Memo Opening Docket for Comment
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Memo Opening Docket for Comment
Docket Opening Memo Asbestos Part 2
- Posted
- Jun 23, 2026
- Comment period
- Jun 23, 2026 – Aug 25, 2026
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Issues are identified as comment analysis progresses — nothing tagged on this document yet.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- Jul 22, 2026Comment submitted by AccuGuard Environmental LLCAnalysis pending📎 AttachmentRead comment →
- Jul 16, 2026Comment submitted by American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO)SupportUnion📎 Attachment
The AFL-CIO is requesting a 60-day extension of the comment period for the EPA's Request for Information on Legacy Uses of Asbestos. They argue that more time is needed to coordinate with their wide-ranging membership and manage simultaneous deadlines for other worker safety and health regulations.
Read comment → - Jul 10, 2026Comment submitted by Masek Consulting Services, Inc.SupportBusiness📎 Attachment
F. Stephen Masek, President of Masek Consulting Services, Inc., supports the proposed action and provides expert testimony on the prevalence of asbestos in various building types. He recommends expanding asbestos requirements to smaller residential units, requiring high school awareness training, and mandating asbestos surveys for older buildings.
Read comment → - Jun 25, 2026Comment submitted by Holden LooperSupportIndividual
The commenter, an asbestos abatement and remediation professional, supports the EPA's effort to develop a rule for legacy asbestos but argues it must specifically address asbestos abatement following emergency property damage (e.g., fire, storm, or water damage). They request that the rule define these situations as "emergency work" to ensure insurance carriers authorize immediate abatement rather than subjecting it to standard, delayed approval cycles.
Read comment →