Mount Snow Ski Area Snowmaking Water Source Alterations, Green Mountain National Forest, Windham County, VT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Mount Snow Ski Area Snowmaking Water Source Alterations, Green

Mountain National Forest, Windham County, VT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service, will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) for Mount Snow's proposal to upgrade its existing

snowmaking system to insure more reliable and consistent snow surfaces

throughout the ski season regardless of weather conditions. Existing

snowmaking water withdrawals, storage facilities and on-mountain

pipelines will be modified, a new water source(s) and storage

facility(ies) will be designed into the system. An indirect benefit

from this proposal will be to retrofit the existing system and design

the new facilities so as to reduce adverse impacts on fisheries, water

quality and aquatic biota which currently exist. Based upon preliminary

information from a snowmaking needs and alternatives study, conducted

pursuant to Vermont Water Quality Regulations, Somerset Reservoir,

Harriman Reservoir and the Howe Farm have been identified in addition

to eight other possible sites as potentially viable candidates for new

water sources and/or storage facilities. Presently, the Mount Snow

snowmaking system utilizes three artificial ponds for water storage:

Snow Lake, fed by the North Branch of the Deerfield River, and

Carinthia Pond, fed by an unnamed tributary to the North Branch of the

Deerfield River, are both in-stream impoundments. Mirror Lake at

Haystack Ski Area, fed by Cold Brook, is an off-stream impoundment. All

water sources are approved and operate under Vermont Act 250 permits or

State of Vermont Water Quality Regulations, but are not consistent with

current guidelines for winter conservation flows. The goal of the

proposed action is to design an approach for withdrawing water from a

new source, and/or to create new storage capacity, thereby allowing the

current withdrawals to be brought up to present flow guidelines, and

enabling Mount Snow to take Snow Lake and Carinthia Pond off-stream.

This would have significant beneficial impacts to fisheries, water

quality, and aquatic biota on the North Branch of the Deerfield River.

The combined water available from the new source and the existing

modified sources must enable Mount Snow to increase snowmaking

production from the current coverage of 83% to 100% of the existing ski

trail network.

Mount Snow has been operating under a Special Use Permit from the

USDA Forest Service since it opened for business in 1956. Presently,

alpine skiing/snowboarding and other four season resort activities are

provided to the public through a permit issued by the United States

Forest Service and administered through the Green Mountain National

Forest. The current forty term permit was issued on December 29, 1989.

In 1995, Mount Snow, Ltd. acquired the nearby Haystack Ski Area and

constructed a pipeline connecting the two snowmaking systems.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received

by October 13, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope

of the analysis to Beth LeClair, District Ranger, Green Mountain

National Forest, RR #2, Box 35, Rochester, Vermont 05767.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions regarding the proposed action and environmental impact

statement to Nancy Burt, Project Coordinator, Green Mountain National

Forest, 231 N. Main Street, Rutland, Vermont 05701, phone: 802-747-

6700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need

Mount Snow/Haystack ski area has a combined ski trail network of

635 skiable acres of which 527 acres (83% of total) are currently

served by snowmaking. As currently configured, the combined snowmaking

system at Mount Snow/Haystack ski area has a storage capacity of

approximately 22 million gallons and utilizes a total seasonal water

volume of about 300 million gallons. This existing system is not

adequate to provide snowmaking coverage on the 527 acres of ski trails

currently serviced. The snowmaking system cannot meet target dates for

initial trail opening, does not provide sufficient depth of snow

coverage and cannot recover rapidly following thaw and melt-off events.

Natural snowfall is inconsistent and often inadequate during a typical

Vermont winter. Predictable snow coverage is needed if Mount Snow is to

consistently provide quality winter sports recreation opportunities, be

attractive to skiers/snowboarders and remain competitive with other

major ski areas in New England.

Additionally, with significantly improved and upgraded snowmaking

capacities at competing resorts in recent years, Mount Snow has been

unable to compete effectively during periods of insufficient natural

snowfall. Upgrading capacities would promote repeat visitation and

continue the long-term viability of the ski area and Deerfield Valley

businesses. Unless Mount Snow remains viable, the economic health of

the region could be adversely affected. The financial success of the

resort has a substantial bearing on the continued ability of USDA

Forest Service and Mount Snow to provide quality winter sports

recreation to the public as called for in the Forest Plan and Mount

Snow's Special Use Permit.

Development of a new water withdrawal system would be designed to

result in current withdrawals being brought up to present flow

guidelines. This would enable Mount Snow to take Snow Lake and

Carinthia Pond off-stream, thereby having significant beneficial

impacts to fisheries, water quality, and aquatic biota on the North

branch of the Deerfield River.

The Proposed Action

The proposed action is (1) to identify and develop new water

sources and/or storage options and pump water for snowmaking through a

buried pipeline to the Mount Snow system, (2) to upgrade existing water

withdrawal and storage facilities to bring them into compliance with

current state and

[[Page 44636]]

federal regulatory guidelines, and (3) to install air and water

pipelines on existing ski terrain to increase snowmaking coverage from

527 to 635 acres. No new ski terrain is proposed.

Management Direction

The proposed action is consistent with the long-range goals for

this area as defined in the Land and Resource Management Plan for the

Green Mountain National Forest. That Forest Plan was approved on

January 15, 1987. Under that Forest Plan, the area encompassed by the

Mount Snow Ski Area is assigned to management under prescription 7.1A.

This management prescription emphasizes highly developed recreation,

including downhill ski areas. The purpose of prescription 7.1A is to

provide opportunities for recreation requiring highly developed

structures and facilities, maintain a visually appealing landscape, and

manage for other resource uses in a compatible way. The Forest Service

does not anticipate the need for any amendments to the Land and

Resource Management Plan as a result of this snowmaking proposal since

all new snowmaking will be located within the boundary of the existing

SUP or on private land.

The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives to meet

the objectives of this proposal. One of these will be the ``no action''

alternative, in which none of the proposed activities would be

implemented. Additional alternatives will examine varying levels and

locations for the proposed activities to achieve the proposal's

purposes, as well as to respond to the issues and other resource

values. Proposed alternatives have been determined by the proponent

based on a preliminary Snowmaking Water Supply Needs and Alternatives

Analysis, which is currently being finalized, in which twelve water

sources have been studied. Various screening factors were analyzed

including water availability, on-site development costs, pond volume,

and environmental impacts.

The EIS will analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative

environmental effects of the alternatives. Past, present, and projected

activities on both private and National Forest lands will be

considered. The EIS will disclose the analysis of site-specific

mitigation measures and their effectiveness.

Public participation is an important part of the analysis,

commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7), which will

occur upon publication of this notification. In addition, the public is

encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials at any time during

the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest Service will be

seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and

local agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be

interested in or affected by the proposed action. The proposed project

will be presented at an Open House in the local area, where

representatives from the Green Mountain National Forest will be

available to discuss the proposed project and provide additional

information.

Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in

preparation of the Draft EIS. Please note that comments will be

regarded as public information. The scoping process will be used to:

1. Identify potential issues.

2. Identify major issues to be analyzed in depth.

3. Eliminate minor issues or those which have been covered by a

relevant previous environmental analysis, such as the Green Mountain

Forest Plan EIS.

4. Identify alternatives to the proposed action.

5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action

and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects).

6. Determine potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.

Preliminary issues identified to date include:

Is the project consistent with the Deerfield River

Settlement?

Potential effects of increased snow deposition on stream

runoff.

Potential effects on aquatic habitat.

Potential effects on Mount Snow's ability to compete in

the marketplace.

Other issues commonly associated with ski area development include:

effects on cultural resources, water quality, soils, sensitive species,

and scenery values. This list may be verified, expanded, or modified

based on public scoping for this proposal.

The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review in March, 1998.

At that time, the EPA will publish a notice of availability of the

Draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the Draft EIS

will be 45 days from the date the EPA's notice of availability appears

in the Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in

management of the Mount Snow Ski Area participate at that time. To be

most helpful, comments on the Draft EIS should be as site-specific as

possible. The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed by June 1998.

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 reviewer's position and

contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 US 519.553

(1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the

draft environmental impact 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 scoping 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

developing issues and alternatives.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as possible.

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: August 14, 1997.

James W. Bartelme,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 97-22388 Filed 8-21-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M