Mike McColl, pictured, managing director of the security composite panel manufacturer Securiclad, writes of protecting utilities infrastructure from physical attack.
The physical security of utilities infrastructure has long been a concern of the UK Government, especially after 9/11. Yet the vulnerability of facilities – such as electricity substations and water treatment plants – to physical attack has still been exposed on numerous occasions in recent years.
The upsurge in metal theft has seen electricity substations targeted simply for the materials housed within them – but this trend has highlighted the ease at which damage can be caused to the power grid by criminals. In November 2013, a break-in at a substation in Greenock caused a power surge which led to four homes going up in flames and 280 properties being left without power. November 2011 saw 50,000 homes in Glasgow lose power after an attempted theft at a substation and in another incident in the city, criminals smashed through the brick wall of a substation to steal equipment.
These incidents were caused as a by-product of metal theft, rather than the actions of trained terrorists… who could potentially cause far more damage.
Substations and other control facilities are often in sparsely-populated areas, and are unmanned or remotely monitored – increasing their vulnerability. And while CCTV or alarms are usually fitted, the physical barriers which are supposed to keep out criminals are often traditional brick or block walls, with the associated weaknesses caused by joins, or the lightweight standard panelling found in modular buildings or portable/temporary buildings. However it’s these physical barriers which provide the last line of defence, should all else fail.
The water sector is also at risk from criminal and terrorist action and several foiled plots, in the US and Spain, illustrate that there has been intent among terrorist groups to poison water supplies. Just last year in the USA, a break-in occurred at the Carters Lake Water Treatment Plant in Ramhurst, Georgia and settings that control the amount of chlorine and fluoride that is added to the water were tampered with. As a consequence, approximately 400 residents were advised not to drink the water.
Thankfully, to date there haven’t been any publicised serious breaches of security in critical areas of the UK’s water industry. However, the sector is still vulnerable to physical threats associated with theft, contamination, terrorism and disruption to service/supply that could occur as a result of unauthorised access to operational areas. Like the energy sector, emphasis within the water sector is often placed on electronic monitoring or surveillance hardware, such as CCTV, to protect critical areas. Again, this does not address the physical threat of a perimeter security breach within critical areas. And given the remote location of some facilities, security staff or emergency services may only be able to respond on-site long after a breach has been detected.
At the most immediate risk are control rooms and water treatment plants. We should not, however, underestimate other areas of risk such as storage facilities and offices used to house high value assets, dangerous chemicals (such as chlorine gas), or confidential information. Physical security should therefore play a significant part in the ‘layered’ security strategy of any operator in the utilities sector. But often, if the threat to physical security is addressed within the critical areas of infrastructure, then the more traditional building methods which are adopted cause operational delays and disruption – without the benefit of offering a certified solution.
Thankfully, advances in technology are now leading to refinements in facility design, which identify ‘mission critical’ areas. This helps in an operator’s decision making process by determining the correct and most viable building methods to be utilised in a particular environment. Any physical security measures – such as wall panels and locks – used to protect critical areas in utilities infrastructure should be certified by the Loss Prevention Certification Board (the standard is LPS1175) and/or approved by the Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI) to guarantee both their quality and suitability.
At Securiclad we’ve responded to additional demand for heightened physical security in the utilities sector by developing a complete and certified high security modular panel system solution achieving a number of ratings within BRE security standard LPS1175 and approved by the CPNI. It’s also pre-finished, negating the need for any wet trades and keeping any disruption to an installation down to a minimum. The system can be used to create a secure environment or partition within an existing structure, or be incorporated into a new-build and is built to withstand attack by a circular saw and a high-powered 750W reciprocating saw with specialist blades, as well as tools including drills, sledgehammers and disc grinders.
To conclude, it’s clear that investment in the right physical security measures – in the right places – is vital. Certified, appropriate security solutions can provide both peace of mind to operators and the general public, something which in the current climate, is invaluable.
For more on Securiclad, visit www.securiclad.co.uk.
