3.4.2 Quality Assurance Procedures for Data Analysis and Reporting
The Quality Assurance officer established and implemented procedures for:
Data entry into the ERP Performance Analyzer.
Analysis and presentation of the data.
Quality assurance procedures for data entry, analysis, and presentation.
See Appendix J for Quality Assurance Procedures.
OBSERVATIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM PHASE 3
Some states found many facilities that were initially identified as SQGs were actually conditionally exempt, out of business or in some cases Large Quantity Generators. These states felt that the project was useful because it helped them clean-up classification issues and find and address problem facilities.
Despite a variety of individual state SQG definitions and procedures, project states were able to agree on definitions and uniform field verification methods for the project.
States were able to agree to data collection standards that would work for both a seasoned inspector and an intern.
It was possible to give effective training to staff with widely diverse backgrounds and responsibilities.
It was possible to give effective training for a large group over the phone.
Some states observed that it would have been more efficient and effective to define their enforcement response strategy before going out into the field.
Connecticut’s training and intern program structure and approach was viewed as a useful model for other states because it showed how a state could do more field observations than could otherwise be possible with agency staff alone.
States found that involving hazardous waste field staff in the design of the indicators improved buy-in and the quality of data collected.
The States Common Measures Project Final Report