Opponents Push Michigan to Reassess Line 5 Tunnel Water Permit Debate

Concerns Rise Over Enbridge's Proposed Line 5 Tunnel Under Straits of Mackinac The proposal to construct a tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac for the aging Line 5 pipeline has sparked significant debate, prompting calls for a more thorough review from the State of Michigan. As the evaluation of the Water Resources Permit approaches, stakeholders are voicing their apprehensions regarding the project's potential environmental implications. Enbridge, the Canadian pipeline company behind the project, aims to reroute its 72-year-old Line 5 into a new tunnel to replace the existing pipeline that lies on the lakebed. This crucial four-mile channel connects Lake Michigan to Lake Huron. A draft Environmental Impact Statement issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a key component of the approval process, which has been expedited by a directive from former President Trump emphasizing energy initiatives. This directive is linked to his “national energy emergency” declaration. During a recent event, critics expressed concerns that the Army Corps might not prioritize environmental impacts as much as the Michigan Public Service Commission and the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE), both of which have approved permits, with EGLE's approval on the brink of reevaluation. A map from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers illustrates the proposed route for the Line 5 tunnel. Environmental advocates like Sean McBrearty of Clean Water Action argue that significant ecological factors have been overlooked in the draft statement, stressing that, “Nobody so far in this permitting process have looked at the actual environmental impacts of building a tunnel through the most sensitive part of the bottomlands of the Great Lakes.” The ongoing legal battle surrounding the project includes a lawsuit from Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, which remains active in state courts. This legal contention touches on Michigan’s public trust rights regarding the Straits’ bottomlands, as noted by Liz Kirkwood, Executive Director of For the Love of Water (FLOW). There is also apprehension from Native American tribes about potential damage to ancient artifacts located on the lakebed, alongside concerns from Canada regarding treaty rights that govern energy transfer across the border. Kirkwood remarked on the project's framing by Enbridge, stating that Line 5 is primarily an infrastructure asset for Ontario and Quebec, despite traversing Michigan. She emphasized, “And they’re saying that multinational corporations should be able to trump sovereign rights of states and indigenous peoples because oil is more important and their profits are more important than our ability to govern and protect the most important thing, which is water.” Furthermore, McBrearty accused Enbridge of attempting to weaken opposition through media campaigns and local incentives to garner support for the project. In response to community concerns, Enbridge replied, “In designing and constructing the tunnel, Enbridge is working with state and federal agencies to study and develop plans that will minimize and mitigate impacts to the natural environment, natural resources, cultural heritage and community priorities.” The event, organized by the Groundwork Center, concluded with a push for action, reporting that over 800 letters have been sent to Governor Whitmer and Director Roos in opposition to the project.