Panel weighs HB 226 to authorize drug-checking services for harm reduction programs

Concord — The Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee considered HB 226, a proposal to explicitly authorize drug-checking equipment and activities when used by registered harm reduction or public-health programs.

Proponents said the measure would legally enable programs to test illicit substances more comprehensively than single-target test strips and to carry out confirmatory analyses that public-health authorities need for rapid warnings. "We just do not have the information," Liz Bowley, director of education and technical assistance at the New Hampshire Harm Reduction Coalition, told the committee.

Representative Jody Newell, who introduced the bill, said the current law permitted single-substance test strips (for example, fentanyl strips) but not the broader range of equipment now available commercially. The bill would add definitions for "drug checking," "drug checking equipment" and related terms, carve out an explicit exemption from paraphernalia prohibitions for registered programs, and state that results should not be used for punitive enforcement action.

Public-health and harm-reduction witnesses described practices used in other states. Carrie Nolte, a family nurse practitioner and University of New Hampshire faculty member, described cases in which substances thought to be non-opioid contained fentanyl and caused fatal outcomes. "I found one of my best friends dead from an overdose. He had been using a substance in order to sort him through. It was not an opiate ... it was confirmed to have fentanyl in it, and that was his cause of death," Nolte said.

Harm reduction advocates said current rapid test strips identify only the presence or absence of a single targeted compound and cannot detect combinations or new analogs. Expanded testing — including portable Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) or comparable instruments and confirmatory laboratory testing — can identify multiple constituents in a single sample and reveal unexpected adulterants such as xylazine or benzodiazepines.

Proponents also said clearer legal authority would allow providers to apply for federal and other funding streams they are currently unable to access. Kate Frey of New Futures and other public-health advocates urged passage as part of an "all-of-the-above" overdose-prevention strategy that includes naloxone distribution, syringe services and targeted interdiction.

State police raised operational concerns. Major Bill Bright, who oversees the investigative bureau, said the bill as drafted was broad and could be interpreted to allow any person to possess and transport drugs for testing; he urged tighter definitions and procedures for handling, securing and disposing of samples and asked for protections against exploitation or diversion. "How does somebody bring an illegal, dangerous, narcotic drug somewhere safely in order to get it checked? I don't have that answer," Bright said. He also flagged potential liabilities and administrative consequences tied to possession and transport of samples.

Supporters said the draft already narrows the exemption to registered harm-reduction and public-health programs and that they were prepared to work with law enforcement and committee staff on implementation details such as chain-of-custody, storage and confirmatory lab pathways. Representatives of syringe-service and harm-reduction groups described existing client engagement practices: programs often serve as trusted points of contact, distribute naloxone and make treatment referrals, and the presence of testing can prompt risk-reduction behavior.

No vote was taken. Committee members asked sponsors and advocates to provide clarifying language and to work with law enforcement and the Department of Health and Human Services to refine definitions and protocols; the sponsor said an amendment had already been submitted to clarify that the exemption applies only to authorized program employees and not to people bringing samples for testing.

Ending note: Sponsors and advocates said they will provide draft language and operational guidance addressing sample handling and confirmatory testing requirements for the committee’s consideration.