IMO / DeLaval: Asbestos Product History and Occupational Exposure Reference

Company History

IMO Industries and DeLaval are closely connected names in American industrial manufacturing, with DeLaval operating as a predecessor or affiliated entity whose product lines and corporate identity became intertwined with IMO over successive decades of industrial consolidation. For the purposes of asbestos litigation and occupational exposure research, the two names are often treated as a single corporate entity, and court filings and plaintiff documentation frequently reference them together under the combined designation “IMO — See DeLaval.”

DeLaval has roots in industrial machinery manufacturing stretching back to the early twentieth century, with operations focused on rotating equipment, turbines, pumps, separators, and related mechanical systems used across heavy American industries. These product categories placed DeLaval equipment on some of the most asbestos-intensive jobsites in the country — shipyards, power generation facilities, refineries, and large-scale industrial plants — throughout the mid-twentieth century.

IMO Industries, a successor and related corporate entity, continued manufacturing and distributing industrial equipment that had been produced under the DeLaval name. As with many industrial manufacturers of the era, the companies’ operational timelines span a period when asbestos-containing materials were standard components in pipe insulation, gaskets, packing, and other high-temperature or high-pressure mechanical applications. According to asbestos litigation records, the corporate history of DeLaval and IMO is significant in identifying responsible parties for exposures that occurred across several decades of American industrial activity.

The companies are believed to have ceased meaningful asbestos use by approximately the early 1980s, consistent with broader industry transitions prompted by mounting regulatory pressure from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and growing awareness of asbestos-related disease within the medical and scientific communities.

Asbestos-Containing Products

The specific asbestos-containing products associated with IMO and DeLaval are documented primarily through asbestos litigation records rather than through comprehensive publicly available product catalogs. Plaintiffs alleged that asbestos-containing pipe insulation was among the materials associated with DeLaval-branded and IMO-related equipment and systems installed on American jobsites from at least the 1940s through the early 1980s.

Pipe insulation was one of the most common asbestos-containing materials used across American industry during this period. Asbestos was prized for its thermal stability, resistance to heat and flame, and durability under mechanical stress — properties that made it a natural fit for insulating steam pipes, hot water lines, and other high-temperature piping systems. In the context of industrial turbines, pumps, and separators of the type manufactured by DeLaval, pipe insulation was a routine component of installation and ongoing maintenance.

According to asbestos litigation records, plaintiffs working with or around equipment associated with DeLaval and IMO alleged exposure to asbestos-containing pipe insulation during installation, maintenance, and repair activities. Court filings document claims that this insulation, when disturbed — whether during initial fitting, later repair work, or removal — released respirable asbestos fibers into the work environment.

It is important to note that in many industrial settings, workers encountered asbestos from multiple sources simultaneously. Pipe insulation adjacent to DeLaval turbines or pumps may have been supplied by third-party insulation manufacturers rather than by DeLaval or IMO directly. Asbestos litigation records reflect the complexity of this exposure environment, with plaintiffs alleging that the presence and use of DeLaval and IMO equipment created conditions in which asbestos-containing materials were regularly encountered.

Occupational Exposure

Workers in several skilled trades and industrial sectors have appeared in asbestos litigation records alleging exposure linked to IMO and DeLaval equipment and associated pipe insulation. The occupational environments most frequently documented in court filings include:

Shipyards and Naval Installations Shipbuilding and ship repair were among the most heavily asbestos-contaminated work environments in twentieth-century America. DeLaval turbines and pumps were widely used in naval and commercial vessels, and pipe insulation was applied extensively throughout engine rooms, boiler rooms, and mechanical spaces. Pipefitters, machinists, boilermakers, and insulation workers aboard ships routinely worked in proximity to asbestos-covered systems, often in enclosed spaces with limited ventilation where fiber concentrations could reach dangerous levels.

Power Generation Facilities Steam turbines and associated rotating equipment were central components of coal, oil, and early nuclear power plants. Workers at these facilities — including pipefitters, millwrights, maintenance mechanics, and plant operators — may have encountered asbestos-containing pipe insulation associated with turbine systems during construction, routine maintenance, and equipment overhaul. Court filings document claims by power plant workers alleging exposure in precisely these settings.

Petroleum Refineries and Chemical Plants Refineries and chemical processing facilities relied on pumps, turbines, and extensive piping systems to manage high-temperature, high-pressure processes. Workers in these environments — including pipefitters, instrument technicians, and maintenance crews — were regularly involved in work that disturbed pipe insulation. Plaintiffs alleged in court filings that such disturbances, during both maintenance and capital improvement projects, released asbestos fibers from insulation associated with installed equipment.

Industrial Manufacturing Plants Large-scale manufacturing operations across industries — steel, paper, automotive, and others — incorporated steam-driven equipment and pressurized systems as integral parts of their production infrastructure. Maintenance workers, pipefitters, and millwrights at these facilities have appeared in litigation records describing routine exposure to asbestos insulation during equipment servicing.

The latency period for asbestos-related diseases is a critical factor for workers researching their exposure history. Mesothelioma, asbestosis, and asbestos-related lung cancer typically do not manifest clinically until 20 to 50 years after initial exposure. Workers who performed maintenance or installation work involving DeLaval or IMO equipment during the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s may only now be receiving diagnoses linked to those decades of occupational exposure.

Secondary exposure is also documented in the broader asbestos litigation record. Family members of industrial workers — particularly those who laundered work clothing — have alleged exposure to asbestos fibers carried home from jobsites, a mechanism of exposure well recognized in the scientific and medical literature.

IMO and DeLaval are classified as Tier 2 entities in the context of asbestos litigation: companies that have been named as defendants in asbestos-related personal injury lawsuits but for which no dedicated asbestos bankruptcy trust fund has been established to process claims.

According to asbestos litigation records, plaintiffs have named IMO and DeLaval in lawsuits across multiple jurisdictions, alleging that occupational exposure to asbestos-containing materials associated with their equipment caused mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis, and other serious asbestos-related diseases. Court filings document these allegations; however, legal liability has not been established as a blanket matter of fact, and each claim reflects the specific circumstances of the individual plaintiff’s exposure history and medical condition.

Because no asbestos bankruptcy trust fund exists for IMO or DeLaval as of this writing, individuals with potential claims against these entities would pursue recovery through the civil litigation system rather than through a trust claims process. This means filing suit directly against IMO, DeLaval, or their successors in interest, rather than submitting an administrative claim to a trust fund administrator.

It is also common in asbestos litigation for plaintiffs to file claims against multiple defendants simultaneously. Workers who encountered asbestos-containing pipe insulation in environments where DeLaval or IMO equipment was present frequently have documented exposure to materials from numerous other manufacturers, insulation suppliers, and equipment makers. An experienced asbestos attorney can evaluate the full scope of a worker’s occupational history to identify all potentially responsible parties — which may include companies that do maintain active bankruptcy trust funds — and pursue recovery through the appropriate channels for each.

If you or a family member worked with or around equipment manufactured by DeLaval or IMO — particularly in shipyards, power plants, refineries, or industrial plants — and have been diagnosed with mesothelioma, lung cancer, or asbestosis, the following points are important to understand:

  • No dedicated trust fund exists for IMO or DeLaval claims at this time. Compensation claims against these entities proceed through the civil court system.
  • Multiple defendants are common in asbestos litigation. Other manufacturers, insulation suppliers, or equipment makers present on the same jobsites may have established asbestos bankruptcy trusts, which can be accessed in parallel with any civil litigation.
  • Exposure documentation matters. Employment records, union records, coworker testimony, and jobsite documentation can all help establish the specific circumstances of asbestos exposure for legal purposes.
  • Time limits apply. Statutes of limitations for asbestos-related personal injury and wrongful death claims vary by state and begin to run from the date of diagnosis or death, not from the date of exposure. Prompt consultation with an attorney experienced in asbestos litigation is advisable.
  • Secondary exposure claims are recognized. Family members who developed asbestos-related disease through take-home fiber exposure may also have legal options worth exploring.

Asbestos litigation is a specialized area of law with a well-developed body of precedent. Workers and families researching exposure history involving IMO or DeLaval equipment are encouraged to consult an attorney with specific experience in asbestos personal injury claims to evaluate their individual circumstances.