Nieuwsuur: Serious Concerns About PFAS Discharges from a Limburg Waste Management Company—But Will It Still Get a Permit?

Regulatory authorities have for years expressed concerns about PFAS discharges by waste processing company CFS in Weert. There are also serious doubts about the reliability of data submitted by the company. This is evident from documents obtained by the Dutch current affairs programme Nieuwsuur and radio programme Nieuws en Co.

The Province of Limburg intends to grant the company a controversial permit. Under this permit, CFS, which processes industrial wastewater, would be allowed to discharge up to 5 kilograms of PFAS into the sewer system annually. These discharges could ultimately reach the River Meuse (Maas) via the wastewater treatment plant in Weert. The Meuse is also a source of drinking water.

Remarkably High Levels

Concerns about CFS, a subsidiary of Renewi, date back to 2018. In that year, the first illegal discharge of GenX—a type of PFAS—was detected by the Limburg Water Authority and the Environmental Service South Limburg. Following this finding, the company submitted an improvement plan and, in 2022, applied for a permit to discharge three types of PFAS.

Meanwhile, CFS continued discharging PFAS without a permit, according to external research reviewed by Nieuws en Co and Nieuwsuur. For example, discharge water in 2023 failed to meet the required environmental quality assessment (immissietoets), which measures specific concentration levels. The assessment revealed remarkably high concentrations of several highly hazardous PFAS compounds that had not previously been reported by the company.

What Is PFAS?

PFAS is a collective term for thousands of persistent and toxic chemicals that do not readily break down in the environment. The abbreviation stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. GenX, PFOA and PFOS are among the best-known examples. These substances accumulate in the food chain and can impair the immune system. Some PFAS compounds are carcinogenic after prolonged exposure. Recent research by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) indicates that nearly everyone in the Netherlands has excessive levels of PFAS in their blood.

PFAS substances have been used since the 1950s in products such as non-stick cookware coatings, waterproof clothing, packaging materials and firefighting foams. They are also listed among substances of very high concern (SVHCs).

CFS is not the first company to discharge PFAS without a permit. Drinking water companies and environmental experts have expressed concerns for years about outdated permits and the lack of oversight regarding industrial discharges. Such discharges are often tolerated because, according to the province, there is a “reasonable prospect of obtaining a permit.” However, it is precisely this permit that has become the subject of intense debate.

This summer, the Limburg Water Authority, the Dutch Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (ILT), drinking water companies and the Municipality of Weert strongly opposed a draft permit proposed by the province. In their view, the permit was far too lenient. Among other concerns, the Limburg Water Authority warned of an “unacceptable burden” on the wastewater treatment plant, while the ILT described the permit as a “blank cheque” for PFAS discharges.

Internal documents show that concerns had already been raised within the provincial administration. In an email to the province at the end of 2023, the Limburg Water Authority stated that CFS had “deliberately withheld information about PFAS discharges.” It therefore advised the province to exercise “extra scrutiny” when assessing a new permit application. The water authority noted that CFS initially reported only three PFAS compounds in its discharge application, whereas in reality many more were found to be present.

In addition, an expert—whose name was redacted in the documents—referred to “magic tricks” in complex calculations. According to the expert, the purpose appeared to be to push the limits of what is legally permissible: the more untreated wastewater the company can discharge, the lower its costs.

‘Enormous Costs’

Despite these warnings, the Province of Limburg is continuing with the permitting process for CFS. One important argument is that legal standards have not yet been established for many harmful PFAS compounds, making it difficult to prohibit their discharge.

Companies are nevertheless subject to a so-called minimisation obligation, requiring them to reduce emissions as much as possible. Contrary to the critical advice received, the province maintains that CFS complies with this obligation. The province also points out that CFS does not manufacture PFAS itself; rather, the substances are present in waste streams received from third parties. As a result, the company is considered to bear less responsibility.

CFS declined to respond substantively to questions from Nieuwsuur and Nieuws en Co. In a general statement, however, the company said that it is “a reality” that PFAS will remain present in wastewater “for the foreseeable future.” The company also stated that removing PFAS almost completely would result in “enormous costs.”

Drinking Water Concerns

PFAS expert Chiel Jonker of Utrecht University finds that argument difficult to accept.

“You are paid well to clean up that waste,” he says. “Yet in this case it is simply being passed on without being properly treated.”

He points to notable measurements taken at CFS in 2023, which revealed concerning concentrations of 6:2-FTS, another harmful PFAS compound.

Jonker, who has previously researched PFAS permitting, was alarmed by the volume the company seeks to discharge.

“Five kilograms per year is comparable to a major player such as Chemours in Dordrecht. People and wildlife are already affected there.”

The debate surrounding CFS is now causing concern beyond Limburg. “The permit currently on the table is unacceptable to us,” says Maarten van der Ploeg, director of RIWA-Maas. The affiliated drinking water companies fear increased PFAS contamination in the River Meuse.

“We use the Meuse as a source of drinking water for four million households.”

According to Van der Ploeg, “This case demonstrates what is probably happening in many other places as well. We need to know what is being discharged. Companies must take their duty of care seriously, and governments need clear regulatory frameworks.”

Although the province intends to proceed with the permit, possible amendments are still being considered. A final decision is expected by the end of this year. If the permit is granted, both the Limburg Water Authority and the Municipality of Weert are considering legal action.