Workshop on early warning systems : ERNCIP thematic area Chemical & Biological Risks in the Water Sector Task 5, deliverable 1.
Date: 2015-04-07
Institutions: Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen
Subjects: drinking water, environmental monitoring, environmental risk prevention, pollution control, research method, research report, water pollution, water treatment

Workshop on early warning systems  

ERNCIP thematic area 
Chemical and biological 
risks in the water sector 
Task 5, deliverable 1 

Philipp Hohenblum 
Environment Agency Austria 

A r o n a   ( I t a l y )  

2 6   J u n e   2 0 1 4  

The  research  leading  to  these  results  has  received  funding  from  the  European 
Union  as  part  of  the  European  Reference  Network  for  Critical  Infrastructure 
Protection project. 

Report EUR 27082 EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
European Commission 
Joint Research Centre 
Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen 

Contact information 
Georgios Giannopoulos 
Address: Joint Research Centre, Via Enrico Fermi 2749, TP 721, 21027 Ispra (VA), Italy 
E-mail: erncip-office@jrc.ec.europa.eu 
Tel.: +39 0332786211 
Fax: +39 0332785469 

http://ipsc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ 
http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ 

Legal Notice 
Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission 
is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication. 

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union 
Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed. 

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. 
It can be accessed through the Europa server  http://europa.eu/. 

JRC94436 

EUR 27082 EN 

ISBN 978-92-79-45243-7 

ISSN 1831-9424 

doi:10.2788/277981

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014

© European Union, 2014

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Italy 

© European Union, 2014 

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Contents 

Section 1 — Background of the meeting ................................................................ 4 

Section 2 — Summary of the findings of the thematic group’s work to date ........... 5 

Section 3 — Findings and conclusions of the workshop .......................................... 6 

Section 4 — Next steps ......................................................................................... 8 

Annex 1 — Agenda ................................................................................................ 9 

Annex 2 — List of participants ............................................................................. 10 

3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Section 1 — Background of the meeting 

The  European  Reference  Network  on  Critical  Infrastructure  Protection  (ERNCIP) 
aims  at  providing  a  framework  within  which  experimental  facilities  and  laboratories 
share  knowledge  and  expertise  in  order  to  harmonise  test  protocols  throughout 
Europe,  leading  to  better  protection  of  critical  infrastructures  against  all  types  of 
threats  and  hazards.  ERNCIP  is  set  up  by  the  European  Commission’s  Joint 
Research  Centre  (Institute  for  the  Protection  and  Security  of  the  Citizen)  under  the 
mandate of the Directorate-General for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship and 
the Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. 
ERNCIP’s thematic area ‘Chemical and biological risks in the water sector’ deals with 
the security of the drinking water supply. 
One priority of the thematic group (TG) is early warning systems (EWS), which aim at 
protecting  treatment  plants  and  drinking  water  networks  from  being  affected  by 
malicious or harmful events. Ideally, these systems trigger an alarm as soon as the 
quality  of  the  source  water  or  the  drinking  water  differs  from  normality  and,  hence, 
allow the operator to supervise it and react properly, if necessary. A second priority 
deals  with  the  analytical  identification  of  ‘unknown’  chemical  and/or  biological 
contaminations  in  drinking  water  following  an  incident.  This  rather  analytical  topic 
deals with screening methods used for the purpose of identifying and quantifying the 
individual  contaminants  rapidly  as  a  basis  for  risk/crisis/mitigation  management. 
Corresponding state-of-the-art reports were also elaborated. 
The  thematic  group  elaborated  state-of-the-art-reports,  inter  alia,  on  ‘sensors  and 
early  warning  systems’,  ‘biofilm  formation’  and  ‘monitoring  techniques  for  biological 
contaminants’.  The  reports  comprise  of  an  appraisal  of  available  instruments  and 
discuss standardisation, gaps and (scientific) needs. 
The workshop aimed at bringing together stakeholders from academia, operators of 
Critical  Infrastructures  (CI)  (water  unit  operators)  as  well  as  manufacturers,  who 
already offer security solutions on the market. 
In  parallel,  a  questionnaire  was  elaborated  by  the  group  in  order  to  survey 
preparedness  of  water  utilities  against  incidents  and  use  of  security  solutions.  The 
questionnaire  was  issued  online  approximately  one  month  prior  to  the  workshop. 
Specific  water  utilities  as  well  as  drinking  water  associations  and  governmental 
institutions were addressed and asked to complete the questionnaire. 

4 
 
 
 
 
Section 2 — Summary of the findings of the thematic group’s 
work to date 

The outcomes and conclusions of the mentioned state-of-the-art reports on ‘sensors 
and  early  warning  systems’,  ‘biofilm  formation’  and  ‘monitoring  techniques  for 
biological  contaminants’  were  the  basis  for  the  workshop.  The  major  findings  are 
listed below. At the workshop the authors of the reports briefly presented their work 
and  raised  open  issues  for  discussion  with  the  stakeholders.  The  major  outcomes 
are summarised below. 

Review of sensors to monitor water quality 
•  A number of sensors are available on the market. Lately, they have started to be 

accepted by water utilities. 

•  Sensor  manufacturer  verification  schemes  do  not  sufficiently  match  utility 

practices. Utilities will require validation studies. 
There is a poor link between sensor technologies and water quality regulations. 
• 
•  Different  types  of  contaminants  and  levels  of  exposure foster  the  use  of  event-

detection software. 

•  Management  of 

large  data  material  and 

its 

translation 

into  meaningful 

information constitutes a challenge. 
• 
There are no standardised procedures for data analysis available. 
•  An increase in collaborating between SMEs and end-users is needed. 

Review of monitoring techniques for biological contaminants 
• 

Traditional parameters like turbidity or free chlorine (Cl2) are surrogate indicators 
which are unspecific and insensitive. 

•  Available  systems  involve  time-consuming  and  complex  processes  to  identify 

strong biological poisons or pathogens. 

•  Potential  systems  like  biosensors,  electronic  tongues  and  electronic  noses, 
which  are  performing  comparably  to  chemical  sensors,  are  commercially  not 
available. 

•  Most  technologies  are  not  technically  mature  for  integration  in  online  water 

• 

surveillance systems. 
Further research and development of suitable systems is needed to identify and 
characterise waterborne threats in real time. 

Deterioration of water quality due to biofilm development 
•  Deterioration of water quality due to biofilm formation is still a scientific topic with 

little practical background. 
There is a lack of measurement methods in general. 
The topic is not widespread. There is a lack of knowledge. 

• 
• 
•  Standard procedures for sampling, characterisation etc. are missing. 
•  EWS for biofilms are not available. Few systems are suited for monitoring. 
•  Sensors  are  theoretically  suited  for  measurement,  but  limited  applications  are 

available for water. 
There is a lack of standard procedures. 

• 

In two  break-out  sessions  the following  questions  were  discussed and the outcome 
was presented by the moderators. 

  What are needs of operators in terms of security monitoring? 
  What would facilitate applying EWS in the future? 
  How would a certain degree of standardisation of EWS help? 

5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Section 3 — Findings and conclusions of the workshop 

The outcomes of the state-of-the-art reports were presented and discussed with the 
stakeholders  in  order  to  elaborate  their  conclusions  with  operational  realities  and 
options  for  further  action.  Needs,  gaps,  drivers  and  obstacles  were  identified  as  far 
as  possible.  Special  demands  were  worked  out  in  terms  of  standardisation, 
harmonisation or validation. 

General conclusions 

•  Water  utilities  are  interested,  open  and  want  to  learn  to  work  with  EWS,  but 
combined with a good practice of automatic meter reading (AMR) as some of the 
consumption patterns today are still not perfectly known. 

•  Sensors should be cheap, simple and efficient. Different uses for sensors are: 

1.  real  time  monitoring  to  be  able  to  know  if  a  problem  is  real  and  where  it 

comes from with proper decision support to minimise problems; 

2.  sensors  for  big  events  like  the  Superbowl,  the  Cannes  Festival,  etc.  which 
facilitate preparing action plans that also avoid stopping the water supply. 
The  project  ‘Techneau’ made  a good  report  on vulnerability;  a  risk  assessment 
guideline is a result of the project. 

• 

•  Risk assessment guidelines already exist (EN15975-2: Security of drinking water 
for  risk  and  crisis  management―  Part  2:  Risk 

supply  ―  Guidelines 
management). 

•  One of the main problems for water utilities is the dynamic flow in the network, 
especially  when  pipes  are  being  replaced.  An  increase  of  health-relevant 
parameter values indicated by, for example, colour or total organic carbon (TOC) 
measurements  can  be  solved  by  chlorination.  In  susceptible  pipes  (especially 
cast iron), however, sensors cannot be placed due to interferences with iron. 
•  Sensors should be geo-referenced and also used to check efficiency of actions 
taken in the network (e.g. once a water utility detects a too low concentration of 
chlorine 
locally. 
Nevertheless, it is not always possible to check afterwards, that optimal chlorine 
dosing was applied.) 

the  network,  chlorine  dosing  needs 

to  be  applied 

in 

•  Currently, different understandings of EWS exist, which are usually restricted to 
quite  simple  ‘traditional’  parameters’  (e.g.  physico-chemical  parameters)  which 
are not enough. 
The workshop focused on EWS, but only two of the topics discussed are directly 
associated  with  this  issue.  Biofilms  should  be  regarded  as  a  separate  issue  of 
concern. 

• 

What are needs of operators? 
•  Operators  and  managers  need  to  know  their  water  utility  risk  (vulnerability 

assessment). 
Needs  of  operators  seem  to  be  focused  on,  for  example,  risk  management 
plans.  A  description  of  different  targets  of  EWS  referring  to  different  conditions 
and  complexity  of  utilities  is  needed  (e.g.  vulnerability  assessment,  resources, 
size,  general  situation  referring  to  security  issues)  to  fix  the  complexity  of  a 
future EWS. 

•  Operators  need  clear  indications  of  capabilities  and  performances  of  existing 
systems in order to be able to compare and select appropriate instruments. 
There  is  the  impression  that  a  complete  overview  of  existing  systems  together 
with  consolidated  information  on  practical  experience  in  everyday  operation  is 
missing.  Better  information  would  help  individual  utilities  select  appropriate 

6 
 
 
 
 
 
systems more easily and not having to always start again from the beginning by 
performing their own and local validations. 

•  Systems need to be simple and provide clear and unambiguous information for 

decision-making. 
Event  detection  software  should  be  an  important  tool  to  control  and  evaluate 
data of the detector network. It should be a mandatory part of a system in order 
to assist the operator by providing facts for the human decision-making process. 

What would facilitate applying EWS in the future? 
•  Systems  should  prove  to  comply  (partly?)  with  legal  frameworks  (e.g.  WHO 

water safety plan). 
EWS  is  a  complementary  instrument/measure  for  (obligatory)  water  safety/risk 
management. 

•  Uniform  vulnerability  assessment:  A  standardised  methodology  of  individual 
risk/vulnerability assessment of water utilities would reveal areas of concern that 
need  continuous  monitoring.  This  would  probably  be 
to  sensor 
investment.  It  is  already  compulsory  for  some  of  the  big  water  companies 
supplying  big  populations  but  not  for  medium-sized  and  small  ones.  A 
vulnerability  study  would  help to  choose locations for  sensors  and  optimise  the 
cost–benefit ratio. 

linked 

Would a certain degree of standardisation of EWS help? 

• 

Improved general approaches to validation of EWS (single parts of EWS) would 
be  helpful,  as  single  utilities  applying  EWS  have  to  put  a  lot  of  effort  into  own-
validation  procedures.  A  uniform  definition  of  minimum  criteria  for  EWS  is  still 
missing. 

•  Regulations  would  assist  establishing  EWS  in  water  utilities.  However,  political 
awareness regarding threats caused by drinking water contamination is currently 
low. 

7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Section 4 — Next steps 

A questionnaire was elaborated, piloted and launched by the group which addresses 
security-relevant issues. It was intended to provide results from this survey at the 
workshop. However, the survey was delayed and only preliminary results could 
therefore be presented. The survey was left open until the end of 2014 and all 
addressees were informed about the extended deadline. All participants who 
indicated their interest in the results will receive an anonymous evaluation of the 
survey. 
Systems to detect contamination events will be the focus of the thematic group’s 
work in 2015. Specifically, we will address aspects of validation at close to real 
conditions, validation by external facilities, identification of critical parameters, which 
describe the system and its reliability and aspects of corresponding software. It is 
aimed to end up in a workshop agreement under the mandate M487 of DG Growth1. 
To detect a change of the drinking water’s quality in real time is a first step to alert 
the management of a water utility. Consequently, the reason for this deterioration has 
to be identified by analytical means as a first response to an emergency. Several 
institutions across Europe have excellent experience in this field but knowledge is 
isolated and scattered. Proficiency tests for laboratories are available but there are 
no uniform procedures in place to approach unknown contamination. A workshop to 
bring together expert institutions in this field could trigger discussion of harmonised 
approaches and could lead to a process for standardising analytical responses to 
emergencies. Details will be elaborated by the group early in 2015. 

1 The Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs 

8 
 
 
 
 
                                                        
Annex 1 — Agenda 

26 June 

09:30 

10:00 

10:05 

10:10 

10:20 

10:30 

11:30 

12:00 

12:30 

13:30 

14:00 

15:30 

16:00 

16:00 

Welcome with coffee 

Welcome and opening (ERNCIP office) 

Introduction of the workshop’s aims (Philipp Hohenblum) 

Introduction ERNCIP (ERNCIP office) 

Introduction TG water (Philipp Hohenblum) 

Presentation of relevant state-of-the-art reports: 

Sensors to monitor water quality (Jordi Raich) 
Monitoring techniques for biological contaminants (Peter Hufnagl) 
Monitoring of biofilms (Iris Trick) 

Discussion and feedback to the reports 

Reflection in working groups 

Lunch (and networking) 

Results of the drinking water utility questionnaires (Philipp Hohenblum) 

Results of the working groups, discussion 

Conclusions, next steps, farewell 
Closing 

End of the workshop 

Departure to airports 

9 
 
 
 
 
Annex 2 — List of participants 

Carl-Johan FORSBERG 

Peter GATTINESI 

Philipp HOHENBLUM 

Peter HUFNAGL 

Alessandro LAZARI 

Ramon LOPEZ-ROLDAN 

Minoves MERITXELL 

Miquel PARAIRA 

Joint Research Centre 
Via E Fermi 2749 
21027 Ispra 
Joint Research Centre 
Via E Fermi 2749 
21027 Ispra 
Environment Agency 
Austria 
Spittelauer Lände 5 
1090 Vienna 
Austrian Agency for 
Health and Food Safety 
Währingerstraße 25a 
1090 Vienna 
Joint Research Centre 
Via E Fermi 2749 
21027 Ispra 
CETaqua, Centro 
Tecnologico del Agua, 
Fundacion Carretera 
d’Esplugues 75 
08940 Cornella, Barcelona 
Aigües de Barcelona 
General Batet, 1–3 
08028 Barcelona 
Aigües de Barcelona 
General Batet, 1–3 
08028 Barcelona 

Italy 

carl-johan.forsberg@jrc.ec.europa.eu 

Italy 

peter.gattinesi@jrc.ec.europa.eu 

Austria 

Philipp.hohenblum@umweltbundesamt.at 
+43 1313045204 

Austria 

Peter.hufnagl@ages.at 
+43 5055537225 

Italy 

Spain 

Spain 

Spain 

Alessandro.lazari@ext.jrc.ec.europa.eu 
+39 0332786244 

rlopez@cetaqua.com 
+34 933124800 

mminoves@aiguesdebarcelona.cat 
+34 933422753 

mparaira@aiguesdebarcelona.cat 
+34 933422688 

10 
 
 
Reinhard PERFLER 

Robert PITCHERS 

Aikaterini POUSTOURLI 

Elisabetta PREZIOSI 

Jordi RAICH-MONTIU 

Jean Francois RENARD 

Andreas RIHA 

Sara RODRIGUEZ-MOZAZ 

Valérie TANCHOU 

University of Natural 
Resources and Life 
Sciences 
Muthgasse 18 
1190 Vienna 
WRc plc 
Frankland Road 
SN5 8YF Swindon 
Joint Research Centre 
Via E Fermi 2749 
21027 Ispra 
National Research Council 
Via Salaria km 29.300 
00015 Monterotondo 
Stazione 
S:CAN Messtechnik 
Gmbh 
Brigittagasse 22–24 
1200 Vienna 
Lyonnaise des Eaux 
Tour CB 21–16  
Place de l’Iris 
92040 Paris La Defense 
OVGW 
Schubertring 14 
1010 Vienna 
Catalan Institute of Water 
Research, ICRA 
Emili Grahit 101 
17003 Girona 
CEA 
CEA Marcoule — BP 

Austria 

Reinhard.perfler@boku.ac.at 
+43 1476545800 

United 
Kingdom 

Robert.pitchers@btinternet.com 
+44 01793865000 

Italy 

Italy 

Aikaterini.poustourli@jrc.ec.europa.eu 
+39 0332786032 

preziosi@irsa.cnr.it 
+39 0690672778 

Austria 

jraich@s-can.es 
+34 692229808 

France 

Jean-francois.renard@lyonnaise-des-eaux.fr 

Austria 

riha@ovgw.at 
+43 15131588-16 

Spain 

srodriguez@icra.cat 
+34 972183380 

France 

Valerie.tanchou@cea.fr 
+33 466796714 

11 
 
 
 
Marianthi THEOCHARIDOU 

K Clive THOMPSON 

Iris TRICK 

Enrico VESCHETTI 

Andreas WEINGARTNER 

17171 
30207 cedex Bagnols sur 
Cèze 
Joint Research Centre 
Via E Fermi 2749 
21027 Ispra 
Alcontrol Laboratories 
Mill Close 
S60 1BZ Rotherham 
Fraunhofer IGB 
Nobelstr. 12 
70569 Stuttgart 
Instituto Superiore Di 
Sanitá 
Viale Regina Elena, 299 
00616 Rome 
S:CAN Messtechnik 
Gesmbh 
Brigittagasse 22-24 
1200 Vienna 

Italy 

Marianthi.theocharidou@jrc.ec.europa.eu 

United 
Kingdom 

Clive.thompson@alcontrol.com 
+44 1709841024 

Germany 

Iris.trick@igb.fraunhofer.de 
+49 7119704217 

Italy 

Enrico.veschetti@iss.it 
+39 0649902532 

Austria 

ldzambasovic@s-can.at 

12 
 
 
 
European Commission 
EUR 27082 EN Joint Research Centre — Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen 

Title: Workshop on early warning systems – ERNCIP thematic area Chemical and biological risks in the water sector 
Task 5, deliverable 1 

Author: Philipp Hohenblum, Environment Agency Austria 

2014 — 14 pp. — 21.0 x 29.7 cm 

EUR – Scientific and Technical Research series – ISSN 1831-9424 

ISBN 978-92-79-45243-7 

doi:10.2788/277981 

Abstract 

ERNCIP’s  thematic  area  ‘Chemical  and  biological  risks  in  the  water  sector’  deals  with  the  security  of  drinking  water 
supply.  
One priority of the thematic area group is early warning systems (EWS), which aims at protecting against the intake of 
drinking water from treatment plants and drinking water networks affected by malicious or harmful events. Ideally, these 
systems trigger  an  alarm  as soon  as  the  quality  of the source  water  or  the  drinking  water  differs  from  normality  and, 
hence,  allow  the  operator  to  supervise  it  and  react  properly,  if  necessary.  A  second  priority  deals  with  the  analytical 
identification of ‘unknown’ chemical and/or biological contaminations in drinking water following an incident. This rather 
analytical  topic  deals  with  screening  methods  used  for  the  purpose  of  identifying  and  quantifying  the  individual 
contaminants rapidly as a basis for risk/crisis/mitigation management. Corresponding state-of-the-art reports were also 
elaborated. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
L
B
-
N
A
-
2
7
0
8
2
-
E
N
-
N

As the Commission’s in-house science service, the Joint Research Centre’s (JRC) mission is to 
provide  EU  policies  with  independent,  evidence-based  scientific  and  technical  support 
throughout  the  whole  policy  cycle.  Working  in  close  cooperation  with  policy  directorates-
general,  the  JRC  addresses  key  societal  challenges  while  stimulating  innovation  through 
developing  new  methods,  tools  and  standards,  and  sharing  its  know-how  with  the  Member 
States, the scientific community and international partners. 

doi:10.2788/277981 

ISBN 978-92-79-45243-7