From: Subject: FR Doc E8-631 Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:05:41 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-631.htm X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 FR Doc E8-631 
[Federal Register: January 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 13)]
[Notices]              =20
[Page 3449-3450]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18ja08-27]                        =20

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

=20
White River National Forest; Summit County, CO; Breckenridge Ski=20
Resort--Peak 6 Terrain Development Proposal

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact=20
Statement (EIS) to disclose the anticipated environmental effects of=20
the Breckenridge Ski Resort Peak 6 Terrain Development proposal. This=20
proposal is designed to provide for an improved balance of services to=20
meet the needs and expectations of guests.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received=20
by February 17, 2008. The draft environmental impact statement is=20
expected in November 2008 and the final environmental impact statement=20
is expected in January 2009.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Maribeth Gustafson, Forest=20
Supervisor, c/o Roger Poirier, Winter Sports Program Manager, White=20
River National Forest, 900 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602-
0948.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shelly Grail--Snow Ranger, Dillon=20
Ranger District, P.O. Box 620, Silverthorne, CO 80498, 
sgrail@fs.fed.us, or (970) 262-3484.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action addresses issues related=20
to the quality of the recreational experience. Presently, alpine=20
skiing/snowboarding and other resort activities are provided to the=20
public through a Special Use Permit (SUP) issued by the White River=20
National Forest. All elements of the proposal are within the existing=20
SUP boundary area. The proposed improvements are consistent with the=20
2002 Revised White River National Forest Land and Resource Management=20
Plan (Forest Plan).

Purpose and Need for Action

    Given the current visitation rates, guest experiences, and terrain=20
distribution concerns, the following needs are addressed by the=20
proposed action:
    1. Better accommodation of current daily visitation levels.
    2. Reduced skier/rider congestion on BSR's existing Intermediate=20
and Advanced Intermediate terrain network and associated lifts.
    3. Reduced waiting time for lifts at BSR.
    4. Efficient dispersal of Intermediate and Advanced Intermediate=20
skiers/riders across the entire skiable terrain network.
    5. Additional lift-served terrain to accommodate the existing=20
terrain distribution deficit.
    6. Additional hike-to access servicing advanced ability levels.
    7. Sufficient infrastructure in pods to serve guests.

Proposed Action

    All proposed projects are within Breckenridge Ski Resort's (BSR)=20
existing SUP boundary. The proposed action includes:
     Developing terrain on Peak 6 that would encompass=20
approximately 450 acres of traditional downhill and hike-to skiing=20
accessed by a single lift.
     Installing a bottom-drive, high-speed, detachable, six-
person lift to service the Peak 6 terrain with a slope length of 5,963=20
feet, a vertical rise of 1,537 and a design capacity of 3,000 people=20
per hour.
     Constructing a food and beverage facility (including=20
restrooms and associated infrastructure) at the bottom terminal of the=20
proposed lift. The food and beverage facility would be approximately=20
1,800 square feet in size and seat approximately 150 guests.
     Constructing a ski patrol/warming hut at the proposed top=20
terminal location on Peak 6.
     Rehabilitating and extending decommissioned roads within=20
the South Barton timber sale patch cut areas to specific locations to=20
gain access to Peak 6 for construction and future maintenance needs.
     Installing a power line to the proposed top terminal=20
location in a corridor that minimizes impacts to environmentally=20
sensitive areas.

Responsible Official

    The responsible official is Maribeth Gustafson, Forest Supervisor=20
for the White River National Forest, 900 Grand Ave., P.O. Box 948,=20
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602. The responsible official will=20
document the decision and reasons for the decision in a Record of=20
Decision. That decision will be subject to appeal under 36 CFR part 215=20
or part 251.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Based on the analysis that will be documented in the forthcoming=20
EIS, the responsible official will decide whether or not to implement,=20
in whole or in part, the proposed action or another alternative=20
developed by the Forest Service.

Scoping Process

    Public questions and comments regarding this proposal are an=20
integral part of this environmental analysis process. Comments will be=20
used to identify issues and develop alternatives to BSR's proposal. To=20
assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and=20
concerns on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as=20
possible. Input provided by interested and/or affected individuals,=20
organizations and governmental agencies will be used to identify=20
resource issues that will be analyzed in the Draft EIS. The Forest=20
Service will identify significant issues raised during the scoping=20
process, and use them to formulate alternatives, prescribe mitigation=20
measures and project design features, or analyze environmental effects.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides=20
the development of the environmental impact statement.

Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent=20
Environmental Review

    A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for=20
comment. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement=20
will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency=20
publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important=20
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public=20
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of=20
draft environmental impact statements must structure their=20
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is

[[Page 3450]]

meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and=20
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,=20
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the=20
draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised=20
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may=20
be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d=20
1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490=20
F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings,=20
it is very important that those interested in this proposed action=20
participate by the close of the 45-day comment period so that=20
substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest=20
Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to=20
them in the final environmental impact statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues=20
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft=20
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is=20
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the=20
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft=20
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives=20
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer=20
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing=20
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at=20
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
    Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who=20
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal=20
and will be available for public inspection.

    Dated: January 8, 2008.
Maribeth Gustafson,
Forest Supervisor.
 [FR Doc. E8-631 Filed 1-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-P