White River National Forest; Summit County, CO; Breckenridge Ski Resort-Peak 6 Terrain Development Proposal, 3449-3450 [E8-631]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 13 / Friday, January 18, 2008 / Notices
during the meeting. All persons wishing
to address the committee must sign in
at the door.
Check for the status of the meeting,
the final agenda and a final list of the
fee proposals to be reviewed at: https://
www.fs.fed.us/r2/recreation.
The Recreation RAC is authorized by
the Federal Land Recreation
Enhancement Act, which was signed
into law by President Bush in December
2004.reneescott
Dated: January 10, 2008.
Greg Griffith,
DFO, Colorado Recreation Resource Advisory
Committee.
[FR Doc. 08–154 Filed 1–17–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
White River National Forest; Summit
County, CO; Breckenridge Ski
Resort—Peak 6 Terrain Development
Proposal
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
AGENCY:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will
prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to disclose the
anticipated environmental effects of the
Breckenridge Ski Resort Peak 6 Terrain
Development proposal. This proposal is
designed to provide for an improved
balance of services to meet the needs
and expectations of guests.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope
of the analysis must be received by
February 17, 2008. The draft
environmental impact statement is
expected in November 2008 and the
final environmental impact statement is
expected in January 2009.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to
Maribeth Gustafson, Forest Supervisor,
c/o Roger Poirier, Winter Sports
Program Manager, White River National
Forest, 900 Grand Avenue, Glenwood
Springs, CO 81602–0948.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shelly Grail—Snow Ranger, Dillon
Ranger District, P.O. Box 620,
Silverthorne, CO 80498,
sgrail@fs.fed.us, or (970) 262–3484.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
proposed action addresses issues related
to the quality of the recreational
experience. Presently, alpine skiing/
snowboarding and other resort activities
are provided to the public through a
Special Use Permit (SUP) issued by the
White River National Forest. All
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Jan 17, 2008
Jkt 214001
elements of the proposal are 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).
Purpose and Need for Action
Given the current visitation rates,
guest experiences, and terrain
distribution concerns, the following
needs are addressed by the proposed
action:
1. Better accommodation of current
daily visitation levels.
2. Reduced skier/rider congestion on
BSR’s existing Intermediate and
Advanced Intermediate terrain network
and associated lifts.
3. Reduced waiting time for lifts at
BSR.
4. Efficient dispersal of Intermediate
and Advanced Intermediate skiers/
riders across the entire skiable terrain
network.
5. Additional lift-served terrain to
accommodate the existing terrain
distribution deficit.
6. Additional hike-to access servicing
advanced ability levels.
7. Sufficient infrastructure in pods to
serve guests.
Proposed Action
All proposed projects are within
Breckenridge Ski Resort’s (BSR) existing
SUP boundary. The proposed action
includes:
• Developing terrain on Peak 6 that
would encompass approximately 450
acres of traditional downhill and hiketo skiing accessed by a single lift.
• Installing a bottom-drive, highspeed, detachable, six-person lift to
service the Peak 6 terrain with a slope
length of 5,963 feet, a vertical rise of
1,537 and a design capacity of 3,000
people per hour.
• Constructing a food and beverage
facility (including restrooms and
associated infrastructure) at the bottom
terminal of the proposed lift. The food
and beverage facility would be
approximately 1,800 square feet in size
and seat approximately 150 guests.
• Constructing a ski patrol/warming
hut at the proposed top terminal
location on Peak 6.
• Rehabilitating and extending
decommissioned roads within the South
Barton timber sale patch cut areas to
specific locations to gain access to Peak
6 for construction and future
maintenance needs.
• Installing a power line to the
proposed top terminal location in a
corridor that minimizes impacts to
environmentally sensitive areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3449
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 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 BSR’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 and project design
features, or analyze environmental
effects.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the
scoping process which guides the
development of the environmental
impact statement.
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
E:\FR\FM\18JAN1.SGM
18JAN1
3450
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 13 / Friday, January 18, 2008 / Notices
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 45day 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 the final
environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in
identifying and considering issues and
concerns on 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.
Comments received, including the
names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the
public record on this proposal and will
be available for public inspection.
Dated: January 8, 2008.
Maribeth Gustafson,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E8–631 Filed 1–17–08; 8:45 am]
(1) Call to order and approval of the
Agenda.
(2) Approval of the Minutes of the
84th Meeting.
(3) Reports from Congressional
Liaisons.
(4) Agency Reports.
The focus of the meeting will be
reports and updates on programs and
research projects affecting the Arctic.
Any person planning to attend this
meeting who requires special
accessibility features and/or auxiliary
aids, such as sign language interpreters,
must inform the Commission in advance
of those needs.
Contact Person for More Information:
John Farrell, Executive Director, U.S.
Arctic Research Commission, 703–525–
0111 or TDD 703–306–0090.
John Farrell,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 08–155 Filed 1–17–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–M
COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM
PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR
SEVERELY DISABLED
Procurement List; Proposed Addition
and Deletions
Proposed Addition to and
Deletions from the Procurement List.
ACTION:
The Committee is proposing
to add to the Procurement List a product
to be furnished by nonprofit agencies
employing persons who are blind or
have other severe disabilities, and to
delete products previously furnished by
such agencies.
Comments Must Be Received On Or
Before: February 17, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase
From People Who Are Blind or Severely
Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800,
1421 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Arlington, Virginia, 22202–3259.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT
COMMENTS CONTACT: Kimberly M. Zeich,
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
ARCTIC RESEARCH COMMISSION
Telephone: (703) 603–7740, Fax: (703)
603–0655, or e-mail
CMTEFedReg@jwod.gov.
85th Meeting; Notice
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
January 7, 2008.
Notice is hereby given that the U.S.
Arctic Research Commission will hold
its 85th meeting in Boulder, CO on
February 6–8, 2008. The Business
Session, open to the public, will
convene at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday,
February 6, 2008 in Boulder, CO. An
Executive Session will follow
adjournment of the Business Session.
The Agenda items include:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Jan 17, 2008
Jkt 214001
This
notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C
47(a) (2) and 41 CFR 51–2.3. Its purpose
is to provide interested persons an
opportunity to submit comments on the
proposed actions.
Addition
If the Committee approves the
proposed addition, the entities of the
Federal Government identified in this
notice will be required to procure the
product listed below from nonprofit
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
agencies employing persons who are
blind or have other severe disabilities.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
I certify that the following action will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The major factors considered for this
certification were:
1. If approved, the action will not
result in any additional reporting,
recordkeeping or other compliance
requirements for small entities other
than the small organizations that will
furnish the product to the Government.
2. If approved, the action will result
in authorizing small entities to furnish
the product to the Government.
3. There are no known regulatory
alternatives which would accomplish
the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in
connection with the product proposed
for addition to the Procurement List.
Comments on this certification are
invited. Commenters should identify the
statement(s) underlying the certification
on which they are providing additional
information.
End of Certification
The following product is proposed for
addition to Procurement List for
production by the nonprofit agencies
listed:
Product
Paper, Copying, Xerographic—Convenience
Pack
NSN: 7530–00–NIB–0814—Reamless.
NSN: 7530–00–NIB–0826—Ream Wrapped.
NPA: Association for Vision Rehabilitation
and Employment, Inc., Binghamton, NY.
Coverage: A-List for the total Government
requirement as specified by the General
Services Administration.
Contracting Activity: General Services
Administration, Office Supplies & Paper
Products Acquisition Ctr, New York, NY.
Deletions
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
I certify that the following action will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The major factors considered for this
certification were:
1. If approved, the action should not
result in additional reporting,
recordkeeping or other compliance
requirements for small entities.
2. If approved, the action may result
in authorizing small entities to furnish
the product to the Government.
3. There are no known regulatory
alternatives which would accomplish
the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in
connection with the product proposed
for deletion from the Procurement List.
E:\FR\FM\18JAN1.SGM
18JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 13 (Friday, January 18, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3449-3450]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-631]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
White River National Forest; Summit County, CO; Breckenridge Ski
Resort--Peak 6 Terrain Development Proposal
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 Breckenridge Ski Resort Peak 6 Terrain Development proposal. This
proposal is designed to provide for an improved balance of services to
meet the needs and expectations of guests.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received
by February 17, 2008. The draft environmental impact statement is
expected in November 2008 and the final environmental impact statement
is expected in January 2009.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Maribeth Gustafson, Forest
Supervisor, c/o Roger Poirier, Winter Sports Program Manager, White
River National Forest, 900 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602-
0948.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shelly Grail--Snow Ranger, Dillon
Ranger District, P.O. Box 620, Silverthorne, CO 80498,
sgrail@fs.fed.us, or (970) 262-3484.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action addresses issues related
to the quality of the recreational experience. Presently, alpine
skiing/snowboarding and other resort activities are provided to the
public through a Special Use Permit (SUP) issued by the White River
National Forest. All elements of the proposal are 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).
Purpose and Need for Action
Given the current visitation rates, guest experiences, and terrain
distribution concerns, the following needs are addressed by the
proposed action:
1. Better accommodation of current daily visitation levels.
2. Reduced skier/rider congestion on BSR's existing Intermediate
and Advanced Intermediate terrain network and associated lifts.
3. Reduced waiting time for lifts at BSR.
4. Efficient dispersal of Intermediate and Advanced Intermediate
skiers/riders across the entire skiable terrain network.
5. Additional lift-served terrain to accommodate the existing
terrain distribution deficit.
6. Additional hike-to access servicing advanced ability levels.
7. Sufficient infrastructure in pods to serve guests.
Proposed Action
All proposed projects are within Breckenridge Ski Resort's (BSR)
existing SUP boundary. The proposed action includes:
Developing terrain on Peak 6 that would encompass
approximately 450 acres of traditional downhill and hike-to skiing
accessed by a single lift.
Installing a bottom-drive, high-speed, detachable, six-
person lift to service the Peak 6 terrain with a slope length of 5,963
feet, a vertical rise of 1,537 and a design capacity of 3,000 people
per hour.
Constructing a food and beverage facility (including
restrooms and associated infrastructure) at the bottom terminal of the
proposed lift. The food and beverage facility would be approximately
1,800 square feet in size and seat approximately 150 guests.
Constructing a ski patrol/warming hut at the proposed top
terminal location on Peak 6.
Rehabilitating and extending decommissioned roads within
the South Barton timber sale patch cut areas to specific locations to
gain access to Peak 6 for construction and future maintenance needs.
Installing a power line to the proposed top terminal
location in a corridor that minimizes impacts to environmentally
sensitive areas.
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 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 BSR'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 and project design features, or analyze environmental effects.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides
the development of the environmental impact statement.
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
[[Page 3450]]
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 45-day 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 the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on 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.
Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal
and will be available for public inspection.
Dated: January 8, 2008.
Maribeth Gustafson,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E8-631 Filed 1-17-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
