Report on New Jersey Drinking Water Quality and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

This report analyzes the state of drinking water quality in New Jersey, examining legislative actions, historical context, and current challenges through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The primary focus is on SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), with significant connections to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions).

Legislative Framework and Institutional Accountability: Pursuing SDG 16

Effective governance and transparent institutions are fundamental to ensuring public access to safe resources. New Jersey’s legislative efforts reflect a commitment to SDG 16 by strengthening regulations and improving communication regarding water quality.

Proposed Legislation for Enhanced Transparency

A key legislative proposal, Bill A1400, aims to fortify the institutional framework for water safety, directly supporting the principles of SDG 16.

• The bill mandates that water suppliers provide direct notification to municipalities and schools regarding any violations of drinking water standards.
• If enacted, this legislation would significantly improve public awareness and transparency, empowering consumers and local governments with critical information about their water quality.
• This initiative aligns with SDG Target 16.6, which calls for developing effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels.

Historical Evolution of Water Quality Standards

The development of drinking water regulations in the United States has been an incremental process, driven by public health crises that underscore the importance of robust standards for achieving SDG 3 and SDG 6.

1. Early 1900s: The first federal drinking water standards were established to combat the spread of waterborne diseases like typhoid fever.
2. Mid-20th Century: Growing awareness of the neurotoxic effects of lead prompted municipalities to regulate its presence in drinking water.
3. 1974: The Safe Drinking Water Act was passed, creating a comprehensive federal framework for protecting public water supplies from contaminants.
4. 1986 & 1996: Amendments to the Act further addressed lead in plumbing and other emerging concerns, demonstrating an evolving commitment to public health.

Ensuring Access to Safe Water and Public Health: A Focus on SDG 3 and SDG 6

The availability of clean water is a cornerstone of public health and sustainable development. Recent events and ongoing contamination challenges highlight the critical need for vigilant management of water resources to meet the targets of SDG 3 and SDG 6.

The Imperative for Clean Water Access

High-profile water crises, such as the one in Flint, Michigan, have elevated national awareness that access to safe drinking water cannot be taken for granted. These events serve as stark reminders of the consequences of failing to uphold SDG 6. Case studies from affected regions, such as Pontiac, Michigan, reveal severe disruptions to daily life, where contaminated water rendered unfit for consumption or domestic use forced residents to rely entirely on bottled water. Such experiences underscore the profound health and well-being implications, particularly for vulnerable populations like children with pre-existing health conditions.

Contemporary Contamination Challenges: PFAS Chemicals

A modern threat to achieving SDG 6 is the prevalence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often called “forever chemicals.” Prolonged exposure to PFAS poses significant health risks, directly impacting the achievement of SDG 3.

• Decreased fertility and increased high blood pressure in pregnant women.
• Developmental delays or effects in children.
• Increased risk of certain cancers, including prostate, kidney, and testicular cancers.
• Negative impacts on the immune system.

Utility Initiatives and Sustainable Infrastructure: Advancing SDG 6 and SDG 11

Water utilities in New Jersey are actively implementing strategies to combat contamination and improve infrastructure, contributing to the development of sustainable communities as envisioned in SDG 11 and ensuring the sustainable management of water as required by SDG 6.

Technological and Financial Commitments to Water Treatment

In response to the PFAS challenge, New Jersey was the first state to establish Maximum Contaminant Levels for these chemicals. Utilities are now making substantial investments in treatment solutions.

• Aqua New Jersey: The utility launched a $3 million filtration system in Lawrenceville to remove PFAS. However, the company estimates a further $70 million to $80 million is required for comprehensive remediation across all its contaminated sites, illustrating the significant financial challenge in upgrading infrastructure to meet modern safety standards.
• American Water: As the state’s largest supplier, the company is actively working to address PFAS contamination and enhance consumer confidence in line with state regulations.

Promoting Consumer Confidence and Community Partnership

Transparency and public engagement are crucial for building trust and fostering community resilience, key components of SDG 11. Water utilities are utilizing various tools to keep residents informed.

• Consumer Confidence Reports: American Water provides an annual, searchable database of water quality reports, allowing residents to access information specific to their location.
• Community Outreach: The utility engages in community events and provides accessible resources, such as informational one-pagers and explainer videos, to demystify complex topics like PFAS contamination. These efforts position the utility as a community partner in the shared goal of securing safe and reliable drinking water for all.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

The article on drinking water quality in New Jersey touches upon several interconnected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by highlighting issues of public health, environmental contamination, infrastructure, and governance.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  This is the most prominent SDG in the article. The entire text revolves around the safety, quality, and accessibility of drinking water. It discusses historical and current challenges, such as contamination from typhoid, lead, and “forever chemicals” like PFAS. The efforts of water utilities like Aqua New Jersey and American Water to filter contaminants and the state’s regulations directly address the core mission of SDG 6.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article explicitly links water quality to human health. It mentions the spread of “typhoid fever” in the early 1900s and the “harmful effects” of lead discovered in the 1940s and 50s. Furthermore, it details the health risks associated with PFAS, citing the EPA on links to “decreased fertility or increased high blood pressure in pregnant women, developmental effects or delays in children, and increased risk of some cancers.” The personal story of Meralys Crespo’s child with eczema also underscores the health dimension of poor water quality.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The issues are framed within municipal and community contexts. The article mentions specific locations like Flint, Michigan; Pontiac, Michigan; and Camden, New Jersey, highlighting that access to safe water is a critical urban service. The proposed Bill A1400, which involves communication between water suppliers and municipalities and schools, reinforces the role of community-level systems in ensuring public welfare. The focus on infrastructure, such as the “$3 million filtration system” in Lawrenceville, is key to building resilient and sustainable communities.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article discusses the role of legislation, regulation, and institutional transparency. It references the “Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974” and the proposed New Jersey “Bill A1400” as examples of governance aimed at protecting public health. The push for transparency through this bill and the actions of American Water, which provides a “Consumer Confidence Report resource page,” are efforts to build “effective, accountable and transparent institutions.”

Specific Targets Identified

Based on the article’s content, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.

   The article’s central theme is the struggle to ensure safe drinking water. The experience of Meralys Crespo, who found the water in Pontiac, Michigan, to be “brown, almost maroon,” is a direct example of a lack of access to safe water. The entire regulatory framework and the utility upgrades discussed are aimed at achieving this target for residents in New Jersey.

2. Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials…

   This target is addressed through the discussion of specific contaminants. The article focuses on combating “forever chemicals, like PFAS.” The action by Aqua New Jersey to launch a filtration system to “capture and removed the chemicals” is a direct effort to reduce pollution and improve water quality.

3. Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.

   The article connects water contaminants directly to illness. It mentions historical public health crises like “typhoid fever” and modern concerns over PFAS, which are linked to cancer and developmental delays. Efforts to regulate and filter these “hazardous chemicals” are aimed at achieving this target.

4. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   The proposed “Bill A1400” is a key example. It “requires water suppliers to notify municipalities, school districts, charter schools, and non-public schools of violations of drinking water standards.” This is a mechanism designed to improve transparency and accountability. Similarly, American Water’s provision of “Consumer Confidence Reports” and “Water Quality One Pagers” serves to make the utility a more transparent institution.

5. Target 6.b: Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management.

   The article mentions that Joey Rodriguez of American Water is a “consistent figure in community events and outreach opportunities in Camden.” The company’s efforts to be a “resource hub and partner to the city” and design its website “with the community in mind” are examples of strengthening local community participation and access to information.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

The article mentions or implies several indicators that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets:

• Indicator for Target 6.1: Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services.

  This is implicitly measured by the article’s narrative. The description of water in Pontiac, Michigan, as “brown, almost maroon” indicates a population not using safely managed services. Conversely, the existence of “well-monitored water systems” in New Jersey and the provision of “Consumer Confidence Reports” are tools to track and verify the proportion of the population that does have access to safe water.

• Indicator for Target 6.3: Presence of water quality regulations and standards.

  The article explicitly states that “New Jersey was the first state to set maximum contaminant levels for PFAS.” This regulation serves as a direct indicator of efforts to improve water quality by controlling hazardous chemicals.

• Indicator for Target 3.9: Mortality rate attributed to unsafe water.

  While not providing statistics, the article implies this indicator by referencing historical “deaths and illnesses” from “typhoid fever” and the potential for severe health effects from lead and PFAS. Tracking the incidence of these specific health outcomes in relation to water quality data would be a way to measure progress.

• Indicator for Target 16.6: Public access to information.

  The article provides concrete examples of this indicator. The proposed “Bill A1400” aims to mandate the sharing of information about water quality violations. Furthermore, the availability of tools like the “Consumer Confidence Report resource page,” “Water Quality One Pagers,” and “PFAS explainer videos” from American Water are tangible measures of public access to information.

• Indicator for Target 6.b: Financial investment in water infrastructure.

  The article provides specific financial figures that serve as an indicator of investment in water management. It mentions Aqua New Jersey launched a “$3 million filtration system” and will need an “additional $70 million to $80 million to remediate all its sites.” These figures quantify the level of effort and resources being dedicated to improving water quality.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

Source: delawarecurrents.org