Re: inadvisability of executive summaries

[zweifel@nexus.chapman.edu]

From: Don Zweifel <zweifel@nexus.chapman.edu>
Subject: Re: inadvisability of executive summaries 

To all interested parties:

Re: RAB questionnaire from CalEPA's Dept. of Toxic Substances Control

In answer to the query: "Is the military's Co-Chair distributing executive
summaries of key documents in place of full reports?" May we state that if
there is a move afoot to abridge adequate data at the RAB subcommittee
level then we disapprove of it.

These so-called summarizations are, in our considered opinion nothing but
a concerted attempt to spoon-feed "pablum" down the gullets of
unsuspecting subcommittee members. 

If there is a new nation-wide policy from the DoD regarding this then they
should attempt to justify it unequivocally from the get-go.

RABs and/or the public must not be turned into mushroom factories ("Keep
'em in the dark and feed 'em night soil"). To relegate them to digesting
someone's regurgitations or over-simplifications will be viewed in the end
as counter-productive or at the worst obstructionistic. 

An example would be the consultant/contractor: In all fairness to them 
they are often asked to encapsulate their findings into impossibly small
compendiums or a synthesis of conclusions. Oftentimes this has been
erroneously interpreted as giving license to interpret and/or delete
potentially embarrassing or insufficiently researched findings. In
other words the temptation to place their own spin on it through
editorializations or glossing over the facts.

We believe it is fallacious to assume that one could transform by
distillation, all pertinent data relating to highly complicated and
technical studies into simple pat answers. The spectre of superficiality
then has a tendency to raise its ugly head.

The DoD's argument, we contend, is that they believe most subcommittee
members don't have the technical background and/or expertise to properly
evaluate a report. This may be true, but is it fair to second-guess them?

Defense has an obligation to bring these lay-members up to speed on
most aspects of remediation and restoration a priori or before the fact,
so that they can attempt at least some semblance of an effective
evaluation regarding their findings.

DoD has made some headway in this department but the problem is one of
sufficiency. 

There are those who will then point to the adequacy of funding after
Congress partially eviscerated DERA and BRAC funding, however efforts 
could probably be promulgated to overcome the above within existing
strictures.

In summation may we reiterate that executive summaries are fine when
accompanied with all relevant data but not as stand-alone documents.

What do you think?

 Donald Zweifel
 CalEPA Advisory Grp Mil. Base Closure
P.S.: These POV's don't
necessarily reflect the
views of the Adv Grp or CalEPA.