Salt Lake City-Environmentalists are misguided by appealing to the Utah Supreme Court in their attempts to derail Great Salt Lake Mineral’s plan to expand its potash recovery operations on the Great Salt Lake, according to a GSLM spokesman. More than a dozen activist groups maintained in their suit against the state early this month in the high court that they should be entitled to a formal hearing on the expansion and other specific projects even though they have already submitted written comments on the leases that state officials approved in July 2007. One of the petitioners, Friends of the Great Salt Lake, which advocates for protecting the lake’s natural resources, filed three separate petitions challenging the decision and claiming that it was entitled to an administrative hearing on possible adverse effects from the leases that were not considered. Dave Hyams, spokesman for the subsidiary of Overland Park, Kan.-based Compass Minerals, said GSLM, which is participating as an interested party, questions the merits of the suit since these interests are defined in the Great Salt Lake comprehensive management plan adopted by the state in 2000. “The state after a long process determined the different ways to balance the various needs, which include wildlife, industry, recreation, and population growth,” Hyams explained. “Having adopted that plan in our view defines meeting the public interest more than if every lease were subject to a public hearing. In fact, these areas are defined under the plan as suitable for mineral leasing.” He also said GSLM agrees with Assistant Utah Atty. Gen. Brent Burnett, who argued that the case should be heard in district court rather than “leap-frogging” to the supreme court.
Transparency Across the Fertilizer Value-Chain