Posted Draft EIS Comments

Shut down Line 5 . It has been controversial for years. We cannot take the risk that it will damage the Great Lakes. And why send Canadian oil thru michigan. Stop it now.

I wish to point out two glaring deficiencies in the Draft EIS: (1) the truncated scope of review improperly excludes consideration of the full range of alternatives to Enbridge's Tunnel Project (its Preferred alternative, including decommissioning Line 5 altogether as unnecessary and (2) complete absence of a credible risk assessment of the project from a geotechnical perspective (e.g., risk of tunnel collapse and impact to submerged lands, water quality, navigation and integrity of existing, fragile dual pipelines).

I am opposed to Line 5 expansion going under Makinac Island. We should be focused on how to eliminate Line 5 in order to preserve our beautiful northern environment and save a planet from the abuse of fossil fuels. I am not a scientist but I am a mother and a grandmother who tries to think of the generations that will follow ours.

We no longer need Line 5 for fossil fuels. The proposal to build a tunnel is at the least disruptive and unnecessary and at its worst a disaster waiting to happen in unstable geology. Please do not approve this tunnel. Our children and grandchildren require pristine waters and clean air to survive.

Hello, my name is Brandon Berry, I am writing this in support of the Line 5 Tunnel. I am a welder member of Pipeliners Local 798. I am also a Michigan resident and avid outdoorsman in the state of Michigan, as well as my wife and her family. The lakes and the natural resources Michigan has to offer are extremely important to us. I support this tunnel project for many reasons, one being the importance of our major natural resource such as our Great Lakes being affected. Many Michiganders rely on the Great Lakes for livelihood, sporting, outdoor fun etc. It is extremely important to support this tunnel project with a new, state of the art tunnel which will allow energy to pass through the Straits Of Mackinac safely, efficiently as well as un bothering day to day life for people living in Northern Michigan. Not only will that being the most safe way to transport energy, it will also ensure the well being of our states world renowned Great Lakes, being that the energy will be safely traveling through a well built, strong structure that is the Line 5 Tunnel. This tunnel will also create many many good living wage union jobs for Michigan residents, as well as other United States Citizens, bring incredible amounts of revenue into the State of Michigan just by the workers themselves being in the Northern Michigan area. Its time to move forward with progress and build this tunnel to ensure our Great Lakes safety, environment safety, wildlife safety, safe energy transport for so many Michigan residents, as well as good union paying jobs to support our local, state and federal economies. This tunnel is a win for all parties involved and in my opinion should be supported. Thank you for your time.

Is it actually possible that the Army Corps of Engineers isn't aware of the potential catastrophic damage that the Line 5 pipeline could cause throughout the Great Lakes? An engineer has a moral obligation to protect people and the environment by not supporting (or even contemplating) projects that could cause irreparable harm. This pipeline provides no benefit to US citizens so the fact that it is still being considered despite public opposition is a mystery. Living in the US today is like living in bizarro world. . .most decisions made by our public officials are the wrong decision. Instead of moving ahead with a project that will exacerbate climate disruption by leaving us dependent on fossil fuels, the Army Corp should propose projects that will improve the environment and our quality of life. Moving ahead with this project is morally and ethically wrong. . .just say no to big monied interests (and Canada) and do your job by protecting the citizens and water resources that depend on you to make good judgments and sound decisions. Thank you.

There are many reasons to oppose Line-5 including: 1) a real potential for environmental damage; 2) risks to drinking water; 3) threats to tribal treaty rights and cultural resources; and 4) concerns about its economic impact. Additionally, the pipeline's age raises safety concerns and alternative transportation methods do currently exist. Please oppose Line-5. It is too risky for the Great Lakes.

See attached comment.

I am writing in opposition to the Line 5 tunnel. The tunnel has been pushed along under the political words that include energy emergency which is false. There is no emergency that includes the pipe line. There has not been a comprehensive study on the Great Lakes, the climate, and the future. Instead of ramming this through it would be best practices to consider all aspects including indigenous people and Native Americans whose land this potential effects. Their rights must be considered.
I urge thoughtful consideration to all theses factors.
The people of the state of Michigan have a right to safe lakes and streams for our water. A potential spill could damage that and the livelihoods of many of us.
Thank you.
Cindy Mason

The Michigan League of Conservation Voters calls on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to abandon its fundamentally flawed and inadequate Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Enbridge's Line 5 oil tunnel proposal and to deny the permit sought by Enbridge. Through a deliberate pattern of exclusions and omissions, USACE has orchestrated a sham review process that appears designed to rubber-stamp approval for a project that poses catastrophic risks to the Great Lakes. This represents not merely procedural failure, but an unconscionable betrayal of the agency's legal obligations to the public.

USACE's Draft EIS is a mockery of environmental review, systematically ignoring critical construction risks and project impacts that any competent analysis would address. The agency has turned a blind eye to Enbridge's project modifications and the company's calculated efforts to circumvent full state analysis, allowing fundamental design elements, environmental consequences, and construction protocols to escape proper scrutiny under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other applicable laws.

This rigged process ensures that no federal agency will fulfill its legal duty to thoroughly examine the severe risks and impacts of this project or the viable alternatives to threading oil infrastructure through one of the world's most precious freshwater ecosystems. USACE has abdicated its responsibility to conduct genuine environmental review, instead providing cover for a project that should never be permitted. The agency must start over with an honest, comprehensive analysis—or reject this dangerous proposal outright.

Allowing an oil tunnel to be built in the Straits of Mackinac would be an unprecedented experiment that endangers the Great Lakes, one of the most sensitive ecosystems in the world. USACE has failed to fully consider all of the following issues as part of its duty under NEPA to protect our natural resources for the public good and benefit.

I. USACE narrowed alternatives analysis fails to include analysis of reasonable alternative methods and locations for transport of oil currently routed through Line 5.

II. Indirect, cumulative, and connected impacts of this project, including climate impacts and related projects along the path of Line 5 were not fully considered, resulting in segmentation of the analysis.

III. USACE failed to thoroughly review the complex geological and hydrogeological conditions in the Straits of Mackinac and require Enbridge to remedy the inadequacy of existing geotechnical studies.

V. USACE failed to thoroughly evaluate the risk of explosion both during construction and during operation once construction is completed.

VI. USACE’s signaled approval fails to consider the full history of environmental and safety violations committed by Enbridge as it considers potential environmental impacts of the project.

Conclusion: USACE Must Reject This Dangerous and Unneeded Proposal

The Great Lakes are not a testing ground for corporate experiments. Enbridge’s proposal is a reckless gamble with 20% of the planet’s freshwater, and USACE’s truncated review greenlights it without the honest scrutiny required. There is no ‘energy emergency’ justifying this risk, but we do face a climate emergency that demands an end to expansions to dangerous fossil fuel infrastructure, like Line 5. USACE must:

-Reject the current EIS as legally and scientifically indefensible.

-Expand the review to fully analyze alternatives, climate impacts, and risks during construction and operation.

-Honor and protect Tribal Treaty rights, avoid the destruction of cultural resources including resting relatives, and avoid the desecration of an Anishinaabe sacred space by rejecting the Line 5 Tunnel Project.

The stakes could not be higher. If USACE refuses to act, it will be complicit in the potential destruction of the Great Lakes and the communities that depend on them.