ForeverChemicals CNY

Dear Commissioner,

ForeverChemicals CNY submits this letter on behalf of 907 signatories to our public petition, representing residents of the Oneida River, Oswego River, and Lake Ontario watershed — the drinking water supply for 500,000 Central New Yorkers and millions more downstream via the St. Lawrence River. We request that the Department amend the draft SPDES permit for the Oak Orchard Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant (DEC Application No. 7-3124-00018) to include enforceable PFAS discharge limits and scientifically defensible testing requirements before the design-build contract is awarded.

I. Background

Micron Technology's semiconductor manufacturing facility in Clay, New York will discharge industrial process wastewater through the Oak Orchard Wastewater Treatment Plant into the Oneida River at a projected volume of approximately 30 million gallons per day. The Oneida River flows to the Oswego River, which discharges to Lake Ontario approximately 1.5 miles from the shared drinking water intake operated by the Oswego County Water Authority (OCWA) and the City of Oswego, serving over 500,000 people.

Peer-reviewed research (Jacob et al., Cornell University / Environmental Science & Technology, 2021) identified 133 PFAS compounds in semiconductor fabrication wastewater. The same study found that non-targeted analytical methods detected substantially more total PFAS than conventional targeted methods — meaning that standard EPA testing captures only a small fraction of the PFAS load present in semiconductor discharge streams. A 2025 Semiconductor Industry Association survey found an average of 840 ng/L total PFAS in fab effluent across member facilities — 210 times the EPA's 4 ppt Maximum Contaminant Level for PFOA and PFOS individually.

II. Deficiencies in the Current Draft Permit and Supporting Engineering Documentation

ForeverChemicals CNY has reviewed the Oak Orchard Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant Conceptual Design Engineering Report prepared by Brown & Caldwell (November 11, 2025, SPDES No. NY0030317), as well as the Carollo Engineers response to the Regulatory and Facility Assessment Inquiry dated November 7, 2025. These documents reveal the following deficiencies:

• No enforceable PFAS discharge limits exist in the current draft permit. The only PFAS compound appearing in the CDE Report's projected discharge limits is PFOS. PFOA — which has its own federal 4 ppt MCL under the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (88 Fed. Reg. 18638, April 26, 2024) — is absent. No numeric limits for any other PFAS compound appear anywhere in the permitting record.
• The analytical testing standard specified is insufficient for semiconductor wastewater. The CDE Report references EPA Method 1633A as the monitoring basis. However, Method 1633A is a 40-compound targeted array. As documented in the peer-reviewed literature and confirmed by the SIA PFAS Consortium's own publications, targeted methods detect only a subset of the PFAS present in semiconductor fab effluent. The Total Oxidizable Precursor (TOP) Assay — which converts PFAS precursors to terminal perfluoroalkyl acids prior to analysis, allowing quantification of total precursor load — is not mentioned anywhere in 213 pages of engineering documentation. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality data from semiconductor facilities has shown that Method 1633A captures approximately 1–6% of total adsorbable organic fluorine (AOF) in comparable discharge streams.
• The specified treatment technology is ineffective for PFAS removal. The CDE Report specifies a membrane bioreactor (MBR) as the PFAS treatment method. Biological treatment is not effective for PFAS removal — this is established in the engineering and environmental science literature. No granular activated carbon (GAC), ion exchange resin, or destruction technology is specified. No supporting technical data is cited in 213 pages for the claim that MBR will remove PFAS from semiconductor wastewater.
• The PFAS characterization basis is Micron's self-reported workshop statements. The entire PFAS treatment design rests on a single sentence in the CDE Report: Micron "stated during the workshops" that PFAS and mercury are anticipated in low concentrations. There is no independent characterization data, no sampling from Micron's existing facilities, and no compound-specific analysis. The Carollo Engineers RFAI response (November 7, 2025) explicitly states that PFAS limits were "not identified as a critical path issue" and that Micron is "still developing PFAS segregation and treatment technologies."
• A bridge treatment gap is planned for 2028–2029. The CDE Report documents that before the industrial treatment plant is operational, Micron's process wastewater will be routed through the existing Oak Orchard municipal wastewater plant as a stopgap. The municipal plant was designed for domestic sewage and has no PFAS-specific treatment capability. This gap is not reflected in the public permit record.
• Biosolids PFAS testing is not required. The CDE Report projects 14,083 wet tons of biological sludge per year from FAB1 alone (doubling at full capacity), with disposal sites described as "still under investigation." No PFAS testing of biosolids is required or mentioned anywhere in the engineering record, despite Micron's wastewater being the input source for this sludge.

III. Requested Permit Conditions

We respectfully request that the Department amend SPDES Permit Application No. 7-3124-00018 to incorporate the following conditions before the design-build contract is awarded:

1. Full EPA Method 1633A monitoring for all 40 regulated PFAS compounds as a minimum analytical standard for all discharge characterization and ongoing compliance monitoring;
2. Total Oxidizable Precursor (TOP) Assay as a required supplement to Method 1633A for all discharge monitoring, to detect and quantify PFAS precursors that targeted methods miss. TOP Assay results shall be reported as total oxidizable precursor equivalents and included in permit compliance calculations;
3. Enforceable numeric discharge limits for PFOA and PFOS consistent with the federal MCLs of 4 ng/L individually, and numeric limits for all PFAS compounds for which federal health advisory levels or MCLs exist;
4. Independent pre-operational PFAS characterization of Micron's process wastewater, based on actual sampling from Micron's existing Idaho or Virginia fabrication facilities, prior to final permit issuance — not Micron's self-reported workshop assurances;
5. Prohibition on biological treatment as the sole or primary PFAS treatment method, with a requirement that the treatment train include demonstrated PFAS-effective technology (GAC, ion exchange, or a destruction technology) capable of achieving permit limits;
6. PFAS testing of all biosolids generated from treatment of Micron's industrial wastewater, with numeric PFAS thresholds for land application or disposal, consistent with EPA's interim guidance on PFAS in biosolids;
7. Mandatory permit reopener triggered upon identification of any new PFAS compound in Micron's discharge not previously characterized, with interim limits to apply immediately upon detection.

IV. The Regulatory Basis and the Timing

New York State has committed, through the Governor's 2026 State of the State, to requiring PFAS treatment at landfill leachate sources across the state. The science underlying that commitment — that PFAS must be addressed at the point of discharge before it reaches drinking water sources — applies with equal or greater force to Micron's 30-million-gallon-per-day semiconductor discharge into the Lake Ontario drinking water watershed.

The design-build contract for the Oak Orchard industrial treatment plant has not yet been awarded. The design is at approximately 10% completion. This is the last practical opportunity to set the right treatment standard before the engineering is locked and the contract is executed. Changing treatment requirements after contract award will be substantially more expensive and will delay compliance. The Department has both the authority and the obligation to require an adequate permit before that window closes.

ForeverChemicals CNY respectfully requests a written response to this letter and confirmation that the requested permit conditions are under active consideration by the Department's permit review staff.