A water utility maps OT-adjacent IT alerts into the fusion taxonomy without exposing plant networks. What integration practice is that?

A water utility that maps OT-adjacent IT alerts into the fusion taxonomy without exposing plant networks is practicing safe integration for civic critical infrastructure. Fusion centers need situational awareness about IT systems that sit next to treatment plants—VPN gateways, historian jump boxes, corporate AD issues—without interactive paths into PLCs or HMIs. Taxonomy mapping translates local alert classes into fusion-readable categories while network boundaries keep plant process networks isolated.

Why the other options fail by concept: Remote control polling that maps OT-adjacent IT alerts into fusion taxonomy without exposing plant networks is not the described practice, since it adds interactive polling back toward utility systems rather than one-way mapping that preserves network boundaries. Direct historian sync that maps OT-adjacent IT alerts into fusion taxonomy without exposing plant networks exposes plant process data through direct synchronization beyond the allowed boundary and defeats the requirement to keep plant networks isolated. An annual tabletop review that maps OT-adjacent IT alerts into fusion taxonomy without exposing plant networks is a periodic drill activity, not the continuous alert taxonomy mapping integration described in the scenario.

Exam caveat: Safe taxonomy mapping shares IT-adjacent signal, not a claim that fusion has OT command authority; plant response still follows utility OT procedures. Operational check: forward a synthetic OT-adjacent IT alert into fusion with mapped taxonomy fields, and verify no remote control polling, no direct historian sync, and no annual tabletop review mapping were enabled for fusion users.