AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE DCP MIDSTREAM THREE RIVERS PLANT TO CGP 51 PROJECT IN LIVE OAK COUNTY, TEXAS

Similar documents
AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE EASTHAM STATE PRISON FARM UNIT PROJECT IN HOUSTON COUNTY TEXAS

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED VETERANS RETIREMENT HOME PROJECT IN CENTRAL SOMERVELL COUNTY, TEXAS. Texas Antiquities Permit Number 2950

A CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY FOR CITY OF NATALIA WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN MEDINA COUNTY, TEXAS

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE COLEMAN COUNTY SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT PHASE 7 WATER LINE PROJECT IN COLEMAN COUNTY TEXAS

SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT INFORMATION REQUESTED FOR VERIFICATION OF CORPS JURISDICTION

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE FORT GRIFFIN SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN CALLAHAN AND EASTLAND COUNTIES, TEXAS

4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES

David Moore, PacifiCorp Cultural Resources Coordinator Denise DeJoseph, Project Archaeologist

Appendix I-1: Archaeological Records Search

Archaeological Survey and Evaluation at 8954 El Dorado Parkway, El Cajon, San Diego County, California

December 13, Kirk Shields Green Mountain Power 163 Acorn Lane Colchester, VT 05446

Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request

NORTHWEST MENARD COUNTY, TEXAS Prepared for the City of Menard

Additional Testing for Padre Dam Eastern Service Area Secondary Connection- Alternative Site Location, San Diego County, California

8 th 12 th Designing a Monitoring Plan Mapping & Analysis (Activities 1 2)

4.11 CULTURAL RESOURCES

PW Parkway ES Prince William County, Virginia WSSI #

Archaeological Monitoring of Construction of a Six-Inch Force Main Sewer over Lookout Creek, Chattanooga, Hamilton County, Tennessee

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR CGG VERITAS MIDDLETON RANCH 3-D SEISMIC SURVEY IN CHAMBERS COUNTY, TEXAS. BVRA Project Number 10-21

THE TWO MOST SIGNIFICANT ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES IN KERR COUNTY, TEXAS ARE THE GATLIN SITE AND THE BEARING SINK HOLE SITE.

404 Nationwide Permit: File No. SPL PKK FWS-LA-14B F0556 Streambed Alteration Agreement Notification No.

Sacramento River Bank Protection Project

New Mexico Register / Volume XVI, Number 15 / August 15, 2005

Starting at Rock Bottom: A Peculiar Central Texas PreClovis Culture

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE EASTHAM STATE PRISON FARM A-1 and 7-1 WELL LOCATIONS IN HOUSTON COUNTY TEXAS

Monitoring Report No. 022 GREENCASTLE BURIALS GREEN CASTLE COUNTY DOWN LICENCE NO. N/A PHILIP MACDONALD

NEWS RELEASE UNDER SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT (33 USC 1344) ACTION NUMBER SPA ABQ

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DECLARATION OF TIM MENTZ, SR. IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

ENGINEER S CERTIFICATION OF FAULT AREA DEMONSTRATION (40 CFR )

An Introduction to Field Explorations for Foundations

MINNESOTA DEEP TEST PROTOCOL PROJECT

Illinois State Water Survey Division

ACTON COMMUNITY WIDE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY. Town of Acton and PAL, Inc.

MAPS AND THEIR CLASSIFICATION

This report was prepared by Klohn Crippen Consultants Ltd. for Alberta Transportation Central Region under Contract No. CE053/2000.

Advanced Geologic Exploration, Inc.

Waterbury Dam Disturbance Mike Fitzgerald Devin Rowland

ADDITIONAL PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE UMORE PARK SAND AND GRAVEL MINING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SERVICES, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA

Converse Consultants Geotechnical Engineering, Environmental & Groundwater Science, Inspection & Testing Services

UPPER COSUMNES RIVER FLOOD MAPPING

PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DISTRICT 3-0

Materials. Use materials meeting the following.

Lecture 9: Reference Maps & Aerial Photography

AN HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED SAN ANTONIO BOTANICAL CENTER. Stephen L. Black

Cultural Resources Data

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF SUEMAUR EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION LLC s PRIDE PROSPECT IN GALVESTON COUNY TEXAS

CHAPTER 4. Blue Heron Site (47Je1001) 2003 Investigations. By Chrisie L. Hunter

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE GREENHOUSE ROAD PROJECT IN WESTERN HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. Brazos Valley Research Associates. Project Number 07-16

Chapter 5 LiDAR Survey and Analysis in

Geomorphology and Archaeology: Case Studies from Western New York

Archaeological Survey and Assessment of Four Wastewater Interceptor Routes in Garner, Wake Co., N.C. (EPA C )

10 May Rod Walls - Director Facilities New Construction, Sustainability Hays CISD IH 35 Kyle, Texas 78640

City of Lockport Historic Resources Survey - Section METHODOLOGY

Geophysical Investigation of a 19th Century Archeological Site, Boston College K. Corcoran, J. Hager, M. Carnevale

Big Rivers Electric Corporation Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) from Electric Utilities Final Rule CCR Impoundment Liner Assessment Report

CHAPTER 7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

The details represented in the map depends mostly on the scale at which the map is designed.

patersongroup Consulting Engineers April 20, 2010 File: PG1887-LET.01R Novatech Engineering Consultants Suite 200, 240 Michael Cowpland Drive

Project Background. March 9, Commissioners of Public Works 103 Saint Phillip Street Charleston, South Carolina 29203

NEEDLES S STREET LEVEE SYSTEM SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NLD SYSTEM ID #

APPENDIX K NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT COORDINATION BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS

SCI appreciates being of service to you on this project. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments regarding this report.

STRUCTURAL STABILITY ASSESSMENT

Evaluation/Monitoring Report No. 259

Laboratory Exercise #3 The Hydrologic Cycle and Running Water Processes

Saganashkee Slough - McMahon Woods Section 506 Great Lakes Fishery & Ecosystem Restoration Study

Part 1: Buildings to be Demolished. Submitted to

3.12 Geology and Topography Affected Environment

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF BANDERA CITY PARK, BANDERA COUNTY, TEXAS

RE: End of Field Letter for the Proposed Milton Mears Farm Road Solar Project, Milton, Chittenden County, Vermont

THE BERRYESSA CREEK SITE CA-SCL-593. Robert Cartier Richard San Filippo Archeological Resource Management 496 North Fifth Street San Jose, CA 95112

COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Management Data Form Rev. 11/10

PHASE 1 STUDIES UPDATE EROSION WORKING GROUP

1.1 What is Site Fingerprinting?

Bramley Grange, Horsham Road, Bramley, Surrey

ACQUISITION, PROCESSING AND INTERPRETATION TECHNIQUES FOR GROUND-PENETRATING RADAR MAPPING OF BURIED PIT-STRUCTURES IN THE AMERICAN SOUTHWEST

The Rising Sun, Guildford Road, Fetcham, Surrey

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE POYNER WATER SUPPLY CORPORATION WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT IN ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS. BVRA Project 05-11

Hydrogeological Assessment for Part of Lots 2 and 3, Concession 5, Township of Thurlow, County of Hastings 1.0 INTRODUCTION. 1.

Soil Sampling Results Former Truck Maintenance Garage

Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Gooseberry Point Pedestrian Improvements Whatcom County, Washington SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LOMR SUBMITTAL LOWER NEHALEM RIVER TILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON

Information for File # MMJ; Trunk Highway (TH) 7 / Louisiana Ave. Interchange Project

DRAFT

MEMORANDUM FOR SWG

Topographic Map Series:

A GPR ASSESSMENT OF THE NAPLES CANAL 8CR59: PHASE II NAPLES, FLORIDA ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL CONSERVANCY, INC.

GEOLOGY Warren Mining District Idaho County, Idaho March SlI4HARY

TRAFFIC ALERT FOR WEEK OF February 4 8, 2008

EROSIONAL FEATURES. reflect

Author(s): Charles K. Cover, P.E. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

APPENDIX 3B OCCURRENCE OF SIGNIFICANT RIVER ALLUVIUM AQUIFERS IN THE PLATEAU REGION

August 14, James Bolton 312 Perry Lane Lovingston, VA

Internship Report Nate Stanley Center for Archaeological Studies

Slope Stability Evaluation Ground Anchor Construction Area White Point Landslide San Pedro District Los Angeles, California.

Erosional Features. What processes shaped this landscape?

A. My name is Watsun Randolph and my business address is 45 Horner Street Warrenton

DATA REPORT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL 2 GALVESTON, TEXAS

Stratigraphy Layers of Time in the Earth by Carol Schlenk

Archaeological Report Guidelines

Transcription:

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE DCP MIDSTREAM THREE RIVERS PLANT TO CGP 51 PROJECT IN LIVE OAK COUNTY, TEXAS By William E. Moore Brazos Valley Research Associates Contract Report Number 251 2011

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE DCP MIDSTREAM THREE RIVERS PLANT TO CGP 51 PIPELINE PROJECT IN LIVE OAK COUNTY, TEXAS BVRA Project Number 11-03 Principal Investigator William E. Moore Prepared by Brazos Valley Research Associates 813 Beck Street Bryan, Texas 77803 Prepared for CSC Engineering and Environmental Consultants 3407 Tabor Road Bryan, Texas 77808 2011

ABSTRACT An archaeological survey for an oil and gas pipeline in Live Oak County, Texas was performed by Brazos Valley Research Associates on April 28-30, and May 4, 2011. This study investigated both banks of the Nueces River and Olds Slough. The Area of Potential Effect was restricted to the entry and exit points on each bank of the two streams (0.42 acre). No archaeological sites were found, and no artifacts were collected. The presence of clay at the surface at each of the areas investigated is believed to be the reason that no sites were found. Copies of the report are on file at the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Galveston District, Texas Historical Commission, Texas Archeological Research Laboratory, Texas State Library, Brazos Valley Research Associates, CSC Engineering, and DCP Midstream. ii

CONTENTS ABSTRACT... ii INTRODUCTION... 1 METHODS... 4 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS... 9 RECOMMENDATIONS... 11 Appendix I: Backhoe Trench Profiles Appendix II: Photographs of Backhoe Trenches Figures Figure 1. General Location Map... 2 Figure 2. Project Area on Topographic Quadrangles... 3 Figure 3. Areas 1 and 2... 5 Figure 4. Backhoe Trenches 1 and 2... 6 Figure 5. Backhoe Trenches 3 and 4... 8 Figure 6. Thick Brush at Backhoe Trench 2... 10 iii

INTRODUCTION DCP Midstream, LP of Houston, Texas (Sponsor) proposes to install two twenty-inch pipelines in Live Oak County for the purposed of transporting oil and gas from the Three Rivers Plant to Central Gathering Point 51 (Figure 1). This project is regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Galveston District (Lead Agency), and Jerry L. Androy is the agency reviewer. William E. Moore is the Principal Investigator, and the field survey was conducted under the supervision of James E. Warren who is the Project Archaeologist. The environmental firm for this project is CSC Engineering and Consulting, and Stephen _. Swetish is the biologist representing this firm. The Area of Potential Effect (APE) is depicted on two USGS 7.5 topographic quadrangles. They are Comanche Hills (2898-142) and Three Rivers (2898-143) (Figure 2). The pipes will be placed 15 feet apart and extend for a distance of 10 miles with most of the project area traversing cross-country on private property. The trenches will be 30 inches wide and have 48 inches of cover. There will be a permanent easement of 50 feet and a temporary easement of 40 feet. The proposed pipelines will cross the Nueces River, Olds Slough, and two minor tributaries. Horizontal directional boring will be used to cross the streams, and the depth of the boring will average ten feet below the bottom of each stream. The entry point for the Nueces River crossing is located 1125 feet from the north bank of the river, and the exit point is located 565 feet from the south bank of the river. The entry point for the Olds Slough crossing is located 250 feet from the north bank of the slough, and the exit point is located 92 feet from the south bank of the slough. 1

Figure 1. General Location Map 2

Figure 2. Project Area on Topographic Quadrangles 3

METHODS This project was performed in order to identify any cultural resources that might be present within the route of the proposed pipelines at the point where they cross the Nueces River and Olds Slough. Prior to entering the field, the site records at TARL and the Texas Archeological Sites Atlas were checked for the presence of previously recorded archaeological sites in the project area and vicinity as well as previous projects performed by professional archaeologists. The focus of this project was the two stream crossings (Nueces River and Olds Slough). The pipeline crosses other streams, but they were evaluated in the field and determined to be ephemeral and not likely to contain significant sites. Since the only areas to be disturbed at the surface are the entry and exit points for the horizontal directional boring, these are the areas that were investigated. In order to examine the subsurface to a sufficient depth, a backhoe was used and one trench was excavated at each entry and exit point. The fieldwork was documented by a sketch map at each area investigated, notes, profiles of the backhoe trenches, log of photographs taken, and digital photographs. At each backhoe trench selected samples of dirt were screened using quarter-inch hardware cloth, and the profiles of were scraped with a trowel and examined for cultural materials and features. The project involved 120 hours including pre-field tasks, the archaeological survey, and report preparation. The following discussion presents specific methods used and dimensions for each area. Figure 3 depicts the crossings at the river and Olds slough where the investigation took place. The Nueces River crossing was designated in the field as Area 1, and Olds Slough is Area 2. Olds Slough Crossing Backhoe Trench 1 was dug in thick brush at the entry point on the north bank of the slough and oriented north south (Figure 4). It was located 250 feet from the water and 50 feet from the dirt road that parallels the proposed pipeline. The trench was dug through clay to a depth of 178 centimeters below the existing ground surface. Its dimensions are 5 meters long and 85 centimeters wide. The east profile of the trench is depicted in Appendix I (Backhoe Trench Profiles), and a photograph of the trench during excavation is depicted in Appendix II entitled Backhoe Trench Photographs. Backhoe Trench 2 was dug in thick brush at the exit point on the south bank of the slough and oriented north south (Figure 4). It was located 92 feet from the water and 50 feet from the dirt road that parallels the proposed pipeline. The trench was dug through clay to a depth of 182 centimeters below the existing ground surface. Its dimensions are 5 meters long and 85 centimeters wide. The east profile of the trench is depicted in Appendix I (Backhoe Trench Profiles), and a photograph of the trench during excavation is depicted in Appendix II entitled Backhoe Trench Photographs. 4

Figure 3. Areas 1 and 2 5

Figure 4. Backhoe Trenches 1 and 2 6

Nueces River Crossing Backhoe Trench 3 was dug in thick brush at the entry point on the north bank of the river in thick brush and oriented north south (Figure 5). It was located 1125 feet from the river and 50 feet from the dirt road that parallels the proposed pipeline. The trench was dug through clay to a depth of 170 centimeters below the existing ground surface. Its dimensions are 5 meters long and 85 centimeters wide. The north profile of the trench is depicted in Appendix I entitled Backhoe Trench Profiles, and a photograph of the trench during excavation is depicted in Appendix II entitled Backhoe Trench Photographs. Backhoe Trench 4 was dug in thick brush at the exit point on the south bank of the river in thick brush and oriented north south (Figure 5). It was located 565 feet from the river and 50 feet from the dirt road that parallels the proposed pipeline. The trench was dug to a depth of 160 centimeters below the existing ground surface. Its dimensions are 5 meters long and 85 centimeters wide. The soil at this location is clay over caliche with two narrow lenses of calcium carbonate at 65 centimeters and 110 centimeters below the surface. When the caliche was encountered, the excavation was terminated since this soil type pre-dates human occupation. The east profile of the trench is depicted in Appendix I entitled Backhoe Trench Profiles, and a photograph of the trench during the field excavation is depicted in Appendix II entitled Backhoe Trench Photographs. 7

Figure 5. Backhoe Trenches 3 and 4 8

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Examination of the files at TARL in Austin, Texas and the Atlas revealed no sites have been recorded within any portion of the APE, and no previous archaeological projects or surveys had been conducted within the area. A search for known sites within one mile of the project area identified nine sites that varied in distance from 440 meters (41LK307) to 1380 meters (41LK223). Six of the sites are prehistoric, two are historic, and there is no information for 41LK228. All of the prehistoric sites were found in localities with soils described as sandy or loamy except for two lithic procurement sites where the soils contained large amounts of gravels. Although six sites is a small sample upon which to arrive at a meaningful interpretation regarding high probability areas for prehistoric sites, it does suggest that prehistoric sites in the area are not likely to be found in areas where clay is at or near the surface as is the case in the current project area. A visual inspection of the minor streams and tributaries revealed the presence of clay at the surface, and there were no deposits of gravels that would have been suitable for making stone tools. Therefore, these areas were not considered worthy of a formal subsurface investigation. All four backhoe trenches were excavated in areas of thick brush. Figure 6 illustrates the typical vegetation encountered. Professional studies have been conducted in Live Oak County with the most notable being along the Frio River at Choke Canyon by archaeologists from The University of Texas at San Antonio (Center for Archaeological Research). Numerous significant sites were recorded and excavated, but they were located in a more favorable setting than the area investigated for this project. 9

Figure 6. Thick Brush at Backhoe Trench 2 10

RECOMMENDATIONS No evidence of a prehistoric or historic site was found as a result of this survey. It is recommended that the client be allowed to proceed with construction as planned. Should evidence of an archaeological site be encountered during the proposed construction, all work must stop until the regulatory agencies are notified and the situation evaluated. If the route of the pipelines is moved to another area, the regulatory agencies must be informed, as additional survey may be required. This survey was conducted in accordance with the Minimum Survey Standards as outlined by the THC. 11

APPENDIX I BACKHOE TRENCH PROFILES

APPENDIX II PHOTOGRAPHS OF BACKHOE TRENCHES

Backhoe Trench 1 Backhoe Trench 2

Backhoe Trench 3 Backhoe Trench 4