STATE OF VERMONT
PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD
Petition of Vermont Transco, LLC, and
Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc.
(collectively, “VELCO”), and Central Vermont
Public Service Corporation (“CVPS”) for a
Certificate of Public Good, pursuant to 30
V.S.A. § 248, for the “
Southern Loop within the same utility right-of-way as
Project and Cavendish, Vermont, consisting of the following elements: (1) a new, approximately
51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between
Vernon-Cavendish, to be built parallel to and
VELCO’s existing Vernon-Cavendish 345 kV line; (2) a new VELCO 345/115 kV Vernon substation, to be located just north of the
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station; (3) a new 345/115/46 kV Newfane substation; (4) a
,” located in Vernon, Guilford, Brattleboro,
Dummerston, Newfane, Brookline, Townshend,
Grafton, Windham, Andover, Chester, Ludlow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Docket No. ____ new, approximately one-mile, 345 kV transmission line loop between the new
Newfane substation and the new Vernon)
)
)
)
Cavendish 345 kV line; (5) expansion of
VELCO’s Coolidge substation in Cavendish,
Vermont; and (6) the implementing of incremental energy efficiency to defer transmission upgrades in Southern Vermont
)
)
)
)
PREFILED TESTIMONY OF
DR. HOPE LUHMAN
ON BEHALF OF
PETITIONERS
November 8, 2007
Dr. Luhman presents the results of the Archaeological Resource Assessment and Scope of Work that The Louis Berger Group, Inc., prepared for VELCO. She summarizes the principal results of the assessment and explains the scope of work that she recommends be performed by the Petitioners in the archaeologically sensitive areas that the report identifies for the Southern Loop Project. Dr. Luhman concludes that if the Petitioners perform the work that she recommends, the Southern Loop Project will not have an undue adverse affect on archaeological resources that constitute an historic site under
Section 248.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ......................................................................................................1
2. Conclusion ........................................................................................................7
Exhibit Petitioners HL-1
EXHIBITS
Archaeological Resource Assessment and Scope of
Work/Southern Loop 345 kV Line Project

1
STATE OF VERMONT
PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD
Petition of Vermont Transco, LLC, and
Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc.
(collectively, “VELCO”), and Central Vermont
Public Service Corporation (“CVPS”) for a
Certificate of Public Good, pursuant to 30
V.S.A. § 248, for the “
Southern Loop Project
,” located in Vernon, Guilford, Brattleboro,
Dummerston, Newfane, Brookline, Townshend,
Grafton, Windham, Andover, Chester, Ludlow and Cavendish, Vermont, consisting of the following elements: (1) a new, approximately
51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between
Vernon-Cavendish, to be built parallel to and within the same utility right-of-way as
VELCO’s existing Vernon-Cavendish 345 kV line; (2) a new VELCO 345/115 kV Vernon substation, to be located just north of the
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station; (3) a new 345/115/46 kV Newfane substation; (4) a new, approximately one-mile, 345 kV transmission line loop between the new
Newfane substation and the new Vernon-
Cavendish 345 kV line; (5) expansion of
VELCO’s Coolidge substation in Cavendish,
Vermont; and (6) the implementing of incremental energy efficiency to defer transmission upgrades in Southern Vermont
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Docket No. ____
PREFILED TESTIMONY OF
DR. HOPE LUHMAN
ON BEHALF OF
PETITIONERS
1. Introduction
2
3
4
Q1.
What is your name, and by whom are you employed?
A1.
My name is Hope Luhman, and I am employed by The Louis Berger Group,
Inc. (“Berger”), of Albany, New York. My position is Assistant Director for
5 Cultural Resources.

12
13
14
15
16
20
21
22
17
18
19
10
11
7
8
9
5
6
1
Southern Loop Project, PSB Docket No. ______
Prefiled Testimony of Dr. Hope Luhman
November 8, 2007
Page 2 of 7
Q2.
What are your qualifications to present the testimony you intend to sponsor?
2
3
A2.
As a Senior Archaeologist and Assistant Director for Cultural Resources in
Berger’s Albany office, my responsibilities include, among others, overall
4 management of cultural resource investigations throughout the Northeast, including the New England region. In that capacity, I supervised preparation of an Archaeological Resource Assessment and Scope of Work for VELCO in
Q3.
connection with the proposed Southern Loop Project (the “Project”). My resume is attached to the joint testimony regarding historic properties.
Have you testified before any court or administrative agency?
A3.
Yes. I offered prefiled testimony for the Deerfield project in Searsburg,
Vermont (Docket No. 7250) and for the East Avenue Loop project (Docket No.
7314).
Q4.
What is the purpose of your testimony?
A4.
At VELCO’s request, Berger assessed the archaeological potential of the rightof-way (“ROW”) and other Project components through field reconnaissance of the area of potential effect (“APE”) and use of the Vermont Department of
Historical Preservation (“DHP”)’s ArcheoMap Information System. Exhibit
Petitioners HL-1 presents the methodology and findings of the archaeological resource assessments (“ARA”) of the APE and also presents the scope of work
(“SOW”) that Berger developed to provide a subsurface testing strategy to use

17
18
19
20
21
12
13
14
15
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
10
11
7
8
9
Southern Loop Project, PSB Docket No. ______
Prefiled Testimony of Dr. Hope Luhman
November 8, 2007
Page 3 of 7 for Phase I investigations for the archaeologically sensitive areas that we have identified.
My testimony will address the APE and SOW in turn. The details of our work and conclusions are found in Exhibit Petitioners HL-1.
Q5.
What were Berger’s conclusions with respect to the APE affected by the
Project?
A5.
Berger identified 53 areas of potential archaeological sensitivity through background research and walking the ROW and other locations where other
Project components will be located. Berger reviewed several factors to make recommendations for additional testing to identify precontact archaeological sites. These factors are largely derived from the locations of known sites and include: proximity to sources of water including streams, wetlands, and rivers; location of level landforms; presence of relatively well-drained soils as well as erosion; relationship to topography including glacial features and terraces; presence of modern disturbance; and proximity to known sites. Berger also identified several areas with historical structural remains including cellar holes.
Q6.
Describe your recommendation to VELCO for the SOW that it should perform in the project ROW, other Project components or the access roads.

20
21
22
17
18
19
12
13
14
15
16
10
11
7
8
9
5
6
2
3
1
Southern Loop Project, PSB Docket No. ______
Prefiled Testimony of Dr. Hope Luhman
November 8, 2007
Page 4 of 7
A6.
Berger proposes that VELCO be required to perform field investigations
4 involving both surface inspections and subsurface surveys in areas that we have identified as archaeologically sensitive. Subsurface surveys provide information on soils, landscape development and the presence or absence of buried cultural remains.
Subsurface surveys typically rely on shovel tests, but other types of excavation, such as measured excavation units, hand trenching, or machine trenching, may be used if appropriate. The Vermont DHP guidelines specify that the standard shovel test is a square unit measuring 50 by 50 centimeters.
Shovel tests sample areas of sensitivity using grid, transect or cluster designs as appropriate to the anticipated characteristics of the resource. The guidelines indicate that the standard maximum spacing of shovel tests in areas of sensitivity is ten meters. Soil from shovel tests are processed through sixmillimeter mesh sieves to assure systematic artifact recovery, and all artifacts obtained during subsurface testing are retained for laboratory processing and analysis.
During the Phase I subsurface survey, all shovel tests will extend into the Chorizon. When artifacts are encountered, additional tests will be excavated.
Decisions about the extent of supplementary investigations during Phase I

17
18
19
20
21
12
13
14
15
16
10
11
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
Southern Loop Project, PSB Docket No. ______
Prefiled Testimony of Dr. Hope Luhman
November 8, 2007
Page 5 of 7 investigations revolve around the Principal Investigator’s judgment as to whether the additional information obtained by the testing will materially advance the investigation, resource management and/or project planning and design.
Any deep excavations should be conducted in a manner consistent with the trenching and shoring regulations of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration. Deep tests will continue until late glacial sediments, such as cobble-rich alluvial deposits, are encountered. Profiles should be inspected for evidence of paleosols or other depositional features that could indicate the presence of deeply-buried archaeological deposits. Soil removed from handexcavated measured test units should be screened to recover any artifacts that may be present, and, if appropriate, deposits exposed through backhoe trenching should also be sampled to determine whether artifacts may be present.
Where deep deposits are a possibility, it may be necessary to use a different suite of techniques for Phase I survey than those used for areas with shallow deposits. For example, a staged approach to a Phase I may be appropriate, where a series of backhoe trenches are first used to evaluate patterns of deposition and test units are than placed in areas that appear to have the greatest potential for site occurrence and preservation. Berger will work with VELCO

10
11
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
17
18
19
20
12
13
14
15
16
Southern Loop Project, PSB Docket No. ______
Prefiled Testimony of Dr. Hope Luhman
November 8, 2007
Page 6 of 7 and DHP to develop project-specific testing strategies where there is potential for deeply-buried deposits.
Should any archaeological sites be identified during the Phase I subsurface survey, Berger recommends that VELCO review project plans to determine whether the identified resource can be avoided. If avoidance is not possible, then Berger recommends additional investigation at the site-examination (Phase
II) level to ascertain site boundaries with respect to the proposed activities. If it is determined that the archaeological site is eligible for the National Resister and that project-related impacts will occur, it is Berger’s recommendation that a data recovery plan (DRP) be prepared to guide any Phase III or data recovery excavations that may be necessary.
Q7.
With respect to the proposed SOW, do you believe that your recommendation represents best practices?
A7.
Yes. Berger’s ARA relied on background research, the DHP GIS system and field reconnaissance to develop our assessment. An assessment such as this is intended to provide a baseline on which any subsequent investigations will be built.

8
6
7
2
3
1
Southern Loop Project, PSB Docket No. ______
Prefiled Testimony of Dr. Hope Luhman
November 8, 2007
Page 7 of 7
Q8.
In your opinion, will the SOW, if performed in the archaeologically sensitive areas that Berger identified, ensure that the Southern Loop Project will not have an undue adverse affect on archaeological historic sites?
4
5
A8.
Yes.
2. Conclusion
Q9.
Does this conclude your testimony?
A9.
Yes.