Improve Health and Human Services
Senate Bill 600 is a broad health and human services measure that makes several unrelated changes to North Carolina law. One major provision lets resident taxpayers elect organ and tissue donation directly on their state income tax return, rather than only through a driver’s license or other existing methods. The bill directs the Department of Revenue and DMV to share donor-election information with the organ donor registry and procurement organizations, and it updates the anatomical-gift statutes so a tax-return election is a valid form of consent once the return is filed.
The bill also creates a new state prohibition on medical products made with intentionally added DEHP, a phthalate used in some IV bags and tubing. Beginning in 2030, IV solution containers with intentionally added DEHP may not be sold or distributed in North Carolina, and beginning in 2035, IV tubing with intentionally added DEHP may not be manufactured, sold, or distributed. The law includes definitions, limited exemptions for blood collection/storage bags and apheresis/cell therapy kits, a delayed-compliance pathway for certain manufacturers, and administrative penalties for violations. In addition, the bill expands school and public-access emergency allergy treatment rules by allowing epinephrine nasal sprays and other FDA-approved delivery systems alongside auto-injectors, and it updates school health requirements for local, charter, regional, and laboratory schools.
The bill further changes school nurse staffing rules by requiring the State Board of Education to treat certain registered nurses with at least two years of hospital or clinic experience as eligible for the certified school nurse pay scale, and it bars the Board from imposing a four-year degree requirement as a condition of employment. It also authorizes temporary rules and directs the Department of Public Instruction to update salary manuals accordingly. Most provisions take effect when the act becomes law, while the organ-donor tax return option is delayed until 2027 and the DEHP restrictions phase in over several years.
Overall, the voting history suggests strong bipartisan support and little overt opposition. The Senate passed the bill unanimously on second reading, and the House votes were overwhelmingly favorable, with only two no votes on one House second reading and unanimous support on the final concurrence vote. The broad support indicates the bill was generally viewed as a health-focused package with multiple public-benefit provisions.
The main points of potential contention are the DEHP restrictions and the school nurse staffing changes. The DEHP section imposes new product restrictions and compliance deadlines on manufacturers and distributors of medical devices, which could raise cost, supply, or regulatory concerns, although the bill’s findings emphasize health risks and cancer-related concerns. The school nurse provision may also be debated because it changes credentialing and pay-scale rules, potentially affecting hiring standards and school personnel policy. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows little explicit controversy beyond the policy implications of these sections.
The bill amends multiple chapters of North Carolina law, including tax administration, anatomical gift rules, environmental/health regulation for medical devices, school health statutes, and school nurse employment rules. It creates a new income-tax-return organ and tissue donor election, authorizes interagency data sharing for donor registry purposes, adds a new Article 19C in Chapter 130A to regulate DEHP in IV containers and tubing, expands the definition of epinephrine delivery systems to include nasal sprays, and revises school and public-entity emergency allergy treatment requirements. It also changes State Board of Education authority over school nurse qualifications and pay classification.
The overall sentiment appears strongly favorable and health-oriented. The bill passed with overwhelming support in both chambers, including unanimous or near-unanimous votes at key stages, suggesting broad agreement with its public health, donor registration, school safety, and workforce provisions. The recorded votes do not indicate organized opposition, though the bill’s regulatory and staffing changes likely drew some policy scrutiny.
The most likely areas of contention are the new DEHP ban and the school nurse provisions. Medical-device manufacturers and distributors may be concerned about the phased prohibitions, the ban on replacing DEHP with another ortho-phthalate, and the compliance deadlines, while health advocates would support the restrictions based on toxicity findings. On the education side, the requirement to classify certain registered nurses on the certified school nurse pay scale and the prohibition on a four-year degree requirement could affect hiring standards, compensation, and local school staffing practices. The organ-donor tax return election and epinephrine changes appear less controversial and were presented as convenience and safety measures.