Phase I Survey of Three Areas at Naval Support Facility Indian Head and Predictive Model Testing, Charles County, Maryland

On behalf of the Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Washington, The Louis Berger Group, Inc. (LBG), carried out a Phase I archaeological survey of three areas at Naval Support Facility Indian Head, Charles County, Maryland. The survey was conducted as part of compliance efforts for Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. The purpose of the Phase I survey was both to determine the presence or absence of archaeological sites in the survey areas and to assess the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility of the sites to the extent possible at the Phase I level. The archaeological survey was also conducted to test a predictive model for archaeological resources developed for the installation in 2009.

The total area surveyed was 16.1 acres. Survey Area 1, covering 3.5 acres, is located on a ridge top overlooking Mattawoman Creek and Hog Island. The area was considered principally low potential in the 2009 predictive model because it is not close to water. LBG excavated 52 shovel tests in this area. One prehistoric artifact was recovered from the testing; it is considered an isolated find.

Survey Area 2, covering 8.9 acres, is located on a ridge top landform overlooking the Potomac River. Survey Area 2 was drained by an intermittent stream and was considered high potential in the 2009 predictive model. LBG excavated 168 shovel tests in this area. A historic site was identified, designated Site 18CH815. The identified site appears to be related to early twentieth century Navy housing.

Survey Area 3, covering 3.7 acres on one of the highest ridge tops on the installation, overlooks tributaries of Mattawoman Creek. The landform was intensively surveyed in 2003/2004 with no sites identified, although this was not recognized until after the current survey was complete. Because of the prior survey, the area was considered low potential in the 2009 predictive model. Seventy-nine shovel tests were excavated in the area during the present investigation, identifying a very low-density prehistoric site (18CH816). The present survey and the 2003/2004 surveys had different findings because low-density sites are very difficult to identify, particularly through shovel test sampling.

Both identified sites (18CH815 and 18CH816) are recommended as not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Site 18CH815 is an early twentieth-century domestic site with poor integrity and negligible information potential. Site 18CH816 is a small prehistoric site of unknown age with a very low density of prehistoric debitage; it appears to have good stratigraphic integrity but has low information potential.

The Phase I survey findings, particularly from Survey Area 2, raised questions about the accuracy of the 2009 predictive model. Survey Area 2 was determined to have high potential for prehistoric resources, but no prehistoric sites were identified. In addition, the findings from Survey Areas 1 and 3 showed that very low-density scatters of prehistoric artifacts may be present in areas modeled as low potential. Suggestions are made regarding refinement of the 2009 model: additional testing of the model should take place; and if model refinement is necessary, archaeologists may wish to reconsider treatment of the “distance to water” variable.