The standards presented in the following sections represent minimum standards for field survey, testing, excavation and report writing. They are developed primarily for Section 106 projects; their application to other archaeological projects in the state is discussed in the documentation below. These standards are not intended to constrain or limit research efforts to these standards; investigators are encouraged to develop projects and reports that exceed these standards, explore new technological approaches, and examine Louisiana’s cultural history in new and creative ways.  

 Federal Involvement Report Checklist

 Due Dilligence Report Checklist

A Brief Overview of the Review Process

• Individuals and firms developing proposals for archaeological investigations are encouraged to consult with the Division concerning methods and strategies prior to beginning fieldwork.
• Upon completion of a field project, the draft site forms (for both newly reported and previously reported sites) are submitted to the Division. The Division will issue site numbers for all new sites within 5 days. Batches of 20 or more site forms may take longer to receive site numbers. The state site numbers are required for the discussion of all sites within a project area in management summaries, draft reports and final reports. Written comments on the draft site forms will be provided within 45 days of submission. Visit the Site Forms page for more information. Draft reports are not accepted until the site forms and LHRI forms are finalized.
• The draft report is submitted to the Division for review. The Division will provide written comments within 30 days. Please see the procedure page for submitting a report.
• After addressing comments from the federal agency and the Division, the final report is submitted. The report is considered final when a letter accepting the report is issued to the federal agency and contractor.
• The project is not considered final until the collection is curated at an appropriate facility.

DOWNLOAD REPORT STANDARDS 

I. Introduction

A. Application

1. The report standards are developed primarily to address Section 106 projects and reports that are submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for review and comment. Other reports (non-106) that are submitted to either the Division of Historic Preservation (DHP) or the Division of Archaeology (DOA) for review and comment are expected to meet these standards. Other types of projects, such as thesis or dissertation work, or grant-funded studies, are encouraged to consider these standards in preparing their report but it is recognized that these standards may not be applicable in all respects for those studies.
2. The principal goal of the standards is to ensure adequate information is obtained on the presence, absence, and eligibility of cultural resources within a project area such that federal agencies, SHPO, federally recognized American Indian Tribal Nations (Tribes), and other interested parties can be confident that they are appropriately considered under the aegis of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
3. The standards provide guidance to clients, agencies, and contractors on what the Divisions consider appropriate information to be presented in a report.
4. The standards provide the framework through which the submitted reports will be reviewed and ensure that staff will provide consistent reviews of those reports.
5. The standards also ensure that Division staff provide consistent advice to clients, agencies, and contractors concerning report expectations.

B. Definitions

1. Area of Potential Effect     The Area of Potential Effect (APE) is defined as the area within which there is the potential for a federal undertaking to have an effect on a historic property. This term is used for those projects where a federal agency is involved at the time of the cultural resources survey. The effect may be direct, as in historic properties impacted by construction or other development. The effect may also be indirect, including historic properties that lie outside the direct impact area whose setting, feeling, etc., would be impacted by the development. The nature and extent of the undertaking must be considered when determining the APE, and the APE must be agreed upon by the federal agency and the SHPO. The standing structures survey should encompass the entire APE. Archaeological survey is confined to the direct impact portion of the APE.
2. Project Area     For a project that a client undertakes as part of its due diligence prior to federal agency involvement, an APE has not yet been defined. The cultural resources study will be confined to the Project Area (PA) as determined by the client. The PA may not be the same as the APE.
3. Historic Area     In the past, large cultural landscapes such as a historic plantation have been recorded as a single, large archaeological site, with the spatially separate components (quarters, sugarhouse, etc.) identified as “loci” within the larger site. While this approach captured the boundaries of cultural areas, it created administrative challenges, limited the consideration of the relationship between the individual loci, and often lumped non-contemporaneous deposits into a single site. In an effort to avoid these challenges, the Divisions have developed an alternative approach modeled on practices in other states.

A Historic Area is defined as a group of individual cultural resources (Pre- or Post-Contact) representing discrete areas on the landscape, that are temporally and spatially related. Examples could include a plantation, a historic community, or a set of discrete but adjacent, contemporary American Indian deposits. Each of the discrete deposits and/or structures is recorded as a separate archaeological site or historic structure. A Historic Area should be defined if it is believed that two or more resources are elements of a larger complex. These resources can include, but are not limited to: archaeological sites, structures, earthworks, roads/railroads/tram beds cemeteries, or agricultural features.

There is not a specific form for recording a Historic Area. It should be defined in the report. The Historic Area discussion should include:

• • • an identifying name. The name is left to the discretion of the researcher, but for example, a historic plantation would likely be known by its name.
    • an explicit description of the boundaries and how they were defined. If the Historic Area has undergone multiple name and boundary changes, as is frequently the case with plantations, professional discretion should be used in determining the most appropriate name and boundary for recordation. Generally, the most inclusive boundary is preferred. Researchers are encouraged to consult with the DOA and DHP in defining the Historic Area.
    • a discussion of the contributing cultural resources to the Historic Area. This should also include a brief discussion of those resources located within the Historic Area that are not contributing elements.
    • Identification of the Period of Significance for the Historic Area and discussion of how the various elements contribute toward that significance.

Each Historic Area should be clearly evaluated for eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in the report. For example, when recording a plantation that has multiple related resources, the researcher should define the historic boundary, the Period of Significance, and the appropriate name. All resources that date to the Period of Significance should be identified, individually evaluated, and then considered together. Resources that are found to be ineligible individually may still contribute to the eligibility of the Historic Area.

A shapefile for each Historic Area should be submitted to the Site Files Manager.

Historic Areas are not applied to urban city blocks where the entire block is identified as the archaeological site.

C. Timing

If a project needs to proceed quickly and there is not time for the contractor to prepare a complete draft Phase I or Phase II report, the DOA/DHP will accept a Management Summary; see the Management Summary report guidelines. The contractor will submit the complete draft Phase I or II report as soon as possible.

D. Draft Report Requirements

1. Phase I cultural resource reports submitted to SHPO must address archaeological sites and standing structures. If information on previously recorded Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP’s) is developed during the project, it should be included in the report, but the project is not required to identify or evaluate new TCP’s.
2. If the project scope specifics that only archaeological sites or standing structures are to be addressed, the Abstract and Introduction must clearly explain this. To the extent known, please provide a brief explanation why archaeological sites or standing structures are not discussed.
3. Any new or updated archaeological sites discussed in the report must have site numbers assigned by the DOA. Reports without site numbers will not be reviewed. All site forms must be accepted as final by the Site Files Manager before the draft report is submitted. For Phase II and III investigations, updated site forms for each site investigated must be submitted and finalized before the draft report is submitted.
4. If standing structures are present, historic structure numbers must be obtained from the Division of Historic Preservation (DHP). Reports without standing structure numbers will not be reviewed. All standing structure forms must be accepted as final by DHP before the draft report is submitted.
5. All eligibility recommendations must be prepared by an SOI-qualified archaeologist (for archaeological sites) or an SOI-qualified architectural historian, historian, architect, or historic architect (for standing structures).
6. Draft reports must be submitted with:

• • a cover letter identifying to whom the SHPO response should be sent;
  • one bound copy of the report and a pdf of the report on a disc or jumpdrive; these should be submitted together; and
  • a GIS shapefile (.shp) and all accompanying data files (e.g., .sbn, .dbf, .prj, .sbx, and .shx) for each new and updated site and structure as well as all surveyed areas. Currently, all the SHPO GIS data is projected in NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_15N and submitted files should be in this format. If a shapefile is not possible, the DOA will accept .kmz or .kml files. For specific submission information, contact the DOA Site Files Manager or the DHP Structure File Manager
  • The Divisions will provide written comments on the draft report within 30 days of the date it is received in our office. The Divisions use the Report Checklist when reviewing reports; contractors and agencies should familiarize themselves with the Checklist when preparing a report. The Checklist is available on the DOA’s website. If a Division has significant and substantive concerns about a draft report, it may request a revised draft for review. The review process begins anew with the submittal of the revised draft. Effect determinations and eligibility recommendations will not be provided until the revised draft is submitted and reviewed.

E. Final report requirements

1. For final reports, investigators must provide one bound copy, including all appendices, and a pdf copy. If any site or survey areas have been modified since the draft report was submitted, updated shapefiles must be submitted as well.
2. The final report will be accepted when:
   • all site, structure, and survey area shapefiles are submitted;
   • a pdf copy of the final report is on file;
   • and the SHPO, federal agency, and Tribe(s) if appropriate, have agreed on the eligibility status of each archaeological site and standing structure. The final report must include the agreed-upon eligibility determination for each site and structure.
3. If the Division has no comments on a negative findings draft or revised draft report, it will be accepted as the final report if:
   • all shapefiles are submitted,
   • and a pdf copy of the report is on file.
4. If the Division has no comments on a draft report that identified archaeological sites and/or standing structures, it will be accepted as the final report if;
   • all archaeological site and standing structure forms are accepted as final,
   • all shapefiles are submitted,
   • a pdf copy is on file, and all parties agree on the eligibility determination(s).
5. The Division will amend the hard copy and pdf copy to say final. If the draft is accepted as the final, submission of a final copy by the contractor or agency is not required.

II. Terrestrial Phase I Cultural Resource Survey Reports

Phase I reports must include the following sections and information:

A. Front Matter

1. Report Cover
   • report title (with the phrase “Phase I” included),
   • the lead federal or state agency involved, as well as any other client,
   • the contractor performing the work,
   • the date of the report (month and year).
2. Title page
   • report title (including the phrase “Phase I”)
   • the author(s),
   • the date of the report (month and year),
   • the contracting firm and address,
   • the lead federal or state agency and address,
   • the agency contract/permit number, where applicable.
   • the client firm or agency and address, if different from e)
3. Abstract
   • One page maximum whenever possible. Include a brief summary of the project, project area (PA) or Area of Potential Effect (APE), its size (acres), and the parish or parishes where the work was done. Include site numbers for all sites identified or updated in the PA/APE, and structure numbers for all buildings in the (PA/APE). Summarize the results and the National Register eligibility recommendations for each site and structure, and succinctly state any recommendations for additional work. The Abstract should also include a statement that indicates which facility will curate the artifact collection and associated records. If the collection will be returned to the landowner(s), this should be noted here.
4. Table of Contents
   • Headings should duplicate verbatim those found in the text. The Table of Contents should use leader tabs (e.g. ……..) between the heading and page number. All appendix materials should be listed in the Table of Contents. Include page numbers on all pages.
5. List of Figures
   • Duplicate verbatim the first sentence of the caption of each figure in the text (excluding image citations or permissions). The List of Figures should use leader tabs between the figure caption and page number.
6. List of Tables
   • Duplicate verbatim the title of each table in the text. The List of Tables should use leader tabs between the table title and page number. Tables should not use a font smaller than eight (8) point.
7. Preface or Acknowledgments
   • Include the names of the Principal Investigator, Project Archaeologist, other archaeological personnel, and the funding and/or sponsoring agency. If the contracted firm is listed as the author, describe here the individual authors and their relative contributions.

B. Report Body (In Chapter Format)

The pages for all final reports should be consecutively numbered in Arabic numerals. Pagination by chapter numbers (e.g. 1-2, 3-5, 7-35 etc.) is acceptable for draft reports.

1. Introductory Chapter
   • Outline the scope of work, including a project description and a brief general description of the project’s history, the agencies involved, the project setting and boundaries, the purpose of the archaeological investigation, etc. Be certain to describe the PA and/or the APE. If the PA and APE differ, this should be made explicit. List the dates of investigation. Provide a detail of a 7.5’ USGS topographic quadrangle map showing the location of the area being investigated with a state inset map showing the project location within the state of Louisiana. If the PA extends into several 7.5’ quadrangles, provide individual maps as an appendix. All maps must have a north arrow, scale, and legend. Also, provide a synopsis of the organization of the report in the Introduction. It is not necessary to summarize the results of the project in the Introduction.
2. Land Use History Chapter
   • Discuss the natural history of the PA/APE to the extent known and specifically as it is relevant to the potential for finding sites (for example, a Late Pleistocene surface or an area buried by the 1927 flood). Provide an overview of the historic land use of the property, including construction of trails, roads, railroads, and homesteads, in addition to logging, farming, mining or other activities, with specific emphasis on activities that would have created or impacted archaeological sites.
3. Previous Investigations Chapter
   • This discussion should be limited to the PA/APE for previous archaeological surveys and known sites. This chapter should include a map illustrating previously known sites within 1 (one) mile of the PA/APE in rural areas (a table with site attribute data can be provided but is not required). Discussion of sites outside the PA/APE should focus on 1) attributes that identify high probability areas for survey within the PA/APE, and 2) types of sites that can be expected within the PA/APE. In urban areas, the map should incorporate the area within six (6) blocks of the PA/APE boundary.
   • For standing structures, this review should include any previously recorded structure, or National Register listed structure or district within the APE. This information is available from the DHP’s GIS database. A map must be included which shows the APE or PA and all of the previously surveyed and National Register listed or eligible properties. Listed or eligible properties directly adjacent to the APE, or whose significance may affect the project area’s evaluation, should also be considered in this section.
4. Methods Chapter
   • Standing Structures
     • Discuss standing structure survey methods. Every structure at least 50 years old within the APE must be surveyed and recorded on an Louisiana Historic Resources Inventory (LHRI) form. Describe the methods employed to determine the location of structures, including by not limited to, windshield survey, historic map analysis, or any other method.
   • Archaeological Field Methods
     • Describe the fieldwork strategy(s) used during this project, including a thorough description of the field methods and the rationale for their use. If investigators encounter conditions that lead to deviations from the Field Standards, this must be explained here. Please include any correspondence between the investigators, agencies, and the DOA concerning deviations from the standards in an appendix. Define high and low probability areas and the distribution of transects and shovel tests. Provide a map and narrative illustrating the distribution of high and low probability areas within the project area.
     • Describe shovel test size and depths, stratigraphic controls, and state if the material was screened or hand troweled. If other survey strategies were employed (walkover, augering, stripping, deep testing), describe how and where they were undertaken and the relevant artifact collection strategy. Please include a map(s) showing the location of all shovel test transects, and other survey methods.
   • Laboratory Methods
     • Discussion should include a brief overview of procedures used to clean and conserve artifacts, specifically noting any variation from standard practice;
     • the references used for artifact identification and classification;
     • overview of any artifact analyses beyond identification and description;
     • criteria for discard of any material classes (following discussion with the collection manager where the collection will be curated).
   • Curation
     • Include a statement that designates which facility will be curating any recovered artifacts, field notes, and other relevant materials. If recovered artifacts are requested by landowners, this must be noted in the report. If the collection is to be curated at the DOA, please see our Curation Standards for more information. If the collection is from a Euroamerican site and will be curated at the DOA, an artifact culling plan may be developed in consultation with the DOA’s Collection Manager. The culling plan should be included as an appendix.
5. Results Chapter
   • Provide a broad overview of the survey results;
     • include the acres surveyed and at what probability, number of shovel tests excavated, and the sites identified or relocated. Any areas that were not surveyed should be illustrated on a map and the reason(s) for the lack of survey discussed;
     • if the project includes more than one discrete survey area, provide the information for each separate area as well as cumulatively;
     • if there were any deviations from the standard survey methods, describe and illustrate where they were implemented;
     • include the location of any standing structures, paved areas, utilities, etc. that limited or restricted the survey. This is particularly important in urban contexts;
     • illustrations of representative shovel tests from each landform or distinct region of the survey area should be presented;
     • the boundary of the surveyed area must be plotted on a topographic map and/or aerial image of the project area and included as a figure in the report or as an appendix;
     • the beginning and ending transect shovel tests should be plotted on a map, along with all positive shovel tests and negative site delineation shovel tests. Shovel test symbols should identify positive and negative tests. If some transects were not completed due to structures or other barriers, describe in the text. If the project area is large, individual sites can be shown as polygons with their defining shovel tests presented on the site maps;
     • if deep testing was conducted, describe the rationale, location, natural setting, geomorphology exposed by the testing, and results. Discuss the implications of the deep testing for buried site potential and the impact of the proposed project on buried sites. Include maps, photographs, and descriptions of the relevant profiles;
     • provide one or more overview photographs illustrating the survey conditions.
   • Describe each archaeological site identified or relocated.
     • include a map of each site showing the location of all positive and negative shovel tests employed in the identification and delineation, including the negative delineation tests that fall outside of the site boundaries;
     • describe and discuss the artifacts found and the cultural components present;
     • if artifacts extend below the base of the surface plow/disturbed zone, clearly illustrate and describe the cultural and soil stratigraphy;
     • if there are multiple discrete areas of subsurface deposits, describe each individually and assess any temporal/cultural relationships between them;
     • provide at least one overview photograph of the site showing conditions at the time of the survey;
     • site descriptions in reports should be consistent with information presented on site forms submitted to the DOA.
   • Describe each standing structure identified. For urban projects with a large number of structures, follow the guideline developed by DHP and/or consult with DHP staff. These may be submitted in table format.
     • provide a broad overview of the survey results. Include a map of the APE or PA and any recorded structures. The map must be adequately labeled and include a legend, scale, and north arrow.
     • describe each structure recorded, including a photograph. All of the information presented in the LHRI form should be included here. For projects with a large number of structures, the information may be presented in a table format as long as the LHRI forms are referenced and included as an report appendix.
   • If a Historic Area is defined, please define the boundaries and describe why those boundaries were selected. Identify each archaeological site, standing structure, and/or other landscape features that are contributing elements to the historic area. Identify the Period of Significance for the historic area, and briefly describe how each site, structure, and landscape feature are related to that period.
   • Provide a statement addressing the National Register eligibility of each archaeological site, standing structure, and Historic Area.
     • For each site/structure, state its recommended eligibility for nomination to the National Register (citing each criterion), and discuss the characteristics of the site that the recommendation is based upon. Each site/structure must be recommended as Eligible, Not Eligible, or Undetermined. The term “Potentially Eligible” is not an acceptable recommendation for the National Register, in accordance with the guidelines set by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The DOA’s criteria for assessing eligibility are presented in the Louisiana Comprehensive Archaeological Plan and elsewhere in the DOA’s website.
     • For post-contact sites, sufficient documentary research to determine whether the occupants represent a locally/regionally important family, or a poorly known community (e.g., post-contact American Indian, free person of color, minority ethnic group, etc.) should be undertaken to provide context for the National Register assessment. In depth research (chain-or-title or probate for example) is not expected, but who occupied a property can be a significant factor in assessing eligibility, so sufficient information to address this issue should be presented.
     • If a Historic Area was defined, please provide an assessment of the eligibility of the Area as a whole, including consideration of each contributing element. Resources that are individually not eligible may still be a contributing element to the overall eligibility of the Historic Area.
6. Summary and Recommendations Chapter
   • Succinctly summarize the results of the investigation and provide archaeological interpretations.
   • If no archaeological sites or standing structures are encountered provide a brief statement that the project will have no impact on historic properties.
   • If sites and/or structures are identified, list each archaeological site and standing structure encountered during the project and their recommended National Register eligibility.
   • If sites and standing structures are recommended not eligible, provide a clear statement that the project will have no effect on the sites/structures.
   • If sites and standing structures are recommended Undetermined or Eligible, and the client has developed a proposal to avoid or minimize effects, provide the proposed avoidance/minimization plan here or in an appendix.
   • If sites and standing structures are recommended Undetermined or Eligible and cannot be avoided or minimized at this time, provide a clear statement recommending further work and any management recommendations relative to ground-disturbing activities.
7. References and Citations
   • References cited should use the Style Guide for the Society of American Archaeology. Please include the DOA report number when known.
8. Appendices
   • Items such as project maps showing the surveyed areas and shovel tests, correspondence, shovel test data, etc. may be included in a report as an appendix if they are cited in the body of the report. If artifacts recovered during a project are returned to a property owner or owners, any correspondence or other related documents should be included as an appendix. If a culling agreement was implemented as part of the laboratory methodology, the culling plan should be included as an appendix. Site forms must not be included as an appendix to a report.
9. Addendum Reports
   • Project areas can be modified or expanded after a Phase I cultural resources report has been submitted. The report of investigations for the new area(s) can be submitted as an Addendum to the original project report. The Addendum should include all the relevant report sections that pertain to the survey of the new property. It does not need to repeat information from the primary original report. Multiple addendum reports can be submitted as the project evolves. Each report should be labeled as below, with the addenda numbered sequentially:
     • Addendum 4: New Additions to the Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Acme Pipeline, East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana (Report No. 22-9876-4)
   • Please note that if an archaeological collection is to be curated with the DOA, each addendum is considered a separate collection. Consult with the DOA’s Collections Manager for information on preparing addendum collections.

III. Submerged Cultural Resources Reports

If the submerged cultural resources report will be included as a chapter or appendix within a terrestrial Phase I report, the report should follow the terrestrial Phase I guidelines with the following information included in the submerged cultural resources chapter. If the report is a stand-alone document, it should generally follow the framework of a terrestrial Phase I survey report and incorporate the specific information discussed below.

A. Introductory Chapter

The description of the surveyed area must delineate the surveyed area, including a navigation post-plot of survey transects. Maps may refer to a NOAA Chart or USGS topographic quadrangle map.

B.  Land Use History Chapter

Discuss the history of the submerged PA/APE, including any river channel shifts, shoreline changes, and/or evidence of subsidence/sea level change. Also include discussion of any post- AD 1700 efforts, including dredging, canal construction, pipeline constructions, etc., that may have impacted the PA/APE.

C. Previous Investigations Chapter

This discussion should be limited to the PA/APE for previous submerged cultural resource surveys, known sites (including terrestrial archaeological sites now submerged), and previously identified submerged anomalies. The chapter should include a map with all previously identified cultural resources within one mile of the PA/APE, with discussion focusing on 1) attributes that identify high site likelihood areas within the PA/APE, and 2) types of sites/anomalies that can be expected within the PA/APE.

D. Submerged Survey Field Methods Chapter

Describe the fieldwork strategy(s) used during the project, including a thorough description of the field methods and the rationale for their use. If investigators encounter conditions that lead to deviations from the Field Standards, this must be explained in the report. Please include any correspondence between the investigators, agencies, and the DOA concerning deviations from the standards in an appendix. The chapter should:

1. Describe the survey grid, including size, line spacing intervals, cross lines (or tie lines), and grid orientation.
2. Describe the functional responsibilities and duties of the personnel involved in survey planning, fieldwork, and report preparation.
3. Describe the survey instrumentation including, as appropriate, scale and sensitivity settings, sampling rates, frequency, and tow heights above the seafloor (height range is acceptable).
4. Describe or illustrate the survey vessel, including its size, sensor configuration, and navigation antenna location.
5. Summarize the field operations including vessel speed, course changes, sea state, weather conditions, and unusual incidents.
6. Describe the survey procedures.
7. Discuss any data acquisition problems or issues that may have affected the ability of the archaeologist to identify and analyze potential cultural resources in the survey area.
8. Provide a copy of all survey line logs/field notes as an appendix to the report.
9. Discuss all data processing methodologies used for correcting, filtering, contouring, and interpreting all data sets.
10. Discuss the project geodetics used (e.g., acquisition, transformations).

E. Results Chapter

This chapter should include a broad overview of the survey results, and describe each archaeological site, shipwreck, and unidentified anomaly identified during the survey. The chapter should include the following information:

1. A list of all magnetic anomalies (with intensity, duration, signature, and latitude/longitude and/or UTM coordinates). Provide recommended avoidance distances for possible archaeological anomalies.
2. Provide a representative data sample showing magnetic data.
3. A list of all side scan sonar targets (with target length, width, height, description, and latitude/longitude and/or UTM coordinates; tabular format in an appendix is acceptable). Provide recommended avoidance distances for possible archaeological targets. Images of each individual sonar target must be included.
4. Provide side scan sonar mosaics in geotiff format.
5. Provide a discussion of any correlations between sonar targets, magnetic anomalies, or sub- bottom features.
6. Provide samples of sub-bottom profiler data for each/any landform of potential archaeological interest.
7. When possible, sub-bottom features such as channels or isopach contours should be plotted on a separate sub-bottom features map.
8. An assessment of the National Register eligibility of each archaeological site, shipwreck, and unidentified anomaly identified during the survey.

IV. Phase II Standing Structure Report: Determination of Eligibility

A. Application

When there is a structure identified as eligible or undetermined in the Phase I report, and there is a potential for the undertaking to effect this property, then additional research must be completed as part of the Phase II. This must include a full Determination of Eligibility (DOE) on each structure or district that has been identified as eligible or undetermined. For structures that have already been determined eligible under one Criterion, the full DOE may identify additional Criteria for which the structure is eligible. For structures which had been identified as undetermined, this DOE must make a determination based on National Register Evaluation guidelines.

B. Determinations of Eligibility

Determinations of Eligibility can be presented as separate documents for each property, and do not have to be complied into a single cohesive report. However, a cover letter must be included which details the findings of each DOE and the effect determination based on the undertaking.

C. Each DOE must include the following:

1. A detailed physical description of the property.
2. An in-depth history of the property, including previous ownership information if available. This should include historic map research, chain of title, and any other reasonable methods of gathering information on the property history and association with historic figures or events.
3. A full evaluation of eligibility in relationship to all of the National Register Criteria.
4. High quality color photos of the stricture,
5. Historic maps and aerials appropriately labeled.
6. All references used in the research.
7. A final Eligibility Determination.
8. A final Effect determination based on the undertaking.

V. Terrestrial Archaeological Site Phase II National Register Evaluation Reports

Phase II reports must include the following sections and information:

A. Front Matter 

1. Report Cover
   • report title (with the phrase “Phase II” included),
   • the lead federal or state agency involved, as well as any other client,
   • the contractor performing the work,
   • the date of the report (month and year).
2. Title page
   • Report Title (including the phrase “Phase II”)
   • the author(s),
   • the date of the report (month and year),
   • the contracting firm and address,
   • the lead federal or state agency and address,
   • the agency contract/permit number, where applicable.
   • the client firm or agency and address, if different from e)
3. Abstract
   • One page maximum whenever possible. Include a brief summary of the project, PA/APE, its size (acres), and the parish or parishes where the work was done. Summarize the results and the National Register eligibility determination for each site investigated. Succinctly state any recommendations for additional work. The Abstract should also include a statement that indicates which facility will curate the artifact collection, field notes, and other relevant materials. If the collection will be returned to the landowner(s), this should be noted here.
4. Table of Contents
   • Headings should duplicate verbatim those found in the text. The Table of Contents should use leader tabs (e.g.,……..) between the heading and page number. All appendix materials should be listed in the Table of Contents. Include page numbers on all pages
5. List of Figures
   • Duplicate verbatim the first sentence of the captions of each figure in the text (excluding image citations or permissions). The List of Figures should use leader tabs between the figure caption and page number.
6. List of Tables
   • Duplicate verbatim the title of each table in the text. The List of Table should use leader tabs between the table title and page number. Tables should not use a font smaller than 8 point.
7. Preface or Acknowledgments
   • Include the names of the Principal Investigator and other archaeological personnel, and the funding and/or sponsoring agency. If the contracted firm is listed as the author, describe here the individual authors and their relative contributions.
8. Pagination
   • The pagination for the front matter must be in lower case Roman numerals. The pages for all final reports must be consecutively numbered in Arabic numerals. Pagination by chapter numbers (e.g. , 1-2, 3-5, 7-35 etc.) is acceptable for draft reports

B. Introductory Chapter

Outline the scope of work, including the project description and general description of the project’s history, the agencies involved, the project setting and boundaries, the purpose of the archaeological investigations, etc. List the dates of investigation. Provide a detail of a 7.5’ USGS topographic quadrangle map showing the location of the site[s] being tested. All maps must have a scale, north arrow, and legend. Provide a synopsis of the organization of the report. It is not necessary to summarize the results of the project in the introduction.

D. Cultural Setting Chapter

1. Discuss the cultural history of the time period(s) represented at the sites being tested. Emphasis should be placed on information from contemporary sites that inform on how the tested site(s) may be organized, types of features expected, nature of the deposits, function/purpose, etc. The review should focus on what is currently known from sites of this period, and identify the significant gaps in our knowledge. The relevant sites may be located in the adjoining parishes, across the state, or in some cases outside Louisiana. For example, shipwrecks or institutional sites which have not been previously investigated in Louisiana will need to look regionally or nationally for relevant examples.
2. For post-contact sites, the Cultural Setting should include review of property records, census data, city directories, sewer and water board records, historic maps, and other documents that shed light on the individuals/businesses that occupied the property(s) being investigated. These records are critical to understanding the occupational history of the property, what archaeological deposits may be encountered, and what disturbances may have impacted those deposits. This information is also important for assessing the site’s eligibility.
3. Discuss the research design and identify the issues and questions anticipated to be addressed through investigation of the tested sites. For many sites, this section will address what site characteristics are the focus of the investigation (chronology, integrity, vertical and horizontal stratification) and how the methods address those questions. When possible, the research design should draw upon the results of previous investigations at contemporary sites as identified in the Cultural Setting discussion. It should also reflect to the extent appropriate the relevant research themes identified in the Louisiana Comprehensive Archaeological Plan. The research design is not limited to these sources and should address other topics as appropriate to the site(s) and time period being investigated.

E. Methodology Chapter

1. Describe the archaeological field methods used, including:
   • Discuss how the investigation strategy enables the research design questions to be addressed;
   • Location of test units, trenches, augers and other techniques and rationale for their placement;
   • Size and excavation strategy for each technique, including screening, screen size, and excavation unit levels;
   • Special sample collection strategy;
   • Discussion of any conditions that resulted in a deviation from the field method standards, the revised technique, and the rationale for its use. If consultation with the DOA was held concerning this variation, please include any correspondence with the DOA in a report appendix.
2. Laboratory Methods Discussion should include:
   • brief overview of procedures used to clean and conserve artifacts, specifically noting any variation from standard practice;
   • the references used for artifact identification and classification;
   • overview of any artifact analyses beyond identification and description;
   • criteria for discard of any material classes (following discussion with the collection manager where the collection will be curated).
3. Curation
   • Include a statement that designates which federally or state approved curation facility will be curating any recovered artifacts, field notes, and other relevant materials. If recovered artifacts are requested by landowners, this must be noted in the report. If the collection is to be curated at the DOA, please see our Curation Standards for more information. If the collection is from a Euroamerican site and will be curated at the DOA, an artifact culling plan may be developed in consultation with the DOA’s Collection Manager. The culling agreement should be included as an appendix.

F. Results Chapter

1. Provide a thorough and complete description of the investigations at each site.
2. Provide a comprehensive analysis of the artifacts, and the vertical and horizontal natural and cultural stratigraphy.
3. Discuss the cultural component(s) at each site, their spatial and vertical distribution, and assess their integrity.
4. If site-specific research questions were developed (Section IV.D.4), discuss them and the data developed to address them. If additional or modified research issues are identified during the analysis, discuss their development and interpretation.
5. For each site, state its recommended eligibility for nomination to the NR (citing each criterion), and discuss the characteristics of the site that the recommendation is based upon. This discussion should explicitly address the research design to the extent appropriate and any new questions or topics that arose during the excavation and analysis. Each site should be recommended as Eligible or Not Eligible. See the Section on NR Eligibility elsewhere in the Guidelines for more information on developing an eligibility recommendation. If the client has developed a proposal to avoid or minimize effects, provide the proposed avoidance/minimization plan here or in an appendix.
6. The chapter should include:
   • a map of each archaeological site showing topographical features, existing modern cultural features (e.g., structures, roads, ditches), the locations of all archaeological investigations such as additional shovel testing, test units, surface collection areas, auger testing, trenching, remote sensing, and large-scale block excavations. All maps must have a scale, north arrow, and legend.
   • representative profiles and plan views of each test unit, feature, and other excavations as appropriate should be photographed and/or illustrated in the report, and include a scale, Munsell color descriptions, and caption clearly identifying the illustrated provenience.
   • photographs and/or illustrations of representative diagnostic artifacts are strongly encouraged; include the provenience of each illustrated artifact in the caption. If there are numerous images with lengthy provenience lists, they can be included in an appendix. The appendix should include all artifact photo proveniences. A reference to the appendix should be included in each relevant caption.
   • a specialist’s report on specific material classes (botanical, faunal, etc., if undertaken) should be included either in the body of the report or in an appendix.
   • please include the laboratory report form for each radiometric sample in an appendix.

G. Conclusions Chapter

Succinctly summarize the results of investigations at each site investigated and the archaeological interpretations based on the data obtained. Clearly state the National Register eligibility recommendation for each site. The recommendation should address each of the National Register criteria and include the specific criteria that the recommendation is based upon. The DOA’s criteria for assessing eligibility are presented in the Louisiana Comprehensive Archaeological Plan and elsewhere on our website. Clearly explain the possible effect a proposed project will have on each site and make recommendations for additional work if appropriate. Discussion of strategies to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects to recommended eligible sites should be included to the extent they are known or can be anticipated.

H. References and Citations

References cited should use the Style Guide for the Society of American Archaeology. Please include the DOA report number when known.

I. Appendices

Information such as artifact inventories, radiocarbon analysis forms, correspondence, etc. may be included as a report appendix. If artifacts recovered during a project are returned to a property owner or owners, any correspondence or other related documents must be included in an appendix. If a culling agreement was implemented as part of the laboratory methodology, the culling plan should be included as an appendix. Site forms must not be included as an appendix to a report.

VI. Terrestrial Archaeological Site Phase III Data Recovery Reports

Phase III reports must include the following sections and information:

A. Front Matter

1. Report Cover
   • report title (with the phrase “Phase III” included),
   • the lead federal or state agency involved, as well as any other client,
   • the contractor performing the work,
   • the date of the report (month and year).
2. Title page
   • Report Title (including the phrase “Phase III”)
   • the author(s),
   • the date of the report (month and year),
   • the contracting firm and address,
   • the lead federal or state agency and address,
   • the agency contract/permit number, where applicable.
   • the client firm or agency and address, if different from e).
3. Abstract
   • One page maximum whenever possible. Include a brief summary of the project and project area, its size (acres), and the parish or parishes where the work was done. Summarize the results of the investigation. Include a statement that the investigation has mitigated the adverse effect to the site and no further work is recommended. The Abstract should also include a statement indicating which facility will curate the artifact collection, field notes, and other relevant materials. If the collection will be returned to the landowner(s), this should be noted here.
4. Table of Contents
   • Headings should duplicate verbatim those found in the text. The Table of Contents should use leader tabs (e.g.,……..) between the heading and page number. All appendix materials should be listed in the Table of Contents. Include page numbers on all pages.
5. List of Figures
   • Duplicate verbatim the first sentence of the captions of each figure in the text (excluding image permissions and citations). The List of Figures should use leader tabs between the figure caption and page number.
6. List of Tables
   • Duplicate verbatim the title of each table in the text. The List of Table should use leader tabs between the table title and page number. Tables should not use a font smaller than 8 point.
7. Preface or Acknowledgments
   • Include the names of the Principal Investigator and other archaeological personnel, and the funding and/or sponsoring agency. If the contracted firm is listed as the author, describe here the individual authors and their relative contributions.
8. Pagination
   • The pagination for the front matter must be in lower case Roman numerals. The pages for all final reports must be consecutively numbered in Arabic numerals. Pagination by chapter numbers (e.g. , 1-2, 3-5, 7-35 etc.) is acceptable for draft reports.

1. Outline the scope of work, including a project description and history, agencies involved, project setting and boundaries, purpose of the archaeological investigations, etc. List the dates of investigation. Provide a detail of a 7.5’ USGS topographic quadrangle map showing the location of the site[s] being investigated. All maps must include a scale, north arrow, and legend. Provide a synopsis of the report organization.

1. Discuss the cultural history of the time period(s) represented at the site(s) being investigated. Emphasis should be placed on information from 1) previous investigations at the site, and 2) contemporary sites that inform on how the investigated site(s) may be organized, types of features expected, nature of the deposits, function/purpose, etc. The review should focus on what is currently known from sites of this period and identify the significant gaps in our knowledge. The relevant sites may be located in the adjoining parishes, across the state, or in some cases outside Louisiana. For example, shipwrecks or institutional sites which have not been previously investigated in Louisiana will need to look regionally or nationally for relevant examples.
2. For post-contact sites, the Cultural Setting should include review of property records, census data, city directories, sewer and water board records, historic maps, and other documents that shed light on the individuals/businesses that occupied the property(s) being investigated. These records are critical to understanding the occupational history of the property, what archaeological deposits may be encountered, and what disturbances may have impacted those deposits.
3. Describe the research design and identify the issues and questions anticipated to be addressed through the site(s) investigation. The research design should draw upon the results of previous investigations at this site and at contemporary sites as identified in the Cultural Setting discussion. It should also reflect the relevant research themes identified in the Louisiana Comprehensive Archaeological Plan. The research design is not limited to these sources and should address other topics as appropriate to the site(s) and time period being investigated.

1. Describe the archaeological field methods used, including:
   • how the proposed investigation strategy enables the research design questions to be addressed;
   • location of test units, trenches, augers and other techniques and rationale for their placement;
   • size and excavation strategy for each technique, including screening, screen size, and excavation unit levels;
   • special sample collection strategy;
   • discussion of any conditions that resulted in a deviation from the field method standards, the revised technique, and the rationale for its use. If consultation with the DOA was held concerning this variation, please include any correspondence with the DOA in a report appendix.
2. Laboratory Methods
   • Discussion should include a brief overview of procedures used to clean and conserve artifacts, specifically noting any variation from standard practice;
   • the references used for artifact identification and classification;
   • overview of any artifact analyses beyond identification and description;
   • criteria for discarding of any material classes (following discussion with the collection manager where the collection will be curated).
3. Curation
   • Include a statement identifying which facility will be curating the recovered artifacts, field notes, and other relevant materials. If recovered artifacts are requested by landowners, this must be noted in the report. If the collection is to be curated at the DOA, please see our Curation Standards for more information. If the collection is from a Euroamerican site and will be curated at the DOA, an artifact culling plan may be developed in consultation with the DOA’s Collection Manager. The culling agreement should be included as an appendix.

1. Provide a thorough and complete description of the investigations.
2. Provide a comprehensive analysis of the artifacts, and the vertical and horizontal natural and cultural stratigraphy.
3. Discuss the cultural component(s) at the site, their spatial and vertical distribution, and assess their integrity.
4. Thoroughly discuss the research questions and the data developed to address them. If additional or modified research issues are identified during the analysis, discuss their development and interpretation. If the site represents a Euroamerican occupation, identify and discuss what was learned from the archaeological investigation that was not available from documentary sources.
5. The chapter should include:
   • a map of each archaeological site showing topographical features, existing cultural features (e.g., structures, roads, ditches), the locations of all archaeological investigations such as additional shovel testing, test units, surface collection areas, auger testing or soil probes, remote sensing, and large-scale block excavations. All maps must have a scale, north arrow, and legend.
   • representative profiles and plan views of each test unit, each feature, and other excavations as appropriate should be photographed and/or illustrated in the report, and include a scale, Munsell color descriptions, and caption clearly identifying the illustrated provenience.
   • photographs and/or illustrations of representative diagnostic artifacts are strongly encouraged; include the provenience of each illustrated artifact in the caption.
   • a specialist’s report on specific material classes (botanical, faunal, etc., if undertaken) should be included either in the body of the report or in an appendix.
   • please include the laboratory report form for each radiometric sample in an appendix.

VII. Terrestrial Management Summary Reports

A. Introduction

1. When time constraints compel a quicker completion of the Section 106 review process, the SHPO will accept a management summary for review. Management summaries hasten the review process by postponing the detailed analysis and interpretation elements of the archaeological report. Management summaries may be submitted to the DOA/DHP upon the completion of fieldwork, but only after prior consultation with the DOA/DHP.
2. Management Summaries are accepted for Phase I and Phase II projects. For Phase III projects, the DOA and/or DHP can provide a letter enabling the project to move forward once all the field investigations have been completed.
3. Management Summaries are not substitutes for draft or final reports. Investigators should consider comments made by DOA/DHP on management summaries when preparing the draft report.
4. All archaeological sites and standing structures addressed in a Management Summary must have archaeological site numbers assigned by the DOA, and standing structure numbers assigned by the DHP. Management summaries without site and structure numbers will not be reviewed.  If a Management Summary will be prepared, draft archaeological site forms can be submitted with the currently available information (including a site map, and general material classes recovered) and shapefiles in order to receive a site number. All site forms and standing structure forms must be finalized prior to submission of the complete draft report.
5. One bound copy and a pdf copy on disc/jumpdrive of the management summary must be submitted.

Management Summaries in letter format are not accepted. Management Summaries should include the following sections and information:

B. Front Matter

1. Report Cover
   • report title (with the phrase “Phase I” or “Phase II” included),
   • the lead federal or state agency involved, as well as any other client,
   • the contractor performing the work,
   • the date of the report (month and year).
2. Title page
   • Report Title (including the phrase “Phase I” or “Phase II”)
   • the author(s),
   • the date of the report (month and year),
   • the contracting firm and address,
   • the lead federal or state agency and address,
   • the agency contract/permit number, where applicable.
   • the client firm or agency and address, if different from e).
3. Abstract
   • One page maximum. Include a brief summary of the project and project area, its size (acres), and the parish or parishes where the work was done. Summarize the results and the National Register eligibility determination for each site investigated. Succinctly state any recommendations for additional work.
4. Table of Contents
   • Headings should duplicate verbatim those found in the text. The Table of Contents should use leader tabs (e.g.,……..) between the heading and page number. All appendix materials should be listed in the Table of Contents.
5. List of Figures
   • Duplicate verbatim the first sentence of the captions of each figure in the text (excluding image citations or permissions). The List of Figures should use leader tabs between the figure caption and page number.
6. List of Tables
   • Duplicate verbatim the title of each table in the text. The List of Table should use leader tabs between the table title and page number.
7. Preface or Acknowledgments
   • Include the names of the Principal Investigator and other archaeological personnel, and the funding and/or sponsoring agency. If the contracted firm is listed as the author, describe here the individual authors and their relative contributions.
8. Pagination
   • The pagination for the front matter must be in lower case Roman numerals. Pagination by chapter numbers (e.g. , 1-2, 3-5, 7-35 etc.) is acceptable for management summaries.

C. Introductory Chapter

1. provide an overview of the project, including size (in acres) of the PA/APE
2. briefly summarize the environmental setting
3. briefly summarize the cultural setting

D. Methods Chapter

1. for a Phase I Management Summary, include the information presented in the Phase I report guidelines.
2. for a Phase II Management Summary, include the information presented in the Phase II report guidelines.

E. Results Chapter

1. For Phase I projects, include the information presented in the Phase I report guidelines. Detailed discussion of the materials recovered, cultural and natural stratigraphy, and interpretations of the site is not required for the Management Summary. A thorough discussion of the recommended National Register eligibility addressing the issues outlined in the Phase I report guidelines must be included. If the client has developed a proposal to avoid or minimize effects, provide the proposed avoidance/minimization plan here or in an appendix.
2. For Phase II projects, include the information presented in the Phase II report guidelines. Detailed discussion of the materials recovered, cultural and natural stratigraphy, and interpretations of the site is not required for Management Summaries. A thorough discussion of the recommended National Register eligibility addressing the issues outlined in the Phase II report guidelines must be included.

F. Conclusions Chapter

Succinctly summarize the results of investigations at each site investigated and the archaeological interpretations based on the data obtained. Clearly state the National Register eligibility recommendation for each site. Clearly explain the possible effect a proposed project will have on each site and make recommendations for additional work if appropriate. Discussion of strategies to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects to recommended eligible sites should be included to the extent they are known or can be anticipated.

G. References and Citations

References cited should use the Style Guide for the Society of American Archaeology. Please include the DOA report number when known.

VIII. The Process for Terminated Projects

The SHPO encourages and expects the individual or firm contracting the archaeological work to ensure their contract provides for the results of any archaeological work undertaken up to the time the project is cancelled will be reported on and curated. This must include completion of all new and updated site forms, preparation of a report describing the work undertaken, and curation of all collected materials and associated records. It is not expected that an archaeological firm will complete this work without compensation.

Section 106 review, including assessments of standing structures and archaeological sites, typically begins at a project’s planning stage. On occasion, the project is cancelled before these reviews are completed, leaving the documentation of the archaeological work in limbo and the materials not analyzed or curated. If a report on the completed work is not provided to SHPO, then there is no evidence the work was undertaken, and SHPO will recommend archaeological investigations begin anew if and when the property is selected for a subsequent project.

Section 306131(a)(1)(C) of the National Historic Preservation Act requires the federal agency to ensure that all collections and associated records (including site forms and the project report) for any Section 106 project to be curated. This section and the accompanying 36CFR800 regulations obligate the agency/company contracting the archaeological investigation to provide sufficient funding to complete the report and curation for the investigations conducted to date. It does not obligate the agency/company to undertake any further proposed and/or planned archaeological investigations or analysis within the project area beyond those completed at the time the project is cancelled.