Document Gon0ybxLLQom1Xbx9L1r2mVY

A20 THE NEW YORK TIMES NATIONAL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 199i Appeals Court Strikes Down Major Parts ofFederal Asbestos Ban J By WARREN E. LEARY whether it would appeal. Agency offi The first stage of the ban, which took Joining the asbestos industry in op ( Special to The New York.Times cials and lawyers were examining the effect in 1990 and was upheld by the posing the ban in court were the gov WASHINGTON. Oci. 21 -- A Federal appeals court documents, said Gwenn appeals court, prohibited new uses of ernments of Canada and the Province appeals court in New Orleans today Brown, an E.P.A. spokeswoman. asbestos, banned imported asbestos of Quebec, which argued that the mate struck down major, parts of a farreaching ban by the Environmental Protection Agency on asbestos prod The agency had proposed a gradual phaseout of asbestos over seven years that would have eliminated 84 percent products and ended use of the material in roofing and flooring fell, sheeting and tile, and clothing. rial could be mined and used safely under controlled conditions. Improper Procedures ucts: ruling that the agency had not adequately considered alternative reg ulation short of the prohibition. The ruling upheld the provisions of the agency's 1989 phaseout of asbestos use that are already in effect but sent provisions that would have taken effect in 1993 and 1996 back to the agency for more proceedings. The decision was issued by the Unit of the material's uses in domestic prod ucts. Because of growing concerns about asbestos's safety, use of the ma terial had declined to 85,000 metric tons at the beginning of the ban in 1989 from 560.000 metric tons in 1979. Current consumption of asbestos, most of which Is imparted from Canada, is about 40.000 tons, according to industry fig ures. A second stage, which was thrown out by the court ruling, would have stopped asbestos use in products like brake drum linings, automotive trans mission components, gaskets and other friction parts in 1993. And finally, in 1996, the rules would have barred pro duction and use or roof coatings, brake blocks, paper, pipe and shingles made with asbestos. Writing for the unanimous threemember court, Judge Jerry E. Smith said the E.P.A. had violated pro cedures of the Toxic Substances Con trol Act of 1976 when it drafted the asbestos ban in 1989. He said the agen cy failed to follow provisions of that law and previous court rulings requir ing that "before it impose, a ban on a ed Stales Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which has handled previous asbestos cases. Asbestos, a durable, heat-resistant mineral once widely used In building and consumer products, insulation and heat-bearing components, is a carcino gen that Is also believed to be responsi ble for debilitating lung ailments in those who inhale its fibers. Many of the diseases associated with loose asbestos, fibers do not develop until two or three decades after exposure, experts say. Continued Use In Brakes The asbestos industry said today's ruling clears the way to continue using the'material in automobile parts like brakes and clutch facings and in other products subjected to friction. Asbes tos would have been banned from those products in 1993, and additional uses wotjld have been ruled out in 1996. Robert J. Pigg, president of the As bestos Information Association/North America, an Industry group, welcomed . the | ruling as a "critical step in the j right direction." It was "a vindication" of industry efforts to promote the con-; trolled and safe uses of asbestos, he | product it first evaluate and then reject precedent for industry to challenge the less burdensome alternatives laid regulation of other toxic substances by I out for it by Congress." claiming it did not get a fair chance to Th6 panel said the agency also erred comment on pending rules. when it adopted estimates of what level "This ruling may slow down-tbe of exposure to asbestos is dangerous phasing out of asbestos and asbestos after the public comment period on its products in the United States, but Jit proposal had expired, thereby depriv won't stop it," said Mary Vogel, execu ing opponents a chance to challenge the tive director of the Asbestos Victims figures. Special Fund Trust, of Philadelphia,! a "Finally, the E.P.A. failed to provide not-for-profit group set up as part bf a reasonable basis for the purported the bankruptcy of the Manville Corpo benefits of its proposed rule by refus ration, once the nation's biggest asbes ing to evaluate the toxicity of likely tos producer. "If the E.P.A. won't ban substitute products that will be used to asbestos in the U.S., market forces replace asbestos goods," Judge Smith will." .-? wrote. Officials of groups representing pea-, pie injured by past exposure to asbes tos said the ruling would not stop the decline in its use. But the officials worried that the ruling could set a said. "We have known for many years thal asbestos can be safely and secure ly bound in today's products, as long as carefully controlled manufacturing 'and installation processes are em- Iployed," Mr. Pigg said. "We are glad to 'see. the court agrees that the evidence supports this view." The environmental agency had no immediate comment on the ruling or. HWBUI0004564