SE GROUP assisted the Coconino National Forest in producing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) analyzing a proposal from the Arizona Snowbowl ski area, just north Flagstaff, AZ. Because the Snowbowl is situated on the San Francisco Peaks, which are held sacred to at least 13 federally recognized Native American tribes in the Four Corners area, all historic and proposed activities at the ski area are highly sensitive and controversial. While the proposal included improvements to the ski area’s lift and terrain network, day lodges and parking, the most notable aspect was the proposed use of Class A+ reclaimed wastewater for snowmaking. It came as no surprise that this novel approach to meeting the snowmaking needs of the ski are was met with considerable resistance from both the tribal communities and the general public. The Draft EIS, released to the public in February 2004, yielded responses from almost 6,000 commentors. After comments were processed and the analysis was revised, a Final EIS and Record of Decision was released in February 2005, approving of all aspects of the proposal, including snowmaking. During the requisite administrative appeal process, the Forest Service received 169 appeals filed by the tribes, environmental groups and the public. Upon review by the Regional Forester for the Forest Service’s Southwest Region, the Forest Supervisor’s decision was upheld on all counts. With the administrative process exhausted, the decision was challenged in federal district court by six plaintiffs, where it was again upheld. The district cout's decision was subsequently appealed to a 3 judge panel of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in favor of the project on four of the complaints and against it on two. The Snowbowl has since appealed the ruling of the 3 judge panel in the 9th Circuit to an 11 judge panel of the 9th Circuit. In the fall of 2007, the 11 judge panel reviewed the decision of the 3 judges and agreed to re-hear the case en banc, which effectively threw out the decision of the 3 judge panel. The case was heard in December of 2007 before 11 judges of the 9th Circuit. A ruling is expected in late spring/early summer 2008.
