Attachment 4 - AMDP_Tinian NFHD Rehab_Ph1n2.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND MARIANAS

PSC 455, BOX 195

FPO AP 96540-2937

IN REPLY REFER TO:

Ser EV24/700

04 JAN 24

Mr. John Palacios Acting- CNMI Historic Preservation Officer Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Historic Preservation Department of Community and Cultural Affairs P.O. Box 500090 Airport Road Saipan, MP 96950

Subject: ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING AND DISCOVERY PLAN IN SUPPORT OF

PHASE 1 AND 2 OF THE ADAPTIVE REHABILITATION OF THE NORTH FIELD

HISTORIC DISTRICT (NFHD) RUNWAYS, TINIAN, COMMONWEALTH OF THE

NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS (CNMI)

Håfa Ådai Mr. Palacios, Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command Marianas (NAVFAC MAR) is providing your office with the Archaeological Monitoring and Discovery Plan (AMDP) for Phases I and II of the Adaptive Rehabilitation of the Tinian North Field Historic District

(NFHD).

We value your support in our efforts to continue carrying out the Department of

Defense’s responsibility regarding the stewardship of CNMI cultural resources. Should you have any questions or require additional information, my point of contact regarding this matter is Megan Hawkins at megan.t.hawkins2.civ@us.navy.mil or (671) 349-3016.

Sincerely, Dana T. Lujan Acting Environmental Director By Direction

Enclosure 1: AMDP in Support of Phases 1 and 2 of the Adaptive Rehabilitation of North Field Historic District (NFHD) Runways, Tinian, Commonwealth of the Northern Marians Islands mailto:megan.t.hawkins2.civ@us.navy.mil

-Final-

Archaeological Monitoring and Discovery Plan in Support of Adaptive

Rehabilitation of North Field Historic District (NFHD) Runways, Tinian, Commonwealth of the Northern Marians Islands

Prepared by:

Anthony L. Arcane MSc

Prepared for:

Department of the Air Force

Pacific Air Forces (PACAF/A4C)

25 E. Street, Suite G-214.

Joint Base Pearl Harbor – Hickam

Hawaii 96853

Under Contract to:

Viakorp

333 Office Square Ln Ste 103 Virginia Beach, VA, 23462

January 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………….II

List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………………...II

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations…………………………………………………………….III

I.INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………

Project Description……………………………………………………………………

Activities Overview……………………………………………………………………….2

Equipment…………………………………………………………………………………2

Area of Potential Effect (APE)……………………………………………………………2

Organizational Framework…..……………………………………………………………3

II. BACKGROUND……………………………………………………………………………….7

Natural Environment of Tinian……………………………………………………………7

Cultural Context of Tinian………………………………………………………………...9

Pre-Latte Period………………………………………………………

Latte Period…………………………………………………………

Pre-Colonial European Trade Period……………………………………..……...13

Spanish Colonial Period………………………………………………………….13

German Colonial Period…….…………………………………………………...14

Japanese Occupation Period……………………………………………………..14

World War II and the American Territorial Period………….…………………..15

Previous Archaeological Investigations………………………….……………………

Tinian North Field Historic District (TN-6-0424)…….…………………………………20

Expectations…………………………………………………………………………..….26

III. RESEARCH QUESTIONS………………………………………………………………….27

IV. ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING……………………………………………………..29

V. DISCOVERY PLAN…………………………………………………………………………31

IV. REPORT PREPARATION AND PROJECT DELIVERABLES…………………………...34

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………..36

FORMS…………………………………………………………………………………………..41

Daily Cultural Monitoring Form…………………………………………………………41

Feature Description Form………………………………………………………………..42

IO Description Form……………………………………………………………………..43

APPENDIX A: Site Safety and Health Plan……………………………………………………..45

APPENDIX B: Training Records………………………………………………………………..72

APPENDIX C: Activity Hazard Analysis……………………………………………………….76

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Page

Table 1: Tinian Chronology and Landscape Transformation……………………………...……10

Table 2: Previous Archaeological Studies and Investigations within the AMDP APE………….19

Table 3: Inventory of Contributing Cultural Landscape Features within the North Field………23

Table 4: Deliverable and Due Date(s)…………………………………………………………...34

Figure 1. Overview of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands…………………….4

Figure 2. North Field Adaptive Rehabilitation, APE, Tinian……………………………………...5

Figure 3. Vegetation Clearing and Pavement Repair APE, Charlie and Delta Runway…………..6

Figure 4. Physiographic zones of Tinian……………………………………………………….…8

Figure 5. Previously conducted surveys within and around the APE……………………………17

Figure 6. Previously recorded archaeological sites and cultural resources within and around the

APE……………………………………………………………………………………………

LIST OF IMPORTANT ACRONYMS

Archaeological Monitoring and Discovery Plan (AMDP)

Archaeological Protection Act (ARPA)

Area of Potential Effect (APE)

CNMI State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)

Commander Joint Region Marianas (CJRM)

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)

Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

Cultural Resource Management (CRM)

Department of the Navy (DON)

Exclusive Military Use Area (EMUA)

Integrated Cultural Resource Management Plan (ICRMP)

Contracting Officer (KO)

National Historic Landmark (NHL)

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

North Field Historic District (NFHD)

Military Leased Area (MLA)

Pacific Air Force Agile Combat Employment Program Management Office - (PACEPMO)

Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs)

Page | 1

I. INTRODUCTION

The Pacific Air Force Agile Combat Employment Program Management Office

(PACEPMO) is initiating a comprehensive adaptive rehabilitation project for the airfield pavement surfaces encompassing the Tinian North Field Historic District (NFHD), as illustrated in Figure 2.

The primary objective of this undertaking is to methodically restore the runways within the Tinian

NFHD to their 1945 configuration, concurrently modernizing the airfield to accommodate cutting-edge aircraft. The proposed activities are located within a National Historic Landmark (NHL). As a result, this undertaking is subject to 36 CFR 800.10(a). In accordance with this regulation, the agency and project proponent will undertake such planning and actions necessary to minimize harm that could befall the Tinian NFHD and minimize activities that would directly and adversely impact the NFHD. The agreement specifically necessitates monitoring during the initial ground disturbance phase. Furthermore, all project activities are required to align with the guidelines set forth in the Antiquities Act of 1906, the Archaeological Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979, and the implementing regulations of ARPA (32 CFR Part 229). An assessment of the project's impact has determined that it will have "No Adverse Effect" on the adjacent archaeological site(s).

Archaeological monitoring is being conducted as a result of the consultation with the CNMI HPO and in accordance with 36 CFR 800.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This rehabilitation initiative encompasses mechanical vegetation clearance from designated roads and airfield surfaces within the NFHD runways in Tinian, Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands. The project involves selective repair and maintenance and is structured into Phases I and Phase II.

Phase I will consist of vegetation removal and surveys of the hard surfaces of the airfield and will include: clearing surface vegetation from runways Able, Baker, Charlie, Delta, and associated parking aprons, and transportation of green waste to stockpile locations. Small bore holes (1-inch) will be drilled into the pavement at 500’ intervals to conduct geotechnical studies

(i.e., Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Sustainment Evaluation) to determine the structural capabilities of the airfield pavement and underlying subbase below. Soil samples will be collected from 6-inch x 6-inch surface holes through the overlying pavement (3 per runway, 1 per taxiway, and 1 per parking apron). Soil will be collected to depths of up to 9 feet (ft) using a 3.25-inch diameter sampler head. This information will better facilitate the rehabilitation design. The removal of vegetation will be conducted using mowers, graders, dozers, mulching machines, compact track loaders (CTL), excavators, front end loaders, dump trucks, and kick broom sweepers. The removal of vegetation will start by the removal of brush from the pavement with graders and dozers. The brush will then be loaded with mechanical equipment (such as excavators), into dump trucks and transported to the green waste stockpile location at the western end of Runway Charlie once it has been cleared and undergoes final disposal. The subsequent construction phases outlined below cannot begin until the vegetation has been removed and the area can be surveyed for construction.

Phase II will consist of tent construction for a 250-man Expeditionary Base Bed-down on the North Sub-service apron. There will be two types of tents at the Base Bed-down: Small Shelter

Systems (SSS) and Medium Shelter Systems (MSS). SSS tents have dimensions of 32.5’ (L) x 20’

Page | 2

(W) x 10’ (H) and can accommodate 8-12 personnel per tent. The base frame will be held down by 32 stakes around the perimeter and 6 stakes per side to anchor guy ropes 4 -ft from the base walls (3 ft for MSS). MSS dimensions are 52’ (L) x 29.5’ (W) x 15’ (H) and will accommodate work centers and shops. The base frame will be held down by 32 stakes around the perimeter and

8 on each end wall. Tent construction will require the installation of tent stakes into the apron pavement at a depth of 18 inches and trenching for utilities. The proposed trench will measure no larger than 54’’ (W) x 30’’(D) (burying cables for a temporary bed-down is not required).

Generators for each tent will have a ground rod with a depth of 10 ft and a diameter of ¾ - 1 inches.

Vegetation clearing, selective access road repair, and maintenance will span approximately

15 miles of the roadway access along Broadway, Boston Post Road, 8th Avenue, Lenox Avenue, and 86th Street. Selective access road repair will consist of temporarily filling potholes in the road as they develop, either with base course or asphalt, depending on the availability of material.

ACTIVITIES OVERVIEW

Rehabilitation of NFHD runways will involve the following activities:

• Operating heavy equipment.

• Repairing existing access roads, only as needed.

• Clearing vegetation.

• Transportation of removed vegetation.

• Construction of tents (for 250-man Expeditionary Base Bed-down).

• Installation of tent stakes into the apron pavement.

• Minimal ground disturbance power utility trench that will power the Expeditionary Base

Bed-down (a 3- ft maximum depth).

• Topographic survey to record the elevation of the selected area.

• Drilling of 1 - inch diameter holes into the pavement (for Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

Sustainment Evaluation).

• Soil samples will be collected from 6-inch x 6-inch surface holes through the overlying pavement (3 per runway, 1 per taxiway, and 1 per parking apron). Soil will be collected to depths of up to 9 ft using a 3.25-inch diameter sampler head.

EQUIPMENT

Typical equipment for the rehabilitation NFHD runways including the following:

• Mowers

• Graders

• Dozers

• Mulching machines

• Compact track loaders (CTL)

• Excavators

• Front end loaders

• Dump trucks

• Kick broom sweepers

AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT (APE)

Page | 3

The APE is within the Military Leased Area (MLA) on Tinian and consists of the complete extent in which the undertaking has the potential to cause alterations, either directly or indirectly, in the character or use of historic properties (Figure 2). The total area of the APE spans 660 acres

(ac) and it extends from Able, Baker, Charlie, and Delta runways inclusive of associated features such as taxiways, aprons, and keyholes. The APE follows the road on Boston Post Road, transitioning into Broadway to the south of the Unai Dankulo Road intersection, progressing along

86th Street to the east, then north along 8th Avenue, then connecting to Lenox Avenue via

Riverside Drive, continuing along the road north of the runways and bomb pits, and eventually looping back around the east perimeter of the National Historic Landmark (NHL). A 5-meter (16-foot) buffer, extending from the periphery of the project footprint, will be incorporated into the

APE to provide additional spatial coverage.

ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK

The remainder of this AMDP is organized as follows. The first section provides a project overview. The second section presents the natural and historical background of Tinian, a review of previous archaeological projects and cultural resources near the proposed project area. The third section presents research questions that will guide monitoring. The fourth section summarizes field and laboratory procedures. The fifth section summarizes report preparation and project deliverables. The sixth section is the Discovery Plan. The seventh section is the Field Safety Plan.

The final section lists references cited.

Page | 4

Figure 1: Overview of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (Bodner and Welch

1992: Figure 2)

Page | 5

Figure 2: North Field Adaptive Rehabilitation, APE, Tinian (NAVFAC)

Page | 6

Figure 3:Vegetation Clearing and Pavement Repair APE, Charlie and Delta Runway (NAVFAC)

Page | 7

II. BACKGROUND

The following section provides background information for this archaeological monitoring project. It consists of a description of the natural environment, an overview of the history of Tinian and previous archaeological projects in the area. Condensed consultation documents for the proposed project, JRM Integrated Cultural Resource Management Plan (ICRMP) dated 2015, Carlson (2012, 2016), Dixon et al. (2021), Simonds et al. (2023), Farrell (2018), and previous reports/studies regarding Tinian and the North Airfield, provide information for the background research.

NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Tinian, the second-largest island within the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana

Islands (CNMI) with a total land mass of 39.2 square miles, is located approximately 100 miles north of Guam. Tinian lies towards the southern end of the Mariana Islands, situated between

Aguigan and Saipan. Part of the Mariana Archipelago, a chain of islands approximately 1,500 miles long, Tinian is one of 14 islands located in the North Pacific Ocean.

The NFHD rehabilitation project area is situated on the island of Tinian. Tinian's topographical features are classified into five primary physiographic areas (Gingerich 2000). The

NFHD project encompasses three of these zones, the Central Plateau, the North-Central Highland, and the Northern Lowland. The Central Plateau extends northward and comprises all of the central and a portion of the northern part of Tinian. The Central Plateau is large and moderately sloping, with the greatest topographic variation around its borders with the Median Valley and the Northern

Lowland. The North-Central Highland rises in the northern part of the Central Plateau, approximately halfway between the east and west coasts. The North-Central Highland's highest point, at 545 ft, is only surpassed in height by the Southeastern Ridge.

Except for Hagoi Lake, which is near sea level, the Northern Lowland is mainly flat and around 100 ft above sea level. Ground water supplies two wetland areas around sea level. Hagoi

Paoe is a fresh to brackish body of water surrounded by marsh in the Northern Lowland. During the wet season, the area of open water can stretch for half a mile and then shrink to a marsh with little open water during the dry season. The Median valley's Marpo marsh is a wetland with a small area of shallow open water (Gingerich 2000).

Page | 8

Figure 4: Physiographic zones of Tinian (Gingerich 2000: Figure 1)

Page | 9

Tinian is composed of coralline and algal limestone, with volcanic tuff and breccias on top.

Tinian has two primary limestone formations: Mariana and Tagpochau (Young 1989). The

Mariana Limestone covers 83% of Tinian. The Mariana Limestone is a friable limestone that originated during the Pliocene-Pleistocene period (Tracey et al. 1964). The Tagpochau Limestone is a recrystallized fractured limestone fragment developed during the early Miocene epoch that covers 15% of Tinian (Young 1989). Soils in the project area are characterized as a Chinen-Urban

Formation and Dandan-Chinen Complex. The Chinen-Urban is a shallow well drained clay encountered at depths ranging from 0 to 66 cm. The soil profile consists of clay A horizon, ranging from 0 to 12 cm, a clay Bt horizon, ranging from 12 cm to 66 cm, and a bedrock 2R horizon, ranging up to 76 cm in depth. In the Chinen-Urban clay loam deposits, as indicated by Simonds et

al. (2023), potential surface scatters and shallow subsurface deposits are observable within the surface layer and upper portion of the subsoil characterized by dark brown clay. However, such occurrences are not evident in the deeper subsoil composed of yellowish-red clay loam. Dandan-

Chinen is characterized by a shallow well drained clay A/Bt horizon, ranging from 0 to 18 cm, a clay loam Bt horizon, ranging from 18 cm to 35 cm, and a bedrock 2R horizon, ranging up to 46 cm in depth. Within the Dandan-Chinen complex, archaeological deposits could potentially exist in the surface layer and upper section of the subsoil, distinguished by dark brown clay. Conversely, the lower subsoil, characterized by dark reddish-brown clay, is likely to be archaeologically sterile, as reported by Simonds et al. (2023).

The vegetation composition within the project area encompasses distinct ecological communities classified by the U.S. Forest Service as Tangantangan and Casuarina Forest.

Tangantangan, predominantly found on limestone substrates, is characterized by the prevalence of the non-native tangantangan tree. In addition to the project area, Tangantangan forests dominate the northern regions of the island. Casuarina forests, native to the Mariana Islands, are typified by ironwood or Australian pine trees, which are utilized for timber, fuel, and craft wood.

These forests often thrive in shrub and grass habitats, occasionally forming sparse woodlands.

The accumulation of dense layers of needle-like branches on the ground impedes the growth and reproduction of other plant species in the immediate vicinity. It is pertinent to note that the current vegetation in the project area primarily constitutes secondary growth (shrubs, small trees, and vines on disturbed surfaces) resulting from extensive land modifications initiated during

World War II (WWII) (Falanruw et al. 1989).

CULTURAL CONTEXT

The Rehabilitation project is located within the NFHD. This section summarizes archaeological and historical information for the NFHD, Tinian, and the Northern Mariana Islands.

Archaeological research at NFHD and the surrounding areas of Tinian has identified evidence of the Pre-Latte Period (1,500 BCE – 800 CE), the Latte Period (800 CE – 1521), the Spanish

Colonial Period (1700 CE – 1898); the German Period (1899 -1941); the Japanese Occupation

Period (1941 – 1944); and the American Territorial Period (1945 – 1950).

Page | 10

Table 1: Tinian Chronology and Landscape Transformation

Era Period/Event Date(s) Note

Pre-Contact Settlement in ca. 1280-1135 BCE;

original settlers.

ca. 1500 - 900

BCE

Original major human transformation of the Tinian landscape, two phases:

settlement and village development, with agriculture development, followed by expansion.

Early Unai Period

ca. 1500 - 900

BCE

First major human transformation, first phase: Coastal settlements based on marine resources, taro, and coconut.

Middle Unai Period 900 - 400 BCE Little use of near-coastal inland areas

Late Unai Period

400 BCE - 400

CE

Increased movement into interior areas.

Huyong (Transitional) Period 400 - 1000 CE Agricultural intensification.

Latte Period 800 - 1521 CE

First major human transformation, second phase: Beginning of latte construction and introduction of rice.

Pre-Colonial

European

Trade Period

Spanish discovery of the Marianas;

infrequent Spanish contact.

1521 - 1668

Spanish

Colonial Period Marianas clamed for Spain. 1565 - 1898

Beginning of the Manila galleon trade. 1568

Spanish settlement of Guam. 1668

Limited Spanish settlement on Tinian;

Father Alonso Lopez constructs government house on Tinian; Spanish defeated Tinian rebels.

1670-1700

Chamorro removed from Tinian;

island depopulated. Tinian stocked with cattle.

Second major human transformation of the landscape as traditional site occupation is truncated; depopulated

Tinian becomes a "ranch", which lasts for around 200 years.

Carolinian family established on

Tinian.

1805 - 1818

Tinian established as isolation settlement for people with Hansen's

Disease; Spanish install mayor on island; Sunharon village established;

New Carolinian settlement established with 230 residents; Carolinians removed from Tinian in 1889.

1836 - 1889

Page | 11

Era Period/Event Date(s) Note

German

Colonial Period

Spanish - American War, Guam acquired by the U.S.; German acquired the Northern Mariana

Islands; German administration.

1899 - 1914

Japanese

Occupation

Period

WWI, Japan acquires the islands of

Micronesia; Micronesia Mandate created by League of Nations, governed by Japan; NKK established on Saipan and Tinian.

1914 - 1939

Third major transformation of the

Tinian landscape, majority of the island is converted to sugarcane cultivation.

Japan establish Naval Air Facilities and construct defenses and war refuge.

1939 - 1944

Various areas of the Tinian landscape are converted to air bases and defense facilities, not a transformation but an augmentation of landscape pattern.

American

Territorial

Period

U.S. land on Tinian and overrun

Japanese defenses; POW camp established, and U.S. cemetery created; U.S. military facilities are constructed (airfields, camps, and defenses); civilians interned

1944 - 1950

Fourth major transformation of the

Tinian landscape, burning of vegetation and destruction of military/civilian structures. Fifth major transformation, earth-moving and extensive U.S. airfield and facilities construction.

Japanese civilians repatriated from

Tinian; U.S. closure of Tinian for military use; Trust Territory of the

Pacific Islands (TTPI) formed;

Chamorro resettlement of Tinian in

Old San Jose; Korean War and

Vietnam U.S. Naval Air activities.

1945 - 1953

Sixth major transformation of the

Tinian landscape: structure demolition, foundations, roads, and runways abandoned to the environment.

CNMI established in 1976 1953 - Present Farmlands occupy most of the rural lands on Tinian.

Pre-Latte Period (1,500 BCE – 800 CE)

The Pre-Latte Period occurred from 1500 BCE until approximately 800 – 1000 CE, when monumental architecture in the form of latte structures began to be constructed on the islands.

Based on the analysis of pottery characteristics, the Pre-Latte Period can be divided into four phases: Early Unai, Middle Unai, Late Unai, and Huyong. For further information on the delineations, refer to Moore (2002).

The Early Unai Phase (1500 – 900 BCE) is the period attributed to the early settlement of the Mariana Islands. Ceramic assemblages during the Early Unai Phase are distinguished by thin-walled calcareous sand-tempered (CST) and red-slipped pottery (termed Marianas Red). Although usually undecorated, a small number of sherds from this phase are decorated with geometric designs, Achugao and San Roque Incised types. Artifacts dating to this period include flaked chert, ground stone, bone and shell implements, and ornaments manufactured from Cypraea and Conus

(Carlson 2016: 153). Archaeological middens are also present during this phase in the form of an

Page | 12 abundance of Anadara shellfish remains. Generally, Early Unai sites have been discovered at coastal locations (some up 100 m inland of the current coastline). As of yet, there are no identified

Early Unai sites in the central areas of Tinian.

The Middle Unai Phase (900 – 400 BCE) was a period distinguished by the predominance of Marianas Red pottery and slightly larger vessels than its predecessor. The ceramic marker for this phase is a bold-line, lime-filled decorated pottery called Ipao Stamped. Shell beads became coarser and less refined during this phase as well. The use of interior areas of Tinian began in the

Middle Unai Phase with archaeological evidence indicating that people brought food resources from the shore inland (middens with fish bones, turtle carapace, and marine shells) (Dixon et al.

2010). However, the majority of sites associated with this phase have been discovered in rock shelters and caves near Tinian’s coastlines.

The Late Unai Phase (400 BCE – 400 CE) is distinguished by thick-walled sherds from huge vessels. The application of Ipo Stamped sherds are less prevalent and finally disappear from the archaeological record during this phase (Carson 2016, Butler 1995). During this stage, the most popular type of decoration is impressing and stamping on vessel lips (a technique occurring rarely).

CST or a mix of calcareous and volcanic sands (MST) is the most frequent temper. Large Conus spp. beads and bangles were found during this era. During this time, Middle Unai sites were still occupied. However, new sites are found along the coast, with a modest shift away from the near coastline areas and toward land-based resources. Longer-lasting communities also spread into the island's interior, most likely following the major river valleys (Carlson 2016).

The Huyong Phase (400 – 1000 CE) is distinguished by the absence of Middle Unai ceramic forms and lime-filled impressed and incised decorations (Butler 1995, Moore 1983).

Instead, vessels with more rounded bottoms emerge rather than flat-bottomed bowls.

Hemispherical bowls of varying sizes with thicker rims were common during this phase, along with the use of volcanic sand temper or mixed volcanic and calcareous sand temper. The presence of hemispherical bowls likely displays a shift in cooking techniques (Moore et al. 1992). During this phase, surface and subsurface scatters of ceramics and midden have been reported in both coastal and inland settings of Tinian.

Latte Period (800 – 1521 CE)

The interior of Tinian is occupied by the Marpo Valley. Due to the fertility and abundance of fresh surface water, Marpo Valley is a major archaeological area. During the Latte period, settlements expanded into areas outside of the optimal coastal environments. Archaeological sites associated with this period (800 – 1521 CE) are more abundant than Pre-Latte sites throughout the

Marianas Islands and are present throughout all environmental settings. The Latte period is distinguished from the Pre-Latte period by the presence of latte sets or stone structures (Carlson

2012). The larger of the stone structures date to around 1450 – 1650 CE and the smaller structures date to 800-1300 CE (Russell 1998). Haligi are large upright stone pillars topped by a semi-hemispherical tasa (capstone). Haligi would be placed in two parallel rows forming a single latte set. Undisturbed latte sites generally consist of clusters of up to 18 structures forming hamlets and villages. Additionally, burials are often associated with latte sets. Individuals were buried beneath the structure within the area demarcated by haligi. Latte sites are generally found on beach berms

Page | 13 and on low marine terraces behind coastlines. Stone artifacts such as chisels, gouges, slingstones, mortars, scrapers, knives, and debitage. Shell and bone artifacts such as – are often associated with this phase.

Pre-Colonial European Trade Period (1521 – 1668)

The first European to sight the Marianas was Magellan, in 1521. Tinian itself was likely sighted next by Gonzalo Gomez de Espinosa in 1522 in his attempt to reach Panama following the death of Magellan, on board the ship Trinidad (Rogers et al. 1989). With the fleet under command of Gomez de Espinosa, Gonzalo de Vigo, a member of the Espinosa fleet, deserted on Maug. De

Vigo lived on Rota several years before being picked up in Guam by the Loaísa expedition in 1526

(Russell 1998). Following De Vigo’s report that the Chamorro people valued iron, the Loaísa expedition established a trade of iron for fresh water and food for six days. In 1565, following a two week stay in Guam, Miguel López de Legazpi’s voyage would establish the Manila Galleon trade route. The Chamorros and Spanish would trade, but frequent episodes of violence would occur. Despite Legazpi later claiming the islands for Spain, the Spanish wouldn’t attempt to colonize the islands for over a century (Russell 1998). The islands would frequently be visited by

English and Dutch ships. The Manila Galleons traveling from Mexico to Manila in the Philippines, would stop in the Marianas. Iron objects such as nails, knives, hatchets, scissors, and hop iron would be traded to the Chamorros for fresh water and food (Russell 1998; Driver 1983).

Spanish Colonial Period (1668 – 1898)

After European contact, in 1565, Spain established colonial possession of Guam and the surrounding Northern Mariana Islands. The first Spanish contacts with Tinian were from shipwrecks off the islands coast. Having jumped ship in 1602, Missionary Frey Juan Pobre de

Zamora, reported that Diego de Llerena survived the wreck of Manila galleon Santa Margarita and was sold into slavery on Tinian in 1602 (Driver 1983). In 1683, the galleon Nuestra Senora de la Concepcion went down three miles from Tinian, and reportedly, Don Marco Fernandez de

Corcuera, nephew of the governor of the Philippines, was rescued by Chief Taga. Taga would later be baptized by Corcuera and become the first Christian of Tinian (Hezel 1982).

Despite the establishment of Spanish settlements in coastal areas and trading with Spanish settlers for materials, the majority of the Chamorro population continued to utilize Latte Period sites (Reinman 1977; Henry et al. 1998). In 1671, Frey Alonzo Lopez constructed the first government house (palacio) near San Jose Village. The house would serve as a seminary for children. A large number of Tinian residents converted to the new religion, but many rebelled against following its doctrine. In 1684, the Spanish garrison and supporting facilities were destroyed. The garrison was replaced, and facilities were rebuilt in 1690 (Farrell 2011). With

Guam in possession, Spain sought to extend control to the Northern Mariana Islands, starting the

Spanish – Chamorro War (Hezel 2015). While most of the Spanish forces were extending control in the north, Guam erupted into rebellion. Meanwhile, Tinian and Saipan united to attack Spanish forces lead by Quiroga on Saipan. Following his escape after a siege, Quiroga sailed to Guam where he sought to extinguish the rebellion. The Spanish did not attempt to extend its control of the northern islands again until 1694. Quiroga captured Saipan and faced an entrenched defense on Tinian (Hezel 2015). After defeating the forces on Tinian, Quiroga forcefully relocated the

Page | 14 population of Tinian to Guam, known as the “Reduccion”. The “Reduccion” forced the indigenous populations of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands into six villages in Guam (Agat, Hagatna, Inarajan, Merizo, Pago, and Talofofo) (Bowers 1950). The final phase of the Spanish – Chamorro

War consisted of a military expedition against eight small islands at the northern end of the

Marianas in 1698. After two centuries of rule during the Spanish Colonial Period, between 40,000 and 73,000 inhabitants were reduced to 600 in 1825 (Bowers 1950). At the end of the Spanish period, the population was 95. Latte sets continued to be built during this period. Spanish-introduced materials found at sites attributed to this period including iron, fragmented glass, bones of cattle, pig, sheep and deer, and maize. The Spanish did not leave a lasting architectural or cultural imprint on Tinian (Bowers 1950).

German Colonial Period (1899 – 1914)

In 1899, Germany acquired Tinian following U.S. victory in the Spanish-American War.

The Mariana Islands, apart from Guam, were sold to Germany (James 2015; Rhodes 1986). While

Japanese trading companies dominated trade in the Marianas during the acquisition period, German colonial administrators implemented comprehensive educational, economic, and social policies that fundamentally altered the trajectory of the Northern Mariana Islands thereafter

(Spenneman 2007). Attempting to develop a cash based agricultural economy based on copra production, Coconut trees were planted on Saipan and the smaller islands (Fritz 1989). However, following the destruction of the coconut plantations to two typhoons in 1905, Germany considered the endeavor a failure. The agricultural trials were specifically concentrated on Saipan, Medenilla, Guguan, and Uracas, with limited information available regarding the extent of agricultural practices conducted on Tinian (Spenneman 2007). In 1907, the islands were combined with Palaus and the western Carolinas into a single district, with headquarters on Yap. Proving to be climatically unstable, Germany steered away from investing into public administrative infrastructure and the German presence on Tinian would be close to non-existent (Spenneman

2007). A single administration building was constructed in the Sanhuron and would later be converted into a police station by the Japanese (Farrell 1992). No permanent settlements were established on Tinian and no further German administration sites have been documented on Tinian

(Spenneman 1999; Welch and Tuggle 2008).

Japanese Occupation Period (1914 – 1944)

In 1914, following Britain’s declaration of war on Germany, Japan declared war on

Germany as well. Japanese naval squad seized control of Saipan and Tinian, along with other

German possessions in Micronesia. Although the Japanese developed large-scale sugarcane production for trade on Saipan in 1922, Japanese occupation was best developed on Tinian. Tinian was divided into rectangular plots, 6 hectares each (14.7 ac). These plots were leased by tenant farmers. In 1926, Tinian was leased to the Japanese company, Nan’yō Kōhatsu Kaisha or South

Seas Development Company (NKK), with the purpose of developing Tinian into a major sugar cane producer (Prefer 2012). By 1930, the NKK had cleared land for sugar cane cultivation, organized factories, imported laborers, constructed Shinto shrines, and constructed railways to the sugar mill (Welch and Bodner 2015). In 1931, there were around six thousand residents on Tinian, all engaged in aspects of sugar cane production. Sugar cane fields occupied 80% of the arable land on Tinian (Bowers 1950). In 1939, the Japanese military initiated large-scale infrastructure

Page | 15 development on the island, serving as a precursor to the onset of World War II (WWII). Ushi Point

Airfield would be constructed along with a 4,750 – foot runway, steel hangers, administrative buildings, storage facilities, and a power plant (Prefer 2012). 8,350 soldiers were brought to Tinian and served to operate defensive positions. By 1944, the Chamorro population accounted for 26 of

17,900 civilians on Tinian (most being Japanese, Okinawan, and Korean) (Dixon et al. 2021).

Later in 1944, with rising tensions between the United States and Japan, barracks, air raid shelters, and Hagoi Airfield would be constructed. A third airfield would start to be constructed at Kahet, but it was never completed (Dixon and Welch 2002).

World War II and the American Territorial Period (1944 – 1950)

Following the surprise attack on the U.S. Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii late 1941, the U.S. declared war on Japan. Following the destruction of 150 Japanese planes by U.S. forces on Saipan and the 43-day pre-invasion bombardment of Tinian, the U.S. would land on Tinian in

July of 1944, initiating Phase III of Operation Forager and Phase II of Operation Tattersalls (Farrell

2018). Phase II of Operation Tattersall encompassed the capture and development of Tinian into a forward operating base for the U.S. Army Air Force. Having landed on White Beach 1 (Unai

Babui) and White Beach 2 (Unai Chulu), U.S. forces launched a surprise offensive maneuver on

Japanese defenses and limited U.S. casualties. Although the U.S. launched a successful surprise attack, the U.S. suffered 1,900 casualties and 318 deaths in the battle for Tinian (Hoffman 1951).

Once the U.S. was able to seize Tinian by August, reconstruction of already existing Tinian airfields for the B-29s (Boeing Superfortress Bombers) began. Tinian Town was almost entirely destroyed at the end of the conflict, and the island's rural infrastructure suffered significant damage after napalm clearing (Dixon and Welch 2002).

12,500 U.S. Seabees would build a seaport in what is now San Jose to host 20,000 airmen who were scheduled to arrive on Tinian for further war support. To build the runways and roads, coral was mined and blasted. What would later become Runway Able, North Field, Strip Number

1 was constructed on top of the Japanese Hagoi Airfield (Farrell 2018). North Field would be comprised of four 8,500-foot parallel runways with support facilities, taxiways, service aprons, and hardstands for B-29 bombers. Additional facilities included the following:

• Facilities for maintenance;

• Administrative buildings;

• A military hospital with a 2,000-bed capacity, with a 6,000-bed hospital complex in development at the conclusion of WWII;

• Radio and radar installations;

• Water and power facilities;

• Anti-aircraft emplacements;

• Recreational amenities, including 90 theaters, 17 libraries, and 75 basketball courts;

• 52 churches.

The West Field Airfield would be constructed on top of the Japanese Gurguan Point

Airfield, what is now the Tinian International Airport. Tinian was transformed into the largest U.S.

base in the Pacific (Russell 1995). In April 1945, construction of facilities to support Project

Alberta began. The 509th Composite Group constructed buildings for laboratories, instrument

Page | 16 work, and bomb assembly; hardstands; generator buildings; and two hydraulic lift loading pits for loading bombs into the specialized aircraft. In the spring and early summer of 1945, there were more than 200 B-29s stationed at Tinian that were utilized in campaigns that helped weaken that

Japanese infrastructure and defenses by means of incendiary assaults on Japanese cities

(Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Kuri, and Tokyo) (Farrell 2018).

Following the successful L-1 test bomb drop in late July, Tinian would become fully operational and serve as a crucial locale for future U.S. military operations. Early August of 1945, one bomb loading pit would be utilized for loading Little Boy (a gun-type uranium bomb) and Fat

Man (a plutonium implosion-type weapon). Originally, it was believed that two pits were used for loading Little Boy and Fat Man onto the B-29 bombers. August 6th of 1945, with support of the

509th Composite Group, 20th Air Force, the crew of Enola Gay would drop Little Boy over

Hiroshima, Japan from North Field. The crew of Bockscar would drop Fat Man over Nagasaki, Japan three days later from North Field as well. The two deployments would result in a total of

130,000 to 340,000 casualties (Farrell 2018). After the surrender of Japan, marking the end of

WWII, most of North Field’s buildings and features were removed.

Following WWII, the U.S. continued administration of the Northern Marianas under a mandate of the United Nations. In September of 1945, a typhoon would strike Tinian and destroy the remaining U.S. military facilities. U.S. military personnel would later clear the wreckage and dump it into the ocean (Russell 1995). Tinian would largely be abandoned following the repatriation of Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, and Okinawans in 1946 (Russell 1995). The population of Tinian would grow from 354 in 1949 due to the resettlement of Chamorro immigrants from Yap

Island. In 1976, the Marianas signed an agreement with the U.S. and became part of the CNMI. In

1995, the population reached around 1,500 residents. Residents would grow watermelon, tomatoes, tapioca, corn, sweet potatoes, yams, and raise cattle (AECOM 2010)

PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

In compliance with 36 CFR 800.4(a) and (b), the Commander Joint Region Marianas

(CJRM) has undertaken a comprehensive examination of extant data pertinent to the APE associated with the designated project. A succinct overview of the findings is presented herein.

The existing body of information encompasses 32 cultural resource surveys and/or studies conducted previously within and in proximity to the APE.

The earliest cultural resource investigations conducted within the NFHD involved systematic surveys and site-specific evaluations, as documented in SEARCH 2015. The range of cultural resource investigations within the NFHD includes Phase I archaeological surveys, Phase

II archaeological testing, Phase III data recovery excavations, site overviews and assessments, and architectural surveys specifically targeting WWII-era resources (Welch and Tuggle 2008).

Furthermore, the CJRM ICRMP for the CNMI, outlined in Table 4.2 of SEARCH (2015), delineates 368 archaeological sites and/or potential Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs) within the Military Lease Area (MLA). Notably, the APE for the subject undertaking falls within the confines of the MLA. Among the 368 identified sites, 66 exhibit a Pre-Contact temporal component, five demonstrate evidence of a Spanish Administration component, 219 incorporate a

Page | 17

Japanese Administration component, and 110 an American Administration component. It is pertinent to note that several sites exhibit more than one temporal component.

Page | 18

Figure 5: Previously conducted surveys within and around the APE (SEARCH 2015)

Page | 19

Figure 6: Previously recorded archaeological sites and cultural resources within and around the

APE (SEARCH 2015).

Page | 20

Table 2: Previous Archaeological Studies and Investigations within the Proposed AMDP APE

No Author(s) Year Type of

Investigation

Location Area

(ac)

1 Pangelinan 1982 Survey, site specific

North Field 1,436

2 Denfeld 1983 Survey, site specific

North Field N/A

3 Thompson 1984 Survey, NRHP

Nomination

North Field N/A

4 Moore et al.

1986 High intensity survey with intensive testing

All beaches 1,779

5 Donham 1986 Survey and site recording

North end of North Field 312

6 Haun 1988 Survey and site recording

North end of North Field 80

7 Haun 1989 Site recording North end of North Field 80

8 Haun and

Donham a

Site recording North end of North Field 80

9 Haun and

Donham b

Site recording North end of North Field 80

10 Haun et al. 1990 Survey and site recording

North end of North Field 37

11 Dilli an

Haun

1991 Archival compilation

North field N/A

12 Jones 1991 Historical architecture survey

MLA 17,798

13 Welch and

Bodner

1993 Site-specific;

assessment for TT

North field N/A

14 Welch 1994 Survey, site specific

Unai Chulu, Unai Dangkolo N/A

15 Craib 1995 Low intensity survey

Unai Chiget, roadways 528

16 Henry and

Haun

1995 Survey and testing Unai Chulu 25

17 Franklin and Haun

1995 Survey Unai Dangkolo 200

18 Franklin and Haun

1995 Data recovery Road corridor (8th Ave) 83

19 Athens and

Ward

1998 Sediment coring Lake Hagoi N/A

Page | 21

20 Welch and

Tuggle

1998 Site specific assessment

Tinian MLA N/A

21 Bouthillier 1999 Historical architecture survey

Unai Chiget, Unai Chulu, Unai

Babui, Unai Dangkolo, Unai

Masalok

N/A

22 Craib 1999 Low intensity survey with limited testing

Unai Dangkolo, Banderon Numu, portion of Mt.Lasu (also area north of House of Taga, outside present

MLA)

23 Haun et al. 1999 High intensity survey with intensive testing

Unai Chulu N/A

24 Tuggle and

Welch

1999 Site protection plan, selected site mapping

Tinian MLA N/A

25 Tuggle and

Schilz

1999 Cultural Resource

Management Plan

Tinian MLA N/A

26 Henry et al. 1999 High intensity survey with intensive testing

EMUA 4,162

27 Denfeld 2002 WWII camps and architecture

Tinian MLA N/A

28 Welch and

Tuggle

2008 Tinian synthesis of research and historical documentation

Tinian MLA N/A

29 Athens 2009 High intensity survey with intensive testing

Tinian MLA 4,597

30 Griffin et al.

2010 Traditional

Cultural

Properties

Tinian MLA N/A

31 AECOM 2015 Cultural

Landscape Report

North Field NHL N/A

32 Jackson-

Retondo and

Johnson

2016 NPS assessment North Field NHL N/A

Tinian North Field Historic District (TN-6-0424)

The most significant site within the APE is the NFHD with its associated features, identified as TN-6-0424. The APE and smaller project footprints are located within an NHL, and, as a result, this undertaking is subject to 36 CFR 800.10(a). Both the North Field and the NHL are situated within the Exclusive Military Use Area (EMUA), a component of the MLA utilized for periodic military training exercises. The NHL encompasses approximately 2,500 acres and is

Page | 22 accessible to the public for recreational purposes during periods when it is not utilized for military training activities. The information presented here is primarily derived from Jackson-Retondo and

Johnson (2016).

In 1985, North Field attained NHL status due to its integral role in military history, particularly its contributions to the Pacific War and the deployment of atomic bombs. The property, encompassing "Tinian Landing Beaches, Ushi Point Field, and North Field, Tinian

Island," was officially recognized as the "North Field Historic District." The nomination delineated key historic elements, such as the two landing beaches, preserved Japanese military constructions, and the visible infrastructure of North Field, including runways, taxiways, service aprons, and the atomic bomb loading apron.

The NFHD is comprised of interconnected systems and features that collectively constitute the North Field landscape. The defining characteristics of this landscape, as outlined by Jackson-

Retondo and Johnson (2016), are considered integral to the NFHD. Destruction of these historic resources would result in the irrevocable loss or impairment of the landscape's historical significance.

North Field holds national significance under Criterion 1 due to its association with pivotal events during World War II. These include Japanese colonial and military expansion into the

Pacific, the U.S. Central Pacific Drive, the commencement of B-29 strategic and incendiary bombing missions targeting the Japanese home islands, and the historic deployment of atomic bombs. The defined period of significance spans from 1944 to 1945, encapsulating critical milestones such as the initial U.S. aerial bombardment of Tinian on February 23, 1944; the amphibious assault and ground invasion initiated on July 24, 1944; the establishment and operation of the airfield; and the epochal deployment of atomic bombs on August 6 and 9, 1945 (Jackson-

Retondo and Johnson 2016).

The significance values of the NFHD are conveyed through a variety of resources and resource types. The original NHL nomination listed several contributing resources, a number of additional resources that possess the same or similar significance values and integrity as those identified in the initial evaluation have subsequently been documented both inside and outside the NFHD boundary. Many of these have been identified as “likely contributing” to the NFHD in

Navy-sponsored studies. Jackson-Retondo and Johnson (2016) identify original contributing resources as:

• Landing Beaches Unai Babui (White Beach 1) and Unai Chulu (White Beach 2).

• The north Japanese pillbox at Unai Chulu.

• Resources associated with the former Ushi Point Airfield including the Japanese service apron, the Air Administration Office, the Air Operations Building, Japanese Power Plant, and two adjacent air raid shelters.

• Runways Able, Baker, Charlie, and Delta.

• Taxiways 1 through 8 including cross taxiway stations (20+00, 40+00, and 80+00).

• Two atomic bomb loading pits.

Page | 23

Additional associated resources located inside the present NFHD include:

• 265 B-29 hardstands obscured by vegetation.

• Additional service aprons, taxiways, and east-west connectors obscured by vegetation.

• The 509th Composite Group Service Area.

• The 121st Navy Construction Battalion (NCB) Group Camp.

• The perimeter road network.

• Ruins and archaeological sites including concrete pads, footings, and debris associated with base support facilities that were removed after the war including Quonset huts, flack towers, radar towers, and dump sites.

• Borrow pits and quarries associated with the construction of the airfield.

• Additional Japanese military features including the south pillbox at Unai Chulu, ammunition storage bunker, fuel storage bunker, power plant, aviation tie-downs, drainage canal, and cisterns at the air administration building.

• Japanese defensive bunkers, modified caves, tunnels, and rock shelters located in the limestone cliffs within the southern boundary of the NFHD. Similar features are also located outside the NFHD boundary.

Additional associated resources located outside the present NFHD include:

• Site of the three atomic bomb assembly buildings northwest of the NFHD.

• The 509th Composite Group camp site located southeast of the 8th Avenue roundabout.

• The Broadway roundabout including the American Memorial Hinode Shrine.

• The Eighth Avenue roundabout including the Landing Vehicle Tracked (LVT).

• The 1322nd/67th NCB camp site located southeast of the NFHD.

• The 313th Bomber Wing Command Area (Service Group Shop Area) located northeast of the NFHD.

• The road network extending south of the NFHD including Riverside Drive, Eighth Avenue, and Broadway.

• Japanese earthen revetments extending east of the NFHD.

• Japanese pillbox at Unai Dankulo southeast of the NFHD.

• Japanese defensive bunkers, modified caves, tunnels, and rock shelters located in the limestone cliffs outside the southern boundary of the NFHD.

Outside the APE, there are two Pre-Latte sites recognized as North Field Historic Landmark sites

(NHL):

• NHL-4, the Unai Chulu Latte Site

• NHL-7, Lake Hagoi

Page | 24

Table 3: Inventory of Contributing Cultural Landscape Features within the North Field.

Feature Type Feature Name Period NHL Status NR Eligible

Spatial Organization 509th Composite Group service area American Territorial Period In NHL and Likely Contributing Y

Spatial Organization Atomic bomb assembly area American Territorial Period Not in district, Likely Contributing Y

Spatial Organization Atomic bomb loading…