Posted Draft EIS Comments

Hello,
I am a concerned citizen who feels that the study for the Line 5 tunnel has been rushed and I cannot support it. It puts our Great Lakes at risk and I propose that further study is done to assess the potential damage that the line 5 tunnel can cause.

With the Great Lakes holding a significant portion of the world’s fresh water, it is absolutely necessary that more time is spent on the EIS. Any problems caused by the line 5 tunnel WILL affect the drinking water of millions, and that is not a risk that we can take.

After researching the history of Enbridge and previous spills from their pipelines, I am just sick to think about them being allowed to continue to route oil through the Great Lakes. The pipeline through the Straits just needs to be shut down. Enbridge can afford to transport their products by rail. And why would Michigan and surrounding communities agree to risk environmental devastation from a Canadian company anyway. Please don’t permit this tunnel to go through. Our Great Lakes and water are sacred, and should be protected from profit driven corporations. Thank you.

Opposed to the pipeline project. Too dangerous for our freshwater resources. Leave the oil where it is and decommission the existing pipeline.

Dear Army Corps of Engineering – Detroit Office,

After reading the EIS statement thoroughly, it is clear that if any of the listed options are chosen, there will be significant impacts and risks to the Great Lakes eco-system, people, and the world.

I find it baffling that the option for fully decomissioning the pipeline with no replacement is not listed in the EIS. The pipeline has been operating illegally without a permit from the state of Michigan, clearly demonstrating that the people (represented by the government) do not wish for this pipeline to continue. Decommisioning the pipeline with no replacement is the only option that safeguards the world’s largest freshwater system from contamination. In regards to the purpose and need, there has been no demonstrated need for neither the state of Michigan or Great Lakes facing states for this pipeline to be continued. The propane deliveries to the UP could easily be achieved by maintaining the pipeline through the UP or switching to truck/rail based transport for this small amount, in contrast to the incredible amounts of resources it would take to even complete the tunnel.

If any of the EIS-listed options are enacted, I still do not see sufficient oil spill action plans outlined that prevent irreversable damage to the environment, fresh-water systems, and local communities. How does the applicant (Enbridge) plan to address the following situations:
– Oil recovery in the event of a spill when transporting heavy (tar-sands) crude. Which would sink to the floor of the straits and be quickly dispersed by currents?
– Oil spill containment during the winter months where the lake surface is fully/partially ice covered?
– Financial impacts of a spill on tourism, water-based, and fishing industries?
– The risks to local populations and indigenous groups, which often experience missing or murdered women or children when large “work-camps” of construction crews are housed for long periods of time.
– The climate impacts of tunnel construction / pipeline continuation and tar-sands oil extraction/use in the decades to come. We are already beyond climate tipping points, and investing in further oil-based infrastructure indirectly causes damage for communities across the world through increased extreme weather events and displacement, often to those who have contributed the least to this crisis.

The people of Michigan have spoken through the first round of comments and through our state government. This is not a pipeline or tunnel that benefits any parties except for non-national entities. It would be deeply disturbing to have the will of a foreign for-profit corporation prioritized over US citizens that the government has the duty to protect.

Please take these considerations seriously. The only real option which avoids risking this precious resource is to decommission Line 5 at the Straits of Mackinac with no replacement and no tunnel.

Sincerely,

Ryan Werdon
Minneapolis MN / Eckerman MI

As a Climate Justice Organizer, it is my responsibility to advocate for the quality of air, water and quality of life for my community. As a lifelong Michigan resident, it is my (our) duty to respect, protect and honor our Great Lakes. Some would say we have the whole world in our hands, and as our climate continues to change, our resources continue to deplete and our safety seems under attack, that seems more and more true every day. The supposed “energy emergency” being used to justify fast-tracking this project is false and politically motivated, and should not override public safety and environmental protections. It is a direct threat to the American people.

Despite undeniable evidence of the urgent need to transition to clean energy and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the USACE’s decision failed to align with Michigan’s public policy goals and meet the legal requirements of the Michigan Environmental Protection Act (MEPA). This project endangers our natural resources, undermines climate action, and puts the Great Lakes at unnecessary risk of catastrophic damage. This project also has not undergone a full environmental review, including its impacts on climate and public health. That is unacceptable.

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. Many communities also share concerns about the construction impacting the ecosystem, local businesses, as well as man camps which are proven to increase crime and violence against women and children.

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. The construction of this tunnel threatens the climate progress that our communities have fought so hard to accomplish. Michigan has committed to ambitious clean energy goals, including achieving 100% clean energy by 2040. Approving new fossil fuel infrastructure directly contradicts these commitments.

Keeping fossil fuel infrastructure in a highly sensitive area poses concerns, shared by residents and folks regionally who have been impacted by Enbridge’s spills in the past. 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.

Tribal nations and Indigenous communities have not been meaningfully consulted. This construction continues to perpetuate generational harm while threatening the safety of Anishinabek fishing grounds. Their rights, treaties, and voices must be honored.

As stewards of one of the world’s most precious freshwater resources, Michigan is responsible for leading by example. Together, we must prioritize a safe, sustainable, and equitable future for all. This approval is a violation of state policy and endangers our ecosystem. USACE must uphold responsibility to protect our nation’s people and environment by upholding the highest standard and following a code of honor. Please, protect the American people and pause all approvals until a full environmental review is completed, including climate and public health impacts.

USACE has failed to adequately analyze the risk that a collapse of the tunnel during construction could have on the safe operation of Line 5.

The risk of a collapse to the safe operation of Line 5 warrants an alternative by which Line 5 would be shut down during high risk tunnel construction activities.

I am against Pipeline 5 because of its mega impact on our natural resources including our natural forests, our Great Lakes, and the environmental impact on us and the wildlife that live here.