Supplemental Draft EIS Comments

I am against line 5 and feel as though it would directly negatively effect future generations, fresh water security, amongst many other good and valid reasons. Please stop

As a citizen of the United States, lifelong resident of Michigan, frequent visitor to the Tip of the Mitt (Lower Peninsula), and respecter of tribal treaty rights, I have deep and abiding interest in the preservation of the cultural, environmental, economic, and social benefits provided by the waters of the Straits of Mackinac and the land and ecosystems associated with them to all the people of the Great Lakes.

Enbridge Energy’s Line 5 presents a grave threat to the integrity of this entire region, currently at risk of catastrophic and irreversible harm should a major rupture of Line 5 occur underwater. For the past five years, since Governor Whitmer revoked the easement authorizing Enbridge to operate the dual pipelines currently conveying over 20 million gallons of fossil fuel products daily across the Straits, the pipeline company has fought to continue operating the pipeline despite the near-misses we have already experienced from a poorly-maintained system that is long past its expected service life.

Concurrently, ever since the deal reached at the end of 2018 between outgoing Michigan Governor Snyder and Enbridge Energy, proposals related to the construction of some sort of alternative method of conveyance of fossil fuel products across the Straits of Mackinac have been subject to review by many public agencies, including the US ACE, that are allegedly empowered to protect the public’s interest on a variety of grounds.

Now you, the US ACE, are presenting a new alternative, one that Enbridge itself rejected as implausible and impractical several years ago.

I must concur with the observations of experts in the field who argue that this whole deal smells fishy, and not in an appetizing way.

The EIS review process for the tunnel was already compromised due to its artificially-restricted scope. This new proposal offers no substantial reassurance that the review of this alternative design (using horizontal directional drilling to create a borehole for the pipeline) will proceed in a conscientious manner, given the haste with which the whole process is unfolding. There’s been insufficient notice, inadequate time for response, and incomplete information provided to us.

If there were genuine benefits to be had from either the original tunnel proposal or this last-minute suggestion, objections from the general public, hydrologists, ecologists, recreational users of the Straits, and–most importantly, given the history of the region–the Tribal nations seeking to uphold their treaty rights to hunt and fish would not have continued and indeed increased in these intervening years.

The ongoing attempt to legitimize any alternative method of transmitting massive quantities of fossil fuel products across the precious and unique Straits of Mackinac defies common sense. It ignores the inexorable consequences of maintaining an energy system relying almost entirely on the burning of fossil fuels. It violates treaty rights that should take priority over these decisions. It dodges accountability for the ongoing risk presented by the daily operation of the dual pipelines in their current state. It ignores the inexorable consequences of maintaining an energy system relying almost entirely on the burning of fossil fuels. Approval of expensive and unproven infrastructure of any sort to perpetuate this system is a waste of time, money, and resources that should be devoted instead to shutting down Line 5 permanently. I urge rejection of this alternative.

I firmly oppose this pipeline. It will devastate Michigan's ecosystem and indigenous land. We need to look into fossil fuel alternatives instead. Let's protect the future of our children!

As a 79-year summer resident on the Straits of Mackinac, I am appalled that a new proposal by Enbridge for a tunnel to carry oil under the Great Lakes Enbridge is being considered. The company has no experience in this sort of construction. Too much is at stake to allow them to proceed. The clean water of the Great Lakes is a precious resource that would be threatened should an accident occur, along with the wildlife that depends on this environment. Moreover, the disruption of the lakebed would destroy valuable ancient man-made structures that were only recently discovered under the Straits, and that have religious significance for the indigenous peoples and scientific importance for anthropologists, who have not had time to study them. This tunnnel—and the pipeline it is intended to replace—would not benefit the United States, only Canada, where it begins and ends. I think the current aged pipeline should be closed down and not replaced by either a tunnel or a pipeline. Let Enbridge build its pipeline or tunnel in Canada, across dry land. The risks to the Great Lakes are too great to allow the Enbridge proposal to be accepted.

Hello,

As a life long Michigan resident, I cherish our state’s abundant natural resources. I am writing to greatly oppose the line 5 tunnel for the extreme threat it would cause to the environment of the Great Lakes. A leak in this tunnel would also drastically negatively impact Great Lakes tourism, property values, and overall state revenue. I urge lawmakers to do everything in their power to stop the construction of this tunnel as it threatens life itself for our great state.

Sincerely,
Trevor Drost

Line 5 Tunnel EIS

The potential for a major ecological disaster. Is to risky. Especially from a company with a horrible maintenance record for it's equipment, making it even riskier.

The line 5 tunnel project should be abandoned.

As a person who lives near the Kalamazoo River, I have experienced firsthand the long term adverse effects of pipeline fissures. Our community has learned what it is to be paid off by a corporation that could never truly clean up its mess. Our watershed has been devastated, and our fishing and recreation has been forever changed. I cannot imagine putting our State's giant bodies of water at risk.

I am opposed to the Line 5 expansion. Instead, please invest in renewable energy sources.

It makes little to no sense to destroy sensitive environments while carrying oil from Canada into Michigan, to be used back in Canada. Fossil fuels are directly responsible for a significant portion of air and land pollution. Further, the prospective company to do the work was solely responsible for the Kalamazoo River oil spill. Please preserve Michigan's natural ecosystem.

The unknowns and risks to drilling under the straits are too great to chance. The straits are a migration path for a variety of waterfowl. They are a connection between the two peninsulas of our state ; all the resources available to Enbridge and our state and nation should be able to come up with a better alternative than the tunnel.