Anti-Line 5 coalition raises alarms as tunnel project is placed on emergency permitting list
Anti-Line 5 sign at a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Detroit District public scoping meeting regarding the Line 5 tunnel project, Saint Ignace, Sept. 8, 2022 | Sharon Fighter
Opponents of Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline are warning that a January 20 executive order could fast track the permitting process for the pipeline's controversial tunnel project.
Indigenous activists and environmental organizations have advocated against the pipeline for years, raising particular concern about a four-mile stretch running through the Straits of Mackinac that connects Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.
In 2018 the pipeline was dented in three places by an anchor strike, with another cable or anchor strike in 2019 harming the pipeline's protective coating and severely damaging a support, breeding further fears of the pipeline rupturing.
Opponents warn a spill from the pipeline would be catastrophic, with Line 5 transporting more than 22 million gallons of light crude oil and light synthetic crude through the straits daily.
Though activists argue the pipeline is too great a threat to continue operating, Enbridge signed an agreement with GOP Gov. Rick Snyder in 2018 to build a utility tunnel in the Straits aimed at containing any potential spills.
The dual pipelines would be relocated into a concrete-lined tunnel buried beneath the lakebed. However, in order to move forward with construction, the pipeline must receive permits from the Michigan Department of Environment Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE), the Michigan Public Service Commission and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
While the Army Corps of Engineers announced in March 2023 that it would extend its environmental review for the tunnel project, with plans to issues its draft environmental impact statement in Spring 2025, members of the anti-Line 5 coalition Oil and Water Don't Mix are warning President Donald Trump's executive order declaring a national energy emergency may expedite the permit's review.
The USACE has until Feb. 20 to designate emergency projects for expedited processing, with the Line 5 tunnel project among those under consideration for an emergency permit on the corps' website.
Emergency approval would undermine the extended environmental review process, the coalition said.
'Rushing the approval process for an oil tunnel beneath the Great Lakes is the opposite of emergency action – it's reckless endangerment,' Oil and Water Don't Mix Campaign Coordinator Sean McBrearty said in a statement. 'The Great Lakes provide drinking water for millions of people and support a multi-billion dollar tourism and fishing economy. Ensuring that the Great Lakes continue to be a shortcut for Enbridge to move Canadian oil that we don't need is not an emergency. This is precisely the kind of project that demands careful scrutiny and robust public participation, not a rubber stamp.'
Trump's executive order instructs the USACE to exercise its emergency powers to the fullest extent practicable, with the coalition warning these measures raise serious concerns about transparency and environmental protection.
'The public has a right to weigh in on projects that could impact their water, their livelihoods, and their communities for generations to come,' McBrearty said. 'We're putting the Army Corps on notice — we're watching this process closely and will fight any attempt to bypass essential environmental reviews or silence public voices.'
Oil and Water Don't Mix has demanded the USACE maintain its full environmental review process, ensure meaningful opportunities for public participation and reject any efforts to classify the project as an emergency in need of expedited review.
The National Wildlife Federation raised similar concerns, arguing that fast tracking the project would set a dangerous precedent and place the waters wildlife and people of the Great Lakes in danger.
When asked about the status of the tunnel project's USACE permit, Enbridge spokesperson Ryan Duffy emphasized that the pipeline is critical energy infrastructure.
'Enbridge submitted its permit applications in April 2020 for the Great Lakes Tunnel, a project designed to make a safe pipeline safer while also ensuring the continued safe, secure, and affordable delivery of essential energy to the Great Lakes region,' Duffy said in an email.
While the state has provided its environmental permits, and the MPSC has approved the company's plan for the tunnel project, the project is still awaiting action on an environmental impact statement and a permitting decision five years later, Duffy said.
However, the permit issued by the MPSC is currently under appeal, following legal challenges filed by the Bay Mills Indian Community, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, and Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi, alongside several environmental organizations.
Enbridge must also redo one of its permits as part of a legal agreement with EGLE and the Bay Mills Indian Community, allowing its current water resources to expire on Feb. 25, 2026 while incorporating updated information on the project's potential impacts to nearby wetlands into its new application.
EGLE Strategic Communications Advisor Scott Dean told the Advance in an email that the company had completed mapping of wetlands that could be impacted by the project and the Wetland Identification Program had performed their services in preparation for Enbridge's wetlands protection and Great Lakes bottomlands permit application. However, this application has not been submitted yet, Dean said.
Additionally, Enbridge filed another application for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit last week, with its current permit set to expire on Oct. 1, 2025, Dean said. Initiated by the Clean Water Act in 1972, this permit aims to protect water quality by imposing limits on the amount of pollutants that can be discharged into a body of water.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
US officials warn of heightened threats in United States
The Department of Homeland Security issued an advisory June 22 warning Americans cyber attacks are likely, and violence in the homeland is possible. Homeland Security officials are warning Americans of heightened threats in the United States after the attacks on Iran. The Department of Homeland Security issued an advisory June 22 saying attacks from low-level cyber 'hacktivists' are likely, and larger attacks could follow if Iranian leaders issue a religious ruling 'calling for retaliatory violence against targets in the Homeland.' The agency said Iran has a longstanding commitment to strike American government officials following the killing of Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani, but the attacks on Iran will likely amplify that commitment. In addition, officials said they could trigger more anti-Semitic attacks in the U.S. 'Multiple recent Homeland terrorist attacks have been motivated by anti-Semitic or anti-Israel sentiment, and the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict could contribute to US-based individuals plotting additional attacks,' the advisory issued at noon ET said. The United States struck three nuclear facilities in Iran in a stealth bombing raid that began June 21. Using so-called bunker-buster bombs for the first time in such a military operation, B-2 bombers were used in the mission targeting Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz. The attack, dubbed "Operation Midnight Hammer," involved more than 125 warplanes, submarines and surface warships, Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters.
Miami Herald
2 hours ago
- Miami Herald
How South Florida's congressional delegation reacted to U.S. bombing of Iran
President Donald Trump is receiving something approaching bipartisan support from South Florida's congressional delegation after the United States bombed Iran late Saturday, though Democrats are taking a more cautious tone than their GOP counterparts. Nationally, some members of Congress have expressed concerns about Trump acting without their approval, with some strongly opposing U.S. involvement in a bombing campaign first launched by Israel. But here, most of the South Florida congressional delegation is either celebrating the attack on Iranian nuclear facilities or at least avoiding criticism. U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz, a Coral Springs Democrat, said on X Saturday night that the bombing of three facilities 'appears to be a targeted strike to defend the U.S., Israel, and allies throughout the region and the world.' 'Now, Iran must come to the table to finally make a deal,' Moskowitz wrote. 'Their regime has had multiple opportunities to pursue diplomacy, and perhaps today's events will push them to a safer path.' Moskowitz was in support of Israel's initial attacks on Iran. So was fellow Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz. She joined Moskowitz on X Saturday night in saying that 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.' However, both Wasserman Schultz and Moskowitz wrote that they hoped the Trump administration would contain any escalation of the conflict. They also noted Congress' role in overseeing and authorizing U.S. military action. Wasserman Schultz told Local 10 that she was not in support of any further military action against Iran without that approval. The tone from the two Democrats was less celebratory than Republicans in the South Florida delegation, who were in full support on their social media accounts. Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar wrote she was grateful for Trump's decision. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart said he was 'proud of our exceptional military' and 'proud to stand by our ally Israel.' 'I FULLY BACK PRESIDENT TRUMP's DECISIVE ACTIONS & SUPPORT MORE STRIKES AGAINST IRAN's POLITICAL STRUCTURE IF THEY DO NOT SURRENDER!' Rep. Carlos Giminez, another Miami Republican, wrote on X. But South Florida's congressional Democrats were also less critical than others in their party. On Sunday, Florida Democratic Party Chairwoman Nikki Fried said that 'Trump is not the leader we need at this moment,' and said he oversees 'an administration that operates lawlessly and runs on chaos, lies, and ignorance…' 'It's shameful that he is politicizing a critical moment in world history by excluding Democratic leadership and only including Republicans in the war decision,' Fried said. 'Iran must not have a nuclear weapon, but Donald Trump cannot be trusted to choose what is best for our country.' Referencing the party's leadership conference that took place Saturday evening at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino Hollywood, where news that the United States had bombed Iran rippled through the audience, she said she 'saw the shock and fear on the faces of my colleagues backstage as we tried to process the gravity of what had just happened.' Moskowitz and Wasserman Schultz were at the event. Moskowitz gave a speech after the bombing was first reported, but did not mention the attack, nor did the speakers that followed, including U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, of New Jersey. Wasserman Schultz also spoke, but before reports of the attack emerged. Some members of the House and Senate have argued that authority to authorize military action against another country belongs to Congress, not Trump. 'The procedure should have been that Congress was briefed before we enter war, and that we had a vote on it,' Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman from California, said Sunday on Face the Nation. Khanna and Republican U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky are calling on Congress to vote Monday on a war-powers resolution that would call on Trump 'to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran.' U.S. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, a Democrat who represents a district that includes parts of Broward and Palm Beach counties, issued a statement with a similar message, writing: 'The Constitution is clear: only Congress has the power to authorize war.' She wrote that any further action would be 'troubling overreach,' but stopped short of criticizing Trump's actions directly. Democratic U.S. Rep. Frederica Wilson had not issued a statement on the bombing as of 1 p.m. Sunday. Her office did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
MAGA movement divided over Trump's move to bomb Iran
President Donald Trump's MAGA sphere of conservative media and influencers — many of whom had expressed skepticism before his decision to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities — is divided over the president's dramatic move to strike. Many of its most prominent figures rallied around Trump. But others sharply criticized the decision, said they want to see more explanation than his brief Saturday night speech, or warned of a drawn-out conflict. Ahead of Saturday's bombing, the prospect of United States involvement in another Middle Eastern conflict had opened rifts in the GOP. Trump himself had ripped the United States' involvement in wars in the Middle East as a presidential candidate, and his 'Make America Great Again' movement includes many more isolationist voices aligned with his 'America First' vision. Those voices were at odds in recent days with GOP hawks who advocated a muscular US role in supporting Israel in its bid to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. But after Trump's Saturday night announcement, some prominent MAGA voices rallied around the president. 'Iran gave President Trump no choice,' said Charlie Kirk, a pro-Trump media personality and founder of the activist group Turning Point USA. 'For a decade he has been adamant that Iran will never get a nuclear weapon. Iran decided to forego diplomacy in pursuit of a bomb. This is a surgical strike, operated perfectly,' Kirk said Saturday on X. 'President Trump acted with prudence and decisiveness.' Former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, who withdrew as Trump's first selection for attorney general, compared on X Trump's bombing of Iran Saturday to his first-term killing of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani, which was met with some predictions that it would ignite a regional conflict that did not come true. 'President Trump basically wants this to be like the Soleimani strike - one and done. No regime change war,' Gaetz said Saturday night on X. 'Trump the Peacemaker!' However, on Sunday, Gaetz expressed skepticism toward any broader mission in Iran. 'Just remember: every regime change war has been extremely popular at the start. But the historical trajectory isn't good.' he said on X, later adding: 'There will always be another Iranian mountain to bomb for the neocons.' Georgia GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a staunch Trump ally, posted Saturday night on X: 'There would not be bombs falling on the people of Israel if Netanyahu had not dropped bombs on the people of Iran first. Israel is a nuclear armed nation. This is not our fight. Peace is the answer.' It's too early to tell how the American public — and particularly those within Trump's MAGA movement — will react to the United States' bombing of Iran. On Wednesday, before the bombing, a Washington Post one-day survey of Americans, conducted with SSRS, found that 45% opposed US airstrikes against Iran, 25% supported airstrikes and 30% were unsure. Republicans were more likely than Democrats to say they viewed Iran's nuclear program as a serious threat, and more likely to support airstrikes. Polls conducted in one day can be subject to larger potential errors than those fielded over multiple days, since not everyone selected to participate may be available to respond on that single day. Some prominent figures in Trump's MAGA movement called for the president to delve into more detail on his decision to step directly into what had been a conflict between Israel and Iran. Steve Bannon, Trump's former chief strategist and now a pro-Trump podcaster, said Saturday night that the president has 'some work to do' to explain his decision to supporters. 'I do think that the president's got to have a little deeper explanation of this — particularly why it looks like we're doing the heavy lifting for Israel,' he said on his podcast shortly after Trump addressed the nation Saturday night. He also said he was concerned with 'incrementalism' and the prospect of the United States entering a 'forever war' if Iran retaliates and the US takes further action. And he warned that being pulled into a Middle Eastern conflict could distract from Trump's domestic agenda. 'This is how you don't focus on sanctuary cities. This is how you don't focus on the great big, beautiful bill — everything you need to do,' Bannon said. 'Not that it's wrong to take these actions. Sometimes you must take these actions. I think President Trump came to the conclusion that he had to take these actions.' Jack Posobiec, a pro-Trump commentator, on X sought to portray Trump's bombing of Iran as one intended to accomplish a specific target, rather than the first step in a longer-term effort to oust Iranian leadership. 'President Trump has clearly signaled, as he has all along, that he opposes a regime change war in Iran. This is about the nuclear program of Iran which he promised he would end from day one,' Posobiec said. Laura Loomer, a pro-Trump activist who said Trump 'just saved us all from a nuclear holocaust' by bombing Iran, noted the silence from some in Trump's movement who had opposed US involvement. 'Can someone please conduct a wellness check on Tucker Carlson, Dave Smith, Candace Owens and the entire MAHA crew?' she wrote on X, making reference to the 'Make America Healthy Again' movement of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. supporters who backed Trump. Carlson, a former FOX News host and one of the loudest voices opposing US involvement in Iran, as of late Sunday morning had said nothing on social media about Trump's bombing. Owens, a conservative commentator who said on her YouTube show last week that 'MAGA was a declaration of war on neocons' and accused Trump of fracturing his base, was perhaps the most vocal critic Saturday. Owens, who regularly expresses anti-Israel views, pointed to the $100 million that pro-Israel donor Miriam Adelson gave a pro-Trump super PAC during the 2024 presidential campaign. 'If we had raised the 100 million Adelson gave him on Go Fund Me, maybe he would have kept his promises,' she wrote on X. 'Guess we'll never know.' She also called his post on Truth Social announcing the bombing 'utterly deranged.' Trump, for his part, said the GOP was behind him and called for passage of his massive tax and spending package. 'Great unity in the Republican Party, perhaps unity like we have never seen before. Now let's get the Great, Big, Beautiful Bill done. Our Country is doing GREAT. MAGA!' Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Sunday.
