The Michigan Messenger

Top Stories

The Michigan Messenger going forward

By Staff Report | 11.16.11

I am writing today to announce the closure of the Michigan Messenger. After four years of operation in Michigan, the board of the American Independent News Network, has decided to shift publication of its news into a single site, The American Independent at Americanindependent.com. This is part of a shift in strategy, towards new forms [...]

Colorado-based abstinence program provided false and misleading information to Michigan students

HIV-AIDS-small
By Todd A. Heywood | 11.16.11

An abstinence-only presentation provided to numerous school districts in Calhoun and Eaton Counties in October of this year provided false and misleading information to students about HIV, experts allege.

Class action lawsuit filed against MERS over unpaid taxes

foreclosure
By Todd A. Heywood | 11.15.11

Two county registers of deeds filed a class action lawsuit Monday on behalf of Michigan’s 83 counties alleging that the Mortgage Electronic Registration Services owes millions of dollars in property title transfer taxes.

Schuette fights important mercury regulations

epa_logo
By Eartha Jane Melzer | 11.14.11

Despite evidence of the impact of mercury on children and public health, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette last month joined with 24 other state attorneys general in filing a lawsuit to scuttle new EPA regulations that would reduce mercury emissions from power plants.

Reports say Enbridge employee was on scene Sunday night

By Todd A. Heywood | 08.02.10 | 3:56 pm

Despite repeated denials by Enbridge and an initial denial of access to the documentation, the Marshall Township Fire Department has now released an incident report from late in the evening on Sunday, June 25 to the Michigan Messenger. That report clearly documents that firefighters met with an Enbridge employee on the scene of the oil spill nearly 12 hours before the company says it first became aware of a possible oil leak.

The firefighters were on the scene at Division Dr. and Old 27 at 10:05 pm on Sunday, June 25. And the report states:
 

In regard to this incident, two firemen responded to Division Drive and Old 27 for a gas odor investigation. Upon arriving on scene, the two firefighters smelled what they thought was a petroleum smell. After checking the area to determine the cause, they came in contact with an Enbridge employee who agreed that it smelled more like a petroleum smell and that he thought it was coming from the Clark Oil holding tanks. One of the firefighters made the comment that it smelled more like crude oil and the Enbridge employee then stated he still thought it was coming from Clark Oil.

After further investigation, nothing was found and the scene was cleared and returned to Station Number one at 23:10.

The document is signed by Marshall Township Fire Chief Steve Riggs.

Enbridge has repeatedly denied any knowledge of a possible leak until 10:30 am on Monday, June 26. At that point, they say, they noticed a drop in pressure and first received a call from local authorities about the smell of oil. This documents confirms that they knew about the leak some 12 hours earlier.

Despite this evidence, Enbridge continues to deny that any of their employees was present. At a press conference moments ago, CEO Patrick Daniel said unequivocally in response to the document, “There was no Enbridge employee on site on Sunday.”

Update: The NTSB now says that the firefighters who filed this report were mistaken and the person they talked to was a Michigan gas utility worker, not an Enbridge employee.

Here is the document itself:


Marshall Township Fire Departmentoil spill

Comments

  • http://twitter.com/vielmetti Edward Vielmetti

    “There was no Enbridge employee” may well have been true; Enbridge employs very few people directly, and almost everyone who has an Enbridge badge is really a contractor.

  • bonniebucqueroux

    Sorry, Ed, but the distinction isn't really whether they quality for a full-blown employee under IRS rules or whether they act as a representative of Enbridge. Bottom line is that an Enbridge “agent” (a term the company might like less than “employee”) was there and should have done more to find out what was going on – and may or may not have reported back to HQ. What is most worrisome is that it appears lots of CYA is going on.