### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent _Good SSatisfactory Useless( 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

___ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough <4,Y'es, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?



### · 

## la~cq H / Q'a U ,. ,Y^ 5. How could we have improved this effort? A ' 

### fe 

## s n ( £ 'Sc(St B. 

### \


### . ^e~p (pfMP^f . '



## sc Gs, ,>atoC 

# e-,

_ 

### 6. Additional comments/suggestions: I J 

### y 4Name (optional)V
Name (optional) WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12; 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent

# G~od**~atiSfactory** . __ Useless __ 2. W(!re your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

. __ Yes, more than I wanted

## ~~, Not nearly ·enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

4. 

### 5.
6. __ .Yes, more than I wanted

# --I:/.fe'~, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all

# Bas~:r~~~etin&**add;:abj~e ne~~**  

# i**()~~**

# ~ whL/. 

# iff-so 

# /J .fAe-ra-.

# f:,('\.~**+h~,~** J 

### I

### ~**uS~' ~r** **~~~** How could we have improved this effort? 

# C**~** 

# . 

# {1
, f. 

### f .**{\~. ~_f~_r-f~~** **~~** 

## J**~~jlc._:t6,.~ n~·**  "--O{

## ("~kc... 

## J U s=/20lc::> 

# *' k**~ ~~~.**  

# - ---r---

# ~we...- W 0

## 0lGJ1

# i.J. -

# ke~**Q5D~ ~** 

Additional comments/suggestions: 

# th**ie~** d

# ovd**~** 

# a**~** t .

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent _Good _Satisfactory __ Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough



### _ Yees, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted _ No, Not nearly enough

tA Yes, as much as I wanted
_ No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comm nts/suggestions: J /

N e (oponal 

# , 

# A a0P5 &4 *··y^ y /y WATERHEATERTESTPROCEDUREPUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION 

### February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation**~f** this workshop? Excellent Good

# ~atisfactory __ _ Useless __ _ 2.**W(~re** your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted

### _~s, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 3. Di'rJ you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

4. 

### 5.
6. _. _ Yes, more than I wanted

### ~/Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all

### WATER HEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12,'1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good i, Satisfactory V 

### Useless 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted 

### •No, Not nearly enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

_ Yes, more than I wanted - No, Not nearly enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 

# 5V



# Wou moat W; thi&sefrt ? 'k, 5. Howjoumtwe 

# aven mpre this 

### effort? 

# ^€e 

# cmt- W\" 6. Additional comments/suggestions: 

# I; rmwa +t u#I 

# 1b,' eVor L 

# 0

4\ 0(7r'we i g 

# wlv A
- 

# ADS ^- no rt(-I / 

# 6T r 

# Flur 4 

# -v proAc
Name (optional) 

# k4taS"\n,; 2 WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDUREPUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EYALUATION 

### February 12,'1997 

### --_.,.--- 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good I Satisfactory

# L Useless __ 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted 

# 1 No, Not nearly

## eno~gh

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No,-not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?



### 4.
5. Yes, more than I wanted - 

# ----1L No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all ' -Based on this meeting, what additional steps 

# are needed?

# 'q)~**M~ m~tI** **~r' ~o;rins**  

# -**C~S** • 

# t.vatit IJIN/J

# ~**u.~.** Howj'fu1r'we

# ~_~ this effort?

# ~t**fAYn~ ~~** 

### WATER HEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12,1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good / Satisfactory Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

_Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough 

### /_ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

..Yes, more than I wanted No; Not nearly enough _/_ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort? 

# s6^. Additional cmments/suggestions: · I 

### A 6. Additional comments/suggestions:

- reNa P AU^alA 

### Name (optional) WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDUREPUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION 

### February 12" 1997
1. 

### What is your overall eva.!uati0lthis workshop? .' Excellent Good Satisfactory __ _ Useless __ _ 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? _(Yes, more than I wanted**~_** Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__.,·Yes, more than I wanted 

# ! -.J1._ Yes, as much as I wanted No; Not nearly enoug,h No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort? 

### 6.

) Name (optional) 'V.

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What isyour overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent V/ Good Satisfactory __ Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough 

### _/_ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough



## I/ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? * 

### ^ .iXo- A d z l u1 Jt A4 

### (cAK x otAil: 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional.comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) WATERHEATERTESTPROCEDUREPUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent 

# V Good Satisfactory __ _ Useless __ _ 2. Wt:re your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted 

# / ...:L._ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

4. Yes, more than I wanted 

# _:st/ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all Ba'Sed on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?

# ~\¥V'l**~~** 0--

# ,\lM.**~** 11{,fL

# ~ 

# tv b l t

# ~**Lh~,LtC>** (f>L

# ~UJo.ll

# 1 rL-**'IJ>~~** 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional.comments/suggestions:



# -
Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good / Satisfactory Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

v/ Yes, as much as I wanted _ No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? /I_ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted _ No, rot at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) 1. 

### WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLIC**~ORKSHOP** 

### MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Ex.eellent·

# G~od / . Satisfactory __ _ Useless __ _ 2. Wc!re your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough



# ./ v 

### Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to 

### participate as much as you wanted?



### .

# /

. v 

### Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, riot at all 4. 

### Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 

# .**e~ ~**  lAp

# ~1I\.4i;- +-

# F~~**~** 

# flM.k,. . 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6.. Additional comments/suggestions:

# ~~~ Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What isyour overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent 

# iL Good _Satisfactory Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? _4 Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? A. Yes, more than I wanted _ No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted . No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? z<£>W;1fL> ozn ; ,;(-, 

### an> m \ .'I f^Coo Zi 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) Name (optional) WATERHEATER TESTPROCEDUREPUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop?

## Excellent~ Good __ _ Satisfactory __ _ Useless __ _ 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

, I' 

# 2L Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all'

,3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

### 2~ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough' , Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? ,

# (~h~'~~**on~** J

# \N(~~t'~-**m'~~O** <S>Vl'**G..l'YjfY'l:J'tVr\S~ ~** **~I\IO** • , 5. How could we have improved this effort?

### ~f 

# otlr- rJlSl._ 6. Additional**c~mments/suggestions:**

# c-·~**)OO~** Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good Satisfactory V Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted 

# I No, Not nearly enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at-all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort? ? ./ / 't OR A ^®I^ 

### / .r ~o- 

### : ~ 

### C-^, c .£^U^^^> 6. Additional comments/suggestions:


### J 

## / kamQ /I//AV /OAl/ Name (optional) - ' 

### WATER HEATERTEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. 

### What 

### is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good Satisfactory '/ Useless __ _ 2. 

### Wf.:re your priority issues adequatelydiscussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted 

# j No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at-all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? 

# _.J Yes, more than I wanted '_-_'No, Not nearly enough 

### 4. 

### 5.
6. Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all Ba')ed on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?

## c.O~v~4,~·**~ k~** 

# '~fi~.~· ..

# <kP-~.**--It~.~ ~** **~.~** f

# ~~~~tJL'=---L How could we have improved this efforr?

### '~Iliii";- 

# J P- 

# ,**~,jk** 

# -;t**l#~** 

### .**~~ ~~~** **-O~-~k_~6(** 

### Additional comments/suggestions: 

### VOL?

# '.~k-

# ~..

# It- 7'J ''7/

# d~· Name**(optional~**WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent __ Good _Satisfactory / Useless 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted i/ No, Not nearly enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough / Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions: 

### '-2 I 

### QUA & I, I Q-_& f(^ G4*-nl
Name (optional) WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997


## .---- 1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent __ _ Good __ _ Satisfactory Useless __ _

, 2.**W(~re** your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? _---.,. Yes, more than I wanted /'No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? Yes, more than I wanted

__ / Yes, as much'as I wanted No, N9t nearly enough No, not atall 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?
5. How eould we have improved this effort?
6. Adlditional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent / Good Satisfactory _ Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough 

# J/_ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

___ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough / Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? aced, M atbifit^ bA) 'FiWA.L- Ao)SSO A 

### 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) WATER HEATERTEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 

# ._.--0--- 1.**WJ~at** 

### is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent ,Good __ _ Satisfactory _:__ Useless __ _ 2. 

### Were .your priority'issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted 

### JC:/ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate a$ much as you wanted? Yes, more than I wanted 

## -1./ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 4. 

### Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?' 

## fJ),jlJ.t,l( 

### 1)j .()yt 

### Ii**~J**

### fJ&rJ £'It !JjlJO -

### f I JjIJ.

### z;. 'c'f}J.bWf)

### If\!

# r , 5. How could we have improved this effort? 

# --- 6. Additional comments/suggestions:



# -- Name (optional) I.

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent __ Good ._ / Satisfactory _Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted · No, Not nearly enough

o' Yes, as much as I wanted
_ No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

_ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough /_ Yes, as much as I wanted _ No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 1)'To v 4z Am o dv lvrk/ Az6S/ -/gj PAOC~taRf 

### 5. How could we have improved this effort? 6> Addtinalc/sugetions: 6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) 

### WA'fERHEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION**Fe~ruary** 12, 1997 

### 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent __ _ Good

### ,~ Satisfactory __ _ .Useless __ _ 2. Wf:re your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted· __ No, Not nearly enough , 

### /' ..J:::._ 

### Yes, as much as I wanted __.No, not at all 3. Did you have an'opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? Yes, more than I'wanted No, Not nearly enough



## ..// IY 

### Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? /Yi'"vtZ ANt:.-10· 

### dN "vfJ.,w 

### S'7AfV'OA,e Do/rt£sT**II<~Ccb{)£.€.** 5.· How could we have improved this effort?

## ~~~~~~~~~~**:t'd;..~~.** 

## , 6. Additional comments/suggestions:WATER HEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent_ Good ' Satisfactory / Useless 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted _ No, Not nearly enough V Yes, as'much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

___ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions: 

# O

. -- sr< T/s A'o /I£ 7a; {raef Dsc_ LJAp- ew1trs Ar7 A 6{tf/j doavilr , t Ad T7£SE /Nu $S 5 2e/ f .see.~h r io;ndca, 

### Ai 4^ f, J4 q/4Nme (t Io al }d;4 

### 4 . i t/jName (optional) 

## Ad;74;1 9 A'7/ A^4 

### J 

### J 

# E161' 

# &se4 ^t 

# o -f4a 

# Anpa

WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. What is yoqr overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent __ _ Good_- __ Satisfactory Useless' __ 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes,more than I wanted No; Not nearly enough / 

# . V _ Yes, as much as I wanted, No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted

# ~/ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 4. \ Based on this meeting, what addition.al steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions: 5(D.• 

## 7j:,.,.,#t.- IS 

## 10**~A-/l.~** $"""':

## II4It.. W,4-rtR.. 

### hel1.-rEu Ar A 6JN(N 

### e(J"''ln"ri"N.

### 7Ht~£ "'","8£/1.5

### 12~t1~ lAo

### I'k:lfi""J~, 

### .

## ·"ff:7G:~,/jk 

## If**J(~d./4fWle/L. ~**  . . 

# 1 /f_ 

# bi /}()fei

# ~**f1'~';, ~** **7~Oi,e,?,J.,c** .

# ~**~** . J . . Name (optional)

## ~cJ,.jr;,A> 

## wIll**,'v~ ~.** **J,.f~t¥lwf**

# {lo;~u1-h'**-ft,~ ~** **~IV ~** **~ ~/.M..** 

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent _Good Satisfactory Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

___ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough



### L_ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? Yes, more than I wanted . No, Not nearly enough 

### /" Yes, as much,as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting what additional steps are needed? 5 Yc.

How c d we have i oved ts 5. How could we have improved this effort?


### 6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) 

# i WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997


### 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Ex.cellent

# G~od**~** Satisfactory __ _ Useless __ _ 

### 2.**WI~re** 'your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted .J:./ves, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No. not at**al~** 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted,

, / 

# -.J/Yes, as much,as I wanted No. Not nearly enough No, 'not at all 4.**~,sed on~his**  meetin .**w}~at** additiona,l steps are needed?

# _/~-YlcAt~**~ ~cJ-tu** **v/~ Ct7-7:n;n~** 

# 7l-. (77u

## ~ "'/ 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions: '

Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent L / Good _Satisfactory Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough _- Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (option a) 

### WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDPRE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION I February 12, 1997
1. 

### What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent 

## V Good __ _ Satis,factory __ _ Useless __ _ 2. 

### W,ere your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? /..,..// . 

### __ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted.

# _~es, as

# ~uch as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 4. 

### Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good / Satisfactory Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough 

### / Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted N6, Not nearly enough 

### ,/ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. 

### What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent __ _ Good 

# / Satisfactory __ _ .Useless __ _ 

### 2. W,ere your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted _,/'Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? Yes, more than I wanted ./ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearJy enough. NO,not at all 4. , 

### Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort? - .

### t\Ghl~\)**~\'\l~~** .;t;-

### \,~o~~**~'f ~<::.~~i~\IS"}**  6. 

### Additional comments/suggestions:**Nam~** 

### (optional)

### WATER HEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good X Satisfactory Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? Yes, more than I wanted _ No, Not nearly enough aXV Yes, as much as I wanted
_ No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

_ Yes, more than I wanted _ No, Not nearly enough

., Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? /L</?( 

### @4r^ 

## P/r- (Va/^^I 

# /^-. s-rr/6) .-



## O'c r-~,o~ 3 o° wa/-l ;z, ( f4r -- 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent

# G~od**~** Satisfactory __ _ 'Useless __ _ 2. We:re**yo~r** priority issues adequately**discu~se~** during this**me~ting?**

__ Yes, more than I wanted ,No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?



### 4.
5.
6. Yes, more than I wanted

# Z~ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enougn No, not at' all , \ Based on thi,s,meeting, what additional steps are**n~eded?** ' ;...-t..1 )

### ,~z,.**o~**

# ( /J4r4 (Jol A/

### T.f 

# (uj 

### 4'6(;-/ i,&

## "'1fJ. JE--rr/. 

### ,6 d,,('L., 

### r't/-J6J**o~ /..V'4r~,e**  

## IIc;4TG"2.S How could we have**improve~** effort? 

### Jt;-v11 0(../(

### (,(;::fp~ r!A/4--{ 

## 4-6E.-/V4A**/.}e~~** fLt6-'61'-/-'V6' 

# ro'**/l~r/c../~,4-/VTJ** Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What isyour overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent __ Good / Satisfactory _ Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted _ No, Not.nearly enough



### lo Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

___ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

/ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? -gadfly 9 'i- v+ft,6d 

### reAe9zt D. g e/^ > 71 /f?1oarts 

### 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:
X 4LM

# ;J,'



# Rfo- I,/ a 

### fName (optional)° 

## ft 0 Name (optional) WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP

.MEETING EVALUATION 

### February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent __ _ Good 

# V Satisfactory __ _ Useless __ _ 2.**W(~re** your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted**/~** ..**~** Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not.nearly enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted _>/Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, 'not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are nyeded?

## ~ t(tfJt<

## </Ii, 

# Y""f41r7 refC'An4

## ~orl.**t:~e// v~f!**  ",:(, 

### tp t'

## ~rt7v5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. . Additional comments/suggestions: -:;' tt,'",,t 

## J,'-t /(1I61t 

## /j**~** u/rt'

# jL96 IJf

## ~t?h.r.,,/tJv
Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TESTPROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. W]hat is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good /X Satisfactory_ Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? 

# a'^Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

-- Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

_ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

· Yes, as much as I wanted 

### No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) WATER HEATERTEST PROCEDUREPUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997

------- 1. Wlhat is your overall evaluation ofthis**~orkshop_?** Excellent

# G~od

# L Satisfactory _-'--_ Useless __ _

, 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

# 4~es, m.ore than I wanted __ - No, Not nearly enough
"'-

### ~, /" Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. -Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more- than I wanted 

### /

## L~· Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough /. No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort? 

### 6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) ,. -

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. Wlhat is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent _Good / Satisfactory __ Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

___ Yes, more than Iwanted No, Not nearly enough

'- Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

___ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough ,,' Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP,. MEETING EVALUATION . February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Good / Satisfactory __ _ Useless Excellent __ _ 

### 2. Wc!re your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? Yes, more than I wanted -:/Yes, as much as I 

### wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted

## ~/'Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions: 

# ---

Name (optional)WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent < Good Satisfactory Useless 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted

d,_ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? ¢~_ Yes, more than I wanted

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? P<V(!<CIQPE Q-S S cOA e- 0 sd Prso-TOa CxO icT <3 Pr.§ARjG * * P PP4hP P-A% L.O4<VEp5. How could we have improved this effort? , ... ,_ s,,.-s P , ,m' 6. «n Ad 'itioea PciS /gs5s r be\'- A If 'ssuL s:Lrs. ~\r;='<T,.'s rC-- a fos t'o b-ermo v I:A

### 6. Additional comments/suggestions: 1 lo s, or- as >ss<. > c-6SFi,~\ or~ S i F eS>< o C~°c3 (s (D s, ts»- 0> cr ~ E"^ " KTOccu r LB- f -t L Vt C1.&Le-^>fb--» C.e s 1 AA O u ( n> eeS . Name (optional) (sk^c r;~ 5h& oF »cs6P,; .. tl > CS'S, lo^ 6 rac 

### v0<.C. v3,rt >^- PbOJ<^ o^^^ us0 *<AsPAc^-P^^ I 1 Cd UP«y ^ a- o ' T^> <r

C(or»Pi-ctw» &->7y T(Lt. ,L A.OSvb. C<i^OP»tfDi« WATER HEATERTEST PROCEDUREPUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February" 12. 1997
1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? ExcelJent s.L Good __ _ Satisfactory"_"__ Use1ess __ _ 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? "__ Yes. more than I wanted No. "Not nearly enough**~~** Yes. as much as I wanted No. not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? <:;1- Yes. more than I wanted No. Not nearly enough Yes. as much as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting. what**ad~itional** steps ,are needed? • SC)Mr\

### Qo/t.'~ Q.t::.,.,.c....

### '-l~lO""'!

### p.~~ '"

### Pr\c...~ /)..,J (>.(

### ~M.....:-**1'tl,-jVnc..LP""""'~** 1)....9**~** ' ....**-r-erlLiFS.~ P~LCf:l** 

•**~f\Q..C""I.,",,'"\.** O-z:.,...,s**.o~** f)or-**~~"TO c.t::."-~«"\**  't: A·SI«.C(!,-.:.'"N& 5. How could we have improved this effort? \.,oJ**I>~/l- ~""'c..~** **~ ~"N'** **~-:::'M** \.J..J l**~..-,t.. ,\,~p.~**  

### p..s,-.ss fbe'n..l**~ c.~**  I/\.S**\.~ ~** **~Sp~~jl.'·** I>rft.t:rtt". 6. Additional comments/suggestions: -\ ,.-.-- r> ....**S~~~(~.'""** '-01M .....,**~'""'-** t....1E' ....c...**~~aruCL~. \~<** **~Cl** ........**'<"("~** C,P**/l>~ €~CACL\"'<2>"'1-** **~\,\** of**...c.~fil'.""'- ~** **~ I~** **CU~Sta.""** 0I>,..l**,,\II.~~.** 

### '1..6"**~** Q<1' '"' C\ ....**~** ....**~ '\l~** **~,","jl,.~C.1** pp..""--s rJlA:>().JCY\ .....**~ v~**  ...**~ Wl~**  />.'\J I> l**L~.....s- s~**  -.l (l..e**~**s.**~ ~N**  • C'O,..St0 (Z't\. "**e~c...**

### ,su.,....<t... 

## :r:.**r'<t"Ea.~** c:s("" - e,p.Sco ,.... a-t;)'"\) ,....**~**(\-

### ()'~C.O~Le.,..J 01=-

### ~~**lSSu~.** ::Iti

### Coo~o ilC-r-'\H'V't...o<"

### Q.JJ'L~ I(

### ~""''' QY-**~ ~I\...""p.~** **M~"'bJ.**

## "b"U~ f>..(!:>n.,P--MS Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent _Good X Satisfactory · Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted _ No, Not nearly enough

X( Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than 1wanted No, Not nearly enough

__ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING'EVALUATION February 12, 1997 '
L What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Excellent __ _ Good 

# ><**S~tisfactory** __ _ Useless __ _ 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted



# X_ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not'neaily enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? Yes, more than I wanted 

# -X- Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at,all 4. , Based on this meeting, what a9ditional steps are needed?
5. How could we have improved this effort;
6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent / Good _Satisfactory Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough



### _ Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted?

__ Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough



### v_ / Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Additional comments/suggestions: 

## > /ce//r- 7, 

## A W/5pR 7 C? A//4 

### •(o/?/6
Name (optional) I WATERHEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP- MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 

# _._-- 1. What is your overall evaluation of this workshop? EKcellent 

# V Good __ _ Satisfactory __ _ Useless __ _ 2. W-ere your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting?

__ Yes, more than I wanted _/ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? Yes, more than I wanted __ No, Not nearly enough 

## --.l./ Yes, as much asI wanted __ No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?- 

### 5. How could we have improved this effort? 

### 6. "-

# :x:ti;;4:;en:;;Zti°Al'f~**~Y' ~h**  (;ooc7

# ~4A:

- Name (optional)

### WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997 1. What is your overall evaluation ofthis workshop? Excellent Good / Satisfactory . Useless 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 

### 3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? Yes, more than I wanted No, Not nearly enough



### - Yes, as much as I wanted No, not at all 4. Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed? 

# ,:zr -a 

# 2 /P
- M~ ',- Z4' 

### / 

## -. 5. How could we have improved this effort?
6. Aditional comments/suggestions: 

# L'

2)7 -/ . :d . " 0W /2-I 5 *: S _________ ___ 

# (3

- y J Name 

### (optional

I-A

WATER HEATERTESTPROCEDURE PUBLICWORKSHOP MEETING EVALUATION February 12, 1997
1. \\'hat. is your overall evaluation of this workshop? Exceilent

# G~od**~**Satisfactory __ __ Useless __ _ 

### 2. Were your priority issues adequately discussed during this meeting? .

__**~ore** than I wanted**,~** __ Yes, as much as I wanted No, Not nearly enough No, not at all 3. Did you have an opportunity·to participate as much as you wanted?

4. 

### 5.
6. __ Yes, more than I wanted

# -=~as much as I

# wa~t~d No, Not nearly enough No, not at all Based on this meeting, what additional steps are needed?



# r c4**<~ ~,/;r'~.** **y~** 

# t.'L--T-**~ ~~.** **~** How could we have improved this**ef~ort?.** ./ ./

# -r;t~fV 

# "**?-~** 

# C+-drt

# -.10 

# 1 C-.ritA:a'ctitional comments/suggestions:

# :Z-d~~~/~~ 

# 1J 

# :poe -t"**J,9~** ::fry

# elQtb~**~**

# /L.~**kT-~fi(** fV5 lL-./.e

# ~**cF';L.~~**

rJ'V 

# J? -; .. 0 

# 'b**.~~** Name**(optional~**


## .**~** 

## I')'-'-' 

# t-\t> Lj-

## d f 

# ,' f, W I j,/lyej

. ^ 7 ^c~i 

# I~4 7 1I 

### y 16Y

### 7- ? 

# IT -ACE


# Qc)c /-



# t., - - 

# 72" e7 

# QZ- e_( 

# -y<^^ ? 

# / / AZ 1 

# 6$) 

# 2'- '- 

# y 

# / 

# 4/ c 

# 7, /AIAV? e~~< 

# A/-Z~t~ C) A
41 -- ~ - 

# lmet

/I - -17 - I /// z -



### a-·-· ~~~~~~e"'l1- 

# >L ^ 7tP 

## L^e^ 

# M/ .9^ I 

### Ca /^ -^- /



## /^y^ <^/^v-e-&