Follow ADAO to Court: The Fifth Circuit Takes Up the 2024 Chrysotile Asbestos Rule on June 1

Posted on April 30, 2026

On June 1, 2026, ADAO will travel to New Orleans for the oral argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in TexasChemistry Council v. EPA (Case No. 24-60193). The case centers on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 2024 “Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos rule, the first risk management rule for asbestos issued under the amended Toxic Substances Control Act.

EPA determined that chrysotile asbestos presents an unreasonable risk to human health. Asbestos is a known carcinogen linked to mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis, and other serious diseases. These outcomes are preventable if asbestos exposure is eliminated.

Background of the EPA Part 1 Rule

On March 18, 2024, EPA finalized restrictions on how chrysotile asbestos, the only form of asbestos currently imported into the United States, can be used. The rule addresses six ongoing chrysotile uses and phases them out. 

The rule is a significant step forward. At the same time, it is limited in scope and does not represent a full asbestos ban.  It addresses one asbestos fiber type and only six chrysotile uses and includes a lengthy compliance time-line for chlor-alkali facilities. It also contains limited protections against asbestos exposure during the repair and maintenance of older vehicles containing asbestos components.  Finally, the rule  does not cover legacy asbestos, which remains in homes, schools, workplaces, and infrastructure across the country. Legacy asbestos is the subject of a separate regulatory effort referred to as “Part 2.”

Legal Challenges and Consolidation

Following publication of the rule, multiple petitions for review were filed in federal appellate courts and later consolidated in the Fifth Circuit.

Petitioners in the consolidated case include:

Industry and Trade Associations

  • American Chemistry Council
  • Georgia Chemistry Council
  • Ohio Chemistry Technology Council
  • Texas Chemistry Council
  • Olin Corporation

Public Health and Advocacy

  • Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization

Labor Organization

  • United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO

Industry petitioners seek to challenge or vacate the rule. Public health and labor petitioners seek to address gaps that limit the rule’s  protections.

Why ADAO Is Participating

ADAO petitioned for review of the Part 1 rule in 2024 as part of a coordinated public health effort focused on two priorities.

First, ADAO supports the scientific findings underlying the rule and the use of TSCA authority to regulate asbestos. The rule represents progress in reducing exposure risks and eliminating six ongoing uses of chrysotile asbestos.

Second, ADAO has identified critical gaps that must be addressed to fully protect public health. These include the limited scope of the rule and  the exclusion of other asbestos fiber types and future uses of these fibers and chrysotile.

Relationship to Prior Litigation

The current case builds on earlier asbestos litigation filed by ADAO. These cases involved EPA’s obligation to address legacy asbestos, the sufficiency of its Part 1 risk evaluation and gaps in reporting on asbestos which hampered EPA’s data collection and analysis of asbestos risks. 

The present case continues that process, with the court reviewing whether EPA’s 2024 rule meets statutory requirements and adequately addresses identified risks.

What Is at Stake

The outcome of this case will determine whether the EPA’s Part 1 rule remains in place, is strengthened, or is vacated. The decision will also affect how TSCA is applied to other  substances presenting unreasonable risks in future rulemaking.

For ADAO, the case is part of a broader effort to prevent exposure and advance public health protections. Regulatory action is one component. Durable and comprehensive protection requires legislative action.

ADAO continues to support the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act, which would prohibit the import and use of all forms of asbestos. A comprehensive statutory ban would provide protections and future certainty that go beyond the theTSCA  regulatory process.

Looking Ahead

The June 1 oral argument marks the next phase in this litigation. The Fifth Circuit’s decision will shape the trajectory of asbestos regulation in the United States. Mr. Robert M.  Sussman will present arguments on behalf of ADAO.

ADAO’s role in the case reflects its commitment to science-based advocacy, legal accountability, and prevention. The central issue before the court is whether protections against asbestos exposure will be sustained and strengthened.

Linda Reinstein