Archaeological Survey of Project PI #M004206, Dawson, Jackson, and Rabun Counties

In compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and amendments thereto, Project PI #M004206, Dawson, Jackson, and Rabun Counties, has been surveyed with respect to archaeological resources, especially those on or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The purpose of the survey was to locate, identify and evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources within the proposed project's area of potential environmental effect. This project consists of maintenance to the bridge decks for the following bridges: SR II over the Middle Oconee River in Jackson County, SR 53 over Amicalola Creek in Dawson County, and SR 246 over Little Tennessee River in Rabun County. Proposed work at these locations may include all or some of the following activities: hydroblasting of the existing bridge deck, replacement of expansion joints, repair of concrete columns, sealing of cracks in the substructure, replacement of the approach slabs, milling and inlaying, removal and replacement of the existing guardrail, replacement of riprap, removal of drift buildup, refurbishment of bridge bearings, and repair of erosion. All work would be restricted to existing right-of- way. The project at SR 246 over the Little Tennessee River, Rabun County, also proposes the complete removal and replacement of the existing bridge deck (including removal and replacement of barrier, deck, edge beans, and endwalls), and would require an off-site detour. An archaeological survey consistent with these project specifications was performed within the project corridor. An archaeological survey (Level I) was conducted in accordance with "GDOT/FHWA Cultural Resource Survey Guidelines" developed by the GDOT Staff Archeologists in consultation with DNR Historic Preservation Division Staff and concurred in by the Federal Highway Administration and State Historic Preservation Officer. These guidelines provide general survey boundaries and methodological approaches to archaeological surveys based on the type/scope of work of proposed highway projects and are followed during the initial identification of archaeological resources. By agreement, since no archaeological resources were located within the project's area of potential effect, no signed concurrence form the State Historic Preservation Officer is required. It is concluded, therefore, that the project will have no effect upon archaeological resources on or eligible for inclusion in the NRHP provided that the project conforms to that described above.