PFAS and discharge permits: a current issue

Introduction

Recently, H2O Actueel published an article about a permit application that would allow a certain amount of PFAS to be discharged annually via the sewer (source: H2O Waternetwerk, 25 August 2025). This sparked much debate, as WWTPs (wastewater treatment plants) are not designed to remove PFAS from wastewater. This raises the broader question: how should we handle permits for substances that hardly degrade and pose risks to the environment and health?

Why this draws so much attention

PFAS is now high on the agenda of water managers and policymakers. This is because:

• Technical limitations
  WWTPs are designed for nutrients and organic matter, but persistent substances like PFAS pass through largely unhindered.
• Uncertainty about composition
  It is not always clear exactly which substances are present in industrial wastewater, making careful assessment difficult.
• Future applications
  One permit also raises questions for the future: how do we handle similar situations with other companies or sectors?

The role of permits

Discharge permits are an essential tool to regulate discharges and provide clarity for both companies and governments. At the same time, they face challenges:

• Some permits were issued when substances like PFAS were not yet recognized.
• Many permits focus on traditional discharge streams, while indirect routes via sewers and WWTPs play an increasing role.
• The pace of technological and chemical developments means permits need updating more often.

This means permits may be formally correct but still not fully aligned with today’s environmental challenges.

From rules to cooperation

The PFAS debate shows how important it is to view policy, enforcement, and practice together. Provinces, water boards, municipalities, and environmental services each have their own roles and responsibilities. By sharing knowledge and data more effectively, a more complete picture emerges and the permitting system can better respond to current challenges.

A shared focus on source prevention – preventing substances from entering the sewer or surface water in the first place – also fits within the European ambitions of the Water Framework Directive and the goal of a cleaner, safer water system.

Conclusion

The current PFAS case makes clear that discharge permits are increasingly under pressure from new insights and substances. This is a broader challenge that requires ongoing cooperation, updates, and data-driven decisions.

By revising permits in time, linking information better, and working together on transparency, governments can strengthen their role and confidently move towards achieving the WFD goals.