Technical Memorandum for Record of No Significant Archaeological Findings; Phase 1 Archaeological Survey of the 14-acre Proposed Cumming RRC Site, Forsyth County, Georgia

The field investigation team surveyed the project tract from July 15th to July 16`h 2009 by a Field Director (Mike Reynolds) and one field technician (William Trimble). Methods employed by the field team included a thorough visual/pedestrian survey of the entire footprint as well as a systematic shovel testing strategy. The investigation methodology was consistent with the State of Georgia professional standards (Georgia Council of Professional Archaeologists [GCPA] 2001), complied with the guidelines set forth in 36CFR part 800, and was carried out by personnel qualified under 36CFR part 61. The shovel testing strategy employed by the field crew consisted of eight transect effected throughout the footprint with shovel tests placed at 30-meter intervals. The Visual/Pedestrian survey consisted of a close examination of the ground surface for signs of mounds, features, or artifacts. Field notes detailing the soil conditions of excavated shovel tests and disturbed conditions were logged in field notebooks. Photographs detailing the current status and environment of the project corridor were taken extensively. Background investigations consisted of an examination of archaeological site forms and previous undertakings either on or within one mile of the subject tract. The investigated records are now maintained by the Georgia Archaeological Site Files (GASF) at the University of Georgia, in Athens. This data set is available through an online querying system; the Georgia Natural, Archaeological, and Historic Resources Geographic Information System (NAHRGIS). Additionally, a records search was made for documents pertaining to previously known, reported, and/or NRHP nominated resources within one mile (1.6 km) radius of the project corridor. An on-site assessment was also made based on topography, setting, previous regional surveys, and nearby resources as to the potential for the project tract to produce as yet unidentified archaeological resources, or for the undertaking to have an effect on those not yet identified outside of the immediate project tract footprint.