In a suit alleging that the United States Forest Service (USFS) violated the National Environmental Protection Act by permitting a ski resort operator to produce artificial snow using reclaimed water, the district court's grant of the defendants' motions for summary judgment is affirmed, where: 1) laches did not apply because the defendants could not demonstrate that they suffered prejudice; but 2) the USFS took the requisite "hard look" at the possibility and the risks of persons ingesting snow made from reclaimed water; and 3) USFS did not fail to ensure the scientific integrity of its analysis in considering the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality's conclusions as to the safety of the reclaimed water. The Court considered that although it is apparent to us that the “new” plaintiffs and their counsel have grossly abused the judicial process by strategically holding back claims that could have, and should have, been asserted in the first lawsuit (and would have been decided earlier but for counsel’s procedural errors in raising those claims), it was compelled to hold that laches does not apply here because the USFS and ASRLP cannot demonstrate that they suffered prejudice, as defined by the case law.