|
As an independent environmental consultant who has supported
RABs as a TAPP advisor since 1998 when the program was just
beginning, I find this disturbing.
I have helped RABs at Navy, Army and Air Force sites. I
have never been told by a US Gov't representative that I could not disclose any
type of information to a RAB member or at a RAB meeting, except when I have
become privy to pre-QC'd data and asked to not provide copies of the draft data
report to anyone. That is understandable and I think acceptable - why even try
to understand data until it is proven to be valid. I could talk about what
the data "indicated", however, and the preliminary data in general
terms.
If this report is something else, I suggest
bringing this to the attention of the person's supervisor (base commander,
whomever) and the regulators on the RAB.
I do a lot of work in the private sector as a site
characterization/remediation expert also, and often the idea of not
acknowledging a document or report is suggested by someone because it doesn't
appear to help their side of the debate That's never a good idea - it
will always come out eventually and then your credibility is
shot. Everything in the record that I have knowledge of has to be
disclosed, let the chips fall where they may. Experienced and astute
clients understand this, be they government or private-sector.
But then again, look at what is unfolding with
Toyota..............
Frank S. Anastasi, PG
301 309-0061
----- Original Message
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 6:59
PM
Subject: Re: [CPEO-MEF] Bullying RAB
Members
Dear all, As a former RAB member of the 32nd Street Naval Base here
in San Diego California, I find the statements a little bit discerning at
their attempt to shape and control the meetings. I understand the
need for facts and accuracy when conducting any type of meeting
(public or private), but concerns and issues should not be limited and
controlled by any one party. If someone has an issue, concern subject or
topic, they should be able to submit it as an agenda item, and then brought up
for discussion/action at the meeting. The Army has no business
restricting or controlling the agenda, as long as the items presented are
pertinent to the business of the RAB of that particular facility.
Remember, one person's opinion may differ from another, depending on who's
"side" they are on, but it should be in the interest of the Board and the job
that it is tasked with. Everything should be open and honest, and people
and issues should not be restricted or suppressed, as long as everyone is
trying to make an honest and accurate effort in their concerns and
presentations. Respectfully submitted, Craig F. Woempner, San Diego
California.
In a message dated 3/22/2010 2:10:46 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
cswab@merr.com writes:
Hi Steven and all,
Good question. The Army cited its contract
with the RAB's TAPP consultant as the basis for the gag order to me.
While I am the community point of contact for the RAB's request for TAPP
funding, I am not a party to the contract between U.S. TACOM-Rock Island and
our TAPP consultant.
To be honest, I find the bullying both intimidating
and hostile -- after all, this is the U.S. Department of Defense ordering me
to hide an environmental report pending some action on their part and I've
no idea what the “or else” might be. Further, the action is
discriminatory as I am the only RAB member who has been so approached by the
Army.
As far as the specific language in the TAPP
contract, the Army cites the following terms:
“…The contractor is expected to present
information at the RAB meetings. The Army and the
contractors that prepared the documents will also make presentations at the
same meetings. There will be coordination between these parties
required before the meeting, so the information presented is not redundant
and responsibility for presentation topics are clearly defined…”
“…The contractor shall make Power Point or other
presentations for public education at FS-associated public meetings (RAB or
site-specific). These presentations shall be provided to the BAAAP
installation staff at least 24 hours before the meeting to allow for fact
checking and verification of equipment compatibility. The installation
can provide the computer and projection equipment for the
meeting…”
I'll leave it to readers to decide for themselves if
these conditions require that TAPP work products such as fact sheets and
written comments are subject to Army retention and approval and that the
release of unapproved TAPP work products is expressly prohibited.
And further, that community members who volunteer to
facilitate the engagement of TAPP consultants for their RAB may be bullied
by the U.S. Department of Defense.
Laura
--
Laura Olah, Executive Director
Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger
(CSWAB)
E12629 Weigand's Bay South
Merrimac, WI 53561
(608) 643-3124
info@cswab.org
www.cswab.org
_______________________________________________
Military
mailing
list
Military@lists.cpeo.org
http://lists.cpeo.org/listinfo.cgi/military-cpeo.org
__________
Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database
4972 (20100324) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32
Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
Military mailing
list
Military@lists.cpeo.org
http://lists.cpeo.org/listinfo.cgi/military-cpeo.org
__________
Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database
4972 (20100324) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32
Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4973 (20100325) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
|