Assignment 2: Applying the NIPP to the Jackson Water Crisis Background Protecting critical infrastructure requires partners to understand risks, establish priorities, and coordinate their efforts. In this assignment, you will analyze

Assignment 2: Applying the NIPP to the Jackson Water Crisis

Background

Protecting critical infrastructure requires partners to understand risks, establish priorities, and coordinate their efforts. In this assignment, you will analyze the August 2022 drinking-water crisis in Jackson, Mississippi. Apply NIPP 2013 concepts, core tenets, and the Call to Action to evaluate the case and recommend an improvement

Case Background

In August 2022, flooding exposed longstanding weaknesses in Jackson’s publicly owned drinking-water system. A subsequent EPA Office of Inspector General audit identified maintenance, operational capacity, and internal communication problems that contributed to the crisis (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General [EPA OIG], 2024a). A separate evaluation identified shortcomings in state oversight and information sharing with EPA (EPA OIG, 2024b). Use these retrospective findings as evidence when applying the NIPP; distinguish what the reports document from your own analysis and recommendations.

Required Resources

NIPP 2013: Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience

This Department of Homeland Security plan explains how government, infrastructure owners and operators, and other partners work together to manage risk. Use it as the framework for analyzing Jackson’s vulnerabilities, partner responsibilities, and opportunities to improve resilience.

GOVPUB-HS-PURL-gpo147129.pdf (SECURED)

Read the following selections. Page numbers refer to the printed pages in the document, not the PDF viewer.

• Executive Summary, pages 1–2, and “Key Concepts,” page 7.
• Section 4, “Core Tenets,” pages 13–14. Review all seven tenets; apply two in your analysis.
• Figure 3 and its introduction, page 15, for the risk management framework.
• Section 6, “Call to Action,” pages 21–26. Scan the activities, then read the explanation of one activity that fits your recommendation.

Consult relevant partner descriptions in Appendix B as needed. Read only the assigned selections and the two short summaries below; the full EPA reports and independent research are not required.

Lack of State Financial Support and Local Capacity Prolonged Jackson, Mississippi Drinking Water Issues

This EPA OIG audit (May 13, 2024; Report 24-P-0038) examines funding, maintenance, and management capacity. Read only the “At a Glance” summary, including “What We Found” and the recommendation. Use the findings to identify a documented vulnerability and explain how it affected system resilience.

Document Display | NEPIS | US EPA

State Program Deficiencies and Inadequate EPA Oversight of State Enforcement Contributed to the Drinking Water Crisis in Jackson, Mississippi

This EPA OIG evaluation (August 12, 2024; Report 24-E-0055) examines oversight and enforcement responsibilities. Read “Why We Did This Report” and “Summary of Findings” on the linked page. Use these findings to examine government responsibilities, information sharing, and accountability.

full_report_-_24-e-0055_errata.pdf (SECURED)

Instructions

Prepare an approximately 500-word analysis using the three headings below. Write as an adviser reviewing lessons from the 2022 crisis. Support your analysis with the assigned NIPP selections and both EPA OIG summaries. No independent case research is required.

1.  Infrastructure Importance and Risk

Identify the infrastructure sector and explain why reliable drinking water is essential to public safety and broader national security goals. Analyze how the flooding interacted with one documented system vulnerability. Explain a consequence for essential services and what improved resilience would mean for Jackson. Clearly distinguish documented impacts from possible consequences you infer.

2. Applying and Evaluating Core Tenets

Select two NIPP core tenets and explain how the values or assumptions behind each would guide a decision in this case. Evaluate one strength and one limitation of applying the NIPP approach to Jackson’s problem. Connect your reasoning to the reports’ findings.

3. Partner Responsibilities and Recommended Action

Recommend one priority action connected to a specific activity in the NIPP’s Call to Action. Explain why it should take priority over one other reasonable option. Identify relevant city, state, federal, or supporting partners and explain who would lead and support the action. Give one measurable sign of improvement. Distinguish documented partner roles from any roles you propose.

Submission Requirements

• Submit one Word document with an approximately 500-word analysis, excluding the title page and references.
• APA Formatting: Follow APA 7th edition guidelines, including a student title page, double-spaced text, appropriate headings, in-text citations, and a reference list. Use 12-point Times New Roman font and 1-inch margins throughout the document.
• Cite all three required resources using APA 7 and include them in your reference list. The two EPA OIG reports have the same author and year; distinguish the May report as 2024a and the August report as 2024b. Additional credible sources are optional.