WAS AND IS THE MANNHEIM EAST WELLFIELD IN WATERLOO REGION A BUST ?

This wellfield is located on Kitchener's west side near Trussler Rd. and the boundary with Wilmot Township. It consists of multiple Supply Wells (i.e. pumping wells K21A, K25, K29) along with Recovery Wells (RCW1-2) originally and now RCW 2-4.  Aquifer Storage & Recovery Wells (ASR1-5) are to accept treated Grand River water for storage to be pumped later into the distribution system by the Recovery Wells RCW 2-4 .   There are also a set of wells known as Peaking wells and they are designated K91-94). 

I would very much like to see audited up to date pumping rates for all these wells because the data I do have does not jive with the reality of a system constantly needing to expand along with our population. I have long suspected that the entire Mannheim  Aquifer Storage and Recovery System has not lived up to expectations whether through misadventure, bad luck or poor planning. Regardless again the data for all these wells that I have shows pumping rates well below the permitted volumes. This alone without ever greater population growth would cause pressure on other nearby well systems to take up the slack. This would include the Mannheim West Wellfield in Wilmot Township as well as the just down the road further west Wilmot Centre Wellfield which has been causing well interference complaints from local residents.

Under all the circumstances well interference is hardly surprising but what is, is the Region's hardas# attitude towards these residents and their water shortages possibly caused by again misadventure, bad luck or poor planning. 

WATERLOO REGION'S CREDIBILITY CONTINUES TAKING HITS

 

Wow! Today's K-W Record advises us that our vaunted LRT (Light Rail Transit) is having more than teething pains. The lawsuit by  GrandLinq is for $110 million. That's a chunk of change . Regardless of who's right, who's wrong and whether or not we taxpayers yet again end up on the hook; it tends to make us at the very least ask the question: "Are we getting value for money in our political governance?" Or do we have a lot of dead wood on regional council who are simply literally bums in chairs pretending to be administrators and managers of the public interest? Is it possible that half or more of them simply show up in order to receive their pay cheques with absolutely no  concern for the issues or the public interest? It has been said that the greatest and most important skill of a politician is their acting abilities. Pretending to care and pretending to want to resolve problems and disputes would seem beneficial in giving hope and confidence to citizens and residents.

If and when the entire truth is exposed around the destruction of our fabulous water resources; I predict there will be a wholesale abandoning of the ship of state. Politicians may quickly decide that early retirement sure beats being shamed and harassed into resigning mid term. I predict that as early as tomorrow or as late as the August 21 deadline for registering to run in this fall's municipal election; many rats will give varying excuses for stepping down. 

The Region have most recently mistreated Wilmot residents both with the still surreptitious huge land grab as well as the refusal to acknowledge well interference even after breaking the 1980 agreement with Wilmot over the Wilmot Centre Wellfield pumping. They have also broken faith with Woolwich (Elmira) residents for the last 36 years regarding our contaminated local aquifers caused by both private, industrial greed and negligence as well as by provincial oversight gross failures.  The Region's day of reckoning is overdue.

ARE TRAC CAPABLE OF LOOKING STUPID PUBLICLY WHILE LOBBYING BEHIND THE SCENES ?

 

I don't know that to be true but I guess I'm hoping it is so because there are at least two people on that committee (Technical Remediation Advisory Committee) that I believe to be inherently honest. Indeed it is likely to be a couple more but I just don't know them well enough to confirm that. Generally speaking I do know the deadbeats etc. well enough and know who they are.

Jen Lyndall of Integral possibly may decide never to work for Lanxess and her old buddy Hadley ever again. Or otherwise if she has no problem sleeping at night by counting sheep jumping over dead animals, livestock and or human beings.   

I'm going to repeat last Saturday's health criteria here for those with a serious bent for eye blurring numbers. These are the health standards for dioxins/furans and for Total DDT both in creekbank soils and in the sediments on the bottom of the Creek (Canagagigue). None of the criteria change based on depth i.e. surface versus subsurface soils and surface and subsurface sediments.

Soils:               DDT      .078 ppm (parts per million)

Sediments:      DDT      .00119 ppm.

. 

Soils:              dioxins/furans      7  ppt. (parts per trillion)

Sediments:     dioxins/furans       .85 ppt

DDT   in   fish     tissues                 14 ppb. (parts per billion)

dioxins/furans in fish tissues             .71 ppt (parts per trillion)

These are the numbers/concentrations that Jen Lyndall of Integral has utterly failed to put on her Tables and Figures.  Likely/possibly they are buried somewhere in her report. Or not. Starting from Figure 4-24 and going to Figure 4-63 the data tells TRAC, the public and most certainly the politicians absolutely nothing worthwhile without the health criteria being clearly marked on each and every Figure.  Is this failure Jen Lyndall's or did Lanxess (Hadley ?) ensure that this vitally important information was not to be found where it should be?

THIS IS THE FOLLOWUP THAT TRAC NEVER DO REGARDING LANXESS FUNDED SHABBY, IRRELEVANT & RIDICULOUS PRESENTATIONS

 

Regarding Tables 3-3 to 3-6 which describe Total DDT and Dioxins/Furans TEQ (toxic equivalency) generally in Creek Reaches 1-4 except for the last Table which oddly only describes Reach 4 (the Lanxess site). These Tables also represent both surface and subsurface Soils and Sediment readings. Sediments of course are in the bottom of the Creek beneath the water and soils refer to creekbank soils above the waterline. 

Previously mentioned by myself is the fact that in four pages of Tables;  Dioxins/Furans over the four Creek Reaches plus Background (below Reach 1/Grand River) and with 889 samples over many years have an average of 99.87% detection rate. This is beyond incredible, is not remotely normal or ubiquitous and speaks to massive past and ongoing releases of Dioxins and Furans downstream from the Uniroyal/Lanxess property. THIS IS BEYOND SHAMEFUL and no wonder TRAC is so tightly controlled by agenda, membership, meeting times, minutes and limited public access and less.

Total DDT detections are also high although not at the same level of Dioxins/Furans.  The lowest detection rate through five locations is 10% and the highest 100% (twice). The average detection rate in the four Reaches plus Background (Grand River) is 57% . Keep in mind this is for DDT only albeit in both Sediments and Soils both surface and subsurface. This also is not "normal" nor ubiquitous.

Regarding concentrations above health criteria the results are startling. Sediment detections are very high for both surface and subsurface DDT and in fact ALL detections from the highest to the lowest EXCEED the health criteria of .00119 ppm. (parts per million) again for Reaches 1-4 and Background (Grand River). Soil detections for DDT on the other hand while ALL maximum concentrations per area (Reach etc.) EXCEED the health criteria of .078 ppm.; minimum concentrations are all below the health criteria.

Dioxins/Furans maximum concentrations in surface Sediments ALL exceed the health criteria of .85 ppt (Parts per trillion) while only two of five areas (4 Reaches & Background Grand River) of the minimum concentrations exceed the health criteria. Subsurface Sediments maximum concentrations for Dioxins/Furans ALL EXCEED the health criteria whereas only one of five of the minimum concentrations for the five areas exceeds the health criteria. 

Dioxin'Furan Soil maximum concentrations ALL exceed the heath criteria of 7 ppt. whereas 0 of the five minimum concentrations exceed the health criteria. This is the same for both surface Soils and subsurface Soils.  

The title above states that TRAC never do necessary followups to ridiculous presentations. Let me add the following. Maybe they do privately but this is a public process and needs to be clarified to the public each and every time a deceptive, dishonest or blatantly foolish and non factual presentation is made.

 

 

  

GOT SIDETRACKED (WESTWARDS/WILMOT) : BACK TO JEN LYNDALL'S (INTEGRAL) SILLY REPORT TO TRAC

 

Silly is a nicer word than deceptive, evasive, phony or corrupt. As I have mentioned it's hard to write an intelligent and honest data Summary of dozens of sad, pathetic and client driven pieces of garbage (GIGO-garbage in, garbage out). Half the battle is won simply by a single presentation to TRAC followed by...nothing. It takes time to read carefully, analyze, understand and form an intelligent response. I've got that time and ability whereas most TRAC members who have the ability simply don't have the time or the incentive ($$$) to do so. They have paying jobs and careers and homes and families to take up their spare time. 

One of the biggest, most nonsensical pieces of crap that she bestowed upon TRAC are a series of Figures as in Figure 4-24 to 4-63. She referred to these Figures as I believe Box and Whiskey Plots. I don't know the origins of that name. These Figures allege to show large (many not all) amounts of data recorded for DDT and dioxin concentrations in Surface Sediments, Subsurface Sediments, Surface Soils, Subsurface Soils, versus either Location (Reach 1-4, Background) or Time (eg. 1996, 1997, 2013, 2015, 2017, 2022). 

There are a few issues with these Figures which I have previously mentioned such as the vertical (y) scale for concentrations visually minimizing the extent and amount of extremely high concentration readings of Total DDT and or Dioxin/Furan TEQ (toxic equivalency).There are other problems including large numbers of high Method Detection Limits (MDL) leading to far too many orchestrated Non Detects (N.D.) in the data  however the simplest and most obvious problem is the lack of relevance of the concentrations being shown. Yes you can compare the concentrations with location/distance downstream from Lanxess (Uniroyal) towards the Grand River and even somewhat over time (eg. 1996-2022)  but really and significantly what do they mean and how serious are they? Nobody knows and I think that is intentional.

Ms. Lyndall has failed to include any health criteria whether provincial or federal for either Total DDT or for Dioxins/Furans. The accepted health concentrations (which differ) for these two compounds as well as differing whether for Soils or for Sediments are MIA (missing in action). They need to be written on the Figures as well as most importantly drawn as a horizontal line across the Figures hence immediately showing how many of the data points are above (exceed) the mandated health concentrations.

Doing that exposes the massive and major contamination for five miles downstream from Uniroyal/Lanxess. This report was produced on behalf of Lanxess Canada for the purpose of once more snowing and bulldozing TRAC and the public. Mission mostly accomplished.

I THINK THAT WATERLOO REGION'S WATER SYSTEM IS IN BIG TROUBLE

 

This is based upon multiple lines of evidence. Unfortunately it's also based upon multiple lies by the Region over the years. Also multiple deceptions. Lies, bragging and puffery do not produce healthy, clean water. The Region of Waterloo based upon their own self congratulatory back patting seem to think otherwise.

Looking at lists of wells and wellfields throughout the Region I find it disheartening to see the following words after too many listed wells namely: Standby, Disconnected, Purge, Abandoned. Also looking at the Number of Significant Threat Activities and the Number of  Properties with Significant Threats as listed in the Grand River Source Protection Area 2025 is downright scary.  Looking at the various listed threats including Nitrates, TCE, Chemicals, DNAPLS, Pathogens, Salt, Chloride  etc. does not build confidence. Another issue I find strange is that despite off and on warnings of water shortages and for example water rationing for lawns, again far too many wells throughout the Region are NOT pumping anywhere near their stated capacities and alleged abilities. Why is that?

I also am aware of the disinterest in soil and groundwater remediation to the point of denial of known facts by our authorities if it will reduce costs and enhance development and building. Growth apparently is never to be stymied or stalled either by lack of water or excess of contaminants. Workarounds, engineering "solutions", natural attenuation or whatever verbal manipulations are required to promote progress and growth at all costs, always wins out. This game is not sustainable and we, our children and following generations will be the big losers.

WATERLOO REGION ARGUE OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF THEIR MOUTHS REGARDING THE WILMOT CENTRE WELLFIELD

 

Among numerous reference sources I've been reading is the RMOW (Regional Municipality of Waterloo) April 8, 2026 staff report to councillors titled "Wilmot Centre Aquifer Assessment". Hoo boy but it is quite the document.  The Region are arguing both in this report and at the Regional Council level that all is fine at the Wilmot Centre Wellfield.

Here's the rub. They are also advising that between past lower rainfall AND higher pumping rates the aquifer level has dropped three to four metres in elevation. Now perhaps on a municipal wellfield level that is not an unusual situation. Perhaps it is. Regardless if you have a private drilled well that extends 32 metres below ground surface for example and the aquifer level drops from 29.5 mbgs  (metres below ground surface) to 32.5 mbgs then guess what? You're sucking air instead of water. Prior to the aquifer's lowered elevation you had 2.5 metres or over eight feet of water level above your wellscreen (intake). 

Other issues that do not add credibility to the Region's position include their admission that certain groundwater elevation triggers have been crossed at the Wilmot Centre Wellfield already just as they have been crossed at the Mannheim West Wellfield. Then however the Region states "Crossing the trigger levels at Wilmot Centre does not mean that adverse impacts are anticipated at nearby private wells in the natural environment. This is a fundamental difference from trigger levels established under the Mannheim Well Field PTTW." (i.e. Permit To Take Water) .

Other problems with the Region's staff report include Table 1 on page 4 & 5. This Table purports to show pumping levels at three wellfields in Wilmot namely the Erb St. Wellfield, the Mannheim West Wellfield and the Wilmot Centre Wellfield. Clearly there has been increased pumping at the Wilmot Centre Wellfield from 2019/20 until 2025 compared to 1980. Also on page 8 the Region confirm that some of this increased pumping was to make up for decreased water pumping and problems at FOUR Kitchener Wellfields namely Strange St., Parkway, William St., and Greenbrook. Finally I find it peculiar that Table 1 does not include the Mannheim East Wellfield immediately beside but just over the Wilmot boundary from the Mannheim West Wellfield. Perhaps it is the incredible number of wells and total amounts of nearby pumping that is causing likely well interference issues with private wells.

Add to this in the report the Region's immodest attitude is characterized by their self admitted incredible, world class, superior professional and astute management of everything wet in Waterloo Region and you begin to suspect that they've been taking lessons from trash talking MMA fighters prior to losing a major fight (Conor McGregor anybody?). Somewhat like Donald Trump it's almost as if the Region are looking over their shoulder cringing at the expected upcoming disaster but bragging to give themselves courage, or as my father used to say they are whistling by the graveyard to hide their fear.