Water Utility Risk Intelligence MCP

Municipal water system risk assessment and compliance intelligence for utility analysts, bond credit teams, ESG investors, and environmental consultants. This actor orchestrates 8+ US government data sources in parallel and applies 4 transparent scoring models to produce a Composite Water Risk Score (0–100) across contamination exposure, infrastructure stress, drought and climate, and affordability dimensions.

MCP-native — the same engine is exposed as 8 Model Context Protocol tools, so it plugs directly into Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, or any MCP-compatible client with zero glue code.

Why use it?

Manually checking EPA SDWIS, pulling FEMA disaster declarations, finding NOAA drought monitors, digging through Federal Register rulemaking notices, and cross-referencing local economic data takes 4–6 hours per utility. This actor automates the whole pipeline in under 2 minutes, with every signal that drove the score returned in the output.

Data Point	Source
📡 Seismic events near the system	USGS Earthquake Search
🚨 Disaster declarations affecting the area	FEMA Disaster Declarations
🌩️ Drought, flood, and extreme weather alerts	NOAA Weather Alerts
📋 EPA MCL changes, PFAS/lead/arsenic rulemaking	Federal Register
💬 Water utility billing and service complaints	CFPB Consumer Complaints
💼 Regional unemployment and inflation	BLS Economic Data
🌍 Freshwater availability, precipitation, poverty, Gini	World Bank Indicators
🏭 Industrial PM2.5 air-quality contamination proxy	OpenAQ (optional API key)
🎯 Composite Water Risk Score (0–100)	Scoring model

Input

{
  "waterSystem": "Flint, Michigan",
  "assessmentType": "full",
  "state": "Michigan"
}

Field	Type	Required	Description
waterSystem	string	yes	Water utility name, municipality, "lat,lon", or EPA PWS ID (e.g. "NY1100301")
assessmentType	string	no	full (default), contaminant, infrastructure, drought, affordability, regulatory
state	string	no	US state name/abbreviation for geographic disambiguation
contaminant	string	no	Focus regulatory scan: PFAS, lead, arsenic
systems	array	no	List of systems for a side-by-side comparison
openaqApiKey	string	no	Optional OpenAQ v3 key to enable the air-quality proxy

Output

A single dataset item per assessment:

{
  "system": "Flint, Michigan",
  "compositeScore": 67,
  "verdict": "HIGH_RISK",
  "waterVulnerability": {
    "score": 52,
    "contaminantAlerts": 5,
    "airQualityImpact": 0,
    "environmentalRisk": 10,
    "riskLevel": "ELEVATED",
    "signals": ["5 PFAS-related regulatory actions"]
  },
  "infrastructure": { "score": 58, "seismicRisk": 20, "disasterExposure": 24, "climateStress": 14, "riskLevel": "DETERIORATING", "signals": [] },
  "droughtClimate": { "score": 62, "droughtAlerts": 2, "heatEvents": 4, "waterStressLevel": "SCARCE", "signals": [] },
  "affordability": { "score": 61, "complaints": 8, "economicStress": 18, "affordabilityLevel": "UNAFFORDABLE", "signals": [] },
  "allSignals": ["..."],
  "recommendations": ["..."],
  "dataSources": ["USGS Earthquake Search", "..."]
}

Scoring methodology (fully transparent)

Dimension	Weight	Sub-scores	Sources
Water Vulnerability	30%	regulatory contaminant actions (0–30), air-quality proxy (0–25), environmental risk (0–20)	Federal Register, OpenAQ
Infrastructure	25%	seismic (0–30, M4.0+ = 10 each, cap 30), disaster exposure (0–30), climate stress (0–25)	USGS, FEMA, NOAA
Drought / Climate	25%	drought alerts (0–100 base), heat events, compounding +15, low-rainfall flag +10	NOAA, World Bank
Affordability	20%	billing complaints, unemployment >6% +10, CPI >4% +8, poverty >15% +10, Gini >40 +5	CFPB, BLS, World Bank

Composite = vulnerability×0.30 + infrastructure×0.25 + drought×0.25 + affordability×0.20. Verdicts: CRITICAL ≥ 80, HIGH_RISK ≥ 60, ELEVATED ≥ 40, MANAGEABLE ≥ 20, LOW_RISK < 20. Every signal that moved a score is listed in that dimension's signals array — the audit trail is the output.

Run from API

# Full assessment
curl -X POST "https://api.apify.com/v2/acts/darknezz~water-utility-risk-intelligence/run-sync-get-dataset-items?token=YOUR_TOKEN&timeout=180" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"waterSystem":"Phoenix, Arizona","assessmentType":"full"}'

Use cases

• Municipal bond credit analysis — infrastructure condition, regulatory exposure, and affordability risk in one tool call
• ESG portfolio water risk screening — quantify drought/climate exposure aligned with TCFD physical risk frameworks
• PFAS and contaminant monitoring — track Federal Register rulemaking against specific systems
• Peer benchmarking — standardized per-dimension scores across a portfolio of utilities
• Recurring monitoring — run on Apify Scheduler to track risk score changes over time, alert via webhooks

Limitations

• No direct SDWIS violation-level access. Data.gov and EPA ECHO violation records are not keyless; this actor uses Federal Register rulemaking, FEMA, NOAA, USGS, CFPB, BLS and World Bank signals instead. For per-PWS violation history use EPA ECHO directly.
• No water sample concentrations. Scores reflect regulatory and environmental risk signals, not laboratory results.
• Air quality is a proxy (and optional — requires an OpenAQ key). It indicates industrial proximity, not causation.
• World Bank indicators are country-level; sub-national precision is limited.
• Scores reflect current data availability. Run on a schedule and persist datasets to build trend tracking.

Pricing

Pay-per-event. Full assessment events are the primary charge; focused tools cost less.

FAQ

How accurate is the score? It is a relative risk indicator reflecting the density and severity of public risk signals — calibrated to flag systems warranting investigation, not to certify compliance.

Can I assess non-US systems? Most sources are US-focused; World Bank signals work globally. US regulatory/infrastructure scores will be sparse elsewhere.

How long does it take? Full assessments typically 60–120s; focused tools faster.

Support

Open an issue on the actor page, or reach out via the Apify platform for custom water risk workflows.