Loon Mountain Ski Resort Development and Expansion Project

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 erwst/[email protected].

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, jstrand/[email protected].

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