PFAS in North Carolina drinking water
145 drinking-water utilities in North Carolina reported PFAS detections at or above the EPA minimum reporting level under UCMR 5 (the federal monitoring round that ran 2023–2025). Of those, 112 exceeded the final EPA Maximum Contaminant Level for PFOA or PFOS (4 parts per trillion), serving roughly 3,882,128 people.
By the numbers
- 145 North Carolina water utilities with at least one PFAS compound detected
- 5,868,791 people served by those utilities
- 112 utilities above the final 4 ppt MCL for PFOA or PFOS
- 11 federal and Department of Defense sites with reported PFAS in groundwater
The interactive map below plots every reporting North Carolina utility, colour-coded by whether their worst reading exceeds the federal MCL, sits below it but at or above the reporting threshold, or falls below the reporting threshold. Use the search box to find a specific utility, ZIP code or address.
Top North Carolina water utilities by PFAS impact
The 15 North Carolina public water systems with the most significant PFAS detections under UCMR 5, ranked by how far each system’s worst MCL-exceeding compound runs over the federal limit:
| # | Utility | Population served | Headline ng/L | Compound | vs MCL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nashville, Town of | 5,600 | 200.0 | PFOS | 50.0× final MCL |
| 2 | Robeson County Water System | 65,303 | 30.0 | PFOA | 7.5× final MCL |
| 3 | Greensboro, City of | 320,756 | 27.6 | PFOS | 6.9× final MCL |
| 4 | Brookwood Comm Wtr System | 15,665 | 27.4 | PFOS | 6.8× final MCL |
| 5 | Asheboro, City of | 27,191 | 16.3 | PFOS | 4.1× final MCL |
| 6 | Fayetteville Public Works Comm | 214,137 | 15.4 | PFOS | 3.9× final MCL |
| 7 | Grassy Pond Water Corporation | 1,257 | 15.0 | PFOS | 3.8× final MCL |
| 8 | Carolina Trace Water System | 4,270 | 13.8 | PFOS | 3.5× final MCL |
| 9 | Spring Lake, Town of | 11,725 | 13.3 | PFOS | 3.3× final MCL |
| 10 | Old North Utilities Services/Ft Bragg | 65,000 | 13.1 | PFOS | 3.3× final MCL |
| 11 | Dunn, City of | 12,088 | 12.9 | PFOS | 3.2× final MCL |
| 12 | Harnett Regional Water | 109,415 | 12.3 | PFOS | 3.1× final MCL |
| 13 | Benson, Town of | 4,259 | 12.0 | PFOS | 3.0× final MCL |
| 14 | Maiden, Town of | 5,275 | 11.9 | PFOA | 3.0× final MCL |
| 15 | Orange-Alamance Water System | 9,123 | 11.8 | PFOS | 3.0× final MCL |
Use the interactive map above to find every utility (not just the top 15) and to search by ZIP code or address.
The biggest North Carolina systems above the PFOA/PFOS MCL
Ranked by population served, the largest North Carolina water utilities reporting at least one PFAS reading above EPA’s final MCL:
| # | Utility | Population served | Worst compound | Reading | vs MCL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Raleigh, City of | 620,000 | PFOS | 5.6 ng/L | 1.4× MCL |
| 2 | Durham, City of | 321,414 | PFOS | 5.6 ng/L | 1.4× MCL |
| 3 | Greensboro, City of | 320,756 | PFOS | 27.6 ng/L | 6.9× MCL |
| 4 | Fayetteville Public Works Comm | 214,137 | PFOS | 15.4 ng/L | 3.9× MCL |
| 5 | Union County Water System | 156,055 | PFOA | 4.2 ng/L | 1.1× MCL |
| 6 | Brunswick County Water System | 126,966 | PFOS | 10.7 ng/L | 2.7× MCL |
| 7 | High Point, City of | 116,270 | PFOS | 11.0 ng/L | 2.8× MCL |
| 8 | Concord, City of | 112,212 | PFOS | 7.3 ng/L | 1.8× MCL |
| 9 | Harnett Regional Water | 109,415 | PFOS | 12.3 ng/L | 3.1× MCL |
| 10 | Greenville Utilities Comm | 103,140 | PFOS | 6.3 ng/L | 1.6× MCL |
PFAS compounds detected in North Carolina
UCMR 5 required utilities to test for 29 different PFAS compounds. The table below shows how many North Carolina utilities had at least one above-reporting-level result for each compound, sorted by frequency:
| Compound | North Carolina utilities | Share of detecting utilities | EPA MCL |
|---|---|---|---|
| PFOS | 109 | 75% | 4 ppt (final) |
| PFPeA | 96 | 66% | None |
| PFHxA | 92 | 63% | None |
| PFOA | 81 | 56% | 4 ppt (final) |
| PFBS | 80 | 55% | None |
| PFBA | 65 | 45% | None |
| PFHxS | 60 | 41% | 10 ppt (April 2024, under reconsideration) |
| PFHpA | 45 | 31% | None |
| 6:2 FTS | 9 | 6% | None |
| HFPO-DA | 7 | 5% | 10 ppt (April 2024, under reconsideration) |
| PFPeS | 2 | 1% | None |
| PFHpS | 1 | 1% | None |
Where North Carolina’s PFAS contamination is coming from
EPA’s PFAS Analytic Tools also catalogue the suspected industrial, federal and accidental sources of PFAS in each state. North Carolina has 11 federal facilities (mostly U.S. military installations and federal airports) reporting PFAS in groundwater, 2 EPA Superfund sites flagged for PFAS, and 39 recorded PFAS-related spills (31 of which reached surface water).
Federal and DoD sites with the highest PFAS in groundwater
The U.S. Department of Defense has reported PFAS contamination at hundreds of installations nationwide, largely tied to decades of fire-training exercises with PFAS-based firefighting foams (AFFF). These readings are taken from monitoring wells at the source site, not from drinking-water taps, but plumes from these sites are a known route into nearby public and private water supplies. Readings are in parts per trillion (ppt) of PFOS and PFOA respectively:
| Site | Agency | Max PFOS (groundwater) | Max PFOA (groundwater) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Seymour Johnson AFB | Air Force | 300,000 ppt | 100,000 ppt |
| Camp Lejeune Nc Mcb | Navy | 172,749 ppt | 25,100 ppt |
| Salisbury AASF #2 | Army | 2,700 ppt | — |
| Cherry Point Nc Mcas | Navy | 1,600 ppt | 330 ppt |
| Morrisville AASF #1 | Army | 316 ppt | 80 ppt |
Superfund sites flagged for PFAS in North Carolina
EPA’s Superfund program has identified the following North Carolina sites with confirmed PFAS detections:
- Camp Lejeune Military Res. (Usnavy), Onslow County, Onslow County. NPL status: Final. EPA site report
- Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station, Havelock, Craven County. NPL status: Final. EPA site report
Recent PFAS-related spills in North Carolina
- 2026: Aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) released in Charlotte (Mecklenburg County) by Usps. Reached water.
- 2026: Oil, misc: motor released in Charlotte (Mecklenburg County) by Usps. Reached water.
- 2026: 70 gallons of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) released in Durham (Durham County) by Duke University Health Sytems.
- 2026: Gasoline: automotive (unleaded) released in Charlotte (Mecklenburg County) by Usps. Reached water.
- 2023: Fire fighting water released in Rutherfordton (Rutherford County) by Trelleborg Engineered Coated Fabrics. Reached water.
What “exceeds the MCL” means here
In April 2024 the EPA finalised the first-ever federal Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for six PFAS compounds in drinking water. The two most consequential are PFOA and PFOS, both set at 4.0 nanograms per litre (ng/L) — equivalent to 4 parts per trillion. Every red marker on the map above represents a North Carolina water system whose most-recent UCMR 5 result for PFOA or PFOS sat above 4 ng/L.
EPA also issued individual MCLs of 10 ng/L for PFHxS, PFNA and HFPO-DA (GenX) and a Hazard-Index MCL covering mixtures. In May 2025 the agency confirmed the PFOA and PFOS limits would stay in place (with the compliance deadline extended to 2031), and announced its intent to rescind the four other limits. We continue to flag exceedances of the published April 2024 MCL for those compounds and label them as “under EPA reconsideration” so the rule status is honest and current.
Yellow markers mean PFAS were detected at or above EPA’s reporting threshold (the minimum reporting level) but no individual compound exceeded an MCL. Detection at any level is not necessarily a regulatory violation, but it is a signal that PFAS treatment may be needed before the 2031 compliance deadline.
Methodology and data sources
- Drinking-water detections: EPA PFAS Analytic Tools, UCMR 5 layer. Filtered to North Carolina samples at or above the minimum reporting level. We aggregate the raw 2023–2025 sample records to one entry per public water system, taking the most-recent reading per compound.
- Superfund sites: EPA PFAS Analytic Tools, Superfund-with-PFAS layer. Includes National Priorities List sites and Superfund Alternative Approach sites where PFAS has been detected.
- Federal and DoD sites: EPA PFAS Analytic Tools, federal-sites layer. PFOA and PFOS values are maximum readings from groundwater monitoring wells at each installation, not finished drinking water.
- Spills: EPA PFAS Analytic Tools, spills layer. Covers reported releases involving PFAS-containing materials.
UCMR 5 only required community water systems serving 3,300 or more people, plus a representative sample of smaller systems, to test for PFAS. Private wells, very small public systems, and bottled water are not in this dataset. Absence of a dot on the map does not mean absence of PFAS.
What you can do
- Check whether your utility appears in the table above or on the map. If it does, your utility is required to come into compliance with the federal PFOA/PFOS MCL by 2031 — usually via granular activated carbon, ion-exchange resin or reverse osmosis treatment.
- If you are on a private well in or near a flagged area, consider independent PFAS testing through a state-certified laboratory.
- Look up your most recent Consumer Confidence Report (CCR), which utilities are required to publish annually. PFAS results from UCMR 5 must now appear there.
- If you want point-of-use protection, only filters certified to NSF/ANSI 53 or NSF/ANSI 58 for PFOA and PFOS reduction will reliably remove PFAS.
