NARAB

["Theodore J. Henry" <thenry@umabnet.ab.umd.edu>]

To interested parties:

I guess it is time to put the next level of discussion on the floor. The
responses I have received have been supportive, while admitting it may be
difficult. So lets take the next step with the National Association of
RABs.

With regard for support, I do not think DOD or EPA support is something to
be concerned with at the present time. From the DOD perspective, they
would not see much gain from helping RABs communicate so lets not hold our
breathe for that support. As far as EPA, well I think they are interested
in having proper community participation, but from my experience, this is
clearly regional and site-specific as far as the level of outward support
that exists. I believe EPA has their own learning curve to
deal with regarding community participation and helping citizens reach the
decision making table, so while they are good to have in our corner, I
certainly do not think they hold "veto power" on the concept. If we
construct a well built machine, support will come. So, as far as fiscal
issues, I think this discussion is not an immediate concern.

Therefore, the logical question is what is the role of the NARAB? While
it could serve a clearinghouse role, I do not think it is necessary.
Career/Pro exists and does a fine job so why duplicate it. Additionally,
I do not think the NARAB could be a "consensus" body, since the NARAB, in
my view, would not be a negotiator for policy. Nor would it try to
install some national approach with respect to the RAB/CAB working
relationship since views will always differ among different groups and
certain aspects will work in one forum but not another. I do think that
the NARAB could be a problem solver and a link to bring appropriate
attention by higher DOD and Congress to sites where communities have been
overlooked, ignored etc. I believe the true value of the NARAB would be to
reduce the level of frustration and feelings of being overwhelmed
experienced by those working hard for the benefit of their communities.
The goal of the NARAB would be to help the front-lines, grass-root people.
During such an effort, the NARAB would also be able to better organize and
assess both the consistent problems for RABs as well as the unique issues
that may only affect 1 or 2 sites and help carry these issues to DOD and
Congress. While this is likely being done in some forums, to bring about
change, the more speaking the message the better.

As far as structure, I would see maybe a dozen people volunteering to
participate on the Board. I think it should be a mix of people including
someone active in policy (such as a representative from Career/Pro, a
scientist or two who works with community groups (to which I would be
willing to volunteer my time), a person with experience in facilitating
discussion with communities and DOD (I met a person at the MASS Clean-up
workshop who is working with 5-9 RABs on such issues), and a half dozen
community individuals who have served on a RAB or related body and has
some interest in adding to a national effort.

I would see initial work as including the development of the Board,
sending a questionnaire to Community representatives from each RAB to
assess views, needs and hurdles, and developing a structure on how the
Board would receive, process and respond requests for help or issues to be
addressed. While the NARAB may provide some support such as scientific,
communicative and other information, the strongest tool would be the pen
and writing on behalf of the local citizens so they may have better input
at their site, which is their right. Again, I have some ideas on how to
start some of these efforts, and I will type more specifically on these
issues down the road. As for now, lets hear more suggestions and
feedback. Of course, if I am missing the boat on an issue, let me know.

Sincerely

Ted Henry