Merrimack asks DOT to reduce road salt after tests show high salt levels in water supply – WMUR

Report on Road Salt Contamination in Merrimack, NH and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Introduction and Background

Officials in Merrimack, New Hampshire, have identified excessive road salt application as a significant source of contamination for the local water supply. The Merrimack Village District’s water source, Naticook Brook, has exhibited progressively rising salt levels over several decades, a trend linked to de-icing activities on roads managed by the New Hampshire Department of Transportation (DOT). This situation presents a direct challenge to public health, environmental integrity, and the achievement of key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

2.0 Impact on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The groundwater contamination in Merrimack directly undermines progress on several critical SDGs:

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The increased salinity of drinking water poses a direct public health risk, particularly for individuals with hypertension or other sodium-sensitive health conditions. Ensuring the safety of the public water supply is fundamental to this goal.
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: The core of the issue is the chemical contamination of a vital freshwater resource. The failure to mitigate salt runoff directly contravenes the target of ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: This case highlights a conflict between two aspects of community sustainability: ensuring safe transportation infrastructure (via road salting) and protecting essential public services like clean water. A sustainable community requires integrated planning that addresses both without compromising public health.
• SDG 15: Life on Land: Road salt runoff degrades freshwater ecosystems, harming aquatic life in sources like the Naticook Brook and altering the chemical balance of the surrounding environment. This directly impacts the goal of protecting and restoring terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The administrative deadlock preventing a solution demonstrates a weakness in institutional effectiveness. The requirement for unanimous consent from all municipal departments has created a procedural barrier, hindering a timely and just resolution for the community’s environmental health.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals: The inability of the Merrimack School Board, other town departments, and the state DOT to reach a collaborative agreement exemplifies a failure in partnership. Effective multi-stakeholder partnerships are essential for addressing complex environmental challenges and achieving sustainable development.

3.0 Stakeholder Positions and Institutional Challenges

A resolution has been stalled by a procedural requirement set by the DOT, which mandates a signed approval letter from all town departments to designate the area for reduced salt application. The positions of the key stakeholders are as follows:

1. Merrimack Village District Water Works: Actively advocating for the creation of a reduced salt area to protect the integrity of the public water supply, noting that signage indicating such a zone already exists.
2. Merrimack School Board: Has refused to sign the required approval letter, citing unspecified legal reasons. This refusal has created a complete halt in the process.
3. New Hampshire Department of Transportation (DOT): Has deferred action pending the fulfillment of its procedural requirement for unanimous local approval.

This institutional impasse means that no changes to road salt application are likely for the upcoming winter season, perpetuating the cycle of contamination.

4.0 Historical Context and Conclusion

This is not an isolated incident of water contamination for the community. Merrimack previously faced a significant environmental challenge with PFAS contamination from the Saint-Gobain plastics plant, which led to its closure. The current issue with road salt underscores a recurring vulnerability in the community’s environmental and public health systems. Achieving a sustainable and healthy future for Merrimack requires stronger institutional collaboration and a more proactive approach to environmental protection that aligns with the principles of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article directly addresses public health concerns arising from water contamination. State Rep. Nancy Murphy is quoted saying, “Groundwater contamination by road salt affects the environment and public health,” and later mentions “the health impacts in human beings from environmental contamination.”
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: The core issue of the article is the contamination of drinking water sources by road salt. It states, “Merrimack officials say too much road salt is contaminating their water,” and identifies a specific water source, the Naticook Brook, as being affected.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The problem stems from municipal practices—the application of road salt by the Department of Transportation (DOT). The effort to create a “reduced salt area” is a move towards making the community’s infrastructure management more environmentally sustainable.
• SDG 15: Life on Land: The contamination of groundwater and brooks like Naticook Brook represents a threat to local freshwater ecosystems, which falls under the protection of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article highlights a governance challenge. The inability of different public bodies (Merrimack officials, the DOT, and the school board) to agree on a solution demonstrates a weakness in institutional effectiveness and cooperation needed to protect public welfare.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• 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’s focus on the “health impacts in human beings from environmental contamination” caused by road salt (a chemical) in the water supply directly aligns with this target.
• Target 6.3: “By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution… and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials.” The central conflict is about reducing the amount of road salt (a chemical pollutant) entering the water supply to improve its quality.
• Target 11.6: “By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities…” The use of road salt is a municipal practice with a negative environmental impact on the local water supply. The request to the DOT to “put less on the roads” is an attempt to reduce this impact.
• Target 15.1: “By 2030, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services…” The contamination of Naticook Brook and the local groundwater affects inland freshwater ecosystems, and reducing this pollution is a step towards their conservation.
• Target 16.6: “Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.” The article illustrates a failure of this target, as the disagreement between the town departments and the school board is preventing an effective response to a public health and environmental problem.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for Target 6.3: The article explicitly mentions that “Testing shows salt levels have risen over decades.” This directly implies a measurement of water quality. Progress towards Target 6.3 could be measured by monitoring these salt levels, which relates to Indicator 6.3.2: Proportion of bodies of water with good ambient water quality. A reduction in salt concentration in Naticook Brook would indicate improvement.
• Indicator for Target 3.9: While no specific health data is provided, the concern for “health impacts in human beings” implies that tracking illnesses related to water contamination is a relevant measure. This connects to the concept behind Indicator 3.9.2: Mortality rate attributed to unsafe water, unsafe sanitation and lack of hygiene. A reduction in such health incidents would signify progress.
• Indicator for Target 11.6: The request to “put less on the roads” implies that the quantity of road salt used is a key metric. An implied indicator would be the amount of road salt applied by the DOT in the Merrimack area. A documented reduction in salt usage would be a direct measure of progress in reducing the city’s environmental impact.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: wmur.com