DOCSLIB.ORG

Responsiveness Summary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Responsiveness Summary RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY WHATCOM WATERWAY SITE Bellingham, Washington Draft Consent Decree and Exhibits September 2007 ISSUED BY: WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY TOXICS CLEANUP PROGRAM 1. Introduction On July 12, 2007 the draft Consent Decree and exhibits (including a Draft Cleanup Action Plan) for the Whatcom Waterway site (Site) in Bellingham were issued for a 30-day public comment period. Public involvement activities related to this public comment period included: • Distribution of a fact sheet describing the Site and the documents through a mailing to over 650 people, including neighboring businesses and other interested parties; • Publication of one paid display ad in The Bellingham Herald, dated July 8, 2007; • Publication of notice in the Washington State Site Register, dated July 6, 2007; • A public hearing held on August 8, 2007; • Posting of the documents on the Ecology web site; and • Providing copies of the documents through information repositories at Ecology’s Bellingham Field Office and Northwest Regional Office, and the Bellingham Public Library – Downtown Branch. A total of 54 persons, organizations, and businesses submitted written and/or verbal comments on the Consent Decree and exhibits. The commenters are listed in Table 1-1. Comment letters and excerpts from the public hearing transcript are organized according to commenter in Appendix A. The full public hearing transcript is attached as Appendix B. Appendix C Ecology correspondence associated with Ecology’s responses to commenter #29. Section 2 of this document provides background information on the Site and Site cleanup activities, Section 3 describes next steps. Sections 4 and 5 present the comments received (and Ecology’s responses) as follows: • Overview of Comments Received: Section 4 • Detailed Summary of Comments and Responses: Section 5 Sections 4 and 5 contain concise summaries of comments and Ecology’s responses to those comments. To review a comment in its original form, refer to Appendix A. 1 2 2. Background The Site includes lands that have been impacted by contaminants historically released from industrial waterfront activities, including mercury discharges from the former Georgia Pacific (GP) Chlor-Alkali plant. The Chlor-Alkali plant was constructed by GP in 1965 to produce chlorine and sodium hydroxide for use in bleaching and pulping wood fiber. The Chlor-Alkali plant discharged mercury-containing wastewater into the Log Pond (an industrially-constructed pond open to the Whatcom Waterway) between 1965 and 1971. Between 1971 and 1979 pretreatment measures were installed to reduce mercury discharges. Chlor-Alkali plant wastewater discharges to the Log Pond were discontinued in 1979 following construction of the Aerated Stabilization Basin (ASB). The ASB was constructed by GP for management of pulp and tissue mill wastewaters in compliance with the Clean Water Act. The outfall from the ASB continues to be owned by GP and wastewater and sediment quality in the outfall area are monitored under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. Initial environmental investigations of the Site identified mercury in sediment at concentrations that exceeded MTCA standards (Chapter 173-340 Washington Administrative Code [WAC]) and Sediment Management Standards (SMS; Chapter 173-204 WAC). These are the state standards that govern the cleanup of contaminated sediment sites. The MTCA regulations specify criteria for the evaluation and conduct of a cleanup action. The SMS regulations dictate the standards for cleanup. The key MTCA and SMS decision-making document for Site cleanup actions is the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS). The RI/FS for the Whatcom Waterway Site was initiated in 1996 by GP under the terms of an Agreed Order with Ecology. On October 10, 2006 Ecology issued the Draft Supplemental RI/FS for the Whatcom Waterway Site. Along with the draft RI/FS, a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) was issued for public review and comment. During the joint comment period on the draft RI/FS and DSEIS, 162 oral and written comments were received. Ecology summarized and responded to these comments in a Responsiveness Summary issued in July 2007. Ecology has approved the RI/FS as final. The final RI/FS and DSEIS, and public comments received on these documents were used by Ecology to develop a draft Cleanup Action Plan (DCAP), describing Ecology’s proposed cleanup for the Whatcom Waterway site (Site). The DCAP was one of several exhibits to a proposed legal agreement called a Consent Decree. Ecology proposed entering the Consent Decree with the Port of Bellingham (Port), the Washington Department of Natural Resources, the City of Bellingham, and Meridian-Pacific, LLC to implement the cleanup of the Site and to settle their liability. The draft Consent Decree included the following Exhibits: • Exhibit A, Site Diagram: shows the site location and vicinity • Exhibit B, Draft Cleanup Action Plan: describes Ecology’s proposed cleanup action for the Site 3 • Exhibit C, Schedule of Work and Deliverables: lists specific reports and actions required under the Consent Decree, along with the schedule for performance • Exhibit D, List of Required Permits: describes permits that will likely be required for implementation of the cleanup • Exhibit E, Applicable Substantive Requirements: lists regulatory requirements that Ecology will coordinate as part of implementation of the cleanup • Exhibit F, Draft Public Participation Plan: describes opportunities for public involvement Ecology issued the draft Consent Decree and exhibits for public comment from July 12, 2007 through August 13, 2007. This Responsiveness Summary summarizes the comments received by Ecology during the comment period, as well as Ecology’s responses to those comments. 4 3. Next Steps As a result of public comment Ecology has not made significant changes to the draft Consent Decree and its exhibits, including the DCAP. Therefore, Ecology has finalized the Consent Decree, including the CAP and Public Participation Plan, and has completed a Final SEIS. This Responsiveness Summary is being issued jointly with these final documents. The Consent Decree will now be signed by the Potentially Liable Parties and by Ecology. After the Consent Decree has been signed it will be entered into the records of Whatcom County Superior Court. Entry of the Consent Decree into court records establishes the effective date for the Consent Decree, and initiates the schedule of required cleanup activities defined in the Consent Decree and its exhibits. Following entry of the Consent Decree in court the cleanup will move forward into remedial design and permitting which is expected to take between 2 and 3 years. As part of the design and permitting phase of the cleanup, a draft Engineering Design Report (EDR) will be issued for public review and comment. The draft EDR is expected to be released for public review in late 2009 or early 2010. The draft EDR will contain design details on the proposed caps and other cleanup elements, as well as a Construction Quality Assurance Project Plan and a Compliance Monitoring and Contingency Response Plan. The objective of the plans is to confirm that cleanup standards have been achieved, and also to confirm the long-term effectiveness of cleanup actions at the Site. The plans will contain discussions on duration and frequency of monitoring; the trigger for contingency response actions. Following Ecology approval of the EDR, detailed construction plans and specifications will be developed, and construction of the cleanup action will be implemented. Construction of the cleanup action is expected to take 3 years following completion of remedial design and permitting. Long-term monitoring activities will be initiated following completion of construction activities. 5 4. Summary of Comments Received 4.1 Overview of Comments Received A total of 54 individuals or organizations submitted comments on the draft Consent Decree during the public comment period. The form of comments received is as follows: • 44 parties submitted only written comments, and did not present testimony at the public hearing on August 8th; • 4 parties provided only verbal testimony at the public hearing, and did not provide written comments (other than in the form of exhibits provided at the public hearing); and, • 6 parties provided written comments as well as verbal testimony at the public hearing on August 8th. Of the 54 sets of comments received, half (27) were from parties that previously commented on the draft RI/FS and DSEIS during the comment period on those documents (see Table 1-1). The other half (27) represented “new” commenters who had not submitted comments on the draft RI/FS and DSEIS. 4.2 Statements of Remedy Preferences As part of their comments, 46 of the 54 commenters provided a statement of either support or opposition to the remedy described in the Draft Cleanup Action Plan. These statements of remedy preference are summarized in Tables 4-1 and 4-2. Of the 27 “new” commenters listed in Table 4-1, over half (14) stated support for the remedy as proposed by Ecology in the draft Consent Decree and Exhibits. A smaller number (9) stated either preference for a different alternative, or general opposition to the remedy proposed by Ecology. Four of the “new” commenters provided specific technical comments without specifying a remedy preference. In most cases, the 27 “repeat” commenters listed in Table 4-2 expressed remedy preferences consistent with those previously provided during the public comment period for the draft RI/FS and DSEIS. Five of the 27 “repeat” commenters expressed support for the proposed remedy, consistent with previous comments from these five parties. Eighteen of the “repeat” commenters expressed either opposition to the proposed cleanup action, or a preference for a different cleanup approach than that proposed by Ecology. Most of these eighteen had provided similar comments during public comment on the draft RI/FS and DSEIS (four of the eighteen had previously expressed unclear statements of remedy preference, but were interpreted as opposition to the proposed remedy in the current comment period).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nooksack Indian Tribe Climate Change Adaptation Plan for Key Species and Habitats
    NOOKSACK INDIAN TRIBE CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION PLAN FOR KEY SPECIES AND HABITATS Prepared by University of Washington Climate Impacts Group In Partnership with Nooksack Indian Tribe Natural and Cultural Resources Department Acknowledgments The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to the project partners who participated in workshops and document review. Nooksack Natural and Cultural Resources Project Lead: Oliver Grah, Water Resources Program Manager Participating stakeholders from Nooksack watershed: Nooksack Indian Tribe Natural Resource Department Oliver Grah Jezra Beaulieu Ross Cline Jr. Jeramiah Johnny George Swanaset Jr. Tom Cline Trevor Delgado Eric Stover Richard Auguston Tricia Cline Treva Coe Whatcom County Chris Elder Washington Department of Natural Resources Chris Hankey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wendy Cole U.S. Forest Service Jeremy Gilman Andrew Montgomery Sierra Pacific Industries John Gold Whatcom Land Trust Jennifer Mackey Gabe Epperson Evergreen Land Trust Holly O’Neil Ian Smith Alex Harris Natural Systems Design Susan Dickerson-Lange Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Kip Killibrew University of Washington Climate Impacts Group Harriet Morgan Meade Krosby Funding Funding for this effort was provided by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Recommended citation: Morgan, H., and M. Krosby. 2020. Nooksack Indian Tribe Climate Change Adaptation Plan. A collaboration of University of Washington Climate Impacts Group and Nooksack Indian Tribe Natural and Cultural Resource Department. NOOKSACK TRIBE’S CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION PLAN 2 Image Citations Cover page image: Shuksan and Wildflowers, Sean Munson, licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0 Section header images: Executive Summary | Image Source: Wendy Cole, WA Department of Fish and Wildlife Section 1 | Image Source: 215.
    [Show full text]
  • STUDY GUIDE This Study Guide Includes Suggestions About Preparing Your Students for a Live Theatre Performance in Order to Help Them Take More from the Experience
    TH’OWXIYA: THE HUNGRY FEAST DISH | STUDY GUIDE This Study Guide includes suggestions about preparing your students for a live theatre performance in order to help them take more from the experience. Included is information and ideas on how to use the performance to enhance aspects of your education curriculum with exercises that respond to the themes presented in the performance and the dramatic and musical elements. Please copy and distribute this guide to your fellow teachers. ​ CREDITS » Written by Joseph A. Dandurand – Inspired by a Kwantlen First Nation legend » Dramaturgy & Direction by Chris McGregor » Set, Props, Mask and Costume Design & Painting by Jay Havens » Original Composition by Marguerite Witvoet » Sound Design by Stephen Bulat » Recorded Hang Drum by Jerrett Plett » Mask carving and background design by Carrielynn Victor » Feast Dish carving by Steven Beaver » Original Feast Dish carving by Earl Moulton and Don Froese Please contact the Tour Coordinator for more information LOCAL: 604 669 0631 TOLL FREE: 1 866 294 7943 EMAIL: [email protected] WEBSITE: www.axistheatre.com ​ ​ ​ ​ CONTENT CREDITS & CONTENT 1 - 2 SYNOPSIS 3 ORIGINS OF THE STORY ABOUT THE AUTHOR Q&A WITH PLAYWRIGHT JOSEPH A. DANDURAND 4 CURRICULUM CONNECTIONS 5 First People’s Principles of Learning 6 PRE-PERFORMANCE ACTIVITIES 7 POST-PERFORMANCE ACTIVITIES 8 - 10 Review the Show 8 - 9 Having Fun with Drama Games 10 RESEARCHING AND REFLECTING ON FIRST NATIONS CULTURE 11 - 14 Stó:lō, Kwantlen, and Musqueam History 13 - 14 APPENDIX 15 - 20 Characters 15 Vocabulary 15 - 16 Websites for Reference 17 Pantomime 18 Colouring Page 19 About Axis 20 Th’owxiya: The Hungry Feast Dish Study Guide 2 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Nooksack Place Names Geography, Culture, and Language
    Nooksack Place Names Geography, Culture, and Language Allan Richardson and Brent Galloway Sample Material © 2011 UBC Press Noxwsá7aq Temíxw Pókw Nooksack Place Name Book Lhiyá kwes tse7ít xwhítsolh ilh ta Noxwsá7aq Temíxw tolí7 slhiyólh yestí7ixwólh. This here now is truly the history of the Nooksack Place Names from our late elders. Án7ma híkwt-as-kwm tíya s7aháynit ilh ta mókw’wát. It’ll be very important work for everyone. Ílholh ay ná7an kwóxwenalikw Selhám Líche7tsen qe sqw’ó7 ta Selhám Lawéchten. The authors were Mr. Allan Richardson along with Dr. Brent Galloway. S7aháynitas tíya Noxwsá7aq Temíxw Pókw tamatl’ótl’em qex syilánem, yalh as-híq’-as They worked on this Nooksack Place book for many years, finally it’s completed. Stl’í7-chalh kwes tson as7ísta tíya, “Yalh kwómalh as-hóy” ilh ta Selhám Líche7tsen qe Selhám Lawéchten kwes ay aháynitas tíya án7ma híkw syáyos. We want to say like this to Mr. Richardson and Dr. Galloway, “thank you” for working on this very important project. Ílh-olh-chalh kw ay wo7-aháyan-as tíya aslhq’ílnoxw ilh ta Lhéchalosemáwtxw-chalh. We are already using this information for our Lhéchalosem class. Íma ílh-olh-chalh kw ay wo7-aháyan-as tíya aslhq’ílnoxw ilh ta qalát ay welhtáchtxw-as welhnímelh xwhÍtsolh qe welhnímelh asláq’alhsólh. Also, we are already using this information for reclaiming our history and our culture. Tl’ósmas-kwom tse7ít-as tíya Pókw ay kwóxwen txwyátl’ slhiyólh sníchichim ilh ta Noxwsá7aq Stí7ti7ixw. Then so truly this book will help in the return of our language to the Nooksack People.
    [Show full text]
  • WWTP Cultural Resources Report
    d r a y t o n ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE POST POINT WASTEWA T E R TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS, BELLINGHAM, WH A T C O M COUNTY, WASHINGTON BY: MEREDITH A. MORENO, M.A., RPA PRINCIPAL: GARTH L. BALDWIN REPORT PREPARED FOR FREEMAN ANTHONY P.E. CITY OF BELLINGHAM PUBLIC WORKS – CAPITAL PROJECTS 210 LOTTIE STREET BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON 98225 TECHNICAL REPORT 0211J APRIL 13, 2011 684B Peace Portal Drive - Blaine, WA 98230 - (360) 332.2600 - draytonarchaeology.com Table of Content Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 4 Regulatory Context ......................................................................................................................... 4 Project Location and Area of Potential Effect ................................................................................ 5 Environmental Setting .................................................................................................................... 8 Geologic Context ............................................................................................................................. 8 Cultural Context .............................................................................................................................. 9 Historic Background ...................................................................................................................... 11 Previous Archaeology ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nooksack Indian Tribe: Rivers and Glaciers — Keeping Salmon and the Ecosystem Healthy in Light of Climate Change and Distressed Ecosystems
    Nooksack Indian Tribe: Rivers and Glaciers — Keeping salmon and the ecosystem healthy in light of climate change and distressed ecosystems The Nooksack Indian Tribe resides in the Northwest tip of Washington State. Their homeland extends throughout the Nooksack River watershed. This area includes an area from the Georgia Straight (Salish Sea) to Mount Baker (west to east) and from just over the border of British Columbia down to Skagit County, WA. Additionally, traditional use and management areas extended beyond these boundaries; some of these areas were shared between the Nooksack Indian Tribe and other indigenous peoples such as the Lummi Nation. Today, the Tribe is headquartered in Deming, Washington, 15 miles east of Bellingham. This profile draws on the work of the Nooksack Indian Tribe to address climate change impacts on the hydrology of the Nooksack River and salmon survival and recovery. These efforts include the recent study by Grah and Beaulieu (2013), which is included in the recently published special issue of Climatic Change dedicated to issues facing tribal people as well as a summary of this work in the Tribal Chapter of the Northwest Climate Assessment. Tribal Concerns: Climate Change Impacts on Nooksack River Hydrology and Pacific Salmon In response to concerns about the Nooksack River and the glaciers that drain into it, the Nooksack Indian Tribe is undertaking efforts to address climate change and its impacts on Nooksack Usual and Accustomed lands and its people. In a study on changes to glaciers feeding the Nooksack
    [Show full text]
  • Nooksack, Salish, Salishan, Extinct: Language No Longer in Use
    1. Description 1.1 Name of society, language, and language family: Nooksack, Salish, Salishan, extinct: language no longer in use. 1.2 ISO code (3 letter code from ethnologue.com): ISO-639-3 1.3 Location (latitude/longitude): Latitude: N 48 degrees: 55’ – Longitude -123 degrees: 40’ 1.4 Brief history: Before contact with white settlers and the diseases that decimated their population, the Nooksack hunting territories were located south near the Skagit and Samish rivers. On the west, their territory met near the Lummi people; on the north side, it went as far as the people of the Halkomelem people; and on the east, to the Lower Thompson and Upper Skagit people. The Nooksack were part of the larger Coast Salish economic and social system. Ethnographic and historical evidence suggests that a Nooksack-speaking group may have earlier occupied the area near the Bay of Bellingham and were displaced from there by the Lummi (Amoss 1978; 4) 1.5 Influence of missionaries/schools/governments/powerful neighbors: The Treaty of Washington in 1846 split Central Coast Salish country between the United States and Canada. Christian missionaries started to form in 1841, became more popular after 1858.By the 1860s, many Central Coast Salish Indians were working in the new industries of logging, farming shipping, and commercial fishing. By the turn of the century, Indian culture had changed significantly. 1.6 Ecology: They were hunter/gathers who developed large dependency on their environments whether it was hunting game on land and took full advantage of resources from nearby rivers and oceans.
    [Show full text]
  • Lummi Nation Announces COVID-19 Mass Vaccination Event Saturday
    Xwlemi Nation News FEBRUARY 2021 Lummi Communications - 2665 Kwina Road - Bellingham, Washington 98226 Lummi Nation announces COVID-19 mass vaccination event Saturday, February 27, 2021 For Immediate Release – February 25, 2021 Lummi, Washington – On February 19th the Lummi Indian Business Council (LIBC) approved modifica- tions to the Lummi Nation vaccine distribution plan. The Lummi Public Health team has completed multiple vaccine events for the first six phases of the distribution plan. 2,800 vaccines have been provided to Lummi continue that responsibility a sovereign nation, we have Nation members and their today by giving our children the unique ability as a gov- families, caregivers for our everything they need to live a ernment to establish our own most vulnerable members, healthy life. Which means we policies and prioritization of all LIBC employees, and must act as good neighbors, the vaccines we receive from Moles Funeral Home staff. work together with our sur- the Indian Health Service On Saturday, February rounding governments, to (IHS).” 27, 2021 the Lummi Public take care of our children, and Lummi members will Health team will host an- to take care of each other.” continue to be prioritized other mass vaccination event Vaccinating the FSD for vaccines as the Lummi at the Silver Reef Casino teachers creates a layer of Public Health team pro- from 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. protection and allows our gresses through the planned This event is not open to the education professionals the distribution phases. When general public, but follows ability to enter the classroom individuals who have been the approved vaccine distri- with less of a risk to do their hesitant to participate decide bution plan of LIBC.
    [Show full text]
  • Native American Liaison.Indd
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Tribal Wildlife Grant and Tribal Landowner Incentive Program Periodic Report, 2006 Message from the Director Dale Hall Dale Hall is Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Indian Country comprises more than 100 million In reviewing this report, you’ll see many examples of acres––much of which encompasses some of the most on-the-ground conservation–––from the Oglala of Pine important fi sh and wildlife habitat in the nation. Ride Igmu Tanka (mountain lion) program to the Iowa Countless plants and animals, many of which are Tribe of Oklahoma’s project to construct and manage protected by the Endangered Species Act, thrive on the Grey Snow Eagle (Rehabilitation) House, Bah Kho- Indian lands. At the same time, Indian tribes have je Xla Chi. often lacked the means to adequately manage and protect these important resources. I also want to mention the work of the Sauk-Suiattle Tribe in northwestern Washington, which truly In the spirit of cooperative conservation, I am embodies the spirit of the TWG and TLIP programs. honored to present this report on the U.S. Fish and The tribe is addressing a declining population of the Wildlife Service’s Tribal Wildlife Grants (TWG) and North Cascade mountain goat, which in turn will Tribal Landowner Incentive Program (TLIP). These help the tribe maintain an important element of its competitive grant programs provide great fl exibility traditions and culture. for tribal governments to focus on their own fi sh and wildlife management priorities. During the past four I hope this report inspires you––as it inspires me––to years, the Service has provided nearly $40 million to continue working cooperatively to conserve and protect more than 125 tribes for 219 projects.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Reconnaissance Level Survey Report
    CITY OF LYNDEN Reconnaissance Level Survey 2018-01-00051 Lynden, Whatcom County, Washington September 2018 Report prepared and survey conducted by: Katie Pratt, Architectural Historian, Northwest Vernacular, Inc. Spencer Howard, Historic Preservationist, Northwest Vernacular, Inc. Contents Acknowledgments 5 1. RESEARCH DESIGN 6 Objectives 6 Survey Methodology 6 Expectations 8 Area Surveyed 9 Integration with Planning Process 10 2. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT 12 Natural Setting 12 Pre history 12 1800–1860 Early settlement 14 1870–1899 Logging Community 16 1900–1909 Logging to Agriculture 23 1910–1919 Commercial Growth 28 1920–1929 City Growth 31 1930–1939 Depression Era Growth 35 1940–1949 Density and INdustrial Growth 37 1950–1959 Post World War II Growth 39 1960–1969 Subdivision Expansions 41 1970–1979 Population growth 43 1980–1989 Business District Changes 44 1990–2018 Subdivision Growth 45 3. SURVEY RESULTS 47 Development Periods 47 Property Uses 48 Architectural Styles 51 National Register and Washington Heritage Register Eligibility 51 City of Lynden | Reconnaissance Level Survey Northwest Vernacular 2 Lynden Register of Historic Places Eligibility 55 Recommendations 63 Development Trends 64 4. APPENDIX 65 Bibliography 65 Maps 67 City of Lynden | Reconnaissance Level Survey Northwest Vernacular 3 LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS Table 1. Survey Reports within and adjacent City of Lynden 9 Table 2. Population Data 1890 to 1910 24 Table 3. Properties Surveyed by Development Period 47 Table 4. Property Types Surveyed 48 Table 5. Architectural Styles of Properties Surveyed 51 Table 6. Potential NR Eligible Properties per Criterion C 53 Table 7. Table: Potential LR Eligible Properties per Criterion 2 57 Map 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Native American Crime in the Northwest: 2004- 2005 – BIA Information from Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Native American Crime in the Northwest: 2004- 2005 – BIA Information from Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington Author(s): Gary R. Leonardson, Ph.D. Document No.: 218937 Date Received: June 2007 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Native American Crime in the Northwest: 2004-2005 – BIA Information from Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington By Gary R. Leonardson, Ph.D. MPR 55 Rodeo Trail, Dillon, MT 59725 406-683-6424 [email protected] Prepared for the Montana Board of Crime Control October 2006 This project was supported by a grant awarded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in the Office of Justice Programs, at the U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology-Enhanced Language Revitalization
    TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION Editors: Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D. Phillip Cash Cash, A.B.D. Candace Kaleimamoowahinekapu Galla, M.A. Yetsast^slahawi Kah^tokt / Tracy Williams, M.A. Depree ShadowWalker, A.B.D. © Arizona Board of Regents, 2006 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................4 PREFACE..................................................................................................5 PART I: THE PLACE OF TECHNOLOGY IN INDIGENOUS LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION ............................................................6 THE FACTS ON INDIGENOUS LANGUAGE ENDANGERMENT .............................................6 ON BEING AN INDIGENOUS LANGUAGE ADVOCATE...........................................................9 THE PLACE OF TECHNOLOGY IN LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION ...................................12 THE CRIT PROJECT ...........................................................................................................................14 WORKING WITH PEOPLE AND DATA ........................................................................................16 Working with Data ............................................................................................................................17 CREATING A LANGUAGE LESSON..............................................................................................18 Language Lesson Planning................................................................................................................19 The Lesson Plan.................................................................................................................................20
    [Show full text]
  • Native American Crime in the Northwest: 2004-2008 – BIA Information from Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Native American Crime in the Northwest: 2004- 2008 – BIA Information from Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington Author: Gary R. Leonardson, Ph.D. Document No.: 227727 Date Received: July 2009 Award Number: 2007-BJ-CX-K020 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Section 1 Native American Crime in the Northwest: 2004-2008 – BIA Information from Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington By Gary R. Leonardson, Ph.D. MPR 55 Rodeo Trail, Dillon, MT 59725 406-683-6424 [email protected] Prepared for the Montana Board of Crime Control July 2009 This project was supported by grant number 2007-BJ-CX-K020 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Department of Justice.
    [Show full text]