[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 129 (Monday, July 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36254-36255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-17554]


 ========================================================================
 Notices
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
 or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
 and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
 delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
 statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
 appearing in this section.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 129 / Monday, July 7, 1997 / 
Notices  

[[Page 36254]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Arapahoe Basin Ski Area Master Development Plan, Arapaho National 
Forest, (Administered by the White River National Forest), Summit 
County, Colorado

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Revised notice of intent to prepare environmental impact 
statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On August 9, 1996, a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an 
environmental impact statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose the 
effects of a Master Development Plan for Arapahoe Basin Ski Area (A-
Basin) was published in the Federal Register (pages 41562 to 41563). 
The Master Development Plan would update the 1982 plan presently in 
effect and outlines a number of ski area modifications and new 
facilities, including limited snowmaking.
    The NOI stated that the draft EIS would be published in late 1996 
or early 1997 and the final EIS would be completed in mid 1997. This 
project has been delayed in order to analyze another stream as a 
potential water source for the snowmaking. Additional stream studies 
will be completed in the summer and fall of 1997. We now expect to 
publish the draft EIS in early 1998, to ask for public comment for a 
period of 45 days, and to complete a final EIS in mid 1998.

DATES: The formal scoping period ended September 7, 1996, however 
comments from interested parties and agencies are still being accepted.

ADDRESSES: Send written correspondence to: Tere O'Rourke, District 
Ranger, U.S. Forest Service, P.O. Box 620, 680 Blue River Parkway, 
Silverthorne, CO, 80498 or FAX to (970) 468-7735.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wendy Bailey, NEPA Coordinator, (970) 468-5400.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Arapahoe Basin Master Development Plan 
(MDP) was completed in 1996 to update the 1982 Arapahoe Basin Ski Area 
Master Plan (1982 Plan). The 1982 Plan currently guides the Forest 
Service in their administration of the ski area's Special Use Permit. A 
majority of the upgrades described in the 1982 Plan have been 
implemented, with the exception of the proposed snowmaking facilities. 
Given the age and status of the 1982 Plan, the Forest Service and A-
Basin determined that an updated plan would be appropriate at this 
time.
    The purpose of and need for the proposed MDP are as follows:

--Update the 1982 Plan which is outdated (almost 15 years old). Most of 
the improvements described in the 1982 Plan have been implemented. In 
addition, new ski area technologies, planning strategies, and 
environmental philosophies have emerged during this time which warrant 
consideration in an updated plan.
--Increase summer recreational opportunities at A-Basin, potentially to 
include off-season alpine skiing, mountain biking, interpretive trails, 
and an alpine slide.
--Provide off-season public skiing opportunities and race camp 
experiences for young racers through the use of snowmaking to cover 
approximately 15-30% of the skiable terrain at A-Basin. This would also 
provide for fall training facilities for the U.S. Ski Team (USST).
--Upgrade and improve restaurant, parking, patrol headquarters, and 
other facilities at the resort.
--Encourage year--round use of the facilities while maintaining the 
resort character.

    The decision to be made is whether or not to approve and accept the 
proposed MDP as a portion of the existing special use permit. The range 
of preliminary alternatives include Alternative A (No Action, Status 
Quo), Alternative B (Proposed Action: A-Basin MDP), and Alternative C 
(Modified Proposed Action, with conventional smowmaking and no alpine 
slide).
    Public comment was received in response to the August 9, 1996 
Notice of Intent. Newsletters have been mailed to the public and two 
public meetings were held in August, 1996. The comments received have 
been analyzed and distilled into a set of preliminary analysis issues 
which include: recreation/resort experience, user conflicts/safety/
skier density, hydrologic basin capacity, water quality and tundra 
ecosystem.
    A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ``404 Permit'' for dredging and 
filling waters and/or wetlands may be required. The Forest Service has 
requested the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service to cooperate in the environmental analysis.
    We expect to publish the draft environmental impact statement in 
early 1998, to ask for public comment for a period of 45 days, and to 
complete a final environmental impact statement in mid 1998. The 45-day 
public comment period on the draft EIS will commence on the day the 
Environmental Protection Agency publishes a ``Notice of Availability'' 
in the Federal Register. The responsible official will be the Forest 
Supervisor, White River National Forest, P.O. Box 948, Glenwood 
Springs, CO, 81602.
    The Forest Service believes that it is important to give reviewers 
notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the 
environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental 
impact statements must structure their participation in the 
environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and 
alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions. Vermont 
Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, 
environmental objections that could be raised at the draft 
environmental impact statement stage but are not raised until after 
completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or 
dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d, 1016, 1022 
(9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F.Supp. 
1334, 1338, (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings it is very 
important that those interested in this proposed action participate by 
the close of the 45-day comment period so that substantive comments and 
objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it 
can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final 
environmental impact statement.

[[Page 36255]]

    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft 
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is 
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the 
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft 
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives 
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer 
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing 
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.

    Dated: June 25, 1997.
Ben L. Del Villar,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 97-17554 Filed 7-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-BW-M