Abstract:From 2018 to 2020, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) performed a risk evaluation of chrysotile asbestos to evaluate the hazards of asbestos-containing products (e.g. encapsulated products), including brakes and gaskets, allegedly currently sold in the United States. During the public review period, the EPA received more than 100 letters commenting on the proposed risk evaluation. The Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC), which peer reviewed the document, asked approximately 100 questions of the EPA that they expected to be addressed prior to publication of the final version of the risk assessment on 30 December 2020. After careful analysis, the authors of this manuscript found many significant scientific shortcomings in both the EPA's draft and final versions of the chrysotile risk evaluation. First, the EPA provided insufficient evidence regarding the current number of chrysotile-containing brakes and gaskets being sold in the United States, which influences the need for regulatory oversight. Second, the Agency did not give adequate consideration to the more than 200 air samples detailed in the published literature of auto mechanics who changed brakes in the 1970-1989 era. Third, the Agency did not consider more than 15 epidemiology studies indicating that exposures to encapsulated chrysotile asbestos in brakes and gaskets, which were generally in commerce from approximately 1950-1985, did not increase the incidence of any asbestos-related disease. Fourth, the concern about chrysotile asbestos being a mesothelioma hazard was based on populations in two facilities where mixed exposure to chrysotile and commercial amphibole asbestos (amosite and crocidolite) occurred. All 8 cases of pleural cancer and mesothelioma in the examined populations arose in facilities where amphiboles were present. It was therefore inappropriate to rely on these cohorts to predict the health risks of exposure to short fiber chrysotile, especially of those fibers filled with phenolic resins. Fifth, the suggested inhalation unit risk (IUR) for chrysotile asbestos was far too high since it was not markedly different than for amosite, despite the fact that the amphiboles are a far more potent carcinogen. Sixth, the approach to low dose modeling was not the most appropriate one in several respects, but, without question, it should have accounted for the background rate of mesothelioma in the general population. Just one month after this assessment was published, the National Academies of Science notified the EPA that the Agency's systematic review process was flawed. The result of the EPA's chrysotile asbestos risk evaluation is that society can expect dozens of years of scientifically unwarranted litigation. Due to an aging population and because some fraction of the population is naturally predisposed to mesothelioma given the presence of various genetic mutations in DNA repair mechanisms (e.g. BAP1 and others), the vast majority of mesotheliomas in the post-2035 era are expected to be spontaneous and unrelated in any way to exposure to asbestos. Due to the EPA's analysis, it is our belief that those who handled brakes and gaskets in the post-1985 era may now believe that those exposures were the cause of their mesothelioma, when a risk assessment based on the scientific weight of evidence would indicate otherwise.

An Australian study to evaluate worker exposure to chrysotile in the automotive service industry

Evaluation of airborne asbestos concentrations associated with the maintenance of brakes on an industrial overhead crane

Evaluation of Airborne Asbestos Concentrations Associated with the Operation and Maintenance of Brakes and Clutches on Nonautomated Heavy Equipment

A 40-year cohort study on cancer mortality among female workers with manual spinning of chrysotile asbestos]

Airborne concentrations of chrysotile asbestos during operation of industrial crane controls and maintenance of associated arc chutes

Assessing lifetime occupational chrysotile inhalation exposure, respiratory symptoms, and lung cancer risk among brake maintenance workers in Malaysia

[A Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies on Cancer Mortality among Workers Exposure to Chrysotile Fiber Alone].

Cohort Studies on Cancer Mortality among Workers Exposed Only to Chrysotile Asbestos： a Meta-analysis

A critical review of the 2020 EPA risk assessment for chrysotile and its many shortcomings

An assessment of worker exposure to respirable dust and crystalline silica in workshops fabricating engineered stone

Dust exposure and mortality in an American factory using chrysotile, amosite, and crocidolite in mainly textile manufacture.

Exposure to crystalline silica at Alberta work sites: review of controls

Exposure to Welding Particles in Automotive Plants

Exposure-response estimate for lung cancer and asbestosis in a predominantly chrysotile-exposed Chinese factory cohort

Measurement of ambient fiber and fibrous glass concentrations near three fiberglass wool manufacturing facilities in the United States

Mesothelioma carcinogenesis of chrysotile and forsterite compared and validated by intraperitoneal injection in rat

Asbestos exposure among transmission mechanics in automotive repair shops

Application of a Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Principal Component Regression (PCR) Chemometric Method for the Quantification of Respirable Crystalline Silica (Quartz), Kaolinite, and Coal in Coal Mine Dusts from Australia, UK, and South Africa

Exposure to crystalline silica in abrasive blasting operations where silica and non-silica abrasives are used

Long-term instillation to four natural representative chrysotile of China induce the inactivation of P53 and P16 and the activation of C-JUN and C-FOS in the lung tissues of Wistar rats

Respiratory symptoms and lung function abnormalities among machine operators in automobile production