Effective Risk and Crisis 

Communication during Water 

Security Emergencies

SUMMARY REPORT OF EPA SPONSORED 

MESSAGE MAPPING WORKSHOPS

EPA/600/R-07/027

Offi ce of Research and Development

National Homeland Security Research Center
SCIENCE
EPA/600/R-07/027

March 2007

Effective Risk and Crisis Communication during Water

Security Emergencies

Summary Report of EPA Sponsored 

Message Mapping Workshops

by

Vincent Covello

Center for Risk Communication

New York, NY 10011

Scott Minamyer and Kathy Clayton

U.S. EPA National Homeland Security Research Center

Cincinnati, OH 45268

U.S. EPA Contract No. 68-C-02-067

Work Assignment 4-94

Science Applications International Corporation

Reston, VA 20190

Work Assignment Managers

Kathy Clayton

Threat and Consequence Assessment Division

Scott Minamyer

Water Infrastructure Protection Division

National Homeland Security Research Center

Offi ce of Research and Development

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Cincinnati, OH 45268
ii

Disclaimer 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Offi ce of Research and Development funded and collaborated in the 

research described herein under Contract Number 68-C-02-067 to Science Applications International Corporation. It has been 

subjected to the Agency’s peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of 

trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
iii

Abstract 

This report summarizes results from three water security risk communication message mapping workshops conducted by 

U.S. EPA’s National Homeland Security Research Center during 2005/2006. It provides information about effective message 

development and delivery that could be useful to water sector organizations as they develop their respective risk communication 

plans. 

Message mapping is a process by which users can predict 95 percent of questions likely to be asked by the media and others 

following an incident, prepare clear and concise answers to the questions along with supporting information ahead of time, and 

practice effective message delivery before a crisis occurs. 

The workshops were facilitated by Dr. Vincent Covello, internationally known crisis communication expert and Director of the 

Center for Risk Communication in New York City. Invited workshop participants represented a cross-section of water utilities 

from various regions of the United States; local, state, and federal government agencies; emergency response organizations; public 

health offi cials; law enforcement agencies; and water sector professional associations.
iv
v

Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................................................................vi

1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................................1-1

 EPA Workshops .......................................................................................................................................................................1-1

 Risk Communication Plan .......................................................................................................................................................1-1

 Workshop Proceedings .............................................................................................................................................................1-2

 Report Organization .................................................................................................................................................................1-2

2. Guide to Message Mapping (Authors: Vincent T. Covello, Center for Risk Communication, and Scott Minamyer, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) ................................................................................................................................. 2-1

 Background ...........................................................................................................................................................................2-1

 What Is Risk Communication? ................................................................................................................................................2-1

 Mental Noise: Why Risk Communication Matters During a Crisis ........................................................................................2-1

 Message Mapping .................................................................................................................................................................. 2-2

 Benefi ts of Using Message Maps ........................................................................................................................................... 2-2

 Uses of Message Maps ........................................................................................................................................................... 2-3

 History of Message Maps ...................................................................................................................................................... 2-3

 Steps in Developing Message Maps ...................................................................................................................................... 2-3

 Step 1. Identify Potential Stakeholders ........................................................................................................................ 2-4

 Step 2. Identify Potential Stakeholder Questions ........................................................................................................ 2-4

 Step 3. Analyze Questions to Identify Common Sets of Concerns ..............................................................................2-6

 Step 4. Develop Key Messages .................................................................................................................................... 2-7

 Step 5. Develop Supporting Facts ................................................................................................................................ 2-8

 Step 6. Test and Practice Messages ............................................................................................................................. 2-8

 Step 7. Deliver Maps Through Appropriate Information Channels ............................................................................. 2-8

 Other Resources .......................................................................................................................................................................2-9

3. Message Mapping Workshop Products .................................................................................................................................. 3-1

 Scenario 1: Hypothetical Credible Threat Involving Chemical Contamination of a Reservoir ......................................... 3-2

 Scenario 2: Hypothetical Physical Attack— Attack Bomb Explosion ............................................................................................ 3-6 —

 Scenario 3: Hypothetical Credible Threat ........................................................................................................................ 3-12

 Scenario 4: Hypothetical Power Loss Incident ................................................................................................................. 3-17

 Scenario 5: Hypothetical Pesticide Contamination Incident ............................................................................................ 3-23

 Scenario 6: Hypothetical Intentional Biological Contamination Incident ......................................................................... 3-30

4. Conclusion ...........................................................................................................................................................................4-1

Appendix A: Seven General Rules of Risk Communication ...................................................................................................... A-1

Appendix B: Water Security Message Mapping Workshop Participants ...................................................................................... B-1

Appendix C: References ............................................................................................................................................................... C-1 

List of Figures

2-1. Message Map Template .......................................................................................................................................................... 2-2

2-2. Sample Smallpox Message Map Developed by CDC ............................................................................................................ 2-3

2-3. Sample Matrix of Stakeholders and Their Concerns ...............................................................................................................2-6

 Scenario 2: Hypothetical Physical —

Contents 
vi

Acknowledgments 

The Message Mapping Workshops and this report were developed in close cooperation with the EPA Offi ce of Water, Water 

Security Division, Washington, DC.

EPA wishes to acknowledge all of the workshop participants for their signifi cant contributions, expertise, and hard work in 

developing the questions and maps contained in this report. Participants and their contact information are listed in Appendix B.

Meg Olberding of the City Manager’s Offi ce, Cincinnati, Ohio, and Bret Atkins of the Ohio Department of Health, Columbus, 

Ohio, peer reviewed this report. Other reviewers include Susan Ruggles formerly with the EPA Offi ce of Water, Water Security 

Division in Washington DC; Patricia Lamb of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities in Charlotte, NC; Kerry Kirk Pfl ugh of the 

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection in Trenton, NJ; Scott Decker of the Washington State Department of Health 

in Olympia, WA; Raymond Riordan of Riordan Associates in San Ramon, CA; and John Spitler of the Golden State Water 

Company in Rancho Cordova, CA.
1-1

1. Introduction 

Risk Communication

The interactive process of exchanging information and opinion among individuals, groups, 

and institutions involving multiple messages about the nature of risk...

– The National Research Council

EPA Workshops

Risk communication skills are imperative for the successful 

management of crises. Recent U.S. and global events have 

resulted in heightened recognition by public offi cials and 

others responsible for crisis management of the need to 

evaluate and refi ne these skills. Message mapping (described 

in Section 2) has become widely accepted as a method of 

preparing ahead of time for crisis communication that will 

be necessary during various types of potential incidents, 

including those affecting drinking water and wastewater 

utilities. For this reason, the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) has sponsored message mapping workshops 

focusing on several categories of water infrastructure crises. 

These were conducted in the following locations:

 Atlanta, GA March 2-3, 2005

 Washington, DC August 17-19, 2005

 Alexandria, VA February 14-15, 2006

This report presents information from the workshops that 

could be useful to water sector organizations as they develop 

or improve their respective risk communication plans.

Risk Communication Plan*

The techniques for developing and delivering effective crisis 

messages described in this report should be considered within 

the context of a comprehensive written risk communication 

plan prepared by the water sector organization in advance. 

Such plans allow for a proactive, quick, and effective 

response during an emergency since many of the necessary 

communication decisions and activities will have already been 

decided upon. If carefully designed, a risk communication 

plan can save precious time when an emergency occurs and 

enable leaders and spokespersons to focus on particulars of 

the emergency at hand and the quality, accuracy, and speed of 

their responses.

To show the context of messaging as part of the overall 

plan, the following describes what a comprehensive risk 

communication plan should do.

*Source: Adapted from Hyer RN, Covello VT. Effective Media 

Communication during Public Health Emergencies: A WHO Handbook, 

WHO/CDS/2005.31, World Health Organization, Geneva, 2005 (www.who.

int/csr/resources/publications/WHO_CDS_2005_31/en/)

• Describe and designate staff roles and 

responsibilities for different emergency scenarios

• Designate who is accountable for leading the 

response

• Designate who is responsible for implementing 

various actions

• Designate who needs to be consulted during the 

process

• Designate who needs to be informed about what is 

taking place

• Designate who will be the lead spokesperson and 

backup for different scenarios

• Include procedures for information verifi cation, 

clearance, and approval

• Include procedures for coordinating with important 

stakeholders and partners (for example, with 

other water utilities, health agencies, emergency 

responders, law enforcement, elected offi cials, and 

state and federal government agencies)

• Include procedures to secure the required human, 

fi nancial, logistical, and physical support and 

resources (such as people, space, equipment and 

food) for communication operations during a short, 

medium and prolonged event (24 hours a day, 7 days 

a week if needed)

• Include agreements on releasing information and on 

who releases what, when, and how

• Include polices and procedures regarding employee 

contacts from the media

• Outline well thought out communication 

contingency plans for various scenarios

• Include regularly checked and updated media 

contact lists (including after-hours news desks)
1-2

• Include regularly checked and updated partner 

contact lists (day and night)

• Outline exercises and drills for testing the 

communication plan as part of larger preparedness 

and response training

• Identify subject-matter experts (for example, 

university professors) willing to collaborate during 

an emergency, and develop and test contact lists (day 

and night); know their perspectives in advance

• Identify target audiences

• Identify preferred communication channels (for 

example, telephone hotlines, radio announcements, 

news conferences, Web site updates, and faxes) to 

communicate with the public, key stakeholders and 

partners

• Contain message maps, including holding 

statements, core messages, message templates, and 

message maps with answers to frequently asked 

questions 

• Contain fact sheets, question-and-answer sheets, 

talking points and other supplementary materials for 

potential scenarios

• Contain a signed endorsement of the communication 

plan from the agency’s director

• Contain procedures for posting/updating information 

on a Web site

• Contain task checklists for the fi rst 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 

and 48 hours

• Contain procedures for evaluating, revising, and 

updating the communication plan on a regular basis

Workshop Proceedings

Dr. Vincent Covello, internationally recognized crisis 

communication expert and Director of the Center for Risk 

Communication in New York City, facilitated the workshops. 

Dr. Covello has consulted for several hundred public and 

private sector organizations over the past 30 years, including 

the EPA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 

Department of Defense, Department of Health and Human 

Services, and the World Health Organization. He has provided 

expert consultations related to such threats as bioterrorism, 

West Nile virus, smallpox, SARS, and pandemic fl u, and has 

authored or edited more than 25 books and 75 articles on crisis 

communication.

Invited workshop participants (see Appendix B) represented 

a cross-section of water utilities from various regions of the 

United States; local, state, and federal government agencies; 

emergency response organizations; public health offi cials; 

law enforcement agencies; and water sector professional 

associations.

Following an overview of risk communication and message 

mapping principles by Dr. Covello, participant work groups 

produced several message maps for each of the following six 

hypothetical scenarios:

(1) Possible chemical contamination of a reservoir

(2) Physical attack—bomb explosion

(3) Credible threat—unknown agent and location

(4) Loss of electrical power impacting water delivery 

 systems

(5) Pesticide contamination

(6) Biological contamination 

Products generated by workshop participants include:

■ A list of stakeholders who will need information during a 

water sector crisis 

■ A list of anticipated questions or concerns from the 

public and media for each of the six scenarios

■ Message maps for a small subset of anticipated questions 

for each scenario

Report Organization

This report is organized into four sections. Section 1, 

Introduction, provides a brief overview of workshop locations, 

proceedings, and scenarios. Section 2, Guide to Message 

Mapping, provides a “how to” guide outlining the background, 

benefi ts, and steps to message mapping. Section 3, Message 

Mapping Workshop Products, provides lists of potential 

questions and a subset of message maps produced for each 

scenario. Section 4, Conclusion, provides a brief discussion 

of this and other risk communication tools available from 

EPA. Appendix A presents seven best practices for effective 

risk communication, Appendix B provides a list of workshop 

participants, and Appendix C includes a list of references.
2-1

2. Guide to Message Mapping 

Authors 

Vincent T. Covello, Center for Risk Communication

Scott Minamyer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

“We have only recently come to understand that communications are as critical to outbreak 

control as laboratory analyses or epidemiology.”

– Dr. Lee Jong-wook, Director-General, 

 World Health Organization, September 2004

Background

Under normal circumstances, the elaborate infrastructures and 

mechanisms that protect the nation’s water systems generally 

go unnoticed. In the middle of a water security crisis, 

however, such as an attack against a water treatment plant or 

contamination of the drinking water with a naturally occurring 

organism like cryptosporidium, they will be of intense interest. 

Risk communication during such emergencies will directly 

infl uence events. Poor risk communication can fan emotions 

and undermine public trust and confi dence at best, and at 

worst, incite high tensions, misinformation, and additional 

crises that need to be handled. Good risk communication 

can rally support, calm a nervous public, provide needed 

information, encourage cooperative behaviors, and potentially 

help save lives.

Effective risk communication is a key responsibility of water 

utility offi cials and public information offi cers in times of crisis. 

The public, news media, policy-makers, and other stakeholders 

will expect timely and quality information from water utilities, 

regulatory agencies, public health offi cials, and other authorities 

about the situation. A spokesperson who communicates badly 

may be perceived as incompetent, uncaring, or dishonest, thus 

losing trust. One who communicates well, however, can reach 

large numbers of people with clear and credible health, safety, 

and security messages.

While the specifi cs of water security crises are diffi cult to 

predict, risk communication strategies for such events can 

be planned before a crisis occurs. Such planning greatly 

increases the likelihood that communication will further health 

and safety interests and contribute positively to emergency 

response efforts. Well-constructed, practiced, and delivered 

messages will inform the public, reduce misinformation, and 

provide a valuable foundation for informed decision making. 

What Is Risk Communication?

Risk communication is a science-based approach for 

communicating effectively and accurately to diverse audiences 

in situations that are high-concern, high-stress, emotionally 

charged, and/or highly controversial. Its purpose is to enhance 

knowledge and understanding, build trust and credibility, 

encourage constructive dialogue, produce appropriate levels 

of concern, and provide guidance on appropriate protective 

behavior and actions following a crisis incident. Although 

much about risk communication involves elements of common 

sense, its principles are supported by a considerable body of 

scientifi c research as refl ected in more than 8,000 articles in 

peer-reviewed scientifi c journals, 2,000 published books, and 

a number of published literature reviews by major scientifi c 

organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences.

Mental Noise: Why Risk Communication 

Matters During a Crisis

Mental noise theory, one of the main constructs of risk 

communication, indicates that when people are highly 

upset, they often have diffi culty hearing, understanding, 

and remembering information. Research shows that mental 

noise can reduce a person’s ability to process information by 

more than 80 percent. This is mostly due to trauma and a 

heightened emotional state during a crisis. Factors that cause 

the highest levels of worry, anxiety, and mental noise during a 

crisis include but are not limited to perceptions that:

 ■ The situation is under the control of others, especially 

those we do not trust ■ The situation is involuntary ■ The situation is inescapable ■ The crisis is of human origin versus nature ■ The crisis involves something that is unfamiliar or exotic ■ The crisis threatens a form of injury or death that 

is dreaded ■ There is a great deal of uncertainty ■ Victims include children, pregnant women, or other 

vulnerable populations ■ There are untrustworthy sources of information

The challenge for risk 

communicators is to overcome the 

communication barriers created by 

mental noise. Solutions include 

developing a limited number of key 

messages that are brief, credible, 

and clearly understandable. One of 

the most powerful tools available to 

risk communicators for this purpose 

is “message mapping.” 
2-2

Message Map 

Audience/Stakeholder: ____________________________

Spokesperson: _____________________________________

Question or Concern: _____________________________________________________

Key Message 1

■ Supporting Information 1-1

■ Supporting Information 1-2

■ Supporting Information 1-3

Key Message 2

■ Supporting Information 2-1

■ Supporting Information 2-2

■ Supporting Information 2-3

Key Message 3

■ Supporting Information 3-1

■ Supporting Information 3-2

■ Supporting Information 3-3

Figure 2-1. Message Map Template.

Message Mapping

Message mapping is a seven-step process by which users can:

■ Predict 95 percent of questions likely to be asked by the 

media and others following an incident 

■ Prepare clear and concise answers to the questions along 

with supporting information ahead of time

■ Practice effective message delivery before a crisis occurs 

Message maps are viable tools for communicating information 

about terrorist attacks and other manmade or natural 

emergencies. They ensure that risk information has the 

optimum chance of being heard, understood, and remembered. 

Message maps allow organizations to convey timely, accurate, 

clear, and credible information. They enable audiences 

to better understand issues, act constructively upon the 

information provided, recover more quickly from the stress of 

the event, and gain or regain trust in risk managers.

The process has been used for some time by outstanding risk 

communicators such as Mayor Rudolph Giuliani; most notably 

in communicating about the attacks on the World Trade 

Center in New York City on September 11, 2001. Message 

maps present concise, detailed, and hierarchically organized 

responses to anticipated questions or concerns. They are 

visual aids that can highlight at a glance the organization’s 

messages for key issues of concern.

As shown in the template in Figure 2-1, the top portion 

of a message map identifi es the intended audience, the 

spokesperson, and the specifi c question or concern the map 

is intended to address. The next layer of the message map 

contains three key messages in response to the question. Key 

messages are intended to address the information needs of a 

wide variety of audiences. The three key messages can also 

serve singularly or collectively as a media sound bite (a very 

short comment or phrase suitable for use in a broadcast or 

print news story). Sound bites are critical to successful media 

interviews. The bottom tier of the message map contains 

supporting information, blocked in groups of three under the 

key messages. Supporting messages amplify the key messages 

and provide additional facts or details. 

Benefi ts of Using Message Maps

As a strategic tool, a message map affords multiple benefi ts. 

It provides a handy reference for water security leaders and 

spokespersons who must respond swiftly to questions on 

topics where timeliness and accuracy are critical. Multiple 

spokespersons can work from the same message map to ensure 

rapid dissemination of consistent messages across a wide 

spectrum of communication outlets. Message maps provide 

a unifying framework for disseminating information about a 

wide range of water security issues.

When used consistently, message maps promote multiple partners 

“speaking with one voice.” Message maps also minimize 

chances of “speaker’s regret,” which includes regretting saying 

something inappropriate or regretting not saying something 

that should have been said. A printed copy of the message map 

enables spokespeople to “check off ” the talking points they want 

to address during interviews, in order of their importance. This 

helps prevent omissions of key facts or misstatements that could 

provoke misunderstandings or controversy. 

Message mapping permits organizations to develop messages 

in advance for potential emergencies and crises, such as a 

terrorist attack. Message maps can be tailored to the specifi cs 

of the event when the crisis occurs. Once developed, the 

effectiveness of message maps can be tested through focus 

groups and practice.
2-3

Uses of Message Maps

Message maps can be used for effectively sharing information 

in news conferences, media interviews, stakeholder 

information exchanges, public meetings, Web sites, telephone 

hotline scripts, and fact sheets.

History of Message Maps

Message maps were developed by Dr. Vincent Covello in the 

early 1990s as a specialized tool for communicating effectively 

in high-stress, high-concern, or emotionally charged 

situations. Message mapping was fi rst adopted as a public 

health tool in the aftermath of the U.S. anthrax attacks in the 

fall of 2001. Early in 2002, the CDC conducted an intensive 

message mapping session focused on the communication 

challenges posed by a potential smallpox attack. A product of 

this workshop was several hundred smallpox message maps. 

Figure 2-2 (below) provides one example. 

Since 2002, agencies at the national, regional, state, and 

local levels have conducted dozens of message mapping 

workshops focused on a wide variety of emergency events. 

For example, emergency events that have already been 

mapped include bioterrorism, pandemic infl uenza, exposure 

to anthrax, smallpox, plague, botulism, viral hemorrhagic 

fevers, tularemia, and radiation. EPA has conducted message 

mapping workshops focusing on water sector incidents; crises 

involving indoor facilities such as buildings, schools, or 

arenas; and decontamination following an incident.

Several important outcomes have resulted from these mapping 

efforts. These include identifi cation of key stakeholders early 

in the risk communication process, anticipation of stakeholder 

questions and concerns before they are raised, internal and 

external partnering in the development of messages, and 

a vetted central repository of clear, concise, and accurate 

information for the major types of emergency events. 

Steps in Developing Message Maps

There are seven steps involved in the message mapping 

process. These include: (1) identifying stakeholders, (2) 

identifying stakeholder questions, (3) analyzing the questions 

to identify the underlying concerns, (4) developing key 

messages, (5) developing supporting facts for the key 

messages, (6) testing and practicing messages, and (7) 

delivering maps through the appropriate information channels. 

Figure 2-2. Sample Smallpox Message Map Developed by CDC.

Message Map Example

Stakeholder: General Public

Spokesperson: Public Health Offi cial

Question or Concern: How contagious is smallpox?

Key Message 1: Smallpox spreads slowly compared to many other diseases. 

■ People are infectious only when the rash appears.

■ Smallpox typically requires hours of face-to-face contact.

■ There are no carriers without symptoms.

Key Message 2: This allows time to trace those who have come in contact with the disease.

■ The incubation period for the disease is 10-14 days.

■ Resources are available for tracing contacts.

■ Finding people who have been exposed and vaccinating them has proved successful in the past.

Key Message 3: Those who have been traced can be vaccinated to prevent illness.

■ People who have never been vaccinated are the most important to vaccinate.

■ Adults who were vaccinated as children may still have some immunity.

■ Adequate vaccine is on hand. 
2-4

 Step 1. Identify Potential Stakeholders

The fi rst step in message mapping is to identify potential 

stakeholders for a selected issue or topic, such as a terrorist 

attack against a water treatment plant or the discovery of a 

contaminant in the water system. Stakeholders include the 

public at large as well as all interested, affected, or infl uential 

parties (local, state, and federal; including law enforcement, 

public health, and elected offi cials).

Every emergency event involves a distinctive set of 

stakeholders. Each stakeholder may have a different set of 

questions and concerns that may be voiced. The following is 

a list (in alphabetical order) of potential stakeholders for a 

water security emergency identifi ed by EPA Message Mapping 

Workshop participants. This list is intended to provide 

examples of potential stakeholders. Individual water utilities 

or other water sector organizations may choose to include 

additional or different stakeholders in their respective risk 

communication plans than those in this list.

■ advisory panels

■ business leaders and business community

■ consultants

■ contractors

■ disabled populations

■ educational leaders and educational community

■ elderly populations

■ emergency response personnel

■ employees of other responding organizations

■ environmental offi cials

■ ethnic populations

■ families of emergency responders, law enforcement 

personnel, hospital personnel, and health agency 

employees

■ fi re department personnel

■ government agencies

■ homebound populations

■ homeless people

■ hospital personnel

■ illiterate populations

■ institutionalized populations

■ law enforcement personnel

■ legal professionals

■ local residents who are out of town and their relatives

■ media, print and electronic 

■ military leaders

■ minority populations

■ non-English speaking groups ■ non-governmental organizations

■ other water utilities

■ physicians, nurses, paramedics, and other 

healthcare personnel

■ politicians/legislators/elected offi cials

■ professional societies

■ public-at-large

■ public-at-risk

■ public health offi cials

■ religious groups

■ scientifi c leaders and scientifi c community 

■ security personnel

■ service and maintenance personnel

■ suppliers/vendors

■ tourists or business travelers and their relatives

■ union offi cials and labor advocates

■ veterinarians

■ victims

■ victims’ families

■ water utility employees

As part of this fi rst step of message mapping, stakeholders can 

be further distinguished and categorized according to: (1) their 

potential to affect outcomes; (2) their credibility among other 

stakeholders; and (3) whether they are likely to be apathetic, 

neutral, supportive, non-supportive, adversarial, or undecided 

regarding issues on the table. 

It is important to note that maps need not be developed for 

every stakeholder group on the list. Providing information to 

the media, for example, will get information to many of the 

other stakeholders listed. Additionally, the same messages can 

be used for multiple stakeholders.

Step 2. Identify Potential Stakeholder Questions

The second step is to identify as complete a list of potential 

questions and concerns for each stakeholder group as possible. 

Questions and concerns typically fall into three categories:

■ Overarching Questions: for example, “What do people 

need to know?”

■ Informational Questions: for example, “When will the 

water be safe to use?”

■ Challenging Questions: for example, “Why should we 

trust what you are telling us?” 

The questions can be further refi ned by grouping them 

according to themes (for example, whether the incident 

involves chemical, biological, physical, or radiological agents; 

the likely organization responsible for answering the questions; 

certainty or uncertainty that the event has occurred; and the 

level of protective actions).

How to Develop Lists of Questions

Lists of specifi c stakeholder questions and concerns can be 

generated through research, including:

■ Media content analysis (print and broadcast)

■ Analysis of web site material

■ Document review, including public meeting records, 

public hearing records, and legislative transcripts

■ Reviews of complaint logs, hotline logs, toll-free number 

logs, and media logs

■ Focused interviews with subject matter experts

■ Facilitated workshops or discussion sessions with 

individuals intimately familiar with the issues

■ Focus groups

■ Surveys 
2-5

The 77 Most Frequently Asked Questions by Media 

Following Crisis Incidents

Recent research conducted by the Center for Risk 

Communication and other groups indicates that questions and 

concerns raised by stakeholders in emergency situations can 

be identifi ed in advance using the techniques described above. 

For example, the following is a list of the 77 most frequently 

asked questions by journalists during a crisis. The list was 

generated by researching a large database of questions posed 

by journalists at news conferences immediately following a 

disaster and distilling the larger list into 77 questions. This is 

an excellent resource for identifying potential questions for 

which message maps should be developed.

What is your name and title?

What are your job responsibilities?

What are your qualifi cations?

Can you tell us what happened? 

When did it happen?

Where did it happen?

Who was harmed?

How many people were harmed?

Are those that were harmed getting help?

How certain are you about this information?

How are those who were harmed getting help?

Is the situation under control?

How certain are you that the situation is under 

control?

Is there any immediate danger?

What is being done in response to what 

happened?

Who is in charge?

What can we expect next?

What are you advising people to do? What 

can people do to protect themselves and their 

families – now and in the future – from harm?

How long will it be before the situation returns 

to normal?

What help has been requested or offered from 

others?

What responses have you received? 

Can you be specifi c about the types of harm 

that occurred? 

What are the names of those that were harmed?

Can we talk to them?

How much damage occurred? 

What other damage may have occurred?

How certain are you about damages?

How much damage do you expect?

What are you doing now?

Who else is involved in the response?

Why did this happen? 

What was the cause? 

Did you have any forewarning that this might 

happen?

Why wasn’t this prevented from happening? 

Could this have been avoided?

How could this have been avoided?

What else can go wrong?

If you are not sure of the cause, what is your 

best guess? 

Who caused this to happen? 

Who is to blame?

Do you think those involved handled the 

situation well enough? What more could/should 

those who handled the situation have done?

When did your response to this begin? 

When were you notifi ed that something had 

happened?

Did you and other organizations disclose 

information promptly? Have you and other 

organizations been transparent?

Who is conducting the investigation? Will the 

outcome be reported to the public?

What are you going to do after the investigation?

What have you found out so far?

Why was more not done to prevent this from 

happening?

What is your personal opinion?

What are you telling your own family?

Are all those involved in agreement?

Are people over-reacting?

Which laws are applicable? 

Has anyone broken the law?

How certain are you about whether laws have 

been broken?

Has anyone made mistakes?

How certain are you that mistakes have not been 

made?

Have you told us everything you know?

What are you not telling us?

What effects will this have on the people 

involved?

What precautionary measures were taken?

Do you accept responsibility for what 

happened?

Has this ever happened before?

Can this happen elsewhere? 

What is the worst-case scenario?
2-6

What lessons were learned? 

Were those lessons implemented? Are they 

being implemented now?

What can be done now to prevent this from 

happening again? What steps need to be taken to 

avoid a similar event?

What would you like to say to those who have 

been harmed and to their families? 

Is there any continuing danger?

Are people out of danger? Are people safe? Will 

there be inconvenience to employees or to the 

public?

How much will all this cost?

Are you able and willing to pay the costs?

Who else will pay the costs?

When will we fi nd out more?

Have these steps already been taken? If not, why 

not?

Why should we trust you?

What does this all mean?

Step 3. Analyze Questions to Identify 

Common Sets of Concerns

The third step in message map construction is to 

analyze the lists of questions to identify common sets 

of concerns in order to focus on the most salient issues. 

Case studies indicate that questions can typically be 

categorized into 15 to 25 overarching areas of concern. 

The following is a sample list, in alphabetical order, 

of categories of concern that could be considered for 

a water security event. This list is intended to provide 

examples of potential categories of concern. Individual 

organizations may choose to use additional or different 

categories than contained in this listing. 

 ■ Accountability (who is responsible) ■ Basic Informational – Who, What, Where, When, 

Why, How ■ Changes in the Status Quo ■ Control (who is in charge) ■ Duration/Recovery/Decontamination ■ Ecological/Environmental ■ Economic 

■ Effects on Children/Future Generations/Elderly ■ Equity/Fairness ■ Ethics/Morality ■ Expertise ■ Honesty

■ Human Health Concerns

 - one’s own

 - children

 - parents

 - friends and family

 - elderly persons

 - expectant mothers

 - special populations

 - others

■ Irreversibility

■ Legal/Regulatory

■ Listening/Caring/Empathy

■ Openness/Transparency/Access to Information

■ Options/Alternatives

■ Organizational (for example, who’s in charge)

■ Quality of Life

■ Safety

■ Trust

■ Unfamiliarity

■ Voluntariness

Once common concerns are listed and analyzed, a useful next 

step is to construct a matrix (Figure 2-3) that contains a list 

of stakeholders on one axis and a list of stakeholder questions 

and concerns on the other axis. Within the boxes of the 

matrix, stakeholder questions and concerns can be designated 

as: (1) high concern; (2) medium concern; (3) low concern; (4) 

not applicable. One of the most important uses of the resulting 

matrix is as a resource allocation guide. Boxes that have the 

highest number of entries or are of the highest concern should 

be the fi rst addressed.

Concerns

Stakeholders

HumanhealthTrustBasicInformation

OrganizationalQuality of LifeAccountabilityDuration/RecoveryControlListening/CaringUnfamiliarityEconomicEquity/Fairness

Public-At-Large

Public-At-Risk

Victims

Victims’

Families

Media

Water Utility

Personnel

Public Health

Personnel

Emergency

Response

Personnel

Law

Enforcement

Personnel

Goverment

Agencies

Special Needs

Population

Other

Safety

Other

Figure 2-3. Sample Matrix of Stakeholders and Their 

Concerns.
2-7

Step 4. Develop Key Messages

The fourth step in message mapping is to develop key 

messages in response to each stakeholder question or concern. 

Key messages should be based on what the target audience 

most needs to know or most wants to know.

Key messages can most effectively be developed through 

brainstorming sessions with a message mapping team. The 

message mapping team typically consists of subject matter 

experts, communication specialists, policy/legal/management 

experts, and a facilitator. The brainstorming sessions produce 

message narratives, usually in the form of complete sentences. 

These sentences are then entered as key messages onto the 

message map template. 

Construction of the message map key messages should be 

guided by theories and principles of risk communication, 

including mental noise discussed previously. Studies recently 

conducted by the Center for Risk Communication, for 

example, indicate that it is crucial for key messages to be 

concisely stated if they are offered to the news media as sound 

bites or quotes. Based on an analysis of 10 years of print and 

media coverage of emergencies and crises in the United States:

■ The average length of a sound bite in the print media 

is 27 words

■ The average duration of a sound bite in the broadcast 

media is nine seconds

■ The average number of messages reported in both the 

print and broadcast media is three

■ Quotes most likely to be used as sound bites contained 

compassion, conviction, and optimism.

With this in mind, the key messages should be organized into 

sound bites with a total of three bullets containing a maximum 

of 27 words (combined) that can be spoken in nine seconds. 

Each of the three bullets should be supported by three 

additional supporting facts, as described in Step Five. Avoid 

long explanations. Adherence to the 27 words/9 second/3 

message limitation, or 27/9/3 template, helps ensure that 

spokespersons are quoted accurately and completely in media 

interviews. 

It is often appropriate to provide a brief preamble to the 

message map or key messages that indicates authentic 

empathy and compassion, which are crucial factors in 

establishing trust in high-concern, high-stress situations. The 

greater the extent to which individuals and organizations 

are perceived to be genuinely empathic, the less likely it is 

that mental noise will interfere with the audience’s ability to 

comprehend messages. This is referred to as the Compassion, 

Conviction, and Optimism (CCO) template in risk 

communication. This preamble does not count in the 27/9/3 

message.

An example of the CCO template was the response offered 

by Mayor Giuliani in New York City following the terrorist 

attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. At 

the fi rst news conference following the collapse of the second 

Tower, the Mayor said: “The number of casualties is more than 

any of us can bear ultimately.” He delivered his messages with 

the perfect balance of compassion, conviction, and optimism.

Additional Key Message Templates and Principles

Professional risk communicators have developed several 

additional templates for developing effective messages, 

including the following:

Rule of 3: In high-stress situations, people can process only 

three messages at a time instead of the seven they could 

normally process. This is why message maps have three key 

messages.

Primacy/Recency: Spokespersons should state the most 

important messages fi rst and last. In high-stress situations, listeners 

tend to remember that which they hear fi rst and last. Messages in 

the middle of a list are often not heard or remembered. 

Average Grade Level Minus 4 (AGL- 4): During crises, 

messages should be at the average grade level of the intended 

audience, minus four. For example, message maps produced 

for populations in industrialized nations during crises are typically 

constructed to be easily understood by an adult with a 6th to 8th

grade education, instead of the normal 10th to 12th grade level.

Triple T Model: When time permits, present the full message 

map using the repetitive structure found in the “Tell me, Tell 

me more, Tell me again model,” or “Triple T Model”: (1) Tell 

people what you are going to tell them in summary form, i.e., 

the three key messages; (2) Tell them more, i.e., the supporting 

information; (3) Tell people again what you told them in 

summary form, i.e., repeat the three key messages. The greater 

the extent to which messages are repeated and heard through 

various channels, the less likely it is that mental noise will 

interfere with the ability to comprehend messages.

Negative Dominance (1N = 3P): According to risk 

communication theory, people tend to focus more on the 

negative than on the positive in emotionally charged situations. 

For this reason, it is important to balance negative key 

messages with positive, constructive, or solution-oriented 

key messages; offering three positive messages for every 

one negative. Also, it is important to avoid unnecessary, 

indefensible, or non-productive uses of absolutes and of the 

words “no,” “not,” ”never,” “nothing,” or “none.”

Anticipate, Prepare, Practice (APP): Spokespersons should 

anticipate questions, prepare answers, and practice delivery 

ahead of time (never wing it).
2-8

Cite Third Parties: Spokespersons should cite third parties or 

sources that would be perceived as credible by the receiving 

audience. The greater the extent to which messages are 

supported and corroborated by credible third party sources, the 

greater the trust and the less likely it is that mental noise will 

interfere with the ability to comprehend messages. 

Address Risk Perceptions: Key messages and supporting 

information should address emotionally charged factors 

that infl uence the way people perceive risks, such as lack 

of control, dread, unfamiliarity, uncertainty, and effects on 

children. Research indicates that the greater the extent to 

which risk perception factors are addressed in messaging, the 

less likely that mental noise will interfere with the ability to 

comprehend messages. 

Use Graphics and Other Visual Aids: The use of graphics, 

visual aids, analogies, and narratives (e.g., personal stories) 

can increase an individual’s ability to hear, understand, and 

recall a message by more than 50 percent. Moreover, because 

visual aids are processed by a different part of the brain 

than word messages, they present the opportunity to provide 

information that can be processed in addition to the 27/9/3 

messages.

Step 5. Develop Supporting Facts

The fi fth step in message map construction is to develop three 

supporting facts, information, or proofs for each of the three 

bullets in the 27/9/3 key message. The same principles that 

guide key message construction guide the development of 

supporting information. 

Step 6. Test and Practice Messages 

The sixth step is to conduct systematic message testing using 

standardized testing procedures. Message testing should 

begin by asking subject matter experts who are not directly 

involved in the original message mapping process to validate 

the accuracy of information contained in the message maps. 

Message testing should then be done with individuals or groups 

who have the characteristics to serve as surrogates for key internal 

and external target audiences and with partner organizations. 

Sharing and testing messages with partners promotes message 

consistency and coordination across organizations.

Step 7. Deliver Maps Through Appropriate 

Information Channels

The seventh and fi nal step is to plan for the delivery of the 

prepared message maps through: (1) trained spokespersons, 

(2) trusted individuals or organizations, and (3) chosen 

communication channels. 

In the event of a signifi cant threat or water security 

incident, the water utility will work collaboratively with 

other responsible agencies in managing the response and 

communicating risk. Depending on the type of incident, 

this may include local government offi cials; state and local 

public health departments; the state water primacy agency; 

emergency responders; law enforcement; and pertinent 

federal agencies. Coordination among the partner agencies in 

selecting the appropriate spokespersons and delivering clear 

and consistent messages across organizations will enhance 

communication effectiveness. Having experts available from 

the various organizations to verify information or answer 

questions pertaining to their areas of responsibilities will also 

increase credibility when delivering messages.

As mentioned previously, once developed, message maps 

can be used to structure news conferences, media interviews, 

information forums and exchanges, public meetings, web sites, 

telephone hotline scripts, and fact sheets or brochures focused 

on frequently asked questions.

Trust Factors for Effective Delivery

Trust factors are extremely critical for effectively delivering 

messages during a crisis incident. Under non-stressful 

circumstances, people base opinions regarding the 

trustworthiness of a spokesperson largely on competence and 

expertise. During a crisis, however, factors that most infl uence 

whether or not people trust the speaker change primarily to 

perceptions of empathy and trust. Will Rogers, the famous 

American humorist of the 1930s, put it well when he said 

“When people are stressed and upset, they want to know that 

you care before they care about what you know.”

Research indicates that during a crisis, listeners will base their 

opinion of the trustworthiness of a speaker on the following:

Competence/

Expertise

15-20%

Listening/Caring/Empathy

50%

Honesty/

Openess

15-20%

Dedication/

Commitment

15-20%
2-9

It is important to note that during crises, people judge the 

messenger before the message and they base their judgment in 

terms of trust, forming their impressions within the fi rst 

9 to 30 seconds. Trust is judged primarily through actions, 

body language, and verbal communication. In Western 

culture, non-verbal cues that communicate when a speaker 

is attentive and empathetic include maintaining eye contact, 

keeping hands above the waist and visible, and maintaining 

body posture that signals that the speaker is listening such as 

standing straight or leaning slightly toward the audience while 

sitting. Other non-verbal factors that have an infl uence include 

dress, appearance, and voice infl ection.

Crisis Message Delivery Templates

The following fi ve templates will assist in effective message 

delivery during crisis situations.

1. Bridging Templates: Spokespersons should use statements 

such as the following to return to the key points or to redirect 

the communication when the discussion moves off course:

■ “However, what is more important to look at is ...” 

■ “However, the real issue here is ...” 

■ “And what’s most important to remember is ...” 

■ “With this in mind, if we take a look back ...” 

■ “If we take a broader perspective, ...” 

■ “Let me put all this in perspective by saying ...” 

■ “Before we continue, let me take a step back and 

 repeat that ...” 

■ “This is an important point because ...” 

■ “What this all boils down to is ...” 

■ “What matters most in this situation is ...” 

■ “Let me just add to this that ...” 

■ “I think it would be more correct to say ...” 

■ “In this context, it is essential that I note ...” 

■ “Another thing to remember is ...” 

■ “Before we leave the subject, let me add that ...” 

■ “And that reminds me ...” 

■ “While...is important, it is also important to remember ...” 

■ “It’s true that...but it is also true that ...” 

2. IDK (I Don’t Know) Template: Spokespersons should use 

this approach when they do not know the answer to a question, 

cannot answer, or are not the best source for the answer:

Steps

■ Repeat the question (without negatives)

■ Say “I wish I could answer;” or “My ability to answer is 

limited;” or “I don’t know” (less preferred)

■ Say why you cannot answer

■ Give a followup with a deadline (for media question)

■ Bridge to what you can say

Example: (1) “You’ve asked me about...; (2) I wish I could 

answer; (3) We’re still looking into it; (4) I expect to be able to 

tell you more by ...; (5) What I can tell you is...”

3. Guarantee Template: Spokespersons should use this 

template when asked to guarantee an event or outcome:

Steps

■ Indicate that the question is about the future

■ Indicate that the past/present predict the future

■ Bridge to known facts, processes or actions

Example: (1) “You’ve asked me for a guarantee, to promise 

something about the future; (2) The best way I know to talk 

about the future is to talk about what we know from the past 

and the present; (3) And what we know is ...” OR

“What I can guarantee [assure; promise; tell you] is ...”

4. “What If” Template: Spokespersons should use this when 

asked a “what if, what might happen” question:

Steps:

■ Repeat the question (without negatives)

■ Bridge to “what is”

■ State what is known factually

Example: (1) “You’ve asked me what might happen if ...; (2) I 

believe there is value to talk about what is, what we know now; 

(3) And what we know is ...”

5. False Allegation Template: Spokespersons should use 

this when responding to a hostile question, false allegation, or 

criticism.

Steps

■ Repeat/paraphrase the question without repeating the 

negative; repeat instead the opposite; the underlying 

value, or use more neutral language

■ Indicate that the issue is important 

■ Indicate what has been done or will be done to address the 

issue

Example: (1) “You’ve raised a serious question about “x;” 

(2) “x” is important to me; (3) We have done the following to 

address “x.”

Other Resources

Appendix A presents seven best practices for effective risk 

communication. Other resources are available in the literature 

and on the web. Appendix C lists a selection of references 

used in developing this report.
2-10
3-1

3. Message Mapping Workshop Products 

As mentioned in Section 1, six hypothetical scenarios dealing 

with water infrastructure crisis incidents were developed 

for the EPA Message Mapping Workshops and presented to 

participants. These include incidents involving the following:

1. Potential chemical contamination of a reservoir 

2. Physical attack/bomb explosion

3. A credible threat involving an unknown agent and location 

4. The loss of electrical power impacting water delivery 

systems 

5. Pesticide contamination

6. Biological contamination

For each of the scenarios, work groups brainstormed to 

develop lists of anticipated questions and example message 

maps for a selected subset of the anticipated questions. 

Work groups included fi ve to seven subject matter experts 

representing various sized water utilities, public health, 

emergency response, law enforcement, water sector 

professional organizations, and local/state/federal water 

agencies; public information offi cers and other communication 

specialists; and policy and management experts. 

Stage of Crisis Designation

Work group members recognized that the focus of risk 

communication may change as a given crisis situation 

unfolds. The various stages of an incident, as defi ned in EPA’s 

Response Protocol Toolbox (http://www.epa.gov/safewater/), 

include the following:

Possible: An incident is considered feasible under the 

circumstances

Credible: Evidence is available indicating that an incident 

could have occurred

Confi rmed: Analysis and other evidence verifi es that an 

incident has occurred 

Remediation and Recovery: Stage begins after an incident has 

been contained.

The message maps included in this section list the stage of the 

incident at which workshop participants intended the maps to 

be delivered.

Scenarios, Questions, and Message Maps

Descriptions of the six individual scenarios, along with lists 

of potential questions and a set of message maps developed 

for each, are provided below. The summaries of the scenarios 

presented are intentionally brief and general in nature for 

security purposes. They are intended to provide the broad 

context under which the questions and maps were developed.

Workshop Subject Matter Experts Collaborate to Develop 

Message Maps.

NOTE

Because of the limited time available during the 

workshops, the groups focused on developing a small 

subset of message maps for potential questions that may 

be asked by the media. The maps have been reviewed by 

technical experts but not tested as indicated in Step 6 of 

the message mapping process. 

IMPORTANT

Questions and message maps included in this report are 

intended to serve as examples water sector organizations 

can refer to while developing questions and maps as part 

of their own crisis communication planning. 

Organizations should use the message mapping process 

described in Section 2 to identify their own respective 

key stakeholders, compile lists of pertinent anticipated 

questions, and develop messages they would most likely 

need to deliver under various crisis situations they may 

confront. 
3-2

The following scenarios represent hypothetical narratives and 

in no way represent EPA intelligence or opinion related to 

events perceived as the most probable to occur. 

Scenario 1: Hypothetical Credible Threat 

Involving Chemical Contamination of a 

Reservoir

Summary of Scenario: Security guards at a local country 

club noticed two people driving a golf cart along the club 

fence line in the middle of the night. The fence where the 

people were spotted separates the country club from a drinking 

water reservoir. At daybreak, the golf course’s grounds crew 

notifi es security that they have found several empty plastic 

fi ve-gallon containers in the area where the intruders were 

spotted and that there are dead squirrels in this area. The 

police fi nd the cart used by the intruders in the club service 

lot. Hazardous materials responders are called in and their 

equipment indicates the presence of [insert nerve agent] in the 

containers by the fence. The incident is in the credible stage 

since it has not been verifi ed that the water supply has been 

contaminated.

Hypothetical Credible Threat Involving Chemical 

Contamination of a Reservoir Questions 

(alphabetical order)

Refer also to the list of 77 most frequently asked questions in 

Section 2 of this report.

Are people safe who live near the reservoir?

Are you worried about how bad this could get?

Can people drink the water?

Can people use the water at all and, if so, for what?

Can you adequately treat those who have been exposed?

Can you clean the distribution system to make it safe again 

and, if so, how?

Can you guarantee that the water in areas outside of the 

contamination zone is safe to drink?

Can you guarantee that this will not happen again?

Can you provide specifi cs about the potential water 

contamination incident?

Has this happened anywhere before?

Have you called experts trained in safely dealing with [insert 

chemical agent] to assist?

How do you know what to do?

How long will the [insert impacted area] remain closed?

How many people have been harmed or killed?

How much will it cost to clean the system?

How will you know when the water is safe after cleanup?

Is the distribution system contaminated and, if so, how much 

of it?

Is this an isolated incident?

Should people be worried about our drinking water?

Was this a terrorist attack?

What about people’s pets?

What are the symptoms of [insert chemical agent] exposure?

What are you doing about the situation now?

What could you have done to prevent this?

What should people do if they think they have been 

exposed?

What should people do to protect children and the elderly?

What should people know about [insert chemical agent] 

poisoning?

What type of security do you have in place to protect the 

reservoir?

What will happen to wildlife, such as geese, that live on the 

reservoir?

What would you like people to know?

Where can people in the contaminated area get water from 

now until after cleanup?

Where should the reporters go, or call, to fi nd updated 

information?

Who else is working with you to deal with the crisis?

Who are most at risk if they have been exposed to 

contaminated water?

Who is in charge right now?

Who is responsible for contaminating the water?

Will the reservoir be drained?

Message Maps

For this scenario, workshop participants developed maps for 

the following questions (see maps on following pages):

1. Can you provide specifi cs about the potential water 

contamination incident?

2. What are you doing about the situation right now?

3. Should people be worried about the drinking water?

4. Who are most at risk if they have been exposed to 

contaminated water? 

5. What are the symptoms of exposure?
3-3

Credible Threat Involving Chemical Contamination of a Reservoir Message Map 1

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, or Police

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Can you provide specifi cs about the potential water contamination incident?

Containers with [insert agent name] residue were found near the water reservoir at [insert location]. 

■ [Insert chemical agent name] is a chemical affecting the central nervous system.

■ Law enforcement and health offi cials have begun a full investigation.

■ Law enforcement and public health will be providing continuous updates on the investigation. [Refer to law enforcement 

and public health].

We are testing the entire water system for [insert chemical agent name].

■ The water utility is sampling the water in the reservoir and throughout the system.

■ They are following testing procedures recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

■ We will provide updates as results become available.

People should not use the water until the investigation is complete.

■ Bottled water should be used for drinking, cooking, and bathing.

■ Water distribution points will be set up at [insert location] by [insert time].

■ People should call [insert number] or go to [insert Web site name] for additional information.

Credible Threat Involving Chemical Contamination of a Reservoir Message Map 2

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, Mayor, Public Health, and/or EMA Director

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What are you doing about the situation right now?

We are advising people in [insert area] not to drink or use the water until further notice.

■ We are providing bottled water to people in the impacted area.

■ We have set up distribution centers throughout the affected area at [insert locations], and they are open [insert times].

■ Call [insert number] for additional information about [insert chemical name] or visit the city’s Web site at [insert Web 

address] for the most up-to-date information about the situation. 

We are testing the entire system.

■ Testing will verify whether [insert chemical agent name] is present in the water. 

■ We are sampling and testing water throughout the water distribution system.

■ We are following testing procedures recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

We are coordinating our emergency response actions with partner agencies.

■ Our federal partners include the Environmental Protection Agency, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

■ Our partners at the state and local level include the state health department, the police, local hospitals, and local 

healthcare providers.

■ We will have updates for the media as we get more information. 
3-4

Credible Threat Involving Chemical Contamination of a Reservoir Message Map 3

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, Mayor, Public Health, and/or EMA Director

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Should people be worried about the drinking water? 

We are concerned about any threat to our water system.

■ We are working closely with public health and others to minimize any potential harm.

■ We have experts on staff trained to respond to events such as this. 

■ We are using all available resources to protect public health.

We are testing the water system for the presence of [insert chemical name].

■ We are testing the water in the reservoir and all associated distribution points.

■ We have highly qualifi ed people taking samples. 

■ We are following testing procedures recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

We ask you be alert and stay tuned for updates. 

■ People should call [insert number] or go to [insert Web site name] for more information.

■ People should stay tuned to local radio or television.

■ Until we know more, people in the impacted area [insert area] should use an alternative supply of water. 

 Credible Threat Involving Chemical Contamination of a Reservoir Message Map 4

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health, City Manager, and/or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Who are most at risk if they have been exposed to contaminated water?

Children, the elderly, and others with weaker immune systems are most at-risk.

■ Children have less developed body defenses.

■ The elderly and people with diseases such as HIV/AIDS or hepatitis may have weakened immune systems.

■ Such individuals should take extra precautions.

At-risk persons should avoid contact with tap water.

■ Parents should not prepare infant formula or cook food using the water. 

■ Children and the elderly should not drink beverages prepared with the water.

■ Bottled water will be distributed at [insert locations and times].

At-risk persons with symptoms should call 911 or go to the nearest emergency room.

■ Early symptoms include [insert symptoms].

■ A child or elderly person who has been exposed should not be encouraged to vomit. 

■ A child or elderly person who has been exposed should not be given liquids.
3-5

Credible Threat Involving Chemical Contamination of a Reservoir Message Map 5

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What are the symptoms of exposure?

The extent of health effects depends on the extent of exposure.

■ People may not know they were exposed because [insert chemical agent name] has no taste or odor. 

■ People exposed to a low or moderate dose may experience symptoms within seconds to hours of exposure such as runny 

nose, blurred vision, excessive sweating, chest tightness, rapid breathing, confusion, headache, or nausea. 

■ Exposure to large doses by any route may result in loss of consciousness, convulsions, paralysis, or respiratory failure 

possibly leading to death.

Antidotes are available.

■ Treatment consists of removing [insert chemical agent name] from the body as soon as possible and providing supportive 

medical care in a hospital setting.

■ Antidotes are available for [insert chemical agent name]. 

■ They are most useful if given as soon as possible after exposure.

Mild or moderately exposed people usually recover completely.

■ These types of chemical agents have not been associated with neurological problems lasting more than one to two weeks 

after the exposure.

■ Severely exposed people are not likely to survive. 

NOTE: A message map for each agent can be prepared regarding symptoms, treatment, and other health effects. CDC fact 

 sheets, at http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/, provide the health effects for various specifi c agents.
3-6

Scenario 2: Hypothetical Physical 

Attack—Bomb Explosion

Summary of Scenario: A terrorist group drives a suicide 

truck bomb directly through security fencing surrounding 

the water treatment plant. The truck bomb detonates upon 

impact, causing signifi cant damage and rupturing chlorine 

gas canisters within the plant, causing a chlorine leak. The 

incident is at the confi rmed stage.

Hypothetical Physical Attack Questions 

(alphabetical order)

Refer also to the list of 77 most frequently asked questions in 

Section 2 of this report.

Are any other water systems impacted?

Are people in the impacted areas safe?

Can people have contact with the water?

Can people use the water for drinking?

Can people use the water for washing, bathing, irrigation, 

and other purposes?

Could this have been prevented from happening?

Do people need potassium iodide tablets?

Do people need to wash their pets’ fur?

Has anyone died?

Have you called for assistance?

Have you sampled the water?

How can people get more information?

How did the attackers do it?

How large an area has been affected?

How long will people be without water?

How many people are at risk?

How much will it cost to fi x?

How will a person know if they have been exposed?

How will low-income people get bottled water?

How will people who are sick or disabled get bottled water?

How will you clean up the water?

How will you deal with contamination in people’s appliances 

(water heater or ice maker)?

How will you deal with contamination in people’s plumbing 

systems?

Is anyone sick?

Is bottled water available?

Is the situation under control?

Is there enough bottled water?

Is this an isolated incident?

Should people evacuate or stay inside?

What about people who already drank the water?

What about people who already used the water for other 

purposes?

What are the alternate sources of water?

What are the dangers for those close to the scene of the 

incident? 

What are the dangers of the chlorine release?

What are the dangers to vulnerable populations, such as 

the elderly, children, pregnant women, and those with weak 

immune systems? 

What are the long-term effects of exposure to chlorine?

What are the possible health effects of exposure following 

the bomb explosion?

What are the sample analysis results?

What are the symptoms of exposure to chlorine?

What are you doing about the bomb explosion at the water 

treatment plant right now?

What are you doing to fi x the water system?

What are you doing to protect our water?

What do people need to know about this incident as it relates 

to our water supply?

What do people need to know and do in order to protect 

themselves from contaminated water?

What do you want people to do now about the chlorine gas 

release?

What happened? 

What impact will this have on people’s plumbing systems?

What is the danger of being exposed to the chlorine? 

What is the danger of breathing the air? 

What is the danger of drinking the water?

What is the danger of using the water for other purposes?

What is the state of the treatment plant?

What is the worst case – how bad could things get?

What precautions should responders take to be safe?

What should people do to protect themselves from the 

chlorine release?

What should people do who are located downwind of the 

cloud?

What should people do who are unable to evacuate?

When will the situation be brought back to normal?

When will the water be safe to use? 

Where can people get safe water?

Where do people get alternate sources of water?

Which way is the chlorine cloud going?

Who caused the incident?

Who is at the greatest risk?

Who is to blame?
3-7

Who will pay the costs?

Why did they do it?

Why should we believe you?

Will home treatment devices work?

Will people get sick or die?

Will the cloud residue that falls in my yard be dangerous?

Will water bills go up?

Will you be able to supply water to emergency services, 

hospitals, nursing homes, and other critical facilities?

Message Maps

For this scenario, workshop participants developed maps for the 

following questions (see maps below and on following pages):

1.What do people need to know about this incident as it 

relates to the water supply?

2.What are you doing about the bomb explosion at the water 

treatment plant right now?

3.What are you doing to fi x the water system?

4. How long will we be without water?

5.What is the state of the water treatment plant?

6.Is the situation under control?

7.Will you be able to supply water to emergency services, 

hospitals, nursing homes, and other critical facilities?

8.What do you want people to do now about the chlorine 

gas release?

9.What are the possible health effects of exposure 

to chlorine?

10. What do people need to know and do to protect 

 themselves from contaminated water?

Physical Attack Message Map 1

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, and/or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What do people need to know about this incident as it relates to the water supply?

There has been a bomb attack at the [insert name] treatment plant located at [insert location].

■ There were casualties as a result of the attack and we will provide more information when we have it.

■ The plant has been heavily damaged and will be inoperable for an unspecifi ed period of time.

■ The explosion caused a chlorine leak affecting an area of the city [defi ne boundaries].

We ask you not to use the water at this time.

■ The water could be contaminated, so people should not drink the water.

■ The loss of the treatment plant means the only supply source for our city is not available.

■ We need to conserve water now in the system for emergencies—such as fi re fi ghting.

We will provide information as soon as possible on the distribution of emergency water supplies.

■ We have contingency plans to establish emergency water supplies for the entire affected area.

■ People should stay tuned to radio or TV for information on where water will be supplied.

■ We will continue to keep people informed through the media.

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Physical Attack Message Map 2

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, and/or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What are you doing about the bomb explosion at the water treatment plant right now?

We are coordinating several activities to assess the impact, restore service, and provide safe alternativ

drinking water. 

■ Because of the attack, the water may be unsafe to drink or use so people should only use alternative water supplies.

■ We recommend that people avoid drinking and using the water until further notice.

■ We need to conserve water now in the system for emergencies—such as fi re fi ghting.

Teams specialized in handling hazardous materials are assessing the damage.

■ The treatment plant and surrounding area have been isolated.

■ The treatment plant has been shut down.

■ Water supply lines and other facilities are being inspected.

We are currently making arrangements for alternate drinking water supplies.

■ Free bottled water will be provided at various locations throughout the impacted area starting this afternoon. 

■ Please call [insert number] or visit the Web site at [insert Web address] for distribution site locations.

■ Additional public announcements will be made as more information becomes available.

e 
3-8

Physical Attack Message Map 3

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility and/or City Manager or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What are you doing to fi x the water system?

We are assessing the blast damage to the system in order to begin repair.

■ Some parts are clearly destroyed.

■ Some parts of the treatment plant may be damaged beyond use.

■ Much may be useable.

We are determining whether the distribution system has been contaminated.

■ We are testing water in the distribution system and storage tanks.

■ We will have results for most things in a couple of days. 

■ We will tell you more as soon as we know. 

We are coordinating response efforts with the emergency operations center. 

■ Technical experts are on site and in the fi eld to determine the scope of impact.

■ After an initial determination of impact, we will implement a plan of action. 

■ Local, state, and federal experts continue to actively work on a solution to the problem. 

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Physical Attack Message Map 4

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, Mayor, and/or EMA Director

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How long will people be without water?

Crews are working very hard to determine the extent of damage to quickly and safely restore water service.

■ Local, state, and federal teams are in the fi eld actively inspecting and assessing the system.

■ This is an ongoing inspection and will continue until the system is fully restored.

■ We will provide an update on water restoration at [insert time] this afternoon.

Drinking water is being supplied at designated sites in the affected area.

■ We have a coordinated effort to provide drinking water to serve those affected. 

■ Water is available at points of distribution as listed on [insert Web site] and announced on radio and TV. 

■ Please call [insert 800-number] for additional information. 

Drinking water will be provided until the problem can be resolved. 

■ People should avoid drinking and using tap water until further notice to prevent contamination.

■ People should only use alternative water supplies for all uses. 

■ People should use alternative water supplies for pets. 
3-9

Physical Attack Message Map 5

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, and/or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What is the state of the water treatment plant?

The water treatment plant is currently inoperable.

■ We are working to determine when we can safely re-enter the plant to assess damage.

■ Law enforcement has confi rmed that a truck bomb caused the damage.

■ Chlorine gas canisters within the plant ruptured and have leaked chlorine.

Local, state, and federal teams are in the fi eld actively inspecting and assessing the system.

■ These teams are working very hard to determine the extent of damage and quickly and safely restore water service.

■ This is an ongoing inspection and will continue until the system is fully restored.

■ We will provide an update on the status of the water treatment plant at [insert time] this afternoon.

Since the water is no longer being treated, it may be contaminated.

■ We are asking the public not to drink the water.

■ This includes any water remaining in water pipes or faucets.

■ The “do not use order” will remain in effect until tests confi rm that the water is safe to use.

Physical Attack Message Map 6

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, EMA Director, and/or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Is the situation under control?

Emergency response plans at the local, state, and federal levels are in effect. 

■ Our emergency response plan contains procedures for responding to a bomb attack.

■ We are working closely with our emergency response partners, including law enforcement and public health.

■ An emergency operations center has been opened to better coordinate resources and response efforts.

We are conducting an assessment to determine the impact. 

■ We are checking tanks and water lines for damage and contamination.

■ We are taking water samples at points throughout the system to test for possible contamination.

■ We expect to have additional information to share with you in the next few hours.

We are working to provide water to our customers.

■ Current supplies of bottled water will be distributed at [insert locations].

■ Additional supplies of bottled water are enroute from other locations.

■ The plan for providing emergency supplies for critical facilities, such as hospitals, has been activated.
3-10

Physical Attack Message Map 7

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Fire, City Manager, Mayor, EMA Director, and/or Police

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Will you be able to supply water to emergency services, hospitals, nursing homes, and other critical facilities?

We are supporting critical facilities that provide basic emergency services.

■ We have notifi ed schools, daycare centers, and other critical facilities.

■ We have notifi ed food manufacturing facilities.

■ We have notifi ed hospitals, nursing homes, and other health care facilities.

We have worked with hospitals to prepare for water emergencies.

■ Hospitals in our area maintain a back-up water supply.

■ Hospitals are currently using these back-up water supplies.

■ When water service is being restored, hospitals will have high priority.

We have activated the State Fire Response Plan to immediately request needed emergency resources. 

■ Pump stations should be able to provide enough water for fi refi ghting.

■ The fi re department has contingency plans to handle loss of water supply.

■ Specialist teams are assessing the contamination risk of using the water to fi ght fi res.

Physical Attack Message Map 8

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Fire, City Manager, Mayor, EMA Director, and/or Police

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What do you want people to do now about the chlorine gas release?

The chlorine release has been stopped.

■ The bomb damage to the chlorine canisters was not extensive.

■ The chlorine gas released was easy to track because of the color and odor.

■ Our best information available indicates that the chlorine gas has dispersed to insignifi cant levels.

The chlorine release affected only a small portion of the community [use map to show boundaries].

■ The affected population has been advised to stay inside.

■ Emergency response personnel continue to advise residents.

■ The gas release will have no lasting effects on the impacted area.

Those in the area of the release should remain indoors.

■ We are asking residents in the [identify area] area to remain indoors for a little longer.

■ We will make an announcement when it is safe for residents in this area to go outdoors again.

■ If additional information is needed, please contact the emergency hotline at [insert number].
3-11

Physical Attack Message Map 9

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What are the possible health effects of exposure to chlorine?

The extent of health effects depends on the extent of exposure.

■ Symptoms include coughing, chest tightness, blurred vision, nausea, or blisters on the skin. 

■ Other symptoms are diffi culty breathing or fl uid in the lungs. 

■ Having symptoms does not necessarily mean that a person has been exposed. 

No antidote exists for chlorine exposure. 

■ Treatment consists of removing the chlorine from the body as soon as possible and providing supportive medical care in a 

hospital setting.

Long-term health effects rarely occur.

■ Long-term complications from chlorine exposure are not found in people who survive a sudden exposure.

■ However, in some cases, complications such as pneumonia may occur during therapy. 

■ Chronic bronchitis may develop in people who develop pneumonia during therapy. 

Physical Attack Message Map 10

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Fire, City Manager, Mayor, EMA Director, Public Health, and/or Police

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What do people need to know and do to protect themselves from contaminated water?

People should use alternative water supplies until further notice.

■ Do not drink the water until further notice.

■ Avoid using water for pets, laundry, bathing, and other household purposes until further notice. 

■ Avoid using water for washing cars, watering lawns, or other outdoor purposes until further notice.

Samples are being analyzed to determine if the water has been affected.

■ We will continue to collect and test water samples.

■ We will have results from the latest round of tests available at [insert time].

■ We will provide an update at our next scheduled briefi ng at [insert time and place]. 

If you have health concerns, contact your health care provider.

■ Urine sampling can show whether you have been contaminated.

■ Your health care provider can advise you about urine sampling.

■ Additional information is posted on our Web site at [insert Web address], or call the hotline at [insert number].

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-12

Scenario 3: Hypothetical Credible Threat

Summary of Scenario: The water utility received a threat 

note indicating that terrorists had contaminated the water. The 

note does not specify the risk agent, time, or exact location. 

Law enforcement has, however, identifi ed the threat as 

“credible and possible.” The incident has not been confi rmed 

as an actual attack at this point.

Hypothetical Credible Threat Questions 

(alphabetical order)

Refer also to the list of 77 most frequently asked questions in 

Section 2 of this report.

Are people in danger?

Are there plans to turn off the water? 

Are you testing for everything that could cause harm?

Can people use the water?

Can you confi rm that there has been a threat to the 

water supply?

Do people need to buy bottled water?

Do the police have any leads?

Do you have in-line monitoring? What does it show?

Do you think the threat is real?

Have any other systems received similar notes?

Have there been any reports of any unusual patterns 

of sickness?

Have there been any similar threats to other water systems? 

If so, what happened?

Have you activated your emergency response plan? If not, 

why not?

Have you added extra security?

Have you called for assistance?

Have you called in the FBI?

Have you had any unusual events?

Have you notifi ed critical institutions, such as hospitals, 

schools, and nursing homes?

Have you sampled the water?

Have you tested the system?

Have your facilities been shut down?

How are you responding to the threat?

How can people protect themselves?

How can you tell if the system has been compromised?

How effective is your security?

How sure are you that the water is safe right now? 

How was the threat made (e.g., letter or call)?

How will people know if their water is contaminated?

How will you alert the public if you fi nd something 

is wrong?

How will you know when or if an attack has occurred?

If a person feels ill, who should they contact?

Is it a credible threat? If so, what makes it credible?

Is the water safe right now?

Is there any evidence the water system has been 

compromised?

Is there anything else people should know? 

Should people boil the water?

Should people stop using the water?

Should the public be afraid?

Was the threat directed specifi cally at the water system?

Was the threat specifi c as to the nature of harm?

What are the most likely places for an attack?

What are the results from your preliminary tests?

What are you doing now to ensure that the water is safe?

What are you doing to inform the public?

What are you telling your own family?

What can the public do to help?

What can you tell us about the safety of the water system 

right now? 

What can you tell us about the threat to the water supply?

What contaminants are you looking for in your sampling?

What exactly did the note say?

What have you learned from previous threats such as this?

What is the nature of the threat?

What is the worst case scenario?

What other agencies are involved?

What will your response be if the threat is real?

When did law enforcement learn of the threat?

When were you notifi ed of the threat?

Where was the note found?

Who made the threat?

Who’s in charge?

Why is our water system so vulnerable to this type of threat?
3-13

Credible Threat Message Map 1

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What can you tell us about the threat to the water supply? 

A written note was received threatening the water supply and law enforcement believes the threat to be 

credible.

■ The written threat was received this morning in the water utility’s normal mail delivery. 

■ The writers of the note threatened to contaminate the water system, but did not specify where or what kind of contaminant 

would be used.

■ We have initiated our threat response procedures and protocols.

We have implemented our emergency response plan.

■ We immediately contacted local law enforcement after we received this threat.

■ We are informed by the police that they believe this threat is credible and needs to be addressed.

■ They are currently conducting an investigation to determine who may have sent this note.

At this time, we have not detected any contamination.

■ We are inspecting facilities for breaches and monitoring for contamination within the system.

■ We are collecting information to determine any water system impacts.

■ We will provide more information as it becomes available.

Credible Threat Message Map 2

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What can you tell us about the safety of the water system right now? 

The threat is considered credible. 

■ We immediately activated our emergency response plan.

■ We are working closely with law enforcement, the health department, emergency response organizations, and local 

offi cials.

■ We are in communication with critical institutions, including hospitals, schools, and nursing homes.

We are investigating the situation with the support of partner agencies.

■ We have increased security at key locations by working with local law enforcement.

■ We will provide the media updates as information becomes available.

■ We are asking the public for their assistance by reporting any suspicious activities to law enforcement authorities at 

[insert telephone number].

Our initial inspection indicates that the system is secure.

■ We have inspected the water treatment plant, pump stations, and tanks.

■ Water samples have been tested from throughout the system.

■ We will continue to conduct inspections and take samples.

Message Maps

For this scenario, workshop participants developed message 

maps for the following questions (see maps below and on 

following pages):

1.What can you tell us about the threat to the water supply?

2.What can you tell us about the safety of the water system 

right now? 

3. How will you know when or if an attack has occurred?

4.What will your response be if the threat is real to 

the water?

5. How are you responding to the threat?

6.What are you doing now to ensure that the water is safe?

7.Why is our water system so vulnerable to this type 

of threat?
3-14

Credible Threat Message Map 4

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What will your response be if the threat is real to the water? 

Protecting public health is our top priority, so we take all credible threats seriously.

■ We are working closely with our partners in public health.

■ We are working closely with our partners in law enforcement.

■ We are working closely with critical institutions, including the fi re department, hospitals, and schools.

We have already activated our emergency response plan.

■ We are working with local, state, and federal emergency response agencies.

■ We have alerted agencies that have alternative sources of water about the situation.

■ Utility personnel have been placed on alert.

Water use may be restricted.

■ Bottled drinking water will be supplied if needed.

■ Water will be available at designated distribution sites.

■ People can obtain additional information from our Web site [insert Web site] or toll-free number [insert number].

Credible Threat Message Map 3

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How will you know when or if an attack has occurred?

Hopefully, we will be able to prevent or minimize the impact of an attack.

■ We have security personnel patrolling our system.

■ We have alerted the public to be vigilant and report suspicious activities.

■ Law enforcement and the FBI are following the threat leads.

We have ongoing water quality testing throughout our system.

■ We are using a number of microbiological tests for harmful biological agents.

■ We are conducting broad testing for chemical contaminants and other indicators.

■ We have laboratories on standby to analyze anything unusual we discover.

We are closely monitoring operations.

■ We are looking for unusual changes in things we normally monitor, such as dissolved oxygen levels.

■ We are tracking disinfection and other distribution system water quality markers.

■ We have also increased levels of disinfectants as an additional protection.
3-15

Credible Threat Message Map 5

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How are you responding to the threat?

We have taken all reasonable measures to ensure the safety of the water system.

■ Our staff is trained and has practiced applying security measures.

■ For security reasons, specifi c measures we have taken must remain confi dential.

■ We are conducting security activities jointly with law enforcement at the local, state, and federal levels.

Initial testing shows no signs of contamination. 

■ Our staff is well trained in conducting inspections and monitoring.

■ Our staff is well trained in taking water samples.

■ Samples have been sent to state and federal laboratories for additional testing.

We will continually monitor the safety of the system.

■ We have asked hospitals to be alert for unusual patterns of illness.

■ We have asked our partners in public health to be alert for unusual patterns of illness.

■ We have asked our partners in law enforcement to provide additional security.

Credible Threat Message Map 6

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What are you doing now to ensure that the water is safe?

At this time, we have no evidence that any event has occurred.

■ Law enforcement believes that the threat is credible.

■ We take any threat to the water system seriously.

■ The investigation is ongoing.

We have activated our emergency response plan.

■ As part of our emergency response plan, we are collaborating with emergency response agencies.

■ We are working closely with other local and state offi cials, including public health.

■ We have alerted agencies that supply emergency water supplies, emergency analytical staff, and laboratories.

We have increased our inspection, monitoring, and sampling activities.

■ We have elevated our security level.

■ We are conducting additional inspection, monitoring, and sampling activities.

■ We encourage people to report any suspicious activity by calling [insert number].
3-16

Credible Threat Message Map 7

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible X Credible __ Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Why is our water system so vulnerable to this type of threat?

Our system has hundreds of miles of pipeline and thousands of connections. 

■ The water utility supplies water to [insert names] Counties in [insert state] and [insert names] Counties in [insert state].

■ In order to provide service to this area, there are numerous connections to the system.

■ These connections include such things as hydrants, water meters, and transmission lines.

We have a comprehensive emergency response plan for handling crisis events.

■ We conduct drills and exercises on a regular basis to test our emergency response plan.

■ We partner with local offi cials in monitoring and sampling.

■ Our plan will remain activated until the threat has been cleared.

Since the attacks of 9/11, we have worked vigorously to enhance system security.

■ We have inspection, monitoring, sampling, and testing programs to protect the system. 

■ We work closely with the police and have an active neighborhood water watch program.

■ Our employees go through extensive training for various security scenarios.
3-17

Scenario 4: Hypothetical Power Loss 

Incident

Summary of Scenario: There has been a loss of power, due 

to a major storm, that has impacted the water distribution 

system for a water utility. Half of the water utility’s pumps 

are currently running on back-up power and the remaining 

pump stations were damaged or destroyed by the storm and 

are inoperable. The power utility estimates a minimum of three 

days before power will be restored. Back-up generators will 

provide power for approximately 36 hours. The incident is at 

the confi rmed stage.

Hypothetical Power Loss Questions 

(alphabetical order)

Refer also to the list of 77 most frequently asked questions in 

Section 2 of this report.

Are other local utilities (power and water) helping?

Can water be brought in from other communities?

Can you guarantee that normal water service will resume 

once the power comes back on?

Could you do more to help the situation?

Has any of the water been contaminated?

Has the power utility isolated the source(s) of the problem?

Have you prepared for the worst-case scenario?

How could you have prevented this effect on the 

distribution system?

How do people know if their area is affected?

How do you know the water is safe to drink?

How long can the water utility provide water using the backup generators?

How long until the pump stations are repaired?

How much damage to the water system do you expect?

How will the damaged roads impact your repair efforts?

How will you know the water is safe when the power comes 

back on?

Is it safe to drink, cook, and bathe?

The weather is still bad; what happens if we get hit by 

another storm?

Was anyone harmed?

What does voluntary conservation mean?

What happens if the power is not back up in 

[insert number] days?

What if you need generator power for longer than [insert 

number] hours?

What is the water utility doing to address this problem?

What is the worst-case scenario?

What precautions should people take with the water during 

the power outage?

What should people know about the situation regarding the 

water supply?

What was the cause of the power outage?

What will you do to better prepare for events of this nature 

in the future?

When were you notifi ed something happened?

Who will provide water and how will it be distributed?

Why are you mandating conservation?

Why doesn’t the utility have more than [insert number of 

hours] supply of power?

Will people’s water bills increase?

Message Maps

For this scenario, workshop participants developed message 

maps for the following questions (see maps on the following 

pages):

1. How long can the water utility provide water using the 

back-up generators?

2.Can water be brought in from other communities?

3. Have you prepared for the worst-case scenario?

4.Can you guarantee normal water service will resume 

when power comes back on?

5.What should people know about the situation regarding 

the water supply?

6.What is the water utility doing to address the problem?

7.Why are you mandating conservation?

8.What can you tell us about the situation? 

9. How will you know the water is safe when the power 

comes back on?
3-18

Power Loss Message Map 1

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, Mayor, and/or EMA Director

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How long can the water utility provide water using the back-up generators? 

Our generators will enable us to provide water for 36 hours. 

■ Our generators are functioning properly.

■ Our generators are designed to provide back-up power if there is a power outage. 

■ We can operate at 100 percent capacity using our generators.

We will resume normal operations when full power is restored.

■ Treated water will be available soon after power is restored.

■ We will use all available resources to resume operations as quickly as possible.

■ Water will be safe to drink when normal operations resume.

People can help by conserving water. 

■ Conservation efforts will help extend the time water is available.

■ People should not store water until the system is back to normal. 

■ People should stay tuned to local radio stations for updates. 

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Power Loss Message Map 2

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, Mayor, and/or EMA Director

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Can water be brought in from other communities?

We are in contact with nearby water utilities.

■ We are conducting an inventory of water available from other sources.

■ We are reviewing various water transportation options.

■ We are reviewing various water storage options. 

The state health department is helping in this effort.

■ We have a state health offi cial on site at the utility.

■ The state health department has provided us additional resources.

■ We are jointly reviewing the state emergency plan in case of need.

We expect to have reserve water on-site within [insert time].

■ [insert number] water tankers are currently on their way from [insert location and supplier].

■ We are identifying locations to distribute water to our customers.

■ [Insert number] more water tankers are on the way. 
3-19

Power Loss Message Map 3

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, and/or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Have you prepared for the worst-case scenario?

Our back-up system is designed to provide safe water for [insert time period].

■ We are committed to providing safe water to the community. 

■ We are able to provide water from several sources. 

■ Through conservation and cooperation, the effects of the power outage can be minimized.

We are evaluating the need for additional resources.

■ We are working with other agencies to maintain water service to our customers.

■ We are activating our own reserve resources. 

■ A special task force is determining if additional resources are needed.

State, regional, and federal support is available if needed.

■ We have cooperative agreements with other agencies to help in times of need.

■ We have made arrangements to receive support from other organizations.

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Power Loss Message Map 4

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, Mayor, and/or EMA Director

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Can you guarantee normal water service will resume when power comes back on?

Water service is dependent upon electricity.

■ All available resources have been committed to the recovery effort.

■ Back-up generators will operate for [insert time]. 

■ We have partnership agreements with other utilities to provide reserve water if needed. 

We are working to minimize impacts on our customers.

■ We have requested that our customers conserve water as much as possible. 

■ We are working with the local and state health departments to make sure hospitals and facilities have the water they need. 

■ We are coordinating our efforts with the fi re department to ensure that fi re protection is maintained.

Normal water service should resume soon after power is restored.

■ We are coordinating our efforts with the power company. 

■ Once electricity is restored, it typically takes [insert time] for normal water service to resume. 

■ We will provide updates through the media, our Web site at [insert address], and our telephone hotline at [insert number]. 

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-20

Power Loss Message Map 5

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, Mayor, and/or EMA Director

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What should people know about the situation regarding the water supply?

The power outage has affected operations of the water system.

■ We are operating undamaged pump stations using emergency generators that will provide back-up power for only [insert 

time period].

■ We estimate that there is [insert time period here] supply in the system with conservation measures.

■ The power utility estimates that it will take [insert time period here] to restore service.

The limited water supply available until power is restored must be conserved for emergency services. 

■ Emergency services include fi re suppression and health care facilities. 

■ We are working with other support agencies to ensure hospital and fi re supplies remain available.

We are implementing mandatory water use restrictions.

■ Water use should be limited to personal hygiene, cooking and health care.

■ We are making arrangements for alternate supply sources of water, if needed.

■ We will communicate updates through the media, our Web site at [insert address], and our telephone hotline at [insert 

number].

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Power Loss Message Map 6

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What is the water utility doing to address the problem?

We are following procedures specifi ed in our response plan.

■ We have an emergency response plan for this type of situation.

■ Our plan calls for mandatory conservation to maintain critical services.

■ We will modify operations as necessary to maintain water quality.

We are coordinating our response efforts with other organizations. 

■ We are working closely with the power company.

■ We are working with the local and state emergency response agencies to provide alternate supply sources. 

■ We are working with the health department to ensure the safety of the water.

We will resume normal operations soon after power is restored.

■ Response crews are working around the clock. 

■ We expect to resume normal operations within [insert time] after power is restored.

■ We will work with public health to continue water testing after service is restored. 

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-21

Power Loss Message Map 7

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, Mayor, and/or EMA Director

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Why are you mandating conservation?

Without power sources, there is no way to add more water to the system.

■ Electric pumps are used to refi ll tanks and reservoirs.

■ Without the ability to refi ll, supplies could be exhausted.

■ Previous outages elsewhere have demonstrated that we should prepare for the power not being restored in time.

Some water needs are more pressing than others.

■ Conservation is important to meet the needs of fi refi ghters.

■ Conservation is important to meet the needs of health care facilities.

■ Household use other than for drinking can be temporarily reduced.

Conservation can help meet these needs as long as possible.

■ Under normal use, we anticipate depletion of supplies in as little as one day.

■ Under normal cases, people use about 100 gallons but drink only about half a gallon of water per day.

■ Conservation can substantially lengthen the time we can go without new water.

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Power Loss Message Map 8

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What can you tell us about the situation? 

A storm came through the area [insert when storm hit].

■ The storm caused damage to the power system.

■ The power outage affected all parts of the community.

■ The power company estimates that power will be restored in [insert time]. 

We can operate on generators for [insert time period].

■ Our generators are reliable and run on gasoline.

■ Several pumps were damaged but we have enough pumps to operate the system. 

■ Our generators were automatically triggered resulting in no loss of service for the time being.

We will resume normal operations soon after power is restored.

■ Response crews are working around the clock. 

■ We expect to resume normal operations within [insert time] after power is restored.

■ We will work with public health to continue water testing after service is restored. 

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-22

Power Loss Message Map 9

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility, City Manager, and/or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How will you know the water is safe when the power comes back on?

We run many tests to ensure water safety. 

■ Our experts are experienced in water analysis.

■ All analyses will be performed according to standard EPA methods.

■ State and federal approved labs are prepared to help us with confi rming water safety.

Our emergency plans cover restoring the system.

■ Water will be treated to meet federal standards.

■ Our work crews are experienced with restoring service following other types of disruptions, such as pump failures and 

main breaks.

■ Plans meet or exceed industry standards and local, state and federal requirements.

We will let you know when the water is safe.

■ Your safety is our fi rst priority.

■ Once power is restored, we will work as hard as possible to restore the water quickly.

■ We will provide updates through the media, our Web site [insert Web address] and our telephone hotline at [insert number].

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-23

Scenario 5: Hypothetical Pesticide 

Contamination Incident

Summary of Scenario: The water utility is receiving several 

taste and odor complaints about the water. In addition, the 

local health department and 911 are receiving calls about the 

water making residents ill. In response to the complaints, the 

water utility collected and analyzed numerous samples. The 

laboratory analysis indicated that [insert pesticide name] is 

present in the drinking water; however, the source and extent 

of contamination is unknown. The incident is in the confi rmed 

stage.

Hypothetical Pesticide Contamination Incident 

Questions (alphabetical order)

Refer also to the list of 77 most frequently asked questions in 

Section 2 of this report.

Can people drink the water?

Can people use the water for their pets? 

Can people use the water on their lawns?

Can the water be used for fi refi ghting?

Can you clean the distribution system to make it safe again?

Could this have been prevented?

Do you accept responsibility for what happened?

How are you going to clean the system?

How did this happen?

How do you normally know that the water is safe to drink?

How long will it be until people can use the water again? 

How many people are affected?

How many people may have been contaminated?

How much will this cost to clean up? Will it result in higher 

water bills?

How will you know that the water is safe to drink?

If people cannot drink or touch the water, is there anything 

people can do with it?

Once it is cleaned, how will you know the water system is 

safe?

Was this a terrorist attack?

What are the symptoms of exposure?

What are you doing about the situation?

What are you doing to help businesses affected by the 

situation?

What are your qualifi cations for handling this kind of 

situation?

What can residents do to help?

What can you tell us about the water contamination?

What do you most want people to know about the situation?

What else can go wrong?

What impact will this contamination have on the plumbing 

and water heaters in people’s homes? 

What is [insert pesticide], how is it used, and what impact 

does it have on people who drink it?

What is the extent of the damage to the water supply?

What is the water utility doing now about the pesticide 

contamination?

What is wrong with the water?

What kind of treatment is necessary for people who have 

been exposed to contaminated water?

What should people do if they washed clothes with the 

contaminated water?

What should people do now for safe water?

What should people do to protect children and the elderly?

What will happen to people who have drunk contaminated 

water?

What will happen to the people exposed to the pesticide?

When did this happen?

When will the water be safe to use?

When will you provide updates?

Where do people in the impacted areas get water?

Who is in charge?

Who is responsible? Who is to blame?

Who will decide that the water is safe to use after cleanup?

Why wasn’t this prevented?

Will the water contamination affect neighboring 

communities?

Will this incident result in higher water bills?

Message Maps

For this scenario, workshop participants developed message 

maps for the following questions (see maps on the following 

pages):

1.What can you tell us about the water contamination?

2.What is the water utility doing now about the 

pesticide contamination?

3. How many people may have been contaminated?

4.What are the symptoms of exposure?

5.What should people do to protect children and 

the elderly?

6.If people cannot drink or touch the water, is there anything 

people can do with it?

7.What should people do now for water?

8. Do you accept responsibility for what happened?

9. How are you going to clean the system?

10. Once it is cleaned, how will you know if the water 

 system is safe?

11. How do you normally know the water is safe 

 to drink?
3-24

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 1

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: City Manager and/or Mayor

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What can you tell us about the water contamination?

We have confi rmed the presence of a pesticide in the drinking water. 

■ The pesticide is [insert name of pesticide], which is used for [insert use]. 

■ Levels of the pesticide are above recommended drinking water standards. 

■ The drinking water in the following locations has been affected [insert locations]. 

An investigation is underway to determine the source and amount of the pesticide. 

■ We are taking samples and conducting tests throughout the system.

■ Public health and hospitals are tracking and treating those who are ill.

■ Law enforcement is investigating the cause.

Effective immediately, people should not use the water.

■ People and pets should not drink the water. 

■ People should not use the water to bathe, shower, or wash.

■ Alternative sources of drinking water will be made available at the following locations [insert locations and show map].

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 2

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What is the water utility doing now about the pesticide contamination?

We are testing water quality throughout the system.

■ We are taking samples at various locations.

■ [Insert laboratory name] is testing those samples.

■ The results of these tests will determine our next steps.

We have begun recovery operations. 

■ Our recovery operations are being coordinated with local, state, and federal agencies.

■ The CDC and other public health experts are advising us on potential health effects.

■ The US Environmental Protection Agency and other experts are advising us on how to clean the system.

Effective immediately, people should not use the water. 

■ People should not drink the water. 

■ People should not use the water to bathe, shower, or wash.

■ Alternative sources of drinking water will be made available at the following locations [insert locations]. 
3-25

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 3

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health 

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How many people may have been contaminated?

We are assessing the number of people who might be affected.

■ Health offi cials are tracking calls and complaints.

■ Samples have been sent to state laboratories for testing.

■ Results of the tests will help us better determine affected areas.

We are working closely with local hospitals.

■ Hospitals are prepared to provide treatment.

■ Hospitals are also providing medical advice.

■ The CDC is providing advice to us and the hospitals.

We are coordinating our response efforts with other organizations. 

■ In special cases, we will make door-to-door visits.

■ Hospitals and nursing homes will receive priority attention.

■ Other communities have offered resources and support. 

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 4

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health 

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What are the symptoms of exposure?

Symptoms depend on exposure.

■ Because of the unusual smell and taste, most people will not drink the water.

■ Because of the small amounts of pesticide involved, most people will not breathe amounts large enough to cause harm.

■ Skin penetration is unlikely unless there has been prolonged contact with the water.

The pesticide can enter the body through drinking, breathing, or skin contact.

■ Exposure is typically not life threatening.

■ Most people who have been exposed and have symptoms will fully recover.

■ The biggest concern is exposure by drinking a large amount of contaminated water.

There are many symptoms. 

■ People who drank more than a quart of the water may experience nausea, an upset stomach, and vomiting.

■ People who are experiencing symptoms should not be encouraged to vomit.

■ Call 911 immediately or go to an emergency room if you have symptoms.
3-26

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 5

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health 

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What should people do to protect children and the elderly?

Children and the elderly need special protection. 

■ Children and the elderly are more vulnerable to illness than other populations.

■ Children are more vulnerable because they have less developed body defenses.

■ The elderly are more vulnerable because they may have weakened immune systems.

Children and the elderly should be especially careful not to contact the water.

■ Children and the elderly should not bathe using the water.

■ Children and the elderly should not swim in the water. 

■ Children and the elderly should not wash dishes using the water or use dishes washed in the water.

Children and the elderly should be especially careful not to drink the water.

■ Children and elderly should drink only bottled water.

■ Children and the elderly should not drink beverages prepared with the water.

■ Parents should not prepare infant formula using the water.

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 6

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health 

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: If people cannot drink or touch the water, is there anything people can do with it?

Our primary concern is the pesticide entering the body through drinking.

■ People should not drink the water or cook with it. Boiling does not remove a pesticide.

■ People should not drink beverages prepared with the water or make infant formula.

■ People should keep children and pets away from the water.

People can water their plants, gardens, and lawns with the water.

■ People should wear gloves to prevent skin contact with the water when using a hose.

■ Avoid breathing aerosolized water from sprinklers.

■ Avoid creating run-off that could contaminate the sewer system.

Skin contact should be avoided, especially if contact is prolonged.

■ People should not use the water for washing dishes. 

■ People should not use the water to take baths or showers.

■ It is okay to fl ush toilets.

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-27

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 7

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What should people do now for water?

At this time, people should not use the water. 

■ People should not drink the water.

■ People should not use the water to bathe, shower, or wash.

■ Boiling the water will not make it safe.

We will provide regular updates on our testing.

■ Updates are available on our Web site [insert Web site].

■ Updates will be broadcast through local radio and TV.

■ Updates are available from our information line at [insert number]. 

People from affected areas should drink only bottled water.

■ Free bottled water will be available at the following locations [insert location] at [insert times].

■ Bottled water should be used for cooking and other uses. 

■ Bottled water should be used for pets.

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 8

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: City Manager

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Do you accept responsibility for what happened?

Our most immediate concern is the safety of the water.

■ We are working to identify impacted areas.

■ We are working to minimize the spread of the pesticide in the system.

■ Our goal is to restore normal service throughout the system as quickly and safely as possible.

We will help determine the cause of the incident.

■ It is possible that the contamination was unintentional.

■ We are working closely with law enforcement as they conduct their investigation of the incident.

■ The investigation should identify the source of contamination.

We are responsible for making changes in our operations, if needed.

■ After the incident has been addressed, standard procedure is to review our emergency response plan and make any 

necessary changes to improve it.

■ We will review the actions we took following the discovery of the pesticide.

■ We will know more once the investigation is complete.

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-28

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 9

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How are you going to clean the system?

We are evaluating which parts of the distribution system need to be cleaned.

■ We will take samples from throughout the distribution system. 

■ We will analyze the samples to determine where pesticide is present in the system

■ We will also use water-fl ow models to determine which parts are affected.

We will use fl ushing and other cleaning methods as applicable.

■ We are consulting with experts at federal, state, and local agencies.

■ We will select methods that are safe and effective for dealing with pesticides.

■ We will select cleaning methods that will enable us to meet regulatory requirements for this pesticide.

We will selectively replace pipes if needed.

■ We will replace pipes based on results from the testing program.

■ Replacement pipes are readily available.

■ We have extensive experience replacing pipes.

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 10

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Once it is cleaned up, how will you know if the water system is safe?

Testing will confi rm the absence of harmful levels.

■ We will collect water samples at multiple locations along the distribution system.

■ Samples will be tested for [insert pesticide name] at laboratories.

■ The tests are highly accurate in detecting the pesticide.

Federal and state agencies determine what level is considered safe.

■ The water system will not be put back into service until the contamination is reduced below this level.

■ This cleanup level is based on protecting human health against long-term effects for all age groups.

■ The public health department will verify that levels are safe.

We will continue testing to ensure that levels remain safe.

■ We will monitor for elevated levels of the pesticide.

■ We will report any problems and take necessary actions.

■ Water users should report any unusual odors, coloration, or other problems by calling our hotline at [insert number].

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-29

Pesticide Contamination Incident Message Map 11

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How do you normally know the water is safe to drink?

We continuously test the water for safety.

■ The law requires us to check water safety daily.

■ We continually meet or do better than water quality standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Testing is done in partnership with the local health department.

■ The water utility and the local health department have experts on staff with specialized knowledge of testing procedures.

■ Our experts test the water daily.

We will inform you when testing shows that the water is safe to drink and use.

■ We will provide updates through the media.

■ We also post updates on water quality on our Web site at [insert Web address].

■ People can also call our telephone hotline for updates at [insert number]. 

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-30

Scenario 6: Hypothetical Intentional 

Biological Contamination Incident

Summary of Scenario: The event is fi rst discovered when a 

high number of residents from a neighborhood visit local drug 

stores, doctor offi ces, and emergency rooms complaining of 

gastrointestinal symptoms. Law enforcement discovers that 

someone has introduced a bacterial agent into the distribution 

system. The incident is at the confi rmed stage.

Hypothetical Intentional Biological Attack Questions 

(alphabetical order)

Refer also to the list of 77 most frequently asked questions in 

Section 2 of this report.

Are any other water systems impacted?

Are people going to get sick?

Are there any health effects associated with the use 

of chlorine?

Are there long-term effects of exposure?

Can it happen again?

Can people stay in the area?

Can people use the water at all (bathing, washing dishes, 

making coffee)?

Can people use water from their water heaters?

Can the fi re department use the water to fi ght fi res?

Can the illness spread?

Can you guarantee that the sampling/testing will detect all 

cases of contamination?

Do you know exactly where the contaminant is within the 

drinking water system?

Does the contaminant react differently when heated—such 

as when the water is used to fi ght fi res?

Has anyone died? 

Has this happened before – here or elsewhere?

Have people been drinking contaminated water?

Have the perpetrators been caught?

Have you sampled/tested all the water?

How can people decontaminate their appliances (such as the 

water heater or ice maker)?

How can you be sure this won’t happen again?

How contagious is the illness caused by the affected water?

How did public health fi nd out that there is contamination?

How did the city fi nd out that there is contamination?

How did the terrorists do it?

How did they get the biological agent?

How did this happen?

How do people know if they have been harmed?

How do people treat water in their homes? 

How far has the contaminated water spread?

How long did it take for you to fi nd it?

How long has the contaminant been in the water?

How long will it be until people can use the water?

How many people are ill?

How or where can people in the affected area get safe water?

How will low-income people get bottled water?

How will people know if they have been exposed?

How will people who are sick or disabled get bottled water?

If people leave the area to stay with relatives, will the people 

they visit get sick?

Is it safe to drink the water? 

Is the contamination contained?

Is the contamination harmful to special populations (e.g., 

children, the elderly, people who have weak immune systems 

and pregnant women)?

Is the situation under control?

Is there enough bottled water?

Is this a terrorist act?

What about people’s kids?

What about people’s pets?

What about the water supply to hospital and nursing homes?

What are the health effects associated with exposure to 

[insert biological agent]?

What are the results from the sampling/testing?

What are you advising people to do?

What are you doing to fi x it?

What are you doing to prevent this in the future?

What are you doing to stop the spread of the contaminant?

What are you not telling us?

What are your qualifi cations to handle the situation?

What can we expect next?

What can you tell us about this contamination event? 

What cautions should people take to be safe?

What do people do if they are sick?

What do people do if they think their homes are 

contaminated?

What do you not know yet?

What effect will this have on water bills?

What effects will this have on the plumbing systems of 

people in the impacted areas?
3-31

What is the worst case – how bad could things get?

What steps are being taken to make sure this will not 

happen again?

When can people drink the water?

When did you fi nd out it was a terrorist act?

When is the system going to be fi xed?

Where can people get more information? 

Where do people go for medical attention?

Where will people in the impacted areas get water?

Who did it?

Who is at greatest risk? 

Who is going to pay to fi x the problem?

Who is in charge of the investigation?

Who is in charge of the overall response?

Who is taking care of the problem – law enforcement, public 

health, the utility?

Who is to blame?

Why should we believe you?

Why wasn’t it prevented?

Will people be able to drink the water?

Will people be able to use the water for other than drinking 

purposes?

Will people be allowed to stay in the area?

Message Maps

For this scenario, workshop participants developed message 

maps for the following questions (see maps below and on 

following pages):

1.What happened?

2.What can you tell us about this contamination event? 

3. Do you know exactly where the contaminant is within the 

drinking water system? 

4. How did public health fi nd out there was contamination?

5.Can people in the affected area use the water at all 

(bathing, washing dishes, making coffee)?

6.What are the health effects associated with exposure to 

[insert biological agent]?

7. How did the city fi nd out there was contamination?

8. How or where can people in the affected area get 

safe water?

9. How did this happen?

Biological Attack Message Map 1 

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What happened? 

Terrorists contaminated part of the water system with [insert biological agent].

■ People have reported gastrointestinal illness.

■ [Insert biological agent] causes nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, but it is generally not life threatening.

■ If you are experiencing symptoms, please seek immediate medical attention.

We have contained the contamination [insert map showing system and indicating affected area].

■ The affected area has been isolated from the rest of the water system.

■ Sampling for additional contaminants is currently being performed.

■ Additional public announcements will be made as more information becomes available.

We recommend people living in this area [insert boundaries] boil their water.

■ Bring your water to a rolling boil for [insert number] minutes and let cool before drinking.

■ Fact sheets and other information are available on the following Web site [insert Web site] or at our toll-free telephone line 

[insert telephone number].

■ Alternative drinking water is available at [insert address of location].

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-32

Biological Attack Message Map 3

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Do you know exactly where the contaminant is within the drinking water system? 

We know the source of the contamination.

■ The police and FBI have identifi ed a location in the [insert name] neighborhood where the contaminant was introduced.

■ The police are currently treating this contamination event as an act of terrorism.

■ Evidence collected at the scene confi rms that the source of the water contamination came from this location. 

We are currently working to clearly defi ne the area affected.

■ We are sampling and analyzing the water system around that location.

■ We are looking at the water distribution system to specifi cally defi ne the affected area. 

■ Sample results can be expected from the laboratory within 48 hours.

At this time, illness has been reported only in this area [insert boundaries].

■ In addition to the localized sampling, we are sampling throughout the system for evidence of contamination.

■ Preliminary water quality testing indicates that this contamination has not spread throughout the system.

■ If you have questions as to whether or not you may be affected by this event, please call our 24 hour hotline at [insert 

number].

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Biological Attack Message Map 2

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What can you tell us about this contamination event?

There has been an intentional contamination of the water system.

■ We are currently working with local law enforcement and the FBI in response to this event.

■ We know the location of the point of introduction [insert location], and are currently working to defi ne the area affected.

■ We are also working to sample our entire system for indication of other areas that may be contaminated.

Most people infected with this bacterium will have mild to moderate illness.

■ [Insert biological agent] infection can cause diarrhea and vomiting.

■ The very young and old, and people with weakened immune systems are typically most at risk.

■ If people are having symptoms, they should consult their physicians.

We have issued a “do not use” notice in response.

■ “Do Not Use” means do not use the water for drinking, bathing, or cooking. It is safe to fl ush toilets.

■ We are recommending the use of alternative sources (such as bottled water) until we lift the “do not use” notice.

■ We are working to contain and clean up this contamination and will provide more information as soon as it becomes 

available.

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-33

 Biological Attack Message Map 4

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How did public health fi nd out there was contamination? 

RODS – our public health surveillance system – showed a higher than normal number of illnesses in the 

community. 

■ The Real-time Outbreak Disease Surveillance (RODS) system examines emergency department data from area hospitals 

and over-the-counter drug sales.

■ Recent RODS data has shown an increase in the number of emergency room patients with diarrhea and GI symptoms.

■ RODS data has also shown an increase in the sale of over-the-counter anti-diarrheal medications from local drug stores. 

Water samples were collected by the water utility.

■ Samples were collected within the impacted areas.

■ Samples were collected throughout the distribution system.

■ Additional sampling and analysis will be conducted as needed.

Further investigation indicates that the public water system is the likely source.

■ The health department interviewed patients to investigate the cause of their illness.

■ Clinical laboratory tests supported the diagnosis.

■ The health department worked with the water department to verify the cases occurred within the water department’s 

service area.

X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Biological Attack Message Map 5

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Water Utility

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: Can people in the affected area use the water at all (bathing, washing dishes, making coffee)?

If you live in the affected area (see map), your water may still contain [insert biological agent].

■ This bacterium can cause illness when people come in direct contact with it.

■ The “do not use” notice is based on taking a conservative stance to protect against any resulting illness.

■ The protection of public health and safety is the basis for all aspects of this advisory and response.

This should not affect fi re fi ghting.

■ The fi re department has informed us that they will continue to use this water as needed to fi ght fi res. 

■ Bacteriological contamination of this type does not prohibit its use for fi refi ghting purposes.

■ Fire protection will continue during the emergency.

People should avoid direct contact with this water at this time.

■ People in this area are advised to not drink, cook, bathe, give to pets, or otherwise use the water where personal contact 

may occur. 

■ We are working as quickly as possible to resolve this issue and restore full use of the drinking water system in the affected 

areas. 

■ We will inform you of any change in the use advisory.
3-34

Biological Attack Message Map 6

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Public Health

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: What are the health effects associated with exposure to [Insert biological agent] 

[Insert agent] is a bacteria that affects the gastrointestinal system.

■ Frequent hand washing will help control the spread of [insert agent].

■ The water utility has treated the water with higher but safe levels of chlorine to kill the [insert agent].

■ Use alcohol-based hand cleaners until the water is safe to drink.

Symptoms will generally last for 7 – 10 days.

■ Primary symptoms include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea.

■ People with symptoms should contact their health care providers for treatment information.

■ People can call the public health hotline at [insert number] for more information about [insert biological contaminant].

[Insert agent] does not typically cause long-term health effects.

■ [Insert agent] is generally not life threatening.

■ The most vulnerable groups include small children, the elderly, and people with weak immune systems.

■ [Insert biological contaminant] infection is treatable by [insert treatment].

NOTE: A message map for each agent can be prepared regarding symptoms, treatment, and other health effects. CDC fact 

 sheets, at http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/, provide the health effects for various specifi c agents.

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Biological Attack Message Map 7

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: City Manager

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How did the city fi nd out there was contamination?

Hospital reports from [insert names of hospitals] indicate higher numbers of cases of ill patients than 

normal.

■ [Insert number] hospitals have reported a total of [insert number] cases during a [insert number]-day period.

■ The number of hospital patients with gastrointestinal symptoms is well above normal.

■ The reports were provided to the health department as part of the community’s medical tracking system.

The health department identifi ed [insert biological contaminant] in the water system as the cause.

■ The health department conducted interviews with ill patients to determine the cause.

■ The health department’s investigation also included laboratory tests.

■ The health department contacted the water authorities and indicated there may be a waterborne problem.

The water utility reports [insert biological contaminant] in samples collected from the water system. 

■ The water utility initiated testing after notifi cation from the health department. 

■ The water utility is identifying impacted areas. 

■ The water utility will continue to sample and test the water, and we will keep you posted. 

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery
3-35

Biological Attack Message Map 8

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: City Manager

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How or where can people in the affected area get safe water?

Water is being made available to households in the affected area [insert boundaries].

■ The city is setting up distribution centers for the affected area.

■ We are able to distribute [insert number] gallons of water per person. 

■ Disabled or other individuals who cannot get to a distribution center should call [insert number] for assistance.

Hospitals in the affected area will have supplies of safe drinking water.

■ The water utility has arranged for the provision of water treatment units for the hospital system.

■ People should not go to a hospital for their household’s supply of emergency water.

■ Health clinics in the area are also receiving supplies of emergency drinking water.

Please follow the “do not use” drinking water order.

■ People are not to use the water for cooking, bathing, or any other personal contact uses, including for pets.

■ Ongoing samples of the water system are being taken.

■ We will let you know when the water is again safe to use.

 X Confi __ Remediation/Recovery

Biological Attack Message Map 9

Audience/Stakeholder: Public/Media

Spokesperson: Law Enforcement

Stage of Crisis: __ Possible __Credible X Confi rmed __ Remediation/Recovery

Question: How did this happen?

A terrorist group has claimed responsibility.

■ Police found a note at [insert location].

■ The group who left the note is on the FBI watch list.

■ The investigation to fi nd the perpetrators is ongoing.

Terrorists introduced the bacteria into the location’s plumbing system. 

■ Police found equipment at the location.

■ Laboratory results verify traces of [insert bacterial agent] in containers near the equipment.

■ Initial tests by the water utility confi rm traces of [insert bacterial agent] in the water system in the vicinity of this location.

Authorities have found the contamination source.

■ Residents reported suspicious activities in and around this location.

■ Equipment at the location is consistent with this kind of attack

■ Fact sheets related to [insert biological agent] bacteria were found as well.
3-36
4-1

4. Conclusion 

Successful implementation of the guidelines for developing 

and delivering message maps presented in this report will 

improve the effectiveness of risk communication during 

crisis situations. Amid the uncertainty and high stress 

of such events, good risk communication will minimize 

negative impacts of fear and concern, increase knowledge 

and understanding, enhance trust and credibility, encourage 

appropriate behaviors, and potentially help save lives. 

As with many other activities, good risk communication 

requires anticipation, preparation, and practice. This involves 

anticipating scenarios requiring risk communication, preparing 

key messages, and practicing delivery in advance of crisis 

events. Preparing for effective risk communication is an 

ongoing process that should be an integral component of 

overall crisis response planning. 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s National 

Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC) has researched 

the state of the science in risk communication and produced a 

set of tools and reference materials to assist those responsible 

for providing information during emergency events. 

In addition to conducting message mapping workshops and 

publishing this report, NHSRC has conducted a National 

Water Security Risk Communication Symposium 

(proceedings available on CD) and produced a DVD video 

presentation of basic principles of crisis communication by Dr. 

Vincent Covello. Please visit the Web site at http://www.epa.

gov/nhsrc for more information. 
4-2
A-1

Appendix A 

Seven General Rules of Risk Communication

The following are seven best practices for effective risk communication developed by Dr. Vincent Covello.

1. Accept and involve stakeholders as 

legitimate partners

■ Demonstrate respect for those affected by risk 

management decisions by involving people early, before 

important decisions are made

■ Include in the decision-making process the broad range of 

factors involved in determining public perceptions of risk, 

concern, and outrage

■ Involve all parties that have an interest or a stake in the 

risk in question

■ Use a wide range of communication channels to engage 

and involve people

■ Adhere to highest ethical standards: recognize that people 

hold you professionally and ethically accountable

■ Strive for win-win outcomes

2. Listen to people

■ Do not make assumptions about what people know, think 

or want done about risks

■ Take the time before taking action to fi nd out what people 

are thinking: use techniques such as interviews, facilitated 

discussion groups, information exchanges, availability 

sessions, advisory groups, toll-free numbers, and surveys

■ Let all parties who have an interest or a stake in the issue 

be heard

■ Let people know that what they said has been understood 

and what actions will follow

■ Identify with your audience and try empathetically to put 

yourself in their place

■ Acknowledge the validity of people’s emotions

■ Emphasize communication channels that encourage 

listening, feedback, participation, and dialogue

■ Recognize that competing agendas, symbolic meanings, 

and broader social, cultural, economic, or political 

considerations often exist and complicate the task of risk 

communication

3. Be truthful, honest, frank, and open

■ If an answer is unknown or uncertain, express willingness 

to get back to the questioner with a response within an 

agreed-upon deadline

■ Disclose risk information as soon as possible 

(emphasizing appropriate reservations about reliability); 

fi ll information vacuums

■ Do not minimize or exaggerate the level of risk; do not 

over reassure

■ Make corrections quickly if errors are made

■ If in doubt, lean toward sharing more information, not 

less – or people may think something signifi cant is being 

hidden or withheld

■ Discuss data and information uncertainties, strengths 

and weaknesses – including the ones identifi ed by other 

credible sources

■ Identify worst-case estimates as such, and cite ranges of 

risk estimates when appropriate

■ Do not speculate, especially about worst cases

4. Coordinate, collaborate, and partner with other 

credible sources

■ Take the time to coordinate all inter-organizational and 

intra-organizational communications

■ Devote effort and resources to the slow, hard work of 

building bridges, partnerships, and alliances with other 

organizations

■ Use credible and authoritative intermediaries between you 

and your target audience

■ Consult with others to determine who is best able to take 

the lead in responding to questions or concerns about 

risks: establish and document agreements

■ Do not attack those with higher perceived credibility

■ Cite credible sources that believe what you believe; 

issue communications together with, or through, other 

trustworthy sources
A-2

5. Meet the needs of the media

■ Be accessible to reporters; respect their deadlines

■ Prepare a limited number of key messages in advance 

of media interactions; take control of the interview and 

repeat or bridge to your key messages several times

■ Provide information tailored to the needs of each type of 

media, such as sound bites and visuals for television

■ Provide background materials on complex risk issues

■ Say only those things that you are willing to have repeated 

by the media: everything you say is on the record

■ Keep interviews short: agree with the reporter in advance 

about the specifi c topic of the interview and stick to this 

topic during the interview

■ Always tell the truth

■ If you do not know the answer to a question, focus on 

what you do know and tell the reporter what actions you 

will take to get an answer

■ Stay on message; bridge to important messages

■ Be aware of, and respond effectively to media pitfalls and 

trap questions

■ Avoid saying “no comment”

■ Follow up on stories with praise or criticism, as warranted

■ Work to establish long-term relationships of trust with 

specifi c editors and reporters

6. Speak clearly and with compassion

■ Use clear, non-technical language appropriate to the target 

audience

■ Use graphics and other pictorial material to clarify 

messages

■ Avoid embarrassing people

■ Respect the unique communication needs of special and 

diverse audiences

■ Understand that trust is earned – do not ask or expect to 

be trusted by the public

■ Express genuine empathy; acknowledge, and say, that any 

illness, injury, or death is a tragedy and to be avoided

■ Personalize risk data: use stories, narratives, examples, 

and anecdotes that make technical data come alive

■ Avoid distant, abstract, unfeeling language about harm, 

deaths, injuries, and illnesses

■ Acknowledge and respond (in words, gestures, and 

actions) to emotions that people express, such as anxiety, 

fear, anger, outrage, and helplessness

■ Acknowledge and respond to the distinctions that the 

public views as important in evaluating risks

■ Use risk comparisons to help put risks in perspective; 

avoid comparisons that ignore distinctions people 

consider important

■ Identify specifi c actions that people can take to protect 

themselves and to maintain control of the situation at hand

■ Be sensitive to local norms, such as speech and dress

■ Strive for brevity, but respect a person’s desire for 

information and offer to provide needed information 

within a specifi ed period of time

■ Always try to include a discussion of actions that are 

underway or can be taken

■ Promise only that which can be delivered, then 

follow through

7. Plan thoroughly and carefully

■ Begin with clear, explicit objectives – such as providing 

information, establishing trust, encouraging appropriate 

actions, stimulating emergency response, or involving 

stakeholders in dialogue, partnerships, and joint problem 

solving

■ Identify important stakeholders and subgroups within the 

audience – respect diversity and design communications 

for specifi c stakeholders

■ Recruit spokespersons with effective presentation and 

personal interaction skills

■ Train staff – including technical staff – in basic, 

intermediate, and advanced risk and crisis communication 

skills: recognize and reward outstanding performance

■ Anticipate questions and issues

■ Prepare and pretest messages

■ Carefully evaluate risk communication efforts and learn 

from mistakes

■ Share what you have learned with others
B-1

Appendix B

Water Security Message Mapping Workshop Participants

Brad Addison

Assistant Branch Chief

Georgia DNR, Drinking Water Compliance Program, Water 

Resources Branch, Environmental Protection Division

2 Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. SE

Suite 1362 East

Atlanta, GA 30334-9000

Phone: 404-651-5155

Email: brad_addison@dnr.state.ga.us

Steve Allgeier

Water Sentinel Implementation Coordinator

U.S. EPA, Offi ce of Ground Water and 

Drinking Water (OGWDW)

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-596-7131

Email: allgeier.steve@epa.gov

Verna Arnette

Senior Engineer

Greater Cincinnati Water Works (GCWW)

5651 Kellogg Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45228

Phone: 513-624-5624

Email: verna.arnette@cincinnati-oh.gov

Bret Atkins

Public Information Offi cer

Ohio Department of Health

246 North High Street

Columbus, OH 43215

Phone: 614-644-8562

Email: bret.atkins@odh.ohio.gov

Jeanne M. Bailey

Public Affairs Offi cer

Fairfax Water

8570 Executive Park Ave.

Fairfax, VA 22031

Phone: 703-289-6291

Email: jbailey@fairfaxwater.org

Paul Bennett

Director - Security Planning for DEP Police

New York City Department of Environmental Protection

465 Columbus Ave.

Valhalla, NY 10595

Phone: 914-773-4512

Email: paulb@dep.nyc.gov

Laurie Blake

Epidemiologist

Ohio Department of Health

246 North High Street, PO Box 118

Columbus, OH 43215-0118

Phone: 614-752-8451

Email: laurie.blake@odh.ohio.gov

Dominic Boccelli

Environmental Engineer

U.S. EPA, National Homeland Security 

Research Center (NHSRC), Water 

Infrastructure Protection Division (WIPD)

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-569-7654

Email: boccelli.dominic@epa.gov

Erica Brown

Director Regulatory Affairs

Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA)

1620 I Street, NW, Suite 500

Washington, DC 20006

Phone: 202-331-2820

Email: brown@amwa.net

Jennifer Browne 

U.S. EPA Superfund

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 703-603-8922

Email: browne.jennifer@epa.gov 

Darcy M. Burke

Executive Director, California Nevada Division

American Water Works Association

10574 Acacia St., Suite D6

Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730

Phone: 909-481-7200

Email: dburke@ca-nv-awwa.org

Patty Burke

Senior Administrative Specialist

Greater Cincinnati Water Works (GCWW)

4747 Spring Grove Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45232

Phone: 513-591-7973

Email: patty.burke@cincinnati-oh.gov
B-2

Kurt Byrd 

Police Lieutenant, Executive Offi cer/PIO

Cincinnati Police Department

310 Ezzard Charles Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45124

Phone: 513-352-3519

Email: kurt.byrd@cincinnati-oh.gov

Bill Clark 

Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA)

1620 I Street, NW, Suite 500

Washington, DC 20006

Phone: 202-331-2820

Kathy Clayton 

U.S. EPA, National Homeland Security Research 

Center (NHSRC), Threat and Consequence Assessment 

Division (TCAD)

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-569-7046

Email: clayton.kathy-ci@epa.gov

Shanna Collie 

Formerly with Tetra Tech EMI

Kimberly Cooper 

Director, External Communications and Corporate 

Responsibility Coordinator

American Water

1025 Laurel Oak Road

Voorhees, NJ 08043

Phone: 856-346-8207

Email: kimberly.cooper@amwater.com

Faye Cossins

Senior Administrative Assistant

Greater Cincinnati Water Works (GCWW)

4747 Spring Grove Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45232

Phone: 513-231-5048

Email: faye.cossins@cincinnati-oh.gov

Lon A. Couillard

Water Quality Manager 

City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee Water Works

Linnwood Water Treatment Plant

3000 N. Lincoln Memorial Dr.

Milwaukee, WI 53211

Phone: 414-286-2226

Email: lcouil@mpw.net

Vincent Covello

Director

Center for Risk Communication

29 Washington Square West, Suite 2A

New York, NY 10011

Phone: 646-654-1679

Email: vincentcovello@ix.netcom.com

Ed Dadosky 

District Chief

Cincinnati Fire Department

2000 Radcliff Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45204

Phone: 513-263-8060

Email: edward.dadosky@cincinnati-oh.gov

Scott Damon

Health Education & Communication Specialist

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

Air Pollution & Respiratory Health Branch

MS E17, 1600 Clifton Rd.

Atlanta, GA 30333

Phone: 404-498-1825

Email: scd3@cdc.gov

Chrissy Dangel

Installation Restoration Branch

Environmental Security AC/S

MCB Camp Pendleton

Phone: (760) 725-0247

Email: Chrissy.Dangel@USMC.MIL

Sandra Davis 

Director, Emergency Management Solutions

CH2M Hill

1100 12th Avenue, NE, Suite 400

Bellevue, WA 98004

Phone: 425-503-3462

Email: sandra.davis@CH2M.com

Scott Decker

Security Coordinator

Washington State Department of Health, 

Offi ce of Drinking Water

PO Box 47822

Olympia, WA 98504-7822

Phone: 360-236-3162

Email: scott.decker@doh.wa.gov

Steven A. Dennis

Environmental Compliance Offi cer / Emergency Services 

Supervisor

Alameda County Water District

43885 South Grimmer Boulevard, PO Box 5110

Fremont, CA 94537

Phone: 510-668-6530

Email: steve.dennis@acwd.com

John Dunham

Senior Environmental Safety Specialist

Cincinnati Health Department

3101 Burnet Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45229

Phone: 513-357-7207

Email: john.dunham@cincinnati-oh.gov
B-3

James Elder 

Water Consultant

11328 Woodbrook Lane

Reston, VA 20194

Phone: 703-904-9528

Steven Englender

Director, Epidemiology and Public Health 

Emergency Preparedness

Cincinnati Health Department

3101 Burnet Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45229

Phone: 513-357-7208

Email: steven.englender@cincinnati-oh.gov

Stuart Freudberg 

Director, Environmental Programs

Metropolitan Washington Council of 

Governments (MWCOG)

777 North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 300

Washington, DC 20002

Phone: 202-962-3340

Email: sfreudberg@mwcog.org

Kevin Garrahan

U.S. EPA, National Homeland Security Research 

Center (NHSRC)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 202-564-3336

Email: garrahan.kevin@epa.gov 

Robert Glenn

Chief, Readiness and Response Branch

Ohio Emergency Management Agency

2885 West Dublin-Granville Road

Columbus, OH 43235

Phone: 614-799-3889

Email: rglenn@dps.state.oh.us

Gregory Gwaltney 

Environmental Scientist

U.S. EPA

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Mail Code 4601-M

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 202-564-2340

Email: gregory.gwaltney@epa.gov

Tiffaney Hardy 

Assistant to the Director

City of Cincinnati, Department of Public Services

805 Central Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45240

Phone: 513-352-5498

Email: tiffaney.hardy@cincinnati-oh.gov

David Hartman 

Assistant Superintendent Water Quality and Treatment

Greater Cincinnati Water Works (GCWW)

5651 Kellogg Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45228

Phone: 513-624-5659

Email: david.hartman@cincinnati-oh.gov

Elizabeth Hedrick 

Chemist

U.S. EPA, Water Security Division (WSD)

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-569-7296

Email: hedrick.elizabeth@epa.gov

Rick Hiers

Technical Assistance Provider

Southeast Rural Community Assistance Project, Inc.

540 St. Andrews Rd., Suite 114

Columbia, SC 29210

Phone: 803-414-6450 (cell)

Email: rhiers@sercap.org

John Hoornbeek

Training Director

National Environmental Services Center, 

West Virginia University

P.O. Box 6064

Morgantown, WV 26506-6064

Phone: 304-293-4191 or 800-624-8301

Email: jhoornbe@mail.wvu.edu

Jack Jacobs 

Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) (Corporate)

2100 East Grand Avenue

El Segundo, CA 90245

Phone: 310-615-0311

Bruce Johnson

Deputy Director

Tucson Water

310 W. Alameda, 3rd Floor

Tucson, AZ 85701

Phone: 520-791-2666

Email: Bruce.Johnson@tucsonaz.gov

Tara Johnson 

U.S. EPA, Offi ce of Water (OW), Water Security 

Division (WSD)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 202-564-6186

Email: johnson.tara@epa.gov
B-4

Kathleen Judd

PNNL/Battelle

PO Box 999 / BSRC

Richland, WA 99352

Email: kathleen.judd@pnl.gov

Peter Jutro

Deputy Director, National Homeland Security 

Research Center

U.S. EPA, National Homeland Security Research 

Center (NHSRC)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 202-564-3331

Email: jutro.peter@epa.gov

Colm Kenny 

Environmental Scientist

Formerly with U.S. EPA, Offi ce of Water (OW), 

Water Security Division (WSD)

Kerry Kirk Pfl ugh

Manager

Offi ce of Watershed Education, Estuaries and Monitoring, 

Division of Watershed Management, New Jersey Department 

of Environmental Protection

401 E. State St., PO Box 418

Trenton, NJ 08625

Phone: 609-633-7242

Email: kerry.pfl ugh@dep.state.nj.us

Natalie Koch 

National Decontamination Team

U.S. EPA

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-487-2422

Email: koch.natalie@epa.gov

Eric Koglin 

Physical Scientist

U.S. EPA, National Homeland Security Research 

Center (NHSRC)

PO Box 93478

Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478

Phone: 702-798-2332

Email: koglin.eric@epa.gov

Patricia Lamb

Utilities Safety and Health Manager

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities

5100 Brookshire Blvd.

Charlotte, NC 28216

Phone: 704-391-5061

Email: plamb@ci.charlotte.nc.us

Bruce Larson 

American Water

1025 Laurel Oak Road

Voorhees, NJ 08043

Sheri Lewis 

Johns Hopkins University

National Security Technology Department

Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory

11100 Johns Hopkins Road

Laurel, MD 20723

Phone: 240-228-7604

Email: sheri.lewis@jhuapl.edu

Joe Lombardo

Johns Hopkins University

National Security Technology Department

Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory

11100 Johns Hopkins Road

Laurel, MD 20723

Kathy Lordo

Assistant Health Commissioner

Hamilton County General Health District

250 William Howard Taft Road, 2nd Floor

Cincinnati, OH 45249

Phone: 513-946-7801

Email: kathy.lordo@hamilton-co.org

Bary Lusby 

Operations Manager

Hamilton County Emergency Management/

Homeland Security

2000 Radcliff Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45204

Phone: 513-263-8206

Email: bary.lusby@hamilton-co.org

Bruce A. Macler

National Microbial Risk Assessment Expert

US EPA Region 9

75 Hawthorne St., WTR-6

San Francisco, CA 94105

Phone: 415-972-3569

Email: macler.bruce@epa.gov

Matthew Magnuson

Research Chemist

U.S. EPA, Offi ce of Research and Development (ORD), 

National Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC), 

Water Infrastructure Protection Division (WIPD)

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-569-7321

Email: magnuson.matthew@epa.gov

Jeanelle Martinez 

U.S. EPA, National Decontamination Team

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-487-2428

Email: martinez.jeanelle@epa.gov
B-5

Jayne Michaud 

U.S. EPA, Offi ce of Solid Waste and Emergency 

Response (OSWER)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 703-603-8847

Email: michaud.jayne@epa.gov

Scott Minamyer 

Environmental Scientist

U.S. EPA, National Homeland Security Research 

Center (NHSRC)

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-569-7175

Email: minamyer.scott@epa.gov

Kim Morgan

Task Manager Consequence Management

Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC)

6101 Stevenson Avenue

Alexandria, VA 22304

Phone: 571-723-2999

Email: kmorgan27@csc.com

Zohreh Movahed 

Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission

14501 Sweitzer Lane

Laurel, MD 20707

Phone: 301-206-9772

Debbie Newberry

U.S. EPA, Offi ce of Water (OW), 

Water Security Division (WSD)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 202-564-1415

Email: newberry.debbie@epa.gov

Meg Olberding 

Public Information Offi cer/City Manager’s Offi ce

City of Cincinnati

801 Plum Street

Cincinnati, OH 45202

Phone: 513-352-5358

Email: meg.olberding@cincinnati-oh.gov

Holly Parada 

Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority

441 Smithfi eld Street

Pittsburgh, PA 15222

Phone: 412-255-2423

Dan Petersen 

U.S. EPA, National Risk Management 

 Research Laboratory (NRMRL)

26 West Martin Luther King Drive

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513-569-7831 

Email: petersen.dan@epa.gov

Jeff Pieper

Assistant Superintendent, Distribution Division

Greater Cincinnati Water Works (GCWW)

4747 Spring Grove Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45232

Phone: 513-591-7908

Email: jeff.pieper@cincinnati-oh.gov

Brad Poole 

Tucson Citizen

PO Box 26767

Tucson, AZ 85726-6767

Phone: 520-573-4561

Email: bpoole@tucsoncitizen.com

Jessica Pulz

Water Security Division

Offi ce of Ground Water and Drinking Water

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Phone: 513.569.7918

Email: pulz.jessica@epa.gov

Ray Riordan 

Certifi ed Emergency Manager

Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC)

2662 Marsh Drive

San Ramon, CA 94583

Phone: 925-830-9019

Email: rayriordan@comcast.net

Alan Roberson 

American Water Works Association (AWWA)

6666 West Quincy Avenue

Denver, CO 80235

303-794-7711

Tom Rockaway 

University of Louisville

Phone: 502-852-3272

Email: tom.rockaway@louisville.edu

David Ropeik

Communications Director

Harvard School of Public Health

718 Huntington Ave., 2nd Floor, Room 202

Boston, MA 02115

Phone: 617-432-6011

Email: dropeik@hsph.harvard.edu

Susan Ruggles 

U.S. EPA, Offi ce of Water (OW), Water Security 

Division (WSD)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460
B-6

Jerry Scott 

Senior Project Manager

Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC)

6101 Stevenson Avenue

Alexandria, VA 22304

Phone: 703-461-2421

Email: gscott26@csc.com

Irwin Silverstein 

AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow (2004-2006)

Formerly with the U.S. EPA, Water Security Division (WSD)

Washington, DC 

Ashley Smith 

Formerly with the U.S. EPA, Water Security Division (WSD)

Washington, DC 

Ted Stanich 

Senior Intelligence Advisor/NJTTF, Homeland 

Security Program

U.S. EPA, Offi ce of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics, and 

Training

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Mail Code 2231A

Washington, DC 20004

Phone: 202-564-5484

Email: stanich.ted@epa.gov

Stanley States

Water Quality Manager

Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority

900 Freeport Road

Pittsburgh, PA 15238

Phone: 412-782-7553

Email: sstates@pgh2o.com

James Sullivan

General Counsel

Water Environment Federation

601 Wythe

Alexandria, VA 22314

Phone: 703-684-2436

Email: JSullivan@wef.org

Scott L. Szalkiewicz

Division Program Unit Supervisor

Connecticut Dept. of Public Health, Drinking Water Division

410 Capital Ave.

Hartford, CT 06134-0308

Phone: 860-509-7333

Email: scott.szalkiewicz@po.state.ct.us

Timothy Tillery

Safety/Security Administrator

Suburban Water Systems

1211 E. Center Court Dr.

Covina, CA 91724-3603

Phone: 626-543-2549

Email: ttillery@suburbanwatersystems.com

Robert Troxel 

Critical Infrastructure Planner

Ohio Homeland Security

1970 West Broad Street

Columbus, OH 43223

Phone: 740-707-2235

Email: rctroxel@dps.state.oh.us

Janet Ward

Public Information Manager

City of Atlanta, 

Department of Watershed Management

55 Trinity Ave. SW, Suite 5400

Atlanta, GA 30303

Phone: 404-330-6620

Email: jward@atlantaga.gov

Christian Westbrook 

Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority

441 Smithfi eld Street

Pittsburgh, PA 15222

Phone: 412-255-2423

John Whitler 

Environmental Protection Specialist

U.S. EPA, Water Security Division (WSD)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue

Mail Code 4601M

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 202-564-1929

Email: whitler.john@epa.gov

Paul Wright 

Fire Chief

City of Montgomery

10150 Montgomery Road

Montgomery, OH 45242

Phone: 513-985-1639

Email: pwright@ci.montgomery.oh.us

Kelvin D. Yamada

Emergency Coordinator

California Department of Health Services, Drinking Water 

Program, 

Technical Program Branch

1616 Capitol Ave., MS 7416

PO Box 977413

Sacramento, CA 95899-7413

Phone: 916-552-9999

Email: Kyamada@dhs.ca.gov
C-1

Appendix C

References

Bennett P, Calman K, eds. Risk Communication and Public 

Health. New York (NY): Oxford University Press; 1999. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Emergency Risk 

Communication: CDCynergy (CD ROM). Atlanta (GA): 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2004.

Chess C, Hance BJ, Sandman PM. Planning Dialogue with 

Communities: A Risk Communication Workbook. New 

Brunswick (NJ): Rutgers University, Cook College,

Environmental Media Communication Research Program; 

1989.

Covello VT. Best Practice in Public Health Risk and Crisis 

Communication. Journal of Health Communication, 2003:8, 

1-5.

Covello VT, Allen F. Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk 

Communication. Washington (DC): Environmental Protection 

Agency (US); 1988.

Covello VT, McCallum DB, Pavlova MT, eds. Effective risk 

communication: the role and responsibility of government and 

nongovernment organizations. New York (NY): Plenum;1989.

Covello VT, Peters R G, Wojtecki JG, and Hyde RC. 

Risk communication, the West Nile virus epidemic, and 

bioterrorism: Responding to the communication challenges

posed by the intentional or unintentional release of a pathogen 

in an urban setting. Journal of Urban Health, 2001; 78, 382-

391.

Covello VT, Sandman PM. Risk communication: 

Evolution and revolution. In: Wolbarst A, ed. Solutions to 

an Environment in Peril. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins 

University Press; 2001:164-178.

Davies CJ, Covello VT, Allen FW, eds. Risk communication: 

proceedings of the national conference. Washington (DC): The 

Conservation Foundation; 1987.

Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein L, Read S, Combs B. How 

safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards 

technological risks and benefi ts. Policy Sciences, 1978: 9:127-

152.

Hyer RN, Covello VT. Effective Media Communication during 

Public Health Emergencies: A WHO Handbook. WHO/

CDS/2005.31, World Health Organization, Geneva, 2005 

(www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO_CDS_2005_

31/en/).

Jamieson KH, Lammie K, Warlde C, and Krutt S. Questions 

about hypotheticals and details in reporting on anthrax. 

Journal of Health Communication, 2003: 8, 121-131.

Johnson BB, Covello VT. The Social and Cultural 

Construction of Risk: Essays on Risk Selection and 

Perception. D. Reidel Publishing; 1987.

Lum MR, Tinker TL. A primer on health risk communication 

principles and practices. Washington (DC): Agency for Toxic 

Substances and Disease Registry (US); 1994. Available from: 

US Government Printing Offi ce, Washington (DC); HE

20.502:97024783.

Mebane F, Temin S, and Parvanta C F. Communicating anthrax 

in 2001: A comparison of CDC information and print media 

accounts. Journal of Health Communication, 2003: 8, 50-82.

Morgan G, Fischhoff B. Risk communication: A Mental 

Models Approach. Cambridge University Press; 2001.

Mullin S. The anthrax attacks in New York City: The “Giuliani 

press conference model” and other communication strategies 

that helped. Journal of Health Communication, 2003: 8, 15-16.

National Research Council. Improving Risk Communication. 

Committee on Risk Perception and Risk Communication. 

Washington (DC): National Academy Press; 1989.

National Research Council. Understanding Risk: Informing 

Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, (DC): 

National Academy Press; 1996.

Peters RG, Covello VT, McCallum DB. The determinants of 

trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An 

empirical study. Risk Analysis, 1997: 17(1):43-54.

Renn O, Levine D. Credibility and Trust in Risk 

communication in RE Kasperson and PJM Stallen, 

eds. Communicating Risks to the Public: International 

Perspectives. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1991.

Sandman PM. Hazard versus outrage in the public perception 

of risk. In: Covello VT, McCallum DB, Pavlova MT, eds. 

Effective Risk communication: The Role and Responsibility of 

Government and Non-government Organizations. New York 

(NY): Plenum Press; 1989:45-49.

Slovic P. Informing and educating the public about risk. Risk 

Analysis, 1986 Dec; 6(4):403-15.

Tinker TL, Silberberg PG. An evaluation primer on health risk 

communication programs and outcomes. Washington (DC): 

Department of Health and Human Service (US); 1997.

World Health Organization. Communication Guidelines for 

Disease Outbreaks, WHO Expert Consultation on Outbreak 

Communications, 21-23 September, Singapore, 2004.
C-2

Notes
C-3

Notes
C-4
SCIENCE
Recycled/Recyclable

Printed with vegetable-based ink on paper that contains a minimum of 50% post-consumer fi ber content.

Processed chlorine free.

Offi ce of Research and Development

National Homeland Security Research Center

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Offi cial Business

Penalty for Private Use

$300

EPA/600/R-07/027

March 2007

www.epa.gov/ord

PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

EPA

PERMIT No. G-35