Posted Draft EIS Comments

I strongly oppose the Line 5 tunnel project.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tribal nations and Indigenous communities have not been meaningfully consulted. Their rights, treaties, and voices must be honored.
As a lifelong Michigan resident I know that our Great Lakes are too precious of a resource to risk oil spills and contamination. Our wildlife, farming, and local economies depend on our clean water. Lining the pockets of big oil companies is not worth destroying our beautiful Great Lakes. I strongly urge you to reconsider this proposal.

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.