Procedures and ProcessesPhase II: Evaluation

CRM Phases I-III

This presentation uses materials taken from Ricardo Elia’s Cultural Resources Archaeology MATRIX course prepared for the Society for American Archaeology

On from Phase I

The contractor who does the Phase I often does Phase II.

Why? They know the site and turf better than others.

After you find the sites, what’s next?

EvaluationFor Section 106 of NEPA, that involves figuring out if the

properties are likely to be significant, which means they meet the National Register criteria.

Do sites "possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association" and also meet one or more of four eligibility criteria.

a) sites associated with significant events; b) sites associated with significant people; c) sites that embody a type, period, or method of

construction; or represent a master's work; or possess high artistic values; or represent a significant, distinguishable entity; and

d) sites "that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history."

Significance examples

Gettysburg battlefield is certainly significant under Criterion A.

The lands at Mount Vernon could qualify under Criterion B because of their association with George Washington.

An Iroquois village site with longhouse architecture typical of the period might qualify under C.

What about archaeological sites?

For archaeological sites, especially

prehistoric ones, Criterion D

Four Goals of a Phase II Evaluation Survey or “Site

Examination”1. The horizontal and vertical extent of the site must be determined

in order to delineate boundaries for National Register purposes.

2. The basic identification of the site type and chronological range must be established.

• Is the site a single- or multiple-component site?

• Is it a habitation, settlement, industrial, or special use site?

3. The archaeological integrity of the site must be assessed:

• Is the site well enough preserved to retain its archaeological associations?

• Is the site of sufficient complexity and material culture to provide meaningful data?

4. Does the site contain enough integrity and data to allow important research questions to be addressed through excavation and analysis?

More Detailed Background Studies Historical sites often require deed research to determine the history of ownership and occupation of the property.

If the site type is known, additional research will be carried out in the appropriate research area.

Example: if a 19th-century industrial site was discovered, Phase II research would try to identify the specific industry as well as explore the industry's development and characteristics in order to understand the discovered site's role in it.

Mill Ruins,

Minneapolis

From shovel tests to 1 x 1’sTest Excavations

Establishing Site boundaries

Shovel tests and coring are usually okay

Significance usually requires larger units

1 x 1 meter is the most common.

Arbitrary stratigraphic levels are okay.

Careful excavation is crucial.

The idea is to in order to assess site integrity and to recover the kinds of qualitative information needed to evaluate whether the site is likely to be significant.

1 x 1m tests vs. block units

1 x 1 m tests allow you to cover more of the site.

May give better idea of whether there are activity areas

Block units provide better information about site integrity.

Mill Creek Bridge, Cherokee Co.,

Iowa Site example

Just recovering more data is not enough.You need to do what is necessary to characterize and understand that data.

Examples:

Geophysical remote sensing might be used to identify buried features or to delineate subsurface walls and foundations.

Radiocarbon dating will be attempted at prehistoric sites in order to learn the chronology of sites.

Floral and faunal analysis, soils analysis to understand the ecological nature of the site and its use by people

The goal is to understand the nature of the site so that its research potential and significance may be determined.

Evaluating Potential Significance

After testing, does a site meet National Register eligibility criteria?

For most archaeological sites, especially prehistoric ones, that means that the site has the potential to answer important research questions (Criterion D).

Must articulate the important research questions

Must show how the excavation and analysis of the site's data (as understood on the basis of the Phase II investigations) will effectively address those questions

To do this, the archaeologist must be knowledgeable of the archaeology of similar sites in the region and the broad research questions being asked in the field.

About those research questionsThe State Plan again…

A Maryland Example: Blueberry Hill

The Phase II Report

1) How well does the report summarize the earlier Phase I work?

2) What additional background research and/or historical studies were conducted for the Phase II?

3) How did the testing program 1) define the site's boundaries; and 2) evaluate the quantitative and qualitative cultural characteristics of the site?

4) Does the project explicitly utilize historic contexts as evaluative frameworks?

5) What kinds of laboratory and analytical studies were done?

6) What kinds of research questions are developed in the report? How cogent is the articulation of research value?

7) Does the project explicitly utilize the National Register criteria for evaluation in determining whether or not the site is potentially significant?

Remember!

Phase II work is providing data and advice to the agency that is obligated to perform the work.

As with Phase I, results are proprietary.

The agency is likely to comment on, edit, and criticize your draft Phase II report before it is submitted to the SHPO.

The SHPO in turn may do the same, so be prepared to make revisions. AND…

It’s only a recommendation.

The archaeologist recommends that a property is potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register…

…not that a particular site is significant or eligible for the National Register.

A determination of eligibility is made by others in the Section 106 process (the agency official in consultation with the SHPO/THPO and others).

Example: "Site X is considered potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register under Criterion D etc. It is recommended that the site be avoided by the proposed project; if avoidance is not possible, then a data recovery project should be undertaken to mitigate the adverse effects of the project on the site."