Hosted by the Michigan Department of Agriculture
Grand Rapids, Michigan
July 14-18, 2008
WAS THE AGENDA FOR THIS COURSE ADEQUATE AND DID IT MEET YOUR EXPECTATION?
 | The team did a good job, especially if this is the first C/C role PREP course. We definitely need a PIRT course. Great hotel facility. I also enjoyed the lake trip. |
| Yes, I want to thank all the planning group and presenters - especially EPA staff for the hard work that really made this PREP valuable. |
| The agenda was good but I believe we could have covered everything in 4 days. |
| Yes. |
| Very adequate. |
| Yes, the agenda was adequate. My expectations for the course were exceeded. States with containment regulations were very helpful during the week. |
| I am amazed at the wide array of approaches to implementation and it reinforces my concern about implementation in a one year (12 month) period. |
| Very much so. Yes and more. |
| Yes - actually more than met my expectations. I have a lot of work to do. |
| In my situation every segment was very helpful since I’m about to create tribal regulation for both fertilizers and pesticides, all the information presented will facilitate the creation of the new tribal regulation. |
| Yes - well conceived agenda and good mix of perspectives from presenters. MDA deserves lots of praise for their work on local arrangements and tours and field trips. |
| Yes. This is the best PREP I’ve attended. More useful information available than I expected. |
| Yes, especially given it was a pilot or first try, at the subject, the subject was unfamiliar to nearly all participants, and the perspective of the subject was different for most participants. |
| I feel the agenda was well planned and executed. The exercises for small group were helpful and well facilitated. I believe I have the information I need to take my next steps in the rule implementation. The materials provided here will be helpful. |
| Yes, Thursday was the most informative day of them all. Understanding the fluid nature of where the reg is at right now, some interpretations were left unresolved. Overall, course was very helpful. |
| The agenda reflected a lot of work and was an excellent 1st effort in training on the new rule. I had no idea of its complexities. It will not help me significantly only because I have 3 dealer/PEIs that will be affected. It will probably be most helpful in sharing with other tribal programs. |
| Yes. The container and repackaging was a little confusing or not clearly explained. Since not finalized until 2010 not as pertinent to job. |
| Do 1 field trip and cut the course to 4 days. Industry rep. part was good. Breakouts were good - except for our poor facilitator. |
| Definitely - it exceeded my expectations and I came away with a lot more knowledge and a far better grasp of the regulations than I anticipated. It was almost too much information to get a handle on for one training course. |
| The agenda was excellent. It combined a good balance of "theory" and "practice." The regulations were thoroughly discussed through presentations and were also put into practice through exercises and small group discussion as well as field trips. |
| Yes, the agenda met my expectations. Some of the small group topics could have been shorter and other more time allowed. |
| The agenda was very adequate to provide a good mix of training and discussion for implementation of C/C rule. |
| Our Region 6 rep left early on the last day and blew off the last exercise. Regions should stay through the very end like the rest of the states! |
| Yes. The work group did a fantastic job in putting this course together in light of my small contribution from me. I think the strong point in developing this course was the fact that members of the work group that have containment regs in place took the lead and the hard work Dea contributed to keep the workgroup on schedule. |
| Yes. It gave me some real ideas to bring back and opened my eyes to some issues I need to deal with. It also brought up some shortcomings in the rule, which will make me think about the need for state regs. |
| Agenda was great and also identified other issues that were addressed in discussions. |
| Agenda was well organized, very full and challenging. |
WHAT COULD THE PREP PLANNERS HAVE DONE TO MAKE THIS COURSE MORE USEFUL TO YOU?
| Have a video or include in our site visits showing a scenario of transportation, repackaging, refilling of pesticides from bulk tanks to mini-bulks. This would help us be familiar with the process and understand who is not in compliance. |
| Nothing at this stage, but as EPA processes equivalency rulings, MI may benefit by options to reach equivalency offered to states -> MI wants to pursue equivalency. |
| Don’t spend as much time on non refillable containers, the assessment of state containment regulations did not add anything to the course; skip the report on assessment on state containment regs. More information on how to handle tamper-proofing refillable containers. |
| Specific to containment or containers not both. |
| They did an outstanding job in putting this together. |
| Maybe shorter field trips with pre-field trip sessions on what to look for, what to ask? A follow- up session on what we saw? |
| Look at facilities that did not meet requirements but that would have required being in a state that did not currently have container/containment regs. |
| I know the rule is not quite finalized, but it would have been nice if there was a little more detail or final decision on certain parts of the rule. Example - what is a locked facility, or what is a rigid structure, etc. |
| Clarify grey areas. |
| They just keep getting better, my hat off to the ladies! |
| 1. More flow charts/ decision trees and checklists. 2. Get all 10 regions to participate. 3. More "train the trainer" materials. |
| I don’t know - a year from now I’ll have a better idea since this is a brand new program. |
| Field trip more structured and focused. |
| Given the stage of progress of the federal implementation there wasn’t much else that could have been covered. |
| It’s a tough task to spend a week on one topic but the planners had a good mix of classroom, break out and field trips. The last day was slow and seemed to not have the same content level as the first part of the course. |
| Would like to have spent more time on the calculations. Would like to have spent more time on the container portion and how the states are to enforce that portion. Needed to spend more time on the operational insp. And maintenance requirements. |
| Some evaluations were missing on day 5- state reports and Nancy’s equivalency presentation and small group. I spent a lot of time on my homework assignment - more should have been related for presentations (shorter presentations, more could be added) I assume they will be included in the CD sent out afterwards, but they should be in the book because I probably won’t look at any of them later on. |
| Devote more time to containers or decrease the agenda items on it, as it would be easier to absorb container detail if the breakouts were more spread out. Expand outreach to include a mock compliance assistance discussion between an inspector and a member of the regulated communities (PIRT?) Share samples of state outreach materials on back tables just to see setup style, etc. how message was conveyed. Change final breakout to include more attendee participation. Perhaps a hands-on development of a "pretend" strategy, questions will be raised and they may not get through every stop, but participation by attendees would be key and a good practice initiation for when they return to the office and do it on their own. Now that I hear the report-outs, it looks like other breakout groups had more participation. |
| Be more thorough in evaluating room acoustics. With the combination of poor acoustics and (often) dim lighting I had serious eyelid issues. At the onset provide flow charts and checklists, it will assist those of us that are more visually challenged. Have correct practice problems and additional practice problems and develop outreach materials for dealers and custom applicators. |
| The course was very helpful - do containment then cover containers. |
| More teaching prior to breakout sessions. Don’t make the breakout the learning experience hunting for regulations. |
| Hotel was great - except for the sound - more presentations on how to implement a program. I came away with more questions than answers. |
| Found the equivalency determinations the least valuable - maybe could have been a break out for just those 21 states it applied to. Give more time to states without to continue learning regs. |
| Because this course includes a lot of information and some of the information is technical, I had a little difficult understanding the first exercise regarding containment. Although I read the rule prior to the course, I was not familiar with different containment structures and during the first exercise; I was not clear on the discussion (small group discussion). Having the topic #2 presentation prior to the topic #1 small group discussion would have been helpful for clarity purposes. |
| For a first-time PREP, I thought you really nailed it! Great mix of speakers and points of view. Table space for all members of the breakout groups would be nice. |
| I can’t think of anything specifically. |
| The field trips were great, even if they became a bit repetitive toward the end. |
| Good job. Slide PowerPoints should insert answer slide after the question slide to maintain uniformity of information taken home. Provide separate rooms for breakout sessions. Too much cross noise. |
| Several sessions would have benefited from a facilitated discussion led by an extension educator or by developing goals and recommendations to focus the discussion on useful take home lessons. Small group exercises need to be fine tuned, e.g. one on calculations. |
| Rotating small group and facilitators would have been helpful. This would have allowed states without regs to hear from more states with regs. Hearing from the same group participants over and over again got old. |
IF THIS COURSE WAS TO BE HELD AGAIN IN THE FUTURE, CAN YOU SUGGEST FACULTY WHO COULD SUBSTANTIALLY IMPROVE THE AGENDA?
| Substantially? No, but varying perspectives operational differences, state issues and examples for variation all expand content. |
| Add regional enforcement representatives to discuss how the enforcement will go. |
| The states with rules, IL, MI, WA. |
| No. |
| Maybe a lead inspector or 2 from a state that already has its own containment regulation. |
| No, I don’t have any suggestions. |
| No one in particular. Use industry presenters as much as possible. |
| Maybe challenge attendees to perform an inspect |
| 1. Extension ag engineers 2. Crop Life staff, 3. More OECA/OGC staff to explain enforcement protocol and deal with "gray area" issues. |
| Ask me in a year. |
| No. |
| The next step will be PIRT for field implementation. Inspectors will need multiple trainings to get a handle on this rule. |
| How about a refillable tank manufacturer or bulk tank manufacturer? |
| Brent and April were real assets. Great, use Al Havinga next time. |
| Follow the regulations in order - that is how we will always look at them. |
| No, maybe recycle company. |
| More industry presenters - found their input very valuable and interesting. |
| I would suggest having a speaker from industry that has unstructured containment areas to discuss what works and what does not and also discuss different construction techniques. |
| Unfortunately I can’t suggest faculty who could substantially improve the agenda. Perhaps in a few years after getting California’s PCC regs and program in place DPR can contribute more to improving the agenda. |
| Maybe more engineering types to talk about facility design more? |
| Wisconsin staff (WDATCP) are very experienced and knowledgeable. Addition of a math lessons or primer on calculations would be useful. Jerry Kirbach, Brent (WA), Tim were great instructors. Nancy is excellent and a terrific resource. |
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
| I want to thank the state of Michigan people and EPA for putting this together. |
| Again, thanks to all who made this happen… Dea, Suzanne, Sanaa and planning committee. |
| Please request that speakers put no more than 2 slides per page of a handout (presentation). With more than 2 slides the font is difficult to read. Ask people to stand and stretch between sessions if sitting for an entire morning, for example! |
| The breakout sessions were great - allow us more hands-on activities and great discussion. |
| I think all other aspects of the course were put together very nicely. Hotel arrangements, course materials, field trips, after-hours field trips, etc. were all great. Thanks to everyone involved. |
| Found acoustics of meeting room very poor. Very well run meeting. Kept things moving and on schedule. Michigan was an excellent host. |
| Keep up the great work! |
| 1. Smaller room with better audio next time 2. But kudos for the fantastic food! |
| Excellent! Great facility. |
| The Michigan staff was great. Thank you for the beach field trip and providing a beautiful facility with great staff and amenities. Thanks to Suzanne and Sanaa for their excellent work and keeping things running smoothly. Having the opportunity for Nancy, David and Jeanne to hear the needs of the states especially in compliance assistance is essential. Follow-up on the parking lot issues is very important. Also, on the course CD, having the materials for the small group breakouts as they were presented here, plus the answer key will be helpful to provide internal state staff training. Also, having CD copies of the photos that we worked with during the week will be needed. Also, thank you for the mix of EPA, state folks (both with and without reg) and industry was very good and helpful to me. |
| A second course may be needed once the rule is fully implemented. This course would look at success/failure stories, identify problems, and assist states in working out issues. I very much enjoyed the Amway Grand and Grand Rapids area. A good facility and great location. My only problem the entire week was with the significant echo of the sound system, which was more of a function of the size and space of the room rather than the speaker system itself. |
| Had difficulty hearing some of the speaker to a slight echo because of the high ceiling. |
| Tim Creger’s presentation demonstrated that we need to work on the issue of pesticide rinsate. |
| Since this is the first training available on this subject it’s difficult to comment objectively, because we needed the training and, so far, it’s the only one available. This has been a great, relaxed sharing group to work with, plus involved and interested EPA staff - a great combo! |
| The 9am Friday session was of very little value to those (states and tribes) who are NOT involved in equivalency determinations. This session could have been better planned as an optional session at the end of the day. Except for the meeting room acoustics the facility and Grand Rapids was very nice. |
| Room acoustics could have been better. Good facility, good location. Overall, good job! |
| The breakout sessions (if you continue to use them) need to be run by people of identical knowledge on the subject at hand. |
| Hotel was great (rooms, meals) except for sound in the meeting room, which was horrible, I wouldn’t use the hotel again just because of that. |
| You could almost do a whole PREP or PIRT on just containers. Would like some mock inspections; determine containment, inspect containers. Facilities/accommodations/lunches excellent as usual - hope to see more PREP or PIRT offered at this location. |
| Although I was not very clear during the first small group exercise, in the end, it all came together and I am very satisfied with the course. It was great to hear from other states and their experiences during implementation. |
| The breakout sessions were good; provided more intimate setting for discussion. The acoustics in the main session room were not the best - difficult to hear some of the speakers. Overall, very good!! Kudos to MDA for providing excellent facilities for field trips. |
| Kudos to Dea and Nancy. |
| The host state did an outstanding job! The PREP staff was great as usual. |
| Sound system was terrible. Extremely difficult to understand. |
| Some field trips were a bit too long - perhaps focus the discussions into "lessons learned." Small groups were a great way to "digest" portion of the rule. It was a long week but went by very fast. |
| Ensure facilitators can facilitate. Although one may possess knowledge of the regs, that doesn’t ensure they have facilitation skills. |