RE: [CPEO-MEF] RAB questions

[ted@theodorejhenry.com]

Jim

I am least familiar with BRAC process, and if my memory serves me well,
you are or were involved with Sunflower that did revolve around
transferring property.

Obviously, you are well aware of the financial incentives for the early
transfer process, both from the military perspective as well and the
civilian business side.  There are many, many times where money out
muscles sound science or environmental investigation and I suspect we do
not disagree on this topic.

There are ways to discuss issues that do not fall directly in line with
the simple text/scenario originally posted by Laura - both within a RAB
setting, as the examples I posted are things we talk about at Aberdeen
Proving Ground, and through the approach posted by walshw@pepperlaw.com.

I certainly understand that many RABs do not function well, I am just
saying it does not always have to be that way.

Ted




-----Original Message-----
From: UTOSI [mailto:UTOSI-Hdqrs@kc.rr.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 12:02 PM
To: ted@theodorejhenry.com; cpeo-military
Subject: RE: [CPEO-MEF] RAB questions

At 11:33 AM 10/30/02 -0500, ted@theodorejhenry.com wrote:
>Jim
>
>I do not think DOD made RABs just to make them fail, although I
>certainly think they could have supported them better. DOD has always
>said that such guidance was not made too detailed so site personnel
>would have the flexibility needed to fit their situations.
>
>Unfortunately, some sites do not want it to work or simply have had no
>training in the same room with community members to learn how to make
it
>work.

The question becomes:  Why does the DOD not put the total clean up of 
closed bases in the IAP and allow the RAB to question the total clean up

process?

The failure of DOD to do such allows DOD to transfer the DOD property
under 
the "Early Transfer Process" before the property is cleaned up.

Place the clean up in a non-DOD lap!

Jim Oyler

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~