Micron's existing semiconductor fab in Manassas, Virginia discharges into a drinking-water reservoir — and PFAS has already turned up in it. Virginia responded by writing an enforceable, drinking-water-standard limit into law. New York's permit for the Clay plant has none.
Micron has run a memory-chip fab in Manassas for years. Like the plant being designed for Micron's discharge in Clay, it does not pipe its industrial wastewater straight to a river. It sends it to a public treatment plant — the Upper Occoquan Service Authority (UOSA) — whose treated output then flows down Bull Run into the Occoquan Reservoir, a primary drinking-water source for nearly two million people in Northern Virginia.
That is the identical structure we are fighting in Central New York: fab → public treatment plant → surface water → drinking-water intake. The "indirect discharger through a public plant" routing is the same loophole in both states.
This is the part that matters most. In Virginia, the watershed monitoring lab went looking for where PFAS in the drinking-water reservoir was coming from. PFOA and PFOS were found above the federal drinking-water limits at multiple locations — several times higher than the limit. Source-tracking identified Micron's discharge to UOSA as one of the confirmed industrial PFAS contributors, alongside a separate facility (Freestate Farms).
We say "one of" deliberately — Micron is not claimed to be the sole source. But it is a confirmed source, in a real reservoir, feeding real taps. The Clay project is being approved as if this risk were theoretical. In Virginia it already happened.
UOSA is not a weak facility. It runs advanced treatment — chemical clarification, multimedia filtration, granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption, and disinfection — at a rated 54 million gallons per day. GAC is exactly the kind of carbon treatment often proposed for PFAS.
And PFAS still shows up above drinking-water limits in the reservoir downstream.
The plant being designed for Micron's discharge in Clay relies on a membrane bioreactor, which removes essentially no PFAS at all. If a plant with carbon adsorption can't hold the line in Virginia, a membrane bioreactor in Clay is a worse bet — not a better one.
UOSA's treated output normally supplies about 20% of the Occoquan Reservoir's inflow. During droughts it can briefly supply up to 90%. In other words, when the natural flow drops, the reservoir is running largely on recycled wastewater — the same vulnerability our pathway carries into Lake Ontario.
The contamination already documented in Virginia comes from a comparatively small discharge. The Clay campus is an order of magnitude larger.
An existing fab discharging at roughly 2.5 mgd already put PFAS into a Virginia reservoir. The Clay campus is forecast to need on the order of 50 mgd — more than the entire city of Syracuse uses.
In 2025 Virginia passed HB 2050, the Occoquan Reservoir PFAS Reduction Program, now written into the Code of Virginia at § 62.1-44.34:34. It was introduced by Delegate David Bulova and signed into law by Governor Glenn Youngkin. Here is what it actually requires of industrial dischargers feeding the reservoir watershed — Micron included:
This is the enforceable, numeric PFAS limit on a Micron discharge that New York's permit for the Clay plant does not contain.
| Virginia (Manassas) | New York (Clay) | |
|---|---|---|
| Discharger | Micron, existing fab | Micron, plant not yet built |
| Routing | Fab → public plant → reservoir | Fab → public plant → river → lake |
| Drinking water at risk | ~2 million people | 500,000+ in CNY, 3M+ downstream |
| PFAS confirmed in source water? | Yes — above MCLs, Micron a confirmed source | Discharge hasn't started yet |
| Treatment | Advanced, includes GAC carbon | Membrane bioreactor — near-zero PFAS removal |
| Enforceable PFAS discharge limit? | Yes — tied to drinking-water MCLs by law | None in the current permit |
Virginia identified the exact same fab-to-public-plant-to-drinking-water routing as a threat and forced an enforceable limit onto it. New York issued a permit with monitor-only language and no limit on the industrial outfall. We're asking New York to do at minimum what Virginia already did.
Virginia's law ties the discharge limit to promulgated drinking-water MCLs, not to a semiconductor-specific, all-compound standard. It is a backstop, not a ceiling on every PFAS compound. We think a limit should go further. But a backstop tied to MCLs is more than New York's permit currently has.
The Virginia program uses EPA Method 1633, which targets a defined list of compounds. It does not require the Total Oxidizable Precursor (TOP) Assay that catches the precursor "dark PFAS" semiconductor wastewater is known to carry. That gap is exactly why our demands call for Method 1633A plus the TOP Assay — Virginia's floor, raised.
We hold ourselves to a strict rule: every claim here is traceable to a primary source. The sources are listed below.
Note on the Micron source-attribution claim: the strongest primary documentation is the Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory source-tracking reporting presented to Fairfax Water / Fairfax County. Pull that presentation for the citation of record before relying on it in formal correspondence.
The plant being designed for Micron's discharge in Clay hasn't been built. The contract hasn't been awarded. That's the window.
Sign the petition Read the demands