[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 149 (Tuesday, August 4, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41541-41543]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20744]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Loon Mountain Ski Area Improvements and Expansion

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a Supplement to the Loon Mountain 
Ski Area South Mountain Expansion Project Final Environmental Impact 
Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will 
prepare a Supplement to the Loon Mountain Ski Area South Mountain 
Expansion Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for Loon 
Mountain Recreation Corporation's proposal to improve and expand 
recreational facilities at Loon Mountain Ski Area. The project area is 
located on the Pemigewasset Ranger District of the White Mountain 
National Forest, Grafton County, New Hampshire. The agency invites 
written comments that are specific to new information or changed 
conditions that pertain to the proposed action in respect to the 
issues, affected environment, and environmental effects as they were 
disclosed in the original FEIS.

DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be 
received on or before September 15, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Beth LeClair, Eastern Region Winter 
Sports Team Leader, U.S. Forest Service, RR 2, Box 35, Rochester, 
Vermont 05767. Donna Hepp, Forest Supervisor, White Mountain National 
Forest, Federal Building, 719 Main Street, Laconia, New Hampshire 03246 
is the Responsible Official for this Supplement to the FEIS.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jay Strand, Project Coordinator, U.S. Forest Service, RR 2, Box 35, 
Rochester, Vermont 05767; voice and TTY phone (802) 767-4261; FAX (802) 
767-4777; E-mail, jstrand/[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Loon Mountain Recreation Corporation (LMRC) 
operates Loon Mountain Ski Area, a portion of which is under a special 
use permit on the White Mountain National Forest (WMNF). The total 
acres under the existing 1976 special use permit on National Forest 
lands is 785 acres. In 1986, LMRC submitted a proposal to develop and 
expand the existing ski area to meet the demand for additional skiing 
on the WMNF, and meet the demand for more capacity at Loon Mountain Ski 
Area. The environmental effects on the proposal and five alternatives 
were disclosed and documented in the Loon Mountain Ski Area South 
Mountain Expansion Project FEIS which was completed in late 1992. The 
Record of Decision (ROD) was issued on March 1, 1993 and authorized the 
implementation of Alternative 6 to meet the stated purpose and need.
    The 1993 ROD was litigated and the subsequent court ruling found 
that parts of the FEIS analysis were inadequate. Specifically, the 
court found that: (1) The public did not have an opportunity to review 
and comment on Alternative 6 before its selection in the ROD; and (2) 
the FEIS did not include a reasonable range of alternatives in the 
analysis, in particular the alternative that water storage ponds be 
used for snowmaking needs. A court order dated May 5, 1997 invalidated 
the 1993 ROD and prohibited any further activities related to 
Alternative 6 pending the outcome of a new analysis and ROD that 
addresses the identified FEIS inadequacies. The No Action Alternative 
for this analysis would include the removal of all approved and 
constructed improvements related to the 1993 ROD.
    The purpose and need for LMRC's current proposal is essentially the 
same as the original purpose and need for the expansion activities 
disclosed in the 1992 FEIS. However, the original preferred alternative 
(Alternative 6) has been modified in order for the proposal to: (1) 
Meet the intentions of the May 5, 1997 Court Order; (2) respond to 
current conditions at Loon Mountain Ski Area; (3) reflect changed ski 
market demands; (4) reflect changed ski industry technology; and (5) 
include new information that is available for this analysis.
    Change ski market expectations and new ski industry technology have 
created market conditions that are different than those existing when 
the 1993 ROD was released. Destination ski resorts such as Loom 
Mountain Ski Area compete in a skier market that expects a quality 
skiing experience. Ski resorts need a proper mixture and variety of ski 
terrain that caters to all ability levels with support facilities (i.e. 
lifts, lodges and parking) that provides a multiple day destination 
resort opportunity. Additionally, the amount of snow coverage and depth 
needed on ski terrain has changed to meet today's desired skier demands 
necessitated by developments such as snowboards and shaped skis. New 
England area

[[Page 41542]]

destination ski resorts need the ability to make machine-made snow that 
ensures an initial coverage of ski trails before the December holiday 
season, and additional coverage to respond to thawing and trail wear. 
Currently, Loon Mountain Ski Area is not able to provide the skiing 
product necessary that will secure the market share needed to remain an 
economically viable destination ski resort. The proposal as modified 
from the original Alternative 6 provides the complete development and 
expansion activities needed to improve the efficiency and function of 
the existing resort facilities. This will provide the quality winter 
recreation experience visitors have grown to expect at Loon Mountain 
Ski and on National Forest lands, while meeting both the original and 
current purpose and need.
    On January 26, 1998, LMRC submitted a proposal to improve and 
expand the Loon Mountain Ski Area, and on May 14, 1998 amended to 
proposal. The scope of their proposal includes ten categories: (1) 
Expansion of the existing special use permit (SUP) area by 581 acres of 
a total of 1,366 acres; (2) construction of six new ski trails and a 
free style jump (30.9 acres), widening of many existing ski trails 
(20.1 acres), and reconfiguration of the Lower Speakeasy Trail system 
within the existing SUP area, and construction of six new trails (73.2 
acres) within the expanded SUP area; (3) construction of one new J-bar 
lift on private land, realignment of two existing lifts, and upgrade of 
all existing lifts within the existing SUP area, and the construction 
of two new chairlifts within the expanded SUP area; (4) expansion of 
existing buildings on private land and within the existing SUP area, 
and construction of a base area and lodge for the expanded SUP area on 
private land; (5) expansion of existing parking lots and construction 
of new parking facilities on private land; (6) provision to meet a 
snowmaking water demand target of 435 million gallons in 85% of the 
years for complete coverage for 382.3 acres of ski terrain on both the 
existing and expanded SUP areas; (7) provision to continue water 
withdrawals within levels currently authorized from the East Branch of 
the Pemigewasset River, Boyle Brook, and Loon Pond for snowmaking 
needs; (8) installation of a 20-inch diameter pipeline, pumps and 
facilities to serve the expanded SUP area, and expansion of the 
existing pipelines and facilities on private land and the existing SUP 
area for complete snowmaking coverage of the entire Loon Mountain ski 
terrain; (9) construction of multiple water storage ponds with a total 
capacity of 220 million gallons on private land to supplement 
snowmaking water needs; and (10) increasing the existing skier 
comfortable carrying capacity from 5,800 to 9,000. The Forest Service 
assumes that category nine may necessitate a provision to authorize the 
withdrawal of water from the Main Stem of the Pemigewassset River, if 
certain pond sites are included in this analysis.
    The proposal is needed to achieve the following objectives: (1) 
Meet the intention of the May 5, 1997 Court Order; (2) provide the 
proper mixture of ski terrain, support facilities, and snowmaking 
coverage that meets current and anticipated skier market demands; (3) 
ensure Loon Mountain Ski Area remains a viable destination ski resort; 
and (4) achieve Forest Service goals by providing a unique and quality 
recreation experience for National Forest visitors. The site-specific 
environmental analysis provided by the Supplement to the FEIS will 
assist the Responsible Official in determining whether the proposal, or 
alternatives to the proposals, best meet the objectives of the proposal 
while addressing public concerns and issues.
    The proposed actions within the existing SUP area are within 
Management Area (MA) 7.1 as described in the WMNF Land and Resource 
Management Plan (Forest Plan). Actions within the proposed expanded SUP 
area are within MA 9.2. All actions meet the objectives for these MA's, 
and are fully consistent with Forest Plan standards and guidelines. The 
lands within the expanded SUP area would be redesignated as MA 7.1 if 
this proposal is implemented.
    Potential permits and licenses required to implement the proposal 
may include the following: (1) Special Use Permit from the Forest 
Service; (2) Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 
(3) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit and 
Stormwater Permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and 
(4) Significant Alteration of Terrain Permit, Section 401 Permit, Dam 
Permit, and Stormwater Permit from the New Hampshire Department of 
Environmental Services. Any additional permits needed from other Local, 
State, or Federal agencies will be identified during the analysis 
process. In addition, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service for compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, 
and any assistance and cooperation from other agencies will be 
conducted if necessary.
    Tentative issues related to the proposal which have been identified 
are: (1) Water demand target for snowmaking needs; (2) configuration 
and options of water sources for snowmaking; (3) wetland impacts from 
water storage pond construction; (4) impacts to various resources (i.e. 
soils, water quality, wildlife and aquatic habitat, threatened, 
endangered, and sensitive plants and animals, visual, and cultural 
sites); and (5) socioeconomic impacts to the local community (i.e. 
dependent businesses, traffic congestion, infrastructure demands). In 
preparing the Supplement to the FEIS, the Forest Service will consider 
the proposal against a range of feasible and practicable alternatives 
including the No Action Alternative. Alternatives to the proposal may 
be developed to address issues based on public comments.
    Public participation will be incorporated into the preparation of 
the Supplement to the FEIS under the provisions of NEPA. Although 
scoping is not required in the preparation of a supplement to an EIS, 
the Forest Service will be seeking new or additional information, 
comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and Local agencies, as 
well as other individuals or groups who may be interested or affected 
by the proposed action. Comments will be invited that are specific to 
new information or changed conditions that pertain to the proposed 
action in respect to the issues, affected environment, and 
environmental effects as they were disclosed in the original FEIS. This 
information will be used to help further define the limits of the 
analysis of the proposal while preparing the Supplement to the FEIS. 
Public meetings will be held to assist the public involvement process. 
The exact locations and dates of these meetings will be published in 
the local newspapers at least two weeks in advance.
    The State of New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, 
New Hampshire Fish and Game Department, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 
and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have been invited to be 
cooperating agencies. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been 
invited to be a participating agency. The New Hampshire Department of 
Resources and Economic Development, and the Towns of Lincoln and 
Woodstock, New Hampshire have been invited to assist in the analysis 
process.
    The Draft Supplement to the FEIS is expected to be filed with the 
EPA in the Winter of 1998-1999. The Forest Service will seek comments 
on the Draft

[[Page 41543]]

Supplement to the FEIS for a period of at least 45 days from the date 
the EPA publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. 
Public meeting dates during the public comment period will be 
advertised in the media. Please note that comments in response to this 
NOI and in response to the draft supplement will be regarded as public 
information.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important 
to give reviewers notice of court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
draft environmental impact statements (in this case a draft supplement 
to the environmental impact statement) 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 supplement stage but that are not raised until after completion 
of the final supplement 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 they can meaningfully 
consider them and respond to them in the final supplement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action and alternatives, comments on the 
draft supplement should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful 
if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft 
supplement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft 
supplement 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.
    After the comment period ends on the Draft Supplement to the FEIS, 
the comments will be analyzed and considered by the Forest Service in 
preparing the Final Supplement to the FEIS. The Final Supplement to the 
FEIS is scheduled to be completed by the Spring of 1999. The Forest 
Service is required to respond to the comments received in the Final 
Supplement to the FEIS (40 CFR 1503.4).
    The Responsible Official will consider the comments, responses, and 
environmental consequences discussed in the Final Supplement to the 
FEIS, and applicable laws, regulations, and policies when making a 
decision regarding this proposal. The Responsible Official will 
document the decision and reasons for the decision in the Record of 
Decision. The decision will be subject to appeal under 36 CFR 217 and 
36 CFR 251.

    Dated: July 28, 1998.
Donna Hepp,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 98-20744 Filed 8-3-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M