TCNS ID 97373 Proposed 300-Foot Guyed-Type Telecommunications Structure (310-Foot Overall Height with Appurtenacnes)

Environmental Corporation of America (ECA) has completed an Archaeological Assessment for the federal undertaking at the project area. The project area includes a proposed 100-foot by 100-foot (30-meter by 30-meter) lease area, an approximate 375-foot long by 30-foot wide (114-meter by 9-meter) access/utility easement, three proposed approximate 160-foot long by 60-foot wide (49-meter by 18-meter) guy-wire easements, and all the immediate adjacent areas. The lease area would be developed with a fenced compound that would include a 310-foot (overall height) tall guyed-type telecommunications structure and associated ground level support equipment. The project area is located off Georgia Highway 83, Culloden, Monroe County, Georgia. An archaeological assessment was conducted in order to ascertain whether the proposed undertaking, on the project site, might directly or indirectly affect cultural resources, if any such resources exist. Through our review of available cultural records and databases, no previously recorded archaeological sites and one archaeological survey (Report 6889) were identified within a ¾-mile background search radius. However, the area surveyed in Report 6889 was not located within the APE for direct effects for the proposed undertaking. During our pedestrian survey, ECA discovered remnants of a chimney located approximately 250 feet northeast of the proposed access/utility easement and not within the APE for direct effects for the proposed undertaking. Further, no archaeological cultural artifacts were uncovered during our fieldwork (see Attachment E-1c). Therefore, based on our findings, we recommend no further consultation under Section 106 Review of the National Historic Preservation Act for this proposed undertaking. ECA believes that the proposed undertaking would have no effect on any historic or prehistoric archaeological resources that are listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Based on our findings related to archaeological resources, we recommend no further consultation under Section 106 Review of the National Historic Preservation Act for this proposed undertaking.