Arapahoe Basin Ski Area Master Development Plan, Arapaho National Forest, (Administered by the White River National Forest), Summit County, Colorado

SUMMARY: On August 9, 1996, a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an

environmental impact statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose the

effects of a Master Development Plan for Arapahoe Basin Ski Area (A-

Basin) was published in the Federal Register (pages 41562 to 41563).

The Master Development Plan would update the 1982 plan presently in

effect and outlines a number of ski area modifications and new

facilities, including limited snowmaking.

The NOI stated that the draft EIS would be published in late 1996

or early 1997 and the final EIS would be completed in mid 1997. This

project has been delayed in order to analyze another stream as a

potential water source for the snowmaking. Additional stream studies

will be completed in the summer and fall of 1997. We now expect to

publish the draft EIS in early 1998, to ask for public comment for a

period of 45 days, and to complete a final EIS in mid 1998.

DATES: The formal scoping period ended September 7, 1996, however

comments from interested parties and agencies are still being accepted.

ADDRESSES: Send written correspondence to: Tere O'Rourke, District

Ranger, U.S. Forest Service, P.O. Box 620, 680 Blue River Parkway,

Silverthorne, CO, 80498 or FAX to (970) 468-7735.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wendy Bailey, NEPA Coordinator, (970) 468-5400.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Arapahoe Basin Master Development Plan

(MDP) was completed in 1996 to update the 1982 Arapahoe Basin Ski Area

Master Plan (1982 Plan). The 1982 Plan currently guides the Forest

Service in their administration of the ski area's Special Use Permit. A

majority of the upgrades described in the 1982 Plan have been

implemented, with the exception of the proposed snowmaking facilities.

Given the age and status of the 1982 Plan, the Forest Service and A-

Basin determined that an updated plan would be appropriate at this

time.

The purpose of and need for the proposed MDP are as follows:

--Update the 1982 Plan which is outdated (almost 15 years old). Most of

the improvements described in the 1982 Plan have been implemented. In

addition, new ski area technologies, planning strategies, and

environmental philosophies have emerged during this time which warrant

consideration in an updated plan.

--Increase summer recreational opportunities at A-Basin, potentially to

include off-season alpine skiing, mountain biking, interpretive trails,

and an alpine slide.

--Provide off-season public skiing opportunities and race camp

experiences for young racers through the use of snowmaking to cover

approximately 15-30% of the skiable terrain at A-Basin. This would also

provide for fall training facilities for the U.S. Ski Team (USST).

--Upgrade and improve restaurant, parking, patrol headquarters, and

other facilities at the resort.

--Encourage year--round use of the facilities while maintaining the

resort character.

The decision to be made is whether or not to approve and accept the

proposed MDP as a portion of the existing special use permit. The range

of preliminary alternatives include Alternative A (No Action, Status

Quo), Alternative B (Proposed Action: A-Basin MDP), and Alternative C

(Modified Proposed Action, with conventional smowmaking and no alpine

slide).

Public comment was received in response to the August 9, 1996

Notice of Intent. Newsletters have been mailed to the public and two

public meetings were held in August, 1996. The comments received have

been analyzed and distilled into a set of preliminary analysis issues

which include: recreation/resort experience, user conflicts/safety/

skier density, hydrologic basin capacity, water quality and tundra

ecosystem.

A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ``404 Permit'' for dredging and

filling waters and/or wetlands may be required. The Forest Service has

requested the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service to cooperate in the environmental analysis.

We expect to publish the draft environmental impact statement in

early 1998, to ask for public comment for a period of 45 days, and to

complete a final environmental impact statement in mid 1998. The 45-day

public comment period on the draft EIS will commence on the day the

Environmental Protection Agency publishes a ``Notice of Availability''

in the Federal Register. The responsible official will be the Forest

Supervisor, White River National Forest, P.O. Box 948, Glenwood

Springs, CO, 81602.

The Forest Service believes that 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 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

environmental impact statement stage but 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.

[[Page 36255]]

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: June 25, 1997.

Ben L. Del Villar,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 97-17554 Filed 7-3-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-BW-M