This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

18543

Vol. 61, No. 82

Friday, April 26, 1996

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT

FOUNDATION

Board of Directors Meeting; Sunshine

Act Meeting

TIME: 12:00 noon—3:00 p.m.

PLACE: ADF Headquarters.

DATE: Wednesday, May 1, 1996.

STATUS: Open.

Agenda

12:00 noon—Lunch

12:30—Chairman’s Report

12:45 p.m.—President’s Report

1:30 p.m.—Other

If you have any questions or

comments, please direct them to Ms.

Janis McCollim, Executive Assistant to

the President, who can be reached at

(202) 673–3916.

William R. Ford,

President.

[FR Doc. 96–10530 Filed 4–24–96; 12:57 pm]

BILLING CODE 6116–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Waterville Valley Ski Area Ltd.

Snowmaking Ponds

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will

prepare an environmental impact

statement for Waterville Valley Ski Area

Ltd.’s proposal to construct snowmaking

impoundments on the Pemigewasset

Ranger District, White Mountain

National Forest, Grafton County, New

Hampshire. The New Hampshire

Department of Environmental Services

has been asked to participate as a

cooperating agency. The U.S. Corps of

Engineers the Fish and Wildlife Service,

Department of the Interior and the Town

of Waterville Valley have been asked to

provide assistance. The agency invites

written comments and suggestions on

the scope of the analysis. In addition,

the agency gives notice of the full

environmental analysis and decisionmaking process that will occur on the

proposal so that interested and affected

people are aware of how they may

participate and contribute to the final

decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of the analysis must be received by June

10, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

and suggestions concerning the scope of

the analysis to Donna Hepp, Forest

Supervisor, White Mountain National

Forest, 719 Main St., Laconia, New

Hampshire 03246.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions about the proposed

action and environmental impact

statement to Fred Kacprzynski,

Waterville Valley Snowmaking

Impoundments Coordinator, White

Mountain National Forest, 719 Main

Street, Laconia, New Hampshire 03246,

phone: 603–528–8721.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Skiing is

an important component of the

recreational opportunities offered by the

National Forests. The enabling

authorities of the USDA-Forest Service

are contained in many laws enacted by

Congress and the regulations and

administrative directives that

implement these laws. The major laws

include, the Organic Administrative Act

of 1897, the Weeks Act of 1911, the

Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act of

1960, the Forest and Rangeland

Renewable Resources Planning Act of

1974, the National Forest Management

Act of 1976 and the National Forest Ski

Area Permit Act of 1986. Ski area

operations are consistent with the

recreation objectives of the National

Forests.

It is the policy of the Forest Service

to meet downhill skiing demand on

National Forest Lands by partnering

with the private sector. The National

Recreation Strategy (USDA-Forest

Service 1988a) details the Forest Service

role in increasing outdoor recreation on

National Forests through partnerships

such as those with the ski industry.

The intent of ski areas as noted in the

White Mountain National Forest plan is

to, ‘‘Broaden the range of recreation

opportunities by recognizing the

potential for year-round recreation

facilities at alpine ski areas managed by

the private sector.’’ In addition, the

Forest Plan states that, ‘‘The Forest will

not consider developing any completely

new alpine ski areas.’’ Indicating a

direction to emphasize the continued

operation of current ski areas. Skiing on

the White Mountain National Forest

accounted for about 17 percent of the

total recreational use on the Forest, and

uses about 3,500 acres or 0.4 percent of

the Forest, and use about 3,500 acres or

0.4 percent of the Forest. Waterville

Valley Ski Area is an integral part of the

Forest partnership in providing these

recreation opportunities.

Snowmaking is essential to a quality

downhill skiing experience, and as

such, important in maintaining the

economic viability of the area and the

partnership. Waterville Valley currently

withdraws water directly from the Mad

River, which has historically been an

extremely unreliable source of water.

The intent of Waterville Valley Ski Area

is to provide enough water to fully cover

the existing trail system three times

during the winter,while increasing the

minimum flow of the Mad River from

the currently permitted minimum flow

of 0.50 csm to the calculated February

Median Flow (FMF) of 0.75 csm.

Utilizing the current system (without

snowmaking impoundments), with a

direct withdrawal at 0.75 csm,

Waterville Valley could only provide

full coverage 9 percent of the time. The

goal of the ski area is to provide

coverage 95 percent the time.

As a result, Waterville Valley Ski Area

Ltd, has proposed to construct water

storage impoundments to augment

water withdrawal from the Mad River in

order to provide a reliable and sufficient

source of water to meet this goal. Their

proposal is a combination of four to five

sites with a total capacity of 130 million

gallons in concert with the 100 million

gallons available directly from the Mad

River. Impoundment locations are near

the existing Ski Area permit, they are in

Management Areas 2.1 and/or 3.1.

Proposed locations have been reviewed

by the proponent based on screening

factors including, operating costs, land

availability, pond volume and

environmental impact.

Tentative issues which have been

identified include, (1) changing water

withdrawal limits from the current

approved .50 csm to the FMF of .75

csm., (2) visual, (3) safety of the dams,
18544 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 82 / Friday, April 26, 1996 / Notices

(4) continued implementation of the

Forest Plan and (5) economics. In

preparing the environmental impact

statement, the Forest Service will

consider the proposal against a range of

reasonable alternatives to address issues

identified through scoping. Alternatives

may be other combinations of potential

sites, on demand sources of supply,

(direct withdrawal, wells) and the

required No Action Alternative.

Permtis and licenses to implement the

proposed action may include a

Wetlands Permit, State of New

Hampshire dam permits and Alteration

of Terrain permit. The issuing authority

will be a term special use permit under

the Term Permit Act of March 4, 1915

as amended (16 U.S.C. 497).

Donna Hepp, Forest Supervisor,

White Mountain National Forest, 719

Main Street, Laconia, New Hampshire,

is the responsible official.

Public participation will be important

at several points during the analysis.

The first point is during the scoping

process (40 CFR 1501.7). The Forest

Service will be seeking information and

comments from Federal, State, and local

agencies and other individuals or

organizations who may be interested in

or affected by the proposed action. This

input will be used in preparation of the

draft environmental impact statement

(DEIS). The scoping process includes;

1. Identifying potential issues.

2. Identifying issues to be analyzed in

depth.

3. Eliminating insignificant issues or

those which have been covered by a

relevant previous environmental

analysis.

4. Exploring additional alternatives.

5. Identifying potential environmental

effects of the proposed action and

alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and

cumulative effect and connected

actions).

6. Determining potential cooperating

agencies and task assignments.

The State of New Hampshire

Department of Environmental Services

has been invited to participate as a

cooperating agency. The Fish and

Wildlife Service, Department of the

Interior, the U.S. Corps of Engineers and

the Town of Waterville Valley have

been informed and will be assisting in

the analysis.

Public scoping meetings will be held

in the Spring of 1996. Meeting dates

will be advertised in the media.

The draft environmental impact

statement (DEIS) is expected to be filed

with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and to be available for

public review in Summer, 1996. At that

time EPA will publish a notice of

availability of the DEIS in the Federal

Register.

The comment period on the draft

environmental impact statement will be

45 days from the date the

Environmental Protection Agency’s

notice of availability appears in the

Federal Register.

The Forest Service believes that, 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

stage 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 responding to the DEIS 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 or 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.

After the comment period ends on the

DEIS, the comments will be analyzed

and considered by the Forest Service in

preparing the final environmental

impact statement (FEIS). The FEIS is

scheduled to be completed by the Fall

of 1996. In the FEIS the Forest Service

is required to respond to the comments

received (40 CFR 1503.4). The

responsible official will consider the

comments, responses, environmental

consequences discussed in the FEIS,

and applicable laws, regulations, and

policies in making a decision regarding

this proposal. The responsible official

will document the decision and reasons

for the decision on the Record of

Decision. The decision will be subject to

appeal under 36 CFR 217 and 36 CFR

251.

Dated: April 22, 1996.

[FR Doc. 96–10359 Filed 4–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

Rural Housing Service

Notice of Request for Extension of a

Currently Approved Information

Collection

AGENCY: Rural Housing Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed collection; comments

request.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this

notice announces the Rural Housing

Service (RHS) intention to request an

extension for a currently approved

information collection in support of the

program for the Housing Preservation

Grant Program.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be

received by June 25, 1996 to be assured

of consideration.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue

M. Harris-Green, Senior Loan Specialist,

RHS, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

AG BOX 0781, Washington, D.C. 20250,

Telephone (202) 720–1606.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: RHS/Housing Preservation

Grant Program.

OMB Number: 0575–0115.

Expiration Date of Approval: July 31,

1996.

Type of Request: Extension of a

currently approved information

collection.

Abstract: The primary purpose of the

Housing Preservation Grant Program is

to repair or rehabilitate individual

housing, rental properties, or co-ops

owned or occupied by very low- and

low-income rural persons. Grantees will

provide eligible homeowners, owners of

rental properties, and owners of co-ops

with financial assistance through loans,

grants, interest reduction payments or

other comparable financial assistance

for necessary repairs and rehabilitation

of dwellings to bring them up to code

or minimum property standards.

These grants were established by

Public Law 98–181, the Housing UrbanRural Recovery Act of 1983, which

amended the Housing Act of 1979 (Pub.