In 2008, the Department of the Army at Fort Benning Military Reservation requested a technical proposal for the archaeological mitigation (Phase III) of Site 9CE24 70 in Chattahoochee County, Georgia. Proposed construction of a Multi-Purpose Training Range (Fort Benning Project Number 64551) as a part of the installation's transformation to meet the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Act of 1995 and other Army initiatives will destroy the site.
PCI performed the archival research, data recovery fieldwork, and laboratory processes related to the Phase III mitigation of9CE2470 between September 22 and October 27,2008. All work was conducted in compliance with Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, with regulations implementing this legislation (36 CRF Part 800: Protection ofHistoric Properties), specific National Register Bulletin guidelines (e.g., Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Cemeteries and Burial Places), the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines for Evaluation and Documentation, and with standards set by the Georgia Historic Preservation Division, Department ofNatural Resources.
Previous investigations related to this project included Phase I survey work by Panamerican Consultants, Inc. (PCI) (Rovetto and Laird 2006) and Phase II testing by Brockington and Associates, Inc. (Gardner 2008}. Based on the results of the Phase III investigations, the site represents a small, short-term encampment that was used throughout the Early Archaic to the Historic Creek time periods. This 25-x-25 m site is located on a small alluvial terrace and slopes gently to the northwest. A tributary, connected to Upatoi Creek, flows north and winds around the northern and western edges of the terrace. There is a berm and firebreaks located on the southwestern, southern, and eastern sides of the site that were placed at this location by the military for training and forest management purposes. Even though the land was previously disturbed by these construction activities, as well as, prior timber harvesting activities; PCI recovered cultural materials that were in intact stratigraphic layers and an intact cultural feature that included material recovered from this provenience that was radiocarbon dated.
The report of PCI's mitigation of9CE2470 is presented in the following chapters. Chapter 1, written by Kristen R. Reed presents an introduction to the project area and discusses past investigations at 9CE2470. Chapter 2, updated by Jan M. Jamison, contains information regarding the past and present environmental conditions in the project area. Chapter 3, co-written by Kenny Pearce, H. Lee Harrison, Jr., and Kristen R. Reed, consists of a description of the field methods used during the survey and review of the research design. Chapter 4, written by LeeAnne Wendt, details the laboratory methods used during artifact analysis, provides a description of the artifacts recovered during the course of field investigations, as well as an overall analysis of the material recovered at 9CE24 70. Chapter 5, authored by Kenny Pearce, contains the results of fieldwork and interpretations for 9CE2470. Chapter 6, co-written by LeeAnne Wendt and Kristen R. Reed, contains a specialized analysis of the diagnostic artifacts recovered during the excavations at 9CE24 70, as well as an applied cultural history of the site. Chapter 7, authored by Kristen R. Reed, concludes the report with an interpretive synopsis ofPCI's findings and recommendations. Appendix A is the Material Recovered Table. Appendix B contains the revised copy of the Georgia State Site File Form. Appendix C contains the Research Design developed for the project. Appendix D contains the radiocarbon sample analysis from Beta Analytic, Inc. Appendix E contains an analysis of ceramics from 9CE2470 that was submitted for an undergraduate class project by Kelley Sommers. Appendix F is the Scope of Work for this project and, lastly, Appendix G contains the curriculum vitae of key personnel.