This is the letter sent after the comment period on the PFAS discharges from a plant in Scottsville leaking PFAS into the James River.

Dear Austin Galbraith:

I am submitting these comments on behalf of Wild Virginia and our members and supporters across the state. We object to issuance of the referenced permit as currently drafted and urge the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to deny the permit, for the reasons explained below. In addition, we request that DEQ hold a public hearing to provide for wider public involvement and awareness of the issues related to this permit.

Our primary concerns include the following:
•The application submitted by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA or the Authority) is incomplete and must be amended to include PFAS data and to provide a proper basis for the permit decision.
•DEQ has failed to perform required analyses regarding impacts of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) discharged from the Scottsville Water Resources Recovery Facility (WRRF) on state waters or to provide any reasonable explanation for refusing to address PFAS in the record.
•DEQ has failed to meet its duty to set limits for pollutants currently in the permit that are protective of all affected state waters, improperly basing it analyses only on the James River as a receiving stream.
•DEQ must establish effluent limits for PFAS in the permit and must include appropriate monitoring requirements for PFAS throughout the permit period.

RWSA has gathered sampling results for a set of PFAS showing significant concentrations are present in both influent and effluent at the Scottsville WRRF.2 RWSA has an obligation to disclose information to DEQ about the presence of pollutants in the discharge from its facility, and this obligation certainly extends to those for which proof of the pollutants’ presence in the discharge exists. Here the Authority has demonstrated that PFAS are present in the discharge but failed to submit the data with its application.

As the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has long made clear:
[D]ischargers have a duty to be aware of any significant pollutant levels in their discharge. […] Most important, [the disclosure requirements] provide the information which the permit writers need to determine what pollutants are likely to be discharged in significant amounts and to set appropriate permit limits. […] [P]ermit writers need to know what pollutants are present in an effluent to determine appropriate permit limits in the absence of applicable effluent guidelines.

DEQ must not hide behind this omission from the Authority’s initial application to pretend it does not know of the presence of PFAS in the discharge or avoid its obligation to assess the risk to water quality related to these pollutants. Further, DEQ must not rest on the excuse that EPA application forms do not currently name or require PFAS to be entered. As an applicant, RWSA “must provide any additional information that the permitting authority may reasonably require to assess the discharges of the facility (40 CFR 122.21(e), (g)(13)).”

Read the full letter here.