Money Versus Necessity

Water system vulnerability assessment (VA) methods and related federal financing are dynamic and continually evolving.  Gannett Fleming security specialists, among other consultants, are completing VAs for various-sized systems under tight time frames and uncertain governmental funding (click here for the latest from the AWWA web site).

  VA services range from conducting threat and vulnerability analyses (including chemical, biological or nuclear), to developing critical threat scenarios, formulating protection options and budgeting.  Improvement recommendations must not only meet specific public safety, client and regulatory requirements, but must be highly flexible.  There are many ways that a water supply system can be compromised or interrupted. 

Understanding

The two major threat categories are Physical and Contamination.  The following information does not comprehensively outline all possible threats and related countermeasures, but instead provides a general overview, regardless of system size and specific facility details.

Physical threats can damage or destroy a water system and its components.  They are much more likely to occur than contamination. For starters, the means to carry out physical threats, and the materials required to do so, are more readily available.  These threats can also be implemented more readily than a contamination attack.  Potential physical threats include:

• Vandalism

• Sabotage

• Aerial attacks
• Equipment failure
• Cyber-terrorism
• Power outages
• Explosives
• Fire
• Distribution system problems
• Personnel attacks

Improved on-site security can reduce the potential for sabotage, equipment damage and similar incidents.  However, systems need to understand that the potential for an insider threat is every bit as possible.

Contamination threats present different levels of concern for detection and treatment. Some are of more potential concern than others. All have different thresholds for the appearance of symptoms, infection and lethality.

• Biochemical toxins normally require a smaller volume to be disruptive, as compared to other chemicals.  While most are difficult to develop in quantities large enough to pose a lethal threat, smaller, non-lethal doses can still disrupt a system and cause illness and panic.

• Microbial agents include bacteria, viruses, protozoans and other microbes.  In many instances, most bacteria and viruses can be effectively inactivated through chlorination, or by UV irradiation.

• Industrial chemicals are a more likely threat since they are readily available in large quantities. Fortunately, the vast majority of industrial chemicals make poor candidates for lethal, undetectable agents of contamination.  Nonetheless, an incident would prove disruptive to operations.

• Nerve, blood and blister agents include sulfur, mustard and sarin gases. These agents are primarily designed to be absorbed into the body through the skin or inhalation. Their most effective form of delivery is not in a public water system, and their use is more likely in the gaseous or spray form. These agents are not considered likely toxic water contamination threats due to the high concentration levels required.

• Radioactive materials include uranium, plutonium. The most likely threat is the use of conventional explosives to distribute radioactive contamination over a large area. Using these materials to contaminate a water supply presents a challenge.  Not only do they pose a safety hazard for the attacker, but require large quantities of materials, many of which are insoluble, heavy and would settle out before reaching the target. They are not considered to be a credible threat to the system, but would result in serious public relations issues.

Countermeasures

Management strategies for dealing with credible threat scenarios to a water supply system normally fall under one or more of the following general categories:

• Prevention

• Detection

• Delay

• Mitigation

Prevention is intended to reduce the vulnerability of a water system to purposeful or accidental contamination. Most prevention measures involve improving the security surrounding key system facilities to secure them against casual vandalism or contamination. These include installing locks, security cameras or intrusion alarms that will notify on-site security personnel that an individual has entered a restricted area.

Detection of contaminants can be achieved in some cases by installing monitoring devices. 

Delay can be provided by installing the necessary detection and monitoring devices as far away from the ultimate point of use as possible.  Typically, this includes entry points. An Emergency Response Plan can also alert the facility in the event of an incident.

Mitigation measures minimize the impact of a contamination event on a water system, preventing a complete system shutdown. Mitigation steps include treatment systems to remove water contaminants from the water. These can be either system-wide treatment processes, individual Point of Entry (POE), or Point of Use (POU) devices.  POU devices typically protect interior processes and/or individual fixtures.  Other measures may involve adding redundancy to the system, improving operating flexibility and eliminating single points of failure.