Multi-agency Response to a Major Water Pipe Break: A Massachusetts Case Study and Evaluation Final Report FUNDED THROUGH A GRANT FROM THE ALFRED P. SLOAN FOUNDATION | PREPARED BY STRATUS CONSULTING, INC. PREPARED FOR: Multi-agency Response to a Major Water Pipe Break: A Massachusetts Case Study and Evaluation Final Report Prepared for: Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies Water Research Foundation WaterISAC Funded through a grant from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Prepared by: Stratus Consulting Inc. 1920 L Street NW, Suite 420 Washington, DC 20036 202-466-3731 March 31, 2011 Contents List of Exhibits List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in this Report Executive Summary................................................................................................................... S-1 Section 1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................1 1.1 Case Study Objectives and Purpose ........................................................................1 1.2 Research Approach..................................................................................................2 1.3 Summary of Report Contents ..................................................................................5 Section 2 Incident Overview..................................................................................................7 2.1 Incident and Response.............................................................................................7 2.1.1 Recognition and Characterization of the Incident .......................................7 2.1.2 Response Coordination and Notification.....................................................9 2.1.3 Response Implementation..........................................................................11 2.1.4 Maintenance of Service and Provision of Bottled Water Supplies ...........13 2.1.5 Resumption of Normal Service .................................................................13 2.2 Summary of Roles, Responsibilities, and Key Decision Points............................14 Section 3 Evaluation of the Shaft 5A Break Incident .......................................................19 3.1 Evaluation Approach .............................................................................................19 3.2 Evaluation of Response to the Shaft 5A Break by Emergency Response Action Area............................................................................................................21 3.2.1 Action Area 1 – Recognize Status Changes and Activate Plan.................21 3.2.2 Action Area 2 – Mobilize Staff .................................................................22 3.2.3 Action Area 3 – Engage in External Communication ...............................23 3.2.4 Action Area 4 – Analyze the Type and Severity of an Event....................26 3.2.5 Action Area 5 – Develop Specific Response and Recovery Actions ........27 3.2.6 Action Area 6 – Assess and Address Health and Safety Issues ................28 3.2.7 Action Area 7 – Preserve Stored Water and Identify Alternative Water Sources............................................................................................29 3.2.8 Action Area 8 – Perform Emergency Repairs...........................................30 3.2.9 Action Area 9 – Return System to Normal Levels....................................31 3.2.10 Action Area 10 – Evaluate Response and Plan .........................................32 3.2.11 Action Area 11 – Revise Plan....................................................................32 3.2.12 Action Area 12 – Conduct Ongoing Training and Security Acculturation...............................................................................33 Section 4 Case Study Conclusions ......................................................................................35 4.1 Emergency Planning and Preparedness.................................................................36 4.2 Emergency Response.............................................................................................40 4.3 Organizational Issues.............................................................................................41 4.4 Communication Practices......................................................................................43 Appendices A In-Person and Telephone Survey Respondents B Massachusetts Water Resources Authority Shaft 5A Pipe Break Interview Guide (November 8 and 9, 2010) C Sample Guidance, Notices, and Other Documents D General Resources E Media Sources F Community Resources List of Exhibits MULTI-AGENCY RESPONSE TO A MAJOR WATER PIPE BREAK: A MASSACHUSETTS CASE STUDY AND EVALUATION Exhibits S.1 12-step emergency response framework for assessing Shaft 5A response ..................... S-2 1.1 Massachusetts state and local agencies and organizations represented by interview respondents..........................................................................................................4 1.2 Key interview questions regarding MWRA pipe break ......................................................5 2.1 Timeline of Shaft 5A incident .............................................................................................8 2.2 Map of MWRA MetroWest Water Supply Tunnel .............................................................9 2.3 Broad and detailed views of MWRA system surrounding the May 1, 2010 break site ....10 2.4 Communities affected by the Shaft 5A break....................................................................11 2.5 Analysis of media reports on the Shaft 5A incident..........................................................14 2.6 Analysis of community response actions ..........................................................................15 2.7 Agency/organization roles and responsibilities in May 1, 2010 event..............................15 2.8 Key decisions in May 1, 2010 Shaft 5A incident..............................................................18 3.1 Water Resources Foundation emergency framework........................................................20 3.2 State and municipal agencies and organizations mobilized in response to the Shaft 5A incident...............................................................................................................23 3.3 Communication media utilized by MWRA and partner agencies during the Shaft 5A break incident ....................................................................................................................25 3.4 Definition of a Level III – Major Emergency....................................................................26 4.1 Summary of case study observations, lessons, and themes...............................................35 List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in this Report MULTI-AGENCY RESPONSE TO A MAJOR WATER PIPE BREAK: A MASSACHUSETTS CASE STUDY AND EVALUATION Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in this Report AwwaRF American Water Works Association Research Foundation BPHC Boston Public Health Commission BWSC Boston Water and Sewer Commission CWTP Carroll Water Treatment Plant DEP Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection DOT Massachusetts Department of Transportation EAP Emergency Action Plan E. coli Escherichia coli EOC Emergency Operations Center EOEEA Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ERP Emergency Response Plan FAQs Frequently Asked Questions FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency ICS Incident Command System MDPH Massachusetts Department of Public Health MEMA Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency MWRA Massachusetts Water Resources Authority OEP MWRA Office of Emergency Preparedness UASI Urban Areas Security Initiative WASM Weston Aqueduct Supply Mains WaterRF Water Research Foundation Executive Summary MULTI-AGENCY RESPONSE TO A MAJOR WATER PIPE BREAK: A MASSACHUSETTS CASE STUDY AND EVALUATION S. Executive Summary The Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) was established in 1984 to provide wholesale water and sewer services to 2.5 million people and more than 5,500 large industrial users in 61 metropolitan Boston communities. MWRA provides drinking water to residents living in 51 of these communities. At about 9:30 a.m. on Saturday, May 1, 2010, a 10-foot-diameter coupling, which holds segments of pipe together, broke loose near Shaft 5A of the MetroWest Water Supply Tunnel, a primary component of the MWRA system. Millions of gallons of water were released, and the subsequent MWRA actions required to maintain water supply and repair the pipe damage affected the drinking water supply to the City of Boston and 29 other communities in the metropolitan area. To maintain water delivery, MWRA reconfigured parts of the transmission system and switched to a combination of fully treated and chlorinated backup water supplies. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick declared a state of emergency and issued a boil water order for the affected communities. Despite the magnitude of the situation, MWRA repaired the broken pipe and restored full flow in less than two days. By 7:00 a.m. on Tuesday, May 4, the boil water order had been lifted for all 30 communities affected by the break. S.1 Purpose and Objectives Water utilities are required to complete a vulnerability assessment and Emergency Response Plan (ERP) under the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act (Bioterrorism Act, 2002). Nevertheless, utilities