New Hampshire Lawmakers Seek To Extend Statute of Limitation for PFAS Exposure Lawsuits

Some New Hampshire state lawmakers say they intend to introduce legislation that would give residents injured by exposure to toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) more time to file civil lawsuits, since new data continues to emerge that shows the toxic side effects associated with the chemicals, and how manufacturers have known for years that there was a problem.

Currently, New Hampshire has a six-year deadline to file a PFAS exposure lawsuit, based on when the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known that they were exposed to chemicals that caused their injuries. That statute of limitations was doubled from just three years in 2021, and the lawmakers now propose pushing that time limit out to a decade.

PFAS Exposure Concerns

PFAS include a group of over 9,000 man-made substances, which are widely used to resist grease, oil and water. However, they are known to persist for decades, and researchers have identified myriad adverse health effects linked to the so-called “forever chemicals”, including testicular cancer, kidney cancer, ulcerative colitis and other side effects.

Most of the PFAS health concerns have stemmed from water contamination problems, caused by the large volumes of the chemicals in aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), which have been used by the military and firefighters for decades to fight fuel-based fires.

During training and response exercises, these PFAS chemicals have been dumped into the environment and local water supplies, particularly around military bases, airports and firefighter training locations, causing many communities to have dangerous levels of the chemicals in their drinking water.

However, it has taken years for scientific evidence to emerge drawing links between PFAS exposures and injuries, and many individuals nationwide are just now discovering that their water was contaminated, or that a particular chemical they were exposed to was harmful.

Since it often takes a long time for PFAS exposure illnesses to appear, and there is growing evidence that manufacturers have actively worked to conceal the risks from consumers, New Hampshire lawmakers indicate that state residents should have more time to file a lawsuit.

The new legislation is expected to be outlined soon by New Hampshire House Representative Suzanne Vail, who championed lengthening the statute of limitations back in 2021. The bill will be cosponsored by Representatives Wendy Thomas and Nancy Murphy.

Vail has already introduced a place-holder bill with just a title, and indicates the full language will be available soon. Last year, she introduced legislation that sought to eliminate the statute of limitations for PFAS lawsuits entirely.

However, she and her cosponsors now say they are willing to work with lawmakers for an extension of the current timelines instead, to about 10 to 12 years, with the option to extend the statute of limitations further in the future, if deemed necessary.

Vail has indicated that she and the other cosponsors believe the country and their state are still discovering how widespread PFAS exposure and injuries are.

PFAS Exposure Lawsuits

3M Company, DuPont, Chemguard, Inc., Tyco Fire Products and other manufacturers of chemicals and fire safety products already face thousands of lawsuits over PFAS exposure from firefighting foam, including claims brought by former firefighters as well as individuals diagnosed with various types of cancer after drinking contaminated water.

Given common questions of fact and law raised in the litigation, complaints brought throughout the federal court system have been consolidated under U.S. District Judge Richard M. Gergel in South Carolina, for pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation.

As part of the coordinated management of the claims, a small group of early PFAS exposure lawsuits are being prepared for trial dates starting in 2025, involving claims that individuals developed injuries after drinking water known to be contaminated with high levels of the chemicals.

While the outcome of these early trial dates will not have any binding impact on other claims being pursued throughout the federal court system, they are designed to help gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that will be repeated throughout the litigation.