IMG_9343.jpg

Updates

State House Updates

PFAS Action Package Receives Unanimous Vote from NH Senate Committee

unnamed.jpg

Tuesday morning, the Senate Health and Human Services Committee held a public hearing on HB-1264—a bill that I sponsored that originally would have extended the work of the Commission on the Investigation of the Seacoast Cancer Cluster for two more years until June 30, 2020. But because of the need to prioritize and consolidate legislation because of the pandemic,  the bill was amended by Sen. Tom Sherman and Sen. Jeb Bradley to also include three additional PFAS-related bills that were formerly separate bills.

In an executive session that immediately followed the hearing, the both the original bill and the amendment received unanimous bipartisan 5-0 Ought to Pass recommendations from the committee. The amended bill now moves on to the full Senate for a vote on June 11.

In addition to extending the work of the commission, HB-1264  also would:

  • Formally enact into state statute allowable maximums for PFAS in public drinking water supplies that were developed in 2019 as administrative rules by the NH Department of Environmental Services. (Formerly SB287)

  • Provide a $50 million bond that would provide loans and grants for municipalities and water districts addressing PFAS contamination in drinking water. (Formerly HB-1603)

  • Require health insurance companies doing business in NH to offer coverage for PFAS and PFC blood tests. (Formerly SB623)

Plymouth Water and Sewer Superintendent Jason Randall spoke in favor of the amended bill. Randall said he applauds the committee for taking on PFAS, but worries about the potential impact on water and sewer rates should the $50 million the state would set aside for remediation prove to be too low. He also expressed concern that testing waste water effluent may have been left out of the bill and that ongoing operations and maintenance costs may not be accounted for. Randall says PFAS has been detected in Plymouth’s water supply.

Also speaking in favor of the amended package was environmental advocate and Executive Council candidate Mindi Messmer and Rep. Renny Cushing. Messmer said extending the work of the Seacoast Cancer Cluster Commission was vital and that the amended bill represented an opportunity for New Hampshire to make genuine progress in the battle to combat environmentally triggered cancers. 

David Creer, Director of Public Policy for the NH Business and Industry Association, spoke in opposition to the amendment. Creer said that that after introducing the new requirement in 2019, the Department of Environmental Services DES failed to quantify the financial cost/benefit of imposing more rigorous standards as required by state law. Industry and municipal groups, including the chemical companies that manufacture PFAS, have challenged the standards in court, claiming that the DES analysis did not take into account the impact of required remediation on municipal and water district budgets. 

Meanwhile, representatives of NH health insurance companies opposed the part of the bill requiring insurers to cover blood testing costs.

Sabrina Dunlap of Anthem questioned whether blood testing for PFAS has any clinical value for guiding treatment. Sen. Sherman, a practicing physician, pushed back saying it is Important to get a baseline level in patients who have had exposure when assessing the impact on other illnesses. 

Kathryn Cole, representing the Tufts Health Freedom Plan, also opposed requiring coverage for testing saying that a blood test can’t identify where the contamination came from. Sen. Sherman again pushed back, saying that doctors test for conditions like Hepatitis C all the time even though those tests can’t identify where the patient contracted the illness. 

Peter Bragdon, the former President of the NH State Senate and current lobbyist for Harvard Pilgrim Health Care also opposed covering the cost of testing. Bragdon told the committee that while Harvard Pilgrim understands the legitimate public concern that prompted the legislation, at $800 per test it is too expensive for a test that he claimed could not be used in the treatment of an individual.

David Meuse