—compared to the $13
         billion a year that water pollution
         now costs the American people.
         Congress felt that expenditures
         under the construction grants
         program were essential to deal
         with a significant and pressing
         environmental problem.
            With the cooperation, hard
         work, and investment of
         considerable amounts of  money
         from industries and all levels of
         government, progress has
already beeen made toward
reducing—and eventually
eliminating—pollution in our
Nation's waterways. But much
remains to be done. Still more
money and effort will have to be
invested if the clean water
program is to be successful—if
we are to have water that is safe
and healthful for drinking, for use
by industry and agriculture, for
swimming and boating, for fish
and wildlife.
For additional copies of this
booklet, write: Public Information
Center (PM-215). EPA,
Washington, D.C.  20460.
              Some Suggestions on How
              to Improve Pollution Control
              in Plants
              In-plant control measures
              are  essential in the  total
              effort to control pollution in
              the  cane  sugar  industry.
              There are several  ways in
              which individual plants can
              reduce  pollutants  in  cane
              sugar waste waters.
                Two  of  the major waste
              sources in cane sugar mill-
              ing—cane  wash water and
              filter  muds—are  directly
              affected by harvesting tech-
              niques.  There are  several
              mechanical harvesting sys-
              tems currently being evalu-
              ated which should signifi-
              cantly   reduce   the  total
              amount of extraneous mate-
              rial  entering a  cane sugar
              factory. The goal is to lower
              the  extraneous  material to
such a level that cane wash-
ing is not necessary.
  The mills  and refineries
can  also  reduce waste wa-
ters  or waste water pollut-
ants by such control meas-
ures as dry hauling of filter
mud, reducing the amount
of  sucrose  in  barometric
condenser cooling  water,
and  the recirculation of that
water through cooling tow-
ers,  ponds,  or canals.  In
addition, mills can also recir-
culate cane  wash water to
further reduce waste water
  In another effort to reduce
waste, some refineries rec-
over water from nearly  all
floor wash drains as sweet
water for reuse. To prevent
untoward sugar loss, most
refineries sweep up as much
spilled  sugar  as possible
before  washing  down  the
receiving area.