NH Green Snow Pro program cited as model as Vermont panel debates H86 liability, training and funding

Officials from the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services told a Vermont legislative panel Wednesday, April 9, that New Hampshire’s Green Snow Pro certification and limited-liability provisions have helped reduce road-salt use while still allowing property owners and contractors to defend against slip-and-fall claims.

Ted Diers, assistant director for the Water Division at the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, and Aubrey Velker, New Hampshire’s salt reduction program coordinator, described how New Hampshire began a voluntary salt-reduction program after monitoring found elevated chloride levels and after an Interstate-93 widening increased paved surfaces. Diers said the state began a voluntary training and certification program in the mid-2000s and later added a liability-relief element to encourage contractors to use less salt.

The testimony came during discussion of H86, a Vermont bill that would create a certification-based program for winter applicators and includes a limited-liability presumption for certified applicators. The issue has drawn attention in Vermont because municipalities and the Vermont League of Cities and Towns urged lawmakers to pair any new liability protection with municipal monetary caps or other taxpayer protections.

How New Hampshire’s program works Aubrey Velker described the Green Snow Pro certification process and recordkeeping requirements. Applicants must complete approved coursework, pass an exam and file an annual certification application and fee with New Hampshire DES. Velker said individual certificants pay an annual application fee of $150; a master certificate (typically for a company supervisor or owner) costs $250; subordinate applicators are $25 each (capped at the first four subordinates, or $100). When a company has five or more applicators, Velker said the typical annual program fee is about $350.

Velker said the program requires renewal every year (certificates expire June 30) and refresher training every two years. Larger firms may apply to have an approved master trainer in-house; that person must still complete outside partner training. She said New Hampshire issued about 35 certificates in 2013 and more than 700 certificates in the most recent winter season, representing 136 companies. The state adopted municipal Green Snow Pro rules in May 2024 that create standard, advanced and expert municipal certification tracks.

Recordkeeping and legal role Diers and Velker said certified applicators must keep event-level records that include application type and rate, dates of treatment and weather conditions for each treatment event; they submit an annual salt-use report to DES listing treated pavement and municipalities served. Diers noted DES supplies these records to attorneys when asked in litigation; the applicators themselves must retain the underlying logs and contracts.

Attorney Mike Johnson, who said he has litigated New Hampshire snow-removal cases since the late 1990s, told the panel that Green Snow Pro certification does not bar plaintiffs from suing. "This law is not [an] absolute bar," Johnson said. He described the limited-liability provision as an affirmative defense the defendant must prove at trial, listing the elements juries have been instructed to consider (that the applicator was a commercial applicator, that a contract existed, that the hazard came from snow or ice, that the failure to remove or mitigate the hazard was not gross negligence or reckless disregard, that best-management practices were implemented, and that written records were kept). Johnson said he tried a Rockingham County case to jury verdict for a certified defendant and that the plaintiff later dismissed the appeal.

Municipal concerns in Vermont Josh Hanford, director of intergovernmental relations at the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, told the committee municipalities support salt reduction but raised several concerns with the narrow liability protection proposed in H86. Hanford said Vermont lacks municipal monetary caps that other states maintain, and he urged lawmakers to consider adding broader municipal protections (he cited a 2011 Vermont statute that set state caps—"500,000 and combined at 2,000,000," as described to the committee—and noted New Hampshire’s municipal caps of $325,000 per incident and $1,000,000 combined). Hanford warned that when settlements are large the cost falls on taxpayers and that municipalities do not enjoy the same sovereign protections that the state does.

Committee questions and points of contention Committee members asked about program staffing, costs and the availability of training. Velker said she is the program manager and works part-time, supported by colleagues during busy season; Diers said New Hampshire’s Green Snow Pro program has an annual operating budget of about $100,000 and that the program would benefit from another staff person and improved financial incentives (for example, low-interest loans used in Ohio to help vendors adopt brining equipment).

Members asked about homeowner-level incentives. Velker said homeowners are not certified unless they hire a certified commercial applicator; DES is focusing outreach to homeowners but historically emphasized commercial parking lots and driveways because they contribute most to chloride impairments. Diers and Velker told the committee that research shows typical applications often exceed needed salt by 25–50 percent and that best-management practices and brine use can reduce salt use substantially.

Several lawmakers said they are not yet comfortable advancing limited-liability language until the program’s operational standards and funding are clearer. Multiple members suggested a two-step approach: fund and finalize standards and training, then reassess whether to add or expand liability protections. Others recommended exploring fee-based funding, partnerships with New Hampshire or the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, and more robust outreach and training before changing tort standards.

Where this goes next No formal action or vote was recorded at this hearing. Committee members indicated they want more detail on standards, enforcement and funding before deciding whether H86’s liability presumption should move forward. Several members asked staff to seek additional information from agencies and stakeholders on training cadence, database costs and cross-state coordination.

Ending The committee paused the hearing for a short break and will consider follow-up requests for information before submitting a recommendation to the full legislature. DES officials and municipal representatives offered to provide further technical details and to continue answering committee questions.