The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Dec. 3 issued Part 2 of a final risk determination providing an overview of the hazards of asbestos “to workers in certain conditions.” The agency will soon begin the risk management process to address the “unreasonable risk” associated with legacy use and associated disposal of asbestos.
EPA announced previously Part 1 of the final rule in March. That initial section banned the use and import of chrysotile asbestos under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Although there are several types of asbestos, chrysotile is the only type imported into the country. The TSCA was originally passed in 1976 to regulate the use of chemicals not otherwise regulated by federal statutes. EPA’s new campaign against asbestos use is just one of several efforts following the 2016 amendments to the TSCA. EPA requested public comment on the regulation in March and it went into effect on May 28.
Despite this relatively short period, there have already been several lawsuits related to the new rules throughout multiple jurisdictions and fields. Plaintiffs from industry, labor, and environmental groups filed lawsuits across four circuit courts. As a result, a federal judiciary panel consolidated all the suits into the Fifth Circuit of Appeals, where litigation will proceed.
Part 2 focuses on five different types of asbestos, talc, and Libby asbestos. The purpose of EPA’s evaluation focused on what is known as legacy use of asbestos, which includes use without ongoing or prospective manufacturing, processing, or distribution. The study also analyzed the future disposal of legacy asbestos. Common sources of legacy asbestos include construction materials in older homes and buildings. Products such as floor tiles, ceiling tiles, pipe wraps, and insulation once commonly contained asbestos. Talc or talcum powder is now seen as a cause of mesothelioma and other asbestos-related cancers as well.
The natural proximity of asbestos and talc results in contaminated talc during the mining process. Manufacturers then use talc for talcum powder products including makeup and baby powder. As a result, the number of lawsuits concerning talcum powder and associated cancer diagnoses has skyrocketed. One major manufacturer of baby powder has been named in nearly 60,000 lawsuits as of December and remains embattled in a contentious chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding.
Libby asbestos refers to that originating from the asbestos mine once located in Libby, Montana. Gold miners discovered vermiculite in Libby in 1881. The Zonolite Company began mining vermiculite in the 1920s and did so until the mine closed in 1990. It is estimated that while in operation, the Libby mine may have produced up to 80 percent of the world’s supply of vermiculite. Previously, products such as building materials and soil conditioners contained the substance. However, the vermiculite from Libby was also contaminated with a toxic and friable form of asbestos known as tremolite-actinolite series asbestos also known as Libby Amphibole asbestos (LA).
EPA studies revealed the presence of LA in both indoor and outdoor ambient air, vermiculite insulation and bulk materials, indoor dust, dirt, water, animals, and fish, among other objects. The agency began a formal LA removal and cleanup program in 2000 which lasted until 2018. Today, it is estimated the amount of LA in the air in downtown Libby is almost 100,000 times lower than it was during the many decades of mining activities.
Following the evaluation, EPA stated it “expects that the highest asbestos exposure potential exists” for workers who cut, sand, or grind asbestos-containing materials on a regular basis. The demolition of older buildings often poses a risk of exposure for construction workers and other laborers. Likewise, first responders such as firefighters face an elevated risk of exposure through their line of work.
Fires and other emergencies have the ability to spread asbestos containing materials throughout a building. Individuals in these professions face the most significant risk of being exposed to legacy asbestos products. Thus, although such building materials are no longer manufactured containing asbestos, the “legacy” asbestos present in older buildings still presents a major risk to these workers and first responders.
Part 2 is designed to establish the foundation for a proposed regulation to protect the workers from the above-described hazards. Despite these efforts, EPA reiterates that asbestos remains a serious health hazard that requires attention and caution. EPA intends for its continued efforts to reduce asbestos exposure altogether and thus prevent disease and save lives in the future.