Company outlines settlement tied to draft EIS; council approves letter to BLM

A company communications official told the Soda Springs City Council that a settlement with three conservation groups, a vacated earlier environmental review and a new draft Environmental Impact Statement have set the stage for renewed federal mine permitting and related public comment.

The presentation centered on the company’s recent settlement with plaintiffs that had sued to vacate the project’s earlier EIS and on a draft EIS now open for public comment; the presenter asked the council to authorize the mayor to sign and submit a letter to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) during the comment period.

Trent, identified in the meeting as the communications and community relations lead at the plant, said the project first completed an EIS on May 17, 2019, and received a Record of Decision on Sept. 20, 2019. He said the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho vacated that EIS and the record of decision on July 31, 2020, after lawsuits by environmental organizations.

Trent said the company reached a settlement with the three plaintiffs and described the financial and operational terms the company agreed to while asking the city to participate in the review process. He said the company agreed to provide funds for greater sage‑grouse conservation and monitoring, and to alter certain operational windows at the mine site. Quoting the presentation: “we agreed to contribute 2,430,000.00 for land purchases connecting habitat corridors,” and to “pay 300,000 for sage grouse population surveys,” statements Trent made during the presentation. He also described the aggregate conservation funding related to the settlement as being “over 7,000,000,” as reported to the council.

Trent said the draft EIS was published in late December and that the public comment period was open through Feb. 3 (the presenter identified a 45‑day comment window). He provided council staff with a link to the draft EIS and offered to share presentation materials with the city clerk so residents and council members could submit comments directly to the BLM.

A council member moved that, after council review, the mayor be authorized to sign a letter of support and have the city clerk submit it to the BLM. The motion was seconded and the council voted in favor; the motion to approve and submit the letter carried. Council staff and the presenter confirmed the city had a draft letter in the packet and that a version signed by all three commissioners was available.

Trent told the council the settlement terms included operational changes the company will implement during certain seasonal windows and that some of the settlement funds will be used for habitat restoration, population surveys and land purchases intended to connect sage‑grouse habitat. He said the settlement had required the plaintiffs to agree not to challenge the company’s upcoming BLM mine authorizations in exchange for the company’s commitments on funding and operating changes.

After the vote, council staff said they would circulate the presentation slides and links to the draft EIS and that individual residents are also welcome to file comments directly with the BLM.

The council did not adopt any ordinance or regulatory change; its action was limited to authorizing the mayor to sign and submit the prepared letter supporting the company’s application and encouraging public comment on the draft EIS.