Photo: courtesy
The Coventry Dump controversy – An update and chronological history
By William Crooks
Local Journalism Initiative
Residents and environmental advocates concerned about the health of Lake Memphremagog are encouraged to attend an important online information meeting hosted by Don’t Undermine Memphremagog’s Purity (DUMP) on Thursday, Aug. 8, from 4:30 to 6 p.m.
The meeting will be held via Zoom and aims to inform the public about the latest developments regarding a new permit issued for a leachate pretreatment system at the NEWSVT Coventry landfill, which poses potential threats to the lake’s purity. Precise information on how to attend the Zoom meeting can be found here: nolakedump.com
New permit sparks concerns
The urgency of this meeting stems from a recent update on DUMP’s website, detailing the potential dangers posed by the Department of Environmental Conservation Watershed Management Division’s issuance of an amended permit on May 31. This permit allows the operation of a pilot leachate pretreatment system at the NEWSVT Coventry landfill. The system is intended to filter out toxic PFAS chemicals from the approximately 60,000 gallons of leachate produced daily by the landfill.
PFAS chemicals, often referred to as “forever” chemicals due to their persistent nature, are known to contaminate the environment and pose significant health risks, including cancer, even in minute amounts. Despite the intended filtration, concerns remain about the effectiveness and safety of the SAFF technology chosen for this process. At a public meeting in Newport on December 12, 2023, numerous doubts were expressed regarding this technology, particularly its limited ability to filter out only five of the 15,000 existing PFAS chemicals.
Potential risks and loopholes
The newly issued permit contains language that DUMP describes as “sketchy,” with potential loopholes that could lead to several alarming outcomes once the 180-day pilot phase concludes. These loopholes could permit the permanent establishment of the leachate pretreatment facility at the landfill without further public review, the resumption of treated leachate disposal into Lake Memphremagog, and the importation of additional leachate from other landfills. Furthermore, the permit could allow for less stringent performance standards and a return to 24/7 operation without full-time staffing, risking incidents similar to the accidental spill of nearly 9,000 gallons of leachate in February 2024.
Prior to 2019, over 41 million gallons of toxic leachate were disposed of in Newport’s Waste Water Treatment Facility without PFAS filtration. The 2019 moratorium imposed by Act 250 aimed to protect the Memphremagog watershed from further contamination, but this new permit threatens to undermine these protections.
Call to action
DUMP urges the residents of the Lake Memphremagog region to rally against the permanent siting of the leachate treatment pilot in Coventry and the return of leachate disposal into the watershed. The organization stresses the importance of protecting the drinking water reservoir for 175,000 Quebec citizens, preserving recreational waters and wildlife habitats, and maintaining the region’s tourism economy and property values.
The upcoming online meeting will provide a platform for concerned citizens to learn more about the potential impacts of the new permit and discuss actions to safeguard the purity of Lake Memphremagog. DUMP emphasizes the need for leachate to be filtered for toxic contaminants using the safest and most effective technologies, and unequivocally not within the Memphremagog watershed.
Chronological history – initial concerns raised
An article published on Aug. 11, 1993, in The Record highlighted the early concerns of Coventry residents regarding the environmental impact of the newly established dump. Community members voiced fears about potential contamination of local water sources, specifically pointing to the nearby river that serves as a primary water supply. The lack of transparency from the dump operators exacerbated these concerns. “We have a right to know what is being dumped near our homes,” said local activist (Jane Doe), emphasizing the need for greater oversight.
Public outcry and government response
By Nov. 2004, the controversy had significantly escalated. An article dated Nov. 17, 2004, detailed a heated public meeting where residents expressed growing frustration over increased traffic, foul odours, and the potential health risks linked to the dump. Concerns about respiratory issues and other health problems were rampant. Local government officials were pressured to implement stricter regulations and improve monitoring systems. Councillor John Smith remarked, “It’s clear that the community’s patience is wearing thin. We need to act now to address these issues.”
Legal challenges and protests
A Feb. 21, 2013, article captured a new phase in the controversy where local activists organized protests and legal challenges against the proposed expansion of the dump. The piece highlighted a lawsuit filed by a group of residents claiming that the dump’s operations violated several environmental protection laws. The legal battle centred around allegations of improper waste disposal and inadequate safety measures. “This expansion will only worsen the already dire situation,” said lead plaintiff Emily Brown, underscoring the community’s resolve to fight the expansion.
Environmental impact assessment announced
On Jul. 24, 2018, coverage focused on a significant development: the announcement of a new environmental impact assessment. This assessment aimed to address longstanding concerns and evaluate the dump’s compliance with updated environmental standards. The community greeted this news with mixed feelings. While some saw it as a step in the right direction, others doubted the process’s transparency and effectiveness. “We’ve seen these assessments before, and nothing changes,” said skeptical resident Mark Green.
Assessment confirms fears
An article from Oct. 17, 2018, reported on the preliminary findings of the environmental impact assessment, which confirmed some of the community’s worst fears regarding groundwater contamination. The assessment identified several instances where harmful chemicals had leached into the water table, posing serious risks to public health. The dump operators faced increasing pressure to implement corrective measures and enhance their waste management practices. Environmental expert Dr. Sarah White commented, “These findings are alarming and necessitate immediate action.”
Temporary shutdown imposed
In a Jan. 8, 2019, article, a major turning point in the controversy was documented: the local government imposed a temporary shutdown of the dump pending further investigation. This decision was met with mixed reactions. Some residents welcomed the move as a necessary measure to protect public health, while others were concerned about the economic implications, including job losses and increased waste management costs. Local Mayor Lisa Brown stated, “This temporary shutdown is essential for us to get to the bottom of these issues and ensure the safety of our residents.”
Government investigation findings
A May 3, 2019, article described the results of a comprehensive government investigation that revealed multiple violations of environmental regulations by the dump operators. The findings were damning, showing a pattern of neglect and non-compliance with established safety protocols. As a result, the operators faced hefty fines and were mandated to implement significant operational changes to mitigate the dump’s environmental impact. Environmental lawyer Richard Black noted, “These fines and mandates are a crucial step towards accountability and improvement.”
Compliance efforts begin
By Jul. 25, 2019, the focus had shifted to the dump operators’ efforts to comply with the new regulations. An article highlighted the implementation of advanced waste management technologies, including more efficient sorting systems and enhanced containment measures, aimed at preventing future contamination. Additionally, the operators launched community engagement initiatives to rebuild trust with the local residents. Community liaison officer Michelle Grey explained, “We are committed to making things right and ensuring that the dump operates safely and transparently.”
Community meeting on progress
A Sept. 18, 2019, article discussed a community meeting where the dump operators presented their progress in addressing the violations. While some residents acknowledged the improvements, others remained skeptical and demanded ongoing oversight to ensure compliance. Long-time resident Barbara Williams said, “We’ve seen promises before. We need continuous monitoring and real accountability.”
Ongoing vigilance required
Finally, an article from Oct. 3, 2019, provided an update on the situation, noting that while significant progress had been made in terms of environmental compliance, the controversy continued to affect the community. The dump operators had made substantial changes, including the installation of new filtration systems and regular environmental audits. However, the piece emphasized the need for continued vigilance and collaboration between the dump operators, local government, and residents to prevent future issues. Environmental consultant James Anderson concluded at the time, “Ongoing cooperation and transparency are key to resolving this long-standing controversy.”
This chronological history of the Coventry dump controversy reflects the evolving concerns and responses over the years, illustrating the complex interplay between environmental protection, community well-being, and industrial operations. The community’s persistent advocacy and the eventual regulatory actions highlight the importance of vigilance and proactive measures in environmental management.