New Jersey Residents To Get Share of $4.9 Million Drinking Water Settlement – Newsweek

Report on Middlesex Water Company Settlement and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A $4.9 million settlement has been reached in a lawsuit against Middlesex Water Company, compensating approximately 60,000 New Jersey residents for the presence of carcinogenic chemicals in their drinking water. This case highlights critical failures in achieving key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being). The contamination and subsequent legal action underscore the importance of corporate accountability, regulatory enforcement, and access to justice in the pursuit of sustainable development.

Violation of SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

Failure to Provide Safe Drinking Water

The lawsuit originated from Middlesex Water Company’s failure to meet state-mandated safety standards, a direct contravention of the principles outlined in SDG 6, which calls for universal access to safe and affordable drinking water.

• Contaminant Levels: In 2021, the company reported levels of Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a type of PFAS chemical, at 36.1 parts per trillion (ppt).
• Regulatory Breach: This level significantly exceeded New Jersey’s maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 14 ppt, established in 2020 to protect public health.
• Affected Population: The violation impacted the water supply for 61,000 residents served by the company.

Impact on SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

Public Health Risks and Consequences

The presence of high PFOA levels in the water supply poses a direct threat to public health, undermining the objectives of SDG 3. The company’s own notice acknowledged the severe health risks associated with prolonged exposure.

Identified Health Threats:

1. Increased risk of testicular and kidney cancer.
2. Adverse effects on blood serum cholesterol levels, liver, and kidney function.
3. Damage to the immune and reproductive systems.
4. Specific health risks for pregnant women and fetuses.

As a result of these risks, residents, particularly vulnerable groups, incurred out-of-pocket expenses for bottled water, water filters, and medical consultations, placing an additional burden on their well-being.

Challenges to SDG 12 and SDG 16

Responsible Consumption, Production, and Institutional Justice

This incident also reflects broader systemic challenges related to other Sustainable Development Goals.

• SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production): PFAS chemicals are widely used in industrial and consumer products due to their durability. Their persistence in the environment and presence in drinking water highlight a failure in the environmentally sound management of chemicals throughout their lifecycle.
• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): The class-action lawsuit represents a crucial mechanism for citizens to seek justice and hold institutions accountable. The settlement, the largest of its kind in New Jersey, provides a remedy for affected residents. However, the case also points to potential weaknesses in regulatory oversight, especially in light of reports that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may consider rolling back standards for certain PFAS chemicals.

Settlement Outcome and Conclusion

Remediation and Accountability

The settlement resolves the lawsuit by providing financial reimbursement to the affected residents, with payments ranging from $50 to $2,500. Attorney Stephen DeNittis stated the settlement represents a “great recovery” for customers who incurred expenses due to the water quality violations. This outcome reinforces the principle of accountability but also serves as a critical reminder of the ongoing need for stringent water quality monitoring and corporate responsibility to safeguard public health and achieve the fundamental human rights enshrined in the Sustainable Development Goals.

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

The article on the Middlesex Water Company lawsuit highlights issues that are directly connected to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These goals address the fundamental challenges of ensuring public health, providing essential services, and maintaining justice and strong institutions.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  This goal is central to the article, which focuses on the health risks associated with carcinogenic PFAS chemicals in drinking water. The text explicitly mentions that exposure to PFOA levels above the accepted limit could lead to “problems with their blood serum cholesterol levels, liver kidney, immune system, or, in males, the reproductive system,” and an “increased risk of testicular and kidney cancer.” The lawsuit was initiated by a resident with “specific health concerns and a severely compromised immune system,” further emphasizing the direct link to human health and well-being.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  The entire article revolves around the contamination of a public drinking water supply, which is the core focus of SDG 6. The lawsuit was filed because the Middlesex Water Company provided water with PFOA levels that “violated a New Jersey drinking water standard.” The issue is about the quality and safety of drinking water provided to 60,000 residents, making this SDG directly relevant.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  This goal aims to make human settlements safe, resilient, and sustainable. Access to safe and reliable basic services, including drinking water, is a cornerstone of a sustainable community. The article demonstrates a failure in providing this basic service to a community of “Around 60,000 residents in New Jersey,” impacting the safety and sustainability of their living environment.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  This goal is addressed through the legal and institutional aspects of the story. The residents’ ability to file a lawsuit and achieve a “$4.9 million” settlement demonstrates access to justice. The article also touches upon the role of institutions, such as the water company (which was held accountable), state regulators (who set the health limits), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), whose potential rollback of standards raises concerns about institutional effectiveness in protecting citizens.

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

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 3.9: Substantially reduce deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and pollution

   This target is directly relevant as the article details the presence of “carcinogenic” PFAS chemicals in the water supply. The lawsuit and settlement are a response to the potential for illness caused by this chemical contamination. The company’s notice outlined numerous health risks, from liver and kidney problems to cancer, which are the exact types of illnesses this target aims to reduce.

2. Target 6.1: Achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all

   The article highlights a clear failure to meet this target for the 61,000 people served by the Middlesex Water Company. Their water was not safe, as it contained PFOA levels exceeding the state’s health limit. The fact that residents were advised to “consider using bottled water for drinking or cooking” and subsequently filed a lawsuit to be reimbursed for these costs underscores the lack of access to safe drinking water from their primary supplier.

3. Target 6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals

   This target is addressed by the article’s focus on the contamination itself. The water quality was compromised by “levels of a certain carcinogenic chemical in its drinking water supply over state health limits.” The presence of PFOA at 36.1 ppt, more than double the state’s maximum contaminant level, is a direct example of water pollution by hazardous chemicals that this target seeks to eliminate.

4. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law and ensure equal access to justice for all

   The lawsuit filed by a resident on behalf of the entire affected community is a clear example of citizens using the legal system to seek remedy and justice. The successful outcome, described as “the largest settlement of its kind in New Jersey,” demonstrates that the legal framework provided a mechanism for holding the company accountable and providing relief to the affected residents, thereby upholding this target.

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

Yes, the article contains several specific quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure the status and progress related to the identified targets.

• Indicator for Targets 3.9 and 6.3: Concentration of pollutants in drinking water

  The article provides a precise measurement of the PFOA chemical concentration. It states the level was “36.1 ppt,” which can be directly compared against the established safety standard, the “state’s health limit of 14 parts per trillion (ppt).” This numerical data serves as a direct indicator of the extent of water pollution and the associated health risk.

• Indicator for Target 6.1: Population using safely managed drinking water services

  The article implies a negative indicator by stating that “Around 60,000 residents” or “61,000 Americans” were supplied with water that was not safe. This number represents the population within this specific service area that did not have access to safely managed drinking water, directly measuring the gap in achieving Target 6.1.

• Indicator for Target 16.3: Access to legal remedy and justice

  The financial settlement serves as a quantifiable indicator of justice being delivered. The article specifies the total settlement amount is “$4.9 million” and that affected residents are “set to receive either $50 or up to $2,500 as reimbursement.” These figures represent a tangible outcome of the legal process and provide a measure of the remedy provided to the victims.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: newsweek.com