EPA expresses concern over 'likely significant impacts' of Line 5 tunnel in new report
When the EPA writes about Michigan water safety, I think about Flint, MI.
EPA expresses concern over 'likely significant impacts' of Line 5 tunnel in new report
by Rachel Louise Just | Sinclair Broadcast GroupWednesday, October 12th 2022
Michigan's Mackinac Bridge is seen from shore in this undated file photo. (File/WWMT)
LANSING, Mich. — The federal agency tasked with protecting the environment outlined a number of concerns about the potential impacts from the Line 5 tunnel in northern Michigan in a new report.
The Environmental Protection Agency, also known as EPA, reported its concerns about "likely significant impacts" of the proposed tunnel that would run under the Straits of Mackinac, the agency said in an Oct. 7 detailed scoping comment report.
In the 29-page report, the EPA called on Line 5's Canadian owner Enbridge - along with other state actors - to analyze and commit to protective measures that would ensure protections for the water, tribal treaty rights, the global climate, and all of Michigan's vast natural resources.
EPA NEPA DEIS Scoping Comments - Enbridge Line 5 Tunnel (10-7-2022) by Rachel Louise Just
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 5
77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD
CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590
October 7, 2022
REPLY TO THE ATTENTION OF
:
Mail Code RM-19J
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ONLY
Katie L. Otanez
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Detroit District
477 Michigan Avenue
Detroit, Michigan 48226
RE: EPA scoping comments – Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement for the Enbridge Line 5 Tunnel Project, Mackinac and Emmet Counties,
Michigan
Dear Ms. Otanez:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers’ (USACE) Federal Register Notice of Intent (NOI) regarding the proposal to construct
a tunnel (the Line 5 Tunnel) that would house a replacement segment of the existing Enbridge
Line 5 pipeline crossing the Straits of Mackinac (Straits). USACE is the lead agency under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Enbridge, Inc. (Enbridge) is the project
proponent. EPA is serving as a Cooperating Agency for the NEPA process, while maintaining
our authority under Section 309 of the Clean Air Act to independently review this proposal. This
letter provides EPA’s scoping comments on the proposal pursuant to NEPA, the Council on
Environmental Quality’s NEPA Implementing Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and
Section 309 of the Clean Air Act.
Enbridge owns and operates the 645-mile-long Line 5 pipeline. Line 5 transports up to 540,000 barrels per day of light crude oil, light synthetic oil and/or natural gas liquid from Superior, Wisconsin, through northern Wisconsin and the Upper and Lower Peninsulas of Michigan, to its terminus in Sarnia, Ontario, Canada. It has been in operation since 1953. In Michigan, Line 5 crosses the Straits, an approximately 4-mile-long span of water that connects Lake Michigan and Lake Huron, with two 20-inch diameter pipes that rest on or are anchored to the lakebed (the “Dual Pipelines”). Among multiple safety incidents in the past 5 years, in 2018, Line 5 was struck by a ship anchor in the Straits’ busy shipping lanes. The damage to the exposed pipeline raised concerns about its vulnerability to accidental damage and strikes. Michigan Governor Whitmer and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) revoked the 1953 easement for the existing crossing of the Straits on November 13, 2020. Enbridge continues tooperate Line 5 through the Straits.
The tunnel construction is being pursued in accordance with the “Tunnel Agreement” executed by Enbridge and the State of Michigan on December 19, 2018. That Agreement was entered in furtherance of Public Act 359, through which the State of Michigan established the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority and delegated to it the right to acquire, construct, maintain, improve, repair, and manage a utility tunnel across the Straits. The State of Michigan also granted an easement for the proposed tunnel in December 2018 and has since issued several permits related to tunnel construction.
Enbridge proposes to bore a tunnel below the lakebed of the Straits, connecting Point La Barbe
in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula to McGulpin Point in Michigan’s Lower Peninsula. The distance
between these two land points is approximately 3.6 miles and represents the shortest distance
between Michigan’s Upper and Lower Peninsulas. Enbridge proposes that the tunnel extend as
near as practicable from the existing Line 5 North Straits Facility (on the north side of the
Straits) to the existing Line 5 Mackinaw Station (on the south side of the Straits).
The tunnel would be constructed and operated by Enbridge and owned by the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority after construction. Except for the entrance points on either side of the Straits, the tunnel would be constructed entirely beneath the lakebed of the Straits at depths between 30 feet and 370 feet. Once complete, the proposed tunnel’s inside diameter would be approximately 21 feet.
The tunnel would provide secondary containment in order to minimize the potential for leakage of fluids from Line 5 into the lakebed or the Straits. A new 30-inch pipeline would be installed within the tunnel and connected to the existing portions of the Line 5 pipeline. Upon completion, Enbridge proposes to decommission the existing Dual Pipelines crossing the Straits by purging, cleaning, and abandoning them in place.
EPA is concerned about likely significant impacts from the proposed project. The enclosed Detailed Scoping Comments include recommendations to fully analyze, disclose, and commit to protective measures related to potential impacts on (1) waters that are essential to the exercise of Tribal treaty rights and continuation of Tribal traditional lifeways; (2) high-quality surface
waters that serve as vital drinking water supplies and wetlands with valuable ecological and habitat functions; (3) our global climate; and (4) on a wide range of natural resources, should a spill occur. We urge USACE to ensure that the DEIS fully analyzes and discloses spill risks and potential impacts and demonstrates that the project proponent is prepared to adequately prevent and address spills. We also offer recommendations related to environmental justice, air quality, and threatened and endangered species and habitat.
and-energy-issues-tunnel-permits
We appreciate the opportunity to provide scoping comments on the NOI, serve as a Cooperating
Agency, and attend public meetings hosted by USACE. EPA staff would appreciate an
opportunity to discuss our scoping comments with USACE. Liz Pelloso, Professional Wetland
Scientist, of EPA’s NEPA Program is the primary contact for coordination and review of NEPA
documents and can be reached at
R5NEPA@epa.gov
.
Sincerely,
Alan Walts
Director
Tribal and Multimedia Programs Office
Enclosures:
(1) EPA’s Detailed Scoping Comments
(2) Construction Emission Control Checklist
cc (via email, with enclosures):
Amy Krull, Michigan State Historic Preservation Office
(
krulla@michigan.gov
)
Scott Slagor, Michigan State Historic Preservation Office
(
slagors2@michigan.gov
)
Katie Kolokithas, Michigan State Historic Preservation Office
(
kolokithask1@michigan.gov
)
Martha MacFarlane-Faes, Deputy Michigan State Historic Preservation Officer
(
faesm@michigan.gov
)
Michael Sanders, Michigan Natural Features Inventory
(
sander75@msu.edu
)
Cindy Creisher, Michigan Public Service Commission
(
creisherc@michigan.gov
)
Greg Ochs, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Central Region Office
(
gregory.ochs@dot.gov
)
David Chislea, Michigan Public Service Commission
(
chislead@michigan.gov
)
Melanie Burdick, EPA
(
burdick.melanie@epa.gov
)
Kerrie Kuhne, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Detroit
(
kerrie.e.kuhne@usace.army.mil
)
Charlie Simon, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Detroit
(
charles.m.simon@usace.army.mil
)
Scott Hicks, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-East Lansing
(
scott_hicks@fws.gov
)
Jason Radcliffe, U.S. Coast Guard
(
jason.a.radcliffe2@uscg.mil
)
Charles Maricic, U.S. Coast Guard
(
charles.f.maricic@uscg.mil
)
Whitney Gravelle, Bay Mills Indian Community
(
wgravelle@baymills.org
)
Aubrey Maccoux-LeDuc, Bay Mills Indian Community
(
ammaccoux-leduc@baymills.org
)
Rebecca Liebing, Bay Mills Indian Community
(
rliebing@baymills.org
)
Debbie Chizewer, Earthjustice
dchizewer@earthjustice.org
David Gover, Native American Rights Fund
dgover@narf.org
Wes Furlong, Native American Rights Fund
wfurlong@narf.org
Esteban Chiriboga, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission
esteban@glifwc.org
John Coleman, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission
Ojcoleman@glifwc.org
Walts, Alan
Digitally signed by
Walts, Alan
Date: 2022.10.07
Ann McCammon-Soltis, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission
David Arroyo, Chairman-Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians
John Petoskey, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians
Allison Smart, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians
Lakota Hobia, Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Potawatomi Indians of Michigan THPO
Liz Binoniemi-Smith, Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Potawatomi Indians of Michigan
Elizabeth.Binoniemi-Smith@glt-nsn.gov
John Swimmer, Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi
Amy Wesaw, Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi
Regina Gasco-Bentley, Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians (tribalchair@ltbbodawa-
nsn.gov)
Spencer McCormack, Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians
DJ Hoffman, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians
Austin Lowes, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians
Marie Richards, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians
Kathie Brosemer, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians
Larry Romanelli, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians
Jamie Stuck, Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi
L. John Lufkins, Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan
The US States People Are Fleeing And The Ones They Are Moving To
"We urge [U.S. Army Corps of Engineers] to ensure that the [draft environmental impact statement] fully analyzes and discloses spill risks and potential impacts and demonstrates that the project proponent is prepared to adequately prevent and address spills," the report reads.
In the scoping comment report, the EPA also offered recommendations related to concerns beyond those listed above, including environmental justice, air quality, and the impact on threatened and endangered species and habitats.
The 69-year-old line sits at the bottom of the Straits of Mackinac, between Michigan's two peninsulas.
Multiple safety concerns over the last few years, including a ship's anchor that struck the exposed Dual Pipeline in 2018, pushed Enbridge to try to shift the pipeline underground - between 30 and 370 feet below the lakebed, to be exact.
Safety concerns: Company says it knew about oil pipeline damage 3 years ago
Related: 15,000 pound anchor left at bottom of Straits of Mackinac
In 2018 under Gov. Rick Snyder, the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority was created to oversee the process of building the tunnel, though some critics voiced concerns that the three-person panel is doing more rubber stamping than revamping.
“The Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority was founded to be an oversight body, and so far they’ve failed in their role of oversight," Sean McBrearty, the Michigan legislative and policy director for Clean Water Action, said. "They take reports from Enbridge, they don’t ask a lot of questions, and they sign the paperwork.”
Initial plan: Michigan, Enbridge reach deal to replace 65-year-old crude oil pipelines in Great Lakes
During the panel's Wednesday meeting in Lansing, McBrearty urged the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority to look into the EPA's concerns about the project.
Like other pipelines around the country, Line 5 has faced scrutiny as critics fear it could cause a major oil spill, damaging the waters, lifestyle, and environment the state has built its "Pure Michigan" reputation on.
Top leaders in Michigan, including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel, have taken legal action to try to shut the line down before it's built.
Latest on legal efforts: Michigan drops federal lawsuit seeking to shut down Line 5, focuses on state lawsuit
Enbridge will push forward in developing the tunnel, spokesperson Ryan Duffy said in a statement Wednesday.
“Placing the pipeline in a new Great Lakes Tunnel will provide extra layers of safety and environmental protection making a safe pipeline even safer, while creating Michigan jobs and securing the energy consumers in Michigan and the region rely on every single day to live their lives and fuel the economy,” Duffy said.
Enbridge has already invested more than $100 million on the Line 5 tunnel project, representatives said.
The company continues to be "intensely focused on obtaining the required permits to construct the project" while implementing "enhanced safety measures."
Back and forth: Canada cites US treaty in Line 5 pipeline dispute in Michigan
McBrearty said while top Michigan leaders have taken steps to stop the tunnel's development, it may be the federal government that makes the final decision to shut down the project.
“The Biden administration has frankly everything that they need right now to order this pipeline shut down,” he said.
The current timeline for the Line 5 tunnel project doesn't plan to have ground broken for several years. The Detroit Division of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is near the beginning of drafting its environmental impact statement, as the public comment period closes out. Two more public comment and analysis periods are planned before a final statement is expected in fall 2024.
Follow political reporter Rachel Louise Just on Twitter and Facebook. Send tips to rjust@sbgtv.com.