White River National Forest; Summit County, CO; Arapahoe Basin Ski Area and Montezuma Bowl Projects, 71801-71802 [05-23262]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 30, 2005 / Notices Expiration Date: April 30, 2006. Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection. Abstract: The Child and Adult Care Food Program is mandated by section 17 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. § 1766). Program implementing regulations are contained in 7 CFR part 226. In accordance with § 226.7(d), State agencies must submit a monthly report of program activity in order to receive Federal reimbursement for meals served to eligible participants. Respondents: State agencies that administer the Child and Adult Care Food Program. Number of Respondents: 53. Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: The number of responses includes initial, revised, and final reports submitted each month. The overall average is three submissions per State agency per reporting month for a total of 36 per year. Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average three hours per respondent for each submission. Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 5,724 hours. Dated: November 17, 2005. Roberto Salazar, Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service. [FR Doc. E5–6708 Filed 11–29–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–30–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service White River National Forest; Summit County, CO; Arapahoe Basin Ski Area and Montezuma Bowl Projects Forest Service, USDA. Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to disclose the anticipated environmental effects of the Arapahoe Basin Ski Area and Montezuma Bowl Projects. The Proposed Action would upgrade and expand infrastructure within the existing Special Use Permit (SUP) area to accommodate parking demands and improve skiing opportunities for existing and proposed visitation, thereby enhancing the quality of the recreation experience. The major aspects of the Proposed Action include: • Install a new fixed-grip triple of quad chairlift in Montezuma Bowl. Adding lift-served skiing within VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:12 Nov 29, 2005 Jkt 208001 Montezuma Bowl would increase ABasin’s existing overall skiable acreage for approximately 487 to 812 acres. The Montezuma Bowl area would add approximately 175 acres of intermediate terrain and 149 acres of advanced and expert terrain, all accessible for roundtrip skiing via one proposed chairlift. • Install snowfencing west of the proposed lift terminal, below (south) of the ridgeline, to aid in snow retention. • Install a raised ‘‘avalauncher’’ platform to allow A-Basin ski patrol to safely conduct snow safety operations in Montezuma Bowl. • Replace the existing Exhibition lift (fixed-grip triple) with a high speed detachable quad chair accommodating 2,60 people per hour in a slightly modified alignment. • Create an additional 231 parking spaces by widening and re-grading the Lower Overflow Lot and the High Noon Lot, bringing total parking capacity at ABasin’s five lots to 1,781 vehicles. In conjunction with the re-grading of the High Noon lot, a series of sediment detention basins are proposed along the west edge of the parking area, parallel with Highway 6. DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received by January 6, 2006. ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning this notice should be addressed to Maribeth Gustafson, Forest Supervisor, c/o Peech Keller, Project Leader, Dillon Ranger District, PO Box 620, Dillon, CO 80498; (970) 468–7735 (fax); or by submitting an e-mail to: comments-rocky-mountain-white-rivereastzone@fs.fed.us. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peech Keller, Project Leader, at the Dillon Ranger District via telephone at (970) 468–5400 or e-mail at cpkeller2fs.fed.us. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Proposed Action addresses issues related to the recreation experience. Presently, alpine skiing/snowboarding and other resort activities are provided to the public through a SUP issued by the Forest Service and administered by the White River National Forest. All elements of the proposal remain within the existing SUP boundary area. The proposed improvements are consistent with the 2002 Revised White River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan). The proposed improvements are considered necessary in light of current PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 71801 resort deficiencies and projected future visitation. Purpose and Need for Action The Forest Service and A-Basin cooperatively identified a purpose for this proposal, which is to upgrade and expand infrastructure within the existing SUP area to accommodate parking demands and improve skiing opportunities for existing and proposed visitation, thereby enhancing the quality of the recreation experience. Responsible Official The responsible official is Maribeth Gustafson, Forest Supervisor for the White River National Forest, 900 Grand Ave., P.O. Box 948, Glenwood Springs Colorado 81602. 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. Nature of Decision To Be Made Based on the analysis that will be documented in the forthcoming EIS, the responsible official for this project, the Forest Supervisor of the White River National Forest, will decide whether or not to implement, in whole or in part, the Proposed Action or another alternative developed by the Forest Service. Scoping Process 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 A-Basin’s proposal. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as possible. Input provided by interested and/or affected individuals, organizations and governmental agencies will be used to identify resource issues that will be analyzed in the Draft EIS. The Forest Service will identify significant issues raised during the scoping process, and use them to formulate alternatives, prescribe mitigation measures, or analyze environmental effects. Comment Requested This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides the development of the draft environmental impact statement, including the identification of the range of alternatives to be considered. While public participation is strictly optional at this stage, the Forest Service believes that it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public E:\FR\FM\30NON1.SGM 30NON1 71802 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 30, 2005 / Notices participation in the subsequent environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft statement 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. 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 during the scoping 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 development of the alternatives. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the proposed action should be as specific as possible. Initiation of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstance Review, 70 FR 17063 (April 4, 2005) (Initiation Notice). On October 17, 2005, the Department published a notice of preliminary results of this changed circumstance review in which we preliminarily determined that Yieh Phui is the successor–in-interest to Yieh Hsing for purposes of determining antidumping liability. We gave interested parties the opportunity to comment after publication of the Preliminary Results. See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Taiwan: Prelminary Results of Antidumping duty Changed Circumstance Review, 70 FR 60279 (October 17, 2005) (Preliminary Results). No comments were received; thus, the Department is adopting its preliminary determination for these final results. EFFECTIVE DATE: November 30, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angela Strom or Robert James at (202) 482–2704 or (202) 482–0649, respectively; AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave. NW., Washington DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: November 18, 2005. Catherine Kahlow, Acting Forest Supervisor, White River National Forest. [FR Doc. 05–23262 Filed 11–29–05; 8:45 am] Background On February 15, 2005, Yieh Phui requested the Department to conduct an expedited changed circumstance review of the antidumping duty order on certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Taiwan. The Department determined that the information submitted by Yieh Phui was sufficient to warrant initiation of changed circumstance review and, on April 4, 2005, the Department published the Initiation Notice for this review. Yieh Phui claims to be a successor–ininterest to Yieh Hsing after it acquired Yieh Hsing’s pipe production facilities. On April 6, 2005, the Department issued Yieh Phui a questionnaire requesting further details on the acquisition of the pipe facilities. Yieh Phui responded on April 29, 2005. On May 17, 2005, the Department issued a second supplemental questionnaire, to which Yieh Phui responded on June 13, 2005. The evidence on the record shows that Yieh Phui operates in essentially the same manner in terms of production, management and customer base as did Yieh Hsing prior to the transfer of its pipe facilities. In analyzing the totality of the factors on the record with respect to the transfer of the pipe operations, the Department preliminarily concluded that Yieh Phui BILLING CODE 3410–11–M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–583–008] Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstance Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On April 4, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published a notice of initiation of changed circumstance review of the antidumping order on certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Taiwan to determine whether Yieh Phui Enterprise, Ltd. (Yieh Phui) is a successor–in-interest to Yieh Hsing Enterprise, Ltd. (Yieh Hsing). See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Taiwan: AGENCY: VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:12 Nov 29, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 was the successor–in-interest to Yieh Hsing and ought to be accorded the same antidumping duty treatment as its predecessor. See Preliminary Results. Scope of the Order Imports covered by this order are shipments of certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes. The Department defines such merchandise as welded carbon steel pipes and tubes of circular cross section, with walls not thinner than 0.065 inch and 0.375 inch or more but not over 4.5 inches in outside diameter. These products are commonly referred to in the industry as ‘‘standard pipe’’ and are produced to various American Society for Testing Materials specifications, most notably A–53, A–120 and A–135. Standard pipe is currently classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, and 7306.30.5055. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under the order is dispositive. Final Results of Changed Circumstance Review For the reasons stated in the Preliminary Results, we determine that Yieh Phui is the successor–in-interest to Yieh Hsing for antidumping duty purposes. The Department did not receive any comments or requests for a hearing from either party within the time frames established in the Preliminary Results. As a result, Yieh Phui will receive the same antidumping duty cash–deposit rate (i.e., 1.61 percent) that was calculated and applied to Yieh Hsing during the most recent administrative review under this order. See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 69 FR 58390 (September 30, 2004). The Department will instruct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to collect cash deposits at a rate of 1.61 percent for all entries made by Yieh Phui of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this changed circumstance review. Notification Regarding APOs This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance E:\FR\FM\30NON1.SGM 30NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 30, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71801-71802]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23262]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


White River National Forest; Summit County, CO; Arapahoe Basin 
Ski Area and Montezuma Bowl Projects

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 
the Arapahoe Basin Ski Area and Montezuma Bowl Projects. The Proposed 
Action would upgrade and expand infrastructure within the existing 
Special Use Permit (SUP) area to accommodate parking demands and 
improve skiing opportunities for existing and proposed visitation, 
thereby enhancing the quality of the recreation experience.
    The major aspects of the Proposed Action include:
     Install a new fixed-grip triple of quad chairlift in 
Montezuma Bowl. Adding lift-served skiing within Montezuma Bowl would 
increase A-Basin's existing overall skiable acreage for approximately 
487 to 812 acres. The Montezuma Bowl area would add approximately 175 
acres of intermediate terrain and 149 acres of advanced and expert 
terrain, all accessible for round-trip skiing via one proposed 
chairlift.
     Install snowfencing west of the proposed lift terminal, 
below (south) of the ridgeline, to aid in snow retention.
     Install a raised ``avalauncher'' platform to allow A-Basin 
ski patrol to safely conduct snow safety operations in Montezuma Bowl.
     Replace the existing Exhibition lift (fixed-grip triple) 
with a high speed detachable quad chair accommodating 2,60 people per 
hour in a slightly modified alignment.
     Create an additional 231 parking spaces by widening and 
re-grading the Lower Overflow Lot and the High Noon Lot, bringing total 
parking capacity at A-Basin's five lots to 1,781 vehicles. In 
conjunction with the re-grading of the High Noon lot, a series of 
sediment detention basins are proposed along the west edge of the 
parking area, parallel with Highway 6.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received 
by January 6, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning this notice should be addressed 
to Maribeth Gustafson, Forest Supervisor, c/o Peech Keller, Project 
Leader, Dillon Ranger District, PO Box 620, Dillon, CO 80498; (970) 
468-7735 (fax); or by submitting an e-mail to: comments-rocky-mountain-
white-river-eastzone@fs.fed.us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peech Keller, Project Leader, at the 
Dillon Ranger District via telephone at (970) 468-5400 or e-mail at 
cpkeller2fs.fed.us. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for 
the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 
1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday 
through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Proposed Action addresses issues related 
to the recreation experience. Presently, alpine skiing/snowboarding and 
other resort activities are provided to the public through a SUP issued 
by the Forest Service and administered by the White River National 
Forest. All elements of the proposal remain within the existing SUP 
boundary area.
    The proposed improvements are consistent with the 2002 Revised 
White River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest 
Plan). The proposed improvements are considered necessary in light of 
current resort deficiencies and projected future visitation.

Purpose and Need for Action

    The Forest Service and A-Basin cooperatively identified a purpose 
for this proposal, which is to upgrade and expand infrastructure within 
the existing SUP area to accommodate parking demands and improve skiing 
opportunities for existing and proposed visitation, thereby enhancing 
the quality of the recreation experience.

Responsible Official

    The responsible official is Maribeth Gustafson, Forest Supervisor 
for the White River National Forest, 900 Grand Ave., P.O. Box 948, 
Glenwood Springs Colorado 81602. 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.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Based on the analysis that will be documented in the forthcoming 
EIS, the responsible official for this project, the Forest Supervisor 
of the White River National Forest, will decide whether or not to 
implement, in whole or in part, the Proposed Action or another 
alternative developed by the Forest Service.

Scoping Process

    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 A-Basin's proposal. 
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and 
concerns on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as 
possible.
    Input provided by interested and/or affected individuals, 
organizations and governmental agencies will be used to identify 
resource issues that will be analyzed in the Draft EIS. The Forest 
Service will identify significant issues raised during the scoping 
process, and use them to formulate alternatives, prescribe mitigation 
measures, or analyze environmental effects.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides 
the development of the draft environmental impact statement, including 
the identification of the range of alternatives to be considered. While 
public participation is strictly optional at this stage, the Forest 
Service believes that it is important to give reviewers notice of 
several court rulings related to public

[[Page 71802]]

participation in the subsequent environmental review process. First, 
reviewers of draft statement 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. 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 during the scoping 
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 development of the alternatives. To assist 
the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns 
on the proposed action, comments on the proposed action should be as 
specific as possible.

    Dated: November 18, 2005.
Catherine Kahlow,
Acting Forest Supervisor, White River National Forest.
[FR Doc. 05-23262 Filed 11-29-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M