mesowatch
Reviewing the EPA’s Asbestos Ban
Section divider

EPA’s Asbestos Ban: Not Enough to End Cancer for Workers

Asbestos removal workers still at risk like many other occupations related to asbestos inhalation risk

Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently banned chrysolite, the last known type of asbestos imported into the United States, union officials and health and safety advocates say asbestos still exposes far too many American workers to mesothelioma and other forms of cancer.

Inadequate Protections Cited by Union

The United Steelworkers and the nonprofit Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization have asked the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the EPA’s mid-March ban, arguing that it fails to provide protections for those handling existing chrysolite gaskets in refineries, chemical plants, and other facilities. 

The EPA ban requires that chrysotile asbestos be phased out over several years. The USW petition acknowledges that the EPA has mandated interim occupational exposure protections for most workers exposed to asbestos during this period.

“However, EPA failed to provide such interim protections for workers exposed when handling asbestos sheet gasket,” the court document stated. “With this petition, USW challenges EPA’s failure to provide interim protections for the thousands of workers represented by USW who will continue to handle asbestos sheet gaskets.”

Challenges to EPA’s Ban

According to a press release from the ADAO, the EPA still allows one chlor-alkali producer “an unwarranted 12 years to phase out asbestos use when non-asbestos technology is available to complete the transition several years sooner.” 

The release states that the EPA also permits “hundreds of thousands of asbestos gaskets to remain indefinitely” without protecting workers from the release of asbestos fibers. 

Furthermore, according to the ADAO, the EPA ban does nothing to protect auto mechanics exposed to asbestos while servicing or repairing existing vehicles containing chrysolite brakes, linings, and other friction parts.

Workers aren’t the only ones the ADAO says are left unprotected by the EPA ban as it currently exists. The organization’s press release states the new rule “fails to address the release of asbestos to air, water, and soil and during on and off-site disposal of asbestos-containing waste at facilities subject to the rule, even though chlor-alaki plants are concentrated in environmental justice communities in Texas and Louisiana.”

Although the USW and ADAO say the chrysolite ban doesn’t go far enough, the American Chemistry Council and its Georgia, Ohio, and Texas affiliates filed petitions in the circuit courts of appeals for those states on April 19, seeking to weaken the EPA’s rule. 

On May 7, a judicial panel consolidated all the petitions and assigned them to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Louisiana. 

Continued Risks from Legacy Asbestos

The EPA’s ban on chrysolite doesn’t address the ongoing health risks of exposure to legacy asbestos such as crocidolite (riebeckite), amosite (cummingtonite-grunerite), anthophyllite, tremolite and actinolite, plus richterite and winchite-asbestos. 

Tremolite and anthophyllite are sometimes present in talc deposits and have been found in talcum powder consumer products.

In addition, chrysolite fibers still exist in insulation, roofing, and other materials used to construct buildings from the 1930s through the 1970s. 

Draft Report on Asbestos Risks

However, on April 15, the EPA released a draft of the second part of its asbestos risk evaluation, which focuses on the dangers of chrysolite and legacy varieties. This preliminary report states that exposure to asbestos “poses an unreasonable risk to human health.” 

If the EPA’s final evaluation affirms the draft’s findings, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) mandates that the agency conduct rulemaking to eliminate the risk. 

Public and Environmental Health at Stake

A statement the ADAO issued the same day the EPA released the second part of its asbestos evaluation says millions of workers and consumers “may be exposed to asbestos from these legacy products, often unknowingly and without any precautions to prevent exposure.”

“This draft evaluation is long overdue,” Reinstein said. “We have done far too little to understand how and where Americans are being exposed to legacy asbestos that lurks in our homes, schools, workplaces, and consumer products.”

Lack of Independent Review Raises Concerns

However, the ADAO noted in its statement that in a “sharp break” with the EPA’s first 10 risk evaluations under the Toxic Substances Control Act, the agency “did not seek any independent scientific peer review of the draft evaluation.”

The ADAO and other organizations “have raised concerns with EPA leadership about this lack of independent oversight,” according to the statement. 

Bob Sussman, ADAO counsel, and a former senior EPA official, noted in the statement that public health experts and policymakers will rely on the second part of the asbestos evaluation “for authoritative guidance on the ongoing health threats from legacy asbestos, but the absence of independent peer review raises questions about the evaluation’s completeness and scientific validity.”

Upcoming Deadlines and Public Involvement

The EPA will complete the evaluation by Dec. 1, 2024. That date was set as part of a 2021 settlement with the ADAO, which heavily criticized the agency’s first asbestos risk evaluation completed the year before. The ADAO and other organizations objected to the evaluation because it did not include legacy uses of chrysolite and other types of asbestos.   

The ADAO and the ACC plan to participate in the 60-day public comment period for the current asbestos evaluation. 

In a statement, the ACC said, “EPA’s continued decision to consider all asbestos fiber types as equal in cancer potency when the science indicates otherwise and when EPA anticipates exposures to mixed fibers is troubling. For more than 40 years, there has been broad agreement in the toxicology and epidemiology community that there are massive differences in the potency of these fiber types for lung cancer and mesothelioma.”

Mary Pieper

Reading Time: 1 mins

Published On: May 10, 2024

Mary Pieper - author

Mary Pieper is a seasoned journalist, focusing on asbestos awareness and legal and medical issues. She earned her Bachelor's in English with a minor in Journalism from the University of Northern Iowa. Mary's extensive experience includes nearly 20 years as a reporter at the Globe Gazette in Mason City, Iowa, demonstrating her commitment to impactful journalism.

More to Read

Section Divider

John Edwards - September 24, 2024

Arizona Veterans: The Persistent Danger of Asbestos Exposure

Mini Divider

News & Data

News & Data Divider
Hands of a veteran in military uniform, clasped together in reflection.

Arizona Veterans: The Persistent Danger of Asbestos Exposure

By John Edwards

Read Story
j&j talcum powder bottle, contains asbestos

Johnson & Johnson Faces Critical Legal Test in Connecticut

By Matthew Davis

Read Story
chemotherapy is next frontier for mesothelioma treatment

FDA Approves Pembrolizumab with Chemotherapy for Advanced Mesothelioma

By Amna Anees

Read Story
https://www.istockphoto.com/photo/scales-of-justice-and-gavel-on-wooden-table-and-lawyer-or-judge-working-with-gm939262058-256820558

Asbestos Litigation Trends Reveal Ongoing Health Crisis, Study Finds

By Jared Reagan

Read Story
mesothelioma jury verdict

J&J Subsidiary Declares Bankruptcy to Push Forward $10 Billion Talc Settlement

By Rachel Sasser

Read Story
mark leniar trial lawyer secures 39m - lady justice texas flag

$39M Awarded In Mesothelioma Case Tied to Medical Contaminated Talc

By Rachel Sasser

Read Story
Featured Image

Is J&J Playing Fair? Lawyers Dispute the $1.1 Billion Talc Settlement Increase

By Matthew Davis

Read Story
Lady Justice And Columns Of A Courthouse Facade

J&J Raises Talcum Powder Settlement by Another $1.1 Billion

By Matthew Davis

Read Story
Mini Divider
mesowatch

Mesowatch serves as an industry watchdog and advocates for patients and families affected by asbestos by providing reliable and up-to-date news stories and information on asbestos and mesothelioma.

NAVIGATE

About UsEditorial GuidelinesNewsSupport and ResourcesPrivacy Policy

CONTACT US

Email: support@mesowatch.com

Phone: (866) 402-1000

Address: 3260 N Hayden Rd, Suite 210, Scottsdale, AZ 85251

Copyright © 2024 by Mesowatch. All Rights Reserved.
The content on this website is protected by law and provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional medical or legal advice. Always seek advice from qualified professionals for health or legal matters.Disclaimer