Posted on January 7, 2026

As the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) engages in another critical legal challenge against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), we reflect on how far we’ve come and how far we still need to go. Thanks to the dedication of so many advocates, experts, and community members, we are very proud of the progress we’ve made together. This blog provides a glimpse into the changes we’ve made, tracing the history of asbestos regulation in the United States, highlighting key legal victories and challenges, and reinforcing the urgent need for stronger protections against asbestos exposure.

A Brief History of Asbestos Regulation (1989–1991)

  • 1989 EPA Asbestos Ban and Phase-Out Rule (Remanded)
    The EPA issued a rule banning most asbestos-containing products. However, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned it in 1991, leaving only a limited number of products banned and creating a regulatory vacuum that persists to this day.

Recent Federal Action on Asbestos (2016–2024)

Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Act (ARBAN) (2016 – 2026) 

Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Acts in the U.S. Senate

Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Acts in the U.S. House of Representatives

There have been two ARBAN legislative hearings:

ADAO’s Legal Advocacy Timeline

ADAO and allied public health groups challenged the EPA’s framework for evaluating chemical risks. In 2019, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the EPA must consider legacy asbestos in its risk evaluations, a landmark decision reinforcing TSCA’s full intent.

After the EPA denied our petition to strengthen asbestos data reporting, ADAO filed suit. The court ruled the denial was “arbitrary and capricious,” requiring the EPA to revise the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule.

ADAO challenged the Final Risk Evaluation for asbestos, citing significant omissions like contaminated talc and environmental pathways. We also issued a 60-day notice under TSCA Section 20 and subsequently sued to compel action on legacy asbestos.

On April 19, 2024, ADAO and co-petitioners filed a Petition for Review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to define the science, protect the existing rule, and, where possible, improve it, calling for a more substantial Part 1 Chrysotile Rule. Key concerns include:

    • Prolonged transition periods for technology phase-outs
    • Inadequate controls over in-place asbestos
    • Failure to regulate environmental release pathways
    • The rule has since been challenged in at least five separate lawsuits by environmental, labor, and industry stakeholders. These cases have been consolidated in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, chosen at random by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

ADAO, joined by public health, scientific, and labor partners, filed a final reply brief challenging EPA’s limited March 2024 chrysotile asbestos rule as incomplete and under‑protective, arguing it must cover all six asbestos fibers, all conditions of use, faster phase‑out timelines for OxyChem, and ongoing environmental releases, while industry petitioners simultaneously seek to vacate the rule outright.

ADAO filed a federal FOIA complaint on January 7, 2026, after months of unanswered requests to agencies overseeing the White House East Wing demolition. The suit seeks documentation on asbestos inspection, abatement, and disposal to ensure public transparency and compliance with safety laws.

Forthcoming Regulation: MoCRA and Cosmetics Safety

  • Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act (MoCRA)
    MoCRA mandated the FDA to develop standardized testing for asbestos in talc-containing cosmetic products. On December 26, 2024, the FDA proposed a rule that would require manufacturers to use validated testing methods, such as Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), to detect and identify asbestos. 

The Trump Administration withdrew the FDA’s proposed rule that would have required standardized, scientifically validated methods to detect asbestos in talc-based cosmetics, defying both scientific consensus and a Congressional mandate under the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022. Linda Reinstein warned that, without enforceable testing standards, contaminated talc products can remain on the market, leaving women, children, and other consumers at ongoing risk of preventable asbestos exposure and deadly diseases such as mesothelioma, ovarian cancer, and lung cancer.

Looking Ahead

While the EPA’s 2024 actions signal progress, they are not enough. ADAO remains committed to a dual-track strategy: leveraging the power of the courts and the legislative process to demand stronger protections, better enforcement, and ultimately, a full ban on asbestos.

From courtroom victories to proposed regulatory reforms, our mission remains the same:
To eliminate asbestos-related diseases through prevention, education, and policy reform.