New Hampshire's Attorney General says the recently passed US House Energy bill will hurt the state's chances in court. Of specific concern is a provision in the bill that protects the manufacturers of the gasoline additive MTBE from liability lawsuits. New Hampshire Public Radio's Rebecca Kaufman has more.
In late September of 2003, the state of New Hampshire filed a lawsuit against the companies that manufacture the gasoline additive MTBE.
The chemical helps cut down on air pollution from cars and trucks, but it has a downside.
MTBE has leaked into the ground, widely contaminating drinking water in certain parts of the state and across the nation
The State's lawsuit alleges that these companies made and sold MTBE knowing it could be harmful to the state's water supply.
And the suit seeks compensation from the companies for the cost of cleaning up the damage MTBE has caused.
1:42 right now the way the federal legislation is drafted, it bars all claims for that type of claims
That's New Hampshire's Attorney General Kelly Ayotte.
She says current language in the House energy bill essentially halts their lawsuit from moving forward.
1:52 it could preclude New Hampshire's suit from going forward because it essentially says any claims filed after september 5th of 2003 cannot go forward against these manufacturers
And she says without being able to claim that MTBE is a defective product, the state's suit is weak.
2:55 we do have other theories we have brought that are not defective product claims however this is a significant claim and a significant portion of our lawsuit and could have a very detrimental effect on new Hampshire's ability to recover from these manufacturers for the harm that has been caused to our groundwater and surface water from MTBE
Currently 195 public water supplies in the state have shown detectable levels of MTBE - that's 16 percent of the state's total public water supplies.
And MTBE contamination is most pervasive in Strafford County, where it has been found in 30 percent of wells.
Attorney General Kelly Ayotte addressed her concerns in a letter to Representative Charlie Bass, who voted for the energy bill last week.
:44 I'm not pleased with that provision in the bill anymore than the attorney general is
The 2nd District Republican says rather than compensate states through a lawsuit that could drag on for years, he's advocating for setting up a special fund devoted to states effected by MTBE.
To do that, Congressman Bass first has to be appointed to the conference committee that will work out the differences between the House and Senate Energy Bill.
4:05 I'm supporting my committee's position on the bill because I want to be part of the solution and I think the solution will be better than the status quo and obviously significantly better than what's in the bill today, if its not I won't support it when it comes back to the floor
2:37 I don't know exactly what Charlie thinks he can achieve
That's first district Representative Jeb Bradley.
He voted against the energy bill, in part because he has concerns over the current MTBE provision.
Bradley says he'd be willing to consider Bass' plan.
But he also doesn't want to let MTBE manufacturers off the hook.
2:40 hopefully he's on the committee of conference and a reasonable settlement is reached, and a reasonable settlement means that manufacturers have to pay for a significant portion of the cost of remediating public water supplies, private wells, the gamut in new hampshire
Back in 1999, the cost of cleaning up MTBE in the Northeast was estimated to be around 45 million dollars.
The energy bill now goes to the senate.
Senators John Sununu and Judd Gregg both voted against the last energy bill in 2003 in part because of a similar provision that would have protected MTBE manufacturer's from liability lawsuits.
For NHPR news, I'm RK.
