WORK PLAtf FORPHASE ffi CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDIES

AT THE FORMER KOPPERS COMPANY, INC. SITELOCATED IN NEWPORT, DELAWARE

PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY:

WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS MAAR ASSOCIATES, INC.5120 Butler Pike . ' ,9 Liberty PlazaPlymouth Meeting, PA 19462 : Newark, DE 19711 'Attn: James Buczala . Ronald A. Thomas,

' . . . ' ' MAI President. ; (302)368-5777. • .'•

October 2, 1995

AR309»*09

TABLE OF CONTENTS/"X- • • '• .-" '. • •'. "'••••• '• •• 'i- /:'v-.'- :••••••.'••• . ••• '. ,'•'•-V .;:;,';\v..^;:;,.-:;,-:/ v>;-^ ' -::v:-,;:--..:•./•--;•-;••

1.0 INTRODUCTION : 1

2.0 PHASE IB SURVEY APPROACH ; '..' - 3

2:1 Investigation Strategy 32.2 Summary of Phase IA Modeling . 32.3 Phase IB Investigation Approach , - 6

3.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE ' - 11

/ 4:0 REFERENCES CITED ' 12

LiSTOFnCCRES

Figure!: Project Location Map .- ( • • •' • ',.-.- -.. • " ..' .;• :- - • - .'.;'..- -.. . • ',.-.- -.. • " ..' .;• :- - • - .'.;'..- -2.Figure 2: Revised Site Sensitivity Model

S: Soil Boring Interpretations of Disturbance' - . • _ - • ... ' • '. . - : " '"' ,' "V . . ' , • ' "

.Figured Archaeological Site Potential Model

ftR309MO

The following Phase IB archaeological work plan has been prepared in partial fulfillment ofthe cultural resource management (CRM) requirements for the former Koppers Company, Inc.Superfund Site located in Newport, Delaware (Figure 1). The CRM requirements for the Phase IB:study focus on location and identification of prehistoric and historic resources within the formerKoppers Company, Inc. property. The work plan is based on the reports of earlier Phase IA andgeoarchaeological studies (Kellogg et al. 1995; Kellogg1995), as modified after review. Thesestudies were performed concurrently with the Phase 1 of the Remedial Investigation of, the propertyby Woodward-Clyde Consultants (WCC) (Woodward-Clyde 1994a). The purpose of the Phase IBsurvey is to provide sufficient information about the extent of prehistoric and historic resources onthe property for use during the Feasibility Study (FS). The results of the Feasibility Study will beused to guide development of Phase II of the cultural resource investigations, if appropriate, in thoseareas likely to receive some form of remediation which could impact potential resources.

The study area1 (Figure 1) described in this work plan consists of an approximately 240-acretract of land. .The. entire northern boundary is formed by the main, Amtrak Northeast RailroadCorridor line. The southern boundary of the former Koppers Company, Inc. property consists ofthe White Clay Creek and the Christina River into which it flows. On the east, the property bordersthe DuPont Holly Run manufacturing plant, a chromium dioxide producer, and on the west HersheyRun, a small tributary of the White Clay Creek, which separates the study area from Bread and, Cheese Island. At present, the land lies idle; however, in the past, it has served as farmlandassociated with two or more farmsteads and, until 1971, as 4 woo4 preservation operation referredtd as the former Koppers Company, Inc. property,

. The soils of the study area consist of extensive tidal marshes as well as areas of Othello-Fallsington Urban land complex and Aldino-Keyport-Mattapex Urban land complex soils. The lattertwo are described in the Geoarchaeology Evaluation. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey (Kellogg1995) as having been altered or disturbed, mainly by cutting and filling during commercial andindustrial development. The fill is defined (Kellogg 1995) as being, for the most part, less than 1&inches in depth, covering naturally-formed soils to provide a level surface and to improve drainageconditions, . - !

1 The study area is the former Koppers Company, Inc., Newport, Delaware property/ Tlift tenn "site" will be ^reserved for designating historical and prehistoric occupation localities. •

• : : ; - . ; • • ' • • • • ' • • • . . • • • • - - . . - . . • ' : • - • ' • ' . ' ' - • - • ; . ; ' VI . ' - , , • . ! • ' '

: .' • .••.-.'•'• '• '••'. '••• ••••"•''.-I-: '• •''

FORMER KOPPERS PROPER!

CHURCHMANS MARSH

BASE MAP: USGS NEWARK EAST, DEL., 1953, 1985 A WU.MINGTON SOUTH, DEL.-N.J., 1967. 1987

FEET___ 6000

2000

MAI PROJECT: D-41FORMER KOPPERS COMPANY, INC. SITE,NEWPORT, DELAWARE __'

FIGURE IPROJECT LOCATION MAP

AR3091* I 2

2.0 PHASE EB SURVEY APPROACH-• ' ' ' '• ' * .' ' ' • • '

• ' - '. ' ' * ' • -. • . .' ' - • ' • ' ' ' ' . ' ' ' ; .

2.1 Investigation Strategy -' ' "•"•- ';;• .'- : ' .:••:'-•, "' ' " ' ':.- . •' . <' •' W

The Phase IB investigation will be performed in sequential tasks within the explicit ,framework of this work plan, which stipulates a set of specific investigation objectives andmanagement goals. The specific objectives of Phase IB archeological surveys consist of thelocation, identification and definition of functional, temporal and physical attributes of extant :resources. Management objectives pertain primarily to the Cultural Resource Management .requirements of the Delaware State Historic Preservation Office. ~ These include the location .ofextant sites within a project area and preliminary assessments of integrity and significance.

2.2 Summary of Phase IA Modeling

The Phase IB survey builds on information obtained from the Phase IA study completed in1994 (Kellogg et ah 1995). The types of documentation that were researched during the Phase IAstudy included: archaeological literature pertinent to the project area, such as cultural resources'management reports (both those derived from consultant and governmental organizations) andscholarly publications as well as local libraries and universities; land use and ownership documents;secondary historical reports and publications; and such primary historic documents as maps, courtdocuments and tax records. l

, The Phase IA background research focused on:

1. The identification of areas that have a high to moderate potential for containing i jcultural resources and.the relocation of previously .recorded historic an4 prehistoric

. . sites. This required library and archival file searches as well as close attention to theDelaware State Cultural Resources Management Plans and recent geomorphological

- ' • •" research; ...»•••: - ' ; • . . . ; . . . : ,'• " . • •'/ . . '' .. t ,-' ' ••-. \-

2. The establishment of historical contexts for the eventual interpretation of identifiedresources. Use was made of Delaware management plans.

Following the Phase IA study, a geoarchaeology report was prepared which evaluated the 'geomorphology of the site and refined the sensitivity (Figure 2) and integrity (Figure 3) modelingefforts .which were performed to evaluate the potential for cultural resources, and the potential oftheir integrity (degree of disturbance), respectively. Also reviewed were pertinent geological data ;-.gathered by Woodward-Clyde during the Rl both within and adjacent tp the study area (Kellogg1995). The geoarchaeology report(Kellogg 1995) focused on:

1. This assessment of the nature of modern disturbance within the study area in order. * to 'identify areas having the potential for containing cultural resources with high to

moderate integrity (disturbance assessment). The focus of this activity was onevaluating land use during the period of industrial use of the property;

AR 3091*13

.MAI PROJECT: D-41FORMER

(COPPERS COMPANY. INC. SITE.NEWPORT, DELAWARE

FIGURE 2REVISED SITE

SENSITIVITY MODEL

MAI PROJECT: 0-4 i. FORMER

KOPPERS COMPANY. INC. SITE,NEWPORT, DELAWARE1 ———— __ ———— J

' FIGURE 3 ^ •" .' . , \_SOIL BORING INTERPRETATIONS

OF DISTURBANCE

ia.30.9!4's ———

2. The review of existing geomorphological and cultural/ecological models to determinethe environmental nature of the study area' from a geoarchaeological andpaleoecological viewpoint;

• • ; - ' • ' . • ; . • - . ; . . • • " , - . • . • , - . - ; " • ' . ; - ' • - " ; '3. The establishment of parameters, field identification and mapping of areas within the

former Koppers Company, Lie. property where extant archaeological resources arelikely to exist and within which varied degrees of archaeological testing would be

; - appropriate. ^

^ Geoarchaeological interpretation of soil boring data collected during the Phase IRI, aerialphotographs, and topographic data have allowed refined mapping of the three factors utilized todevelop the initial prehistoric site sensitivity model presented in the Phase IA report (Kellogg et al.1995): 1) the "distance to water11 factor was modified based on the identification of former streampositions; 2) soil drainage characteristics were clarified somewhat for the areas south of the formerwood storage area, but were only tentatively refined for the majority of the former wood storagearea; and 3) topographic details were clarified based on field reconnaissance after inspection ofdetailed contour maps.

Evaluation of the Phase I RI soil boring data allowed a re-assessment of disturbance in thearea of the former Koppers Company, Inc. wood storage area. Much of the area was almostcompletely disturbed; only limited areas retained any possible integrity. Soil borings clearly showedthat the northeastern portion of the property was heavily disturbed and that fill was introduced overthe majority of the wood storage area. In addition, areas of remnant plow zones and soil horizonswere present across the eastern and southeastern portions of the former wood storage area. The areaof the former New Castle County Sewage Treatment facility was also heavily disturbed. Bycombining the revised site sensitivity model with an integrity model, a prehistoric archaeologicalsite potential model was derived. The site potential model takes into account both the probabilityof prehistoric landuse and the impacts of subsequent agricultural and industrial landuse on prehistoricsite survival. This refined model supersedes the prehistoric site sensitivity model developed in thePhase IA report (Kellogg et al. 1995), and can be used to guide Phase IB archaeological testing.

. •. • : • * ' .

In addition, historic site sensitivity factors were considered during the refinement of the sitepotential model. Historic site models consider those factors pertinent to the siting of occupation and. work areas within a defined landscape. Many of the areas used by prehistoric populations were alsoused by historic populations, whose basic economic needs were similar. Additional factors whichcontribute towards a high potential designation for historic sites include access to waterways for thetransportation of products, purchased goods and personnel, at a later date roads and then railroadsfor similar purposes, topographical highs near rich farmland (preferred domicile and cemeterylocation:?), and proximity to work sites for paid labor. In addition to the modeling of historic sitesensitivity over the landscape, this work plan considers documented and archaeologically-verifiedhistoric site locations. Figure 2 designates areas of both prehistoric and historic site sensitivity.Due to the'similarity of modeling results; the map presented as Figure 4 serves to present bothprehistoric and historic site Potential. It is based on a matrix of prehistoric and historic sitesensitivity models and integrity models used to establish the potential of intact archaeological sitesbeing present within a specified geographical area.

AR309U6

MAI PROJECT. D-41

FORMERKOPPERS COMPANY* 1N£. SITE,

NEWPORT. DELAWARE

FIGURE 4ARCHAEOLOGICAL 'SITE POTENTIAL MODEL

2.3 Phase IB Investigation Approach > -. ; !"?•;'• . •' • ' - . < . " • ' ' •. ,- . .

, Task 1 Archaeological Field Investigations, as proposed for the Phase IB work plan, willconsist of the following: '

. • 1. Surface "ground truthing" (i.e. field verification) of the resource sensitivity datagenerated (Figure 4) during Phase IA background research, and

2. Surface and subsurface archaeological survey to locate and identify archaeologicalresources within defined potential resource study areas as shown in Figure 4.

> ' - ' • • . • - - ~ * ' •Survey intensity will vary depending upon the results of the sensitivity and integrity models,

and on identification of areas likely not to require active remediation, based upon a preliminaryevaluation of the Phase I RI data*. The Phase IB survey will focus on areas that may potentiallyrequire active remediation as shown on Figure 4. The property was broken up into the followingcategories with respect to the potential of identifying intact prehistoric and historic resources: 1)marsh/negligible potential, 2) very low potential, 3) low potential, 4) moderate potential, and 5) highpotential* Open marshlands are considered of negligible potential; these areas will not requirearchaeological testing. Areas of fastland that contain definite poorly-drained soils are consideredvery low potential, due to the low likelihood of prehistoric or historic occupation or intensive use;judgemental testing of these areas will be performed. Areas of low site potential, those defined asof low site sensitivity and/or high disturbance, will receive systematic wide-interval testing.Moderate testing will be undertaken in areas designated as of moderate potential (areas of mediumsite sensitivity with moderate disturbance anticipated). Intensive testing is reserved for areas of thehigh or high-medium archaeological sensitivity where prehistoric or historic occupation is a virtualcertainty or already kno (but not fully documented), and which remain relatively undisturbed.

Known and suspected historic archaeological resource loci within relatively undisturbed areaswill be treated as high potential areas (Figure 4). Industrial activities will have some effect onpotential historic resources (but not necessarily as much on prehistoric resources). High potentialhistoric areas anticipated to be within severely disturbed during the initial Phase IA survey will bejudgementally evaluated. As an example, the building used as an office for the former KoppersCompany, Inc. (CRS # N-381) has been severely impacted due to cutting and filling activitiesassociated with construction of the New Castle County Sewage Treatment Facility (Kellogg 1995).Likewise, other documented and suspected historic period loci will be surveyed to determine thepresence or absence of predicted historic resources. •

Little of the area occupied by the former Koppers Company, Inc. processing plant and woodstorage area was classified as highly sensitive for prehistoric archaeology. Only a limited area alongthe western margin of the study area adjacent to Hershey Run is classified as highly sensitive(Figure 2). The Fire Pond was excavated into a highly sensitive area, and hence, the disturbancereduces thd archaeological potential there. Areas of moderate potential were minimally disturbedand low to medium in sensitivity (Figure 4) . The magnitude of these areas may be reduced afterinitial archaeological testing if soil drainage is found to be poor. The low potential of much of thewood storage area may likewise be teduced to Very low if it is found that disturbance has been moresevere than suggested by the soil borings. Wetland areas indicated pn Figure 4 are considered tohave very low potential for cultural resources. ;

' "" . ' ' '•'•; •' '' - - ; ; l -,';'; 8 •"• ": ' ' •'.-" ' ' .-• " •" * ; ' '. AR309U8

The archaeological method to be employed in the course of Task 1 field investigation willbe the excavation of shovel tests. Shovel test excavation is the method used to locate sites in areas ..of heavy surface vegetation and to obtain approximate boundaries for discovered resources.

The shovel test holes will measure approximately 1;5 feet in diameter and up to 3 feet indepth. The soil from each excavation, would be placed on plastic sheeting adjacent to the hole andused to backfill the hole immediately after completion of data collection at that location. r

' • • . . . ! ' • - ' » ;

The sampling plan for the excavation of hand-excavated shovel test pits (STP's) within areasof varying potential (Figure 4) is as follows: ; ; '

. - • " - ' ' , ' - ' • •. ' v • • ' • " '' ' • • • '1) High Potential - grid intervals of 10 meters within 31 acres (approximately 310

• • V "'.' STPs). -.' . . --.•.. ' -.' . ;'. .- : • •: . •' /' . . : . . .

2) Moderate Potential - grid intervals of 20 meters within approximately 45 acres(approximately 115 STPs).

3) Low Potential - grid intervals of 36 meters will be excavated within low potentialareas outside of the wood storage and process areas ("Koppers Proper" area).Judgemental shovel testing will be used within the approximately 100 acres of the"Koppers Proper" area. Field decisions on final interval size will be justified.

.4) Very Low Potential - 100 judgmentally-placed shovel tests, placement to bedetermined through field decision. ! • , - -

5) Additional judgmental shovel tests in areas of High and Moderate potential whencultural resources are encountered (estimated at 140 STPs). ;

All soil matrices are to be screened through 1/4 inch hardware cloth on plastic sheeting, and .aH excavations wiU be backMed to restore the project area to its original condition. Recordationprocedures include the mapping of all tests, plan views and profiles of features, text and graphicillustrations of site stratigraphy with soil descriptions using standard Munsell terminology, fieldnotes detailing methods, finds and constraints, as well as black and white and color photography.Day-to-day supervision will be supplemented by periodic site visits by the Principal Investigator.During initial testing in previously unexainined portions of the study area, and where complexstratigraphic situations are encountered, such as in depositional environments where alluvial, aeolianand/or colluvial soils are present, data will be immediately reviewed by the PrincipalInvestigator/Archeo-geologist

All work will be performed in accordance with the RI Health and Safety Plan (Woodward-Clyde 1994b) for this site. It is anticipated that most intrusive activities will be performed at themodified Lfcvel D (i.e. Tyvek Suits and chemically-resistant boots and gloves).

, task 2 Data Processing and Analysis will include processing of artifactual data as per thestandard requirements of the Delaware State Historic Preservation Office. Analysis of artifacts willinclude identifications of material, function, locale of manufacture, technique of manufacture and /cultural affiliation; Data analysis will be geared towards the valuation of the site(s) in terms of\s /

&R309M9

criteria of eligibility for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and the interpretationof that data with respect to information needs as outlined in the State plans for archaeologicalresources. Data will be interpreted within a broad anthropological perspective and will typicallyconsider a wide range of topics and hypotheses. At this level of investigation, the focus of dataanalysis will be influenced by whether the site is prehistoric or historic. ' ,

Generally, data analysis will center on the determination of a site's history, culturalaffiliation, site system, infrastructure and environment. Other topics will correlate with the specificnature of the site, as in the case of an historic property, where trade networks, ethnicity, economicor political setting, rural or urban constraints, or local and regional factors, may be applicable.Topics directed toward a prehistoric resource would include resource procurement and utilization,aboriginal technologies, settlement patterns, and environmental change. Data analysis andinterpretation will employ current theories and identified research themes of Delaware. Regionaland national aspects will also be incorporated where they may apply. Based on the analysis andinterpretive results, an evaluation will be developed as to the site's significance as determined byNational Register eligibility criteria. ' -

Task 3 Report Preparation will consist of the preparation of draft and final technical reports.The technical report will contain sections on cultural history, pertinent environmental factors,methods and survey results, as well as management recommendations. Reports will be supportedwith appropriate documentation including illustrations (line drawings) and plates (photographs), asper the reporting requirements outlined in the Guidelines for Architectural and ArchaeologicalSurveys in Delaware (1993).

10

3.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE•i : • f . .. . • ' •• , '•'••' • • - - • / < " '

The Phase EB Survey effort is anticipated to cover a period of six months. This time periodincludes the background research and field program (Tasks! 1 & 2; 12 weeks), data evaluation (Task3; 4 weeks), and jeport preparation and submittal to SPA (Task 4; 8 weeks). A preliminaryestimate of man hours for each of these tasks is 80, 1276, 228, and 592, respectively. TheRemedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Project schedule will bjs adjusted in accordance with theseestimates. These schedule estimates are based on the assumption that a total of 66S shovel test pitswill be required and with respect to the scope of the entire Phase IB Survey effort.

Realizing that a Phase IB Survey requires an iterative approach and that the work scope maychange as information is gathered, modifications to the project schedule may be necessary.

AR3Q9U2I

4.0 REFERENCES CITED

Delaware State Historic Preservation Office ." 1993 Guidelines for Architectural and Archaeological Surveys in Delaware. Delaware

SHPO, Dover.

Kellogg, Douglas C."1995 Geoarchaeological Evaluation. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Former

Koppers Company. Inc. Property. New Castle County. Delaware. Unpublished/ Report. Submitted to Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Inc., Plymouth Meeting, PA.

Kellogg, Douglas C., Bettyl'C. Zebpoker, Donald Theime and Joseph Schuldenrein" 1995 Phase IA Cultural Resources Survey for the Former Koppers Company. Inc.,

Property. New Castle County. Delaware. Unpublished, Report. Submitted to. , Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Inc., Plymouth Meeting, PA. .

Woodward Clyde Consultants1994a Revised-Work Plan: Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Former Koppers

..•;-.'•''.. Company. Inc. Newport Site. Prepared on behalf of Beazer East, Inc., Pittsburghand Du Pont Chemicals, Wilmington for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

, Region 3, Philadelphia.

1994b Health and Safety Plan. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. Former KoppersCompany. Inc. Newport Site: Prepared on behalf of Beazer East, Inc., Pittsburghand Du Pont Chemicals, Wilmington for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Region 3, Philadelphia...

AR309l*22