Chemical industry groups, labor unions and a prominent public health group have filed separate petitions asking four different appellate courts to review EPA’s final TSCA risk management rule phasing out ongoing uses of chrysotile asbestos, setting up a high-stakes lottery to determine which court will ultimately hear the precedent-setting case.
November 15, 2026
Maria Hegstad
Maria Hegstad is managing editor of Inside EPA’s Risk Policy Report, where she has been writing about all things chemicals, risk assessment policy and toxicology since 2008. Before joining Inside EPA, Maria reported for local newspapers in Manassas, VA, and D.C., covering courts and local government. Maria is a proud native of the “other” Washington, raised in Tacoma. She earned her BA from the College of William & Mary and her MSJ from Medill.
Archived Articles
EPA has preliminarily determined that many activities that disturb legacy asbestos -- such as demolition of older buildings that were constructed with the material -- pose “unreasonable risk” to workers and others, potentially triggering new TSCA rules to protect them, according to a draft of the agency’s long-awaited “part 2” evaluation of the mineral.
Date:
Republican lawmakers are continuing their push-back against EPA’s draft risk evaluation of formaldehyde, with a new letter warning the agency that a potential workplace exposure limit is too stringent and could jeopardize a range of industrial sectors, while also raising concerns that any rule based on the review could conflict with Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) policies.
Date:
EPA will use an industry “workshop” next month to unveil standard “occupational exposure scenarios” (OES) developed by staff to assess potential worker exposures as part of its TSCA risk evaluations of existing chemicals -- a move that could help address industry complaints that those reviews greatly overstate occupational risks.
Date:
Nine congressional Republicans and one Democrat are pressing EPA to loosen an exposure limit in its draft TSCA risk evaluation of formaldehyde, arguing that adopting the proposed figure would result in a “de facto ban” of the ubiquitous chemical despite the agency’s statements that it will consider costs and practicability in any rule based on the review.
Date:
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) is raising early attacks on a workplace exposure limit in EPA’s draft TSCA evaluation of formaldehyde, calling it unreasonably strict and at odds with science -- even as the agency itself acknowledges that key challenges in implementing that figure could lead to a different value in its eventual rulemaking.
Date:
EPA has released its final TSCA risk-management rule for chrysotile asbestos, aiming to phase out the carcinogen from chlor-alkali production on a sliding timeline that will run between five and 12 years based in part on the alternative technology to which a facility is switching -- a win for industry groups that argued the proposed two-year deadline was impossible.
Date:
EPA chemicals chief Michal Freedhoff used a March 5 speech to reiterate her defenses of the agency’s approach to workplace safety in a series of landmark chemical-safety rules, seeking to counter arguments that it is improperly stepping into areas that should be the domain of OSHA or older environmental programs.
Date:
Environmental groups are arguing that EPA’s first draft TSCA risk evaluation since the Trump era fails to consider the “aggregate” risks workers and other vulnerable populations face from toxic chemicals, as they press the agency to instead assess -- and eventually regulate -- dangers from multiple sources at once.
Date:
The federal district judge hearing litigation over an EPA formaldehyde assessment that employers fear could drive strict workplace limits lobbed skeptical questions at all attorneys involved at a hearing on the parties’ dueling requests to either dismiss the suit or immediately block all use of the contested document, showing few hints on his plans for the case overall.
Date: