Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Sawtooth National Forest, Idaho; Twin Falls BLM District, ID; Bald Mountain Ski Resort Master Development Plan, 24499-24500 [05-9254]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 10, 2005 / Notices
Dr. Albert P. Morgan, Chief Staff
Officer, Operational Support Section,
Center for Veterinary Biologics, Policy,
Evaluation, and Licensing, VS, APHIS,
4700 River Road Unit 148, Riverdale,
MD 20737–1231; phone (301) 734–8245,
fax (301) 734–4314.
For information regarding the
environmental assessment or the risk
analysis, or to request a copy of the
environmental assessment (as well as
the risk analysis with confidential
business information removed), contact
Dr. Patricia L. Foley, Risk Manager,
Center for Veterinary Biologics, Policy,
Evaluation, and Licensing, VS, APHIS,
510 South 17th Street, Suite 104, Ames,
IA 50010; phone (515) 232–5785, fax
(515) 232–7120.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the
Virus-Serum-Toxin Act (21 U.S.C. 151
et seq.), a veterinary biological product
must be shown to be pure, safe, potent,
and efficacious before a veterinary
biological product license may be
issued. A field test is generally
necessary to satisfy prelicensing
requirements for veterinary biological
products. Prior to conducting a field test
on an unlicensed product, an applicant
must obtain approval from the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS), as well as obtain APHIS’
authorization to ship the product for
field testing.
To determine whether to authorize
shipment and grant approval for the
field testing of the unlicensed product
referenced in this notice, APHIS
conducted a risk analysis to assess the
potential effects of this product on the
safety of animals, public health, and the
environment. Based on the risk analysis,
APHIS has prepared an environmental
assessment (EA) concerning the field
testing of the following unlicensed
veterinary biological product:
Requester: Fort Dodge Animal Health.
Product: Escherichia Coli Vaccine,
Live Culture.
Field Test Locations: Delaware,
Maryland, Georgia, Virginia, and
Arkansas.
The above-mentioned product is a
live aroA gene-deleted Escherichia Coli
Vaccine. The vaccine is for use in
chickens as an aid in the prevention of
disease caused by Escherichia coli.
The EA has been prepared in
accordance with: (1) The National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality for
implementing the procedural provision
of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3)
USDA regulations implementing NEPA
(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:17 May 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part
372).
Unless substantial issues with adverse
environmental impacts are raised in
response to this notice, APHIS intends
to issue a finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) based on the EA and
authorize shipment of the above product
for the initiation of field tests following
the close of the comment period for this
notice.
Because the issues raised by field
testing and by issuance of a license are
identical, APHIS has concluded that the
EA that is generated for field testing
would also be applicable to the
proposed licensing action. Provided that
the field test data support the
conclusions of the original EA and the
issuance of a FONSI, APHIS does not
intend to issue a separate EA and FONSI
to support the issuance of the product
license, and would determine that an
environmental impact statement need
not be prepared. APHIS intends to issue
a veterinary biological product license
for this vaccine following completion of
the field test provided no adverse
impacts on the human environment are
identified and provided the product
meets all other requirements for
licensing.
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 151–159; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.4.
Done in Washington, DC, this 4th day of
May 2005.
Elizabeth E. Gaston,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 05–9281 Filed 5–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement for
the Sawtooth National Forest, Idaho;
Twin Falls BLM District, ID; Bald
Mountain Ski Resort Master
Development Plan
AGENCIES: Forest Service, Agriculture,
Lead Agency; Bureau of Land
Management, Interior, Cooperating
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) and the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), the
USDA Forest Service (Lead Agency) and
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24499
the USDOI Bureau of Land Management
(Cooperating Agency) intend to prepare
an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) to analyze and disclose the effects
of the updated Bald Mountain Ski Area
Master Development Plan (MDP) and
40-year term ski area permit application.
Both agencies have authority over the
Bald Mountain ski area, which is also
known as the Sun Valley Ski Resort.
DATES: Written comments concerning
the proposed action should be
postmarked by June 9, 2005. The draft
environmental impact statement is
expected to be available for public
review and comment in July 2006 and
the final environmental impact
statement is expected to be available
March 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be sent to Kurt Nelson, District Ranger
at the Ketchum Ranger Station; P.O. Box
2356, Ketchum, ID 83340. Faxes should
be sent to 208–622–3923 and e-mails to:
comments-intermtn-sawtoothketchum@fs.fed.us. Comments received
on this proposal, including names and
addresses, will be considered part of the
public record and will be available for
public inspection. Individual
respondents may request
confidentiality. If you wish to withhold
your name or street address from public
review or from disclosure under the
Freedom of Information Act, you must
state this prominently at the beginning
of your written comment. Such requests
will be honored to the extent allowed by
law. All submissions from organizations
and businesses, and from individuals
identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, will be
available for public inspection in their
entirety.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe
Miczulski, Winter Sports Manager at the
Ketchum Ranger District; P.O. Box 2356,
Ketchum, ID 83340; or phone at (208)
622–5371.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sun
Valley Company has requested a new
40-year term ski area permit for the Bald
Mountain Ski Resort. The existing ski
area permit, which was issued in
December 1977, expires December 2007.
One requirement for a ski area permit is
to have an approved Master
Development Plan (MDP), which is
prepared by the permit holder and
encompasses the entire winter sports
resort envisioned for development and
authorization by the permit. Upon
acceptance by the Authorized Officers,
the MDP becomes part of the ski area
permit. The EIS will analyze the effects
of the proposed action and alternatives.
The agencies give notice of the National
E:\FR\FM\10MYN1.SGM
10MYN1
24500
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 10, 2005 / Notices
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
analysis and decision making process
on the proposal so interested and
affected members of the public may
participate and contribute to the final
decision. The Sawtooth National Forest,
as the lead for both agencies, invites
written comments and suggestions on
the scope of the analysis and the issues
to address.
The 1989 MDP currently guides the
Forest Service and BLM in their
administration of the special use permit
for the ski area. A majority of the actions
described in the 1989 MDP have been
implemented. Given the age and status
of the 1989 MDP, the Forest Service,
BLM, and Sun Valley Company
determined that an updated plan would
be appropriate at this time. Sun Valley
Company has updated their MDP for
Bald Mountain Ski Area and presented
it to the Forest Service and BLM in
conjunction with their request for a new
40-year permit to continue operating on
these public lands. The existing ski
resort permit expires December 2007.
The draft MDP as submitted by Sun
Valley Company is available
electronically on the following Web
sites: Sawtooth National Forest—https://
www.fs.fed.us/r4/sawtooth and Sun
Valley Company—https://
www.sunvalley.com. An approved MDP
will guide development on Bald
Mountain Ski Area. Anticipated projects
include new ski trail development both
inside and outside of the current permit
boundary, additional snowmaking
installation, existing ski run
modification, installation of new ski
lifts, including gondola, removal of
some existing ski lifts, and addition of
a mountain restaurant. A Vegetation
Management Plan (VMP) will be
developed concurrently with the MDP,
and will be shown as an appendix in the
proposed MDP and analyzed as part of
the proposed action. The VMP will
assess current conditions of vegetative
components on Bald Mountain, both
with respect to timber and grass/forb
species. The VMP will specify
treatments necessary to enact, that will
ensure long-term health of vegetation on
Bald Mountain.
Proposed Action
The proposed action to be analyzed in
this EIS is to implement the MDP as
submitted by the Sun Valley Company.
The Agencies have a responsibility to
determine consistency of the MDP with
their respective Land Management
Plans, to evaluate if any proposed
facilities are in hazardous areas (i.e.
avalanche path); evaluate if
improvements are an appropriate use of
Forest Service and BLM land; determine
if private land is available to accomplish
the proposed activities; and to make a
public interest determination.
Purpose and Need For Action
The purpose and need for the
proposed MDP are as follows: Update
the 1989 MDP to reflect current
conditions and needs at the ski resort.
Most of the improvements described in
the 1989 MDP have been implemented.
In addition, new ski area technologies,
updated Land Management Plans, and
changes in the environment have
emerged during this time which warrant
consideration in an updated MDP.
Comments Requested
This notice of intent initiates the
scoping process which guides the
development of the environmental
impact statement for the update of the
Bald Mountain Ski Resort MDP.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:17 May 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
Possible Alternatives
Possible alternatives include: Alt. 1—
No Action (continuing the present
course of action). The existing MDP
would not be updated. The ski area
permit would be renewed in 2007 and
the current MDP would be made part of
it. Alt. 2—Proposed Action, the MDP, as
submitted by Sun Valley Company,
would be attached to a new ski area
permit. Other alternatives may be
developed that meet the purpose and
need and respond to issues associated
with the proposed action.
Responsible Official
The responsible officials are the
Forest Supervisor for the Sawtooth
National Forest and the District Manager
for the Twin Falls District of the Idaho
BLM.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The decision to be made is whether or
not to approve the proposed MDP as a
condition of the special use permit, or
to approve an alternative to the
proposed action. After a MDP is
approved, a 40-year ski area resort
permit would be issued.
Scoping Process
Public notices will be placed in local
newspapers. Public meetings will be
held in conjunction with Sun Valley
Company. Informal public participation
is encouraged throughout this process.
Formal opportunity for public review
and comment will be provided upon
publication of the Draft EIS.
Early Notice of Importance of Public
Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
A draft environmental impact
statement will be prepared for comment.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The comment period on the draft
environmental impact statement will be
45 days from the date the
Environmental Protection Agency
publishes the notice of availability in
the Federal Register.
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 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also,
environmental objections that could be
raised at the draft environmental impact
statement 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
comment period for the draft
environmental impact statement 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.
To assist the Forest Service in
identifying and considering issues
raised by 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: March 15, 2005.
Ruth Monahan,
Sawtooth Forest Supervisor, Forest Service.
Dated: March 17, 2005.
Howard Hedrick,
Twin Falls District Manager, BLM.
[FR Doc. 05–9254 Filed 5–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
E:\FR\FM\10MYN1.SGM
10MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 10, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24499-24500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-9254]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for
the Sawtooth National Forest, Idaho; Twin Falls BLM District, ID; Bald
Mountain Ski Resort Master Development Plan
AGENCIES: Forest Service, Agriculture, Lead Agency; Bureau of Land
Management, Interior, Cooperating Agency.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA),
the USDA Forest Service (Lead Agency) and the USDOI Bureau of Land
Management (Cooperating Agency) intend to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose the effects of the
updated Bald Mountain Ski Area Master Development Plan (MDP) and 40-
year term ski area permit application. Both agencies have authority
over the Bald Mountain ski area, which is also known as the Sun Valley
Ski Resort.
DATES: Written comments concerning the proposed action should be
postmarked by June 9, 2005. The draft environmental impact statement is
expected to be available for public review and comment in July 2006 and
the final environmental impact statement is expected to be available
March 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to Kurt Nelson, District
Ranger at the Ketchum Ranger Station; P.O. Box 2356, Ketchum, ID 83340.
Faxes should be sent to 208-622-3923 and e-mails to: comments-intermtn-
sawtooth-ketchum@fs.fed.us. Comments received on this proposal,
including names and addresses, will be considered part of the public
record and will be available for public inspection. Individual
respondents may request confidentiality. If you wish to withhold your
name or street address from public review or from disclosure under the
Freedom of Information Act, you must state this prominently at the
beginning of your written comment. Such requests will be honored to the
extent allowed by law. All submissions from organizations and
businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be
available for public inspection in their entirety.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Miczulski, Winter Sports Manager
at the Ketchum Ranger District; P.O. Box 2356, Ketchum, ID 83340; or
phone at (208) 622-5371.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sun Valley Company has requested a new 40-
year term ski area permit for the Bald Mountain Ski Resort. The
existing ski area permit, which was issued in December 1977, expires
December 2007. One requirement for a ski area permit is to have an
approved Master Development Plan (MDP), which is prepared by the permit
holder and encompasses the entire winter sports resort envisioned for
development and authorization by the permit. Upon acceptance by the
Authorized Officers, the MDP becomes part of the ski area permit. The
EIS will analyze the effects of the proposed action and alternatives.
The agencies give notice of the National
[[Page 24500]]
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis and decision making process on
the proposal so interested and affected members of the public may
participate and contribute to the final decision. The Sawtooth National
Forest, as the lead for both agencies, invites written comments and
suggestions on the scope of the analysis and the issues to address.
The 1989 MDP currently guides the Forest Service and BLM in their
administration of the special use permit for the ski area. A majority
of the actions described in the 1989 MDP have been implemented. Given
the age and status of the 1989 MDP, the Forest Service, BLM, and Sun
Valley Company determined that an updated plan would be appropriate at
this time. Sun Valley Company has updated their MDP for Bald Mountain
Ski Area and presented it to the Forest Service and BLM in conjunction
with their request for a new 40-year permit to continue operating on
these public lands. The existing ski resort permit expires December
2007.
The draft MDP as submitted by Sun Valley Company is available
electronically on the following Web sites: Sawtooth National Forest--
https://www.fs.fed.us/r4/sawtooth and Sun Valley Company--https://
www.sunvalley.com. An approved MDP will guide development on Bald
Mountain Ski Area. Anticipated projects include new ski trail
development both inside and outside of the current permit boundary,
additional snowmaking installation, existing ski run modification,
installation of new ski lifts, including gondola, removal of some
existing ski lifts, and addition of a mountain restaurant. A Vegetation
Management Plan (VMP) will be developed concurrently with the MDP, and
will be shown as an appendix in the proposed MDP and analyzed as part
of the proposed action. The VMP will assess current conditions of
vegetative components on Bald Mountain, both with respect to timber and
grass/forb species. The VMP will specify treatments necessary to enact,
that will ensure long-term health of vegetation on Bald Mountain.
Purpose and Need For Action
The purpose and need for the proposed MDP are as follows: Update
the 1989 MDP to reflect current conditions and needs at the ski resort.
Most of the improvements described in the 1989 MDP have been
implemented. In addition, new ski area technologies, updated Land
Management Plans, and changes in the environment have emerged during
this time which warrant consideration in an updated MDP.
Proposed Action
The proposed action to be analyzed in this EIS is to implement the
MDP as submitted by the Sun Valley Company. The Agencies have a
responsibility to determine consistency of the MDP with their
respective Land Management Plans, to evaluate if any proposed
facilities are in hazardous areas (i.e. avalanche path); evaluate if
improvements are an appropriate use of Forest Service and BLM land;
determine if private land is available to accomplish the proposed
activities; and to make a public interest determination.
Possible Alternatives
Possible alternatives include: Alt. 1--No Action (continuing the
present course of action). The existing MDP would not be updated. The
ski area permit would be renewed in 2007 and the current MDP would be
made part of it. Alt. 2--Proposed Action, the MDP, as submitted by Sun
Valley Company, would be attached to a new ski area permit. Other
alternatives may be developed that meet the purpose and need and
respond to issues associated with the proposed action.
Responsible Official
The responsible officials are the Forest Supervisor for the
Sawtooth National Forest and the District Manager for the Twin Falls
District of the Idaho BLM.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The decision to be made is whether or not to approve the proposed
MDP as a condition of the special use permit, or to approve an
alternative to the proposed action. After a MDP is approved, a 40-year
ski area resort permit would be issued.
Scoping Process
Public notices will be placed in local newspapers. Public meetings
will be held in conjunction with Sun Valley Company. Informal public
participation is encouraged throughout this process. Formal opportunity
for public review and comment will be provided upon publication of the
Draft EIS.
Comments Requested
This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides
the development of the environmental impact statement for the update of
the Bald Mountain Ski Resort MDP.
Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for
comment. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement
will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency
publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
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 U.S. 519,
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the
draft environmental impact statement 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 comment period for the draft
environmental impact statement 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.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
raised by 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: March 15, 2005.
Ruth Monahan,
Sawtooth Forest Supervisor, Forest Service.
Dated: March 17, 2005.
Howard Hedrick,
Twin Falls District Manager, BLM.
[FR Doc. 05-9254 Filed 5-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P