Copper Mountain Resort Trails and Facilities Improvements Plan White River National ForestSummit County, Colorado

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Copper Mountain Resort Trails and Facilities Improvements Plan

White River National Forest--Summit County, Colorado

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) to disclose the anticipated environmental effects of

Copper Mountain Resort's (CMR) proposed Trails and Facilities

Improvements Plan. The proposed development includes the replacement

and upgrading of two existing lifts, development of two new lifts,

expanding on-mountain snowmaking coverage, creation of additional

skiing trails and glades, the renovation and expansion of an existing

on-mountain restaurant, construction of a snow-vehicle maintenance shop

with fuel storage, the development of two skier warming facilities, and

upgrading one existing ski patrol facility.

The agency gives notice of the full environmental analysis and

decision-making process that will occur on the proposal so that

interested and affected individuals may become aware of how they may

participate in the process and contribute to the final decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the proposal and environmental analysis

should be received by January 21, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments concerning this proposal to Michael

Liu, Special Project Coordinator, Dillon Ranger District, P.O. BOX 620,

Silverthorne, Colorado, 80498. Fax: 970 468-7735. E-mail: Liu__Mike/

[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct questions about the proposed

action and EIS to Michael Liu, Special Project Coordinator, Dillon

Ranger District, P.O. BOX 620, Silverthorne, Colorado, 80498. Phone:

970 262-3440.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action would increase

recreational opportunities at Copper Mountain Resort while remaining

within the existing Special Use Permit Boundary. Presently, alpine

skiing/snowboarding and other resort activities are provided to the

public through a Special Use Permit (SUP) issued by the U.S. Forest

Service and administered by the White River National Forest (WRNF).

Many of the proposed projects have been conceptually approved through

previous National Environmental Policy Act analysis of the resort's

Master Development Plan.

The project is located on National Forest System lands within

sections 29, 30, 31, and 32, Township 6 South, Range 78 West, sections

5, 6, and 7, Township 7 South, Range 78 West, section 25, 26, 35, and

36, Township 6 South, Range 79 West, and sections 1, 2, 11, and 12,

Township 7 South, Range 79 West, of the 6th Principal Meridian.

The proposed improvements were found to be generally consistent

with the White River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan

(Forest Plan) and Regional Guide direction. It was determined that a

non-significant Forest Plan amendment may be required

[[Page 71102]]

to meet the Visual Quality objective contained within the Management

Prescription for the 9A Management Area. The proposed improvements are

considered necessary in light of current resort deficiencies, increased

visitation experienced over the past decade, and projected future

visitation. The ensuing analysis will provide additional site specific

detail for portions of the MDP to accommodate changing socio-economic

and environmental considerations, and may modify previous approvals

shown in the MDP in response to environmental issues.

Over the past five months, a ``Collaborative Frontloaded

Interagency Process'' was conducted to establish a cooperative dialogue

with various state, local, and federal agencies and to garner their

input to the preliminary proposal. Additionally, CMR conducted several

public forums allowing the community an opportunity to provide input to

the proposal formulation process.

Purpose and Need: Purpose 1: To qualitatively improve Alpine skiing

and snowboarding opportunities and bring infrastructure into balance

with current use levels.

A. To improve quality, distribution, and circulation of

intermediate through expert skiers and riders by enhancing access to

and from less accessible terrain.

B. To enhance teaching facilities completing the learning area, and

to provide an atmosphere responsive to the needs of beginning level

guests.

C. To increase the amount of groomed, gladed terrain, responding to

changing skier/boarder preferences, desires for these types of terrain,

and develop appropriate management of gladed area throughout the

resort.

D. To improve the balance between skiable terrain and existing lift

capacity.

E. To improve circulation and address guest expectations for

reliable, diverse, high-quality, early-season terrain. Additional

snowmaking would provide durable coverage on high traffic, and exposed

areas.

F. To increase the quantity, and improve the quality of on-mountain

seating, improving the quality of the guest experience, increasing the

range of services provided, and minimizing base area congestion.

Purpose 2: To improve operational efficiencies by incorporating

technological innovations and through the development, renovation,

relocation, and centralization of facilities.

A. To provide a snow vehicle maintenance shop, which can be easily

accessed by employees, vehicles, and materials during the winter, and

is located closer to the majority of the terrain and facilities being

served. Development of a new facility would allow reallocation of the

existing shop space to maintenance of the rubber-tired fleet, thus

maximizing operational efficiencies. A more centrally located facility

would increase operational efficiencies, and increase the effective

productivity of the grooming and maintenance fleet.

B. To upgrade and replace aged infrastructure, thereby reducing

maintenance requirements, increasing operational efficiencies and

reliability, meeting guest expectations, and incorporating modern

technologies.

C. To install underground snowmaking infrastructure on trails

currently being covered, thereby reducing risks to personnel,

decreasing labor requirements, and incorporating current technology

resulting in higher productivity.

D. To provide an emergency egress route from Copper Bowl, allowing

guest and employee egress in the event of a lift failure, and

facilitating rapid evacuation of patients with life-threatening

conditions. To provide a ski patrol duty station in the Tucker Mountain

pod sized to ensure the appropriate availability of emergency equipment

and personnel.

Purpose 3: To integrate ski area development and use with

ecological principals such as managing habitats, water resources,

forest cover, and connectivity thus maintaining viable plant and animal

populations.

A. To ensure projects are designed and implemented to maintain

functions and values of critical or unique habitats as identified by

resource professionals.

The Proposed Action: The proposed improvements include: the

replacement and upgrading of two existing lifts (Alpine and Sierra),

development of two new lifts (one on Tucker Mountain and a teaching

lift in the Union Creek area), expanding on-mountain snowmaking

coverage by approximately 400 acres, creation of additional skiing

trails and glades, the renovation and expansion of an existing on-

mountain restaurant (Solitude Station), construction of a snow-vehicle

maintenance shop with fuel storage, the development of two skier

warming facilities, and upgrading one existing ski patrol facility.

Preliminary Issues: Identified preliminary issues include potential

forest fragmentation, effects to wildlife, botanical resources,

wetlands, water quality, mountain hydrology, and the relationship of

the proposed action to future development of adjacent real estate.

Public Involvement: Public questions and comments regarding this

proposal are an integral part of this environmental analysis process.

Comments will be used to identify issues and develop alternatives to

CMR's proposal. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and

considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the

draft EIS 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 EIS 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.

A public meeting will be held on January 11, 2000 at 5:30 p.m. in

the Summit County Commons Building, 37 County Road 1005, Frisco

Colorado. The purpose of the meeting will be to provide the public with

an opportunity to become more familiar with the proposal and to ask

questions. Additional information may also be obtained on the web by

accessing: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/whiteriver/reading__room.html

Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names

and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the

public record on this proposed action and will be available for public

inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and

considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments will not have

standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR Part 215 or

217. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request

the agency to withhold a submission from the public record by showing

how the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality.

Persons requesting such confidentiality should be aware that, under the

FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very limited

circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest Service

will inform the requestor of the agency's decision regarding the

request for confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the

agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the

comments may be resubmitted with or without names and addresses within

thirty (30) days.

Public comments are appreciated throughout the analysis process.

The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) in September 2000 and will be available

[[Page 71103]]

for public review at that time. The comment period on the draft EIS

will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice of

Availability in the Federal Register. Completion of the final EIS is

anticipated in February 2001.

The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers

notice of this early stage of public participation and of several court

rulings related to public participation in the environmental review

process. First, reviewers of the draft EIS must structure their

participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is

meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's positions and

contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,

553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could have been raised

at the draft stage may be waived or dismissed by the court if not

raised until after the completion of the final EIS. 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 comment period so

substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest

Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider and respond to them

in the final EIS.

In the Final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to

substantive comments received during the comment period, which pertain

to the environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS.

Responsible Official: The responsible official is Martha Ketelle,

Forest Supervisor for the White River National Forest. The responsible

official will document the decision and reasons for the decision in a

Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to appeal under 36

CFR part 215 or part 251.

Dated: December 13, 1999.

Martha J. Ketelle,

Forest Supervisor,

White River National Forest.

[FR Doc. 99-32833 Filed 12-17-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M