[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 238 (Monday, December 13, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69474-69476]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-32155]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Loon Mountain Ski Resort Development and Expansion Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) rather than a Supplement to the Loon Mountain Ski Area
South Mountain Expansion Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
(FEIS) to disclose the environmental effects of Loon Mountain
Recreation Corporation's (LMRC) proposal to develop and expand
recreational facilities at Loon Mountain Ski Resort. The Forest Service
has decided that the environmental analysis should be documented and
disclosed in an EIS rather than a Supplement to the FEIS based on
changes to the original purpose and need for the Proposed Action since
the FEIS was prepared. The project area is located on the Pemigewasset
Ranger District of the White Mountain National Forest, Grafton County,
New Hamsphire. The agency invites written comments concerning the
Proposed Action as described in proposal letters submitted to the
Forest Service on January 26, and May 14, 1998; and reaffirmed and
clarified on December 2, 1999.
DATES: Written comments concerning the Proposed Action should be
received on or before January 12, 2000. No public scoping meetings are
planned at this time. The Draft EIS is scheduled to be completed by
June 2000, and the final EIS is scheduled to be completed by November
2000. The Forest Service will seek comments on the Draft EIS for a
period of at least 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection
agency publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.
Public meeting dates and venues during the public comment public for
the Draft EIS will be advertised in the media.
Resposible Official: Donna Hepp, Forest Supervisor, White Mountain
National Forest, Federal Building, 719 Main Street, Laconia, New
Hampshire, 03246 is the Responsible Official for the EIS.
[[Page 69475]]
Written Comments: Send written comments to Beth LeClair, Eastern
Region Winter Sports Team Leader, US Forest Service, 99 Ranger Road,
Rochester, Vermont, 05767; or E-mail to r9__gmfl@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jay Strand, Project Coordinator, US
Forest Service, 99 Ranger Road, Rochester, Vermont, 05767; TTY phone
(802) 767-4261; voice phone (802) 767-4261 ext. 522; FAX (802) 767-
4777; or E-mail, r9__gmfl@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Loon Mountain Recreation Corporation (LMRC) operates Loon Mountain
Ski Resort, a portion of which is under a Special Use Permit (SUP)
issued and administered by the White Mountain National Forest (WMNF).
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 to
meet the demand for more capacity at Loon Mountain Ski Area. The
environmental effects of the proposal and five alternatives were
disclosed and documented at 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 analysis were inadequate. A May 5, 1997 Court Order
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. On January 26, 1998 and May
14, 1998, LMRC submitted proposal letters to modify Alternative 6 to
reflect changed conditions. Based on the acceptance of LMRC's proposal,
the Forest Service issued a Notice of Intent (NOI) dated August 4, 1998
to prepare a Supplement to the FEIS that would address the May 5, 1997
Court Order, update the analysis with new information, and disclose the
environmental effects of the proposal as submitted by LMRC. On March
31, 1999 the Forest Service issued a public newsletter that modified
the Proposed Action. The modifications included the addition of the
construction and operation of a 16-inch snowmaking pipeline to provide
instantaneous snowmaking capacity to the ski terrain within the
existing SUP area. Although the Proposed Action has not changed since
the August 1998 NOI and March 31, 1999 Newsletter, the Forest Service
has decided that the environmental analysis should be documented and
disclosed in an EIS rather than a Supplement to the FEIS. This decision
is based on changes to the original purpose and need for the Proposed
Action since the FEIS was prepared.
Purpose of and Need for Action
The purpose of LMRC's proposal is to ensure a continued high-
quality winter recreation experience for existing and future skiers and
snowboarders at Loon Mountain Ski Resort through the following means:
(1) Improving the variety, diversity, and amount of terrain by adding
new trails with different characteristics; (2) improving skier
distribution and convenience by adding and upgrading lifts; (3)
improving skier and snowboarder access and egress by developing a
second portal; (4) increasing the quality and capacity of base-area and
on-mountain facilities; (5) improving snow conditions by increasing the
total and instantaneous snowmaking coverage; and (6) adding parking
facilities. The need for the proposal is to: (1) To respond to a
proposal by LMRC which has the potential for offering more effective
recreation utilization of National Forest System lands; (2) address
shortcomings in the existing design, operations, and facilities of Loon
Mountain, respond to guest preferences to Loon Mountain Ski Resort, and
stay abreast of evolving ski market trends; (3) fulfill the WMNF Forest
Plan management goals and objectives for Management Area 7.1 and 9.2;
(4) ensure that LMRC remains a viable operation so that high-quality
public recreation opportunities continue to be offered over the long
term at Loon Mountain Ski Resort; and (5) respond to court orders
directing the Forest Service to address the inadequacies of the 1992
FEIS, and disclose the effects of the 16-inch pipeline.
Description of Proposed Action and Tentative Alternatives
The Proposed Action as resubmitted by LMRC in a letter dated
December 2, 1999 and accepted by the Forest Service includes ten
categories: (1) expansion of the SUP area by 581 acres for 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),
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 100%
of a 449.7 million gallon snowmaking water demand target 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 (East Branch) and Boyle Brook for snowmaking
needs, and elimination of snowmaking water withdrawals from Loon Pond
once adequate snowmaking water storage facilities are in place and
operational; (8) installation of a 16-inch diameter pipeline and
associated facilities to serve the existing SUP area, installation of a
20-inch diameter pipeline and associated facilities to serve the
expanded SUP area, and installation of pipelines and associated
facilities from water storage ponds on private land to provide complete
snowmaking coverage of the entire Loon Mountain ski terrain; (9)
construction of multiple water storage ponds with a total capacity of
160 million gallons on private land for snowmaking water needs; and
(10) increase the existing skier comfortable carrying capacity from
5,800 to 9,000.
The EIS analysis will include the Proposed Action and the No Action
Alternative. Tentative alternatives may include: (1) Pre-1993
conditions with the 16-inch pipeline and snowmaking water storage
facilities only; (2) Existing condition (includes trails and
infrastructure constructed and in use within the existing SUP area
since 1993); (3) Development within the existing SUP area only; and (4)
various options for target water demand needs and water storage
facilities and requirements. Additional alternatives that meet the
purpose and need of the Proposed Action may be developed to address
issues based on public comments received in response to this NOI.
Tentative Issues
Tentative issues that have been identified from public and agency
comments to the Supplemental EIS Proposed Action include: (1) Skier
comfortable carrying capacity is too high; (2) snowmaking water demand
target is too high; (3) consider the Main Stem of the Pemigewasset
River as a
[[Page 69476]]
snowmaking water source; (4) February median flow should be the minimum
for water withdrawals from the East Branch, and a minimum flow for
water withdrawals should be set for Boyle Brook; (5) a full range of
water storage options should be considered for snowmaking needs; (6)
visual impacts; (7) impacts to private residences at the base of Loon
Mountain from parking facilities and associated traffic; (8) not enough
opportunity for glade and tree skiing; (9) include cross-over trails
between South Mountain and the existing ski area; (10) maintain natural
snow only ski trails; (11) the purpose and need for the Proposed Action
is questionable; (12) wetland impacts from water storage pond
construction; (13) impacts to various resources (i.e., soils, water
quality, wildlife and aquatic habitat, threatened, endangered, and
sensitive plants and animals, and cultural sites); and (14)
socioeconomic impacts to the local community (i.e., dependent
businesses, traffic congestion, and infrastructure demands).
Decision To Be Made
The site-specific environmental analysis provided by the EIS will
assist the Responsible Official in determining whether the Proposed
Action, or an alternative to the Proposed Action, best meets the
purpose and need of the Proposed Action while addressing public
concerns and issues. In preparing the EIS, the Forest Service will
consider the Proposed Action against a range of feasible and
practicable alternatives including the No Action Alternative. The
Responsible Official will consider the comments, responses, and
environmental consequences discussed in the Final EIS, 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.
Public Participation
Public participation will be incorporated into the preparation of
the EIS under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act.
The Forest Service solicited comments for 42 days after the August 4,
1998 Notice of Intent, 37 days after the March 31, 1999 Newsletter, and
accepted comments at three public meetings. Information and written
comments received from the public and agencies during the August 1998
and March 31, 1999 Newsletter scoping periods for the Supplement to the
FEIS will be considered as part of the analysis for the EIS, and will
be used in preparation of the Draft EIS and Final EIS. Written comments
responding to this NOI should be submitted to the Forest Service within
30 days from the date of publication of this NOI in the Federal
Register. Please note that comments in response to this NOI and in
response to the Draft EIS will be regarded as public information
including names and addresses.
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 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 FEIS may be
waived or dismissed by the Courts [City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F2d
1015, 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 EIS.
Cooperating and Participating Agencies
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 were cooperating agencies in
preparing the Supplement to the FEIS and will continue to be
cooperating agencies in preparing the new EIS. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service will continue as a participating agency. The New
Hampshire Department of Transportation, New Hampshire Department of
Resources and Economic Development, and the Towns of Lincoln and
Woodstock, New Hampshire will continue to assist in the analysis
process.
Potential Permits
Potential permits required to implement the Proposed Action 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 Local,
State, and 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 as needed.
Dated: December 7, 1999.
Anne Archie,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 99-32155 Filed 12-10-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
