Cultural_Resources_Treatment_and_Discoveries_Plan_MOTCO_Pier_2.pdf

Final

Cultural Resources Treatment and Discoveries Plan

Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO) Pier 2 Modernization & Pier 3 Repair Projects

January 2016

Cultural Resources Treatment and Discoveries Plan: MOTCO Pier 2 Modernization & Pier 3 Repair Projects ii

Contents

1. Introduction and Executive Summary

1.1. Executive Summary

1.2. Purpose of the Treatment and Discoveries Plan

1.3. General Description of MOTCO

1.4. Historic Properties at MOTCO under NHPA Section 106

1.5. Project Description

1.6. Project Location and Setting

1.7. Project Context

1.8. Project Area of Potential Effects

1.8.1. Landside Area of Potential Effects

1.8.2. Waterside Area of Potential Effects

1.9. Qualifications of Archaeological Monitors

1.10. Worker Awareness Training

2. Monitoring Plan

2.1. Central Monitoring Station

2.2. Protective Measures and Initial Survey for Historic Properties

2.3. Landside Monitoring

2.3.1. Location of Monitoring

2.3.2. Monitoring Methods

2.4. Waterside Monitoring

2.4.1. Location of Monitoring

2.4.2. Monitoring Methods

2.5. Communication and Reporting

3. Discoveries Plan

3.1. Landside Discoveries

3.1.1. Initial Resource Protection

3.1.2. Initial Assessment

3.2. Waterside Discoveries

3.2.1. Initial Resource Protection

3.2.2. Initial Assessment

3.3. Focused Sampling

3.4. Communication and Notification

iii

4. Treatment Plan

4.1. Further Assessment

4.2. Immediate Conservation

4.3. Long-Term Conservation

5. Evaluation Criteria

5.1. Evaluation Criteria: Contributing Resource

5.2. Evaluation Criteria: Separate Eligible Site

6. List of Preparers

7. References

Appendices

Appendix A: Map 1: Existing Historic Properties at MOTCO

Map 2: Landside Project Area of Potential Affect (APE)

Map 3: Waterside Project Area of Potential Affect (APE)

Map 4: Historic Properties at MOTCO with Protecting Measures

Appendix B: Worker Awareness Training

Appendix C: Project Improvement Plans

1. Introduction and Executive Summary

1.1. Executive Summary

This Cultural Resources Treatment and Discoveries Plan (CRTDP) is the result of steps undertaken by the United States Army (Army) to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA), for the Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO) Pier 2 Modernization & Pier 3 Repair Projects (Project).

The project will update the facilities at MOTCO to support its continuing mission as a west coast munitions shipping facility and involves demolition and construction activities within an area of potential effect (APE) both on land and in the water around the piers.

The CRTDP is a specific mitigation measure listed in the Project’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), and is an outcome of the Project’s Inventory and Evaluation Report under Section 106 of NHPA, the resulting finding of conditional no adverse effect, and the consultation process set forth in the federal regulations that included the National Park Service (NPS), the California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and Native American groups and individuals.

Section 106 of NHPA requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. Two historic properties related to the Port Chicago Disaster of 17 July 1944 were identified in close proximity of the Project during the inventory and evaluation phase of the Section 106 process. These two properties are the Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial (Memorial) and the Port Chicago Naval Magazine Explosion Site (PCNM Explosion Site). This CRTDP is a practical guide for the protection of these known resources and related resources that may be discovered during the Project.

The CRTDP specifically describes a construction monitoring protocol that includes: how, when, and where monitoring will be conducted; if encountered, how new cultural resource discoveries will be assessed and treated; and, what criteria will be used to evaluate potentially significant resources that may contribute in some way to the value and importance of the Memorial and PCNM Explosion Site.

Successful implementation of the CRTDP will result in completion of the Project with no adverse effects to historic properties. It will also increase general knowledge regarding the distribution of cultural materials within the APE including the location, nature, and condition of artifacts remaining in the area from the Port Chicago Disaster, and how the artifacts relate to the PCNM Explosion Site.

1.2. Purpose of the Treatment and Discoveries Plan

This CRTDP describes particular methods and procedures to protect, locate through monitoring, treat, and evaluate previously unknown discoveries of cultural resources that may be encountered during the Project. This document was prepared at the request of the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on behalf of the Army, the entity performing the undertaking. The objectives of the CRTDP are 1) to protect existing and known historic properties in the vicinity of the planned construction; 2) to establish procedures for the discovery and treatment of previously unidentified cultural resources;

3) to provide specific criteria for evaluation of potentially significant resources that may warrant listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); and 4) to provide a framework for consultation with NPS and SHPO under 36 CFR 800.13.

1.3. General Description of MOTCO

MOTCO is an Army Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC) munitions and general cargo transshipment facility located at a strategic site in north-central Contra Costa County, California. The Army’s 834th Transportation Battalion (TRANS BN) operates MOTCO. This installation is the primary West Coast common-user ammunition terminal for the Department of Defense (DOD). MOTCO operated as a tenant of Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach, Detachment Concord (NWSSBD Concord) from 1 October 1999, to 1 October 2008, under the Department of the Navy (Navy). As part of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005, the 6,526-acre Tidal Area and 115-acre Inland Area were transferred to the Army. The Army currently operates 6,641 acres at MOTCO.

1.4. Historic Properties at MOTCO under NHPA Section 106

Under Section 106, federal agencies must evaluate their projects for adverse impacts to historic properties. According to regulation 36 CFR 800.16, an historic property is a district, site, building, structure, or object included in the NRHP, or that is eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, according to specific criteria. There are two historic properties in close proximity to the MOTCO Pier 2 Modernization & Pier 3 Repair Projects (see Map 1 of Appendix A):

The Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial (Memorial) is a NRHP listed property and historic district. The Memorial was established by the Port Chicago Memorial Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-562), and was made a unit of the National Park System (NPS) in 2009, which automatically entered the Memorial into the NRHP as a listed historic district. The Memorial is a tribute to the 320 men who died in the World War II explosion and includes 5 acres located along the shoreline of Suisun Bay west of Pier 2 and in the Tidal Area.

The Port Chicago Naval Magazine Explosion Site (PCNM Explosion Site) was recorded as part of the Section 106 inventory and evaluation phase of the Project. The site consists of the footprint of the original location of Pier 1 and the locations of the two ships moored at Pier 1 at the time of the explosion, the SS E. A. Bryan and SS Quinalt Victory. The PCNM Explosion Site has been found eligible for listing in the NRHP due to the influence that the Port Chicago Disaster had on the racial desegregation of the U.S.

Armed Forces and for its impact on safety practices in the Navy (Criterion A), and also for the PCNM Explosion Site’s association with the “Port Chicago 50,” who were tried and convicted of mutiny after the explosion (Criterion B). The PCNM Explosion Site has not been found to be significant for architectural qualities, for its association as the resulting work of a master, or as a representation of a type, period, or method of construction (Criterion C), and it has not been found to yield, or been determined to be likely to yield, information important to history or prehistory (Criterion D).

1.5. Project Description

The proposed Project will modernize and repair the critically needed Piers 2 and 3 at MOTCO. The Pier 2 main platform, west trestle and personnel trestle will be removed and replaced with new structures. Pier 3 will be repaired and structurally stabilized by wrapping a select number of piles. Alternatives considered in the EIS include: 1) fully implement repairs to Piers 2 and 3 with Pier 2 re-oriented to align/rotate the west end to meet a more modernized configuration; 2) fully implement repairs to Piers 2 and 3 leaving the Pier 2 footprint in its present location; 3) fully implement repairs to Piers 2 and 3, reorienting Pier 2 to meet a more modernized configuration (same as in Alternative 1) but with a larger deck surface and heavier carrying capacity; and 4) no action to modernize and repair Piers 2 and 3. For all alternatives except for the no action alternative, use of associated staging areas and shore-side infrastructure were also treated as part of the Project.

Note that as part of the detailed design process, a Value Engineering (VE) Study process generally occurs, this process includes various disciplines looking at the project for engineering and cost efficiencies. As a result of that process some project modifications have been proposed. The VE process has provided a second design concept that combines the West Trestle and forklift trestle from the original concept into a single wider trestle located at or near the forklift trestle’s intended locations. Design engineers have presented three viable variations for the location of the realigned West trestle. Minor fender and lighting changes have also been identified.

Due to the VE process, the 35% design was not provided to any of the consulting resource agencies for review. The revised design for the project will be completed at the 65% level and agency review will occur at that time. As part of this process, a supplemental NEPA document will be prepared evaluating these changes and Section 106 consultation will be reinitiated as part of that process.

The CRTDP is applicable to the entire APE including any changes to the APE and APE map throughout the course of the Project.

1.6. Project Location and Setting

MOTCO is located in central California in the eastern San Francisco Bay region on the south shore of Suisun Bay, approximately 7 miles east of the east terminus of the Carquinez Strait that connects Suisun Bay to San Pablo Bay. The facility is approximately 30 miles northeast of Oakland and approximately 65 miles southwest of Sacramento. The City of Concord is located approximately 5 miles to the south. Piers 2 and 3 are in the north-central portion of MOTCO and extend into Suisun Bay from an artificial peninsula of historical-period fill. The visible portion of the remains of Pier 1 is located just west of the west end of Pier 2. MOTCO is located on the Vine Hill, Honkers Bay, Walnut Creek, and Clayton, California, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic maps.

Based on historical research and preliminary investigations, the Project has very low sensitively for prehistoric cultural resources. The entire Project is planned for areas of historical-period fill or submerged tidal areas that are unlikely to contain prehistoric cultural materials.

From a cultural resources perspective the most important aspect of the project setting is that the entire area is the final resting place of those killed in the Port Chicago Explosion. While the Memorial is the focal point for the reverence and tribute paid to the fallen, the entire area has great personal meaning beyond its official designation as a historic site. As a direct reflection of this fact, the CRTDP is focused on the protection of the PCNM Explosion Site and the artifacts from the explosion that may be discovered and how they relate to the PCNM Explosion Site. Given the magnitude of the explosion, remains from the two ships, the ships’ stores, 16 train cars, Pier 1, and cargo (munitions) could be present anywhere in the APE.

The Project has very low sensitively for cultural resources that post-date the Port Chicago Disaster. Finding archaeological resources dating from 1944 to 1965 (i.e., 50 years old or older) is possible within the APE; however, numerous surveys and evaluations have found no historic properties within the APE other than those described in Section 1.4.

1.7. Project Context

The Project has both a terrestrial (landside) and submerged (waterside) context. While the methods needed to address archaeological monitoring, data collection, and treatment protocols are fairly standard for the landslide portion of the Project, the waterside area requires a different approach. The key difference is that a submerged environment is more dynamic than a terrestrial environment, and underwater deposits are almost always mixed with unrelated material (Gould 2000).

This methodological issue is addressed in underwater archaeology through the use of three tiered association descriptions: Primary (attached elements of a ship or structure that by their “connectedness” cannot be mixed unrelated material), Secondary

(elements of a ship or structure that have become detached but that can be reconnected as originally built, thus making it unlikely they are unrelated material), and Tertiary (material that cannot be reconnected to a ship or structure that may be unrelated material) (Gould 2000). Also useful in this regard is the idea of the iconic artifact—a single item that is instantly identifiable and that coveys great significance, even without primary associations. In the context of the Port Chicago Explosion, iconic artifacts would include the ships’ rudders, anchors, or brass wheels, as well as all nonferrous metal objects (because of their rarity), items related to the daily lives of sailors at the time such as ceramic cups and plates and utensils from the mess deck, and personal effects such as dog tags, rings, keys, buckles, and pocket knives. These two concepts are particularly useful for evaluative purposes, where the threshold of significance must be set high in order to separate special artifacts from mundane items found in great quantities such as non-descript angle iron and sheet metal elements from the ships’ hulls, abundant iron fittings and connectors, and ordnance of all kinds.

Another important contextual consideration for the Project is safety. Due to the nature of the mission at Port Chicago at the time of the explosion, munitions and explosives of concern (MEC) were deposited throughout the area and may be encountered during construction. This fact makes it unsafe for cultural resource personnel to participate directly in underwater construction monitoring. Without having cultural resource personnel directly in contact with possible resources underwater expectations should be realistic regarding the data that can be reasonably collected for underwater resources.

Alternative methods using MEC divers in conjunction with cultural resource personnel topside have been developed to address this issue, however, the presence of MEC combined with generally poor dive including low visibility and swift current is likely to limit the amount of material collected underwater.

Safety is also related to what is considered a portable artifact. A portable object on land is one that can be moved comfortably by one person. In the water a portable object is one that can be moved by divers without the assistance of a lift bag.

Furthermore, the Project will take place at a time when NPS is trying to grow its Port Chicago Naval Magazine NM museum collection to support various outreach endeavors in the coming years (U.S. Department of the Interior 2015). NPS has been building the collection only recently, and only a small amount of material saved from the original cleanup of the base following the explosion, personal donations from descendants that have returned mementos taken at the time by family members with access to the area, and a larger amount of material from a 2012-2014 project by Parsons Corp. to evaluate the risks from and remedial options for MEC at MOTCO have been archived. The recovery effort from the Parsons project was accomplished partly with the use of metal detectors on land and a barge-mounted electromagnet in the water (Parsons Corp.

2015). Not surprisingly, almost all of the items in the NPS collection are iron objects with almost no primary associations—isolated nondescript iron objects completely separated from other elements. To the extent that NPS goals are a consideration in the recovery of material during the Project, nonferrous artifacts and objects with multiple primary associations should be a priority for recovery and conservation. Doing so would diversify the NPS collection and increase its overall significance and interpretive value.

1.8. Project Area of Potential Effects

The area of potential effects (APE) for an undertaking is defined as the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties. The APE is influenced by the scale and nature of the undertaking and is unique to most projects. The APE for the Project includes both landside and waterside areas and includes all areas of construction, staging, and access. Access areas and routes such as existing roads or already frequently traveled waterways are not included in the APE since their use for the Project will be similar to how they have been or are presently used. The entire Project APE is located on the USGS Vine Hill, California, 7.5-minute topographic map.

1.8.1. Landside Area of Potential Effects

The landside APE includes areas of construction activities, staging areas for temporary equipment, and material storage needed to complete the Project. Elements of the Project taking place within the landside APE include improvements to White Road and the approach to the west trestle of Pier 2. One of the parking areas near White Road will be expanded beyond its current footprint. Concrete pads will support two new 1500-kilowatt diesel generators, a sewage lift station, and an electrical substation.

Underground utilities will replace aerial lines in this area. Building 100 will be relocated and Building 160 will be demolished. The pedestrian trestles connecting Pier 2 to land will also be removed and replaced with the realigned west trestle. These areas may undergo grading and some subsurface disturbances, but all of these areas are currently disturbed or on historical-period fill. The landside APE is shown on Map 2 of Appendix A.

1.8.2. Waterside Area of Potential Effects

The waterside APE includes those areas where demolition and construction activities will occur on or within the water surrounding Piers 2 and 3. This includes the built resources within the water and a 100 foot buffer within which impacts could occur during activities such as wrapping piles at Pier 3, and pile removal and driving at Pier 2. The waterside APE is shown on Map 3 of Appendix A.

1.9. Qualifications of Archaeological Monitors

Cultural resource monitors (CRM) are the field level staff responsible for implementation of the CRTDP. The role of a CRM is as an expert in locating, protecting, and documenting cultural resources encountered during the Project. CRMs will be supervised by a lead CRM that is responsible for quality control of CRM work, coordination with other work units, and reporting to Project supervisors.

All CRMs shall meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archeology. The lead CRM shall also meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Historical Archeology (48 Federal Register 44738-44739), be a certified SCUBA diver, have project-level experience working with submerged cultural resources, and have a demonstrable working knowledge of the information presented in publications such as, or equivalent to, those listed below:

Methods of Conserving Archaeological Material from Underwater Sites (1999) by Donny L. Hamilton.

Underwater Archaeology: The NAS Guide to Principles and Practice (2009) edited by Amanda Bowens.

Submerged Cultural Resource Management: Preserving and Interpreting Our Sunken Maritime Heritage (2003) by James D. Spirek and Della A Scott-Ireton.

1.10. Worker Awareness Training

All persons doing fieldwork for the Project shall attend a Worker Awareness Training prior to beginning work. The training will be given as needed over the course of the project to ensure everyone is trained. The purpose of the training is to ensure that all workers understand the historical significance of the artifacts that may be encountered and to increase their capacity to identify and protect cultural resources that might otherwise be damaged or remain undiscovered due to a lack of awareness.

The training will consist of one classroom session with four areas of concentration:

Overview of the Port Chicago Explosion and the historic properties at MOTCO;

Artifacts associated with the Port Chicago Explosion;

Working with CRMs; and

Procedures for protection of new archaeological discoveries.

Ample time will be given for questions. Persons attending the training will be given a written summary of the field procedures for the protection of archaeological discoveries, a contact sheet with phone numbers of key personnel that would need to be contacted if a new discovery is made, and any maps relevant to their work area. The script of the Worker Awareness Training is attached as Appendix B.

2. Monitoring Plan

The Monitoring Plan for the Project is divided into Landside Monitoring and Waterside Monitoring. The division is based on the significant difference in methods needed to successfully observe construction activities in terrestrial and submerged contexts.

2.1. Central Monitoring Station

Monitoring operations will be conducted from a central location. The Central Monitoring Station (CMS) will be a dedicated space of approximately 10,000 square feet (100 X 100 feet) for cultural resource personnel that will serve as monitoring headquarters and as a temporary storage area for artifacts collected in the field. It will also serve as a field lab for initial conservation of artifacts.

The location of the CMS will be coordinated with the biological monitor on site and the Army representative at MOTCO. The CMS will be centrally located within close proximity to the APE but ultimate location will be consistent with overall project environmental constraints. The CMS will include the following facilities provided by the general contractor:

A lockable 20-foot storage container with shelves;

110-volt AC power for recharging battery-powered equipment;

A ready source of fresh water; and

Containers ranging in size from 5 to 30 gallons for storage of waterside artifacts in fresh water.

2.2. Protective Measures and Initial Survey for Historic Properties

Memorial: Plastic orange construction fencing will be installed between landside areas of construction and the Memorial by the general contractor. Where White Road bisects the Memorial, fencing will be installed north of the construction zone and south of the Memorial including all vegetation surrounding the Memorial. The lead CRM will oversee the fence installation and survey the Memorial grounds as a baseline condition assessment prior to construction (see Map 4 in Appendix A for the approximate location of protective construction fencing for the Memorial).

PCNM Explosion Site: Prior to in-water work beginning at Pier 2, buoys will be installed by the general contractor between waterside areas of construction and the PCNM Explosion Site. A linear buoy will be placed between the remaining piles of Pier 1 and the west trestle of Pier 2 with a minimum 100-foot buffer, where possible. A minimum of eight point buoys will be installed surrounding the outline of the PCNM Explosion Site.

The point buoys will signal the location of the PCNM Explosion Site so that caution will be exercised in the area. The buoys will also provide a reference for CRMs and MEC divers when estimating the locations of found underwater resources relative to the PCNM Explosion Site. The lead CRM will oversee the buoy installation topside and the MEC divers will assist underwater, and both will survey the Pier 1 area as a baseline condition assessment prior to construction (see Map 4 in Appendix A for the approximate location of protective buoys for the PCNM Explosion Site).

2.3. Landside Monitoring

Landside monitoring will be conducted by the lead CRM or CRM. Three monitoring methods will be applied to areas of landside construction. These methods are Continuous Observation, Spot Check Observation, and No CRM Observation/Worker Observation, as described below. The determination of which method will be used in a given location at any given time will be made by the lead CRM based on field observations and experience that relates to the likelihood of finding material from the explosion. The frequency and duration of spot checks, when that method is used, will also be based on field observations and experience.

Monitoring Equipment: The CRM staff will have access to/be equipped with the following items for the performance of their work:

Copies of the final approved grading plan on a full-size plan sheet;

Portable wand-style metal detectors;

Strong pocket magnets;

GPS units;

Ruggedized field tablets for access to the Project’s mobile digital database communication and reporting system; and

Two-way radios if cell phone service is poor or unreliable.

2.3.1. Location of Monitoring

All areas of the landside APE are included in the monitoring plan. Significant differences in the type and depth of ground disturbance exist within the APE. The lead CRM will use information on Project plans regarding type and depth of construction in combination with field observations to determine which monitoring method is warranted.

2.3.2. Monitoring Methods

Continuous Observation Method: Monitoring will consist of direct observation of the major excavation processes. The monitoring will occur during the entire work day (including multiple shift activities) while work is underway and will continue on a daily basis until either the depth of excavation has been reached at which cultural resources could not occur, or if field observations confirm that continuous observation is not warranted.

Spot Check Observation Method: Monitoring will consist of intermittent monitoring during the major excavation processes. During spot check monitoring all back dirt, open trenches, graded areas, or other areas of ground disturbances will be periodically inspected for evidence of cultural material. Spot check monitoring will continue until the lead CRM determines that the situation warrants an alternative monitoring method.

No CRM Observation/Worker Observation Method: Monitoring will consist of diligent observation by construction workers rather than CRMs.

2.4. Waterside Monitoring

Waterside monitoring shall be conducted exclusively by the lead CRM or a designated CRM with equivalent qualifications, as described above in Section 1.9. Three monitoring methods will be applied in waterside areas of construction: General Topside Observation, Diver Observation/Diver Debriefing, and Inspection of Demolished Materials. The determination of which method will be used in a given location at any given time will be made by the lead CRM based on safe access to the piers, the availability of divers for debriefing, the relative sensitivity of the work areas, observable conditions, and access to recovered materials.

2.4.1. Location of Monitoring

While all areas of the waterside APE are included in the monitoring plan, safety restrictions for access to the water (no diving by CRMs) precludes direct observation of the underwater ground disturbance by CRMs. This situation dictates that the only personnel to directly observe the underwater construction disturbance will be the MEC divers. Of necessity, MEC diver observation is a key component of the CRTDP and is closely linked to communication between the lead CRM and the MEC divers. Other waterside methods that do not involve dive observation will be conducted by the lead CRM or designee. The monitoring methods for the waterside APE may at times be used concurrently.

2.4.2. Monitoring Methods

General Topside Observation: Monitoring will consist of the direct observation of the major construction processes in the waterside area by CRMs from a safe topside location.

Diver Observation/Diver Debriefing: Monitoring will consist of direct observation of Bay bed disturbance by MEC divers and information transfer about underwater materials between the MEC divers and the Lead CRM. The location of the lead CRM during and after MEC dives should be close to the divers’ entry/exit point in case cultural material is handed topside. Following completion of their normal post-dive responsibilities, the lead CRM will debrief the divers regarding the disposition of cultural materials on the Bay bed, details of any found objects, and the likelihood of obtaining new information on subsequent dives. The lead CRM will relieve the divers of any recovered materials during the debriefing sessions.

Inspection of Recovered Materials: Monitoring will consist of visual inspection of all materials recovered from the water, such as old pier pilings and debris removed from path of construction and brought topside. Inspection of the material will occur after it has been placed in a safe location and has been cleared by MEC personnel. This monitoring method will occur when no diving is underway, or when diving is underway and additional CRMs are available.

2.5. Communication and Reporting

Communication and reporting for landside and waterside monitoring will be accomplished through the use of a mobile digital database system provided by the cultural resource contractor. This method will permit efficient transfer of information collected by CRMs to those managing the Project on behalf of USACE and the Army.

The system will contain writable documents designed by the cultural resource contractor and approved by USACE and the Army for artifact documentation, requesting cultural resource-related support, and general reporting. Cultural resource personnel will populate documents by means of a ruggedized field tablet device as new archaeological material is encountered in the field and new data are collected. Field tablets will be backed up in the field twice daily and their stored information will be uploaded to the database at least once daily.

All documents on the system can be viewed by USACE and Army managers at any time. Access to the database will be controlled by the Army. Given the location of the Project and the limited access to MOTCO, the ability to share information remotely will be an asset to the Project. Sorting and analysis of material found during the Project will be greatly simplified. The main elements of the system are:

Field Catalog: The catalog is a database with the necessary data fields to appropriately document cultural resources as they are encountered. Each artifact will be given a unique number using the next unused sequential entry, or record, in the field catalog.

Data fields will include basic information for an initial assessment such as artifact number, CRM identification, GPS coordinates, composition, artifact class, a brief description, and whether or not the artifact was collected.

Artifact Detail Pages: Artifact pages contain additional data fields for artifacts that may meet eligibility criteria in Section 5 such as metric information, preliminary identification, condition, and a more complete description.

Photo Attachment: Photos will be uploaded and attached to each artifact number in the field catalog. All field photography will be digital color images.

Dive Request Form: This form is the method by which the lead CRM may request a cultural resources-oriented dive by MEC divers based on information gathered during waterside monitoring. The lead CRM will complete the form with information needed to execute the dive (purpose, location, time, collecting objective, etc.). The form will be uploaded to the database for approval. The lead CRM can view dive approvals via the system.

Weekly Field Report: The lead CRM will file a weekly activity report to Guy Romine at the Army via the system. The field report will be forwarded to SHPO and NPS.

3. Discoveries Plan

The Discoveries Plan is the method used to protect unknown cultural resources that are found during construction monitoring by means of basic protective measures and an initial assessment for data collection and evaluation. There are separate landside and waterside discoveries plans due to differences in monitoring methods in the two environments. The Discoveries Plan takes over from the Monitoring Plan as soon as suspected significant cultural resources are encountered.

The difference between a significant cultural resource and other material is whether or not an object or group of objects is likely to meet the evaluation criteria in Section 5 below, thus all CRMs must know and understand the criteria. It is axiomatic in archaeology to be extremely conservative during monitoring fieldwork and initial evaluation in order to avoid overlooking important finds. Consequently, more material will be collected and assessed for further evaluation than will actually meet the criteria.

In general, expectations of what will be found during the Project are similar between the landside and waterside APEs. Minor differences are noted in the respective sections below and come about because the recovery and cleanup from the explosion was more complete on land than in the water, leaving more and larger fragments of debris remaining in the waterside APE.

In the event that suspected human remains are found, work in the vicinity shall cease immediately and the remains shall be treated with dignity and respect. If the find is made by construction personnel or a CRM, they shall immediately notify the lead CRM.

The lead CRM will come to the area as soon as possible and confirm the nature of the find. If during the initial assessment the find proves to be a discovery of human remains, the Lead CRM will contact the Army with a professional opinion as to whether the origin of the remains is likely 1) Native American; 2) The Port Chicago Explosion; or 3) other.

For Native American human remains, funerary objects, and object of cultural patrimony, the Army will meet the requirements of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) for all discovery situations in accordance with 43 CFR 10.

For human remains from the Port Chicago Explosion, the remains will be treated according to the CRTDP and be deemed qualified as a contributing resource under evaluation criteria in Section 5.1 below. The Army will consult with NPS and SHPO on recommendations and consider comments received within 48 hours. For human remains that are not Native American or from the Port Chicago Explosion, the Army will notify the appropriate law enforcement authorities concerning a possible criminal investigation.

3.1. Landside Discoveries

The following protocols for the discovery of cultural material will apply to all construction activities conduced in the landside APE. The most likely materials to be encountered will be small portable metal objects including the fragments of spent ordnance, broken or fire-damaged ship parts, parts from ship stores, and train car parts. Although it is unlikely, finding personal effects and human remains from the explosion is possible.

Similarly, there may be a rare discovery of MEC in the landside APE.

3.1.1. Initial Resource Protection

If a member of the construction crew believes he or she may have discovered a cultural resource, the equipment that encountered the suspected resource will be stopped and a CRM will be notified. Until the CRM arrives, equipment at the site of the discovery will remain stopped and the immediate area will be blocked to pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Upon arrival, the CRM will begin an Initial Assessment of the find.

If a member of the construction crew believes he or she has discovered MEC, the equipment will be stopped and the MEC team will be contacted to handle the object per MEC protocol.

3.1.2. Initial Assessment

The initial assessment will include collecting enough data to determine whether a find may meet the evaluation criteria listed in Section 5. If the object is portable and lacks any fragile association, the CRM may collect the object immediately so that construction may resume, and the CRM will perform the initial assessment at the CMS. Similarly, non-portable objects that clearly will not be damaged will be moved from the path of construction so that work can continue.

If the assessment must happen in situ, the CRM will work quickly to determine the significance of the find. Work will remain stopped until the assessment is complete.

If the object is determined not likely to meet the evaluation criteria in Section 5, it will be removed from the path of construction and work will continue. If the object is determined likely to meet the criteria, then the CRM will contact the lead CRM to confirm the finding.

If the lead CRM confirms the finding, the Army will be notified.

3.2. Waterside Discoveries

The following protocols for the discovery of cultural material will apply to all construction activities conducted in the waterside APE. The most likely materials to be encounters will be a combination of large non-portable objects and small portable metal objects including the fragments of spent ordnance, damaged ship parts, parts from ship stores, and train car parts. Although it is unlikely, finding personal effects and human remains from the explosion is possible. Far more MEC is anticipated in the waterside APE than is anticipated in the landside APE.

3.2.1. Initial Resource Protection

Protecting a new discovery in the waterside APE is considerably more complex than in the landside APE. It is also the case that little harm is likely to come to new discoveries from point-specific construction activities such as pile driving, unless discoveries are directly under the pile

For portable objects, the most efficient method of protection will be to collect the find for initial assessment topside. This is also the preferred method because small items may be difficult to relocate due to poor dive conditions including lack of visibility and strong currents.

Recovered artifacts should be kept wet in fresh water with a sodium hydrozide-adjusted pH of 10 to 12. Encrustations should not be removed in the field; as such layers are protective and may cover impressions that could be damaged if not removed carefully.

All metal objects should be handled wearing gloves as some lead and copper compounds are toxic.

For non-portable objects, protective measures near pile driving and pile removal may include mechanically moving the find laterally out of the path of construction. Finds should be moved slowly underwater as pressure exerted by water may cause damage to fragile primary associations. In this case, initial assessment will happen underwater as described in Section 3.2.2.

3.2.2. Initial Assessment

Due to the dive restrictions for the cultural resource personnel, the initial assessment process for the waterside APE will be a cooperative effort between the lead CRM and the MEC divers.

For portable items, the MEC divers will bring items to the surface as they are found rather than temporarily relocating them for later retrieval to the surface because of poor dive conditions. In this case, the lead CRM will conduct the initial assessment topside.

As a result, more items will be assessed than will meet the evaluation criteria in Section

5. As in the landside APE, initial assessment consists of assigning an artifact number from the field catalog and collecting data needed to compare the find to the evaluation criteria in Section 5.

For non-portable items, the initial assessment begins when the MEC divers communicate the information they have regarding a possible resource from the first encounter to the lead CRM during debriefing. The lead CRM will assign an artifact number and begin recording information in the field catalog. If on subsequent dives more information can be collected, it will be added to the catalog under the artifact number, and the MEC divers will securely tag the artifact with the artifact number. If cumulative information suggests that the artifact may meet the evaluation criteria in Section 5, then the lead CRM will request a supplemental cultural resource dive to collect enough data to compare the find to the evaluation criteria.

If a resource appears to meet the evaluation criteria in Section 5 and cannot be moved out of the path of construction, then the lead CRM will notify the Army. The Army will consult with NPS and SHPO on recommendations and consider comments received within 48 hours.

3.3. Focused Sampling

Where artifacts are found in large numbers, recovery of a representative sample will be considered as a practical option in lieu of mass collection. For waterside deposits of a mass nature, it is likely that visibility will not permit a full assessment of the material deposit, so sampling may be the only method of data collection. Sample items will be given an artifact number with additional information regarding the origin of the find and rationale for use of a sampling method.

3.4. Communication and Notification

All data collected during the discovery phase initial assessment will be entered into the field catalog by artifact number and uploaded once daily. This information will be available to those overseeing the Project via the mobile digital database.

4. Treatment Plan

During and after the Project, the artifacts will be stored at the CMS until arrangements are made to transfer the collection to NPS. Artifacts from the waterside APE will be kept in water in appropriately sized containers. All artifacts will remain securely tagged and data collection will continue as needed to complete the field catalog as thoroughly as possible so that a determination of eligibility can be made for each artifact. If the eligibility of individual artifacts is the subject of consultation with NPS and SHPO, then the field catalog will be finalized following consultation. The field catalog will reflect the eligibility determination in the framework of the following categories:

Group I: All artifacts eligible under Section 5 below. These artifacts will be transferred for curation and long-term conservation, or conserved in situ.

Group II: Artifacts not eligible under Section 5 below but with adequate integrity and interpretive value to warrant long-term conservation and curation. This group will also include portions of well-represented artifact classes with the highest integrity and interpretive value.

Group III: Artifacts with especially low integrity and interpretive value, objects for which association with the Port Chicago Explosion cannot be established with reasonable certainty, and the remaining portions of well-represented artifact classes. These artifacts will be securely tagged and redeposited within the boundaries of the PCNM Explosion Site. The redeposit site will be determined through consultation with NPS and SHPO.

4.1. Further Assessment

If the initial assessment is not sufficient to determine eligibility, additional data collection and research may be needed to properly evaluate an artifact. This may include documentary research after completion of the Project. For landside discoveries this may also include mechanical excavation or hand excavation to expose more of a find or to explore nearby areas for a possible continuation of a particular deposit followed by documentation of the newly exposed areas. For the waterside discoveries this may include additional supplementary dives as outlined above for data collection such as photographs, measurements, metal identification, mapping and structural integrity.

Supplementary dives may also be needed to resurvey the Pier 1 area following construction activities and at the end of the Project, or to develop a plan for mechanical artifact recovery or long-term in situ preservation.

4.2. Immediate Conservation

For landside discoveries of small fragile items such as personal effects, objects should be handled with latex gloves and placed in plastic bags and in hard-shell containers with sufficient padding to prevent chafing or rolling. Human remains should be loosely wrapped in aluminum foil and placed in hard-shell containers with padding. Metal objects that are not fragile should not be bagged or wrapped. All portable objects should be moved to the CMS where they will be out of the way of construction activities. For objects left in situ, no immediate conservation measures are needed other than to protect in place by marking their position with temporary construction fencing to block pedestrian and vehicular through traffic over the find.

For waterside discoveries, portable objects should be recovered when first encountered, brought topside, and kept submerged in fresh water. This will prevent uncontrolled drying and forestall corrosive processes that begin once an object is in contact with the atmosphere. For objects left in situ, no immediate conservation measures are needed other than to protect in place as described in Section 3.2.1.

Human remains, if found, will be collected and treated with minimal handling, the use of latex gloves, and the use of sterile containers so as not to contaminate through the introduction of new DNA or otherwise diminish the possibility of later testing to identify the remains.

4.3. Long-Term Conservation

Long-term conservation is most appropriately undertaken after a decision is made regarding where and how an object will be permanently stored. The primary goals of the conservation process are to preserve the artifacts to the greatest degree possible and return them to a condition and appearance that allows long-term interpretive museum display.

Long-term conservation of human remains is not applicable since both professional standards and honorable consideration dictate that the goal for treatment of human remains should be internment. In the context of the Project, acceptable internment options would include underwater internment within the existing boundaries of the PCNM Explosion Site, burial within the boundaries of the Memorial, or burial within a national cemetery. The Army will consult with NPS and SHPO regarding the wishes of living descendants concerning identification of remains and methods of internment if human remains from the explosion are found.

Several iron objects from the Port Chicago Explosion have been treated for long-term conservation at the direction of NPS by sand blasting and acid treatment followed by zinc coating. Later, the iron was treated with a two-part matte epoxy coating to seal the treatments. This method has been very successful for objects intended for public display (Sara Hay, NPS, personal communication 2015).

Future NPS conservation with iron artifacts will likely continue with the method described above. The following information regarding treatment of nonferrous artifacts follows the guidelines in Hamilton (1999). In instances where artifacts require only minor cleaning, an abbreviated version of the treatments below may be adequate. If artifacts with primary associations can be separated into component parts with no further damage, then components should be conserved separately and reassembled after treatment.

Copper-alloy (bronze and brass) artifacts will be treated using electrolysis, to remove chlorides and undergo mechanical cleaning. They will be rinsed in a series of boiling de-ionizing water baths, polished using a fiberglass brush and baking soda, and chemically treated using a solution of benzotriazole in ethanol. The chemical treatment imparts a corrosion-resistant layer to the metal, which is then sealed using methacrylate.

Lead artifacts will be mechanically cleaned and then placed in a hydrochloric acid solution to remove any marine and surface calcareous deposits. The lead will then be rinsed in a de-ionized water to neutralize the acid. A solution of ammonium acetate will be used to chemically treat the lead and remove the corrosion products. The artifact will then go through a series of boiling rinses to remove any remaining salts and chemical.

Microcrystalline will be use as a final sealant.

Wood, rope, and other organic artifacts will all be rinsed in de-ionized water to remove all of the chlorides. They will then be conserved using a silicone treatment. The artifacts will also go through a series of 10 alcohol baths (ethanol and acetone) with increasing concentrations of alcohol to remove all of the water. The artifacts will then be placed in silicone oil for a period of time, which penetrates all of the voids in the surface. The artifacts are then removed from the silicone and allowed to air-dry. They will then be mechanically cleaned and placed in an airtight bag with a catalyst to bind the silicone with organic material and prevent any deformation of the artifact.

Ceramics will go through a series of rinse baths to remove all of the salts in the matrix.

The artifact will then be mechanically cleaned if necessary. Any iron or sulfide staining will be removed using various chemical solutions depending on the nature of the stain.

After cleaning and final rinse, the ceramic will be dehydrated in an alcohol bath and consolidated using either a PVA or and Acryloid B-72…