BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON
THE BAN OF ASBESTOS PRODUCTS IN FRANCE

The ban on asbestos products

Exceptions will be granted in those product categories where "less hazardous" products do not exist (e.g. heavy duty truck brakelinings, fireproofing clothing).

An official Decree giving legal status to the ban is expected to be put forward in September or October of this year.

The INSERM report

• The ban was announced on the day following the release of a report by INSERM (Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale), entitled "Effets sur la santé et principaux types d'expositions à l'amiante" (Asbestos related health effects and principal types of exposure to asbestos);
• The report estimates that the number of asbestos-related deaths by mesothelioma and lung cancer could approach 1,950 in 1996;
• The report suggests that asbestos insulation materials in buildings constitute a public health hazard and that chrysotile workers are at significant risk, event at low levels of exposure (e.g. 0.1f/ml).

The regulatory context
Two decrees on asbestos were adopted on February 7, 1996, according to which:

• the owners of buildings containing asbestos must conduct a survey of their premises before the end of 1999 to identify the presence of asbestos insulation materials, evaluate the condition of the premises concerned and undertake remedial action if the exposure level should exceed 25f/litre;
• the permissible exposure limit for chrysotile in the workplace was lowered in two phases:

        Prior to the February 1996 Decrees, France, unlike most other countries in Europe
        and North America, did not have in place regulations obliging building owners to
        inspect for and put in place management programs for in-place asbestos insulation
        materials.

The political and social context (see Annex I)

• Since 1994, several anti-asbestos committees have been formed. Media attention has increased and public concern over asbestos insulation materials in buildings now approaches a panic situation.
• In June, 1996, ANDEVA, an anti-asbestos group, launched a court action (plainte contre X) just days before the ban was announced. This civil suit attempts to incriminate all those individuals, including government and industry representatives and scientific authorities who purportedly have conspired to delay implementation of regulations to address the problem of asbestos insulation in buildings and a total ban of asbestos use in France.
• 1995 saw the election of a new government in France, strikes that brought the country to a standstill, and an international protest against French nuclear testing in the Pacific.

The reaction of French industry

• The French asbestos industry has decided not to contest the government's decision;
• Industry is attempting to negotiate an extension to the January 1, 1997 deadline in order to have more time to convert manufacturing installations and to minimize the social impact.

The Asbestos Institute's position

• The recent sequence of events suggests that France's ban of asbestos products was a well-orchestrated political decision taken by a new government intent on placating certain environmental and trade union groups, and washing its hands of a difficult problem it inherited from the previous administration.
• Developments in France parallel events which took place in the United States in the 1980's. The EPA's proposed ban in the U.S.A. coincided with public alarm surrounding the use of asbestos-insulation material in school buildings. It is noted that the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned EPA's asbestos ban on October 1991, because the ban "actually may increase the risk of injury Americans face".
• The INSERM report cannot be viewed as a state-of-the-art document. It contains the same flaws that were present in the EPA proposal: an overestimation of the deaths attributed to asbestos exposure in the years ahead; failure to recognize the differences in risk associated with the different types of asbestos fibres; failure to take into account those studies showing no detectable risk to chrysotile workers at low levels of exposure; and no consideration is given to the hazards associated with the use of substitutes. (see Annex II)
• Special emphasis on the asbestos-cement sector has been misplaced. Modern asbestos-cement factories have won international awards in many countries around the world and indeed are seen as models of prevention and control. Several epidemiological studies confirm that at control levels of between 1.0 - 2.0 f/cc, chrysotile workers in the asbestos-cement sector, are not at detectable risk. In addition, the use of hand tools and the application of simple, straight-forward work practices can readily control dust exposure on construction sites. (see Annex III)
• In conclusion, failure of the previous French administration to introduce effective regulations to address the problem of in-place asbestos insulation materials has led to a crisis situation. However, the decision to ban the manufacture, import and use of asbestos products will do little to address this problem. Unfortunately, the French government, in its haste to find a political solution, has unjustifiably sacrificed a responsible industry which has made major investments to provide safe working conditions for its workers. Moreover, it sets an undesirable precedent for the regulation of other hazardous substances and products.

                                                                 July 22, 1996