Posted Draft EIS Comments

Thank you for working to ensure protection and safety of Michigan citizens, the Mackinac Straits, Lakes Michigan and Huron. My concerns about the Enbridge Energy proposed tunnel through the Mackinac Straits include safety issues surrounding methane pockets and leaks that could cause explosions during tunnel construction and transport of oil and gas through the Line 5 pipelines, commitment of Enbridge to build a $1-2 billion dollar tunnel they may only use 11 – 12 years based on Enbridge’s proposed pipeline depreciation schedule, the possibility of Michigan being hampered by a stranded asset, and Enbridge’s maintenance and safety record, to date, and oil and gas contamination of a large portion of the Great Lakes causing catastrophic human and environmental health impacts. Enbridge has acceptable pipeline capacity and could eliminate the tunnel construction project and Line 5 and utilize residual capacity in their pipeline system, according to the extensive report by Environmental Defense Canada.
Enbridge Energy filed papers with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission claiming they plan to depreciate all their pipelines within 20 years. This allows Enbridge to charge a cost-of-service toll to investors which increases the fuel price within the pipeline. The tunnel, at the earliest if all goes perfectly, would be completed in 2028 – 29, meaning the 99-year-old tunnel would be used for about 11 years, leaving the State of MI to decommission the tunnel and pipelines. Will Enbridge invest 1- 2 billion dollars in a tunnel they plan to utilize for a short time? The pipeline tunnel would be a stranded asset costing the State of Michigan taxpayers millions to maintain.
Brian O’Mara, Director, Industrial and Power Sector Remediation Solutions at Lone Wolf Resources, LLC, an environmental engineer with decades of tunnel and pipeline construction and maintenance experience, said the poor quality of the bedrock (beneath the Mackinac Straits) will make completing the tunnel challenging. He suggested that it is possible an explosion or fire would put workers at risk and many thousands of gallons of natural-gas liquids could be released into the Great Lakes. It should be noted that in 1971 22 men were killed and nine injured in an explosion inside a Lake Huron water intake tunnel owned by the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department. A spark ignited an unseen cloud of methane gas, creating an explosion that caused a massive shock wave to travel the length of the tunnel. O’Mara suggested that the risks of explosion and fire could be alleviated by filling the tunnel with concrete around the pipeline. This was the original tunnel design proposed to the Snyder administration, but Enbridge has since altered the design.

Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) Staff Witness Travis Warner summarized the Alternatives Analysis (Line 5 Tunnel project) by “testifying that “the risks associated with the potential for a release of Line 5 products to enter the waters of the Great Lakes from a Straits tunnel crossing based on the current design, as proposed, is negligible, and un-quantifiably low.” (Warner Testimony at 22:12-16).

Richard B. Kuprewicz, president of Accufacts, Inc. pipeline regulatory advisor, incident investigator, and expert witness on matters related to gas and liquid pipeline siting, design, operation, maintenance, risk analysis, and management testified on behalf of Bay Mills Indian Community that the tunnel does not negate the risks of an explosion and release of oil and gas into the Straits. Mr. Kuprewicz is an engineer with substantial experience with oil and gas pipelines. He testified in opposition to the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority (paid for by MI taxpayers but working directly with Enbridge). Enbridge attempted to have Mr. Kuprewicz testimony withheld from the court in the Nessel (on behalf of the State of MI) vs. Enbridge suit but luckily this was denied.

The case, Nessel vs. Enbridge Energy has been mired in litigation. Hopefully, the Michigan courts will follow the law and allow Michigan to protect the Great Lakes and Michigan citizens.

With gratitude for the work you do,
Sue Holcombe

I support line 5. Energy is vital for the USA from home use to national defense.

Please approve this project as it will not only protect the great lakes but also give Michigan its needed fuel to keep our homes heated and industry working. Using 8 acres of land is not a problem.

I have complete faith that this Line 5 is safe and functional. We need it here. Thank you all for doing a commendable service to our state.
I have zero complaints.

I support the Line 5 Tunnel Project. It is a good, safe plan. The plan will benefit the people of Michigan and the US. We will have a more secure oil supply and hopefully less expensive fuel which will boost the entirety of our economy. This progress has been stalled long enough.
Thank you kindly.

I strongly urge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to reject the proposed Line 5 tunnel project. This project has not undergone a comprehensive risk assessment, despite posing grave risks to the Great Lakes, our climate, and public safety. The tunnel would not eliminate the spill threat from the aging pipeline, and an oil spill in this region would be catastrophic – threatening drinking water for 40 million people, harming wildlife, and jeopardizing Michigan’s economy, which depends on the Great Lakes for over 1.3 million jobs and $82 billion in wages. Tunnel and safety experts have raised serious concerns about the logistics and worker risks of boring beneath the lakebed, calling the project technically challenging and dangerous. The DEIS acknowledges ecological damage – including wetland loss, endangered species impacts, noise, and contamination – yet fails to fully evaluate greenhouse gas emissions or health impacts, locking us into decades more of fossil fuel use at a time of worsening climate and public health crises. The so-called “energy emergency” used to justify the rushed review is politically motivated and should not override public input or environmental protections. At least seven Tribal Nations have suspended consultation due to failure to uphold treaty rights or consider alternatives like pipeline decommissioning. Approving this project before those concerns and legal processes are resolved would be premature, unjustified, and harmful to future generations.

When are we finally going to learn that Mother Nature matters more than greed? Our fresh water and the wildlife and people that count on it SHOULD have more value in the decision making than the fossil fuel industry. A complete environmental review is needed. Our water is special, please do the right thing and not put it at risk. We do not need Line 5!
Thank you