Supplemental Draft EIS Comments

Enbridge must go before any more destruction, threats or contamination of our lands and waters. HDD in the Straits is both unnecessary and destructive and involves seizure of and wide swaths of park and public lands for experimental drilling to fuel the short- term profit of a couple of Enbridge conglomeration subsidiaries without any responsibility for short or long-term harms caused or dangers threatened. Nothing in Enbridge's EIS gives any indication that they have a clue about what they are proposing. Here, on the Straits of Mackinac, preservation and restoration of 90% of North America's surface fresh water for us all requires closing Line 5 before further leakage or rupture. We stand with Bay Mills Indian Community President, Whitney Gravelle, "The Straits of Mackinaw are not just a waterway, they are the heart of creation for Anishinaabe people and a vital source of life for all who depend on the Great Lakes."

I’m writing to urge you to reject the latest proposal concerning the EIS for Line 5. Enbridge cannot do this drilling project safely, they’ve proven that with their Line 3 expansion. As a Michigan taxpayer, I don’t want my money on the line when this goes bad. I want no part of it.

Thank you for allowing us to take the time to comment on this issue.

It is recommended that we as commenters provide evidence, scientific information, to back up our perspectives. But I believe that USACE is fully aware of both the natural and economic resources at risk should Enbridge be allowed to continue to pump oil through this region. If not, I will note the economic and cultural impact to the rice fields and the Bad River Reservation's residents should there be a spill from this line. Likewise, the impact to urban communities via the fact that these waterways provide drinking water for many communities along the shores of these lakes. And finally, these waters are habitat for multiple at-risk species that will be devastated from any spills from this line.

The watersheds of the Great Lakes region are some of the most important (and cherished) in our country, and the fact we've allowed this type of damage to go on this long is a betrayal of US citizens and tribal nations. Therefore, I write to ask that Line 5 be decommissioned altogether to protect the many resources that are already critically at risk.

Thank you.

Enbridge can not safely preform HDD drilling in the straights of Mackinac. Enbridge’s line 3 expansion project demonstrates the company’s inability to properly conduct such a project.
This project is very risky. Michigan tax payers should not be forced to carry the risk for a foreign company.

My name is Jeremy Cronk. I am a high school science teacher with a degree in Earth Science and a Masters degree in science education. As a science educator, resident of Michigan, and person who greatly values the freshwater resources found in the Great Lakes, I urge you to reject all iterations of the Line 5 project. Whether tunnel, borehole, or exposed pipe on the bottom of the straits, every scenario both poses immense risk to the largest continuous bodies of freshwater on Earth. It also locks us into decades further dependence on carbon emitting hydrocarbon fuels that EVERY SINGLE climate scientist and engineer are telling us we need to scale down.

There is no scenario where the pros outweigh the cons of continued operation of Line 5. Please reject all permits that would allow continued operation of Line 5.

Dear US Army Corps of Engineers,

I am deeply concerned about the future of Line 5. I was surprised to hear several weeks ago that the Army Corp added a Supplemental EIS for the Line 5 replacement project, looking at Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) as an alternative to the tunnel.

HDD is a hazardous process – one that Enbridge said was not feasible for this location when this EIS process started. While they claim it may be “possible” now with newer technology, that does not mean it’s a safe bet.

“Frac outs” are common with Horizontal Directional Drilling. Enbridge has admitted that it is a “common risk associated with the HDD method.”

Look at the construction impacts from Enbridge’s build out of Line 3 in Minnesota:

• At least 28 frac outs
• Drilling fluid released at 12 river crossings
• Four confirmed aquifer breaches

The same thing could very well happen in Michigan, under the Straits of Mackinac no less. According to the Supplemental EIS:

• There are groundwater aquifers underlying this region.
• When drilling through bedrock with HDD, there is potential for the equipment to encounter, breach, and potentially impact groundwater aquifers. If an artesian aquifer is breached, it can result in the mixing of previously confined groundwater, causing long-term changes to groundwater quality and characteristics.
• HDD drilling could cause unintended releases of drilling fluids into adjacent groundwater resources
• Conditions that make inadvertent fluid losses more likely include permeable soils or fractures/fissures in bedrock. In the limited geotechnical data available (from the tunnel), fractured and variable geologic conditions have been identified, indicating it’s most likely permeable in places. (No geotechnical data has been collected for the HDD method.)

The risks outlined here are not just possible, they are probable. Maybe even inevitable. Why are we willing to gamble with 84% of North America’s fresh surface water, about 21% of the world’s total surface freshwater, and drinking water to more than 40 million people?

The bottom line is that neither a tunnel nor a new pipeline installed using HDD is safe – especially given the location in the heart of the Great Lakes. Why would we risk this in such an ecologically sensitive area? The only safe option here is to decommission Line 5.

I urge the Army Corp to deny Enbridge’s permit request.

Thank you for your time.

Julie Geisinger
Birmingham, MI

As a concerned resident of Michigan and citizen of the United States, I am submitting comments on the Supplemental Draft U.S. ACE EIS for the proposed Enbridge Line 5 Tunnel Project under the Straits of Mackinac. While there are many concerns, I am commenting on: A) the suspicious nature of this Supplemental Draft EIS, including the inadequate public notice and comment period USACE has provided for it, and B) the USACE approach to Incomplete and Unavailable Information (Section 3.1.4). Based on the discussion below, I conclude that the ACE has acted improperly and without transparency.

There is, in fact, no reasonable alternative to the current Line 5 pipelines under the Straits, and the USACE should immediately deny the permit application. Additionally, the applicant should be required to shut down and decommission the existing pipelines currently posing an untenable risk to human, aquatic and other ecological systems health of the region, and to the more than 1.3 million jobs directly tied to the Great Lakes.

Issues with the draft EIS:
A) Suspicious nature of this Supplemental Draft EIS: Since this document was published by the USACE, the applicant has publicly stated that its intent remains the construction of the tunnel as proposed. Additionally, Appendix F clearly states that the HDD alternative “is not proposed by the Applicant.” Why, then, did the applicant submit additional information supporting the technical feasibility of HDD installation after the May 2025 Draft EIS, prompting USACE to develop and offer this Supplemental Draft EIS? The opaqueness around the origin/impetus for this action raises questions about the relationship between the applicant and USACE, contaminating this process. USACE should immediately release all communications between itself and the applicant regarding the HDD installation alternative.

Inadequate notice and comment period: The USACE did not announce the Supplemental Draft EIS until November 12, 2025, with a revised version on November 14, 2025. And with the comment period closing on December 5, the public has had only three (3) weeks to review this document. Nor did ACE fully notify the public, including conducting usual notice to media outlets. This comment timeline is wholly inadequate for analyzing a new technique in the Straits. Disadvantaging the public in this way further draws into question USACE’s process and transparency.

B) USACE’s approach to Incomplete and Unavailable Information (Section 3.1.4): It bears repeating that the USACE has provided insufficient time for the public to reasonably evaluate impact and effects of the HDD installation alternative presented in this Supplemental Draft EIS.

The Supplemental Draft EIS states directly that there is an absence of critical design and specific location data, and that analysis of effects of the HDD installation alternative utilizes essentially insufficient baseline data. As a result, consideration of this alternative requires assumptions and interpretations that, very likely, could yield unfounded determinations in this EIS. USACE should withdraw consideration of the HDD installation alternative immediately.

In closing, the USACE is acting irresponsibly in both process and content with this Supplemental Draft EIS, potentially imperiling the Great Lakes’ incipient and adjacent ecosystems and all other impacted parties.

* Line 5, especially under the Straits of Mackinac, is a disaster about to happen and must be closed.
* At a time of increasing environmental disasters, hurricanes, excessive heat, flooding, resulting from increased carbon dioxide and other emissions into the atmosphere,
* I am amazed that anyone would seriously think of spending billions to preserve line 5 instead of pressing even harder for safe, nonnuclear energy.
* Elmbridge's new proposal of HDD is not a solution, but a move that does nothing but exacerbate the crisis to say nothing of the environmental destruction resulting from this Horizontal Drilling Disaster.

If this line five ruptured it would be devastating to not only the ecosystem but to tourism, recreational boating and fishing, tribal commercial fishing, water consumption and swimming not to mention the bottomlands in the Straits of Mackinac have not been ceded by Native Americans. Verticle boring beneath one of the largest sources of fresh water in the world over a distsncr of five miles is ludicrous and the existing line five is a out 25 years past its life expectancy. In recent years some of the supports for line five deteriorated le as ving the pipe line laying on the lake bed
, when discovered they lifted the pipeline and installed new supports. My question is how much stress was placed on the joints of the oil / gas pipeline. Michigan benefits very little from Enbridges line five ! I would der what their profit is on the million glo s if oil that travels through line five every day. We g ave t even touched on how tumultuous the currents in the Straitsof Mackinac are and under the cover of ice they are even more violent ! How do we clean up after a rupture when the Straits are frozen. Even if E bridge had insurance Michigan residents would still be on the hook for in excess of 3 billion dollars.