Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project FERC Project No. 2079 February 26, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Wilderness and Cultural Resources: Symbiotic Management Pei-Lin Yu Rocky Mountains Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit March 6, 2013.
Advertisements

Gold Ray Dam Interagency Technical Team Meeting. NEPA Update Deconstruction Plans Hydraulic Modeling Next Steps Agenda.
Section 106 Clearance Application Missouri Local Programs How to Complete the Application for Section 106 Clearance.
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT of 1966 as amended Garry J. Cantley Regional Archeologist Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The National Register of Historic Places. NOT THE: National Historic Registry National Historic Registry Historical List Historical List Historical Registry.
IDENTIFYING & EVALUATING HISTORIC PROPERTIES NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES –CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION HISTORIC.
Cultural Resources of the Middle Fork of the American River Archaeological and historic studies in support of The PCWA Middle Fork American River Project.
Post fieldwork analysis – archaeology Module: 10004/SU10 Archaeological reports Dr James Morris Museum of London
Real Property Training
Cultural Resource Management Plans What good are they?
NHPA, Section 106, and NEPA Highlights and Misconceptions.
Feasibility Studies National Heritage Areas. Initiating National Heritage Areas National Heritage Area designations have been initiated in four different.
Federal Preservation Activities: Part 1. What did With Heritage So Rich (1965) and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 provide to administer.
Forest Plan Revision Using the 2012 Planning Rule Process Overview Steps and Expectations (I don’t know….but I’ve been told…if the horse don’t pull….you.
Sacred Sites. Documentation Documentation: Forest Supervisor or Ranger District Offices may document Sacred site (s) information in a variety of ways.
Field Survey Introduction. What is a survey? Survey = process of identifying and gathering data on a community's historic resources. Field survey= the.
COSCDA Workshop Renovation, Reconstruction and Renewal of Historic Properties and Neighborhoods Section 106 and Programmatic Agreements Overview.
Welcome. DBE Outreach for the On-Call Cultural Resource Contract Caltrans D5 July 21, 2015.
Field Survey Introduction. What is a survey? Survey means a process of identifying and gathering data on a community's historic resources. It includes.
Florida Cultural Resources and How They Relate to Your Public Works Project Presented by: Brent Handley, MA, RPA Archaeology Division Director.
Environmental Planning CULTURAL RESOURCES CH 5 - HO # 13
The Study of Anthropology and Archaeology. Definitions Anthropology is the study of the human skeleton Archaeology is the systematic study of past human.
Procedures and Processes Phase II: Evaluation CRM Phases I-III This presentation uses materials taken from Ricardo Elia’s Cultural Resources Archaeology.
Procedures and Processes CRM Phases I-III Phase I: Reconnaissance Survey.
1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING CULTURAL RESOURCES LAWS AND REGULATIONS CH 5 CH 5 HO # 13, 13a, 13b
Nadine Peterson Preservation Planner NH Division of Historical Resources Lynne E. Monroe Preservation Company Christopher W. Closs Christopher W. Closs.
#oldhousefair Old v/s Historic What is historic anyway? Melissa Wyllie.
Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project (FERC No. 2079) Recreation Technical Working Group Meeting April 8, 2008.
Cultural Resources Fort Wainwright, Alaska Environmental Officer Course 2011 Name//office/phone/ address UNCLASSIFIED 10/27/
3D Technology and the Section 106 Process Matt Diederich Archaeologist Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Oregon Heritage Programs Division.
National Historic Districts And Why Taylor Should Be Among Them.
By Rachel Coleman.  “ The head of any federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed federal or federally assisted undertaking.
April 2006 Middle Fork Project Relicensing Process April 25, 2006
The Extent of BLM Responsibility over Actions Occurring on Non-Federal Lands: Cultural Resources.
1/11/12CCC-12-CD-01 & CCC-12-RO-011 Consent Cease and Desist Order CCC-12-CD-01 and Consent Restoration Order CCC-12-RO-01 Goodell Family Trust Unincorporated.
Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project (FERC No. 2079) Cultural Technical Working Group Meeting November 18, 2008.
Historical Resources SURVEY SAVVY Marie Nelson State Historian II OHP-Survey/CLG Coordinator Sep 07 – Chico.
Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project Plenary Meeting January 4, 2010 Handout #3.
NRC Environmental Reviews for Uranium Recovery Applicants and Licensees James Park (301)
Categorical Exclusion Training Class
Historic Preservation Memoranda of Agreement. What is an MOA? As part of the Section 106 review process, it is an agreement among an agency official,
NEPA and Section 106: An Introduction WISDOT MEETING NOVEMBER 3-4, 2015.
The Preservation Process. Sequence of Preservation actions 1. Setting standards or criteria that define what is worth preserving. 2. Undertaking a survey.
Archaeology 101.
Suzanne Derrick Technical Director – Cultural Resources FCC Section 106 Process and the Archeology of Tower Siting Panelist Presentation May 4, 2016.
The National Register. The National Register of Historic Places The National Register of Historic Places is authorized by Section 101 (a)(1)(A)of the.
Archaeology. Archaeology has been called “the science of rubbish” because it is the study of the remains (garbage) of human behaviors in the past. Archaeologists.
Image Field Data Work Record ID 16 Reproduction Record ID 16 Work Class Photographs Work Type photographs Title Seip Earthworks.
Shell CONFIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION STUDIES OF KOLO CREEK FIELD FACILITIES Adesuyi Adeola Alex Ph.D. Research Intern (EIA Team – Corporate Environment)
Anth January 2012.
Proven Management – Proven Gold Districts – Safe Jurisdictions Symbol:PG Exchange:TSX Hardrock Project Environmental.
Advanced Environmental Management (AEM) Training Phase I
Deepwater Horizon (MC 252) Oil Spill: Section 106 Compliance
Landscape Preservation and Archaeology
What is Archaeology?.
101 New London Road Newark, Delaware
Pedestrian Survey.
MPO School Transportation Working Group
Evaluation Real Archaeology.
Early humans – The Journey Begins
Review for Final.
May 8, 2018 Marion Werkheiser, Cultural Heritage Partners
Cultural Resources Categorical Exclusion Training Class – Presented by the Office of Environmental Services.
And why it has nothing to do with INDIANA JONES!
The Role of the SHPO John Pouley, Assistant State Archaeologist
Background research Starting a Project.
Protecting What We Love Building What We Need – The “H” Factor
Fort Wainwright, Alaska Environmental Officer Course 2011
National Historic Preservation Act
Determination of Eligibility 2/20/19
Presentation transcript:

Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project FERC Project No. 2079 February 26, 2008

Evaluation of Cultural Resources in the Middle Fork American River Study Area Image from http://thefirstamericans.homestead.com/Maidu.html Image from http://www.legendsofamerica.com/CA-Goldrush.html

Introduction The relicensing of the Middle Fork American River Project is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) The FERC must comply with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Under the NHPA, a federal agency must identify cultural resources eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) that may be affected by the Project Significant historical characteristics of resources on, or eligible for listing on, the NRHP are to be preserved

Introduction Identification of cultural resources in the Middle Fork Project Study Area began in 2005 with records searches Field work to locate archaeological sites and other resources began in 2006 and is on-going Once it is determined that a resource may be affected by the Project, it must be evaluated for NRHP eligibility

Introduction The potential for Project affects on cultural resources depends on the nature and location of Project operations and maintenance (O&M) activities Based on this, a preliminary assessment of effects to cultural resources can be made

Introduction This presentation will briefly describe: Resources that may be affected by Project O&M activities and therefore need to be evaluated The evaluation strategies to be used

Resource Summary A total of 29 resources are known to exist within the study area. Of these, 28 have been recorded or re-located during surveys. These include: 10 Native American archaeological sites 10 Historic structures/buildings/objects (including mine ditches and stream diversions) 4 Historic archaeological sites (i.e., include both Native American and EuroAmerican remains) 2 Mixed-component archaeological sites 3 Isolated finds

Evaluation Categories Category 1 – Resources that will not be evaluated because they are not affected by Project O&M activities Category 2 – Resources that will be evaluated because they could potentially be affected by Project O&M activities Category 3 – Evaluation strategy will be determined pending further information Category 4 – Resources that have previously been evaluated for the NRHP

Category 1 These are resources that will not be evaluated because they are not affected by Project O&M activities. These resources are located near Project facilities (i.e. within 200 feet), but ongoing operation and maintenance activities will not affect these resources because they fall outside of the area of potential affect. Should the Project description change, these resources may be affected, and some may need to be evaluated.

Category 1 Resources in this category include: Prehistoric archaeological sites

Category 1 Historic mining sites

Category 1 Historic roads, ditches, and the remains of structures

Category 2 These are resources that will be evaluated because they could potentially by affected by Project operation and maintenance activities Evaluation will determine if each resource retains integrity and meets one of the following criteria for inclusion on the NRHP

Category 2 NRHP Criteria The resource is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history …is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past …embodies distinctive characteristics of type, period, method of construction, represents the work of a master, possesses high artistic value, or is a contributing element to a significant cultural resource …has yielded or may yield information important to history or prehistory

Category 2 The evaluation approach can be divided into two parts: Resources to be evaluated by historical research Resources to be evaluated by archeological field work

Category 2 Resources to be evaluated by historical research will be completed using: Histories of the region and of gold mining Historic maps, photographs, and documents written during the 19th and 20th centuries Resources available through local museums, libraries, and historical societies

Category 2 Resources to be evaluated by archeological field work will be completed using the following methods: Excavation using Shovel Probes (50 cm X 50 cm units) to define site boundaries, assess depositional integrity, and determine age and contents of the sites. If necessary, test excavation units (1m X 1m or 1m X 2m units) will be used to better assess sub-surface contents of the sites. All soil will be screened using 1/8” mesh screens. Obsidian samples for hydration dating and source determination, and basalt and welded tuff samples for source determination will be collected. Only the most important artifacts will be retained and other materials will be left at the sites tested. Collected items will be curated by the ENF or TNF.

Category 3 The evaluation strategy for these sites will be determined pending further information. Information required to assess potential impacts includes the precise location of: Project facilities or features Resource boundaries and features These resources will be assigned to Category 1 or Category 2 after the potential Project effects to these sites are better understood.

Category 3 Resources in this category include: Prehistoric archeological sites

Category 3 Historic archeological sites

Category 3 Mixed-component (prehistoric and historic) archeological sites

Category 4 These resources have already been evaluated for NRHP eligibility

Category 4 There are four prehistoric archaeological sites already evaluated by the Forest Service One is determined not eligible One was determined eligible Two are recommended eligible with concurrence from the SHPO pending All are prehistoric archaeological sites

Next Steps Additional surveys will conducted in 2008 at newly identified Project features Additional data will be gathered to allow all Category 3 resources to be placed in Category 1 or Category 2 ARPA permits will be obtained from the ENF and TNF to allow archaeological resources to be evaluated A Historic Properties Management Plan (HPMP) will be produced and filed with the License Application, detailing how NRHP-eligible resources will be managed over the term of the new FERC license