Updates on Enbridge Line 5 Pipeline – December 2024
Wisconsin's Green Fire, December 19, 2024
Enbridge received permits from Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for oil pipeline Line 5 Reroute to cross streams and wetlands in northern Wisconsin.
Meanwhile, crude oil spilled from Line 6 in southern Wisconsin.
Enbridge Line 5 Segment Relocation Map, 2020
Prepared by Nancy Larson, WGF Water Resources Specialist
Wisconsin’s Green Fire (WGF) has followed and commented on Enbridge Line 5 Reroute plans since 2019. We evaluated and commented on state and federal permitting steps and together with Midwest Environmental Advocates (MEA) produced guides for the public on the permitting process.
On November 14, 2024, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) issued the permits (link: Enbridge Pipeline Projects in Wisconsin) required by Enbridge to construct the Line 5 oil pipeline reroute (L5R) across waterways and wetlands in Wisconsin. The WDNR also issued the stormwater permit for erosion control. These are the major permits under the WDNR’s authority over the L5R construction.
The same week that the Line 5 permits were being issued, Enbridge reported a release of crude oil from its Line 6 pipeline in Jefferson County, Wisconsin. This spill of nearly 70,000 gallons of crude oil was only made known to the public in December 2024.
Read on for our concerns about Line 5, the Line 6 oil spill, and our observations on the WDNR waterway and wetland permit.
WDNR Issues Waterway and Wetland Crossing and Stormwater Permits for Enbridge Line 5 Oil Pipeline Reroute
Regulatory Steps
On November 14, 2024, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) issued the permits required by Enbridge to construct the Line 5 oil pipeline reroute (L5R) across waterways and wetlands in Wisconsin. It also issued the stormwater permit for erosion control. These are the major permits under the WDNR’s authority over the L5R construction.
Enbridge applied for permits in 2020 to reroute a 41-mile segment of its Line 5 pipeline around the Bad River Reservation. The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa sued Enbridge to remove the pipeline from its reservation, where it has continued to operate under expired leases. The reroute would construct a new pipeline upstream of the reservation, but still within the Bad River watershed of Lake Superior. The pipeline, dating from 1953, carries crude oil and natural gas liquids to refineries in Sarnia, Ontario.
Although the state Environmental Impact Statement (released in September 2024) evaluates environmental impacts of alternative routes and the purpose and need of the project, Wisconsin does not have a law that determines where oil pipelines should be placed, whether they are needed, and how they should be operated. Pipeline operation and safety falls under the authority of the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).
Federal permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) are also required for waterway and wetland crossings for the Line 5 Reroute. The state permits are required before federal permits can be issued (state permits serve as the certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act that state water quality standards would be met by the conditions of the permit). Issuance of the federal permits also requires a water quality certification from the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa that tribal water quality standards would be met at the reservation boundary.
Wisconsin’s Green Fire’s Actions on Enbridge Line 5 and L5R
Wisconsin Green Fire (WGF) has followed the proposed pipeline reroute since 2019. WGF has commented and testified on both state and federal regulatory steps. Our team of reviewers includes biologists, engineers, and people who have worked in the state regulatory programs. We have partnered with a number of organizations on our evaluation of the pipeline, including Midwest Environmental Advocates (MEA), with whom we produced fact sheets explaining the regulatory process.
With the November issuance of the permits, the public has no further opportunity for comment on the state permits. The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, MEA, and Clean Wisconsin, and have filed petitions to contest the permits.
Our Major Concerns with Enbridge Line 5 and L5R:
Tribal Sovereignty
This project is immediately adjacent to Mashkiiziibii (Bad River Band) tribal waters. Line 5, whether on the reservation or within the watershed upstream, places disproportionate risk to tribal communities, an environmental justice issue. WGF supports Mashkiiziibii’s legal responsibility to protect their waters from adverse environmental impacts through the 401 Water Quality Certification process.
Oil Spills
An oil spill in the Lake Superior region would be devastating to natural resources and tribal and non-tribal communities.
The spill on Enbridge Line 6 in southern Wisconsin in November 2024 shows the company’s spill detection and response track records are not adequate to protect the environment.
WGF is very concerned that Enbridge Line 6 spilled nearly 70,000 gallons of crude oil in Jefferson County in southern Wisconsin. The spill was first reported as 2 gallons discovered near a buried unit valve on Nov. 11, 2024, and by Nov. 12 the WDNR database states the estimate of the amount increased as the investigation continued. The line was isolated on Nov. 12, and excavation of contaminated soil continues. Information on this spill became known to the public in early December.
Climate Change
We are experiencing the effects of climate change. A clean energy future is the only safe response.
Public Transparency: Incomplete Plans
The waterway and wetland permit applications were deemed complete and the public comment period closed in 2020. This was long before site specific plans were available for how Enbridge proposed to cross individual waterways and wetlands, and the steps they would take to protect water quality and habitat at the site.
WGF made this comment in 2020. In fact, Enbridge’s approved Environmental Construction Plan is dated October 2024, just a month before the final permit was issued.
Observations on the Waterway and Wetland Crossing Permit:
Public Transparency: Incomplete Plans
The WDNR determined the permit application was complete in February, 2020, although site specific information on waterway and wetland crossings was not included for the public to review. The information provided by Enbridge for the public comment period, which ended July 11, 2020, was very general. WGF commented that the permit applications should not be considered complete without site specific plans. Since 2020, information from Enbridge on the crossings has trickled into the WDNR in response to DNR requests. Permit condition #35 directs Enbridge to implement the approved Environmental Construction Plan, dated October 2024.
Again, the public had no access to this plan which is a cornerstone of the permit, during public comment periods. WGF searched for and accessed this plan once the permit was issued, on WDNR’s permit site.
Blasting Plan
As we commented in the past, Enbridge’s blasting plan remains general and shifts responsibility to the blasting contractor. However, the WDNR permit affirms Enbridge’s ultimate responsibility. Permit conditions #123-127 limit blasting to the greatest extent practicable and require monitoring and hydrological restoration of wetlands and waterways subject to blasting. There is a high likelihood of hydrological disruption that can’t be restored. Streams may be cold water streams or brook trout refuge areas, where populations may be decimated. Also, there are no monitoring requirements for blasting chemicals, a concern raised by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Independent Environmental Monitors (IEM)
Permit condition #4 requires Enbridge to hire at least three IEMs who must be approved by and report directly to the WDNR. It also states IEMs must be staffed at all times Enbridge is working on the project. This is a useful approach to encourage compliance. Further, permit condition #30 states that Enbridge must notify the IEM within two hours of permit compliance issues.
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) and Sheet piling
Some waterways and wetlands would be crossed with HDD. Several permit conditions address inadvertent releases of drilling fluids and mud. However, the permit does not address aquifer breaches or punctures that could release uncontrolled flows of groundwater during HDD. Aquifer breaches have occurred on Enbridge Line 3 in Minnesota. Condition #181 addresses sheet pilings, which have also punctured aquifers elsewhere. The permit prohibits sheet piling to a depth that would hit known artesian aquifers. Artesian conditions are found throughout the watershed in red clay / sand areas, but locations are not well documented. Consequently, an unknown number would be vulnerable to sheet-pile punctures.
Invasive Species
Invasive species prevention and control measures are robust in both the stormwater permit and the waterway and wetlands permit.
Wetland mitigation
The project would result in wetland fill and conversion that would require compensatory mitigation. The mitigation plan and permit conditions allow purchase of wetland mitigation credits in the Lake Superior Bank Service Area. WGF and others commented that wetland mitigation should focus on the watersheds where the wetlands are lost, to compensate for that lost flood storage capacity. This is especially important in flood-prone Lake Superior red clay watersheds.
Addition of 10 new mainline block valves
The permit Findings of Fact #5 states that Enbridge would add 10 new mainline block valves with the L5R. These valves can be shut in the event of a spill to decrease the volume released. WGF had commented on the draft EIS that additional block valves would be useful to reduce spill volumes.
The spill on Enbridge Line 6 in southern Wisconsin in November 2024, shows the company’s spill detection and response track records are not adequate to protect the environment. WGF also commented in the draft EIS review period that pipelines should be built to the highest safety standards, comparable to standards for natural gas pipelines in populated areas.
WGF will continue to engage with partners and follow developments in the L5R to keep our members informed.
More from WGF on Enbridge Line 5 and the Line 5 Reroute (L5R):
WGF Comments on Enbridge Line 5 Re-Route draft Environmental Impact Statement
WGF and Partners Submit Letter to CEQ on Enbridge Line 5 Environmental Impact Review
A Guide to WATER RESOURCE PERMITTING for Pipeline Construction in Wisconsin
Contact us with your questions or thoughts about our work on science-based conservation.
Does our work on energy, wetlands, water or other topics mentioned here inspire or inform you?
Please consider supporting our work with a donation to Wisconsin’s Green Fire. An annual gift of any amount makes you a member. Thank you!