Under California law, any project requiring a "descretionary" permit (any permit where the agency can approve or deny the activity) must be reviewed for archaeology (CEQA sec. 15065 a, 21083.2 and 21084.1). In most cases this requires a simple inspection of the project area and background record search by a qualified archaeologist. The inspection and report is often referred to as a Phase I Cultural Resource Evaluation and is designed to locate and report on the presence or absence of historic or prehistoric features, buildings, or archaeological sites.
If no historic or prehistoric sites are found, the project can proceed as planned. In those few cases where an archaeological or historic site is discovered, the next step is to determine the "significance" of the site. This can often be done during the initial inspection based on surface evidence.
CEQA indicates that only "significant" cultural resources need be considered during the land use planning process (sec. 12084.1 and 15064.5). Guidelines for determining the significance of a cultural resource have been codified by both the Federal and State government. The State guidelines [Title 14, PRC, Sec. 4852 (b and c)] list the criteria which must be met for a historic or prehistoric resource to be deemed “significant” or “unique” enough to be included in the California Register of Historic Resources and to come under the protection of CEQA. To be determined significant, a resource must meet at least one of the following criteria:
1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; or
2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or National history; or
3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or
4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Federal guidelines list the same criteria and add that the cultural resource must be at least 50 years old (36 CFR part 60.6).
If the initial surface inspection was unable to determine the significance of the cultural resource, then it may be necessary to conduct a small test excavation. The test excavation is designed to determine the depth and size of the resource, its contents, and whether it has already been disturbed. Such a testing program is often refered to as a Phase II Test.
CEQA indicates that, as a last resort, archaeological sites that cannot be preserved in place shall be mitigated through the excavation and analysis of the “scientifically consequential information from or about the resource” (CEQA 15026.4 C). The archaeological community is able to recover the “scientifically consequential information” by retrieving and studying a “Statistically Valid Sample” of the proposed area of impact. The size of this sample is directly related to the content of the archaeological site. A site that contains materials from only a single cultural activity (such as stone tool making) may be adequately mitigated by the recovery and analysis of a 1% sample of the proposed area of impact. A site which contains materials representing several activities such as stone tool making, ceremonial activity, food processing, house construction, etc. may require an 8% to 10% sample to adequately characterize all the various activities.
This data recovery work is commonly refered to as a Phase III excavation.
Based on CEQA requirements, most permitting agencies have provisions in place for dealing with archaeological sites accidentally discovered during construction. These provisions usually include an immediate evaluation of the find and a method for allowing sufficient time and resources to either develop a plan for preserving the resource in place or recovering the information contained in the resource before it is damaged (CEQA sec. 21083.2 i). Check with your local city or county planning department for details.
Yes. There are a few types of projects listed in CEQA which are considered "exempt" from environmental review because of their small nature or location. These are called "categorical exemptions" (CEQA sec. 15300). However, CEQA specifically indicates that "A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource." (CEQA sec. 15300.2 f).
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this division, this division shall apply to discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or approved by public agencies, including, but not limited to, the enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, the issuance of zoning variances, the issuance of conditional use permits, and the approval of tentative subdivision maps unless the project is exempt from this division.
(a) The lead agency shall be responsible for determining whether an environmental impact report, a negative declaration, or a mitigated negative declaration shall be required for any project which is subject to this division. That determination shall be final and conclusive on all persons, including responsible agencies, unless challenged as provided in Section 21167.
A lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment and thereby require an EIR to be prepared for the project where any of the following conditions occur:
(a) The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
(a) As part of the determination made pursuant to Section 21080.1, the lead agency shall determine whether the project may have a significant effect on archaeological resources. If the lead agency determines that the project may have a significant effect on unique archaeological resources, the environmental impact report shall address the issue of those resources. An environmental impact report, if otherwise necessary, shall not address the issue of nonunique archaeological resources. A negative declaration shall be issued with respect to a project if, but for the issue of nonunique archaeological resources, the negative declaration would be otherwise issued.
(b) If it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts to be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. Examples of that treatment, in no order of preference, may include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
(1) Planning construction to avoid archaeological sites. (2) Deeding archaeological sites into permanent conservation easements. (3) Capping or covering archaeological sites with a layer of soil before building on the sites. (4) Planning parks, greenspace, or other open space to incorporate archaeological sites.