Province, firm deny responsibility in Virden aquifer failure

The provincial government and a consulting firm being sued by the Town of Virden both say the community’s municipal government is to blame for the failure of its water supply system.

In a statement of claim filed earlier this year in the Court of King’s Bench, the town said it is seeking damages for what it alleges were “untrue, misleading and/or negligently made” representations it received from both the province, through its Manitoba Water Services Board, and engineering and geological consultant W.I. Gibbons and Associates.

Virden, which had been struggling with water quality issues, entered an agreement with the water board in 2019 to investigate groundwater supply. The board retained the consultant, which recommended in a 2020 report that the town draw water from a new aquifer, referred to as the Leask aquifer in court filings.

The new aquifer and pipes, which the town began using in 2021, cost $3 million and replaced one that was found to have arsenic levels above Health Canada’s drinking water safety guidelines.

Faced with a critically low aquifer that caused it to issue a water advisory warning in October last year, the town switched back to its old aquifer in November. The town remains under a water advisory due to the level of arsenic in the old water supply.

But the province and the consulting firm, in separate statements of defence, say the consultant’s report advised the Leask aquifer may only have the potential to provide a “partial supply of water” and that it might be necessary to supplement it with water either from the existing supply wells or another source.

The province and firm have both denied wrongdoing and asked the lawsuit be dismissed.

“The town could have avoided the municipal water emergency and dewatering of the Leask aquifer if it had followed the recommendations and advice provided in the… report,” argues the province’s court papers, filed late last month.

“The town did not follow the recommendations and advice provided in the… report which caused and/or contributed to the municipal water emergency and the dewatering of the Leask aquifer.”

The report recommended that the existing wells connected to the old aquifer be refurbished or replaced and that the town regularly assess water levels in the new aquifer in order to take proactive steps in case it declined, the province’s court filing said.

The report also recommended the town inspect pumping wells and test well capacity at least annually and that it maintain the supply from both aquifers in case of failures in the new system, the province said.

“(The board) agrees that the town shifted its water supply system… However, (the board) understood that this shift was occurring with an acknowledgment and agreement from the town that it would follow the recommendations and advice provided in the… report,” the province’s court papers say.

The town was responsible for operating, maintaining, repairing and replacing the new system, including monitoring the new aquifer’s long-term sustainability, the province argues.

The water services board assisted the town in installing an emergency supply well when it shifted back to its own supply and the board has continued to support the town in resolving the issues, the province says.

The two defendants have also filed cross claims against each other, seeking the other party to be required to contribute or fully cover any damages for which the court may find them liable.

erik.pindera@freepress.mb.ca