3. Module Three 101603 WBY

[Pages:152]Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual

i

Module Three

Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals

MODULE THREE TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1

2.0 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEYS (PHASE I) 3

2.1 INTRODUCTION

3

2.1.1 Other Survey Types

4

2.1.2 Defining the Area of Potential Effect (APE)

5

2.2 BACKGROUND RESEARCH

7

2.2.1 Florida Master Site File (FMSF)

7

2.2.2 Survey and Registration Section

9

2.2.3 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) 9

2.2.4 Other State, Regional, and Local Sources

9

2.3 RESEARCH DESIGN

10

2.3.1 Predictive Model Formulation for Archaeological Sites 11

2.3.2 Historic Structures Considerations

12

2.3.3 Methodology and Site Evaluation Criteria

13

2.4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEY

14

2.4.1 Introduction

14

2.4.2 Survey Methods

15

2.4.3 Unanticipated Discoveries of Human Remains

20

2.5 HISTORIC STRUCTURES SURVEY

21

2.5.1 Introduction

21

2.5.2 Survey Methods

21

2.6 ARTIFACT PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS/CURATION 24

2.6.1 Introduction

24

2.6.2 Processing

24

2.6.3 Artifact Analyses

24

2.6.4 Curation

26

2.7 CRAS REPORTS

26

2.7.1 Introduction

26

2.7.2 Completeness and Sufficiency Criteria

27

2.7.3 Report Contents

30

2.8 ACCOMPANYING DELIVERABLES

37

2.9 TECHNICAL MEMORANDA AND OTHER REPORTING

FORMATS

38

2.10 SUBMISSION FOR REVIEW

39

2.11 SPECIAL PROJECT TYPES

39

2.11.1 Reconnaissance Assessments

39

2.11.2 Cellular Tower Projects

40

2.11.3 Submerged Cultural Resources and Remote

Sensing Surveys

42

Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual

ii

Module Three

Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals

MODULE THREE TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

3.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL TEST EXCAVATION (PHASE II) 3.1 INTRODUCTION 3.2 BACKGROUND RESEARCH 3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN 3.4 FIELD METHODS 3.5 ARTIFACT PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS/CURATION 3.6 DOCUMENTATION

4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL MITIGATION, INCLUDING MITIGATIVE EXCAVATION (PHASE III) 4.1 INTRODUCTION 4.2 MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES 4.3 TYPES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES 4.3.1 Artifact Scatters 4.3.2 Black Earth Middens 4.3.3 Shell Middens 4.3.4 Sand Mounds and Earthworks 4.3.5 Mortuary/Cemetery Sites 4.3.6 Historic Archaeological Sites 4.3.7 Underwater Sites 4.4 MITIGATIVE EXCAVATION 4.4.1 Principles 4.4.2 Recommended Approach 4.5 RESEARCH DESIGN 4.5.1 Elements of a Research Design 4.5.2 Submittal of a Research Design 4.6 EXCAVATION PROCEDURES 4.6.1 Topographic Mapping 4.6.2 Grid Systems 4.6.3 Broad Scale Testing 4.6.4 Data Recovery Through Controlled Excavation 4.6.5 Recording 4.7 ARTIFACT AND DATA ANALYSIS/CURATION 4.7.1 Preliminary Processing and Cataloging 4.7.2 Artifact and Data Analysis 4.7.3 Curation 4.8 DOCUMENTATION

Page

46 46 46 47 47 48 48

50 50 50 52 52 53 54 54 55 55 56 56 57 58 60 61 66 66 67 67 68 69 72 74 74 75 79 80

Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual

iii

Module Three

Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals

MODULE THREE TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

Page

5.0 THE NRHP AND EVALUATING SITE SIGNIFICANCE

82

5.1 INTRODUCTION

82

5.1.1 NRHP Program Description

82

5.1.2 Nomination Procedures

83

5.2 THE NRHP CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION

84

5.3 STATE SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA

85

5.4 NRHP CRITERIA CONSIDERATIONS

85

5.5 INTEGRITY

86

5.6 WHAT IS A SIGNIFICANT CULTURAL RESOURCE?

87

5.6.1 Archaeological Sites

87

5.6.2 Historic Resources

90

5.7 NOMINATING SITES TO THE NRHP

92

5.7.1 Preliminary Steps

92

5.7.2 Suggestions for Background Research

93

5.7.3 Instructions for Completing the NRHP Registration

Form

94

5.7.4 Additional Documentation

97

5.8 PREPARING MULTIPLE PROPERTY SUBMISSIONS

98

5.8.1 Introduction

98

5.8.2 Completing the Multiple Property Documentation

Form

99

5.9 REQUESTS FOR DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY

101

6.0 EFFECTS DETERMINATIONS AND CASE REPORTS

102

6.1 OVERVIEW

102

6.2 SECTION 106 CONSULTATION CASE REPORT

102

6.2.1 Introduction

102

6.2.2 Components of the Case Report

103

6.3 DETERMINING EFFECTS

104

6.3.1 Applying the Criteria of Adverse Effect

104

6.3.2 No Historic Properties Affected

105

6.3.3 Historic Properties Affected

106

6.3.4 No Historic Properties Adversely Affected

106

6.3.5 Historic Properties are Adversely Affected

107

6.4 RESOLVING ADVERSE EFFECTS

108

7.0 PREPARING AGREEMENT DOCUMENTS

111

7.1 INTRODUCTION

111

7.2 AGREEMENT-BASED DETERMINATIONS OF NO

ADVERSE EFFECT

111

Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual

iv

Module Three

Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals

MODULE THREE TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

7.3 MEMORANDA OF AGREEMENT 7.4 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENTS Exhibit 1: Check List for a Good Agreement Document Under

36 CFR Part 800 Exhibit 2: Example No Adverse Effect Determination Exhibit 3: Example Three-Party MOA Exhibit 4: Example Two-Party MOA Exhibit 5: Example Programmatic Agreement

8.0 MITIGATION MEASURES FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES 8.1 INTRODUCTION 8.2 DOCUMENTATION 8.3 REHABILITATION AND RESTORATION 8.4 PRESERVATION AND MAINTENANCE 8.5 SALVAGE 8.6 OFF-SITE MITIGATION Exhibit 6: Architectural History and Historical Narrative Form

Page

112 115

116 122 124 128 132

135 135 136 140 142 144 144 146

Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual

1

Module Three

Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Module Three of the Manual contains guidelines for the identification, evaluation, recordation, and treatment of cultural resources for use by historic preservation professionals conducting work in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations. The primary legal authorities on the federal and state levels are Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as implemented by 36 CFR Part 800, Chapter 267, Florida Statutes (F.S.), and Rule 1A-46, F.A.C. The intent is to foster quality assurance through the standardization of work and reporting requirements.

Exclusive of the Introduction (Section 1), Module Three is divided into seven major sections, which address the following:

? Section 2 provides a detailed look at the site assessment survey (Phase I) process for both archaeological and historic resources.

? Section 3 focuses on archaeological test excavation (Phase II). ? Section 4 describes the mitigation alternatives for archaeological sites, including

excavation and data recovery (Phase III). ? Section 5 explains how identified cultural resources are evaluated as per their

eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). It includes a "how to" for nominating individual properties, districts and multiple properties to the NRHP. ? Section 6 explains the effects determination process, and includes information on the preparation of Section 106 Consultation Case Study Reports. ? Section 7 provides guidance on the preparation of agreement documents, including agreement-based determinations of no adverse effect, memoranda of agreement, and programmatic agreements. ? Section 8 examines the ways in which adverse effects to significant historic resources may be avoided, minimized, or mitigated.

Module Three incorporates the guidance contained in a number of existing documents. Hyperlinks are provided for easy navigation to the primary source documents, which include some of the following:

? The Historic Preservation Compliance Review Program of the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources (November 1990, final draft)

? Florida Rule Chapter 1A-46 (2002) (Archaeological and Historical Report Standards and Guidelines)

? The Florida Department of Transportation's Cultural Resource Management Handbook (1995, revised 2001)

? 36 CFR Part 800 (Protection of Historic Properties) ? 36 CFR Part 60 (National Register of Historic Places) ? 36 CFR Part 63 (Determinations of eligibility for inclusion in the National Register

of Historic Places)

Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual

2

Module Three

Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals

? 36 CFR Part 68 (Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties)

? 36 CFR Part 79 (Curation of Federally-Owned and Administered Archaeological Collections)

? 43 CFR Part 10 (NAGPRA Regulations) ? Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic

Preservation (48 FR 44716) ? Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological

Documentation ? Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Architectural and Engineering

Documentation ? Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Preservation Planning ? Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation ? Various "How To" Bulletins published by the U.S. Department of the Interior,

National Park Service (NPS) ? Preparing Agreement Documents (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

[ACHP], 1988) ? Recommended Approach for Consultation on Recovery of Significant Information

from Archaeological Sites (64 FR 27085-87, ACHP 1999) ? National Register Handbook (1996) prepared by the staff of the Survey and

Registration Section of the DHR ? Guidelines for Section 106 Review of Proposed Cellular Tower Locations (DHR) ? Florida's Cultural Heritage: A View of the Past (DHR) ? More Than Orange Marmalade: A Statewide Comprehensive Historic Preservation

Plan (DHR) ? Documentation Requirements for Buildings Proposed for Demolition and Standards

for Architectural Documentation (DHR) ? Performance Standards for Submerged Remote Sensing Surveys ? Minimum Documentation for State and Local Reviews

Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual

3

Module Three

Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals

2.0 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEYS (PHASE I)

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS), also known as a Phase I survey, is the only type of survey which satisfies the historic preservation requirements of federal and state laws and regulations (e.g., Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and 36 CFR Part 800; Chapter 267, F.S. and Rule 1A-46, F.A.C.). The standards for conducting and reporting the CRAS, as set forth in Rule 1A-46, F.A.C., are detailed in this section of Module Three.

A CRAS is an intensive survey focusing on both archaeological sites and historic resources, and associated features. The goal of such surveys is to locate, identify and evaluate cultural resources present within the "area of potential effect" or APE. Site evaluations are in terms of their eligibility for listing in the NRHP. A survey of an area containing historic structures which fails to identify and evaluate archaeological resources will not be considered adequate. Likewise, a survey, which addresses the archaeological resources without identifying and evaluating the historic structures in the APE, is not considered to be complete and sufficient. A survey that only identifies historic properties without evaluation is never acceptable. The CRAS:

? results in a formal survey report, including completed Florida Master Site File (FMSF) forms for all identified resources, regardless of their significance;

? evaluates specific project impacts to significant historic resources; ? forms the basis for recommended measures to avoid and preserve or mitigate project

impacts to significant historic resources; and ? provides data used in developing local preservation plans and land management

plans.

Typically, the CRAS is divided into a number of work elements, each of which is explained in Sections 2.2 through 2.9. These include:

? Background Research (Section 2.2) ? Research Design (Section 2.3) ? Archaeological Field Survey (Section 2.4) ? Historic Structure Field Survey (Section 2.5) ? Artifact Processing and Analysis/Curation (Section 2.6) ? Documentation (Sections 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9)

Prior to the initiation of background research, the specific level of assessment and documentation required should have been provided by the DHR reviewer in writing, based upon the nature of the proposed project. If you are a consultant providing services to a client, such as a permit applicant, request a copy of the survey request letter. The survey requirements will generally depend upon the nature of the potential ground disturbance activities, as well as potential impacts to historic structures.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download