This is the second story in a two-part series. If you would like to learn more about why the proposed surveillance and minimization plan is facing public backlash, please see the first article here.
PFAS and 1,4 dioxane are man-made toxic chemicals found in some rivers and lakes in North Carolina. State regulators have proposed plans aimed at reducing emissions of these chemicals. However, this plan has faced opposition from the public, partly because it does not include numerical limits on hospital discharges.
WUNC environmental reporter Celeste Guajardo spoke with weekend host Bradley George. This conversation has been edited for clarity and context.
BRADLEY: Before we talk about chemical emissions, let’s remember what an environmental control board is and what its mission is.
Celeste: The Environmental Management Commission is the state’s environmental regulator. This is the organization that sets all environmental regulations for the state of North Carolina. It is made up of 15 politically appointed members.
cornel watson
/
For WUNC News
April 20, 2026, in the first floor hearing room of the Archdale Building in downtown Raleigh. This is the room where the Environmental Management Committee meets regularly. On this day, the room was packed with people offering public comment on the proposed PFAS and 1,4 dioxane monitoring and minimization rules.
And how is the commission different from the state Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)?
DEQ is essentially a state agency that functions as the commission’s staff. DEQ recommends regulations to the commission, but it is ultimately up to the commission to adopt those recommendations. I think a good example of this power relationship is the current situation of disagreement over numerical standards.
Please tell me more about that. How did we get here?
Back in 2023, DEQ began submitting information to the commission regarding the adoption of health-based numerical standards for nine PFAS in rivers and lakes. Remember, there are thousands of different types of PFAS.
According to DEQ’s presentation to the European Commission in November 2023, DEQ recommended standards for these specific PFAS because “there is significant literature evidence for these compounds and health effects can be determined.”
1 of
— III-1.2_Toxicological overview of proposed PFAS chemicals_Page_23.jpg
Screenshot of a November 2023 presentation by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. DEQ had submitted this information to the state regulator, the Environmental Control Commission.
Provided by North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
2 of
— III-1.2_Toxicological overview of proposed PFAS chemicals_Page_24.jpg
Screenshot of a November 2023 presentation by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. DEQ had submitted this information to the state regulator, the Environmental Control Commission.
Provided by North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
3 of
— III-1.1_Introduction_Timeline_and_Milestone_Page_17.jpg
Screenshot of a November 2023 presentation by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. DEQ had submitted this information to the state regulator, the Environmental Control Commission. WQC stands for Water Quality Committee and refers to a subcommittee of the committee.
Provided by North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
The committee seemed very welcoming to this proposal. However, in 2024, the commission went in a different direction and directed DEQ to develop a monitoring and minimization approach instead. This is the current proposal.
what happened? Why the sudden change?
In the fall of 2023, Republicans in the North Carolina General Assembly passed a bill that would strip the governor of some of his appointments to various state commissions, including this commission. Former Governor Roy Cooper actually filed a lawsuit over this, calling it a “blatantly unconstitutional usurpation of legislative power.”
Chris Cooper, a political scientist at Western Carolina University, said that since Republicans took control of the state Legislature in 2010, they have very systematically taken power away from the governor and given it to themselves.
“In almost every aspect of public life that we’ve seen, the General Assembly has put more power in the hands of what is already the most powerful branch and taken it away from positions that tend to be held by Democrats,” Cooper said.
As a result, the commission went from being a majority-Democrat-appointed committee to a Republican-appointed majority committee.
Why is that political change important?
To be fair, some argue that it doesn’t matter. They say politics has nothing to do with this. But some say the new commission was influenced by lobbyists.
“A group of wastewater treatment plants approached EMC and asked it to create these health protection regulations and pursue a monitoring and minimization approach,” Hannah Nelson of the Southern Environmental Law Center said of the Environmental Management Board.
cornel watson
/
About WUNC News
Southern Environmental Law Center staff attorney Hannah Nelson speaks at a public hearing on April 20, 2026 in Raleigh, North Carolina.
“And EMC directed the state to do that,” Nelson said. “They directed the state to create rules that were supposed to protect … people and instead go after the rules that the wastewater treatment plants ended up creating.”
This group of wastewater treatment plants that Hanna mentioned is the North Carolina Water Quality Association. Paul Calamita is the Group’s General Counsel.
Calamita sent an email to the commission in September 2024 expressing concerns about DEQ’s proposed rule, according to emails obtained through SELC’s public records request.
“We do not understand how adoption of these proposed PFAS standards is justified or appropriate at this time,” Calamita wrote. “Instead of such strict standards, which would have highly problematic consequences that would cause DEQ to lose control, we would like to propose an alternative approach: minimizing the PFAS load of industrial emitters.”
Another email from March 2025 shows how much influence Calamita’s group had on the current proposal. DEQ staff members sent a draft of the rule to the commission, which they said “has done our best to incorporate all of Paul’s concepts and processes into this rule.”
When I spoke to Mr. Calamita, he denied that wastewater treatment plants drafted the regulations. He said his group remains deeply concerned about key aspects of the proposal to this day.
He added that his organization opposes numerical standards because of the potential for huge treatment costs.
“There are certain groups that want a constant,” Calamita said. “They want a very low fixed number that has no basis in statute or regulation, whereas they want to let us do our jobs and do what has been successful elsewhere and work with these industries to see what is achievable and what best management practices are in place…What can they do without going out of business to help us deal with these chemicals?”
Calamita maintains that voluntary reductions in PFAS and 1,4 dioxane are effective and says his clients are already doing minimization work today, regardless of the rules.
1 of
— PFAS WUNC CW-1655.jpg
Haw River, Bynum, North Carolina, April 29, 2026. PFAS and 1,4 dioxane are toxic chemicals that cannot be seen, tasted, or smelled. Releases of 1,4 dioxane were discovered in the Hoh River in 1985.
Cornell Watson / WUNC News
2 of
— PFAS WUNC CW-1642.jpg
Haw River, Bynum, North Carolina, April 29, 2026. PFAS and 1,4 dioxane are toxic chemicals that cannot be seen, tasted, or smelled. Releases of 1,4 dioxane were discovered in the Hoh River in 1985.
Cornell Watson / WUNC News
I would like to know, what is the response from the Department of Environmental Quality?
I spoke with DEQ Secretary Reid Wilson. He said his department is adamant that health-based numerical standards are needed.
“We believe that the most effective, efficient and fair way to protect people’s health is to reduce the sources of contamination, rather than having to install very expensive technology to filter these contaminants from the drinking water supply before water utilities can provide drinking water to people’s homes,” Wilson said.
For example, Wilmington-area utilities have spent more than $240 million since 2017 installing treatment technologies to prevent PFAS from entering drinking water. However, these filtration systems are not compatible with 1,4 dioxane.
Next steps are open for public comment until June 15.
