Posted Draft EIS Comments

Please find the attached letter that details our energetic support of this well-conceived project.

I support shutting down line 5 work and removing the pipeline from the bottom of the straights as soon as safely possible. It is inconceivable to me that such a project is allowed in such a sensitive area. The water quality of the Great Lakes is far more important than whatever benefits the pipeline may offer for the transport of this oil.

The Line 5 pipeline should just be shut down with no replacement tunnels. Enbridge and the Army Corps overstate the economic importance of the pipeline. Court documents show an Enbridge consultant said a Line 5 shutdown would raise gas prices by a half-cent per gallon. The environmental risks are just not worth it, and climate change demands that we keep pressing to reduce our use of fossil fuels. This is an opportunity to do just that by shutting down the Line 5 pipeline.

As a past oil regulatory geologist with the Michigan Geological Survey who also owned a geological consulting firm specializing in mapping and boring Niagaran Age limestone and dolomite such as the Mackinac Breccia Formation and associated collapsed Pointe Aux Chenes Formation, please heed the following grave concerns with allowing the "tunnel" to transport hydrocarbons under the Straits of Mackinac. By their very nature, "brecciated" rock formations are in fact fractured, broken and deformed by geological processes, including faulting, volcanic activity, and sedimentary compaction. It's reckless to assume that the re-calcification of the fabric the brecciathat formation and resulting collapse of the Pointe Aux Chenes has "geologic integrity". Some of the worst groundwater and surface water contamination in recent decades have resulted in blind assumptions on the integrity of rock formations known to be fractured and karst. And that is the case with this project.

The public trust demands that you protect the most valuable natural resource of the Great Lakes and their ecosystems by denying building of the tunnel plus removal of the outdated and hazardous line laying on the bottom of Lake Michigan. If you're unsure, simply go through several "risk-reward" ratios and hopefully you'll see that rewarding the monetary pocket of Canadian corporations in the relative short term cannot begin to outweigh the long term risk of damaging the surface, ground water, and Great Lakes ecosystems of "Pure Michigan'

I fully support the Line 5 Tunnel Project underneath the bedrock of The Straits of Mackinaw! This project is a win-win situation and a no-brainer. Dig Baby Dig!

MEG Letter of Comment on USACE DEIS for GLTP6.13.25

I've attached my concerns relating to the EIS for the Line 5 Tunnel. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input.

As a resident of Kalamazoo Michigan I have seen first hand the way Enbridge maintains current lines and it was a dismal experience to say the least. They have not acted in good faith in the past and I see no reason why that behavior would change. The current line 5 needs to be removed and not buried. A tunnel is not a sound alternative due to the geology in that area.