Current through Register Vol. 35, No. 18, September 24, 2024
Evaluate each property identified during the survey in
conformance with this section and document in the technical report and on the
LA archaeological site record or HCPI form. Depending on the complexity and
scale of the project, present evaluations in both narrative and tabular
form.
A. Apply the criteria for
integrity and significance to evaluate each property over 50 years old
identified during the survey pursuant to 36 CRF Part 60.4. Identify the
property as a district, site, building, structure or object. Indicate whether
the property should be listed on the state register or should be determined as
eligible for national register listing. Properties less than 50 years old
should be evaluated if it is apparent that they will be eligible for the state
or national registers within 5 years of the date of survey. Properties less
than 50 years old that may be eligible for inclusion in the national register
based on exceptional significance should be evaluated using national register
criteria consideration G. If a property has been previously nominated for
either the state or national registers, discuss the register status of the
property.
B. Significance
statement. Prepare a clear statement of significance for each archaeological
site, historic structure or building, or other cultural property identified
during the project. Indicate the level of significance as local, state or
national and include in the technical report.
(1) If the cultural property is recommended
as not significant or not eligible for listing, provide a clear discussion and
complete documentation to support the recommendation. For archaeological sites,
the discussion shall demonstrate that the site has been thoroughly studied,
that surface artifacts and features have been recorded and that sufficient
subsurface tests have been performed to support a conclusion that the site is
unlikely to contribute important information. The lack of subsurface deposits
is not in itself sufficient to support a recommendation that a site is not
significant or not eligible. If the cultural property is from the historic
period, provide basic archival documentation to augment field information and
support the significance evaluation.
(2) If the cultural property is recommended
as significant or eligible for listing, provide evidence supporting its
significance including reference to historic contexts and scholarly research in
the region. Include a specific, evidence-based argument, linked to specific
research topics and characteristics (historic values) observed. The
recommendation shall be documented on the LA archaeological site record, HCPI
form or other HPD-approved inventory form. For archaeological sites provide
detailed descriptions of the types and numbers of surface artifacts and the
types and numbers of features visible on the surface or in arroyos or road
cuts. The presence of a large artifact scatter or the potential for subsurface
deposits is not sufficient information to support an eligibility recommendation
without additional discussion. If the cultural property is historic, include
the results of archival research to support the evaluation.
(3) Survey data alone may not be sufficient
to evaluate the property. For archaeological sites, it may be necessary to
conduct more extensive test excavations, beyond survey-level study and limited
tests, to gather sufficient information to evaluate the specific research
potential to support a recommendation for listing or not listing the property
on the state or national registers. Additional archival research and detailed
documentation may be necessary to evaluate the specific potential and criteria
for historic structures, buildings and engineering features. Provide a clear
explanation that details the need for additional information. Document the
recommendation on the LA archaeological site record, the HCPI form or other
HPD-approved inventory form.
