Senate Bill 384, titled the 2025 Safe Drinking Water Act, would direct the North Carolina Commission for Public Health to begin rulemaking by October 15, 2025, to establish maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for chemicals that are probable or known carcinogens or otherwise toxic and likely to pose a substantial hazard to public health. The bill specifically requires MCLs for PFAS, PFOA, PFOS, hexavalent chromium (chromium-6), and 1,4-dioxane.
The bill also requires the Commission to consider setting MCLs for other contaminants if at least two other states have already set MCLs or issued guidance. In setting these standards, the Commission must review other states’ standards, scientific studies, ATSDR materials, and the latest peer-reviewed or government research, and it must adopt limits protective of public health, including for vulnerable populations such as pregnant and nursing mothers, infants, and children. The bill further provides that North Carolina’s standards may not exceed any EPA MCL or health advisory, and it requires annual review and additional rulemaking as needed to keep contaminant limits current.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would expand the Commission for Public Health’s rulemaking duties under North Carolina drinking water law by requiring the adoption and periodic review of contaminant limits for specified toxic substances. It would likely affect public water systems, regulators, and potentially private entities subject to state drinking water standards, while also creating a framework for future standards based on emerging science and actions taken by other states. The bill does not itself set numeric contaminant limits, but it compels the state to establish or revise them through administrative rulemaking.
Sentiment
The bill’s stated purpose and structure suggest a strong public-health orientation, with an emphasis on protecting residents from toxic drinking water contaminants and prioritizing vulnerable populations. Because no committee transcripts or votes are provided, there is no recorded debate or formal vote history to indicate broader legislative support or opposition. Based on the text alone, the measure appears designed to address contamination concerns that have drawn significant public attention, especially around PFAS and related chemicals.
Contention
The main potential points of contention are likely to be the scope and pace of the required rulemaking, the inclusion of specific contaminants, and the compliance costs that new or revised MCLs could impose on water systems and regulated parties. Another possible issue is the bill’s reliance on scientific review and standards from other states, which may raise questions about regulatory flexibility and how quickly North Carolina should act relative to federal EPA guidance. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the available legislative history.