Supplemental Draft EIS Comments

I think the possibility of an oil spill in the largest source of fresh water in the world is insane. Make them go around the lakes. The way water moves in that area and the depth at which we are talking the spill would be out of control before we even knew it was happening. It's not worth risking this unique natural space for the current or future generations.

I oppose the drilling plan under the Straits of Mackinac. The company behind Line 5, Enbridge, has a history of drilling accidents and spills. If something goes wrong under the Straits, oil could spread quickly into two Great Lakes at once. And Michigan taxpayers — not the company — would be left with the damage. We need to protect the Great Lakes and abandon fossil fuels as opposed to hunting for oil.

Line 5 transports tar sands oil for processing in Whiting, Indiana, putting the LARGEST SOURCE OF SURFACE DRINKING WATER IN THE WORLD FOR MILLIONS AT RISK IN TWO CRITICAL GEOGRAPHIES. These are two immediate adjuncts to Lake Michigan that critically endanger this essential fresh water source: Line 5 under the Mackinaw Straits and Northwest Indiana’s Lake Michigan shoreline. WE KNOW OF HISTORICAL BREACHES. These high pressure long lines always experience links and this particular carbony rich dirty oil source is especially rife with dangers.

WE STRENUOUSLY OBJECT TO LINE 5.

After reading both original and final proposals for Line 5 Tunnel, I am firmly opposed to the new plan.

For slant drilling as for direct, highly porous limestone bedrock and underground karst still present challenges. Wide linear shoreline corridors are still needed for welding long pipe sections. Vegetation clearing and noise will still disturb the Headlands International Dark Sky Park. Any such operation will harm the biome of harm river and wetlands. The fact that tankers and algae are greater harms does not make these threats negligable

The company behind Line 5, Enbridge, has a history of drilling accidents and spills. Under the Straits an accident would spread toxic oil into two Great Lakes at once. Michigan taxpayers — not the company — would be left with the damage.

Insurance data provide only what premiums reflect—not impact to local communities’ long term well-being, not downstream costs for which developers are seldom held responsible. Benefits are premised on the idea that fossil fuels are critical—and there is still a lot of money to be made from them. Underwriters are willing to insure slant drilling operations at an affordable cost chiefly because those who will live with the results are unlikely to make claims.

Insurance data can provide only what premiums reflect—not impact to local communities’ long term well-being, not downstream costs for which developers are seldom held responsible. Benefits are premised on the idea that fossil fuels are critical—and there is still a lot of money to be made from them. Underwriters are willing to insure slant drilling operations at an affordable cost chiefly because those who will live with the results are unlikely to make claims.

Please think again, The Army Corps likes to pave and dig and drill and solve engineering problems, not to think of alternatives to their meddling.

The drilling plan under the Straits of Mackinac is risky, dangerous, and a straight up bate and switch that Enbridge should NOT be permitted to see through. For years, the government said it would only review a tunnel proposal and now they’re suddenly shifting to a new drilling plan instead. This change in direction makes it difficult for taxpayers and citizens to trust the government as well as its relationship with Enbridge.

Because Enbridge has a history of drilling accidents and spills, the taxpayers and citizens have a right to stand up against Enbridge's drilling and activity in our very precious Great Lakes. If something goes wrong under the Straits, oil could spread quickly into two Great Lakes at once. Michigan taxpayers — not the company — would be left with the damage. This is unethical and environmentally irresponsible.

As a citizen that lives near Lake Michigan I oppose drilling in the Straits of Mackinac.

Shutting down Line 5 is critical for the long-term ecological health of the Great Lakes because it removes a major spill risk from one of the most sensitive freshwater ecosystems on the planet. The pipeline’s location in the Straits of Mackinac means even a single leak could rapidly contaminate vast areas, harming fisheries, wildlife, tribal treaty rights, and coastal communities for generations. At the same time, shifting our attention toward renewable energy offers a far better path forward—both economically and environmentally. Clean energy investments create long-term jobs, reduce carbon emissions, and build resilient local economies without putting the Great Lakes at risk. Prioritizing renewables over aging fossil-fuel infrastructure helps protect our waters while positioning the region for a healthier, more sustainable future.

It makes absolutely zero sense to be moving backward in this way when there are so many opportunities for Michigan to lead in renewable energy infrastructure. We don’t need fossil fuels anymore. But we do, and always will, need water.

As a former Michigan resident and current Chicago resident who lives on the shores of Lake Michigan, I strongly oppose the proposed Line 5 drilling plan under the Straits of Mackinac and urge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to reject this proposal outright.

The Straits represent one of the most hydrologically sensitive and complex freshwater junctions in the world. The bidirectional, rapidly shifting currents mean that even a relatively small release of oil or drilling fluids could disperse into both Lake Michigan and Lake Huron within hours. Multiple peer-reviewed hydrodynamic models have shown this area to be among the worst possible locations for subsurface drilling or fossil fuel infrastructure failure.

Enbridge’s safety record heightens this concern considerably. The company was responsible for one of the largest inland oil spills in U.S. history along the Kalamazoo River, and its internal compliance and monitoring failures have been widely documented. It is scientifically and operationally unjustifiable to assume a zero-failure scenario for a company with repeated spills, maintenance violations, and drilling fluid losses in other projects.

A spill beneath the Straits would threaten the drinking water supply for millions of Midwestern residents, including those in Chicago and throughout Michigan. It would also endanger the Great Lakes’ multibillion-dollar tourism and recreation economy. These are not theoretical harms; they are foreseeable outcomes based on the combination of geologic risk, hydrologic behavior, and Enbridge’s documented operational history.

For years, the federal review process focused on a tunnel proposal. Abruptly shifting to a new drilling plan—one with potentially greater environmental risk—introduces procedural uncertainty and raises questions about whether cumulative impacts and worst-case spill scenarios are being adequately assessed.

Given the high-hazard location, the company’s track record, and the magnitude of potential harm, the only scientifically defensible decision is to reject the drilling plan entirely.

The risks to the Great Lakes are unacceptable and irreversible. I urge the Army Corps to prioritize the long-term protection of our freshwater resources over short-term corporate interests. They are our most precious and abundant resources and essential to our region's importance on the Global stage. To compromise them is to compromise our future; financial and otherwise.

Ni drilling in the Straits of Mackinaw. The company behind Line 5, Enbridge, has a history of drilling accidents and spills. If something goes wrong under the Straits, oil could spread quickly into two Great Lakes at once. And Michigan taxpayers — not the company — would be left with the damage.

Given the fact that oil and water don't mix, Given the fact that drilling an not be guaranteed to not produce problems such as leaking into the Great Lakes,
Given the fact that I live in Chicago on Lake Michigan, I am stating my opposition to the current proposal to do more drilling in the Mackinac straits.

Respectfully submitted,
Sydney Reed