Yesterday, the three year anniversary of the spill in Marshall brought with it, as we pointed out, some excellent reports by some of our favorite reporters and writers– Dave Hasemyer, Lindsey Smith, Jacob Wheeler, and Josh Mogerman, to name a few.
By contrast, today, the day after the anniversary, has brought us some reports that are to, a greater or lesser extent. just plain maddening.
Take, for instance, the anniversary story released today by UPI, the people, you might recall, who think Beth Wallace is a “global warming advocate.” Unlike the group we mentioned above, the UPI typist couldn’t be bothered to do anything at all except quote back the hollow phrases served up to them by Jason Manshum. In fact, that’s the story’s lead:
There’s always a chance of failure when dealing with mechanical equipment and oil pipelines, Canadian pipeline company Enbridge said.
A couple of paragraphs later, the story offers up the same disingenuous load of hay about “mechanical equipment” from Jason Manshum that we discussed yesterday. Which really just raises one question: wasn’t UPI once a reputable news service?
Less maddening from a journalistic standpoint, but still a little maddening, is this item from a local paper covering Macomb County in Michigan, through which phase two of the Line 6B replacement runs. The headline of the story, oddly, is “NTSB report harshly criticizes Enbridge for oil spill in the Kalamazoo River.” This confused us a little at first, considering the fact that that report was released one year ago this month. But once we got our bearings, we realized that the story is a very good thing. The good citizens of Macomb and St. Clair counties need to know about that report, even if it’s a year old. So we commend The Voice and reporter Jim Bloch, who does a nice job of summarizing the report, for running the story. He even includes the really important stuff, like this:
The report condemned the “culture of deviance” that characterized Enbridge operators, pointing to “systemic flaws in operational decision-making.” The company’s operating culture was one “in which not adhering to approved procedures and protocols was normalized.”
Bloch also has a second story in The Voice, reporting on a meeting between some Enbridge reps and the Marysville, Michigan city council. It mainly consists of Enbridge saying, as they always do, “hey, none of this is any big deal; don’t you worry.” But at one point, Enbridge project manager Doug Reichley says this extraordinary thing:
“The original pipeline was built in the late ‘60s,” said Reichley. “We’ve had some repair issues and some maintenance issues, so we thought it best to replace the entire thing.”
That’s right. On the third anniversary of the most expensive inland oil spill in U.S. history, Reichley says they’ve “had some repair issues.”
The last two maddening items from today are of the déjà vu sort. The Minnesota Star-Tribune has a truly infuriating story about Enbridge violating the terms of some environmental permits:
Enbridge Energy said Friday it will pay a $425,000 fine to settle federal allegations that it made illegal discharges into wetlands and rivers while testing two Minnesota pipelines, including one being upgraded to carry more crude oil.
The violations pertain to the discharge of water during testing of the lines in 2009 and 2010. Sound familiar? It should. Because that’s exactly what happened in Michigan a few weeks ago when Enbridge discharged some rust-colored water into Ore Creek, violating ELEVEN conditions of its MDEQ permit. We believe this constitutes a pattern. The fact is, as our friend Beth Wallace pointed out, that Enbridge treats these matters simply as the cost of doing business. To which we would add that our regulations are so weak and the fines issued for these violations are so small that there is no disincentive for companies like Enbridge to violate these permits. So as much as we want to point out that Enbridge is a very bad actor, we also hasten to add that the systems we have in place compound the problem: they are too weak to force companies like Enbridge to behave.
We also did a double-take when we read that “Enbridge spokeswoman Terri Larson said the company didn’t admit to the violations, but decided to settle the case and avoid litigation.” It’s not just that we remember our own not-unpleasant encounter with Terri Larson at the PSTrust conference back in November (though we have a strong hunch that she was subsequently told to stop replying to our emails). It’s that this also seems to be a pattern with Enbridge. Long time readers might recall that when Enbridge finally reached a “consent agreement” with Brandon Township, they did not admit that they’d violated an ordinances or that they were required by law to seek consent. Enbridge is nothing if not recalcitrant.
Lastly, Michigan Radio’s Lindsey Smith, who’s doing great work, spent a long, late evening at the Comstock Township Planning Commission last night, as the commissioners considered whether to approve Enbridge’s dredging plan. Based on Lindsey’s fine report, it sounds like it was an interesting, if a little exhausting, meeting. But the déjà vu moment for us in the story was this:
Tracy presented the plans to the township’s planning commission after apologizing for not coming sooner. Enbridge set up a lot of equipment at the location near Morrow Lake in June, without getting township approval.
“There is a small slice of time here, that’s no excuse for not coming you to begin with,” Tracy said.
He also apologized to planning commissioners who said they were kicked off the proposed site when they attempted to see it.
This, too, is part of a pattern with Enbridge, something we have seen (and pointed out) on numerous occasions. Enbridge shoots first and aims later. They plow forward, doing whatever they want, and then later, pretending to be innocent and sincere, they issue apologies or offers to fix whatever problems they have caused. It’s a very convenient strategy– for Enbridge– and far too many regulatory and governing bodies have allowed them to get away with it for far too long. Here’s hoping Comstock Township does not do the same.
Lastly, here’s something really interesting for this anniversary. When the spill happened in Marshall 3 years ago, a lot of committed people took lots of different forms of action. This included a small local paper called the Michigan Messenger, which did a lot of vital reporting in real time and did a great job of trying to hold Enbridge’s feet to the fire. Through the magic of the internet, a great deal of that reporting lives on. So if you really want a look back upon that nightmarish summer, hop a ride on the internet wayback machine.