[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 19 (Friday, January 29, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4633-4635]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-1974]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


The Summit at Snoqualmie Master Development Plan; Mt. Baker-
Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests, King and Kittitas Counties, 
Washington

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service, USDA, will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) for Ski Lifts, Inc. (The Summit at Snoqualmie) ski area 
proposal to develop its Master Development Plan. The Summit at 
Snoqualmie consists of four ski areas: Alpental; Summit West; Summit 
Central and Summit East. The proposed action would expand the area 
under special use permit to 1,905 acres, an increase of 41 acres, to 
provide for additional parking at Summit West and to connect the Summit 
Central and Summit East ski areas. The proposed development includes 
the replacement and addition of chair and surface lifts; addition of a 
multi-user gondola at Alpental; new lifts and terrain within the 
existing SUP boundary; and expanded night skiing at Alpental and Summit 
Central. In addition, the proposal includes the expansion and addition 
of parking lots at Summit West, Summit Central and Alpental, day lodges 
and other related facilities, maintenance facilities and utilities to 
support the skiing and other recreational opportunities. The project 
also includes reforestation at Summit West and Summit Central, as well 
as

[[Page 4634]]

identified watershed restoration projects.
    At Alpental, implementation of the proposed MDP would increase the 
Skiers-At-One-Time (SAOT) capacity from 1,710 to 2,800. Accordingly, 
the peak day capacity of the facility would increase from 1,881 
Persons-at-One-Time (PAOT) to 3,080. At The Summit at Snoqualmie 
(excluding Alpental), the MDP proposes to increase the SAOT capacity 
from 7,410 to 10,900. Consequently, the peak day capacity of The Summit 
at Snoqualmie will increase from 8,151 to 11,990.

DATES: Comment concerning the scope of this analysis should be in 
writing and postmarked by March 5, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Daniel T. Harkenrider, Acting 
Forest Supervisor, 21905 64th Avenue West, Mountlake Terrace, 
Washington, 98043, Attention: The Summit At Snoqualmie Master 
Development Plan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Donovan, Winter Sports 
Specialist, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Supervisor's Officer, 
21905 64th Avenue West, Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043-2278. Phone 
(425) 744-3403. Internet: Idonovan/[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Summit at Snoqualmie operates under a 
Special Use Permit from the USDA Forest Service. Presently, alpine 
skiing/snowboarding and other four-season resort activities are 
provided to the public through a Special Use Permit administered by the 
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.
    Currently, there are four master plans for the Summit at 
Snoqualmie, dating from the time each of the four areas (Alpental, 
Summit West, Summit Central and Summit East) were managed as separate 
ski areas. The purpose (objective) of this project is to develop one 
Master Development Plan for the management and development of The 
Summit at Snoqualmie over the next 7-10 years. The goal of the Master 
Development Plan is to ensure the long-term economic viability of The 
Summit at Snoqualmie, maintain the competitive position of The Summit 
at Snoqualmie with other ski areas in the Puget Sound Basin; maintain 
and restore a healthy ecosystem; and be consistent with the Mt. Baker-
Snoqualmie National Forest Plan.
    The proposed action is the submitted Master Development Plan 
proposal. At Alpental it would include: replacement of one existing 
chairlift, re-alignment of one existing chairlift, construction of one 
new chairlift and construction of a gondola, providing for year-round 
access to the top of the facility. Two existing lifts would remain 
unchanged and the two existing surface tows would be removed. Downhill 
terrain would be expanded by 18.5 acres and night skiing terrain would 
increase by 34 acres. The proposed action would include the addition of 
17,500 square feet of visitor support facilities, including a mountain-
top restaurant. Parking would be expanded from 8.4 acres to 8.5 acres. 
The proposed action would also include watershed restoration projects 
as identified in the Upper South Fork Snoqualmie and Coal Creek 
Watershed Condition Assessment. Implementation could begin in the 
summer of 2000 and would continue for approximately 7-10 years.
    At the Summit at Snoqualmie (Summit West, Summit Central and Summit 
East), the Master Development Plan proposal would include 23 chairlifts 
and surface tows. It includes the elimination, replacement or 
realignment of 21 of the 22 existing chair and surface lifts. When 
coupled with new chairlift construction there would be a total of 17 
chairlifts and 6 surface tows. Downhill terrain would be expanded by 54 
acres and night skiing would increase from 386 acres to 440 acres. The 
proposed action would include the addition of 60,708 square feet of 
guest support facilities, including a new mountain-top restaurant at 
Alpental and remodeling the existing mountain-top restaurant at Summit 
West. Parking would be expanded from 26.3 to 32.7 acres. The proposed 
action would also include watershed restoration projects as identified 
in the Upper South Fork Snoqualmie and Coal Creek Watershed Condition 
Assessment. Implementation could begin in the summer of 2000 and would 
continue for approximately 7-10 years.
    The site-specific environmental analysis provided in The Summit at 
Snoqualmie Master Development Plan EIS will assist the Forest 
Supervisor in determining which improvements are needed to meet the 
goals and objectives, as stated above.
    An EIS will be produced, which will display alternatives considered 
including (1) no action (continued management of the ski area under the 
existing master development plans), and (2) the proposed action. Three 
additional alternatives have been tentatively identified: (3) reduced 
development in the area between Summit Central and Summit East (Section 
16); (4) no development in the area between Summit Central and Summit 
East (Section 16); and (5) reduced disturbance to riparian reserves. 
The EIS will analyze the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the 
alternatives. Past, present and projected activities on both private 
and National Forest System lands will be considered. The EIS will 
disclose the effects of site-specific mitigation.
    Comments from the public will be used to:
     Identify potential issues.
     Identify major issues to be analyzed in depth.
     Eliminate minor issues or those that have been covered by 
a previous environmental analysis, such as the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie or 
Wenatchee Land and Resource Management Plans.
     Identify alternatives to the proposed action.
    Issues identified as the result of internal scoping include:
     Consistency with the Forest Plan/Aquatic Conservation 
Strategy Objectives.
     Consistency with the Snoqualmie Pass Adaptive Management 
Area Plan (1997).
     Ability to maintain or increase the north/south Late-
Successional connective corridors in the areas between Summit Central 
and Summit East; and Summit West and Summit Central.
     Ability to maintain snag and large downed wood habitat 
with the development of ski runs and chairlifts.
     Maintenance of habitat for Threatened & Endangered, 
Sensitive and Survey & Manage species.
     Potential removal/degradation of wetland habitat.
     Opportunity to implement restoration projects that will 
improve visual quality and reduce erosion.
     Potential disruption of the back-country skiing route to 
Nordic Pass.
    Scoping and public involvement are continuing. An initial scoping 
letter was mailed on January 15, 1999. Two public scoping meetings will 
be held: February 8, 1999, from 5:30 PM to 9:00 PM at the Cle Elum 
Ranger Station, 803 West 2nd Street, Cle Elum, WA 98922; and February 
10, 1999, from 5:30 PM to 9:00 PM at the West Coast Bellevue Hotel, 625 
116th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA 98004. The information and comments 
received will be used in the preparation of the draft EIS.
    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names 
and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the 
public record on this proposed action and will be available for public 
inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and 
considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments will not have 
standing to appeal the subsequent decision under

[[Page 4635]]

36 CFR 215 or 217. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person 
may request the agency to withhold a submission from the public record 
by showing how the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) permits such 
confidentiality. Persons requesting such confidentiality should be 
aware that under the FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very 
limited circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest 
Service will inform the requester of the agency's decision regarding 
the request for confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the 
agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the 
comments may be submitted with or without the name and address within 
30 days.
    The draft EIS is expected to be filed in May 1999. Following the 
release of the draft EIS, there will be a public comment period of at 
least 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency 
publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes that it is important to give reviewers 
notice at this early stage of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
the draft EIS 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 EIS stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the EIS 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 EIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
on the proposed action, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific 
as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or 
chapters of the draft EIS. Comments may also address the adequacy of 
the draft EIS or the merits of the alternatives formulated and 
discussed in the EIS. (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.)
    The final EIS is scheduled to be completed in December 1999. In the 
final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and 
responses received during the comment period that pertain to the 
environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable 
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making the decision 
regarding this proposal. The lead agency is the Forest Service. The 
Forest Supervisors of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National 
Forest are the responsible officials. The responsible officials will 
document the decision and the reasons for the decision in the Record of 
Decision. That decision will be subject to Forest Service appeal 
regulations 36 CFR Parts 215 or 251.

    Dated: January 19, 1999.
Daniel T. Harkenrider,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 99-1974 Filed 1-28-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M