Laurel County
Water Sector
Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Laurel Water District 2
Introduction and Core Functions
Laurel water district 2 treatment facility was constructed in consideration of the environmental nature of Laurel County. It is paramount to mention the fact that water in the region contains substantial proportions of naturally dissolved organic matter, some that could be adverse to the human health. The water is also colored, an issue that does not please most residents. Nonetheless, it is safe for human consumption.
The city leaders were concerned about the quality of water that the town residents consumed. These concerns compelled them to introduce stringent water regulation measures geared at ensuring the safety of the water regarding chemical components and the aesthetic quality (Firestone, Kaswan & Meraz, 2006). The main activities that are conducted at the water facility are the production and treatment of drinking water in proportion to the number of residents in the county. The objective is to ensure that safe drinking water is available to all residents in line with the international human rights guidelines. The production of this essential commodity consists of underground and surface water. However, the treatment plant also purifies water from alternative sources such rainwater to increase the county’s water supply.
The desalination process is a significant activity at the water facility and involves the conversion of sea and brackish water to fresh water, which is acceptable for human consumption. The choice of Equipment used in the desalination process is determined by the concentration of chlorides in the water. In the entire process, corrosion-resistant materials are used to ensure that the large proportions of salts in the water are reduced to acceptable levels. In particular, stainless steel pipes and other non-reactive metals are recommended in the purification of sea water. A major feature of the desalination process is the application of high and low-temperature technologies to eradicate the amount of acids in the water.
The wastewater treatment is a strong function for the asset. The waste from domestic use and business facilities is subjected to a high-level treatment to recycle the commodity into the system (Kroger, 2008). The process involves the removal of all objects and pollutants from household and sewer water to make it environmentally safe and hence eradicate any possibility of destruction to the surroundings. The resultant water after treatment is free from all toxic impurities. As a result, it can be directed to the rivers and other water bodies without any adverse consequences. The odor management process is also one of the main activities at the facility. This process ensures that only water that meets all the safety standards is distributed to the county residents. The other crucial event at the water purification plant consists of control systems that monitor and survey the critical equipment in the water treatment process.
The asset is interconnected with other key infrastructures such as telecommunication and electricity. The entire process at the facility requires power to run. Therefore, an interference in the power lines would have very adverse effects on its performance. The resulting consequences could be detrimental to the human lives and affect the entire economy of the state. The communication infrastructures such telephone network and internet connectivity are also crucial in the operations of the asset. The water facility relies entirely on the existing telecommunication networks in most of the operations (Kroger, 2008). A collapse of the telecommunication network would severely jeopardize the functions of this facility.
It is apparent that the smooth operations of the facility are highly dependent on other critical infrastructures within Laurel County and indeed with the entire Kentucky state. On the other hand, the facility supplies all the water requirements for businesses, industries, and homesteads, implying that an incident at the plant would severely affect operations in other industries as well as the town’s critical infrastructure such as electricity. As a result, a negative occurrence on the water treatment facility would negatively affect the long-term economy of the area. Similarly, the quality of life of the town’s residents would be reduced. Generally, the assets are not a geographically concentrated; they are uniformly distributed about other critical assets such as telecommunications, transport, gas, and waste control
Asset Value
More than eighty people work at the facility while customers and other stakeholders visit daily .Due to the high rate of inflow of individuals into the service, several hundreds of casualties would be achieved in the event of an incident. As a mitigation measure, there are well laid down control systems for the monitoring and surveillance of the operations at the facility. All the processes are subjected to rigorous assessments to ascertain their safety to reduce the risk of an incident. The management at the water treatment plant has installed a backup system to minimize the effects of an event at the facility (Brown, et al, 2006). As a precaution measures, each mechanical system at the installation is supported by well-tested alternatives so that a breakup or interference in the running of the system does not necessarily lead to a halt of activities of the entire facility.
Due to the plant’s design, any damage or degradation of a part of the establishment would only slow down the water treatment processes with minimal effects on the quality of service to the residents. In the case of damage to the water treatment facility, the effect within its jurisdiction would be enormous. Water for domestic consumption would utterly disappear while businesses such as the restaurants and manufacturing in the industries would have to be suspended (Brown, et al, 2006). The health of both the humans and the animals would be compromised due outbreaks such as cholera and typhoid. Additionally, there would be pollution of the natural water resources since the wastewater would find its way into surrounding water bodies. Other main sectors such as transport, energy, and telecommunications would also be hampered as they mainly depend on water for their operations. To mitigate the effects of the incidents the management at the facility have instituted emergency planning measures to enable the infrastructure cope with unexpected eventualities. Moreover, there are contingency plans capable of handling emergencies of various magnitudes that may affect the facility (Rossi, Cancelliere, & Giuliano, 2005).
In addition, there are contingency plans for the supply of drinking water to the residents if there is interference in the water plant at Laurel County. These plans are a mitigation measure to ensure that the resident’s access to water for domestic use during emergencies (Kröger, 2008). The facility has hazard resilience mechanisms to overcome the effects of hazardous materials that could find their way into the water system. Consequently, there are clear mechanisms to protect the asset against natural disasters such earthquake and other natural calamities occasioned by climatic changes. Therefore, the facility is properly designed to cope with incidents of floods and other natural disasters without compromising its service to the residents of Laurel County (Rossi, Cancelliere & Giuliano, 2005). The plant’s contingencies plans such as backup pumps, valves, and water storage tanks ensure that the facility offers services at all times. There are also fire support and emergency services to minimize the effects associated with fires at the facility.
Asset Criticality
The occupancy would consist of 51-250 people at times of maximum occupancy, which is a large number by any standards. Due to the critical nature of the property, an average incident would cost more than $10,000,000 and would result in an enormous financial setback to the management of the facility. A significant interference with the smooth operations of the asset would impact the state’s economy. In particular, since various industries are dependent on the existence of the water treatment facility, its closure would result in them reducing on their operation efficient or even shutting down. Specifically, industries that use water-cooling plants would have to close down. The facility is largely interdependent with other critical infrastructure in the state of Kentucky. Therefore, it provides essential services to external facilities such as transport, telecommunications, and energy sectors. The total score is 11-16 in the public sector, a score that demonstrates the high criticality of the asset. The score shows that the asset is the highly desirable target, which demands effective mitigation measures against, terrorist activities and natural disasters (Brown, et al, 2006).
Conclusion
Laurel water district 2 is one of the major critical infrastructures in the state of Kentucky. The facility serves more than 60,000 people in the county. The facility is also highly interconnected with other major infrastructures such as telecommunications, power lines, and transport network. Consequently, it is highly critical and desirable target, which if affected could cripple the operations of the residents in the county. However, the facility administration has put in place emergency planning measures to cope with incidents such as terror attacks. The facility is also well prepared to mitigate the effects of floods and other natural disasters.
 
 
 
 
 
References
Brown, G., Carlyle, M., Salmerón, J., & Wood, K. (2006). Defending critical infrastructure. Interfaces, 36(6), 530-544.
Firestone, L., Kaswan, A., & Meraz, S. (2006). Environmental justice: access to clean drinking water. Hastings Law Journal, 57(6), 1367.
Kröger, W. (2008). Critical infrastructures at risk: A need for a new conceptual approach and extended analytical tools. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 93(12), 1781-1787.
Rossi, G., Cancelliere, A., & Giuliano, G. (2005). Case study: multicriteria assessment of drought mitigation measures. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 131(6), 449-457.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Page Four and Five
Criteria #1: Occupancy
How many people would be present at the asset at the time of maximum occupancy?
Score   Criteria
Score 2
0          Asset is not normally occupied

  • Normal occupancy of 1-50
  • Normal occupancy of 51-250
  • Normal occupancy of 251-1,000
  • Normal occupancy of 1,001 or more

Criteria #2: Repair/Replace
If the asset were damaged/destroyed, what would the direct financial consequences be to repair or replace the physical asset and the associated equipment housed in the asset?
Score   Criteria
Score 4                                                           
0          No significant effect is likely

  • Repair/replacement cost is <$250,000
  • Repair/replacement cost of $250,000 – $1,000,000
  • Repair/replacement cost of $1,000,000 – $10,000,000
  • Repair/replacement cost of >$10,000,000

Criteria #3: Economic Impact (Private Sector Asset Only)
If the asset were damaged/destroyed, what effect would the incident have on the asset’s contribution to the economy?
Score   Criteria          
Score 4                                                           
0          No significant economic impact likely
1          Impact on the individual asset’s profitability of greater than 10%
2          Impact on the corporation’s profitability greater than 10%
3          Impact on the state economy
4          Impact on the national economy
 
Criteria #4: Business or Service Interruption
If the asset were damaged/destroyed, for what period of time would the asset be unable to provide its product or service?
Score   Criteria
Score 1
0      Could stand-up or resume service with minimal procedural changes or repairs

  • Can provide partial services or product
  • Shut down or unable to provide services for less than six months
  • Shut down or unable to provide services for more than six months
  • Not expected to be rebuilt or services will not be provided in the future

 
Criteria #5: Interdependencies
If the asset were damaged/destroyed, would there be an adverse effect on other assets that are interdependent?
Score   Criteria          
Score 4                                               
0          No effect on the asset’s normal operations or its ability to provide services

  • Asset is a standalone facility and is not interdependent with other assets; adverse effects would be limited to this asset only
  • Asset is part of and interdependent with a larger system; however, adverse effects would not extend beyond this single asset
  • Asset is interdependent with or provides services to at least one other facility on-site
  • Asset is interdependent with or provides services to external facilities

Presenting Total Scores
Table 1: Criticality Scores for [Laurel Water District 2
Treatment Plant]

Criticality Criteria Score
(0 through 4)
Justification/Explanation
Criteria #1: Occupancy 2 Generally, these are the number of people who would be working in the facility.
Criteria #2: Repair/Replace 4 Water treatment plants and dams cost billions of dollars. For instance, the Ethiopia’s Reconnaissance dam, which is under construction, is estimated to costs $6.4 Billion dollars. Therefore, its repair would be very costly.
Criteria #3: Economic Impact (Private Sector Asset Only) 4 Industries in the private sector that rely on water, such as for water-cooling plants and those in the hospitality industry would be unable to operate without water.
Criteria #4: Business or Service Interruption 1 It has contingency plans such as standby water tanks that would supply water to the state.
Criteria #5: Interdependencies 4 Industries with water-cooling plants rely on it. It relies on telecommunication and electricity industries
Total Score (out of 16 for Public Sector Asset or 20 for Private Sector Asset):    _15____ / _20____   ®  ____75__ %

 
Table 2: Score Meaning

Public Sector
Asset Score
Private Sector
Asset Score
Importance Meaning
11-16 14-20 High Criticality Highly Desirable Target
6-10 7-13 Moderate Criticality Desirable Target
0-5 0-6 Low Criticality Not Likely to be a Target

 
Score: 11-16 Public Asset