Dispatch · July 27, 2026 · Micron's Own Data

This Isn't Our Estimate. It's Micron's.

Four years of PFAS that Micron itself reported discharging from an operating semiconductor fab into a public sewer — quarter after quarter, released under public records law.

When Onondaga County says Micron will hand the Oak Orchard plant “treatable wastewater,” here is what that phrase means in practice.

At Micron's existing fab in Manassas, Virginia, the company samples its own discharge every quarter and reports the results to the Upper Occoquan Service Authority — the treatment plant that receives it. Those reports were released under a public records request. Everything below is Micron's own laboratory data, not ours.

270–2,300 ng/L

Total PFAS in Micron's reported discharge across four years of quarterly reports — typically well over 1,000 ng/L.

8–20×

How far Micron's reported PFOA sits above the 4 ppt federal drinking-water limit — in every quarter.

40 of 100s

EPA Method 1633 counts only 40 PFAS. Fab wastewater holds far more, so these totals are a floor.

What Micron sends to the plant

Total PFAS in Micron's discharge, every quarter

Sum of detected PFAS (ng/L) reported by Micron each quarter — Manassas, VA fab → UOSA. The 4 ppt federal drinking-water limit for a single compound would be an invisible sliver at this scale.

PFOA vs. the federal limit

PFOA alone, against the 4 ppt drinking-water limit

Micron's reported PFOA (ng/L) each quarter. The red line is the EPA limit of 4 ppt (4 ng/L). Micron clears it 8–20× every single quarter.

Straight with the numbers: these are concentrations in what Micron sends to the plant (its pretreatment monitoring point), not the plant's final effluent to the river. That is exactly the right figure for the question in front of Onondaga County right now — what Micron will send to Oak Orchard — while the industrial section is still being designed. And because Method 1633 measures only 40 named PFAS, the true totals are higher than shown.

They fought the very testing we're asking for

In December 2021, as UOSA drafted Micron's discharge permit, Micron's environmental manager pushed back on being required to use EPA's PFAS method — arguing in writing that it was:

Micron to UOSA · December 2021 “…not fully validated nor formally approved by EPA.”

The result: monitoring only, no enforceable limit, with a footnote flagging the method as “draft.” That is the same posture we're working to prevent in Central New York — except here the industrial treatment plant hasn't been designed or bid yet, so the limit can still come first. And note: even the 40-compound method Micron eventually used misses the precursor PFAS in fab wastewater, which is why we ask for Method 1633A plus the TOP Assay.

Why this matters for Oak Orchard

Micron's discharge is dominated by short-chain PFAS and novel replacement compounds — PFBA, PFPeA, PFHxA, PFBS, GenX and others — the exact chemicals that conventional treatment and even carbon filtration remove worst. Legacy PFOS is nearly absent. That profile is the technical case, in Micron's own data, for requiring PFAS destruction technology rather than filtration, full-array testing rather than a short list, and a real mixture-toxicity assessment.

What we are asking

Set enforceable, numeric PFAS limits at Micron's own outfall in the Oak Orchard SPDES permit, verified by EPA Method 1633A + the TOP Assay, and require destruction, not filtration — before the industrial treatment plant is designed and the contract is signed. Micron's own Virginia data shows exactly what that plant will have to handle.

Limits first. Design second. Contract third.

Source: Micron Technology quarterly PFAS self-monitoring reports (EPA Draft Method 1633 → Method 1633; Enthalpy Analytical / Eurofins Lancaster), Manassas VA fab discharge to the Upper Occoquan Service Authority, sampling events June 2022–December 2025, plus the March 2026 (Q1) laboratory report; and Micron–UOSA permit correspondence, December 2021 — all released under public records request (obtained by Clean Water Action).