[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-6203]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: March 17, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Vail Category III Ski Area Development; White River National
Forest; Eagle County, CO
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) to disclose the effects of alternative plans for
developing the Category III portion of Vail Ski Area. Vail Ski Area is
located on the Holy Cross Ranger District of the White River National
Forest and operates under a Forest Service special use permit.
DATES: Written comments concerning the preliminary assessment of the
scope of the analysis, the issues, or the alternatives, should be
received on or before April 1, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to William A. Wood, District Ranger,
P.O. Box 190, Minturn, CO 81645.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Loren Kroenke, Project Manager, Holy Cross Ranger District. Ph. (303)
827-5715.
Responsible official: Veto J. LaSalle, Forest Supervior, White
River National Forest.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Vail Ski Area operates on the White River
National Forest, Holy Cross Ranger District, and is located about 100
miles west of Denver, Colorado. The Category III area encompasses the
upper (eastern) portion of the Two Elk Creek watershed and comprises
the southern extent of the special use permit boundary. It is
approximately 4,000 acres in size.
The proposal consists of two parts. The first includes a request to
construct 3 ski lifts, one restaurant, 2 picnic facilities, and provide
about 1,000 acres of lift-accessed ski terrain. The ski terrain would
be composed of about equal portions of existing open bowls, gladed
trails through trees, and traditional runs cut in more dense, forested
areas. A system of service road/ski-ways would be constructed to
circulate skiers and provide construction and maintenance access. The
area is currently closed to public motorized use and would remain so.
In the second part of the proposal, Vail Associates, Inc. has
proposed construction of lift in a mostly developed portion of the ski
area called Tea Cup Bowl. Construction of several ski trails and a
short section of road would also be associated with the Tea Cup lift.
For both the Category III and Tea Cup projects, implementation is
proposed to begin 1995 and would span several summers.
The proposed project is consistent with prior agency decisions and
plans. The area is included in the Rocky Mountain Regional Guide (1983,
Revised May 1992) as a Category 1 priority for future ski area
development study. The 1984 White River National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan EIS and Record of Decision allocated this area
to management emphasizing developed alpine skiing. Finally, an
Environmental Assessment prepared in 1986 examined a proposed Master
Development Plan for the entire Vail Ski Area. In the Decision Notice
approving this Master Development Plan, the Forest Service authorized
additions to the permit boundary and provided site-specific approval
for construction of developments on much of the special use permit
area. However, the Decision Notice required further environmental
analysis for the Category III area following submission of a detailed
development plan.
The proposed action is intended to improve existing ski conditions
at Vail Ski Area, address skier preferences for bowl and gladed skiing
opportunities, and better distribute skiers, particularly during the
critical Christmas to New Year's Day period and when unfavorable
weather or snow conditions prevail in the existing Back Bowls. As well,
action is needed to respond to a request which would implement previous
land allocation decisions.
Public participation will be fully incorporated into preparation of
the EIS. The first step is the scoping process during which the Forest
Service will seek information, comments, and assistance from Federal,
State, and local agencies, and other individuals or groups who may be
interested or affected by this action. This information will be used in
preparation of the EIS. Scoping includes inviting participation,
determining the project's scope, and identifying potential issues. The
public will also be invited to participate in developing the
alternatives and identifying and reviewing the potential environmental
effects of the proposed action and its alternatives.
Preliminary issues associated with this proposal include effects
relating to elk habitat, habitat for North American lynx, biological
diversity, non-motorized recreation, wetlands, water quality,
maintaining quality skiing opportunities, and the demand for additional
skiing opportunities. As well, there are concerns regarding parking and
transportation in the Town of Vail. The process will examine these and
other issues. This analysis will focus on key issues and eliminate from
detailed study insignificant issues or those which have been addressed
in previous environmental review.
Alternatives will be developed and examined which respond to the
significant issues and which are consistent with the purpose and need
for the action. Tentatively, the alternatives include the applicant's
proposal (described above) and No Action, which assumes that no
development will be allowed. Additional preliminary alternatives
include: the proposal outlined in Vail's 1985 Master Development Plan,
which included additional trail development and a modified version of
Vail's current proposal which would include less trail development.
These alternatives will be modified as a result of public scoping. In
the EIS, the direct and indirect effects of each of the alternatives,
together with effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
future actions will be evaluated.
The lead Agency in the preparation of the EIS is the Forest
Service. The process will also include consideration of designating
cooperating agencies. Among those who may become cooperating agencies
are the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Implementation of this proposal may require a permit from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
The Forest Service anticipates the Draft EIS will be filed in the
Fall of 1994, and the Final EIS in the Spring of 1995. The comment
period on the Draft EIS will be 60 days from the date the Environmental
Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal
Register.
The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, 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 reviewers 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 that 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.
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: February 25, 1994.
Veto J. Lasalle,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 94-6203 Filed 3-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
