Skip to main content

A Review of DOT Compliance with GASB 34 Requirements (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Chapter 3 - Identification of Candidates for Case Study Analyses
Pages 15-15

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 15...
... The team then condensed individual nominations into a single list recommended by the team. The recommended case study departments are as follows: • Illinois -- depreciation approach, AASHTO Region 3, GASB 34 skeptic; • South Carolina -- depreciation approach, AASHTO Region 2, change in approach anticipated; • Tennessee -- modified approach, AASHTO Region 2, GASB 34 champion; • Texas -- combination approach, AASHTO Region 4, major system modifications; • Vermont -- depreciation approach, AASHTO Region 1, interest in using GASB 34 information; and • Washington -- modified approach, AASHTO Region 4, emphasis on condition assessment.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • intended purposes
  • approach anticipated
  • depreciation approach
  • study departments
  • state dots

  • individual nominations
  • panel authorized
  • questions dealing
  • dot implemented
  • nchrp panel

  • aashto regions
  • condensed individual
  • researchers considered
  • team thought
  • modified approach

  • research team
  • reporting approach
  • combination approach
  • single list
  • list recommended

  • expressed skepticism
  • similar division
  • leadership role
  • using gasb
  • tative sample

  • asset management
  • substitute michigan
  • geographical diversity
  • condition assessment
  • south carolina


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.