WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP

MEETING EVALUATION

February 12, 1997

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

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---

Additional 

~we...- comments/suggestions: W0 0lGJ1 i.J. th -ke~ ie~ Q5D~ d ovd ~ ~ a ~ t . 
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

_ 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

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

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 TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP

MEETING EVALUATION

February 12,'1997

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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 W; moa thi&s t efrt 'k,? 

5. Howjoumtwe aven mpre this effort?

^€e cmt- W\"

6. Additional comments/suggestions:

I; rmwa +t u#I

1b,' eV or 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

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EY ALUATION 

February 12, '1997 

--_.,.---

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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 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

/_ 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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EVALUATION 

February 12" 1997 

1. What is your overall eva.!uati0l this 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 PUBLIC WORKSHOP

MEETING EVALUATION

February 12, 1997

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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?

* ^ A .iXo- d z l Jt A4 u1 x (cAK otAil:

5. How could we have improved this effort?

6. Additional. comments/suggestions:

Name (optional)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

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 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?

/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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

1. 

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC ~ORKSHOP 

MEETING EV ALUA TION 

February 12, 1997 

What is your overall evaluation of this 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 TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP

MEETING EVALUATION

February 12, 1997

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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 Zi f^Coo 

5. How could we have improved this effort?

6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional) Name (optional)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

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? 

, 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 PUBLIC WORKSHOP

MEETING EVALUATION

February 12, 1997

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

- ' 

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. Wf.:re your priority issues adequately discussed 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~.~ How could we have ~ improved ~.~ this efforr? f ~~~~tJL'=---L '~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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

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. 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 at all 

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 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

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- A Ao)SSO 

5. How could we have improved this effort?

6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EVALUATION 

February 12, 1997 

._.--0---

1. WJ~at 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 

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),j lJ.t,l( 1) j .()yt Ii ~J fJ &rJ £'It !JjlJO -f I Jj IJ. 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 lvr k/ Az6S/ -/gj PAOC~taRf

5. How could we have improved this effort?

6> Addtinalc/sugetions:

6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WA 'fER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EVALUATION 

Fe~ruary 12, 1997 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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 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

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< A'o /I£ T/s 7a;{raef Dsc_ LJAp- ew1tr s Ar7 A

6{tf/j doavilr t Ad , T7£SE /Nu 5 $S f 2e/ .see.~h r io;ndca,

Ai 4^ f, J4 (t Io al q/4Nme 

}d;4.4 i t/jName (optional) Ad;74;1 9 A'7/ A^4 J J E161'

&se4 -f4a ^t o Anpa

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

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 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

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 How Yc. c d we have i oved ts

5. How could we have improved this effort?

6. Additional comments/suggestions:

Name (optional)

i

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EVALUATION 

February 12, 1997 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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 TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP

MEETING EVALUATION

February 12, 1997

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDPRE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EVALUATION I 

February 12, 1997 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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 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

/ 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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WA TER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EVALUATION 

February 12, 1997 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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 TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP

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

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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EVALUATION 

February 12, 1997 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this 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 (u j 4'6 (;- / i,& "'1fJ. J E--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 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

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 Rfo- 4LM ; J,' I,/ a fName ft 0 (optional)° 

Name (optional)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

. 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 TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP

MEETING EVALUATION

February 12, 1997

1. W]hat is your overall evaluation of this 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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING EVALUATION 

February 12, 1997 

-------

1. Wlhat is your overall evaluation of this ~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 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

'- 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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

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. 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 of this 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 0e- sd Pr.§ARjG Prso-TOa CxO icT <3 

* * P P-A% PP4hP L.O4<VEp5. How could we have improved this effort? , ...,_ s,,.-s, ,m' P 

6. «n Ad 'itioea PciS /gs5s r be\'- A If s:Lrs. 'ssuL 

~\r;='<T,.'s rC- - a fos t'o b-ermo v I:A6. Additional comments/suggestions: 1 lo s, or- as >ss<. >

c-6SFi,~\ S o i eS>< F or~ ts»- (D C~°c3 0> s, (s cr ~ E"^ "

KTOccu r f LB- L -t Vt C1.&Le-^>fb--» C.e 1 AA s 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 ^ a- o 'UP«y T^>

<r

C(or»Pi-ctw» &->7y T(Lt. ,L A.OSvb. C<i^OP»tfDi«

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

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~~~(~.'"" '-01 M ....., ~'""'- 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,..St 0 (Z't\. " e~c... ,su.,....<t... 

:r:. r'<t"Ea.~ c:s("" - e, p.S co ,.... 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 PUBLIC WORKSHOP

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 1 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)

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

MEETING' EV ALU ATION 

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 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

_ 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/5pR7 C? A//4 •(o/?/6

Name (optional)

I

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP -

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 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

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 2 -a - /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

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R

WATER HEATER TEST PROCEDURE PUBLIC WORKSHOP 

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/s uggestions: 

: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-&

EE-RM-94-230 COMMENT 49R