Rep. Wendy Thomas, a Merrimack Democrat, speaks in Merrimack on Friday, Sept. 27, 2024. Thomas attributes her breast cancer to the high levels of PFAS in her blood. (Claire Sullivan | New Hampshire Bulletin)
Merrimack has paid a steep price to clean up PFAS pollution in its public drinking water. A lawmaker said Friday she hopes that doesn’t mean the town will miss out on funds from massive lawsuit settlements from manufacturers of the “forever chemicals.”
Rep. Rosemarie Rung, a Merrimack Democrat, pointed out that in New Hampshire those settlement funds will be directed to the Drinking Water and Groundwater Trust Fund, which will provide loans and grants to public water systems where levels of PFAS, a class of harmful man-made chemicals, are above standards.
In 2019, voters approved the Merrimack Village District to spend $14.5 million to filter four public wells contaminated with PFAS. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics, a French manufacturer that emitted PFAS from its Merrimack facility, agreed to foot filtration for two other public wells.
Rep. Rosemarie Rung, a Merrimack Democrat, said of Merrimack’s response to the PFAS problem: “You know, we’ve set the example about how to get out there and address a problem head on. (Claire Sullivan | New Hampshire Bulletin)
“I think the fair thing to do would be that Merrimack Village District should be able to get money … from that fund to cover that cost that the ratepayers committed to years ago,” Rung said. “You know, we’ve set the example about how to get out there and address a problem head on and don’t wait, and take the leadership, and it seems as though that’s not being acknowledged.”
Rung hopes those distributing settlement funds will “be fair to us and use some of that money to cover that cost.” The state is expected to get upwards of $65 million in the next two to three years as the result of settlements with manufacturers of PFAS and aqueous film-forming foam, also known as AFFF.
The money was one of many issues addressed at a Friday morning press conference of Democratic lawmakers and citizen activists concerned by PFAS pollution in the state. They celebrated wins in the legislative session but also acknowledged the long path ahead to root out the chemicals that break down at an extraordinarily slow pace. PFAS are linked to numerous health problems – high cholesterol, weakened immune systems, some cancers, and more – and can be found in almost all humans.
The scene of the press conference, a Merrimack park along the Souhegan River, illustrated that even in a state revered for its natural beauty, the harmful, man-made chemicals are ubiquitous. Beneath a canopy of trees, sunlight streaming through the wet leaves, lawmakers and residents held signs with slogans like “people over polluters” and “stop the source.”
Laurene Allen, co-founder of Merrimack Citizens for Clean Water, speaks at a press conference Friday, Sept. 27, 2024. (Claire Sullivan | New Hampshire Bulletin)
“Look around at this beautiful, beautiful, beautiful town,” said Laurene Allen, co-founder of Merrimack Citizens for Clean Water. “We have many, many parks, we have many, many natural resources, and who would guess that it’s all contaminated with the most persistent of all endocrine disruptors, PFAS?”
One bill passed this session aims to stem the flow of PFAS-laden products into the state. House Bill 1649, approved by Gov. Chris Sununu in August, will ban certain products with intentionally added PFAS from sale in the state starting in 2027. The chemicals are often found in everyday products, used to make things stain- or water-resistant. The ban will include cosmetics, carpets, feminine hygiene products, products for young children, and more.
The use of the chemicals in so many corners of society has spread the contamination far and wide.
“Constantly, PFAS are being discovered where they shouldn’t be: food, drinking water, lakes and rivers, soil, freshwater fish, seafood, ocean spray, breast milk, and even the blood of newborns,” said Rep. Karen Ebel, a New London Democrat who was the prime sponsor of the bill. “Why? Because these harmful ‘forever chemicals’ are used in just about everything you can imagine.”
Though Sununu approved the product ban, which also created strict liability for PFAS polluters, he shot down House Bill 1415, which would’ve created liability for PFAS facilities and had a much stricter standard than the bill he signed. He cited concerns from the New Hampshire Business and Industry Association over the conflicting standards.
The prime sponsor of that bill, Rep. Nancy Murphy, a Merrimack Democrat, said there would be an attempt to override the veto when lawmakers convene Oct. 10.
“I will likely refile HB 1415 and hope that our next governor will stand up for New Hampshire citizens and prioritize people and planet over polluter profits,” she said.
Many of those at the press conference Friday spoke to the issue not just in political terms, but personal ones.
Rep. Wendy Thomas, a Merrimack Democrat who got a bill passed this session to notify property-buyers about possible PFAS pollution, has breast cancer she attributes to the high levels of PFAS chemicals detected in her blood. Her husband had a quadruple bypass at age 55. She said dogs in town are put down “all the time because of cancer.”
“This stuff is very, very bad,” she said. “If you consume it long enough, you’re going to get sick.”