Posted Draft EIS Comments

As a taxpaying. voting citizen of the Western UP, I object to the continuance of Line5 through the Straits of Mackinac for all the impacrts listed above, but mostly for the significant threat of pollution to the water, air and land, to wildlife, fish, birds, turtles and not least of all, people. Take out the existing pipe and don't replace it!!

We don't want it and we don't need it! The fresh water of our Great Lakes is more valuable than gas and oil. Save this valuable water source for future generations and respect Treay rights. Be safe; don't pollute. Close down Line5 now!!

I am writing to express my concern about the continued use of line 5. Pipelines that cross water carry immense risk. A leak would be catastrophic for Michiganders and the amazing place we call home. Pipelines do leak and line 5 is in poor repair. With the pipeline flowing under our Great Lakes, this puts a major fresh water resource and source of tourism at risk. Shut down line 5. We need to find clean energy solutions.

Line 5 is too risky for the Great Lakes. Only 2% of all fresh water is available for human use. Putting oil through such a precious resource is foolhardy. Bowing to economic interests as we have done for the past 100 years has created the climate crisis. Bowing to the whim of Big Energy by gambling our life blood is inexcusable. We vowed to allow our indigenous brothers and sisters the use of their land. The Great Lakes are not only their Land, but represent their spiritual faith and beliefs. I can hardly imagine the tantrum that would be thrown if someone threatened one of the "major" religions in such a way. But, because we have dominated, stolen, killed, raped, pillaged, and displaced to gain this water- we have the right to continue to risk it? Shameful. Also does not align with the tenets prescribed by any of the "major" religions- honesty, faithfulness, being a good steward, being a good neighbor. Choose to do better. Choose to make a future that is not enslaved to big energy. Choose better for Michigan. Choose better for our future.

Proposed Line 5 tunnel is deeply flawed and must be rejected because it fails in the following ways:

Fails to analyze viable alternatives to the tunnel route.

Fails to Consider cumulative climate impacts.

Fails to Account for geologic and explosion risks.

Fails to Evaluate track record of spills and violations.

Finally, This oil tunnel would be a reckless experiment beneath the Great Lakes, putting more than 20% of the world’s fresh surface water and Tribal rights at risk. Send the Army Corps of Engineers a message that the Great Lakes are no place for a fossil fuel gamble.

As a Michigan resident, I am not in favor of the Line 5 Tunnel.

As a Michigan resident I am concerned about several areas of the Enbridge application.
1. The Line 5 tunnel project has not undergone a comprehensive risk assessment, which is crucial for a project that poses risks to the Great Lakes, our climate, and our future.
2. Many tunnel experts who have reviewed Enbridge's plans share concerns for the logistics of placing a tunnel under the lakebed, considering it to be complicated, dangerous, and technically challenging. Experts also share concerns for the workers who are subjected to the dangerous pipeline construction and operations.
3. The supposed "energy emergency" used to justify fast-tracking this project is false and politically motivated, and should not override public safety and environmental protections. We the people do not believe there is justification for an "energy emergency"
4. An oil spill in the Great Lakes would be catastrophic for drinking water, wildlife, and Michigan’s economy. More than 1.3 million jobs, equating to $82 billion in wages, are directly tied to the Great Lakes.
5. Approving this tunnel locks us into decades of fossil fuel dependency, exacerbating the climate and public health crises; it must be thoroughly assessed for its greenhouse gas emissions and health impacts before proceeding.
6. Tribal nations and Indigenous communities have not been meaningfully consulted. Their rights, treaties, and voices must be honored.

The tunnel is not needed, the line should be shut down and the water resources protected.

It's difficult to convey in words the severity of this pipeline. As a people on this Earth we have been at a crossroads for quite some time where we have put practices that endanger the safety of the planet and by extension ourselves at risk. While I hear the concerns for jobs and economy, we cannot have an economy when the place within which you live is at risk of incomprehensible destruction at any point in time. I am hurt to the core that those purporting the economic and energy argument can be okay with the hundreds of spills that have taken place over multiple pipelines across our nation yet still claim this is safer than other methods to deliver this crude oil. The nature of the pipeline is a direct reflection of our own nature which appears to be a failure to listen to how our use of energy is harming us and our winged/standing/aquatic relations. I drove across the Mighty Mack just this past week and since learning of the precarious nature of the pipeline, hold my breath with each passing I've made over the years. Let the Great Lakes not be another body of water poisoned to realize that we cannot eat money and that indeed harming our waterways ends up costing us more financially and in innumerable other ways.

Regarding the Line 5 tunnel project, as a Michigander and American, I demand a pause all approvals until a full environmental review is completed—including assessments of climate impacts, Indigenous rights, and publichealth. The artificially rushed environmental evaluation has left major concerns about the impact of even a 'small' oil spill into our most prescious fresh water and the risks of constructing a tunnel unaddressed. As a professional with decades of quality assurance experience, it's clear that building the tunnel is a flawed parallel process to address an aging and risky pipeline. It is shockingly irresponsible to move forward either with continuing to use the line at all or attempting to encase it in a tunnel. The tunnel plan, in and of itself, is confirmation that Enbridge recognizes an imminent risk of pipe failure and yet chooses financial gain over environmental and professional responsibility. The Great Lake States cannot be complicit in this inappropriate gamble .