According to a report in the Chesterton Tribune out of Indiana, a forensic anthropologist has determined that the skull found by Enbridge contractors is at least 74 years old. That means that the matter is to be turned over to the Indiana DNR’s Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology (which sounds like a pretty awesome division). Construction work appears to still be halted until the DNR can determine whether the area is a burial ground.
We wish we could start this little news roundup by telling you that Enbridge spokesperson Graham White has issued a public apology to Emily Ferguson for his apparently fictional account of her behavior at an informational meeting regarding Line 9. Unfortunately, we have yet to hear whether White has decided to abide by Enbridge corporate value of “Maintain[ing] truth in all interactions” (although it may be that “maintaining” truth is somehow different than just telling it).
But there’s other news to pass on. Inside Climate News has run its own story regarding the fallen pipe on Dave Gallagher’s property. Needless to say, reporter Maria Gallucci practices the same sort of quality journalism as her ICN colleagues. We only wish the article were a bit longer, as it raises some important questions that could be further explored, such as the lack of regulations (at either the state or federal levels) about pipeline proximity to dwellings, the shoddy work of the MPSC when approving this project, and, of course, the fact that what has gone on out at the Gallagher property is just an extreme version of the troubles endured by countless landowners along the Line 6B route. The article also, unfortunately, doesn’t shed any light on the question of whether the Smith-Manshum account of immediate on site inspection of the dropped pipe really did occur.
Speaking of construction accidents, news from Griffith, Indiana is that Enbridge crews accidentally busted a water main, draining the entire contents of one of the city’s water towers. Thinking back on some other accidents– the tree they dropped on that power line over the holidays, the sewer line they broke at an intersection in Howell a while back– we’re wondering just how common these sorts of accidents are on large-scale projects like this. It’s no clear whether this is routine or whether Enbridge’s contractors are especially accident prone. But even if they’re not particularly unusual, the messy realities of pipeline construction are clearly a far cry from the smooth, hassle-free portrait of the process that Enbridge painted for landowners and municipalities before it all began.
Finally, on the national scene, the Wall Street Journal this morning is reporting that the vast majority of pipeline leaks are not discovered by operators and all their fancy gadgets and doodads, all those high-tech devices they love to talk about, but by individuals on-site. We’re glad the WSJ has done the story, but they’re pretty late to the party. We’ve been talking about this for a long while, as have some of our very favorite reporters. The splendid Elana Schor, for example, was on it way back in August of last year. (Incidentally, Schor’s been getting a fair amount of television face-time lately (and more). We’re glad her voice is reaching national ears, as it should, but we’re also a little worried she’s moving over toward the dark side. We’ve all seen what the tv does to people…)
Oh boy. We’ve been trying to begin a new semester, which is always slightly frantic, while all sorts of things are happening on the Enbridge front. This has put us behind the curve somewhat; we’re sorry for that. We’re going to try and do some catching up today; it’s going to take more than one post.
The obvious place to start is with the crazy situation out at Dave Gallagher’s property in Ceresco. As most readers of this blog already know, Dave’s situation is a bit of a nightmare, given the proximity of construction to his home (he’s not the only one who has had to live such a nightmare either: just ask Beth Duman or Marty Burke) and he’s been documenting construction activity pretty carefully.
Which is a good thing considering what happened last week: while lowering a section of pipe into the trench, one of the cranes carrying the pipe tipped over completely. You’ve probably seen one or more of the news reports, as the incident has been covered widely. The dramatic pictures tell the story:
Exactly what caused this accident, we have no idea; we’re certainly not pipeline installation experts. Nor do we know how unusual this sort of accident is, though we suspect it’s pretty unusual. Below, we’ll hazard a theory about what may have contributed to the incident. But first, we’ll at least acknowledge that like any other enterprise, especially a large complicated project like the installation of miles of pipeline, accidents are bound to happen. For that reason, the tipping over of the crane– though obviously very serious– may not actually be the most interesting part of the story. It’s what happened next that makes it all so troublesome.
Mainly that’s because what happened next now appears to be a matter of some dispute. Dave, who was there videotaping the whole thing, says that after righting the crane, construction crews simply continued installation. No one on site inspected the pipe for potential damage.
But in a statement released to the news media, Enbridge spokesman Jason Manshum says otherwise:
“…the pipe was lifted out of the ditch and inspected by the senior lead coating inspector, the assistance chief inspector and a utility inspector for all possible damage. The assessment was that no damage occurred as a result of this situation. Work resumed and the pipe was installed into its final position and backfilled in the area that did not have sheet piling.”
Enbridge spokesperson Jennifer Smith tells the same story. According to Michigan Radio’s Lindsey Smith:
Enbridge Energy disagrees with Gallagher. Enbridge community relations advisor Jennifer Smith says three of their lead inspectors were on hand and did a visual inspection of the pipe. She says further inspection would’ve been completed once the section of pipe was installed.
Now, Lindsey (or Jennifer Smith) is very polite to call this a “disagreement”. But this is not disagreement. It is not just some difference of opinion. It is not merely a matter of interpretation. In fact, it’s very simple: either someone on site inspected that pipe or not. Period. Somebody here is not telling the truth. Dave Gallagher was there watching the situation unfold. Jason Manshum and Jennifer Smith were not there. Moreover, both Manshum and Smith have a history of making misleading comments to the press. On that basis, we can only conclude that Smith and Manshum– directed, of course, by the powers-that-be at Enbridge– were instructed to do some serious backside covering. We wish reporters would press them on this point a little. Dave’s is a first-hand, eyewitness account. Can Smith or Manshum produce any sort of evidence at all that their account is true? If so, we would gladly post it here (Enbridge knows how to reach us).
Because no one on site inspected the pipe– despite Enbridge’s claims to the contrary– Dave had the good sense to contact PHMSA. Surprisingly, PHMSA actually looked into the matter, sending inspectors out to Dave’s property and everything. Bizarrely, Jason Manshum tried to pass this off as “routine,” which it quite plainly is not. At any rate, PHMSA directed Enbridge to replace the section of pipe in question, which they did. But of course, as Dave points out in Keith Matheny’s Free Press article, all of this happened only because Dave was there to see it:
“Who knows how many times this has happened before — how many times the homeowner wasn’t home to see this happen, or it happened out in the woods somewhere out of sight?” he said.
Dave actually raises two important issues here, both of which we’ve discussed at length over the past year and a half. The first, of course, has to do with oversight. It shouldn’t be news to anyone at this point to say that our regulatory system is weak, ineffectual, and terribly broken. In a rational world, landowners wouldn’t have to be the ones watching out for the safety and integrity of pipelines during or after construction.
But the reality is, given this seemingly hopeless regulatory environment, that landowners are the first line of defense when it comes to pipeline safety. And for that reason, like it or not, we are (or ought to be) partners with operators like Enbridge whose pipelines cross our properties. Unfortunately– and this is the second issue that Dave’s remarks tacitly raise–Enbridge seems incapable of fostering such partnerships. Just as they have with so many other landowners, Enbridge has, from day one, botched their relations with Dave Gallagher. As a result, he’s become an outspoken critic, vigilant and vocal.
And that poses a serious problem for Enbridge–not because they won’t ultimately get to do whatever they want more or less how they want. They almost certainly will. No. Dave Gallagher poses a problem for Enbridge because reporters keep coming out to his property and writing stories and doing television reports on what’s happening there. And if we’ve learned anything through all of this, it’s that Enbridge cares far more about its public image than it cares about landowners.
Which brings us to our theory about what may have contributed to this construction incident. Enbridge, we suspect, just wants to get the hell off of Dave Gallagher’s property as quickly as they possibly can. The longer they’re there, the more (bad) publicity they’ll get. So they’re rushing, they’re hurrying. It’s why they’re working through all sorts of nasty weather (while at the same time citing winter conditions for NOT continuing work on our side of the state); it’s why they tried to pound steel pilings into the ground before installing seismic monitoring equipment; it’s why they’re blocking his driveway; it’s why they’re working well after dark; it’s why they didn’t inspect the pipe that fell into the ground; maybe it’s even why the crane tipped over in the first place: because they’re acting hastily, in a rush to get finished. And when you rush things, when you act in haste, you are prone to mistakes.
The result? Yet again, Enbridge’s peculiar way of (mis)handling problems only compounds them.
This week, we’ve been running down the Top Ten Line 6B Citizens’ Blog Posts/Stories of 2013. If you missed it, here is the bottom half of the list and here are the next four. We’ve saved #1 for last, in a feeble and probably not-very-effective attempt to build a little suspense. Once more for the record, here’s what the list looks like so far:
10. Line 6B Earns Pulitzer Prize
7. How Not to Write About Line 6B
6. IJNR Kalamazoo River Institute
5. PHMSA
4. Enbridge Thinks EPA is Stupid
3. Why Enbridge Can’t Do Better
2. Enbridge Re-writes Michigan Law
Now, we have to say once more that it was tempting to place “Enbridge Re-Writes Michigan Law” at the top of the list. We still think that’s an important, revealing, deeply disturbing story, one that has garnered far too little interest. Unfortunately, regulatory matters just aren’t terribly interesting to people, even though, in our view, they are tremendously important when it comes to protecting the public interest, the environment, and the rights of ordinary, individual citizens.
On the other hand, the truth is that #1 on our list was obvious from the start. And fittingly, it’s the content on this blog that we did NOT write ourselves. From the very beginning, this blog has always been devoted, first and foremost, to helping and trying to protect landowners– the people most directly affected by Enbridge’s path of destruction. For that reason, the choice for our top story of the year– actually, a series of stories– is a no-brainer:
1. Landowner Stories. Earlier this year, figuring we could stand to shut up for a change, we turned the blog over to our fellow landowners and let them express themselves and describe their Enbridge experiences in their own words. The results, we think, were extraordinarily powerful. What’s more, for every one who has told her or his story here, there are surely 5, 10, or 20 more landowners along the Line 6B route (not to mention along the routes of pipelines all across the U.S. and Canada!) with similar tales. These people are your neighbors and your fellow citizens. They’ve gotten a bad deal from Enbridge and they’ve been left unprotected by ineffectual regulatory agencies and timid state elected officials. They should be heard.
Last week, we brought you the latest in our series of “Landowner Stories,” this one from our friend Patricia Maurice over in Cass County. Enbridge has been working furiously over there, often late into the night and making all sorts of terrible racket. In the process, they’ve been distressing landowners like Patricia who have little to no idea of what’s been going on and why they have been working all night. This is part of the pattern of poor communication that we’ve been talking about here on the blog for more than a year. Why Enbridge can’t understand that the vast bulk of landowner anxiety, distress, and worry– not to mention bad feelings toward Enbridge– could be eliminated simply by keeping people honestly informed, we have never been able to fathom (though we have worked hard at fathoming).
For a long time, the bizarre dynamic that has followed from Enbridge’s failure simply to keep people informed is that people wind up contacting us, at which point we try to contact Enbridge, even though Enbridge long ago appears to have adopted a policy of not communicating with us about most matters (with the exception of things that happen on our property, causing a frenzy of emails and phone calls on our part to everyone we can think of…). The end result is that nothing really gets answered, everybody winds up even more frustrated, and we have no choice but type up long blog posts about how awful Enbridge is at communicating with landowners.
Lately, however, this seems to have changed a little. Specifically, Enbridge spokesperson Jason Manshum seems to have been given the green light to actually respond to us (we noted this last month). And he has continued to do so. (We have no idea what prompted this remarkable change.) This is a genuinely positive step forward and we think that Manshum would agree that our correspondence has been pretty painless and perfectly amicable; we’re polite and everything!– though we are also persistent and don’t accept non-answers. The crazy thing is that this is almost all we have ever asked for: honest, open, prompt, forthright communication. That alone could solve so very many of Enbridge’s problems with landowners. (Again, why they haven’t just taken our word for that and corrected the problem is beyond anyone’s comprehension). As we said to Jason just today: if this keeps up, we might just run out of things to blog about…
All of which is a very long-winded way of saying that Manshum explained the Cass County situation to us. They have been doing various tests on the pipe over there, hydrotesting in particular. The thing about hydrotesting a pipeline is that once you start, you can’t stop until the test is completed (which takes some time). And when other inline inspection tools (like smart pigs) run through a line, the line has to be constantly monitored until those tools are removed. So that means– particularly on these short winter days– that the tests might well need to run through the night. We ran this explanation through some of our knowledgeable expert friends and it is indeed true (it’s in the actual federal regulations). We’re grateful to Jason Manshum for explaining the situation to us.
Of course, this doesn’t explain everything that has had Patricia concerned. And it certainly doesn’t change the fact that not having explained this or anything else to residents of the area like Patricia Maurice caused those residents all sorts of sleepless nights and all kinds of (possibly) needless worry and turmoil. That remains inexcusable.
While Enbridge has decided to suspend construction activity over on the east side of Michigan, they are evidently continuing work to the west. We’ve been hearing from some more frustrated landowners over the past couple of weeks. A good example of that frustration– combined with more uncertainty and poor communication– is the subject of this latest installment of our ongoing series of landowner stories, in their own words. Exactly what’s happening in this particular neighborhood isn’t altogether clear; it appears to be testing of some sort. Whatever the case, it’s making landowners’ lives miserable:
December 7, 2013
Today, most of my day has been blown dealing with problems related to the Enbridge construction that is currently going on in my next door neighbor’s yard. We live on Dailey Road north of Edwardsburg, along the Enbridge Line 6B pipeline construction zone. Phase 1 and phase 2 construction zones meet in our neighbor’s yard. For the last several weeks, crews have been working 24 hours a day to prepare the new phase 2 pipeline segment to be joined to the phase 1 pipeline; i.e., to make the new pipeline segment active. This has involved pumping air and/or water through the pipeline (and who knows what else is being used?). The pumping noise has been extremely loud, 24 hours a day. On top of this, there has been a steady stream of trucks running all day and all night, making a huge amount of noise. We wake up constantly to the beep-beep-beep of trucks backing up. As one of my neighbors said, the noise is relentless.
This morning, I found a message on my cell phone from (?Joey Brockman?—hard to understand his name) at Enbridge warning us that sometime tonight or tomorrow night they would be blowing air and water out of the pipeline 300 feet into the air, that it would make an extremely loud noise, and that the water was likely to turn to ice. He wanted me to know that it was just water, not a contaminant, but that it would be very loud and ice would likely form. I spoke with some of the workers and then managed to connect with the person who had called me. He said that it would be air, not water, and would be extremely loud. I told him that Enbridge spokesman Tom Hodge had stated on WNDU evening news that in areas where Enbridge is working all night, they have been paying to put people up in hotels and asked why no such offer had been made to us and whether they would put us up in a hotel in anticipation of what they say will be an extremely loud noise at night. The Enbridge person said that if we wanted to stay in a hotel or to be compensated, our lawyer would have to call the Enbridge lawyers sometime on Monday. When I noted that would be after the fact, he said there was nothing they could do. He was giving us a courtesy call to warn us of the impending loud noise and associated activity but that he had no way of offering us a hotel or compensation. We’d have to wait until Monday and have our lawyer call Enbridge. Given that today is Saturday, and this is imminent, Monday will be too late.
I spoke with the local sheriff’s county dispatcher to find out whether there were any noise ordinances that could force Enbridge to do this during the day rather than at night. She told me that the same thing had happened about a year ago and that they had received a large number of phone calls of complaint and worry. She said to expect that it would be extremely loud, like a jet liner taking off right next to our house. An officer was very polite in saying that there was nothing they could do about it, but suggested that if it wakes us up, we videotape it, and that we call them if we feel that we or our home are in danger at any time. He said that we could try to file a complaint but that there are no noise ordinances in our township and that the prosecutor’s office would not prosecute Enbridge, anyways.
After wasting a good part of the day on various phone calls, and talking with some neighbors, here are my thoughts.
First, this is another example of Enbridge’s dishonesty when dealing with the public. Enbridge spokesman Tom Hodge said on WNDU evening news last week that in areas where Enbridge is working overnight, they are putting local residents up in hotels. That is not happening here. As one of my neighbors put it, it’s a complete lie. Many of us have been woken up repeatedly at night and the noise has been relentless. Now, they are even warning us of an extremely loud noise and air (potentially with water/ice) spouting 300 feet upwards, sometime in the middle of the night. But when asked, they say there is no way to put us up in a hotel… have our lawyer call Enbridge’s lawyers to ask (but after the fact). This is another clear example of an Enbridge lie; their PR person is saying one thing on the nightly news but something completely different is being experienced by the people who actually live along the pipeline. Even when we are warned of an extremely loud noise and ask for a hotel, they say there is no way to do this.
Second, people who live along the pipeline have essentially no rights. Even if a problem occurs, our local sheriff’s office tells us that unfortunately there is nothing they can do because the prosecutor’s office is unlikely to act against Enbridge. I must say that our local sheriff’s officers seem to be very good, caring people.
Third, the people who are working along the pipeline are making huge amounts of money (one worker today told me he is making $150,000 a year) but the people who live here are seeing our home life and property values decimated but are receiving no compensation. Enbridge and its workers care only about making a lot of money. They are not ethical in their treatment of the people who live here and pay taxes.
Fourth, Enbridge just can’t get its story straight. First, they leave a message warning of water fountaining up 300 feet and forming ice. [Think about this… high pressure water and ice cascading on our neighbor’s property with the potential for ice to be pushed at high pressure towards our home.] But, when I question their contention that it is completely safe, they change their story to say that it will involve no water, only air. But, even a blast of air coming out of the pipeline may not be ‘safe.’ Pipelines have all sorts of coatings, some of which can contain hazardous chemicals that can get into either air or water at high pressure.
Fifth, what does this mean for our future? After they are done connecting up the pipelines, they will have to start cleaning out the old pipeline, which is full of contaminants from decades of operation. How long will that go on? How noisy will it be? I can only assume it will be happening here, as they haven’t told us anything one way or another. How are they going to protect local families from potential air- or water-borne contaminants coming out of the old pipeline as they clean it? Obviously, they will say it is safe, but how can we believe them? As a professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences, I have learned about the long history of companies telling people that things are safe when they are not. They have given us no information.
Sixth, I have informed WNDU repeatedly that what Tom Hodge said on their news broadcast was not correct. I even sent them a video with sound of the horrendous noise and commotion at night. But, they have not done a follow up story questioning the PR that was broadcast on evening news. Why aren’t local journalists questioning Enbridge’s PR machine? Will they respond to my news tip about what is supposed to go on here sometime over the next two nights? Will that response be something more than an Enbridge PR person telling lies?
Seventh, is Enbridge doing this at night because they don’t want people to see it? I’ve asked for them to tell me exactly when it will be happening, but they said it was too fluid to predict the timing. On the other hand, they say it will be at night… which can only be because they don’t want it to be during the light of day when people would see it and be able to videotape it easily. I could buy them saying that it will be sometime over the next 48 hours—but they are not sure exactly when. But to say it will be AT NIGHT means that they are purposely doing it in the dark to keep people from seeing and taping what they are doing. That is scary.
Eighth, the workers on our neighbor’s property are working in an extremely noisy environment. Yet, they often are not wearing ear protection. I’ve noticed when I’m out in my yard that I can often see them walking around without any ear protection. When I was there this morning, one of the workers showed me his ear protective gear in a brand-new, un-opened package. So, who is supervising to make sure that all of the proper safety regulations are enforced? I have earaches/ringing in my ears today after only being next to the site for 5 minutes. But, they are there for hours on end and not always wearing ear protective gear. What other safety regulations are they not following? I plan to call OSHA on Monday to make a complaint. BTW, there were no ‘no trespassing’ signs or other warnings anywhere near the site, and I was not asked to leave. I left on my own accord because of fear of damage to my ears. What if I had been a child?
Finally, what kind of Christmas are we going to have? Will the incessant noise and worry (of potential contamination—and who knows what else could happen at a major construction site?) go on all through Christmas as it did through Thanksgiving? Will they offer a hotel or (better yet) compensation? After all, who wants to spend Christmas in a hotel rather than at home? Can we ever believe anything Enbridge says?
This is only one tiny part of a long saga of our problems with Enbridge. This is a company that is making billions of dollars and that is running a dangerous pipeline. It should be treating local citizens honestly and with integrity. It should be following safety guidelines strictly. It should be doing everything it can to protect the local homeowners and the environment. It’s good that Enbridge actually called to warn us in advance; but a warning is not enough to provide homeowners the ‘peace of mind’ that Enbridge keeps talking about. And, I suspect the warning was not for our sakes but for theirs… it could be embarrassing to have a bunch of panicky homeowner phone calls to the police in the middle of the night (which apparently happened before).
December 10, 2013
This morning, we were woken up very early to an extremely loud, piercing noise throughout our house. Once it was bright enough, I walked out and took photos of the site, where Enbridge is discharging vapor into the atmosphere. The smell was quite strong and organic, which caused me to start having an asthma attack. I took a number of short videos and some photos, although it is hard to get clear shots because the work is happening on the other side of large mounds that Enbridge has created.
I called the sheriff’s office and told them about the extremely loud noise and organic smell and the fact that Enbridge may be violating Michigan ordinance 750.352 Molesting and disturbing persons in pursuit of occupation, vocation or avocation given that I am trying to work at home today. I told them that the air pollution was causing an asthma attack. They said they could not do anything about it. I had to cancel a phone conference because of Enbridge’s activities, so it in indeed affecting my work.
I also called the PHMSA hotline and voiced my concerns that Enbridge is venting something from their pipeline activities that is causing not just a huge amount of noise but also a very bad smell in the air. They said they would inform the EPA.
Enbridge has been making a huge amount of noise all day and all night for weeks as they work to link up Line 6B Phase 1 and Phase 2 on our neighbor’s property. Despite the fact that Tom Hodge stated on WNDU nightly news that they are putting people up in hotels in areas where they are working all night, no such offer was made and when we asked an agent who called this weekend, he told us they could not do anything. This is causing massive disturbance for our family. Our son keeps getting woken up at night which is a serious problem when he has school (or SAT tests!) the next morning. We are also woken up repeatedly, and when we try to work from home we are often disturbed. This morning, it is completely impossible to get any work done because of the loud noise and air pollution, and my phone conference had to be postponed. I am about to head out because of this.
I would like to go outside and hold up a sign along the road protesting Enbridge’s unethical treatment of homeowners but the air pollution and noise are too overwhelming. Enbridge has created enormous problems for our family for months. When will this stop? When will they begin to act in an honest, ethical manner? When will they put enough money into engineering (noise reduction, pollution reduction, etc.) that they won’t cause such problems for local families?
Patricia Maurice, Cass County, MI
It’s the end of the semester for us, which is why we’ve been a little quiet this past week. There are all sort of final tasks to attend to this time of year, not least of which are piles of student papers to grade. Wish us luck that they are all brilliant and trenchant!
But there is a bit of pipeline news to share, including a personal item we’ll tell you about soon.
The latest Enbridge news, unfortunately, isn’t so good. Ace reporter Jennifer Bowman over at the Battle Creek Enquirer reported this week that Enbridge is suing the owner of a farm along the Line 6B route to gain access to his property for activities related to the spill cleanup. In its suit, Enbridge claims that the landowners have been recalcitrant and unwilling to reach an agreement. Knowing how Enbridge negotiates with and treats landowners, we’re more than a little skeptical about Enbridge’s claims in this matter, although the full details of the situation aren’t entirely clear. At the very least, dragging yet another landowner into court doesn’t seem like a very good p.r. move, given Enbridge’s already damaged reputation in this state.
We’ve also gotten word that construction activity has begun to heat up on our friend David Gallagher’s property. And evidently, it’s off to a rocky start. Dave tells us that crews tried to begin work before installing some agreed-to seismic monitoring equipment. We fear that this is only the first of a long stretch of headaches Dave, like so many others have endured, is going to have to attend to in the weeks and months to come.
Another landowner, our friend Patricia, has also contacted us with some terrible, ongoing noise and mess over in her neighborhood– again, just one in a long litany of difficulties she’s had to put up with. That story will be the next installment of our ongoing series of landowner stories. Expect it very soon.
Lastly, we’re still working on the first of our series of posts about last month’s PS Trust conference. If you haven’t seen them already, the video presentations are available for viewing. If nothing else, we strongly recommend, where you can hear from the above-mentioned Dave Gallagher, along with two other remarkable pipeline-company-created activists.
We’re already working on our series of posts following last week’s PS Trust conference (we think we’ll start by discussing everybody’s favorite federal regulatory agency!). But there’s a holiday coming up, so we’re not sure how soon we’ll get to the first one. Meanwhile, some more papers have picked up the story of the construction delays on phase two of the Line 6B replacement, including the suspension over to our east that we mentioned last week. There’s this one and this one, for example.
And then there’s this one. If we had the energy, Joseph S. Pete’s article in the Times of Northwest Indiana (whatever happened to Lauri Harvey Keagle, who was doing such good work?) could easily be the basis of another of our “How Not to Write About Line 6B” posts. But to be honest, we haven’t got the energy; sometimes, it just feels too much like howling into the dark and empty wilderness. Suffice it to say that Pete did little more than type up a friendly Enbridge press release. Sigh.
Setting that aside, we just have one little question: aren’t any local reporters even remotely interested in asking the blatantly obvious question here about these delays? What environmental permits, specifically, has Enbridge not yet obtained and why have they not obtained them? Wouldn’t anybody covering this story think to ask that?
We’re trying to find out ourselves and will let you know if and when we learn anything.
This week, Enbridge notified some townships on phase two that they will stop work for the winter. CJ Carnacchio over at the Oxford Leader has the story. This is a very strange turn of events and the article raises far more questions than it answers. It also contains more of the same old Manshumisms we’ve heard before. Let’s take a look:
According to Carnacchio, a letter to Oxford and Addison Townships, Manshum announced that:
. . . construction on Segment 8 (of Line 6B) is being adjusted due to timing of receipt of final environmental approvals and seasonal constraints,” Manshum wrote.
We will resume the work as soon as weather permits in 2014, and anticipate completing Segment 8 construction by mid-2014.
In the letter, Manshum treats this as if it’s good news, the result of Enbridge thoughtfulness and consideration toward landowners:
By conducting the majority of construction activities, such as excavation, installation and restoration next spring, it will allow us to minimize disruptions to landowners and impacts to the environment because work can be completed in one season.
But let’s think about this for a minute. The bit about “seasonal constraints” is surely complete hogwash. Although the letter mentions “construction challenges and potential damages associated with freezing weather, including road frost bans and slippery road conditions”– challenges that are certainly real– those things in no way prevented Enbridge from working all through the winter last year. In fact, they didn’t even begin construction on our property until November. And work continued all through December, January, and February. So clearly, Enbridge has no trouble real trouble working through the winter months. Also, it’s not clear– the article doesn’t say– whether this cessation of work applies to the parts of phase two on the west side of the state (we suspect not, but we’ll try to find out).
Winter construction work, January 2013.
What this suggests is that the real reason they’re stopping construction has to do with “the timing of receipt of final environmental approvals.” Now that’s a typically wriggly and awkward Manshum phrase, just unclear enough to leave some doubt as to what it’s actually saying. But what we suspect it is saying– although Manshum would never say anything so clear and unequivocal as this– is that Enbridge for some reason failed to obtain some necessary permits and, as a result, they have no choice but to stop work. (Again, we’re not sure about this but are trying to find out.) In other words, we strongly suspect this has nothing at all to do with “seasonal constraints” or a desire to “minimize disruptions to landowners.” That’s just Manshum disingenuously trying to dress this situation up to make Enbridge look good when in fact, they failed to do what they are required to do (secure appropriate environmental approvals and permits).
But then the article gets even stranger. Specifically, things get strange when Carnacchio explains what will happen with the old, deactivated Line 6B. It’s not entirely clear in the article, but it appears that Manshum told Carnacchio this:
The old underground pipeline will not be removed to make way for the new one. It will be left in place where it will run parallel and adjacent to the new line using the same right-of-way.
Once the new line is tied in and activated, the old line will be deactivated.
Deactivation involves purging all the oil from the old line and cleaning it thoroughly to remove any remaining crude. The old line is then taken apart, divided into small segments and capped.
It’s the last sentence here that has us scratching our heads: “The old line is then to be taken apart, divided into small segments and capped.”
Say what?!
This is news to us. In nearly two years of talking, thinking, and asking about the deactivated pipe we have never heard any such thing before. Surely this can’t be true. For one thing, it just doesn’t make sense. Enbridge has said from day one that the main reason for leaving the old line in place is because taking it out would cause further disruptions to landowners. In fact, Manshum says it again at the end of this article:
Coming back and removing the old pipeline once the new one is activated would be inconvenient and disruptive for landowners who would have their properties dug up and disturbed a second time, according to Manshum.
But if they’re going to divide the old line into segments and cap them, how exactly would they do this without digging up disturbing landowners’ properties a second time? This segmenting and capping business needs some further clarification and explanation to say the least. We’re looking into this, too.
Lastly, we can’t help but say one more thing about this matter of inconvenience and disruption to landowners, which Enbridge’s stableful of Manshums has been repeating for so long. That line is supposed to make it look like they just care so much about us. But frankly, it’s insulting. It is not up to Jason Manshum to decide what is too much inconvenience and disruption; no one from Enbridge has ever asked us or any other landowner whether we think the disruption it would cause would be worth the permanent removal of the old Line 6B. Until they do, we would appreciate it if they would stop speaking for us.
If you’ve been keeping up with our series of Landowner Stories, then you know that what’s on the minds of most phase one landowners is restoration. It’s certainly been on ours. This morning, Sam the dog wanted to take a tour of some of the work in the neighborhood. What we saw was not very pretty. To the right, for example, is the current state of yard that was seeded at least six weeks ago, maybe longer.
And here’s what it looks like in our backyard, which was seeded a month ago. Note the bare spots, indicating the poor mulch job.
We also noticed that there is a new restoration contractor on the scene– an outfit brought in all the way from Idaho. We find this turn of events very interesting and are working on a much longer post about restoration work on phase one and the companies Enbridge has hired to do that work. It’s quite a tale. Please stay tuned!
