Line 5 Tunnel EIS
16501 Shady Grove Road
P.O. Box 10178
Gaithersburg, MD 20898
Subject: Stop Enbridge reroute project and shut down Line 5 — Line 5 Tunnel Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement
To USACE Chief of Engineers and Commanding General Lieutenant General William H. Graham, Jr., USACE Great Lakes and Ohio River Division Commanding General Major General Mark C. Quander, and USACE Detroit District Lieutenant Colonel Wallace W. Bandeff:
I’m writing about the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 tunnel project. Given the concerns this project poses, the Corps should ultimately reject this project and work to shut down Line 5.
“As we peer into society’s future, we—you and I, and our government—must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”
— Dwight D. Eisenhower
Approving this project would needlessly jeopardize Tribal rights, irreplaceable watersheds, communities across the Great Lakes region, and the broader global community through the impacts of climate change just to maximize the profits of a multibillion-dollar oil conglomerate.
A federal judge has found that Line 5 has been illegally trespassing on the Bad River Band reservation since 2013 and ordered a shut down by June of 2026. This decision must be acknowledged in the Corps’ analysis of the public interest and the purpose and need of the project. Shutting down Line 5 is a reasonable alternative to permitting the re-route, and the Corps cannot ignore information that supports a shut down.
“Our duty to the whole, including to the unborn generations, bids us to restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations. The movement for the conservation of wildlife and the larger movement for the conservation of all our natural resources are essentially democratic in spirit, purpose and method.”
— Theodore Roosevelt
Enbridge’s track record indicates that they cannot be trusted. Their construction of Line 3 in Minnesota caused enormous damage through frac-outs and aquifer breaches, which caused nearly 300 million gallons of groundwater to flow to the surface, incurring fines and a criminal charge for Enbridge. They have proposed the same process for the reroute, and we cannot risk the damage that will likely occur to safe drinking water and water-dependent ecosystems.
The oil Line 5 carries already exacerbates the climate crisis, causing untold damage.
“The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children.”
— Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Given these concerns, I urge you to stop this project and decommission Line 5.
Thank you for your consideration of my comments. Please do NOT add my name to your mailing list. I will learn about future developments on this issue from other sources.
Sincerely,
Christopher Lish
San Rafael, CA
The Enbridge corporation has never filled me with confidence. Neither has their subsidiary that is now aggressively pushing for a tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac. I will tell you why:
**Enbridge has done a vastly insufficient number of rock core samples along the projected route for their tunnel. The core samples were shallow. The industry standard is to do a core sample every 50 to 200 feet. By its own report, Enbridge did not do that. Even Enbridge had to admit that their core samples found 25% of the rock beneath the Straits to be very poor (0 on a scale of 0 – 100) and another 25% to be poor (<25 on a scale of 0 – 100). Their personnel are taking significant shortcuts and hoping naively for the best.
**It was an undetected methane leak that caused the massive explosion beneath the Lake Huron bed in 1971 that killed 22 skilled workers. Methane has been detected in groundwater in the Straits region; Enbridge has chosen to not recognize that.
**Enbridge has disregarded the original plan by Dynamic Risk, a company they hired in Calgary. The Dynamic Risk plan requires the tunnel to have a sealed annulus. Enbridge independently and significantly modified what the Dynamic Risk company proposed and now wants to completely skip the cement, have an air space and make the diameter much bigger at 21 feet. Neither Enbridge nor Dynamic Risk have tunnel engineers on staff. From what I’ve heard in Marquette, they’ve even offered to the company “Peninsula Fiber Network” the option of running their fiber-optics through the tunnel. It’s anyone’s guess who else they are inviting to share costs and space with them. Not very bright.
**Enbridge contractors severely damaged their own pipeline supports in 2019 but failed to detect it until 2020. When Line 6B spilled into the Talmadge Creek and thus into the Kalamazoo River in 2010, the controllers in Calgary, Alberta were clueless – the company shows repeatedly that it doesn’t know how to handle emergencies. Just a couple weeks before the Kalamazoo area spill, Enbridge executives testifying before Congress insisted that they would know within 10 minutes if a spill had occurred and would shut it down immediately. What actually happened is that it ran for 17+ hours and it wasn’t until someone near Marshall, Michigan called Calgary and told them their pipeline was leaking that the controllers shut it down.
**Enbridge has no fire plan for this tunnel. Their stated plan is to “seal both ends” and “let it burn itself out.” They give no thought to the damage and destruction this would cause to the lakebed and quite potentially the water. So reckless. Also, a total disregard for the fishing rights of the state’s tribes.
**If Enbridge was hiring the same engineers who built the Eurostar Chunnel beneath the English Channel, I would be confident in the plan. But with the companies Enbridge has hired to drill and explode indeterminate rock geology under 295 feet of water, I am not confident. They have settled on two companies without proven safety records at completing an oil tunnel. There is a reason 99% of the world’s oil tunnels are not flowing through tunnels – the risk is too great.
**Enbridge uses the scare tactic of telling Michiganders that we can’t do without Line 5 to heat our homes in the winter. Trust me – we don’t need it. Upper Peninsula propane providers care about their local customers and have contingency plans in place. Ferrellgas has already assured their customers of this fact. In fact, if the Enbridge Corporation were truly interested in supplying U.P. residents, they could send the required amount to their facility in Rapid River near Escanaba, Michigan – no more, no less. This would be only 1300 barrels per day.
**This tunnel project has not undergone a full environmental review, including its impacts on climate and public health. The risks are too high. I ask that you pause the fast-tracking of this project and require Enbridge to prove within a shadow of a doubt that they know what they are doing. The risks otherwise are too great!
I am a concerned citizen of Michigan and value the Great Lakes and Straits of Mackinac far too much to allow preventable damage to occur. I ask that you deny the Enbridge plan.
Thank you for your time,
Jeanne Sekely
Marquette
“They assumed very good rock conditions, they assumed minimal groundwater inflow, they assumed no toxic gases or methane. Most importantly they assumed that the tunnel annulus, which is the space between the pipeline and tunnel wall, be completely filled or backfilled with concrete … none of those conditions came true…. They didn’t do nearly enough borings, they didn’t go nearly deep enough, and they didn’t take the samples where they should have. And despite all of those deficiencies in their study they came back—and the report is open to the public—the rock quality is extremely poor to very poor quality. They grade rocks from 0-100%. 25% of the rock was a zero …This is the worst rock I’ve ever seen anyone think about putting a tunnel in… because the rock is so bad it doesn’t behave like rock, it behaves more like gravel.”
I realize that there is a market for the petroleum products the tunnel would provide. I remain unconvinced, however, that the benefits in any way outweigh the dangers. This would be a terrible place for an accident to take place and Enbridge has a problematic record. Please do not allow the Line 5 Tunnel to proceed. As a proud Michigander, I highly value our Great Lakes, not only for their economic benefits (which are enormous) but for the life they support and the pleasure they give both locals and visitors.
Thank you
As a tribal citizen of Northwest lower peninsula of Michigan, I am greatly concerned about the continued use of the aging line 5 pipeline and also the proposed tunnel. The environmental impact on the land, water and all life is huge and the region is at risk. The benefits are small and the danger is great!
We depend on the water for so much, and it needs to be honored and protected for the present and future generations. The permit for the tunnel must not be given. In regards to the aging line 5 pipeline it must be decommissioned. We need to move forward with a healthier ,better vision,and action for the future generations!
George Brewbaker