On more than one occasion over the past couple of years, Enbridge officials have told us that the Line 6B situation in Michigan is anomalous– presumably meaning that the contention, the poor communication, the acrimony, and the miscues (on their part) are out of the ordinary. Elsewhere and in the past, they would have us believe, Enbridge does not and has not conducted itself the way it has conducted itself here.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, too much evidence suggests otherwise. The latest glaring example of this has to do with Line 9 in Canada. Line 9, you will recall, runs across Ontario to Sarnia (where Line 6B terminates). Enbridge is currently seeking to reverse the flow of that pipeline, raising serious concerns on the part of residents all along that route.<\/p>\n
Just this week, a Canadian television program, CTV’s W5, ran a major story on the project<\/a>, uncovering some troubling facts about the integrity of Line 9, which is 38 years old. (The video is currently unavailable in the U.S., but we’ll link to it once it is viewable); they even came to Michigan to speak with residents here, like our friend David Gallagher. Among other things, the report discovered far more incidents on the line, including at Enbridge facilities, than previously reported publicly.<\/p>\n Most striking to us about the report– and in a follow-up story at the Toronto Star<\/a>— is the reaction to this news by local officials. Their refrain is one that we and many others all across Michigan have been singing for a very long time: Enbridge does not, despite all of their claims to the contrary, communicate openly, honestly, and straightforwardly. For instance:<\/p>\n Landowners like Walker living along Enbridge\u2019s Line 9 pipeline say that when problems arise on the pipelines running through their land they struggle with getting answers and help from the company.<\/p>\n \u201cI didn\u2019t believe that a pipeline or anybody would kind of leave you holding the bag the way that they\u2019ve left me holding the bag on this one,\u201d says Walker.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n And this:<\/p>\n W5 called the municipalities where these spills occurred and the majority of them were not notified. The Mayor of Sarnia, Mike Bradley, where thousands of litres of product released at an Enbridge terminal, said he wasn\u2019t informed of the nine incidents there since 2006 and believed that regardless of the fact that they were on Enbridge property, he thought the city should be informed.<\/p>\n \u201cIf you want to have a good relationship with your community, and you want to get rid of the distrust that is out there for the pipeline industry you disclose everything,\u201d said Bradley.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n And in the Toronto Star<\/em>:<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s quite alarming,\u201d said Brian McHattie, a city councillor in Hamilton, where seven leaks over the years have released nearly 3,000 litres of crude oil at company facilities northwest of the city. \u201cThis is new information for me.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n McHattie said the information raises concern about what is shared with municipalities. Hamilton staff met regularly with Enbridge officials since the company submitted its application, but none, to McHattie\u2019s knowledge, were ever informed of the spills.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n \u201cThey just haven\u2019t been very forthcoming with us,\u201d said McHattie. \u201cIt just makes you less confident in their integrity as a company and their willingness to share information and be above-board.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n And this:<\/p>\n Cramahe Mayor Marc Coombs said he first learned of five spills that together leached 1,824 litres of oil when he was contacted by a\u00a0W5<\/i>\u00a0reporter.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n \u201cWe were not notified of any of them,\u201d said Coombs. \u201cIt does (raise concerns), from the point of view of transparency.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n And this:<\/p>\n Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley said the city isn\u2019t usually notified when spills are contained within facilities and don\u2019t require municipal staff to be involved in containment or cleanup. He said the city hadn\u2019t heard about the nine spills linked with Line 9 facilities in the past decade \u2014 but it should.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n \u201cIt\u2019s just a good practice to notify, and then we can make our own judgment whether we need to do anything further,\u201d said Bradley. \u201cJust tell us. That\u2019s all we want \u2014 to know.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n In both reports, Enbridge spokesperson Graham White– he’s the guy who not long ago out-Springered Larry Springer by fabricating a story<\/a> about one citizen seeking more information about Line 9–is on hand with all of the standard excuses and platitudes. In fact, it appears that he and his team of spin doctors even tried a preemptive strike, sending out a letter to local officials criticizing the report before it had even aired.<\/p>\n Of course, to those of us in Michigan, there’s nothing new about any of this. Enbridge’s failure to communicate honestly with landowners, municipalities, and the public and its desperate attempt to try and solve all of its problems via its vast (and inept) public relations apparatus\u00a0has been the predominant theme of this blog for a very long time; just see, for example,\u00a0this<\/a> and this<\/a>\u00a0and this<\/a>\u00a0and this<\/a>. Perhaps Canadians will have more success convincing elected officials and regulators to step up and protect the public than we have in Michigan.<\/p>\n —-<\/p>\n\n