Outline Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation · Outline Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation – Volume 8.9 1 Contents 1.1 Executive summary 3 1.2 Roles and responsibilities

Brechfa Forest ConnectionDevelopment Consent Order Application - Reference EN020016

Outline Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation

May 2015The Infrastructure Planning

(Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Regulation 5(2)(q)

Onl

ine

Writ

ten

Sche

me

of In

vest

igat

ion

8.9

Outline Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation – Volume 8.9

1

Contents

1.1 Executive summary 3

1.2 Roles and responsibilities 4

1.3 Introduction 5

1.4 Relevant legislation, policy, guidance, and technical advice 7

1.6 Research objectives 11

1.7 Project management 12

1.8 Archaeological Contractor’s Risk Assessment and Method Statement (RAMS) 13

1.9 Method for archaeological watching brief 14

1.10 Unexpected, highly significant remains 19

1.11 Method for preservation in situ of archaeological remains 21

1.12 Site monitoring and progress reports 22

1.13 Method for assessment, reporting and publication 23

1.14 Safety, health and environment 26

Tables

Table 1 – Proposals for construction phase mitigation of physical effects on assets within

the works boundary and Order Limits

Table 2 – Summary of construction phase mitigation by proposed development component

Table 3 – Assets within the works boundary

Appendices

Appendix 1: Summary of proposals for construction phase mitigation

Appendix 2: References


2

Figure

Figure 1.1 Archaeological Mitigation Location Plan


3

1.1 Executive summary

1.1.1 This document provides an Outline Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) for

mitigation of predicted physical effects of the Brechfa Forest Connection

(hereafter: ‘Proposed Development’) on ‘heritage assets with archaeological

interest’ (DECC 2011a). Physical effects that would require mitigation are

predicted in relation to archaeological remains and historic hedgerows.

1.1.2 This WSI provides the framework through which archaeological mitigation would

be managed and monitored. The legislative and policy requirement, and the

objectives of the proposed mitigation, are described.

1.1.3 This document provides the locations of all known historic assets that would be

affected by the Proposed Development, as well as the potential for as-yet

unknown assets to be impacted.

1.1.4 Methods for investigation and recording of known and as-yet undiscovered

archaeological remains are provided. The detailed design of mitigation works

would be outlined in a Risk Assessment and Method Statement produced by an

Archaeological Contractor engaged to carry out the mitigation works.


4

1.2 Roles and responsibilities

1.2.1 The following roles are identified in this document:

Western Power Distribution (WPD): the Applicant;

Statutory Consultee: the organisation appointed by the Welsh Government to

provide advice on all aspects of the Secretary of State's responsibilities

affecting the historic environment (i.e. Cadw);

Local Authority’s Archaeologist: any individual or body appointed by a local

authority to serve as a consultee for archaeological works and to provide

advice concerning archaeological matters (i.e. Dyfed Archaeological Trust);

Main Contractor: any organisation appointed by WPD as their main works

contractors to carry out the construction required to install the new 132kV

connection to Brechfa East;

Archaeological Contractor: any individuals or organisations appointed by WPD

to carry out any works related to archaeological field assessment, mitigation

and post-excavation assessment, analysis and archiving. The Archaeological

Contractor’s project manager would be a named full Member of the Chartered

Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) who is qualified to manage the required

archaeological work in line with the CIfA Code of Conduct (2014a); and

WPD’s Archaeologist: any individual or organisation appointed by WPD to

represent them in negotiations with other archaeological parties (including

Archaeological Contractor, Local Authority’s Archaeologist and Statutory

Consultee), and to oversee works carried out by the Archaeological

Contractor. WPD’s Archaeologist would be a full member of the Chartered

Institute for Archaeologists with over ten years of relevant professional

experience.


5

1.3 Introduction

Context and requirements

1.3.1 This document provides an Outline Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) for

mitigation of predicted physical effects of the Brechfa Forest Connection

(hereafter: ‘Proposed Development’) on the historic environment.

1.3.2 Physical effects that would require mitigation are predicted in relation to ‘historic

assets’. These assets include archaeological remains, as well as historic

hedgerows that are ‘important’ (i.e. that meet the ‘Archaeology and history’ criteria

in the Hedgerow Regulations: Statutory Instrument 1997/1160). The effects relate

to the predicted whole or partial loss of their ‘evidential value’ (cf. Cadw 2011).

1.3.3 This WSI proposes methods for investigation and recording to provide additional

information about the historic assets, thereby mitigating any loss of their evidential

value. The WSI also provides an appropriate procedure for the identification and

treatment of any significant archaeological remains that may be discovered during

construction, as part of an iterative process of identifying and mitigating effects on

as-yet undiscovered assets.

1.3.4 The Development Consent Order includes a requirement that secures the

implementation of this WSI. The procedures outlined in this WSI comply with the

provisions of paragraphs 5.8.19 – 5.8.22 of the Overarching National Policy

Statement for Energy (EN-1: DECC 2011a). The Construction Environmental

Management Plan (CEMP) (Volume 8.6) and this WSI are consistent with each

other in terms of commitments to mitigating the predicted adverse effects of the

Proposed Development on archaeological remains and historic landscape assets.

WPD would be responsible for ensuring that the procedures are implemented.

1.3.5 The procedures for archaeological mitigation provided in this WSI have been

developed with reference to best practice standards and guidance documents

produced by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA 2014a-i), and national

and regional archaeological research frameworks (WAT 2011-14), in order to


6

ensure that the proposals are reasonable and proportionate.

Location of effects requiring mitigation

1.3.6 A summary of the known assets that may be affected by the Proposed

Development is provided in Table 1 of Appendix 1 of this document. This table

also identifies, where necessary, the procedures proposed to mitigate the effect of

the Proposed Development on those assets.

1.3.7 This WSI also provides a summary of the mitigation measures proposed in each

area of the Proposed Development (see Table 2 of Appendix 1 of this document).

1.3.8 This WSI also lists in Table 3 of Appendix 1 all known assets within the works

boundary. These assets would be notified to the Main Contractor to ensure

avoidance during construction.

1.3.9 A figure has been prepared indicating areas identified for archaeological

mitigation; this is attached to this WSI as Figure 1.1.

1.3.10 Effects that relate to changes within the settings of assets are not referenced in

this WSI; rather, these are described in the Environmental Statement (ES) Volume

6.4, Appendix 11.1.

Summary of proposals

1.3.11 This WSI provides the outline method of approach during the construction phase,

which involves:

identification of archaeological remains through archaeological watching brief;

if required, mitigation of effects on archaeological remains through

archaeological excavation;

if required, mitigation of effects on archaeological remains through

preservation in situ;

mitigation of effects on palaeo-environmental and geo-archaeological


7

evidence that would be disturbed during construction; and

mitigation of effects on ‘important’ historic hedgerows and the historic

landscape character through reinstatement of boundaries, trackways,

earthworks and other physical elements of the historic environment.

1.3.12 This WSI also provides the approach to post-construction phase assessment,

analysis, and public dissemination of the results of the programme of

archaeological work.

1.3.13 Outline methods for the above procedures are provided. Detailed method

statements for the required works would be provided by the Archaeological

Contractor. These would be produced in consultation with WPD’s Archaeologist,

the Local Authority’s Archaeologist and Statutory Consultee.

1.4 Relevant legislation, policy, guidance, and technical advice

Relevant legislation

1.4.1 Legislation relevant to any archaeological programme of work of this nature can be

found in:

Burial Act 1857

1.4.2 Section 25 of the Burial Act states that it is a criminal offence to remove human

remains from any place of burial without a Home Office license.

Treasure Act 1996

1.4.3 The Treasure Act defines what constitutes ‘treasure’ and states that any finds of

treasure and objects found in association with ‘treasure’ must be reported to the

local Coroner.


8

Policy context

1.4.4 Paragraphs 5.8.19 to 5.8.22 of the Overarching National Policy Statement for

Energy (EN-1: DECC 2011a) relate to securing a proportionate record of the

heritage significance of any assets affected by the Proposed Development, before

that significance is lost as a result of consented development.

1.4.5 Paragraph 5.8.20 of EN-1 states that, “Where the loss of the whole or a material

part of a heritage asset’s significance is justified [PINS] should require the

developer to record and advance understanding of the significance of the asset

before it is lost. The extent of the requirement should be proportionate to the

nature and level of the asset’s significance. Developers should be required to

publish this evidence and deposit copies of the reports with the relevant Historic

Environment Record”.

1.4.6 Paragraph 5.8.21 of EN-1 directs that PINS, “should impose conditions on a

consent that such work is carried out in a timely manner in accordance with a

written scheme of investigation”.

1.4.7 Paragraph 5.8.22 of EN-1 directs that where PINS, “considers there to be a high

probability that a development site may include as yet undiscovered assets with

archaeological interest [they] should consider conditions to ensure that appropriate

procedures are in place for the identification and treatment of such assets

discovered during construction”.

Relevant guidance and technical advice

1.4.8 This WSI has been prepared in accordance with relevant guidance and technical

advice documents, including:

Cadw, 2011, Conservation Principles for the sustainable management of the

historic environment in Wales;

English Heritage (EH), 2007, Geoarchaeology: using earth sciences to

understand the archaeological record;


9

English Heritage (EH), 2011a, Environmental Archaeology;

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014c, Standard and Guidance

for an archaeological watching brief; and

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014e, Standard and Guidance

for archaeological excavation.

1.5 Background

Project description

1.5.1 A full description of the Proposed Development is provided in the Volume 6.2,

Chapter 2.

Historic environment background

1.5.2 The historic background, known and predicted archaeological, palaeo-

environmental/geo-archaeological and historic landscape features are all

described in the ES (Volume 6.2), Chapter 11, and associated Volume 6.4,

Appendix 11.1.

1.5.3 The results of the assessment carried out during production of the ES, including

details of the known historic environment baseline, are described in the ES

(Volume 6.4), Appendix 11.1, Sections 1.6-1.8.

1.5.4 Figures 11.1 and 11.2 in Volume 6.3 provide details of the location of the known

assets. The locations of proposed mitigation works are provided on Figure 1.1

accompanying this Outline WSI.

Archaeological potential within the Order Limits

1.5.5 This section summarises the expected potential for as-yet unidentified

archaeological remains to be present within the Order Limits. Further details of

the historic background and archaeological potential are provided in Volume 6.4,

Appendix 11.1, Section 1.9.


10

1.5.6 There is very high potential for the remains of landscape features such as tracks

and historic hedgerows, which may date from the Medieval to Modern periods, and

palaeochannels of unknown date, to be present within the Order Limits.

1.5.7 There is high potential for the remains of Roman roads to be present within the

Order Limits.

1.5.8 There is moderate potential for the presence within the Order Limits of buried

remains of isolated dwellings or agricultural buildings dating from the Post-

medieval or Industrial period.

1.5.9 There is low potential for Bronze Age buried archaeological remains to be present

within the Order Limits, either in the context of upland funerary deposits or within

fluvial deposits in valley bottoms. There is also low potential for the presence

within the Order Limits of Early Medieval, Medieval or Post-medieval settlements,

or Roman remains in the form of settlement or industrial activity alongside the

roads leading from Carmarthen.

1.5.10 There is very low potential for Palaeolithic or Mesolithic artefacts, Neolithic

remains, Iron Age settlements, or remains dating to the Second World War, and

extremely low potential for the remains of crannogs or boats from the prehistoric

periods onwards, to be present within the Order Limits.

1.5.11 Early prehistoric artefacts, boats or crannogs are likely to be of high heritage

significance. Any late prehistoric remains, or remains of Roman or Medieval

settlement, are likely to be of medium heritage significance. All other types of

archaeological remains described above would be of low heritage significance.

1.5.12 The Proposed Development would cross areas of known palaeo-environmental

importance. The Towy Valley contains sequences of river development and

alluviation that are likely to include preserved botanical remains, which can be

used to reconstruct past landscapes.


11

1.6 Research objectives

1.6.1 Ongoing environmental assessment leading to production of the ES was informed

by the research aims identified at a national and regional level as part of the

research framework for the archaeology of Wales (WAT 2011-14). The following

research aims have been identified that may be advanced as a result of the

investigation required as part of the Proposed Development:

National research aims

What were the environmental conditions associated with wetland sites?

What was the economy of medieval and post-medieval farms in the uplands and to

what extent did climatic and other environmental changes contribute to farm

abandonment and changes of agricultural regime?

What was the relationship between climate change and successive human

communities?

What has been the influence of river channel and floodplain development on the

archaeological record, i.e. settlement, land-use, ritual practices and landscape, from

the Palaeolithic to the present?

What was the role of hunting, fishing and wildfowling in agricultural societies in

Wales?

The wider setting of Medieval settlements within their agrarian landscapes

Understanding the road network (Medieval, but also later)

Regional research aims

What were the environmental conditions associated with wetland sites?

What impact did post-medieval industrialisation have on the surrounding

environment and what is the longevity of its environmental signature?

What was the relationship between climate change and successive human


12

communities?

How far has river channel and floodplain development influenced the archaeological

record from the Palaeolithic to the present?

1.6.2 Prior to works commencing, the Archaeological Contactor would formulate further

research aims specific to the assets and locations affected by the Proposed

Development. Identification of these aims would be informed by discussions with

the Local Authority’s Archaeologist and/or Statutory Consultee, and would be set

out in the Archaeological Contractor’s Method Statement.

1.7 Project management

1.7.1 Archaeological works would be carried out by the Archaeological Contractor, who

would be engaged by WPD and managed by WPD’s Archaeologist.

1.7.2 WPD would provide the Main Contractor with locations and descriptions of all

known assets within and adjacent to construction works, including any restrictions

to construction methods to protect assets, where these have been identified in the

ES and WSI.

1.7.3 WPD’s Archaeologist and the Archaeological Contractor would be notified of the

Main Contractor’s programme in advance of the works. WPD and the Main

Contractor would then agree a programme detailing the implementation of

archaeological works, addressing the measures set out in the ES and WSI.

1.7.4 The Main Contractor would direct any sub-contractors to facilitate the

Archaeological Contractor undertaking the works specified as an appropriate

mitigation measure.

1.7.5 The Archaeological Contractor would provide a risk assessment and method

statement (RAMS) for the works they undertake.

1.7.6 The Archaeological Contractor would appoint a named individual to liaise with the

Main Contractor regarding programme and progress, and notify WPD’s


13

Archaeologist regarding any significant archaeological finds. This individual would

also ensure that a log is maintained of the mitigation works undertaken and results

obtained, and on a regular (e.g. weekly) basis would update the historic

environment data held by the Main Contractor.

1.7.7 WPD’s Archaeologist would undertake appropriate monitoring of the mitigation

measures implemented and the effectiveness of the measures to ensure

compliance with the archaeological RAMS.

1.7.8 All archaeological mitigation works would also be monitored by the Local

Authority’s Archaeologist. If the works are in relation to a designated asset or an

asset demonstrably of equivalent heritage significance to a designated asset, that

role may defer to the Statutory Consultee.

1.8 Archaeological Contractor’s Risk Assessment and Method

Statement (RAMS)

1.8.1 The Archaeological Contractor would provide a detailed Risk Assessment and

Method Statement (RAMS) for the works, which would be approved by WPD’s

Archaeologist. The RAMS would be prepared in association with the Main

Contractor, taking account of the Environmental Management Plan. As a

minimum, the RAMS would include:

resource plan and programme;

CVs of managers and supervisors;

Health and Safety Plan and Site-Specific Risk Assessments;

Site management plan (including details of the method for preparing safe access

route to the working areas, proposed site accommodation, services and welfare) to

be agreed with the Main Contractor where appropriate;

methods to address the specific works required;

methods for survey and setting out works;


14

recovery policy for archaeological material (artefactual and ecofactual), including

sampling strategies and methodologies;

methods for dealing with human remains, treasure, and potentially nationally

significant discoveries;

retention and disposal policies for samples and artefacts recovered;

method for preparation of reports, archive and all associated deliverables;

procedures for post-excavation assessment of potential (if required), analysis and

publication; and

method for preparation of the digital dataset, drawings, reporting and archive.

1.8.2 During production of the RAMS, the Archaeological Contactor would also

formulate further research aims specific to the assets and locations affected by the

Proposed Development. Identification of these aims would be informed by

discussions with WPD’s Archaeologist and the Local Authority’s Archaeologist

and/or Statutory Consultee, and would be set out in the RAMS.

1.9 Method for archaeological watching brief

Definition and purpose of watching brief

1.9.1 An archaeological watching brief is defined as, “a formal programme of

observation and investigation conducted during any operation carried out for non-

archaeological reasons” (CIfA 2014c). The CIfA (op cit) defines the purpose of a

watching brief as:

“a. to allow, within the resources available, the preservation by record of

archaeological deposits, the presence and nature of which could not be

established (or established with sufficient accuracy) in advance of

development or other potentially disruptive works

b. to provide an opportunity, if needed, for the watching archaeologist to

signal to all interested parties, before the destruction of the material in


15

question, that an archaeological find has been made for which the resources

allocated to the watching brief itself are not sufficient to support treatment to

a satisfactory and proper standard”

Summary method

1.9.2 A summary of the method for archaeological watching brief is as follows:

construction works (topsoil stripping or ‘important’ historic hedgerow breaches)

would be monitored by the Archaeological Contractor;

if potential archaeological remains are encountered, the machine driver would be

required to pause works;

the area would be hand-cleaned in order to assess the complexity and quantity of

remains:

if simple remains (i.e. that which can be investigated and recorded rapidly) are

present, these would be recorded and construction works would continue;

if complex remains are present, these would be fenced off and the Main Contractor

and WPD’s Archaeologist notified;

WPD’s Archaeologist would determine whether to excavate or preserve in situ, in

consultation with the Local Authority’s Archaeologist and/or Statutory Consultee if

necessary;

the Main Contractor and WPD’s Archaeologist would determine whether a variation

in the works programme should be made; and

WPD’s Archaeologist would determine whether additional staffing or other

resources are necessary to carry out mitigation work, following discussion with the

Archaeological Contractor.


16

Construction works that would be subject to watching brief

1.9.3 All construction activities that may result in a significant impact on an intact

archaeological horizon below ground, or features surviving above ground, would

be monitored. These include, but are not limited to:

topsoil stripping of the underground cable section working width;

excavation of launch and reception pits for non-open cut horizontal directional

drilling (HDD) sections;

excavation of pits as part of pole erection, where these are within archaeologically

sensitive areas;

any significant drainage excavations within archaeologically sensitive areas;

breaches through ‘important’ historic hedgerows; and

where necessary, reinstatement within archaeologically or historically sensitive

areas.

Location of proposed watching brief areas

1.9.4 Locations where watching briefs would be maintained during construction are

shown on Figure 1. These are also summarised in Table 2 of Appendix 1 of this

WSI.

1.9.5 Watching brief is proposed in all areas where there is a potential for as-yet

undiscovered significant archaeological remains to be identified, and also areas of

known assets where the significance of effect of the Proposed Development is

predicted to be minor or negligible.

Programme

1.9.6 Works would be carried out to the Proposed Development specification and as

such, the archaeologist cannot define the depth of excavation, but would observe

works as they progress.


17

1.9.7 Where possible, archaeological works necessary to mitigate the effect of the

Proposed Development would be carried out within the existing construction

programme. If there is insufficient time to carry out archaeological works in the

existing programme, it may be possible to relocate construction works to another

section of the route until the archaeological works have been completed. (This is

achievable because the construction works would lay a duct through which a cable

would subsequently be pulled, and the duct can be laid and buried in non-

sequential stages).

Staffing

1.9.8 The watching brief would be undertaken by appropriately qualified professional

archaeologists. At least one supervising archaeologist would be appropriately

experienced in working with geoarchaeological/palaeoenvironmental remains of

the type expected to be encountered in the Towy Valley during the watching brief.

1.9.9 Resourcing would be commensurate to the volume of work taking place

concurrently. If more than one team of archaeologists is required, each would

include at least one member of staff of supervisor level or above. Should multiple

machines be excavating at the same time, more than one watching brief

archaeologist may be required to their monitor progress.

Determining the appropriate response to discovered archaeological remains

1.9.10 If archaeological remains of moderate or high heritage significance are identified

during the watching brief, a suitable programme of mitigation would be agreed with

Local Authority’s Archaeologist and/or Statutory Consultee.

1.9.11 If identified assets with archaeological interest of high or moderate heritage

significance cannot be recorded by the monitoring archaeologists in tandem with

the construction programme, the area would be fenced off, and below ground

works within the fenced area would be suspended until a strategy has been

agreed between the Archaeological Contractor, WPD’s Archaeologist and the

Local Authority’s Archaeologist and/or Statutory Consultee.


18

1.9.12 In the case of significant archaeological remains (i.e. with high evidential value),

once the site is secure and construction staff are aware of the importance of

avoiding impacts to the area, a decision would be taken, with regard to the

approach to the archaeology. The decision would be taken in consultation with

WPD, their environmental advisors, and the Statutory Consultee, while maintaining

the work programme as far as reasonably possible.

1.9.13 Assets with archaeological interest of high heritage significance may be preserved

in situ by means of a local variation in the main line works or, in extemis, by using

non-open cut horizontal directional drilling (HDD). Archaeological remains that

cannot be preserved in situ would be archaeologically excavated and recorded in

accordance with the Archaeological Contractor’s RAMS, supplemented by

additional Method Statements if necessary.

Palaeoenvironmental sampling

1.9.14 Appropriate features and deposits would be sampled to effect the retrieval of

palaeoenvironmental and economic data. The Archaeological Contractor would

make provision for the sampling of a wide range of contexts for potential

assessment and analysis for plant and animal micro/macro fossils and

soils/sediments in order to fulfil the research aims set out in the WSI and RAMS.

1.9.15 The selection, preparation for and methods of taking samples together with their

size, presentation and processing would be in accordance with current best

practice (e.g. English Heritage 2007, 2011a; CIfA 2014g).

1.9.16 The Archaeological Contractor would be responsible for the protection of all

samples and finds and for their transport (including loading and unloading) from

the Proposed Development site(s). Samples would be protected at all times from

temperatures below 5 and above 25 degrees Celsius and from wetting and drying

out due to weather exposure.


19

Recording ‘important’ historic hedgerow breaches

1.9.17 Hedgerows that meet the ‘Archaeology and history’ criteria in the Hedgerow

Regulations are identified in the historic environment baseline data. The location

of these ‘important’ historic hedgerows would be provided to the Main Contractor.

1.9.18 During construction works, archaeological recording would be undertaken of all

breaches through ‘important’ historic hedgerows, to record in section the

hedgerow profile and record any associated structures, archaeological features

such as earthworks and ditches, or dating evidence.

1.10 Unexpected, highly significant remains

1.10.1 In the event that human remains, treasure, or potentially nationally significant

archaeological remains are encountered, the Main Contractor and any sub-

contractors would be required to cease all works at that location until further

instruction is provided by WPD’s Archaeologist. The Archaeological Contractor

would inform WPD’s Archaeologist and the Main Contractor immediately by

telephone or in person. The Archaeological Contractor would also confirm the

circumstances of the discovery in writing within 24 hours, providing digital

photographs and as much information as is available that would assist in

determining the heritage significance of the discovery.

1.10.2 Where recording and removal of grave goods, ‘treasure’, or highly significant

archaeological remains deemed to be at risk of theft is not feasible or appropriate

on the day of discovery, the Main Contractor would ensure that adequate site

security is provided.

Human remains

1.10.3 Any discovered human remains would in the first instance be left in situ, covered

and protected. WPD’s Archaeologist may inform the local Coroner as appropriate.

Advice would be sought by WPD’s Archaeologist from the Ministry of Justice as to

whether a licence may be required to exhume any or all remains. Where possible,

preservation in situ would be preferred to exhumation.


20

1.10.4 Where possible, visible grave goods and other obvious artefacts would be

recorded and removed before the end of the day of discovery, to avoid the risk of

vandalism or theft.

1.10.5 All treatment of human remains would follow best practice guidance (McKinley &

Roberts, 1993).

Treasure

1.10.6 Under the 1996 Treasure Act, “treasure” can be summarised as: objects other

than coins containing at least 10% gold or silver and at least 300 years old, coins

found together (but not single coins) that contain at least 10% gold or silver,

groups of 10 or more coins of other metals that are at least 300 years old, any

object found associated with treasure except unworked natural objects, and any

other object that would have been Treasure Trove before the 1996 Act. Subject to

the Provisions of the Treasure Act, all material that is defined as Treasure is

vested in the franchisee or, if none, the Crown.

1.10.7 Any finds made that are identified under this Act would be reported to WPD’s

Archaeologist, who would inform the local Coroner.

1.10.8 To protect the finds from theft, where possible, the Archaeological Contractor

would record the finds and remove them to a safe place on the day of discovery.

Potentially nationally significant archaeological remains

1.10.9 Potentially nationally significant archaeological remains are defined as any that

may meet the criteria for designation as Scheduled Monuments (Cadw 2002,

Annex 1), or those that do not meet these criteria but are demonstrably of

equivalent heritage significance to Scheduled Monuments by virtue of their

‘archaeological interest’ (referenced in EN-1 (DECC 2011a) and defined in DCLG

2010) or ‘evidential value’ (Cadw 2011).

1.10.10 In the event that unexpected, potentially nationally significant archaeological

remains are identified during the construction phase, WPD’s Archaeologist would


21

immediately inform the Statutory Consultee, as well as the Local Authority’s

Archaeologist. WPD’s Archaeologist would investigate, with the consultees

whether preservation in situ is feasible within the Order Limits and any other

constraints.

1.10.11 If preservation in situ is not feasible, the Archaeological Contractor would produce

an updated RAMS to include works appropriate to conduct an archaeological

excavation on the site and achieve preservation by record. The Main Contractor

would allow a time period for archaeological recording and excavation, which

would be determined in consultation with the Statutory Consultee, but shall not be

less than 14 days.

1.10.12 In the event that well-preserved, waterlogged remains are located (e.g. preserved

boats), consideration would be given, in consultation with the Statutory Consultee,

for the appropriateness (or otherwise) and feasibility of their removal and

conservation.

1.11 Method for preservation in situ of archaeological remains

Preservation in situ of remains that would be physically impacted

1.11.1 Where the conservation of all or part of an asset’s heritage significance is justified

(e.g. for assets of demonstrably equivalent significance to a designated asset),

and where preservation in situ is achievable, the following techniques would be

considered:

avoidance of the asset through a minor variation (within the Limits of Deviation) in

the proposed working area;

use of non-open cut techniques, where available; and

protection of subsoil within the working area (e.g. through the use of floating

trackway panels, topsoil retention, or any other suitable technique).

1.11.2 The implementation of any of the above techniques would be subject to review by


22

the Main Contractor and other environmental constraints.

1.11.3 Implementing the above techniques would be undertaken by the Main Contractor

in consultation with WPD’s Archaeologist, the Archaeological Contractor and the

relevant consultees.

1.11.4 Any areas identified for preservation in situ that are identified during the watching

brief would first be recorded as found.

1.11.5 Any area identified for preservation in situ would be identified by signage and if

necessary fencing, within the order limits. These ‘exclusion zones’ would be

notified to on-site managers and monitored throughout construction and re-

instatement activities. Re-instatement methods would be reviewed and monitored

by WPD’s Archaeologist to ensure that the preservation in situ is taken into

account after construction.

Ensuring avoidance of remains for which physical impacts are not predicted

1.11.6 The Main Contractor would be provided with the locations and descriptions of all

known assets within and adjacent to construction works, including restrictions to

construction methods to protect assets. The Main Contractor would disseminate

this information to all sub-contractors.

1.11.7 Any assets that cannot be avoided because of variations within the Limits of

Deviation would be identified in a review and update of this WSI undertaken by

WPD’s Archaeologist, and included in the scope of works undertaken by the

Archaeological Contractor, as detailed in the RAMS.

1.12 Site monitoring and progress reports

Monitoring

1.12.1 WPD’s Archaeologist would be responsible for all liaisons with the Local

Authority’s Archaeologist and Statutory Consultee. The Archaeological Contractor

would not communicate information regarding the Proposed Development to


23

consultees unless directed to do so by WPD’s Archaeologist.

1.12.2 WPD’s Archaeologist would notify the Local Authority’s Archaeologist that

fieldwork is due to commence at least two weeks in advance.

1.12.3 WPD’s Archaeologist would arrange and convene monitoring site visits by the

Local Authority’s Archaeologist and/or Statutory Consultee, as appropriate. Any

visits to the works would be in accordance with the Main Contractor’s health and

safety, site access and security requirements. There would be no unauthorised

access to the works in other circumstances.

Progress reports

1.12.4 During the construction phase, the Archaeological Contractor would provide

weekly reports to WPD’s Archaeologist, summarising progress, any discoveries,

and the forthcoming programme and resourcing.

1.12.5 The Archaeological Contractor’s weekly reports, supplemented where necessary

with plans or digital spatial data, would also be used to keep the Main Contractor

informed of changes to the known historic environment data.

1.13 Method for assessment, reporting and publication

1.13.1 A staged programme of post-excavation assessment and reporting would be

undertaken, to commence on completion of archaeological mitigation fieldwork.

Review of archaeological fieldwork results

1.13.2 The Archaeological Contractor would produce a database for all sites, finds and

archive material recovered during the pre-construction and construction phase of

the Proposed Development. The material archive would be ordered, and initial

finds processing would take place to better understand the nature and importance

of the records.

1.13.3 At this point, WPD’s Archaeologist would determine in consultation with the Local

Authority’s Archaeologist and/or Statutory Archaeologist, whether or not a stage of


24

assessment is required prior to analysis and reporting.

1.13.4 In the event that archaeological remains discovered during the construction phase

are limited in quantity or heritage significance, a programme and strategy for

reporting and public dissemination of the results would be produced on the basis

of the work carried out thus far. The work would then proceed to the reporting

stage without the requirement for an interim assessment stage.

1.13.5 In the event that widespread or complex archaeological remains have been

recorded, those remains may not be sufficiently understood to create an

appropriate project design for reporting and dissemination. In this case, an interim

assessment stage would be required.

Post-excavation assessment

1.13.6 If an interim assessment stage is required, the Archaeological Contractor would

produce a ‘post-excavation assessment’, which would provide an overview of the

results of the archaeological mitigation and outline methods for assessment,

potential for analysis and reporting. The regional research aims would be

addressed in determining the scope of for specialist analysis. This would also

include a project design, describing the programme and methodology for

undertaking that assessment, with recommendations (based on specialist input

where needed) for the method for processing, sampling and the analysis of all

artefacts and ecofacts recovered.

1.13.7 The ‘Post-Excavation Assessment and Project Design’ would be produced by the

Archaeological Contractor and provided to WPD’s Archaeologist, for discussion

with the relevant consultees. The programme would identify quantified stages to

ensure a reasonable and timely programme for the final publication and public

dissemination of the results.


25

Reporting

1.13.8 The proposals for publication would be commensurate to the findings.

1.13.9 As a minimum, ‘grey literature’ reports would be produced and deposited with the

Historic Environment Record within a reasonable and agreed timescale from

completion of fieldwork.

1.13.10 In the event that complex, highly significant or widespread remains are discovered,

the Proposed Development may require additional and more complex reporting,

through for example period or regional journal, stand-alone ‘monograph’

publication and/ or popular publication.

Archiving

1.13.11 Before any fieldwork commences, all reasonable steps would be taken by the

Archaeological Contractor to obtain the agreement of the landowner(s) to the

deposition of the full site archive, and transfer of title to the relevant repository.

1.13.12 The Archaeological Contractor would consult with the intended depository before

fieldwork commences regarding specific requirements for archive deposition and

curation, and regarding any specific cost implications of deposition.

1.13.13 Archives would be prepared to conform to current best practice (CIfA 2014i). The

archive would cover all finds, samples and records (drawn, written, photographic

and electronic) collected and produced during the works. The archive would be

indexed and internally consistent.

1.13.14 In addition to the deposition of project reports and archive with the relevant local

and national curators, an electronic record of the project details would be created

through OASIS (http://oasis.ac.uk/). Subject to any contractual requirements on

confidentiality, copies of the OASIS record would be integrated into the relevant

local and/or national records and published through the Archaeology Data Service

ArchSearch catalogue.

http://oasis.ac.uk/


26

1.14 Safety, health and environment

1.14.1 All companies working on the project would adhere to WPD’s required quality,

health, safety and environment controls. All work on site would be undertaken

strictly in accordance with the Main Contractor’s health and safety plan and task-

specific risk assessments. Where specific health and safety constraints or

requirements for the Archaeological Contractor’s method of work are required,

these would be addressed in the Archaeological Contractor’s RAMS.

1.14.2 No ground intervention or other survey would be made prior to approval of the

Archaeological Contractor’s Health and Safety Plan and RAMS by the Main

Contractor.

1.14.3 Access routes to working areas would be specified by WPD and access would

only be permitted to those routes and the area of the fieldwork.

1.14.4 All intrusive works would be subject to screening against other environmental

constraints (primarily ecological sensitivity).

1.14.5 All site staff, including subcontractors, machine operators and visitors, would prove

that they have attended a site induction and have the necessary competencies

(e.g. Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) training for machine operators)

and any other necessary health and safety qualifications.


27

Appendix 1: Summary of proposals for construction phase mitigation

1.14.6 In Table 1 below, the mitigation measures proposed for specific assets are

described. In Table 2, proposed mitigation measures that would take place in

specific areas of the Proposed Development are summarised. Table 3 provides

details of all known assets within the works boundary, irrespective of whether

adverse effects are predicted, concerning which the Main Contractor should be

notified.

1.14.7 Assets are identified below by their unique identification reference (UID) and

name; further details are presented in a gazetteer in Volume 6.4, Appendix, 11.1,

Tables 1.17-1.22. Designated assets are indicated as such by the use of bold

type. Heritage significance, magnitude of impact, significance of effect before

mitigation and residual effect are determined using the methodology described in

the Volume 6.2, Chapter 11, Tables 11.2-4.

1.14.8 The column ‘Works’ indicates area of the Proposed Development in which the

identified effect would occur. These are:

OHL(s): Construction of a 132kV overhead line from near Llandyfaelog to near

Llangunnor;

UGC: Installation of a 132kV underground cable though the Towy Valley;

OHL(n): Construction of a 132kV overhead line from near Peniel to Brechfa East;

Temp: Temporary works associated with the construction phase, including

compounds and access; and

UGC (local): undergrounding of certain local electricity connections.

1.14.9 The ‘Mitigation’ column indicates the type of mitigation work that is proposed. The

acronyms used refer to:

WB: Watching brief during overburden strip and trenching;

PE: Provision for palaeo-environmental sampling; and


28

RS: Reinstatement of boundaries, trackways, earthworks and other physical

elements of the historic environment.

1.14.10 Note that for some assets described below, effects related to changes within

setting are also predicted. These assets are RHL2, ND173, ND174, HLC8 and

HLC20. Further details are provided on Table 11.8 of the Volume 6.2, Chapter 11.


29

Table 1 – Proposals for construction phase mitigation of physical effects on assets within the works boundary and

Order Limits

UID Name/

Description Heritage

Sig. Works

Mag. of Impact

Sig. of Effect

Proposed Mitigation

Residual Effect

(physical) Figure

Vol. 2 Figure

RHL2

Towy Valley Registered

Historic Landscape

High OHL(s),

UGC Negligible Minor WB, RS None

1.1 Map 4

& 5

11.2 Map 1-4

ND57 Site of earthworks/

palaeochannels Negligible Temp Low Negligible WB None

1.1 Map 6

11.1 Map 10

ND166 Palaeochannels Low UGC Low Minor WB, PE None 1.1

Map 4 & 5

11.1 Map 9 &

10

ND171 Possible quarry Negligible OHL(s) Low Negligible WB None 1.1

Map 3 11.1

Map 5

ND173 Former track Low OHL(s) Negligible Negligible WB, RS None 1.1

Map 3 11.1

Map 6

ND174 Earthworks Low OHL(s),

UGC (local)

Negligible Negligible WB, RS None 1.1

Map 3 11.1

Map 6

ND178 Possible Roman

road Low OHL(s) Negligible Negligible WB None

1.1 Map 2

11.1 Map 3

ND186 Roman road Low UGC Negligible Negligible WB None 1.1 11.1


30

UID Name/


Sig. Works

Mag. of Impact

Sig. of Effect

Proposed Mitigation

Residual Effect

(physical) Figure

Vol. 2 Figure

Map 6 Map 10

HLC8 Croesyceilog-

Cwmffrwd HLC High UGC Negligible Minor WB, RS None

1.1 Map 4

11.3 Map 1-9

HLC16 Morfa Melyn HLC High UGC Negligible Minor WB, RS None 1.1

Map 4 & 5

11.3 Map 8-

10

HLC18 Ystrad Tywi: Carmarthen-

Llandeilo HLC High UGC Negligible Minor WB, RS None

1.1 Map 4

11.3 Map 8-9

HLC20 Abergwili-

Llanegwad Parish HLC

High UGC Negligible Minor WB, RS None 1.1

Map 6

11.3 Map 9-

15

HLC23 Afon Gwili HLC Medium UGC Negligible Negligible WB, RS None 1.1

Map 5 & 6

11.3 Map 9-

11

HH53 ‘important’ historic

hedgerow Low Temp Low Minor WB, RS None

1.1 Map 1

11.3 Map 2


hedgerow Low Temp Low Minor WB, RS None

1.1 Map 1

11.3 Map 2


hedgerow Low Temp Low Negligible WB, RS None

1.1 Map 5

11.3 Map 10

HH262 ‘important’ historic Low UGC Low Minor WB, RS None 1.1 11.3


31

UID Name/


Sig. Works

Mag. of Impact

Sig. of Effect

Proposed Mitigation

Residual Effect

(physical) Figure

Vol. 2 Figure

hedgerow Map 6 Map 10


hedgerow Low UGC Low Minor WB, RS None

1.1 Map 6

11.3 Map 10


hedgerow Low Temp Low Negligible WB, RS None

1.1 Map 8

11.3 Map 14


32

Table 2 – Summary of construction phase mitigation by proposed development component

Proposed Development Component

Description Archaeological

Potential Summary of Impact Mitigation Measures Figure

OHL(s)

Construction of a 132kV overhead line and

associated poles from near Llandyfaelog to near

Llangunnor

Areas of high - low potential

Negligible/None: limited pitting at pole locations

Watching brief at locations where there is known

potential for archaeological impacts, i.e. at the following poles only: 34, 50, 54, 55 &

59

1.1 Map 2 & 3

UGC Installation of a 132kV

underground cable though the Towy Valley

Areas of moderate and low potential

Low - High: stripping of topsoil across working width, HDD pits, cable

trench

Watching brief of all works; reinstatement of any earthworks; palaeo-

environmental sampling where appropriate

1.1 Map 4-6

OHL(n)

Construction of a 132kV overhead line and

associated poles from near Peniel to Brechfa

East

Areas of high - low potential

Negligible/None: limited pitting at pole locations

None n/a

Bury Port

Alteration/ undergrounding of

existing 132kV overhead lines at Burry Port

substation

Negligible/None

Negligible/None: limited trenching through

previously disturbed ground

None n/a

Showground Construction and use of a Low Low: topsoil stripping Watching brief 1.1 Map


33

Proposed Development Component

Description Archaeological

Potential Summary of Impact Mitigation Measures Figure

Compound compound site at Carmarthen Showground

9

Towy Compound

Construction and use of a compound site in the

Towy Valley

Areas of moderate and low potential

Low Watching brief 1.1 Map

6

Forest Compound

Construction and use of a compound site near the

north terminus of the Proposed Development

Low/Negligible None: no stripping None n/a

UGC(local) Underground cabling of

local connections

Areas of low and negligible potential (i.e. near earthworks ND174 & Roman road ND75)

Low

Watching brief in areas of archaeological potential, i.e. between the following poles

only: 53 & 54 143 & 144 147 148 & 149

1.1 Map 3 & 7

Temp

Temporary works associated with the construction phase,

including access

Low/Negligible

Negligible: no stripping; cut-back/breaches

through six ‘important’ historic hedgerows for

access

Watching brief and reinstatement at six

hedgerows (HH53, HH56, HH240, HH262, HH264 &

HH434)

1.1 Map 1, 5, 6,

& 8


34

Table 3 – Assets within the works boundary

UID Name/Description Heritage Significance Vol. 2 Figure

RHL2 Towy Valley Registered Historic Landscape High 11.2 Map 1-4

ND1 Church land Negligible 11.1 Map 1

ND25 Church land Negligible 11.1 Map 5

ND28 Possible site of a former standing stone Low 11.1 Map 5

ND44 Canal (“Bishop's Palace Canal”) Low 11.1 Map 9

ND48 Possible site of a water mill in Abergwili Medium 11.1 Map 9

ND52 Leat to 'Bishops Mill' Low 11.1 Map 9

ND55 Earthworks near Glangwili Bridge (date and purpose unknown) Low 11.1 Map 10

ND57 Site of earthworks/palaeochannels Negligible 11.1 Map 10

ND60 Trial mine/quarry Negligible 11.1 Map 10

ND69 Quarry Negligible 11.1 Map 14

ND104 Former road running north from Capel Farm Low 11.1 Map 4

ND114 Site of a farmhouse or cottage Low 11.1 Map 6

ND121 Roman road ('Via Julia') between Carmarthen and Abergwili Low 11.1 Map 9

ND122 Site of a building Low 11.1 Map 10


35


ND166 Series of palaeochannels along the eastern side of the River Gwili Low 11.1 Map 9 & 10

ND167 Possible settlement plots Low 11.1 Map 4

ND171 Quarry Negligible 11.1 Map 5

ND172 Former track Low 11.1 Map 6

ND173 Former track Low 11.1 Map 6

ND174 Earthworks Low 11.1 Map 6

ND175 Trackway Low 11.1 Map 18

ND178 Section of road, possibly Roman Low 11.1 Map 3

ND186 Roman road Low 11.1 Map 10

ND193 Field boundary (same as HH68) Low 11.1 Map 3

ND194 Former field boundary Negligible 11.1 Map 3

ND195 Field boundary (same as HH72) Low 11.1 Map 3

ND206 Site of New Lodge Brickworks Negligible 11.1 Map 23

ND208 Site of a relict drainage system Negligible 11.1 Map 23

HLC6 Morlais Valley Medium 11.3 Map 1

HLC8 Croesyceilog-Cwmffrwd High 11.3 Map 1

HLC10 Llandyfaelog, Llangyndeyrn High 11.3 Map 1-5


36


HLC14 Mynydd Cyfor, Pant-Y-Parchell Moderate 11.3 Map 4-6

HLC16 Morfa Melyn High 11.3 Map 8-10

HLC17 Carmarthen High 11.3 Map 22

HLC18 Ystrad Tywi: Carmarthen-Llandeilo High 11.3 Map 8-9

HLC20 Abergwili-Llanegwad Parish High 11.3 Map 9-15

HLC23 Afon Gwili Moderate 11.3 Map 9-11

HLC24 Trelech High 11.3 Map 12-19

HLC32 Mynydd Tre-Beddau Negligible 11.3 Map 16, 18

& 20

HLC47 Dyffryn Cywyn High 11.3 Map 22

HLC48 Sarnau Mansion, Trebersed Medium 11.3 Map 22

HLC50 Tywyn Bach, Cefn Padrig Medium 11.3 Map 23

HH2 ‘important’ historic hedgerow Low 11.3 Map 1










37






























38






























39






























40






























41






























42






























43






























44






























45







46

Appendix 2: References

The list below is taken from a full bibliography of sources utilised, which is

provided in Volume 6.4, Appendix 11.1.

Burial Act, 1857

Cadw, 2002, Ancient Monuments in Wales: What is Scheduling?

Cadw, 2011, Conservation Principles for the sustainable management of the historic

environment in Wales

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014a, Code of Conduct (revised)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014b, Standard and Guidance for

commissioning work on, or providing consultancy advice on, archaeology and the historic

environment

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014c, Standard and Guidance for an

archaeological watching brief (revised)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014d, Standard and Guidance for

archaeological field evaluation (revised)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014e, Standard and Guidance for

archaeological excavation (revised)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014f, Standard and Guidance for

archaeological geophysical survey (revised)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014g, Standard and Guidance for the

collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materials (revised)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014h, Standard and Guidance for Historic


47

Environment Desk-Based Assessment (revised)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2014i, Standard and guidance for the

creation, compilation, transfer and deposition of archaeological archives (revised)

Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), 2010, Planning Policy

Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5)

Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC), 2011a, National Policy Statement for

Energy (EN-1)

English Heritage (EH), 2007, Geoarchaeology: using earth sciences to understand the

archaeological record

English Heritage (EH), 2011a, Environmental Archaeology

McKinley, J.I. & Roberts, C, 1993, Excavation and post-excavation treatment of cremated

and inhumed human remains, Institute of Field Archaeologists Technical Paper, 13

Statutory Instrument 1997/1160 ‘The Hedgerow Regulations’ (Schedule 1, Part 2)

Treasure Act, 1996

Welsh Archaeological Trusts (WAT), 2011-14, A Research Framework for the Archaeology

of Wales (available at: http://www.archaeoleg.org.uk/documents2011.html#content

accessed 24/06/2014)

http://www.archaeoleg.org.uk/documents2011.html#content

Documents

Outline Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation · Outline Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation – Volume 8.9 1 Contents 1.1 Executive summary 3 1.2 Roles and responsibilities