1. These outline instructions are available on the IFF website and are intended to provide a useful overview of the likely sequence of events and possible ramifications of joining a SIT. Detailed protocols for use by SIT's on site can be found by accessing the online help system in your local IFF JIM Bright Slave unit.
2. Throughout this paper, the term "find" subsumes within it all sites, artefacts, bases, technology or other aspects associated with the Forerunners.

Outline Aim:
3. The outline aim of a SIT is: -
a. to liaise with the competent local authorities to secure, or continue to secure, the find;
b. to liaise with the competent local authorities to arrange initial excavation/investigation, or to support such investigation already underway;
c. to assess the find and determine if it is Forerunner; if it is;
d. to assign a provisional find category;
e. to assist and support with subsequent local exploitation; or;
f. to handover to any follow on IFF exploitation.

Securing the Site:
4. In order to ensure that the exploitation of a particular find is speedy, adequate and intellectually impeccable, it is necessary to ensure the security and safety of a particular find. This can only be accomplished with the active involvement and assistance of competent local authorities.
5. "Competent local authorities" in this context will not only comprehend local police and/or security services (for the physical protection of the site and advice and guidance on any likely subversive or terrorist interest), but also local Militia, Fire, Medical and Hazmat services for any physical "threats". If the find is threatened due to imminent industrial or commercial damage, then local planning or environmental authorities may also need to be involved.
6. "Securing the find" not only means ensuring the physical sequestration and security of the find, but may also need to include the obtaining of necessary permits, licences, leases and any other local legal requirements.
7. The overriding principle is that enshrined in Provision 11 of the IFF Treaty: -
"Investigations into Forerunner sites within polities will be lead by the polity whose area it is within…"
8. This presupposes that the IFF, for whom the SIT is often the first supra-polity organisation on scene, must work with and alongside the local authorities.
9. For a variety of very understandable reasons, many local authorities and academics will not view interference by the SIT kindly. This will require active measures by the SIT to allay justifiable local fears over such issues as academic credentials, authorship of academic papers, financial or other exploitation of a local "resource" by strangers etc. etc.
10. In all cases, local authorities have primacy and must be worked with.
11. The IFF treaty recognises the right of all polities to have representation on all IFF teams (Provision 8). Within such a small team as a SIT it is not possible for all signatories to be represented, and, indeed, it may be that the presence of certain polity members may cause problems on certain worlds. Nevertheless, the problems of multi-polity teams' are problems to overcome rather than excuses for failure and the rights and obligations of the treaty are to be respected at all times.
12. Given the above, it is often difficult to see why the "owner" of a find would want, or need, assistance from the IFF. However, there are several powerful cards that the IFF can play to ensure IFF access to finds: -
a. Expertise: The expertise of the indigenous staff involved in Forerunner finds can vary widely; from blatant treasure hunters through enthusiastic but untutored amateurs to fully qualified and equipped academic archaeologists. In all cases, however, it is very unlikely that extensive expertise on forerunner archaeology and the specific protocols and techniques will be readily available, except from or through the SIT.
b. Information: The IFF database is the foremost repository of Forerunner related data. Access to this data as a quid pro quo can be a powerful incentive to allow access to the find by the SIT.
c. Resources: The IFF has access to a significant pool of resources and can assist and support often quite large and complicated digs.
d. Access: Given the nature of the treaty governing its activities, and the high level interest in its actions and outputs, many political and governmental doors that may be closed to often marginalised local archaeological interest can be opened by the IFF.

Initial Investigation:
13. Archaeological investigation must involve the competent local authorities. "Competent local authorities" in this instance will include local archaeological and academic institutions, plus the appropriate central or local government agencies involved in this area.
14. Where such are not available, it may be sufficient to extract from those authorities with jurisdiction a franchise or licence to carry out the work on behalf of those authorities, which is obviously to the advantage of the IFF.
15. While it is inevitable that the primary focus of the investigation should be on the find itself, full advantage should be taken of the opportunities, if any, to expand the scope of the investigation. This is in order to exhaust all possible avenues of discovering further or other finds.
16. In this context, full weight should be given to local and planetary histories, mythologies, folk tales and other such "soft" evidence. While not necessarily of any use as evidence of forerunner activity it can be a very useful pointer to potentially indicate areas for search or eliminate areas from consideration.

Assessing the Find:
17. The vital thing to keep in mind at all times is that it is not the job of the SIT to definitively excavate or exploit the find, but to set boundaries that allow the SIT to accurately categorise the find.
18. A limited excavation will often be necessary but the extensive use of non-invasive technology is preferred. This may include, but not be limited to: -

• Geophysics and associated scanning
• Surveying.
• Satellite and aircraft photography.
• False colour and alternate spectra imagery.
• Side scan radar.
• Ground scan radar.

19. Removal of the artefacts from the local context should be avoided if at all possible, unless and until full recording has been taken, so as to allow for reinstatement at a future date.
20. If it proves necessary to do so, offer all assistance to support the safe and secure removal, transport, storage etc. Especially, offer the use of the appropriate IFF HQ Institutes specialist resources, including the ex gratia funding of specific local authorities to accompany the artefacts.
Assigning a provisional find category:
21. This, of course, plays no part in a purely academic view of the find but is very important in an IFF context as it keys in subsequent follow-on levels of exploitation.
22. The category assigned must be based solely on the evidence and must take any account of local political, religious, economic or ecological concerns. However, these must be detailed separately and any issues or concerns or sensitivities highlighted as context to the assessment. But the assessment itself must be intellectually impeccable.

Subsequent Investigation:
23. The degree to which a find requires subsequent or detailed investigation is dependant in the main on the research category that is assigned to it.
24. Cat 1 and 2 are of sufficient - almost self-evident- importance such that a FIT/MIT/LAE will be recommended for funding to the owning polity. See the section on "Upgrading" below.
25. Category 3 finds are somewhat transitory; once the first flurry of categorisation has passed the onsite SIT should make regular and detailed reviews of the evidence it has gathered to see if there is any justification to either upgrade - and thus potentially involve more detailed exploitation by the IFF - or downgrade and handover the find to local exploitation.
26. Category 4 and 5 finds, while interesting and important in and of themselves, do not justify further support or exploitation by the IFF. Once this category has been determined, the SIT should make arrangements to withdraw and ensure that local authorities have taken the find into ownership and care.
27. A reciprocal agreement for the exchange of site data and find reports on the one hand, and (limited) access to the IFF database on the other should be entered into.
28. Category 6 presupposes that the find has either been unsubstantiated or no further IFF involvement is required. Refer to the "Closure and Withdrawal" section below.

Upgrading:
29. Depending on the categorisation assigned by the FIT, and if the owning polity will assign the necessary resources, the SIT may be subsumed within the follow-on organisation. This follow-on will be a FIT, an MIT or an LAE as appropriate.
30. The role of the SIT is to act as the on-scene representative of the team leader, and to act as broker to make the ramping up of the IFF presence as smooth a seamless as possible.
31. This will undoubtedly involve the leasing/purchase etc. of local labour, housing, supplies etc. as well as introducing and integrating the follow-on presence into the local efforts and organisational structures.
32. Individuals scientists will undoubtedly remain on site during the initial transition period and may, at the discretion of the IFF and with the individuals' agreement, remain on site and work as part of follow on FIT etc. While their professional expertise may be subsumed within the FIT's ongoing work etc, their prime role is to aggressively follow up any existing or newly discovered leads to new finds.

Closure and Withdrawal:
33. Closure of a site assumes that either no exploitable evidence of forerunner finds exists, or that the find has been exploited to the fullest extent possible, or that the IFF's support and assistance is no longer desired or required.
34. Exploitation of a site may well have required excavation and the guiding principle is that the site is to be returned to as near its original condition as possible and any necessary reparations or compensation has been adjudicated and finalised before final withdrawal.
35. Given the current situation with forerunner archaeology, it will almost always be appropriate to setup, and arrange for maintenance of, a stay behind monitoring effort.