LANSING, MI— The Canadian petroleum pipeline company Enbridge was granted a permit by the Michigan Public Service Commission to construct a tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac.
The nearly 72-year-old Line 5 sits on the lake bed of the Straits. A section of that pipeline would be replaced by a new line in the tunnel.
In an appeals court hearing Tuesday, tribal nations, environmental groups and some businesses challenged the permit, saying the Commission did not allow all the evidence to be heard.
The Michigan Public Service Commission is a state agency, so the Attorney General’s office represents it. Daniel Sonneveldt’s job was to defend the Commission’s decision.
“There was no option before the commission that would result in the ceasing of the operation of the pipeline.”
He said the Commission was limited in what it could consider: should a permit be issued to build a four-mile tunnel. Those challenging the permit say the real question is how risky Line 5 is to the environment and the Great Lakes. He said the Commission was limited to approving or denying a permit for the tunnel.
“The effect of the denial of the application is that the existing seabed pipeline would continue to operate across the Straits of Mackinac. It would continue to run the product through that pipeline and the risk of a spill still remains and exists there.”
An attorney representing Enbridge said what the opponents of Line 5 want would be impossible for the Commission to do. John Bursch added if the court decides against Enbridge, it won’t make much difference.
“First, if they prevail on appeal or back in the MPSC, then that's not going to stop the pipeline. It's going to continue operating, but it's going to do so on the lakebed when everybody wants it in the tunnel.”
Line 5 opponents say you cannot look at just the four mile section of Line 5 in a tunnel. They argue the pipeline—which has a record of oil spills over the decades—would be further enabled by allowing it to continue operating.
Adam Ratchenski represented four tribal nations who oppose Line 5.
“The Tunnel project is a massive and disruptive undertaking through the heart of the Great Lakes and the center of the Anishinabe creation story. And whether there's a public need to greenlight such a thing must be the subject of a full and fair hearing. That didn't occur in this case, and the court should fix that by sending it back to the Commission to allow parties to put on their case about it.”
At a news conference outside after the hearing, opponents of Line 5 gathered.
Carrie La Seur is one of the lawyers arguing the case against the Michigan Public Service Commission’s permit. She’s the Legal Director for the group, For Love of Water, which is based in Traverse City on Grand Traverse Bay of Lake Michigan.
“One of the communities that will be the frontlines, the first and the most damaged if and when the line five pipeline bursts in the Straits of Mackinac. The consequences would be catastrophic.”
The Executive Director of the Michigan Climate Action Network said the Commission violated the state’s Environmental Protection Act and the Administrative Procedures Act. Denise Keele said that's because the commission did not allow her group and others to present evidence of all of the impacts of Line 5 and the impacts of the crude oil and natural gas liquids it carries.“These attorneys have made it clear, I hope to the court and to all of you that the Michigan Public Service Commission failed to consider Enbridge's proposed tunnel project threatens the Great Lakes and all its peoples, violates the Michigan Environmental Protection Act, exacerbates the climate crisis and undermines Michigan's clean energy goals.”
In a statement, Enbridge said, as it often does, the tunnel would make an already safe pipeline safer. It added the Commission’s staff concluded that putting the Line 5 pipeline in a tunnel “is in the public interest and better protects the Great Lakes.” The pipeline company agrees with that.
Later this month, Attorney General Dana Nessel will be in court arguing that the best protection for the Great Lakes would be to shut down Line 5.