But some critics say this would exclude too many people from filing claims, and they favor another possible solution, setting up a trust fund for victims. They are also hoping to get their ideas into legislation in the new Congress.

The Senate Judiciary Committee Republican chairman Orrin Hatch of Utah, and the ranking Democrat, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, are trying to find a consensus on asbestos reform that industry, lawyers and unions could support.

Earlier this week the American Bar Association backed limits on asbestos lawsuits brought over noncancerous lung injuries that plaintiffs allege were caused by exposure to the fire-retardant mineral.

Nickles' bill, which largely mirrors the ABA approach, and a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on asbestos set for March 5 could spur further debate in Congress over whether to stop the torrent of litigation blamed for driving more than 60 companies into bankruptcy.

Previous Congresses have failed to address soaring asbestos claims. Companies lobbying for limits have been countered by environmentalists and trial lawyers with major involvement in asbestos litigation. Last year, there was talk in Congress for months about an asbestos bill, but it never materialized.

Supreme Court justices have invited Congress to find a national solution to the "elephantine mass of asbestos cases," as Justice David Souter said in 1999.

Asbestos was widely used for fireproofing and insulation until the 1970s, when scientists concluded that inhaled fibers could be linked to cancer and other diseases. An avalanche of claims since then has cost more than $54 billion in settlements.

In a statement last week, Nickles, a former businessman, said: "There is no question asbestos litigation is a serious deterrent to economic growth." He held a Senate Budget Committee hearing on that aspect last month.

AMA CRITERIA

Nickles' bill would use criteria approved by the American Medical Association to establish whether someone is sick enough to sue.

It would also put on hold the statute of limitations until a physical impairment is discovered, a provision aimed at preventing a rush to file claims over fear that the right to file suit might expire before illness develops.

The bill prohibits "venue shopping" in courts, with the exception of cancer patients diagnosed with a life expectancy of less than three years.

Michael Baroody, executive vice-president of the National Association of Manufacturers, welcomed Nickles' effort, saying it "brings the stars into even closer alignment for passage of long-needed reform legislation." Baroody chairs the Asbestos Alliance, an industry group that favors setting medical criteria to root out frivolous lawsuits.

But Damon Silvers, counsel for the AFL-CIO and an advocate of an asbestos victims trust fund, said the Nickles bill was harmful to victims who could not meet the specific medical criteria for suing.

"We estimate that more than a million people who have been injured would not get any compensation" under such a medical criteria system, Silvers said.

In the House, Reps. Chris Cannon, a Utah Republican, and Cal Dooley, a California Democrat, are also drafting an asbestos bill, a Cannon spokeswoman said.