# 

## Archeological Value

“Archaeological Value” is defined in Section __.14 of the ARPA       Uniform Regulations:
> Archaeological value. For purposes of this part, the archaeological       value of any archaeological resource involved in a violation of the prohibitions       in § __.4 of this part or conditions of a permit issued pursuant to       this part shall be the value of the information associated with the archaeological       resource. This value shall be appraised in terms of the costs of the retrieval       of the scientific information which would have been obtainable prior to       the violation. These costs may include, but need not be limited to, the       cost of preparing a research design, conducting field work, carrying out       laboratory analysis, and preparing reports as would be necessary to realize       the information potential (Section __.14(a)).

Note that the definition specifies that scientific information retrieval       costs “may include, but need not be limited to” those of the       four operations listed. Therefore, costs of other legitimate scientific       retrieval operations also may be included in the archeological value determination.       An example of a necessary scientific information retrieval operation that       is not included in the definition's list of operations is consultation with       the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), the Tribal Historic Preservation       Officer(s) (THPOs), or other parties as appropriate. Other examples are       repatriation of Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)       items and the long-term curation of other artifacts and materials when items       of either category would be recovered during scientific information retrieval.

In determining archeological value, it is important to understand the legal       concept on which this value is based. Archeological value is not a dollar       figure for the cost of actually carrying out scientific research or contract       archeological work in which all currently accepted methodological standards       would apply. Archeological value is a projected cost figure for scientific       information retrieval operations as required by ARPA for use in the legal       system in order to assess the amount of harm to an archeological resource       caused by unauthorized acts. This determination requires the calculation       of reasonable and credible costs for appropriate retrieval of scientific       information from the damaged portion of the archeological resource if it       was still in an undamaged condition. These costs should be proportional       to the amount of damage in order to be accepted as a justifiable measure       of the harm caused. Therefore, methodological considerations that would       apply to actual retrieval of information from the archeological resource       do not necessarily apply in an archeological value determination.

For example, proposing to base archeological value on continuing an excavation       unit to sterile soil at a depth of two meters below the surface would not       be proportional to the damage caused by an unauthorized excavation by a       looter that stopped at one yard (0.9144 meter) below the surface, even though       an actual excavation unit normally would continue to sterile soil. Alternatively,       proposing to base archeological value on complete scientific excavation       of a site would be proportional to complete destruction of the site by unauthorized       mechanical excavation, even though actual scientific information from the       site as a unit using modern archeological methods normally would be based       on a sampling strategy.

### Procedures for Determination of Archeological Value.

The following procedures can be used to determine archeological value.       These procedures are phrased as questions to be answered making this determination.       The questions are based on the Society for American Archaeology “Professional       Standards for the Determination of Archaeological Value” (2003). The       standards are included here as Appendix B (see       also McAllister 2006). The applicable standard is referenced in each question.       The use of these professional standards in determining archeological value       is recommended strongly. An archeologist who has or will develop the required       expertise should carry out these procedures.
      - What is the archeological resource involved in the violation (see Standard         1 a., c. and d.)? For example:                  - Is it an isolated artifact?
        - Is it a portion of a site where no features are present?
        - Is it a feature (e.g. a house floor; an historic cemetery plot;             a rock art panel or boulder)?
        - Is it the entire site? 
      - How, both qualitatively (type of damage) and quantitatively (amount         of damage), has the identified archeological resource been affected by         the violation (see Standard 1. b.)? For example:                  - Has an isolated artifact been removed?
        - Has a portion of the site where no features are present been excavated             and, if so, how much excavation, both horizontally and vertically,             has occurred?
        - Has a feature been excavated or defaced and, if so, how much of             the feature has been affected (i.e. all of the feature or only some             portion of the feature)?
        - Has an entire site been affected and, if so, how has it been damaged             (e.g. has it been bulldozed; have all the metal artifacts been removed             with the aid of metal detectors; has it been completely surface collected)? 
      - How, both quantitatively (scale, e.g., area and depth) and qualitatively         (methods), would scientific information have been retrieved from the identified         archeological resource prior to the violation (see the discussion of scale         and methods in Standards 2 and 3)? For example:                  - What scientific information retrieval strategy would have been used             if the isolated artifact affected by the violation had been located             during an archeological survey (e.g., documentation, mapping and controlled             collection)?
        - What scientific information retrieval strategy, both quantitatively             (scale) and qualitatively (methods), would have been used if the featureless             portion of the site affected by the violation had been excavated scientifically             (e.g., a test excavation and, if so, of what size)?
        - What scientific information retrieval strategy, both quantitatively             (scale) and qualitatively (methods), would have been used if the feature             affected by the violation had been excavated or documented scientifically             (e.g. scientific excavation or documentation the entire feature or             only a portion of the feature)?
        - What scientific information retrieval strategy, both quantitatively             (scale) and qualitatively (methods), would have been used if the entire             site affected by the violation had been excavated or documented scientifically             (e.g., scientific excavation or documentation of the entire site or             only a sample of the site)? 
      - Is the scientific information retrieval strategy projected for the identified         archeological resource proportional, both quantitatively (scale) and qualitatively         (methods), to the effect of the violation (see the discussion of proportionality         in Standards 2 and 3)?
      - What operations would be involved in the scientific information retrieval         strategy projected for the identified archeological resource and what         is the justification for each of these operations (see Standards 3 and         4)?
      - What is the line item cost of each of these operations?          Develop an archeological value table that shows the operations and           their line item costs (see Figure 3). Note that these costs should be           consistent with industry standards and should include all administrative           overhead costs such as employee benefits. 
      - What is the total dollar figure for archeological value?          Include this figure in the archeological value table. 

### Examples of Categories of Scientific Information Retrieval Operations       in an Archeological Value Determination

The following are examples of categories of scientific information retrieval       operations that might be included in an archeological value determination       in a case involving unauthorized excavation at a Native American site. (It       should be noted that the scientific information retrieval operations included       in an actual archeological value determination will depend upon the specific       circumstances of the case.) These operations can be categorized as planning,       investigation, and post-investigation activities. The italicized operations       are those specifically identified in the definition of archeological value       in the ARPA uniform regulations. It is important to consider the initial       consultation and the latter two, post-investigation activities.
      - Consultation with SHPO, THPO(as appropriate), affiliated tribes (if         any), and other consulting parties
      - Preparation of Research Design
      - Conducting Field Work
      - Carrying Out Laboratory Analysis
      - Preparation of Reports
      - Repatriation of NAGPRA human remains and cultural items (if any)
      - Curation of artifacts and remains not repatriated under NAGPRA, and         records           

This list of operations also can be used to illustrate some important concerns       and potential problems in archeological value determinations. Operations       and resulting costs that cannot be justified should not be included. For       example, laboratory analysis costs in an archeological value determination       should be for the analysis of artifacts and specimens reasonably expected       to be recovered in the scientific information retrieval strategy on which       this determination is based. They should not include analysis costs for       artifacts or specimens not observed in association with the damaged archeological       resources since there would be no reasonable basis for projecting their       recovery. For example, it would be speculative and inappropriate to include       radiocarbon dating analysis costs when specimens expected to contain carbon       are not present. By the same token, it would not be appropriate to include       repatriation operations and costs unless the violation affected items protected       by NAGPRA.

Also note that all of the costs in the archeological value determination       should be directly associated with scientific information retrieval operations       and should be clearly distinct from operations carried out or projected       as part of restoration and repair (see below) to avoid the "double counting"       problem. Two examples illustrate this point. Archeological value laboratory       analysis costs should be for artifacts and specimens expected to be recovered       in retrieving scientific information from the archeological resources involved       in the violation. Restoration and repair examination and analysis costs       are those costs incurred or projected for actual damage to archeological       resources. Similarly, repatriation and curation costs under archeological       value should be for items subject to these requirements reasonably expected       to be recovered in retrieving scientific information. Restoration and repair       repatriation and curation costs are for items actually collected or seized       as evidence. 

**Figure 3:** Example of an Archeological Value Table Format.       (Adapt as necessary based on circumstances of violation. Note that cost       is shown only as an example.)
| **Archeological Value**                              |
|------------------------------------------------------|
| **[Category / Line Item]**                           | **[Units / Unit Cost]** | **[Line Item Cost]** |
| Consultation with SHPO                               | 4 hours @ $50.00/hour | $200.00 |
| Consultation with THPO(s)          or Other Parties | 4 hours @ $50.00/hour | $200.00 |
| Preparation of Research Design                       | __________________ | _______ |
| Conducting Field Work                                | __________________ | _______ |
| Carrying out Analyses                                | __________________ | _______ |
| Preparation of Reports                               | __________________ | _______ |
| Curation                                             | __________________ | _______ |
| Total Archeological Value                            | _______ |

## Cost of Restoration and Repair

“Cost of restoration and repair” is defined in Section __.14       of the ARPA uniform regulations:
      - Cost of restoration and repair. For purposes of this part, the cost         of restoration and repair of archaeological resources damaged as a result         of a violation of prohibitions or conditions pursuant to this part, shall         be the sum of the costs already incurred for emergency restoration or         repair work, plus those costs projected to be necessary to complete restoration         and repair, which may include, but need not be limited to, the costs of         the following:                  - (1) Reconstruction of the archaeological resource;
        - (2) Stabilization of the archaeological resource;
        - (3) Ground contour reconstruction and surface stabilization;
        - (4) Research necessary to carry out reconstruction or stabilization;
        - (5) Physical barriers or other protective devices, necessitated             by the disturbance of the archaeological resource, to protect it from             further disturbance;
        - (6) Examination and analysis of the archaeological resource including             recording remaining archaeological information, where necessitated             by disturbance, in order to salvage remaining values which cannot             be otherwise conserved;
        - (7) Reinterment of human remains in accordance with religious custom             and State, local, or tribal law, where appropriate, as determined             by the Federal land manager;
        - (8) Preparation of reports relating to any of the above activities             (Section __.14(c)). 

Note that the definition specifies that restoration and repair costs “may       include, but need not be limited to” those of the eight operations       listed. Therefore, costs of other legitimate restoration and repair operations       also may be included in the cost of restoration and repair determination.       Examples of necessary restoration and repair operations that are not included       in the definition's list of operations are the eventual repatriation or       curation of archeological resource items seized as evidence (repatriation       of NAGPRA items, curation of other archeological materials and the associated       documentation).

It is important to note that there are two types of restoration and repair:       emergency restoration and repair and projected restoration and repair. Emergency       restoration and repair operations are those already carried out or those       that have not been carried but will need to be carried to prevent further       immediate loss or damage of the resource(s) or to complete the emergency       operations. The field damage assessment procedures and preparation of the       archeological resource damage assessment report are part of the emergency       restoration and repair process (these operations are components of items       (6) and (8) above). Projected restoration and repair operations are those       that will need to be carried out, but do not need to be carried out immediately.       Examples of projected restoration and repair are full reconstruction to       the pre-violation condition of a prehistoric or historic structure damaged       by vandalism and curation of items collected or seized as evidence.

### Procedures for Determination of Cost of Restoration and Repair

The following procedures can be used to determine the cost of restoration       and repair. An archeologist who has or will develop the required expertise       should carry out these procedures.
      - Identify the emergency restoration and repair operations already carried         out or that will be carried out to complete emergency restoration and         repair.
      - Identify the projected restoration and repair operations to be carried         out in the future.
      - Determine the line item cost of each of these operations.
      - Determine the subtotals for emergency restoration and repair costs and         projected restoration and repair costs and their sum, the total cost of         restoration and repair.
      - Develop a cost of restoration and repair table that shows the operations,         their line item costs, the subtotals for emergency restoration and repair         costs and projected restoration and repair costs and the total figure         for cost of restoration and repair (see Figure 4). Note that costs should         be consistent with industry standards and should include all administrative         overhead costs such as employee benefits. (Separate tables may be developed         for emergency restoration and repair costs and projected restoration and         repair costs; however, the recommended approach is to show these costs         in a single table since they are components of the total cost of restoration         and repair.)

### Examples of Categories of Emergency and Projected Restoration and Repair       Operations in a Cost of Restoration and Repair Determination

The following are examples of categories of emergency and projected restoration       and repair operations that would be included in a cost of restoration and       repair determination in a case involving unauthorized excavation at a Native       American site. (It should be noted that the restoration and repair operations       included in an actual cost of restoration and repair determination will       depend upon the specific circumstances of the case.) The italicized categories       are those specifically identified in the definition of cost of restoration       and repair in the ARPA uniform regulations.

Emergency Restoration and Repair
      - Examination and analysis of archeological resources  (field         damage assessment)
      - Consultation with affiliated tribes (if any)
      - Stabilization of archeological resources  and preparation of         stabilization records
      - Preparation of reports  (damage assessment report preparation)

Projected Restoration and Repair
      - Repatriation of NAGPRA items collected or seized as evidence (if any)
      - Curation of non-NAGPRA items collected or seized as evidence and the         associated documentation
      - Consultation with SHPO, THPO and/or affiliated tribes (if any).

Examples of important concerns and potential problems with restoration       and repair determinations are also illustrated by this list. As in the case       of an archeological value determination, all operations and costs in a restoration       and repair determination should be fully justifiable. For example, the consultation       with affiliated tribes as part of emergency restoration repair is required       because looting of a Native American site constitutes an "inadvertent discovery"       under NAGPRA. The consultation operation under projected restoration and       repair may or may not be necessary depending on whether or not any of the       other operations proposed in this phase would require consultation. If they       do not, the second episode of consultation is not justifiable and should       not be included.

As was also noted in relation to archeological value determinations, restoration       and repair operations should not include any of the same operations projected       as part of the scientific information retrieval strategy developed for the       archeological value determination. Already discussed has been the necessity       for a clear distinction between analysis, repatriation and curation operations       potentially projected for an archeological value determination versus the       analysis, repatriation and curation operations included in a restoration       and repair determination. Other examples are provided by the consultation       and report preparation operations potentially included in both determinations.       Consultation in a restoration and repair determination should pertain directly       to restoration and repair measures already carried out or projected to be       necessary to complete this process. By contrast, this operation in an archeological       value determination is the consultation that would be required prior to       carrying out the projected scientific information retrieval strategy on       which archeological value is based. Similarly, the report preparation operations       in restoration and repair and archeological value determinations have two       different purposes. The report prepared as part of emergency restoration       and repair is a damage assessment report documenting the findings on damage       to archeological resources actually caused by the violation. Alternatively,       the report preparation operation in an archeological value determination       pertains to the technical report that would be required on the findings       of the projected scientific information retrieval strategy. 

**Figure 4:** Example of a Cost of Restoration and Repair       Table Format (Adapt as necessary based on circumstances of violation. Note       that cost is shown only as an example.)
| **Cost of Restoration           and Repair**        |
|------------------------------------------------------|
| **[Category / Line Item]**                           | **[Units / Unit Cost]** | **[Line Item Cost]** |
| **Emergency Restoration and Repair**                 |
| Examination and Analysis                             | 3 hours @ $50.00/hour | $150.00 |
| Consultation                                         |
| Consultation with SHPO                               | 4 hours @ $50.00/hour | $200.00 |
| Consultation with THPO(s)          or Other Parties | 4 hours @ $50.00/hour | $200.00 |
| Stabilization                                        |
| Labor                                                | ___________________ | _______ |
| Materials                                            | ___________________ | _______ |
| Preparation of reports                               | ___________________ | _______ |
| Emergency Restoration and Repair Subtotal            | _______ |
| **Projected Restoration and Repair**                 |
| Repatriation                                         | ___________________ | _______ |
| Curation                                             | ___________________ | _______ |
| Projected Restoration and Repair Subtotal            | _______ |
| **Total Cost of Restoration and Repair**             | _______ |

## Archeological Resource Damage Assessment Report Preparation

The field damage assessment and value and cost determination procedures       carried out and the findings of this process are presented in an archeological       resource damage assessment report. The archeological resource damage assessment       report is an extremely important part of the overall criminal case report       or civil case documentation because it provides the information necessary       to prove that the archeological elements of a violation of ARPA (criminal       or civil) or other applicable statutes are met. The report also is the basis       for the author's testimony in a criminal or civil legal proceedings since       it tells the attorneys involved in the case what this archeologist is prepared       to testify about.

## Report Topics

The topics that will be included in an archeological resource damage assessment       report are listed below. These topics serve as an outline for planned reporting       and as a table of contents for reports as they are drafted. Some resource       damage assessment reports may not include all of these topics. The order       of the sections in the report dealing with these topics is optional. For       example, in some reports, the archeological resource damage section precedes       the field damage assessment procedures section. Also, the field damage assessment       procedures and archeological resource damage sections are sometimes merged       into a single section.
      - Introduction
      - Archeological Resource Description
      - Field Damage Assessment Procedures
      - Archeological Resource Damage
      - Value and Cost Determinations
      - Conclusions
      - Summary

## Basic Stylistic Rules

Three basic stylistic rules should be observed in preparing archeological       resource damage assessment reports. The first two are particularly critical       because these reports must be read and understood by non-archeologists.       For example, in a criminal case, non-archeologists who will read the report       include the case agent, the prosecuting attorney and the defense attorney.       The judge may also read portions of the report.
      - Write for non-archeologists, not other professional archeologists.
      - Use clear, easily understandable language and explain archeological         terms clearly (when a number of archeological terms will be used in the         report, a glossary is recommended).
      - Present all necessary information, but do not include unnecessary information.       

## Procedures for Archeological Resource Damage Assessment Report Preparation

 The following section-by-section listing suggests procedures that can       be used to prepare an archeological resource damage assessment report. They       are presented using the topical outline for such a report suggested above.
      - Introduction          Describe how you became involved in the case and the details of your           participation. 
      - Archeological Resource Description          Show that all aspects of ARPA's archeological resource definition are           met (refer to the ARPA definition of an archeological resource [see           above] and the ARPA uniform regulations list of the “classes of           material remains” considered to be archeological resources [see           Appendix A]).  In establishing that the archeological resource has archeological interest,           discuss both scientific interest (the scientific or historical importance           of the resource) and humanistic interest (the importance of the resource           to living people, both descendants of the people associated with the           resource, if any, and the general public). 
      - Field Damage Assessment Procedures          Describe the field damage assessment procedures carried out. 
      - Archeological Resource Damage          Describe the damage to the archeological resources in terms of the           acts prohibited by ARPA (see above) or other statutes and state the           total amount of damage. This text may be supplemented with a table showing           damage amounts by damage location if such a table will be of assistance           in understanding how the total amount of damage was determined. Photographs           and a map or maps should be included as figures to illustrate the extent           of damage and profile drawings may also be useful for this purpose in           cases involving excavations. 
      - Value and Cost Determinations          Identify the value and cost determinations carried out. For example,           as was noted above, some cases may involve an archeological value and           cost of restoration and repair determination, but not a commercial value           determination. Also, in some cases, the archeologist who prepares the           damage assessment report dealing with topics 1 through 4, may not have           carried out any of the value and cost determinations or only some of           them. For example, a government archeologist determines the cost of           restoration repair, a contract archeologist determines archeological           value and a third archeologist or an appraiser determines commercial           value. In such a situation, there would be a report dealing with the           procedures carried out by each person. (Note that there should be only           a single dollar figure for each of the prosecution's value and cost           determinations, even when different individuals determine the figures.)                   - Commercial Value              Describe the procedures carried out in determining commercial value               (see above) in text that clearly and convincingly explains the method(s)               used in making this determination. This text is extremely important               because it provides the rationale for the commercial value determination               method(s) and supports the commercial value table(s) developed for               the determination. At the conclusion of this text, state the total               figure for commercial value that is also shown in the commercial               value table(s). 
        - Archeological Value              Describe the procedures carried out in determining archeological               value in text (or in the case of question 6, a table) that clearly               and convincingly answers each of the seven questions asked in the               procedures for determining archeological value (see above). This               text is extremely important because it provides the rationale for               the scientific information retrieval strategy and operations proposed               to determine the archeological value figure and supports the archeological               value table developed in making this determination.            - Identify the archeological resource involved in the violation                 in text that references the "Archeological Resource Description"                 section of the report.
          - Describe the archeological resource damage in text that references                 the “Archeological Resource Damage” section of the                 report.
          - Describe both the quantitative (scale) and qualitative (methods)                 approach projected to retrieve scientific information from the                 identified archeological resource prior to the violation.
          - Describe how the scientific information retrieval strategy projected                 for the identified archeological resource is proportional, both                 quantitatively (scale) and qualitatively (methods), to the effect                 of the violation.
          - Describe the operations that would be involved in the scientific                 information retrieval strategy projected for the identified archeological                 resource and the justification for each of these operations in                 text that clearly and convincingly explains what each operation                 is and why it would be necessary in terms of learning about the                 identified archeological resource. Show how any operations that                 appear similar to restoration and repair operations are included                 in the scientific information retrieval strategy for a different                 purpose (e.g. projected repatriation of NAGPRA items expected                 to be recovered in the scientific information retrieval strategy                 developed for the archeological value determination versus actual                 repatriation of NAGRPA items collected or seized as evidence as                 a component of restoration and repair). 
          - Present the archeological value table developed in making this                 determination.
          - State the total figure for archeological value that is also                 shown in the archeological value table. 
        - Cost of Restoration and Repair              Describe the procedures carried out in determining the cost of               restoration and repair (see above) in text that clearly and convincingly               explains what each emergency and projected restoration and repair               operation is and why it is necessary to carry it out to restore               and repair the archeological resource. This text is extremely important               because it provides the rationale for the restoration and repair               operations identified in determining the cost of restoration and               repair figure and it supports the cost of restoration and repair               table developed in making this determination. Show how any operations               that appear similar to archeological value operations are included               as part of restoration and repair for a different purpose (e.g.               actual curation of non-NAGPRA items collected or seized as evidence               versus projected curation of non-NAGPRA items expected to be recovered               in the scientific information retrieval strategy developed for the               archeological value determination). At the conclusion of this text,               state the total figure for cost of restoration and repair that is               also shown in the cost of restoration and repair table. 
      - Conclusions          State the damage assessment report's conclusions. When figures have           been developed for any or all of the three value and cost determinations,           commercial value, archeological value and cost of restoration and repair,           state these figures again in the Conclusions section. 
      - Summary          Summarize the damage assessment report and its findings. 

## Summary and Conclusions

This technical brief has discussed the legal basis and methods for archeological       resource damage assessment. Archeological resource damage assessments provide       the information necessary to prove that the archeological elements of a       criminal or civil violation of ARPA are met according to the requirements       of the law and the judicial system. Three specific topics have been considered.       First, the elements of an ARPA criminal or civil violation have been identified.       Second, because of its importance to proving the ARPA violation and in conducting       damage assessment, ARPA's definition of an “archaeological resource”       has been presented. Finally, and most importantly, procedures for field       damage assessment, value and cost determination and damage assessment report       preparation have been recommended and explained. These procedures can be       utilized to carry out these three components of the archeological resource       damage assessment process.

Given its relationship to the law and the judicial system, the importance       of the archeological resource damage assessment process cannot be overemphasized.       The credibility of the archeological resource damage assessments produced       for violations of ARPA will directly affect the outcome of these cases and       the criminal or civil penalties imposed. Their importance is clearly demonstrated       by the effect that the monetary determinations for archeological value,       commercial value and cost of restoration and repair have on sentencing in       criminal cases under the United States Sentencing Guideline that applies       to ARPA and other federal crimes involving “Cultural Heritage Resources”       (USSG § 2B1.5). Under this guideline, adopted by the United States       Sentencing Commission in 2002, the sum of these three monetary determinations       constitutes a “Specific Offense Characteristic,” a sentencing       enhancement that increases the severity of the sentence as the total amount       increases. (Note that this specific offense characteristic is based on the       sum of all three values, archaeological value plus commercial value plus       cost of restoration and repair, whereas the sections of the ARPA statute       and the ARPA Uniform Regulations that apply to criminal and civil penalties       allow consideration of only archaeological value plus cost of restoration       and repair or commercial value plus cost of restoration and repair.) 

Therefore, archeologists, government attorneys, and resource managers who       become involved in archeological resource damage assessment for violations       of ARPA must fully understand this process and how to carry it out correctly.       It is hoped that this technical brief will be of assistance to them in this       endeavor and in the protection and preservation of archeological resources.

Technical Briefs|back|next

      -  Foreward 
      -  Introduction 
      -  ARPA Criminal Violation 
      -  ARPA Civil Violation 
      -  Protected Resources 
      -  Field Damage Assessment 
      -  Value & Cost Determination 
      -  Commercial Value 
      -  Archeological Value 
      -  Restoration and Repair Cost 
      -  Damage Assessment Report 
      -  Report Topics 
      -  Basic Stylistic Rules 
      -  Report Preparation 
      -  Summary & Conclusion 
      -  Appendix A: Protected resources 
      -  Appendix B: Professional Standards 
      -  References 
      -  Acknowledgements 
      - print         version  
      -  technical briefs index 

    -  DOI 
    -  History & Culture 
    -  Search 
    -  Contact 
    -  FOIA 
    -  Privacy 
    -  Disclaimer 
    -  USA.gov 

    - archeology       in the parks  
    - archeology       nationwide  
    - professional       tools  
    - for       the public  
    - kennewick       man
    - the       antiquities act
    - what's       new

    -  
    -  
    - technical assistance
    - databases
    - standards & guidelines
    - training & education
    - reports
    - publications

    -  
    -  
    -  
    - features
    - learn and participate
    - for teachers