July 22, 2020

Dear Governor Whitmer and Director Ajegba,

We the undersigned residents of Southwest Detroit and surrounding neighborhoods, and fellow Detroiters and Michiganders, oppose the routing of Hazardous Materials on to the Ambassador Bridge. We understand that the state is being urged by the Detroit International Bridge Company (DIBC) to review a decision by the Snyder administration regarding the routing of cargo labeled Flammable, Corrosive, Radioactive, and Explosive in Wayne County.

Lobbyists pushing for this change reference a technical report issued by the Michigan Department of Transportation in 2012. We believe the 2012 MDOT report was flawed and that the previous administration made the correct decision in 2013 to continue enforcing hazardous materials routes as currently restricted and to deny the request that they be lifted.

The National Hazardous Material Route Registry may and should only be changed in efforts to enhance public safety. The 2012 MDOT study neglected that fact and offered no explanation of how permitting more hazardous materials across the bridge would enhance public safety. Three schools and two public parks lie within the vicinity of the Bridge and Plaza, and the bridge opening lies in a densely populated neighborhood, where 40 percent of the residents are children. Risking the safety of the seniors, families and children in these places would be negligent.

Moreover, our communities have already faced tremendous environmental justice challenges, from truck traffic to industrial pollution and last year's Revere Dock collapse. Allowing further environmental hazards would be extremely detrimental to our communities. We request that your administration continue this policy to protect the public health, public safety, and integrity of the border crossing.

For more than 90 years, the Ambassador Bridge has been held to hazardous materials restrictions. And while recent efforts by DIBC to lift these restrictions mention only gasoline, and most recently hand sanitizer, their request clearly is to lift the restrictions on all four categories listed above.

Other international crossings allowing hazardous materials transport are operated by, open to, and regularly inspected by government officials. The Ambassador Bridge continues to restrict government inspectors and enforcement unit access to the bridge. Not one of us has seen a State of Michigan or independent analysis of the Ambassador Bridge or its infrastructure.

Considering the age and security requirements, allowing hazardous materials transport endangers the public as the Ambassador Bridge continuously opposes any inspections and is reluctant to share any internal information about the condition of its bridge substructure, superstructure or roadway.

The Ambassador Bridge is over 90 years old and cannot be credibly compared to Michigan's other international bridges, which are much more modern. The bridges in Sault Ste. Marie and the Blue Water Bridge are significantly younger and have transparent fire suppression and spill containment plans which the Ambassador lacks. This inhibits public safety agencies from creating and collaborating on an emergency response plan in the event of an accident or discharge of