o//o ^cc)

E-R , /r $ 7 3 - ~ .. c z/ vo

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent 2 Very Good 7 Good 7 Satisfactory 2 Useless 0

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

Yes, More than I wanted 3 No, Not nearly enough

15 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 3 No, Not nearly enough

14 Yes, As much as I wanted _ No, Not at all

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

(1) TAKE STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS AND ACCEPT ARI SUGGESTIONS

(2) NEED ANOTHER WORKSHOP TO RESOLVE ISSUES

(3) ACHIEVE CONSENSUS ON ANALYTICAL TOOLS

5. How could we have improved this effort?

(1) STAY FOCUSED ON THE IMPORTANT TOPICS

(2) FOLLOW THE FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT MORE CLOSELY

(3) BETTER ROOM SET-UP

6. Additional comments/suggestions

(1)WORK MORE CLOSELY WITH ARI. WALTER MARKOWSKI

(2) "PAY BACK" SHOULD NOT BE THE ONLY ISSUE IN DETERMINING

MINIMUM ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS. NAME UNKNOWN

(3) JIM IS THE WRONG PERSON TO PRESENT TO GROUP. D. LEWIS

(4) BE DEMANDING OF STAKEHOLDERS. C. STEPHEN

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

GE-{<..M (S7j)- ct t - Lfv,0 

(lolfolAn- ~e.) 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent_2 _ Very Good 7 Good---,-7_ Satisfactory 2 Useless_O_ 

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

__ Yes, More than I wanted 

~ Yes, As much as I wanted 

_3 _ No, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

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

1 Yes, More than I wanted 

14 Yes, As much as I wanted 

_3_ No, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

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

(1) TAKE STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS AND ACCEPT ARI SUGGESTIONS 

(2) NEED ANOTHER WORKSHOP TO RESOLVE ISSUES 

(3) ACHIEVE CONSENSUS ON ANALYTICAL TOOLS 

5. How could we have improved this effort? 

(1) STAY FOCUSED ON THE IMPORTANT TOPICS 

(2) FOLLOW THE FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT MORE CLOSELY 

(3) BETTER ROOM SET-UP 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

(l)WORK MORE CLOSELY WITH ARI. WALTER MARKOWSKI 

(2) "PAY BACK" SHOULD NOT BE THF. ONLY ISSUE IN DETERMINING 

MINIMUM ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS. NAME UNKNOWN 

(3) JJM IS THE WRONG PERSON TO PRESENT TO GROUP. D. LEWIS 

(4) BE DEMANDING OF STAKEHOLDERS. C. STEPHEN 

... 
EE-RMSTD-98-40 CC-I

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory / Useless_

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

__Yes, More than I wanted _ No, Not ISly enough -- m0 tq'w 0C\ s5sOtheif s I ;-

Yes, As much as I wanted No, Not at all 0o -' - Ort

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

Yes, More than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

CYes, As much as I wanted No, Not at all

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

WEE pjiU-, ^^ SCUu

UDo 4o fl r Sjon\ rLifY VX a ib LA h Rf6t<

5. How could we have improved this effort?

6. Additional comments/suggestions

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. J d )

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-88-440 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good __ Good __ SatiSfact01Y~ 

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

CC-JUseless 

__ Yes, More than I wanted tho, Not omty enough" 100 ML\(n+j~ 01\ sOfrle.1k~ lift __ Yes, As much as I wanted __ No, Not at all ~o +(~ 1W o1W3. Did you have an opportunity to participate as much as you wanted? 

__ Yes, More than I wanted 

~es, As much as I wanted 

__ No, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

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

DOE f~ ~vt~ ~h~~e 

DoE -to flr.,\J srote +~ ~ ~ i p<~~5i\- ~ ~n\j ~lf,b ~5 1A~~~e 

5. How could we have improved this effort? 

~\b{) 'H~ q~ of -+:~ ~ 1y 5f)M( f~oyh w~ ~e>W~ ~t).%10~ 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 - CC-2-

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

I. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good , Good Satisfactory_ Useless

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

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

tK 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?

LcS aC \6b) Cor <\|

5. How could we have improved this effort?

/ gn(:oL s4o- cD '°e Oerr Owes1)<D '

ho t )>< ci <>6^~~ 

6. Additional comments/suggestions

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-440 - cc,-"7-

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

I. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good~ Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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 

--.:s6.... 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? 

1-!G..y\/)oV-...+ --:s-ho"",kD 

()?J-t: t. ~~ /) d2v.y . 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Useless 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 . CCCentral Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

I. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent _ Very Good_ 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

/Y"es, 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

Thank you for filling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-440 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good __ Good__ Satisfactory V 

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

__ Yes, More than I wanted 

~ es, 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 

. ~es, 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 

Thank you for .filling out this evaluation. 

Useless __ 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 - C-j'

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good -'/ 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 wNo, Not at all

4. Based on this meeting, atdditional ss e needed?

6 4R , ,At~ As. I ' 

5. How could we have improved this effort? ,

6. Additional comments/suggestions

ta ji~j < A RT

Thank you for filling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

· EE-RM/STD-98-440 - cc..r c4 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent VeryGood~ Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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 

__ Yes, As much as I wanted 

__ No, Not nearly enough 

+No, Not at all 

Useless 

4. Based on this meeting, ~ needed? 

(~ . '. ~ a-vSr R-.d-~ 

~~i~~·~L~ 5. How could we have improved this effort?~' ~ ~. 

~1L~~,,-~~.~ 

~ -6- p-ir-th ~. 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

tJ~~~ 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

WAL:,tr..,. MA(\l(OW5 K I 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD.9 8-440 -

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent _ Very Good _ 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 _L 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?

Tage -oov S0m eP 4aS VCry f:of.

fo40 , i W1c d 1S-;C3⁄4Ltl ior Aose io

6. Additional comments/suggestions

Thank you for flling out this evaluation.

Oame (opti

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STO-98-440 __ e"C-~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good __ Good V Satisfactory_>_ 

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 

__ Yes, As much as I wanted 

~o, 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? 

The \OOvY\ se£U.f> WQ5. ve,( p6or_ 

Useless __ 

Hoi Siu.~~J dl'-t+-l'~LLlt: +or ~05e Ifloi 

J 

aT fh..e. i-a b Ie Zo fa.. \ -t ('~ ( PCL-t{ ~ 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 - CCCentral Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent_ Very Good_ 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

)c Yes, As much as I wanted No, Not at all

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

Wuc Ptoeo 0 CWOJTO <3Va5 weaT &-,t?.

5. How could we have improved this effort?

COOXKJA^: pR£ Sasy *k3 O/ tWeswe ft"enAf

6. Additional comments/suggestions

< M \<> rion pe"z perStt \ mW

Thank you for filling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2 

EE-RM/STD-98-440 - c..c-~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good __ GoodX Satisfactory __ 

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 

~ 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 

.L ~L' 5 ftl~~~--

Useless 

.J ltY\ \~ Wf~ ~f'(\ \'D ~f-ebev::}\ ~ ~ 

~ ~ \t)\' -') 0<,rvJ't'\ 'JS. ~,,~ ~u..e6~~ 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-9-440- C.-

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent _ Very Good f

< Good_ Satisfactory_ Useless

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

Yes, More than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

Q 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

X) Yes, As much as I wanted No, Not at all

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

? Chsb>6l to sE /}^i^, Lxua, 1 xt^^o^l <r

5. How could we have improved this effort? Ae Srrt, .

roR. P tUcc-oFro friR FtGr i wI' vwjws (aGoJ> Co-fm . >

cr 98 4rme f-AMd,.

6. Additional comments/suggestions

"ypu~z >< a Q<, ,n i 6H~-Jau,^ A a9i Q cfrvm Li3NLThank you for filling out this evaluation. b. qc, ed(. .

C Na e (option

Naine (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

· EE-RM/STD-98-440·- C-6-~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent VeryGood~ Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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 

---Xl. Yes, As much as I wanted 

__ No, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

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

Useless 

-X ~Qwf7J ~v<::. ~ V:"tt 1e. A tu...st.& dor ~tl~Vwekkf 10 ~oIv~ ~ Jr~~~rk, 11Z.-oeJUx) ~StA.IW I'~'~ 

~. Cht.,.~~ev- ~\s I)~fi!\c±.r" Lee:. ~~~~ 1Y)?~t 

5. How could we have improved this effort? ~.ess ~ J 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

~~ .st).,..~) 

o::::r 9<a -1-/;" e. JrdM'L . 

j ... &.vna;-,J,..:~ .of ~ / ~14t ~&~~. 

-r~ \NM a. Qg+- ~5 Of'vl1.-~aVI~~ .tUt.& dl.s..tl'"Z'iuh.:.Z3 rfr-r.m Li3/1/L 

~ J 'sfIt,V¥,' ~ZfX}~ (cl:.. J e.speG/~ whst.n f)1-;;,~.fJI;' '':'0 fJ,&r 0","10-

ftl~ 2Z~ In1fx;;:....ssi~_ w,'-H..t::.lA-f f("f::.cJ .... .- &,~,,.J.ar.l SIAc.J... A.sre...-t:I::"'"tS .rh.~~ 'J 

Thank you fOT fillillg out this ""aJuoJion. b<. ~+e&. C . ~~s- . 

N e (optional) 
EE.RM/STD-98-440 - CC -

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent_\ Very Good Good_ Satisfactory_ Useless_

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

Yes, More than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

LI 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?

It -XC< j~r c^ zlc. c<) ^ z~~ '- -- -i

6. Additional comments/suggestions

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. /

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STO-9S-440 - C. C. - ~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent~ . Very Good__ Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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

Yes, More than I wanted s= 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? 

C~~~_~~~~ 

d~d~ 

5. How could we have improved this effort? 

Useless 

" c:JJ!lJ?c. ~ eX $~v-.r-t. @~ ~ ~ '1 ~ --cr-v--.Q/ ~..e ,. 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

~2>':"Z<r~ 

~~~~ 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

~J=--9 Name (optional) 
EE.RM/STD-98-440- C-C/

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good _ Good Satisfactory+/4 Useless

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

Yes, More than I wanted YNo, 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 o, 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?

- - w

6. Additional ommen suggestions -

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

.EE-RM/STD-98-440 ~ c.-~ -~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

I. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good __ Good__ Satisfactory ~ Useless 

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

__ Yes, More than I wanted 

Yes, As much as I wanted 

--XNo, 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 

~o, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 CCCentral Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good _ Good Satisfactory_ Useless

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

ytes, More than I wanted _ No, Not nearly enough

_

1 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?

w ',wJR1re 6tWi ^w6. Additional comments/suggestions

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-440 - c..,c., -c:!2, 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meet7' 

Excellent__ Very Good__ Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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

~s, 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? 

"-etf ~ VJJ1J ~y\ tlL l ~ tMDlftfpwm 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

Useless 

~~~.~~ 

~ ) r'Uj~ ~~~~ Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 -

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory_ Useless

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

Yes, More than I wanted _No, Not nearly enough

2 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

,C 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

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-440 - CC-c:{ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

I. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excel1ent Very Good__ GOOdA Satisfactory __ 

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

Yes, More than I wanted 

X 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 

-AYes, 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 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Useless 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440- C C

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good _ 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

JYes, As much as I wanted No, Not at all

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

e d S 0 j WA rJe DAi r

5. How could we have improved this effort? cd9J I, 7 i/-f /( / / 7A

C4L/ ii /lo etoCl //D X /ii 6rarn / C p- IdLSd// /'t, 7< Al A) i4 1⁄2iz Or, 4&cLI XJtJo tZ : 4 e nJz

6. Additional comments/suggestions

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

/ame (ooptonal)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-440 - C ~ - ~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Go 0 d __ Good / Satisfactory __ 

2. Were 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? 

Yes, More than I wanted 

/Yes, As much as I wanted 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

__ No, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

Useless 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 - CC ,

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent_ Very Good ___ Good Satisfactory_ Useless

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

Yes, More than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

tYes, 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

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-9S-440- 6C .... ~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good ~ Good~ Satisfactory __ 

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

Yes, More than I wanted 

Vv es, 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? 

~s, More than I wanted 

_~_ YYe es, As much as I wanted 

__ No, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

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

. O-h .. d;" /<ud-y 

5. How could we have improved this yffort? 

/10 re. c...kr-; 'tS ~ 

--fk5 U/i-ff ~/.Ih!-r;s/ ~-h-x.L 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Useless 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440- CC -

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good " Good_ Satisfactory_ Useless

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

Yes, More than I wanted No, Not nearly enough

~I 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

Thank you for filling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-440- CC ... ~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent VeryGood~ Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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 -* 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 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Useless 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440- C--C

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good / 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?

5. How could we have improved this effort?

6. Additional comments/suggestions

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation. Mf / rp jj

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-440 - CC .... 4 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good--.i: Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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 ""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? 

5. How could we have improved this effort? 

6. Additional comments/suggestions . 

. Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Useless 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 -COCCentral Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good 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?

i4c4i t CQ (Queu ac, Dock,;

5. How could we have improved this effort?

$ - /f(oczuX / XYji rcveL(gofbc9Jk dcCA ,. 4 c (Aoj

6. Additional comments/suggestions

zOc)i - (s24icQ t> s<- t <--j(( 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-440 - Q.c...,-~ 

Central Air Workshop· 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good __ Good~ Satisfactory , 

~ 

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

__ Yes, More than I wanted 

__ Yes, As much as I wanted 

-.L No, Not nearly enough' 

__ No, Not at all 

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

Yes, More than I wanted 

~ es, As much as I wanted 

__ No, Not nearly enough 

No, Not at all ..----

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

!1/AC177- ~e /l~ ~7 DoCXd _ 

Useless 

5. How could we have improv~ this effort? 

~ ~(rou..;(~. fJ..e from.eWOJl(' c/'oc(;. M6)IIr-.f-- M~_ c (O.~. 

6. Additional comments/sugge.stions 

f)a..,-fe- b~v-lcO. ~~ c;> ~~vv--, -H-c:-c:fJ (~~ ('7 

~ ~ J- ) o..~\~oJ;Q.~ \,. ') d (l,7.r c-cf,' S t..-£. vV' , rf-J 

fa J (}s2-~ . 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 - O. -?

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good 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?

i Yes, More than I wanted _ No, Not nearly enough

k_ Yes, As much as I wanted No, Not at all

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

/^^20v) T ^ Ad A TV <F d 4C7 o 

A/4 t6;.g5', fit R/ C8^^ ^ ^ Su L DZ C £ > /' As' M,

A: our 97- Ad ,72 W1 r/I^ a d+ /v<_ 5. How could we have improved this effort?

a'r/ pCn^^ / ago o^ 7p /iPvsm P7 7g -/> a° -R

fo . >ir&nr f^AP~ ^ u

Lo r Ad An ^ /^^r7lTJ/^ 

6. Additional comments/suggestions

LftDL 06L /X1 A- Ao y BeIA eA CW4 LThank you forfilling out this evaluation

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-9B-440 - C-c...-d:? 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Exceilent__ Very GOOd~ Good_. _ Satisfactory __ Useless __ 

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

--L 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 d Yes, As much as I wanted 

__ No, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

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

tf.uo~l/t" vJ/hn'" TlfIt, ~ 11> fA C 'I CUI LL.- Go (,I ell- 1flJJ> wlfF~ 

~tJAJ j t,.J'lA-- ~ flJ71> ~ )rc-ce/T ifLr .>"u~"1u.J. tiP 

Va CGf?W~ n;£- /(./bL- .£tLul/,A€:;Jr )u£' ~ kJ/o /~a.r; 

n;.J]J I)v<-, t<1ffJ'rr ft1>7U~M (/6- 1-#j(!Itf&..A07fo ~y I'~ IfJ /:J~ IN S'~, 5. How could we have improved this effort? 

J~ f7; Cl.u:G-iJ ~.J5 '1JI-e. /MI''()/l,TJhJ/ 'JdjlIC"s - - 'J:>wJI/ -.J 

J;e'f TO Pt1J6i+ ~#6:M/-./f7Tt;AB J?I";trr 117rvE- ur-rt--G ~/Z., 

';0 /tI/.;e:lf-x.JdAJIlr) 6L Al'r~ 71 1Ji) T (!.e, /NS"c-/t.uJ7Hj 4f:., ¥ /0 

r/lOf3 I R- )A-.7I-' LLS.£;lJ I 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

jlr>LJ> fk.f:brlv~ IIJ k ,IZoo;.A W IT)./-' 13~ CLt;VlA-'71C; U>J..J ~CThank you for filling out this evaluation. 

~ (AuL 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440- (CCCentral Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent Very Good 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?

j1Yes, 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?

0 Age-d .t 4a 4Out 5 o - o t

A;} o 4eJ" /ISves 6)*/7>7/ y^,,^/ 352,, 5 oC

5. How cpuld we have improved this effort?

6 s'iAo/e s/ , ct o i d c 

6. Additional comments/suggestions

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STD-98-44o- ~C-~ 

Central Air Workshop. 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very Good __ Good~ Satisfactory __ 

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

Yes, More than I wanted 

X 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? 

~ es, More than I wanted 

__ Yes, As much as I wanted 

__ No, Not nearly enough 

__ No, Not at all 

Useless __ 

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

is pel!-& h ~~ ~ ~f,.-,y /o~~&i "') ~ d q I Y-a 

I/hp//n.,;n.e-r« ou-J- .In "'\) /) ("' /55 ~e s:., t..-V_ I.J- / -:5 3~o....., ~ s 0 r 

/hC>v~ 6..e~ "71~~/--7ffS tA..)')//0""/9 d r

75 Itt /5- ou--:J-/ 

5. How cpuld we have improved this effort? . r'-e~ . -

JJeJ ct f.v6 d", I r7e~f,:> h Jet c k oH!-t? /$ tf?rt>c.e~ .. 

T~/n(JG-A. ftna-e..- 5~+- .o") ~ 1(~/\/eJ~ ,krn....5 ~-J-. 

5JtDVId.k /D-z,~ &. -I- dO?>Ai ~ r-oc:;.d .. · 

6. Additional comments/suggestions 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Name (optional) 
EE.RM/STD-98-440- CC -

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent _ Very Good /Good 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 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?

- ,A -'"~ ,.c,/? 7

~ *TZ,- FC7~ C4&/^iy, -, c'C3-6,'

- ,/4-4A oU7 g '& 4/ /D64 /P/g

5. How could we have improved this effort?

-A A^- H C l46z o-~ '7-I. c ~ / -

6. Additional comments/suggestions

R 6f(G ~ All,:^i /o/- F ^ /^aCf C / -7-0 PA C- t F

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

EE-RM/STO-9S-440- e.G -~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent Very GOOd;i.. Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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

Yes, More than I wanted X 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? 

Useless 

- /.~'-'IS (; 4 I'VA'L. YJI S /'::> //f~E- l/4/£~koL;;J~ CD~~c'-"-TS 

( /V ro A-e:.c.. OV,A./ T. 

- /J~-4J<::. oVT ,(c r {" 1I~.tJ /If,fT ;tJc.--"".utt:JJ 

5. How could we have improved this effort? 

f:.- E~ jJGo-""'Ll: ~c v f 6::J 0..-.." rz:;'/ t' c6. Additional comments/suggestions 

·~O..,A-( . ,/ 

Thank you for filling out this evaluation. 

Name (optional) 
EE-RM/STD-98-440- .-C =

Central Air Workshop

Meeting Evaluation

June 30, 1998.

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting?

Excellent _ Very Good 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

*$ do FIti4 L 

^ Mu laid O& 'L^ Ca ^^ o r d r

Thank you forfilling out this evaluation.

Name (optional)

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 01CC2

\// 

EE-RM/STD-98-440- C,C,- ~ 

Central Air Workshop 

Meeting Evaluation 

June 30, 1998· 

1. What is your overall evaluation of this public meeting? 

Excellent V Very Good__ Good__ Satisfactory __ 

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 

ZYes, 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? 

Useless __ 

Name (optional)