Thursday, Apr. 16, 1998

Memorandum in support of motion to vacate second administrative action

VII. DEFENDANTS HAVE NOT PROPERLY CURATED THE SKELETON.

Despite their obligations under ARPA and the Court's Remand, and contrary to their assurances that all needed remedial actions had been taken, ER 27-30; COE 6703-6704, 6731-6732, defendants allowed the skeleton to remain for months in substandard, unsafe conditions. Even after the relocation to Seattle, defendants' conduct still gives cause for concern.

There is still no long-term preservation plan, notwithstanding the recommendations of plaintiffs' curation expert and defendants' promises. See ER 80; DOI 03403 (Leckie memo); ER 17; COE 0004787 (Revised MOA); ER 484, 486; Defendants' 6th Status Report at 2, dkt. #196, Enclosure H at 12. Instead, defendants are using "a series of action plans," and a long-term preservation plan may come only when this controversy has ended. ER 405 (Rumsey 2/24/00). Defendants have also allowed substantial fluctuations to occur in relative humidity even though they promised it would stay between 40 and 45%. ER 484, 486; Defendants 6th Status Report; dkt. # 196, at 2, Enclosure H at 7. Datalogger readings at the Burke Museum show a low of 16.9% to a high of over 54%. ER 528-29; Defendants' February 2001 Curation Status Report, dkt #410, Attachment C at 56, 112. Low levels can damage skeletal remains. ER 64; DOI 01884. Levels have fallen below 30% many times. See, e.g., ER 104; DOI 05666; ER 371-74.