In March 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency published the final rule banning chrysotile asbestos under the Toxic Substances Control Act, the first comprehensive asbestos use prohibition to survive legal challenge in more than three decades. For building owners, contractors, and property managers in Georgia and South Carolina, the rule raises immediate questions: what exactly did it ban, what does it require, and does it change how legacy asbestos in existing buildings must be managed?
The short answer to the last question is no, but the explanation matters. The 2024 rule addresses ongoing commercial uses of chrysotile. The asbestos already installed in buildings constructed before the mid-1980s is governed by a separate body of regulation: NESHAP, OSHA 1926.1101, AHERA, and state-level requirements from Georgia EPD and South Carolina DHEC. Those obligations remain in place regardless of the 2024 rule, and they are the rules that directly affect renovation and demolition projects in the CSRA. For a full overview of those operational compliance requirements, see our post on NESHAP, OSHA, and Georgia EPD asbestos requirements.
This post covers the TSCA regulatory pathway: what the 2020 risk evaluation concluded, what the 2024 final rule bans, and what the November 2024 Part 2 evaluation means for legacy materials.
The TSCA risk evaluation process
The Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act in 2016, requires EPA to evaluate high-priority chemicals for unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. For asbestos, EPA designated it a high-priority substance and began its formal evaluation process. The evaluation for Part 1 focused specifically on chrysotile asbestos, the only asbestos fiber type still commercially imported and used in the United States at the time.
A TSCA risk evaluation covers specific “conditions of use”: the ways a chemical is manufactured, processed, distributed, used, and disposed of in commerce. For chrysotile, the conditions of use examined included:
- Use in chlor-alkali manufacturing, where asbestos diaphragms are used to separate chlorine and caustic soda in electrolytic cells
- Processing of asbestos-containing sheet gaskets
- Use in aftermarket automotive brakes and linings
- Use in oilfield brake blocks and other vehicle friction products
- Disposal of chrysotile-containing products and waste
The evaluation did not cover legacy uses, meaning asbestos already installed in older buildings, because legacy materials were not part of active commerce. That became the subject of Part 2.
What the 2020 risk evaluation found
The EPA published the Final Risk Evaluation for Asbestos Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos in December 2020. The conclusion was unambiguous: chrysotile asbestos presents unreasonable risks to health under all of its ongoing conditions of use.
The evaluation identified unreasonable risks across four categories of exposed populations:
- Workers directly handling chrysotile in manufacturing and processing operations, including diaphragm manufacturers and installers, sheet gasket cutters and fabricators, and automotive brake technicians
- Occupational non-users: people working in facilities where chrysotile is used but not directly handling the material themselves, who nonetheless are exposed to ambient fiber concentrations
- Consumer users: people purchasing and installing aftermarket asbestos-containing brake products for personal vehicle maintenance
- Bystanders: people in proximity to consumer use of chrysotile-containing products
The evaluation cited mesothelioma, lung cancer, and other asbestos-related cancers as the basis for the unreasonable risk findings, applying the standard toxicological and epidemiological evidence on chrysotile health effects. Finding unreasonable risk under TSCA Section 6 triggers an obligation for EPA to promulgate a risk management rule.
The 2024 final rule: what it bans and when
EPA published the final risk management rule in the Federal Register on March 28, 2024. The rule prohibits the manufacture, import, processing, distribution in commerce, and use of chrysotile asbestos across all identified conditions of use, on staggered compliance timelines:
Automotive and oilfield friction products: banned six months from the rule’s effective date. Aftermarket asbestos-containing brake linings, clutch facings, and oilfield brake blocks may no longer be sold or used.
Sheet gaskets (most uses): banned two years from the effective date. Specific phase-out extensions apply to gaskets used in titanium dioxide production and nuclear material processing facilities, which required additional transition time due to the specialized nature of those operations.
Chlor-alkali diaphragms: the most complex phase-out, with individual facility timelines ranging from five to twelve years depending on the scale of the transition involved. The eight remaining chlor-alkali facilities using asbestos diaphragms must convert to non-asbestos membrane or diaphragm technology. Each facility must certify its transition progress to EPA. During the extended phase-out periods, the rule mandates enhanced workplace safety measures to protect workers from chrysotile exposure.
The rule was comprehensive in scope for ongoing commercial uses. No new applications of chrysotile asbestos may be introduced into U.S. commerce.
Part 2: legacy uses and associated disposal (November 2024)
In November 2024, EPA published the Final Risk Evaluation for Asbestos Part II: Supplemental Evaluation Including Legacy Uses and Associated Disposals. Part 2 expanded the scope of the TSCA asbestos evaluation in two significant ways.
First, it covered five additional asbestos fiber types not addressed in Part 1: crocidolite, amosite, anthophyllite, tremolite, and actinolite, as well as asbestos-containing talc.
Second, and more practically significant for property owners, it evaluated the health risks from legacy uses, meaning asbestos-containing materials that were installed in buildings, vehicles, and equipment in prior decades and remain in place today. The materials examined included:
- Floor tiles, ceiling tiles, and associated adhesives
- Pipe insulation, duct insulation, and mechanical system insulation
- Roofing shingles and felt
- Spray-applied fireproofing and textured coatings
- Cement board, transite pipe, and other cementitious products
- Joint compound and texture paints
EPA’s conclusion in Part 2: disturbing and handling asbestos associated with legacy uses and disposal poses unreasonable risks to workers, occupational non-users, and bystanders. That finding sets the stage for future risk management rulemaking under TSCA Section 6 that would govern how legacy ACMs must be managed when buildings are renovated or demolished.
As of this writing, EPA has not yet published a final risk management rule for the Part 2 legacy uses. The practical implication is that the existing regulatory framework, specifically NESHAP, OSHA 1926.1101, AHERA, and state programs, continues to govern legacy ACM management, and the Part 2 evaluation provides additional regulatory grounding for strengthening those requirements over time.
What the 2024 ban does not require building owners to do
The 2024 final rule does not require property owners to remove asbestos from existing buildings. The rule prohibits new commercial manufacture, import, processing, and use. It does not create a retroactive obligation to disturb or remove legacy materials that are already in place.
This is an important distinction. A building owner with intact asbestos floor tiles from 1975 is not out of compliance with the 2024 TSCA rule by virtue of owning that building. The appropriate management approach for intact legacy ACMs that are not being disturbed is typically ongoing monitoring and maintenance, not immediate removal, which carries its own risks if performed improperly.
What the existing regulatory framework does require is this: before any renovation or demolition work that could disturb suspect materials in a building constructed before 1981, those materials must be surveyed for asbestos by an accredited inspector, and the results must govern how the project proceeds. For projects exceeding NESHAP thresholds (260 linear feet of pipe insulation, 160 square feet of surfacing material, or 35 cubic feet of other ACM), EPA notification is required before work begins.
Regulations governing legacy asbestos in Georgia and South Carolina
The regulatory framework that actually governs day-to-day asbestos management in the CSRA is distinct from the TSCA product ban and has been in place for decades:
- EPA NESHAP (40 CFR Part 61 Subpart M): Requires pre-renovation and pre-demolition asbestos surveys, establishes notification requirements for regulated projects, and sets standards for ACM handling and disposal. Violations can reach $70,117 per day per violation.
- OSHA 29 CFR 1926.1101: Governs worker protection during all construction activities that may disturb asbestos, including mandatory air monitoring, PPE, regulated areas, and training requirements by work classification.
- AHERA: Requires accredited inspections and written management plans for asbestos in public and private K-12 schools, with re-inspection every three years.
- Georgia EPD: State-level asbestos notification and licensing requirements that parallel and in some cases exceed federal NESHAP standards.
- South Carolina DHEC: State certification requirements for asbestos inspectors, contractors, and laboratories, with its own notification and disposal requirements.
FAQ
Does the 2024 EPA chrysotile ban mean I need to remove asbestos from my building?
No. The rule bans ongoing commercial uses: manufacturing, importing, selling, and using chrysotile asbestos in products. It does not require removal of existing asbestos-containing materials from buildings. The decision to manage legacy ACMs in place versus abate them depends on the condition of the materials, planned renovation activity, and applicable federal and state requirements.
If asbestos was already banned in most products years ago, why was the 2024 rule necessary?
EPA attempted a comprehensive ban in 1989, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down most of it in 1991, finding that EPA had not met the cost-benefit analysis requirements under the original TSCA. That ruling left chrysotile asbestos permissible in specific product categories for over 30 years. The 2016 TSCA reforms established a clearer risk evaluation and risk management framework, which EPA used to successfully implement the 2024 rule.
What does EPA’s Part 2 risk evaluation mean for my renovation project?
The Part 2 findings reinforce that disturbing legacy ACMs during renovation or demolition poses unreasonable health risks. While specific new rules under Part 2 are pending, the existing NESHAP, OSHA, and state requirements that already require pre-renovation surveys and proper ACM handling remain fully in effect. The Part 2 evaluation does not create any new immediate obligations, but it signals that the regulatory framework for legacy asbestos management is likely to be strengthened over time.
My contractor says he can tell by looking whether material contains asbestos. Is that accurate?
No. Asbestos-containing materials are visually indistinguishable from non-asbestos versions of the same products. Floor tiles, pipe insulation, joint compound, and ceiling tiles from the same era and manufacturer may or may not contain asbestos. Visual inspection cannot determine which.. The only way to confirm the presence or absence of asbestos is laboratory analysis of a sample collected by an accredited inspector using polarized light microscopy or transmission electron microscopy.
EnviroPro 360: Certified asbestos inspections in Augusta and the CSRA
Whether you are navigating the TSCA rule’s implications for your facility or planning a renovation project that may disturb suspect materials, EnviroPro 360 provides certified asbestos testing and inspection services to help you understand what is in your building and what your obligations are under Georgia and South Carolina regulations.
- Pre-renovation and pre-demolition asbestos surveys
- Bulk material sampling and NVLAP-accredited laboratory analysis
- NESHAP threshold determination and notification support
- AHERA school inspections and management plan documentation
- Post-abatement clearance air sampling
- Serving Augusta, Evans, Grovetown, Aiken, North Augusta, Columbia, and surrounding CSRA communities
If you own or manage a commercial or residential property in the CSRA and need clarity on whether asbestos is present and how it must be handled, contact EnviroPro 360 to schedule an inspection with a Georgia EPD and South Carolina DHEC accredited inspector.
