ALERT! RAB TECH ASSISTANCE THREATEN

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>]

RAB TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FUNDING THREATENED
Lenny Siegel
July 17, 1995

 Just as the Defense Department appeared finally to be 
making progress in the establishment of a technical assistance 
program to provide independent technical help and other 
support for the community members of Restoration Advisory 
Boards, the Senate Armed Services Committee, without 
warning, has recommended changes that could destroy the 
program before it even gets underway.

 I just received the legislative language and report of the 
Senate Defense Authorization bill, which I believe has not yet 
gone to the floor, so I could use help in interpreting the 
language. I do not yet know the politics of the changes, or 
what can be done to prevent them. Stay tuned for additional 
information!

 The Senate bill makes three changes in the Underwood-
Kohl amendment, included in last year's Defense Authorization 
Act.

1) It reduces the maximum amount specified for RAB support 
from $7.5 million to $4 million. Since the $7.5 million has not 
been spent, this was to be expected.

2) It combines RAB administrative support, currently handled 
by each base, with technical assistance funding. This could 
dramatically reduce both administrative and potential 
technical support. (This is the part that I could use the help of 
someone else who has the entire language.)

3) IT DROPS THE NOTION OF "INDEPENDENT" ASSISTANCE, 
PROPOSED BY THE "KEYSTONE" FEDERAL FACILITIES 
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION DIALOGUE COMMITTEE AND 
LEGISLATED BY THE UNDERWOOD-KOHL AMENDMENT.

The new bill says (!!!!), "The commander of an installation may 
obtain technical assistance for a technical review committee or 
restoration advisory board under paragraph (1) with respect 
to an installation only if the Federal, State, and local agencies 
responsible for overseeing environmental restoration at the 
installation, the contractors carrying out environmental 
restoration at the installation, and available Department of 
Defense personnel do not have the technical expertise 
necessary for achieving the objective for which the technical 
assistance is to be obtained."

 The Committee misses the point. The military, its 
contractors, and the regulatory agencies have plenty of 
technical expertise. But community stakeholders cannot 
effectively function - other than as rubber stamps - unless 
they have access to technical consultants that they select and 
direct.