X hits on this document

253 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

96 / 108

selection used for the auto body sector was similar to the approach used in SQG sector. See Section 3.2 of this report.

STATE

METHODOLOGY

DATE PERFORMED

UNIVERSE IDENTIFICATION

Check all that apply:

Use of phone books Web-based searches including yellowpages.com Manifest System / Review of hazardous waste shipment data List from OSHA List from Auto Body Associations List from Dept. of Business Regulation’s Licensee Program _____List from Department of Motor Vehicles _____ Info USA (please list SIC/NIAC Codes): __________________________________________ _____ Dunn and Brad Street (please list SIC/NIAC Codes): __________________________________________ Other Electronic Business Databases (please list): Other Method (please describe): _____ _____ _____

RANDOM SAMPLE SELECTION

Pick One:

_____ State Common Measures Project: Methodology for Generating A Random Sample Power Point, June 8, 2007

_____

Alternative Method (describe):

PROJECT LEAD

A Common Measures Auto Body Performance Checklist was developed using the final auto body indicators that were selected by states. On January 31, 2008, the Project Management Team facilitated a data collection training workshop to review each indicator and to agree upon procedures and decision rules for determining whether or not the facility was in conformance with the indicator. See Exhibit 5.1 below for the States Common Measures Project Auto Body Performance Checklist:

The States Common Measures Project Final Report

96

Document info
Document views253
Page views253
Page last viewedTue Dec 06 19:33:07 UTC 2016
Pages108
Paragraphs3821
Words29990

Comments