Response to NARAB--corrected

["Sam Goodhope" <Sam.Goodhope@OAG.STATE.TX.US>]

I believe that the formation of a national RAB committee is critical. 
Looking back from a vantage point of serving on DERTF during five out of
its six years of existence since 1991, I believe that it is clear that the
federal government as a whole is retreating from its commitment to
cleaning up its 20 to 40 billion dollar mess at DoD facilities, as well as its
commitment to protecting the health and safety of our citizens (including
service folks and their families) and our communities. I hasten to add
that the folks leading the retreat are not the people in the environmental
offices within the Services. It is, rather, DoD as a whole as well as
certain congressional committees (actually, certain staffers within certain
committees).

It strikes me that a collegial group of community-based members with a
more national and policy outlook is essential to counter the federal
government's advance to the rear--or at least such a group may ensure
that policy makers in DoD (outside of the enviro offices) and elected reps
have input from sources other than committee staffers. 
Furthermore, a national group would be useful for disseminating info
among RABS, and could, perhaps, aid in the training or education of local
RAB members.

I remain concerned about friction between base commanders (etc.) and
RABs. Having been an Army Brat for 22 years, I have been somewhat
exposed to the politics of base dancing. I am not yet quite convinced that
base folks embrace the RAB concept, based as it is on outside-the-fence
line community concern. It seems to me--out here in the hinterland--that
base folks and base reuse folks unfortunately dwell on every little
pronouncement from the boosters and LRAs, while giving short shrift to
environmental concerns. Perhaps, the NARAB might help in sensitizing
base commanders to enviro issues........ : )