Cultural Resources Survey of the Lone Star Express II Pipeline Project-Loop 1, in Midland, Martin, Howard, Mitchell, and Nolan Counties, Texas

Gray & Pape, Inc., of Houston, Texas, on behalf of Lone Star NGL Pipeline, LP, conducted an intensive pedestrian cultural resources survey within permitted areas of the 174.36-kilometer (108.34-mile) long Lone Star Express II Pipeline Project – Loop 1, in Midland, Martin, Howard, Mitchell, and Nolan Counties, Texas. The lead agency for the project has been identified as the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District (Permit No. SWG-2019-00091). Thus, survey efforts concentrated on areas anticipated to be under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (permit areas). Within Loop 1, the total Area of Potential Effects within the permit areas measures approximately 125.6 hectares (310.3 acres). This area encapsulates approximately 29.6 kilometers (18.4 miles) of proposed project alignment. In addition, approximately 2.3 kilometers (1.4 miles) or 8.9 hectares (21.9 acres) of the proposed route are controlled by the City of Colorado City and thus required the issuance of a Texas Antiquities Code Permit. Permit number 8896 was issued for the project. The procedures to be followed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to fulfill the requirements set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act, other applicable historic preservation laws, and Presidential directives as they relate to the regulatory program of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (33 CFR Parts 320-334) are articulated in the Regulatory Program of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Part 325 Processing of Department of the Army Permits, Appendix C Procedures for the Protection of Historic Properties. All fieldwork and reporting activities were completed according to a scope of work submitted to the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Texas Historical Commission and accepted standards set forth by the Texas Historical Commission and the Council of Texas Archeologists and in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Gray & Pape, Inc. submitted project records to the Center of Archaeological Studies at Texas State University. A records and literature review of the project location prior to survey identified 62 previously recorded archaeological resources, one cemetery, one historic marker, and 22 previously conducted surveys within a 0.8-kilometer (0.5-mile) radius of the Loop 1 segment. Of those, 10 recorded archaeological resources and six previous surveys intersect anticipated permit areas. Fieldwork on Loop 1 was conducted in the Spring of 2019 with supplemental survey in July, August, and September 2019. Survey of Loop 1 required approximately 1,200 Gray & Pape, Inc. person-hours to complete and involved archaeological reconnaissance and shovel testing throughout anticipated permit areas within the project corridor. In total, approximately 664 shovel tests were excavated within permit areas, 25 of which were positive for cultural materials. An additional 122 shovel tests were conducted as part of resource delineation efforts. Field effort also included the excavation of a total of 13 deep tests. Nine previously recorded resources: 41NL6, 41NL313, 41NL314, 41NL315, 41NL316, 41NL320, 41NL321, 41NL323, and 41NL326; eight new previously unrecorded resources: 41HW142, 41MH128, 41MH130, 41NL377, 41NL378, 41NL379, 41NL380, and 41NL392; and four isolate finds were identified within Loop 1 permit areas. An additional 10 previously recorded resources: 41MD41, 41HW8, 41HW104, 41HW105, 41HW106, 41NL310, 41NL312, 41NL322, 41NL324, and 41NL325; and one newly identified resource, 41MH129, were identified within the Area of Potential Effects but outside of jurisdictional areas. These sites largely exhibited surface scatters of lithics which are typical for the area and were consistent with the resources identified within jurisdictional permit areas.

Two of the isolates, MH-48-ISO-01 and MH-50-ISO-01, were identified on properties controlled by the City of Colorado City. These finds consisted of one to two chert flakes each with no additional materials present. Only one resource (41MH128) is of historic age, consisting of surface remnants associated with a former nearby farmstead. The remainder are prehistoric. Prehistoric contents consist nearly entirely of surface scatters of artifacts, with artifact classes largely the same across each site, consisting mainly of debitage, with small numbers of cores, bifaces, and utilized flakes, and less than half of the permit area sites containing fire-cracked rock. On very few occasions, a preform, an identifiable tool such as a scraper, or a broken projectile point fragment were also observed.
In general, the resources appear to represent raw material procurement areas due to the abundant chert deposits available in the rocky soil. Activities are believed to have been largely limited to the procurement and testing of cobbles and expedient manufacture of bifaces. It appears that more refined tool manufacture was taking place elsewhere. None of the lithic scatters or isolates contained temporally or culturally diagnostic artifacts and no artifacts were collected. Nor were any cultural features or historic-age standing resources encountered in the field. The presence of fire-cracked rock suggests thermal features were once present at a few sites, but these are now deflated and dispersed. The resource areas within the pipeline corridor showed clear disturbance from the adjacent pipeline rightof-way. Indications of soil deflation, erosion, and past land modifications such as terracing were also observed. Soils within the resources were shallow and artifacts found subsurface were often within 0 to 10 centimeters (0 to 4 inches) and most likely are the result of pipeline disturbance or taphonomic processes. Deep test results undertaken adjacent to Sweetwater Creek in Nolan County indicated a lack of A horizon soils and showed no potential for deeply buried cultural material within the anticipated depth of impacts at the location.

Report Organization
This report is organized into seven numbered chapters and two lettered appendices. Chapter 1.0 provides an overview of the project. Chapter 2.0 presents an overview of the environmental setting and geomorphology.
Chapter 3.0 presents a discussion of the cultural context associated with the APE. Chapter 4.0 presents the research design and methods developed for this investigation. The results of this investigation are presented in Chapter 5.0. Chapter 6.0 presents the investigation summary and provides recommendations based on the results of field survey. A list of literary references cited in the body of the report is provided in Chapter 7.0. Maps of the field survey results for Loop 1 are displayed in Appendices A and B.

Physiography and Geomorphology
Most of the project is situated in the Southern High Plains and North Central Plains areas of the Interior Plains physiographic region. The Southern High Plains, which includes Midland and the surrounding counties, are characterized by a nearly level to low rolling topography situated on an elevated plateau. This area includes portions of the Llano Estacado, a large, flat mesa that covers parts of New Mexico and northwest Texas. The area as a whole is dotted by more than 20,000 playa lakes, with many older such features buried under wind deposited sands. These ephemeral lake basins formed as a result of deflation and karstic processes and served as a valuable water source for both wildlife and humans (Ferring 2007). The paleogeographic setting was a deep ocean basin surrounded by shallow carbonate platforms (Bureau of Economic Geology [BEG] 1996). The eastern portion of the project, which includes Mitchell and Nolan Counties, is characterized by the rolling plains of the North Central Plains Physiographic region. The rolling terrain was created by the effects of erosion from ancient streams, leaving a landscape that is also steeply sloped in areas of highly dissected riverine edges (BEG 1996).

Surface Geology
Loop 1 crosses 14 geologic formations (Table  2-1). The surface deposits across the western portions of the project primarily consist of Holocene-age windblown cover sands underlain by Pleistocene-age fluviatile terrace deposits. Martin County contains red moderately finetextured to sandy loams overlying clay loam, with a horizon of calcium carbonate, while Midland County has sandy red and dark loams. Howard County soils are comprised of brown to dark brown sandy clay loam or crumbly clay loam overlying reddish-brown sandy clay loam to clay loam, with lime accumulations. Mitchell County contains sandy, red, and loamy soils. Clay can be found in the western portion of the county, while the northern and eastern areas contain reddish-brown loam overlying brown to yellowish-red sandy clay loam with a yellowishbrown sandstone sub-layer. Parts of the county that are at lower elevations have reddish-brown fine sandy loam overlying reddish-brown crumbly loam on top of reddish-brown to yellowish-red sandy clay loam. Nolan County soils range from dark brown gravelly clay loam atop limestone bedrock to grayish brown gravelly clay loam overlying white caliche to reddish-brown loam atop red mottled sandstone (SSS NRCS USDA 2019).

Natural Environment
The western portion of the project area is largely dominated by Mesquite brush and grassland (BEG 2000). As the project moves east, the Mesquite shrub becomes more interspersed and, in some places, entirely replaced with agricultural crops (BEG 2000). Local plants include oak, sand sage, acacia, yucca, prickly pear cactus, juniper, mesquite, and buffalo grass. Wildlife include the critically endangered lesser prairie chicken, as well as mammal species such as deer, fox, raccoon, skunk, opossum, badger, ringtail cat, bobcat, coyote, and peccary (Griffith et al. 2007). Other species inhabiting the area include waterfowl, rattlesnake, raptor, and jackrabbit (Lowther 1981). Loop 1 lies within the Kansan and Balconian biotic provinces. The Kansan biotic province contains grassland species, along with some Austroriparian species. The Balconian biotic province contains a mix of Austroriparian, Tamaulipan, Chihuahuan, and province species (Blair 1950).

Climate
The project area has a semi-arid climate. Rainfall is typically less than 33 centimeters (13 inches), most of which falls during spring and early summer storms. The level landscape and high intensity rains can lead to flash flooding. Summer temperatures can be intense, but a large diurnal range and low humidity results in relatively cool evenings, even in the hottest times of the year. Winters are highly variable, with cold fronts, and occasional light snows, quickly followed by rapid warming. Dust storms are also common in late winter and early spring, and dust can hang in the air for days, leading to hazy skies (Stoner 1974;Stoner et al. 1969Stoner et al. ,1974.

Land Use
Land use is largely split into two broad categories: 1) oil and gas infrastructure activities, and 2) agricultural including livestock. Most of the former are located throughout Midland and Martin Counties. A small portion of Loop 1 crosses a suburban area on the outskirts of Big Spring. For the most part, portions of the project not used for agriculture are covered by desert grasses and mesquite scrub. Much of the project length is collocated and shows clear signs of disturbance from adjacent pipeline corridors and supporting infrastructure.

Prehistoric Context
Prehistoric sites in the Southern High Plains and Central Plains regions are commonly found on the surface and in mixed context (Meltzer 1987). Sites are typically located along the remnants of draws, playas, and larger salina basins that have been filled in by eolian processes (Johnson and Holliday 2004). The majority of known prehistoric Clovis, Folsom, and Late Paleoindian archaeological sites in Texas are found in portions of the High Plains region near New Mexico and western Oklahoma. The general area was near the southernmost reach of now extinct megafauna in the United States and included mammoth and a large form of bison, which were frequently hunted by prehistoric groups.
Sites with historical components in the region date as far back to the 1700s as was recorded in Blanco Canyon. Most historic sites in the area represent materials left behind by Hispanic sheepherders called pastores, European buffalo hunters, military outfits, and Anglo dumpsites (Perttula 2004).
Archaeological materials that have contributed to the development of a five-period cultural chronology, as developed by Kelley (1964) and Prikryl (1990), in the area based on excavations at a handful of intact sites. For the purpose of this report, an attempt is made to generalize these periods in the following paragraphs; however, it should be noted that cultural periods are not equally represented across the varying ecological and physiographic areas that the project intersects.

Paleoindian Period
The Paleoindian period falls within the latter part of the Pleistocene and into the early Holocene. It is generally agreed to have begun as far back as 11,500 years before present (B.P.) and continued until 8,500 B.P. and is marked by ubiquitous hunting and on-site butchering of megafauna in small nomadic groups. Martin, Midland, and Nolan Counties contain a number of sites in the vicinity of the APE from this time period.
The Paleoindian period is further subdivided into three more specific periods marked by projectile point technologies (Frison 1991;Holliday 1997;Wheat 1972;Wormington 1957). These include the well-known Clovis, Folsom, and Late Paleoindian periods. The Clovis period is thought to have endured at least 500 years during the latter part of the Pleistocene and its lithic technology is the oldest known in North America. Clovis points are lanceolate-shaped with short flutes (Turner and Hester 1993). Clovis points are large, heavy, and well-made tools that were used for puncturing the thick flesh of large game. The Folsom period, from 10,800-10,300 B.P., is also defined by a large fluted lanceolateshaped point. Folsom points look similar to the Clovis point, but are thinner, more symmetrical, evenly chipped on the edges, and have a single classic flute all the way up the center of the point (Turner and Hester 1993). The Late Paleoindian period, from 10,000-8,500 B.P, is characterized by excellent craftsmanship of long, thin, narrow, lanceolate points without flutes. Instead, these points have parallel flakes and are ground with thinned bases typically accomplished with a few vertical flakes (Turner and Hester 1993). Paleoindian sites of note located in the Southern High Plains and Central Plains regions include the Lone Wolf Creek (41MH23), Midland (41MD1), and McClean (41TA29) sites.

Archaic Period
Following a transition to a warmer climate, the Archaic period is accepted to have lasted between 8,500-1,250 B.P. The Archaic period is marked by an adaptation to less abundant water resources and to more dependence on vegetation as a food source than compared to people living in the Paleoindian period (Johnson and Holliday 2004). The Archaic period is further subdivided into two periods, known as the Early and Late Archaic periods, which the former is characterized by a lack of occupational sites in the area during a time called the Altithermal when the land was hot, dry, and dusty. The Late Archaic is defined by a sudden increase in the number of sites around 4,500 B.P., when a noticeably milder climate with less hostile conditions returned to the area (Antevs 1954;Hughes 1991). Archaic sites are commonly associated with fewer megafauna kill sites than earlier Paleoindian sites. Such sites are often associated with an array of stemmed and later barbed dart points, ground stones, and hearths lined with burned stone and caliche-cobbles (Hofman 1989).

Late Prehistoric Period
The Archaic period was followed by the development of ceramic technology and the bow and arrow. These two inventions made way for significant sociocultural changes including a shift toward sedentism and decreased mobility. These developments are the hallmarks of the Late Prehistoric period, which lasted from A.D. 200-1450.
Because of more specific diagnostic traits associated with the Late Prehistoric, it is further subdivided into the Woodland period (A.D. 200-1450), the Palo Duro Complex (A.D. 500-1100), and the Antelope Creek Phase (A.D. 1200-1450). The Lake Creek Site in the Texas Panhandle represents the Woodland period in the High Plains, which is characterized by cordmarked ceramics, corner-notched Scallorn arrow points, and a large assemblage of lithic flake tools (Hughes 1962). Palo Duro Complex Sites are defined by the use of pit houses and evidence of plant food procurement and processing. The first evidence of such was gathered during excavations by Willey and Hughes (1978) of the Deadman's Terrace Site, more commonly called Deadman's Shelter.
Finally, the Antelope Creek Phase, sometimes called the Antelope Creek Focus, is the most distinctive and well-known of the Late Prehistoric periods in the Panhandle. Hughes (1991:31) documents the highest density of Antelope Creek Sites occurring along the Canadian breaks. Antelope Creek sites are best known by their pueblo-like structures with numerous rooms. These sites are also commonly identified by the presence of bone tools, made from butchered bison, scrapers, grinding slabs for plant processing, and sometimes obsidian (Hughes 1991).

Protohistoric Period
The Protohistoric period dates from A.D. 1450 to AD 1600. It is defined by documented trade activities with neighboring Pueblos and increased ceramic production projectile points that seem to be confined to one of two subdivisions of the Protohistoric. The Tierra-Blanca Complex and the Garza Complex are contemporary. The Tierra-Blanca Sites are thought to have traded with the New Mexico Pueblos and are typically identified by the presence of larger villages (Hughes 1991). The Garza Complex is associated with the Garza point type which seems to only appear at Garza Complex sites. Other point types found at Garza Complex sites include the Washita, Harrell, Lott, and Fresno (Hughes 1991).

Historic Period
Several Native-American tribes are known to have inhabited the area prior to Spanish contact in 1541; these include the Apache, Comanche, Kiowa, and Kiowa-Apache (Newcomb 1961). In the nineteenth century, the area was inhabited by the Kiowa and Comanche tribes, who preferred free range over Oklahoma's reservations (Whitlock 1970). By then, the Comanche had displaced the Apache. It is widely known that by the nineteenth century, aboriginal groups remaining in the High Plains had begun exploiting horses for use during hunting and raiding. During that time, the Comanche were assigned by the Army to reservation life in Oklahoma (Newcomb 1961).

Historical Context of the Region
The earliest written descriptions of the northcentral region of Texas come as a result of Spanish exploration of the areas to the north and west of the current project. The cliff on the north facing side of the Canadian River was seen by Francisco Vásquez de Coronado in 1541 on his way east from Cíbola, leading him to name the plateau the Llano Estacado, or Palisaded Plain. In addition to recording the initial explorations of the Llano Estacado, Coronado developed the region's orientation toward the Hispanic Southwest. Coronado's efforts were mimicked by Juan de Oñate during an early seventeenth century expedition along the Canadian River. In 1872, the Llano Estacado was described by General Randolph Marcy as a "great North American desert" with "not a tree, bush or water" (Whitlock 1970).
At the time, buffalo herds were common across the Llano Estacado. In the 1870s, conflict between American buffalo hunters and regional Native-American tribes reached its apex in the Red River War. Military defeat and the slaughter of the buffalo herds forced the Comanches, Kiowa, Cheyenne, and Arapaho off the plains to reservations (Haley 2010).
The area was originally organized as Tom Green County in 1874. The massive area would eventually be subdivided into 66 modern counties (Henderson 2010). White settlement in the region remained sparse, with large cattle ranches being the primary industry. Irrigation diverted from the Pecos allowed for agriculture in some areas, but repeated drought and floods often disrupted production. It wasn't until the 1920s and the discovery of oil that the region experienced significant growth. Subsequent booms and bust within the petroleum and natural gas industries have continued to be the major driver of development of the region into the present day (Justice and Leffler 2010; Smith 2010; Leffler 2010).

FIELD METHODOLOGY
This cultural resource investigation was designed to identify and assess new and previously recorded cultural resources that may be impacted by the proposed project. Desktop assessment and modeling were performed prior to initiating field investigations to better understand cultural, environmental, and geological settings. Results of the desktop assessment were then used to develop the field methodology.

Site File and Literature Review
The background literature search included a review of previously conducted cultural resource surveys in the vicinity of the proposed project area, and of any historical document pertaining to the history of the area. Site file research was performed to identify all previously recorded archaeological sites within a 0.8-kilometer (0.5-mile) study radius of the project area and any recorded historic structures eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or State Antiquities Landmark (SAL) listing located adjacent to the project area. Site file research was done by reviewing records maintained by the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory in Austin, Texas, and by consulting the Texas Historical Commission (THC).
Historical topographic maps and aerial photographs, when available, were reviewed to identify any historic structures, residential, and other structures that might be located close to or within the project area. Historical maps of Texas and Texas counties were also reviewed in order to better understand the history of the region and to identify any potential historic trails and important historic sites located or crossing the project area.

Intensive Pedestrian Survey
The project was subjected to pedestrian survey within permit areas. Permit areas were based on water features which were field delineated by biological field crews in conjunction with the cultural resource survey. The permit areas for each water feature was assessed on a case-bycase basis but in general comprised the first terrace to first terrace of large perennial creeks and rivers that intersect the APE. For smaller streams and water features without terraces, a minimum baseline buffer area placed to either side of the water feature was assessed. These buffer areas consist of 180 linear meters (600 linear feet) to either side of larger perennial and intermittent drainages and 100 linear meters (300 linear feet) to either side of some intermittent and ephemeral drainages, wetlands, and catch basins. Preliminary permit areas were further modified based on additional data such as geological units, soils, riparian areas, and previously identified resources. Based on the project's typical corridor width of 39.6 meters (130 feet), two transects were investigated, with additional transects added as needed for wider temporary workspaces. Transects were spaced no more than 30 meters (100 feet) apart. Because most of the project APE is collocated with an existing pipeline corridor, which at times subsumes half or more of the total corridor width, one survey transect was often within an existing pipeline easement. Existing easements were routinely maintained and often displayed greater than 30 percent surface visibility. Survey transects overlapping existing easements were at a minimum subjected to pedestrian surface inspection/walkover and also judgmentally shovel tested where warranted to confirm/refute suspected subsurface disturbance. Digital photography aided documentation of the existing conditions of the project area and fieldwork methods, with photograph locations recorded on field maps and logged with a global positioning system (GPS) unit.
Shovel testing within permit areas and areas subject to the state antiquities code was attempted along each transect at a number which met or exceeded Texas State Minimum Archaeological Survey Standards regardless of surface visibility. Shovel tests were generally spaced at intervals between 30 and 60 meters (100 and 200 feet). In areas of clear previous disturbance or areas of lower probability for cultural resources, shovel tests were not to be conducted at a distance greater than 100 meters (328 feet). Shovel tests were attempted to depths of 1 meter (3.3 feet) or until culturally sterile subsoil was reached, except where bedrock was present at shallow depths, or where potential existing pipelines were present.
All shovel tests measured approximately 30 centimeters by 30 centimeters (1 foot by 1 foot). When possible, all soil was screened through 0.64-centimeter (0.25-inch) wire mesh. Vertical control of each shovel test was maintained by excavating in arbitrary 10-centimeter (4-inch) levels with reference to the parent soil stratum. The profile of each shovel test was inspected for color and texture change potentially associated with the presence of cultural features. Descriptions of soil texture and color followed standard terminology and soil color charts (Munsell 2005). Additional information such as mottling, evidence of disturbance, and moisture level was also recorded. All shovel test data were recorded on standardized forms for analysis. All shovel tests were backfilled after excavation and documentation. The excavated shovel tests were placed on field maps and points were taken with GPS.

Deep Testing
One permit location in Loop 1, Sweetwater Creek in Nolan County, was identified as a likely candidate for deep testing based on geomorphological data, project plans, and field survey results in conjunction with agency coordination. The location contains Holoceneage alluvial deposits and soils mapped for the location have the potential for a deep A horizon. Agency consultation concurred with the use of machine auguring at the location. Auger tests were placed at 50-meter (164-foot) intervals, conducted along a single transect placed outside of the existing pipeline right-ofway (ROW) for safety concerns. Mechanical auguring was conducted with reference to the most recent draft of the Council of Texas Archeologists (CTA) guidelines. Soil matrix removed during auguring was placed on plastic tarp to keep it separated from the surrounding vegetation. The removed material was monitored for texture and color changes and screened using ¼-inch mesh. Descriptions of soil texture and color followed standard terminology and the Munsell (2005) soil color charts. The locations of all deep tests were recorded with a sub-meter accurate GPS data collector and recorded on field maps.

Site Definition
Surface visibility along the entire project length was generally 70 percent or greater. Thus, all previously recorded sites that intersect the APE within permit areas were subjected to surface inspection supplemented by a sample of shovel tests placed at regular intervals within the previously established site boundary to check for deposition and density. The number and interval of these sample shovel tests was determined by the field Archaeologist on a case-by-case basis but generally was based on the previously established site size, previous disturbance, landforms, amount of surface visibility, and perceived areas of surface density. Beyond the previously or newly established site boundary, a minimum of six radial shovel tests were conducted in 10-meter (33-foot) intervals in cardinal directions within the limits of the APE. Delineation tests were pursued until reaching two consecutive negative tests.
Newly identified sites were delineated in the same manner. Positive shovel tests, artifacts visible on the surface, and site boundaries were recorded on project maps and via sub-meter accurate GPS. Newly identified sites and revisited previously recorded sites were also documented on standardized archaeological site forms.
For each cultural resource identified, including structures or other resources within or immediately adjacent to the APE, photographs were taken of the general vicinity and of any visible features, if present. A sketch map was prepared showing site limits, feature locations, permanent landmarks, topographic and vegetation variations, sources of disturbances, and total number of tests performed within and near the site. Artifacts recovered from shovel tests were not to be collected. All discovered artifacts were photographed in the field and placed in the backfilled shovel test or left on the surface. Locations of all positive tests were recorded with the GPS.
Each identified resource was given a temporary field site number. Site forms were submitted for each cultural site identified. Revisit site forms were completed for previously recorded sites reidentified in the field. State-issued trinomial site numbers were requested for cultural sites but not for identified isolates.
If any architectural resources had been identified, these would have been recorded on corresponding field forms. Details of form, construction, material, style, condition, and alteration would be recorded both on the forms and photographically for each structure. All documentation would be reviewed by a qualified Architectural Historian who would decide if additional information or a personal field inspection was necessary at the survey level.

Artifact Analysis
Artifacts encountered in the field were not collected; thus, no lab analysis was conducted. Artifacts were instead described and classified in the field as best as possible and representative samples were photographed. Data recorded in the field for uncollected artifacts included general attributes such as form (if identifiable), material, functional classification (if identifiable), and counts.

Curation
No diagnostic or non-diagnostic artifacts were collected in the course of the current survey. As a project permitted through the THC; however, Gray & Pape submitted project records to the Center of Archaeological Studies at Texas State University.

Result of Site File and Literature Review
A search of the Texas Archeological Sites Atlas, maintained by the THC, determined that no National Register properties intersect the project alignment within Loop 1. The same research identified that 62 previously recorded archaeological sites, 22 previously conducted archaeological surveys, one historical marker, and one cemetery had been recorded within the 0.8-kilometer (0.5-mile) study radius of the project area.

Previously Recorded Surveys
According to a search of the Texas Archeological Sites Atlas, at least 22 previous surveys have been conducted within a 0.8kilometer (0.5-mile) study radius of Loop 1 (Table 5-1, Appendix A). Fourteen of those surveys intersect the project alignment; however, all but two of these consist of narrow survey corridors and do not significantly overlap the current project. Two previously conducted surveys, the Permian Express II Pipeline (Karpinski et al. 2014) and the Lone Star Express 24-inch Pipeline Project (Turpin and Sons, Inc.), both overlap significant portions of the current project; however, the Turpin and Sons project is not published and no data regarding survey coverage is available. The most recent of these surveys were conducted by Tetra Tech, SWCA, AR Consultants, ACI Consulting, and others. A review of reports associated with these and other surveys in the vicinity indicated a mix between 100 percent survey coverage and survey of USACE jurisdictional water crossings. Survey findings suggests that while archaeological sites are not uncommon in the general vicinity, they do not typically contain the information that would result in a recommendation for eligibility. Some of these resources are discussed further in-depth below.

Previously Recorded Archaeological Resources
Per a search of the Texas Archeological Sites Atlas, 62 previously recorded archaeological resources occur within the 0.8-kilometer (0.5mile) study radius of the project area. Of those 62 resources, 23 are located within 91 meters (300 feet) of the APE (Table 5-2). And 10 of those are potentially located within permit areas. Those 10 resources, or at least portions of them, have been previously determined to be ineligible for listing on the National Register. Nine of those resources were re-identified during survey and are described in greater detail in Section 5.2.2 of this report. Previously recorded resource 41NL317 was not reidentified during the current survey effort.

Historical Markers
One historical marker is recorded within 0.8 kilometers (0.5 miles) of the project ( Figure  A23). Marker number 1146, entitled "Wallace, D.W. '80 John' " was established in 1965, and commemorates the marker's namesake, who was a child of slaves before emancipation. At 15 years old he became a cowboy and rode for a local rancher beginning in 1877. He eventually became a ranch owner himself. As an adult he went back to school and his emphasis on education was passed to his children, some of whom became teachers (THC 2019). Cemeteries the project corridor at its closest. The Wallace family cemetery is located west of County Road Only one cemetery is located within the 0.8-424 near Loraine, Texas, and includes the kilometers (0.5-miles) radius of the Loop 1 property's namesake, D.W. "80 John" Wallace project area ( Figure A23). The Wallace along with approximately 19 other family Cemetery (No. MH-C010) is located members. approximately 200 meters (656 feet) south of  * Denotes the potential to intersect the APE. ** Denotes the potential to intersect a permit area.

Results of Field Investigations
Fieldwork included archaeological reconnaissance throughout USACE jurisdictional areas of the APE. Crews from both Gray & Pape and Horizon conducted field survey. In total, 56 permit areas were surveyed (Table 5-3). These entailed approximately 93 water features consisting of streams, rivers, wetlands, and ponds/catch basins. Three permit areas were surveyed under the provisions of the Texas Antiquities Code.
In total, 664 shovel tests were excavated within the permit areas (see maps in Appendix B). Of those, 25 were positive for cultural materials resulting in the re-identification of nine previously recorded resources, the discovery of eight new resources, and four isolate finds within permit areas (Table 5-4). An additional 10 previously recorded resources and one newly identified resource were identified within the project APE but outside of permit areas (see Report Sections 5.3 and 5.4). Resource and artifact descriptions are provided in more detail in report sections below.   Loop 1 General Characteristics The loop's setting largely consisted of two surface characteristics: 1) desert plains with vegetation consisting of desert grasses, scrub, and forbs typically seen in Midland to Mitchell Counties ( Figure 5-1); and 2) agricultural fields in various stages of growth typically seen in Mitchell to Nolan Counties ( Figure 5-2). To the west, the vicinity of the loop is pockmarked by several well pads and petroleum infrastructure. Surface visibility generally ranged from 70 to 100 percent. Almost the entire survey corridor has been previously impacted by pipeline installation, maintenance, or subsequent erosion, county roads, and unimproved roads that cross the APE.

Revisits of Previously Recorded Resources Located within Jurisdictional Areas
Nine previously recorded resources located within permit areas: 41NL6, 41NL313, 41NL314, 41NL315, 41NL316, 41NL320, 41NL321, 41NL323, and 41NL326, were reidentified during survey. The resources were reidentified by either Horizon or Gray & Pape crews. In some cases described below, Horizon performed the site investigation within the APE and Gray & Pape conducted delineation work outside of the APE to better define the site boundary. Results at each re-identified resource are described below.

5.2.2.1
Resource 41NL6 According to the earliest site form for the site, Resource 41NL6 was first recorded in 1979 by Biddy R. Harrison as an approximately 0.4hectare (1-acre) area located to the west of Sweetwater Creek. The site was reported to contain an undocumented number of shallow sandstone hearths along the eastern edge of an eroded terrace. The site form also mentions an unknown number of lithics of Tecovas and Edwards chert (THC 2019).
The resource was revisited in 2014 by Tetra Tech as part of survey for the Permian Express II Pipeline (Karpinski et al. 2014). That visit resulted in a revision to the site record. The 2014 record describes the site as being composed of a Middle Archaic to Late Archaic period series of short-term camp sites and lithic procurement and/or tool maintenance workstations. The 2014 visit expanded the resource to both sides of Sweetwater Creek, east side of Highway 70. The hearths recorded in 1979 were absent at the time of the 2014 recording; however, sparsely scattered firecracked rock (FCR), four tested cobbles, two cores, two bifaces, 12 retouched or utilized flakes, approximately 2,000 pieces of lithic debitage, and five projectile points dating to the Middle and Late Archaic period were observed. Investigation in 2014 included a systematic surface inspection at 5 meter (16 foot) intervals as well as the excavation of four shovel tests and two test units. Although two shovel tests resulted in near-surface cultural materials, testing failed to provide evidence for a potential intact subsurface cultural component. As a result of the investigation, the investigation suggested that the site has been impacted by water erosion, wind deflation, livestock grazing, agriculture, and mechanical vegetation treatments. As of 2015, the resource was determined by the THC to be ineligible for listing on the NRHP within the Permian Express II Pipeline right-of-way (ROW) (Texas Archeological Sites Atlas 2019).
Current investigation of the resource was initiated by Horizon on April 5, 2019, which conducted surface inspection and the excavation of 20 shovel tests spaced at 30meter (100-foot) intervals across the length of the resource within the APE (Figures 5-3 and 5-4). As discussed by previous reports, the site consists of gently sloping uplands to either side of Sweetwater Creek. The site is largely covered by thick short grasses, causing significant hindrance in the rerecording of the resource ( Figure 5-3). The APE within the resource generally measures 40 meters (131 feet) wide with an expanded workspace at the water crossing to approximately 47 meters (156 feet). Of that width, approximately 30 meters (100 feet) is located within the existing ROW. Only one flake was observed on the ground surface by Horizon. Two positive shovel tests within the APE contained one flake each (Table 5-5).
On April 12, 2019, Gray & Pape conducted delineation of the site boundaries ( Figure 5-4). Fourteen delineation shovel tests placed to the east and west of the resource boundary produced no additional positive shovel tests. Two additional surface flakes were identified. Soils mapped for the location consist of primarily of Nipsum clay loam, which consists of a surface layer of brown (10YR 4/3 to 7.5YR 5/2) clay followed by a subsurface layer of reddish brown (5YR 5/4) clay (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). Of the 19 shovel tests placed within the resource boundary/APE, four were positive for one lithic flake each (Table 5-5). View is to the east.

REMOVED FROM PUBLIC COPY
A typical shovel profile within the resource / APE differed from soils mapped for the location and consisted of a surface layer of light reddish brown (5YR 6/4) silt loam to a depth of 50 centimeters (20 inches) followed by a layer of reddish brown (5YR 5/4) clay. As was determined by Tetra Tech in 2014, current shovel test results suggest that here is a lack natural surface soils at the location. However, to verify the depth of soils and to determine if deeper cultural deposits or buried paleosols exist at the location, 13 auger tests were conducted within the APE at the site ( Figure 5-4). These resulted in 1 flake identified within 0-10 centimeters (4 inches) below surface with no signs of buried paleosols or features. Further details of the auger testing are provided below in report Section 5-4. The resource was not investigated beyond the ROW to the north and south during the current effort. Resource 41NL313 was revisited on April 8 by Horizon which conducted a pedestrian walkover and three shovel tests excavated at 30-meter (100-foot) intervals within the APE ( Figure 5-5).
The surface scatter along the pipeline ROW is located on the east side of Bitter Creek. The location within the existing ROW is sparsely covered by grasses with the ground surface visibility decreasing outside of the ROW ( Figure  5-5). The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by flooding, erosion, existing pipelines and berming. The APE within the resource generally measures 47.5 meters (156 feet) wide, with approximately 30 meters (100 feet) of that width located within the existing ROW. Within the APE, Horizon recorded a scatter of 20+ flakes, a scraper, 3+ bifaces, a preform, and one core (Table 5-6, Figure 5-6). Of the three shovel tests placed within the resource boundary/APE, only one was positive with a single piece of clear glass observed at between 0 and 20 centimeters (0 and 8 inches) below ground surface. The previously recorded midden feature was not reidentified during the effort. The feature and likely one of Tetra Tech's two reported artifact concentrations are likely located outside of the current APE to the north based on the field map depicted in Karpinski et al. (2014).  Soils mapped for the location consist of primarily of Colorado loam, which consists of a surface layer of light reddish brown (5YR 6/3) silt loam to a depth of 13 centimeters (5 inches) followed by a subsurface layer of light reddish brown (5YR 6/3) loam (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). This differed slightly from soils observed in shovel tests which contained a surface layer of brown (7.5YR 4/3) sandy loam to a depth of 20 centimeters (8 inches) followed by a layer of reddish brown (5YR 5/4) clay.
The site was revisited by Gray & Pape and agency representatives of the THC and USACE on August 28, 2019. During a cursory walkover of the site it was noted that FCR is scattered across the site with concentrations in the existing pipeline area at the northern side of the site (possibly corresponding with Artifact Concentration 1 reported by Tetra Tech in 2014), a concentration just south of the APE, and a linear concentration of FCR along an alluvial terrace slope within the APE. At the request of the THC, Gray & Pape conducted an additional investigation within the APE on August 29, 2019, to finish site delineation within the southern portion of the APE. As a result of the supplemental investigation, six shovel tests were conducted within the central and southern portions of the APE within the site boundary. Two of the shovel tests were positive for cultural materials, consisting of one reworked flake identified at between 20 and 40 centimeters (8 and 16 inches) below surface in Shovel Test 5 and one unmodified flake between 30 and 40 centimeters (12 and 16 inches) below surface in Shovel Test 7. Both shovel tests are located within the existing ROW.
Within the APE, the resource appears to have experienced moderate erosion since its original recordation in 2014, resulting in soil deflation and the exposure and likely displacement of artifacts now on the surface. Based on the sparsity of significant subsurface deposits within the APE and lack of diagnostics recorded during the current effort, Site 41NL313 appears to have low research potential within the APE and no further work is recommended within the project footprint. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.2.3
Resource 41NL314 Resource 41NL314 was originally recorded in 2013 and 2014 by Tetra Tech, Inc. for the Permian Express Pipeline II (Karpinski et al. 2014). The resource was recorded as a temporary lithic reduction and tool maintenance locality of unknown prehistoric affiliation. The resource is located approximately 657 meters (0.4 miles) south of Highway 221, along the west side of Little Stink Creek, between a two-track road and manmade pond. Materials recorded at the time were distributed between two small, sparse artifact concentrations located along the western side of the drainage and consisted of two expedient tools, three exhausted secondary cores, and approximately nine pieces of lithic debitage. Investigation in 2014 included a systematic surface inspection at 5-meter (16foot) intervals. No shovel tests were excavated due to previous impacts of the man-made pond and visual inspection of the sediments within the adjacent cut bank. The resource was recorded as having been significantly impacted by the two-track road and a man-made pond. The resource was not recommended for further work and in 2014 and 2015 was determined by the THC to be ineligible for listing on the NRHP (Texas Archeological Sites Atlas 2019).
Gray & Pape revisited Resource 41NL314 on April 8 and conducted a pedestrian walkover and seven shovel tests excavated at between 20 and 30-meter (66 and 100-foot) intervals within the APE. The location within the existing ROW is sparsely covered by grasses with the ground surface visibility decreasing outside of the ROW ( Figure 5-8). The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture. The vegetation consists of mesquite brush, paddle cactus, and various grasses and forbs. The location has been impacted by flooding, erosion, the existing pipelines and access road. Current observations recorded a small scatter of lithics located on a rise west of a drainage (Figure 5 Gray & Pape returned to the site location on April 12, 2019 in an attempt to identify the site's northern and southern limits. Delineation efforts identified and additional 27 flakes, one core, and one biface (Table 5-7, Figure 5-10). An additional four shovel tests placed beyond the identified limits of the surface scatter produced no additional cultural materials.  Soils mapped for the location primarily consist of Sagerton clay loam and Burson-Quinlan association. These soils consist of shallow A horizons composed of red (2.5YR 5/6) to brown (7.5YR 4/2) loam/clay loam to a depth of about 20 centimeters (8 inches) followed by a subsurface layer of red (2.5YR 4/6) loam to brown (7.5YR 4/2) clay (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). A typical shovel profile within the resource/APE consisted of a surface layer of brown (7.5YR 4/4) sand to a depth of 10 centimeters (4 inches) followed by a layer of rock. The results of shovel tests at the location suggest the soils have been eroded.
The resource was found to extend beyond the pipeline corridor to the south and may continue to the north as well.  (  Of the 27 shovel tests excavated along the length of APE within and between the two former resource boundaries, none were positive for cultural materials and most of the shovel tests showed signs of disturbance from the adjacent pipelines. Several soils are mapped for the location including Sagerton clay loam, Burson-Quinlan association, Pyron clay loam, and Pitzer gravelly loam. A general characteristic of these soils is that they consist of a shallow red (2.5YR 5/6 to 2.5YR 4/6) A horizon of loam / clay loam followed by varying thicknesses of red (2.5YR 5/6) Cr horizon of interbedded weaklycemented fine-grained sandstone, siltstone, and shale (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). A representative shovel test profile within the resource/APE consisted of a surface layer of brown (7.5YR 4/4) sand to a depth of 10 to 25 centimeters (4 to 10 inches) followed by a layer of rock. This closely resembles soils mapped for the location; however, this profile was typically identified outside of the existing ROW to the south. Shovel test profiles nearer to the proposed centerline typically contained disturbed or eroded soils, with bedrock located at increasingly shallow depths.   The location of both previously recorded sites was revisited by Gray & Pape and agency representatives of the THC and USACE on August 28, 2019. During a cursory walk-over of the site it was noted that approximately 20-40 flakes are located across the surface in the vicinity of the previously mapped location of 41NL315, mostly consisting of tertiary and secondary reduction stages. Approximately 20-40 flakes of mostly tertiary and secondary reduction stages were observed across the previously mapped location of 41NL316 as well as a concentration of FCR observed within the southeastern corner of the site ( Figure 5-14). The FCR concentration consisted of approximately 25 limestone and likely represents a deflated feature.
Current investigation of the former resource boundaries within the corridor found that cultural materials continue between the two resources. However, the location has been previously disturbed by previous pipeline installation, particularly adjacent to the existing pipeline ROW, and subsequent erosion/displacement. Shovel testing within the APE produced no subsurface artifacts and displayed a shallow or deflated soil deposition. Based on the lack of subsurface deposits within the APE, lack of diagnostics, and signs of disturbance observed during the current effort, Site 41NL315/41NL316 appears to have low research potential. No further work is recommended within the project footprint. The Corps agreed with this recommendation subsequent to the visit on August 28, 2019. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D. The Corps agreed with this recommendation subsequent to the visit on August 28, 2019.

5.2.2.5
Resource 41NL320 Resource 41NL320 was originally recorded in 2015 by Turpin and Sons, Inc. (TAS) for the Lone Star Express 24 survey . The resource was recorded as a camp site and quarry/procurement location of an unknown prehistoric temporal affiliation. The resource is located along both banks of Idlewild Creek, approximately 800 meters (0.5 miles) east of CR 143. The 2014 site form describes 3 thermal features consisting of a burned rock midden and two hearths, FCR, and stone tools and flakes consisting of a spokeshave, unifaces, modified flakes, and hammerstone, but lacking temporally diagnostic artifacts. The resource was found to be largely disturbed due to damage from previous pipelines, erosion, deflation, and a two-track road that cuts through the resource. The resource was not recommended for further work and in 2015 was determined by the THC to be ineligible for listing on the NRHP (Texas Archeological Sites Atlas 2019).
Current investigation of Resource 41NL320 was initiated by Horizon on April 3, of 2019, and consisted of pedestrian walkover and 15 shovel tests excavated at 30-meter (100-foot) intervals within the APE (Figure 5-15). The APE within the resource generally measures 40 meters (131 feet) wide with an expanded workspace at the water crossing to approximately 47 meters (156 feet). Of that width, very little of the APE is outside the limits of previous disturbance related Plan view of Resource 41NL320. 36 Figure 5-15 REMOVED FROM PUBLIC COPY to either pipeline construction or mechanical land modification. The location is dissected into northern and southern portions by Idlewild Creek, which is damned alongside the southern half of the site. The northern APE of the site consists entirely of previous pipeline workspace. The area is devoid of vegetation and contains several gravels. The southern portion of the site is largely covered by short grasses with the ground surface visibility decreasing outside of the ROW (Figure 5-16). Observed surface artifacts recorded within the APE by Horizon consist of approximately 34 chert debitage (Table 5-9). Of the 15 shovel tests placed across the location, one (test 28) was positive with a single chert flake observed between 20 and 30 centimeters (8 to 12 inches) below ground surface.  Table 5-9). Thirteen delineation shovel tests placed around the visible surface scatter at 10-meter (33-foot) intervals produced one additional positive shovel test (Test 2), containing one flake at between 20 and 30 centimeters (8 to 12 inches) below ground surface.  The southern portion of the site location was revisited by Gray & Pape and agency representatives of the THC and USACE on August 28, 2019. During a cursory walk-over of the site it was noted loosely clustered limestone and quartzite FCR was inside the APE. At the request of the USACE, Gray & Pape revisited the northern portion of the site within the APE on September 4, 2019, to look for additional signs of FCR. The revisit noted the APE within the site boundary was entirely disturbed but noted no additional finds of FCR. The location had been previously graded as part of previous pipeline construction.
The resource appears to have experienced moderate erosion and deflation due to previous impacts along the length of the resource. The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by flooding, erosion, multiple existing pipelines and two-track roads. This observation combined with the sparsity of surface artifacts, lack of diagnostics, and shallow soils recorded during the current effort suggests the resource is not significant or intact. No further work is recommended within the project footprint. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.2.6
Resource 41NL321 Resource 41NL321 was originally recorded in 2015 by TAS for the Lone Star Express 24 survey . The resource was recorded as a camp site and quarry/procurement location of an unknown prehistoric temporal affiliation. The resource is located along the west side of Long Branch immediately south of CR 152 within the existing pipeline corridor. The 2015 site form describes a scatter of stone tools and lithics consisting of three scrapers, one uniface, four tertiary, one sec, two utilized flakes, one biface, four expedient tools, one shatter, FCR, and a single displaced hearth. The resource was found to be largely disturbed due to damage from previous pipelines, erosion, and deflation. The resource was not recommended for further work and in 2015 was determined by the THC to be ineligible for listing on the NRHP (Texas Archeological Sites Atlas 2019).
Resource 41NL321 was revisited on March 27 by Gray & Pape and was investigated by pedestrian walkover and 14 shovel tests excavated at 30-meter (100-foot) intervals within the APE (Figure 5-18). The APE within the resource measures 40 meters (131 feet) wide with approximately 30 meters (100 feet) of that distance within the existing ROW. The location consists of an upland/hilltop adjacent to Long Branch Creek. A great deal of non-cultural rock was present at the surface of the hilltop. The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and is sparsely covered by short grasses with the ground surface visibility decreasing outside of the ROW and adjacent to waterways ( Figure 5-19). Within the ROW, the resource consists of a small lithic scatter of approximately 10 confirmed lithics of mostly secondary and tertiary flakes, and a biface fragment ( Figure 5-20, Table 5-10). Of the 14 shovel tests placed within and around the previous resource boundary and surface scatter, three tests were positive for cultural materials, one test (A8) containing two flakes between 20 and 30 centimeters (8 and 12 inches) below ground surface and the remaining two tests (A8+10S and A8+20W) each containing a single flake located between 20 and 30 centimeters (8 and 12 inches) below ground surface.
On April 1, 2019, the resource was subjected to delineation by surface inspection and shovel testing in an effort to identify the southern limits of the site. Delineation tests were placed within and around visible surface scatters at 10-meter (33-foot) intervals. Surface finds continue to the south where they expand consistent with the topography. The southern portion of the resource contains a good deal more materials and types including a multitude of bifaces and scrapers.
Plan view of Resource 41NL321.    While more intact areas may exist beyond the ROW to the south where the topography changes to include higher terraces and landforms, the portion of the site within the current APE has experienced moderate erosion and deflation due to previous adjacent impacts. This observation combined with the sparsity of artifacts, lack of diagnostics, and shallow soils recorded during the current effort suggests that the portion of Site 41NL321 within the ROW has low research potential and no further work is recommended within the project footprint. This recommendation was concurred with by the USACE. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.2.7
Resource 41NL323 Resource 41NL323 was originally recorded in 2015 by TAS for the Lone Star Express 24 survey . The resource was recorded as a camp site and quarry/procurement location of an unknown Archaic temporal affiliation. The resource is located along the east side of Idlewild Creek, 800 meters (0.5 miles) east of CR 143. The 2015 site form describes a burned rock midden with FCR and two dispersing hearths as well as a lithic scatter containing a consisting of a spokeshave, unifaces, modified flakes, hammerstone, and numerous flakes but without temporally diagnostic artifacts. The resource was found to be largely deflated and disturbed due to existing pipelines, fence lines, and twotrack road. The resource was not recommended for further work and in 2015 was determined by the THC to be ineligible for listing on the NRHP (Texas Archeological Sites Atlas 2019). resource area, six were positive for cultural materials. These consisted of flakes at depths of 0 to 50 centimeters (0 to 20 inches) below the ground surface (Table 5-11).   (4), bifaces (4), and one reworked flake (Table 5-12).
Of 26 delineation shovel tests placed within and around the previous resource boundary and surface scatter, six tests were positive for cultural materials (Table 5-     Outside of the project ROW, there are relatively intact soils with some increase in artifact density and deposition. However, within the current APE, the resource appears to have experienced moderate erosion and deflation due to previous impacts. This observation combined with the sparsity of surface artifacts, lack of diagnostics, and shallow soils recorded within the APE during the current effort suggests that the portion Site 41NL323 located within the APE has low research potential. No further work is recommended within the project footprint. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.2.7
Resource 41NL326 Resource 41NL326 was originally recorded in 2015 by TAS for the Lone Star Express 24 survey . The resource was recorded as a quarry/procurement location of an unknown prehistoric temporal affiliation. The resource is located on the eastern terrace of an unnamed tributary of Sweetwater Creek, approximately, 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) east of Highway 70, and 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) southsoutheast of East Bradford Lane. The 2015 site form describes debitage and tested cobbles visible on the ground surface and lacking temporally diagnostic artifacts or formal and well-executed tools. The resource was found to be largely disturbed due to damage from previous pipelines, erosion, and deflation. The resource was not recommended for further work and in 2015 was determined by the THC to be ineligible for listing on the NRHP (THC 2019).
Resource 41NL326 was revisited on April 5 by Horizon and was subjected to pedestrian walkover and nine shovel tests excavated at 30meter (100-foot) intervals within the APE ( Figure  5-24). The APE at the location generally measures 40 meters (131 feet) wide, with an area of expanded workspace north and south of the tributary of Sweetwater Creek. The location within the existing ROW is sparsely covered by grasses with the ground surface visibility decreasing outside of the ROW (Figure 5-25). The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture. The resource consists of a gravel bar and contains several natural chert cobbles eroding out of the hillside.
Within the APE, ten or more flakes were observed on the surface as well as two cores and one scraper. It is thought that some of the observed flakes may be the result of mechanical disturbance rather than deliberate cultural manufacture. Nine shovel tests were placed within and beyond the original resource boundary/APE, all of which were negative for cultural materials.
On April 12, 2019, the resource was subjected to delineation outside of the APE by Gray & Pape. Delineation consisted of surface inspection and shovel tests spaced 10 to 20 meters (33 to 66 feet) apart beyond the limits of the identified surface scatter. Surface artifacts continue outside of the project APE to the west and east. Twelve delineation shovel tests placed around the visible surface scatter at 10-meter (33-foot) intervals produced one positive shovel test, containing two flakes between 0 and 10 centimeters (4 inches) below ground surface (Table 5-      Outside of the project ROW, there are relatively intact soils with some increase in artifact density and deposition. However, within the current APE, the site has experienced moderate erosion and deflation due to previous impacts. This observation combined with the sparsity of surface artifacts, lack of diagnostics, and shallow soils recorded within the APE during the current effort suggests that the portion of Site 41NL326 located within the APE has low research potential. No further work is recommended within the project footprint. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

Newly Identified Resources within Jurisdictional Areas
Six new archaeological sites were identified as a result of survey within jurisdictional permit areas in Loop 1. These are described below.

Resource 41HW142
Resource 41HW142 was identified on April 6 The resource is located approximately 800 meters (0.5 miles) northeast of the Big Spring Country Club golf course. The resource consists of a surface scatter of lithics, dispersed to either side of an unnamed tributary of Beals Creek on a series of rises near the base of a bluff. The APE is wider in this area, measuring roughly 55 meters (180 feet) across to the east of the tributary, the majority of which to the north is outside the existing ROW. The location is sparsely covered by grasses but with good surface visibility due in part to the rocky soil and outcroppings prevalent at the location ( No diagnostic artifacts or more developed tools were identified. Investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover and shovel tests excavated on a judgmental basis within the APE (Figure 5-30). Five shovel tests were conducted within and outside the site boundary. All were negative for cultural materials.   During a cursory walkover of the site, cut banks with lithics exposed in-situ from 25 to 100 centimeters (10 to 39 inches) were observed along the centerline at beyond the recorded western edge of the site (Figure 5-31). The observance of this material resulted in the expansion of the boundary of 41HW142. The cultural materials are embedded within a mixture of colluvium/alluvium due to matrix attributes and close proximity to the sloping headwaters of the adjacent water feature. Approximately 100 to 200 lithics (all chert) were observed across the surface, with approximately 15 of these buried in the cut bank exposure. One uniface was observed. At the request of the USACE, Gray & Pape revisited the location on August 29, 2019 to conduct additional testing. The investigation consisted of three shovel tests and a column excavation into the exposed cutbank. All were negative for additional cultural materials. Two shovel tests were within the center of the previously mapped site boundary, and the third shovel test was placed above/beyond the cut bank in an effort to determine the extent of the soil deposition away from the cut. The column sample was excavated into the cut bank approximately 10 centimeters (3.9 inches) wide and 70 centimeters (27.6 inches) deep ( Figure  5-32). The sample exhibited a surface layer of brown (10YR 4/3) silty loam to a depth of 15 centimeters (6 inches). This was followed by dark brown (10YR 3/2) silty clay loam with several caliche gravels. To a depth of 60 centimeters (24 inches). Beyond that was a layer of caliche and the column excavation was terminated at 70 centimeters (27.6 inches). The column sample produced no additional cultural material. The sample was extremely difficult to excavate due to the compactness and caliche content of the soil. Further, the compactness of the soil and caliche content increased greatly 5 to 10 centimeters (2 to 4 inches) horizontally into the cut bank. Based on this, it would appear that the alluvial/colluvial matrix is thinly spread along the tributary and this thin veil of material was exposed by the washed-out bank. A shovel test placed approximately 5 meters (16 feet) beyond the cut bank column sample produced a layer of brown (10YR 4/3) silty loam to a depth of 19 centimeters (7.5 inches). This was followed by dark brown (10YR 3/2) hard pan and caliche to a depth of 25 centimeters (10 inches) where the test was terminated due to the compactness of the matrix. Based on the results of the supplemental work, it appears that the cultural material buried into the cut bank does not extend very far horizontally into the bank, but rather is deposited vertically along the wall of the gully within a thin veneer of alluvial/colluvial matrix. Above the cut bank but below the landform, there is a thin amount of silty soils, but these terminate within 10 to 20 centimeters (4 to 8 inches). Based on these results, the site boundary was expanded to the cut bank but not further.
The resource is characterized by a number of lithics on the surface, but a lack of diagnostic artifacts, lack of significant amounts of subsurface materials, and shallow soils. Shovel testing across the site suggests that any additional buried materials within the site will be limited in number. For these reasons, Site 41HW142 appears to have low research potential in terms of contributing to the knowledge of prehistoric occupation of the area. No further work is recommended. The site does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

Resource 41MH128
Resource 41MH128 was identified on April 2, 2019 by Gray & Pape. The resource is located immediately east of CR 264, approximately 1kilometer (0.8 miles) south of CR 252. The location is sparsely covered by grasses with good surface visibility ( Figures 5-33 and 5-34). The area is currently not being used but is a transitional area between pasture and adjacent agricultural field and man-made pond. The resource likely extends both north and south of the corridor, however, within the corridor the resource is characterized by a sparsity of surface artifacts, lack of subsurface materials, and shallow soils. For these reasons, Site 41MH128 appears to have low research potential in terms of contributing to the knowledge of historic occupation of the area. No further work is recommended. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.3.3
Resource 41MH130 Resource 41MH130   Soils mapped for the location consist of Miles fine sandy loam which is characterized by an A horizon of brown (7.5YR 4/2) fine sandy loam followed by a B horizon of reddish brown (5YR 4/4) sandy clay loam (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). A typical shovel profile within the resource/APE consists of a surface layer of brown (7.5YR 4/4) sand to a depth of 15 centimeters (6 inches) followed by cemented caliche. In other tests, this hard pan layer was encountered at varying depths but always present. These results suggest that the natural A horizon is lacking at the location, likely the result of continued agricultural use and erosion.
Plan view of Resource 41MH130.  Figure 5-38). The resource consists of a surface scatter of lithics dispersed over the landform. Observed surface materials within the APE initially consisted of a single flake. A shovel test placed near the surface find produced a single chert flake between 0 and 10 centimeters (4 inches) below the ground surface. A surface inspection of the surrounding area within the APE produced more surface finds consisting of approximately 7 flakes, a biface ( Figure 5-39), and 1 small reworked flake (Table 5-15).
Seven delineation shovel tests placed around the lone positive test at 10-meter (33-foot) intervals produced no additional positive shovel tests ( Figure 5-40).
On April 1, 2019, Gray & Pape attempted delineation of the site to the south. Surface finds were found to continue to the south where they expand consistent with the topography. The southern portion of the resource contains a good deal more materials and types including a multitude of bifaces and flakes, heat treated rocks, two broken projectile points, a 1917 penny, and brown glass bottle. No complete diagnostic prehistoric artifacts were identified.   Creek which is located north of the site. The APE at the location measures 40 meters (131 feet) wide with expanded workspaces at the road and one larger water feature that dissects the site. The location is characterized by a series of several undulating uplands. The area is sparsely covered by grasses but with good surface visibility ( Figure 5-41). The area is currently scrub brush pasture. The resource consists of a near continuous surface scatter of lithics, dispersed along the project APE as it parallels Idlewild Creek. The site was investigated by pedestrian walkover and shovel tests spaced between 30 and 100 meters (100 and 328 feet) within the APE. Observed surface materials within the APE consisted of a multitude of debitage (100+) ( Figure 5-42), at least two cores, two bifaces, three utilized flakes, and tools including two end scrapers, and one projectile point tip (Table 5- 16). A small number of flakes could technically be described as blades. No diagnostic artifacts were identified. Fifteen shovel tests were excavated across the property. Of those, eight were found to be positive for cultural materials which consisted of a single non-diagnostic artifact in 7 of the 8 tests (Table 5-     Soils mapped for the location consist of Dermott gravelly loam, a very shallow fractured and weathered soil found on gently to steeply sloping hills and ridges and derived from the Ogallala Formation (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). A typical shovel profile within the resource / APE consists of a surface layer of light brown (7.5YR 6/4) silt loam to an average depth of 25 centimeters (10 inches). This was followed by cemented caliche. Several other shovel tests performed within the existing pipeline corridor showed signs of disturbance exhibited by mottled soils. During the August 27 visit, recent disturbance from an adjacent pipeline was observed. The surface if the adjacent pipeline was graded along the entire length of Site 41NL378. The adjacent workspace was graded to an approximate depth of 30 centimeters (12 inches). Caliche was visible in the graded surface and backdirt for much of the length of the site, underscoring the shallowness of the soils in the area.
Within the current APE, the resource appears to have experienced moderate erosion and deflation due to previous adjacent impacts. The extent of surface artifacts, although relatively continuous along the corridor, are loosely associated and likely represent multiple components which have been displaced by previous impacts, erosion, and migration. The soils are also relatively shallow. For these reasons, the portion of the site within the ROW appears to have low research potential. More intact areas may exist beyond the ROW to the south where the topography changes to include higher terraces and landforms. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.3.6
Resource 41NL379 Resource 41NL379 was investigated on April 8, 2019 by Gray & Pape. The resource is located approximately 260 meters (853 feet) west of CR 131 on an upper (3 rd ) terrace east of an unnamed tributary of Little Stink Creek. The site may be an extension of previously recorded site 41NL72, but the distance between the two has not been investigated and thus their association to each other has not been determined. The location is sparsely covered by grasses but with good surface visibility ( Figures 5-44 and 45). The area currently consists of pasture but is nearly entirely within the existing pipeline corridor. The APE at the location measures 40 meters (131 feet) wide, all of which is within the existing ROW. Investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover and shovel tests excavated at 10-meter (10-foot) intervals around the perimeter of the scatter within the APE (Figure 5-44). The resource consists of a moderately dense surface scatter of lithics, composed of 20+ chert flakes and 5 possible cores ( Figure 5-46, Table 5   However, it should be noted that the entirety of the corridor is within a highly disturbed area and at least some portion of the materials could be the result of mechanical manufacture. No diagnostic artifacts or more developed tools were identified. Of six shovel tests conducted within and surrounding the scatter, none were positive for buried cultural materials and nearly all showed signs of disturbance. The resultant resource boundary measures approximately 65 meters (213 feet) east to west by 24 meters (79 feet) north to south. The resource was not pursued to the north or south outside of the APE but did not appear to continue. Soils mapped for the location consist of Pitzer gravelly loam (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). A typical shovel profile within the resource/APE consists of a surface layer of dark yellowish brown (7.5YR 4/4) sand to a depth of 20 centimeters (10 inches) followed by bedrock.
The site may be associated with previously recorded site 41NL72, located approximately 90 meters (295 feet) to the north, however the distance between them was not investigated. Thus, its relationship to previously recorded site 41NL72 is undetermined. Site 41NL72 was originally recorded by Foy Steadman who collected 10 dart points from the surface. In 2010 Geo-Marine, Inc. revisited the site and noted a large lithic scatter as well as a historic scatter of glass, ceramics, and metal cans. Geo-Marine recommended the site as not eligible within their ROW (Hunt 2011). The site is listed as Undetermined on the Texas Archeological Sites Atlas.
Resource 41NL379 is characterized by a sparsity of surface artifacts, lack of diagnostic artifacts, lack of subsurface materials, and shallow soils. For these reasons, Site 41NL379 appears to have low research value in terms of contributing to the knowledge of prehistoric occupation of the area. No further work is recommended. The site does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.3.7
Resource 41NL380 Resource 41NL380 was identified on April 6, 2019 by Gray & Pape. The resource is located approximately 225 meters (735 feet) north of CR 130 on an upper (3 rd ) terrace between Noodle Creek to the east and an unnamed drainage to the west. The location is approximately 95 meters (312 feet) west of previously recoded site 41NL317, which was not re-identified during the current survey, and 447 meters (1467 feet) east of Site 41NL315/316. The location is sparsely covered by grasses but with good surface visibility ( Figure 5-47). The area currently consists of pasture but is nearly entirely within the existing pipeline corridor. The APE at the location measures 40 meters (131 feet) wide, of which approximately 30 meters (100 feet) is within the existing ROW. Investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover and shovel tests excavated around the perimeter of the scatter at 10-meter (10-foot) intervals within the APE ( Figure 5-48). The resource consists of a moderately dense surface scatter of lithics, composed of 30+ chert flakes and 4 possible cores ( Figure 5-49, Table 5-19).  However, it should be noted that the entirety of the corridor is within a highly disturbed area and at least some portion of the materials could be the result of mechanical manufacture. No diagnostic artifacts or more developed tools were identified. Of seven shovel tests conducted within and surrounding the scatter, none were positive for buried cultural materials and nearly all showed signs of disturbance. Soils mapped for the location consist of Pitzer gravelly loam and Nipsum clay loam (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). A typical shovel profile within the resource/APE consists of a surface layer of dark yellowish brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam to a depth of 10 to 20 centimeters (4 to 10 inches) followed by bedrock.
The resultant resource boundary measures approximately 187 meters (613 feet) east to west by 30 meters (98 feet) north to south. The resource was not pursued to the north or south outside of the APE.
The site was revisited by Gray & Pape and agency representatives of the THC and USACE on August 28, 2019. A cursory walk-over of the site identified two tertiary flakes on the surface.
The resource is characterized by a sparsity of surface artifacts, lack of diagnostic artifacts, lack of subsurface materials, and shallow soils. For these reasons, Site 41NL380 appears to have low research value in terms of contributing to the knowledge of prehistoric occupation of the area. No further work is recommended. The site as currently mapped within APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.
Plan view of Resource 41NL380.

5.2.3.8
Resource 41NL392 Resource 41NL392 was first identified on April 6, 2019 by Horizon. The site was originally identified as an isolate find of a single positive shovel test containing a single flake between 0 and 10 centimeters (0 and 4 inches) below ground surface (Table 5-20). The resource is located approximately 0.6 kilometers (0.4 miles) west of CR 1856, adjacent to small unnamed intermittent drainage. The location is a broad flat terrace, sparsely covered by grasses but with good surface visibility ( Figure 5-50). The west bank of the drainage contains an exposed cut bank. The APE at the location measures between 40 and 55 meters (131 and 180 feet) wide as the location incorporates and extra wide portion of workspace. Nearly all of the APE is within the existing ROW. Investigation of the resource by Horizon consisted of pedestrian walkover and shovel tests excavated around the lone positive shovel test at 16-meter (52.5-foot) intervals within the APE (Figure 5-51). Of six tests placed in the vicinity, none were positive for additional materials.
Gray & Pape revisited the location on September 5, 2019. The revisit entailed pedestrian survey and supplemental shovel testing of the resource. Surface survey observed an additional 4 flakes on the surface adjacent to the west bank of the drainage (Table 5-20). The survey crew also inspected the cut bank along the west bank of the drainage (Figure 5 -52). No artifacts or buried A horizons were observed in the bank. Further, soils in the bank were observed to be shallow with hard pan / caliche present at 20 centimeters (8 inches) below surface.
Of seven shovel tests conducted within and surrounding the scatter and previous positive shovel test, none were positive for buried cultural materials. Soils mapped for the location consist of Quinlan-Burson-Woodward association, rolling (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). These soils typically consist of a shallow (20 centimeter [8-inch]) A horizon of reddish brown (5YR 5/4) loam followed by B and C horizons of red to reddish brown loam. A typical shovel profile within the resource/APE consists of a surface layer of yellowish red (5.5YR 5/6) silt loam to depths between 5 and 15 centimeters (2 and 6 inches) followed by hard pan / caliche.  The resultant resource boundary measures approximately 67 meters (219 feet) east to west by 32 meters (106 feet) north to south. The resource was not pursued to the north or south outside of the APE. The resource is characterized by a sparsity of surface artifacts, most of which are located within the existing ROW, lack of diagnostic artifacts, lack of significant subsurface materials, and shallow soils. For these reasons, Site 41NL392 appears to have low research value. No further work is recommended. The site as currently mapped within APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

Newly Identified Isolates within Jurisdictional Areas
Three new isolates were identified as a result of survey within jurisdictional permit areas in Loop 1. These are described below.

5.2.4.1
Isolate MH-27-ISO-01 Resource MH-27-ISO-01 was identified by Horizon on April 2, 2019. The resource is located 400 meters (0.25 miles) east of Highway 163 and 420 meters (0.26 miles) south-southeast of CR 323. The find is located on a terrace adjacent to a berm of a man-made pond created from an unnamed tributary of the Colorado River. The location is sparsely covered by grasses but with good surface visibility ( Figure 5-53 and 5-54). The area is currently scrub brush pasture. View is to the northeast.
The resource consists of a single flake identified within a shovel test at a depth of 80 centimeters (31.5 inches) ( Figure 5-55). Investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover and seven delineation shovel tests placed around the lone positive test at 10-meter (33-foot) intervals within the APE (Figure 5-54). No additional tests were positive for cultural materials. The isolate does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D. Investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover and seven delineation shovel tests placed around the lone positive test at 10-meter (33-foot) intervals within the APE (Figure 5-58). No additional tests were positive for cultural materials. The isolate does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

Revisit Results of Non-Jurisdictional Resources
In addition to revisits of previously recorded resources located in permit areas, 13 previously recorded resources are located within 91 meters (300 feet) of the APE along nonjurisdictional uplands (Table 5-   Stratum I from 0 to 36 centimeters (14 inches) was strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) moderate fine to medium granular loamy fine sand. Stratum II from 36 to 70 (14 28 inches) to centimeters was strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) strong medium to coarse subangular blocky silt loam with common caliche gravels throughout.   A total of 14 artifacts were found below surface. Shovel Test A3 contained one piece of limestone FCR between 10 and 20 centimeters (4 and 8 inches), one interior chert flake and one limestone FCR fragment between 20 and 30 centimeters (8 and 12 inches), one broken interior chert flake, one limestone FCR fragment and one pigmented sedimentary rock between 30 and 40 centimeters (12 and 16 inches), and one interior chert flake fragment between 40 and 50 centimeters (16 and 20 inches). An additional seven shovel tests were excavated to delineate A3, one of which was positive for buried cultural material. One FCR fragment was found between 10 and 20 centimeters (4 and 8 inches), and one complete chert flake along with one broken chert flake were found between 20 and 30 centimeters (8 and 12 inches). Shovel Test B3 contained three pieces of FCR within the first 10 centimeters (4 inches) and one piece of FCR between 10 and 20 centimeters (4 and 8 inches). Soils from this test were clearly disturbed and the materials were likely buried during the previous pipeline construction and installation.
The portion of Site 41MD41 that lies within the proposed workspace, both above and below surface, has undergone disturbances associated with the previous adjacent pipeline construction and installation as well as agricultural land use across all three tracts. While a variety of artifact types were identified here including debitage, expedient/edgemodified tools, FCR and groundstone tools, none of these materials were in primary context. Due to the lack of integrity, and limited interpretive value of the artifacts recorded, this site appears to have low research potential. No further work is recommended within the project footprint. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

Resource 41HW8
Resource 41NLHW8 was originally recorded by Tom Adams in 1970. The resource was described as a 4-hectare (10-acre) flint quarry site, with material evidence of tool manufacture, including hearths, overlooking a hillside of exposed flint nodules. The site was revisited in 1998 by TRC Mariah Associates Inc. as part of the York Windpower Farm project. Other than noting chipped stone, no other information was recorded on the site form at that time (Tomka 1998). In 2015, the site was again revisited, this time by Turpin and Sons, Inc. as part of a pipeline project. They noted only "sparse" debitage within that project's ROW, and no further work was recommended (Burgess and Davis 2015). The THC notes the site as Ineligible within ROW in October 2015 (THC 2019).
Resource 41HW8 was revisited by Gray & Pape on April 6, 2019. The site location within the existing ROW consists of an upland terrace and a steep, gravelly slope. The surface is sparsely covered by grasses with the visibility decreasing outside of the ROW (Figure 5-69). The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by erosion, and existing pipelines. Within the ROW, cultural material was limited to a surface scatter along the bluff top. Approximately 8 flakes were observed intermixed with raw chert rocks (Table 5-   Creek and Beals Creek. The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by erosion, the installation of electric transmission towers, and existing pipelines ( Figure 5-71). A gravel access road runs along the western boundary of the site and a second graveled access road divides the new extension of 41HW104 from the original site boundary to the north. Approximately 14 flakes were observed on the ground surface within the ROW (Table 5-24). A typical shovel profile within the resource/APE consisted of a surface layer of red (2.5YR 4/6) clay to a depth of 10 centimeters (4 inches). This was underlain by a dark red (2.5YR 3/6) clay between 10 and 55 centimeters (4 and 22 inches) below the surface, which gave way to a reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) friable bedrock.
The lack of subsurface deposits within the APE and lack of diagnostics recorded during the current effort suggests the resource is not significant within the ROW. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.   74). The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by erosion and existing pipelines. A well pad is located immediately north of the site and the connecting gravel access road runs along the site's western edge. An electric transmission tower is located immediately to the south. Approximately two flakes were observed on the ground surface within the ROW (Table 5-25).
Initial investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover survey. An additional shovel test was excavated within the site's extended boundary and was negative for cultural resources (Figure 5-75). As a result, the boundaries of 41HW104 has been extended north to include an area of 20 by 20 meters (66 by 66 feet) within the current ROW. Soils mapped for the location consist of Vernon clay (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). A typical shovel profile within the resource / APE consisted of a surface layer of red (2.5YR 4/6) clay to a depth of 15 centimeters (6 inches). This was underlain by a dark red (2.5YR 3/6) clay between 15 and 50 centimeters (6 and 20 inches) below the surface, which gave way to a reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) friable bedrock.  The extensive disturbances in the area, lack of subsurface deposits within the APE and lack of diagnostics recorded during the current effort suggests the resource is not significant within the ROW. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.5.5
Resource 41HW106 Resource 41HW106 was originally recorded by ACI Consulting in 2011. The resource was described as a 250 by 100-meter (820 by 328foot) lithic scatter located atop a low rise. Material noted at the time included a few flakes and a possible drill tip. Material was limited to the ground surface and no diagnostic material or cultural features were identified (Schooler 2011 Figure  5-80). The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by flooding, erosion, and existing pipelines. Approximately 500+ flakes, 10+scrapers, 20+cores, 10+bifaces, and one preform were observed on the ground surface within the ROW (Figure 5-81; Table 5-28).
Initial investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover. An additional six shovel tests were excavated within the extended site boundary, all were negative for cultural resources ( Figure 5-82). A single positive shovel test was identified within the APE but outside of the newly established site boundary to the west. This test contained one flake at a depth of between 0 and 10 centimeters (4 inches) below ground surface. Additional tests around the positive contained no additional materials and no materials were identified on the surface near the find. The proximity of the lone positive test and the previous or new site boundary suggests it may be an outlier of the site but is insignificant in its association.
As a result, the boundaries of 41NL312 have been extended south and east to include an area of 380 by 50 meters (1,256 by 164 feet) within the current ROW. Soils mapped for the location consist of Colorado loam, Paducah loam, and Burson-Quinlan association (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). The best shovel profile example within the resource / APE consisted of a surface layer of yellowish red (5YR 5/6) silt loam to a depth of 30 centimeters (12 inches) below the surface. This was underlain by a reddish brown (5YR 4/4) clay to the base of the shovel test at 40 centimeters (16 inches) below the surface.    The majority of the shovel tests conducted at the location were either very shallow or showed signs of disturbance. Despite the moderate number of surface finds identified, the location has clearly been impacted by the adjacent pipelines. The lack of subsurface deposits within the APE (which is nearly entirely within the existing pipeline ROW) and lack of diagnostics recorded during the current effort suggests the resource is not significant within the APE. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D.

5.2.5.8
Resource 41NL322 Resource 41NL322 was originally recorded by Turpin and Sons, Inc. in 2015. The resource was described as a 50-meter (164-foot) diameter lithic quarry and procurement site on the western slope of a rise approximately 1.1 kilometers (0.7 miles) west of Bitter Creek. Material noted at the time included hundreds of flakes, tested cobbles, and several non-specific tools. Material was limited to the ground surface and no diagnostic material or cultural features were identified. Portions of the lithic procurement area had been disturbed by previous pipelines . The Texas Archeological Sites Atlas lists 41NL322 as Ineligible within the ROW.
The portion of APE that passes through Resource 41NL322 was surveyed by Horizon on April 8, 2019. The location within the existing ROW is located in pasture ( Figure 5-83). The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by erosion and existing pipelines. A two-track road cuts through the middle of the site. A scatter of an unrecorded number of tested cobbles, and flakes, 1 biface, 1 uniface and 1 scraper were observed on the ground surface within the ROW (Table 5- Initial investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover. An additional four shovel tests were excavated within the extended site boundary. Only one test was positive for cultural resources, producing a single chert flake between 0 and 20 centimeters (0 and 8 inches) below the surface ( Figure 5-  The portion of APE that passes through Resource 41NL325 was surveyed by Horizon on April 5, 2019. The location within the existing ROW is on a terrace overlooking a dry gully ( Figure 5-86). The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by flooding, erosion, and existing pipelines.
Approximately 5 flakes were observed on the ground surface within the ROW (Figure 5-87; Table 5-31).   Initial investigation of the resource consisted of pedestrian walkover. An additional four shovel tests were excavated within the APE, all were negative for cultural materials ( Figure 5-88). As a result, the boundaries of 41NL325 were not adjusted. Soils mapped for the location consist of Dermott soils and Woodward loam (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). A typical shovel profile within the resource/APE consisted of 25 centimeters (10 inches) of brown (7.5YR 4/3) gravelly sandy loam underlain by caliche.
The lack of subsurface deposits within the APE and lack of diagnostics recorded during the current effort suggests the resource is not significant within the ROW. The site portion located within the APE does not retain the potential to provide significant research value and is thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D. Resource 41MH129 was investigated on April 2, 2019. The resource is located on the western bluff above the Colorado River, south of existing pipelines and approximately 2.2 kilometers (1.37 miles) southeast of SR 163. The resource was initially located within a USACE permit area, but the Colorado River will be avoided by directional drill, thus removing the location from permitting. The location is sparsely covered by grasses and scrub brush pasture but with good surface visibility ( Figure 5-89). The site consists of a small lithic scatter located on the sandstone bluff above the Colorado River. The artifacts were scattered over an area measuring approximately 30 meters (98 feet) north-south by 55 meters (180 feet) east-west within the proposed pipeline corridor. Observed materials include a handful (10+) of chert flakes with no diagnostic artifacts or more developed tools identified ( Figure 5-90, Table 5  Investigation of the permit area consisted of pedestrian walkover and shovel tests excavated at 60-meter (197-foot) intervals within the APE ( Figure 5-91). After identification of the resource, six shovel tests were placed within and adjacent to the site; all were negative, and only two exhibited more than 5 centimeters (2 inches) of sand above bedrock.

Previously Recorded Sites Not Re-Identified
Of the 23 previously recorded resources within 91 meters (300 feet) of the APE, three were not re-identified by the current field effort (Table 5-31). These are described below.

5.2.7.1
Resource 41HW133 Resource 41HW133 was originally recorded by TAS, Inc. in 2015. The resource was described as an open camp; quarry/procurement site of unknown prehistoric temporal affiliation measuring 80 meters (262.5 feet) north-south by 150 meters (492 feet) east-west. The site is located on a flat on east side of Plum Draw, gently sloping toward the drainage.
All materials observed at the site were on the surface and included: 2 uniface scrapers, 2 expedient tools, 2 tertiary flakes, 2 sec flakes, 5 utilized flakes, 1 chopper with impact fractures, tested cobbles, and scattered FCR (deflated hearth). No temporally diagnostic artifacts were found. Soils mapped for the location consist of shallow gravelly soils of the Potter series. TAS concluded that the site contained low research potential due to the lack of well-preserved features, erosion/deflation, and no potential for buried deposits. As of 2015, the Texas Archeological Sites Atlas lists 41HW133 as Ineligible for listing on the NRHP.
The portion of APE that passes near Resource 41HW133 was surveyed by Gray & Pape on April 6, 2019. The segment of APE surveyed overlaps a portion of Permit Area #6 for the current project. The location within the APE is an upland that gradually slopes toward Plum Draw to the west ( Figure 5-92). The location is dissected by several pipeline corridors. The area is currently scrub brush pasture and has been greatly impacted by existing pipelines and subsequent erosion. Investigation of the area consisted of pedestrian walkover and shovel testing within the APE. No surface artifacts were observed during survey. Nine shovel tests were excavated within the APE where it passes the site, all were negative for cultural material ( Figure 5-92). A typical shovel profile within the APE consisted of a surface layer of strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) gravelly sand to a depth of 5 centimeters (2 inches) below the surface before hitting bedrock.
The lack of surface or subsurface deposits within the APE during the current effort suggests the resource is not located within the APE. No further work is recommended for the location.

Resource 41NL317
Resource 41NL317 was originally recorded in 2014 by Tetra Tech, Inc. for the Permian Express Pipeline II survey (Karpinski et al. 2014). The resource consists of a prehistoric lithic scatter and historic artifact scatter. The resource was initially recorded to be situated on either side of a north to south trending creek south of a pipeline ROW. The resource is currently entirely within the existing ROW. The 2014 record lists 14 artifacts consisting of 1 secondary core, 2 cores, 8 debitage, 2 cans, and 1 clear glass fragment. The resource was investigated by a systematic surface inspection at 5-meter (16-foot) intervals and two shovel tests. The tests uncovered no additional cultural materials. Overall the 2014 investigation determined that the site has been impacted by water erosion, wind deflation, and previous pipeline construction. The site's research potential was considered to be low. In 2015, the site was determined by the THC to be ineligible for listing on the NRHP within the pipeline ROW (Texas Archeological Sites Atlas 2019).
.  The portion of the APE that passes Resource 41NL317 was revisited on April 6 by Gray & Pape which conducted a pedestrian walkover and four shovel tests excavated within the APE ( Figure 5-93). The location is overlapped by Permit Area #56 and straddles Noodle Creek. The area consists of a low terrace at the base of uplands to the east and west. The APE within the resource generally measures 40 to 55 meters (131 to 180 feet) wide, with approximately 30 meters (100 feet) of that width located within the existing pipeline ROW. The existing ROW is sparsely covered by grasses with the ground surface visibility decreasing outside of the ROW to the south. The area is currently being used as a cattle pasture and has been impacted by flooding, erosion, existing pipelines. Gray & Pape observed no cultural materials on the surface during survey. Four shovel tests were excavated in the location of the site and the adjacent corridor, none of which were positive for cultural materials.
Soils mapped for the location consist of primarily of Nipsum clay loam (1 to 3 percent slopes), which consists of a surface layer of light brown (10YR 4/3) to dark brown (10YR 3/3) clay followed by brown (7.5YR 5/2) to dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) clay (SSS NRCS USDA 2019). This differed slightly from soils observed in shovel tests which contained a surface layer of brown 7.5YR 4/4 sandy loam to a depth of 20 centimeters (8 inches) followed by bed rock or caliche. Tests within and immediately adjacent to the site exhibited disturbance by indicated by mottled clay soils of lower strata.
No attempt was made to investigate outside of the APE to the north during the current effort. Remnants of the resource may still exist between pipelines. However, the lack of surface or subsurface deposits identified within the APE suggests the resource is not located within the APE or has been destroyed within the APE. No further work is recommended for the location.

5.2.7.3
Resource 41NL252 Resource 41NL252 was originally recorded in 2010 and 2011 by Geo-Marine, Inc. for the Oncor -Tonkawa to Sweetwater Project (THC 2019). The site is located approximately 1 kilometer (1.6 miles) east of Little Stink Creek, south of CR 221. There are two site records, one recorded by an initial phase I survey and a revisit form for further testing. The site records describe the site as a campsite/ habitation consisting of a somewhat eroded FCR midden located on the southwest side of the terrace with a lithic scatter to the north. Observed artifacts are reported to consist of 6 cores, 7 edgemodified flakes, 3 bifaces, 2 unifaces, 37 debitage, and 80 FCR. Less than 50 percent of the site was believed to be intact as it had been impacted by severe erosion and pipeline construction. Specifically, the records state that the south edge of the site had been modified by gas pipeline construction. The site area had been cleared at the time of the investigations and yielded excellent surface visibility. The site was investigated by surface survey at 5-meter (16-foot) intervals, shovel testing, six 50 by 50centimeter (20 by 20-inch) units, and nine 1 by 1-meter (39 by 39-inch) units. The test units revealed a low density of artifactual material and shallow deposits, and the potential features proved to have little deposition. No diagnostic artifact or datable materials were discovered during the investigations. Baes on those findings the site was considered to have low research potential and was recommended as not eligible for listing on the NRHP (THC 2019). The resource is currently entirely within existing pipeline ROW.
The portion of the APE that passes Resource 41NL252 was revisited on April 8 by Gray & Pape. Because the location is outside of any USACE permit areas, no shovel tests were conducted, however, the segment of APE was subjected to pedestrian walkover. (Figure 5-94).
Gray & Pape observed no cultural materials on the surface during survey. No attempt was made to investigate outside of the APE to the north   The Woodward series consists of moderately deep, well drained, moderately permeable inceptisols that formed in residuum from sandstone bedrock of Permian age. These soils occur on very gently sloping to steep interfluves and side slopes of hillslopes, ridges and escarpments in the Central Rolling Red Plains. A typical soil profile includes four strata (Ap-Bw-BCk-Cd) to a depth of 152 centimeters (60 inches) below surface. The profile includes a surface layer (A horizon) of reddish brown (5YR 4/4) loam to a depth of 25 centimeters (10 inches). That is followed by successive B horizons of reddish brown (5YR 5/4) loam to a depth of 71 centimeters (28 inches). Below that is red (2.5YR 4/6) noncemented sandstone bedrock (NRCS 2019).
Veal soils are very deep, well drained, moderately permeable inceptisols that formed in calcareous, slope alluvium and colluvium derived from the Ogalla Formation of Miocene-Pliocene age. These soils are on very gently sloping to moderately steep scarps, knolls, and valley sides. A typical soil profile includes five strata (A-Bk-Bkk1-Bkk2-Bkk3) that extend to 203 centimeters (80 inches) below the surface. The profile includes a surface layer (A horizon) of brown (10YR 4/3) loam to a depth of 8 centimeters (3 inches). That is followed by successive B horizons of brown (10YR 5/3) gravelly fine sandy loam 74 centimeters (29 inches). Below that are layers of pink (7.5YR 8/3) and light brown (7.5YR 6/4) gravelly loam down to a depth of 203 centimeters (80 inches) (NRCS 2019).
The Nipsum series is comprised of very deep, well drained, slowly permeable mollisols that formed in clayey and loamy alluvium and colluvium. These soils are on nearly level to very gently sloping drainageways and terraces on uplands in the Central Rolling Red Plains. A typical soil profile consists of four strata (A1-A2-Bk1-Bk2) to a depth of 152.4 centimeters (60 inches). The profile includes a surface layer (A horizon) of brown (10YR 4/3) clay to a depth of 25. Centimeters (10 inches). That is followed by a subsurface layer (A2 horizon) of brown (7.5YR 5/2) clay to a depth of 76 centimeters (30 inches). Below that is successive B horizons of reddish brown (5YR 5/4) clay to a depth of 152.4 centimeters (60 inches) (NRCS 2019).
Deep test locations within Permit Area 45/Resource 41NL6 at Sweetwater Creek.

REMOVED FROM PUBLIC COPY
The Colorado series is comprised of very deep, well drained, moderately permeable entisols that formed in calcareous loamy alluvium. These nearly level soils can be found on flood plains. A typical soil profile consists of three strata (A-C1-C2) to a depth of 152 centimeters (60 inches). The profile includes a surface layer (A horizon) of light reddish brown (5YR 6/3) silt loam to a depth of 13 centimeters (5 inches). That is followed by successive subsoil (C horizon) layers of light reddish brown (5YR 6/3) loam to a depth of 152 centimeters (60 inches).
Of 13 tests placed within the APE, only one was positive for cultural material. One piece of lithic debitage was discovered within the top 10 centimeters (4 inches) of Deep Test 9. Deep Test 9 ( Figure 5-97) is located approximately 45 meters (147.64 feet) east of Sweetwater Creek and contains silty clay loam throughout the profile. A typical deep test profile (Table 5-34) within the permit area consists of a surface layer of strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) silty clay loam to an average depth of 50 centimeters (19.69 inches) followed by brown (7.5YR 5/4) silty clay loam or silty clay extending to an average depth of 150 centimeters (59.06 inches) underlain in some areas by yellowish red (5YR 5/6) silty clay loam to the base of excavation at 180 centimeters (70.87 inches) below surface.
Figure 5-97. Representative soil profile as observed in Deep Test 9 at Sweetwater Creek.
Other than one piece of debitage, no historic or prehistoric artifacts or cultural features were identified. Results of the deep testing indicate a general lack of A horizon, and instead encounter what most closely resembles the Bk1 horizon (Nipsum series) at the surface, which either continues or transitions to the Bk2 horizon until bedrock or the test was terminated. No evidence was observed of deeply buried A horizons or paleosols. Based on these results, there is no evidence for deeply buried cultural materials within the anticipated depth of impacts at Sweetwater Creek. Only one resource (41MH128) is of historic age, consisting of surface remnants associated with a former structure. The remainder are prehistoric. Prehistoric resource contents consist nearly entirely of surface scatters of artifacts. Artifact classes are largely consistent across each resource, consisting primarily of debitage, with varying numbers of cores and bifaces. On very few occasions, a preform or more refined tool were observed. In general, the resources appear to represent raw material procurement and testing areas due to the abundant chert deposits available in the rocky soil or eroding out of nearby waterways. Activities are believed to have been largely limited to the procurement and testing of cobbles and expedient manufacture of bifaces. While secondary and tertiary flakes were noted at a few locations, it appears that for the most part more refined tool manufacture was taking place elsewhere. Based on the preliminary assessment of the larger resource areas located beyond the current corridor, these activities were taking place on landforms above the surrounding landscape. None of the lithic scatters or isolates contained complete temporally or culturally diagnostic artifacts and no artifacts were collected. Nor were any cultural features or historic-age standing resources encountered within the proposed workspace.
The resource areas within the pipeline corridor showed clear disturbance from the adjacent pipeline ROW. Indications of soil deflation, erosion, and past and current land modifications such as agriculture and landscape terracing were also observed. Due to these impacts the observed materials are likely displaced and thereby limit the information that could be gained from any further formal study of these resources.
One location, Sweetwater Creek, was investigated by mechanical auguring to determine if the location contained soils with A horizons deeper than can be reached by shovel. However, deep testing within the APE at the location displayed a surface and subsurface that likely represents the B horizon of the Nipsum series and produced no evidence for deeply buried resources or buried paleosols within the anticipated depth of impact at the location.
Based on the overall sparsity of artifacts within the current corridor, lack of diagnostic materials, and lack of integrity or soil deposition, it is the opinion of Gray & Pape that none of the recorded resource portions located within the current ROW retain the potential to provide significant research value and are thus recommended not eligible for the National Register, under Evaluation Criterion D or for State Antiquities Landmark status. Gray & Pape recommends no additional archaeological work for these resources or surveyed permit areas of the Loop 1 project.
An additional 11 resources were identified within the APE but outside of jurisdictional areas: 41MD41, 41HW8, 41HW104, 41HW105, 41HW106, 41MH129, 41NL310, 41NL312, 41NL322, 41NL324, and 41NL325. These largely were exhibited by surface scatters of lithics which are typical for the area and were consistent with the resources identified within jurisdictional permit areas. Observance of these resources within the APE indicated no features or diagnostic artifacts and suggests research potential is low. None of these resources are recommended as eligible within the APE and no further work is recommended regarding them (Table 6-2).
No further cultural resources work is recommended for the project as currently planned. However, Gray & Pape recommends that an unanticipated discoveries plan be put into place in the event that such discoveries take place during construction.